Whitewater and Clinton Scandal Clips

from The Progressive Review

1992-1999 Part 14

Feburary-March 1999

  Copyright 1999 The Progressive Review

SEARCH

  E-MAIL US

 STATS  

 HOME PAGE 

 GOOD READING

  GIFT SHOP

 UNDERNEWS


OUR CLINTON SCANDAL NEWS CLIPS
  In May 1992, the Review became the first publication in America to present a comprehensive report on what has now come to be known as the Clinton scandals. Outside of conservative media no other publication has so consistently told this story

Clips Vol. 1 Feb '92 - Feb '94
Clips Vol. 2 Mar '94 - Feb '96
Clips Vol. 3 Mar - Sep '96
Clips Vol. 4 Oct 96- Mar 97
Clips Vol 5 Mar 97-July 97
Clips Vol 6 Aug 97 - Feb 98
Clips Vol 7 Feb 98 -Mar 98
Clips Vol 8 Mar 98-Jun 98
Clips Vol 9 Jul 98-Aug98
Clips Vol 10 Sep 98-Oct 98
Clips Vol 11 Nov 98
Clips Vol 12 Dec 98
Clips Vol 13 Jan 99
Clips Vol 14 Feb-Mar 99

Back to the Review's home page

HILLARY CLINTON'S GREATEST HITS
KILLER BLOOD SCANDAL

MARCH 1999

STARBUCKS SLAYINGS

Police have charged a single suspect in the 1997
gang-style slaying of three employees of a Georgetown
Starbucks. The murders have attracted attention for a
number of reasons:

-- Being killed in Georgetown is considered more
newsworthy by local media than being murdered in less
elegant parts of town.

-- In the contemporary gestalt, a murder at Starbucks
creates some of the same horror as a murder in a
church did in earlier times.

-- One of the victims, Mary Caitrin Mahoney, was
formerly an intern at the White House and Monica
Lewinsky was reported to have told Linda Tripp that
she didn't want to end up like her.

Police say the killings were the result of a botched
holdup. Certainly, the arrest came after a long and
botched investigation. It was initially hampered by
the decentralization of the homicide squad shortly
before the murders. Police sources complained that
the move by then Chief Larry Soulsby prevented the
concentration of investigative effort vital in the
critical hours immediately after such a crime.
Soulsby later resigned in the wake of unrelated
scandals. Subsequently a police informant in the case
was killed while serving as part of a sting operation
in a drug case.

The first detective on the Starbucks scene called it
"one of the most difficult cases I've ever handled."
The murders took place after closing. It is not clear
how the murderer(s) gained entrance. No money was
taken and no neighbors heard the ten shots that were
fired. As late as a day before the arrests, police
were saying that there were two gunmen involved, but
now they believe that suspect Carl Derek Cooper used
two weapons in the attack.

If so, he did a lot of damage in a short period,
killing three people -- two with one bullet each and
hitting Mahoney five times. Although Mahoney was
reported to have been fleeing, she was struck in the
face, neck and chest. Police say that Cooper -- who
has been previously convicted of robbery, car theft
and gun and drug violations -- used two guns in other
crimes. The victims' pockets were picked but a
register and a safe filled with cash were left
untouched.

An obituary in the Washington Blade, reported that
Mahoney, 24, had been a founder of the Baltimore
Lesbian Avengers. She founded a women's issues
discussion group at Towson State University, was a
board member of the 31st Street Bookstore in
Baltimore, and worked on Bill Clinton's presidential
campaign as well as interning for the Clinton White
House when he was newly elected.

The lawyer for suspect Cooper has complained that his
client was questioned excessively without legal
counsel.

FIRST FUGITIVE

A husband-and-wife investigator team that interviewed
over 200 witnesses for Paula Jones' lawyers says they
uncovered more accusations of rape and sexual assault
against President Clinton.

In an interview with Carl Limbacher of NewsMax, Rick
and Beverly Lambert also confirmed a story recounted
by Roger Morris in 'Partners in Power" concerning a
woman attorney who had run into Clinton at a
Democratic fundraiser in the late 1970s. Said Beverly
Lambert: "She offered Clinton a ride home. And once
he got her alone in her car, he grabbed this woman
and assaulted her. He did his trademark thing;
exposed himself, asked her to 'kiss it,' and pushed
her head down into his lap."

According to both Morris and the Lamberts, Clinton
apologized to the woman's husband after he threatened
to kill him if he ever went near his wife again.

Limbacher reports that Beverly Lambert has a number
of what she described as strong assault leads on
Clinton: "I can promise you that if someone calls us
to
gather information on Clinton's pattern of forceful
sexual behavior, we
have that. But no one has ever asked us about it
before. There are so
many, so many. They went on and on and on and they
all had basically the
same story. That's the nauseating part, to me."

NEWSMAX
http://www.newsmax.com

QUESTION OF THE DAY

If unrestrained sex is to be a perk of power during times of a rising stock market don't we owe it to Alan Greenspan to throw him a little orgy so he can get in on the fun?

WORD OF THE DAY

"I don't want to make a career out of being Monica Lewinsky forever." -- Monica Lewinsky

STATS OF THE DAY

-- Average number of guilty pleas or convictions per independent counsel investigation since 1978: 3.1
-- Percent of convictions overturned: 8%
-- Acquittals as a percent of convictions or guilty pleas: 13%
-- Total number of convictions or guilty pleas: 62
-- Percent of Americans who say the independent counsel law should be renewed: 61%
[USN&WR]

SECOND QUESTION OF THE DAY

How come President Clinton remembers things that happened in Hope, Arkansas, so much better than he remembers things that happened in Little Rock or Washington?

QUESTION OF THE DAY

Why did all those members of the Commission of the European Union resign over a mere matter of corruption when they could have just hired Bob Bennett and David Kendall and toughed it out the way our president has?

Little noted in the media was the sudden retirement of NSA director Lt. General Kenneth Minihan, who took over the agency in 1996. Some see the move as an attempt by Clinton to gain control over the NSA as he did earlier with top level shifts at the FBI and CIA. The NSA is deeply involved in the China scandals and there are ties linking Webster Hubbell, the late Vince Foster, and NSA in controversial aspects of national encryption policy. Little noted in the media was the sudden retirement of NSA director Lt. General Kenneth Minihan, who took over the agency in 1996. Some see the move as an attempt by Clinton to gain control over the NSA as he did earlier with top level shifts at the FBI and CIA. The NSA is deeply involved in the China scandals and there are ties linking Webster Hubbell, the late Vince Foster, and NSA in controversial aspects of national encryption policy.

BETTER TO RECEIVE THAN TO GIVE

Mike Espy is being touted these days as an example of how evil the Independent Counsel law is. While it is true that the former Agriculture Secretary was acquitted, at least part of the credit goes to a badly written law that makes it difficult to convict government officials unless you can prove they did something specific in return for any payoffs.

Before any more tears are shed on behalf of Espy, however, it may help to know that:

-- Sun Diamond Growers was convicted of providing illegal gratuities to Espy. The case is on appeal.

-- Richard Douglas was convicted of making false statements in denying he had given gratuities to Espy.

-- Ronald Blackley was convicted of receiving over $20,000 from prohibited sources while serving as Espy's chief of staff.

-- Smith Barney paid a million dollar fine for offenses including giving an illegal gift to Espy.

-- Tyson Foods paid the government $6 million in fines and costs for offenses that included gifts of over $12,000 to Espy.

-- Jack L. Williams was found guilty of making false statements concealing knowledge of gifts to Espy and his girlfriend.

-- The Robert Mondavi Corporation paid a fine of $100,000 for offenses including illegal gifts to Espy.

In short, Espy is no victim. He has merely illustrated the advantages to government officials of laws that make it more legal to receive pay-offs than to give them.

ESPY INVESTIGATION SUMMARY
http://oic.gov.smaltz/sum.htm

SCHIPPERS SAYS
GOP SAT ON EVIDENCE

Punching yet another hole in the right-wing conspiracy theory of the Clinton investigation, lead House attorney David Schippers has told NewsMax that the GOP leadership refused to consider key evidence:

"Let me tell you, if we had a chance to put on a case, I would have put live witnesses before the committee. But the House leadership, and I'm not talking about Henry Hyde, they just killed us as far as time was concerned. I begged them to let me take it into this year. Then I screamed for witnesses before the Senate. But there was nothing anybody could do to get those Senators to show any courage. They told us essentially, you're not going to get 67 votes so why are you wasting our time."

