Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton

Gathered together in one place, for easy access, an agglomeration of writings and images relevant to the Rapeutation phenomenon.

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 5:47 am

Part 1 of 2

CHAPTER SEVEN: TERROR CAMPAIGN

WHEN THE STORY BROKE, I had been in the cottage -- in my wonderful, secluded piece of heaven -- for about five months. My safety had never been an issue. I had never felt unsafe there when I was alone. But I suddenly felt very vulnerable in my own house. And when that happens, it is terrible to live without a sense of security. And it happened constantly. A lot of it was little stuff, but some of it got very scary. Through a series of what some consider minor events, my sense of safety eroded.

After Drudge ran my story, it was on television and everything hit the fan. After a few days, I finally called the sheriff because people were knocking on my door and I felt defenseless. Once the deputies got out there and saw where I lived, they realized that I could have a problem because they were not close. The sheriff's office was fifteen miles away from my house. Because they were so far away, the deputies drove by at night to check up on me.

I was new in Powhatan and didn't know anybody, but I started to hear that, after I would leave a store, strange men would walk in after me and say, "You know who that was, don't you?" They would ask the merchants what I bought and how I paid, looking for any information they could find. The merchants did not tell me right then because they didn't know me. But the next time I came in, or if I ran into them a couple of weeks later, they would say, "Oh, did I tell you ... ?"

Since I had moved into a smaller house, I was trying to make room in closets, cleaning things out and organizing my little cottage. I took some clothes to a consignment shop in town. Less than a week later, I went back in and the woman in the shop said, "Boy, you should've seen the guy who came in after you left." She thought it was weird that somebody would walk in and ask her if she knew who I was and what I bought. But she didn't know about everything else that was going on, so she didn't do anything about it until she saw me again. I told her my FBI guy would be calling her.

Things like that started to happen a lot. I sensed I was being followed and started looking in my rearview mirror, asking myself if a car had been behind me a while, or thinking I recognized a person from earlier in the day.

The Mechanic

I'd sold most of my furniture with the other house, and was starting to decorate the cottage. I had ordered a rug and was heading out to pick it up. I was excited and in a hurry. My little white Subaru Outback was parked in my driveway at the top of the walkway steps, forty feet from my kitchen door. I hopped in and took off. The dirt road seemed extra bumpy, but I was in a hurry and distracted, so I didn't think much more about it. But when I got to the paved road, my car made a lot of noise. I got out and looked, and one of my tires was pretty flat. I decided to just drive it to the tire shop. I know it can ruin the rim, but it was only a few miles away and I thought I could make it.

When I pulled in, the men at the shop rolled their eyes. "You drove it here?"

"Well, yeah," I said. "What else am I going to do?" After all, I was in a hurry.

The mechanic went to work on my tire while I waited for my car. It was late in the morning on a sunny September day, and I sat out in the sun reading the paper. Finally, the guy came out and said, "Can I show you something?"

I followed him to my car. "Have you been anywhere, like in a construction area or anyplace like that recently?" he asked me.

I wracked my brain. What have I done the last couple days? "No," I said.

We stood under the lift and he showed me my tire. "I've never seen anything like this before," he said. "There are a lot of nails in these tires, especially the sidewalls."

I was trying to think of where I might have been where someone had dropped nails. People have been known to do things like that. But I clearly remembered where I'd been and I hadn't been near any construction.

And then he said, "It's just got to be a nail gun that did this. It looks like someone has punctured your tires with a nail gun. They are full of nails."

Only one tire had already gone flat, but three of them were punctured, full of nails.

He said to me, "Do you have any enemies?


"Well, possibly," I said.

As I left, I thought, What the hell is this all about? The best I could figure was that it had happened at my house. Somebody had come down in the middle of the night and shot my tires full of nails. And that was only the beginning.

I later found out that at about the same time that my tires were punctured, my best friend's tires were also punctured. She lived in Richmond, on the other side of town, so we didn't see each other often, but we talked on the phone all the time. Now and then we would get together for long visits. Either I was followed to her house in town or she was followed home from visiting me. Either way, "they" knew who she was and where she lived. And presumably, they hoped that terrorizing her would send me another message. To this day, she believes that, as my friend, she was also a target.

Later, when the FBI got involved, I told them about my tires. "The tires went to a recycle center and were ground up before we could recover them," said FBI agent Dennis Alvater. "However, in talking to the professionals in the tire shop, they'd never seen anything like that." Alvater said that, in one of the front tires, there was a grouping of approximately nine nails in an area the size of a fifty-cent piece. In the other front tire, there were approximately four nails in a similar grouping. A rear tire had approximately three nails. "All of the nails were consistent in size and type," he added. Based upon the description and grouping of the nails, the investigators speculated that the person had used an airless, portable trim nail gun. The agent also noted that some of the nails punctured the sidewalls of the tires. "You just don't pick up nails in the sidewall of a tire," Alvater said. "The number of nails, pattern, and consistent nail type suggested that the damage was deliberately done. It's not like somebody threw a bunch of nails on Kathleen's driveway and hoped they would puncture her tires." [1]

Telephone Men

I started to hear all kinds of clicks and interference on the phone. Out where I turned off the main highway onto the dirt road, I noticed a telephone box. And all of a sudden, I saw a lot of activity at that box.

Finally, I stopped and asked the telephone repair man, "What are you doing here? Why am I all of a sudden seeing people here?"

''I'm just working on the lines."

I said, "Are ya'll doing something, because I'm getting all kinds of noise and clicks on my phone."

He just said, "No."

I was exasperated. I never told people who I was but, finally, I said, "Let me show you something." The local newspaper ran an article about me that morning. I said, "Look, that's me." I showed him my picture in the paper. "And I'm getting all kinds of interference on my phone. Now, do you need to tell me something? Who are you? What are you doing here?"

"Ma'am," he said, "I don't know what you're talking about." There was a Verizon truck parked there, so I decided to let it go.

Shortly after that, I sat in my office writing bills on a really hot, humid afternoon. The phone rang and a number came up on caller 10. I answered and the man said he was calling from my power company, VEPCO.

"Is this Kathleen Willey?" he asked me, verifying my address.

And I said, "Yes."

"We're getting ready to turn your power off to work on the line," he said. "We just want to make sure you don't have any invalids or seniors or infants in the house before we turn off the power."

"Nope," I said. "It's just me here." Just cats and dogs, and they were all lazing around in the afternoon heat.

"All right, then, we're going to cut the power off in a few minutes," he said. "It'll be off for about thirty minutes or an hour."

"Okay." I didn't think twice about it.

As the afternoon went on, it got hotter than the hinges of hell and I thought, I wonder when they're turning the power off After a while, I realized the power was never turned off. Finally, I thought, All right, this is bogus.

I looked up the number that had come up on caller ID. I called the number and it just rang and rang. Then I called VEPCO to check, but it wasn't them. So I called Dan and I said, "There's something weird going on here ...
"

Bullseye

On Election Day in November, a month before I was to give my deposition, I opened my front door and let Bullseye out. A sweet old cat, he was thirteen years old. He didn't go out much anymore and, when he did, it wasn't for long. He never went far and he always came right back. But not that day. That day, I watched Bullseye jump off the porch and I never saw him again.

I watched election returns and wondered where he was. The next day, I called a few neighbors to see if they'd seen a yellow tabby, a big guy with a red collar. If you lose an animal, the people around here will look. We're all animal lovers, and they knew how I felt. But all the homes were spread far and wide, surrounded by many acres of woods. No one had seen my cat.

I felt bad for Patrick, because he always thought of Bullseye as his cat. Eventually, I had to tell him and he got really angry at the thought that someone had harmed our old cat.

I was shocked when people later mocked me for being upset about Bullseye. People made terrible jokes about him, as if a cat isn't just as much a family pet as a dog. People would have been outraged if he had been a dog! Lucianne Goldberg, for one, made a really snotty remark on a talk show. I was incensed. I tracked her number down and called her. "You know, you don't have any right to make fun of my poor cat like you did today," I said. "Really! He was our pet!" She backed down and apologized right away.

Judge Merhige

My deposition was coming up on December 5. I was scared. I didn't want to give it.

Adding insult to injury, I had a herniated disc in my neck that had bothered me for years and was exacerbated by the stress in my life. I was going to have surgery about a month later, but on the evening of December 3 my neurosurgeon called with a sudden opening in his schedule. I could have my surgery on the morning of the fifth. I told my doctor that I was supposed to give a deposition that day, but he advised me that I should have the surgery. So I agreed.

Dan informed Judge Merhige and the Jones attorneys, asking to reschedule my deposition for January 10, 1998. The Jones attorneys arrived on December 5 anyway and accused me of performing a stunt to avoid the deposition. Did they actually think I would invent a ruptured disc? Did they think I fooled the chief of neurosurgery at the Medical College of Virginia into performing invasive surgery on me just so I could get out of giving a deposition? Judge Merhige called Dr. Young, who satisfied him that I needed the surgery. The judge postponed the deposition. I had another month.

Patrick surprised me and came home for Christmas. We didn't have a Christmas tree or a single decoration, but I was happy and it hastened my recovery. It was my first Christmas in my little cottage in the woods and, although Bullseye was gone, I had Patrick there. For a while, there was peace on earth.

The Jogger

It was Thursday, two days before my deposition. I'd had a fitful night and awoke very early. Still recovering from surgery, I suffered from insomnia. I had to wear a cervical collar around my neck and was always uncomfortable, so I had trouble sleeping and was often awake at first light. A longtime runner, I felt lethargic and out of shape. My surgeon agreed that careful and moderate walks would help my recovery. I started walking in the early morning, sometimes just as the first hint of daylight broke the night.

I walked about an eighth of a mile up my driveway to my gate, where my mailbox had been, and passed my closest neighbor's house. Through the forest, the house is about five hundred yards from mine and in the winter, when the trees are bare, I can see its lights at night.

I walked along the road, the dirt crunching under my feet. It was still early and quiet. The bats and owls finished their night chatter as my dogs and a rambunctious puppy rambled along with me through the cold morning. Just up the road a piece, I turned right, taking a road that had a few houses on it, maybe one every hundred yards or so. I usually walked to the end of the road where it came to a dead end.

I was about half a mile from home when a hint of light softened the eastern sky through the foggy, gray morning. In the distance, I saw a man jogging toward me from the dead end of the road. As I was relatively new to the neighborhood and still hadn't met all my neighbors, I assumed he lived somewhere around there since he approached me from the cul de sac. Dressed in dark sweats, running shoes, and a plain dark baseball hat, he slowed as he got near me. We walked nearer to each other.

"Hey, Kathleen, how are ya?" He stopped before he reached me. My dogs milled around, sniffing the ground.

"Good," I said. We stood talking, several feet apart.

"Hey, did you ever find your cat?"

"No, he never came home and I still look for him all the time. He was a member of the family and I really miss him." Then I stopped and added, "Why, have you seen him?"

"Yeah, that Bullseye, he was a nice cat." He said, "He was a really nice old cat."

"Yes, yes he sure is." I said.

I started to wonder how this stranger could have known my cat's name.

"It's a shame, and I just have no idea what happened to him," I added. "Well, did you see him?"

I started to feel uneasy. How would he know he was a nice cat?

So I asked, "Who are you?"

He didn't answer. His eyes were fixed on me and he looked serious. I felt more uncomfortable. After a moment, he spoke again.

"Did you ever get those tires fixed?"

Whoa -- how did he know my tires had been vandalized a few months back? I didn't think I'd told any of my neighbors. I felt the hairs stand up on the back of my neck and a sickening feeling welled up in the pit of my stomach.

"Who are you?" I demanded.

"And how are your children doing? How are Shannon and Patrick?"

I got chills, felt a lightness in my head. I thought, Where are my damn dogs? They were just milling around, oblivious to my sense of danger. And I was so far from home. Where was the nearest house? It was about six thirty in the morning and still quiet. I stepped back from him.

"My children are fine. What's it to you?" I tried to sound assertive to hide the fear in my voice. I didn't want him to know that I was scared.

He continued, seeming a little more at ease. Then he asked about good friends of mine and mentioned their two children by name.

Oh God! The realization suddenly exploded in my consciousness. He means me harm! He means my loved ones harm!

"Who are you? What do you want?"

I backed away, trying to be careful not to trip and fall and reinjure my neck. I called the dogs. I was shaking from fear. My legs felt like they were frozen in place. They wouldn't move. A flurry of thoughts clogged my mind. Did he have a gun? Oh my God, this guy is going to shoot me! And who would know? He might even hurt my dogs! Where could I go? Was anyone awake nearby? Would anyone hear me scream?

As I backed up, he walked toward me. He was closer to me now. He looked at me, hardness in his eyes. He spoke deliberately and quietly.

"You're just not getting the message, are you?"

I wanted to get away. I knew I had to get away from him as fast as I could. I had to get home. I turned my back on him and ran, my neck immobile in the collar, my feet like lead. About fifty yards up the road, I stopped to catch my breath. I turned around to see if he was running after me. He was gone. I never saw him again.


As best I could, I ran all the way home, not thinking about the damage I might have done to my neck. I was desperate to get back to the house, to Patrick. Then I remembered that Patrick had gone away for the weekend.

I didn't know what to do. I brought in the dogs, dead-bolted the doors, and locked all the windows. I had resisted getting a security system, but that day I wished I had one. And I wished I had a gun. I was in danger. My children were in danger. My friends and their families were in danger.

I sat in my living room and thought, This is a whole new ballgame ... and I am out of my league. He knew my routine. I was being watched. I was frightened to death.


Should I tell? Should I be silent? Would we be harmed if I went to the police? What was the best way to keep everyone safe?

I started to understand. He was there to scare me, to let me know that I was being watched. But it was more than that. I realized that Bullseye's disappearance was part of it, that the damage to my tires was part of it. And the noises on my phone. It was all part of their message: Keep your mouth shut. Don't talk about the incident in the Oval Office.

I decided not to tell anyone, not even Dan.


Frightened beyond words, I could not sleep for two days. I knew someone was watching me because the jogger knew my routine. I felt more vulnerable than ever. I realized I had no protection. He had harmed or killed Bullseye. He had threatened my children. Who's going to protect them? Who's going to protect me?

"You're just not getting the message, are you?"

I should lie during the deposition on January 10. Go in there and just lie.

Uncle Bob

Two days later, on January 10, 1998, Dan and Uncle Bob went with me to the federal courthouse in Richmond, Virginia. Judge Robert Merhige told me that this was the first time in his long stint on the bench that he had opened his courthouse on a Saturday. He wanted to avoid a media event and succeeded. There was no one in sight except a marshal for security. Nobody had heard about it.

Trying to mediate a settlement, the judge sent Dan and me packing for two hours, then we met with Uncle Bob back in Dan's office for a quick lunch. The three of us sat there eating when Bennett's cell phone rang. "Yes, sir," he said. Then, turning to us, he said, "Excuse me, my client is on the phone." I thought, So, Bill Clinton is calling him down here asking him how things are going. I felt he was calling for my benefit, to let me know that I was on his radar and he was keeping an eye on things. I felt really intimidated by that. Bennett said, "Yes, sure ... Yes, sir, I will certainly give her your best."

I gave my deposition in a conference room in the judge's office suite. I had a large audience: Judge Merhige, two Jones lawyers, Bob Bennett, Dan, various law clerks, and the video camera operator. I danced the dance for about two hours. A classic hostile witness testifying under threat of contempt charges, I was as evasive as I could be. Having been a lawyer's wife, I knew how to dance around their questions, to avoid revealing what had happened. I evaded, I said I didn't remember, on and on, blah, blah, blah. Even Dan noticed it. He had never seen me so evasive. Trying to stay within the parameters of the law, I was doing anything I could think of to get out of Clinton's mess. It took the Jones lawyer a long time to just get me to say that Clinton gave me a cup of coffee in the back room. He had to ask me step-by-step questions to get me to admit that he hugged me when I was leaving the private office. He asked if there was any kissing involved.

I said, "There was an attempt." I only answered each specific question, volunteered nothing.

Finally, the lawyer thought to ask, "Did Mr. Clinton attempt to touch your breasts?"

"I think so."

So the lawyer followed up. "And what is the basis for your thinking so?"

I said, "I have a recollection of that."

"Was he successful?" the lawyer asked.

"Yes."

It went like that for quite a while.

The Jones lawyers got totally exasperated. Finally, so did the judge.

Later, even the FBI said I was very evasive. Of course, that's what I wanted to be. They said that I seemed to contradict myself, but I don't remember that. I may have a few times because I was just trying to get out of it any way I could. I did not want to have to tell the story.


Dan asked for a recess. "Let's go talk," he said. We went into the jury room and sat down. He looked at me and said, "Are you ready for this?"

"I don't think I have a choice here," I said. "So I guess I'm as ready as I can be."

We returned to the conference room and Dan asked Judge Merhige to ask all the interns and law clerks to leave.

I did not cave. I told my story.

The judge grew pale. He couldn't believe it.

I looked at Uncle Bob. He was dumbstruck. Totally blindsided. He looked as if someone had kicked him in the gut. He had no idea of the actual facts. Until that moment, he never knew what Clinton had done to me. His face turned red. His eyes narrowed. He began to perspire. The worm had turned. No more Mr. Nice Guy, no more "Uncle Bob." I had broken the code of silence. It was war.


Bennett had the opportunity to cross-examine me and he could hardly collect himself. His re-direct was brief and pained. "Well, so, what you're saying, Mrs. Willey, is that the president made a pass at you? It was really just a boorish pass, wasn't it?"

I gave him an icy glare. "Hardly."

The judge put everyone under a gag order. "This better not leave this room," he said.

But the session had been videotaped. Each of the parties -- Bennett, the Jones lawyers, the judge, and Dan -- would get a copy of the videotape. And the video operator was sworn to silence under penalty of death.

My brilliant lawyer said, "Your Honor, we don't need to look at it. We'd like you to keep our tape in your safe, with yours."

The judge looked at everyone and said, "This tape better not see the light of day or else I'm coming after people."

After my deposition, I got home when it was getting dark. I'd been invited to my first party in the neighborhood and I found the strength to go. It proved to be a good distraction. Everyone was very casual and welcoming. I liked them. That was the first time I met everybody and actually had a conversation with my next-door neighbor. I had been staying to myself after everything broke in July and I think a lot of my neighbors didn't know who I was. They didn't connect my face with the pictures and didn't know my last name. So I didn't mention the remarkable events of my day and it turned out to be a relaxing evening. I almost felt normal. After all, doesn't everyone swear under oath to a devastating story about the president of the United States before going to a neighborhood party?

"Once Kathleen was deposed in the Paula Jones case," Dan said, "we made every effort to keep information from her deposition away from the media." But Judge Susan Weber Wright, who presided over the Jones case in Arkansas, allowed certain information to become public if filed with other pleadings in the case. According to Dan, "We were notified that substantial portions would be attached to a motion for summary judgment filed by Don Campbell on behalf of Paula Jones," and this meant that the information was going to be made public the following week. [2] The video was attached to the documentation that was going to be released to the public.

It was on the street in seventy-two hours.

After my deposition, Uncle Bob was no longer my friend. In fact, he was clearly my enemy. I never spoke to Bob Bennett again.


Skull

On Monday, two days after I was deposed, I was home alone. Just as the sun was coming up, I opened my front door to let my dogs out. On the porch in front of me was a new horror. A small animal skull was lying on the bricks staring at me. It was bare bone, empty, dry, sitting a few feet from the door. It was the size of a cat's skull.

I thought of Bullseye. Had they had killed my wonderful old cat?

It was payback.

I didn't know what to do with it, and I thought, "I just can't deal with this." I got so mad, I went around to my backyard and I threw it into the woods as far as I could throw. I was really angry -- about the cat specifically, but generally about the scare tactics. I thought, I will not give in to these people!

But I was afraid to tell anybody. I was fearful that it was Bullseye and I didn't want to know. I didn't want to think that somebody would kill a cat -- kill my cat -- to intimidate me. So I didn't tell any officials about the skull right away.

When I finally did tell them about the skull, the FBI came out and found it. "We looked for shoe prints," said FBI investigator Dennis Alvater. "We looked around in the woods for any evidence of people watching the house. I wasn't able to find anything ... " But they did learn that the skull was not Bullseye's. It was a raccoon.


Cats, of course, sometimes drag small rodents to the porch, or bring home similar little gifts. But before this incident and since, not one of my animals has ever brought home any animal bones, and a dog or cat certainly couldn't present a raccoon skull with its face perfectly facing my front door. Besides, my habit is to have all the animals inside the house with me at night. I knew my pets did not put it there.

Later, I watched The Insider, a movie about a witness in a case against "Big Tobacco" and the reign of terror aimed at getting the witness to back away from testifying. The witness opened his mailbox and there was a bullet sitting there. It was a constant campaign of weird things going on. The witness felt like he was being watched. He just knew it. Jack Paladino, one of the Clintons' infamous private investigators, played himself in that movie, doing background research on the witness. I watched that movie with the hair standing up on the back of my neck and thought to myself, Boy, do I know about this!

Clinton

On January 17, Clinton gave his deposition in the Paula Jones case. It took a couple of weeks, but on March 13 portions of his deposition were released. Clinton testified that he never tried to kiss me and never touched me inappropriately. He denied all of it. He remembered that I was "quite agitated about family problems when we met" and he alluded to my financial difficulties, my distraught state, and my husband's suicide, as if it had already happened before I went to see him. In trying to console me, he said, "I embraced her, I put my arms around her, I may have even kissed her on the forehead." But he claimed that my allegations of a sexual encounter were not true. When Paula's lawyers asked him, "You deny that testimony?" Clinton answered, "I emphatically deny it. It did not happen." [3]

The Jogger

Two weeks after I gave my deposition, I told Dan about the jogger. He was shocked.

The FBI investigated it in February, after I became a cooperating witness.
"I absolutely believe that the jogger did occur," said FBI agent Dennis Alvater, but he also said, "We were never able to identify the jogger." Alvater recently said he "always felt Kathleen was one hundred percent honest about that" and pointed out that I passed a polygraph test that included questions about the jogger.

Alvater's partner in the investigation, Jerry Bastin, was a retired FBI agent working for the Independent Counsel as an independent contractor. Jerry said, "We never discovered, to our satisfaction, who it could be. I suspect there's somebody else who knows the identity of the jogger that we did not become aware of, and there are probably other people who knew the identity and did not, of course, come forward."

A year after the jogger confronted me, Jackie Judd, a reporter with ABC, sent Dan a photograph of a man whom she suspected was my "jogger." A lot of people suspected him. His name was Cody Shearer.

Shearer's twin sister, Brooke Shearer, was director of the White House Fellowship Program and she was married to Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott. As Talbott's brother-in-law, Cody Shearer once decided he was going to go save the world from war criminal Radovan Karadzic, one of the awful Bosnians who led the Serbian bloodshed that left hundreds of thousands of people dead or missing. Cody went there making diplomatic passes and setting up meetings with Karadzic's lieutenants. Though he was just Strobe Talbott's brother-in-law, he tried to pull off the impression that he worked with Talbott and the State Department. According to an article by the Associated Press, "The Bosnian Serbs persuaded Shearer to support their goal of partitioning Bosnia." The State Department flipped and went to pains to convince Bosnia's government that Shearer was acting on his own, not for the United States. [4]

While he was there, Shearer became big news in the European press and the newspapers published his picture. Jackie Judd with ABC had a colleague in Europe who saw Shearer's picture in a paper and sent it to her.

Jackie was working on my story and had found out about a private investigator, Jared Stern, who said he was positive that I had told the truth -- that the jogger had approached and threatened me. Jackie had been talking with Dan frequently so she sent the picture to him and Dan gave it to me. He caught hell from the FBI for giving it to me without telling the investigators first, because then they couldn't have me do a proper lineup.

[b]Still, after all those months, I looked at the picture and I thought it was Shearer. I had spoken with the jogger for a few minutes, looking into his eyes when he threatened my children. I do not think I would forget such a man's face!

The man in Judd's photo was Cody Shearer, who had direct ties to the Clintons. At some point he had worked for Terry Lenzner, who owned a Washington D.C. investigation firm, Investigative Group International. The FBI investigators looked into it thoroughly. On the one hand, I was told that Shearer had an "airtight" and "ironclad" alibi but another source told me that it was "uncheckable." In fact, when prosecutors for the Office of the Independent Counsel questioned Clinton aide Sid Blumenthal on it, he said that Cody Shearer "was in California during the so-called jogging incident, had the documents to prove it." In fact, Blumenthal claimed that Shearer's seatmate on a "trip back from Los Angeles to Washington happened to be former secretary of state Warren Christopher." [5] David Schippers, chief investigative counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, said he did not think it was Cody Shearer. "I think they recruited somebody to come up from Arkansas," he said. So I do not know who the jogger was. All I know is that I was up against the Clinton machine, which had unlimited power and money. With those resources, I figured any alibi -- or any "jogger" -- could be arranged.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 6:28 am

Part 2 of 2

Monica

After my deposition, I was in the middle of a media storm.

One evening I came down the road toward my house and there was a car sitting on the side of the road, just outside my driveway. I pulled up next to the car. "Are you looking for somebody?" I said. "What are you doing here?"

"Ah, no," they said. "We're kind of lost ... "

"Oh really?"

They didn't recognize me, and I drove on through my gate and down my driveway. That's when they realized it was me and they had missed their shot. They called from their cell phones and begged me, "Please, please, please talk to us!" They were from a New York newspaper. "Our editor is going to be really mad if we come back without an interview."

That kind of thing happened a lot, but it was nothing. The media storm was about to become a hurricane. Barely two weeks after my deposition, on January 21, I turned on the Today Show and looked into the face of Linda Tripp. A major story had hit the news: Clinton had had an affair with a White House intern and, indeed, Linda was smack in the middle of it. She was close friends with the intern -- Monica Lewinsky.

I thought, Monica? Monica ... It was so familiar. I'd heard that name. I thought back to the conversation I had on the phone with Linda, when someone else had beeped in.

I called a mutual friend who had worked in the Counsel's Office with Linda and me and I said, "Are you watching television this morning?" The press cornered Linda coming out of her house and she looked awful. My heart sank. I felt bad for her. The images of Linda at that time were selected to make her look more ominous.

"Those horrible photos helped the White House defame me," Linda acknowledged in a 2001 article in George Magazine. "I wanted to sink into the earth, disappear, come out different-looking. I tried to change my appearance many times to make it less offensive, but I didn't know how. Which is why I decided to have plastic surgery." [6]

Late-night television dished out a steady stream of jokes and said terrible things about her. The press was brutal to her, just brutal. I felt sorry for her. She was always down on herself about her appearance, so that must have been an extremely bad time for her. The press made fun of everything, from her hair to her clothes to her nose. Nothing was off limits.


Linda had two teenagers and her relationship with them up until that time had been like typical mothers with teenage children -- not good, just constant battling. But the media was so mean that her children rallied to her. And they really did.

Linda was also trashed for betraying her friendship with poor young Monica. Linda later commented on that. "Friends don't ask friends to commit a crime," she said on Larry King Live in 1999. "The notion that I would bastardize my values, my sense of integrity, for a young woman with whom I had worked for a year and a half and commit a crime was not ever an option." [7]

Early in the scandal, Clinton confided in Dick Morris, who later wrote that Clinton said, '''Ever since I became president I've had to shut myself down, sexually I mean,' he told me. 'But I screwed up with this girl. I didn't do what they said I did, but I may have done enough that I cannot prove my innocence.'''[8]

As the scandal steamrolled, Morris conducted a survey for Clinton "that indicated while the voters would, indeed, forgive the adultery, they would not overlook perjury," he wrote in Rewriting History, a Hillary biography. "Misunderstanding my advice, he decided to keep on lying. And he did it in the most emphatic way possible, wagging his finger on national television." [9]

"My own feelings about the Clintons changed as I saw their tactics in defending against impeachment," Morris wrote. "I could not countenance the Clintons' use of secret police digging up dirt on innocent people, a tactic that turned my stomach." [10]


Linda

Clinton's credibility and defense suffered another blow when the press found out about Monica Lewinsky's "talking points" memo. Monica had given it to Linda Tripp on January 14, telling her what to say to the grand jury about my incident in the Oval Office. Monica claimed to have written the "talking points" herself but the notion that Monica wrote the document was widely discredited. Nearly everyone agreed the memo was "far too complicated" for Monica. It also contained information about which Monica would have had little knowledge.

In essence, the memo told Linda to say that nothing had happened to me in the Oval Office. It told Linda, "You now do not believe that what she claimed happened really happened. You now find it completely plausible that she herself smeared her lipstick, untucked her blouse ... " [11] Branding me the liar, the memo told Linda that Monica was going to lie, the president was going to lie, and Linda must do the same.

Finally, in 1999, Linda Tripp came clean. Appearing on Larry King Live, she set the record straight. "What I would like to get across if nothing else," Linda told King, "is the fact that I became aware, in July of '97 when the Kathleen Willey story was just beginning to surface, that the president did call a meeting at the White House, summoned Monica late at night to that meeting ... for one purpose, to get me to sign on to the lie ... about Kathleen, not about Monica." [12]

It is likely that Clinton gave Monica the "talking points" memo at that meeting. It is also likely that he was the author.


Linda added that after the Drudge Report came out, she was "being solicited to commit a crime." She said, "Remember ... I wasn't asked to commit a crime because of Monica Lewinsky. It was all about Kathleen Willey. And Monica to the extent that she was having an intimate relationship with the president was my friend, passing messages to me, from the president: You must lie. You must lie. You must be a team player. You are a political appointee. This is how you save your job." [13]

To confirm, King asked Linda, "The felony they wanted to commit was?"

"Perjury for him in the Paula Jones case," Linda replied, "which had nothing to do with Monica. It had all to do with Kathleen Willey." [14]

"I had the information," Linda continued. "I knew I was going to be deposed. I knew I was being set up by the president and his lawyer as a liar, had been already in the media," Linda told Larry King. "Let's not forget what I was facing. I'm going to lie, he's going to lie, we are all going to lie. If you don't lie, perjury, jail, or worse. There were threats." [15]

In fact, Linda received some very ominous messages. Monica "began relaying implied threats from the president about my safety, the safety of my children," Linda told Nancy Collins of George Magazine in 2000. "That the Clintons would always know my whereabouts, and ... I would never be able to stop looking over my shoulder. That losing my job would be the least of my worries." One time, she said, before the president's deposition in the Jones case, "Someone left a 'body count' on my chair at work ... a list naming the people who were dead ... in close association with the Clintons." [16] There was a note that read, "Thought you might find this of interest," attached to the paper, but the handwriting was not Monica's.

Joanne

I was glued to the television. Morning until night, I flipped through the channels, dreading it all and thinking, What are they saying about me now? After a few days, Patrick came in. "Mom, you're out of here!" he said. "You have got to get out of here. Just go lie in the sun someplace." He bought me an airline ticket.

I had heard about the Turks and Caicos Islands in the Caribbean from Nate Landow. Of course, Nate stayed at the Parrot Cay Resort, which is popular with celebrities, but I found an affordable bed and breakfast. When I arrived, the proprietor, Joanne, met me at my bungalow. "Don't worry, Mrs. Willey, I know who you are," she said. "I have a relative who is with the Secret Service and I assure you, you'll be safe here."

I was dumbfounded. I was in the middle of nowhere and this woman knew who I was? Here I was going to get the hell away from all this, and she had family who worked for the federal government? So much for anonymity. It freaked me out!


The islands were a great place, though, and I found peace and tranquility there for a week. Joanne ran a little motel and a few bungalows. Mine was remote, which was perfect. The room was dreary and sparse, but it was quaint, clean, and it was on the water! For six days I relaxed on the beach, read, and walked. I felt like a chip in a vortex and I pondered my future. I breathed in my surroundings, the beautiful breeze and the aqua water -- a color I'd never seen before. Joanne proved supremely helpful and friendly, driving me from my bungalow to her dining room for meals twice a day.

On the fourth day, Joann showed up unexpectedly. "You've got a big emergency," she said. "Dan's calling."

Oh my God! I thought, Why would he track me down? Why would he call me here? I jumped in her car, wondering what had happened. I had given him the number for emergencies. I got on the phone, out of breath, dry-mouthed, and shaking, trying to steel myself for whatever news I was about to hear.

"Well," Dan said, "we've been invited to the dance."

What a way to put it! I had been subpoenaed to testify before Ken Starr's grand jury.

But there was more.

"Uncle Bob called me today," Dan added. "He said you'll be needing a criminal attorney. He recommended Plato Cacheris."

"Why the hell do I need Plato Cacheris?" I snapped. "He's one of the best criminal lawyers in Washington! Why would I need him? I have done nothing wrong!"

I felt threatened by the suggestion. To me, his implication was obvious: If I told my story under oath, I would be in big trouble. I would face perjury charges. Dan didn't see it as a threat, but I absolutely did.

"Bob suggested that I was out of my league," Dan later said. "He told me that Plato Cacheris should represent Kathleen," and that Cacheris would do it. But, Dan added, "I told Bob that Kathleen had not committed any crimes and that she certainly could not afford Mr. Cacheris. Bob told me that money was not an issue, that it would all be taken care of." [17]

A few months later, on Larry King Live, Bennett's story was at odds with Dan's. Bennett told Larry King that he called Dan and said, "Dan, I wouldn't come down to Richmond and close a commercial real estate transaction. You better get somebody who knows this business." Bennett also told Larry that Dan "asked me for a recommendation, and I gave him a recommendation. I gave him a very fine lawyer, I gave him Plato Cacheris." [18]


Dan eventually talked to Cacheris, a very expensive lawyer, who told Dan, "Money is not an issue here." Regardless, by June of 1998, Cacheris was busy. He was representing Monica Lewinsky! [19]

Julie Steele

I frequently went to Dan's office to meet with FBI agents and federal prosecutors with Ken Starr's investigation. As a cooperating witness for the Office of the Independent Counsel, I was interviewed and questioned on many occasions for eight or nine hours at a stretch. They took notes in longhand on yellow legal pads, with no recording devices whatsoever -- at least not that I knew of. Those agents probably questioned me for more than seventy-five hours total. It was exhausting.

During all this questioning, they asked me about a relationship I'd had in 1995 with a younger man who was a soccer coach, a couple of years after I lost Ed. I had a hard time in this relationship and I confided this to Julie Steele. He hurt me, and I wanted to shake him up and make him think twice before he treated another woman as badly as he treated me. So, after a while, I lied to him and told him I was pregnant. It was stupid and wrong, the worst mistake I've ever made in a relationship. When the FBI asked me about that relationship, I was ashamed of it -- embarrassed about what I had done -- and I denied everything. I did not know it at the time, but even if you're just answering FBI agents' questions, it is a felony to lie to them. If I had known that, I would have just told the truth because I wasn't as interested in concealing it as I was embarrassed and didn't see the relevance. Were I Hillary Clinton, I might have said, "I think those questions are out of bounds," as she did during her Senate race when reporters asked her about a rumored affair with Vince Foster. [20] Or I could have mimicked the Clintons' favorite legal response, "I do not recall." But I didn't. I lied. And Julie, who was already being romanced by Clinton's team, had told the FBI about my lie to the soccer coach and the FBI found him. The prosecutors now had to "rehabilitate" me as a witness. Later, I passed their polygraph test, which resolved the issue of my credibility for them, but it didn't help in court. And I was upset again with Julie Steele for betraying my confidence. The episode was the kind of thing women only tell other women, if anyone.

On my way in to one of the meetings with the investigators, I parked my car in the garage and caught a fleeting glimpse of Julie. I called out to her. She could have kept on walking, but she came back and talked to me. We exchanged greetings.

"What are you doing here?" I asked her.

"Oh, I'm here on business."

I said, "I just have to ask you, Julie, why did you sell me out to the Enquirer? Why did you do that? You took my secrets, things I trusted you with, every picture we'd ever taken with me and Ed and the kids ... What were you thinking?"

"Oh, I don't know," she said. "The story was already out, and everybody knew what was going on. It was no big deal."

It was one day after Drudge ran the story! But she blew it off as if she hadn't done anything wrong.


Soon after that, all the lawyers in Richmond were together at a bar meeting. When it ended, Jim Roberts, one of the top lawyers in the city of Richmond, sidled up to Dan. Jim and Ed had known each other well for years. Dan didn't run in the same circles as Roberts did, so Dan didn't know him.

Roberts said to Dan, "One of these days we've got to sit down and talk about this Julie Steele thing."

"Anytime," Dan said. "Anytime ... "

"She'd come to see us and we talked to her about signing an affidavit," Roberts told Dan. "And all I can tell you is she got some phone call from Washington and all of a sudden she was in a big hurry to get down here to sign that affidavit."

So when I saw Julie in Dan's parking lot that day, she wasn't there on business. She was there to see Roberts, to sign that affidavit about me!

Julie had blown into Richmond wanting people to think that she was from high society. When I met her in 1978, she wanted me to think that her family owned Ashland Oil. At the time I didn't have any reason to doubt it, but years later I found out that her father only worked there. Just a nobody from Nowheresville, Julie came from Ashland, Kentucky, but she preferred a prettier story.

Her grandmother left her some antique jewelry, and Julie was always making a big deal about going to get the "family jewels" out of the safety deposit box at the bank. I think she probably grew up relatively privileged, but she certainly wasn't anything that she portrayed herself to be.

In fact, Julie's life was not pretty. She told me her mother was an alcoholic before she died, and then her father came out of the closet -- and this was back when nobody came out of the closet, much less your father! Julie was really sick with anorexia. And her husband, John, left her for another woman.

Julie always wanted to climb the social ladder, wanted to be on the inside and involved in politics, but she never quite got there. She begged me to get her a job as a White House volunteer, which I never considered. Still, she perpetuated the image that she was filthy rich. The truth was, she was more like me, a soccer mom. Julie had a little more education than I did -- a college degree or close to it -- but it was hard for her to find a job. We both went through that. And she had mortgaged her house to the hilt after her husband left her.

So we were friends, girlfriends, and I trusted her, told her everything, and she told me her secrets, too. But she was pure drama. Julie lived in a world of high intrigue, blaming all of her troubles on her gay father, drunk mother, and anorexia. With a stack of self-help books on her bedside table, she was always victim to the designer disease of the month. A few times I got exasperated and didn't talk to her for a few years but eventually I let myself get sucked back in.

One time after I hadn't seen her for a year or two, I was pumping gas and saw her going into a 7-Eleven. She was nearly fifty years old -- and pregnant!

"Wow!" I said, "Are you married?"

"No," she said. She had gotten pregnant and decided to have the baby so she "wouldn't be lonely anymore." She told me how dramatically things had changed since we'd had our babies back in the 1970s. She was going through Lamaze and loving every minute of it. But they missed something on the amnio. When the baby was born, his days were numbered. A very beautiful baby, he died when he was three days old. Julie was a mess. She had the viewing in her living room.

She was desperate to get pregnant again and tried everything before finally deciding to adopt. She went to Romania. She told me she literally drove from village to village to find somebody who wanted to give up a baby and found a young girl willing to do that. Money changed hands. Julie brought the infant home and named him Adam.


Michael Radutzky

All the press wanted me to talk to them, to go on their shows, and they romanced me. They constantly schmoozed me, looking for anything to motivate me to do an interview. 60 Minutes did the biggest schmooze job on me, using my relationship with Julie Steele to get me on their show.

The 60 Minutes producers went to Dan first. Dan told me that they were in Richmond and wanted to talk to me about doing 60 Minutes. So I met with the producers, Michael Radutzky and Trevor Nelson. They had spent a month in Richmond and had a notebook full of information. They told me that they had figured out why Julie Steele wouldn't corroborate my story, why she had branded me a liar. Julie had a reason.

Radutzky and Nelson said, "We have every reason to believe" that White House advisor Mickey Kantor, a close friend of Bill Clinton's, had been seen in Richmond a number of times. They said they had evidence that Kantor had found out that Adam's adoption was not legal. They told me that the Clinton people were strong-arming Julie, threatening to expose that the adoption wasn't valid. They assured me that the evidence was strong and Radutzky expressed his own disgust at the Clinton machine.

"No mother should be threatened with the loss of her child," I said to Radutzky. "No mother! I don't care what Julie did to me. That's her child."

It was an "aha" moment for me. "Now I get it," I said. "Now I see what's going on." As angry as I was at Julie for selling my picture to the National Enquirer, I finally understood why she was lying about me.

I wanted to expose the Clinton administration's tactics in threatening Julie and her son. Judge Starr had asked me not talk to the media until after I testified, so I agreed to do 60 Minutes after my grand jury appearance on March 10. We set the interview for March 12 at a suite in the Jefferson Hotel in Richmond. It would air on Sunday, March 15. Dan, my attorney, sanctioned the interview, though we had nothing in writing about its scope. We didn't ask to see the proof behind their story that the Clinton people were blackmailing Julie. We trusted the 60 Minutes producers to air the story as they presented it to us, which was a serious mistake.


Julie

I was caught up in the biggest legal case in American politics and my friend Julie had sold me out to a tabloid and called me a liar. But the story Radutzky told me made me sick. I decided to call Julie.

I said, "I know why you're doing all this. I've just been told that you've been threatened with Adam's adoption. I know that somebody from the White House went to the Romanian embassy. I know the whole story." I told her I would support her and that I wanted to expose the truth about Clinton's strong-arm tactics.

She freaked out. "How do you know that? Nobody's going to take my baby!"

"I'm just telling you," I said, "I know why you're doing this, and you know what? I don't blame you! If these people are holding this over your head ... "

I didn't know it at the time, but by then Julie was already the darling of the White House. She had agreed to contradict my testimony and they loved her for it. And Julie loved being loved. Though she was strapped for money, she suddenly had a powerhouse Washington lawyer, Nancy Luque, who happened to be an attorney for the DNC and was close to Hillary. Julie put up a website at the time to solicit money for her legal fund, but I imagine her legal bills were "taken care of," the same way Uncle Bob had recommended Plato Cacheris to me, saying money wouldn't be an issue.

So I was up against it and they got me. With Luque holding her hand, Julie claimed that I was the one who threatened her child. With her lawyers, she claimed that I had told Ken Starr about the adoption questions and that Starr threatened her, told her that if she didn't tell the truth they were going to take Adam away from her. It was all lies. I know Ken Starr as a prosecutor and as a man. He is a good man who would never do such a thing.


The Grand Jury

On March 9, Patrick and I checked into a Washington hotel, using assumed names. The next morning, the FBI picked us up in their van and drove us to the Alfred J. Prettyman Federal Court Building. Hordes of press awaited us.

I appeared before the grand jury while Dan and Patrick waited in the hall. I testified all day with a lunch break and shorter breaks in the afternoon. A few jurors fell asleep in their chairs. Patrick went out for a short walk and the press swarmed him. During the last break, the jury forewoman took me aside, out of view of the others. "I want to commend you," she said. "I believe you and I think you are a role model."

The next day, I opened up USA Today and my picture was on the front page. I was what they call in the business a "get." Every news organization wanted to talk to me.

Ed Bradley

On March 12, I taped the 60 Minutes show at the Jefferson Hotel in downtown Richmond. Ed Bradley interviewed me and he covered the blackmailing of Julie Steele, but he was much more interested in the details of what Clinton did to me. Dan watched the interview on a monitor with Radutzky and Nelson. When it was over, Radutzky said to me, "Kathleen, you are a national hero!"

But, as Dan says, "The 60 Minutes producer, Radutzky, significantly misled us regarding the story that they were going to tell. They told us that the emphasis would be on Ms. Steele and the pressure brought on her by the White House." [21] It sure as hell didn't happen that way.

On Sunday morning, March 15, I disappeared to the Florida Keys to be away when the show aired. It was a great place to go. I was in a new relationship, which was exciting, and I tried to enjoy the Florida sun and forget what I left behind. Seeing myself talking to Ed Bradley on national television felt like an out-of-body experience. It overwhelmed me. There was nothing about Julie, not one word about her or the blackmail! They didn't air that story at all. It was all about the incident in the Oval Office.

Dan called me after the show. He was livid. "Where's the goddamn story?"

In hindsight, it's possible that Radutzky's blackmail story was only part of a strategy to get me on the air. He and Nelson had been in Richmond for a month doing their homework and talking to Julie Steele. They may well have seen Mickey Kantor in Richmond, or knew that he had been there, and maybe they had heard a rumor that he was threatening Julie. I don't know what evidence they had to substantiate the story they told me. But to this day I think it was true. I don't think 60 Minutes producers would lie about something that significant to get me on their show. I don't think they would go that far. I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

A former CBS News producer recently told me that "guys like Radutzky do these kinds of things." When a story emerges about a novice like me, a producer will work on the details of the story and while doing so also uncover something else. They bring that side story to the subject they're after -- like me -- and say, "Look what we've uncovered!" They'll share the information and the subject will fall for it, just as I did. They do their story and then they abandon you. The former CBS producer told me Radutzky has a habit of doing this. [22]

Clinton and his people did not want to attack me too directly, because I wasn't the "usual" kind of accuser. I was a Democrat. They couldn't play the "right-wing conspiracy" song and dance about me. And since I was a widow, a White House volunteer, and a Clinton fundraiser, they couldn't paint me as a slut either. They had to treat me more discreetly. But they smeared me nonetheless.

The administration sent their soldiers to saturate the airwaves with attacks on me and my motives. White House advisors launched a quiet campaign against me, anonymously speaking to reporters about my background, intimating that I was so emotionally distraught, that I was confused by our encounter.

But Kelly Ann Fitzpatrick and other conservatives argued on my behalf. Appearing on Hardball with Chris Matthews the day after my 60 Minutes interview aired, Fitzpatrick said, "If they start attacking Kathleen Willey, even subtly, as overemotional and so distraught that she mistook the president's comfort and patent trademark hugs and a kiss on the forehead, I seem to think that, even in the darkest moments of despair, when a man fondles your breast, you're not confusing it with a hug and some comfort." [23]

Patricia Ireland also went on the offensive. "I've already seen in the newspapers here an anonymous quote that she 'only wanted to hang around with the president.' We've seen comments that she was a 'remarkably untalented woman for the positions she got.' I mean I think already the attacks are coming," Ireland charged. "I don't think that they're going to undermine the credibility of her demeanor, of her apparent lack of political or financial motivation, and the reality that she did not want to come forward with her story." [24]

Their careful strategy started with Clinton's statements of confusion and disappointment, which made him look like a victim. Like a broken record, Clinton's denial of my allegations was constantly played on television. "I have said that nothing improper happened," Clinton said, looking dismayed. "I am mystified and disappointed by this turn of events and I have a very clear memory of the meeting and I told the truth."

The next day, I saw on the news that the Clinton administration had released the letters I'd written to him. I was shocked! Many months earlier, the Jones lawyers had subpoenaed Clinton for any and all material relating to me but the White House provided only vague excuses and couldn't produce my letters. But once I appeared on 60 Minutes, voila! Like magic, they found them.

It felt awful. I kept thinking, That's not for public knowledge! I wrote those letters to him. Once again, I felt betrayed. All those years I'd helped Clinton and the Democrats, all those years of my life, all the time, money, effort, and passion that I had devoted to Democratic causes -- and they repay me by humiliating me?

The media, no doubt encouraged by the Clinton machine, characterized my letters as "adoring" and "admiring," zeroing in on incidental words, such as when I told Clinton I was his "number one fan" when I thanked him for helping us defeat Oliver North in Virginia, or when I signed my letters "fondly," which I always did. I didn't save that for Clinton. Florence Graves and Jacqueline Sharkey wrote in the Nation, "Questions about Willey's credibility surfaced when the White House released a stack of effusive letters she had sent Clinton." [25] Not one of my letters could accurately be characterized as "effusive" but that certainly didn't stop them from attempting to undermine my credibility.

They also misconstrued a telephone message that Nancy Hernreich gave the president from me. As Bill Plante reported on CBS Evening News, "Two days after the incident there is a phone call record saying that there's a message from Kathleen Willey telling the president, 'You can call her any time.'" [26] The White House, the reporter, and many others failed to note that this call was not just two days after the incident, but also two days after my husband's death. That was the day when Nancy Hernreich called me and told me she was sure the president would want to speak with me. I replied, "He can call me anytime."


Patricia Ireland eventually defended my letters to Clinton -- sort of. She argued that I could have been assaulted by Clinton and subsequently written the letters. "I think the letters are an indication that she wanted to not burn those bridges," Ireland said, "which in some apparent sense may be the only allies and resources that she thought she had." [27]

"This is every woman's fear in a workplace with a superior male boss," said Kelly Ann Fitzpatrick on Hardball with Chris Matthews, "creating some type of a hostile work environment where you feel like you can't ask certain questions, you can't be alone with the boss, you can't show up certain times, you can't wear certain clothes ... " [28]

Everywhere I turned, pundits used the letters to malign my credibility and refute my account of the incident. People seemed to accept the interpretation that since I tried to remain on good terms with Clinton after the incident, it must not have happened. But that presumes that what Clinton did to me was so devastating and traumatic, I should have been terrified of him and hated his guts. If he had raped me, obviously, I would likely have felt that way and probably would have left my job at the White House. But Clinton did not rape me. My experience with him showed me what the man is capable of and warned me to be mindful of the potential danger he presented. But he did not victimize me! Clinton violated my person. In fact, he sexually assaulted me, which is a crime. But I was not traumatized by it. He degraded himself in my presence and I was embarrassed for him. Unfortunately, starting in their teenage years, many women have experienced similar abuses. It was wrong and slimy and predatory, but it was not devastating. I never saw myself as his victim. And I still needed the man's professional help. Why in the world would I have cut off all communication -- to my own detriment?

Few people understood that, at that time in my life, Clinton was the only person who could help me. I was desperate after Ed died. My whole world crashed in on me. I was a soccer mom who didn't finish college and I had just lost my husband. I wasn't trained to do anything other than be a homemaker and work in politics. I needed a job, so I turned to him.


I never asked for this fight. I decided that I was going to act like it hadn't happened because I never wanted anyone to know what he did to me that day. I told only my closest friends. Other than them, it would have gone to my grave with me.

"Kirk"

Patrick called. He was staying at my house while I was in Florida. He told my boyfriend, "I think you need to hear something." Patrick played a message that had been left on my answering machine. It was a man's voice. "My name is Kirk," he said. "And I just want to warn you, there are people out there who want to hurt you. I will call you back tomorrow night." That's all he said.

I couldn't hear their conversation, but I could see that it was serious. "What?" I said. "What's going on?"

"Never mind," my boyfriend told me. I never heard the recording. The FBI was interested in it and took my whole phone because it was digital, not a tape.

The next night, two female FBI agents from Miami drove down to the Keys and brought in elaborate electronics to trap the call and automatically diverted my calls from home to Florida. We sat late into the evening and talked, but he never called again.

I figured he lost his nerve. Whoever he was, he had been hired to rattle me, to let me know that I was being followed. And he broke every rule of the private investigators' code of conduct. I mean, PIs don't notify their subjects and tell them to be careful. Do they?

I stayed in Florida for three weeks while my boyfriend ran his charter business in the Keys. He was out working every day and I relaxed, read, and talked to friends on the phone. I finally became bored stiff and said, "Look, I need a project."

He had built a sailboat, the Egret. It was a beautiful wooden boat, his labor of love. "The Egret needs sanding," he said with a hopeful tone.

"Well," I said, "tell me what that's all about."

He set me up with a hand-held sander and a face mask and I ground away on that boat for hours on end. It was a great stress reliever, just mindless sanding. I came to understand why people fall in love with wooden boats. You just can't fall in love with fiberglass, but I sure fell in love with the Egret.

When I finally left Florida, some people in the airport recognized me. On the airplane, nobody said anything to me, but when the plane landed, the whole crew stood at the cockpit, saying "Bye-bye" over and over as all the passengers deplaned. When I walked by them, they all said in unison, "We believe you."

That really got me. I almost started to cry.

In the months after Drudge leaked my story, my life turned upside down. The world that I had started to rebuild was once again threatened by invasions of privacy and threats to my security. The media firestorm made me a figure of public notoriety, which compromised my freedom to lead a normal life, which I desperately wanted and needed.

But the firestorm would not abate. I had aroused the ire of the Clinton administration and was about to bear the full force of its fury. Through their henchmen and minions, Bill and Hillary Clinton would wage nothing less than a media war to undercut my credibility and the credibility of any woman who dared tell the truth about Bill's sexual advances. That war would reveal the chronic hypocrisy of those who advocate for women's rights, as none of them -- not Democrats nor feminists nor Hillary Clinton, an alleged promoter of women's rights -- would come to the aid of the women he had assaulted. It was me versus the machine, and I was scared.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 6:30 am

CHAPTER EIGHT: SMEAR CAMPAIGN

"EVERYBODY IS FAIR GAME, simply for being on the other side," Sid Blumenthal wrote in the New Yorker when the Clintons were moving into the White House. "Humiliating one's prey, not merely defeating one's foes, is central to the process." No doubt this nasty blueprint for political success struck a chord with Hillary. According to Carl Bernstein, who wrote the Hillary biography A Woman in Charge, "His was a message that Hillary could embrace, along with its author." She hired him. [1] Blumenthal helped write some of Clinton's speeches and, in 1997, went to work in the White House as assistant to the president.

And assist he did.

By the time Bill and Hillary were up to their necks in Whitewater and Jones and Monica and me, Blumenthal concluded and collected "copious research on almost every aspect of the political, professional, and private lives of Starr, his prosecutors, the Paula Jones gang, the Republicans in Congress ... and ... the individual mercenaries of the right." [2] He would eventually be questioned in detail as to how he went about collecting that "copious research."

When Monica's story came out, Blumenthal cheered blindly for his team. Like a cult follower, he blamed Hillary's vast right-wing conspiracy. "The right-wing politics that had forced the scandal were alien and unknown to much of the White House senior staff," Blumenthal wrote in The Clinton Wars, his eight-hundred-page account of his years in the Clinton White House. "To them, what the right was doing seemed far-fetched, so impossibly convoluted, that they couldn't quite credit it." [3] It was quite a stretch of the imagination that White House aides would swallow the story that my testimony -- and Monica's and Paula's and Gennifer's -- were creations of right-wing politics, but the Clintons' brainwashed minions chose to swallow it. And Hillary's boy Sid served up the bait.

The techniques of spin include:

• Non-denial denial
• Phrasing in a way that assumes unproven truths, or avoiding the question[5]
• Misdirection and diversion[6]

-- Spin (Propaganda), by Wikipedia



What will later be known as the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy begins on the left as a group of progressive students at the University of Arkansas form the Arkansas Committee to look into Mena, drugs, money laundering, and Arkansas politics.

-- Arkansas Connections, by Sam Smith


Blumenthal says, "Part of my duty as a good soldier, first knight, was to try to get the right story out. I felt I had to go into a journalistic mode, but I couldn't be a journalist myself. I could suggest information, ideas, and leads to writers willing to examine them rather than follow the story line as Starr set it out." Thus he admitted -- and justified -- his dissemination not of facts, but "ideas" and "suggested information," particularly about Monica Lewinsky and me. [4]

Blumenthal said Clinton told him that Lewinsky was a "stalker" who had come on to him. And Clinton had, of course, rejected her. Word of Clinton's characterization of Monica as a stalker happened to leak out and Monica naturally heard it. Needless to say, she didn't appreciate it. But how did it leak out? Starr eventually subpoenaed Blumenthal, demanding to know which journalists he'd spoken with about the Monica scandal -- and what he had told them. Of course, he denied giving any reporters any information about any of us.

In his bio of the Clintons, "Sid Vicious" even glazed over the White House debate and decision to violate federal privacy laws and release my personal letters. Busy in Puerto Rico at the time, Sid implied that, while attending a conference there, he danced the conga and drank rum at a Bacardi party. [5]

He was, in fact, in Puerto Rico, but he was actually having frantic long-distance conversations with Hillary in the White House. With my damaging 60 Minutes interview imminent, they discussed my letters. According to Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch, it was Hillary, in concert with Sid, who approved the release of my private letters -- in violation of federal privacy laws. When Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch filed suit against Clinton, he obtained responses to interrogatories from many of the key players inside the White House. In his response to the Klayman action, Blumenthal acknowledged that he had conversations with senior White House staff about the letters but he "cannot recall with whom he had these conversations, nor precisely when." [6]

In an intriguing twist, George Archibald, writing for the Washington Times, pointed out that while Hillary denied any involvement in Filegate, her role in the release of my letters is indicative of Hillary's misuse of White House files. According to Archibald, Judge Royce C. Lamberth said "misuse" of materials from my White House file "could prove to be circumstantial evidence of file misuse aimed at the [Filegate] plaintiffs." [7]

Klayman alleged, "Sidney Blumenthal and Mrs. Clinton also participated in, recommended, and furthered the release of the letters." Blumenthal's response to the interrogatory validates this. "On or about March 14, 1998, Mr. Blumenthal left on an official trip to Puerto Rico. While in Puerto Rico, on March 16, 1998, Mr. Blumenthal spoke to Mrs. Clinton by telephone. Mr. Blumenthal recalls that he and Mrs. Clinton discussed Ms. Willey's letters to the president, and that the letters were inconsistent with what Ms. Willey had said on 60 Minutes. Both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Blumenthal agreed that the letters should be released." [8]

Urging the press to discredit me, Sid Vicious told reporters that, while my poll numbers looked good then, I would have no credibility by the end of the week. He turned out to be psychic. Blumenthal would have America believe it was a coincidence that the press suddenly had my letters and other private information about my past. It must also have been a miracle that the exact words the president used to smear Monica Lewinsky to Blumenthal were also all over the news.

Clinton's chief advisor Bruce Lindsey was also involved in releasing my files to the public. In responding to a Judicial Watch interrogatory, Lindsey revealed that when he learned from Linda Tripp that I had spoken to Isikoff, he mentioned it to Nancy Hernreich, who told him she had seen my letters to the president. Nancy gave the letters to Lindsey, who kept them in a drawer in his office! Before the 60 Minutes interview aired, the White House received a transcript, which Lindsey reviewed. Lindsey then called Clinton at Camp David "to advise him of the recommendation to release the letters. The president concurred in that recommendation."  [9] Lindsey began preparing to discredit me a year before I was dragged into the public eye! [10]


Cosby's legal team has already taken swipes at Constand's past statements, calling them "riddled with numerous corrections and inconsistencies," and Hostin believes they will continue to do so.

"The defense's strategy will be to say that she willingly took the drugs because she wanted to engage in sexual activity with Cosby," she said. "I think the defense will be that she targeted him for his money and that she didn't behave like a victim of sexual assault, because after this alleged [incident], she saw him again."

The fact that Constand didn't report the alleged incident to police for a year will likely be a factor, too. Though Hostin, who has prosecuted sex crimes herself, said that it's not uncommon for a victim to take time to process what happened before talking to law enforcement, some jurors might find it to be problematic.

-- Bill Cosby: What's Next For His Sexual Assault Trial, by Lesley Messer


Hitch

Author and columnist Christopher Hitchens, a friend of Sid's at the time, reported that he had a conversation with Blumenthal over lunch on March 19, 1998. A journalist who then had twenty-six years of experience, Hitchens was both a social friend and "journalistic acquaintance" of Blumenthal's. Hitchens's wife, Carol Blue, also came to lunch.

