SENSENBRENNER: The gentleman's time has expired. And I think it now is now proper to take a 10-minute recess. I would like to ask the audience to remain in the room, until Judge Starr exits the room and ask the members of the committee, either to stay in the room or not go too far away. The committee stands in recess until 6:10.

HYDE: Now ladies and gentlemen, I would just like to announce sort of a schedule. Things are kind of ad hoc up here. We're going to finish with the members' questioning under the five minute rule. Then when that happens, we're going to take a half hour dinner break. I -- it's unfortunate we just took a break, but maybe it was fortunate for some of you.

But anyway, we will at the end of the completion of the members' questioning, we will take a half-hour break. And then we will come back and Mr. Kendall I believe will question Mr. Starr. We'll start out with a half hour, and then if Mr. Kendall needs more time, as I suspect, we will be liberal in allowing that so that he can ask what he wants to ask or needs to ask.

And then Mr. Schippers will question, if he desires to.

And then we will let Mr. Starr go home with three medals and purple heart.

STARR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: Then we go to a full committee meeting, but you needn't stay for that, although God knows you're welcome.

So the next -- the next questioner is the distinguished gentlelady from California, Ms. Waters.

WATERS: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, let me just start, before I get into the areas that I would like to pay attention to, I'd like to help out my friend from California, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren.

She asked you, would you be willing to release the press from their confidentiality pledge to you and your office so that we can get the leaks investigated that are in question.

STARR: I believe that it would, Congresswoman Waters, be unwise and inappropriate for me at this time in this setting -- and I'm delighted to pursue this in executive session.

WATERS: That's OK. Your answer today is you would be unwilling to do that.

STARR: I believe it would be unwise at this time, with litigation under seal still proceeding. I'm very respectful of the orderliness of that proceeding and it seems to me that that...

WATERS: OK. I just don't want to take up a lot of time with it.
STARR: I'm sorry.
WATERS: I just wanted to know if you would do it or not. The answer is no.
STARR: I -- excuse me...
WATERS: What would you say...
STARR: ... if...
WATERS: Yes, and I understand.
STARR: At this time...
WATERS: I understand.
STARR: ... because of the pendency of the litigation.
WATERS: Let me just go on. I only have five minutes.
STARR: Yes. I'm sorry.

WATERS: I have been one of your harshest critics and you know it.

I have been appalled by what I consider the gross unfairness of the procedure; of the way in which you have conducted yourself.

I've been very critical of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle because of the way that they received these referrals and then dumped into the public domain without any opportunity for the administration, the White House to review the information.

So I make no bones about it. I think that some of the tactics that have been used are unacceptable. I think that the moment it was understood that you were going to remain, for example, on the payroll of your law firm where you would be representing the tobacco companies, for example, while the president of the United States had made them a number one target in his administration for dealing with -- trying to discontinue the smoking by youth in our society and dealing with all of the health risk.

And I think that it is just totally unacceptable that as late as 1995, you were representing the tobacco interest in your law firm at the same time that you were working for us.

As I -- how long did you work for your law firm representing the tobacco interest? And how much did it overlap with this investigation, starting with Whitewater?

STARR: I had two representations. One was an appeal on a class action, which was in the time frame, Congresswoman Waters, of 1995, and 1996. Prior to that time, I believe it was 1994 -- I would have to reconstruct this -- I took on a specific representation again on an appeal, which as you may know, is what I typically do. That was in the 1994 time frame. The issues that I took on were in one a instance, constitutional issues and the second was a federal civil procedure issue.

WATERS: Did you ever feel you were in conflict of interest by working for your law firm at the same time that you were working as independent counsel?

STARR: Congresswoman Waters I did not. I had ethics advice both at the law firm and in the independent counsel's office. And our effort has always been in our office to make sure that we are addressing these issues carefully.

WATERS: So you do normally seek the advice so that you will not get into ethical problems, is that right?

STARR: Yes. We do...

WATERS: Let me just ask you, you did take the oath of office here today and you mentioned in your testimony that the president took the oath of office to tell the truth; however, when you were asked about how you conducted yourself when you sought to expand your jurisdiction in this matter, you literally did not disclose the information that may have a caused the attorney general to rule differently.

What's interesting about it -- the way that you presented it today -- when you were asked very specific questions, you said I don't recall; I don't quite remember; I'm not so sure; I will have to search my memory -- those kinds of answers.

