THE TAPE DEBATE September 17, 1998 The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Transcript

---

The House Judiciary Committee is currently debating whether it should make President Clinton's videotaped testimony available to the public. Following a background report, Margaret Warner and guests discuss the videotape debate.

---

A RealAudio version of this segment is available. NEWSHOUR LINKS September 17, 1998: A background report on the videotape debate. September 16, 1998: Senator Daschle discusses President Clinton's problems. September 15, 1998: Two members of the House Judiciary Committee debate releasing President Clinton's videotaped testimony. September 14, 1998: A discussion on the media's coverage of the Starr report. September 11, 1998: The Starr report and White House rebuttal. September 11, 1998: Mark Shields and Paul Gigot debate the potential impact of Kenneth Starr's referral to Congress. September 11, 1998: Two former federal prosecutors examine the legal issues presented in the Starr report. September 10, 1998: What is the constitutional basis for impeaching a president? September 9, 1998: Kenneth Starr drops off his case to the House. September 3, 1998: Four former senators discuss whether the president should step down. Browse the NewsHour's coverage of Starr investigation, the White House and Congress. OUTSIDE LINKS: The White House The House Judiciary Committee.

MARGARET WARNER: And now the perspectives of two House leaders: Congressman Christopher Cox of California is chairman of the Republican Policy Committee; and Congressman Vic Fazio also of California is the chairman of the Democratic Caucus. Welcome, gentlemen. Congressman Cox, I'm told that the committee just broke up for the evening, that no decision has been made on releasing this videotape. Do you know anything more what's going on?

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Well, as you know, the committee is meeting in executive session, which means that neither I nor Congressman Fazio nor any other member of the House who is not on the Judiciary Committee is party to those proceedings, nor will we find out about them even afterward. We will find out about the result. The reason that they meet in executive session, of course, is so that they can discuss fully all of the things that they have before them, including those that ultimately will not be released. It's my understanding that some of the material almost certainly will never be released to the rest of Congress or to the public, but rather kept under seal.

MARGARET WARNER: But, now are you talking about some of the contents of that videotape, or some of the other 2000 plus pages of material that Kenneth Starr submitted?

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: No, no, not the president's testimony, but other material that is ancillary to the main report that Mr. Starr delivered to the House of Representatives.

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman Fazio, do you know anything more about what's happening in the Judiciary Committee? I mean, do you think it's fair to say that there's some second thoughts about releasing the videotape?

REP. VIC FAZIO: Well, I certainly hope so. I think we need to get off to a fair objective process here. And I'm a little concerned that we follow up the unfortunate decision not to give the president at least two days, let alone the ten days a member of Congress would have, to have reviewed the material before it was released to the public last Friday. If we today make a decision, or tomorrow, it appears now, that would take this tape that was made – I understand to facilitate the absence of a grand juror – and make it available to the public, I think we have compounded the mistake that the Republican majority seems to be making and making a far more partisan process than would be ultimately good for the institution and I think for rendering of justice on the president's case.

MARGARET WARNER: Now are you saying, Congressman Fazio, that you object to ever releasing the videotape, or just simply releasing it under a certain timetable?

Rep. Fazio: " The damage to the President's moral authority.

REP. VIC FAZIO: Well, first of all, I need to make it available now makes little sense if it is determined by the committee that it is, in part at least, part of the evidence that needs to be made available when they decide, if they decide, to bring any charges against the president, it might be reconsidered then. But, you know, this is something that could be made available to all members of Congress if they want to view it, it could be made available in transcript form. But we have now is a proposal to simply make it part of the media's domain so it will run all day on the cable television and, of course, be available for candidates to use in their campaigns. I think I'm really happy to hear what John Linder and Martin Frost have said about not abusing individuals' private lives in our congressional campaigns. But, of course, I'm not sure that extended to including the president's private life, as it would be portrayed in campaign commercials throughout this campaign year. I think there is at least the suspicion that that is one of the reasons why people want this tape to be out now.

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman Cox, what about that idea, what about delaying the release of the videotape or the use of it, at least until a decision is made about whether to proceed with an impeachment inquiry?

Rep. Cox: "I should be able to see more than the transcript. I should be able to see the video."

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Well, of course, in order to determine whether there should be an impeachment inquiry, I will have to vote as a member of Congress. But under the resolution that was adopted governing the handling of those materials referred by the independent counsel, they remain in executive session until September 28th, when – all will be released, and so only if they are released from the executive session character will I be able to view them as a member of Congress in order to vote, and I would go well beyond what my colleague just said. I should be able to see more than the transcript. I should be able to see the video. Jurors have long had the right, not only in our own country but prior to the foundation of our country, to look at a witness, to look at his demeanor, to look at the expression on his face, his emphasis. There's no bold or italics in a transcript, no pause indicated, no indication of what the witness's mannerisms were. But all of these things are solid indicators of whether a witness is telling the truth. When the independent counsel referred this material to us, one of the allegations and one of the surprising allegations to me was that the president lied, committed perjury before the grand jury just a few weeks ago. And now if that is so, if the president's position, as his lawyers have advanced it, is not correct, that the president was not telling the truth, we'll have to be able to see that in the tape. On the other hand, if the president is telling the truth, we should be able to see that as well. It is the witness's credibility in this case, the President of the United States, that is the issue that we must decide if we are to say there's enough fear to start an impeachment inquiry.

