Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate Votes to End Cisneros Probe Funding (Independent Counsel David Barrett)
Associated Press | October 20, 2005 | JIM ABRAMS

Posted on 10/20/2005 5:04:19 PM PDT by HAL9000

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate decided Thursday that it was time to close to a decade-old, $20 million investigation of former Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros - years after Cisneros received a presidential pardon.

The amendment to a spending bill, approved by voice vote, would require that the report of Independent Counsel David Barrett be made public within 60 days, and that the independent counsel close his office within 90 days after the report is published.

``The American taxpayers have spent a lot of money on this report and they deserve the right to see it,'' said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, author of the measure.

The circumstances surrounding the Cisneros investigation are ``all gone but the independent counsel is still working 11 years later,'' said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who earlier this year was unsuccessful in trying to cut off spending for the probe.

Cisneros, housing secretary from 1993 to 1996, admitted in 1999 that when he was being considered for a Cabinet job, he lied to the FBI about how much he had paid a former mistress. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and was fined $10,000.

President Clinton pardoned him shortly before leaving office in 2001.

Grassley said Barrett completed his investigative activities in February 2003, and filed the report under seal in August 2004.

He defended Barrett, saying it was lawyers of individuals named in the report, and not the counsel's office, who were delaying its publication.

``This foot-dragging by the lawyers has been going on for months and months,'' he said.

The Cisneros provision would become law only if the House, which passed a different version of the spending bill, agrees.



TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; audits; barrett; byrondorgan; cisneros; clinton; clintonistas; davidbarrett; davidkendall; dorgan; federalspending; hillary; independentcounsel; irs; irsabuse; kendall; oic; probe; williamsconnolly

1 posted on 10/20/2005 5:04:21 PM PDT by HAL9000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

I understand why we originally wanted the independent council law but it got so far out of control that I could never support it again.


2 posted on 10/20/2005 5:06:05 PM PDT by gondramB (Conservatism is a positive doctrine. Reactionaryism is a negative doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Here's praying that in two months when the report is viewable, the Clintons will be seen as they are...crooks, thieves, destroyers of people.


3 posted on 10/20/2005 5:10:23 PM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

The cat fight will start to bury this so not to be made public, Hitlary's claws just extended.


4 posted on 10/20/2005 5:10:51 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

Funny how the OIC only became "out of control" when it was starting to be used against the Rats.


5 posted on 10/20/2005 5:18:11 PM PDT by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
I understand why we originally wanted the independent council law but it got so far out of control that I could never support it again.

What this AP article conveniently forgot to report is that the counsel's investigation of Cisneros led him into Clinton's personal use of the IRS as an agent of punishment for his enemies.

The case has dragged on interminably because of delaying tactics practiced by Clintonistas and their lawyers.

I still find it difficult to believe that the Democrats will, in the end, actually allow a final report to be published.

6 posted on 10/20/2005 5:20:03 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
"decade-old"

Does our Legal System need some reform?

Does the Gov't have excess $$$$$$?

7 posted on 10/20/2005 5:21:16 PM PDT by Paladin2 (MSM rioted over Katrina and looted the truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

$20 mil???

and what benefits did the taxpayers get out of this??

Any indictments? ...convictions? ...censures? ...citations? ...reprimands? ...warnings? ...oh! Yes! More rich lawyers!


8 posted on 10/20/2005 5:21:35 PM PDT by LibFreeUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeUSA
If (wishful hoping) it rids us of the clintoon's it will be worth it.
9 posted on 10/20/2005 5:29:18 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

i just heard a news bulletin that for some strange reason all MSM newspapers and radio and tv stations have all decided to take the day off sixty days from now...


10 posted on 10/20/2005 5:34:55 PM PDT by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy

Yeah, tell that to the 9-11 Commission!


11 posted on 10/20/2005 5:40:07 PM PDT by dgallo51 (DEMAND IMMEDIATE, OPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF U.S. COMPLICITY IN RWANDAN GENOCIDE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: boomop1

Hillary doesn't need to do anything. The current occupant of the White House has done a far better job of defneding, rehabilitating, and covering for the Clintons than they ever did for themselves.

