[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 87 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                               WHITEWATER

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, although I have not had an opportunity to 
review independent counsel Robert Fiske's interim report, I do want to 
commend him for his apparent diligence in completing the first phase of 
his investigation.
  Of course, there are some who would misuse Mr. Fiske's report to 
suggest that congressional hearings are no longer necessary. The bottom 
line, however, is that Congress and Mr. Fiske have different 
responsibilities: Mr. Fiske's job is criminal investigation. Congress' 
job is full public disclosure.
  Even Mr. Fiske admits that the rules on grand jury secrecy prevent 
him from publicly disclosing anything more than the results of his 
investigation into the White House-RTC-Treasury meetings. So, absent a 
congressional hearing, the American people will remain in the dark 
about what actually went on behind the scenes at the White House. And 
while Mr. Fiske finds insufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing, he 
expresses no opinion as to whether the meetings violated any ethical 
rules or standards. That is what congressional hearings should 
determine.
  As the New York Times pointed out today, in an editorial entitled 
``Not Criminal, Just Reprehensible'':

       * * * an action does not have to rise to the level of 
     criminality to be labeled stupid, irresponsible and improper 
     behavior by government officials. That is the only way to 
     describe the three meetings at the heart of Mr. Fiske's 
     inquiry.

  Mr. President, the American people deserve a full airing of the 
entire Whitewater affair. Notwithstanding what Mr. Fiske may or may not 
conclude, Republicans will continue to insist that Congress fulfill its 
own oversight responsibilities.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the New York Times 
editorial be inserted in the Record immediately after my remarks.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the New York Times, July 1, 1994]

                    Not Criminal, Just Reprehensible

       The ``Washington'' phase of the special prosecutor's 
     Whitewater inquiry is nearly finished. Questions about the 
     behavior of the former White House counsel, Bernard Nussbaum, 
     remain unanswered. And the truly important part--the 
     ``Arkansas'' phase--is still to come.
       Even so, senior officials at the Treasury Department and 
     White House can breathe easier now that Robert Fiske has 
     concluded that they did not act ``with the intent to 
     corruptly influence'' a Federal investigation into whether 
     funds deposited in Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan were 
     diverted to President Clinton's 1984 gubernatorial campaign 
     and the Whitewater Development Company.
       Mr. Fiske asserts that these officials did not criminally 
     obstruct justice as defined in Section 1505 of the U.S. Code. 
     But an action does not have to rise to the level of 
     criminality to be labeled stupid, irresponsible and improper 
     behavior by government officials. That is the only way to 
     describe the three meetings at the heart of Mr. Fiske's 
     inquiry.
       On Sept. 29 and Oct. 14, 1993, Jean Hanson, Treasury's 
     General Counsel, briefed White House officials on the 
     Resolution Trust Corporation's investigation into Madison, 
     which had resulted in criminal referrals naming the Clintons 
     as possible beneficiaries of illegal activities at the 
     Arkansas savings and loan. Then, last Feb. 2, Roger Altman, 
     Deputy Treasury Secretary, gave White House aides a ``heads 
     up'' on the same investigation.
       Lloyd Cutler, brought in by Mr. Clinton to stir through the 
     ethical wreckage at the White House, said he was 
     ``pleased'' by Mr. Fiske's conclusion--although he did 
     have the minimal grace to concede that ``some of these 
     contacts may have been inadvisable.'' That description is 
     inadequate to the point of silliness. What was going on 
     was that Mr. Nussbaum, Mr. Altman and Ms. Hanson, along 
     with White House aides like George Stephanopoulos and 
     Harold Ickes, were meddling in the Cabinet departments to 
     try to control inquiries into the President's finances. 
     Though their behavior has now been judged legal, the fact 
     remains that the Administration from its first days has 
     shown a reckless tendency to put the President's desire 
     for a question-free existence ahead of the independence of 
     law enforcement and regulatory officials.
       The clumsy handling of the late Vincent Foster's records in 
     a case in point. On that count, Mr. Nussbaum is not out of 
     the woods yet. Mr. Fiske will report soon on Mr. Nussbaum's 
     dispersal of Whitewater files left behind by Mr. Foster, the 
     deputy White House counsel whose death Mr. Fiske has now 
     ruled a suicide.
       Nor are the Clintons out of the woods. With the Washington 
     inquiries virtually over, Mr. Fiske turns now to the task 
     that will determine his credibility as a special prosecutor. 
     That involves Madison Guaranty, Whitewater and all those not-
     so-long-ago dealings of an ambitious political couple and the 
     interesting friends who were so eager to do them financial 
     favors.

                          ____________________