July 20, 1995 - Part 1
July 20, 1995 - Part 1
(09:45:25) The CHAIRMAN. Unfortunately, you hear that a test was administered, but what was the basis, what were the questions, what was the scope; so it raises, in many cases, more questions than it answers when we hear that a test was administered. So we share that with you, and maybe he'll reconsider as time goes along. I'd like to say, at the outset of today's hearings and before we hear from the Park Police, that I want to reemphasize and make. something clear because I've had a number of people in the media raise this question to me as recently as this morning. Apparently I would hope that our witnesses, particularly Major Hines-I want to assure him that this Committee does not intend and has no interest in opening up or reopening the question of the tragic death of Mr. Foster. I see that is a concern of the Major in his statement. I've read the statement. We do not dispute in any way that it was anything but a suicide. I can understand the Park Police's feeling, as its characterization of the investigation, I think, took on certain nasty aspects, but we don't intend to look at that. After last summer's hearings, both the Majority and Minority reports concluded--I want to emphasize this-that the evidence overwhelmingly Supports the Park Police's conclusion that Mr. Foster died of a self-inflicted wound. I am aware of nothing that undermines this conclusion. I read Major I-lines' statement this morning, and I understand and appreciate the Park Police frustration with all of the totally unfounded speculation that Mr. Foster was a victim of foul play. The Park Police have worked hard to do a professional job, and such unfortunate speculation simply slows the Foster family's healing process. It raises concerns among the professionals at the Park Police. It is unfair to characterize their investigation as having not been thorough and complete. Last summer, at the request of Mr. Fiske, the Senate did not ex-amine the very important question of the handling of the papers. and documents, including the Whitewater papers, contained in 145 Foster's office. I want to reassure the Park Police that the Committee is now looking-and not only the Park Police, but everyone--were now looking into the handling of the papers in Mr. Foster's office after his death and whether there was any interference with law enforcement review or whether law enforcement was impeded from doing its job in that connection. So I would hope that settles that issue and that you would feel we are not attempting to replow a situation that should not be revisited. With that Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, before you swear in the panel, I'd like to follow up on a matter we were discussing after the hearing yesterday. It's my understanding that Michael Chertoff and Richard Ben-Veniste will seek to interact with Mr. Kendall, who's the private attorney for the Clintons, with respect to the materials that have been furnished. Now, as I understand it, the material redacted does not involve Whitewater or Madison, but I think a procedure whereby our counsel has an opportunity to interact with Mr. Kendall on that matter would be helpful. At the end of the day and the discussions we had after the hearing, I think we reached that understanding, that they would seek to have that interchange over the weekend. Now, we have received an awful lot of documents from the White House which are official, and also documentation from Mr. Kendall as their private lawyer, but questions have been raised about some of the redactions, and I think we're endeavoring to find a process here by which our attorneys interacting with them can obtain some further understanding about how to handle that matter. Is that correct? Is that not correct?