Favorite

President Clinton is inevitable 

Fearless prediction: no legalistic deus ex machina will descend to save the nation from the dread specter of President Hillary Rodham Clinton. No cigar-smoking duck like the one on the old Groucho Marx program, no Kenneth Starr-style "independent" prosecutor, no criminal indictment over her "damn emails," no how, no way.

Ain't gonna happen.

Voters who can't bear the thought of the former first lady, U.S. Senator and Secretary of State taking the oath of office in January 2017 are going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: Defeat her at the polls.

Those impassioned Trump supporters holding "Hillary for Prison" signs are sure to be disappointed. Again. Played for suckers by a scandal-mongering news media that declared open season on Clinton 25 years ago, and haven't laid a glove on her yet.

Which doesn't exactly make her Mother Theresa. But it does lend credence to former New York Times editor Jill Abramson's somewhat surprising column in The Guardian to the effect that when push comes to shove, "Hillary Clinton is fundamentally honest and trustworthy."

Surprising because from 1992 onward the New York Times has been de facto World Headquarters of what I've always called the "National Bitch Hunt." However, after spending years probing Clinton's "business dealings, her fundraising, her foundation and her marriage," Abramson's been forced to conclude that said investigations all came to naught.

And whose fault it that? Why Hillary's, of course. "Some of it she brings on herself," Abramson thinks, "by insisting on a perimeter or 'zone of privacy' that she protects too fiercely. It's a natural impulse, given the level of scrutiny she's attracted, more than any male politician I can think of."

Well, some might argue that the years-long scrutiny of Bill Clinton's zipper is comparable. However, being wrongfully labeled a "congenital liar" in the Times 20 years ago certainly might teach a girl to play her cards close. If not, being accused in a dear friend's suicide (Vince Foster), might tend to make her, oh, a tad mistrustful of the press.

But enough ancient history, although few of the 40 percent of Democrats who tell pollsters they don't trust her know it. Abramson is also right to say that Hillary "was colossally stupid to take those hefty speaking fees, but not corrupt. There are no instances I know of where Clinton was doing the bidding of a donor or benefactor."

Even as somebody aware that Bill and Hillary Clinton have donated roughly $18 million in speaking fees to charity, I find the sums Goldman Sachs paid her preposterous. But payola?

As the late Molly Ivins put it: "As they say around the Texas Legislature, if you can't drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, and vote against 'em anyway, you don't belong in office."

But back to Hillary's emails. From the onset of the Clinton Wars, it's been my experience that when the corrections and retractions reach critical mass and the "investigative" articles start to read like Henry James novels — i.e., diffuse and impenetrable — the end of a given "scandal" episode is near.

Last July, the New York Times got things started with an anonymously sourced exclusive claiming that federal investigators had initiated a "criminal" probe into whether Clinton had sent classified documents on her personal email server. Almost everything important about the story was false. It wasn't a criminal investigation, nor was Clinton a target.

Rather, it was a bureaucratic exercise to settle an inter-agency dispute about which messages to release — as Clinton herself had requested. The Times was so laggard about making corrections that Public Editor Margaret Sullivan thought readers "deserve a thorough, immediate explanation from the top."

They never got it.

Now comes the Washington Post with an interminable 5,000-word narrative anchored by an "eye-popping" claim that according to "a lawmaker briefed by FBI Director James B. Comey," a small army of 147 FBI agents was at work deciding if a crime had been committed.

That one fell apart overnight. Last time I checked, NBC's sources said maybe a dozen agents are involved — an order of magnitude fewer than the Post claimed.

Meanwhile, the American Prospect turned to former Homeland Security classification expert Richard Lempert. Currently a Michigan law professor, Lempert pointed out that there are two big problems with the idea of charging Hillary.

First, we don't have ex post facto laws. You can't classify something tomorrow and charge somebody with leaking it yesterday. If you could, working for the State Department would be like inhabiting a cubicle in Orwell's Ministry of Truth. Nobody would ever be safe.

Second, the job of secretary of state entails considerable powers: "Not only was Secretary Clinton the ultimate authority within the State Department to determine whether ... information should be classified, but she was also the ultimate authority in determining whether classified information should be declassified."

Another ballyhooed scandal goes up in smoke.

Favorite

Comments (9)

Showing 1-9 of 9

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-9 of 9

Add a comment

More by Gene Lyons

  • More on pits

    Some years ago, I visited the local Boys Club early one morning. There had been a break-in.
    • Mar 16, 2017
  • Trump: not so smart

    You know, along with having the impulse control of a 7-year-old boy, it's becoming increasingly clear that Donald J. Trump just ain't real smart. He's a cunning self-promoter, but dim. He did manage to go bankrupt in the casino business, you know. That's really hard to do.
    • Mar 9, 2017
  • No love for pit bulls

    I once kept eight beagles in my backyard. When my wife complained, I'd tell her to choose which ones needed to go. It was a pure bluff: Some were prize-winning field trial hounds, others house pets. However, they all had eager, loving hearts, and she knew all their names.
    • Mar 2, 2017
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • Trump and political correctness

    So I see where candidate Donald Trump and former Gov. Sarah Palin are complaining about "political correctness," the supposedly liberal sin of being too polite to tell the unvarnished truth. Me too. I've always laughed at the follies of self-styled "radical" left-wing professors.
    • Sep 3, 2015
  • Not again

    This just in: Nothing boosts circulation or enhances ratings like a sex scandal.
    • Jan 14, 2016
  • Never wrong

    Quite a few people make noises about leaving the country if the wrong person gets elected president. I've been making discreet inquiries in the vicinity of Kinsale, County Cork, myself — from whence my people emigrated after 1880.
    • Apr 21, 2016

Most Shared

Latest in Gene Lyons

  • More on pits

    Some years ago, I visited the local Boys Club early one morning. There had been a break-in.
    • Mar 16, 2017
  • Trump: not so smart

    You know, along with having the impulse control of a 7-year-old boy, it's becoming increasingly clear that Donald J. Trump just ain't real smart. He's a cunning self-promoter, but dim. He did manage to go bankrupt in the casino business, you know. That's really hard to do.
    • Mar 9, 2017
  • No love for pit bulls

    I once kept eight beagles in my backyard. When my wife complained, I'd tell her to choose which ones needed to go. It was a pure bluff: Some were prize-winning field trial hounds, others house pets. However, they all had eager, loving hearts, and she knew all their names.
    • Mar 2, 2017
  • More »

Visit Arkansas

Forest bathing is the Next Big Thing

Forest bathing is the Next Big Thing

Arkansas is the perfect place to try out this new health trend. Read all about the what, why, where and how here.

Event Calendar

« »

March

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Most Viewed

  • Worse than N.C.'s bathroom bill

    SB 774 extends birth certificate requirement to bathrooms in all public facilities, and that's an original birth certificate, too.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: More on pits

    • Of course you don't care. If you cared, you might want to find a solution…

    • on March 24, 2017
  • Re: More on pits

    • Enough! I don't care if it is the dog or the human factor. The end…

    • on March 24, 2017
  • Re: More on pits

    • Well, news article require facts, something the Lyin's isn't too good about. As for opinion,…

    • on March 24, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation