I was going to write an article today explaining why the recent Filegate Report of Independent Counsel Robert Ray is flawed and lacks integrity. However, the words of Representative Bob Barr, contained in a March 17, 2000, letter to Mr. Ray and copied to the three-judge panel which oversees independent counsel investigations, speak for themselves.

We all owe a debt of gratitude to public servants like Representative Barr.

The text of his letter, published below, can also be found on Judicial Watch's website and Congressman Barr's website.

March 17, 2000

The Honorable Robert Ray
Independent Counsel
Office of the Independent Counsel
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004

Re: Filegate

Dear Mr. Ray:

I am writing to you about a matter which has, since it was uncovered in June 1996, commonly been referred to as the "Filegate scandal"; involving the illegal acquisition of over 900 FBI files by the Clinton-Gore White House, and the misuse of other government files protected by The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a et. seq., in order to gather information to smear political adversaries and critics. As you may know, I have been subjected to these tactics, in order to prevent me from carrying out my duties as a U.S. Congressman during the impeachment proceedings against President William Jefferson Clinton. As a result, I have brought litigation to redress the harm caused to me and to the Congress, and to obtain the files which The Clinton-Gore White House, and its Justice Department, have been keeping on me. I am therefore a putative plaintiff in the widening Filegate scandal, and an actual plaintiff in my own lawsuit. See Attachment 1.

I am concerned about recent reports published in the New York Times, and elsewhere, that you have met with certain members of media, such as William Safire, and disclosed to them that your investigation of this scandal has failed to yield the evidence required for criminal prosecution, and will therefore be closed. While I do not believe it proper or correct for the Office of the Independent Counsel ("OIC") to be leaking details of its investigation to the media -- particularly before the subject report on Filegate is made available to the public and Congress -- I am even more disturbed by evidence that the OIC has failed to conduct an adequate investigation. This evidence comes largely from a civil lawsuit prosecuted by Judicial Watch, Inc., on behalf of the class of aggrieved persons, many of whom are Republicans, and includes but is not limited to, a number of perceived defects in your investigation.

First, sworn deposition testimony shows that key material witnesses, such as Linda Tripp, Thomas "Mac" McLarty and Terry Good have neither been substantively questioned informally nor called before the grand jury, despite Mr. Starr's representations in his letter of December l1, 1998, to the House Judiciary Committee.

Linda Tripp, who testified at deposition to Judicial Watch that she witnessed the misuse of FBI files on Republicans, and overheard conversations between Associate White House Counsel William Kennedy and Marsha Scott, a close confidante of Bill and Hillary Clinton, that confirmed the contents of these files were shared with the Democratic National Committee at the direction of Mrs. Clinton, was never even interviewed by your office about Filegate. The same is true for Mr. McLarty, the President's closest friend and The White House Chief of Staff during the period of Filegate. Terry Good, who, as Director of The White House Office of Records Management, delivered up Privacy Act protected files on Linda Tripp, Kathleen Willey and Monica Lewinsky to The White House Counsel's Office -- some of which material was leaked to the media -- and as someone who stored the overflow of Republican FBI files in his office, should also have been questioned, but was not. Hillary Clinton -- who evidence shows was the mastermind of Filegate -- was questioned informally by Ken Starr for only nine minutes. James Carville was never questioned at all, by Ken Starr's own admission. These are just a few of the many examples of material witnesses who have not been substantively interviewed or called before the grand jury by the OIC.

Second, it defies imagination how the OIC could rely on the FBI to investigate its own improper acts in Filegate, rather than using some other, independent law enforcement or investigatory body. By the admission of its current Director, Louis Freeh, the FBI engaged in egregious violations of privacy without justification when it turned over the subject FBI files to The Clinton-Gore White House. It is therefore not difficult to figure out that the agency should not have been charged with investigating itself. This is akin to asking the fox to investigate his own henhouse massacre. Indeed, past experiences concerning Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, and the Olympic bombing, confirm that the agency cannot properly or objectively investigate its own misconduct.

Indeed, the FBI's conduct in this matter is also troubling. I am aware that two agents of the FBI visited the home of former FBI Special Agent Dennis Sculimbrene; shortly after it was disclosed he had recorded a conversation with former White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum linking Hillary Clinton to the hiring of Craig Livingstone, the former bar bouncer who was encharged, along with Anthony Marceca, with reviewing the subject FBI files. During this visit, former Special Agent Sculimbrene was harassed and intimidated in an attempt to silence or discredit him. Incidentally, Mr. Livingstone's sidekick, Mr. Marceca, invoked the Fifth Amendment nearly 2,000 times when he testified to Judicial Watch -- hardly the conduct of someone who had engaged in an "innocent bureaucratic snafu." For Mr. Marceca's "efforts," his testimony shows that he was rewarded with salary step increases, and never even criticized by the Clinton-Gore Administration for his misconduct.

Third, when Judicial Watch deposed William Kennedy, the Associate White House Counsel who not only supervised Livingstone and Marceca, but also reviewed the subject FBI files himself (having by the admission of his former wife, Gail Leslie Kennedy, taken them home and loaded them onto a computer on the kitchen table), he was asked whether he stored the files of Republicans in his office. In response, he literally choked -- as revealed by the videotape of his testimony.

Fourth, recent revelations -- based on the sworn testimony of two Clinton-Gore White House whistleblowers -- show that The White House has suppressed over 100,000 and perhaps as many as 1,000,000 e-mails, in addition to about 500 hard drive cartridges, which contain incriminating evidence concerning Filegate, Travelgate, Chinagate, Lewinsky and other Clinton scandals. I understand from Judicial Watch you have refused to meet personally with these witnesses, much like your predecessor, Ken Starr, who never met with Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, and other key persons who had evidence about key aspects of the Clinton-Gore scandals. Notwithstanding this, how can you meet with William Safire of the New York Times, and leak information about the results of the OIC's investigations -- thereby creating a false impression that you have thoroughly investigated Filegate and other matters -- when your office has not reviewed crucial evidence and met with key, material witnesses?

Finally, I am aware, from published reports in The Washington Post, that Attorney General Janet Reno had offered to drop her ethics investigation of alleged improprieties in your office, if the OIC closed its investigations. Ms. Reno's offer was based on her professed claim that the Justice Department would no longer have jurisdiction to pursue an ethics investigation if your investigation(s) were closed. See Attachment 2. The timing of your revelations to close the OIC's investigations is therefore quite troubling.

For all of these reasons -- and this simply scratches the surface -- I am deeply concerned that you and your office have failed to duly execute your duties as Independent Counsel. In addition, as I am personally involved in the Filegate scandal -- it has been reported that The White House obtained my FBI and other government files (See Attachment 3) -- I demand a full explanation, before deciding what further action is necessary. I understand that in addition to me, neither you nor your office have been in contact with other aggrieved parties, prior to your leaking the results of your apparent findings to William Safire, and now forwarding your report on Filegate to the three-judge panel.

As a private, aggrieved citizen, and a member of the House Judiciary Committee and Government Reform Committee, I will not rest until justice is done. Clearly, your leaked findings on Filegate and some of the other Clinton-Gore scandals are suspect.

Thank you for the courtesy of a prompt and full response within five (5) days.

Sincerely,

Bob Barr

cc: