•HCON 183 IH
and have engaged in a scheme to launder foreign money
through 
straw 
donors 
in 
violation 
of 
sections
437g(d)(1)(A) and 441e of title 2, United States Code;
Whereas $3,000,000 in campaign donations raised primarily
by three fundraisers close to the President (John Huang,
Charlie Trie, and Johnny Chung) was returned because
it came illegally from foreign contributors;
Whereas the Democratic National Committee has returned
$325,000 raised by Mr. Trie, and the President’s legal
defense fund has announced that it has returned about
$800,000 in illegal contributions he collected;
Whereas the Democratic National Committee, only after the
election and only after a public outcry, has returned
about half of the $3,400,000 raised by Mr. Huang;
Whereas individuals associated with raising foreign funds, in-
cluding Charlie Trie, Thai businesswoman Pauline
Kanchanalak, the head of the Indonesian Lippo Group,
James Riady, and gardener Arief Wiriadinata and his
wife have fled the country to avoid interrogation and pos-
sible prosecution;
Whereas Charlie Trie, now hiding in Beijing, China, said to
Tom Brokow of NBC news that Senate investigators
‘‘will never find me’’;
Whereas James Riady has reportedly fled to Jakarta, Indo-
nesia;
Whereas Pauline Kanchanalak has reportedly fled to Thai-
land;
Whereas Arief and Soraya Wiriadinata have reportedly fled
to Indonesia;
•HCON 183 IH
Whereas close associates of the President implicated in the
plot to raise illegal foreign money, including John Huang
and Johnny Chung, have refused to cooperate with inves-
tigators, asserting the 5th amendment right against self-
incrimination;
Whereas the President knew that some of the attendees at
his fundraising coffees were individuals (foreigners) ineli-
gible to contribute;
Whereas the President on at least 2 occasions thanked audi-
ences for contributing to his campaign at fundraisers he
knew foreigners attended;
Whereas at a February 19, 1996, fundraising dinner at the
Hay-Adams Hotel the President said: ‘‘It was quite a
wonderful thing for me to come here on what we in the
United States now call President’s Day . . . I thank you
for your financial contributions’’, which is specific and
credible evidence that a Federal law barring raising cam-
paign funds from foreign citizens may have been violated;
Whereas at one fundraising event the President urged for-
eigners to ‘‘go back home, reach out to people who are
not here’’;
Whereas at a 1996 fundraiser President Clinton told an audi-
ence of fewer than 50 people, ‘‘how much I appreciate
your support,’’ acknowledging ‘‘those who have come
from other countries to be with us tonight’’;
Whereas a videotape of a campaign fundraiser revealed that
a participant, Arief Wiriadinata—whose campaign con-
tributions totaling $450,000 were ultimately returned re-
portedly because of concerns the funds were laundered—
informed the President that ‘‘James Riady sent me’’
•HCON 183 IH
which may have violated sections 437g(d)(1)(A) and 441f
of title 2, United States Code;
Whereas there appears to have been an administration-wide
conspiracy to subvert Federal campaign and bribery laws;
Whereas it is illegal for ‘‘soft money’’ contributions to di-
rectly assist the campaign of a candidate for Federal of-
fice;
Whereas the President and his subordinates may have vio-
lated section 441a of title 2, United States Code, prohib-
iting Presidential campaigns receiving Federal money
from raising private funds in excess of the limit placed
on Presidential campaigns that receive Federal money;
Whereas former Presidential advisor Dick Morris stated in
his book, ‘‘Beyond the Oval Office’’, that the President
used advertisements paid for with soft money to advance
his reelection campaign, stating that: ‘‘Every line of every
ad came under his informed, critical, and often meddle-
some gaze. Every ad was his ad.’’;
Whereas Dick Morris, in a February 1996 memorandum to
the President, stated that, ‘‘If Dole is nominated, we
need no additional [hard] money for media before May
28 since we can attack Dole with DNC soft money’’;
Whereas the President noted on a May 21, 1996, tape that
television advertisements funded with soft money—money
supposed to be used for party building, not for individual
candidates—boosted his chances for reelection: ‘‘The fact
that we’ve been able to finance this long running con-
stant television campaign . . . where we’re always able to
frame the issues . . . has been central to the position I
now enjoy in the polls.’’;
•HCON 183 IH
Whereas the President stated in a December 1995 tape that:
‘‘We realized we could run these ads through the Demo-
cratic Party, which means we could raise money in
$20,000, $50,000, and $100,000 blocks. We don’t have
to do it all in $1,000 donations.’’;
Whereas section 201 of title 18, United States Code, pro-
hibits Federal officials from receiving any benefit in re-
turn for any official action;
Whereas Democratic National Committee trustee Johnny
Chung commented on the solicitation in the White House
by the First Lady’s aides: ‘‘I see the White House is like
a subway: You have to put in coins to open the gates.’’;
Whereas the former head of the Democratic National Com-
mittee, Donald Fowler, placed a phone call to the Central
Intelligence Agency at the request of a major donor,
international fugitive Roger Tamraz, which involved con-
structing a $1,000,000,000 pipeline through the hostile
state, Iran;
Whereas Paul Eckstein, a Democratic activist and long-time
friend, colleague, and campaign manager of the Secretary
of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt, testified under oath that
Babbitt told him that former Deputy White House Chief
of Staff Harold Ickes had pressured Babbitt to make a
decision on an application for a gaming operation in
favor of tribes that opposed the application, and that
made large contributions to the Clinton-Gore re-election
campaign;
Whereas the application was rejected the same day Babbitt
told Eckstein that Mr. Ickes ordered the decision;
Whereas Eckstein also testified that ‘‘[Babbitt] asked me,
‘Do you have any idea how much money these people
•HCON 183 IH
have given?’ I said, ‘I have no idea.’ He said, ‘Well, a
half a million dollars.’ ’’;
Whereas Federal District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, a
Carter appointee, after reviewing summaries of memos
the White House has been withholding on this matter
concluded that ‘‘there is considerable evidence that sug-
gests that improper political pressure may have influ-
enced agency decision making.’’;
Whereas there are several other instances where evidence
suggests administration policy may have changed as a re-
sult of campaign contributions, including: (1) permitting
100,000 Chinese assault weapons into the country, de-
spite the administration’s public support for the assault
weapons ban law, after meeting with, and receiving con-
tributions allegedly associated with, a Chinese arms mer-
chant; (2) the President issuing a waiver allowing contin-
ued aid to Paraguay, after the State Department rec-
ommended cutting off aid because of the country’s failure
to stop drug smuggling, in close proximity to receiving
contributions from an individual with close ties to the
Government of Paraguay; (3) a reversal of the adminis-
tration’s position on labor and immigration issues in
Guam after receiving large contributions from Guam
businessmen supporting this change; (4) providing a
former employee of the Lippo Group (a multibillion dollar
real estate and financial conglomerate based in Indo-
nesia), John Huang, with a position at the Department
of Commerce and a top secret security clearance without
a full background check—a security clearance Mr. Huang
retained long after he severed ties with the Department
of Commerce—which permitted him, according to the
Commerce Department, 109 meetings at which classified
•HCON 183 IH
information might have been discussed; and (5) the
President’s decision to designate 1,700,000 million acres
of Utah wilderness as a national monument, which halted
plans to mine the world’s largest deposit of clean burning
super compliance coal when the second largest deposit of
this type of coal lies in Indonesia, raising concerns that
the Lippo Group influenced the President’s decision;
Whereas on several occasions the administration has failed to
turn over documents or other materials subpoenaed by
the Committees of the House of Representatives and the
Senate investigating the 1996 Federal election, and may
be violating chapter 73 of title 18, United States Code,
relating to the obstruction of justice;
Whereas videotapes of fundraisers requested by congressional
committees were not produced for months, and might be
incomplete or altered;
Whereas every copy of the film of the Vice President’s illegal
fundraiser at a Buddhist temple has disappeared;
Whereas chapter 40 of title 28, United States Code, sets a
low threshold in favor of the Attorney General requesting
an independent counsel in matters involving White House
or other ‘‘covered’’ officials in which the Attorney Gen-
eral has requested a preliminary investigation under
chapter 40 of title 28, United States Code;
Whereas the standard for the Attorney General to appoint an
independent counsel after initiating a preliminary inves-
tigation is very low;
