Reprinted from The Washington Times , 5am -- March 25, 1998
Starr indicates Whitewater probe is nearing a close
By Jerry Seper and Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr yesterday gave the first clue that his 4-year-old Whitewater probe might be winding down, telling reporters in Little Rock it was in the "national interest" for the inquiry to end.
Mr. Starr suggested he might not seek another grand jury when the term of the current panel in Little Rock expires in six weeks.
"The grand jury still has some weeks to go, and I think we're at a stage where we will be at a position to assess the needs of the investigation promptly," Mr. Starr said outside his Little Rock office. "We're mindful of the interest in bringing things to a closure."
The grand jury, composed of Arkansas residents from throughout the state, has heard from several witnesses over the past month, including former Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, who was convicted in the first Whitewater trial of fraud and conspiracy and sentenced to probation because of ill health.
Tucker, who succeeded Bill Clinton as governor, agreed to cooperate in the Whitewater probe in exchange for probation on a pending indictment in connection with a separate $2 million bankruptcy scheme. He pleaded guilty Feb. 20 to avert a second trial and testified March 18 before the grand jury.
"This investigation could conclude quickly if all persons who have relevant and material information would come forward and cooperate with the grand jury," Mr. Starr said in praising Tucker's testimony. "I'm saying generally it's just extraordinarily useful to have individuals who can provide information that's helpful ... to be in a state of cooperation."
Tucker, according to lawyers and others close to the grand jury probe, is believed to have been questioned about first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton's ties to a questionable real estate project in the mid-1980s. The sources said he can corroborate accusations that Mrs. Clinton lied to federal regulators --and perhaps a Washington grand jury -- when she said under oath that she had little or nothing to do with the legal representation of the project, known as Castle Grande.
Billing records and other information show that Mrs. Clinton did extensive legal work for Castle Grande, which failed in 1989 at a cost to taxpayers of $4 million, and that she and former Associate Attorney General Webster L. Hubbell, her partner at Little Rock's Rose Law Firm, helped divert $300,000 to Mr. Hubbell's father-in-law, Seth Ward, in the Castle Grande project.
Tucker controlled the Castle Grande venture.
The grand jury also has heard from several of Mrs. Clinton's former Rose firm partners in what is believed to be part of an investigation by Mr. Starr into concerns that Mr. Hubbell was paid $500,000 in "hush money" to guarantee his silence in the Whitewater probe.
Mr. Hubbell, who left the Justice Department in disgrace in 1984 and later pleaded guilty to stealing $482,000 from his Rose firm partners, was paid legal fees by friends and supporters of Mr. Clinton's while negotiating with Mr. Starr for a plea agreement in the Whitewater probe. His promised cooperation in the investigation never materialized, and he may face new charges in the probe.
The Little Rock grand jury's term expires May 7 and cannot be extended, although Mr. Starr could seek to impanel a new grand jury.
Asked if he would seek a new panel, Mr. Starr said, "We have long sensed that it's in the national interest to bring these matters to a conclusion and closure in an orderly and very professional way."
A separate Whitewater grand jury is meeting in Washington, and its term extends until September 1999. It is now listening to testimony from witnesses in the White House sex-and-lies scandal.
The Washington grand jury is overseen by U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, who yesterday held another private hearing on Mr. Clinton's claim of executive privilege. Attending the hearing were Neil Eggleston, a private lawyer handling the executive privilege aspect of Mr. Clinton's defense, and White House Counsel Charles F.C. Ruff.
Also appearing was William Murphy, a private attorney for Bruce Lindsey, one of several key White House aides whose discussions about the scandal Mr. Clinton is trying to keep secret.
Robert S. Bennett, Mr. Clinton's attorney in the Paula Jones sexual-harassment lawsuit, also attended the hearing, though his role in the proceeding was not clear.
Mr. Clinton is believed to have formally invoked the privilege last week but has steadfastly refused to acknowledge taking that step. White House spokesman James Kennedy and independent counsel spokeswoman Deborah Gershman have declined to comment on the battle over executive privilege.
Former White House Special Counsel Lanny Davis yesterday defended Mr. Clinton's decision to shield conversations with his aides about the scandal. Mr. Clinton is reportedly trying to extend the privilege to cover conversations the aides have had among themselves and with Mrs. Clinton.
"You can't make general comments about whether there should or shouldn't be executive privilege," he said. "You have to look at the very specific question asked. And the D.C. Court of Appeals set out two tests for a prosecutor to overcome executive privilege.
"One: Is it necessary to ask the question in order to advance a criminal investigation?" Mr. Davis said. "The word is 'criminal' and the word is 'advance' and the word is 'necessary.' The independent counsel has to convince the judge that he meets those words for that particular question.
"The second half of the test is: Even if it's necessary to advance a criminal investigation, is there any other way you can get the same information?" Mr. Davis said. "From somebody else? From some other method?
"If the answer to that is no, even if there's an executive privilege asserted, you can override it."
Copyright 1998 News World Communications, Inc.
Reprinted with permission of
The Washington Times.
To subscribe to the Washington Times National Weekly Edition, click this icon or call 800-363-9118.
