ASK THAT FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE QUORUM CALL BE DISPENSED
           WITH.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
           

           MR. SPECTER: MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE SOUGHT RECOGNITION TO
           COMMENT ON STATEMENTS MADE EARLIER TODAY BY SENATOR LEAHY
           CONCERNING INDEPENDENT COUNSEL KENNETH STAR. MR. -- KENNETH
           STARR. SENATOR LEAHY HAS CHALLENGED MR. STARR ON A NUMBER OF
           MATTER, MATTERS OF SUBSTANTIAL CONCERN, AND I TELEPHONED MR.
           STARR TO FIND OUT WHAT THE FACTS WERE. BOTH SENATOR LEAHY AND I

           ARE ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT HAS OVERSIGHT ON THE
           DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND ALSO ON INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. SENATOR
           LEAHY BEGAN HIS PRESENTATION BY NOTING THAT HE HAD SPENT NEARLY
           A DECADE AS A PROSECUTOR, AND I HAVE A SIMILAR BACKGROUND,
           ACTUALLY A LITTLE LONGER THAN A DECADE, BUT ABOUT THE SAME.
           SENATOR LEAHY THEN COMMENTED ABOUT HIS CONCERN ABOUT LAW

           ENFORCEMENT BEING NONPARTISAN AND NONIDEOLOGICAL AND ON THE
           FACTS AND I WOULD CERTAINLY TOTALLY AGREE WITH SENATOR LEAHY ON
           HIS ASSERTION TOSS THAT EXTENT. THEN SENATOR LEAHY PROCEEDED TO
           CRITICIZE MR. STARR FOR CONDUCTING A PARTISAN INVESTIGATION FOR
           MAKING LEAKS TO THE PRESS, BY COORDINATING THE INVESTIGATION
           WITH WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE CIVIL CASE INVOLVING MISS PAULA

           JONES, AND WITH CHARGING THAT THERE WAS A STING OPERATION TO
           ENGAGE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND SECRETLY RECORDED
           CONVERSATIONS. AND ALL OF THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY VERY SERIOUS
           ACCUSATIONS. MR. PRESIDENT, IT HAS SEEMED TO ME THAT THE
           CURRENT CONTROVERSY INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT AND MISS MONICA
           LEWINSKY IS SOMETHING THAT OUGHT TO BE PUT BEHIND THE COUNTRY

           AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE TIME, AND I MADE THE PUBLIC STATEMENTS
           LAST WEEK WHEN THE PRESIDENT WAS QUESTIONED ABOUT THIS MATTER
           WHILE CHAIRMAN ARAFAT WAS IN HIS OFFICE AND I SAID I THOUGHT IT
           WAS INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE THAT QUESTION AND BAD PRACTICE FOR
           THE PRESIDENT TO RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION AND MAKE PUBLIC
           STATEMENTS LAST WEEK AND ON THE WEEKEND ABOUT WHAT I CONSIDER
           TO BE AN UNWISE MEDIA FRENZY ON THIS MATTER. THAT WE ALL OUGHT

           TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE FACTS ARE BEFORE COMING TO ANY
           CONCLUSIONS. IN THE INTERIM THE PRESIDENT OUGHT TO BE PERMIT
           TODAY CARRY OUT HIS DUTIES, BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY, VERY
           IMPORTANT DUTIES, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH WHAT SENATOR LEAHY
           SAID WHEN HE RECITED THE ISSUES OF FOREIGN POLICY AND THE IRAQ
           AND THE STATE OF THE UNION AND THE MATTERS WHICH THE PRESIDENT
           HAS TO DEAL WITH. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY REPORTS IN THE PRESS
           ABOUT WHAT MR. STARR DID AND HOW HE GOT INTO THIS
           INVESTIGATION, AND WHETHER HIS ACTIVITIES WERE AN INAPPROPRIATE

           EXTENSION OF WHAT HE HAD BEEN AUTHORIZED TO DO PRIOR TO THE
           TIME HE TOOK HIS FIRST STEPS ON THIS MATTER INVOLVING MISS
           MONICA LEWINSKY. KEN STARR, MR. STARR TOLD ME THIS AFTERNOON IN
           A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION, THAT HE DID ENGAGE IN A CONSENSUAL
           MONITORING IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ON A
           CONVERSATION WITH MISS LYNN DRA TRIPP AND MISS MONICA LEWINSKY,