Schippers says that while a number of representatives looked at additional evidence kept under seal in a nearby House building, not a single senator did. And he also tells journalist Carl Limbacher that Juanita Broaddrick was subjected to overt surveillance, a technique used to intimidate witnesses (including Foster case witness Patrick Knowlton)

NEWSMAX: http://newsmax.com

THE REVIEW LIST
A few of the matters
not mentioned by Liz Mundy
in her 111-paragraph story
on Hillary Clinton
in the Washington Post Magazine

--HRC's involvement in a real estate scam in which over half the purchasers lost their land because of the financing deal involved.

--HRC's virtually statistically impossible profit in the futures market.

--HRC misleading the public and prosecutors about her role in Whitewater.

--HRC's role in Travelgate, the abuse of FBI files, and the coverup following Vince Foster's death.

WORD

"For people to say that the president of the United States having -- allegedly -- telephone sex is strictly private, and it has nothing to do with official duties -- it means they've never been acquainted with the world of espionage and the world of blackmail. And certainly, the White House itself is one of the most targeted places in the world in terms of foreign espionage." -- Sam Nunn, former chair of the Senate Armed Service Committee.

INDEPENDENT COUNSEL BATTLE

The effort to kill the independent counsel law is running into a few problems. From the start, the move has been pressed by a Washington establishment anxious to get about its business without anyone suggesting that its business might be a violation of the law. The latest poll finds, on the other hand, that 61% of Americans support the idea of an independent prosecutor. Further, congressional leaders have had to confront the problem that whatever "structural flaws" (to use the structurally flawed Janet Reno's phrase) are in the independent counsel statute, relying on the Justice Department is just a few steps short of selling the chicken coop to a bunch of foxes. As this debate continues, here are a few things to keep in mind:

-- The Justice Department under Janet Reno has been consistently and notoriously incapable of policing its administration. As the China scandal unfolds it will likely become increasingly clear how complicit, indecisive, and unreliable Justice has been. DOJ has either blown or taken a dive in investigations into the FBI files, the dealings around the Clinton health care legislation, and campaign contributions. It hasn't even moved to collect back taxes from Webster Hubbell.

-- 85 percent of the costs of independent counsels since 1978 have occurred in just four cases.

-- Any reliable judgement as to whether a particular case is costing too much can only be made by comparing it to comparable prosecutions by the Justice Department. No such financial information is available.

-- We do know, however, that W.J. Clinton's trip to China cost $5 million more than the Starr investigation had up to that point.

-- One of those testifying against the reauthorization of the independent counsel bill was Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder who is an excellent example why Justice is not up to investigating its own administration colleagues. Holder is a political appointee who demonstrated little skill as a US Attorney but nonetheless was named to the number two justice position.

-- Janet Reno has been inexplicable inconsistent in her positions on the measure. Five years ago she told a Senate hearing that the "costs and burdens" of an independent counsel are "far, far outweighed by the need" for such legislation. Her "firm conviction" was that "the law has been a good one."

-- Since 1978 independent counsels have gained 62 convictions or guilty pleas -- including one governor and one deputy attorney general. That's an average of 3.1 convictions or guilty pleas per investigation.

THE GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
LOYALTY INVESTIGATION (CONT'D)

I hate to defend George Stephanopoulos again, but a reader has sent me a copy of the code of ethics for government employers from Public Law 96-303. Contrary to the views expressed to George S. by Katie Couric and other commentators, loyalty to the president is not included. What the code does say, however, is:

-- Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or government department.

-- Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.

-- Expose corruption wherever discovered.

-- Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.

 

WORD
Eric Margolis
Contributing Foreign Editor
Toronto Sun

In 1991, Chinese agents began making very large
contributions to the presidential election campaigns
of Clinton and leading Democratic party senators and
congressmen. Intelligence intercepts by NSA showed
Chinese intelligence targeting 30 leading Democrats
in a wide-scale influence-buying campaign. China's
efforts sharply intensified during Clinton's 1996 re-
election campaign.

Bill and Hillary Clinton warmly welcomed Chinese
agents at the White House. Beijing's objective was to
obtain access to secret American technology, and, for
the first time, to actively shape U.S. military and
trade policy toward China.

China succeeded brilliantly on both counts. It always
amazes me how cheaply politicians can be bought. For
a mere $2 million or so, Clinton and the Democrats
kept U.S. markets open to Chinese exports, and
ignored China's poor human rights record. Clinton
went so far as to arrange the transfer of advanced
American missile guidance and control technology to
Beijing, permitting China to modernize and make more
accurate its small ICBM force targeted on the U.S.

This, not the sordid Monica episode, was a crime, and
one for which Clinton deserved to be convicted. U.S.
intelligence followed a direct money trail from
Chinese Army HQ in Beijing to the Clinton White House
and senior liberal Democrats.

THE CHINA CLIPPER
& OTHER HORROR STORIES

Charles Smith of the journal Softwar, who tracks the
links between politics, trade, and technology, has
shed new and disturbing light on the Clinton
administration's China dealings. Based in part on his
extensive Freedom of Information discovery, Smith
outlines this chronology:

-- In 1992 ATT comes up with a tap-proof phone. The
government sees the device as a security threat.

-- Webster Hubbell is assigned by Janet Reno to deal
with the secure phone issue. Documents relating to
Hubbell are still being withheld on national security
grounds, others are so censored that even their
classification level is blacked out.

-- Assistant Attorney General Colgate writes Hubbell:
"AT&T has developed a Data Encryption Standard
product for use on telephones to provide security for
sensitive conversations. The FBI, NSA and NSC want
to purchase the first production run of these devices
to prevent their proliferation. They are difficult to
decipher and are a deterrent to wiretaps."

-- In 1993, Webster Hubbell arranges to buy the
entire production run of secure AT&T phones using a
slush fund filled by drug war confiscations.

-- Part of the plan is to refit the phones with a new
chip called Clipper that has been developed by NSA.
This chip allows the government to tap the phone
using a special key.

-- A supply of these refitted phones is given to the
Drug Enforcement Agency. Now other government
agencies can tap the DEA.

-- The plan also mandates Clipper chips for all
American telephones. According to the Colgate memo to
Hubbell, "FBI, NSA and NSC want to push legislation
which would require all government agencies and
eventually everyone in the U.S. to use a new public-
key based cryptography method."

--- According to a 1993 White House email from George
Tenet, Ron Brown insisted the Commerce Dept. be one
of the "key holders" for all Clipper phones. The
Clipper plan will eventually put on hold because of a
large public outcry.

-- ATT says it is wants to distribute a limited
version of its secure phone until the Clipper chip
plan is ready.

-- In April 1994, Hubbell resigns from the Justice
Department under allegations of fraud. By late June
1994, Lippo boss James Riady meets with John Huang,
Webster Hubbell and Bill Clinton during five days of
White House visits. Early the next week, a Lippo
unit pays Hubbell the first $100,000 of what is
reported to be over a half million dollars.

-- Two weeks after the Lippo money is given to
Hubbell, former Lippo banker Huang gets a job at the
Commerce Department as Assistant Secretary. Huang's
position determines technology transfers to such
places as Indonesia and China. Huang is briefed 37
times on encryption communications by the CIA while
working at the Commerce Department. Immediately after
each briefing, Huang walks across the street to the
Lippo/Stephens Group offices and to make long
distance phone calls and send faxes to points
unknown. Huang and his wife will subsequently take
the Fifth Amendment and refuse to testify at Senate
Congressional hearings.

-- In 1994, with administration approval, ATT sells
its secure communications system to the Chinese Army.
The export is called "Hua Mei." Thus the Chinese Army
gets the secure communications equipment that the
American public can't.

-- Clinton also authorizes a Chinese Army lab to
obtain designs similar to the Clipper chip. The
exchange is done in the guise of law enforcement
cooperation
between the Department of justice and the Chinese
police. Writes Charles Smith: "Bill Clinton and Janet
Reno have given the Communists the ability to track
every Chinese citizen."

In short, the Clinton administration:

-- refused to let ATT sell an untappable phone to
American citizens
-- allowed ATT to sell this technology to the Chinese
Army
-- attempted to mandate a quick-tap chip for all
American phones, one whose use would be partly
controlled by Ron Brown and the Commerce Department
-- provided the DEA with phones that others in the
government could tap
-- sold the quick-tap chip technology to the Chinese
police.

