In a potential turning point for a fundraising controversy that has so far been marked by murkiness and confusion, Atty. Gen. Janet Reno is scheduled to decide next week whether to seek an independent counsel to investigate President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore.
Reno is widely expected not to request that high-powered special prosecutors pursue allegations that Clinton and Gore telephoned contributors from the White House, in possible violation of a century-old law prohibiting political fundraising in government buildings.
While investigations of alleged fundraising abuses in the 1996 campaign will forge ahead in Congress and the Justice Department, a decision by Reno not to seek independent counsels would dissipate the most immediate threat to the president and his political heir.
The controversy so far has featured dozens of subplots, ranging from accusations that China tried to influence the presidential election to allegations that campaign contributions have been traded for government favors.
A high-profile Senate investigation has faded with few definitive results, and the Justice Department team investigating the matter has been plagued by delays and conflicts. As a result, little opportunity has emerged for authoritative figures to issue anything like clear findings on the myriad allegations.
That is why next week’s events are viewed by some as a key development.
“They are critically important,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “The attorney general has been under enormous pressure this entire calendar year from the Republican Party to appoint a special counsel. Calling her before Congress, speaking on the floor, threats to remove her, press conferences–there weren’t many arrows left in the quiver.”
Republicans respond that Reno has been under equal pressure from the White House not to pursue an independent counsel. They see next week’s decision as critical because it will finally reveal, they say, whether Reno is an upright official or a partisan lackey.
“In the event that she does not appoint an independent counsel, it would really be a travesty of justice,” said Tim Fitzpatrick, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. “She has been acting as defense attorney for the president, as opposed to acting as the attorney general.”
Whatever Reno decides, a new round of strident partisan squabbling is certain to erupt.
“If she does not appoint a special counsel, you will hear screams of rage from the right wing and the Republicans, calling for her impeachment and removal,” Durbin predicted. “I can write the script for you. It’s like Mr. Pavlov’s dog.”
Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson already has called for Reno’s resignation if she takes the expected course.
In addition, Reno is expected to make a decision on seeking an independent counsel to investigate former Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary. O’Leary has been accused of agreeing to meet with a Chinese official in exchange for a contribution to her favorite charity.
Reno likely will dismiss this allegation, too, as not credible enough to warrant an independent counsel.
If the attorney general were to decide that an independent counsel is warranted to probe Clinton, Gore or O’Leary, she would notify a special three-judge panel, which would make the appointment.
Independent counsels are special prosecutors who are granted an extraordinary degree of freedom to explore charges against officials.
Currently, independent counsels are investigating allegations arising from the Clintons’ ill-fated Whitewater land deal; accusations that ex-Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros lied to the FBI about payments he made to a former mistress; and charges that former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy accepted improper gifts.
Following next week’s decisions, Reno still must decide about an independent counsel for one more top-level official: Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, who is alleged to have lied to Congress about an encounter with a lobbyist regarding a proposed Indian casino.
At the Justice Department, a team of 120 lawyers, investigators and staffers continues sifting the fundraising mess. It is expected that in the next few weeks or months indictments will be made against Democratic fundraisers or contributors. This could prompt the accused to reveal new information about more prominent figures.
Republicans continue to be upset at Reno’s conduct of the fundraising investigation.
By considering only the narrow question of whether Clinton or Gore made the fundraising calls, they say, Reno has ignored a host of broader violations.
“The Department of Justice has left a lot of stones unturned here,” said the RNC’s Fitzpatrick.
But Kenneth Gross, a Washington attorney specializing in election law, says Reno has done a credible job.
“She has been very literal about her interpretation of the statute,” Gross said. “There is just so much swarming around this whole issue that she basically has had to keep her eye on the law. If she starts wandering around into perceptions or into the political maelstrom, she will end up going crazy.”
