About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

National Review's Kudlow revived phony scandals as "Bill Clinton lies"

February 28, 2007 4:30 pm ET

SUMMARY: In a recent column, Larry Kudlow wrote that "David Geffen has reminded folks what it was like when the Clintons were in the White House" and proceeded to list some of "Bill Clinton['s] lies," according to a Google search. But many of the "lies" Kudlow collected are actually well-worn falsehoods about the Clintons and a rehashing of "scandals," such as Whitewater and Filegate, in which they were absolved of wrongdoing.

70 Comments

In his February 23 column, which appeared in the February 27 edition of The Washington Times, National Review Online economics editor Larry Kudlow claimed that the "front-page catfight between" Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), and longtime Democratic donor David Geffen has "pried the lid off the rusty old can of Clinton lies, reminding voters of what will happen if this truth-challenged couple ever returns to the Oval Office." Kudlow then asked: "Does the American electorate want to go through this all over again? Have we forgotten the lies?" Kudlow claimed he conducted a Google search using the phrase "Bill Clinton lies" and offered readers a sampling of the results, which he claimed were from "various" -- though unnamed -- "sources." However, many of the alleged "lies" Kudlow listed are actually well-worn falsehoods about the Clintons and a rehashing of "scandals" in which they were absolved of wrongdoing.

Gennifer Flowers

Among what Kudlow wrote "turn[ed] up" in his Google search was: "Clinton continues to lie about his 12-year affair with Gennifer Flowers." In fact, while Clinton testified to having had "sexual relations" with Flowers on one occasion in 1977, evidence suggests that it was Flowers who lied about the extent of their relationship. As Bob Somerby of The Daily Howler noted on October 15, 2003, Flowers, a former Arkansas state employee, offered no solid evidence that she and Bill Clinton had conducted a 12-year affair, but there exists plenty of evidence to challenge the credibility of her allegations. Somerby wrote:

One week after her story appeared, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter noted some problems with Flowers' credibility. Among them: "Flowers claims she met Clinton at the Excelsior Hotel in 1979 or 1980. The hotel didn't open until late 1982." Another: "Flowers claims to have been Miss Teen Age America, 1967. She wasn't -- that year, or any other." In The Hunting of the President, Joe Conason and Gene Lyons went into more detail about this shaky messenger:

CONASON/LYONS (page 25): Musicians and club owners who had worked with Flowers described her as manipulative and dishonest. Her resume falsely proclaimed her a graduate of a fashionable Dallas prep school she'd never attended. It also listed a University of Arkansas nursing degree she'd never earned and membership in a sorority that had never heard of her. Her agent told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that contrary to her claims, Flowers had never opened for comedian Rich Little. A brief gig on the Hee Haw television program had come to a bad end, the agent would later confirm, when Flowers simply vanished for a couple of weeks with a man she'd met in a Las Vegas casino -- and then concocted a tale about having been kidnapped. She had never been Miss Teenage America. Even her "twin sister Genevieve" turned out to be purely a figment of Flowers' imagination.

Not that there's anything wrong with it! Conason and Lyons also said this: "Flowers never produced a single paragraph, valentine, or birthday card as evidence of her twelve-year affair with Clinton; no witness ever came forward who had seen them together. Indeed, she would eventually write an entire book, Passion and Betrayal, without stating a specific time and place where she and her famous lover were together."

Whitewater

Another of Kudlow's purported finds was: "Clinton persists in dismissing the Whitewater scandal as a 'land deal where I lost money.' (Despite the fact that a dozen of his close associates landed in jail over the matter.)" In fact, the Clintons did lose money in the decades-old real estate deal that ultimately spurred the Whitewater "scandal." Further, as Media Matters for America has noted, the extensive, multimillion-dollar investigation into Whitewater turned up no evidence of illegality by the Clintons. Indeed, the independent counsel assigned to investigate the matter, Robert Ray, announced on September 20, 2000, that he had closed the probe after concluding that "the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either President or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct."

Filegate

Kudlow also wrote that he found that "Clinton illegally obtained FBI files on his political opponents, and lied about that, too." Kudlow was referring to another "scandal" involving the improper collection of FBI background files on former White House employees by then-White House security chief Craig Livingstone -- dubbed by the media as "Filegate." However, in March 2000, Ray concluded that there existed no evidence to implicate the Clintons or any senior White House officials in any wrongdoing. As CNN reported on March 16, 2000:

There is "no substantial and credible evidence" that President Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton sought confidential Federal Bureau of Investigation background checks of former GOP White House personnel, according to a report filed Thursday by Whitewater Independent Counsel Robert Ray's office.

In a statement, Ray's office said that no substantial and credible [evidence] exists to implicate any other senior White House official in the FBI background files controversy that came to be known as "Filegate," and that no prosecutions would be pursued. It also said prosecution was not warranted after an investigation into whether former White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum testified falsely to Congress on the matter in 1996.

Lincoln Bedroom

Kudlow further wrote:

David Geffen also has turned our attentions back to the days of the Lincoln bedroom scandal, when White House sleepovers were regularly offered in exchange for large political contributions. I could be wrong, but I don't recall a single instance of this happening while George W. Bush has been in office. Same for Bush Sr. and Ronald Reagan. For that matter, I don't recall any Lincoln-bedroom sales during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, or Richard Nixon.

Just the Bill Clinton presidency.

In fact, Kudlow is wrong -- several Bush campaign contributors have stayed in the White House. USA Today reported on May 12, 2005, that "[a]bout a third of the 152 adult guests who slept at the White House or Camp David last year were fundraisers or donors to President Bush's campaigns." The Associated Press reported on March 10, 2004:

President Bush played host to dozens of overnight guests at the White House and Camp David last year, from world leaders to some of his most loyal supporters, including friends who double as campaign fund-raisers.

Bush and first lady Laura Bush have invited at least 270 people to stay at the White House and at least the same number to overnight at the Camp David retreat since coming to Washington in January 2001, according to lists the White House provided The Associated Press.

Elton Bomer, a lobbyist, Bush donor and former Democratic lawmaker who served in then-Texas Gov. Bush's administration, said his stay in the White House living quarters was like visiting friends in ... "a very nice home."

"The mattresses are very, very nice and the pillows are very nice," said Bomer, who visited in October 2002 with about 18 other Texans. "It's not ostentatious at all. There's no gilded gold leaf or anything like that."

Some Bush guests stayed in the Lincoln Bedroom, a historic room that gained fame in the Clinton administration amid allegations that Democrats were rewarding big donors such as Hollywood celebrities Steven Spielberg and Barbra Streisand with accommodations there. In all, the Clinton family invited at least 938 overnight guests to the White House in their first four years.

Bush's criticism of the Clinton fund-raising scandal is one of the reasons the White House identifies guests. In a debate with Vice President Al Gore in October 2000, Bush said: "I believe they've moved that sign, 'The buck stops here,' from the Oval Office desk to 'The buck stops here' on the Lincoln Bedroom. And that's not good for the country."

Kudlow may not "recall a single instance of this happening" because, as Somerby pointed out in a May 16, 2005, Daily Howler entry, the media's response to news of Bush's overnight guests was very different from the Clinton years: "They screamed and tore their hair out then, but roll over and play dead today." Somerby further noted the ways in which the "scandal" was spun during the Clinton years, including the addition of family members and Chelsea Clinton's overnight guests to inflate the grand total:

How many overnight guests were involved? 831. Or 938, depending on how clownish a newspaper wanted to be. In March 1997, the White House produced a list of overnight guests for the Clintons' four-plus years in the White House. 831 guests were listed. Beyond that, though, the White House noted that 35 family members had also stayed overnight, and that Chelsea Clinton -- twelve to sixteen years old at the time -- had hosted 72 additional guests (think: junior high slumber parties). Readers can probably guess what occurred. Wanting to make the scandal seem bigger, most news orgs took the relevant number (831), then added the 72 and the 35, producing a more pleasing total -- 938 overnight guests in all. There! That felt about twelve percent better! So when newspapers pimped the pleasing claim that the Clintons had hosted 938 guests, they were including 72 teen-aged friends of their daughter and 35 family members, although the papers almost never told readers that the numbers were being jacked up this way.

Peltier pardon

Kudlow also wrote:

It is highly ironic that the very liberal Mr. Geffen has put all this front and center. It seems that Geffen is still jilted by the fact that President Clinton failed to pardon Leonard Peltier, an American Indian activist who was convicted and sent to jail for killing two FBI agents. I'm speculating here, but the "ultimate" lie may have been that Clinton promised Geffen a pardon for Peltier, reneged on the deal, and instead pardoned Marc Rich, the currency manipulator and money launderer who is the husband of Clinton pal Denise Rich, who is also a suspected Clinton paramour. The trigger for Geffen's Hillary insurrection, and the bile-filled remarks he served to Maureen Dowd, may have been lingering resentment.

