The Secret GovernmentÕs
Made Men
To comment on this
article go to BÕManÕs Revolt.
When the lead Democratic counsel on the Senate
Whitewater Committee interviewed the lead investigator for U.S. Park Police of
the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, Jr., we noticed a
certain orchestrated quality to the exchange. The interviewee, John Rolla, seemed not
to have rehearsed his lines very well, though, because in the 1999 article that
we wrote about it, reproduced below, we can see that he bungled his way through
it. Poor preparation might not have
been the primary cause of his poor performance, though. In this testimony and other testimony he
gave in the case, he comes across as the sort of person who would even make
Howard Payne University professor Matthew McNiece look intelligent by
comparison.
RollaÕs manifest shortcomings have not held him
back, though, in his career in the national security state. We discover from LinkedIn that we, as Americans,
can rest easily at night with the knowledge that the one man most responsible
for preventing terrorists from blowing up the Liberty Bell, or at least defacing it with a pocketknife, is none other than
John Rolla. Here is how he
describes his current position:
As the National Threat Coordinator
for the Department of the Interior, working as a Task Force Agent at the FBI
National Joint Terrorism Task Force, I access multiple databases and agencies monitoring
possible domestic or international terroristic threats against Department of
the Interior critical infrastructure, which includes National Monuments and
Memorials, over 400 dams and 50 hydro-electric power stations nation-wide. I am
also assigned to an FBI group working on other sensitive terrorism matters.
With this assignment to an ÒFBI groupÓ one might
say that his career has come full circle, because if the work of the most
diligent independent researchers of FosterÕs apparent
murder can be credited, the cover-up from its very beginning until today has
primarily been the work of the FBI.
Another way of looking at it is that, possibly all along, Rolla has been
an FBI employee, and that his employment with the Department of the Interior
has simply been a cover. Whatever
the case, it is clear that he did what was expected of him in the Foster case
cover-up and he has been duly rewarded.
One such thing is suggested in the dissenting memorandum presented to Kenneth
Starr by his lead investigator, Miguel Rodriguez, before the latterÕs
resignation:
[Robert] Edwards apparently showed these photos
to [Christine] Hodakievic, plus EdwardsÕ own photos. Later,
I suggested, after the corpse was staged with the revolver brought by [Cheryl]
Braun, [Pete] Simonello and [John] Rolla. [sic, incomplete sentence] New photos were taken and thus
[Franz] FerstlÕs were never produced to the OIC.
This explained the different arm/body distance, gun/hand positions, HodakievicÕs
problems with the photos, FerstlÕs missing photos and
EMT problems with the photos (and their observations of a different
gun).
So questionable was RollaÕs performance,
Rodriguez also wondered if he and others on the scene might have other
affiliations than what they had nominally.
The following is from a telephone conversation between Rodriguez and
the late Reed Irvine of Accuracy in Media:
I found Rolla's, the notes that he made at the
scene, completely incredible and inconsistent with prior statements both made
by him and accounts of others. I think he is completely incredible.
God! I'm just brimming over,
I'm bubbling over. And I'm angry that I cannot
respond. I am angry myself. Because there is much
to be said. Let me suggest to you, investigate, be investigative
reporters. Investigate these people too. What background did they
have? Wouldn't it be surprising if, these people were special liaisons in a
prior life to, in some capacity. And were there
any other supervisor people out there? And, and what were the backgrounds
of some of those police that were out there? There's a whole host of
fertile ground out there. And have you really identified all the main
players out there at the park police?
As we noted in the earlier article, the
interviewer, Ben-Veniste, was already something of a
made man in the national security state.
By performing so skillfully in making sure that novices like Rolla
stayed on script, and otherwise keeping the lid on the Foster scandal, Ben-Veniste demonstrated his suitability for his biggest
assignment of all, membership in the federal governmentÕs 9/11 Commission. In that latter capacity, journalist Daniel Hopsicker
suggests
that Ben-Veniste might have had something of a
conflict of interest:
If
Ben-Veniste client Truman Arnold's business dealings
with terror flight school owner Wally Hilliard come under scrutiny in the 9/11
probe, the slick Washington lawyer may find himself involved in a major
national scandal from two different sides.
If he does, for Ben-Veniste,
it won't even be for the first time. He served as Majority Counsel to the
Congressional Whitewater probe investigating the actions of Truman Arnold, and
then went on to defend Arnold before Ken StarrÕs Whitewater grand jury, an
action for which he was roundly criticized.
