This is simply outrageous!!!!!! There is NO honor in the Dem Congress.
mediaresearch.org
Catching up on Clinton fundraising scandal developments from mid-August ignored so far by the networks, Johnny Chung told FNC's Bill O'Reilly about how Democrats tried to suppress his testimony by encouraging him to take the fifth. The Washington Times pursued his charges and discovered evidence that the Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee encouraged a witness not to testify, tried to intimidate another and misused an unsigned affidavit in an attempt to discredit a witness.
While Chung's charge about being urged to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights garnered some print media attention, another intriguing aspect of what he told O'Reilly went unnoticed. Chung adamantly maintained that in contradiction of what Hillary Clinton and her chief-of-staff, Maggie Williams, claimed, he was solicited for the donation and they knew the envelope he gave Williams inside the OEOB contained a campaign contribution.
Monday morning MRC Webmaster Sean Henry will post a RealPLayer clip, of this part of the August 16 O'Reilly Factor interview, on the MRC home page. Go to: mediaresearch.org
Now, a review of what else Chung revealed and some excerpts from three follow-up Washington Times stories. Through last week, the MRC team of analysts informed me, none of the networks other than FNC has mentioned any of this, not even CNN's Inside Politics.
-- August 18 Special Report with Brit Hume on FNC. Reporter Rita Cosby summarized O'Reilly's interview which ran in two parts on August 16 and 17. Cosby opened:
"In an exclusive interview with Fox News's Bill O'Reilly, former Democratic fundraiser Johnny Chung said he was coached by Democrats on how to plead the fifth amendment prior to a 1997 appearance before the House Government Reform Committee. Chung says Democrats sent his lawyer material on how he could avoid testifying."
Chung: "My attorneys' offices received a package. It said how you can plead -- how you can take a 5th in the United States Congress."
O'Reilly: "Who sent you that package?"
Chung: "Government Reform Committee Democrat side."
Cosby picked up: "But the committee's Democratic minority counsel says Chung pleaded the 5th several times prior to ever going before the House committee, and Democrats never tried to influence any potential witnesses."
After a soundbite from a staffer, she continued: "But Republicans believe congressional records show Democrats on the committee repeatedly tried to delay the panel's investigation. In this letter written by Congressman Henry Waxman, the committee's ranking Democrat, he tells Republican chairman Dan Burton that he has advised White House lawyer Bruce Lindsey, who was also subpoenaed to testify, to, quote, ‘not be available for this deposition.'"
Cosby concluded: "Republican committee staffers now say that they are investigating what role Democrats may have played in trying to shield the White House from allegations of campaign finance abuse. They say that Chung's comments go to the heart of this case, and they say when members of Congress come back next month after a brief recess, they expect that they will carefully review Chung's testimony and also his recent statements that he made during his interview with Fox News."
Well Congress is about to return, so we'll see what happens.
-- August 18 Washington Times. Under the headline "Records show Democrats' stall tactics; Dilatory strategy stymies Chung testimony," Jerry Seper offered further details on a part of the story touched upon by Cosby:
Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee sought for two years to delay and obstruct the panel's campaign-finance investigation, even telling a top White House aide to make himself unavailable for a deposition to which he had been subpoenaed, according to congressional records.
The documents, reviewed in the wake of accusations this week by former Democratic fund-raiser Johnny Chung that he was coached on how to plead the Fifth Amendment before a 1997 appearance before the committee, outline a suspected plan by Democrats to block the committee's ongoing probe....
[Committee minority counsel Philip] Schiliro denied GOP accusations that Democrats sought to delay or block the probe, calling them "ludicrous." He said Republicans had "unilateral authority" to investigate whatever topic or person they wanted and did so without hesitation. He said 163 persons were interviewed over 650 hours and that 2 million documents were collected during the course of the probe....
But Republicans said yesterday that committee records, including depositions of key witnesses and numerous letters written concerning the panel's inquiry, document GOP concerns that committee Democrats and their attorneys sought to delay the depositions, intimidate would-be witnesses and obstruct the investigation.
They said the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, wrote in an April 3, 1998, letter to committee Chairman Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, that he was "disappointed" the deposition of White House Deputy Counsel Bruce Lindsey -- a key figure in the campaign-finance probe -- had been scheduled during the spring recess.
Mr. Waxman told the chairman that he had advised Mr. Lindsey to "not be available for this deposition" -- a suggestion roundly criticized by Republicans as an example of what they said were delaying tactics utilized by Democrats throughout the probe.
