Subject: Is Clinton Above the Law????
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 151923 -0600 (CST)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
......WOW!!....The Supreme Court just answered the question.....
...Bill Clinton has no more rights and/or privileges than any
other citizen......He is NOT above the law......These witnesses
will now be obliged to testify (truthfully!) before the Congress.
.......(It is still possible that the U.S. Constitution will prove to
be more powerful than the pollsters!!!.....)....So long as we can
maintain the inviolability of that principle, we can be confident of
passing on our free society to future generations.....THAT is the
Constitutional principle which Bill Clinton has challenged....guru...
_________________________________________________________________
02:43 PM ET 11/09/98
U.S. Supreme Court accepts Starr arguments
(inserts independent counsel comment, paragraph 15)
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court Monday rejected
White House and Clinton administration appeals arguing that
presidential lawyers and bodyguards should be shielded from
testifying to the Monica Lewinsky grand jury.
In two important cases, the high court allowed Secret
Service officers to disclose what they learn while protecting
President Clinton and said White House lawyer Bruce Lindsey may
be questioned about conversations with Clinton.
By a 7-2 vote, the court rejected the White House argument
that attorney-client privilege bars Lindsey's testimony and
denied the administration's request to create a new privilege to
protect the bodyguards from answering questions.
The two cases were among the most bitterly fought legal
battles during independent counsel Kenneth Starr's investigation
of whether Clinton had an affair with the former White House
intern Lewinsky and lied about it under oath.
While the court's action has little practical impact for
Starr's investigation as he already has submitted a report to
Congress listing possible impeachable offenses by Clinton, the
cases involved important legal principles and may be cited in
the future.
Although not a ruling on the merits, the court's rejection
of the two appeals drew impassioned dissents from Clinton's only
two appointees on the tribunal -- Justices Stephen Breyer and
Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Breyer accepted the administration's argument that forcing
the bodyguards to testify would undermine the special bond of
trust they enjoy, causing the president to push his protectors
away and increasing the risk of presidential assassination.
He listed 12 presidential assassination attempts in U.S.
history, including one attack in 1994 when a gunman opened fire
on the White House. Clinton, who was in the White House private
residence, was not injured.
``There are strong reasons for believing that a president's
physical safety requires the nearby presence of Secret Service
agents,'' Breyer wrote. ``History ... teaches that the
difference between life and death can be a matter of a few feet
between a president and his protectors.''
He said a president has to assume in the future that any
conversation, including lawful discussions about politics or
personalities, might be disclosed later by a nearby Secret
Service agent.
On attorney-client privilege, Breyer said presidents in the
future may decide to hold back information from government
lawyers on significant matters, perhaps hiring outside lawyers
instead.
The White House expressed disappointment that the Supreme
Court denied its appeal in the attorney-client case.
``We continue to believe that the attorney-client privilege
should protect conversations between government officials and
government attorneys,'' Charles Ruff, the White House counsel,
said in a statement.
``The American people benefit from decisions made by
government officials, including the president, on the basis of
full and frank information and discussion,'' he said.
But Starr's office issued a statement saying it was
''gratified'' by the decisions, but in a slap at the White
House, added, ``The administration's continued assertion of
these privileges substantially delayed and impeded the grand
jury's right to evidence.''
Lindsey, one of Clinton's most trusted advisers, has
appeared a number of times before Starr's grand jury, but has
refused to testify about certain information he claimed was
protected by attorney-client privilege.
A federal judge and a U.S. court of appeals have disagreed
with the White House's attorney-client claims, and Chief Justice
William Rehnquist ruled Aug. 4 that Lindsey may be called to
testify while the appeal was pending.
But when Lindsey, the deputy White House counsel, appeared
before the grand jury at the end of August, he still refused to
answer all questions, this time raising executive privilege
claims, Starr said.
The ruling involving Lindsey also applies to other White
House lawyers.
The Secret Service case arose after Starr earlier this year
issued a number of subpoenas demanding that the guards testify
about what they saw or heard concerning Clinton's relationship
with Lewinsky.
After a federal judge, the appeals court and Rehnquist
rejected the administration's position, Starr summoned Clinton's
top bodyguard and about a dozen current or former Secret Service
officials before the grand jury.
Their testimony was included in Starr's report to Congress
in September on possible impeachable offenses by Clinton.
^REUTERS@
References
1. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=main&
2. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=userprofile&
3. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=feedback&
4. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=about&
5. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=terms&
6. http://www.infobeat.com/main/cgi/main_merc.cgi?action=custom&
7. http://adserver.merc.com/adserver.cgi?version=1.0&action=adclick&eid=1&id=0f054dfa69fe8fcca30b8f9e713d15e8583
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html