According to Hitchens, they discussed me. Blumenthal acknowledged that my "poll numbers were high but would fall and would not look so good in a few days." More recently, Hitchens confirmed, "The way he spoke about Kathleen Willey suggested that she would soon be discredited." At the time, Hitchens thought Blumenthal's remarks didn't seem significant so he "didn't pay very close attention." Hitchens assumed that my fall from grace would take the form of an accusation of a "cash for trash" book. But, Hitchens added, "I particularly remember that he said he could go to jail for what he was doing." [11]

Questioned under oath about discrediting me to Hitchens and other journalists, Blumenthal flat-out denied having done any such thing. In his book, he said of Hitchens's account, "I had no recollection of saying that or anything like it." [12] As a result, Hitchens was further drawn in to the ordeal. In February of 1999, he provided an affidavit about the conversation.

Hitchens wanted to testify against Clinton, not against his old friend. In the affidavit, he didn't include Blumenthal's comment that he could go to jail for what he was doing, but iterated that he and Blumenthal met over lunch and "Blumenthal had stated that Monica Lewinsky had been a 'stalker' and that the president was 'the victim' of a predatory and unstable sexually demanding young woman." In fact, Hitchens said, "Mr. Blumenthal used the word 'stalker' several times" about Ms. Lewinsky, and "advised us that this version of the facts was not generally understood."

In his affidavit, Hitchens also said that, "During that lunch, Mr. Blumenthal stated that Kathleen Willey's poll numbers were high but would fall and would not look so good in a few days." While Blumenthal later defended himself by saying that he regarded Hitchens as a friend, not a journalist, Hitchens added in his affidavit, "I have knowledge that Mr. Blumenthal recounted to other people in the journalistic community the same story about Monica Lewinsky that he told to me and Carol Blue." [13] In response to Klayman's Judicial Watch interrogatory, Blumenthal admitted that he left a message for Jill Abramson, a New York Times reporter, about my letters. [14]


About the calls between Hillary and Blumenthal in Puerto Rico, Hitchens would only add, "Yes, I seem to remember something about Puerto Rico also. But I know more than anyone else on this." [15] Tellingly, after nearly ten years, Hitchens doesn't have much affection for the Clintons. "The prospect of a Hillary presidency," he told me, "makes me want to puke." [16]

Bob Bennett

I returned to Virginia to face the music. The White House had gone into damage control mode even before I appeared on 60 Minutes. Phone calls and faxes were flying the whole weekend of the show. In his response to the Klayman interrogatory, Bruce Lindsey said that "members of the White House Counsel's Office," including deputy counsel Cheryl Mills and White House counsel Charles Ruff, met to discuss my letters. Mike McCurry concurs. He responded that he did not participate in meetings, but believed they may have happened. [17]

Before my interview even aired, Bennett campaigned to get 60 Minutes not to run it. He told Michael Radutzky and Ed Bradley that I was unreliable and called me a "fucking floozy bimbo flake." That's my buddy, Uncle Bob! When that didn't work, Bennett threatened to sue CBS. Then he and Clinton's press spokesman Mike McCurry met with 60 Minutes executive producer Don Hewitt. Hewitt offered the president a full hour of rebuttal. Clinton declined. Instead, the White House sent Bennett himself out to badmouth me.


I probably won't ever know if Bennett and others pressured 60 Minutes to leave out the story of Julie being blackmailed. The producers may have decided that the salacious story of Clinton's assault in the Oval Office was more important, a sexier story.

The day after my 60 Minutes interview aired, Clinton took the gloves off. "Nothing improper happened," he said at a high school, of all places, in suburban Silver Spring, Maryland. "As you know, the story's been in three different incarnations," he said, inferring that my version, compared to Linda's and Julie's, discredited my claim altogether. "I have said that nothing improper happened," he continued. "I have a very clear memory of the meeting. I told the truth then, I told the truth in the deposition. I am mystified and disappointed by this turn of events." [18]

Ann Lewis and Bennett got out and hit the talk shows. Bennett appeared on Larry King Live for the full hour. In his typical style, Larry threw softballs at Bennett, who took the baton from Clinton and played the role of the dismayed victim. First, he blamed 60 Minutes for not presenting him favorably in his rebuttal video and for editing out forty-some minutes of the videotaped interview. He also whined that 60 Minutes didn't give the American public the whole story, which was that I was apparently motivated by a financial payoff.

"In fairness to 60 Minutes, I don't know if they paid her," Bennett said. "I don't know if they knew about a book. I don't know, in fairness to them. But I do know this, when the American people heard that show and when they read the newspapers this morning, they may have had a different opinion this morning if they knew on Thursday or Friday of last week there was a book in the works pushing the 60 Minutes show to market it."

There was only one problem with all his "fairness to 60 Minutes." None of his allegations were true!

First, CBS did not pay me for my interview. People think I was paid for the interviews and that I made a fortune, but reputable shows do not pay for stories. If I had to travel, they paid my expenses, but that was all. If anything, I lost money by coming forward because of the legal bills!

About a week later, CBS News president Andrew Heyward told the Washington Post, "The implication that there was some terrifically important salient material we left out is false." [19]


Larry King Live was not the only show on which Bennett suggested I had done the 60 Minutes interview to promote a $300,000 book deal. "For a period of time right up until the Thursday or Friday before Miss Willey went on 60 Minutes, her lawyer Daniel Gecker was hawking a book," Bennett told Matt Lauer on the Today Show. "They were pushing the upcoming 60 Minutes show, saying that this would increase the marketability of the book." [20]

Again, there's only one slight problem with this line: I had no book deal. [/b][/size] I needed to do something about my financial situation and thought a book might be a legitimate way for me to tell my side of the story. I asked Dan to contact publisher Michael Viner to see if he was interested. He was. But, Dan says, the $300,000 figure came from a comment Dan made to Viner. My debt was about $300,000 and Dan told him that I could improve my position by that amount through a bankruptcy. Consequently, Dan told him that it would not make sense to do a book deal unless it paid significantly more than that amount. [21] He didn't seem to have much interest in such a book and we didn't pursue it. When I did 60 Minutes, the interview had nothing to do with conversations between Dan and Viner and it certainly had nothing to do with promoting a book.

"Similarly, we never negotiated with any tabloids regarding selling a story," Dan adds. One man claimed that we did, but Dan says, "The gentleman who claimed that was completely unknown to me." Dan was barraged by calls from a "reporter" who said, "We will pay," but Dan always made it clear that I had no interest in the tabloids. In fact, Richard Gooding of the Star called Dan and said, "She can name her price." I still wasn't interested.

The episode still leaves the most important question unanswered: Did Radutzky have evidence that Kantor was pressuring Julie on behalf of the White House?

60 Minutes was challenged to reveal the footage from my interview, which would substantiate my version, but they refused, saying they would divulge neither sources nor source material. Radutzky is still a producer for the show so I recently asked him, in writing, if he did in fact tell me that he had evidence that the White House was pressuring Julie. He has not replied, nor has his boss, whom I copied on my letter.

A week after the 60 Minutes interview aired, they presented a follow-up. Ed Bradley said, "We stand by our story." The broadcast ended with further defense of both the interview and my integrity. "As for money, Mrs. Willey never asked for any money nor did we offer any money." Two months later, I got a handwritten note from Ed Bradley. "What you did was courageous and well done," he wrote. "I have no regrets about the interview. I hope you feel the same."

The Clinton machine didn't just try to refute my 60 Minutes interview. They attacked me from several angles.

My lawyer was even targeted. The day after my appearance on 60 Minutes, FedEx delivered a subpoena to Dan from the SEC, "seeking financial information," he said. "They were allegedly investigating whether I was guilty of insider trading." Dan owned a few shares of stock in a bank for which he had served not as a member of the bank's official board but as an advisory board member. According to Dan, he'd never before been subject to such an investigation. "I think it was related to the case," he says, "and I told that to the SEC when I was deposed in connection with the investigation."


Isikoff

After I did 60 Minutes, I finally went on the record with Newsweek, but Michael Isikoff never forgave me for not doing so sooner.

Harolyn Cardozo reportedly told Isikoff -- and Starr's grand jury -- that I talked about becoming Clinton's mistress. She said I called her after my incident with Clinton and talked at length about how I wanted to advance a relationship with him. According to an article in the Nation, Harolyn said, "Willey was gushing about her meeting with the president, saying he had given her a big kiss and hug." [22] Considering Harolyn knew how frantic I was to find Ed that evening and how she came to his funeral a few days later, her story is hardly credible. Harolyn, of course, just happens to be Nathan Landow's daughter. I was a married woman when she says I was supposedly trying to "advance a relationship" with the president, yet a few months later Harolyn set me up with her father and gushed, "You could be my stepmother!" I believe she never forgave me for dropping Nate. It has also crossed my mind that she may have been party to the Clinton smear campaign.

The Clintonistas

Many friends in the loop called me with support, but the media storm was frenzied. Everybody wanted me to be on their shows. Even at my Florida hideaway I received dozens of calls. I heard from Jackie Judd, Jane Pauley, Larry King, and Michael Isikoff. The 60 Minutes guys kept calling -- Michael Radutzky, Ed Bradley, and even Don Hewitt -- saying I hadn't told them about the letters. But I had.

Then James Carville, Joe Conason, Gene Lyons, Paul Begala, Julian Epstein, and the rest of the Clinton Goon Squad found Julie Steele. She was heaven-sent, and suddenly she was all over the television. They marched her out and paraded her all over the place.

So the media blitz against me began. All the Clintonistas paraded through the shows, and they all had their talking points. It was ridiculous. On every channel, on all the different shows, the nightly talking heads all said the same things. It was as if they'd each gotten their daily memo: "Things to Say about Kathleen Willey." It was a joke.


One day, they all decided to attack my account of Bullseye's disappearance and my conversation with the jogger. They went on the shows and discussed a man who jogged past my house saying, "Hey, Kathleen, did you ever find your cat?" They made it sound as if I lived in a subdivision and was out watering the lawn! It was nothing like that, but that was the way they portrayed it. Of course, not one of them had been down to Powhatan to see what it really was like. They were just soldiers following orders. They had their talking points for the evening, and you could tell they did because they were tripping over each other, repeating themselves and all saying the same things.

Sid Blumenthal had described my appearance on 60 Minutes as, "Groomed and affluent, wearing a long strand of pearls signifying that she was no Paula Jones, Willey related sordid details to the shocked reporter." The implication that I wore pearls as a ruse is ridiculous. It also reflects an elitism that should never have escaped the liberal press, yet it did. Along with referring to me as a "divorced former airline stewardess," (further evidence of the basic chauvinism at work in the Clinton mind-set), Blumenthal and the Clintonistas often referred to me as a socialite, though I was, in fact, a housewife -- a quintessential soccer mom. [23]

One piece of information that may have helped them paint me as a "socialite" was the fact that my daughter went to a well-known girls' school in the west end of Richmond. The west end had the best homes in town. It was the place to live. Other than my daughter, everybody attending the school probably lived within a five-mile radius of the campus, and their parents lived within a five-mile radius, and so did their grandparents. The church and country club were close by, and it was a very enclosed world. Few of them ever ventured south of the river where we lived. Shannon's peers acted as though they couldn't possibly figure out how to find Midlothian because it was out of their sphere. Shannon felt like she didn't belong there and decided on her own to transfer to another school. Still, her stint at that west end school helped brand me as a socialite, which helped them label me with an elitist connotation and imply that I was ideologically opposed to the Democratic candidates to whom I'd given so much of my life.

It was easy for the Clintonistas to brand me this way. They had the bully pulpit. Everyone listened to their erroneous descriptions of me and the other women. We were David against Goliath. How could we refute them with the power that they wielded in condemning us? For the most part, I was very careful about not putting myself out there and subjecting myself to their many ways of maligning my character.

Contrasting what they did to me, they constantly denigrated Paula Jones as trailer trash. Betsey Wright had an interesting observation about her old boss. "Bill Clinton has spent his whole life scared that he's white trash," she said, "and doing whatever he could to try to prove to himself that he isn't." [24] I think Clinton always lived with that childhood image of himself as the little fat kid from the wrong side of the tracks, which is probably still with him today and also part of the reason he is the way he is. Some things you just can't get away from, no matter who you are. I suspect this sort of inferiority complex is at play in his marriage with Hillary and in their denigration of Arkansas natives, particularly women. In any event, the characterizations aimed at the likes of Paula Jones reveal Bill and Hillary's ideological hypocrisy, as they constantly belittled sexually abused women, working-class women, and non-affluent women.

Over many years, I had helped these Democrats, and many others. Not one -- not a one -- gave me any support. Not from a local level, not Chuck Robb, not Virginia's lieutenant governor Don Beyer, nor Bobbie Scott who is in Congress. These are people whom I had helped and they trashed me.

Am I pissed off at the Democrats? Yes, I am!

More, I am disillusioned. Everything the Democrats stood for -- everything Clinton stood for -- amounted to nothing after what I went through. It is impossible to respect a man like that or his ideology. All it amounts to is hypocrisy.


Later, Alan Colmes interviewed me and I told him I was no longer a Democrat. He acted appalled. "You mean, because of just one thing, all of your political beliefs have changed? Just this?"

"Well, yeah," I said. "A little bit."

"You mean you're not a Democrat? You're thinking like a Republican now?"

I said, "You know, no Democrat came to my aid."

So now that I am older and wiser, I am a "Democrat in recovery."

The Feminists

The feminists were the biggest letdown. As a politically active Democrat, I believed in women's rights, though I was never a militant feminist. Still, I thought I was both "liberated" and strong. I stood up for myself and spoke out against injustice. I became appalled at the way the feminists refused to support me. That really disillusioned me. I kept thinking, Of course the conservatives are supporting me, but where are the women?

In the end, even NOW president Patricia Ireland was despicable. She gave Clinton a pass, dismissing his behavior by saying, "All of us knew he was a snake when we voted for him." [25] When Juanita Broaddrick's rape allegation emerged, Ireland said the media should "stop wasting time on unprovable charges." [26]

Ireland actually advocated for me when my story first came out. "If what Kathleen Willey says happened, we have moved from talking about a womanizer or a philanderer to talking about the behavior of a sexual predator," Ireland said to Lisa Myers. [27] She also said, "If it's true, it's sexual assault... Now we're talking about, really, sexual predators and people who, in positions of power, who use that power to take advantage of women." [28] Later, however, she rallied her troops against impeaching the president for perjury and obstruction of justice regarding his assault on me. "No matter how offensive the president's behavior was, it does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense," she said. "And the no-holds-barred attack by the ultra-conservatives on women's issues is a far more onerous threat to women and our families."
[29] I tried to call her, but she wouldn't take my calls. Of course she wouldn't. What could she possibly say? She calls herself a feminist and this is how she regards a woman who has been sexually assaulted by the most powerful man in the country?

Madeleine Albright echoed Ireland's comment about me. "Yeah," she said, "if it' s true ... "

Singing the same chorus, feminist icon Gloria Steinem "suggested that if the allegations are true, Bill Clinton is a sex addict." [30] Later, she declared that Clinton hadn't committed harassment because he "took no for an answer." Her verdict misses the point. Clinton did not harass me. He assaulted me, which is not just a civil offense but a criminal one. Steinem, however, couldn't care less. In an even more revelatory comment, she added, "The truth of the matter is that [Clinton's] behavior toward women is considerably better than any president I know of." [31] Once again, a free pass.

Then there was Betty Friedan, who said, "She should have slapped him across the face." What kind of feminist blames the victim? And does she really think that when a woman is assaulted by a man, she should slap him across the face and that should be the end of it? Is this really the message she wants to convey to our sisters and our daughters?


"Jesse Jackson, who had been praying with Clinton in the midst of the Lewinsky scandal, chimed in with an excuse for Clinton, rather than a defense," wrote Candice Jackson. [32] "Sex is not the one string on the guitar," Maureen Dowd reported the Reverend Jackson said of the scandal. "There are nine more commandments." [33]

Then James Carville blathered, "He's a good man who did a bad thing." Carville added, "You can't take him to task for his personal behavior." Excuse me? That's personal? The president of the United States, who has to send men off to war, behaves like that in the Oval Office? Seduces young women in the Oval Office? Assaults married women in the Oval Office? This is not personal behavior. At the very least, it is unprofessional. At worst, it is abuse and assault. Obviously, advocating it -- on any level -- is wrong.

Clinton's henchmen trashed me, just as they trashed all of the women. All of us. And they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Many more feminists couldn't even bring themselves to comment. The president of the National Women's Political Caucus said she "wanted to remain circumspect." The president of the National Women's Law Center "declined to pass judgment." So did the president of the Women's Legal Defense Fund. [34] Senator Dianne Feinstein only said that, "The word of the president is a very important thing." [35] Even Anita Hill, whose claims of sexual harassment almost derailed the nomination of Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, said that since Clinton advocates for women on the grand scale, nothing I had said should derail his presidency. "I don't think that most women have come to the point where we've said, 'Well, this is so bad that even if he is better on the bigger issues, we can't have him as president.''' [36] Her statement affirms the "feminist" view that women should make or withhold a claim like mine -- and hers! -- based on the ideology of the perpetrator rather than on what the man actually did to a woman, or women!

Nationally syndicated radio host Monica Crowley points out the hypocrisy of these so-called feminists. "If feminist groups such as NOW were really serious about their professed objective about 'female empowerment,' they would have rallied to Bill Clinton's female accusers, supported them in their David and Goliath struggles against this powerful man," Crowley recently railed on her program. "Instead, they rallied to him. They put politics first and looked the other way." [37]

Many people could have intervened in this ugly saga to keep Bill Clinton from harming women. But one woman above all of them was in a position to make Bill behave.

That woman is, of course, Hillary.

When news of the Monica Lewinsky affair broke, Hillary had been married to her wayward husband for more than twenty years. But Hillary charged to Bill's defense. "Certainly," she said publicly of the allegations, "I believe they're false. Absolutely." [38] She went on the Today Show and told Matt Lauer, "Bill and I have been accused of everything, including murder, by some of the very same people who are behind these allegations. So from my perspective this is part of a continuing political campaign against my husband." Thus she invented the vast, right-wing conspiracy.

Just as Hillary did against Monica Lewinsky, Candice Jackson says she "defended her husband publicly and attacked every woman who leveled charges against him or disclosed consensual affairs with him." Hillary condemned all of us, denied our credibility, and expressed only contempt for us. "She is married to a man who mistreats women on a regular basis, and that marriage is the cornerstone of her own political success ... Not only will she excuse Bill's behavior, she will lead the smear team in discrediting and ruining women who come forward against him." [39] And she will do more than that.

The self-anointed queen of the feminists, Hillary smeared and stepped on every one of the women her husband seduced, accosted, and assaulted. Her position on women's empowerment is nothing more than empty hypocrisy.

As Monica Crowley adds, "Hillary has spun herself successfully as a feminist icon, but even a cursory look at her career shows that she is the exact opposite. Hillary is not the feminist icon she holds herself out to be, but is instead a poster girl for antifeminism. Here's why: everything she has achieved has been derivative of a man. She was a well-connected attorney in Arkansas because she was married to the governor. She was co-president for eight years because she was married to the co-president who got elected under his name. She is a U.S. senator because she was married to her co-president. She is a serious candidate for president today because of the man to whom she is married. This is not to say that Hillary Clinton is stupid. On the contrary, she's a smart, savvy, and clever woman. But her entire adult professional life has been defined by an even smarter, more savvy, and more clever man. She's all about 'female empowerment,' but she has gotten to where she is on the formidable coattails of her husband." [40]

I agree. The fact is that Hillary hasn't got the goods -- the experience -- to be president. She may be a woman, but she is not the sort of woman who has earned the right to be called president. "Voting for Hillary Clinton as a way of breaking the glass ceiling in American politics shatters the glass in the name of biology," Candice Jackson adds, "but not in the name of meaningful advancements for women." [41]

If the media suspected that Bush acted toward women like Clinton did, they would string him up. But the feminists gave Clinton a pass because he furthered their agenda. They lined up to express their doubts about me. These "feminists" gave deference to their man because they liked his politics. And, essentially, it came down to one issue: abortion.

Dick Morris has put it most succinctly. "If you're going to be a sexual predator, be pro-choice." [42]

Real Women

When I was still in the phone book, I had anonymous phone calls from women who said, "He's done this to me," and, "The same thing happened to me." Some said he'd done almost the same thing to them in the Oval Office.

I said, "Well, why don't you come out and tell your story?" Not one of them would go public, which is understandable, given what they saw happening to me. They didn't tell me who they were, but I think a lot of them were White House women. My caller ID on these calls came up "Caller Unknown," which is typical for Washington, D.C., callers.

And I often met women, especially women my age, who told me they had been assaulted in the workplace by a former boss. One woman came up to me in a department store. "I just want to tell you that the same thing happened to me," she said, "and I never forgave myself." She said it happened to her in Richmond, when she was young and had just started working. She said, "It was awful." She broke down in tears, and said that for years she blamed herself. She didn't know what to do and couldn't tell anybody because this kind of behavior by male bosses was somewhat acceptable. It was just one of those things that happened. If you were a working woman, a secretary or even a teacher, you were expected to put up with it, as if that is just the way men are.

When I was a young woman, the attitude was, Honey, this is just something you have to put up with. In fact, in TWA's flight school, they taught us that, as flight attendants, it was part of the job to handle sexual harassment and assaults like a lady. "You're going to get the mashers," they said. "You're going to get the overbearing drunk guys who are going to make a pass at you. You have to figure out how you're going to handle it." It was just part of the job. We had to be ladies and handle them with dignity. It was our responsibility.

The thing is, being a woman my age, an early baby boomer, we put up with that kind of attention for years. Women often blame themselves and wonder, Did I do something? Did I look like I was pursuing him? It must be my fault. I must have invited that.

Men got away with that for a long, long time.

As wrong as it is, the women of my generation just assumed that ninety-eight percent of all men were predators -- that they were all on the make. That was how we survived. If such a man was your boss and you needed to get ahead, then he was inevitably going to take advantage of his power over you. Women were in many situations where they had to give in to get ahead.

In the middle of my media storm, a very well known television interviewer called me numerous times. "No good deed goes unpunished," she said. She gave me woman-to-woman advice and offered to rebut the release of my letters. She also talked with me about sexual harassment. "Boys will be boys," she said. A pioneer in the television industry, she doubtlessly had to deal with it more than once. While she talked to me, we discussed how our interview would go. She said I would talk about what happened to me. "Then," she said, "I want to talk about what happened to me." She didn't name names but told me that early in her career one of her first bosses had chased her around the desk. "This is how it's going to be," he told her, "if you want to get ahead in this business."

Though we've passed laws and now require "sensitivity training" in the workplace, harassment still occurs. When my daughter was at Harvard, I noticed that the men genuinely seemed to respect their female classmates as equals. Shannon, in fact, helped me understand how much our culture has changed in this regard. When she was in medical school and I told her what Clinton had done to me, she said, "Mom! That is sexual harassment! He can't get away with that!" But when I went through the incident in the Oval Office, everything in my background -- not to mention his power -- told me that, yes, he could get away with it and he would get away with it. In my day, men always got away with it.

Every year, I speak to a class of college students at the University of Richmond. Lately, the students I speak to were just ten or twelve years old during the Clinton scandal, so they don't remember it. It's history. I tell them what happened and they want all the dirty details of what happened in the Oval Office. I skirt that. "Read a book or google me," I say. "I don't want to talk about it, but basically it was a pretty rough scene, a very unpleasant scene." Each year the young women become more vocal, more engaged, and more angry about what women have to put up with. Unfortunately, I can't say the young men in the audience have grown as much. Many of them make their attitudes perfectly clear. They sit and listen, but automatically dismiss my story because I am a woman.

Unfortunately, with the Clinton ordeal, our feminists lost all credibility on sexual harassment. We don't talk about it anymore. But obviously women today still have to deal with it -- and not just the women who happen to find themselves alone in a room with Bill Clinton. If a man like Clinton can abuse women with impunity, we really have not made as much progress as we'd like to think. And if his wife knows about his behavior and she still accepts and enables it, and we keep her in power because we think she serves our greater political goals, the future for our daughters and granddaughters is so much less than it might have been.

Annie

While the feminists remained elusive and my Democratic friends stayed silent, the Clinton machine continued to smear me in the media. To get away from it, I spent a lot of time in Florida with my boyfriend.

I was going back down to the Keys and needed to make arrangements for all my pets. I had used a pet sitter, Karen, in Powhatan. But Karen was busy and couldn't sit for me, so I found a great kennel owned by a sweet woman named Annie, here in Powhatan. Since I had only recently discovered Annie's kennel, I never mentioned to anyone where it was or its name. If I had told anyone that I was going to Florida, I just said I was dropping off the dogs and cats.

I left them there early one morning on my way to the airport. I took the dogs -- Meg, Shaun, and Tess -- and the cats -- Buttons, O'Malley, and Blarney. Getting them all to the kennel was an ordeal.

I left there and flew to Florida. While I was in the air, a woman called the kennel. She told Annie that she was my pet sitter and that I had asked her to pick up the dogs and cats because I was coming home early. Annie told the woman she needed to talk to me first, that she wouldn't give her my animals until she talked to me.


As soon as I exited the plane, Annie called. That scared me, because whenever the kennel called, I would think, Oh God! One of them is sick or dying ...

The first thing she said was, "Everything's okay. I just want to ask you something."

When she told me about the phone call, I thought that I must have crossed signals with Karen. Questions flooded my mind. How could Karen know that's where I took them? Did I even tell her I was taking them to that kennel?

My mind was racing. I was trying to make sense of something that just did not make sense. I had to talk to Karen.

I called her. "Look," I said. "Did we get our signals crossed?"

No, she said. She hadn't called.


"Are you sure?"

Karen said, "No, it was not me."

And I started to figure it out.

My God! I thought. How did they know? And who are "they"?

I was so freaked out that they knew where the kennel was. Someone had followed me. That's the only way they would have known where my pets were. It was another reminder of Bullseye.

That's when I said, "We'd better call the FBI."

The FBI followed up with it and tried to trace the call.

Annie had an early version of caller ID, the kind that plugged into the side of her telephone. That morning when I dropped everyone off, Annie mentioned that the battery had died. "I've got to put a new battery in there because when the battery dies there's nothing on the thing." Sure enough, the battery had died. When she told me about the strange phone call, I thought, Well, they broke in there and took the battery out. It was either that or they just blocked the caller ID with *67. PIs are not stupid.

Annie said the woman had a very Southern accent, almost as though the woman was acting. It surprised me that a woman would do such a thing. Women are nurturers and caretakers. Messing with somebody's children or pets is not a woman's way of doing something. It had to be a challenge for a PI to find a woman to pull a stunt like that. That makes it a pretty short list of suspects.

I don't think they would have taken my dogs and cats. I don't think they were going to show up. They would not risk arriving in an identifiable car with a license plate and a person who could be described. I think they just wanted to let me know I was being followed and to scare the hell out of me.

It worked. They scared me. I walked around with the feeling I had when I couldn't find Shannon or Ed before Ed's body was discovered. I felt a knot in my stomach. I was breathing fast, panting, almost as though I was going to have an anxiety attack. What's next? I thought. Are they going to take all my animals away, the way they took Bullseye? What are they doing? And who are they?


FBI Agents

One Saturday morning, I went out to my car to look for something. Under the driver's seat I found what appeared to be a cordless phone. It wasn't a cell phone but something between a cell phone and a car phone. I had never seen it before and didn't know what it was or where it had come from. I called Dan.

"You know, it's the strangest thing," I said. "I found this phone thing in my --"

"Get that out of there," Dan said. "They put bombs in those things. Get it out! Throw it out into the woods!"


It took the FBI agents about two hours to get to my house. They scoured the woods. Dennis Alvater of the FBI said they confiscated the phone and traced it, but felt it was "kind of a nonissue." While they couldn't determine where it came from or how it got into my car, he said, "When we were finished looking at that, it was not very sinister in nature." We never found out where it came from.

With the escalation of these incidents, the FBI asked the Powhatan sheriff to keep a close eye on me, so the sheriff's new routine included making the rounds down my dirt road. It always made me feel good!

I went in to my little post office. "Did we tell you about this guy?" they asked me. While I was in Florida, a scruffy-looking man driving a beat-up car came into the post office very early one morning. "I was really nervous about this guy," said Doug, the postman. The man's car had an out-of-state license plate and Doug thought that the state possibly started with the letter "M." The guy had demanded directions to my home and wouldn't divulge who he was. The postal workers wouldn't help him and he left angry. It could have been anybody. It could've been a tabloid reporter or some nut. But he made the postal employees nervous -- and me too. So I said, "Okay, Doug, well, you should be hearing from the FBI shortly."

A few weeks later, we were in Florida when a suspicious package arrived from Minnesota. We didn't recognize the return address.

"Don't touch it!" I screamed, frantic. "Don't open it!"

I was ready to call the bomb squad. But it was a gift of fishing tackle from a recent charter.

That's how I was, though. I walked around in a constant state of terror, afraid for myself, my family, my friends, and my animals. Those fears continued for at least two more years.
I installed an expensive alarm system in the cottage and a heavy chain across the driveway entrance. The FBI checked my phone several times for mysterious clicks and dead air. And I learned how to use a gun. I was determined to protect myself.

Gentlemen Callers

One night, very late, the phone rang. I was groggy and stumbled to answer it.

"Hello." I finally said.

An irate man was screaming at me. "You fucking bitch! You have ruined my life! I'm going to kill you!"


That woke me up! I thought, Well, do I call my FBI agent now? Wake him up in the middle of the night? The caller ID showed a name with a Powhatan number, so I thought, He's just got to be some drunk wacko. I decided to hope for the best and wait until morning. It was still hard for me to accept that I might be in danger. It was foreign to me. Much of the time, I felt like I was being silly, but I never knew what to take seriously and what to ignore. First thing the next morning, I called the FBI agent on my case.

"Geez, Kathleen," he said, "you get the weirdest phone calls!"