SOFTWAR
http://www.softwar.net/dojweb.html

TPR'S CHART ON HOW
THE HUA MEI DEAL
CAME ABOUT

http://prorev.com/indexa.htm#webs

THE NATION'S BUSINESS

In her videotaped testimony shown at the McDougal
trial, Hillary Clinton declares, "I never spent any
significant time at all looking the books and records
of Whitewater." But in 1993, Jerry Seper of the
Washington Times uncovered a letter that HRC had
written Jim McDougal enclosing a power of attorney
for him to sign "authorizing me to act on your behalf
with respect to matters concerning Whitewater
Development Corporation." Another power of attorney
is enclosed for Susan McDougal. The power of attorney
includes the right to endorse, sign and execute
"checks, notes, deeds, agreements, certificates,
receipts or any other instruments in writing of all
matters related to Whitewater Development
Corporation." The letter directly contradicts the
Clintons' claim that they were "passive shareholders"
in Whitewater.

HOW MANY FOREIGN POLICY POSITIONS CAN YOU FIND?

Energy Secretary Bill Richardson on China during just a few minutes on air with Chris Matthews:

RICHARDSON: We want to engage China. It's not our enemy; it's our friend, but we're leery of that friend. We have no illusions that they conduct espionage, that they're undertaking a number of initiatives that are not helpful to us, in Iraq, on missile technology, export controls. But on the whole, Chris, they're a big, big nation, and we want to engage that nation. We've done better engaging China than isolating them.

MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you about a question. I used the word 'Communist' in describing Red China. Is that still an appropriate term?

RICHARDSON: I don't believe so. Their economy has moved in the direction of market economics, capitalism. There's still a lot of socialist structures, both in their economy.

. . . .

MATTHEWS: The reason I get that--I want to get to the espionage in just a second, but there's all kinds of political questions. You hear them all the time about whether Com--Republic--People's Republican China, companies should be allowed to come over here and buy seaports in Southern California, should they be allowed to be involved with the Panama Canal, once it's taken over completely by the Panamanians? What is our policy? Are they to be trusted or not?

RICHARDSON: Chris, I believe that they can be trusted, but all nations conduct espionage. We shouldn't tolerate espionage, but on issues that don't involve arm sales, that don't involve exports of sensitive technology, that don't involve high-tech that is detrimental to the national security, we should engage them. They're a huge market for us. We should sell them environmental technology so that they reduce their pollution but buy our products. They're a great potential market for us.

MATTHEWS: But they're also a danger, aren't they?

RICHARDSON: In some areas, they have not been friendly to us, but our theory is engaging them, bring them --bring them into the system, into the World Trade Organization, into foreign policy.

STARR CROSSED?

The resignation of Ken Starr's press agent, Charles Bakaley, is raising eyebrows because of the attorney he hired to defend himself against a possible Justice Department leak investigation. That attorney is Howard Shapiro who:

-- was general counsel to the FBI, the first political appointee to hold this post.
-- has been accused of sabotaging the investigation of the White House's illegal use of FBI files by (a) giving the Clinton administration warning of the pending investigation (b) pressuring FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene -- who had provided evidence that implicated Hillary Clinton.
-- was accused of obstruction of justice by the House Government Reform Committee, which also demanded his dismissal.
-- after leaving the FBI, represented Terry Lenzner when Lenzner became a witness in the Starr probe.

Asks Joe Duggan in a Washington Times op ed: "Has there been a mole in Kenneth Star's office? Botched investigations and self-destructive actions by the special prosecutor's office have long suggested this possibility."

GETTING BACK TO THE NATION'S BUSINESS

The Drudge Report says that the Utah ski vacation blowup between Bill and Hillary Clinton was the result of Mrs. Clinton viewing the Juanita Broaddrick interview during the trip: "According to the insider, Mrs. Clinton viewed the video of the Dateline interview late in the evening after Bill and Chelsea had gone to sleep. She was so enraged at what she saw that she stormed into Bill's bedroom, picked up an antique lantern and threw it at her sleeping husband! A screaming match ensued. Chelsea overheard the argument and broke down crying and later told her father that she had wished he wasn't there. The vacation was quickly cut short."

Meanwhile the Clintons managed to get together long enough to go to church and hear their minister quote from Corinthians: "Love is patient; love is kind. Love is not envious. . . It bears all things, believes all things, endures all things," adding, however, that this "doesn't mean love is a sucker for anyone's version of the truth."

DRUDGE REPORT
http://drudgereport.com

POSTMODERN GEO-POLITICS

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Joining me now from Washington, Secretary of Education Bill Richardson. Mr. R--secretary of energy, Mr. Bill Richardson. Let me ask you, Mr. Secretary, just to get the right context, what is China? I said in the opening it's a Communist country. Is it, and is it our enemy or friend, or what is it?

SECRETARY BILL RICHARDSON: We want to engage China. It's not our enemy; it's our friend, but we're leery of that friend. We have no illusions that they conduct espionage, that they're undertaking a number of initiatives that are not helpful to us, in Iraq, on missile technology, export controls. But on the whole, Chris, they're a big, big nation, and we want to engage that nation. We've done better engaging China than isolating them.

MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you about a question. I used the word 'Communist' in describing Red China. Is that still an appropriate term?

Sec. RICHARDSON: I don't believe so. Their economy has moved in the direction of market economics, capitalism. There's still a lot of socialist structures, both in their economy.

MATTHEWS: Right.

Sec. RICHARDSON: ...and their political system, but I would say it's moving towards a market economy.

MATTHEWS: The reason I get that--I want to get to the espionage in just a second, but there's all kinds of political questions. You hear them all the time about whether Com--Republic--People's Republican China, companies should be allowed to come over here and buy seaports in Southern California, should they be allowed to be involved with the Panama Canal, once it's taken over completely by the Panamanians? What is our policy? Are they to be trusted or not?

Sec. RICHARDSON: Chris, I believe that they can be trusted, but all nations conduct espionage. We shouldn't tolerate espionage, but on issues that don't involve arm sales, that don't involve exports of sensitive technology, that don't involve high-tech that is detrimental to the national security, we should engage them. They're a huge market for us. We should sell them environmental technology so that they reduce their pollution but buy our products. They're a great potential market for us.

MATTHEWS: But they're also a danger, aren't they?

Sec. RICHARDSON: In some areas, they have not been friendly to us, but our theory is engaging them, bring them --bring them into the system, into the World Trade Organization, into foreign policy.

SPIN OUT OF CONTROL

His spin a little out of control, Vermont Senator James Jeffords -- who voted to acquit Clinton -- said that Clinton's alleged rape of Juanita Broaddrick was a "private matter." Soon discovering that others didn't share his view, he quickly apologized for his remarks. Here's the exchange on Burlington's WKDR:

JEFFORDS: ... I think things like that are supposedly a private affair that should stay that way unless they get into the public domain by the abuse of the use of the office of the president, as he did in carrying on in the White House. ... But other than that, I'm not interested in what people did 21 years ago.

HOST MARK JOHNSON: How would that be a private matter?

JEFFORDS: Well, I don't know why it wouldn't be a private matter. I can ask you [to look at this] the other way around. If something had happened 21 years ago with a woman who invited, at least under her story, the president up to her hotel room and she was not happy with what happened, I don't know why that's not a private matter.

JOHNSON: OK. Rape usually isn't done in public.

JEFFORDS: Well, no -- she claims she was raped. Whether she was or not, then why did she wait that long and all that? I'm not going to make judgment on the veracity of those things. And I think we could all spend the whole day trying to figure that one out. But if you wait 21 years or whatever to reveal something, you have to question what her reasons are.

Jeffords, who is up for election next year, later issued a statement: "Juanita Broaddrick's statements are disturbing and should be taken seriously, as any claim of rape should be. ... I truly apologize if my inarticulate comments this morning gave anyone the wrong impression."

FILEGATE

Linda Tripp, asked by Judicial Watch in a deposition to produce audio tapes made during any conversations with Monica Lewinsky concerning Filegate, refused to do so on Fifth Amendment grounds.