However, Dowd's February 21 column (subscription required) -- the only source Kudlow cited in support of his "speculating" -- gave no indication that Clinton "promised Geffen a pardon for Peltier." Dowd wrote that Geffen and Bill Clinton "fell out in 2001, when Mr. Clinton gave a pardon to Marc Rich after rebuffing Mr. Geffen's request for one for Leonard Peltier." Dowd later told Newsweek that Geffen never expected a pardon for Peltier. From the March 5 edition of Newsweek, published after Kudlow's column:

Dowd says Geffen was initially reluctant to be interviewed for her column. During their hourlong interview at his Beverly Hills mansion, his tone was "reflective," she says. (When Dowd asked him about the Peltier pardon, he said he never really expected one, though he was angry when fugitive financier Marc Rich was pardoned by Clinton.)

A Lexis-Nexis search* of news coverage regarding Geffen's pardon request found no evidence supporting Kudlow's "speculati[on]" that Clinton "promised ... a pardon for Peltier."

Kudlow's description of Denise Rich as a "suspected Clinton paramour" is also baseless. Allegations of a personal relationship between Clinton and Rich spread in early 2001 as media figures such as MSNBC host Don Imus claimed she had visited the White House on more than 100 occasions during Clinton's tenure. Imus, however, disclosed on the February 22, 2001, edition of CNN's Larry King Live that one of his sources for this information had been former Clinton aide Dick Morris. Imus went on to acknowledge, "I don't know if you can believe Dick Morris or not." As Media Matters has documented, Morris has a long history of advancing baseless and outright false claims to smear the Clintons.

* Search terms used: "Clinton and Geffen and Peltier and pardon" in News (All) between 1/1/01 and 2/28/07

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by rusty shackleford (February 28, 2007 4:36 pm ET)
         

      "David Geffen has reminded folks what it was like when the Clintons were in the White House"

      Not stuck in an insane war of choice quagmire, economic prosperity, balanced federal budget (and surplus), great statute in the international community..

      Thanks, David Geffen. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by DorisRussell (February 28, 2007 4:38 pm ET)
           

        David Geffen is not living in reality.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (February 28, 2007 4:46 pm ET)
           

        Ah, yes...remember those innocent days when the most pressing issue was whether Bill lied about his little fling with an intern.   Congress devoted years and millions of dollars to it.   What a luxury that we had nothing more important to worry about.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DorisRussell (February 28, 2007 4:48 pm ET)
             

          Yeah while Congress was absorbing the President's time our Republican led Congress destracted our nation from the upcoming 9/11 threat . 

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (February 28, 2007 6:18 pm ET)
             

          Yeah, who could take all that peace and prosperity. Luckily Bush came along and saved us from anymore of that.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by clsn_lx1315 (March 01, 2007 2:02 pm ET)
             

          There's nothing innocent about lying under oath or suborning perjury.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by rusty shackleford (March 01, 2007 2:07 pm ET)
               

            $70 million down the Starr hole + impeachment - conviction = you got nothin'

            Report Abuse
    • Author by DorisRussell (February 28, 2007 4:39 pm ET)
         

      Imus

      Why is Imus even mentioned in this article for something that was said in 2001? Imus lies even today about Hillary Clinton, is he to believed in 2001 ? 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by lindenbully (February 28, 2007 4:49 pm ET)
         

      Yeah, I remenber life in the Clinton Era... bunch of loudmouths saying what Kudlow is saying now, except there was no Media Matters calling them out on it.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 4:57 pm ET)
         

      I'm kind of busy, so I'll have to look these over more carefully when I get more time...but I'll begin with Bill & Gennifer

      In fact, while Clinton testified to having had "sexual relations" with Flowers on one occasion in 1977, evidence suggests that it was Flowers who lied about the extent of their relationship.[MMFA]

      Well Clinton ACTUALLY did LIE when first asked about Ms Flowers.  So I guess he lied before he told the truth. But the LIE still counts as a LIE where I come from.... So where's the evidence suggesting Flowers lied about the length of the affair. Bill lied about the affair even existing. I'd be more inclined to believe Flowers on this one.

      ==================

      Mr. Clinton plummeted in the polls, so in an effort to salvage his campaign, he took the risky step of doing an interview on 60 Minutes in front of a huge audience right after the 1992 Super Bowl. During his interview with Correspondent Steve Kroft, Mr. Clinton, who was joined by his wife Hillary, denied ever having an affair with Flowers.

