"Although he [Bush] did not recall tasking [chief of staff James] Baker to research any particular matter, he may have asked why the campaign did not know more about Clinton's demonstrating" against the Vietnam War, the FBI interview report stated.
As for his knowledge about some conservative journalists filing Freedom of Information Act requests for Clinton's passport records, "President Bush remembered a general discussion that people were trying to get some information " although he could provide no details as to who may have mentioned this to him. "
"The President advised that " he probably would have said, 'Hooray, somebody's going to finally do something about this.' If he had learned that the Washington Times was planning to publish an article, he would have said, 'That's good, it's about time.' " Based on his 'depth of feeling' on this issue, President Bush responded to a hypothetical question that he would have recommended getting the truth out if it were legal."
"The President added that he would not have been concerned over the legality of the issue but just the facts and what was in the files," the FBI wrote.
Bush clearly was disappointed that the searches uncovered so little. "The President described himself as being indignant over the fact that the campaign did not find out what Clinton was doing," the FBI report stated.
As the interview ended, two of diGenova's assistants - Lisa Rich and Laura Laughlin - asked Bush for autographs, according to the handwritten notes.
DiGenova's Conclusions
After the Bush interviews, diGenova began work on his final report. Despite the evidence that Clinton's files had been exploited to influence the outcome of a presidential election, diGenova concluded that there was no wrongdoing by anyone in the Bush administration.
DiGenova added "that certain White House personnel may have indirectly encouraged the search for Clinton's passport files by making inquiry about the status of responses to [FOIA] requests." As for the Oval Office, diGenova "found no evidence that President Bush was involved in this matter."
DiGenova reserved his toughest criticism for State Department Inspector General Funk for suspecting that a crime had been committed in the first place. DiGenova castigated Funk for "a woefully inadequate understanding of the facts."
John Duncan, a senior lawyer in Funk's office, protested diGenova's findings of no criminal wrongdoing.
"Astoundingly, [diGenova] has also concluded that no senior-level party to the search did anything improper whatever," Duncan wrote. "The Independent Counsel has provided his personal absolution to individuals who we found had attempted to use their U.S. Government positions to manipulate the election of President of the United States."
While there are many parallels between the Passport-gate and Plame-gate affairs, one striking difference is how the two prosecutors - diGenova and Fitzgerald - handled journalists who had received the government leaks.
DiGenova refused to pressure Newsweek reporters to divulge the government sources who had leaked the confidential criminal referral on the supposed tampering with Clinton's passport file. That meant a central set of facts - who in George H.W. Bush's administration was smearing Clinton - was never discovered.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