My far left sister says that Bush ran for president to make his oil buddies rich. But it's looking to me like he ran for president to protect the Clintons.


12 posted on 10/20/2005 5:48:08 PM PDT by tjg (Being a liberal means never having to grow up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a; HAL9000
Actually, I think the trouble started with Lawrence Walsh.

The Democrats, for some inexplicable reason, just decided to overlook it.

;-)

13 posted on 10/20/2005 6:07:03 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

It seems the people who are involved in it lived a lifestyle to which we all would like to have, all of it funded by the good old USA!


14 posted on 10/20/2005 6:08:59 PM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
I still find it difficult to believe that the Democrats will, in the end, actually allow a final report to be published.

"Limp Wrist" Frist will do anything to bend over for the Senate RATs.

15 posted on 10/20/2005 8:26:37 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

Where has justice gone?

How many years will it take to fumigate the stench of the clintons out of our land?


16 posted on 10/21/2005 5:02:13 PM PDT by Awake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
From "The Corner" There is major news in the fight over the report of independent counsel David Barrett's investigation into the Henry Cisneros matter. Late today, the three-judge panel overseeing Barrett ordered that parts of his report be released to the public -- and that all of the report be given to Congress.

"The Court orders that the independent counsel, with all deliberate speed, prepare for release and make release of the now pending Final Report, except for that portion designated as Section V," the order says. It is not clear what is contained in Section V, but it is known that several Clinton-era figures have sought to prevent the Barrett report from being released, and perhaps the material in Section V relates to that. In any event, the Court further ordered Barrett to prepare a version of the report containing the publicly-withheld sections and deliver it to the leaders of Congress and the chairmen and ranking members of several committees.

But there is a catch -- the judges stipulated that their order be stayed for at least ten days in the event that any figures involved in the matter should petition the Supreme Court for a stay. "If no such stay is sought within the period granted by this paragraph, then this stay shall be lifted," the order says. One unspoken aspect of that provision is that whoever has been blocking the report's release in private -- under seal -- would, if a petition is made to the Supreme Court, have to do so publicly.

17 posted on 10/24/2005 4:01:50 PM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: byteback
Great news - thanks for the update.
18 posted on 10/24/2005 4:51:23 PM PDT by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
From H.R. 3058, currently in conference -

SEC. 408. (a) The division of the court shall release to the Congress and to the public not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act all portions of the final report of the independent counsel of the investigation of Henry Cisneros made under section 594(h) of title 28, United States Code, except for any such portions that contain information of a personal nature that the division of the court determines the disclosure of which would cause a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy that outweighs the public interest in a full accounting of this investigation. Upon the release of the final report, the final report shall be published pursuant to section 594(h)(3) of title 28, United States Code. (b)(1) After the release and publication of the final report referred to in subsection (a), the independent counsel shall continue his office only to the extent necessary and appropriate to perform the noninvestigative and nonprosecutorial tasks remaining of his statutory duties as required to conclude the functions of his office.

(2) The duties referred to in paragraph (1) shall specifically include--

(A) the evaluation of claims for attorney fees, pursuant to section 593(l) of title 28, United States Code;

(B) the transfer of records to the Archivist of the United States pursuant to section 594(k) of title 28, United States Code;

(C) compliance with oversight obligations pursuant to section 595(a) of title 28, United States Code; and

(D) preparation of statements of expenditures pursuant to section 595(c) of title 28, United States Code.

(c)(1) The independent counsel shall have not more than 45 days after the release and publication of the final report referred to in subsection (a) to complete his remaining statutory duties unless the division of the court determines that it is necessary for the independent counsel to have additional time to complete his remaining statutory duties.

(2) If the division of the court finds that the independent counsel needs additional time under paragraph (1), the division of the court shall issue a public report stating the grounds for the extension and a proposed date for completion of all aspects of the investigation of Henry Cisneros and termination of the office of the independent counsel.

This title may be cited as the `Judiciary Appropriations Act, 2006'.


19 posted on 11/10/2005 10:09:52 PM PST by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson