Reno concludes: Gore didn't lie

"The evidence fails to provide any reasonable basis for a conclusion that the Vice President may have lied," Reno advised a special court. "There are no reasonable grounds to believe that further investigation is warranted" into an allegation that Gore lied to Justice Department investigators last year about how a Democratic media fund was financed.

It was the second time in a year that Reno refused to have an outside prosecutor examine Gore over his telephone fund-raising or what he said about it. For Gore, it removed a potential obstacle to his ambition to run for president in 2000.

White House spokesperson Joe Lockhart said President Clinton "believes the vice president has always acted within the letter and the spirit of the law." Gore spokesperson Christopher Lehane said, "The vice president is pleased."

Republicans were not.

"Once again, the Attorney General has failed to follow the law," said Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.). "For the past two years, the attorney general has made it clear she is committed to protecting the president." Burton faulted her for rejecting the advice of FBI Director Louis Freeh to order an independent counsel, which Freeh has been advocating for more than a year.

Steve Forbes, a would-be Republican presidential candidate in 2000, said, "This raises the question of Ms. Reno's fitness to remain in office." Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) suggested asking a court to order Reno to turn the case over to a counsel.

"We need to take these matters out of the hands of the attorney general, who appears to be acting politically and not in accordance with the act," agreed Senate Judiciary Committee Chairperson Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). "Personally, I think it is going to take legislation."

Reno vowed her 120-member campaign finance task force would continue the investigation that has already charged 14 people, including prominent Democratic donors and fund raisers.

"Today's determination does not mean that our work has ended," Reno said in a statement. "We will continue to vigorously investigate all allegations of illegal activity."

Indeed, she is in the midst of 90-day preliminary inquiries about President Clinton and his former deputy White House chief of staff, Harold Ickes. She must decide within two weeks whether independent counsels are needed to continue those probes. Officials say no counsel is likely to be named in the Clinton matter, which involves whether he and aides illegally financed issue advertisements during his 1996 re-election campaign.

This inquiry into Gore began in July when his counsel turned over handwritten notes by Gore's former deputy chief of staff, David Strauss, about a Nov. 21, 1995 meeting which Gore attended. The notation "65% soft/35% hard" called into question whether Gore knew that some of the money in a Democratic media fund for issue advertisements was coming from so-called hard money, which can be used to promote specific candidates but which cannot be raised on federal property.

Gore had told investigators last year he believed his office telephone calls were soliciting only soft money, which can be used for issue ads or general political purposes.

The notes "are not sufficient alone to warrant a conclusion that the Vice President made a false statement" about his understanding of how money he raised from his office would be allocated, Reno wrote.

Interviews with other participants demonstrated Gore was present and at some point the Democratic media fund and the allocation of contributions between so-called soft and hard money accounts was discussed, Reno said.

But "no attendees recall any particular questions or comments by the Vice President," Reno wrote. Only two recalled any mention of hard money, but "there is no evidence that he heard the statements or understood their implications."

Indeed, Reno wrote, others left the meeting with vague and incorrect understandings of the complicated money allocation. And there was discussion that the Democratic Party had enough hard money for the issue ads but needed more soft money. Still others reported that Gore did not concern himself with this level of detail.

Finally, she said, Gore "had little to gain and much to lose" by his statements a year ago, because, as his lawyers had told him, the statements not only would not clear him but caused the Justice Department to investigate further to see why he wasn't aware of details in some memos available to him.

This "weak, circumstantial evidence" is not sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Gore knew as he made the telephone calls that the media fund had a hard money component, Reno concluded. Indeed, she wrote, "I find by clear and convincing evidence that the Vice President did lie."

Reno has to make a decision on Clinton by Dec. 7.

The Ickes case has the greatest chance of prompting Reno to order what would be the seventh independent counsel to look into a top Clinton administration figure, according to Justice Department and law enforcement officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Reno has until Nov. 30 to decide whether enough evidence supports allegations Ickes lied to a Senate committee about administration assistance to the Teamsters union during a strike against Diamond Walnut Co.

Clinton and Ickes have denied wrongdoing.

11-25-98