Witness tampering is a big deal. And when you're a cooperating witness in a federal investigation, the FBI is on top of these things, so people have to be careful about what they say -- or what they scream into a phone in the middle of the night.

I pictured black Chevy Blazers full of FBI agents, guns drawn, descending upon some guy on his farm in Powhatan County. They did go see him. And they scared the bejesus out of him!

The guy had a fight with his girlfriend and her telephone number was close to mine. He transposed a couple of numbers.

I was still in the phone book and got other calls from people who wanted to express their support and sympathy. One night, a younger-sounding man called. He seemed as if he had smoked a couple of joints before he dialed.

"Yeah, hey, how ya doin'?" he said. "Like, I've been reading in the paper about you and, so, anyway, what'd that son of a bitch Clinton do to you, anyway?"

I played along, waiting to see where he was going.

"It's a terrible thing ya'll have to go through," he said. "I just wanna tell ya I feel real bad for you."

"Well," I said. "Thanks a lot. I really appreciate that."

Then he said, "Hey, what're you doing later tonight? Wanna go out for a drink?"

I said, "What?"

"You doin' somethin' later tonight?"

Nah, I thought, potheads aren't my type!

It was so funny. And I have to say that, despite all the difficulties and pain and fear during those years, some funny things happened too.

Blarney

After staying in the Keys for most of the spring, I returned home to Virginia for the summer. When I went out in public, people recognized me and every single person who stopped me was kind, comforting, and supportive. To a person, they were compassionate. Their words meant so much to me, but I still felt uneasy in public. I was constantly checking my rearview mirror, looking over my shoulder. I knew they were following me, but where were "they"?

On the Fourth of July, I went out to a baseball game and party. I'd been gone all day and came home after dark. Once inside my house, I realized the door to my deck was open. A second-floor deck, it had no access to the yard. As I went to close the door and turn on the outside light, I saw my black and white cat, Blarney, on the deck. He was dead. A beautiful, longhaired cat with poochy white cheeks, Blarney was the prettiest cat I had ever owned. He was young and strong, healthy, and not quite full-grown. He was a sweetheart. And he was dead.

I called the FBI once again. "Well, now I've got a dead pet on my porch."

The veterinarian did a necropsy on Blarney but could never find the cause of his death. There was no reason why this one-year-old cat should have died. There was no pneumonia, no heart attack, no stroke, no feline leukemia, nothing. No reason. Cats don't just up and die, but they could find no reason for this cat to have died.

It scared me. It was so traumatic and painful that I buried it deep inside myself. I was emotionally overwhelmed, and part of me needed to shut down. I kept thinking, These people are not doing this to me. This cannot be. I don't think I was naive. Rather, it was more like denial. I refused to believe that people existed out there who did things like that, who would take Bullseye and Blarney and kill them. How could they do that? But there were just too damned many bad things happening, and I had to start believing. It was an awful realization.

That same day, my best friend's new kitten died suddenly, too.


As I ended the summer, I looked forward to the close of this long and grizzly saga. It could not last forever, and I looked forward to its resolution. And it was coming. Bill Clinton would give his deposition in mid-August, which would open the final chapter in the drama. Ken Starr would release his report in September. Everything was moving toward a conclusion. I eagerly awaited its arrival.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:16 am

CHAPTER NINE: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

ON AUGUST 17, 1998, Clinton gave his deposition before Ken Starr's prosecutors. This was the famous deposition in which Clinton parsed words beyond belief -- as in, it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Not only misleading, his testimony was also untruthful and he flat-out lied, especially with regard to me.

Bob Bittman and Jackie Bennett, Jr. questioned Clinton for the OIC and Starr. Near the end of his deposition, the prosecutors asked him about me. Clinton said, "You know what evidence was released after the 60 Minutes broadcast that I think pretty well shattered Kathleen Willey's credibility. You know what people down in Richmond said about her. You know what she said about other people that wasn't true. I don't know if she's made all of this available to the grand jury or not. She was not telling the truth. She asked for an appointment with me. She asked for it repeatedly." [1]

For the record, I asked for an appointment. I didn't ask for "it"! When I heard what he'd said, I was shocked. I thought, What does that mean, "what they're saying about her down in Richmond"? That seems very sophomoric to me.

Still under oath, Clinton denied calling me at Doug Wilder's campaign headquarters after the Kluge fundraiser, and he denied calling me from the Williamsburg Inn, when he had cleared everyone out so I might bring him "chicken soup." Then the prosecutors told Clinton that they had documented his phone calls to me from Williamsburg and they produced records proving that he had called me. When they presented the phone logs, Clinton's eyes darted from side to side and he looked like a caged animal. His famous red face made an appearance. Angry and agitated, Clinton requested a five-minute recess and I was later told that he went outside into the hall and went ballistic, screaming and hollering at Uncle Bob.

When the Starr Report was delivered to Congress, the OIC told me that I was still part of Starr's continuing investigation into witness-tampering incidents, so they did not include my evidence. But faced with the facts in the report and the DNA test results on Monica's blue dress, the president spoke to the nation and delivered his famous "I have sinned" speech. He admitted his affair with Lewinsky but insisted he "did not lie."

Naively, I expected to be mentioned, even hoped for an apology. But he did not acknowledge me.

Once I understood what was in play behind the scenes, of course, I knew he would never apologize to me. While most of his advisors were telling Clinton to be contrite and apologize to the American people, Hillary was in his other ear, nagging at Clinton to continue the fight. According to Christopher Andersen, who wrote Bill & Hillary, she advised Clinton "the day of his mea culpa to the nation confessing his improper relationship with Monica Lewinsky. She reportedly told him, 'The worst thing you can do now is roll over and play dead. Bill, you have to come out and hammer Ken Starr."' [2]

The Clintons left for vacation in Cape Cod, taking the famous walk to the helicopter with Chelsea between her parents. On the first day of Monica's grand jury testimony, the president rushed back from his family retreat, returning to D.C. because of an emergency. He announced our attack on the Sudan and Afghanistan in light of new "revelations." What a coincidence. To this day, I think this was the single-most cowardly and shameful act of the Clinton administration.

Lisa Krapinsky

"Will you take a polygraph test?"

When the Independent Counsel's Office asked me to take the test, I said, "Sure, no problem."

But my lawyer, Dan, of course said, "I don't like it."

It was the only time I didn't take his advice.

It turned out that the polygraph examiner and I had been born in the same hospital, in a little berg right outside of Philadelphia. The questioner was a nice guy from the Richmond FBI office. But Dan had heard that this particular examiner was not well trained. I went forward with it anyway, because I was committed.

The test was degrading. I knew it was a good idea but it was also a testament to the fact that my credibility was in question, that I couldn't prove what I claimed. It was my word against his, and he was the president and I was just me. I felt so vulnerable. They put me in a very sterile room without anything on the walls that could stimulate me in any way. It was a perfectly cream-colored office with a desk, the machine, and the man. He asked my permission before he strapped me up. He sat down in front of me and asked questions.

During the examination, he asked me about talking to Julie the night after the incident. Because of my state of mind that night and the next day, I hadn't originally remembered that I had been there, but Julie eventually reminded me. In light of that confusion, the question the examiner asked was poorly worded. An ambiguous question produced an ambiguous answer, and my response to that one question came up as "inconclusive."

About three or four FBI agents huddled, standing around talking about me. They had a discussion as if I weren't there and I heard them say, "She did this and she ... " It was so intimidating. I said, "Hello? Wait a second! What'd I do wrong? What do you mean by that?" They decided to stop the test and I agreed. I realized why people don't take polygraph tests -- because you can't use them as evidence in court but you can still shout out the results to the whole world, even if they tell the jury to disregard it and even if the test reads wrong. It was terrible and I felt discouraged. I thought, Now what? I don't need this. They're already trying to make a liar out of me!

Dan was angry. I was completely frazzled.

Though the media, of course, reported that I failed the polygraph, a source at the FBI said I really did not fail the test. He said they tested me on several key components of my testimony and the results of one test, involving Julie Steele, were inconclusive because of an "inappropriate question." The source explained that the question referenced Steele and asked if I related all of the details involving the incident with Clinton. Although the test concluded that I did tell Julie about the incident involving Clinton, I had an inconclusive response to "all" and "details."

The FBI asked me if I would retake the test. I said, "Well, yes, I don't think I have a choice." I think Dan thought I should just leave it the way it was, but I couldn't leave it as "inconclusive."

Five days later, I went to retake the test at the FBI headquarters in Washington.

The OIC made arrangements for me to spend the night in Washington so that I would be rested. They registered me at the Hyatt Hotel under a false identity, "Lisa Krapinsky." When I arrived at the desk to check in, the officious desk clerk asked if I had a reservation.

"Yes," I replied. "It's under the name Lisa Krapinsky."

"Is that with a C or a K?"

"Umm ..." I stalled, thinking. I didn't know!

"Ma'am, is that with a C or a K?" he repeated. "Your name?"

"Uh, well, I'm not sure."

"You are not sure?"

"Well," I finally asked him, "how would you spell it?"

It started with a K.

At nine o'clock the next morning I went to FBI headquarters with Dan. Dennis Alvater, the FBI agent on my case, and Jerry Bastin, a retired agent working as a contractor for the Independent Counsel, came with us. The place was swarming with large men in jeans who were carrying big guns. In the testing room next to mine, a well-known spy was going to be examined. He had a reputation as an escape artist, so they transported him in chains and he had on a blindfold.

As I waited to go in, I met all the agents. They were all Irish, including my examiner, Jim Murphy. He was the number one FBI polygraph expert in the country and that was good enough for me. Murphy asked my permission, then put the wires across my chest and hooked me up. This time he sat behind me. Not being able to see him was very intimidating. He asked me the questions and then said, "Okay, we're done. I'll be right back."

But he didn't tell me the results. I waited, dying to know. I didn't know where he'd gone, and I thought maybe he'd dashed out to the bathroom or something. Finally, Murphy came back and we walked out to the hallway. Then they had me wait in a small lunchroom while Dan talked to the agents. Finally, they all returned with big smiles. Murphy looked at everybody and said, "It's a good day. She passed with flying colors."

I was totally relieved and I dissolved into tears.

We had dinner at The Palm with Chris Matthews, his assistant Barbara Daniel, and producer Rob Yarrin. I told Chris "off the record" about the test results.

As we walked back to the car, past the White House south lawn, the presidential motorcade drove by and we saw the president in the back seat of his limo. I always wondered if he saw us, because we held up a copy of Time magazine with the headline, "Impeachment" emblazoned across the top.

Later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch ran an article under the banner headline, "Willey passed polygraph/lie detector test on second try." Bill McElway wrote it. The guy was just looking for trouble. The man couldn't seem to get anything right.

The Intruder

The FBI and my county sheriff ordered me to notify them at any time, day or night, of anything suspicious. I wouldn't hesitate. But I had also learned how to operate a gun and I had one in my home.

My dogs Meg and Shaun did their jobs as barkers, but they were getting old. It was rare that they ever stayed out at night. Before I went to bed, I let them out, with Tess, my German shepherd. I went back out on the kitchen porch a while later and called them to come back in. They didn't come. It was strange. They hardly ever left the yard. But they didn't come. So I walked around the porch thinking how weird it was. Usually I heard them rustling in the woods. I called again. It was a cold night and there was a little frost on the porch railing. It was very late and I was getting impatient, calling them again.

The deck was above a walk-out basement, and the outside light was on down there. Suddenly, I noticed a shadow move beneath me. It extended from the basement patio out on to the grass. I thought it was one of the dogs and said, "Come on, Meg." But it was a long shadow. And then it receded. It moved slowly backward, away from me, away from the lawn, back toward the basement door under my deck. I thought, Geez, there's somebody down there! My dogs are gone, and there's somebody down there, going toward my basement.

I kept my wits' about me and tried to sound casual. I called the dogs again, then muttered, loud enough, "Where are those dogs?" I went back in the house and closed the kitchen door with a little noise. My boyfriend was sound asleep, but I went upstairs and very quietly leaned down and whispered into his ear, "I think there's somebody outside." He woke up quickly and went into reconnaissance mode, grabbing the gun. I said, "For God's sake, be careful!"

I went outside again, still acting as if I was calling the dogs. I didn't see anything. I walked around to the back of the deck. I wanted the man to know I was there, but he was gone. The dogs had come back by the time my boyfriend came outside. Tess went into reconnaissance mode, too, and never left my boyfriend's side. They went up the driveway but didn't find the intruder. I don't know where he went, but we never saw him.
The trash can was down, outside the basement door, and people sometimes go through the trash, but there was no sign that anybody had done that.

The FBI came down the next morning and scoured the woods, searching for a hideaway where he may have sat and watched me. They didn't find anything.

David Schippers

Henry Hyde asked his old friend to serve as chief investigative counsel for the House Judiciary Committee. A staunch Chicago Democrat, David Schippers had voted for Clinton twice. He had also led the Justice Department's Organized Crime and Racketeering Unit under Bobby Kennedy, and convicted the likes of Sam Giancana. I figured he was a man who knew his way around.

Schippers talked about me in a recent interview. "All she'd had was people pushing her around, so she was a little leery," he said. "But she finally agreed to talk to us." [3]

Schippers didn't want me to be seen with him in Washington, so our initial meeting in February 1998 was at a coffee shop in the Sheraton Hotel in Fredericksburg, halfway between Washington and Richmond. Schippers had a legal assistant with him, and a couple of FBI agents. I had Dan. I had gotten lost and must've been forty-five minutes late, so the minute I arrived they started questioning me. We went from breakfast through lunch. Later, Schippers told me that he and his cohorts tried every trick in the legal book to trip me up, but I didn't stumble.

"Number one," Schippers asked me, "why did you write those letters after the injury?"

I had written the letters with my attorney, I told him, "Because I was destitute, I needed some kind of work, and I decided to forget what happened there, to start over, and hopefully they would help me find a job."


At one point, Shippers paused and looked at me. "Why did you finally tell this story in your deposition?" he asked me. "Why didn't you just lie and say nothing happened that day?"

Wisdom, Circuit Judge: David Wiley, the appellant, and Eugene Cunningham, a co-defendant, were arrested on March 17, 1971, in connection with an alleged sexual assault ... on twelve year old Maxine Lewis ... they were charged with carnal knowledge ... and taking indecent liberties with a minor child.... The jury found Wiley guilty.... The principal issue on appeal is whether there was sufficient corroborative evidence to take the case to the jury. We find there was not sufficient corroborative evidence.

-- United States v. Wiley. 492 F. 2d 547 (D.C. Cir. 1973)


It is said that what is heard is a delusion of the senses. That sound consists of waves. That the wave is a momentary shape produced by energy traveling through molecules of air, or wood, or steel. Whether this wave is heard by the human ear as sound, it is said, depends on the frequency of the vibration of the sound. It is said that there are vibrations too rapid for the human ear and vibrations too slow, that vibrations of sound increase in warmer or thicker media, that the structure of the inner ear increases or decreases the frequency of sound waves, that sound waves of one frequency mask the presence of those of another frequency so that the ear hears only one sound when there are two, that many sounds together are heard as undifferentiated noise, that there is no absolute relationship between what produces sound and what is heard, that what is heard is a delusion of the senses and cannot be said to be real.

(It is established in the law that the testimony of an alleged victim of rape must be corroborated. It is said that corroboration is required because the complainants in such cases too frequently have an urge to fantasize or a motive to fabricate. Therefore the credibility of the alleged defiled, it is said, must be approached with skepticism, especially when the complainant is a young girl.)

It is therefore said that sounds do not exist without ears and a mind to hear them, that all sound exists only in the mind. (And the evidence that shortly after the alleged event a witness said that he saw the alleged victim on the street, crying, in a disheveled condition, upset and without a coat though the day was cold, and that she told him she had been attacked and pointed to her alleged attackers a short distance away, is held not to be corroborative, nor is the evidence of another witness that she appeared to him crying and saying that she had been raped held as corroborative since this is evidence that some event took place but not necessarily evidence that sexual intercourse took place.) And since sound is a product of the mind, it is further argued, it is absurd to believe that sound can exist in an unthinking substance, in the violin, or the wood of the violin.

And since all evidence for the existence of matter is sensual evidence of a like deceptive kind, existing only in the mind, it is concluded that matter exists only in the mind. (It is therefore the judgment of this hearing that the defendant was innocent of rape and that no such crime took place.)

-- Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her, by Susan Griffin


I told Schippers that when I was going in there, I didn't know what I was going to do. I was terrified. Finally, I said, "Because I had to. I was asked a question and I was at the point that I just had to answer it. There was no more dancing around it."

"Her lawyer confirmed all this," Schippers says. "When they were in the deposition and they got to the Oval Office business, her lawyer asked for a recess and asked Kathleen, 'Are you ready for this?' and she said she was going to tell the truth."

"It was one of the hardest things in my life," I told Schippers, "because I was terrified."

"Let me tell you something," Schippers replied. "Going in there and telling the truth was your insurance policy. If you had gone in there and lied, you'd be dead today. You would have disappeared. But after you told the truth, you became too dangerous to trifle with. No one could hurt you after that!" Schippers wasn't trying to scare me. He was just telling me the facts.

To this day Dave Schippers maintains, "If she hadn't gone into the deposition and told the truth, if she had lied, they'd want to get rid of her. Kathleen is damn lucky she wasn't murdered." [4]

He also points out that, "When the skull was left on Kathleen's porch the day after [the] deposition, the only people who knew were Clinton and his people." [5]

When Schippers told his colleagues my story, they reacted angrily. "That son of a bitch should have his teeth knocked out," they said.

Schippers later recounted a scary dynamic during Clinton's deposition in the Jones case as well. According to Schippers, after Clinton went into the deposition, he figured he had it locked. "Monica was locked in, she'd given a false deposition," Schippers says, "so we went in to Clinton's deposition and we said, 'What if we have tapes of Monica?' That's when Clinton went to his secretary and said, 'I was never alone with her, right?' But then, they started making calls, thirty-five calls, looking everywhere for Monica. They were killing themselves to find her. I maintain that, when the Clinton people were making all those calls, trying to reach Monica, I would bet that if they had found her, they would have killed her. In a heartbeat. Something would have happened to her. But she was in custody at the time." [6]

"I firmly believe," Schippers said, "that one of these days Monica Lewinsky is going to wake up and thank Linda Tripp for one thing -- for saving that dress -- because if that dress didn't show up, Monica was going to disappear too."


Dave Schippers scared the hell out of me.

But he had a definite realism. "The dress was Monica's insurance policy," Linda Tripp later pointed out, "just as my documentation [the tapes] was mine." [7]

The House Managers

Schippers asked me to testify against the president before Ken Starr's grand jury in March. "I want you to be a witness," Schippers said. He later recalled that my face fell. "Believe me, we will protect you," he added. "Whatever happens, we will protect you."

I agreed.
As a cooperating witness, I would be one of three witnesses against Clinton in the impeachment hearings.

"As far as I was concerned, the Kathleen Willey case was one of the worst ones I had heard of," Dave Schippers said, "other than what happened to Juanita Broaddrick."

After Christmas, Dan and I went to meet with the House managers. Two FBI agents met us in the parking lot of a mall in Northern Virginia, and from there we followed them to an underground garage of one of the House office buildings. We were whisked upstairs to Congressman Jim Rogan's office.

By now, the throngs of press suspected that I was somewhere in the building, but they did not know where. We waited as the House managers arrived. Congressman Lindsey Graham, dressed casually in a blazer, khakis, and open-necked shirt, came first. He looked around the room at everyone and spoke about Clinton. "This guy's a real trip, ain't he?"

When the other managers arrived, I began answering questions. They wanted to see how I handled the pressure. We left Washington unnoticed that day, having outsmarted the press.

For days I watched history in the making. And for days I was left hanging, not knowing whether or not I would be a witness in William Jefferson Clinton's impeachment trial. One day, the House managers said I would be a witness. The next day, I wouldn't.

Throughout the scandal, I had watched and listened to Senator Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine. I thought I could talk to her "woman to woman" about my saga and I decided to call her. She invited me to have dinner at her Capitol Hill home and she brought in Chinese takeout. Her chief of staff, Steve Bailey, joined us in her dining room. She asked me hard questions and I answered honestly. I felt that she was ultimately fair. In the end, Collins voted not to convict the president in the Senate, but she mentioned me in a statement that she entered into the congressional record.

Every day, Dan and I talked to David Schippers and met with House representatives Asa Hutchison, Lindsey Graham, and other members of the impeachment committee. Hutchison, however, said they decided my allegations were not clearly related to the articles of impeachment approved by the House. [8] Still, we prepared for my testimony in the impeachment trial, and Dan appeared before the House managers to answer questions. And we waited.

I was told that Trent Lott told the House managers that they could have three witnesses. But he did not want me to be one of them. Terrified of unseating a popular president, Lott was afraid I might be too effective.

Then, Judge Ken Starr also asked David Schippers not to call me as a witness. Starr was still investigating the issues of witness intimidation and obstruction of justice and didn't want my appearance to jeopardize that investigation. The other issue for Starr, I suspect, was that my testimony contradicted Linda Tripp's. Tripp was an important witness for Starr and, if I impugned Linda, it could jeopardize that case against Clinton.
Linda, however, would eventually vindicate me.

David Barger, Starr's federal prosecutor and lead investigator in the state of Virginia, recently told me that logic strongly suggests that the Clintons were involved to some degree in everything that happened to me, the jogger and all of the other scare tactics, since they were the ones who ultimately would benefit the most from either my not testifying or changing my testimony. Whether either of the Clintons had direct knowledge or whether someone directed those things to be done to scare me without their knowledge is something we may never know. Clearly, someone who was looking after the president's interest was trying to send a strong message to scare me. The investigators had found the skull. They interviewed the mechanic and owner of the tire store. They read "Blarney's" necropsy report. Annie, at the kennel, told them about the woman caller who tried to take my pets out of the kennel while I was away. They talked to merchants who said that strange people followed me into stores and the mailman who talked to the man in the beat up car at the post office. And they had Jared Stern's inside information about the investigation of me which purportedly came out of the Oval Office. In the end, the investigation was not successful in determining for criminal purposes exactly who was behind these scare tactics.

"We did a lot of work on all of those things, and we never concluded anything definitely about any of that, and that's a bit surprising," Jerry Bastin, a retired agent working for the Independent Counsel, recently told me. "Some of the things we checked should have shown some indication, but they just led nowhere, which makes you think it was very well done, a specially done kind of thing or it wasn't connected to your situation. One or the other. If it had nothing to do with your situation, then probably it was just coincidental. But when you add coincidences together, they usually mean something. The difficulty we had was that we never were able to definitively show who had done any of these things and for what reason."

His partner, Dennis Alvater, added, "I'm very disappointed we weren't able to do more and to satisfactorily substantiate more with our investigation."

I met with House representatives Asa Hutchison and Lindsey Graham and other members of the impeachment committee. Hutchinson, however, said they decided my allegations were not clearly related to the articles of impeachment approved by the House. [9]

Clinton was impeached in the House, but he was not convicted in the Senate.

Bill and Hillary Clinton stood on the White House lawn with Al Gore, where Bill gave quite a performance. His arrogance and self-righteousness were almost too much to take. America had witnessed crime without punishment. In abusing me, and in the ensuing coverup, Bill and Hillary Clinton and their minions had committed crimes, ruined peoples' lives, and degraded the presidency with impunity. It was a sad day.


As Linda Tripp told Larry King in 1999, "Based on what I know to be true -- the chilling perjury and the obstruction -- I wish that had at least been identified as being true." [10]

A friend who works for the FBI told me the Clinton modus operandi is reminiscent of the old joke about J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover would walk into his office and simply say, "My television doesn't work." He would never tell anybody to go fix his television or even say he wanted it fixed, but by the end of the day, when he went home, his television worked perfectly. "These are not dumb people," my friend said of the Clintons. "I mean, we're dealing with some very bright, politically crafty individuals and what they would directly tell somebody to do, they certainly wouldn't put anything out, certainly would not put anything on paper, certainly would not have themselves be recorded in any way." He added that there's a good possibility that someone in the White House was pulling strings or implying that they would like some things handled. The FBI, however, was never able to prove it.

Linda

After the media abused Linda about her looks, she had a makeover and cosmetic surgery. Then there was a picture of her looking like a model with her hair blowing. Though it was all done up, she looked incredible. Every time I saw her subsequently, she still looked pretty good.

In 1999, she went on Larry King Live and vindicated me.

Larry asked her, "Do you know Kathleen Willey?"

"Of course," Linda answered.

"And?"

"She's an honest person," Linda said. "She's telling the truth."


"You have no question in your mind?" Larry asked.

"Absolutely not," Linda said. [11]

I could not believe what I was seeing.

Some time later, I found out she had breast cancer, and I called her lawyer. I wanted her to know I'd heard about it and that I had called. I felt like it was something that I needed to say -- no matter what she'd done. There probably weren't many people making phone calls like that.

After she had battled cancer, Larry King had her on his show again. Her hair was growing back. It was really short, not frizzy but naturally curly, and it was brown -- not blonde, like it had always been. She looked great! And she looked like Linda, my former friend. She looked happy.

Her father had been a career army officer and her mother was German, so Linda grew up in Germany. In recent years, she had gone back to Germany and met up with an old boyfriend, her childhood sweetheart. They reconnected, got married, and now live in Virginia. It looks like her life is finally back on track.

Julie

After the Paula Jones case, after the grand jury, and after Clinton's impeachment, my story still had not been heard and I had not been vindicated. I had one postmortem hope to clear my name. Julie Steele was indicted for obstruction of justice and perjury, the only person ever indicted in connection with the whole scandal. Our day of justice had arrived. Julie was on trial.

Dan had informed the OIC investigators that Radutsky and Nelson told us the White House threatened Julie, coercing her to lie about me, so their investigators had to pursue yet another angle. "Certainly as investigators, we considered the possibility that Steele was threatened based on the information provided by Gecker," FBI investigator Dennis Alvater said. "Steele's recollection of the incident involving Kathleen, on critical issues, was inconsistent with the information developed."

Alvater's partner, Jerry Bastin, a retired FBI agent working as an independent contractor for the OIC, remembers it similarly. "What I always thought and what I today remember is that, somehow, something or somebody convinced her to do what she did, to stonewall the investigation," Bastin recently told me. "She seemed to be a person that they could work with. In other words, she could be told in a certain way that things have to be this way ... "

"The investigation showed that her testimony was legitimately subject to perjury and obstruction of justice considerations," Alvater said. "We had no desire to indict a fifty-year-old housewife and mother on a peripheral issue," he added. "It was a tough decision but they decided to go forward with it, based on the evidence. If she chose to cooperate and to reveal any threats that were directed toward her that would have moved the Independent Counsel's investigation forward. Do I think she was threatened by the White House or anyone associated with the White House? She never gave that up. She went to trial as opposed to giving us that information. Were we able to prove that? No, we weren't able to prove it. I think it's a good possibility that it happened. But it also seemed that Julie took a very big risk going to trial. If she was threatened, she may have been less concerned about the Independent Counsel than she was about the people making the threats." [12]

Preparing for her trial, the FBI looked into everything. I was shocked. Before then, I had never realized what they could do. All my privacy was gone. One day, the agents sat me down in my kitchen and showed me records of every phone call I had ever made, from both my home phone and my cell. It verified all my conversations with Julie and confirmed the dates. The agents showed me the list and said, "So, here's where you called Julie on this day, and she called you here ... " Everything I had said was all documented in those phone records. If I called the grocery store or the bank, it was on that list. If I called an old friend or a man I was dating, it was on that list. They showed me every call that came in to my house, too,
to see if anything stuck out to me. And something did.

I saw the name "Monica Lewinsky." She had called my house the day the story broke on Drudge, but I didn't know it until the FBI showed me those phone logs. The press had been calling nonstop that week, so I screened all my calls. But caller ID never identified calls from Washington. Unless it was a cell phone, D.C. calls all came up "Caller Unknown," and during those days, I received dozens of Caller Unknowns a day. Only the FBI could identify those callers, and Monica was one of them.

Clinton had been nervous about me during that time and had told Monica that they shouldn't see each other anymore. But she was badgering him about me, asking him if he was attracted to me. She was like a typical seventeen-year-old, "What's she got that I haven't got?" Of course, the president of the United States did not say, "No, Monica, that would have been wrong," or "No, Monica, I'm married and she was married." According to Michael Isikoff, Clinton told Monica that the allegation that he had accosted me was ludicrous because he "would never be interested in a small-breasted woman like Kathleen Willey." [13] It might have embarrassed me, but I got a laugh out of it -- and more than a little kidding.

Nancy Luque, Julie's powerhouse Washington attorney, gave the opening argument, promising, "You will hear from Julie Steele, and you will hear her words ... " In his opening remarks, the prosecutor chronicled everything he had and it was very damaging.

Julie had become the darling of Bill and Hillary's cause and had just come back from Arkansas, where she testified for Susan McDougal. They were buddies. So Susan and her lawyer, Mark Geragos, showed up front and center on the first day of Julie's trial to support her. They vowed to come every day. It was a circus. But after they heard all the damaging opening remarks, they left during the lunch recess and never came back.

Julie always had frizzy blonde hair that was so big it almost looked like an afro. She had no sense of style or makeup, so she always wore bright purple blush. She looked like Clarabelle. But they had given her a complete makeover. I've never seen her look so good.

Some time after Clinton assaulted me, Julie and I had lunch with Mary Earle Highsmith, a mutual friend of ours. During that lunch, Julie brought up the incident. So I told the FBI about Mary Earle and they subpoenaed her from Colorado to come and tell the story. "Yes, I knew about it," Mary Earle told the jury. "Julie had told me about it."

But it's my opinion that the prosecutors made some mistakes. I thought they should have revealed more of Julie's financial situation because she was mortgaged to the hilt and desperate for money. If she turned on her best friend of twenty years, she would do anything for money, even lie, cheat, and steal. I don't think the prosecutor wanted to appear to be "piling on," so he didn't divulge the dire extent of her financial situation.