      It took years for Mr. Clinton to admit that he was lying in that interview, and that he once had a relationship with Flowers

      http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/60minutes/main620619.shtml

      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (February 28, 2007 5:15 pm ET)
           

        One has to wonder...will Georgey ever admit any of his lies?  Or even be held accountable for them?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 5:57 pm ET)
             

          Hey nerzog,

          Bush will likely NEVER fess up.

          Clinton's lies, whatever they were, aren't even close to the magnitude of Bush's deceit.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by greekfurnace (February 28, 2007 6:09 pm ET)
               

            Absolutely. I'm rather disgusted at the insane double-standard.

            My mother (who's now 66) told me the other day that she thought Bush was "moral"... while Bill Clinton is/was not. In fact, she hates Clinton.

            I tried (without success) to ferret out her reasoning (if it exists) and I think it boils down to the illusion of piety. That is, Bush is a self-professed 'born again' who is on the side of so-called morality/religion etc (the right wing). However, when one considers the utter death, destruction, fraud, theft, misteps, gaffs, etc... all at the hands of our President George Bush... there really is no comparison (even if he supposedly did let OBL go in the late 90's - she pulled that one on me too). Bill is basically guilty of being a philanderer. That in my Mother's eye -- and apparently many if not most Americans -- is the worst possible thing.

            Frankly, I just don't know where everyone's reason went? You can be/do the worst things imaginable (intentional or not) and, if you are a 'moral' Christian... at least publicly... you get a free pass. Amazing. Frankly, I could care less about Bill Clinton's sex life (or anyone's for that matter)... it's their biz. What has Bush done for the country. Big fat zero. Less than zero. We (if we make it out of his Presidency without WWIII) will be paying back this nightmare for years and years to come.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by rusty shackleford (February 28, 2007 5:21 pm ET)
           

        Whether Clinton had an affair with Flowers or not was none of Steve Kroft's business, or anybody else's but Bill's, Hillary's, and Gennifer's.  It was an idiotic question.  Bill shouldn't have lied - he should have said "it's none of your damn business."  But as lies go, that one's pretty harmless to the citizenry.

        I don't approve of adultery, and I'm not a particularly big Clinton fan, but I think all this disingenuous obsessing about his sex life by many on the right is pathetic.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 5:56 pm ET)
             

          Rusty, the Clinton's made it everybody's business when they agreed to do the 60 Minute interview. They had to know Kroft's question was coming.

          Of course it should have been a private matter between Bill & Hill...but you know that it rarely turns out that way in politics...

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 7:37 pm ET)
               

            This is a meme you are propagating.  Bill never denied the affair on 60 Minutes.  In fact, he admitted to "causing pain in my marriage".  The American public knew what that meant and by showing that he was human, he began one of the most amazing political comebacks in history.

            The American people aren't nearly as prudish or naive as the right thinks they are.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 10:07 pm ET)
                 

              This is a meme you are propagating.  Bill never denied the affair on 60 Minutes....by Pragmatic Liberal

              Oh really?

              =====

              Kroft: Who is Gennifer Flowers? You know her.

              Bill Clinton: Oh, yes.

              Kroft: How do you know her? How would you describe your relationship?

              Bill Clinton: Very limited, but until this, you know, friendly but limited . . . .

              Kroft: Was she a friend, an acquaintance? Does your wife know her?

              Hillary Clinton: Oh, sure.

              Bill Clinton: Yes. She was an acquaintance, I would say a friendly acquaintance . . . .

              Kroft: She is alleging and has described in some detail in the supermarket tabloid what she calls a 12-year affair with you.

              Bill Clinton: That allegation is false.

              *****

              Bill Clinton: It was only when money came out, when the tabloid went down there offering people money to say that they had been involved with me, that she changed her story. There's a recession on.

              Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

              Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

              http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/flowers012792.htm

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Rambuncle (February 28, 2007 10:54 pm ET)
                   

                Clinton denied having a 12 year affair with Gennifer Flowers.  There has been no proof that he had a 12 year affair with her.  Slept with her(or whatever happened), but not over 12 years.

                 Sure, we could discuss context, and whether the later question was referring to any affair(affair in this argument meaning any sexual encounter) or the specifically mentioned 12 year timespan affair, but I feel, in a court of law(just to assign a basis for judgment), Clinton could easily win an argument for the "12 year" context.

                Report Abuse
              • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 10:57 pm ET)
                   

                Uh huh.  Made my point.  He bristle up about the "12-year affair".  There was no 12-year affair.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 11:05 pm ET)
                     

                  Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

                  Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

                   There it is in BLACK & WHITE.