REP. VIC FAZIO: I would say this, Chris, if it's important for you not only to read what the president said but to see him saying it, then you could see it, just as other members of Congress could, in camera, in the committee's domain, without it being made available to everyone else, I think that would be more than an adequate means for the jurors in this case --

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: That's theoretically possible --

REP. VIC FAZIO: We are jurors. We are people here who are supposed to be at least hopefully immune from the pressures of public opinion. We're supposed to be viewing the facts and making our own considered judgment the way any other juror would. And I would really hope that we would not make this available because I think it does continue the impression, the people are out to get the president, they were somehow putting it out in the domain of the cable networks and of the campaign managers and their video consultants, rather than using it as a way in which we could become better informed about what this momentous decision of ours should be.

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: I'd just make two quick points. The first is that already people have been asked already to comment, those who have seen the tape, about what goes on in that video, and you've seen reports in print that the president is doing this or that, rather than hearsay, rather than at this point we should have the facts speak for themselves. And second, and perhaps even more importantly, once this material is made public, all of it, then the people can judge for themselves. This is an open process. This is a democracy, not a closed society. And the founders, when they created the impeachment provisions in the Constitution as Alexander Hamilton pointed out in the Federalist Papers, had in mind that this would be a very public process and an open one.

REP. VIC FAZIO: I think we have to look back 25 years to the Nixon process.

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: -- Congress as well –

REP. VIC FAZIO: In the Nixon era the Jaworski report to the committee was never made public -- released publicly to the networks –

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Do you want our attention?

MARGARET WARNER: I'd love your attention. Mr. Fazio, let me go to you with the second thing we wanted to talk about, which is Henry Hyde, the furor over this Salon Magazine article. Now Tom Delay, the House Majority Whip, said today that he thinks – he's got the FBI to investigate - - he says it's essentially a conspiracy. He mentioned aides with access to the Oval Office. They're trying to intimidate the Judiciary Committee by exposing their private lives. Do you think that's what's going on?

Rep. Fazio: "The media is enjoying this circus. The Congress is being eviscerated by it."

REP. VIC FAZIO: I really don't. I am saddened by this. It's an outrage that Henry Hyde has been put through this. I said in my remarks last Friday that Representatives Burton and Chenoweth should not nave been exposed to this. I mean, the bottom line is when you open up this avenue of inquiry into the private lives of individuals, including the President of the United States, there needs to be an understanding by all the parties involved that we won't put an end to it. We can't cap it. It will continued unabated, because there are people around this country who have grievances against members of Congress, they'll go the media, and they'll become public. Now when I heard from a Republican colleague concerns about this, before the Hyde information had hit the news last evening, I called the White House. I talked to Erskine Bowles and John Podesta. John said to me not only will we fire the person if we find a person who may have contributed to this, but if I find anyone authorized this, that I respond to, I will quit. In other words, the White House is just as white hot angry about this. And you can understand why. It couldn't be more stupid to inflame the jury we've just been talking about by making this kind of information available. It is clear, from what I've read, that the individual who wanted this story out has been shopping it around for six months. There will always be a left wing or a right wing publication that will go with something, however irresponsible, and then the rest of the media will regrettably, of course, have to carry it. The media is enjoying this circus. The Congress is being eviscerated by it. It will not be just one party's blood running. Everyone's will run. And it is compounding the tragedy that involves the president.

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman Cox, how do you see it, in terms of the source of this story and the impact that's happened?

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Well, I agree with Congressman Fazio that this is way out of bounds. I also would point out that the reason for the referral today to the FBI is that on ABC News last night Peter Jennings and Linda Douglass reported that a senior White House official is the person who has been trying to peddle this story two to reporters concerning Henry Hyde and to a third reporter concerning other Republican members of Congress. I would also point out that while the reply, the distraction in this strategy, seems to be that it's all about sex, that we need to stick to our knitting in Congress. The reason there is an impeachment referral is not that the president had a private sexual affair, but rather that he lied allegedly before a grand jury; he lied allegedly in another court proceeding; a federal court proceeding; and even insofar as the sex is concerned, it took place in the Oval Office with a federal employee.

REP. VIC FAZIO: Let me say, Margaret, that the White House has told ABC News they want the name. They have waived any potential confidentiality, any right under the First Amendment, or anywhere else. They are after this information. And I think they are sincerely interested in doing what they can to assuring the Congress that they're not going to be part of an effort to tamper with this jury. I think we also see, however, the very effective use of this by the Republican leadership and Tom DeLay to whip up a partisan frenzy among his own troops. I guess that's to be understood and expected, but it is not, unfortunately, what he ought to be doing. This is not the time to escalate. This is the time to do what Frost and Linder did, which is to calm the troops. There are so many innocent people that have already been caught up in this, hopefully more won't be caught up in the release of this information from the committee tomorrow. And I hope we can put an end to it now. We all want to.

MARGARET WARNER: And before we close, Congressman Cox, what about that point just eight days ago Kenneth Starr sent this report to Congress and Speaker Gingrich talked about handling it in a judicious and bipartisan way, is that hope over already?

Back to partisan politics?

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Well, I don't think so. As you know, the people that you don't see arguing about this are the members of the Judiciary Committee. They are conducting this, as they should, in executive session so that they are free to discuss this without worrying about to whom the information is unintentionally directed. When they finish, I think that they will make sure that they do their work consistently with a resolution concerning the handling of this material that passed the House. When the resolution concerning this material passed the House, it was by a vote of 363 to 62, I believe. The Minority Leader, Dick Gephardt supported it; the Speaker Newt Gingrich supported it; and it provides for the release of all of this material on September 28th or before.

REP. VIC FAZIO: But it was done, Margaret, with the hope that this committee would be judicious about what salacious material should be kept in the committee and with the protection of the rights of the president as well.

MARGARET WARNER: All right, gentlemen, that's all the time we have, but thank you both very much.

REP. VIC FAZIO: Thank you.

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX: Happy to join you.

REGIONS TOPICS RECENT PROGRAMS ABOUT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS:

Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.