[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 15 (Wednesday, February 25, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H618-H619]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 ATTACKS ON THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL AND EFFORTS TO AVOID ACCOUNTABILITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) is recognized 
for 10 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make some 
observations about the White House efforts to avoid accountability to 
the American people. It is very apparent that there has been a 
concerted White House attack on independent counsel Kenneth Starr, the 
independent counsel who has been investigating a number of serious 
allegations against the Clinton administration.
  First, regarding all these attacks on Ken Starr: Attorney General 
Janet Reno approved the expansion of Starr's investigation into the 
Lewinsky-related matters as well as the Travelgate and Filegate matters 
of 1996.
  Three Federal judges approved expansions of Mr. Starr's jurisdiction 
each time serious allegations arose. There was overwhelming approval of 
these actions from the Justice Department, according to reports.
  In the past, the President said he was in the cooperation business 
with investigators. That simply has not been the experience of anyone 
investigating anything to do with this administration. What we have 
here is an orchestrated attack on Kenneth Starr, the independent 
counsel, in order to change the subject and avoid answering the real 
questions.
  The Clinton White House has a history of engaging in smear campaigns

[[Page H619]]

against anyone conducting legitimate investigations. The President's 
attorneys and friends have attacked and demonized everyone who has 
conducted investigations of the President or members of his 
administration.
  When FBI director Louis Freeh called for an independent counsel, the 
White House staff started maligning him in the press and trying to 
undermine one of the Nation's chief law enforcement officials. The 
President allowed these attacks.
  Independent counsel Donald Smaltz, who has obtained six guilty pleas 
and six convictions and millions recovered in fines from wrongdoers, 
testified before my Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and 
was compared by one of my Democrat colleagues to a Nazi. Such mindless 
attacks are unprecedented and the Washington Post even attacked this 
senseless smear.
  The Clinton White House has attacked every committee chairman who has 
conducted investigations: Senator Thompson, who conducted the Senate 
campaign finance investigation; the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Jim 
Leach), when he conducted the Whitewater investigation here in the 
House; Senator D'Amato, when he conducted the Senate Whitewater 
investigation; and Mr. Clinger, my predecessor, who had actively 
participated in many investigations of Republicans as well as 
Democrats.
  So when we have the Clinton White House once again attacking, this 
time, Mr. Starr, the independent counsel, it is predictable and 
consistent. Instead of answering questions, the White House attacks the 
questioners, evades the press and changes the topic.
  These are all legitimate and necessary investigations. The Clinton 
White House does not cooperate with investigators to get the truth out; 
they attack them.
  Ken Starr has been doing the work the Justice Department has directed 
him to do. This attack on Mr. Starr is extremely misdirected.
  Mr. Starr has had a distinguished legal career. He clerked for the 
Supreme Court, for Chief Justice Warren Burger when he first got out of 
law school. He served as the chief of staff to Attorney General William 
French Smith during the Reagan administration. He served as solicitor 
general of the United States and argued cases on behalf of the United 
States before the Supreme Court. He also served as a judge on the D.C. 
Circuit Court of Appeals and has taught constitutional law at New York 
University Law School.
  Mr. Starr also was called upon by the Senate to review Senator 
Packwood's diaries when Senator Packwood was embroiled in an ethics 
scandal. No one criticized him when he was involved in an investigation 
of a Republican Senator.
  Now we learn that private investigators, get this, private 
investigators were hired to investigate Mr. Starr's team of Democrat 
and Republicans, a bipartisan group of career prosecutors. Last year, 
we learned these same private investigators investigated Oklahoma 
Senator Don Nickles' wife, and I believe other Members who have been 
investigating the White House have had private investigators looking 
into them and their past as well. And I believe that is being done to 
intimidate those who are trying to get the truth out.
  Senators, both Democrats and Republicans, attacked the actions that 
were taken against Don Nickles' wife in last fall's Senate hearings. 
This suggests an effort to intimidate and silence both investigators 
and witnesses. That is just wrong. If we are trying to get the facts 
out to the American people, as investigators looking into illegal 
activities, or alleged illegal activities, we should not be 
intimidated, or there should be no attempt to intimidate us in doing 
our job. And that goes for Mr. Starr as well.
  In his various positions, Mr. Starr had to go through the 
confirmation process; and never, never was his integrity put into 
question by anybody, Democrat or Republican. When he was appointed 
independent counsel, he was almost unanimously applauded as a fair and 
seasoned jurist.
  Ken Starr selected as his legal ethics adviser for his office a Mr. 
Sam Dash, the chief counsel for the Watergate Committee. Ken Starr has 
selected a team of lawyers who are both Republican and Democrat, yet 
still the attack. Why? All of these attacks are designed to do two 
things: change the subject and delay the investigation. This has been a 
pattern and practice of the Clinton White House in response to each 
investigation, whether it be Travelgate, Filegate, Whitewater, the 
campaign finance investigation or this latest scandal.
  This, after all, was going to be the most ethical administration in 
history. Yet consider this: Numerous close friends and senior aides of 
the President, such as Webster Hubbell, former Governor Jim Guy Tucker 
of Arkansas, and the President's former business partners, Jim and 
Susan McDougal, have been convicted and have served prison terms.
  Four independent counsels have been appointed by Attorney General 
Reno, his Attorney General.
  Independent counsel Kenneth Starr has secured 11 guilty pleas, three 
convictions and two indictments that are pending.
  Independent counsel Donald Smaltz in the Espy investigation over at 
the Agriculture Department has secured six guilty pleas and six 
convictions with three indictments pending, including an indictment 
against former Agriculture Secretary Espy.
  Independent counsel David Barrett, Cisneros investigation, has seven 
indictments pending, including an indictment of former HUD Secretary 
Cisneros.
  Independent counsel Donald Pierson, of the Ron Brown investigation, 
his investigation was turned over to the Justice Department, which has 
now indicted DNC fund-raisers Nora and Gene Lum, as well as Ron Brown's 
son, Michael Brown.
  And consider this: In the campaign finance investigation which I am 
conducting, over 70 people have taken the Fifth Amendment or fled the 
country.
  This is not a history of the most ethical administration in history. 
It is not even close.
  Just in the past few weeks, Attorney General Reno called for an 
appointment of an independent counsel regarding Secretary Babbitt at 
the Department of the Interior regarding actions with Indian tribes who 
are large DNC donors. All of this has come to pass because of the 
actions of the President and his appointees.
  The attacks on Ken Starr should stop. The President has had five 
independent counsels appointed by his Attorney General. Some of his 
closest friends have been convicted of serious crimes and others have 
taken the Fifth Amendment or fled the country. Instead of attacking Mr. 
Starr, the President's lawyers, associates and friends should be 
allowing the answers to many legitimate questions to be answered.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to put into the Record four editorials by 
leading newspapers regarding this because I think it is very relevant. 
So, without objection, I hope you will do that.
  Let me say one last thing. When we had the FBI director before my 
committee and I asked him if he had ever seen scandals before of the 
magnitude that we were investigating, he said, well, as a matter of 
fact, I have. And I said, could you tell me when that was? He said, 
when I was investigating organized crime in New York City.
  Now, I am sure he wished he had that comment back, but the fact of 
the matter is these scandals are huge, they are out of control, and Mr. 
Starr should not be taken to task because he is trying to do his job.

                          ____________________