I too could have done a better job in the trial. Of course, they tried to make a huge deal of the fact that the first polygraph test was "inconclusive" until the judge shut them up. But when I was on the stand, I forgot some details that would have helped my testimony. Julie's lawyers threw some zingers at me, and I wasn't prepared for them. I remembered things later that I should have mentioned, but it was too late, of course.

The FBI agents had asked me about everything, all about Julie, and I was brutally honest in response. I told them about her troubles, including her anorexia. She had been very sick and almost died once of complete kidney shutdown. Her illness was well known. After all, she sat there in the trial, shaking her scrawny, two-inch-diameter ankle! It was pretty easy to see that she was sick. But the defense attorney attacked me for betraying my girlfriend and telling the FBI about it.

"Mrs. Willey, did you tell the FBI that your friend Julie Steele was anorexic?"

"Yes," I said. "I'm sure I talked with them about that."

What I should have remembered was that telling the FBI was nothing that Julie would have objected to. She even asked for an interview about her anorexia with a local reporter. She had endeared herself to a writer who wrote all the touchy feely stories for the "Flair" section of the newspaper, and he wrote a feature article about her trek through anorexia. Julie loved notoriety and certainly didn't mind advertising her plights -- whether it was anorexia or her adopted child. This reporter bought it all. After she had Adam, the same reporter went to her house and did a story about her adopting a Romanian baby, with a picture of him in the den where he spent his entire day swinging in the baby swing.


Julie's lawyer had another trick up his sleeve, the last blow. He ended her defense with a flourish. "And finally, Mrs. Willey, at the risk of offending the court, I will write this down ... and I ask the bailiff to hand this to you ... Did you run into Mrs. Steele at the grocery store and did you call her this name, this four-letter word that starts with a C and ends in T?"

I looked at the piece of paper. "Yes, that's what I called her," I said. Actually, I called her a lying C-word, but I forgot to add "lying" when I testified.

There was a ripple through the courtroom.

When we walked out of court, all the reporters were corralled behind a rope line, but Tom Squitieri with USA Today had somehow gotten close to the door, so he was the first reporter I encountered. I liked Squitieri's reporting and thought he was a good guy. As he approached us, before he even told me who he was, I said, "Tom Squitieri?"

"Oh," he said. "You know me?"

That kind of endeared me to him and we actually became friends. But he was still a reporter. He called later that night and said, "So, what was it you called Julie? A coat?" he asked me. "Did you call her a coat?" He said all the reporters went outside during the recess and were coming up with words -- coat, coot, clot. "Gee, how many four-letter words can we come up with that start with C and end with T, without offending the court?"

It became a joke and a lot of people heard about it. Still, I have to say, I hate that word. It is about the worst thing someone can call a woman. But Julie Hiatt Steele deserved it.

Some time later, before I boarded the plane out to L.A. to do the Larry King show, I was on the phone with Dan. His mom was a really good woman, a single mom and very proud of him. I was getting on the plane and he was giving me advice about the interview -- like don't curse and don't use any four-letter words about my "dear" friend Julie. "Oh, and by the way," Dan said. "Mom says, that name you called Julie? She had it coming!" I loved that.

Despite the problems with my testimony, Julie's defense was weak and Luque never delivered on her opening argument promise to put Julie on the stand. But after a five-day trial, it ended in a hung jury.

It started with one holdout, a government employee who had decided that if it was okay for Clinton to lie, it was okay for Julie to lie. He wasn't going to budge. Then a couple more people went over to his side. The jury voted nine to three to convict her on all counts. They also stated that the evidence was very persuasive and they "strongly advised" the trial judge to retry her. I told Starr that I would be willing to go through it again if he decided to try her again. But he chose not to.

One of the more intriguing aspects of Julie's case was the issue of her legal representation. By all accounts, she was strapped for money. Yet she had a big-name Washington lawyer, Nancy Luque, who had worked for the Democratic National Committee and was close with Hillary. Knowing how needy Julie was, I'm sure that Luque's team had to babysit Julie throughout the trial. I'll bet she drove them crazy the whole time, because she loved being a media star.

Everything was in flux for a while, but when Starr decided not to retry Julie it was all over. He cited "resource allocation" as his reason for not pursuing it. [14] Then Julie couldn't get the lawyers to return her phone calls. They put it behind them and they were done with her.

It has never been revealed who paid for Julie's defense. One story claimed that it was done pro bono. But then Julie set up a website for her "legal defense fund" to help pay her "crushing legal fees." [15] Parading in front of the cameras, she bemoaned her $800,000 legal bill and claimed to be in the process of putting her house up for sale. Ten years later, Julie's website is still soliciting money and she's living quietly somewhere in North Carolina. Was she paid off?

Julie didn't testify during the trial as promised, but afterward she testified before the press like an evangelist, when she was not under oath. After everything I'd sworn to in court and after all the cross-examinations I'd endured, Julie stood up in public and said whatever she wanted. Even after she was nearly convicted, even after the papers reported that the jury voted nine to three to convict or retry her, she stood before the press and lied.

Then she appeared before a Senate subcommittee, and Maxine Waters praised her as a wonderful woman and a patriot.
Julie lapped it up, reveling in the notoriety. She absolutely loved it.

Federal prosecutor David Barger told me they considered retrying Julie, but Judge Starr chose not to. When they looked at the political climate and the public's attitude, they figured everybody was done with it and wouldn't want any more tax dollars spent on it. So they didn't. Luque tried to sue the Starr investigation on Julie's behalf for their "unreasonable prosecution." They lost.

Julie had a game she played about "the white CNN truck." She just knew they were going to be showing up at her house and she said she didn't want to be interviewed by them, because it was "just too upsetting for Adam." This from a woman who would have crawled in the gutter to get to a CNN truck! But then she started calling the Chesterfield police -- and I know they knew she was a whack job -- and she claimed the police were helping her jump over the back fence to get away from CNN. Now find me a policeman who's going to help a woman jump over a fence! If she was being threatened, they would have put her in the car and driven her out of there. They're not out helping ditzy women jump fences to escape from CNN trucks. They're out doing actual police work!

Then she took up with Richard Gooding, who worked for the Star. She had many versions of the story that I had told her about the Oval Office incident, and she planned to profit at my expense. She almost went to Europe to sell the same story to the London tabloids for serious money -- $100,000.

Chris Matthews

As the months went by, the Clintonistas were grinding my reputation into the dirt. And I was still looking for jobs and trying to have a life. Judge Starr's office had requested that I remain out of the spotlight, so I had stayed away from the media for a little more than a year, but once the trial was over I was free to speak. Finally, I thought, I could rehabilitate my reputation.

I decided Chris Matthews might be someone who could help me because he had been a real supporter. I contacted him and we talked. "Clinton's guilty as hell," Chris told me. "Guys like Clinton are protected."
I knew he understood my story, the terror of the jogger's threat, the harm to my pets, and the degradation the Clintons had dished out. He invited me to come on Hardball to tell my story.

Chris was my first interview after that year and that was a big deal for him. He was excited. He even bought a new shirt and showed it to me. I appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews for his entire hour.

After a few background questions, he asked me about the jogger and quizzed me about his identity. I told him I couldn't answer the question because the Independent Counsel was still investigating it. But he was insistent. He asked if I'd been shown pictures of the man. Yes, I had. He asked if I had an idea who the man was. Yes, I did. He asked if he was someone close to the Clintons. Yes, he was. And then he said, "Okay, so it's Cody Shearer."

As Chris uttered those last two words, I could hear his producer Rob Yarin yelling into Chris's earpiece in the middle of the show, "No! What are you doing?"

But Chris did it. He uttered the name. He had broken every rule known to journalists. He had gotten caught up in the hype and he blew it. I later learned the OIC investigation determined that Shearer supposedly had an airtight alibi, which made his gaffe that much worse.

One of the people watching Hardball that night was Pat Buchanan's brother, Hank Buchanan, who has been described as "unstable." When Hank heard Chris say the name Cody Shearer he thought, How dare he threaten Kathleen Willey. I'm just going to go take care of him myself!

Hank Buchanan looked up Shearer in the phone book. Then he got a gun. A few days later, Shearer was having a dinner party and Buchanan broke in, brandishing the gun and making wild threats. The Washington police arrested him and took him away.


And Applebome goes too far when he suggests that an even more reactionary strain of Southern thought -- "neo-Confederate" ideology -- has gone mainstream in America. It's true that the cult of the Lost Cause is resurgent in the South, albeit stripped of its once-blatant segregationism. It's also true there are close parallels between the "Contract With America" and the Confederate constitution, which not only enshrined states' rights but also included term limits, budget balancing, and limits on taxation. But when neo-Confederate ideology went national with the presidential candidacy of Pat Buchanan, who passionately defended displaying the rebel battle flag over the South Carolina statehouse, most Americans -- indeed, most South Carolinians -- found his retro-rebel views too extreme. To suggest, as Applebome does, that "it's hard to know these days where the Confederacy ends and the Republican Party begins," is to lump the GOP with some far-out folk, many of whom genuinely believe in black New World Order helicopters and the genetic inferiority of the black race.

-- Whistling Dixie: A Search for the Real South, by Tony Horwitz


Cody Shearer, of course, went after Matthews. He confronted Chris at a railroad platform in Philadelphia and threatened to sue him and MSNBC from here till tomorrow.

Chris was angry with me. Though he should never have revealed what I had told him behind the scenes and off the record, he blamed me. I had told him the jogger was average height, but when Chris met Shearer, he thought he was short. Chris badgered me, as if I'd misled him because my description of the jogger didn't match Shearer. Chris turned on me, awfully. He started bad-mouthing me, looking for someone -- besides himself -- to be the fall guy for his mistake.


"Chris, I didn't do anything!" I said. "You did it. You broke every rule."

"How did you describe the jogger?" Chris challenged me. "How tall is he?"

"I said he was about medium height."

"Well, I know he's not! He's a real little guy!" Chris yelled at me.

"What are you talking about?" I said.

"Have you ever met Cody Shearer? He's a really short guy! He only comes up to my chest!"

"Well, Chris, has it occurred to you that you're a tall guy and I'm pretty short?"

Chris charged that the jogger's description obviously didn't match Shearer because Shearer was much shorter than average, and I had said the jogger was "average." But Chris is tall and I'm only five-three!

"To me, it's kind of average height to be anywhere from five-seven and taller."

He blew it. He was frustrated that I wouldn't name the guy, so he did it. And he went off on me. I tried to patch it up with him, even calling him at home. But Chris wouldn't talk to me. "What are you calling me for?" he yelled. "What do you want with me?" Unfortunately, I've only spoken to Chris once since then, which I feel is a real tragedy.

The Machine

After everything I'd been through, I was pretty shy. But at the same time I felt like I needed to vindicate myself, tell my side of the story. I had been slammed in the press for more than a year. So I agreed to go on Larry King Live for the entire hour and I did some print interviews. But it was hard.

"I felt that she was very badly maligned by so many people, on many levels," said Dennis Alvater, one of the FBI agents on the obstruction of justice case for the OIC. "Kathleen's motives, background, credibility, and information were thoroughly examined. She was examined, interviewed, and documented more than any other witness, other than, perhaps, Monica Lewinsky."

The Clinton machine also attacked Ken Starr. What they did to him was awful and he finally resigned. David Schippers gave an eloquent speech in the House about Starr. Without reading notes, Shippers was compelling. In fact, Alice Starr thanked him after it was over.

Speaking at a panel discussion hosted by the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia last week, Starr praised the 42nd president for his post-presidential philanthropic work, calling him "the most gifted politician of the baby boomer generation."

"His genuine empathy for human beings is absolutely clear," Starr said. "It is powerful, it is palpable and the folks of Arkansas really understood that about him – that he genuinely cared. The 'I feel your pain' is absolutely genuine."

Starr was Bill Clinton's chief antagonist as the special prosecutor appointed to examine a range of scandals – Whitewater, the suicide of Vincent Foster, the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit and the Monica Lewinsky scandal – that tainted Clinton's legacy.

While lamenting the "deep anger" that has taken over politics, Starr, now the president of Baylor University, said he regretted that so much of Clinton's legacy was tainted by what Starr called "the unpleasantness."

"There are certain tragic dimensions which we all lament," he said. "That having been said, the idea of this redemptive process afterwards, we have certainly seen that powerfully … "President [Jimmy] Carter set a very high standard, which President Clinton clearly continues to follow."

-- ‘90s Redux: Ken Starr Praises Bill Clinton as Trump Mines Scandals for Attacks: Starr says the former president is 'gifted,' but Trump says Hillary was his 'enabler.', by Gabrielle Levy


Robert Ray was appointed to replace Starr and finish the Independent Counsel's investigation. Ray was their boy, with political aspirations. He wanted to run for the Senate from New Jersey and was looking to score points. He undoubtedly thought that, once the thing was over, the Clintons would be out there supporting him, but that didn't happen. They didn't want him, either.

I later learned that Ray considered trying me for perjury, which he couldn't do because I had an immunity agreement. But he was going to try to surpass that.

That's what my life was like after it was all over. Dave Schippers recalls what I went through after the impeachment. "All these people who were going to help her," Schippers says, "who 'had her best interests at heart,' they turned their backs on her, wouldn't help her at all, after it was all over." [16]

Ray concluded the investigation. Everything that had happened to me, all the evidence of scare tactics and intimidation, all came to naught. Ray reported some of my testimony but the terror and intimidation were not part of it. Bullseye and Blarney, the kennel, the man under my deck, the jogger -- it was as if none of it had ever happened.

Everything I had done to help the investigation and all I'd been through -- the invasion of my privacy, the interrogations, the polygraph tests, and all the time and work I'd given to this investigation -- was barely mentioned in the Independent Counsel's report. Even Dennis Alvater, one of the FBI investigators on my case, said, "I really resent the fact that the Kathleen Willey portion of the Independent Counsel investigation was barely mentioned and was practically reduced to nothing more than a footnote in Bob Ray's final report." I felt as if Ray just did not care what Clinton and his wife and their friends had done to me.
However, we wrote a rebuttal, which Ray did include in the final report.

In 2006, a more sinister side of Ray became apparent. While married, Ray was arrested for allegedly stalking his former lover in New York. "His ex-girlfriend, Tracy Loughlin, had told police that Ray -- a former GOP Senate candidate from New Jersey -- had obsessively followed her and blanketed her with unwanted calls and e-mails after their breakup." [17]

Larry Klayman

After all the time I had spent sanding down the Egret and helping to paint it, I finally asked my boyfriend, "Am I ever going to get to ride on this thing? Take me out for a sail!" At last, we went out on that beautiful boat with her bold red sails.

When we got back to the dock and got in the car, my cell phone had thirteen messages. I thought, Wow, something's up. I had messages from Lisa Meyers and Jackie Judd. Numerous media people wanted statements from me.

Larry Klayman had filed a complaint, to which I was not even a party and about which I had been unaware. But he won. We won. The federal judge, Royce Lamberth of the Federal District Court in Washington, decided that Clinton was guilty of invasion of privacy for releasing my letters and that, in doing so, Clinton had committed "a criminal violation of the Privacy Act." In his ruling, Judge Lamberth said that when Clinton and his aides released the letters, they surely knew of his 1997 finding that the White House was bound by the Privacy Avt. [18] A violation of the Privacy Act is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison. Clinton is the only sitting president who has ever been found guilty of a federal misdemeanor. For me it was another small victory, another vindication!

I decided not to do interviews that day because I didn't want to. I'd had a nice sail and I was in a good mood. It was already mid afternoon, so they couldn't get a crew down to the Keys and back to Miami in time for the six thirty news, so they wanted me to come to Miami. They offered to send a car, but I said no. I didn't want to get dressed up and drive three hours to talk about Bill Clinton.

The Clinton administration went to great lengths to protect Bill's all-important image. My character and testimony were repeatedly maligned in the press and I was constantly reminded of the pervasive power of the Clintons. And at the end of it all, my testimony was reduced to a footnote in a report that had no effect. An anticlimactic ending to what was a tiring journey.

When Clinton left office, the thought of a third Clinton term was barely a blip on anyone's radar. In a few years, however, Hillary would set up shop in New York and begin working toward ensuring that she had a place in history as more than just the wife of one of the most promiscuous presidents in history.

Bill Clinton is clearly an offensive and disreputable person who is capable of much when up against the wall. He is a competent person, even if he is incompetent at keeping his hands to himself. But he is surrounded by people who have done nothing to help him change his behavior. Hillary, more than anyone, has enabled him to continue to abuse women. What's more, there is reason to think that Bill was not the one responsible for waging war against me and the other women who were subject to his sexual advances. Rather, it is Hillary who almost certainly saw their political careers on the line and who reacted accordingly -- with a clear and strong determination to suppress anyone who dared jeopardize her shot at the presidency, and to suppress them by any means possible.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:16 am

Part 1 of 2

CHAPTER TEN: A THIRD CLINTON TERM?

THE CLINTONS ARE GOOD at what they do. They are insulated, protected by layers of people who are willing to be layers. Their cabal has long had relationships with private investigators, from the earliest days in Arkansas. And from that beginning, it was Hillary who engaged these private investigators. After all, what woman had more reason? Bill always cheated on his girlfriends and Hillary was no exception. And she knew it. She didn't like it, but she didn't leave him either.

It is fascinating to note that the very first "investigators" that Hillary dispatched were her own father and brother. When Bill and Hillary left Yale and committed to marry each other, Bill went to Arkansas to teach law and Hillary went to work in Washington. But "Hillary eventually got wind of what was going on in Little Rock and sent her father and brother down from Illinois to work on Clinton's congressional campaign," says addictions specialist and author of The Clinton Syndrome Jerome Levin, Ph.D. "Everyone in Clinton's circle assumed that Hillary's father and brother were there to spy on Bill and to reign in his sexual proclivities." [1]

According to former Arkansas state auditor Julia Hughes Jones, Hillary kept tabs on Bill's womanizing, not so she could get him to stop or to fight with him about monogamy, but so she could head off any repercussions. "Every time he was out and Hillary knew where he went," Jones said, "she would call behind him to see what she needed to do to take care of it." [2]

According to Thomas Kuiper, who wrote I've Always Been a Yankees Fan, "Hillary sent out a group of investigators known as the 'Truth Squad' while Clinton was Arkansas governor, to discourage many of Bill's former lovers from going public." [3] One wonders how they might have" discouraged" these women.

One detective Hillary hired to track down Bill's women was Ivan Duda. According to Ed Klein, who wrote The Truth About Hillary, Hillary tasked Duda with "damage control over Bill's philandering." Telling him that her husband was headed for the presidency, Hillary said, "I want you to get rid of all these bitches he's seeing ... I want you to give me the names and addresses and phone numbers, and we can get them under control." [4]

In 1987, Clinton was considering running for the presidency when his Chief of Staff, Betsey Wright, compiled a list of Clinton's affairs. Gary Hart was a rising political star until a scandal revealed he'd had an affair -- ruining his career -- so Wright was more than a little worried that Clinton's rampant infidelities might similarly damage her boy's political future. Dr. Levin says Hillary and Wright were "deeply worried that his 'zipper problem' would lead to disaster." Their plan was to gather the list of Clinton's women and plan for attacks on his character by devising preemptive strikes, "pre-cut responses to the accusations, regardless of what they might be."
Levin says the roster was jokingly referred to as the "Doomsday List." [5] To the women, I'm sure, it was no joke.

But there was one problem. According to Dr. Levin, "Clinton had been with so many women that, not only could he not remember their names, he had no idea how many there had been." [6]

Hillary joined Betsey in the effort to find and discredit the women and hired a private detective to follow her husband and verify her suspicions of Bill's philandering. Of eight women the investigator found, Hillary only had hard evidence to prove that Bill was sleeping with Gennifer Flowers and Dolly Kyle Browning. [7]


In an interview with "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" that aired Sunday, Kyle claimed that during their lengthy affair Bill told her that he had sex with around 2,000 women and described himself as a "sex addict." Kyle said his self-confessed addiction "explains everything" about his destructive sexual behavior.

"You would think that a guy who is a governor and who is nice looking and articulate and all that and then president would not have to sexually assault someone, but that goes back to the addiction," she said. "It's not just plain sex. It's not just a physical attraction. It is some sick, sick need that he has to control women."

Kyle's harshest words were directed at Hillary, whom she described as a "co-conspirator" who "terrorized" the women Bill allegedly abused.

-- Bill Clinton's Alleged Ex-Lover Just Made Some 'Sick, Sick' Claims About Bill and Hillary, by James Barrett


Hillary biographer Carl Bernstein reported that "Betsey's operation became known as the 'The Defense Department,' and Wright was sometimes referred to as the 'secretary of defense.'" Betsey accumulated boxes and boxes of files she'd developed on all the Clinton scandals, including files collected by San Francisco private investigator Jack Palladino. [8]

In 1988, faced with all the evidence, Clinton decided not to run for president. But with help from the "Doomsday List" and the "Truth Squad," he and his team were somehow assured that his "woman problem" would disappear. In 1992, Clinton decided to run.

When Joyce Milton started writing The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton, she was an admirer. In the process of doing her homework, however, Milton connected the dots between Hillary and private investigators. The book names several operatives of the Clinton squad, of which Hillary was in charge. According to Milton, in 1992 Hillary helped enlist a private security agency to silence a rumor that Clinton had sex with a black prostitute and fathered her child. [9]



I think we should be very concerned as to how Hillary's private security agency might silence such a rumor.


A Nest of Spooks

In January of 1999, Jackie Judd reported on ABC News that private investigator Jared Stern had "become a key witness in the investigation of whether there was an attempt to scare Kathleen Willey."

"I've been told that you were doing some work regarding Kathleen Willey," Judd confronted Stern. "Is it true?"

Stern was tight-lipped. "It is true. The specifics of it I don't want to get into." [10]

I didn't care. When I saw Jared Stern on television, my mouth dropped open and I started crying.

Jackie Judd found sources who said Nate had asked his lawyer to detail my story in a "chronology," and the lawyer hired Stern's firm. Judd reported that Stern's assignment included pulling my phone records, finding out what medications I was taking, and conducting a "noisy investigation" so I would know I was being watched. [11]

Stern's lawyer at that time, Ed Bouquet, told Judd, "I think that he perceived a situation where he was being asked to do something that he wasn't comfortable with." Judd added, "Bouquet claims Stern was so uncomfortable that he called Willey and left a message -- using an alias -- warning her that someone wanted to do her harm." [12]

So Stern was the man who called as "Kirk," the man who left a message on my answering machine in Powhatan while I was in the Florida Keys. But, to this day, Stern is cagey about his motives for calling me. He points out that it was his lawyer who characterized his feelings as "uncomfortable," not Stern himself. When I recently asked him why he felt compelled to warn me, his answer was, "No response." When I asked why he called, his answer was the same. [13] I started to wonder if Stern felt uncomfortable at all. Maybe he didn't really call to warn me, but for some other reason.

Stern said that when he left the message on my answering machine he did intend to call back but began to feel concerned about "the enormity of the matter and possible repercussions. And," he added, "the theory that the FBI or OIC may be recording your calls visited me." He was right about that!

Jackie Judd revealed that my old friend, Nate Landow, was behind Stern's involvement. Nate's lawyer, Saul Shwartzbach, hired Prudential Associates, the firm Stern worked for. [14] Stern is vague about who else was involved. He will only add that, "There may have been other contacts."

Stern won't even say what his job was in 1998, but only confirms information that is already public knowledge, including that Bob Miller, the president of Prudential at that time, gave him the assignment regarding me. He says Miller called him "late one night and asked me to meet him at the bottom level of a parking garage. I went and met him. He said he had something very important that needed to be handled so we discussed the matter and tasks." Stern said the garage was not near their office, but on Jefferson Street in Rockville, Maryland. Stern wouldn't tell me why they met there instead of at their offices.

But another man who was a contractor for Prudential during that time, who refuses to release his name, said that Miller and his "Democrat buddies" gathered at a clandestine club that was known as the "Progress Club." In fact, the Progress Club Foundation is still listed in directories at 1610 East Jefferson Street in Rockville, Maryland. It appears today to be a philanthropic organization but, ten years ago, according to the contractor, this private club had no signage and was "real hush-hush." Though Rockville police busted the place for gambling once or twice, the contractor only knew that the club was a "Washington incarnation" and its politicos were a "Clinton crowd." [15]

"I know that Bob Miller had things done for his Democratic Party buddies for decades because he had this nest of spooks -- former CIA agents and contractors -- that was disconnected from the federal government, so there was [a] buffer," the contractor said. "Bob Miller was the information backflow stopgap. He was the king of implied threat regarding these secret tasks and preventing disclosure to the public."
After Miller died in 1998, the buffer between his Democratic buddies and the "nest of spooks" was gone and, as the contractor told me, "That was the end." [16] Presumably, that is when the place went legitimate.

Miller likely walked out of a meeting with Clinton insiders at the Progress Club, met Jared Stern in the parking garage across the street, and gave him the assignment regarding me. Stern would only discuss the basics of that conversation. When I asked him if he had any knowledge of White House involvement in my case, he replied, "I have no response."

But Stern did divulge that he and Miller discussed a "pretty standard checklist" for opposition research. Speaking only generally, he elucidated that a "checklist of civil litigation related opposition research could include background checks, surveillance, pretext contact with the person to extract information, documentation of current and/or past activities or relationships ... " Stern said he suggested some strategies or tactics to Miller, who said, "They have someone else handling that." But, Stern added, "I don't know who 'they' were." When I asked Stern if he knew who had handled the intimidation side of my case, he said, "No response." [17]

Further, when asked what "strategies or tactics" he might have suggested, Stern answered, "No response." However, based on this conversation with Miller, Stern did validate that the jogger approached me. "I knew," Stern says, "because Bob Miller told me it was being handled by someone else. I don't know if that meant someone else within our firm or other." [18] And Stern won't clarify what "it" meant.

"I know that there was a jogger that ... threatened Kathleen Willey, but I don't know who it was," said the unnamed former contractor for Prudential, who added, "I have heard firsthand tape recordings of Nathan Landow, screaming profanity-laden threats, insults, and demands at someone. I won't tell you who ... " [19] Stern, for his part, won't confirm the existence of such tapes -- or even such a conversation.

Stern adds that Miller never explicitly said the assignment was related to Saul Schwartzbach's or Nathan Landow's tasking. Stern further insists that, "Nathan Landow's lawyers -- Saul Shwartzbach and Joe Caldwell -- nor Mr. Landow ever asked me to do anything illegal."

But when I asked Stern whether Bob Miller asked him to do anything illegal, he replied, "No response." [20] Big surprise.

So what did Miller ask Stern to do?

Stern would only say that, "Among the discussed tasks was investigative research." Whether this would include "opposition research" or conducting a "noisy investigation" is open to interpretation, but it raises the possibility that Stern did not call to warn me. That phone call was likely part of an assignment.

The former Prudential contractor described three possible reasons why Stern might have called. First, he said, it might have been to warn me of clandestine activities underway that were counter to my well-being. Second, it could have been a pretext authorized by Bob Miller to gain my trust and extract details from me about what information or evidence I had provided the OIC, such as tape recordings of Nathan Landow or President Clinton. Finally, he added, it could have been a combination of both. [21]


If Stern had called to warn me, why wouldn't he admit that? Indeed, I now have little reason to think that Stern's phone call was motivated by compassionate concern. Certainly it wouldn't help his reputation as a private investigator. And Stern was no novice PI. He joined Miller's firm in 1990 and worked in various capacities -- as a surveillance trainer, manager, and director of operations. In fact, he is now president of Prudential Associates, a "risk-management and security-consulting" firm, after purchasing the company from Miller's widow three years after working on my case. According to his biography on Prudential's website, Stern is a former Marine who has conducted intelligence operations overseas, possesses extensive intelligence acquisition experience, has jungle warfare experience, and has conducted specialized military operations in high-risk environments. [22] Unless I was in danger of being murdered, I doubt that a consummate professional like Stern would defy orders and call to "warn" me out of the goodness of his heart.

Private investigators with CIA training might employ techniques from their experience in intelligence operations. One such concept is the "stalking horse" tactic, which comes from an old hunting technique. It is hard for humans to sneak up on their animal prey, but if another animal approaches, the prey won't flee, so hunters will walk behind their horses to get closer to the prey. In spy jargon, the term "stalking horse" refers to an operative who appears neutral so that he can get close to a subject, but his pretense actually disguises a more sinister motive. In my case, it is possible that Jared Stern called to "warn" me in order to get close to me so he could find out what I had said or was going to say to federal investigators. As the former contractor suggested, Stern may well have called under this "pretext" to find out what I knew about Nate or Clinton.

One PI suggested another strategic concept that might have been at work. "False-flag ops" are operations in which an agent engages in an activity that is counter to one group or country's interest, and makes it look like the activity was done by another person, group, or country. In other words, the operative cloaks his activity behind known or obvious objectives of another entity, as if disguising the action under the "flag" of another group. If this tactic was at work in my case, it may mean that PIs like Bob Miller and his gang were trying to make it look like Nate was behind the investigation, while it was someone else altogether.

Asked whether he was aware of Stern's secret project, the former contractor explained that he was "aware of it, but not of all the details. Things were very compartmentalized," he explained. "The former CIA guys and spook contractors were always working on something secretive." [23] In a large investigative firm, each investigator gets individual orders on a "need-to-know basis." As one investigator told me, "We are all just soldiers." The contractor added that Prudential staff at the time were "all spooks." Bob Miller was former military intelligence, while others were mostly CIA and CIA contractors.

I can only speculate, but I think it is fair to say that despite initial reports, Stern did not have my interests at heart when he called me that day.