           AND IT WAS A CONSENSUAL MONITORING BECAUSE IT WAS CONCEPTED TO
           BY LINDA TRIPP. MR. STARR TOLD ME THAT LINDA TRIPP HAD BEEN
           WITNESSES IN THE PAST ON MATTERS INVOLVING THE WHITE HOUSE
           TRAVEL OFFICE AND MR. FOSTER, AND THAT THE CONSENSUAL
           MONITORING WAS UNDERTAKEN TO CORROBORATE WHAT MISS LINDA TRIPP
           HAD TOLD MR. STARR INDEPENDENTLY. MR. STARR SAID IT WAS AN
           APPROPRIATE EXERCISE OF HIS EXISTING JURISDICTION, BECAUSE ON

           HIS INVESTIGATION INVOLVING MR. WEB HUBBLE, THAT MR. WEB
           HUBBLE'S SITUATION INVOLVED A MATTER WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL WAS
           INVOLVED IN PROVIDING JOB ARRANGEMENTS FOR MR. HUBBLE OUTSIDE
           THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WITH A CERTAIN PERSPECTIVE EMPLOYER.
           AND MR. STARR SAID THAT THE SAME PERSON WAS INVOLVED IN
           PROVIDING A JOB OPPORTUNITY FOR MISS MONICA LEWINSKY OUTSIDE

           THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WITH THE SAME PERSPECTIVE EMPLOYER,
           AND THAT THIS CONNECTION WAS SUFFICIENT FOR MR. STARR TO
           PROCEED WITH THIS CONSENSUAL MONITORING WHICH MR. STARR POINTED
           OUT WAS DONE PROVE FEGS LIBBY THE F.B.I., AND AS MR. STARR
           DESCRIBED IT, IN A COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE MANNER. MR. STARR
           ADVISED THAT HE TOOK THIS MATTER THEN TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
           JUSTICE, AFTER HE HAD COMPLETED THE CONSENSUAL MONITORING, AND
           MR. PRESIDENT, I AM NOT GOING TO BECOME INVOLVED HERE IN WHAT

           THE FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ARE, WHAT MISS TRIPP SAID OR WHAT MISS
           LEWINSKY SAID, BECAUSE THE ISSUE WHICH CONCERNS ME AND THE
           THRUST OF WHAT SENATOR LEAHY COMPLAINED ABOUT IS THE PRO PRY AT
           THIS OF MR. STARR'S ACTIVITY, AND THAT NEED NOT INVOLVE THE
           ALLEGATIONS AND THE SUBSTANCE AND I THINK THERE HAS BEEN ENOUGH
           TALK ABOUT THAT IN ANY EVENT. BUT MR. STARR THEN ADVISED THAT
           HE TOOK THE TAPE RECORDINGS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MET

           WITH THE SENIOR ATTORNEY IN THE PUBLIC INTEGRITY SECTION AND
           THERE WAS A COLLABORATIVE DETERMINATION A BETWEEN THE
           DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL AS TO WHO SHOULD
           CARRY ON THE FURTHER INVESTIGATION. MR. STARR ADVISED THAT THE
           ATTORNEY GENERAL THEN ASKED THE SPECIAL COURT OF THE DISTRICT
           OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT TO SPECIFICALLY ENLARGE MR. STARR'S
           JURISDICTION SO HE COULD PROCEED WITH THIS INVESTIGATION. NOW

           WE ALL KNOW THAT ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO HAS BEEN VERY
           CIRCUMSPECT IN THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL ISSUE AS TO APPOINTMENT
           AND AS TO EXTENDING JURISDICTION. THAT'S BEEN A SUBJECT MATTER
           THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT ON THIS FLOOR TO A GREAT DEAL AND TO
           A SUBSTANTIAL EXTENT BY THIS SENATOR. BUT THE FACTS AS MR.
           STARR OUTLINED THEM ARE THAT HE PROCEEDED IN THIS WAY JUST AS
           OUTLINED, WHICH IS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE, BECAUSE OF THE
           CONNECTION BETWEEN WHAT HAPPENED WITH MISS MONICA LEWINSKY AND