Actually, Hopsicker
somewhat misstates Ben-VenisteÕs work for
Arnold. He represented the man at
the time that he was under investigation by Starr; defense counsel is not
permitted in testimony before a grand jury. His work for Arnold is described more precisely
in ÒThe Hideous Career of
Richard Ben-Veniste.Ó
Now here is the 1999 article:
The
Counsel, the Cop, and the Keys
ÒObjection,
your honor. Counsel is leading the
witness.Ó
ÒObjection
sustained.Ó
And so it goes daily, as any TV
drama fan knows, in courtrooms all over the country. Not so when the charge in
the case is self-murder and the victim/accused-perpetrator is without legal
representation. Unchallenged witness leading, in fact, is the order of the day
at your typical U.S. Senatorial sham hearing/investigation. But just as some
horses coaxed to the proximity of liquid refreshment can be more easily
persuaded to imbibe than can others, some witnesses are more easily led in
desired directions than others.
Consider
the super-smooth chief minority counsel of the Senate Whitewater Committee,
Richard Ben-Veniste, as he interrogates the lead U.S.
Park Police investigator, John Rolla, about Rolla's work on his very first
homicide case, that of Deputy White House Counsel, Vincent Foster. The exchange
took place on Thursday, July 20, 1995, two years to the day after Foster's body
was found on the backside of an earthen berm in the far corner of a lightly visited,
preserved leftover from the Civil War off Virginia's George Washington Parkway,
Fort Marcy Park. The body, we were to learn later, had been found lying
straight as a stick with both arms neatly down by the side. No blood or brain
tissue was seen blown out the back of the head although the autopsy doctor
would report finding an exit wound there the size of a half dollar from a
high-powered .38 caliber bullet supposedly fired into the mouth. The gaping
exit wound noted by the septuagenarian doctor with previous highly-dubious
autopsies leading to suicide conclusions to his credit was not seen by any of
the twenty-five people--by known count--who saw the body that night. The
autopsy had been moved up so that, contrary to standard procedure, the
investigators at the park were not able to attend. Though the revolver found in
the hand, lying almost under the right leg, was said to have been pressed deep
into the back of the mouth, there was no disfigurement of the mouth from the
blast or the recoil. No teeth were chipped. No blow-back was on the weapon or
the hand or the sleeve nor were there any fingerprints
of the deceased. Neither did he leave fingerprints on either the spent shell
casing or the remaining bullet in the cylinder, and no matching bullets were
ever found, to mention just a few of the anomalies.
The
exchange begins this way:
BEN-VENISTE.
Detective Rolla, what does your training tell you to do in a circumstance or
situation where you have come upon a violent death by apparent gunshot in terms
of control of the area?
ROLLA.
On any crime scene you're going to seal off a certain section of the area large
enough to search and keep individuals out of that area.
BEN-VENISTE.
So you want to secure the area and you want to take control of the situation?
ROLLA.
That's correct.
BEN-VENISTE.
That's what your training teaches you?
ROLLA.
That's correct.
BEN-VENISTE.
Now, you made every effort, as we have heard today, to take control of the
situation at Fort Marcy Park to ensure that the scene of Mr. Foster's death was
not disturbed. Is that so, sir?
ROLLA.
That's correct.
BEN-VENISTE.
On the basis of your review of the evidence at Fort Marcy Park, everything that
you saw was consistent with an apparent suicide; is that correct?
ROLLA.
That's correct, keeping an open mind to other options based on the physical
evidence that was in front of us, it was all leading right to a suicide.
BEN-VENISTE.
In fact, later that evening you and Sergeant Braun had advised the Foster
family that this was an apparent suicide?
ROLLA.
Yes I did.
So
far so good for the Columbia-educated New Yorker, Ben-Veniste,
a man who very early in his career rose to national prominence as an assistant
to the special counsel in the Watergate case and later achieved a quieter
notoriety as a defense counsel for government-protected, Arkansas and
likely-CIA-connected mega-drug smuggler, Barry Seal. * The curious choice of
the woefully-inexperienced, diction-challenged, but talkative, Rolla had
already caused problems for the government case in the hearing and deposition
stage of the Foster "investigation." His very presence in such a key
position certainly lends credibility to the fall-back
position that the original investigation was simply botched, but his tendency
to talk too much and his failure at times to see what he is expected to say
have increased the need for an alternative to the simple
suicide-from-depression scenario that the public has been sold from the
beginning.
