.Obama testifies for federal prosecutors
Every president for more than three decades has had to talk with federal prosecutors at one time or another. President-elect Barack Obama may have set a land speed record by giving his first interview to investigators even before taking the oath of office.
Obama sat down last week with four investigators looking into the alleged attempt to sell his former Senate seat. As a witness, rather than a target, Obama seems to have had an easier time with the experience than some of his predecessors. But it is certainly not the way he wanted to begin his presidency.
"Here the guy hasn't even gotten his tuxedo for the ball yet and already there's a prosecutor who wants to talk him," said Robert Bennett, one of Washington's most prominent lawyers who has represented members of Congress, cabinet secretaries and even former President Bill Clinton in all manner of politically charged cases. "It's the era that we live in."
Another reflection of the era is that Obama and his team evidently made no effort to avoid the interview. In the past, some presidents have cooperated with prosecutors or court proceedings only reluctantly, delaying or trying to limit the parameters of their involvement while expressing concern about their prerogatives as the head of the executive branch. But in recent years, the practice has grown so commonplace that Obama's aides said there was never any debate about whether he would answer questions.
"There was absolutely no hesitation whatsoever about making him available - none," said one person involved in the transition.
With no known legal exposure himself, of course, that was an easier decision for Obama. As a political matter, Obama, coming into office on promises of transparency and reform, may have had little choice but to cooperate, even if it meant disclosing the sorts of internal deliberations that presidents often guard jealously, like whether he wanted an adviser to serve on the White House staff or in the Senate.
In addition, a president-elect could have a harder time making a legal argument about shielding confidential discussions than a sitting president does. The concept of executive privilege, while not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, has been recognized by courts over the years, though it can be outweighed in such compelling circumstances as a criminal investigation. It is a matter of some debate among lawyers whether, as president-elect, Obama would have any claim to executive privilege.
Obama was interviewed on Dec. 18 at his Chicago transition office by two assistant U.S. attorneys and two agents from the FBI looking into alleged attempts by Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois to profit from his appointment of Obama's successor to the Senate. Obama was accompanied by his personal lawyer, Robert Bauer, and an associate, but not by Gregory Craig, who has been designated the new White House counsel, Obama advisers said.
The U.S. attorney in Chicago, Patrick Fitzgerald, who is leading the investigation into Blagojevich, did not attend. The two-hour interview was not recorded or conducted under oath, although one FBI agent and Bauer's associate took copious notes, and it is a felony to lie to federal investigators even without being sworn in.
Obama answered every question posed and his lawyers made no objections, according to one adviser to the president-elect. Two of Obama's aides were interviewed separately and he made no effort to block his advisers from answering questions, as some past presidents have done. Rahm Emanuel, the incoming White House chief of staff, brought his lawyer, W. Neil Eggleston, a prominent Washington attorney who was White House associate counsel under Clinton. Valerie Jarrett, named a senior presidential adviser, was accompanied by Vincent Connelly, a Chicago lawyer who was an assistant U.S. attorney.
Eggleston declined to comment Wednesday, and Connelly did not respond to an e-mail message.
The precedent of presidents agreeing to be interviewed by law enforcement authorities can be traced back 200 years to when Thomas Jefferson offered to provide testimony for use at the treason trial of his former vice president, Aaron Burr. James Monroe provided answers at the White House to questions for the court martial of an appointee. Ulysses S. Grant wanted to testify at the corruption trial of his secretary, but was talked out of it by his cabinet. Instead, he gave a deposition at the White House presided over by the chief justice.
But those were rarities until Watergate. Ever since, every president has been called to talk with the authorities, either as a witness or a subject. Gerald Ford provided videotaped testimony in the trial of a woman who tried to assassinate him. Jimmy Carter gave depositions or testimony in several proceedings against others. After leaving office Ronald Reagan provided videotaped testimony in the Iran-contra trial of an aide while George H. W. Bush was interviewed about the scandal while still vice president.
Clinton provided sworn testimony at least 10 times, according to David Kendall, his attorney in the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky investigations. His testimony to the grand jury about his relationship with Lewinsky became the basis for an article of impeachment passed by the House of Representatives but later rejected by the Senate. President George W. Bush was interviewed by Fitzgerald for 70 minutes about the leak of a CIA officer's name.
With all that recent history, Obama had little choice but to agree to an interview, legal veterans said. "You could probably delay it as a good defense lawyer," said Bennett, who managed to push off Paula Jones's sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton until after his 1996 re-election. "You could ask a court if there isn't any other alternative. What if he submits an affidavit? Why don't you send him written questions and see if his answers work?"
But Obama eventually would have to cooperate, Bennett added. "In the real world, at the beginning of an administration, he wouldn't want to start that way," he said. "He can see the headlines - here's the guy who talks about openness and transparency."
While Bennett said he was skeptical that a president-elect could claim executive privilege, Kendall said he thinks Obama would clearly be covered since he is in the process of building a White House. But he agreed that ultimately Obama would have to talk with investigators.
The important thing, Kendall said, would be to give the president-elect enough time to prepare with his lawyers so his testimony is as accurate as possible. If a president-elect, with so many issues on his plate, made an innocent mistake of recollection in his discussion with investigators, Kendall said, it would only cause more problems.
