R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. falsely asserted Clinton's "experience ... includes lying under oath, and obstructing justice"
Research ››› ››› LAUREN AUERBACH
In a Washington Times column, R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. wrote that Sen. Hillary Clinton's "experience ... includes lying under oath, and obstructing justice." But Clinton has never been charged with, let alone found guilty of, "lying under oath" or "obstructing justice."
In a January 25 Washington Times column, American Spectator founder and editor-in-chief R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. wrote that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) "experience ... includes lying under oath, and obstructing justice." In fact, Clinton has never been charged with, let alone found guilty of, "lying under oath" or "obstructing justice." Following a lengthy investigation into the firings of White House Travel Office employees -- often called "Travelgate" -- the Office of the Independent Counsel issued a report in October 2000, which found that, while her 1995 statements to the counsel denying involvement in the firings were "factually false," the report concluded that "the evidence is insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either Mr. [former White House director of administration David] Watkins or Mrs. Clinton committed perjury or obstruction of justice during the course of their testimony before GAO [General Accounting Office], the Congress, and this investigation." The author of the report, Independent Counsel Robert Ray found that "there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mrs. Clinton's statements to this Office or to Congress were knowingly false." The report also stated that "[t]he decision to fire the Travel Office employees was a lawful one "
From the summary of Ray's report:
With respect to Mrs. Clinton, the overwhelming evidence establishes that she played a role in the decision to fire the employees and provided input into that decision to Watkins, [former White House chief of staff Thomas F. "Mack"] McLarty, [former deputy White House counsel Vince] Foster, and [Clinton friend Harry] Thomason. Thus, her statement to the contrary under oath to this Office was factually false. The evidence, however, is insufficient to show that Mrs. Clinton knowingly intended to influence the Travel Office decision or was aware that she had such influence at this early stage of the Administration. To a real degree, her interest in the matter was first generated by Thomason's intervention, and then overstated by him to others. Thus, absent persuasive, corroborated, and admissible evidence to the contrary, there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mrs. Clinton's statements to this Office or to Congress were knowingly false.
Tyrrell is the author of several anti-Clinton books, including The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House (Thomas Nelson, March 2007) and Boy Clinton: A Political Biography (Regnery, September 1996), both of which feature a series of unverified claims about the Clintons.
From Tyrrell's January 25 Washington Times column:
Thitherto, Mr. Obama was the antiwar candidate, the herald of change, the first black candidate to present a plausible campaign for residency at 1600 Pennsylvania. Almost overnight Boy Clinton was casting doubt on Mr. Obama's antiwar bona fides, his honesty and the viability of his presidential ambition. He called it a "fairy tale." Hillary, with her famous tin ear, was slighting Martin Luther King Jr. and doubting Mr. Obama's experience was sufficient for the rigors of the presidency.
No one was frank enough to mention her experience, which includes lying under oath, obstructing justice, slandering such collateral damage of the Clinton Saga as Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, and the fair Monica, and finally forget not her cattle futures bonanza. For that matter, no one was frank enough to say her husband (who in a plea bargain before leaving office admitted to lying under oath, gave up his law license, and paid a $25,000 fine) was unfit to judge Mr. Obama's honesty.
The immediate aftermath of Hillary's slim victory in New Hampshire was the Clintons v. Starr all over again. The race card went into play and the gender card -- all this in a Democratic primary. The only element missing from the Clintons' overwrought 1990s was Hillary's discovery of a "vast conspiracy," but there is still time. Wait until the action shifts to California where the paranoid style inspires some of Hollywood's greatest contemporary masterpieces.