I later learned that Prudential operatives also obtained my telephone records. A man named Russell, who was close to Bob Miller's family during the investigation, provided me a copy of a report of every telephone call I made one day after my 60 Minutes appearance. By email, Russell told me the records were extracted from my telephone records. When the FBI showed me my telephone records, I was stunned at my lack of privacy. When I found out that the private investigators were able to retrieve the same information and pass it along to their clients, I felt sick.

Jared Stern said he didn't exactly quit the investigation or refuse the assignment, but the project "ended at some point." In fact, the end seems to have coincided with the death of Bob Miller, who succumbed to cancer. Stern didn't like Miller, personally or professionally, and when Miller died Stern had to undergo yet another round of OIC questioning. Overall, Stern says, "the OIC investigation was ... burdensome." [24]

But the unnamed Prudential contractor revealed further tantalizing information that has never been publicly divulged, until now. He said that during my investigation, I was not Stern's only target, but that there were others, particularly another "political operator." He would not confirm whether these were more tasks from Landow and his lawyers or if Miller handled these endeavors without Nate's awareness. Further, while OIC agents ferociously insisted that there were grounds for criminal prosecution, none occurred, and the former contractor suggested that Stern's other investigation might have had something to do with why the OIC did not act against Bill Clinton. [25] True to form, Stern will not divulge who else he might have been working for at the time. But when asked if he is concealing anything about these events now, he answers flatly, "Yes."

Clearly, from every angle, there are significant and important elements of the Prudential investigation that are still unknown. The OIC uncovered a great deal of information in several investigations, but most of that remains confidential and under grand jury seal. No doubt the Clintons hope it stays that way. But I hope we find out before it's too late.

While he tries to "maintain a healthy level of near-debilitating paranoia," Stern adds that when Clinton was president, he was more concerned for his own safety and career. Today, as president of Prudential Associates, Stern is obviously mindful of the firm's reputation and won't cooperate in clarifying his firm's role in my case. But what Stern did say was itself revealing. When asked if he had been threatened by any part of the Clinton machine or the Democratic Party, Stern said, "I have no response." And when asked how he feels about the prospect of another Clinton presidency, Stern said, "Sick to my stomach." [26]

Democratic Operatives

In 1978 Clinton was the Arkansas state attorney general, running for governor, when he made a campaign stop at a conference of nursing home administrators. Juanita Hickey, who owned a nursing home, met him at the conference. She was impressed by him. He suggested she call him if she came to Little Rock. When she went there for another conference, they planned a meeting at the coffee shop of the conference hotel. But then he called and asked if they could instead meet in her room, because there were so many reporters in the lobby. She agreed. After all, he was the state attorney general and was going to be the governor. She got coffee ready and he came to her room. Then he raped her.

In time, Juanita remarried and became Juanita Broaddrick. When she finally told her story to Lisa Meyers at NBC in 1999, the network held the story, claiming to need more time to corroborate it. Candice Jackson, author of Their Lives, says that when Juanita's story finally aired, a few pundits minimized her allegation on the simple grounds that it could not be proven, while most of the Clintonistas kept their overt attacks to a minimum. [27]

But, Jackson said, Juanita's business was audited by the IRS for the first time in thirty years. "I do not believe this was coincidence," Broaddrick declared. Her marriage also suffered. As Jackson wrote, Juanita's husband had been "totally against my coming forward and I think the unwanted publicity into our private lives gradually destroyed our marriage." They divorced in 2004. [28]

Deeply traumatized, Juanita did not and does not want to talk about the rape. Though we are friends, she would not discuss the experience or its aftermath with me for this book. Her voice trembled as she told me it's still too difficult. Obviously, Juanita continues to experience trauma as a result of Clinton's violence and subsequent events. As Candice Jackson points out, "Most rape victims don't have to stomach their attacker being heralded as the best thing to happen to women since the right to vote." [29]


Juanita does.

Dolly Kyle Browning, subpoenaed as a material witness by House investigators in Clinton's impeachment scandal, swore under oath that she had a sexual relationship with Clinton from the mid-1970s until 1992. Drawn into the Paula Jones case as well as the OIC investigation, she too had problems with the Clinton henchmen. A lawsuit filed by Larry Klayman on her behalf alleged that, "Plaintiff Dolly Kyle Browning has been intentionally and maliciously threatened by Clinton and his agents, including [Bruce] Lindsey ... They threatened to "destroy" her if she told the media about her sexual relationship with Clinton ... In addition, Clinton, acting through Lindsey, threatened and intimidated Mrs. Browning into severely limiting her public statements about her relationship with Clinton. Most significant to the instant motion, Clinton and Lindsey also knowingly used threats and intimidation to prevent Mrs. Browning from testifying in the Paula Jones civil rights/sexual harassment lawsuit." [30]

Sally Perdue's 1983 affair with Clinton became news in 1992. According to Candice Jackson, Purdue later said a "Democratic operative named Ron Tucker grilled her and then threatened her not to talk about her liaison with Clinton." Perdue said they offered her a federal job in return for her silence, "[but] if I didn't take the offer, then they knew that I went jogging by myself and couldn't guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs ... Life would get hard." [31] Purdue bravely turned it down. She was fired from her job, her car was damaged, and she received anonymous phone calls and hate mail. There is evidence that a private investigator was involved in her case.

Elizabeth Ward Gracen had a brief affair with Clinton in 1983 and, in 1998, it came to light. According to Candice Jackson, Gracen got an anonymous call telling her "she'd better shut up about her affair with the president or she could lose her job or be audited by the IRS." Instead, "Gracen took the advice of her lawyer and told her story to the press." Jackson explains, "She chose the route other Clinton women have chosen: going public, even years after their sexual encounters with Clinton, in order to raise their public profiles enough to feel a bit safer." [32]

The next scandal to emerge almost derailed Clinton's presidential bid. Gennifer Flowers went public with the fact that she'd had a long-term affair with Clinton. She was the "first Clinton woman whose story garnered widespread media attention and attracted vicious public attacks from Clinton and his cadre," wrote Jackson. [33] Along the way, Gennifer experienced some of the tactics that would later be used against others. Her mother received threatening phone calls. Her apartment was ransacked. According to an article in Investor's Business Daily, when she told Clinton about the invasion on her home, Flowers said, "There was just a tone in his voice. And I thought, you probably had this done to me." [34] As her fear grew, her lawyer suggested she should tape her conversations with Clinton, which she did. The Clintonistas slimed her in the press and, Jackson writes, "Flowers's word was mud by the time Clinton and his gang finished trashing her." [35]

But she had the tapes. When the Clintons found out, they went into high gear.

"We have to destroy her," Hillary said.

And then they did.

According to Candice Jackson, James Carville declared, "We're going to have to go to war." [36] Gail Sheehy, author of Hillary's Choice, quoted Hillary as saying, "I would 'crucify' [Gennifer]." [37] Notably, Hillary was ready to crucify Gennifer but she let her husband off the hook. And it wasn't just Gennifer whom Hillary attacked. Reputed to lead the assaults on all of the women who accused Bill, Hillary insulted us, destroyed our credibility, and labeled us as money-grubbing nuts, sluts, liars, and trailer trash. And, all the while, she knew we were telling the truth. And she knew that she was not.

On the attack, the Clinton operatives amplified their "cash for trash" smear and denounced Gennifer Flowers on talk shows, Candice Jackson reported, and denigrated her in the media for years. Later, when she tried to rejuvenate her singing career, Clinton supporters were everywhere, and "an unfriendly public shut her down." [38]

It took six years, but Gennifer was finally vindicated when Clinton had to confess the truth under oath. According to Candice Jackson, many journalists surprisingly called and apologized to her. But throughout her ordeal, as in my case, no feminist organizations helped her in her public battle against Clinton. [39]

In 1993, "Troopergate" gave America another woman: Paula Jones. Once again, according to Candice Jackson, Hillary "came out swinging to defend her embattled husband." [40] Belittling the troopers' claims as "trash for cash," [41] the Clintonistas sang the chorus, labeling Paula a bimbo, trailer trash, and -- their favorite sound bite -- "white trash out for cash." [42] In a monumental insult to millions of Americans, James Carville hit all the talk shows with his most famous cheap shot at Paula Jones: "Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park and there's no telling what you'll find."

Enduring such blatant insults in the press, Paula eventually got a nose job and a makeover, and looked really good. But the experience took its toll. She and her husband divorced in 1999. Although Clinton finally settled the lawsuit for $850,000, Paula didn't see much of it after all of her attorneys "hashed out entitlements to legal fees," reported Candice Jackson, who said that, by 2000, Paula still owed money to lawyers. [43]


Paula Jones became a political football during the five years of her lawsuit, fumbled by conservatives who accused feminists of a double standard for not supporting Jones, and by feminists and left-wingers who used Jones to claim that conservatives never care about women until they have the opportunity to use one to attack a president they hate.

Paula herself once told reporters she felt nettled by feminists' refusal to come to her aid, speculating that maybe it was because of the hatchet job the press and Clinton defenders had done on her character. Comparing herself to Anita Hill, who received immediate, ardent support from feminists in 1992 Paula said, "You know, I'm not college-educated. And, I'm not a law professor. And they slammed me. They made me look like a -- you know, some kind of a trash from Arkansas. And I think that people didn't believe me because of the bad things that -- that they were saying about me." Yet the cruelty continued. Journalist Andy Rooney snidely said after watching an interview with Paual Jones, he believed her -- but his point was "what bad taste any man must have who was ever attracted to anyone so unattractive." Rooney went on viciously:

I went to a library that keeps copies of dirty magazines like Penthouse under lock and key. I was able to look at the issue featuring Ms. Jones. She may be the most unattractive woman ever to voluntarily take off her clothes in front of a camera. In her old age, Helen of Troy was said to have looked at herself in the mirror and wondered why ever she had been twice carried off. If Paula Jones looked at herself in Penthouse she must wonder if any jury is ever going to believe that Clinton was sexually attracted to her.


It was certainly this sort of savage public humiliation that prompted Paula Jones to get a make-over and eventually a nose job. In its Style section, The Washington Post called Paula Jones's revamped image "one of the most jaw-dropping public make-overs ever," and condescendingly observed, "The new Jones is sleeker, softer and sexier than she was in 1994."

-- Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine, by Candice E. Jackson


Then there's the Clintons' use of the IRS to harass their enemies. I'm sure that it is because I suffered financial problems that this burden was not visited upon me but, according to a NewsMax article, the IRS under Clinton investigated Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, and Juanita Broaddrick. The article appropriately asks, "Who ordered the IRS to audit Clinton's critics and accusers?" [44] Of course, I can't answer that question. But Thomas Kuiper relates a story in I've Always been a Yankees Fan, his remarkable book of Hillary Clinton quotes. Kuiper says Clinton told his staff that he wanted everyone in the Independent Counsel's office audited. [45] When several people counseled him against this tactic, Clinton slammed his fist down on the table and said, "I can do any goddamned thing I want. I'm the president of the United States. I take care of my friends and I fuck with my enemies." [46]

In fact, conservative activist and San Francisco radio talk show host Melanie Morgan told me, "Every year that the Clintons were in office, I was audited -- every single year! There was always one thing that they found wrong with my tax return. Always one thing. I haven't had a problem since." But she adds that, if Hillary becomes president, "You can expect to see a lot of conservatives and Republicans audited by the IRS and persecuted." [47]

Linda Tripp affirms that the Clinton operation's tactics were out of bounds. It started with the smear campaigns against her and others. Appearing on Larry King Live in 1999, for example, Linda said that when Clinton made his "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" speech, Linda got chills. "I knew that, without evidence, that that's precisely what Monica would become," Linda said, "a woman with an unstable background and a stalker reputation." Regarding the subsequent attacks on herself, Linda said she was not surprised. "I knew I would be destroyed," she said. [48]

But Linda Tripp actually had more vital issues to worry about than her public image. "There came a point in time," she said, "where I felt that the biggest safety net for me was to become visible."

"You have a fear of your life?" Larry King quizzed her.

"Oh, absolutely."

"Based on what? I mean ... "

"I know these people are ..." Linda paused. "I'm not paranoid. I'm not delusional. I'm just normal, believe it or not, and I have reason to believe that I should at least be somewhat concerned."

'''These people,' meaning?"

"This administration," she answered, "the people who surround themselves or who are in [the] president's inner circle are not ... "

" ... would do you physical harm?" Larry supplied.

"They are not honorable people," Linda answered. "You know, I don't think that the president or one of his henchmen is going to be behind a bush with an Uzi. Do I think it's possible that I may, down the road, walk in front of a Mack truck and have an unfortunate accident? I think it's possible."

"Have you ever had a direct threat?" Larry King asked.

"I have. I believe I've had a direct threat."

"By phone or ... ?"

"In July, when the president had his Linda Tripp meeting with Monica, she carried what I believe to be threats from the president. And, later in that month, when I spoke with Bruce Lindsey, I believe I received implied threats." [49]

"Hillary's legal team kept a phalanx of detectives on the payroll through the impeachment imbroglio to find incriminating information about their enemies," former Clinton strategist and author Dick Morris wrote in Rewriting History. "The fact that they were paid for by private funds, and were not government officials, is a detail. They worked for the president and first lady, and their job was to spy on American citizens." [50]

Morris refers to Hillary's defense of her husband's administration as a "scorched-earth" [51] policy.


It worked. Many of our lives were scorched.

Terry F. Lenzner

Initially, the White House would not confirm whether it had hired Washington, D.C. private investigator Terry Lenzner. In 1998, the Washington Post reported that the administration would only say that "no private investigators were looking into prosecutors, reporters, or Clinton critics." But a day later, Lenzer confirmed that he worked for the Clintons and, though he would not discuss his work, he defended it, saying, "There would be nothing wrong if he was investigating prosecutors." [52]

Terry F. Lenzner owns Investigative Group International (IGI) and has a long, intertwined history with the Clintons, especially Hillary. Before she married Bill, Hillary worked on the Senate Watergate committee, for which Lenzner was an investigator. Hillary and Terry also served together on the board of Legal Services Corporation with their mutual friend, Mickey Kantor. [53] An op-ed in Investor's Business Daily concluded, "More than likely, bringing Lenzner into the White House fold was also Hillary's idea." [54]

Some reports claim that Lenzner began working for the Clinton camp as early as 1991. But when the 1992 campaign heated up, Lenzner met Harold Ickes, Clinton's deputy chief of staff, and before long, IGI was working for the Clintons' legal defense fund. According to a New York Post article by Sam Dealey, "The Clinton campaign hired [Lenzner's) firm in 1992 to do 'opposition research,' a euphemism for dirt-digging." [55] In fact, Joyce Milton wrote that David Kendall, Clinton's personal lawyer, hired Lenzner and IGI to investigate Paula Jones, Ken Starr's prosecutors, and GOP lawyers Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova, among others. "IGI agents didn't stop there," Milton wrote. "Accounts have Lenzner's operatives snooping into the backgrounds of Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, and Linda Tripp." When Dick Morris alleged that IGI was, in effect, the Clintons' "secret police," Milton concluded, "Judging by the revolving door between IGI and the administration, this is not an exaggeration." [56]

Milton said several Clinton staff members had worked at IGI. Raymond Kelly became Clinton's Secret Service chief. Ricki Seidman joined the Justice Department. And Terry Lenzner's daughter became an intern to Clinton's senior advisor, George Stephanopoulos. This revolving door went both ways. Former FBI general counsel Howard Shapiro signed on as Lenzner's lawyer, and former FBI official Larry Potts became an IGI executive. [57]

What's more, the IGI list includes a couple of very familiar names, namely Cody Shearer and his twin sister Brooke. According to Sam Dealey, Lenzner and Shearer were old tennis buddies and, Dealey wrote, Shearer was also a close friend of Sidney Blumenthal's." [58] An intriguing player, Brooke had been Hillary's close friend and political ally since college. Married to Clinton's deputy secretary of state, Strobe Talbott, Brooke also happened to have a private investigator's license. In fact, in the early years, she was known as the "Dumpster Diver" because she'd dig through people's trash to get the goods on them. Notorious for investigating Republicans, Larry Flynt also called Brooke "a very good friend of mine," according to Dealey. [59] Brooke presumably tired of rummaging through other peoples' garbage and left IGI to run a fellowship program at the White House before joining the Department of the Interior. [60]

Her infamous brother, Cody, presumably innocent of being the jogger who threatened me, was nonetheless an IGI "subcontractor." One of the ironies of the mess was that everyone knew Cody Shearer was a covert operator who was tightly woven into the shady side of the Clinton administration. He was also a loose cannon. Pressed under oath in a deposition, Lenzner had to admit that he had hired Shearer as a subcontractor on at least one job. In 1992, Cody Shearer "was charged with digging up dirt on President Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle." Interestingly, the Investor's Business Daily column alleged that Shearer is friends with some of Al Gore's associates and has a relationship with Gore's fund-raiser pal, Peter Knight.[61] I have to wonder if Shearer is also tight with Gore's other fund-raiser pal, Nate Landow.

IGI's offices are located just four blocks from the White House. Following the model of the old "Truth Squad," IGI came to be known as the Clintons' private CIA. Outside the government, it could operate more freely. IGI's other political clients included Ted Kennedy and the Democratic National Committee -- with which Nate Landow also has a tight history! [62]

When IGI was accused of investigating Ken Starr's lieutenants for Clinton's lawyers, Lenzner landed in front of Starr's grand jury. It wasn't the first time he had been called to testify about his activities and clients.

Starr also called Sid Blumenthal as a witness. As "Sid Vicious" wrote in his purported tell-all, The Clinton Wars, "I had been subpoenaed ... to explain my relations with Terry Lenzner, Jack Palladino, and Anthony Pellicano -- all private investigators who at one time or another had worked for Clinton's lawyers." Blumenthal denied having had any contact with the PIs and testified before the grand jury that he had never received information from them, neither directly nor indirectly. And he supposedly did not know anything about the president's lawyers' relationships with these notorious investigators, either. [63] Contradicting himself, though, he also wrote, "tensions grew between McCurry and the lawyers, who acknowledged that they had hired Lenzner -- Bob Bennett had used him for years on the Jones case." But, he adds, "He was not investigating anyone's private life." [64]

Yeah, right.

I recently asked a former CBS News producer if he had information that any of Clinton's notorious private investigators were involved in my case. He told me he thought Lenzner's group was probably one of those involved in the terror tactics against me, but he wouldn't divulge any more information. In fact, he wouldn't let me use his name. But when I told him that it was an awful time for me, he said, "I have no doubt that it was an awful time for you. I am sure you were terrified." [65]

Palladino & Sutherland

"Do you think Gennifer is the sort of person who would commit suicide?" Private investigator Jack Palladino found every old friend that Gennifer Flowers ever knew and posed such questions. Looking to discredit Flowers, he also went "around the country talking to people who knew me," Flowers told Lorraine Adams of the Washington Post. "I had calls from people -- girl friends, guy friends, people I had known. It wasn't necessarily people I had known well." According to Adams, "The Clinton campaign reported that it had paid Palladino $93,000 in 1992 to probe the allegations and private lives of women who claimed to have had relationships with the candidate." [66]

Only recently, a memo from Jack Palladino to the Clintons in early 1992 became known. In this memo, Palladino confirmed that the purpose of his work was to "impeach Flowers' character and veracity until she is destroyed beyond all recognition." [67] That sounds a lot like the philosophy of Hillary and Sid Blumenthal, with their "destroy your enemies" approach to politics. There is little doubt that the Clintons -- Hillary -- hired Palladino to go after Gennifer.

It was Hillary who instructed the campaign to put the ruthless private investigator Jack Palladino on the case. In her memo to Palladino, she ordered him to “impeach Flowers’ character and veracity until she is destroyed beyond all recognition.” Thus primed, Palladino went into action, seeking to portray Flowers as a prostitute, a shakedown artist and career scamster.

-- From Nixon Girl to Watergate, by Jeffrey St. Clair, Alexander Cockburn


Palladino also worked on Sally Perdue's case. Her 1983 affair with Clinton became news in 1992 and, less than a week later, Michael Isikoff reported that Clinton, "had retained San Francisco private investigator Jack Palladino to discredit stories about women claiming to have had relationships with the Arkansas governor," and to "douse a number of stories that threatened to revive the issue." [68]

Reporter David Helvarg also said Palladino started investigating ''bimbo eruptions" for Clinton's 1992 campaign. Working from their Victorian mansion in San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury district, Palladino and his wife Sandra Sutherland run Palladino & Sutherland, working with a crew of West Coast operatives. In a 1998 Mother Jones article, "All the President's PIs," Helvarg wrote that Palladino and Sutherland "have worked for clients ranging from Hell's Angels to Black Panthers to international bankers. While investigating American Express in Europe in 1989, Sutherland posed as a journalist to try to develop leads." [69]

According to Helvarg, there was some question as to why Charles Ruff -- Clinton's chief White House counsel -- paid Palladino $130,000 to snoop for the Teamsters in 1994 during the contested election of Ron Carey as Teamsters president. Neither Ruff nor Palladino, who has a reputation for intimidating the targets of his investigations, have disclosed the nature of that work. [70] According to a 2005 NewsMax story, "A notation in the campaign's Federal Election Commission filing shows that Palladino was paid from campaign coffers." [71]

Of course, Paula Jones's lawyers wanted to question Palladino about his work for the Clintons regarding Gennifer Flowers and "numerous other women who were alleged to have had affairs with Bill," but Helvarg said Palladino dodged the subpoena. [72]

I have every reason to believe that Palladino was deeply involved in my case as well. Many of the scare tactics used against me were just his style.

In the nonfiction movie The Insider, a big tobacco executive and his lawyer make a veiled threat to a former employee who is secretly considering blowing the whistle and exposing the company on 60 Minutes. After the employee leaves the meeting, the lawyer says to the company president, "I don't think he's getting the message."

It gave me chills. That is exactly what the jogger said to me.

Is it just a coincidence that Jack Palladino was a consultant on that movie?

Melanie Morgan met Palladino and his wife in Corte Madera, California, in 2003. Speaking to an audience of mystery writers at the annual Book Passage Mystery Writers Conference, the PI team described their investigative techniques, media exposure, and contributions to books and movies. Melanie, who was writing a cold-case murder mystery, also happens to be a journalist of thirty-plus years and co-host of a conservative talk radio show in San Francisco. At the time, though, Palladino just knew her as another mystery writer.

After they gave their talk, Palladino and Sutherland sat at a table signing books. Melanie approached, interested in hiring Palladino to help with her murder mystery. Looking for investigative tips and resources, Melanie struck up a conversation with him and Palladino gave her some leads and contact information. They had a fun repartee and she found him to be a nice guy, gregarious and outgoing. Melanie established a rapport with him and Palladino jumped up and paced while they talked. He seemed to enjoy the limelight, so she finessed a little more information out of him.

Melanie spoke out of earshot of most of the people around them. "Aren't you ashamed of yourself," she chided Palladino, "with the business you did for Hillary Clinton?"

Palladino looked up and "kind of gave me a lazy smile, and his wife, who is British, shot her husband a look," Melanie says. "Her eyes cut over to him and I could tell he was debating whether to answer me or not." So Melanie added, "You know, come on, that stuff with Kathleen Willey was pretty outrageous. What was that?" She smiled at him. "You guys ran over her cat? What was that all about?"

"Well, I'm not really going to comment about that but let me just say this," Palladino replied. "The only regret that I had about that whole thing was that Hillary did not pay me in a timely fashion."

Then his wife chimed in. According to Melanie, Sutherland looked to be in her late fifties and she had a sharp tongue. "You could tell she was the boss of the operation," Melanie says. "She started making some nasty comments about Hillary Clinton, and the two of them were laughing and snorting over the fact that they had to bring a certain amount of pressure to bear."

"Yes," the radio commentator inquired artfully, "I've read that Hillary has a lot of problems about paying people to whom she owes money, including the ghostwriter for her book."

"Yes, we noticed that problem as well," they told her.

Keeping the rapport going, Melanie smiled at him and asked, "You didn't really kill her cat, did you?"

Palladino indicated his work was "more like Dumpster diving." But Melanie noted that "he smiled when he said it and looked at his wife, and alarm bells were going off, like 'Shut up!'"


"He definitely acknowledged that there was something that had transpired there with Kathleen Willey and her cat," Melanie said, "and that his biggest regret was that he didn't get cash up front from Hillary Clinton!" Palladino and Sutherland were eventually paid, Melanie says, "But my distinct impression was that they had to threaten to go public with it."

"I saved Hillary Clinton's ass," Palladino told her. "You'd think she'd be more grateful to me." [73]

The Pelican

When Gennifer Flowers came forward with taped conversations between herself and Clinton, his team accused her of doctoring the tapes. To refute her, they had private investigator Anthony Pellicano evaluate the tapes. Not surprisingly, the notorious thug determined Gennifer's tapes had been doctored. [74] According to Dick Morris, Gennifer Flowers "submitted the tapes to another service, Truth Verification Labs, which found them to be completely authentic." [75]

But discrediting tapes is tame work for Anthony Pellicano. Also called "The Pelican," he is a notoriously bad guy who is known, according to World Net Daily, "for dirty tricks and rough tactics on behalf of celebrity clients." A member of the "Shadow Team" through Clinton's two terms as president, Pellicano is reputed to have been deeply involved in the efforts to discredit both Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky. [76]

In a [January] 1992 profile in GQ Magazine, Pellicano boasted about the dirty work he had performed for his clients, including blackmail and physical assault. He claimed to have beaten one of his client's enemies with a baseball bat. 'I'm an expert with a knife,' said Pellicano. 'I can shred your face with a knife.''' [77]


Pellicano’s legal troubles began in 2002 when prosecutors claim he hired Alexander Proctor to threaten Anita Busch, then a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, who was working on a story about actor Steven Seagal and possible links to the Mafia.

Proctor allegedly went to Busch’s home, placed a dead fish with a rose in its mouth on the windshield of her car and made a bullet-sized hole in her windshield. He also placed a sign with the word “stop” on the windshield, court documents show. The FBI later raided Pellicano’s office, found illegal explosives and seized documents and computers....

FBI agents raided Pellicano’s West Hollywood office on Nov. 22, 2002, and arrested him on federal weapons charges. In his office, they found gold, jewelry, and about $200,000 in cash –- most of it bundled in $10,000 wrappers –- thousands of pages of transcripts of illegal wiretaps; two handguns; and various explosive devices stored in safes, including two live hand grenades and a pile of C4 plastic explosive, complete with blasting cap and detonation cord.

“The explosive could easily be used to blow up a car, and was in fact strong enough to bring down an airplane,” noted Special Agent Stanley Ornellas in a sworn affidavit....

On the morning of June 20, 2002, reporter Busch approached her car, which was parked near her home. To her horror, she saw a bullet-hole in her windshield. A cardboard sign taped to the glass bore one word: “Stop.” A dead fish with a long-stemmed rose in its mouth lay on the hood.

Busch took the hint. She immediately went into hiding, staying in a series of hotels at her paper’s expense, while the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Deprtment’s organized-crime division investigated.

A break in the case seemed to come when ex-convict Proctor spilled the beans to an undercover FBI informant. Proctor reportedly told the informant, on tape, that it was not the Mafia harassing Busch –- it was Steven Seagal. Proctor said Seagal hired detective Anthony Pellicano to intimidate the woman into silence. Pellicano, in turn, had subcontracted Proctor to do the dirty work.

“He wanted to make it look like the Italians were putting the hit on her, so it wouldn’t reflect on Seagal,” Proctor told the informant. Proctor accused Pellicano of ordering him to “blow up” or set fire to Busch’s car to frighten her. However, Proctor said he got cold feet and merely damaged the car, leaving the dead fish and “Stop” sign as calling cards.

-- Clinton Dirty Trickster Faces New Charges: Private Investigator Pellicano to be Arraigned in Celeb Wiretapping Case, by wnd.com


This is not a nice guy.

In 2002, as the story goes, Pellicano hired Alexander Proctor to threaten a Los Angeles Times reporter who was working on a story about actor Steven Seagal and possible links to the Mafia. According to World Net Daily, "Proctor allegedly ... placed a dead fish with a rose in its mouth on the windshield of her car and made a bullet-sized hole in her windshield. He also placed a sign with the word 'stop' on the windshield, court documents show ... Proctor said Seagal hired ... Pellicano to intimidate the woman into silence. Pellicano ... wanted to make it look like the Italians were putting the hit on her, so it wouldn't reflect on Seagal." [78]

These are precisely the kind of terror tactics that were in play against me. It is also, by the way, a perfect example of the "false-flag ops" that may have been involved in Prudential's work on my case.

Proctor told an informant about the Seagal case and Pellicano went to jail for thirty months. The New York Times reported that Pellicano pleaded guilty of "illegal possession of hand grenades and plastic explosives." [79]

In 2006, Pellicano finished his term on the weapons charges. Thanks to the feds, though, according to World Net Daily, he was "transferred to San Bernardino County Jail, which is sometimes used by the federal prisoners. He was booked on charges that were at that time under seal...[and] is the target of a 110-count federal racketeering indictment..." [80] The New York Times reported that a separate grand jury is investigating reported illegal wiretapping and that authorities seemed to "hope that the prison term would extend much further." [81] Pellicano is still in jail, which is where the guy belongs. Unfortunately, his incarceration came after the Clinton years.

During Clinton's administration, Hillary commissioned Pellicano to spy on their perceived "enemies," presumably me and the other women whom Bill Clinton abused, reported World Net Daily. "During two terms of the Clinton administration, Pellicano was one of several private investigators used by the White House to conduct 'shadow operations,'" World Net Daily said. "But it was Hillary Clinton who hired the 'Shadow Team' -- some believe to do work that employees of the federal government could not do." [82]

"In the political life of the Clintons, it was [Hillary] who pioneered the use of private detectives," reported former congressional investigator Barbara Olson (who was killed on 9/11). "It was she who brought in and cultivated the professional dirt-diggers and smear artists." [83]

The "First Husband"

When Clinton assaulted me, Andrew Friendly knocked on the door, then he pounded on the door, then he yelled for Clinton to answer. But Friendly never came in. If the president of the United States does not answer a knock, shouldn't someone enter and make sure he is okay? But Friendly never did, and neither did anyone else. Clinton had obviously told them to stay out.