STARBUCKS MURDERS

For the forensically minded reader, here are two clips from the Washington Times on the gang-like slaying of three DC Starbucks employees:

MAR 2: In the victims and the office, police found bullets from a .38-caliber revolver and bullets and shell casings from a .38-caliber semiautomatic pistol. Because two guns were used to fire nine shots, investigators think two persons committed the slayings. ~~~ Investigators initially theorized the killings happened because Miss Mahoney -- the only one who knew the combination to the store's safe -- did not open it. But Mr. Evans was closest to the safe, and Miss Mahoney was farthest away. Also, police originally thought a bullet found in the ceiling was a warning shot. It now seems likely that it was fired as Mr. Evans struggled with his killer, sources said. The bullet was in the middle of the office, not above the safe, contrary to earlier reports. During the struggle, one of the gunmen fired his pistol into Mr. Evans' left shoulder from point-blank range. As Mr. Evans fell, the killers shot him in the head and chest, sources said. "They killed him, and they had to kill everyone," a source familiar with the case said. Miss Mahoney might have tried to back out of the office during the struggle. She was shot five times as she fell into the hallway outside the office. Mr. Goodrich died from a shot that passed through his left arm and settled in his chest. After the shootings, the robbers picked the pockets of the victims and took whatever money they could find, sources said. They walked out the unlocked front door without touching two registers filled with cash.

MAR 3: The Starbucks slayings have frustrated investigators, who have no witnesses, little forensic evidence and few leads. Police believe at least two men killed Emory a. Evans, 25, Mary Caitrin Mahoney, 24, and Aaron D. Goodrich, 18, during a botched robbery in the back office of the coffee shop at 1810 Wisconsin Ave. NW. During a struggle with Mr. Evens, his killer shot him in the left shoulder from point-blank range and then fired twice more. Miss Mahoney was shot five times in the face, neck and chest as she tried to flee the office; Mr. Goodrich was killed when a bullet went through his left arm and into his chest.

FLOTSAM & JETSAM
Chasing the snakes
out of Washington

If my genes could vote in Parliament, they would pretty much reflect the major ethnic distribution of the United Kingdom save that my Irish blood is not Catholic. In fact, that part of me has no religion at all for -- as Oscar Wilde explained -- it is Irish Protestant. And while I thus can not be accused of pimping for the Pope in what follows, it is also true, contrary to current tendencies, Irishness and Irish sympathies have not always been exclusively the realm of the Friday fish crowd. From the earliest rumblings of Irish revolt, Protestants have cropped up (albeit in insufficient numbers) on behalf of the cause. From Presbyterians in the 1798 rebellion to the IRA's Robert Erskine Childers, of whom Winston Churchill said, "No man has done more harm or done more genuine malice," they have worked to fulfill Theobald Wolfe Tone's wish to "abolish the memory of all past dissensions, and to substitute the common name of Irishman in place of the denominations. . ."

The somewhat less impressive contribution of Irish-American Protestants has been the secularization of St. Patrick's Day, liberating it for all citizens to enjoy -- especially Irish Catholics. Were it not for early Irish-American Protestants, St. Patrick's would probably still be a day of holy obligation with the pubs closed and the faithful in church or beating themselves with twigs or whatever one does on a holy day of obligation.

Keeping in this cross-cultural tradition, I would like to salute my Irish landsmanshaff for their role in describing the Clinton scandals. During an era when writing and thought are increasingly considered a bureaucratic rather than a creative function, they have at least kept alive a verbal tradition well described by Thomas Flanagan as "impudent, eloquent, full of jokes and irreverence, by turns sardonic and conciliatory, blithely subversive but, without warning, turning to display wide and serious reading, a generosity of spirit, [and] a fierce and authentic concern for social and political justice."

No other ethnic or religious subspecies in the present circumstances has come near. People such as Tim Russert, Maurine Dowd, Michael Kelly, and Chris Matthews have protected a vital part of the story -- not by uncovering facts (many have done that far better) but baring souls.

To be sure, Dowd has gotten squishy, Russert smirks and wriggles, and Kelly is something of a late comer. Matthews, like the others, avoids key aspects of the saga. But then his show's appeal lies not in its revelations but in the fact that the host still doesn't know quite what to make of it all. He is a man alternately struggling with the deepest moral implications and then suddenly becoming a Philadelphia schoolboy again, whispering and giggling with a guest behind Sister Mary's back. Right or wrong, you realize something is quite different about this program: it is real.

There is, in fact, a substantial Irish subtext to the whole Clinton story. While many Irish-Americans have joined blacks and feminists in presidential adulation based upon the succor of saccharine symbolism, in Washington at least, pragmatism seems to have the upper hand. Not only are a number of Irish journalists prominent in the story but a couple of staffers at the House Judiciary Committee even own an Irish pub (which coincidentally caught fire just as impeachment hearings were beginning). Further, two liberal Irish Republican politicians have been featured in the story: Jack Quinn for opposing the president (and getting the Paula Jones treatment as a result) and Peter King, who voted to save the president's butt.

Some of the journalists have been influenced by older Irish politicians -- Kelly by Gene McCarthy, Russert by Moynihan, and Matthews by O'Neil. Out of this relationship may have come the idea that while corruption is only a venial sin, enjoying it at the expense of the poor, the weak, and defenseless is a mortal one. Further Kelly and Dowd, like myself, are DC homies, which lessens one's infatuation with power. Powerful people, one learns early in a Washington life, are just so many more boring adults.

It is easy to ascribe the critical Catholic view of Clinton to prudishness, especially when you grow up thinking that your body is a sacred vessel of Christ rather than of the president. And there is little doubt that the mother church, while not reducing adultery, has certainly made it more painful; that it can be rightfully accused of cruelty to women; and that it sometimes engages in self-exculpation worthy of a politician.

Yet even those who walk away from it never seem to walk away from the arguments, from an understanding that there is always something important lying in wait just beyond our present excuses and desires, something that really matters. I think the Irish Catholic contribution to this story stems from this sensibility. As one of the ilk told me, "we know the difference between liars and fibbers. Remember, we have both mortal and venial sins and we differentiate between them."

It is precisely in this vast territory between prudishness and rampant relativism that the Clinton story has gotten lost. We live in a time of simplistic oppositional presumptions. If you do not favor abortion, you favor murdering doctors; if you don't like Clinton, you hate him and love Tom Delay. And so forth.

The traditional Irish voice both despairs of, and loves, life precisely because of its complexity; it is the voice of the human before television, before spin, before the semiotic terrorism of contemporary power.

Albert Camus, an Algerian, also shared a moral stance that rejected both the prig and the decadent. He put it this way:

"What is a rebel? A man who says no, but whose refusal does not imply a renunciation. He is also a man who says yes, from the moment he makes his first gesture of rebellion. A slave who has taken orders all his life sudden decides that he cannot obey some new command. What does he mean by saying 'no?' He means, for example, that 'this has been going on too long,' 'up to this point yes, beyond it no.' 'you are going too far,' or, again, 'there is a limit beyond which you shall not go.' In other words, his no affirms the existence of a borderline."

So this St. Patrick's Day, hoist a glass to those among the Washington establishment who declared that there was a limit beyond which the president should not go. Drink not to their success, not to their righteousness, or even to their wisdom, but just to their willingness to draw the line some place and try to drive a few snakes from this corrupted capital. -- Sam Smith

MCDOUGAL RETURNS

Susan McDougal, returning before a Little Rock jury, has gotten a free pass from much of the media, so you may not know what this business is all about. When before a grand jury on Whitewater matters, St. Susan of Ark. showed utter contempt not only to the prosecutors but to members of the grand jury, who attempted to take over the questioning after McDougal refused to answer prosecution questions. The grounds: not self-incrimination, but McDougal's view that the prosecution wasn't fair enough for her tastes. At one point she even suggested that she might answer questions if the lead prosecutor would resign, a legal principle not heretofore part of American jurisprudence. Among the questiobns:

-- What did she mean by writing on a $5,000 check "Payoff Clinton?"

-- Did Clinton lie about the $300,000 loan McDougal received with the help of David Hale?

MONICA VS. JUANITA

As the alleged rape of Juanita Broaddrick heads for the media dustbin, the Washington Post Style section ran three front page stories on Monica Lewinsky's interview with Barbara Walters. Thus do the forces of media post-modernity alter our perceptions of the world while still managing to sit on panels and talk about their objectivity with straight faces. There is simply no way a 2-hour infomercial for the president's latest (one supposes) concubine can be justified as journalistically more important that the strong possibility that the president is a rapist. But there you had the Post's media critic, Howard Kurtz, right in the center of the Style spread -- helping to shove Broaddrick out of sight, out of mind.