Yet when the president of the United States responded in that way, you outright called him a liar.

Now, am I to assume that your inability to recollect your involvement -- for example, how many hours did you spent on the brief that you did for the Independent Women's Forum?

STARR: Congresswoman Waters, the answer to the question is I did no brief for the Independent Woman's Forum. And I also respectfully but firmly disagree with your characterization.

I try to put before this committee the events with respect to the -- January of 1998 and why it was that certain things that I had been involved with such as the in Independent Women's Forum...

WATERS: What did you do for them?
STARR: I beg your pardon?

WATERS: What did you do for the Independent Woman's Forum?

STARR: I considered, as I did for Bob Fiske, as I also indicated, doing an amicus brief solely limited to the proposition that the president of the United States is just like the rest of us in that, as a private citizen, he must in fact, respond in court to lawsuits against him.

WATERS: You didn't consider that was a possible information that you should have disclosed to the attorney general when you were seeking to expand your jurisdiction?

STARR: May I respond briefly?
HYDE: Please.

STARR: As I indicated, that information with respect to the Independent Women's Forum was -- I believed then, and I continue to believe, was publicly reported -- what I have indicated today to the committee is the Bob Fiske inquiry had not been in the public domain. But I also didn't think that was of issue of relevancy to the attorney general even though, frankly, perhaps I should have thought of that in as much as that was the Department of Justice -- through Bob Fiske, the independent counsel appointed by the Department of Justice.

HYDE: The gentlelady's time has expired.

WATERS: Yes, but I would ask you for 30 seconds. I have just one issue I have to get in here about abuse of power.

There's a whole list of items that I would like to discuss with you. Much of them said about what happened Monica Lewinsky over in the shopping center at the hotel, but there are others that I am very concerned about.

Are you familiar with Ms. Steele and what she's alleging about what you're doing? Did your investigators ask for her tax records, her bank records, her credit report, her telephone records and question the adoption of a child to try and find out whether it was legal? Did they treat her that way?

STARR: Congresswoman Waters the answer to the first question is, if I have the questions right you asked a series of question. What was your first question? I think it was, yes.

WATERS: Tell me about Ms. Steele. What do you know about her? Did you know your investigators had asked for her tax records, her bank records, her credit reports, her telephone records all because supposedly she was told something by one of the targeted witnesses in the tapes.

STARR: I now understand the question.

We have asked through FBI investigators a variety of questions to individuals that in the judgment of professional experience investigators have a bearing on the witnesses credibility.

WATERS: Did you know she felt abused by you and your investigators?
STARR: I am aware that there are issues that she has raised.
WATERS: OK. Fine, OK. I just wanted to know if you knew and finally...

HYDE: The gentle lady's time -- if your not going to give him a chance to answer your time has expired.

WATERS: Well, let me just take this. You may take the time to answer, but there is one more sixteen year old boy who was subpoenaed at school that you sent your investigators to school to get because you were trying to get his father and you know who I'm talking about.

(UNKNOWN MEMBER): Mr. Chairman, regular order.
HYDE: The gentlelady really give Mr. Starr
WATERS: OK. All right.
HYDE: ... chance to answer and please don't ask more questions.
WATERS: All right. OK.
STARR: I can be brief.
WATERS: Yes.

STARR: That was in the Arkansas phase of our investigation. The individual in question we believe had relevant information.

No subpoena as I understand it was in fact served, but the agent in question did go to the school. In my judgment that was a misjudgment. I don't think he should have even gone to the school, but it's my best understanding that he did not, in fact, effect the service of the subpoena on the young person there.

If I am mistaken then I will say this, no, he should not have gone to the school, but could I add this? We have had in this investigation jurisdiction granted to us in a wide variety of areas that has cost when I took for Bob Fiske, he had a presence of about 120 people in Little Rock. Congresswoman Waters there may be steps along the way that you would say, well, why was that particular judgment made. Gosh, that wasn't a very wise thing to do and I do think it is unwise to go to a school. I completely agree with that.

WATERS: And about the subpoena of the 80 year old grandmother.

HYDE: The gentlelady's time...

WATERS: The same gentleman, you've subpoenaed an 80-year-old grandmother?

HYDE: The gentle lady's time has expired. Will you please follow the chair. Mr. Chabot is recognized.

WATERS: Let him answer that one.

email complaints, suggestions & satirical contributions to
mirth@benegesserit.com