Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Crossfire

Should Tauzin Take Himself Off Enron Case?; Are Republicans Going to Investigate Bill Clinton Yet Again?

Aired February 14, 2002 - 19:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Tonight, he's taken the lead on Congress' Enron investigation. But should the chairman of the Energy Committee take himself off the case?

And the Clinton gifts, will they give Republicans yet another Clinton investigation?

ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the CROSSFIRE, Republican Congressman Billy Tauzin of Louisiana, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. And later, Democratic strategist Victor Kamber and Republican strategist Alex Castellanos.

NOVAK: Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Congress today finally found an Enron executive it could like. No, make it, love. Sherron Watkins, the Enron executive who warned her bosses of big trouble ahead, testified before Congress for the first time, specifically before a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is headed by our guest, Congressman Billy Tauzin.

She was hailed as a heroine, a Houston Joan of Arc. Congressman Ed Markey of Massachusetts gallantly offered her the protection of Congress, if what's left of the Enron ruling class makes life hard for her.

But is that a proper function of Congress? Actually, what are the 11 Congressional committees investigating Enron really up to? Fact-finding for legislation? Digging up new abuses? Brow beating the Enron guilty? Or just getting face time on national TV? Bill Press and I will seek the answers from Chairman Tauzin -- Bill.

BILL PRESS, CO-HOST: Mr. Tauzin, good evening. Believe me, I have no love for the Enron executives, but it seems to me that even the Enron executives deserve a fair trial and a fair investigation. Mr. Chairman, you've been accused of leaking Enron documents and spinning them negatively. You said last Sunday on television that Mr. Skilling may have put himself in legal jeopardy. Have you lynched these guys before you've heard all the facts Congressman? Are you giving them a fair shake?

REP. BILLY TAUZIN, CHMN. ENERGY & COMMERCE CMTE.: Oh, absolutely. In fact, I think we're the only committee in Congress that is working bipartisan. John Dingell, the ranking Democrat, and I got together at the beginning of the investigation to make sure that our staffs were working together jointly, we're sharing information, and basically digging the facts out as we find them.

Look, the facts speak for themselves, Bill. These guys are in deep trouble. And as we overturn more and more information, I think the FBI and SEC have a lot to work with now.

PRESS: Well let's -- tell us how deep trouble they're in, congressman. We know there's a lot of phony financial dealings going on here. Do you see any criminal activity? If so, on the part of whom? Who are the villains here?

TAUZIN: Well, I mean today Sherron Watkins identified the culprits, as she called them, the Skilling, the Fastow, Coppers, Rick Buy and Causey, both of whom got fired today.

PRESS: Criminal?

TAUZIN: Well, here's the question. If putting together financial transactions, that have no other purpose but to deceive investors is not financial fraud, I don't know what is. And if people knew they were doing that, and that's a question the criminal investigators have to prove, yes, indeed there could be criminal charges.

NOVAK: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you on one point. Your hearings are bipartisan. I couldn't tell the Republicans from the Democrats, because all of you just got on your high horse and a high (UNINTELLIGIBLE). A lot of saying, "Oh, my goodness, how terrible this is." I didn't hear much probing to try to get facts out. What I heard was congressmen say how outraged they were. Is that the way a congressional investigation is supposed to be run?

TAUZIN: On the contrary, I've had members of my committee come to me even today and say, "This has been the most informative educational series of hearings we've had in a long time." Not only are we being educated as to what went wrong at Enron, but I can promise you, presidents of corporations across America right now are rethinking the way they manage their corporations, and what they know and they don't know.

Boards of director members are rethinking their responsibility about what questions they should ask about the managers, and what they should know about the way the managers are handling the business of the corporation. And a lot of people in corporate America are beginning to think seriously about their responsibilities to investors, the owners of the corporations in America. And even more importantly, there's lot of accounting firms thinking hard about their role in this affair. And I can guarantee a lot of people are nervous tonight about whether or not they're going to be in trouble with this.

NOVAK: Mr. Chairman, pardon me for my naivete. I've only been here for 45 years. And I didn't know that the function of Congress, the congressional committees, were to make corporation executives and accounting firms nervous. I thought it was to write legislation.

