Time: Fri Dec 12 17:07:49 1997 To: From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: JANET RENO - PROSECUTOR OR COVER-UP GIRL? (fwd) Cc: Bcc: sls References: I vote: COVER-UP FATALE! /s/ Paul Mitchell, Candidate for Congress http://supremelaw.com <snip> > >December 3, 1997 > >AIM Column > >JANET RENO - PROSECUTOR OR COVER-UP GIRL? > >Years ago, we at Accuracy in Media learned that one must read newspapers >with care - that journalistic bias or ineptitude is often revealed through >what is not published, rather than the information that gets into print. A >good example came in early December, with the criminal conviction of the >chief of staff to Mike Espy, the former secretary of agriculture, on charges >of lying to conceal $22,000 in gifts he took from businesses regulated by >Espy. What network television and most newspapers did not include in their >reports was the fact that the conviction of the aide, Ronald Blackley, came >despite dogged opposition from Attorney General Janet Reno, who can't seem >to decide whether her job is as the nation's chief prosecutor or as a >protector of the Clinton Administration. > >Here's the story. In 1994, a panel of three federal judges appointed lawyer >Donald Smaltz as independent counsel to investigate charges that Secretary >Espy took illegal gifts from businesses his department regulated. The first >flush of evidence was so abundant that Espy had to resign. Smaltz's >investigation eventually turned up evidence that persons other than Espy >were involved in the funny-money shenanigans, and he made a routine request >to the Justice Department that his mandate be expanded to include the new >targets. To his surprise, Reno's Justice Department refused his request, >whereupon Smaltz appealed to the panel which appointed him. Reno's >underlings did not desist. The Justice Department filed a motion with the >panel opposing Smaltz's request. It came from Justice's Office of Public >Integrity - and never has there been an office in Washington so >inappropriately titled; it should be renamed the Office of Public Coverups. >The judges, to their lasting credit, slapped aside Reno's opposition and >told Smaltz to go after whatever malefactors he turned up. > >After a jury convicted Blackley, Smaltz spoke bitingly of how Janet Reno >tried to impede his prosecution. The Justice Department should have >conducted the prosecution itself, he maintained. Instead, Smaltz charged, >Reno's opposition "significantly delayed our investigation and prosecution." >Blackley's sins were not trivial. He now faces 15 years in jail and a >$750,000 fine; Espy is under indictment and goes on trial next year. Now >here's where the media fell down. The conviction came at the very time that >Reno and a worried White House were insisting that no special counsel is >needed in the campaign finance scandal, that she and the Justice Department >can do a competent investigation. Her obstructionism in the Blackley case >demonstrates otherwise. Yet neither The Washington Post nor The New York >Times reported the post-trial criticisms which Smaltz made of Reno. Nor did >any television evening news shows. The only news stories we saw of Smaltz's >comments were in The Washington Times and USA Today. That watchdog Reno had >been sleeping in her kennel was seemingly of no interest to other reporters. > >Blackley's conviction dashes claims by Clinton diehards that the independent >counsels are squandering public money without any results. The President >said derisively at a news conference on March 2, 1996, that Smaltz was >wasting his time investigating a few thousand dollars in gratuities "with 33 >lawyers and a historian." In fact, Smaltz's investigation has collected an >impressive number of scalps. Sun-Diamond Growers, a California cooperative, >was convicted of giving more than $9,000 in gifts to Espy and paid a $1.5 >million fine. Crop Growers, another cooperative, paid $2 million on a >no-contest plea to illegal gifts. Smith-Barney, the brokerage firm, paid a >$1 million fine for illegal gifts. Washington lobbyist James Lake pleaded >guilty to illegal gifts. A jury convicted Jack L. Williams, a lobbyist for >Tyson Foods, for perjury, but an appeals court ordered a new trial. A fraud >indictment against Espy's brother was dismissed. > >Smaltz has gone about his work in classic prosecutorial fashion, indicting >and trying lesser figures and compiling the evidence that could mean big >trouble for former Secretary Espy when he finally faces a jury. Turning an >equally-dogged independent counsel loose on the Clinton-Gore campaign >finance scandals could change the course of American history. > >We'll say this for Janet Reno: when she goes after good publicity, she >receives it by the carload. In the days before her decision on the >fundraising special counsel, The New York Times, Newsweek and Time praised >her as a hard-worker who seldom takes a day off and who walks to her office >every morning. Charming stuff, but also irrelevant. We'll agree that Miss >Reno has a tough job: being the Cover-up Girl for the Clinton White House >requires both nerves and a strong stomach. > > [backtoaimpoint.gif (1883 bytes)] > <snip>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail