Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (16899)	7/16/1998 8:27:00 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Bill: The latest about the US (Obstruction of) Justice Department: drudgereport.com JLA

To: Bill who wrote (16899)	7/16/1998 9:46:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Reno's obstruction facilitates Clinton's obstruction of justice: July 16, 1998 ESSAY / By WILLIAM SAFIRE Hell Freezes Over WASHINGTON - Attorney General Janet Reno told the Senate Judiciary Committee's Arlen Specter yesterday she was prepared to take -- and in reality evade -- his questions about Chinese penetration of the White House "until hell freezes over." That was an apt metaphor for an investigation long encased in ice. Twenty-one months ago, journalists discovered evidence of financial corruption in the 1996 political campaign led by a band of Asian-Americans close to Clinton-Gore who were fronting for illegal overseas money. But even after the F.B.I. reported a connection to Beijing intelligence, the Reno Justice Department hid its head in the sand. First the investigation was assigned to "Public Integrity" incompetents. After newspapers dug up facts unknown to her time-servers, she again avoided independent counsel by appointing a supposedly hotshot San Diego prosecutor -- who indicted small fry identified earlier in press reports but then hastily bailed out as the trail led into the White House. This week the New York Times reporters Don Van Natta Jr. and David Johnston revealed that the revolving-door Justice team was now disheartened and floundering. A Times editorial nailed down the reason: "If you want to prevent a ship from reaching its destination, just keep changing the navigators." Confronted with this, the Attorney General sniffed: "one newspaper editorial should not dictate public policy." But this investigation was initiated by "leaks" in print from journalism to Justice, not the other way around. And the need to take it out of the hands of a deeply conflicted Justice Department, it turns out, is supported by the man best in a position to know: F.B.I. Director Louis Freeh. Freeh has been worried all along that secret intelligence gathered by the Bureau and the National Security Agency would make its way back to the top White House policy makers close to the Chinese operatives and most interested in shutting down the investigation. In November of last year, this former Federal judge sent a 27-page legal memo to Reno urging her to seek independent counsel that could safely work with the F.B.I. Reno has that report in her deep freeze. Freeh won't make public his disagreement with her cover-up. But on June 19, the F.B.I. general counsel briefed Senators Fred Thompson and John Glenn in detail on the contents of Freeh's dissent. "It is difficult," the F.B.I. counsel reported Freeh to have written, "to imagine a more compelling situation for appointing an independent counsel. . . . it's a conflict for the Attorney General to investigate her superiors." Did the law require Reno to have an actual conflict, as she had told the Senate, and not merely the appearance of one? Not true, according to Freeh; such a Justice Department proposal was specifically rejected by a then-Democratic Congress as recently as 1994. "The Attorney General can consider appearance," wrote the F.B.I. Director, "as well as actual conflict, might weaken public confidence." Senator Thompson reported that the ultimate conclusion by Director Freeh was that the Independent Counsel law, which arose from Watergate and was closely tied to campaign finance law, "should be triggered under both the mandatory and discretionary provisions of the statute." The discretionary part is inescapable, Freeh pointed out, because "the Attorney General's chief investigator has concluded that there is a political conflict of interest." To these revelations of direct opposition from the F.B.I. to her unlawful misjudgment, Reno took refuge in her power to impose secrecy: "Our understanding was that the briefing was . . . confidential. . . ." Thompson disagreed; though Freeh's detailed opinion was hers to suppress, "As far as the oral part was concerned, we were under no restraints. . . ." At a time when journalists are agonizingly examining our own sources and methods, we do well to remember that this fund-raising corruption affecting our national security was unearthed by responsible reporters and is driven by fearless editorialists. Clinton Justice would rather await sub-zero in Hades. At a recent embassy reception, I ran into Louis Freeh. The only thing he would say was, "You guys led the way." At a recent embassy reception, I ran into Louis Freeh. The only thing he would say was, "You guys led the way." nytimes.com