Whereas section 592 of title 28 United States Code, states
that ‘‘The Attorney General shall apply’’ for ‘‘an appoint-
ment of an independent counsel if—the Attorney Gen-
eral, upon completion of a preliminary investigation
•HCON 183 IH
under this chapter, determines that there are reasonable
grounds to believe that further investigation is war-
ranted’’ or the period of the preliminary investigation as
set forth in the chapter has elapsed and the Attorney
General has not notified the court that ‘‘no reasonable
grounds’’ exist to terminate the investigation;
Whereas there are several significant restrictions on the At-
torney General in conducting a preliminary investigation,
which makes the low threshold in favor of the Attorney
General requesting an independent counsel necessary;
Whereas the Attorney General is statutorily prohibited from
convening grand juries, entering into plea bargains,
granting immunity, or issuing subpoenas during a pre-
liminary investigation begun under section 591(c) of title
28, United States Code;
Whereas the Attorney General is limited to questioning wit-
nesses who voluntarily agree to interviews and reviewing
documents voluntarily produced;
Whereas, pursuant to chapter 40 of title 28, United States
Code, the Attorney General on October 3 opened a pre-
liminary investigation into telephone campaign solicita-
tions made by Vice President Gore at the White House,
and on October 14 she opened a preliminary investigation
into telephone campaign solicitations made by President
Clinton;
Whereas the Attorney General has ordered a preliminary in-
vestigation under chapter 40 of title 28, United States
Code, to investigate charges that former Secretary of En-
ergy Hazel O’Leary solicited a contribution for a favored
charity via a Democratic National Committee trustee,
Johnny Chung, in return for granting a meeting;
•HCON 183 IH
Whereas sufficient evidence exists for the Attorney General to
request the appointment of an independent counsel con-
cerning the fundraising calls of the President and the
Vice President;
Whereas section 607 of title 18, United States Code, makes
it unlawful for ‘‘any person to solicit . . . any contribu-
tion . . . in any room or building occupied in the discharge
of official duties.’’;
Whereas former White House counsel Abner Mikva cautioned
White House employees in 1995—before many of the
questionable calls may have been made by the President
and the Vice President from the White House—that ‘‘no
fundraising phone calls or mail may emanate from the
White House.’’;
Whereas the Vice President has admitted making numerous
fundraising calls from the White House;
Whereas the President has not challenged documentary evi-
dence that proves he made fundraising calls from the
White House, including the Oval Office; and
Whereas Richard Jenrette, who contributed $50,000 to the
Democratic National Committee, reportedly wrote a letter
after receiving a call from the President stating: ‘‘You
[President Clinton] wanted to raise $2,000,000 from 40
friends—by my Wall Street math, this comes out to
$50,000 that you requested from each.’’: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That the Congress—
(1) deplores the refusal of the Attorney General
to seek application for an independent counsel, pur-
•HCON 183 IH
suant to chapter 40 of title 28, United States Code,
concerning the 1996 election campaign of President
William Jefferson Clinton and Vice President Albert
Gore;
(2) condemns the continued control of the in-
vestigation by the Attorney General, despite her ac-
tual conflict of interest in investigating, among oth-
ers, the President at whose pleasure she serves, and
the Vice President;
(3) denounces the lackluster investigation run
by the Attorney General, which has allowed key wit-
nesses and suspects to flee the country and impor-
tant documentary materials to disappear or be with-
held improperly and has given those involved a year
to coordinate their stories;
(4) laments the loss of confidence of the Amer-
ican people in their Department of Justice, engen-
dered by this investigation, which continues to un-
dermine the notion of one standard of justice for all
Americans, regardless of position;
(5) instructs the Attorney General to faithfully
uphold and execute the laws she has sworn to up-
hold, specifically by seeking application for an inde-
pendent counsel to investigate the 1996 Clinton-
Gore campaign, without further wrongful delay; and
•HCON 183 IH
(6) instructs the President to request that the
Attorney General seek application for an independ-
ent counsel to investigate the 1996 Clinton-Gore
campaign, without further wrongful delay.
Æ