                   

                   

                   

                  Report Abuse
        • Author by tommy (February 28, 2007 6:18 pm ET)
             

          I would say the disingenuous obsessing by the right is celebrated by this website with every related topic posted here.  Maybe they're the ones obsessed with his c*ck.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by valentinian (February 28, 2007 7:20 pm ET)
               

            Ohhh! Must... not... think about... the Clenis!

            You're right, it's all in our heads... 

            Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (February 28, 2007 6:32 pm ET)
             

          Rusty,

           I agree on your assesment.......

          If one were to guess on why the right-wing conservatives or so hard-up on Clinton's sex life is that perhaps they are collectively upset that:

          1) He got himself some in the first place and almost got away with it

          2) He was sloppy enough to get caught and since he had been, it is harder for these hypocrites to get away with doing it themselves (see Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich as two such examples!). Quite literally....the right-wingers want their cake and eat it too!

          Since Bush's lies are actually doing harm to the world the right-wingers can only keep going back to the days when they collectively thought Clinton's sex life was all we needed to know or was somehow more important instead of the truth(s) behind the disaster created by BushCo's lies!

          Report Abuse
        • Author by bruce1ace (February 28, 2007 6:35 pm ET)
             

          Clinton was under no obligation to run for President.  Once he threw his hat (sombrero, chapeau, baseball cap, fedora) into the ring, his privacy was pretty much over.  I don't buy the "none of your business" defense, it's fair for the public to scrutinize ones character for the office of the President.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by greekfurnace (February 28, 2007 7:01 pm ET)
               

            Well, this is my point... 'one's character' should then be extended to actual deeds/work performed as the President of the United States. This strangle-hold the 'moralists' in this country hold upon one's 'dirty little thoughts' and sexual misadventures is absurd. How about judging these guys on the job done? George Bush may be considered 'moral' by many... but his actions say otherwise.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by bruce1ace (March 01, 2007 6:08 am ET)
                 

              People largely did that with Clinton, giving him high marks for his job performance and low marks for his personal behavior. 

              Report Abuse
              • Author by greekfurnace (March 01, 2007 12:10 pm ET)
                   

                And, well deserved I think. This is exactly my point. If he's taking care of the important biz as President, worrying about nonsensical information, such as purported licentious behavior is meaningless. Frankly, this is all smoke and mirrors BS that is perpetually used by the so-called moralists in this country and much to the detriment of our overall wellfare.

                Report Abuse
          • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (February 28, 2007 10:22 pm ET)
               

            I voted for a PRESIDENT not a HUSBAND.

            My requirements for a President are far far different than those I require in a husband.  Maybe if Bush got some on the side he wouldn't have make SO MANY STUPID MISTAKES THAT HAVE COST SO MANY MANY LIVES.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by open_mind (March 01, 2007 1:08 am ET)
               

            I largely agree with that Bruce.  The people deserve to have that information.  The thrust of any criticism I have would be directed at those who would seemingly automatically dismiss a candidate for not being perfect.

            Oddly, some of our greatest leaders are at least now well-known philanderers.  Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, LBJ, FDR, JFK, MLK,jr. just off of the top of my head.  I am sure there are others that managed to keep their secret a little better or that I am forgetting.

            Not to mention presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani and Newt Gingrich.

            I am not convinced marital fidelity has any bearing at all on fitness for office.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by rusty shackleford (March 01, 2007 12:10 pm ET)
               

            I don't buy the "none of your business" defense, it's fair for the public to scrutinize ones character for the office of the President.

            That's very high-minded of you.  I agree.  I must have missed the direct questions from journalists to Bush about his drunk driving convictions, cocaine use, questionably military service, and alleged recovery from alcoholism.

            But I'm looking forward to the intensive questioning of Rudy about being married to his cousin, his multiple affairs, and his nasty divorce.

            And to Romney about whether he seriously believes God lives on a planet named Kolob, and that Jesus came to America, and that blacks are part of a cursed race.

            And so on.  Those things aren't really relevant, and I don't personally give a rat's ass, but I have a right to know.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by temphandle hollandaise1degradation (February 28, 2007 5:23 pm ET)
           

        Where the evidence that Jennifier lied?  Um, did you read the article?  

        "Flowers claims she met Clinton at the Excelsior Hotel in 1979 or 1980. The hotel didn't open until late 1982."

        "Flowers claims to have been Miss Teen Age America, 1967. She wasn't -- that year, or any other." 

