Posted on 09/07/2001 4:00:51 PM PDT by freedomnews
White House Hides Clinton Fund-raising Scandal From Congress Friday, Sept. 7, 2001
WASHINGTON - The House Government Reform Committee on Thursday prepared to subpoena the Bush administration for documents relating to Justice Department investigations of the Clinton administration's fund-raising scandal. But the White House said it was prepared to invoke executive privilege to keep the documents secret, shocking congressional investigators.
Subpoenas were also planned for another set of documents related to Boston-area organized crime.
Two sets of documents involve the Justice Department's decision not to seek an independent counsel after the 1996 campaign fund-raising scandals that hit both parties during the Clinton administration.
The other 13 documents relate to Justice Department records involving a series of investigations into organized crime in New England, which resulted in key government informants being indicted for a slew of crimes in 1995. The committee has been investigating the use of informants in investigations of organized crime.
Led by Committee Chairman Dan Burton, R-Ind., investigators sought a deal with the Bush administration over the release of the documents. The White House said the decision would be in the "best interests of the administration of justice."
The "president has accepted the recommendation of White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez and is prepared to invoke executive privilege over these documents," an administration official said.
He said that though the documents had no bearing on actions of the Bush administration, White House lawyers had determined that "it was in the best interests of the administration of justice that prosecutors be able to think about options in a case without making those considerations public."
Why Would Bush Cover Up for Clinton?
The decision to seek executive privilege for the documents of another administration's scandals shocked investigators, a committee source said.
"We were somewhat surprised to see the White House exert executive privilege," the committee source said. "The documents we requested do not go directly to private conversations between past presidents and attorneys general. We even specifically said we didn't want documents related to open investigations.
"We've been negotiating with them for months, and at no time did they even mention that they would claim any privilege."
The committee sources said the subpoenas did not request grand jury information or documents related to open or continuing investigations, which they said should have made the president more responsive to the request.
The claim, if made, would be Bush's first known use of executive privilege, a doctrine recognized by the courts to ensure presidents can get candid advice in private without fear of it becoming public.
White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales recommended that Bush make the privilege claim if a Republican-led House committee subpoenas the memos or seeks to question Attorney General John Ashcroft about them, the officials told The Associated Press.
The House Government Reform Committee prepared subpoenas demanding the disputed documents and planned to serve Ashcroft today, setting up a possible legal showdown.
The officials said the administration has researched at least four other instances in which executive privilege was cited involving similar documents.
Executive privilege is best known for the unsuccessful attempts by former Presidents Nixon and Clinton to keep evidence secret in impeachment investigations.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., the chairman of the House committee, said the Bush administration's stance threatened Congress' ability to oversee the executive branch.
"While I have a great deal of respect for the attorney general, he has announced a new policy that broadens executive privilege," Burton said. "If this unprecedented policy is permitted to stand, Congress will not be able to exercise meaningful oversight of the executive branch."
Burton's committee has for months been seeking Justice Department memos about prosecutors' decisions in cases involving Democratic fund raising, a former Clinton White House official and a former federal drug enforcement agent.
A senior administration official said while the decisions were made during Clinton's presidency, Bush had accepted Gonzales' recommendation and was prepared to invoke the privilege and create a clear policy that prosecutors' discussionsshould be off-limits from congressional scrutiny.
White House lawyers and the president concluded "the fair administration of justice requires full and complete deliberations and that most often can best be accomplished when prosecutors think through their options in private," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The claim would be the latest in a string of efforts by the new administration to restrain the flow of information to Congress about private deliberations.
Vice President Cheney has rebuffed requests by the General Accounting Office and a Democratic congressman to divulge information about people he met with and how he helped develop Bush's energy policy.
And a Senate committee chaired by Sen. Joseph Lieberman was initially turned down when it demanded several documents detailing the administration's decision to review regulations enacted by Clinton. Eventually, the administration allowed the committee to review the memos, but an aide to Lieberman said officials sent a clear message they would assert their right to withhold documents.
Ashcroft indicated last week the administration intended to reverse the practice of sharing prosecutors' deliberative documents with congressional committees.
Several such memos were shared with Congress during both Republican and Democratic administrations.
But the concept of extending executive privilege to Justice Department decisions isn't new. During the Reagan years, executive privilege was cited as the reason the department did not tell Congress about some memos in a high-profile environmental case.
Legal experts are split on how such a claim might fare in a court challenge.
"Prosecution is a core executive function and from that starting point, a claim of executive privilege is quite a good one," said John Barrett, an Iran-Contra prosecutor who teaches law at St. John's University.
Shouldn't treason be an exception?
I agree but then why is Burton's committee, with a Republican chairman, going after the President?
Seems to me that this statement is the key to why Bush doesn't want these documents out. Apparently, the Justice Department was thinking out loud about who it might prosecute and why. If the Department's targets were limited to the Clintons, I don't think Bush or Ashcroft would have any objection to the news coming out that, say, the Clintons almost got indicted for breaking fund-raising laws.
So my guess is that these documents also make references to other famous names, not necessarily all Democrats -- names that would embarrass both parties.
Why would he cover up?
Don't give me the stupid "he's playing a chess game"
I never said this is a "cover up". The President must have a very good reason for not releasing these documents. I'd like to know why Rep. Burton thinks he needs the documents.
I, for one, am not so yellow-dog-Republican that I wouldn't vote to toss this man out on his keister, should the circumstances merit it.
I wish this could come true.
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.