And the Post was not the worst. That title goes to NBC, which not only came damn near not running its Broaddrick exclusive at all, not only is now preventing even its own outlets from making free use of the tape, but as of March 3 had not mentioned Broaddrick on its Nightly News. NBC News found time for run two stories promoting the ABC interview with Monica, but not its own Broaddrick exclusive.

The media is once again busily harboring the First Fugitive From Justice. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard said it well:

"For the media to allow the story to die with no response from Clinton and only a curt denial from his lawyer would be a travesty. If there's a journalistic standard for such cases, it was set in the Clarence Thomas and Bob Packwood episodes. In both, the press investigated aggressively, even though the accusations involved incidents that had occurred years before. Nor was the fact that Anita Hill merely accused Thomas of talking dirty an impediment to reportorial zeal. Packwood was charged with groping and kissing, not rape -- and again, the media went after him relentlessly."

The Anita Hill hearings, incidentally, ran for eight days.

QUID PRO QUO

The deal was that I wouldn't tell the truth about him and he wouldn't tell any lies about me -- Dolly Kyle Browning

LOYALTY UBER ALLES

If you were to read the stories about Clinton casually, you might assume that a Mafioso code of tribal loyalty has effectively replaced the Constitution and the Federal Code as the law of the land. Linda Tripp has been berated mercilessly for choosing legality over loyalty. Christopher Hitchens has been assailed for not being loyal to a White House propagandist. And now Newsday has chided Michael McCurry for "berating his old boss" and George Stephanopoulos for being "the first major pundit-player to raise the prospect of impeachment last January." In Newsday's view, as a result of this disloyalty, "the presidency itself is besmirched, and the bond of trust and confidentiality between the commander in chief and his lieutenants is eroded further."

DEPT OF SILLY TALK

Unless Mr. Nixon wants to serve out the remaining two years of his presidency oddly isolated from the people he leads, he must find a way to resume a normal dialogue with the American people and the press. ~~~ A former Nixon adviser put it aptly this week: "The president should have a reflective conversation with someone on television and really talk about where he is in life, what his aspirations are, talk about his past, try to help us sort this out." -- From a New York Times editorial (with one small change by TPR -- the word Nixon was substituted for the word Clinton to show how bizarre the NYT editorial board is these days)

SCORCHED EARTH UPDATE

As noted here before, one reason some media types have been so supportive of, or circumspect about, W.J. Clinton's sexual predation is that they don't want anyone looking into their own activities. There is now explicit cause for the fear. Hustler publisher Larry Flynt has told Salon magazine that he would start investigating the private lives of media personalities. "All the media moguls better look out. . .Apparently [one anchor] is like a rabbit -- I mean he's got a revolving door to his office. And many of them have been divorced four or five times. A lot of the divorce transcripts are available."

Meanwhile, riding the myth that Clinton was impeached for his sexual activities, Flynt will publish in early April a special report on the sexual activities of congressional Republicans including a Senator and a House manager who continued their affairs during the impeachment proceedings. Says editor Allan MacDonell, "We have pictures of them in bars, beaches. They're kissing and groping."

MacDonell also indicated that some details will be held until the 2000 elections, since there's time for someone exposed to claim later they've had a change of heart.

Flynt and company had much of the material in time for the impeachment trial but, according to one source, they did not want to disrupt proceedings: "There seemed to be bipartisanship in the Senate, even when there seemed there wasn't an overlying desire for a bipartisan conclusion to this. And we respected what they were doing."

The legality of a publication threatening to release information absent a political outcome desired by the publication has yet to be raised.

STARR BLESSED

TPR is not the only one who thinks Kenneth Starr has been a real friend to Clinton. Conservative columnist Joseph Farrah made the point recently in a column and now Al D'Amato has told Newsmax's Carl Limbacher that Starr botched his probe into Whitewater: "I just think he did a horrific job."

An example: When D'Amato's committee tried to learn whether Vincent Foster had been tipped off about an impending FBI search of David Hale's office a few hours before Foster was found dead, "I have to say that Ken Starr didn't help us. Oh no, he went out of his way because he got one of his great friends to represent Judge Hale and insisted on immunity from prosecution so we couldn't hear the story of what actually took place. There was an absolute total fear on the part of the Democrats that Judge Hale, if permitted to testify, would have rocked the country." D'Amato noted that five and a half years after Foster's death, we still have no report on the White House post-death clean-up of Foster's office.

"We were able to pin down with some definiteness phone calls at a specific time from the First Lady to her chief of staff Maggie Williams. The initial phone call came while [Mrs. Clinton's] plane was in the air. And then another call followed, as soon as the plane landed, to Maggie Williams. And within a matter of 15 minutes of that second call, Maggie Williams was in Vince Foster's office."

NEWSMAX http://newsmax.com

THE ATTACK ON SMALTZ

David Broder has used the Mike Espy case to launch a attack on the independent counsel law when, in fact, Espy's prosecutor Donald Smaltz got a lot closer to the truth than Ken Starr ever did. And for far less money.

Broder's article was typical of the deceptive reporting about independent counsels currently in vogue. For example, he correctly said that Smaltz had spent $17 million investigating but failed to repot that Smaltz had also collected over $11 million in criminal fines, civil penalties, damages and costs. Nor was it pointed out (as it seldom is in the case of Starr, either) that 30% of the expenses was paper reimbursement to other federal agencies for staff time by FBI agents, Justice Department officials and so forth.

Broder also further perpetuated the illusion that Smaltz's efforts were only directed at Espy, who was acquitted -- in no small part because under current statutes it is not enough to merely be involved in a payoff shceme, it has to be proved that you did something in return. Broder and other reporters have repeatedly failed to note that though Espy was acquitted of wrongfully receiving payoffs, other defendants were convicted of giving them to him -- and paid for it in millions of dollars in fines and jail sentences

Smaltz actually racked up more than 15 convictions or settlements and was perhaps on his way to uncovering some of Arkansas' dirty drug trafficking secrets when Janet Reno pulled the plug on him.

Convictions won included wire fraud in connection with an illegal campaign contribution, false filings to obtain agricultural subsidy payments, defrauding the FEC, interstate transportation of stolen property, money laundering, false statements to government agents, a $1 million fine against Smith Barney for its role in the scandal, and $6 million in fines and payments by Tysons Food for illegal gratuities to Espy.

The attack on Smaltz is the most dramatic evidence that the politicians, lobbyist-lawyers, and media in Washington want the independent counsel gone -- and the facts be damned.

CHINESE ESPIONAGE: A US federal judge has ordered the Commerce Department to release documents relating to the Chinese Commission of Science, Technology & Industry for National Defense, a Chinese Army unit. Commerce initially claimed it has no records of meetings between it and COSTIND. Then the documents began showing up piece meal.

BOOK SAYS ISRAEL
BLACKMAILED CLINTON
WITH MONICA TAPES

Neal Travis of the New York Post reports that, according to a new book on the Mossad, Israel blackmailed President Clinton with 30 hours of tapes of his phone sex talks with Monica Lewinsky. The agency allegedly agreed not to release the material in return for Clinton calling off an FBI hunt for a top-level Israeli mole supposedly in the White House. The allegation appears in "Gideon's Spies - The Secret History of the Mossad," written by Gordon Thomas and due out next week. The White House response through spokesman P.J. Crowley: "The only thing I can possibly say is we'll skip the book and wait for the movie."

Lewinsky testified under oath that after a session of heavy petting and oral
sex in the White House, Clinton told her a foreign embassy was tapping
the two phone lines in her DC apartment. She claims Clinton told her that if questioned they should say they knew their calls were being bugged and were only joking to fool the tappers. Starr did not pursue the matter.

Thomas told the NYP: "So far as anyone knows, the Israeli agent MEGA - a much more important spy than the imprisoned CIA traitor Jonathan Pollard, and probably his controller - is still in place at the White House."

THE REVIEW LIST
Memory lapses of
Clinton Administration
figures in testimony
on Capitol Hill as compiled by
Softwar newsletter.

Bill Kennedy ====== 116
Harold Ickes ======= 148
Ricki Seidman ======== 160
Bruce Lindsey ======== 161
Bill Burton ========== 191
Mark Gearan =========== 221
Mack McLarty =========== 233
Neil Egglseston ============ 250
Hillary Clinton ============ 250
John Podesta ============= 264
Jennifer O'Connor ================= 343
Dwight Holton ================= 348
Patsy Thomasson ===================== 420
Jeff Eller =================================== 697

[SOFTWAR http://www.softwar.net]

Matt Drudge reports that NBC News has issued an order restricting the use of Juanita Broaddrick's Dateline interview. Outlets must go to network lawyers to get permission to use any of the tape.

WORD
Lie back and like it

I expected more of a reaction to Juanita's plight, or at least some reaction, from organized feminism. After all, organized feminism, in the image of National Organization for Women President Patricia Ireland, has been on TV almost nightly for two years now arguing that whatever The First Flasher's sins, they weren't
that bad.

Then there was Gloria Steinem's famous pro-Clinton, pro-Monica, What's-A-Little-Consensual-Sex-Between-Interns-and-the-Boss essay a year ago in the New York Times. "Like most feminists," she wrote, "most Americans become concerned about sexual behavior when someone's will has been violated; that is, when `no' hasn't been accepted as an answer."

I thought perhaps this weekend she'd become concerned herself about the possibility, at least, that her guy's not always keen on the ``no'' end of the deal. For Steinem, Ireland and most thinking women understand, I hope, what many others do not: that the vast majority of victims (85 percent) do not report rape; that false rape accusations are extremely rare; that rape convictions are a 50-50 proposition at best and that only 2 percent of rapists who are convicted go to prison.

These figures come via Wendy Murphy, who's represented dozens of sexual assault victims, and from statistics in the 1994 Violence Against Women Act. Clinton, by the way, supported that act and signed it and, no doubt, was heartened by it. ~~~ It would appear we have two paths to success, ladies. Shut up and take it. Or lay back and like it. -- Margery Eagan in the Boston Herald

LIP BITING

NewsMax reports that, according to a former rape investigator with the New Orleans Police Department, lip biting is a common MO for rapists:

"The reason rapists bite is because, even with the full weight of her attacker on top of her, the woman is often able to resist the parting of her legs by locking her ankles. The rapist's arms are busy keeping her pinned down. The only weapon the rapist has left is his teeth, which he uses to bite while demanding she open her legs. The lips are very sensitive. Biting them is so painful it distracts the victim, allowing a rapist to overcome her resistance. The victim can only hold out for so long as the blood flows into her mouth. Some women are stronger than others and I've seen their lips half-torn from their faces before they give up."

NEWSMAX http://newsmax.com

TANGLED WEBS

   

WILLIAM HAMBRECHT
WJ CLINTON
received major donations from Hambrecht.
      SALON MAGAZINE
backed by Hambrecht
       
      WILLIAM PERRY
former DOD Secretary and business associate of Hambrecht
  CHAIRMAN MAO
Marshall Lei was aclose associate
  H&Q TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS
Formed by Hambrecht and Perry. Perry remained involved even while Secretary of Defense.
MARSHALL LEI
Father of Madame Nei Li
  GALAXY NEW TECHNOLOGY
Joint Sino-American venture started by SCM/BROOKS
SCM/BROOKS
Financed by H&Q
MADAME NEI LI
Held rank of Chinese general
ADLAI STEVENSON
Former US Senator
Co-chaired Hua Mei Venture
HUA MEI VENTURE
Galaxy and SCM/Brooks were involved in exportinng large quantities of AT&T communications equipment to China.
CHINESE ARMY GENERAL DING HENGGAO
Husband of Madame Nei Li
CHINESE COMMISSION ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & INDUSTRY FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE
GENERAL HENGGAO
was director of COSTIND
     
  PEOPLE'S
LIBERATION ARMY
Received logistical and technological support from COSTIND
 TIGER SONG
Hua Mei system reconfigured by PLA for re-export.
 IRAQ
Purchased Tiger Song from Chinese and used for air defense command and control. It would become a target of US aircraft.

This chart is based on a story by Charles R. Smith of Softwar. Smith has been a leading analyst of the Clinton saga and its connections to encryption policy, technology transfers and espionage.

THE LAST LIE

No story since Vietnam has been covered as badly by
the American media. Right to the end. Using a
perversion of language worthy of Clinton or David
Kendall, the media has been referring to the Senate's
pending action as an "acquittal." Even such
publications as the New York Times and the Washington
Post have engaged in this cynical doublespeak.

In fact, in order to acquit the Senate would have to
vote to find Clinton not guilty. No one even
suggested such an absurdity. As former Justice
Department attorney Todd Gaziano pointed out in the
Washington Times:

"The word acquittal is nowhere mentioned in the
impeachment clauses, Its proper meaning can only be
discerned by analogy to a criminal trial. ~~~ A
criminal jury can deliver three message to the judge.
The jury can return a unanimous (or in some states a
near unanimous) verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt. The jury can return a unanimous (or in some
states a near unanimous) verdict of not guilty, which
leads to an acquittal. Or the jury can tell the judge
that it is deadlocked."

The Senate has been clearly headed -- by any honest
use of the language -- towards a deadlock. A
defendant released because of a hung jury is not
acquitted and may be tried again. It is proper to say
that the "Senate was deadlocked" or the "Senate
failed to convict" but it is absolutely false -- and
a measure of the depth of the media Clinton
codependency -- to say "the Senate acquitted."

DEADLOCKED PUBLIC

The polling data that pro-Clinton media have used to
sway public opinion has been highly distorted as
well. A fair summation of the public's view would be
that it has been consistently conflicted. For
example, three quarters of the public believed
Clinton committed the crime of perjury but almost
that many didn't want him removed from office and
gave him high marks for his performance as president.

And that's just part of the confusing story. A recent
survey by the Center on Policy Attitudes finds, for
example, that the percent of Americans who trust the
federal government has dropped from 38% in 1997 to
21% today. Back in the 1960s 75% of Americans said
they trusted the government. Thus at the height of
the president's popularity, few trust his government.

Further, at the peak of what the media is projecting
as a feel-good era, 75% of the public agree that
"government is run by a few big interests looking out
for themselves." And turnout in last fall's election
was the poorest (as a percent eligible voters) since
1942.

One constant media theme in recent days has been what
a bad job the House managers did, yet two-thirds of
the country thinks they did well. And yet even more
feel that way about the president's lawyers.

Here's another anomaly: while only a third of the
country approved of the way the Senate handled the
impeachment proceedings, a majority felt the
president got a fair trial.

Further, at a time when Clinton is getting his
highest performance approval ratings, a Zogby survey
finds him listed 2nd among the last 11 presidents as
being below average or a failure. Only Nixon beats
him on that score. On the other hand, Clinton ranked
6th among those for being great or nearly great. He
does stand out in one other way, only FDR gathered
fewer rankings as just average.

Now take the matter of sex. The public clearly didn't
want Clinton removed for his sexual behavior. But
that doesn't translate into the libertinism projected
by much of the media. Only 21% in a Fox survey
admitted to cheating in a relationship (which some
defined as being as trivial as holding hands with
another person). Interestingly, Democrats were twice
as likely to cheat as Republicans.

Pollster Scott Rasmussen offers some interesting
insights on all this. He points out that "more than
90% of those who want the President thrown out of
office think he has committed crimes more serious
than anything having to do with Monica. In this view,
the Monica matter was all they could prove -- just
like
income tax evasion was all they could prove about
Capone. Those who don't want the President removed
think Monica is the issue. They have concluded that
the Monica stuff is disgusting but not worth throwing
him out of office over."

He also notes that seven out of ten Americans would
have wanted the president removed from office if he
had timed military action to distract attention from
his own political problems. But this was never
pursued.

In the end, Clinton may have been helped most by the
very cynicism about government, leading to the
conclusion: why punish him for what all politicians
do? Fifty-eight percent believe Clinton's ethics are
at least as good as most politicians. This has
remained constant throughout the year of Monica. Why?
Explains Rasmussen, "Because it's easy to believe
that arrogant men in Congress would abuse their
authority to hit on a young intern. To impeach this
President would have required convincing people that
his ethics were even lower than the political norm."

In short, the country's reaction to the affair has
been consistently muddied, reflecting a sort of
deadlock of the public mind.

