Reno stiffs Congress again

Atty. Gen. Janet Reno is once again holding Congress in contempt.

And once again the question on Capitol Hill is whether the Republican majority will formally recognize that fact by actually citing her for contempt of Congress-which is a crime-or, instead, simply let her get away with flouting the constitutional authority of the legislative branch.

The underlying issue is whether the attorney general is covering up for potential crimes by the Vice President of the United States, who also happens to be the presidential nominee of her party.

Specifically, Reno has not responded to a subpoena served on her August 24 by the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee. The subpoena's compliance deadline was August 31-two weeks ago. The subpoena requested any "reports and memoranda" prepared in the year 2000 "regarding the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Vice President Gore," and specifically cited "any report or memorandum" .created by Robert Conrad, the chief`of the Justice Department's Campaign Financing Task Force, "recommending the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Vice President Gore" for possibly committing perjury in a deposition taken by Conrad in April of this year.

Method in Reno's Madness

On August 23, the day before the committee served her with its subpoena, Reno announced she was rejecting Conrad's recommendation for an outside counsel.

Asked why the Justice Department has not responded to the committee's subpoena, department spokesman Myron Marlin told HUMAN EVENTS, "We have received the request, and are in communications with the committee staff."

In response to a follow-up question, he confirmed that by the term "request" he meant the subpoena that required the attorney general to surrender the requested documents two weeks ago.

Congressional investigators say their discussions with the Justice Department regarding the subpoena have been evasive and even nonsensical-but that there has been a method in the department's madness that the committee investigators now recognize from long years of dealing with Reno lieutenants.

For example, in her August 23 press briefing announcing that she was rejecting Conrad's outside counsel request, Reno indicated that the investigation of Gore in this matter was over. "I've concluded that there is no reasonable possibility that further investigation could develop evidence that would support the filing of harges for making a willful false statement," she said.

"I came to the conclusion, as I have indicated," she said, "that no further investigation could produce facts that would permit, under our principles of federal prosecution, the filing of charges."

Yet, congressional investigators say that when they ask Justice Department officials why they have not responded to the committee's subpoena they are told that releasing the requested documents to the committee could compromise ongoing criminal investigations.

This begs an obvious question: investigation of whom if not the Vice President?

The specific potential criminal acts addressed by Reno in her rejection of Conrad's special counsel request involve only possibly perjurious statements by Vice President Gore in his April deposition. The underlying events discussed in that deposition-the White House fundraising coffees and the Democratic National Committee fundraiser at the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple-took place four and five years ago. Is the Justice Department really still investigating, and planning to possibly prosecute, crimes committed at those events by people other than the Vice President himself?

And, if so, congressional investigators say, why doesn't the Justice Department simply redact those portions of the documents that discuss potential crimes committed by people other than Vice President Gore?

Committee sources say the committee now intends to compel Reno to testify in a public hearing on the matter October 5. If necessary, they will subpoena Reno, compelling her to appear.

A spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R.Ill.) said that the speaker would not comment at this time on the attorney general's tack of compliance with `his Congress's subpoena.

In August 1998, the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee voted to cite Reno for contempt of Congress for refusing at that time to comply with a subpoena requiring her to turn over memoranda from FBI Director Louis Freeh and then-Campaign Finance Task Force Director Charles LaBella that concluded she was obligated by law, under the then-current Independent Counsel Act, to call for an independent counsel to investigate both Vice President Gore and President Clinton.

House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R: Ga.) indicated at that time that he would bring the contempt citation up for a vote on the House floor after the August congressional recess. He never did, however.

Congressional investigators now believe there were at least 10 memoranda that shot back and forth between officials of the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation discussing Conrad's recommendation that an outside counsel be named to investigate Gore for perjury in his April deposition. Reno admitted in her briefing that at least two other officials had joined Conrad's call for the outside counsel. It has been reported that one of these officials was FBI Director Louis Freeh.