Clinton8217;s bodyguards testify

Cockell was also expected to begin his testimony yesterday. Kotelly said his client would initially decline to answer questions involving national security and the President8217;s attorney-client privilege.

quot;If those questions are raised, they will be objected to and he will decline to answer the questions until the court orders otherwise,quot; Kotelly said. Asked about Cockell8217;s mood, Kotelly said, quot;I think right now he8217;s resigned to the fact he has to testify. He8217;s not happy about that, what more can I say.quot;

With the subpoenaed secret serviceofficers waiting at the courthouse a few blocks away, Rehnquist issued a two-page ruling that refused to extend an earlier order by the court of appeals that had blocked their testimony until noon.

quot;The opinion of the court of appeals seems to me cogent and correct,quot; he wrote.

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr had subpoenaed the Secret Service personnel to appear before the grand jury probing possible suborning of perjury, witness tampering and obstruction of justice in an alleged sexual relationship between Clinton and the former White House intern.

Officials said privately that the administration suspects Starr wants Cockell, to testify about what he heard in the limousine with Clinton8217;s attorneys after the president8217;s January 17 deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, in which he was questioned extensively about Lewinsky.

With the legal drama unfolding, Clinton today again declined to weigh in with an opinion on the dispute but did take a poke at a conservative appeals court judge,Laurence Silberman, who on Thursday suggested the administration was trying to declare war on Starr to protect Clinton.

quot;You have to consider the source of that comment. That is simply not true,quot; Clinton said. quot;These people Secret Service agents risk their lives to protect me and other presidents in a professional way, not a political way.quot;

The Clinton administration has been seeking to create a new legal privilege that would allow Secret Service agents to avoid testifying about what they saw and heard while guarding the President.

But a district federal judge, a three-judge US court of appeals panel and, on Thursday, the full 11-member appellate court, all agreed with Starr8217;s position that there is no legal privilege to avoid cooperating with a criminal investigation.