But
at this point, Ben-Veniste must have been breathing
easy. Notice that, with respect to police training and procedures, he has not
elicited from Rolla that in the investigation of any violent death, the
original assumption of murder is fundamental, an assumption that is to be
maintained until enough evidence has been collected to rule it out. Ben-Veniste is not alone in ignoring this point. One may search
the record with a fine-toothed comb and nowhere will he find the direct
question put to the investigating officers, "What steps did you take to
rule out murder?" Notice, too, that when Rolla, speaking of the early
evidence, says that it was "all leading right to a suicide," he is
not asked to elaborate. Having obtained his invited answer, Ben-Veniste then exhibits less curiosity than one would expect
from a casual bystander. He has, no doubt, been warned about Rolla, and knows
that it is not safe to let him talk too much about the sensitive details of the
case.
We
may pass over the fact that conversation with the Foster family that Ben-Veniste alludes to would not have been possible if the
authorities had stuck to the story that The
Washington Post had put out on July 30, 1993, and was left unchallenged for
almost a year, that is that the police were turned away from the Foster house
that night. Immediately after the above quoted transcript, an exchange
ensued--which we shall omit--about how essential it is for the police to make
the death notification to the family, and then we have this:
BEN-VENISTE.
Did you tell Mrs. Foster that no suicide note had been found in Fort Marcy
Park?
ROLLA.
No, she never asked that question, and I didn't advise it.
BEN-VENISTE.
Did you advise anyone there that evening that no note had been found?
ROLLA.
I tell you, I don't know if anyone asked me that question. I don't remember. I
may have told them.
BEN-VENISTE.
If they asked you, you would have told them?
ROLLA.
No, it was not a secret.
BEN-VENISTE.
These people were grieving; they were looking to you for help as well as
comfort from their friends and relatives, correct?
ROLLA.
Yes; correct.
BEN-VENISTE.
There wasn't any reason you wouldn't tell them?
ROLLA.
No, there would be no secret about it.
BEN-VENISTE.
In fact, you've indicated that you did search for a suicide note at the scene
of Mr. Foster's death?
ROLLA.
We searched the scene, searched his person. His vehicle was on the scene. **
Woops!
Sound the alarm bells! We've gone a bit too far here.
If
Rolla had searched Foster's body at the scene, it certainly stands to reason
that he could have hardly failed to miss the keys to Foster's car that Rolla
says was there, that is, if the keys were actually there, but the record shows
that no keys were found at the park, not on Foster, not in the car, not on the
ground, nowhere. At the point where it dawned on the investigators that they
had no car keys they surely could not have continued to think that "it was
all leading right to a suicide." At the very least, a frantic search of
the grounds would have ensued, that is, if anyone really seriously thought that
the evidence otherwise pointed to suicide. Not many people would believe that
Foster hot-wired his car to take his last drive. But no, what we have been
asked to believe is that the very first, not the last thought the police had
was, "Oh, we must have missed the keys when we were going through Foster's
pockets looking for any evidence we could collect and put into our documented
evidence collection. Let's hustle right off to the morgue and look in his
pockets again."
Ben-Veniste knows how the keys turned up, with a set of house
and office keys thrown in to boot, and he tries to dig himself
out of this little hole, pulling on the reins of the uncomprehending witness as
hard as he can:
BEN-VENISTE.
You didn't search his person at the scene, did you?
ROLLA.
After it was pronounced, we emptied his pockets. Yes, I did remove his personal
property and search them.
Wake
up, Rolla! Think of what you are saying.
BEN-VENISTE.
At the scene or at the hospital?
ROLLA.
At the scene. We went to the hospital because I
happened to miss his car keys in his right front pants pocket.
Whew!
That's a relief. But what a gift Rolla or his sidekick/trainer Sgt. Cheryl
Braun must have! It must be nice to know confidently where you must look when
something is missing. I guess it helps when you have been told that two White
House operatives are going to the morgue to "identify the body," a
body that the police have already identified perfectly well with the help of a
White House photo ID. It's a good thing that, by the time Kenneth Starr looked
into the matter, Rolla had got on the same page with Braun and agreed that they
went to the morgue before going to the Foster home and before the White House
people got to the morgue instead of after, as Rolla had clearly implied in
previous testimony. ***
BEN-VENISTE.
