Cisneros, Sex and Consequences

0 Comments | Insight on the News, Dec 13, 1999 | by Timothy W. Maier

Former HUD secretary Henry Cisneros got off with a slap on the wrist after pleading guilty to lying to the FBI, but the case probably has ruined his political future.

Just as the White House tapes tied up the case against President Richard Nixon it also was tape-recorded conversations that brought down former San Antonio mayor and Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, secretary Henry Cisneros.

The lurid tapes -- secretly made by Cisneros' mistress, Linda Medlar Jones, and used later for blackmail -- finally forced Cisneros to plead guilty to lying to the FBI about the amount of hush money he paid to her. He claimed payments of only $60,000, but later admitted to giving her some $250,000. A source knowledgeable about the tapes says that they were far from Grated material, as they described in graphic sexual detail "who was going to stick who with what."

No cigars were involved, but some of the 88 "tainted tapes" made Kenneth Starr's impeachment report about Clinton's dalliances read like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm, says a source familiar with the sexual banter that detailed what Jones was or was not wearing. "They were ... tabloid stuff," says another source.

Critics of Independent Counsel David Barrett's probe called it an unwarranted and partisan $10 million witch-hunt about sex and lies that took more than four years and resulted in no more than a slap on the wrist. Cisneros pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in September under a deal calling for no jail time and a fine of $10,000 -- about the amount Cisneros gets for one speech.

The Washington Post blamed the prosecutor for everything: "This was not a trivial matter, so in addition to deserving criticism for being too aggressive, Mr. Barrett may also be faulted for having failed to prosecute Mr. Cisneros more effectively. One can wonder both whether he should have declined to bring a case against Mr. Cisneros altogether and whether he should have settled for such a gentle plea deal. What is clear is that a reasonable prosecutor would not have taken so long, spent so much and wreaked so much havoc to net so little."

Neither Cisneros nor Barrett is allowed to discuss the plea, and that has made them both punching bags for critics. But a review of the case from sources close to the probe shows that this was no partisan investigation. Barrett's left-hand man was former Iowa attorney general Larry Scalise, a Democrat who worked for John F. Kennedy and was as far from the right as one can be. And Barrett's team believes Cisneros lost more than the Post realizes. Insight sources say that if Cisneros had beaten the conviction he might have been a heartbeat away from being president. Cisneros was No. 1 on Al Gore's shortlist of potential running mates for 2000 -- and a strong choice to draw Hispanic votes away from GOP front-runner George W. Bush. That opportunity now is gone -- hardly a "gentle" blow.

Certainly the FBI didn't see the deal as generous. Barrett recently was honored with the FBI's prestigious Thomas Jefferson Award -- the highest honor the bureau can give beyond its own ranks. The FBI put on a major production for Barrett with Director Louis Freeh personally thanking him for his hard work. "It was a not too subtle flip of the bird to Janet Reno and Clinton," says a law-enforcement source, noting that Freeh and the attorney general seldom have been on the same page concerning investigations of the Clinton administration.

Barrett's critics ignore this award for scrupulous professionalism and instead accuse him of being too hard on Jones and too soft on Cisneros. They note Cisneros dumped Jones, a political fund-raiser, and tried to patch things up with his wife upon moving to Washington. "It is hard to see justice in an investigation that put Ms. Jones in jail for three-and-a-half years while letting Mr. Cisneros off with just a fine," the Post editorialized. "Mr. Barrett indicted Ms. Jones on 28 felony counts for obstructing his investigation and using her sister and brother-in-law as fronts in a house purchase to cover up the fact that she was using Mr. Cisneros' money for the purchase. Ms. Jones brought prosecutors' wrath on herself by lying to Mr. Barrett's investigators after reaching an immunity agreement with them. But the scope and subject of the indictment -- plus the fact that Mr. Barrett also indicted the sister and brother-in-law -- seemed excessive. Mr. Barrett didn't shed that sense of excess when he had to drop charges he had filed against two Cisneros aides he had accused of lying at Mr. Cisneros' behest."

The difference is that Cisneros' aides didn't destroy Barrett's investigation as Jones and her cohorts nearly did. "She messed with the power and he spanked her until he knew she would tell the truth," says a source familiar with the case.

Even if the personable Cisneros had gone to trial, jury nullification easily could have resulted from jury outrage that a blackmail victim was being prosecuted for lying to protect his family. Barrett and other independent counsels spoke frequently to each other and jury nullification was a major concern -- especially after a federal jury acquitted former Agriculture secretary Mike Espy for allegedly accepting illegal gifts from a company close to Clinton. Likewise, nullification was a concern for Starr who didn't pursue an indictment against first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton. So Barrett was pleased with what he got.