           WHAT HAPPENED WITH MR. WEBSTER HUBBLE. AND THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY
           APPROVED BY ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO, WHEN ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO
           THEN ACTED ON THE INFORMATION WHICH MR. STARR BROUGHT TO
           REQUEST THE SPECS COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT TO
           ENLARGE MR. STARR'S JURISDICTION. I ASKED MR. STARR FURTHER
           ABOUT THE OTHER STATEMENTS WHICH SENATOR LEAHY HAD MADE AND I

           NOW QUOTE FROM THE TRANSCRIPT. SENATOR LEAHY, "I LOOK AT THE
           CONTINUING AND VERY SELECTIVE LEAKS AND TACTICS EMPLOYED BY MR.
           STARR'S OFFICE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS AND PARTICULARLY OVER
           THE LAST FEW DAYS, AND I ASKED NOT ONLY MR. STARR ABOUT THE
           LEAKS WHICH HE EMPHATICALLY DENIED, BUT ALSO ABOUT THE
           COMPOSITION OF THE PERSONNEL WHO WERE HANDLING THIS SENSITIVE
           MATERIAL. " AND MR. STARR GAVE ME SOME SUBSTANTIAL DETAIL ABOUT

           THE ATTORNEYS WHO WERE ON THE MATTER IN TERMS OF THEIR
           BACKGROUND AND IN TERMS OF THEIR PROFESSIONALISM WHICH MR.
           STARR SAYS IS THE EFFORT MADE AND HE THINKS A SUCCESSFUL EFFORT
           MADE TO AVOID THE LEAKS. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IN WASHINGTON,
           D.C., OR FOR THAT MATTER ANY PLACE, THE DIFFICULTY OF
           ESTABLISHING LEAKS. BUT IF SOMEBODY MAKES HAS CONTENTION AS
           SENATOR LEAHY DOES AS TO REACTION, THE QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE

           PROOF OF THOSE LEAKS, AND AS I SAY, MR. STARR MADE THE EMPHATIC
           DENIAL AND CITED THE CREDENTIALS OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HANDLING
           CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. SENATOR LEAHY THEN WENT ON EARLIER
           TODAY TO SAY QUOTE, "I HAVE SEEN REPORTS OF TWO WEEKS E.
           WEEKENDS AGO, THAT HE," REFERRING TO MR. STARR, "WAS CONTENT IN
           CONDUCTING A STING OPERATION INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT OF THE
           UNITED STATES IN SECRETLY RECORDED CONVERSATIONS. HAVE WE SUNK
           THIS LOACH, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT WE WOULD DO THINGS LIKE THIS."

           I ASKED MR. STARR ABOUT THAT AND HE EMPHATICALLY DENIED IT. I,
           TOO, HAVE SEEN REPORTS ABOUT A PROPOSED STING OPERATION, BUT I
           THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT AS WE ACCORD THE PRESIDENT THE
           PRESUMPTIONS OF INNOCENCE, AND AS WE ROOK FOR PROOF BEFORE
           COMING TO ANY JUDGMENTS ABOUT ANYONE, THAT THE SAME THING APPLY
           TO MR. KENNETH STARR, THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, AND THAT A
           SERIOUS ACCUSATION ABOUT A STING OPERATION OUGHT TO HAVE SOME

           AUTHENTICATION AND VERIFICATION BEFORE IT IS MADE ON THE FLOOR
           OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE. AT LEAST THAT'S MY OPINION.
           SENATOR LEAHY WENT ON EARLIER TODAY SAYING, QUOTE, "I'VE SEEN
           COMPLAINTS HE'S SOUGHT TO CURSE A YOUNG WOMAN." I ASKED KENNETH
           STARR ABOUT THAT, AGAIN HE DENIED IT IN ABSOLUTE TERMS, "AND
           THREATENED HER MOTHER AND FATHER IF SHE DID NOT COOPERATE," AND
           AGAIN MR. STARR DENIED THAT IN ABSOLUTE TERMS. SENATOR LEAHY

           THEN WENT ONTO SAY THAT, "MR. STARR'S OFFICE SEEMS ODDLY
           COORDINATED TO AID A CIVIL LAWSUIT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT
           INVOLVING MISS PAULA JONES' CASE." AGAIN I ASKED MR. STARR
           ABOUT THAT. IT HAS BEEN DENIED. MR. PRESIDENT, I MAKE THESE
           COMMENTS AFTER TALKING TOKEN EGT STARR, PARTICULARLY TO STATE
           FOR THE RECORD EXACTLY HOW MR. STARR GOT INTO THE MATTER ON THE

