Secret Service, Starr Battle Before Judge
Currie returns to testify before the grand jury
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, May 14) -- Attorneys for the Secret Service and Independent Counsel Ken Starr took the legal battle over whether Secret Service agents should be forced to testify in the Monica Lewinsky investigation before a judge Thursday.
There is "no authority, none, zero" in the law for the privilege being sought by the Secret Service, Starr argued.
But Gary Grindler, a deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's civil division, argued the safety of the president is at stake and Secret Service agents should be allowed to refuse to answer certain questions.
Judge Norma Holloway Johnson questioned Grindler, saying she did not understand how Secret Service cooperation in the independent counsel's investigation would compromise presidential safety.
"I don't see it," Johnson said.
The Secret Service argued presidents will be inclined to keep its agents away, worrying that agents could be forced to testify about what they see or hear.
Grinder argued Secret Service testimony would damage "the trust and the confidence of the president in the ability of the Secret Service to step in and protect the president against assassination."
The Justice Department attorney revealed that at issue is the testimony of three Secret Service employees.
Starr said it is "inappropriate and indeed illegitimate for the
court to engage" in providing a protective privilege to the Secret Service when Congress has already addressed the issue.
Federal law requires executive branch employees to provide any information they have relating to violation of the criminal code, Starr said.
Starr is seeking the testimony of Secret Service officers about the alleged relationship between President Bill Clinton and Lewinsky, a former White House intern. Clinton is accused of having an affair with Lewinsky and asking her to lie about it under oath. Clinton has denied the accusations.
The Justice Department has defined a privilege that deals with Secret Service employees preventing them from answering certain questions that touch on the area of the protection and safety of the president.
Secret Service Director Lewis Merletti has told Starr in stark terms that if the Service loses its claim of "protective privilege," it would mean, "We will lose a president of the United States to assassination."
Merletti, who headed up Clinton's security detail before becoming director, emphasized to Starr the Secret Service slogan of "trust and confidence." Merletti argues that without that, presidents will not allow agents close enough to provide adequate protection.
Starr has been unmoved, expressing sympathy, but insisting his criminal investigation takes precedence over Secret Service safety concerns.
It isn't known when Johnson will rule on the matter, but most attorneys believe the Secret Service will ultimately lose its effort to create a new legal privilege. They think the judge will rule the agents who shield the president cannot be shielded from testifying about him.
Starr has said arguments over Secret Service testimony and executive privilege have delayed his investigation. Sen. John Ashcroft (R-Mo.) and House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) introduced legislation Wednesday that would require presidents to report to Congress when asserting executive privilege.
Ashcroft, a presidential hopeful, said Clinton is using the privilege "as a delaying tactic to try to shield the details of unofficial acts having nothing to do with national security, but everything to do with Mr. Clinton's personal legal problems."
Johnson ruled on May 4 that the prosecutors' interest in obtaining testimony outweighed the president's claim of executive privilege, according to sources familiar with the ruling. According to a Clinton confidant, the decision to appeal the executive privilege ruling has already been made.
Back at the grand jury
Meanwhile, Betty Currie, the president's personal secretary,
returned Thursday for her fourth appearance before the federal grand jury. The panel is interested in what Currie knows about Lewinsky's visits to the White House.
According to her lawyer, she will likely return for a fifth appearance.
"After four appearances before the grand jury, I am sorry to say that Mrs. Currie is not yet finished," said Currie's attorney, Lawrence Wechsler.
"They have indicated that they are not finished with her testimony yet, and we will have at least one more appearance," Wechsler said.
No date has been set for her return, he said, but "it won't be for the
next week or two."
"Mrs. Currie is answering all of the questions that are asked of her as
best as she is able," he said.
When a reporter asked Wechsler to characterize how detailed the questions are, he answered, "We wish it was going more quickly."
Currie spent more than seven hours Thursday inside the courthouse where the grand jury meets.
CNN's Bob Franken and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
|
News
Lewinsky