OT
re: Message 14946286
Ray Moving on Clinton Indictment - Seeks Flowers' Tapes
Carl Limbacher
Wednesday, Dec. 6, 2000
The office of Independent Counsel Robert Ray has asked longtime Clinton paramour Gennifer Flowers for original copies of her famous taped phone calls with President Clinton, NewsMax.com has learned exclusively.
"They didn't tell me what he wants them for," Flowers said, noting that while Independent Counsel Ken Starr was in charge of the president's prosecution, investigators never asked to talk to her and showed no interest in her Clinton recordings.
Flowers tipped NewsMax.com to Ray's request while she was attending a reception for Judicial Watch's Oct. 20 presidential debate in Washington. She asked at the time that the information remain confidential pending advice of counsel.
CNN reported Friday that a grand jury convened by Ray had begun contacting witnesses with an eye toward possibly indicting the president after he leaves office.
The Los Angeles Times revealed Tuesday that Ray intended to interview Monica Lewinsky yet again, despite reams of testimony from the former White House intern already gathered for Clinton's impeachment.
"There's really no reason for Ray to re-interview Lewinsky unless he's figuring to do something with that new grand jury in the way of an indictment," said Washington lawyer Joseph Di Genova, a former independent counsel himself.
By the same measure, Flowers' tapes, complete with transcripts, have been publicly available since 1993.
Ray's request for her originals suggests that investigators have already determined they are somehow relevant to Clinton's prosecution and now merely seek to establish the authenticity of the recordings.
"I'll tell you one thing - wherever those tapes go, I go," Flowers told NewsMax.com, still concerned that her tapes could be tampered with by anyone seeking to discredit her.
The Clinton witness said that while most of the recordings were clear, others were hard to understand.
"I made those tapes on a $20 tape recorder," she explained. "I had no idea at the time how important they eventually would become."
In 1992 Flowers had the tapes examined by Truth Verification Labs after Clinton "War Room" operators James Carville and George Stephanopoulos claimed they were "doctored." TVL certified them as 100 percent authentic.
Working with lawyers for Judicial Watch, Flowers has since sued the Clinton spinmeisters for defamation. A Las Vegas judge dismissed the case in September, but Flowers intends to file an appeal.
In one 1991 tape recorded conversation, Clinton urged Flowers to commit perjury about her state job in testimony before an Arkansas state labor grievance review board.
FLOWERS: The only thing that concerns me, where I'm concerned at this point is the state job.
CLINTON: Yeah, I never thought about that. But as long as you say you'd just been looking for one, if they ever ask if you've talked to me about it, you can say no.
Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, was counseling Flowers to lie under oath in answer to a complaint brought by Charlette Perry, a state clerical worker who lost her promotion after Clinton gave the job to Flowers instead.
Though the statute of limitations would have long ago lapsed on Clinton's 10-year-old attempt to suborn Flowers' perjury, prosecutors could use the tape recorded exchange to demonstrate a pattern of witness tampering and obstruction of justice to grand jurors.
In August, a member of the three-judge panel overseeing Ray's office first revealed that a grand jury had been seated to hear Clinton's case.
In September of last year, Ray confirmed to PBS's Jim Lehrer that he was working with a grand jury. His comments to Lehrer left little doubt in some observers' minds that he intended to indict Clinton after the president leaves office.
Ray told Lehrer that "there are constitutional reasons why it is appropriate to not render that judgment until such time as the president leaves office. I think as a practical matter, as I have explained in other context, even if one were convinced that it was appropriate to bring charges and to bring them now, that would be a constitutional issue about whether or not a sitting United States president could be indicted.
"For that issue to be resolved, and it would have to ultimately be resolved by the United States Supreme Court, that would take us well beyond January 2001, and I do not render decisions in a vacuum. An appropriate decision, as I have said, will be rendered in January 2001.
"Now, I well understand that the viability of my office continues during the life of this administration and not much beyond it. And I fully intend to render a judgment with regard to that matter promptly."
newsmax.com |
