DATE=7/17/98
TYPE=BACKGROUND REPORT
NUMBER=5-40953
TITLE=SECRET SERVICE / GRAND JURY TESTIMONY
BYLINE=NICK SIMEONE
DATELINE=WASHINGTON 
CONTENT=
VOICED AT: 

INTRO:  THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES HAS CLEARED THE 
WAY FOR U-S SECRET SERVICE AGENTS TO TELL A GRAND JURY WHAT THEY 
MAY KNOW ABOUT PRESIDENT CLINTON'S PERSONAL LIFE.  THE GRAND JURY
IS INVESTIGATING WHETHER THE PRESIDENT HAD SEX WITH A FORMER 
WHITE HOUSE INTERN AND THEN TRIED TO GET HER TO LIE ABOUT IT 
UNDER OATH.  SECRET SERVICE AGENTS GUARD THE PRESIDENT 
ROUND-THE-CLOCK.  AND THE FACT THAT THOSE AGENTS CAN NOW BE 
CALLED TO TESTIFY ABOUT A PRESIDENT'S PRIVATE MOMENTS HAS RAISED 
A DEBATE OVER WHETHER THIS COULD JEOPARDIZE WHITE HOUSE SECURITY 
IN THE FUTURE.  CORRESPONDENT NICK SIMEONE TAKES A LOOK AT THE 
ISSUE. 

TEXT:   THE SECRET SERVICE AGENTS WHO PROTECT THE PRESIDENT ARE 
ANYTHING BUT SECRET.  IN FACT, THEY SPEND MORE TIME WITH THE 
PRESIDENT THAN ANYONE EXCEPT HIS FAMILY.  EVERY TIME THE 
PRESIDENT LEAVES THE WHITE HOUSE, AN ENTOURAGE OF SECRET SERVICE 
AGENTS IN BUSINESS SUITS IS AT THE READY TO PROTECT HIM;  THEY 
CAN BE SEEN SPEAKING INTO TINY MICROPHONES WORN ON THEIR WRISTS, 
LISTENING INTO EARPHONES AND CONSTANTLY SCANNING CROWDS FOR 
POTENTIAL THREATS.  THESE AGENTS ARE EVEN TRAINED TO TAKE AN 
ASSASSIN'S BULLET, IF NECESSARY, TO SAVE THE PRESIDENT'S LIFE.   
   

THE U-S SECRET SERVICE ARGUES THAT IN ORDER TO DO ITS JOB, IT 
MUST HAVE THE PRESIDENT'S COMPLETE TRUST -- AND IT SAYS THAT 
TRUST COULD BE LOST IF AGENTS ARE FORCED TO REVEAL WHAT THEY MAY 
HAVE SEEN OR HEARD DURING THE PRESIDENT'S PRIVATE MOMENTS. 

THIS WAS THE CORE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT:  THAT SECRET 
SERVICE AGENTS SHOULD BE SHIELDED FROM TESTIFYING BEFORE THE 
GRAND JURY INVESTIGATING THE PRESIDENT.  IF NOT, THE ARGUMENT 
GOES, PRESIDENT CLINTON OR ANY FUTURE PRESIDENT COULD DECIDE TO 
MOVE OUT OF THE RANGE OF AGENT PROTECTION IF HE FEARS PERSONAL 
MATTERS COULD BECOME PUBLIC. 

LARRY SHEAF IS A FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE SECRET SERVICE.  

                         // SHEAF ACT //

         THE SECRET SERVICE, TO PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS REQUIRED BY
         LAW, MUST BE IN A POSITION TO COVER AND EVACUATE THE 
         PRESIDENT IN TIMES OF ATTEMPTED HARM OR DANGER.  AND IF 
         THE PRESIDENT IS CONCERNED THAT THE CONVERSATIONS THAT 
         HE IS HAVING COULD SOMEHOW END UP WITH AN AGENT 
         TESTIFYING ABOUT THOSE CONVERSATIONS, HE'S NOT GOING TO 
         WANT THE AGENT THAT CLOSE TO HIM AND THEY WON'T BE ABLE 
         TO PERFORM THEIR JOB.

                         // END ACT // 

FORMER PRESIDENT GERALD FORD IS AMONG THOSE WHO BELIEVE SECRET 
SERVICE AGENTS SHOULD TESTIFY WHEN CALLED BY AUTHORITIES IN 
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. JOHNATHAN TURLEY IS A PROFESSOR OF LAW AT 
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY.

                        // TURLEY ACT //

         WE'VE LONG REJECTED THIS MODEL OF A PERSONAL GUARD FOR 
         THE PRESIDENT.  IN THIS COUNTRY, THE SECRET SERVICE HAVE
         A DUTY THAT RUNS TO THE PUBLIC -- NOT TO THE PRESIDENT 
         AS A PERSON -- AND THEIR DUTY FIRST AND FOREMOST IS TO 
         UPHOLD THE LAW AND TO PROTECT THE PRESIDENT FROM THE 
         CRIMES OF OTHERS, NOT FROM HIS OWN POTENTIAL CRIMES.

                         // END ACT //  

BUT THE ISSUE IS NOT SO CLEAR IN THE INVESTIGATION INTO WHETHER 
PRESIDENT CLINTON BROKE THE LAW IN HIS SWORN DENIALS OF AN AFFAIR
WITH MONICA LEWINSKY.  SECRET SERVICE AGENTS MAY HAVE SEEN OR 
HEARD THE PRESIDENT TALKING TO THE FORMER INTERN -- BUT THEY MAY 
HAVE SEEN NOTHING MORE THAN THAT.  SO SHOULD AGENTS IN THIS CASE 
BE FORCED TO TESTIFY?  AGAIN, FORMER DEPUTY SECRET SERVICE 
DIRECTOR LARRY SHEAF:

                     // SECOND SHEAF ACT //

         AT THE TIME, IT JUST WASN'T A CRIME WHAT THEY MAY HAVE 
         OVERHEARD OR WHAT THEY SAW.  NOW, (SINCE THE PRESIDENT 
         HAS DENIED AN AFFAIR UNDER OATH) IT HAS BECOME THAT WAY,
         DOWN THIS LONG, CONVOLUTED ROAD.  FOR INSTANCE, YOU 
         COULD HAVE AN EX-PRESIDENT AND HIS WIFE IN DIVORCE COURT
         AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE (SECRET SERVICE) AGENT GETS 
         BROUGHT IN TO TESTIFY IN THE DIVORCE FOR SOMETHING HE 
         WITNESSED THAT AT THE TIME CERTAINLY WAS NOT A CRIME.  
         NOW IT'S BECOME AN ISSUE IN A CIVIL SUIT.  AND THE 
         AGENTS JUST SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THAT NOR 
         SHOULD THE PRESIDENT OR THE PROTECTEE HAVE TO WORRY 
         ABOUT THAT.

                         // END ACT //  

EVEN THOUGH AGENTS HAVE NOW BEEN FORCED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE 
GRAND JURY IN THE MONICA LEWINSKY MATTER, THE SECRET SERVICE 
MAINTAINS NONE OF THEM HAS INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE THAT COULD BE 
USED AGAINST THE PRESIDENT. (SIGNED) 

NEB/NJS/RRM


17-Jul-98 5:49 PM EDT (2149 UTC)
NNNN

Source: Voice of America
.