The committee records, copies of which were obtained by The Washington Times, show that:
* Democrats proposed that each prospective witness in the committee's investigation into suspected criminal activities be read a statement saying it was "your choice whether to speak with" committee investigators, that they had "every right" to decline to be interviewed, and that they might be called as a witness "to testify in a televised public hearing."
* During the deposition of one White House official, minority counsel raised objections on 49 occasions, and that during another deposition, the Democrats sought to prevent a witness from answering questions by the majority counsel despite the witnesses' willingness to do so.
* At some depositions, objections were raised directly by Mr. Waxman and Rep. Tom Lantos, California Democrat, both of whom challenged with some regularity the validity of questions asked by the majority counsel. During the deposition of one White House aide, Republicans said Mr. Waxman tried to prevent questions concerning former Justice Department official Webster L. Hubbell, a longtime friend of President and Mrs. Clinton.
* Democrats sought to block committee efforts to subpoena records from state Democratic Party organizations, through which suspected illegal campaign funds had been funneled. Mr. Waxman argued there was no evidence of wrongdoing. Investigators later discovered that illegal donations had been routed to the state organizations....
END Excerpt
-- August 19 Washington Times. "Democrat aide tried to silence Trie sister" announced the headline over the story by Jerry Seper and Audrey Hudson:
Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee, as part of a strategy to discourage witnesses with damaging information on campaign finance abuses, sought to intimidate a key witness with limited knowledge of English and U.S. customs during a 1997 deposition, congressional records show.
The newest documentary evidence comes as the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, lashed out at Republicans for what he called "a failure to conduct an effective investigation." But he made no effort in his precisely worded written statement to defend the committee's Democratic staff.
The committee's Democratic lawyers have become a focus of an inquiry by Republicans, who want to know what role they played in trying to delay, impede or obstruct the committee's campaign finance probe. Investigators are trying to determine if the panel's Democratic lawyers were responsible for the 122 would-be witnesses who claimed their Fifth Amendment privilege or fled the country.
A major focus of that inquiry is the Sept. 29, 1997, deposition of Manlin Foung, sister of former Democratic fund-raiser Charles Yah Lin Trie. The deposition, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times, shows that Democratic lawyer Kenneth Ballen warned Mrs. Foung that if she cooperated in the campaign finance probe, she would be brought to Washington to face television cameras in "a large room with...over 44 congressmen sitting there."
At the time, investigators believed she had been used as an illegal conduit for donations Trie made to the Democratic Party.
Mrs. Foung eventually testified before the committee during six hours of rancorous partisan debate that she and a friend, Joseph R. Landon, had given $35,000 to the Democratic National Committee, which was reimbursed by her brother, in part, with cash from a bank in China....
END Excerpt
-- August 23 Washington Times. Jerry Seper and Audrey Hudson were back again with a story headlined, "Evidence builds of attempt to thwart campaign finance probe." They disclosed:
Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee used an unsigned affidavit to challenge the credibility of a witness who diverted cash from fundraiser John Huang to the Democratic National Committee.
The affidavit, among dozens of recently released documents reviewed over the past week by The Washington Times, suggests committee Democrats took part in a scheme to obstruct the panel's campaign finance probe.
The unsigned affidavit -- which has since has been disavowed --came from the father of Los Angeles businessman David Wang, who testified under a grant of immunity that Huang reimbursed him $10,000 in contributions he was asked to make to the DNC.
In the affidavit, Mr. Wang's father, James, disputed his son's sworn testimony of an August 1996 meeting with Huang in Los Angeles at which the illegal diversion of cash to the DNC was discussed. The affidavit said that contrary to his son's claims, James Wang did not attend the Aug. 16, 1996, meeting with Huang.
Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, the committee's ranking Democrat, used the one-page statement during a rancorous October 1997 hearing to challenge the credibility of David Wang. "Two of my staff members have recently spoken to your father, and he has denied being at any such meeting with John Huang," Mr. Waxman said in introducing the affidavit. "I don't think you have been candid from day to day, from Day One maybe. Each time, we get a different version of what happened."
The purported statement by James Wang, obtained without his attorneys present, was written by Democratic staff attorneys Kenneth Ballen and Christopher Lu, who submitted a separate affidavit to the committee recounting their conversation with James Wang. In that statement, dated Oct. 9, 1997, Mr. Ballen and Mr. Lu said James Wang was "neither present at any meeting nor aware of any conversations in which John Huang asked David Wang to make a campaign contribution."
But James Wang did not sign the affidavit. Instead, he called his attorney, Michael A. Carvin, who obtained a separate, handwritten statement in which the elder Wang said he "was present at the meeting with my son and John Huang....At that meeting, John Huang asked for a donation to the presidential campaign."....
Waxman and Lantos ought to be run out of town on a rail! JLA |
