[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 10 (Wednesday, February 11, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S639-S640]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        ATTACKS ON KENNETH STARR

  Mr. NICKLES. Madam President, I rise today to make a couple of 
observations. One is that it is very apparent that there is a concerted 
attack on Kenneth Starr, the court-appointed independent counsel 
investigating several serious allegations against the Clinton 
administration. Some of those attacks were made today on the floor of 
the Senate. I believe a previous attack was made earlier in the week in 
the Senate. And I think Mrs. Clinton joined in the attack on Judge 
Starr. So, there appears to be a concerted attempt by the President, 
his staff, his wife, and others to attack Kenneth Starr as the 
independent counsel. I just think that is inappropriate.
  Just for the information of my colleagues, I have known Ken Starr. I 
understand that he clerked for the Supreme Court for Chief Justice 
Warren Burger when he got out of law school. I got to know him when he 
was assistant and chief of staff to Attorney General William French 
Smith during the Reagan administration. That is the first time I got to 
know him. And I remember him when he served as Solicitor General of the 
United States and argued cases on behalf of the United States before 
the Supreme Court. I happened to sit in on one or two. In one case that 
I remember in particular, he did a very fine job. He represented the 
United States very well. I don't remember anybody ever making any 
allegations that he was a right-wing conspirator at that time.
  He served as a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals with 
Justices Scalia and Ginsburg, and he served with distinction. I don't 
remember hearing one scintilla of negative comments of his service 
there.
  He was chosen--and this is interesting--by the Senate to review 
Senator Packwood's diaries that dealt with a sex scandal in the Senate. 
That was a very sensitive issue and not an easy one. And probably not a 
job that he had any interest in doing either. But it shows that, yes, 
he handled that, and he handled it very professionally. I think 
everyone in the Senate would have to acknowledge that.
  Judge Starr has taught constitutional law at New York University Law 
School, a very prestigious law school. He was chosen by the three-judge 
court to take over as independent counsel and replace Robert Fiske in 
his investigation of Whitewater and related matters. He was chosen for 
this job by the court. I don't believe he campaigned for it. He was 
selected by a three-judge panel.
  So he worked for the Senate, he worked in the Attorney General's 
office, in the Solicitor General's office, he served as a judge, and he 
taught--all of which he did with distinction.
  So I really regret that many people in the administration, and now 
some of our colleagues, are attacking Ken Starr--impugning his motives, 
raising charges of conflict of interest, and so on. I think that is 
really unfortunate.
  I happen to also think it is intended as a diversion. I think it is a 
pattern that we have seen followed by this administration time and time 
again when they are feeling pressure from an investigation or emerging 
scandal.
  It is unfortunate, but this administration has been plagued by 
scandals since prior to President Clinton's election in 1992. It seems 
like there is a repetitive pattern of attacking whoever that scandal 
happens to be involved with--whether it was Gennifer Flowers, when she 
was attacked; Paula Jones, when she was attacked; the FBI, when 
investigating the FBI files matter. A couple FBI people lost their jobs 
over that unfortunate incident. The travel office employees were 
attacked, when Billy Dale was investigated. The Justice Department was 
called in to investigate Billy Dale. So time and time again, it seems 
like there is a pattern that if there is a complaint, we all of a 
sudden start hearing negative stories.
  When it became well known that FBI Director Louis 
Freeh's recommendation was that an independent counsel should be 
appointed to investigate possible campaign abuses by the Clinton 
administration, all of a sudden we start hearing negative stories about 
Director Freeh and the White House's lack of confidence in his work. 
There was even some speculation that he would be fired. Well, he could 
not be fired, he had a 10-year term. I think it is very unfortunate.

  Mrs. Clinton was on television talking about a ``right-wing 
conspiracy,'' and about all these groups spreading stories. I don't 
think Ken Starr has anything to do with any alleged right-wing 
conspiracy, nothing whatsoever. I don't think he has ever had that 
strong of a political philosophy or involvement with partisan issues. 
He has been a judge, he has been working at the Justice Department and 
teaching law school. I just don't think that's the case. I certainly 
don't think that the President's own personal secretary was part of a 
right-wing conspiracy. So I am just bothered by that.
  I think that we see a concerted effort by the administration to have 
a diversion. Certainly this latest scandal is serious. There were 
allegations that were brought to Ken Starr's attention, and he took 
them to the Attorney General for authority to investigate. She gave a 
recommendation to the three-judge court to expand his authority to 
investigate. Janet Reno recommended to the three-judge panel that these 
latest allegations concerning the sex scandal be investigated. That is 
what Ken Starr is doing.
  So I hope that my colleagues will tone down their rhetoric. I hope 
this administration will tone down the rhetoric and quit attacking Ken 
Starr and maybe cooperate with the investigation and let the facts be 
known.
  I hope that nothing happened. I hope that there is nothing to this 
scandal. But I think the President should tell the truth. I think that 
the American people are entitled to the truth and, hopefully, it will 
come out very shortly. Then we can go on and do the Nation's business--
as the President has

[[Page S640]]

called for. But when there are allegations of perjury, or obstruction 
of justice, coaching witnesses, or trying to get people to leave town 
so maybe they would not testify--these are serious charges. I might 
remind colleagues that President Nixon was on the road to impeachment 
not because he broke into the Watergate, but because of charges of 
perjury, tampering with a witness and obstruction of justice.
  So these are serious charges, but they don't need to be investigated 
on the floor of the Senate. It is possible that at some point the 
Senate will have a role; I don't know. But I don't think it is proper 
or right to have this campaign of attack and smear on Ken Starr. I 
think it undermines the judicial process and really undermines those 
people who are making such charges. Madam President, I hope that our 
colleagues and others will allow the independent counsel to do his 
work.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Faircloth). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________