           CONSENSUAL MONITORING. AND A CONSENSUAL MONITORING UNDER
           VIRGINIA LAW IS APPROPRIATE WHEN ONE PARTY TO THE CONVERTION
           AGREES TO IT, SO THAT IN THE ACTION BY MR. STARR AND THE F.B.I.
           AGENTS IN RECORDING THE CONVERSATION OF MISS MONICA LEWINSKY
           AND MISS LINDA TRIPP, WHERE LINDA TRIPP CONSENTED TO IT, IT WAS
           A LAWFUL CON SENSE WAM MONITORING. AS EXPLAINED BY MR. STARR,

           THE NEXT US OR CONNECTION OF JUSTIFYING HIS CONDUCT WAS BECAUSE
           THE SAME PERSON HAD SUGGESTED PROVIDING THE JOB OPPORTUNITY FOR
           MISS MONICA LEWINSKY, WITH THE SAME EMPLOYER WHO HAD MADE A
           SIMILAR ACTIVITY WITH RESPECT TO MR. WEBSTER HUBBLE. IT WOULD
           BE MY HOPE THAT AS THIS MATTER PROCEEDS, THAT THERE WOULD BE A

           TONEING-DOWN OF THE DECIBEL LEVEL  AND A REAL EFFORT LAID TO
           FIND OUT WHAT THE FACTS ARE BEFORE ACCUSATIONS ARE MADE AGAINST
           ANYBODY, AND I THINK THAT APPLIES TO PRESIDENT CLINTON, AS I
           SAID SO LAST WEEK AND OVER THE WEEKEND, AND IT APPLIES TO MR.
           STARR, AND THERE HAS BEEN A CONCERN EXPRESSED THAT THERE IS NOW
           AN ORCHESTRATED EFFORT MADE TO DISCREDIT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL
           KENNETH STARR. I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THAT IS TRUE OR NOT, BUT

           THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF STATEMENTS COMING OUT, BUT WHATEVER
           CHARGES AND ACCUSATIONS ARE MADE AGAINST ANYBODY, PRESIDENT
           CLINTON, INDEPENDENT COUNSEL SFAR, ANYONE, THEY OUGHT TO BE
           BACKED UP BY THE FACTS AND NOT A RECITATION OF SOMETHING THAT
           APPEARED IN THE NEWSPAPER WHERE WE KNOW OF THE QUESTIONABLE
           RELIABILITY OF WHAT APPEARS IN THE PRESS. AND THE REAL ISSUE
           HERE IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT MR. STARR HAS DONE, BUT WHAT THE
           UNDERLYING FACTS ARE ON THE SUBSTANTIVE MATTER AT ISSUE, AND IF

           MR. STARR HAS ACTED IN AN INAPPROPRIATE MANNER, THAT CAN BE
           REVIEWED AT SOME TIME. WHEN YOU DEAL WITH ISSUES SUCH AS THOSE
           INVOLVED HERE, WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT A PROSPECTIVE CRIMINAL
           CASE WHERE THE ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IS JUDGED ON CERTAIN
           STANDARDS, WE ARE LOOKING AT A REAL DETERMINATION TO FIND WHAT
           THE FACTS ARE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHAT
           OUGHT TO BE DONE IN THIS MATTER. IT IS MY VIEW THAT ONCE THE
           FACTS ARE ASCERTAINED, THAT THERE WILL BE GENERAL AGREEMENT

           ABOUT WHAT THE CONCLUSIONS OUGHT TO BE. BUT IT IS NOT THE
           INDEPENDENT COUNSEL'S CONDUCT WHICH IS AT ISSUE HERE. I THINK
           INDEPENDENT COUNSEL OUGHT TO CONDUCT HIMSELF IN A MATTER WHICH
           COME PORTS WITH A HIGH SENSE OF DECENCY. I THINK THAT'S HIS JOB
           AND HIS RESPONSIBILITY. BUT ALSO I THINK THAT HE IS ENTITLED
           NOT TO BE VILLE FILED ON NEWSPAPER HEADLINES OR NEWSPAPER
           STORIES, BUT THAT THE FACTS OUGHT TO BE ASCERTAINED. THE FACTS

           AS MR. STARR OUTLINES THEM TO ME, JUSTIFY THE STEPS WHICH HE
           TOOK, AND THAT'S NOT
{END: 1998/01/27 TIME: 16-15 , Tue.  105TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}