(The audio is available here)
This is the third in a series of audio presentations produced by Whitewater grand jury witness Patrick Knowlton and his lawyer John H. Clarke. You will hear Mr. Knowlton on this audio.
You will also hear the voice of Assistant United States Attorney Miquel Rodriguez, and the voice of Associate White House Counsel Brett Kavanaugh. Both Kavanaugh and Rodriguez served as Associate Independent Counsel under Kenneth Starr. Starr chose Kavanaugh to replace Rodriguez.
In 1994 and 1995, Miquel Rodriquez was the lead prosecutor investigating Mr. Foster’s death. Rodriquez thoroughly reviewed all of the federal records in the Foster case. Despite Ken Starr’s and the FBI’s attempts to hide the first generation crime scene photographs from him, Rodriguez discovered the original photographs.
Miquel Rodriguez is the leading government authority on the evidence. He witnessed criminal activity in the Office of Independent Counsel.
Miquel Rodriguez, from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. It is one thing to have read five, ten to twenty, you know, ten thousand pages worth of documents and to know what I know. I mean facts are a strange thing because they can’t be denied.
And, you know, and like, for example the 35-millimeters, the hand is in a different position than the Polaroids and like if you look at some of the weeds, little weeds, fibers coming up through his hand they are different on photographs, different ah, different photographs indicate different positions based on the vegetation.
From the photographic evidence, Rodriguez knew the perpetrators staged the crime scene.
The press publicized the search of Fort Marcy Park for the fatal bullet to give the public the impression Starr was doing a thorough investigation. The bullet was never found because it remained in Foster’s head. Rodriguez discovered that the FBI, with the assistance of Doctor James Beyer, had destroyed the evidence that showed the bullet remained in Foster’s brain. People asked Rodriguez if exhuming Foster’s body for an X-ray could reveal the bullet trajectory.
They certainly won’t find a brain there. We sure don’t have any way to show what the track of the bullet was, if in fact a bullet came from inside the mouth.
The public would expect an investigation to examine telephone records of calls made to and from Vincent Foster around the time of his death. Kavanaugh wrote in the Starr Report that phone records indicated a call was placed from the White House residence at exactly on the night of Foster’s death. In the same paragraph Kavanaugh also wrote, “Complete records for such calls are not available.”
Rodriguez reveals that the Office of Independent Counsel never subpoenaed any White House telephone records of calls from anyone including Vincent Foster..
Telephone records are not a window into anything. Because the telephone records are only going to be as good as what the FBI asks for. Whatever else I am saying is this, okay, there is no way, based on what I knew was subpoenaed, to confirm or deny that somebody made any particular telephone calls at any particular time and that includes Vince Foster.
After his departure, Miquel Rodriguez encouraged journalists to write articles to educate the public and the grand jurors about their powers. He realized that the common person was the last bastion of hope.
Let me interject one thought, the, really the only fertile ground here for getting a, getting a, ah, full accounting done and I mean even, even beyond what Congress is capable of doing is to target the grand jury. Empowering the grand jury, letting them know what they can demand, what they should be wary of, um, what their independent subpoena powers are, um, whether they have the authority to ask questions on their own in the grand jury. The real check and balance here is um, is the grand jury, the common person, selected at random.
They read the Post. When I used to go into the grand jury, I’d see them reading the Post and the Times on these articles. They follow all of it very carefully. You target them and they are going to feel empowered. That is going to piss Starr and people like Tuohey off more than anything else.
The press did the opposite. Their articles undermined the grand jury. Who were the unnamed government sources that fed the Washington Post and Washington Times information that undermined the grand jury. Rodriguez called a Wall Street Journal article by Ellen Joan Pollock, on March 23, 1995, “nonsense”, “pernicious” and “harmful”.
That Pollock article was nonsense. There is so much manipulation going on in terms of what these people are trying to make people believe. It’s pernicious, it is harmful.
This is all spin being put out by certain people to manipulate, not only the readership but it, you people have no idea how you affect, ah, ah, an investigation. You know, if I walk into the grand jury on the same day that some Post article said that Starr has reached an opposite conclusion than what I am doing, where is that person getting that information? Why are they timing, why are they timing it so perfectly to, to undermine what I am doing and, the attitudes. It is very, very disturbing, from that aspect on how powerful this all is.
