| Printed from JudicialWatch.org Feb 10, 1999 |
Contact: Press Office 202-646-5172 |
Watchdog Preparing Legal Actions and Ethics Complaints to Get To Truth of Major Obstruction of Justice By Clinton Justice Department While Judicial Watch has two lawsuits against the Department of Justice for its failure to produce documents concerning Janet Reno's refusal to appoint an independent counsel in the Chinagate scandal, as well as its malfeasance concerning Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Olympic bombing fiascos, it intends to increase its efforts to "bring justice to the Clinton Justice Department." "A number of legal actions and ethics complaints are in progress or in the works to address the rampant politicization of the Justice Department under Janet Reno and Eric Holder, which has resulted in the widespread failure of the agency to do its job as the nation's top law enforcement agency. As a once proud alumnus, I am appalled and sickened by the misconduct of the Justice Department during the Clinton Administration," stated Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman. Among the illegal or unethical actions of Janet Reno, Eric Holder and their staff during their reign at the Clinton Justice Department, are: 1. The attempt to silence a key witness in the Chinagate scandal, Nolanda Hill, by various retaliatory and unethical actions. 2. The repeated failure to appoint an independent counsel in the Chinagate scandal. 3. The threatened use of criminal process to settle civil litigation in the Chinagate scandal. 4. Litigation misconduct by Reno's and Holders' hand-picked attorneys by coaching witnesses to not tell the full truth, as well as the use of speaking objections to tip them off when important questions are pending in civil litigation detrimental to the Clinton Administration. 5. The suppression of evidence in civil litigation detrimental to the Clinton Administration. The list of egregious misconduct by Reno, Holder and their "career" prosecutors is much longer than this. Judicial Watch is addressing and will address these matters before appropriate tribunals and the Office of Professional Responsibility. | |