And if you're going to get facts to write legislation, weren't you questioning the wrong people, these sorry executives from Enron? Shouldn't you have experts from totally outside of the accounting firms to find out what kind of legislation might be useful to protect the public interests?

TAUZIN: Well, actually, Bob, that was our hearing last week. We conducted a major full committee hearing, inviting accounting professors from the greatest schools in America, from Chicago, from Texas, and New York, and other places.

We invited people from the investment banking industry and analysts to come and tell us about what's wrong with that sector. We got some great advice about how we can improve the accounting standards and how we can make better rules of disclosure. And that's our next step is literally to begin changing those rules and those standards, so that even the things that Enron did that were legal, that ended up deceiving or hiding facts from investors, we might make sure in the future are not proper.

PRESS: Well congressman, you know, the Enron executives may be treated like pariahs today, but they were yesterday's sweethearts, congressman. And nobody seemed to have had a bigger love affair with them, this being Valentine's Day, than you did.

In 1989 to 2001, you received $6,464 from Enron and a whopping $57,000 from Arthur Andersen, which is more than any other member of Congress. Congressman, John Ashcroft recused himself from any Enron investigation. Why haven't you? And maybe, or why shouldn't you? Not maybe, why shouldn't you?

TAUZIN: Well, your network has been a big supporter of mine over the years and so has NBC and ABC and CBS. But with the 14 years, I suppose, that they've helped me as much as some of those other firms that helped me. And...

PRESS: Well, I hope we haven't done as much wrong as Andersen and Enron?

TAUZIN: Well, but remember we had to call you on the carpet, because you messed up the call of the election so badly. The projections you and our networks made with that projection system you had, may have even influenced the outcome of the election. You remember we had some pretty tough hearings about it?

PRESS: But can you be an honest broker, having taken all that money from...

TAUZIN: Well, I'm asking you, were we an honest broker with the networks? Did we hammer you when we thought you were wrong? See, the bottom line is, it doesn't matter whether you've been friend or foe. If you come before our committee having done something wrong or called into question the laws or statutes, or standards in this country, we're going to take you to task. And that's the way it ought to be. It doesn't matter whether you indeed supported any member of my committee or not.

And by the way, Enron supported the top 15 people they supported in Congress. You won't find my name on that list. By the way, 8 of the 15 were Democrats. You know, they spread that largess around. That doesn't matter to me. My job is to take them on when they do it wrong, including the networks. And we've done that.

NOVAK: Mr. Chairman, I was fascinated by today's hearings with Sherron Watkins. Several of your colleagues called her a whistle- blower, but is she really Joan of Arc when she didn't -- she sent anonymous letter to Kenneth Lay? She didn't go the SEC? She didn't go the FBI? She didn't go to Billy Tauzin and the Commerce committee? Some whistle-blower. Haven't you gone a little bit overboard on the deification of Sherron Watkins?

TAUZIN: Well, we careful not to call her whistle-blower, in fact.

NOVAK: Ed Markey did.

TAUZIN: Yes, some people did, but she's very much different from a whistle-blower. And you're correct, Bob. What she did, however, was what I would hope a good employee or officer of every corporation would do. And that is, take to it the top when you see something going wrong. Advise the leader of the corporation if he doesn't know what's happening in his corporation. Give him advice on how to come clean.

NOVAK: And not go to the SEC?

TAUZIN: Well, no, she's done that. I mean, when the leader of a corporation refused to do it, when he refused to take her advice, in fact I called it the last clear chance to save his corporation, when she told him what was going on, told him what he ought to do to come clean and straighten it out, and he wouldn't do it, then she's come forward to investigators, not just our committee, but to those with the FBI and the SEC who were investigating the case.

PRESS: All right, Mr. Chairman, thanks so much for joining us tonight.

TAUZIN: Good to be with you guys.