So you made a cursory search of Mr. Foster's pants pockets, but you did not at
that time locate the set of keys to the car?
ROLLA.
That's correct. I neglected to turn the pocket inside out.
BEN-VENISTE.
You did not find a note, clearly?
ROLLA.
No, there's no note.
Not
yet, anyway. That would take a bit more doing. But for now, let's heave a sigh
that the counsel and the cop are off a subject the counsel dearly wanted to
avoid, the matter of those pesky keys.
*In
addition to Ben-Veniste, a surprising number of
veterans of the "Silent Coup," to
use the title term of Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin's 1991 book about Watergate, resurface in the
Foster case. Foster's boss, White House counsel and White House obstructer of
the police search of Foster's office, Bernard Nussbaum, was on the House
Watergate Committee, where he supervised the freshly-minted young attorney,
Hillary Rodham. On the Senate committee looking into Watergate as assistant
chief counsel was close Clinton confidante in recent years, James Hamilton, the
"Foster family attorney" chosen for them by the White House. Hamilton
ranks up close to autopsy doctor, James C. Beyer, for the role he has played in
building the case for suicide. And we must not forget convicted Watergate
felon, G. Gordon Liddy, the man who brought forward
the "confidential witness" with his belated and unlikely tale of how
he discovered the body and anonymously notified authorities. These are the ones
we know about. Who knows how many more there might be behind the scenes?
We
also find in the Foster case, perhaps by coincidence and perhaps not, a number
of Yale products. Both Clintons, Hamilton, and Williams and Connolly lawyer to
the president, David Kendall, have Yale law degrees, and Whitewater special
prosecutor, Robert Fiske and one of his consulting pathologists, James L. Luke,
have Yale bachelor's degrees.
**The
evidence is quite strong that Foster's car was not "on the scene" at
Fort Marcy Park until well after his dead body was. The failure of early
witness, Patrick Knowlton, to make his description of the car he saw in the
Fort Marcy parking lot accord with what his FBI interrogators wanted him to say
is, according to Knowlton's thesis in his suit against them, what led to his
harassment and attempted intimidation on the streets of Washington, DC. See the
World Net Daily interview of investigator Hugh Turley
on this topic.
***This
is from John Rolla's Senate deposition of July 21, 1994:
Q.
Now, did you ever talk to, let's see, Bill Kennedy at the White House, who was
seeking permission to identify the body?
A.
Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe through a question you asked before -- yes. After we left
the scene, myself and Investigator Braun were heading
to Mr. Foster's residence in Georgetown to make a death notification.
Lieutenant Gavin called us and we talked to him, and he started to call these
guys from the White House. Bill Kennedy and Craig Livingston, or Livingstone,
whatever it is, I called them. I don't know if it was on a mobile phone or
whatever. They wanted to know where he was at, Mr. Foster, and could they see
him. I told them he was taken to the Fairfax County Hospital,
he was in the morgue. They wanted to see him. They
knew him, they were personal friends, they worked with
him at the White House. They could positively identify the body even though we,
through photo identification. knew who he was. If they
wanted to see the body, we didn't have a problem with that. We called the
security guards at the hospital, told them they would be coming and it would be
all right to see the body. (Curious thing, that, wanting to see a colleague's
dead body. ed.)
David
Martin
January
24, 1999
Addendum: Car Keys Never Entered into Evidence
Maybe
the keys that Officers Braun and Rolla say they retrieved from the morgue did
not even include Foster's Honda key.
The only keys that FBI investigators ever officially entered into
evidence, keys with a Cook Jeep Sales of Little Rock, Arkansas, tag attached to
the ring, did not include any key that would open or start a Honda
automobile. You can see a
photograph of the evidence at http://www.fbicover-up.com/photos/fosterkeys.htm.
July
31, 2006
We might note that Ben-VenisteÕs Republican counterpart on that Senate Whitewater
Committee was Michael Chertoff, who, as we demonstrate in ÒThe Chertoff Century,Ó is the
very epitome of a secret government Òmade man.Ó As we show in that article, he also did
Ben-Veniste-like work in leading a key witness in the
Foster case, in this instance, Detective Cheryl Braun.
Finally, the list of made men from
the Foster case is not complete without mentioning Brett Kavanaugh
and John Bates. President George W.
Bush rewarded each for his work on Kenneth StarrÕs staff with federal
judgeships.
David Martin
March 19, 2015
Home Page Column
Column 5 Archive Contact