The real blood sport: the Whitewater scandal machine - Cover Story

Washington Monthly, May, 1996 by Amy Waldman

Hale conceded during testimony in Little Rock that he had lobbied for an independent counsel in the hope that it would help him get leniency. He was quite prescient: Starr has gone to great lengths to coddle the linchpin of his Little Rock investigation. Hale pleaded guilty to fraud and conspiracy in 1994, but with Starr's help, he avoided sentencing for two years. When Hale finally was sentenced, Starr pleaded for leniency: "I believe [Hale] is genuinely remorseful for his criminal past." Hale got 28 months (half the maxiinum) and a $10,000 fine. And after the Tucker/McDougal trial is over, Hale--or Starr --can request that his sentence be reduced still further. Hale has also received immunity for any other crimes that Starr may unearth.

And there's more. Already the beneficiary of a $1,900-per-month state pension, Hale began receiving payments for living expenses--payments that have cost the taxpayers more than $60,000 in the last two years (money Hale recently admitted he hadn't planned to pay taxes on). Keep in mind that Hale owes the government $2 million in restitution. Hale also has the comfort of knowing that when he faces the Senate, he will have Starr's former partner and Justice Department colleague at his side: Starr and Olson worked together at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher and then follow William French Smith to the Justice Department. Hale, by the way, claimed during testimony that he is broke--and then insisted that he is paying Olson's several-hundred-dollar-an-hour fees himself.

The Trouble With Al

As a prominent Washington attorney, Olson will lend Hale some needed credibility when he appears before the Senate Whitewater Committee. The million dollar question, however, is when Hale will make that appearance. As soon as the "Arkansas" phase of the investigation began, Senate Democrats were extremely anxious to have Hale testify. "He is the only person who has made a direct allegation against the President," says Richard Ben-Veniste, the special counsel to the minority on Whitewater. "He had done all his accusing through the the media, [and it was] carefully orchestrated. The public was entitled to the other side of the coin, which was to test the veracity of the allegations ... to see whether [Hale] was still lying."

The Republicans claimed they too were eager to call Hale. "I believe it's an absolute necessity that [Hale] should come here," D'Amato said in late November, and added that it should be done "sooner rather than later" to avoid compromising the Little Rock trial or the presidential election. In the fall, D'Amato instructed Ben-Veniste to work with Michael Chertoff, Ben-Veniste's counterpart on the majority, to expedite Hale's appearance before the committee. Starr had said he didn't want Hale called because it could hinder and impede his investigation; D'Amato indicated to the minority he might be willing to call Hale anyway.

But months passed, and Hale was never called--and it appears that was how D'Amato wanted it. After all, polls show that most Americans don't care much about Whitewater, but Hale will raise questions about the President's character and accuse him of breaking the law in a nationally televised forum. The closer this comes to November, the more damaging to Clinton it will be. It seems unlikely that this would displease Al D'Amato, who is also national co-chairman of Bob Dole's campaign for president.