        CONASON/LYONS (page 25): Musicians and club owners who had worked with Flowers described her as manipulative and dishonest. Her resume falsely proclaimed her a graduate of a fashionable Dallas prep school she'd never attended. It also listed a University of Arkansas nursing degree she'd never earned and membership in a sorority that had never heard of her. Her agent told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that contrary to her claims, Flowers had never opened for comedian Rich Little. A brief gig on the Hee Haw television program had come to a bad end, the agent would later confirm, when Flowers simply vanished for a couple of weeks with a man she'd met in a Las Vegas casino -- and then concocted a tale about having been kidnapped. She had never been Miss Teenage America. Even her "twin sister Genevieve" turned out to be purely a figment of Flowers' imagination.

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by rusty shackleford (February 28, 2007 5:27 pm ET)
             

          But... but... but... Clinton!!!!!!

          Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 6:08 pm ET)
             

          Again where's the evidence that Flower's LIED about the length of the affair?

          Bill lied. Gennifer lied.

          And from that you've concluded she lied about the length of the affair? But he didn't?

          Okie dokie

          Report Abuse
          • Author by funnymanpants (February 28, 2007 6:19 pm ET)
               

            >>Again where's the evidence that Flower's LIED about the length of the affair

            The fact that Flowers is not a truthful person, and that she can't produce one birthday card or valentine's day card or note or anything else, and the fact that no one ever saw them together.  How else are you supposed to "prove" she lied? Unless she comes out and admits that she is not telling the truth, how is one supposed to prove she lied about the length of the affair? The only proof can be lack of evidence. 

             12 years is a long time for a relationship and for there not to be any evidence--no note, no phone messages, no public sightings. The preacher who got caught having having sex with a male prostitute only did so for a few years, I believe and he tried to be very diiscreet. It was not an affair, and yet he left behind some trace.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by open_mind (March 01, 2007 1:25 am ET)
                 

              You are right that it is not logically possible to prove a negative.  The burden would be on Flowers to prove her own point.  There is no reason to believe her on the length of her relationship without any apparent evidence to back it up.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by AmericanMutt (February 28, 2007 11:27 pm ET)
           

        forgive me if I am confused, but was that 60 Minutes interview under oath? Gosh, a married man lying about an affair, well you could bowl me over with a feather!

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (February 28, 2007 4:58 pm ET)
         

      These people, they wrestle with their own bogeyman, when they invoke (with a sneer) former president Clinton...

      You know, the man was rather popular with the American People... also, with each passing day of this Bush administration, the American People recollect Mr. Clinton with greater and greater fondness...

      If there is anyone in this world who is better proof at how good a president Mr. Clinton was, it's George W. Bush.

      I think these people who wrestle with their own bogeyman, I think they don't know what they're doing...

      ...they don't know how popular the man is, especially compared to George W. Bush.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by noconspiracy (February 28, 2007 5:36 pm ET)
         

      Clinton was impeached, not for sex, not for lying, but for WINNING.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by tommy (February 28, 2007 6:25 pm ET)
         

      It's nobody's business, I could care less, it's between Bill and Hillary, it's their private life and shouldn't have been foisted upon the public except that his political opponents couldn't stand him;  had this gift handed to them and wasted all our time and money with silly impeachment proceedings.........I agree with all that.

      But is there anyone on this planet that honestly thinks Monica was his first?  Doubt it.  But it's history now.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 7:50 pm ET)
           

        Once again, Bill didn't deny the Flowers affair.  This is he false premise of the naysayers on this thread.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 10:46 pm ET)
             

          Go read my post on pg 1:

          jeter2 / Wednesday February 28, 2007 10:07:36 PM EST

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 10:57 pm ET)
               

            And read my reply...

            Report Abuse
            • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 11:06 pm ET)
                 

              Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

              Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (February 28, 2007 8:04 pm ET)
           

        First? Does anyone think she was his 100th?

        He told Monica he had "hundreds of affairs" before age 40 but then tried to be faithful to his wife.  For MMFA to continue to try to smear Gennifer Flowers -- who Clinton lied about and then finally admitted that he had one encounter -- is just laughable. So she claims she had a 12 year relationship, Just insert Dolly Kyle Brownings name or god knows how many other names.

        Let's face it, Bill has led a full life, maybe not up to Wilt Chamberlain standards, but Bill didn't lack for a good time. But for MMFA to claim Bill wasn't a habitual liar is well, typical MMFA weak-efforted propoganda. 

