Republicans Attack Reno’s Rejection of Gore Inquiry

Atty. Gen. Janet Reno, rejecting for the third time an outside investigation into Vice President Al Gore’s 1996 fund-raising activities, infuriated Republicans on Wednesday by declaring that she sees no real chance any prosecutor could make a case that Gore had lied about the matter.

Reno’s decision lifts a cloud that had been hanging all summer over Gore, who faced the ominous prospect of a new investigation kicking in just as his Democratic presidential campaign is enjoying a bounce in opinion polls.

At the heart of Reno’s latest review was a contentious, four-hour interview that Gore gave in April to Justice Department investigators probing campaign finance irregularities in the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign. In the face of openly skeptical questioning, Gore said repeatedly that he did not know campaign funds were being raised at a Buddhist temple in Hacienda Heights, Calif., or at a series of controversial White House coffees.

“I do not see how, under the criminal law and under the principles of federal prosecution, these statements [by Gore] could be determined to be either false statements or perjury,” Reno said. “This goes to the heart of everything we care about in this country: that you don’t pursue a case where there is no basis for concluding that you can make a case.”

In the end, Reno said, the issue came down to a disagreement over the definition of a fund-raiser and other terms, making a perjury charge “impossible to prove” because of semantic ambiguities.

Reno noted, however, that the Justice Department’s campaign finance task force “will, of course, continue its ongoing investigation into illegal fund-raising activity and will be free to pursue all avenues of investigation wherever they may lead”--including the Buddhist fund-raiser and the White House coffees.

The task force has secured about two dozen convictions for fund-raising abuses since 1997, most of them tied to irregularities in the Clinton-Gore campaign in 1996.

Gore said he was pleased by Wednesday’s announcement, but Republican critics attacked Reno once again for coddling the White House. The decision “follows a pattern of the attorney general’s protecting the vice president,” said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of a Senate Judiciary Committee panel that has explored the fund-raising issue. And it “flies in the face of strong evidence” that Gore knew--despite his repeated denials--that his 1996 appearance at a Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple luncheon was a fund-raiser, Specter said.

Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush joined in the attack, saying that Gore’s “questionable fund-raising activities” cast doubt about his credibility. “The best way to put all these scandals and investigations behind us is to elect someone new,” he said.

Reno’s decision also countered the recommendation of Robert J. Conrad Jr.--who led the interview of Gore as head of the Justice Department’s campaign finance task force--that she appoint a special counsel to determine whether the vice president had told the truth.

Reno has been mulling over the issue for months. And while she was widely expected to reject calls for an outside investigation, she told reporters Wednesday that “I’ve struggled over this” and that “there were mornings I woke up and said, ‘Maybe I should appoint a special counsel. Let me check the record.’ ”

But Reno consistently has rebuffed efforts, even by her own aides, to draw the White House directly into the fund-raising scandal. In 1997, 1998 and now again this week, she has rejected the need for an outside counsel to probe Gore’s role in fund-raising activities.

Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), one of Reno’s staunchest critics, said the attorney general’s latest decision “undermines the rule of law.”

In the past, the issue has put Reno at odds with FBI Director Louis J. Freeh, who has strongly favored the appointment of an outside counsel. Reno said Wednesday that, in addition to Conrad, two other federal officials advised her to bring in an outside counsel. While she would not name those officials, one of them was believed to be Freeh.

Said one FBI official who asked not to be identified: “Before today, we knew where everyone stood on this issue. No one has backed off from their position, but it’s ultimately the attorney general’s call to make.” But Reno rejected charges that she was playing politics to protect Gore.

“I don’t do things based on politics. I realize that politics will be hurled around my head. I just sit there and duck it as it comes and continue to look at the evidence and the law and make the best judgment I can,” she said.

In his April interview with Justice Department officials, Gore said that he “did not know” that the Buddhist temple event “was a fund-raiser, and I do not to this day know that it was a fund-raiser.”

Gore said in the sworn interview that he saw no money or checks change hands at the temple, and that the subject of campaign funds was never directly discussed.

“There was an implicit assumption,” Gore said, “that the time spent, the honors shown, the communication that took place, all would create a warmer, friendlier relationship, a sense of closeness that would greatly enhance the likelihood that later on some of those who were present to see this visit would be more likely to say, ‘I want to be part of what this person is doing politically and I want to support the [Democratic National Committee].’ ”

The temple luncheon raised $140,000 for the DNC. When questions later arose about some of the donors, much of the money was returned. Maria Hsia, a Los Angeles immigration consultant and longtime Gore fund-raiser, was convicted earlier this year of illegally disguising donations from the temple.