A L S O+T O D A Y Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Starr By Gary Kamiya When the real Kenneth Starr finally stood up before the House, he turned out to have a split personality Starr Wars By Joan Walsh The Democrats strike back Nothing has changed Compiled by Lori Leibovich and Fiona Morgan The consensus of political experts is that no minds were changed by Starr's day in court Dear Ken The full text of ethics advisor Sam Dash's letter of resignation to Kenneth Starr Starr speaks The full text of independent counsel Kenneth Starr's House Judiciary Committee testimony A dozen questions Congress should ask Kenneth Starr By David Talbot, Murray Waas and Joan Walsh (11/18/98)   T A B L E+T A L K Discuss Ken Starr and his testimony in the Politics area of Table Talk   R E C E N T L Y Same Old Party By Joshua Micah Marshall New leadership can't mend the rifts among Republicans in Congress (11/19/98) Reply to C.D. Ellison By David Horowitz It's time for blacks to have a two-party system, too (11/19/98) Toppling Saddam By Frank Smyth Clinton wants a new government in Baghdad, but he and the Iraqi opposition are unlikely to be up to the task (11/18/98) Brother on brother By Murray Waas Whitewater witness David Hale attempted to suborn perjury by his own brother by asking him to falsely corroborate illegal acts by President Clinton (11/17/98) The mark of Cain: a tale of two brothers By Murray Waas Though they traveled the same path from the family dirt farm through law school, the Hale brothers turned out different as night and day (11/17/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S A L O N E M P O R I U M FREE! 12-ounce bag of Salon Blend with a purchase of $30 or more. While supplies last.
		STARR SPEAKS | PAGE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 , 21, 22 - - - - - - - - - - DELAHUNT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The committee has given the independent counsel a full two hours to present his version of the facts -- a version which most Americans are already fully familiar with. At the same time, the majority has seen fit to give the president's counsel all of 30 minutes to question Mr. Starr. This is meant to be the president's sole opportunity to confront his accuser during these proceedings. HYDE: Would the gentleman yield for just a secondeparture from the precedents of this House. During the Watergate hearings of 1974, President Nixon's counsel James St. Clair was given all the time he needed to respond to the evidence and cross-examine witnesses. This is as it should be. We are talking about the impeachment of the president of the United States -- a gave constitutional moment in our national history. I know that some members of the Watergate committee argued that the president's counsel, Mr. St. Clair, should be given limited time to speak, but those views were wisely overruled in the interests of fairness and decency. President Clinton is entitled to the same consideration and respect shown to President Nixon on that occasion -- no more and no less. The record of the Watergate hearings make clear that at no time was Mr. St. Clair given a time limit for his presentation or his examination of witnesses. Is there any legitimate basis for a different rule today? The majority may point out that the Watergate testimony was heard in closed session, while today we sit before the cameras and the American people. Yet that being true, it is more important, not less, that the president be given a full and fair opportunity to respond to the charges that are being leveled against him. They may argue, as they did in a recent letter to the White House, that the president and his counsel are here -- and I'm quoting -- "only as a matter of courtesy and not of right." End of quote. In other words, be glad that we are letting you testify at all. DELAHUNT: With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, if the goal is justice, this cannot be a satisfactory response. A 30-minute presentation is especially inadequate when one considers that Mr. Starr has been preparing for weeks, a presentation that the White House saw for the first time last night. According to news accounts, the witnesses spent the better part of the past several weeks conducting videotaped practice sessions. The president's counsel has had all of 16 hours to prepare his response. Precedent has been abandoned at almost every turn. We rushed to release Mr. Starr's transmittal within hours of its receipt, before any review by this committee or the president's counsel. We posted thousands of pages of secret grand jury testimony on the Internet. And we abdicated our responsibility to make an independent examination of the facts before voting to commence an impeachment inquiry. Let's to this right. I urge support for the motion and yield back the balance of my time. HYDE: The gentleman has made a point that the president needs more time to present -- you said, present. He will be given all the time in the world to present, unlimited time to... WATT: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: ... today's hearing is to hear from Judge Starr. And to question him... WATT: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: No, the chair -- I don't yield for any points of order. I would like to make my statement. WATT: I thought you had already made your statement, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: Well, I know that's what you thought. But you couldn't possibly know when I'm through with my statement or not. So please let me... WATT: Under the rules under which we're operating, Mr. Chairman, we don't know anything about the process. We had regular order at one point. DELAHUNT: With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, if the goal is justice, this cannot be a satisfactory response. A 30-minute presentation is especially inadequate when one considers that Mr. Starr has been preparing for weeks, a presentation that the White House saw for the first time last night. According to news accounts, the witnesses spent the better part of the past several weeks conducting videotaped practice sessions. The president's counsel has had all of 16 hours to prepare his response. Precedent has been abandoned at almost every turn. We rushed to release Mr. Starr's transmittal within hours of its