Miquel Rodriguez discovered that the investigators were treating witnesses inappropriately. Deputy Independent Counsels John Bates and Mark Tuohey and Associate Independent Counsel Brett Kavanaugh used the FBI to harass and intimidate witnesses who had no reason to lie. Witnesses who told investigators Foster’s gray car was not at Fort Marcy Park were re-interviewed, harassed, and intimidated. The goal of Starr’s office was to silence witnesses whose accounts contradicted its desired result.
One thing that I met fierce opposition to, in the trenches, inside the Independent Counsel was this, I was really upset that, the, um, the witnesses who had no incentive to lie, this is the way I phrased it, why is the FBI harassing and re-interviewing witnesses who have no incentive to lie and yet we are treating with rubber gloves persons who do have an incentive to lie, and or at least not be candid. And who in fact, have made misstatements involving questionable…
What does this guy Knowlton have to gain in saying something that he said from the outset and continues to say today? And he should take an incredulous, and others should take an incredulous attitude, like a, why are you questioning me? And even in the grand jury, people can respond this way, people don’t know it, why are you pushing my? why are you following me? Why are you, and you know, if Knowlton wants to make a statement, he is certainly welcome, you know, there is no problem in asking why am I being followed? Why am I, why was I being harassed in the grand jury? Knowlton should find comfort in the fact that he is not alone. He needs to know that. The guy is a damn hero.
What they are trying to do is discredit him by making him out to be, um you know a homosexual cruising at a park. The reality is we had this fight a year ago, and I was literally irate with Tuohey and the FBI agents who were snickering and laughing with Brett about this. And I was just livid! And I said I don’t care if they were there @#&*ing their favorite tree I said! The fact of the matter is if they know what they saw that does not discount them, as for having the ability to recall what they saw with there own eyes! And I don’t care again, if they were #@*%ing their favorite tree. And the FBI finds it particularly funny.
There is a pattern in the treatment of all of the witnesses. It is absolutely crystal clear and you can only see it when you have gone through the ten thousand, fifteen thousand documents. And when you do so, you will see that, that there is a pattern of basically harassing and misstating people who are sort of the innocent bystanders, including the EMTs [Emergency Medical Technicians] and the people who are law enforcement and FBI and White House are being interviewed once and accepted as being true. The EMTs are outstanding people, all outstanding people. They really are.
No, actually it was upon review of all of the documents in this case, my observation and statements that I indicated to, to Tuohey and Starr was that witnesses who had no incentive to lie were being unduly, questioned, (pause) inappropriately. Persons with no incentive to lie were being inappropriately treated. I think I could stand by that. You know, that was something that I believed, I believed it from the outset. You know, people like the Park Police were never asked tough questions. I tried to ask them tough questions and they beat the hell out of me. It was just bass ackwards.
The public has no way to know how many witnesses may have been harassed and intimidated. Journalists Michael Isikoff, Steve Labaton, Micah Morrison, Matt Drudge and others spoke to Patrick Knowlton about his being harassed, but no stories appeared
By not reporting witness’s stories, journalists aid the perpetrators in silencing witnesses. Crime scene witnesses include civilians Jean Slade, Judith Doody, Mark Fiest, Patrick Knowlton, park service workers Chuck Stough, Francis Swann, as well as rescue workers, Todd Hall, Richard Arthur, George Gonzalez, Ralph Pisani, Jennifer Wacha, Cory Ashford, William Bianchi, Victoria Jacobs, Roger Harrison, Andrew Makuch, the coroner’s wife and two unnamed tow truck drivers. The public does not know of these people or their stories.
One person’s story that did receive media attention was the story of the confidential witness known as, “CW”. His name is Dale Kyle, of Midland, Virginia, and his statements and his deposition are not consistent with the facts.
Patrick Knowlton called the authorities to report what he had witnessed. In the months leading up to his Whitewater grand jury appearance, the FBI interviewed Knowlton three times, vandalized his car, and caused him to be intimidated in his home and on the streets of Washington, D.C.
Mr. Knowlton had seen a suspicious man at Fort Marcy Park who may have been involved in the murder of Vincent Foster. After testifying for 2 ? hours before the grand jury, what interested prosecutor Brett Kavanaugh about this unknown man at the park about 90 minutes before the discovery of Foster’s body? Kavanaugh asked Knowlton, “Did he touch your genitals?”