I have often wondered how many times Andrew Friendly knocked on that door for the Monicas of the world -- and whatever the hell else was going on in that place. And I wonder how many times those stewards -- those sweet, friendly men who served the president in the Oval Office -- had to clean up after Clinton and the likes of Monica Lewinsky.

Clinton never seemed to understand where he was when he lived and worked -- and had sex -- in the White House. He treated the people's house as if it were a "cool pad" back in Hot Springs, Arkansas, or a frat house at college. He just didn't get it.

Addictions specialist Jerome Levin, Ph.D., who voted for Clinton twice, wrote the fascinating book, The Clinton Syndrome. Like many Americans, Dr. Levin believed the "misplaced prosecutory zeal" that invaded Clinton's privacy was worse for the country than Clinton's "sexual practices, whatever they may be." [84] Unfortunately, in Clinton's case, "whatever they may be" included sexual assault and rape. Just because a sex addict happens to be a popular president, we cannot allow him to attack women with impunity.

Nonetheless, Levin did hold Clinton accountable for making his sex life a public issue, and affirmed that it was Clinton's addictive behavior that led to his "inability to keep his private life private." Clinton's compulsive desire for approval, which seems to manifest itself in his sexual addiction, "crossed the line from the private to the professional," Levin wrote, "and therefore (because he is the president) has entered the public realm." [85]

Like any other addiction, sexual addiction eventually reaches the breaking point. The alcoholic hits bottom. The gambler goes broke. Drug addicts overdose. And sex addicts self-destruct.

According to Levin, as early as his engagement to Hillary, Clinton's overindulgence in sexual activity became a serious problem for him, not because his behavior had changed but because his life had changed -- he had become engaged. And, according to Levin, Clinton "was cheating on Hillary with a girlfriend that he was also cheating on." [86]

In a few years, the consequences of his addiction began to spiral. The Paula Jones case, for example, was indicative of how seriously addicted Clinton had become. Levin argues that it was madness that Clinton refused to settle with Paula Jones so he could stop the inquiry before it snowballed. But Clinton could not admit that what he did to Paula was out of line or that Paula might have felt differently than he did about what happened in that room, so he certainly wasn't about to apologize for it. According to Levin, this mistake was irrational and "revealed his inability to admit that his sex life had been out of control." [87]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:43 am

Part 2 of 2

Levin further points out that, on the road to self-destruction, Clinton was already under the microscope when he assaulted me and seduced Monica Lewinsky. Given that he was already in serious trouble, these advances were extremely irrational. Levin observes that, in conducting this behavior, Clinton further "opened the door and invited both personal and political destruction."  [88]

Of course, John Kennedy also had many affairs and some of these were risky, Levin recalls, such as "sharing women with various gangsters." And Levin adds that, "Kennedy's sexual behavior had a profound influence on Clinton, even foreshadowing Clinton's behavior in many ways." But the difference between Clinton and other presidents who had extramarital affairs -- including Kennedy -- is that those presidents were not sex addicts. "True leaders are programmed to lead," Levin argues, "not to self-destruct." Clearly, the self-destructive nature of Clinton's sexual addiction subverted his ability to lead. That is the distinction between Clinton and other presidents who had extramarital affairs. While Lyndon Johnson, Dwight Eisenhower, Franklin Roosevelt, and John Kennedy all had affairs, Levin says, they differ from Clinton in that their "private indiscretions were not self-destructive and did not compromise their leadership." [89] Clinton's certainly did.

A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things although no difference exists.[1] It is particularly used when a word or phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid.

-- Distinction Without a Difference, by Wikipedia


After my accusations about Clinton came out, several women who worked in the White House were reportedly upset, refusing to accept his denials. John Harris, author of The Survivor, wrote, "One woman, a senior White House official, had heard from two colleagues who had experiences uncomfortably similar to what Willey described: innocent conversations that pivoted (into) instant fervid advances." [90]

Robert "Buzz" Patterson wrote that President Clinton once even groped a female steward on Air Force One. Upset, the woman demanded an apology. Remarkably, Clinton did apologize to her. [91]

The stories about Clinton's degradation of women go on and on. The undeniable fact is that Bill Clinton is not just promiscuous, not just a womanizer, but a habitual abuser of women, a sexual predator and, in fact, a misogynist.


There is something that kicks in for him when he's around a woman to whom he is attracted. Something overtakes him, manifest in his beet red face, his distraction, his detached consciousness of the person in front of him, and a hyperawareness of his surroundings. He seems tuned only to the risk of moving on his urges, sizing up the place, the time, the woman's reaction. This is the weird, dark side of Bill Clinton.

Consider the striking similarities between Clinton's 1991 abuse of Paula Jones and his assault on me two years later. Just as I did, Paula tried to make conversation but felt like Clinton was distracted. Just as I did, Paula tried to retreat when he tried to kiss her. Just as I did, Paula said she needed to leave but Clinton said, "Oh, you don't need to go right now." And, just as I observed, Paula said Clinton's face got "beet red." As Candice Jackson said of Paula, "Partly because of the ... power differential, she didn't leave the room at that point, not wanting to offend him too badly." [92] My feelings in that moment were similar. Other feelings aside, I was ashamed for the president, and I did not feel not inclined to humiliate him further, even when his behavior was so base.

San Francisco radio talk show host Melanie Morgan once briefly encountered Bill Clinton. In that moment, she also saw his dark side. Clinton was arriving in San Francisco's Pacific Heights neighborhood for a fund-raiser at Gordon Getty's home. To prepare for his arrival, Melanie and a friend organized a unique protest. They emblazoned a neighborhood awareness campaign with a special logo that said, "WARNING: SEXUAL PREDATOR ALERT," with added text about notification requirements for neighborhood sexual predators. Melanie's friend went door-to-door to deliver the information to residents in Pacific Heights. The notoriously liberal San Francisco Chronicle actually covered the protest. The Associated Press picked up the story and it went all around the world.

Clinton's limousine arrived at the Getty residence where he encountered a throng of protestors shouting, "Shame! Shame!" They held a fifteen-foot banner that said, "I Believe You Paula, Kathleen, Gennifer, Dolly, Elizabeth, Monica, Juanita ... " and another that said "I BELIEVE JUANITA," (a reference to Juanita Broaddrick and Anita Hill). Melanie Morgan stood in front of the signs with a megaphone, rallying her troops.

Clinton's smoky-glass window was rolled halfway down and Melanie got a clear view of him as the rage welled up in his face. "Clinton looked at the signs the protestors behind me were holding and then he looked at me," she recently told me. "I will never forget the look in his face when he read the banner. His eyes narrowed and he gave me a stare of such hatred and focus and intensity that I could imagine him raping a woman at that moment. I absolutely believed all of the women's stories. There was no question in my mind when I saw that look directed at me that he was entirely capable of it. I kept staring at him as his face raced to a purple rage and I must say that, for a moment, I was scared." [93]


David Gergen said in a Frontline interview, "Watching Bill Clinton erupt is like watching Mt. Vesuvius. It is something to behold. He gets very red in the face and it goes very quick and it leaves." [94] A US News and World Report story also said of Clinton, "His rage built on itself, and some of his aides thought he might even get violent..." [95]

It is interesting to consider that Clinton's sexual arousal and aggressiveness appear to be related to his anger response. It certainly seems plausible that Clinton's deep-seated emotional issues would include a significant amount of anger around his mother's abandonment of him at a young age. Compound this with her overt sexuality in his presence and all the other complex dynamics that turned him into a sexual addict, and it is likely that, in his psyche, sexual arousal might well be associated with anger. Further complicating his internal dynamic, Clinton, a sex addict, likely has a few issues with himself over his behavior with women. Of course, I am no psychiatrist or sexual abuse expert. But, taken together, these clues might indicate that Clinton's anger issues are wound together with his sexual abuse mechanism, all of which expresses itself in the aroused man's beet red face. Twisted in his mind, perhaps inappropriate arousal triggers his anger. Alternatively, deep, subconscious anger might result in inappropriate, uncontrolled arousal. Either way, the ugly association of anger with arousal sounds dangerously close to a frightening and violent interpretation of "sex," namely rape.

Despite whatever crazy, psychosexual mechanism is at work in his mind and body, he is very savvy at the psych-out. He is a master predator. And that is precisely the problem with having Bill Clinton anywhere near the White House -- as president or first spouse. He is and always will be a sexual predator. Period. We have no reason to think otherwise, no evidence that he has received treatment, nor any other indication that his behavior has or will change, especially if he has the full powers of the presidency to enable his pursuits -- again.

As the child of an alcoholic, Clinton was predisposed biologically and socially to develop his own addiction, Levin says, adding that an "inappropriate early exposure to sexuality taught him to prematurely associate sex with excitement, secrecy, conflict, and intense arousal." Clinton's highly sexual mother perpetuated this dynamic and later added to it, promoting her smart and competent son to the role of her hero. As a teenager, Levin says, Bill filled his mother's need for a father-figure for Roger, his troubled younger brother, and served as a substitute "husband to his flirtatious [and near-sexual exhibitionist] mother." As a teenaged male, Bill was the man in his mother's life. Levin concludes, "There was something unhealthy in this -- excessive and somehow erotic." Levin explains that feelings of grandiosity and special status combined with Bill's successes, causing him to suffer a condition called "terminal uniqueness" -- the belief that he is special, absolutely different from other people, superior to them, and therefore powerful. [96]

For a brief moment in history, Clinton supposedly participated in "counseling" for his sexual addiction. That moment was fleeting. Though it is obvious that nothing has changed, Hillary's presidential campaign would have us believe that it is resolved. But a man with such a deep problem would require extensive intervention and likely even intensive inpatient treatment before he could overcome his lifelong pattern. What's more, his wife would have to contribute to such a recovery, and we have no evidence of that either.

When Clinton gave his famous "I have sinned" speech admitting that he had lied about Monica, he claimed to have had prayer breakfasts in the White House every week with Jesse Jackson. But Jackson himself seemed to refute the impact of those prayer sessions on Clinton. As Jackson himself put it, "There is nothing that this man won't do." According to Jackson biographer Marshall Frady, Jackson once said of Clinton, "He is immune to shame. Move past all the nice posturing and get really down in there on him, you find absolutely nothing ... nothing but appetite." [97] So while he might have had weekly spiritual moments with Jesse Jackson nearly ten years ago, it is highly unlikely that his confessions changed Clinton's behavior in any way.

Sigmund Freud used the name "the Oedipus complex" to explain the origin of certain neuroses in childhood. It is defined as a male child's unconscious desire for the exclusive love of his mother. This desire includes jealousy towards the father and the unconscious wish for that parent's death, as well as the unconscious desire for sexual intercourse with the mother.

-- Oedipus, by Wikipedia


Make no mistake: Bill Clinton is still addicted to sex.

When the Clintons relocated to New York so Hillary could become a senator, her husband started making the rounds, immersing himself in the New York social scene. He dropped in on a party, making a big entrance with his entourage of Secret Service agents. He spied Barbara Walters across the room and sent a Secret Service agent over to her -- just like he used to dispatch the Arkansas state troopers! The agent told Barbara that President Clinton would like to talk to her and asked if she wanted to join him. Being a woman of great dignity, Barbara Walters told the agent that if Clinton wanted to talk to her, he could come on over.

Clinton also spied Monica Crowley at the party. A beautiful young woman, Clinton tried to get near her and witnesses saw him giving her the "full Clinton eye-sweep." But the staunch Clinton-hater proved too agile and avoided him completely.

The former president of the United States just wasn't getting lucky that night, but apparently desperate for female attention, he was still on the prowl. In the end, he was the last to leave the party -- after hitting on the waitresses.

Yes, Bill Clinton is still on the make.

Now that his wife is running for the presidency, however, Bill is doing a better job of keeping his sex life out of the news -- for the most part. "Clinton is rarely without company in public, yet the company he keeps rarely includes his wife," wrote Patrick Healy for the New York Times. "Since leaving the White House, Bill and Hillary Clinton have built largely separate lives ... In choosing to keep their public lives separate, people around the Clintons say, there is a political calculus at work." Indeed, Clinton "has told friends that his number one priority is not to cause her any trouble." [98]

It would seem their "political calculus" also includes distancing Bill Clinton from his role as Hillary's husband. Further, it looks as if Bill might have tried to solve his problem, for the time being, with a "geographic cure." According to Levin, Alcoholics Anonymous describes a geographic cure as "physically running away from one's problems without ever facing them, without ever relinquishing denial and getting help for one's addiction." [99] This sounds like precisely what Bill Clinton is up to.

While Hillary is busy pursuing the presidency, Bill Clinton is often out at night, "Zipping around Los Angeles with his bachelor buddy, Ronald W. Burkle, or hitting parties and fundraisers in Manhattan," Patrick Healy wrote for the New York Times in 2006. In fact, Healy said several prominent New York Democrats got concerned after a tabloid photograph showed Clinton leaving a Manhattan restaurant late one night after a dinner that was attended by the Canadian politician Belinda Stronach. [100]

Worth about $600 million, Stronach also happens to be a smart and elegant blonde who is twenty years younger than Clinton. After a brief foray into Canadian politics as a Member of Parliament, Stronach announced in April 2007 that she would return to the family business as vice-chairwoman of Magna International, an auto-parts company. Rumors about Clinton and Stronach persisted for quite some time. According to Julian Coman, writing for the UK Telegraph, Stronach and Clinton are close friends and though she "firmly denied rumours of a romance with the former president," they maintained their friendship for a couple of years. "She has told friends that her bid for office was inspired by Mr. Clinton, who has been a good friend since the two met over a round of golf in 2001," Coman wrote. "They have since been to the Toronto races together and have been spotted having dinner at an elite Toronto restaurant." Stronach has not volunteered much more than that Clinton "is a great communicator," but Coman said her friends divulged that "she was 'intrigued' by his 'charisma and brainpower.'" Rumors have also swirled that Clinton and Stronach traveled together. [101] This doesn't sound like a platonic "friendship," particularly since Bill Clinton is half of the equation.

While the presidential candidate's spouse is spending a good deal of time traveling outside the United States and overseas, we Americans should be concerned about what forms his "womanizing" might take in other countries. Since Hillary could very well become president, we must consider the damage her spouse may well do as a predator in the White House again. We have even more cause for worry because Hillary has recently suggested that when she becomes president, Bill might assume an ambassadorship. Since it is highly unlikely that he has overcome his addiction but has instead employed a "geographic cure," we must consider the danger this poses for the United States. Not if but when Clinton loses control of his addiction again, when he self-destructs, when he assaults or rapes another woman, this time in a foreign country, or when he has an affair with the wife of some important international figure who might not appreciate it, his "sexual escapades" may well become a foreign-relations disaster. And when his wife is the president of the United States, such an issue could hardly be construed as a matter of the man's "private sex life."

The problem for America was and is that Clinton, like all addicts, thinks he is above the rules that govern everyone else. According to Dr. Levin, "because of this belief, such individuals are prone to lying and justifying their actions with self-righteous rationalization."  [102] Now that sounds like our boy!

Levin raises another issue that will be a concern if Hillary becomes president: Clinton's pattern of flirting with risk. With respect to my case, for example, Levin iterates, "Not only was the time and location risky, but ... he had no reason to believe that she would keep her mouth shut." While his "total lack of consideration for this distraught woman is almost inconceivable," Levin adds, his actions were just as irrational. [103]

Gennifer Flowers described some of the very risky behavior in which Clinton engaged during their affair, stating, "Bill was always a risk-taker." In her book Passion and Betrayal, Gennifer recounts a story about Governor Clinton, who wanted her to make love with him in a bathroom in the Governor's Mansion during a party, when Hillary and fifty guests were just outside. [104] This behavior only adds to the considerable odds that, once his wife is president, his sexual addiction will again cause him to self-destruct.

A Freudian term explains the apparent dysfunction in the Clinton marriage. The "Madonna-whore complex," also known as the "mother-whore complex" is a syndrome in which a man initially pursues a woman who might fill this need for intimacy unmet in childhood. After he marries her, however, he begins to see the wife as a mother or "Madonna" figure, and she then becomes sexually off-limits because, in his mind, it would be incestuous for him to be sexually attracted to a woman whom he beholds as a mother figure.

Admittedly, it requires a stretch of the imagination to see Hillary as a "Madonna" figure, but it's pretty easy to see her as a maternal persona in her relationship with Bill. In fact, Hillary has often been described as Bill's advisor and disciplinarian. While Bill is famously "boyish," Hillary has always assumed the parental role over him. Hillary is not so much a nurturing maternal figure, but more an ill-tempered, scolding woman whose personality is strikingly reminiscent of the very angry grandmother who raised the young Bill Clinton in his mother's absence.

With a sexually charged mother, it is reasonable to assume that Bill would grow up with some "issues." Such a man may well love his wife but, in time, no longer regard her as a sexual woman but, instead, a maternal woman, in whom love and sex no longer mix. Interestingly, Monica Lewinsky revealed that Clinton "confided to her that his romantic affairs 'multiplied' after he married Hillary Rodham." [105]

Detached from feelings of love, then, sex is reserved for "dirty" women. Prostitutes, the other half of the "Madonna-whore" equation, meet this job requirement. However, so do all women whom he perceives as beneath his wife. In Bill Clinton's case, that includes subordinates, volunteers, interns, "white trash," and any other casual acquaintance who happens to be female. Interestingly, other women who nurture him or otherwise behave maternally toward him might also be "Madonna" figures and, therefore, sexually off-limits. This might explain why Clinton apparently never victimized the very beautiful Nancy Hernreich, who actually spoke baby-talk to him.

By all accounts, Bill never developed feelings of love or affection for the women he engaged sexually, but universally objectified women in these relationships. As governor of Arkansas, for example, "Clinton would spot a woman he wanted and, in an incredibly dehumanizing way, would send a bodyguard to bring her to him," Levin says. "Clinton began trying to control women by objectifying them ... [and] did not attempt to establish any type of a relationship with these women, nor did he even engage in the niceties of seduction. Rather, he chose to further degrade them by simply exposing himself and asking for oral sex." [106]

Clinton's own words validate his sexual objectification of women. After a long affair and supposedly loving friendship with Gennifer Flowers, Clinton said of her in 1992, "What does that whore think she's doing to me? She's a fucking slut." [107] Even in a reference to Ted Kennedy's car accident at Chappaquiddick, Clinton said, "He couldn't get a whore across a bridge." [108]

Apparently, calling us "bimbos" was putting it nicely! That degrading term was just for public consumption.

Providing further evidence of Bill's opinions about women, Arkansas trooper L.D. Brown gave a deposition in 1997, describing Clinton's "womanizing" as Arkansas's governor. Paula Jones's attorney asked Brown, "You said that Clinton's extramarital sexual partners were 'purely to be graded, purely to be chased, dominated, conquered.' What did you mean by that?"

"Well, grading, as degrading as it may sound, is something that he and I both would do," the trooper admitted. "Pretty much every pretty woman that we would see, eight, nine, ten, seven, six, whatever."

"Well, you're saying that as far as Clinton was concerned," Paula's attorney asked, "they were purely to be graded, chased, dominated, and conquered?"

"Well, in the sense of a game, in the sense ... that any of these people that I'm talking about, say, Jane Doe 2, it was not a love relationship. It was a sexual relationship alone." [109]

According to Dr. Levin, "The sex addict ... views others as existing only to serve him." Specifically speaking of Clinton, Levin adds, "He does not even appear to care about the other person's feelings at all. Time and time again, Clinton has shown total disregard for the women as people and has treated them as objects." [110] As further evidence of this, Juanita, Paula, and I all observed that Clinton seemed emotionally detached from what he did to us and, eventually, even Monica realized this about her "affair" with Clinton.

While Bill Clinton has demonstrated his view that all women -- except, of course, his wife -- are whores, Hillary evidently shares this opinion. According to Christopher Andersen, rather than expressing anger at her husband about the women, Hillary said to Betsey Wright, "These women are all trash. Nobody is going to believe them," she said. [111] Another time, she said to president-elect Clinton, "What the fuck do you think you're doing? I know who that whore is. Get her out of here." [112]

Cleverly, Hillary's presidential campaign presents a narrow view of the man who will again be her White House roommate. They show us the former president, the world leader, the great orator. They circulate footage of him on his international tsunami mission, suggest that Hillary will appoint him to an ambassadorship, and publicize his altruistic 2007 book promoting volunteerism. But where is Hillary's husband?

They don't want us to remember that he is her spouse, the husband who will sleep with her in the White House residence, who will help make decisions from a nearby desk, and -- worst of all -- who will again have access to the interns, volunteers, and staff. Make no mistake: If Hillary wins the presidency, we will get them both. They are a team, and all of this will come up again. Just as he needed her to put out his fires, she needs his influence and his political wisdom. He will be there as her partner and, still, as a predator.

The Enabler

Hillary could not have been very surprised that her fiance had a problem keeping his pants zipped. Bill Clinton had many "girlfriends" in college and, once he became engaged to marry Hillary, his sexual addiction went to the next level. "Hillary was already, in a way, enabling Bill in his sexual behavior simply by not leaving him," says Levin. [113]

According to Carl Bernstein in his 2007 Hillary biography A Woman in Charge, Clinton had many "short, sexual, casual, one-dimensional" relationships with women when he was at Yale. By 1974, Clinton was campaigning in Arkansas and had a woman in every town. Bernstein wrote that he had "girlfriends in Little Rock and several towns in his campaign district." [114]

Aware of all the red flags, Hillary consciously chose to dismiss them. She married the philandering Bill Clinton in 1974. Why?

By all accounts, they are a formidable team -- much better together, much more effective and powerful -- than they ever would have been individually. There is a yin and yang to the Hillary-Bill partnership, the essence of which seems to be that he is so charming and she is not. In fact, her nastiness seems to be the valuable asset that she brought to their winning equation. "She possessed the one necessary quality that was not native to his soul: a kind of toughness," wrote Bernstein, putting it charitably. "Without it, he could never have gotten to the presidency." Bernstein said former Clinton pollster Stan Greenberg "described this quality as a 'fierceness' ... summoned by Hillary in pursuit of their shared goals because Clinton, unlike his wife, was preternaturally 'conflict averse ... and by nature uncomfortable attacking.'" Dick Morris puts it a little more bluntly, saying, "She has a quality of ruthlessness, a quality of aggressiveness and strength about her, that he doesn't have. A killer instinct." [115] Riding on the coattails of Bill's likeability, Hillary's tough skin got them out of jams. Sounds like a political match made in heaven.

From the get-go, Hillary chose this partnership -- their mutual political ambition -- over a monogamous marriage. She knew what she was getting into. She traded fidelity for the plan. No doubt she recognized early in their partnership that Bill's promiscuity would be a political problem and that it would not go away. She doubtless also realized that her discipline, her problem-solving nature, and her stomach for the fight would keep him afloat, just as she would rely on his charm to keep her in the political game.

But their marriage, by all accounts, has been "less than ideal." They've both been miserable, each paying a high personal price for their lofty political idealism.

But Hillary Clinton is no martyr. If Hillary cares that her husband chases anything in a skirt, if she's repeatedly devastated and surprised that the sex fiend she married continues to be a sex fiend, her sad predicament should not be mistaken for sacrifice.

After all, she didn't just partner with her political alter ego, she married him. Their political simpatico has a precise parallel in their personal relationship, in which they are a perfect match -- a perfect dysfunctional match: He is the addict and she is the enabler.

While it started out subtle enough, Dr. Levin says, "Eventually ... her enabling would be overt." [116] In The Clinton Syndrome, Levin wrote that, "Most addicts, including sexual addicts, are helped by enablers who continue in relationships with someone who is actively addicted for compelling, unconscious emotional reasons despite the fact that the relationship is grossly detrimental to the enabler." [117]

Clinton's sexual addiction has certainly been detrimental to Hillary. Yet she stays. She has stayed for more than thirty years. She makes excuses. She blames the vast right-wing conspiracy. She pays private investigators to threaten and terrorize women -- her primary constituency! She enables her husband's sexual addiction and his predatory activities. In the trade, she gets her shot at power, her turn at the presidency.


Interestingly, Bernstein observes that, early in their relationship, it was not Clinton's philandering that bothered Hillary so much as her inability to control it. "The source of Hillary's frustration and anger ... was her knowledge that she was powerless to change him," says Bernstein, adding that, "She knew that Bill's history of compulsive infidelity during their courtship meant the chances for a stable marriage, especially a marriage without adultery, were at best a crapshoot." [118] She was right about that.

By now a proclaimed supporter of Gene McCarthy, she was appalled, not by the spectacle of McCarthy’s young supporters being beaten senseless by Daley’s cops, but by the protesters’ tactics, which she concluded were not viable. Like her future husband, Hillary was always concerned with maintaining viability within the system....

Hillary’s assessment of Alinsky was hostile, charging him with excessive radicalism. Her preferential option was to seek minor advances within the terms of the system....

The first real anti-war protests at Yale came with the shooting of the students at Kent State. Hillary saw the ensuing national student upheaval as, once again, a culpable failure to work within the system. “I advocated engagement, not disruption.”...

Even as Hillary Clinton was making trouble for herself and Bill in her legal and business dealings, she was reinventing Bill as a politician. Defeat in 1980 after his first two-year gubernatorial term was a cataclysmic event. Bill called it a “near death experience”. According to Gerth and Van Natta, it was “the only time anyone has seen Hillary Clinton cry in public”. Bill was inclined to throw in the political towel and go back to being a law professor in Fayetteville, where he would doubtless be roosting in tenured bliss to this day, plump and pony-tailed, fragrant with marijuana and still working his way through an endless roster of coeds. But in 1980, over a funereal breakfast of instant grits, Vernon Jordan brokered a deal: Bill Clinton would give up being a southern populist in the mold of Orval Faubus, six-term governor of Arkansas. Southern populism involved offending powerful corporations. Bill lost in 1980 because not only had he taken the un-populist course of hiking the rate on car registration, he’d angered Weyerhaeuser and Tyson Foods. So, for his comeback he would remake himself as a neoliberal. Hillary Rodham would give up insisting on keeping her maiden name and become Hillary Clinton. The man charged with supervising the Clintons’ makeover was selected by Hillary: Dick Morris, a political consultant known for his work for Southern racists like Jesse Helms. Morris ultimately guided President Bill Clinton into the politics of triangulation, outflanking the Republicans from the right on race, crime, morals posturing and deference to corporations. As Hillary said in 1980, “If you want to be in this business, this is the type of person you have to deal with”.

-- From Nixon Girl to Watergate, by Jeffrey St. Clair, Alexander Cockburn


An early example of Hillary's enabling was her handling of Bill's affair with Gennifer Flowers, which started within five years of their marriage. Hillary knew about Gennifer and fought with Bill about the affair, but Bill stayed with Gennifer and Hillary stayed with Bill.

But staying was the least of it. Bill Clinton has not kept his sex life private and Hillary has not just enabled him in the privacy of their marriage, but also in their political lives as public servants. We're not talking about an occasional fling during a campaign trip, and not even about promiscuity run amok. We're not even talking about his sexual addiction anymore. We're talking about a woman who enables a sexual abuser and a sexual predator.

As Levin says, "It is very often a mate who enables the addict by making excuses, reinforcing denial, getting the addict out of jams of one sort or another, and doing whatever else is needed to perpetuate the addiction." [119] That is Hillary. But in her case, "whatever else is needed" is scary. Time and again, she has proved willing to do whatever it takes. In fact, she has abused power, not just to win, not for her ideology, but to hurt innocent women, women her husband preyed upon.

After we got caught in Bill Clinton's trap, we were raked over the coals. All of us -- Juanita, Gennifer, Paula, Monica, me -- we have all been through a lot. We were regular women trying to get by when our paths crossed his. Through no fault of our own, we were smeared in the media, terrorized by thugs, audited by the IRS, followed by strangers, victimized by threats. Our homes were broken into and our pets were killed. And we know that Hillary and her minions were behind the terror.

I think Bill routinely confesses his infidelities to Hillary. Certainly, he skews the stories. I doubt he admitted that he raped Juanita, assaulted me, and abused probably dozens or hundreds of others. But I think he told Hillary that he'd done something with us, and it's likely he said we seduced him. I believe that, as part of their dysfunctional dynamic of addict and enabler, in their ugly, twisted cycle, he tells her some story to relieve his guilt. He screws up, he confesses, he asks forgiveness, she throws lamps, and then they make up and he gives her something -- appoints a woman to the Supreme Court, lets Hillary spearhead the grand health care debacle, or campaigns for her presidency. I think it's been like that since the beginning. To Hillary, it is tightly wound up with her political aspirations. She came out ahead. We lost. Women lost. And feminism lost.

Even during the impeachment hearings, all that mattered to Hillary was the impact of the case on her aspirations. According to Christopher Andersen, who wrote American Evita, she was already planning to run for the New York Senate seat. "Said one party official, 'We all knew she wanted it so bad she could taste it. But she knew it would never happen if President Clinton was run out of office in disgrace."' [120] Her plan all along was, "Eight years of Bill, eight years of Hill," as she told a friend after they moved into the White House in 1993. That was the plan and she has stuck to it, sacrificing her feminist ideology.

An avowed advocate for women, Hillary covered for her predatory husband and had a strong hand in intimidating many women, damaging our credibility, and demonizing us. It is bad enough that, all this time, she knew that her husband preys on women. But she also enabled him and participated in those attacks, playing a role in ruining our lives in order to keep her political ambition on track. Hillary is no feminist, no champion for women, no advocate for women. She is an advocate for one woman: Hillary Clinton.