PRESS: Please come back. There's a lot more to talk about. OK, and when we come back, you thought the Clintons had gone away? No, they're back again and still in trouble over White House gifts. We'll unwrap them and debate them when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PRESS: Now big news. Bill and Hillary Clinton are back in the White House. No, not really. But a California congressman still wants the Justice Department to launch an investigation of gifts they took from the White House. They didn't report some gifts and undervalued others, says Republican Doug Ose. The Clintons respond they followed the rules. And this is just another partisan Clinton bashing. Did they make out like bandits? Tonight, we get to the bottom of it with Republican strategist Alex Castellanos and Democratic strategist Victor Kamber -- Bob Novak.

NOVAK: Vic Kamber, what Bill didn't mention was that this has been investigated already, a preliminary investigation by a House subcommittee. And I want you to take a look on the screen. I'm going to put it up there on what Gregory Walden, associate counsel to former President Bush said about it.

He said, "The investigation this subcommittee conducted reveals the Clinton White House failed to register gifts, failed to reports gifts and undervalued gifts." Aren't your friends, the Clintons, up to their old tricks, breaking the rules for personal gain? Aren't they really high level grifters?

VIC KAMBER, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: How can you say this with a straight face, Bob? I'm shocked...

NOVAK: My face is very straight.

KAMBER: It is very straight. This Republican committee you're talking about, chaired by Republicans, a continuous witch hunt, a hate bashing. You know, we've got problems in this country. The country's falling apart, and we're worried about a golf ball or a golf club. You know, Abe Lincoln got a hat free. George Washington got his teeth free. And we're worried about Bill Clinton taking a golf club out of the White House. Give me a break, Bob. This is -- enough with the Clintons. Let's get on with the country's problems.

NOVAK: Vic, I'm glad you got the talking points out of your system. That's what we heard all during the impeachment. Boy, we got these problems.

KAMBER: And he...

NOVAK: We got to take care of the terrorists. They really took care of those terrorists, too, didn't they and not have an impeachment? So we've got that out of the way.

KAMBER: I want to take care of the economy.

NOVAK: Let's talk about the facts right now. Two furniture dealers sent -- furniture makers, I'm sorry -- sent furniture to the White House for the great remodeling project to the White House. Not to the Clintons. Steve Mitman, a furniture dealer, says that the Clintons cleared out two sofas and an easy chair, $19,900 of stuff that was for the White House and wasn't for them. How can - you're a decent fellow. How can you tolerate that?

KAMBER: First of all, I don't know what you're talking about. The list I saw did not suggest they took anything that was federal government property. They took gifts that were given to them, as the Bushes did, as the Reagans did, as the Trumans did, as the Johnsons did. NOVAK: It was designated for the White House. It wasn't their property.

KAMBER: They cannot take gifts that are not theirs.

NOVAK: They did though.

KAMBER: That are not -- no.

NOVAK: That's why we need an investigation.

PRESS: Alex Castellanos, I'm glad of one thing. I am glad the Clinton haters are still in business. And you're one of them. Let me ask you something, a serious question. Don't you guys have anything better to do?

ALEX CASTELLANOS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: You know, I didn't think there was a scandal here until Bill Clinton denied it. That's when you know something really is wrong.

PRESS: Oh, come on, Alex.

CASTELLANOS: Look, frankly, all of us are tired I think of the Clintons. You know, I'm tired of playing whack them with the Clintons, but he keeps popping his head.

KAMBER: No, no.

CASTELLANOS: When you move into the White House with no furniture, and you move out with enough to fill $2 million houses, you've got a problem. He took stuff that's not his.

PRESS: Wait.

CASTELLANOS: But the real problem here is not just the stuff they took. I mean, they took everything but responsibility out of the White House. But what they took, it's what they sold. Ken Lay, now we're finding out that it's part of all of this. Ken Lay slept in the Lincoln bedroom...

PRESS: No, we're not going to do this.

CASTELLANOS: ...all kinds of things.

PRESS: We're not going to Enron. We're going to stick on the White House gifts. And let me just -- here's the problem. Clinton didn't pop up again. You brought him up again. Your Republican congress brought him up again on a deal.

CASTELLANOS: No, no, no.