receipt, before any review by this committee or the president's counsel. We posted thousands of pages of secret grand jury testimony on the Internet. And we abdicated our responsibility to make an independent examination of the facts before voting to commence an impeachment inquiry. Let's to this right. I urge support for the motion and yield back the balance of my time. HYDE: The gentleman has made a point that the president needs more time to present -- you said, present. He will be given all the time in the world to present, unlimited time to... WATT: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: ... today's hearing is to hear from Judge Starr. And to question him... WATT: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: No, the chair -- I don't yield for any points of order. I would like to make my statement. WATT: I thought you had already made your statement, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: Well, I know that's what you thought. But you couldn't possibly know when I'm through with my statement or not. So please let me... WATT: Under the rules under which we're operating, Mr. Chairman, we don't know anything about the process. We had regular order at one point. (UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE) WATT: I'm asking for regular order. I'm requesting order. Regular order is we get five minutes to address this issue. The chairman has already had his five minutes. HYDE: Now, I want to tell this committee, and especially the Democrats, I had a meeting with Mr. Conyers and Mr. Frank a couple of days ago. And I suggested I would be very liberal with the gavel. And if Mr. Kendall is on a line of questioning that he deems pertinent, I don't intend to shut anybody off. Now you are, you are -- you are disrupting the continuity of this meeting with these adversarial motions. WATT: We're disrupting a railroad, it seems like, Mr. Chairman. That's what we're disrupting here. HYDE: The gentleman will observe decorum, and I would appreciate it if you would speak when you're recognized. I have not recognized you. JACKSON LEE: Mr. Chairman, I have a point of information. I'd like a point of information, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate being recognized for a point of information. HYDE: Now, I'm trying to be cooperative. I said I would be liberal in giving people time, and I recognize Mr. Frank. JACKSON LEE: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. FRANK: Mr. Chairman, I thank you. And I appreciate -- we did have that meeting, and you accommodated one of our requests, particularly in terms of the order, and you did say you would be with regard to Mr. Lowell, we talked about it not on a strict gavel. But I did think that with regard to the president's counsel's request, we were not authorized to speak entirely for that. We could speak for our counsel. It does seem to me there's a reasonable difference of opinion here, and we ought to just vote on it. I don't think it's going to be delaying the committee process. Mr. Delahunt's made a motion. But have the vote, and we will decide it. But we did accept that assurance with regard to Mr. Lowell, but not with regard to the independent party of the White House. WATT: Mr. Chairman, I call for a record vote. HYDE: Very well. The record vote is on the motion... NADLER: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, before the... HYDE: Who's seeking recognition? JACKSON LEE: Mr. Chairman... HYDE: Well, just a moment, Miss Jackson Lee, I've got to recognize Mr. Nadler. JACKSON LEE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. HYDE: Mr. Nadler. NADLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, before we vote, I'd like to speak to Mr. Delahunt's motion. NADLER: And I appreciate the chair's comments. But the fact is that as of now, today is the only notice gave for hearing of this committee. We've noticed that some witnesses will be called for depositions. But as of today, Mr. Starr is the only witness that we're aware of before the committee considering the impeachment of the president. As such, given any consideration of fairness and equity, the president's counsel, and for that matter, the Democratic Committee counsel, should have as much time as they request. There should not be a time limit on it. Now the president's counsel requested 90 minutes. That should be, without question, granted. If he asks for five hours, that should be granted. We have requested -- and I don't know what we've requested -- an hour for our counsel. And I don't know what assurances have been given, but I heard the chair say 30 minutes. That should be an hour. And the fact is Mr. Starr, your calculation of 200 -- of 135 minutes and 140 minutes, Mr. Starr's going to sit here for 120 minutes and tell us why the president ought to be impeached in his opinion, and he's entitled to do that. But you add to that the other time that the... (PAUSE) You add to that the other time, the -- one side is going to have 260 minutes and the other side's going to have 135 minutes. Now I really suggest that if the president of the United States asked that this committee in its one day of scheduled hearings should have 90 minutes to cross-examine Mr. Starr, that's the least that can be asked. And I've looked at lists of questions and subjects which Mr. Starr's report, and frankly, his statement that we got last night, raises as obvious questions, and there's a lot more than 30 minutes there. And the Constitution guarantees the right of anyone who is accused of any wrongdoing and fundamental fairness guarantees the right of anyone to have the right to confront the witness against them. And Mr. Starr is the only witness. And frankly, that right ought not to be limited to 30 minutes. So I support Mr. Delahunt's motion, and I hope that in the interest of fairness -- because you know this proceeding must not only be fair but must be seen to be fair. NADLER: If we end up ... HYDE: Mr. Nadler. I now recognize ... NADLER: If we... HYDE: I want to recognize Ms. Jackson Lee. JACKSON LEE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to... HYDE: Thank you, Mr. Nadler. N E X T+P A G E+| "I cannot for the life of me understand why we would gag and bound the counsel for the White House" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Become a Salon member. Click here.