         

         

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 8:18 pm ET)
             

          He never lied about Flowers.  Show where he did.  Oh, I forgot, you're just a sniper.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 10:47 pm ET)
               

            Go read my post on pg 1:

            jeter2 / Wednesday February 28, 2007 10:07:36 PM EST

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 10:58 pm ET)
                 

              And go read my reply...

              Report Abuse
              • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 11:12 pm ET)
                   

                I did...seems as if you missed something.

                Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

                Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

                 

                Report Abuse
    • Author by archae (February 28, 2007 6:26 pm ET)
         

      Speaking of Flowers...

      Did she ever release the UNedited tapes of her conversations with Bill Clinton?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by archae (February 28, 2007 6:30 pm ET)
         

      BTW, the HCAAC club, (Hate Clintons At All Costs) will never give up the fact that they threw their "best" at the Clintons four times, and all four times fell flat on their face.

      Two presidential elections, one Senate election and an impeachment.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (February 28, 2007 6:31 pm ET)
         

      "David Geffen has reminded folks of what it was like when Clinton was in the White House."

      Yeah . . . no illegal war taking thousands of lives, a budget surplus, gas was $1.50/gallon, we were respected and admired by other nations, when there was an attack on our soil {WTC '93, Oklahoma City} we caught those repsonsible, etc . . .

      Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (February 28, 2007 7:50 pm ET)
           

        Illegal war in Kosovo, selling military missile secrets to China for campaign money, running down our intelligence capabilities, recession, shamelessly molesting women and interns with NOW not saying a word. Oh, those were the days my friend, we thought they would never end....

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 7:52 pm ET)
             

          Amazingly, you have run down all the con talking points and as usual none of them have a shred of truth.  Don't ever change, old boy.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by august west (February 28, 2007 7:59 pm ET)
             

          Dude, you need to get that helmet polished as much as Clinton did.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (February 28, 2007 8:16 pm ET)
             

          Why do you lie so much. Supporting NATO in Kosovo, not illegal, at least not by our laws. Selling secrets to China, never happened, rightwing fantasy, lie really. Explain how consensual sex between adults can be molestation? You really  never EVER know what you are talking about do you? You have  become a sad and pathetic troll, there was a time you were reasonable, pity.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 8:21 pm ET)
               

            I have to take issue with you.  Leather hasn't BECOME a pathetic troll.  He always was.  That's why he only snipes a few times a day.  He has nothing else to add.  He waits for his moment of glory where he can parrot long ago discredited talking points.  That's probably the highlight of his day.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (February 28, 2007 10:39 pm ET)
             

          THE INTERN IN QUESTION WAS A LEGAL 21 YEAR OLD ADULT. SHE WAS ABLE TO DRINK, VOTE AND MAKE STUPID MISTAKES. CLINTON WAS NOT HER FIRST AFFAIR WITH A MARRIED MAN, REMEMBER THE COUPLE SHE BABYSAT FOR? THE ONLY PERSON THAT SAID THAT CLINTON MOLESTED HER WAS PAULA JONES AND I HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING THAT.

          HOW WAS THE WAR IN KOSOVOAL ILLEGAL? Even if the war was illegal, which I don't believe, at least his did it right!! Are we still losing American lives each day in Kosovoal? How many innocent lives are we losing each day in Kosovoal?  Were we 90% of the force used in Kosoval? 

          YOU CAN BET YOUR LAST DOLLAR IF THAT WAR WAS ILLEGAL EVERY REPUBLICAN  IN OFFICE WOULD HAVE USE IT TO GET CLINTON.

           

          Report Abuse
    • Author by njguy93 (February 28, 2007 6:37 pm ET)
         

      If it was bad during the Clinton years, it is ATROCIOUS during the Bush years.  Yes, Larry, let us remind the American people what it was like during the Clinton years.  Actually, they already know, which is why Bill Clinton would win in a landslide if he were able to run again for President.  People realized their mistakes.  They thought, "I voted for this idiot George Bush because I was mad at Clinton for getting a BJ in the Oval Office?, What is wrong with me, he can get all the BJ's he wants, I just don't want an incompetent fool like this man to ever get anywhere near the the Oval Office ever again." 

      It was mainly "like that" because the Republicans went to every low avenue possible to try to get Clinton, and they couldn't do it.  This whole tone started with Gingrich and the Gang back in the mid 1990's.  They were the ones who started this, and now they complain about the tone against Bush.  What goes around comes around.  The Clintons are not angels, and certainly they did certain things which gave excuses to the Republicans to go after them like rabid dogs, but what they did to Clinton was what they are now accusing Democrats and Liberals of now doing.