PRESS: Let me finish. OK? There was a fuss about when they left the White House. There was already and investigation. The White House stewards say they did nothing wrong. The Clintons said if there are any questions, we're going to pay back $86,000 and we returned $28,000 worth of furniture, just to make sure that there's no apparent impropriety. Been there, done that. Why do we have to do it again?

CASTELLANOS: First of all, when you get caught stealing, it's not OK.

PRESS: They weren't caught stealing.

(CROSSTALK)

PRESS: They were not caught stealing.

NOVAK: Let him answer the question.

CASTELLANOS: This has been the story of the Clintons all they're lives. Once again, we find out that they've always lived in public housing, I guess. They're moving into million-dollar houses, have no furniture.

If you moved into the White House with nothing, and then moved out with a bunch of furniture that wasn't yours, who...

PRESS: It's not true they had nothing when they...

CASTELLANOS: ...who did you think -- it belonged to the American taxpayers. And you know, it's not a Republican initiative. Justice is served in this country when justice is due. This report says that they undervalued property when they reported it. That's against the law.

KAMBER: Republican subcommittee.

CASTELLANOS: If you fail to report property...

KAMBER: Alex, come on.

CASTELLANOS: Yes, but the facts are the facts. And there's concrete -- there's nothing about...

(CROSSTALK)

CASTELLANOS: $300,000? That's real taxpayer money.

KAMBER: And nothing different than Bush or Reagan did.

CASTELLANOS: It belonged to the American taxpayers.

(CROSSTALK)

NOVAK: I know it's very hard for you to do this. I just want to talk about what the Clintons took out of the White House in gifts. Let's put on the screen. This is from the subcommittee. This is an incredible array.

$173,000 on art objects and books. $69,000 in furniture. $26,000 in golf items. $24,000 in clothing. And what's interesting is, this only includes items less than $260.

KAMBER: Let me ask you...

NOVAK: Let me finish and then I'll let you talk. Over a thousand items, $260. And you know what else they didn't report? The 22 gifts from Monica Lewinsky. Those were not reported.

KAMBER: OK, Bob, you used an example, clothing. Now who gives clothing except to somebody that you want to give it as a gift for? You think that they gave Mrs. Clinton a size 30 suit for the United States government?

NOVAK: Yes.

KAMBER: No, they gave it as gift to her or they gave it as a gift to the family. And the president and First Lady took what was their gifts, no different. When Bush left, he took $41,000 worth of stuff out. No one even questioned it.

CASTELLANOS: They set up a gift registry.

KAMBER: Yes, what's wrong with that?

CASTELLANOS: Usually, you get a gift registry when you get married, not when you're fooling around.

KAMBER: Stop, Alex. That's so outrageous. Today -- there were a lot of people, myself included, that wanted to thank the first lady...

CASTELLANOS: When you're leaving office...

KAMBER: ...that wanted to thank the First -- thank her for being a wonderful First Lady.

CASTELLANOS: And going into the U.S. Senate?

NOVAK: All right, Vic, let me tell you...

KAMBER: I didn't want to give her a toaster. I wanted to give her what she wanted.

NOVAK: Vic, what is so chintzy about this is the undervaluing. And let's hear the testimony from really I think a very valuable servant to bring all this out, Congressman Ose. Let's listen.

KAMBER: Republican congressman.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DOUG OSE (R), CALIFORNIA: The fact of the matter is that an Yves St. Laurent suit, valued at $249, $1.00 below the disclosure threshold, a 1793 French coin valued at $10, an 1826 John Quincy Adams land grant letter valued at something far below the threshold. I mean, if the president did use appraisals, it's on no more than say 40 or 50 percent of the items.

(END VIDEO CLIP) NOVAK: Vic, you're a man of the world.

KAMBER: Look, you're laughing when you say that.

NOVAK: Well, no, it's so funny how -- what grifters they are. A St. Laurent suit for $249. How can you defend that?

KAMBER: I'll take you a lot of places you get it, Bob. Maybe you should shop in some of the right places.

NOVAK: On Maxwell Street?

KAMBER: Well, Maxwell Street's one potential one.

PRESS: I'll tell you, one is called Filene's Basement. It's Connecticut Avenue.