Who asked him if he touched his genitals? (Kavanaugh)
How could Brett stoop that low? I can’t believe Brett did that.
Why did Brett Kavanaugh ask Patrick Knowlton if the suspicious man had touched his genitals? Why did these prosecutors stoop to that level to discredit a witness? Patrick Knowlton saw something very significant in the parking lot. Other witnesses saw the same thing ? an old brown car, with Arkansas license plates, not Foster’s newer, gray car.
Mr. Foster was already dead when witnesses saw the brown car. This fact proves the official story ? that Vincent Foster drove to the park and shot himself ? is false.
The strategy of Starr’s prosecutors was to convince the grand jury that witnesses, like Patrick Knowlton, had not been harassed. During Patrick Knowlton’s grand jury testimony, Brett Kavanaugh said, “Tell us about the alleged harassment, Mr. Knowlton.” Knowlton responded, “it was not alleged, it happened.”
FBI agent Russell Bransford served the subpoena on Knowlton and later intimidated and harassed him. At the grand jury, Knowlton repeatedly asked Bates and Kavanaugh to tell him who had sent FBI agent Bransford to his home. Kavanaugh responded twice that they were not there to answer Knowlton’s questions. When Knowlton adamantly asked again, John Bates, who was seated behind Patrick, said, “We sent Bransford.” Patrick Knowlton tells us how his grand jury testimony ended.
Prior to going to the grand jury I was harassed and intimidated on the streets of Washington. And during that time, a three-day period, my attorney John Clarke repeatedly called the FBI and the OICs office. They never responded to give me any protection or any help. It wasn’t until the following Monday that Russell Bransford showed up at my door and he interviewed me regarding the harassment. All the time I was telling him the story, of what took place, he sat there and smiled at me. And when I asked him at one point if I could trust him? He leaned over into my face and said, “Mr. Knowlton that is a good question, I don’t know.”
Well I was looking forward to going to the grand jury and telling them my story about my harassment and at that time, I did not realize that the FBI and the OIC were behind it.
I remember when I went to the grand jury. And towards the end of this 2 ? hour interview, I was asked by Brett Kavanaugh to step outside of the grand jury room so the grand jurors could ask questions. When I re-entered the room, Kavanaugh first asked me if I was sure that someone else didn’t see me in the park? And I replied that I hoped that someone else had seen me in the park. Then, he sarcastically asked me whether I came forward to the authorities because I was a good citizen or a good Samaritan?
Then, John Bates who was seated behind me leaned forward and passed a note to Brett Kavanaugh, from which Kavanaugh read the following questions,
He said, “Mr. Knowlton did the man in the park talk to you?” And I replied, “no.”
He asked me, “Did the man in the park pass you a note?” And I replied, “no.”
He said, “Did the man approach you?” And I replied, “no.”
“Did the man in the park point a gun at you?” I replied, “no.”
And lastly Kavanaugh asked me, “Did the man in the park touch your genitals?”
I looked at him and I was in shock. I was dumbfounded. I couldn’t believe he asked me such a question. Of course, I replied, “no.”
As I left the grand jury I was puzzled why the grand jurors would ask such questions? And as soon as I saw my attorney, John Clarke, I repeated verbatim the last questions I was asked. Now we know those questions, were designed by John Bates and Brett Kavanaugh. They wanted to discredit me, and my testimony.
Bates and Kavanaugh knew Foster’s car, that gray car, was not in the parking lot when Foster was dead. They also knew that all of the other witnesses and I all saw the brown car in the small parking lot. No one in that park saw that Foster’s gray car.
The press and the government claim that Vincent Foster drove to the park and shot himself. The fact is, Foster did not drive to the park. He did not commit suicide.
Brett Kavanaugh was asked what evidence he had to prove that Foster’s car was at the crime scene.
Well I guess some of it depends on whether, whether ah, we know there was a car there. The question is whether there is evidence, um, other then that no one saw it being moved out, and ah, you know, that it had Arkansas plates, ah, ah, um, you know, I’d have to go back to the Report again and give you a full answer on that, but, I mean, I guess, I guess that is an unanswerable question.
Kavanaugh’s answer did not provide any evidence that Foster’s car was at the crime scene. Kavanaugh is asked a second time about witnesses who saw the brown car.