STARR FIX

A San Francisco reader writes to inquire why Undernews, albeit critical of some of Kenneth Starr's major decisions, has been so quiet about his prosecutorial excesses, conflicts of interest and so forth. Here is an answer or two:

* Contrary to the mythology of investigative reporting, there is actually too much news. The primary task of the journalist is not so much discovery as proper filing. Some news should be filed on the front page, some in a futures folder, and some sent into the revenue stream of Waste Management Inc. This all involves triage based on an ancient journalistic formula: dog bites man is not news; man bites dog is. W.J. Clinton's behavior is simply vastly more important than that of Kenneth Starr.

* Earlier in this affair I described Starr as the sort of lawyer you wouldn't mind having write your will but you wouldn't want him to handle your divorce. Far from being the evil monster Clinton supporters have portrayed, Starr is your run-of-the-mill, hidden-agenda, interest-conflicted, establishment-coddling corporate lawyer. He is no different in this respect than, say, your average partner in Hale & Boggs, purveyor of top aides to the Clinton White House. Clinton supporters should be grateful that the investigation was headed by a reliable member of the establishment rather than a truly skilled and aggressive prosecutor.

* Starr's ties to the tobacco industry are similarly unremarkable especially given that Clinton's chosen successor once grew the villainous weed himself and that Democratic state attorneys general helped create a massive sweetheart deal with the industry.

* Starr is not a lone ranger. He is CEO of an office primarily staffed by persons seconded from the ranks of federal law enforcement, such as Justice, the FBI, and US Attorneys offices. The idea of Starr as a prosecutorial loose cannon is simply wrong. This point was well made by Samuel Dash, Starr's erstwhile ethics advisor, in an New York Times op ed: "The people see the independent counsel as a special case of abuse, but in fact they are observing how federal prosecutions routinely operate. Yes, Kenneth Starr ~~~ may have wired an informer to get incriminating statements from a suspect, threatened to prosecute a minor figure to get that person to give up evidence and called a mother before the grand jury. Though these strategies have been denounced as outrageous examples of misconduct, they are standard operating procedures of federal prosecutors." Procedures, Dash noted, that have been judged by the Supreme and other courts to be both legal and ethical. Procedures, he might have added, that are used daily in the nation's largest and longest abuse of prosecutorial power, the war on drugs, with hardly a murmur from liberal America. This does not excuse such practices, but if we are going to take them on let's not lose interest the moment Clinton is let off the hook.

* Starr has not been guilty of everything of which he has been accused. One of the problems that prosecutors face is that they are not permitted to babble about their case. The White House understood this and so embarked on a deceitful spin and destroy mission against Starr, knowing that he could not rise effectively to his own defense.

* Starr's actual record has been hidden by the mainstream media. Thus many Americans do not know that he has won more than a dozen convictions or guilty pleas including that of the number two official in the Justice Department, a former governor of Arkansas, and one of Clinton's closest friends and business partners. By any fair historical standard, Starr is an above average American political corruption investigator.

* There is a great tendency, in spectacular cases, for the public and the media to second-guess the prosecution every step of the way. In the end, prosecutors are what prosecutors do. I have tried, although not completely successfully, to wait until Starr has shown his hand before criticizing it. It is worth noting, in this regard, that the prosecutor's investigation continues. I believe that Starr took an inexcusable dive on the Foster death and the Arkansas drug trade and, as a result, I confess not to have much hope for the further denouement of this story. But I also admit that only empiricism, and not hard facts, lead me to such a premonition.

* Stuart Taylor of the National Journal said it best when he wrote that Starr "was the wrong man for the job: too political ambitious a Republican, too ignorant in the ways of good prosecutors, too attached to his million-dollar-a-year tobacco-stained law practice, too blind to appearances. His tenure has, in my view been marred by a pattern of seriously bad judgments. ~~~ But I've seen no real evidence so far -- for all the innuendoes -- that Starr has done anything dishonest. And in the end, this remains: Faced with unrelenting obstructionism, stunning levels of dishonesty and vicious personal attacks, Starr and his prosecutors and investigators did their jobs. They amassed irrefutable -- and still unrefuted -- proof of Clintons' crimes. They brought a president to justice."

A commercial pilot, hired to skywrite a message about Washington monuments during Clinton's impeachment trial was detained by Secret Service agents for four hours. The message: "This is God. Convict + Remove. Or Else." The pilot was accused of coming too close to off-limits air space near the White House. In fact he had not violated any FAA laws.


MORE THAN SEX. .
.

As NBC continues to block broadcast of an interview with a woman who is alleged to have been assaulted by President Clinton in the 1970s, there are reports that the women is thinking of taking her story to another network.

NewsMax reports that a source who was present the entire eight hours that NBC grilled Juanita Broaddrick and those close to her says the Myers' team put the Clinton accuser and her family through the wringer. "Their verdict: She's 'squeaky clean.' ~~~ "Dateline" also interviewed nurse Norma Rogers, a key corroborative witness who treated Broaddrick's bruises after her alleged attack by then-Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton."

According to NewsMax, Myers called Broaddrick to tell of NBC's cold feet saying, "The good news is, you're credible. The bad news is, you're very, very credible."

And the Southwest Times Record reports that "Broaddrick, owner of the Brownwood Manor Nursing Facility, has been questioned by representatives of the House Judiciary Committee at the Greenwood office of Republican state Sen. Bill Walters, who is her attorney. Several committee members, including U.S. Rep. Asa Hutchinson, R-Fort Smith, are serving as House managers and prosecuting the impeachment case against Clinton before the U.S. Senate."

Broaddrick last January signed an affidavit in the Paula Jones case denying that Clinton had made unwelcome advances on her. But in an April deposition for Kenneth Star, Broaddrick recanted. Her testimony is sealed.

NEWSMAX
http://newsmax.com

SOUTHWEST TIMES RECORD
http://www.swtimes.com/1999/January/29/news/clinton.html

JANE DOES,
WE HARDLY KNEW YE

Broaddrick is not the only woman alleged to have been assaulted by Clinton. There is, of course, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey (more on her below), but there are at least five other instances ranging from alleged sexual assault with physical harm to groping. One of these instances is described in Roger Morris' 'Partners in Power:'

"A young woman lawyer in Little Rock claimed that she was accosted by Clinton while he was attorney general and that when she recoiled he forced himself on her, biting and bruising her. Deeply affected by the assault, the woman decided to keep it all quiet for the sake of her own hard won career and that of her husband. When the husband later saw Clinton at the 1980 Democratic Convention, he delivered a warning. 'If you ever approach her,' he told the governor, 'I'll kill you.' Not even seeing fit to deny the incident, Bill Clinton sheepishly apologized and duly promised never to bother her again."

Then there is the case of a former Miss America, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, who had a short encounter with Clinton in 1983. She initially told friends that then-Governor Clinton had forced himself upon her but later said the incident was consensual. She refused to talk about it for a number of years but recently admitted the encounter to a Toronto newspaper and also told of alleged intimidation of her family and friends. Following the story's publication, according to Gracen lawyer Vincent Vento, a caller contacted her and said, "You should really keep your mouth shut about Bill Clinton and go on with your life. You could be discredited. You could have an IRS investigation." Since then, she has.

THE WILLEY CASE

In another indication that the real Clinton scandal story is taking place far from the US Senate, Jackie Judd & Chris Vlasto of ABC News have reported that a
"private investigator has become a key witness in the investigation of whether someone tried to scare Kathleen Willey into remaining silent about allegations President Clinton made an unwanted sexual advance."

Sources familiar with PI Jarrett Stern's work say he was hired by Saul Schwartzbach, a lawyer for Nathan Landow, a developer and a shadowy figure in the Clinton scandals.

Says ABC: "Willey has testified that Landow ~~~ pressured her to deny that Clinton made a sexual advance toward her at the White House. The same sources say Landow had Willey investigated at a time when she was a witness in both the Paula Jones sexual harassment case and the Starr criminal investigation."

Landow's involvement in the story could prove a huge embarrassment to Al Gore and may help to explain why Bill Bradley is being warmed up in the establishment bull pen. Landow was a big operative in Gore's 1988 presidential campaign. The Baltimore Sun reported that "Mr. Gore said that a group of major Democratic fund-raisers led by Maryland developer Nathan Landow had 'played a significant role in getting me change my mind about running.' It wasn't so much the strength of the arguments though. Landow and company promised to raise $4 million and Gore said he'd make a run for it.

