|
Thomas Sowell
"A pattern of behavior"
WHETHER OR NOT Paula Jones' lawyers manage to prove a legal case involving "a pattern of
behavior" by Bill Clinton, there is a very clear pattern in how leaks from this case and
the Whitewater case have been handled.
Most of what the Paula Jones lawyers made public had already been leaked out, taking
the wind out of their sails. Who gained by these leaks? Clearly the president gained.
When damaging information leaks out, the president and his supporters and spin-
masters can say that this is just hearsay -- and illegally leaked hearsay, at that. Then
they can wax indignant that "partisan" enemies would stoop to such low tactics and
refuse to dignify it with an answer.
As more and more such information dribbles out bit by bit, the public is less likely to
put it all together and connect the dots that create the big picture. When it eventually
gets confirmed, the White House spokesmen can now dismiss it as "old news."
Had we heard none of the testimony in the Paula Jones case over the past months and
suddenly saw it all, with all the connections made, it would obviously have had more
impact.
The leaks about the Whitewater investigation show the same pattern. Things that are
virtually certain to come out eventually, whether in court or in impeachment hearings,
are being leaked out in bits and dabs. What could special prosecutor Kenneth Starr gain
by tipping his hand ahead of time?
What Clinton and his lawyers gain is an opportunity to put their "spin" on these facts for
months at a time, on talk show after talk show, around the clock, while Kenneth Starr is
not allowed by law to say one word in public about the grand jury proceedings. Leaks
obviously come from someone with something to gain by leaking.
The grand jury testimony is known to many people besides the special prosecutor and
the grand jury, who are the only ones forbidden by law from revealing what went on in
the grand jury room. All the witnesses can talk to the lawyers, to the media or to anyone
else they want to.
The White House lawyers have been talking to these witnesses and have as much
material to leak as Kenneth Starr has -- and far more reason to do it.
What incentive would the special prosecutor have for setting up a totally one-sided
situation in which his opponents are free to carry on in the media to their hearts'
content -- and with no penalty whatever for lying -- while he is not allowed to say a
word?
The biggest spin being put on these cases is that Bill Clinton's "private life" or "sexual
activities" are nobody's business. But when the governor of a state calls a state
employee to his hotel room, that is not a "private" act, even if he just wants her to get
him some paper clips.
Whether what happened in that hotel room was totally innocent or disgustingly guilty, it
was not private. It was a state employee summoned by a governor. It was certainly not
private if he used a state trooper to bring her there.
It is the same thing when a woman on the White House staff goes into the Oval Office.
That is not a private place, even if what goes on there involves touching private parts.
Courts of law are not private places. When you try to get somebody to lie to a judge or a
jury, that is not a private act.
Gifts may be private when you give them, but they become evidence when they are
subpoenaed by a court and you are tampering with evidence when you then try to take
them back.
Your friendships are private, but when your friend starts getting cushy jobs for people
who are witnesses in a court case, then that is something for public officials to
investigate, as the special prosecutor is doing.
Perhaps the people who are most pathetic in all this are those who are standing by the
president, right or wrong, because they think he "cares" about them.
Think of the humiliation that all this is bringing to Clinton's own family and especially to
his teen-aged daughter. She can't turn on a television set without seeing her father's
sleaze being discussed or made the subject of jokes. She must know that all the kids
around her are seeing it too.
If Clinton doesn't care enough to spare his own flesh and blood the humiliations caused
by his reckless behavior, why would anyone think that he "cares" about
3/22/98: Innocent explanations
3/19/98: Kathleen Willey and Anita Hill
3/17/98: Search and destroy
3/12/98: Media Circus versus Justice
3/6/98: Vindication
3/3/98: Cheap Shot Time
2/26/98: The Wrong Filter
2/24/98: Trial by Media
2/20/98: Dancing Around the Realities
2/19/98: A "Do Something" War?
2/12/98: Julian Simon, combatant in a 200-year war
2/6/98: A rush to rhetoric