Listen to Kavanaugh use the phrase “those facts” to avoid using the words, “brown car.”
What, what you don’t like, and I understand this, so I’m not going to get defensive or offensive, is that the ah, you know, you think those facts lead to a certain conclusion, and the Report suggests that those facts do not necessarily lead to any conclusion other than, you know, inconsistent with the ultimate, ah findings, so that is just a debate about what inferences you would take from the facts, that are there, compared to the inferences taken by the, um, Report, which is fine. People disagree about that all the time, I mean the Starr Report seems definitive and, not definitive you wouldn’t agree.
But at least in discussing the physical evidence and why it’s unlikely what was in the, ah, scene in the parking lot contradicts any of that. I think that’s the actual phrasing that’s used. But I don’t think there was anything ignored, I’ll go back and look at that though.
For the third time, Kavanaugh is asked what evidence he had to prove that Foster’s gray car was at the scene.
That, that’s the question ah, that there was questions about whether people were mis-describing colors or something like that, now that’s one inference, another inference is that there was another car and that’s just ah, and then there’s a third inference that, I suppose which is that his car, the gray car wasn’t there and they switched the cars after the [fire] engine arrived. That’s an inference.
Kavanaugh is asked a fourth time what evidence he had that Foster’s car was in the parking lot. Either Foster’s car was there or it was not.
Well at least we you know, at least you know, the Report, look the Report was trying to be honest about a few things, and ah, that, that, the people had complained about with the Fiske Report, and one of them was the fact that there were these cars and people saw different cars and different people.
What about the people, I mean this gets to a problem, what about the people who seemed clearly to see ah, Foster’s car, and described it as brown. So, people were screwed up on the colors, period.
Kavanaugh is right, there is a problem.
What about the people, I mean this gets to a problem. What about the people who seemed clearly to see ah, Foster’s car, and described it as brown.
Kavanaugh’s statement that people clearly saw Foster’s car is not true. Descriptions of a brown car are not descriptions of Foster’s gray car. How does Kavanaugh resolve the problem?
So, people were screwed up on the colors, period.
Brett Kavanaugh called eyewitnesses “screwed up” because what they saw did not agree with the desired result.
But Kavanaugh slipped up. He admitted that all of the police and medical personnel saw a brown car.
Well it all comes down to that brown car issue, right? Ah, all the police and medical personnel that were in the park also described it as brown.
The conclusion that Vincent Foster committed suicide depends on yet another provable lie ? that Foster drove his children’s gray Honda to Fort Marcy Park.
Patrick Knowlton and all the other witnesses were correct. There was no gray car in the parking lot.
We just heard Kavanaugh admit that all witnesses were consistent that the car was brown, proving that Foster did not drive his children’s car to the park.
Earlier in this audio, we heard Kavanaugh admit that the civilian witnesses reported seeing a brown car, and claimed to believe that all these civilians were all simply mistaken, or, “screwed up.”
But twenty-four officials arrived at the park that night, and Kavanaugh admits that these twenty-four police and medical personnel all saw a brown car.
Ah, all the police and medical personnel that were in the park also described it as brown.
Kavanaugh learned of this evidence, disproving the suicide theory, from grand jury testimony. Yet, Kavanaugh knowingly withheld this evidence from Starr’s Report on Foster’s death, and submitted the Report to the United States Court of Appeals, to the Special Division for the Purpose of Appointing Independent Counsels.
Did Kenneth Starr knowingly allow John Bates and Brett Kavanaugh to submit a fraudulent Report to the United States Court of Appeals?
Kavanaugh was willing to do what Miquel Rodriguez was not willing to do: To lie. Kavanaugh’s lie that Vincent Foster drove to the park and killed himself was made to perpetuate the cover-up of the murder.
Brett Kavanaugh and John Bates were among those young, aspiring, people, about whom Miquel Rodriguez said, “will do what is necessary to move up the ladder.” And move up the ladder they have. John Bates is now a federal district court judge in Washington DC and Brett Kavanaugh serves as an official in the White House. President Bush recently nominated Kavanaugh to be a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
I am Patrick Knowlton producer of these audios. We have shown that our government and our press have been caught in a provable lie. When our leaders and our press are covering-up murder, the safety and well-being of the American people are threatened.
If our press and the government will lie to us about the murder of a White House official we should ask what else are they lying to us about?