Government Uncovered
Freedom of Information Equals Freedom From Corruption


Access to information is vital to Judicial Watch’s efforts to hold politicians accountable for their actions. Following is a summary of information obtained by Judicial Watch through Justice Department documents. It concerns an effort by the Clinton White House to discredit Judge Royce C. Lamberth.

Background

Judge Royce C. Lamberth is one of the few judges who truly abides by Judicial Watch’s motto that "no one is above the law!" In the Clinton scandal cases that have come before his court, Judge Lamberth has consistently held criminals in the Clinton Administration accountable for wrongdoing. He sharply criticized the Clinton Commerce Department for concealing and destroying documents related to Chinagate and called for additional discovery. He forced Bill Clinton and Al Gore to search for and produce e-mails pertaining to Filegate. And in unprecedented fashion, Judge Lamberth ruled, for the first time in history, that a sitting President committed a crime, when Bill Clinton violated Kathleen Willey’s privacy rights by releasing her personal correspondence. Documents obtained by JW reveal that in response to the Willey decision, the White House press machine sought to discredit, and potentially influence, Judge Lamberth¹s decision.

Key Excerpts:

Internal Clinton Justice Department Memo, March 29, 2000, 2:26 PM
(Thomas J. Perelli)

"For those who have not seen the wire stories, Judge Lamberth has found that there is sufficient evidence that the President and his close advisors violated the Privacy Act with respect to the release of Kathleen Willey’s letters… We have 20 days to respond."

Release to News Media, March 29, 2000
(Beth Nolan, Counsel to President Clinton)

"…the Justice Department has consistently adhered to the view that the White House Office is not subject to the Privacy Act. Judge Lamberth’s opinion is inconsistent with that precedent. The actions of the President and his staff were fully consistent with the law… In light of these facts and the law, we strongly disagree with Judge Lamberth’s opinion."

(Instructions were made to recipients that they "pass along" the statement.)

Relevance

When combined with the other documents obtained by Judicial Watch, it is clear that the Clinton Administration was threatened by Judge Lamberth’s willingness to hold Clinton officials responsible for their behavior. Not only did Clinton officials assemble a healthy background file on Judge Lamberth, but that they also launched a media campaign to call to question his application of the law. Such activity can be seen as disrespectful at best and as an attempt to improperly influence the Judge’s opinions in cases involving the Clinton White House at worst.













info@judicialwatch.org1-888-JW-ETHIC
Site hosting and technology by Cory Consulting, Inc.
© 1997-2004, Judicial Watch, Inc., All rights reserved.

Also in the
Media Center


Press Release
Archives


2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997