Landow raised over a half million dollars in the 1992 and 1996 Clinton/Gore campaigns and his name has come up in questionable land deals in DC and on an Indian reservation.

Landow has denied stories that he tried to help Webb Hubbell in the alleged hush money case now reinstated against the former Justice Department official. Al Hunt of the Wall Street Journal who wrote the Hubbell-Landow story, responded earlier this year that "I reported that the same Mr. Landow secretly had tried to help Clinton confidant Webb Hubbell when he was in legal and financial straits. Mr. Landow adamantly insisted that wasn't true, either. I know he lied then, which makes his credibility [in the Willey matter] suspect now."

The same year that Clinton had his alleged encounter with Juanita Broaddrick, Landow was trying to break into the hotel and gambling industries. According to a Washington Post story at the time, "Two prominent Washington investors with connections to the Carter administration were involved in a proposal to build a hotel and gambling casino in Atlantic City, with Washington gambling king pin Joe Nesline as a consultant. The investors are multimillionaire builder Nathan Landow and Smith Bagley, a Reynolds tobacco heir. Landow is under consideration for appointment as U.S. ambassador to the Netherlands. Landow acknowledge[d] a casual acquaintanceship with Nesline of many years' standing, and an involvement in one other hotel-casino venture in which Nesline also played a role."

"Nesline, who lives in the luxurious Promenade high-rise apartment building owned by Landow at 5225 Pooks Hill Rd. in Bethesda, has been an internationally known gambling figure for 40 years. He had long been identified in local police files as the suspected 'godfather' of bookmaking and other gaming action [in] and around Washington.

"With an arrest record spanning four decades. Nesline has been charged with bribery and bootlegging as well as gambling. He was convicted of carrying a deadly weapon in the fatal shooting of a man at point-blank range in an after-hours club in 1951."

The Post's Maxine Cheshire wrote that "Landow's lawyer. Saul Schwartzbach, blamed himself for involving Nesline. 'I may have destroyed my client.' Schwartzbach said, because he had consulted Nesline for half an hour for expertise that would enable Landow and Bagley to negotiate knowledgeably in what was to be a joint venture with Resorts International Inc., a conglomerate with gambling in the Bahamas and elsewhere.

The deal fell through.

Landow was also involved with Anthony Plate, an associate of the Gambino Mafia family. Plate owned a 25 percent stake in Quaker Masonry, a firm in which Landow served as vice president and director. Reported the Post, "They [officers of the Montgomery County's organized crime section] learned from Florida police that [Landow] had a financial interest in a now defunct corporation whose concealed owners allegedly included an identified member of the Carlo Gambino Mafia 'family.'"

Landow was a beneficiary of Marion Barry's urban renewal fire sales to prominent Democratic officials in the 1980sw. A 1991 National Review article reported that "In the late 1970s an estimated $100 million in federal property was transferred to the D.C. government. The [Redevelopment Land Agency] was put in charge of selling the transferred property, as well as other tracts already owned by the city. The General Accounting Office was openly critical of the RLA in 1982, charging that city property (much of it a gift from the federal government) was being sold for bargain-basement prices, often to political friends of the mayor [Marion Barry]. ~~~ Nathan Landow, for example, a prominent Democratic Party fundraiser, paid less than one-third the market price for a piece of downtown real estate he purchased from the RLA in early 1982."

Remember what the late Senator Phil Hart had to say about his former occupation: "The Senate is a place that does things 20 years after they should have been done." There is no February 12 deadline on the Willey-Landow story.

MORE THAN SEX (Cont'd)

[Richard Morris on Matt Drudge's TV program]

MORRIS: When I was called by the House Judiciary Committee just last weekend to testify or to meet with them I met with 3 investigators of the committee. They asked me not to use their names and I won't but they were each 50 years of age or over, they weren't kids. They had decades of experience working for the IRS, the FBI, and all kinds of other investigative organizations; they told me that they were physically afraid of retaliation. They asked me if I would testify . . .
DRUDGE: The ones questioning you were afraid?!

MORRIS: Exactly, they asked me if I would testify and I said yeah. And they said aren't you afraid of retaliation? And I said what are they going to expose, my sex life? You know we have done all that. I've taken the trouble to not sin since then. And they said no, no. I mean don't you know the list of the 25 people who have died in mysterious circumstances in connection with this investigation? And I said are you guys out of your minds? And they said no, no. And one of them said I guarantee you that each of us will have an IRS audit when this is over, he said I'm saving my receipts I know that I am going to have an audit. And I said, how does that work? And he said well the head of the IRS and Hillary are very good friends.

DRUDGE: Let me get this straight, those even questioning people at this point are afraid.

MORRIS: Yes. And we are not talking here about some right wing nuts, or some people who are really paranoid. We are talking about guys who have spent 20 or 30 years as top level investigators for the IRS and the FBI who have retired and are now on leave and brought back by the Judiciary Committee and they specifically asked me not to mention their names on the air.

TAINTED BLOOD

While working at the White House, the ubiquitous Linda Tripp stumbled on something she wasn't meant to know anything about. She received a phone call from someone who mentioned the "tainted blood issue." The phrase meant nothing to Tripp and when she tried to find out more from a White House computer, the database denied her access. Testifying in a Judicial Watch deposition recently, Tripp said, "It had been alarming to me that when I tried to enter data from a caller that I was working with on a tainted blood issue, that every time I entered a word that had to do with this particular issue, it would flash up either the word 'encrypted' or 'password required' or something to indicate the file was locked."

At the time, Tripp was working as executive assistant to Bernard Nussbaum, chief White House counsel. Also on the staff: deputy counsel Vince Foster. The Ottawa Citizen has since learned that Foster had tried to protect the Arkansas firm shipping tainted blood from prison inmates in a lawsuit. The New York Post has also reported that Foster may have been worried about the tainted-blood scandal at the time of his death, citing a mysterious phone call about the matter shortly after Foster died.

The Citizen notes that W. J. Clinton was governor of Arkansas "when the Canadian blood supply was contaminated in the mid-'80s. He was generally familiar with the operations of now-defunct Health Management Associates, the Arkansas firm that was given a contract by Mr. Clinton's own state administration to provide medical care to prisoners. In the process, HMA was also permitted by the state to collect prisoners' blood and sell it elsewhere.

"HMA's president in the mid-1980s, Leonard Dunn, was a personal friend of Mr. Clinton's and a political ally. Later, Mr. Dunn was a Clinton appointee to the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission and he was among the senior members of Mr. Clinton's 1990 gubernatorial re-election team.

"The contaminated prisoners' plasma is believed to have been infected with HIV and hepatitis C. Any information linking Mr. Foster to HMA and its blood program is bound to raise more questions about how much Mr. Clinton knew."

OTTAWA CITIZEN
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/national/990131/2231263.html

RENO TAKES ANOTHER DIVE

The best case for the oft-maligned special prosecutors has once again been made by Janet Reno, who has taken yet another dive, this time letting Harold Ickes off the hook despite his involvement in the WH files case, improper fund-raising, the sale of seats on Commerce Department trade missions, and the Teamster scandal. Both the FBI and Justice's own campaign finance unit head had urged an independent counsel and a federal judge has stated that "a full review of the transcript of Ickes'deposition shows his remarkable inability to recall certain memorable facts."

It would seem that, whether in marriage or corruption, you go to Reno to get off the hook.

THE MEDIACRATS

FROM AN ANTHONY LEWIS COLUMN LAST JUNE: "Sidney Blumenthal, assistant to the President, made his third appearance before Kenneth Starr's grand jury in Washington last Thursday... Mr. Blumenthal decided to tell me about the experience, as a grand-jury witness may do... Prosecutors asked Mr. Blumenthal to leave the room so they could consult. After five minutes he was called back, and Mr. Wisenberg asked him: 'Does the President's religion include sexual intercourse?'"

Only problem is, no on can find the exchange in the grand jury transcript. Lewis has never retracted his smearing of the special prosecutor nor apologized for having been taken for a ride. What is in the record -- a somewhat smirking Matt Drudge points out -- is a comment from the grand jury foreperson in the closing moments of Blumenthal's appearance:

"We are very concerned about the fact that during your last visit that an inaccurate representation of the events that happened were retold on the steps of the courthouse."

"I appreciate your statem