Alex, I want to get one thing straight that's been lost totally in this discussion. You may not think presidents ought to get gifts, but they can and they all do, and there's nothing illegal about it.

CASTELLANOS: And the law says they have to report them.

PRESS: I want to finish for once. There's no limit on how much they can get. There's no limit on how much those gifts can be worth. All they have to do is report them.

CASTELLANOS: Which he didn't do, Bill.

PRESS: Yes, he did. When George Bush left the White House, he took 39 fishing rods, golf clubs, briefcases, including a barbecue pit for his house in Houston.

CASTELLANOS: The National Park Service...

PRESS: True or not?

CASTELLANOS: ...says Clinton took $28,000 worth of furniture that did not belong to him. It belonged to the American taxpayers. They give it back, so now it's OK. He took -- he didn't report the gifts. Should he have reported them? Yes or no? Should he have reported their full value, yes or no?

PRESS: Wait, he...

CASTELLANOS: He didn't do it.

PRESS: ...did report the gifts. You've got one, may I say, one Republican congressman claiming he did something wrong.

CASTELLANOS: Oh, you've got to live.

PRESS: And you believe him?

CASTELLANOS: You've got to live.

KAMBER: First of all, you've got a nobody congressman. Let's start with...

PRESS: Yes.

KAMBER: ...a freshman who's a nobody, who hasn't done one thing since he's been in Congress, except attack the Clintons, OK, and vote for campaign finance reform.

NOVAK: Just a minute, I want to tell you this. Doug Ose is one of my personal heroes. He is now as of today.

(CROSSTALK)

NOVAK: All right, all right, I think we're out of time though. And thank you, Vic Kamber.

KAMBER: Thank you.

NOVAK: Alex Castellanos.

Next, CROSSFIRE "Police Blotter." Some crimes and misdeeds, including hanky-panky in the governor's office.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NOVAK: Now it's CROSSFIRE "Police Blotter." How the bad boys and girls, have been behaving, or misbehaving.

A speechwriter for then-Massachusetts Governor William Weld seven years ago, has written a book claiming what really goes on in government. Robert Ebert Byrnes writes in "Brush with the Law" about high old times in the governor's office, night time liquor parties in Weld's absence, the author frolicking with two naked co-eds on the governor's mahogany table.

PRESS: Next the latest on Congressman James Traficant, who went right from CROSSFIRE to the courtroom. Yesterday, he denied taking kickbacks. "I didn't get a damned dime," he told the jury. "I love America, but I don't love those big bureaucrats that run America." Traficant's sounding less like a defendant and more like a candidate for president every day.

NOVAK: Mike Tyson has been barred from fighting in Nevada, New York, and most other places, But in Georgia, it's about as easy to get a boxing license as a driver's license. Give them $10, and it's no questions asked by the Georgia Boxing Commission.

Tyson got his license last week. And over $50 million have been put up for Tyson fighting or biting Lennox Lewis in the Georgia dome. Governor Roy Barnes says he'll find other ways to stop that fight, license or not.

PRESS: And only in Arkansas. Janet Huckabee, wife of Governor Mike Huckabee, is in hot water for giving paid speeches to the Mobile Home industry. She says, "What's the big deal? I loved that mobile home we lived in temporarily, and I don't mind telling everybody so." Only in Arkansas. Only in Arkansas could you get paid for admitting you like living in a trailer.

NOVAK: Bill, I don't know whether Congressman Traficant is guilty or innocent. That's for a jury to decide. But he is a hero because -- for a lot of us, including me, for fighting the IRS. He should be your hero, too.

PRESS: No, he is. I like Jim Traficant. But I want to tell you something. Things in the California governor's office under Jerry Brown were not as lively as apparently they were in the Massachusetts governor's office under Bill Weld. You know? Maybe I worked for the wrong governor, Bob.

NOVAK: That's the story of the year.

(LAUGHTER)

PRESS: From the left, I'm Bill Press. Hey, we want to hear from you folks. Send us your e-mail right here to Bob, Bill and Tucker at crossfire@cnn.com. Good night from the left. I'm Bill Press.

NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com