      There was peace and prosperity during the Clinton years, and yes, he did try in a pre-9/11 world to fight Al-Qaeda, while distracted with the Republican witch hunts.  He actually did want to take some more extensive military action, but he could not because he was afraid of being accused of wagging the dog.  There were mistakes by many people of both parties in dealing with terrorists and terrorism in the years before 9/11. 

      I'm not saying Clinton was perfect in dealing with Al-Qaeda, but he could only do so much in a world before 9/11.  There was a bill that Clinton supported which would have helped to disrupt terrorist financial networks, but it was opposed by the Republican Congress.  Clinton was also accused of wagging the dog when he bombed Iraq and Sudan.   

      THANK YOU.

      njguy93@yahoo.com 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by tman418 (February 28, 2007 6:51 pm ET)
         

      Damn facts! They are liberally biased too!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by hogprint (February 28, 2007 7:22 pm ET)
         

      The affair question was credible, especially in light of the times.  As alluded to above, as soon as they (Bill & Hill) agreed to an interview where I'm sure they knew it was coming, it became fair game. 

      It was just four or five years earlier that Gary Hart's presidential bid was derailed for the same type of action.  Hiis problem was there were pictures.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Pragmatic Liberal (February 28, 2007 7:34 pm ET)
           

        Actually, Clinton never denied the flowers affair.  When asked the question in the 60 Minutes interview, he admitted to "causing pain in my marriage".  Everyone at the time knew what that meant.

        Hart was drubbed out of the race because he was wimp.  He couldn't stand the heat.  Clinton, on the other hand, thrives under adversity and was able to weather the storm. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 28, 2007 11:11 pm ET)
             

          WRONG

          Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

          Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (March 01, 2007 12:37 am ET)
               

            Stop it Jeter, I feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by jeter2 (March 01, 2007 6:54 am ET)
                 

              Haha Sorry about that Beach ;-)

              I'm afraid Persistent...uh Pragmatic Liberal brought out that stubborn streak in me I don't often display here. But I just couldn't let his/her MIS-information go unchallenged.

              Report Abuse
          • Author by open_mind (March 01, 2007 1:43 am ET)
               

            Jeter,  after seeing your correction for the third time, I had to tell you that I agree with you completely.  I admire your persistence as well.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by jeter2 (March 01, 2007 6:59 am ET)
                 

              Thanks Open_mind :-)

              The thing is I don't really even give two hoots about Clinton's indiscretions BUT I felt the need to correct Pragmatic Liberals MIS-information on the subject.

              Hey I'm not a fan of Hillary Clinton but I stuck up for her on 2 threads yesterday. Guess the never ending battle for Truth, Justice & the American way are my goals here...oh wait does that make me Superman? :-O

              Well I'm gonna go test that theory out and see if I'm faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.

              I'll get back to you on that ;-)

              Report Abuse
      • Author by open_mind (March 01, 2007 1:39 am ET)
           

        I agree with you.  The people have a right to know that information.  However, personally I do not find it all that important.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 28, 2007 8:19 pm ET)
         

      HONESTLY...?

      There aren't too many men who will fess up to an affair with a trollup... unless they really want out of their marriage. If the guy is in public life, unless you've got video of him doing her, forget it... he's not copping to anything. Just the way life works in the real world... Clinton got caught and he did what most men would do...  "Honey, you gonna believe me or your lyin'eyes?" 

      Actually I always kinda felt a little sorry for Clinton because it's like he was always making up for lost time. He was a fat poor kid in a little town in Arkansas and I'll bet he wasn't exactly a babe magnet in high school. He gets elected governor, has lost weight, gets a hip haircut and he can't the women off with a stick. Of course, he's gonna succomb... he was deprived in high school. I'll bet we don't know the half of what (or whom) he did as President.

      But otherwise he was a damn good President and the rest is between him and Hillary.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (March 01, 2007 2:48 am ET)
         

      " . . .I don't buy the 'none of your business' defense, its fair for the public to scrutinize one's character for the office of the President." - Bruce1Ace

      Yep, I agree, Brucey . . . heck, if only we had examined just a little closer the character of a hard-drinking, cocaine-abusing, AWOL, Connecticut/Texas Rich Kid . . .

      But I guess its a little late for that now, ain't it . . . just as it should be a little late to continue examine the character of a president who's been out of office more than six years . . .

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.