P.S. You were wrong. And I was right. Barr did call for Clinton's impeachment well before the Lewinsky matter. And he's not even a real southern man. Will you apologize for your mistake as I apologized for even the mere possibility of being incorrect? Of course not.
Copyright 1997 The Atlanta Constitution
The Atlanta Journal and Constitution
December 13, 1997, Saturday, ALL EDITIONS
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. 14A
LENGTH: 865 words
HEADLINE: SATURDAY TALK;
Talking Issues;
Q & A on the presidency with Rep. Bob Barr;
Congress' advocate for an impeachment inquiry
BYLINE: Jay Bookman
BODY:
U.S. Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) has been among the Clinton administration's most vociferous critics in Washington. On
Nov. 5, Barr introduced a resolution calling for an "inquiry of impeachment" against President Clinton for alleged
campaign-finance abuses. The Constitution's associate editorial page editor, Jay Bookman, spoke to him about his
efforts to impeach the president.
Q: Why did you choose to seek the impeachment of President Clinton and Vice President Gore?
A: There are several reasons, but I think more than any other single factor was the appearance of the attorney general
(Janet Reno) before the House Judiciary Committee on Oct. 15. She made it absolutely clear ---and subsequent events
have borne this out ---that this Department of Justice was really not interested in getting to the bottom of this fund-raising
scandal involving this administration. It left me with the conclusion that the impeachment route ---which I've been
studying for quite some time but had held off doing anything formally on ---was the only way that the people of this
country could get to the bottom of these serious scandals. Q: You use the term "abuse of office" to describe the behavior
of the president and vice president. Can you give us a specific example, perhaps in your mind the most egregious,
specific example, that would justify their removal from office?
A: Very broadly ---and there are a lot of specifics we could go into ---I think it's a conspiracy to violate the campaign
laws of this country. And from there we can go in a number of subcategories of violations. Is it an abuse of office for the
president and vice president to make ---to apparently make ---a deliberate, conscious effort to seek out foreign money?
I believe it is.
You also get into very specific questions of quid pro quo. Is it an abuse of office ---I think it is ---for a president or very
high official to specifically sell access to government decision-making, which is different generally from contributors being
able to meet with somebody? There's a fine line between saying OK, somebody's a contributor, I'll meet with them, and
saying that the only way you're going to get access to an administration is to pay large amounts of money, and here's a
list of exactly what access you're going to get for a specific amount of money.
Q: There is certainly evidence that the fund-raising crimes that you mention occurred, but there is to date no direct
evidence linking the president or vice president to those alleged crimes.
A: I think there is. For example, we have a memo from the deputy White House counsel that had been hidden from
congressional investigators for nearly a year that clearly indicates that the president was aware of efforts to illegally
commingle two databases, a campaign database and an official White House database. And if one looks at some of the
tapes that we have of the fund-raising dinners and coffees, one sees evidence that clearly raises the possibility that the
president knew that foreign money was being raised. . . . So I think we have quite a lot of evidence that does show the
possibility that the president and vice president were directly involved in illegal activity.
Q: How many co-sponsors have you attracted to your impeachment resolution?
A: We introduced it just a few days before we went out of session, and we had 18 or 19 or 20, and of course we can't
add any until we go back into session in late January, and I'm hopeful we'll have more by that time. I'm trying to keep in
touch with other members during this break, and we'll send them periodic updates. And hopefully they'll also hear from
their constituents.
Q: Henry Hyde, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has indicated that your resolution is premature.
A: He has.
Q: What's your reaction to that?
A: I have a great deal of respect for Henry Hyde. And that's one reason I introduced the resolution. He is very
well-equipped based on his long tenure in the House and his understanding of the Constitution to head this effort up. His
view of where we are in that process is different from mine in terms of timing. I think we will develop a lot more public
understanding of and support for this effort if we move forward. To some extent his view is that support has to exist
before we move forward.
Q: We recently had a flap that came and went involving the alleged sale of burial plots in Arlington National Cemetery. A
lot of the president's critics jumped on that story rather quickly, and then it was shown not to have any basis. Have the
Republicans hurt their credibility over the years by being too eager to jump on any alleged wrongdoing by the president?
A: I don't think so, because first of all that doesn't happen. It was sort of unusual for that story to get legs so quickly. It
was more the nature of that story. . . . It really hit people right in the gut. It hit an emotional chord that a lot of stories
don't, so that was sort of an unusual one. And as it turned out, there was at least some basis to the story (when it was
discovered that envoy Larry Lawrence had fabricated a war record that led to his burial in Arlington).
GRAPHIC: Chart: ABOUT BOB BARR
Born: Nov. 5, 1948
Birthplace: Iowa City, Iowa
Personal: Married to the former Jeri Dobbin; four children; four
grandchildren Hobbies: Sport shooting; spending time with kids
Illustration: Bill Clinton / TIM BRINTON / Special
mug of Bob Barr |