"This one doesn't feel to me like one where there's particular peril for the president-elect," Kendall said. "But you never know. And you have to have the time to adequately prepare it."
IHT
Obama sat down last week with four investigators looking into the alleged attempt to sell his former Senate seat. As a witness, rather than a target, Obama seems to have had an easier time with the experience than some of his predecessors. But it is certainly not the way he wanted to begin his presidency.
"Here the guy hasn't even gotten his tuxedo for the ball yet and already there's a prosecutor who wants to talk him," said Robert Bennett, one of Washington's most prominent lawyers who has represented members of Congress, cabinet secretaries and even former President Bill Clinton in all manner of politically charged cases. "It's the era that we live in."
Another reflection of the era is that Obama and his team evidently made no effort to avoid the interview. In the past, some presidents have cooperated with prosecutors or court proceedings only reluctantly, delaying or trying to limit the parameters of their involvement while expressing concern about their prerogatives as the head of the executive branch. But in recent years, the practice has grown so commonplace that Obama's aides said there was never any debate about whether he would answer questions.
"There was absolutely no hesitation whatsoever about making him available - none," said one person involved in the transition.
With no known legal exposure himself, of course, that was an easier decision for Obama. As a political matter, Obama, coming into office on promises of transparency and reform, may have had little choice but to cooperate, even if it meant disclosing the sorts of internal deliberations that presidents often guard jealously, like whether he wanted an adviser to serve on the White House staff or in the Senate.
In addition, a president-elect could have a harder time making a legal argument about shielding confidential discussions than a sitting president does. The concept of executive privilege, while not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, has been recognized by courts over the years, though it can be outweighed in such compelling circumstances as a criminal investigation. It is a matter of some debate among lawyers whether, as president-elect, Obama would have any claim to executive privilege.
Obama was interviewed on Dec. 18 at his Chicago transition office by two assistant U.S. attorneys and two agents from the FBI looking into alleged attempts by Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois to profit from his appointment of Obama's successor to the Senate. Obama was accompanied by his personal lawyer, Robert Bauer, and an associate, but not by Gregory Craig, who has been designated the new White House counsel, Obama advisers said.
The U.S. attorney in Chicago, Patrick Fitzgerald, who is leading the investigation into Blagojevich, did not attend. The two-hour interview was not recorded or conducted under oath, although one FBI agent and Bauer's associate took copious notes, and it is a felony to lie to federal investigators even without being sworn in.
Obama answered every question posed and his lawyers made no objections, according to one adviser to the president-elect. Two of Obama's aides were interviewed separately and he made no effort to block his advisers from answering questions, as some past presidents have done. Rahm Emanuel, the incoming White House chief of staff, brought his lawyer, W. Neil Eggleston, a prominent Washington attorney who was White House associate counsel under Clinton. Valerie Jarrett, named a senior presidential adviser, was accompanied by Vincent Connelly, a Chicago lawyer who was an assistant U.S. attorney.
Eggleston declined to comment Wednesday, and Connelly did not respond to an e-mail message.
The precedent of presidents agreeing to be interviewed by law enforcement authorities can be traced back 200 years to when Thomas Jefferson offered to provide testimony for use at the treason trial of his former vice president, Aaron Burr. James Monroe provided answers at the White House to questions for the court martial of an appointee. Ulysses S. Grant wanted to testify at the corruption trial of his secretary, but was talked out of it by his cabinet. Instead, he gave a deposition at the White House presided over by the chief justice.
But those were rarities until Watergate. Ever since, every president has been called to talk with the authorities, either as a witness or a subject. Gerald Ford provided videotaped testimony in the trial of a woman who tried to assassinate him. Jimmy Carter gave depositions or testimony in several proceedings against others. After leaving office Ronald Reagan provided videotaped testimony in the Iran-contra trial of an aide while George H. W. Bush was interviewed about the scandal while still vice president.
Clinton provided sworn testimony at least 10 times, according to David Kendall, his attorney in the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky investigations. His testimony to the grand jury about his relationship with Lewinsky became the basis for an article of impeachment passed by the House of Representatives but later rejected by the Senate. President George W. Bush was interviewed by Fitzgerald for 70 minutes about the leak of a CIA officer's name.
With all that recent history, Obama had little choice but to agree to an interview, legal veterans said. "You could probably delay it as a good defense lawyer," said Bennett, who managed to push off Paula Jones's sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton until after his 1996 re-election. "You could ask a court if there isn't any other alternative. What if he submits an affidavit? Why don't you send him written questions and see if his answers work?"
But Obama eventually would have to cooperate, Bennett added. "In the real world, at the beginning of an administration, he wouldn't want to start that way," he said. "He can see the headlines - here's the guy who talks about openness and transparency."
While Bennett said he was skeptical that a president-elect could claim executive privilege, Kendall said he thinks Obama would clearly be covered since he is in the process of building a White House. But he agreed that ultimately Obama would have to talk with investigators.
The important thing, Kendall said, would be to give the president-elect enough time to prepare with his lawyers so his testimony is as accurate as possible. If a president-elect, with so many issues on his plate, made an innocent mistake of recollection in his discussion with investigators, Kendall said, it would only cause more problems.
"This one doesn't feel to me like one where there's particular peril for the president-elect," Kendall said. "But you never know. And you have to have the time to adequately prepare it."
IHT
posted by madtom at 9:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home