The Nixonian Girl

"I'll do whatever it takes to get us elected," Hillary said during Clinton's first presidential bid. [121] When Gennifer Flowers then came forward to reveal the candidate as an adulterer, Hillary demonstrated what she meant by "whatever it takes." Hillary said, "We have to destroy her." Then Gennifer's home was ransacked, her career was ruined, she was threatened, and she was smeared in the media. This is not an isolated example. Over and over and over again, Hillary has shown how far she will go.

Even when she started law school, Hillary had political ambitions and strong determination that were novel for such a young woman. But as she told a friend, she believed that, "The only way to make a difference is to acquire power." [122] This statement implies a fundamental value structure that became Hillary's ethical mantra: "The ends justify the means."

Moral Justification

One set of disengagement practices operates on the cognitive reconstruction of the behavior itself. People do not ordinarily engage in harmful conduct until they have justified to themselves the morality of their actions. In this process of moral justification, detrimental conduct is made personally and socially acceptable by portraying it as serving socially worthy or moral purposes. People then can act on a moral imperative and preserve their view of themselves as a moral agent while inflicting harm on others. Regional variations in the social sanctioning and use of violent means are predictable from moral justifications rooted in a subcultural code of honor (Cohen & Nisbett, 1994).

Rapid radical shifts in destructive behavior through moral justification are most strikingly revealed in military conduct (Kelman, 1973; Skeykill, 1928). The conversion of socialized people into dedicated fighters is achieved not by altering their personality structures, aggressive drives or moral standards. Rather, it is accomplished by cognitively redefining the morality of killing so that it can be done free from self-censure. Through moral justification of violent means, people see themselves as fighting ruthless oppressors, protecting their cherished values, preserving world peace, saving humanity from subjugation or honoring their country’s commitments. Just war tenets were devised to specify when the use of violent force is morally justified. However, given people’s dexterous facility for justifying violent means all kinds of inhumanities get clothed in moral wrappings.

Voltaire put it well when he said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Over the centuries, much destructive conduct has been perpetrated by ordinary, decent people in the name of righteous ideologies, religious principles and nationalistic imperatives (Kramer, 1990; Rapoport & Alexander, 1982; Reich, 1990). Widespread ethnic wars are producing atrocities of appalling proportions. When viewed from divergent perspectives the same violent acts are different things to different people. It is often proclaimed in conflicts of power that one group’s terroristic activity is another group’s liberation movement fought by heroic fighters. This is why moral appeals against violence usually fall on deaf ears. Adversaries sanctify their own militant actions, but condemn those of their antagonists as barbarity masquerading under a mask of outrageous moral reasoning. Each side feels morally superior to the other.

-- Moral Disengagement in the Perpetration of Inhumanities, by Albert Bandura


Whether they do or not, of course, depends on the "means." Even more concerning is that, to Hillary, the justification seems absolute.

In Rewriting History, former Clinton strategist Dick Morris describes some of Hillary's strengths and some "disturbing echoes of Nixon" as well. "Like him, she has proven susceptible to temptation, paranoia, and scandal," Morris writes. "Like him, she has allowed her fierce political instincts to darken her perspective, and contrived a deceivingly positive public face behind which to hide." [123]

Bernie Nussbaum has said that "he and Hillary shared the view that 'you should do harm to your enemies." [24] This harkens back to Blumenthal's writing that politics is all about "humiliating one's prey, not merely defeating one's foes." This view seems pretty fundamental to Hillary in "power mode." Responding to Bill's sexual scandals, Hillary's modus operandi was always to crucify, destroy, and finish off the women, and never to confront her husband's abuse of them.

Dave Schippers, who spent years investigating the Clintons, says of Hillary, "Nothing is beneath her."

With a ruthless, Nixonian mind and the crazy heart of a compulsive enabler, Hillary stands in an ugly muck that she has been brewing for thirty years. She has abused and misused power, not to advance her ideological agenda but simply to further her political career while enabling her husband as a sexual predator. She took advantage of her position to condone sexual assault, to hurt innocent people, and to preserve power itself. A devious woman, Hillary will stop at nothing and destroy anybody in her way.

How can such a woman pretend to be an advocate for women's rights, for the downtrodden, for victims? That is not her intent. As journalist Melanie Morgan recently told me, "Hillary is one who will use the leaders of power to extract her own personal agenda. She is a woman to whom no slight has ever gone unrewarded or unpunished." [125]

Hillary will use dirty tactics and go to any lengths to clear the path to her legacy as the first woman president. Just as she did with every one of Bill's "women problems," her political strategy has no limits, is without rules. The means to the end, the means by which she will achieve her lifelong goal of assuming the presidency, continues to be: Do whatever it takes.

David Schippers recalls a story about a priest who came to see him after Clinton's impeachment. "I am an exorcist," the priest told Schippers, "and I want you to know that I saw in Bill Clinton's eyes the same thing that I saw in the last person I exorcised."

Okay, here we go, another nut, Schippers thought.

But the priest continued. "I came out here because I wanted to tell you, you need to stay the course," the priest told him. "There are satanic influences in the White House, and they all want you out of here."

"Yes, Bill Clinton is a bad guy," Schippers acknowledged.

"No, not him," the priest said. "Her."

Schippers today says, "I don't know about satanic influences but, whenever I walked by the White House, I got the chills. There was an aura of evil around her."


[David Icke] Could we talk about some of the famous names that people around the world would know who, in your experience, have taken part in these rituals that you’ve conducted? You say that you’ve conducted them in Europe, and the United States. Could we start with the United States?

[Arizona Wilder] Yes. At rituals I have seen George Bush. I have seen Madeline Albright. I have seen Henry Kissinger. I have seen Ronald Reagan. And I have also, by the way, seen his wife, Nancy Reagan. I have seen Hillary Clinton before I knew she was Hillary Clinton, at these rituals. She is involved. The other people that I have named, and I have seen shape-shift into reptilians -- I have not seen Hillary Clinton actually shape-shift, but she is involved -- I have seen the two sons when they were young, the two sons of George Bush, present at these rituals.

-- Revelations of a Mother Goddess, presented by David Icke


Who knows what spiritual elements are at work in another person's psyche? Who knows what altruistic or evil intent lies in someone else's mind and heart and soul? We cannot judge such things. But we can assess a person's actions. We can judge her values when we see her at work.

Having investigated the whole Clinton saga, David Schippers has an inkling of what lies inside Hillary Clinton. "Good Lord!" he said, considering the possibility that Hillary might become president. "That woman is evil! That woman is evil... "

The First Woman President

When our granddaughters and great-granddaughters study American history, they will learn the momentous legacy of the first woman president of the United States. Yes, the time has come. We are ready for a woman to lead our country -- and a woman will. But Hillary Clinton is the wrong woman.

As the presidential primary race led up to 2008, Joan Walsh talked with Elizabeth Edwards, wife of presidential candidate John Edwards, about Hillary's candidacy and her advocacy for women -- or lack of it. "She hit Hillary Clinton particularly hard," Walsh wrote for Salon.com, "arguing that John Edwards is, in fact, the better candidate for women." Elizabeth Edwards added that Hillary "wants to be commander in chief. But she's just not as vocal a women's advocate as I want to see .... And then she says, or maybe her supporters say, 'Support me because I'm a woman,' and I want to say to her, 'Well, then support me because I'm a woman."' [126] Edwards went on to point out that Hillary has not articulated much ideology for her candidacy, other than shouting the obvious from the mountaintops: that she is a woman. In fact, she recalled, when Hillary announced her candidacy she said, "I'm in it to win it." Edwards challenged Hillary, "What is that? That's not a rationale." [127]

Running for her first political job as New York's senator, Hillary was up against Rudy Giuliani, who was very popular in the wake of 9/11. At the precise moment when he was diagnosed with prostate cancer, it was suddenly revealed that he'd had an affair. The one-two punch was too much and Rudy gave up his bid for the Senate seat. "Who threw the knockout punch?" pondered Dick Morris, who suspected a certain someone known to go for the jugular. "They do it secretly, clandestinely, all the while publicly acting above such revolting behavior," Morris said. By way of examples, he cited recent history. "Woman after woman has been demonized by their secret police -- usually on orders from Hillary -- and have had their past dragged through the mud and leaked to the press to discredit their accounts of the president's predatory practices. Did Rudy Giuliani fall victim to the same detectives who preyed on Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Kyle Browning, Elizabeth Ward Gracen?" [128]

During that Senate race, feminist writer Fran Lebowitz didn't regard Hillary as much of a feminist leader. Kate Kelly, writing for the New York Observer, wrote that Lebowitz said, "I think she's a very poor role model for girls ... I believe she's someone who decided at a young age that 'I want to be president, but I can't, because I'm a girl. So I'll marry the president.' I think that's so regressive." Kelly wrote that Lebowitz paused for breath, then added, "She's a poll-taker, she's a pulse-taker, she's not a leader. She doesn't really seem to have any ideas ... And then she comes here and panders." [129]

Lebowitz wasn't the only one. "Some New York City women seem to be developing a grudge against Mrs. Clinton as a representative of their sex," Kelly wrote. "Those interviewed who said they won't support her -- or who have real doubts about voting for her -- said it's not so much about her politics, but rather Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate, and health care reform." While Kelly says the women seemed not to care about Hillary's husband's sex scandals nor Monica Lewinsky, some said they just "didn't respect her as a woman." [130] "Their resentment is an irritation with her persona, her tactics," said Kelly. She wrote that Dr. Patricia Allen, a fifty-two-year-old New York physician, described "unattractive, narcissistic tendencies" in Hillary. "I wanted to like Mrs. Clinton, because she comes from a modest, Midwestern background, as I do. She worked hard for her education and her power. But, you know, I'm ashamed of her," Allen said. She added, "The big difference is that I always went after what I wanted for me. I never lived my life through a man. I never sought to achieve power or professional aspirations through alliance with a powerful man. I always believed that I could make it happen, simply by doing what I was taught to do as a child: to get up in the morning, and do your work, and be a person whose word can be believed." [131]

But those were New Yorkers in 2000, and Hillary was running for the Senate. American women are now giddy about electing our first woman president, and it seems to matter little whether she has earned the position on her own merits or will attain it because she is married to a man who did. Nor does it seem to matter whether she is a feminist or an enabler of sexual abuse, a woman of character or a criminal, a Democrat or Republican. She is biologically female. To some voters, that is all that matters. They are just as chauvinistic as any man who would never vote for a woman just because she is a woman.

When we mark our ballots, we had better be concerned about more than gender. Has she proven to have her own strength, experience, wisdom, and integrity so she can lead our country effectively? If she has not -- and we vote for her anyway -- hers will be the legacy and ours will be the blame. If the first woman president of the United States is not up to the job, if her administration fails and the country suffers, it will not bode well for the women who follow -- even women who will rightfully have earned the job.

Our youngest voters remember little of the Clintons' first two terms in the White House and even less of the scandal. They only remember that the former president popularized the notion that oral sex is not really sex. To voters now in their twenties, that is what his impeachment was about. They do not know about obstruction of justice, or the litany of women who were objectified, harassed, abused, and even raped. They do not know what we endured at the hands of Bill Clinton nor, more important, at Hillary's hands. They do not know what Hillary Clinton really stands for. They do not know about the smear campaigns, the hired thugs, the invasions of privacy, the threats. They do not know about the jogger or the tires full of nails or my dead cat. All they know is that Hillary Clinton is a woman, and wouldn't it be cool to elect our first woman president?

But I know who Hillary Clinton is. I know that she enabled her husband's misogyny. I know that she stepped over the bodies of countless women in her quest for power. I know what she is capable of -- what she has done and what she will continue to do. A woman with her moral compass does not belong in the White House. Just as her husband's presidency was detrimental to the office and to the country, so would her presidency be. A Nixonian woman who employs any means to hurt her enemies, Hillary is a dangerous politician.

Where will it end?

It should end with the women of this country realizing that Hillary does not stand for them. That though she is female, Hillary is not fit to secure the legacy as our first woman president. If she does, it will be a sad irony.

"Somebody said to me the other day if there was ever a time for a woman president it's now, because we're going to have to do a lot of cleaning," Hillary told nearly one thousand women at a $100-a-plate breakfast. "Grab your buckets, grab your brooms," Hillary said, as if she would remember what a broom looked like. According to a CNN report on the fundraiser, the women ate it up. Hillary went on, "We're going to have to do a clean sweep because there has been a culture of cronyism, corruption, and incompetence." The woman has more than a lot of nerve to accuse her husband's successor of cronyism and corruption. [132]

According to the CNN report, the Republican National Committee responded to Hillary's housecleaning speech by arguing that female voters will not support Clinton's positions on major issues. "If Hillary Clinton thinks women will support her candidacy simply based on her gender she is mistaken," RNC spokeswoman Amber Wilkerson said. "Women, like men, will vote for a candidate because they share their views." I certainly hope so.

But activist Katherine Prudhomme-O'Brien tried to confront the Clintons at a "free and open" program at Daniel Webster College in Nashua, New Hampshire, during the primary campaign. Prudhomme-O'Brien had called Hillary's campaign headquarters a few days ahead to secure tickets and learned there would be at least half an hour for questions after Hillary's speech.

At the event, Bill Clinton spoke and then Hillary gave her speech. When she finished, music started playing, which Prudhomme-O'Brien took as an indication that the question-and-answer period she'd hoped for was not going to occur. She joined the cozy group of people pressing toward the stage to meet Hillary or Bill. People extended tickets, baseballs, and other souvenirs for Hillary's autograph and, when she had the opportunity, Prudhomme-O'Brien held out a light green postcard, which Hillary took and signed.

"Whose is this?" Hillary asked.

Prudhomme-O'Brien said it was hers and took the opportunity to ask Hillary if she believed Juanita Broaddrick.

"Who is that?" Hillary asked.

"The woman who said she was raped by Bill Clinton in 1978."

"I don't know anything about that," Hillary said, still holding the postcard.

"I sent you a videotape of the interview she gave to Dateline NBC and I'm sure you have received it," said Prudhomme-O'Brian. "I sent it by certified mail and that's the receipt showing your office got it that you're holding."

Hillary returned the receipt. Prudhomme-O'Brien asked her again if she believed Juanita Broaddrick.

"I don't know what you're talking about." Hillary moved away.


"That's not true!" Prudhomme-O'Brien yelled, to be heard over the music. "Why are you doing this? You've always been so good to rape survivors." According to Prudhomme-O'Brien, Hillary started Arkansas's first rape crisis hotline and helped start its first rape crisis center.

The crowd got hostile toward Prudhomme-O'Brien and made "vehement requests to have someone get me out of there." Before long, she said, a "well groomed, handsome man in a suit with one of those clear, curly wires in his ear, a Secret Service agent perhaps, grabbed both my arms above the elbow and began pushing me backwards and telling me I had to leave."

Prudhomme-O'Brien began to leave, but stopped at the media stage to tell what had happened. She had brought with her a printed sheet for their edification. However, she said, "About four guys in suits with wires in their ears were joined by an equal number of Nashua Police officers who told me I couldn't do that," and all eight of them escorted her toward the gate. So much for a "free and open" event.

Prudhomme-O'Brien declared the event a sham. "If a candidate wants to earn the right of having said they were vetted by the tough, hard-question-asking New Hampshire citizenry, then I respond that she must earn that right," Prudhomme-O'Brien said. "Hillary is not doing that, walking away from tough questions and not being brave enough to take random ones that a whole crowd can hear."

The officers, however, couldn't care less. They sent her off the property and threatened to arrest her if she returned. They would not tell her what law she might have broken. Prudhomme-O'Brien, though, adds that she "couldn't figure out why Hillary would have ever cared about eighteen minutes of blank tape during the Watergate scandal but never wanted to know where her husband was on April 25, 1978, a date he will not account for and the date Broaddrick says the rape happened." [133]

Prudhomme-O'Brien is right. Hillary will not address the issue. But more important, she cannot address it, nor can she address the broader issue of rape, nor even the broadest issues of sexual victimization of women. Unfortunately, the question today is whether anyone really can advocate for women.

The "women's movement" came of age in the sixties. Led by the strong voices of feminist icons, women like me learned to be stronger people, to stand up for ourselves in the workplace, at home, and even in our doctors' offices. The great feminists of the "sexual revolution" empowered my generation to decry sexual harassment, to expect equal pay, and to demand appropriate respect. It helped us to raise our daughters, not as little girls but as women with opportunities that many in the previous generation would never have had the courage to forge.

Unfortunately, our daughters take that for granted. And we women have become complacent. Why? Where are our heroes? Don't we need our leaders any more?

The great voices who once led our empowerment were left in the wake of the Clintons' scandals and their devious campaign against women. And while the Clintons abused feminism itself, the feminists committed suicide. Thanks to the Clintons, leaders like Gloria Steinem and Patricia Ireland lost all credibility on sexual harassment, sexual abuse, assault, even domestic abuse. After condoning Bill Clinton's misogyny and Hillary's enabling, the feminists no longer have the authority to address these issues. Hillary made a mockery of feminism and now feminists can no longer advocate for women. Their great voices have been silenced, another casualty of the Clinton administration's ethics. Feminism no longer represents a fight for women's equality or strength or physical safety. Feminism now stands only for one issue: abortion. When college girls go missing, where are the feminists who once railed about predators? When domestic abuse runs amok and wives are killed in their homes, where are the feminists who once gave us the strength to leave abusive marriages? When corporate women still do not get the same compensation as men, where are the feminists, who once campaigned for our equal rights?

They are gone. And the Clintons are partly to blame.

When he assaulted me, Bill Clinton betrayed me, just as he betrayed countless women who came to him as their boss, their governor, or their president. Hillary also betrayed me -- and all of the women her husband abused -- when she brought her power to bear on her husband's prey. In the end, Hillary betrayed the feminism for which she has always stood. She betrayed us all.  
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:43 am

UPDATE

ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2007, the New York Daily News published a short item about this book being written. It emphasized that the book would contain details about the threats I faced from the Clinton machine. "A rep for the publisher told us the book would also examine what it says are campaign-finance violations by Hillary." [1]

That same week, the name Norman Hsu echoed everywhere. Norman Hsu had posed as a New York apparel executive, well-connected financier, and fat-cat fund-raiser for Democratic politicians -- to the tune of more than a million dollars. He hosted events and raised campaign funds, with the greatest share going to Hillary Clinton. But, suddenly, the threads of his web unraveled. The Wall Street Journal started looking into Hsu's fund-raising practices, providing fascinating insight into Hillary Clinton's campaign.

For one thing, Hsu seemed to have been using "straw donors" to funnel money -- above federal limits -- to certain politicians. For example, Hsu's friends, the Paw family, live in a tiny bungalow near a freeway in Daly City, south of San Francisco. Though they are of modest means, they managed to give Democrats, including Hillary, $200,000 in recent years. If Hsu reimbursed the Paw family, he likely broke federal campaign finance laws. Investigating Hsu a little further, the Los Angeles Times connected the dots and discovered that he was a fugitive.

With the media belatedly onto him, it all came crashing down. On August 31, 2007, two days after the New York Daily News ran the item about my book, fifty-six-year-old Hsu returned to the San Francisco Bay area and surrendered to authorities. Then he posted $2 million bail with a cashier's check. He was released, pending a court appearance a week later when he was to surrender his passport and request a bail reduction. But with the FBI investigating possible campaign finance violations, a New York prosecutor studying whether Hsu stole a $40 million investment fund, and a Southern California investigation examining his connection to another multimillion- dollar investment fraud, Hsu skipped town. At his September 5 court date, his lawyer said he had no idea where Hsu went. It didn't take long to find him.

Hsu boarded the California Zephyr, a passenger train that stops in Denver en route to Chicago. As his train rolled through Colorado, Hsu fell ill and Amtrak personnel called paramedics. Hospitalized for a few days, Hsu was taken into custody and, finally, to jail. Meanwhile, a few Hsu acquaintances received explicit suicide notes, allegedly signed by Norman Hsu and mailed at about the time he got sick. A few days later, since Hsu had forfeited a measly $2 million bail just a week earlier, the Colorado prosecutor asked for $50 million bail saying, "It seems like Monopoly money at this point." [2] The judge set bail at $5 million.

In an effort to distance herself from Hsu's tangled web, Hillary pledged to return $850,000 of Hsu donations. However, a campaign spokesman said the individual contributors could make new donations." We will accept their contributions and ask them to confirm for our records that they are from their own personal funds," Howard Wolfson wrote in an e-mail. [3]

But the Clintons' possible involvement doesn't end there. Many questions remain regarding Hillary's fundraising efforts. Did Hsu break laws to raise more than a million dollars for Hillary and other Democrats? What did Hillary or her staff know about his activities and when did they know it? How did Hsu finance the $2 million bail that he forfeited? And did he really intend to commit suicide?

These questions don't surprise me. They echo -- precisely -- the many lingering concerns about the Clintons' fund-raising irregularities in the 1990s, "irregularities" that may well have involved my husband and even his death.

As these echoes of my past reverberated in the press on Friday night of Labor Day weekend, I fell asleep on my couch. Groggy, I went upstairs to bed without activating my home security system. Sometime that night I heard my dogs barking, but I rolled over and went back to sleep, figuring it was a raccoon or a deer as usual. It wasn't. While I slept upstairs that night, someone climbed through a downstairs window into my home.

I woke up Saturday morning and went about my business, reading the newspaper, puttering around the house, doing my laundry and other chores. Soon, I noticed that something was wrong with my entertainment system and that my television didn't work. My laptop didn't work, either. Finally, I couldn't find my purse. It was missing -- gone. That's when I realized someone had broken into my home.

I called the sheriff and two deputies came to the house, took a report, and said an investigator would contact me. After they left, I noticed that my car, a 1998 Infiniti SUV, had been vandalized, with a key scratch on the side and the antenna broken. I canceled my credit cards and tinkered with my laptop, which I eventually got to work. But, as I sat at my desk, I realized that a copy of this book manuscript was missing. I had printed two copies so I always had one at home and a second one to take with me when I was out running errands or going to appointments. But one copy was gone.

I called a friend, a seasoned investigator, and he suggested I go outside and look around in the woods beyond my yard, so I took the dogs and did so. The dogs led me to my purse, which the burglar had tossed in the woods. My credit cards were still in my wallet, a small consolation after I'd canceled all of them.

My laptop was not stolen. My jewelry was not stolen. My credit cards were not stolen. But the book manuscript was gone. My manuscript, with revelations about Hillary Clinton's tactics, with questions about Ed's involvement in campaign financing, and questions about Ed's suicide, had been stolen.

The break-in came only two days after the New York Daily News article, and on the same day that beleaguered Clinton fund raiser Norman Tsu surrendered to authorities in California. The news article had emphasized that campaign-finance violations by Hillary Clinton would be addressed in the book. It is my belief that Hillary Clinton or her cohorts, concerned about light being shed on their campaign-finance operations -- especially in the wake of Tsu's arrest for such violations earlier that day -- arranged to steal my manuscript. It's the only answer that makes sense.

Team Clinton did not steal the manuscript to prevent its publication. My publisher and I had many drafts on our computers. They stole the manuscript so they would know what is in it, so they could prepare their preemptive strikes, their plan of attack.
Just as they devised preemptive strikes on Bill Clinton's ''bimbo eruptions," just as they tried to smear me in 1998, so they will try again. Just as they damaged my tires with nails nearly ten years ago, so they vandalized my car -- again. And just as they staged a "noisy investigation" and terrorized me with intruders who reminded me of my vulnerability, so they have again.

As soon as the media reported that my manuscript had been stolen, I got a call from David Schippers, who had served as the Chief Investigative Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee on Clinton's impeachment. Schippers said the same thing happened to him in 2000, when he was writing Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment. Schippers told Art Moore of World Net Daily that he wrote his manuscript in longhand and his wife, Jackie, typed it into her computer. Repeatedly, she said, she thought someone was hacking into the computer. Schippers thought she was paranoid. But, then, after he went to his office one morning, Jackie heard someone in the house. With dozens of children and grandchildren, Jackie figured it was the usual family traffic so she called out from upstairs. But no one answered. In the next couple of weeks, it happened again, a few times, until, finally, impeachment-related files were stolen. And a computer technician concluded that her computer was being accessed through a wormhole. [4]

Jayna Davis, author of The Third Terrorist: The Middle East Connection to the Oklahoma City Bombing, argued that she'd faced similar harassment when working on her own book. She claims that her phone was tapped and her computer hacked. [5] Gary Aldrich, author of Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House, says he sent his manuscript to the FBI for approval, as required, but the FBI immediately gave it the to the White House. [6] It is clear that I was not the only author facing such harassment while working on a less than flattering book about the Clintons.

"My suspicion was that the Clintons, or some of their toadies, were trying to find out what we were writing before we submitted the manuscript," Schippers told Moore, adding that he believes what happened to me "was deliberate and designed to scare the hell out of her" and find out what is in the book. "They will go through it page by page, " Schippers said, "and they will set up their war room." [7]

Given the opportunity to respond, the Clinton camp had no comment. Not yet, anyway. But, in the midst of her campaign to return to the White House as our first woman president, Hillary will not let anything stop her. She certainly will not let me get in the way. She and her people will attack me from every angle.

Once again, I am their target. This time, I'm ready.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:43 am

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

WRITING A BOOK is a daunting task and I would like to thank the many people whose help and support brought it to fruition.

At the top of the list is Katie Vecchio without whose help, patience and enormous talent, there would never have been a book. Simple words are not enough. And thank you, Tony, Nick, Sophie and the entire Clark family for sharing her with me for the past year. You are a beautiful, courageous woman, Katie. Always remember that.

My heartfelt thanks to Dan Gecker, our guardian angel, America's best attorney, who saved us from an uncertain future after Ed's tragic death. You brought us back from the brink of total and complete ruin. Also, I would never have survived "The Troubles" without all of your help. What a journey!

I could not have contemplated this book without my dear friend, Monica Crowley, whose love, support and sage advice have kept me on track for the last eight years. You have never let me down and I value our friendship beyond words.

I am beyond grateful to Karen, for forty years of love and support and "C&D" for never leaving my side. And to "Mr. Babb" for years and years of patience, caring and unconditional love.

To the "Streakers," one and all, for twenty three years of love and laughter. Whatever would I have done without you? Thank you from the bottom of my heart to Nancy, "Shanty Irish Beth," Cindy, Sharon, Susan, Laurie, and Joan and Lea, who are no longer with us. And thank you, too, to all of you from the past whose names are too many to mention.

So very many have listened and helped me on this journey: Larry, Kristen, Lane, Ned, Keith, Sam, Teresa, Kristin, Bob, Jimmy, Alice, Jemi, Tudy, Barbara, dear Ralph, Thomas, Beverly, Marie and Michelle for putting up with my "haircut of the month" requests. I thank my two doctors, Karen, for always being available and Jo, who is talented beyond words. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

I am forever thankful to Jared for your unfathomable loyalty and trust.

Many thanks also to Chris and Joan who listened and listened and cried with me for so many years. You both helped me so much after the loss of Ed. Thank you now to Will, Kristin, and Baxter, all of whom have continued the process! I am a walking example of your tireless and continued good talents. Thank you, too, to Dottie, for encouraging me to "come out of hiding and enjoy the world around you." You were so right.

I would also like to thank all of my friends from Douglas Freeman's Class of 1964, Bobby, Tommy, Wayne, Allen, Charlotte, Mike, Dick, Jimmy, and John and also Ken. Mere words will never be enough.

I owe a huge debt to my Tuesday Night Book Club, Kathy, Kim B, Kim P, Michael, Valerie, Noel, Janice, the "two Bills, " and the "two Brendas." Also, Melinda, Seth, Heather, Noel, Terry, Lucien, Tim, Jean Marie, and all members past and present.

Special thanks, also, to my dear friends, Debbie and Judy, who keep me grounded and who are always there to listen and help. I treasure our friendship.

Thank you, Sherman. You have helped me and so very many others. You gave my life back to me! Thanks also to Lynn. I hope you are up to the challenge!

I owe a debt to Senator Susan Collins, who had the courage to listen to and validate my story and also to Congressman Jim Rogan who stood by me through thick and thin.

I also thank Louis from the bottom of my heart for stepping in after Ed's death and taking such good care of us.

Thank you to those who were so helpful throughout the process of writing this book, especially Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, Christopher Hitchens, and Carl Limbacher.

I owe a very huge debt to David Schippers, one of this country's greatest patriots, who believed in me and protected me, and who had the fortitude and courage to face the consequences of his beliefs.

I also thank so many of you whose names I cannot divulge for many reasons. You and I know who you are and I will be forever grateful.

I am also so grateful for the love and support of Joan Daylor, the greatest woman I have ever known, whose memory lives on in my heart and the hearts of so very many. We shall meet again. Your unconditional love got me through the worst of times. Your door was always open to me. Thank you, also, to your wonderful, steadfast family, dear Frank, John, Patty and Chris.

I was so blessed to have my big, beautiful Tess with me for so many years, who never left my side, who protected me throughout "The Troubles," my faithful companion to the very end and whom I miss so terribly. You did your job my sweet girl, and I will never, ever forget you. Now I am blessed with two cairn "terrorists," Roxie and Bridget, pure joy, who keep me laughing all the time and whose love is without fail. And those damn cats, too!

I am indebted to everyone at World Ahead for believing in me and giving me the opportunity to tell my story.

I owe so much to my brother, Michael, who stayed with me during those long, dark days and months of abject grief and hopelessness. We had such a special bond. I miss all of the laughter and I miss you, too.

I am forever indebted to my dad, who tried to be a good father in spite of it all. I think about you every day and I miss you from the very depths of my soul. I can only hope that I was the good daughter that you deserved and I hope I made you proud. I know that I will see you again.

If I have forgotten anyone, please forgive me. "Senior Moments" have come to be an everyday occurrence!

Finally, I send my love and hope to my children from your mother who loves you.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:46 am

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramson, Jill "Testing of a President The Investigation; Two Witnesses Called by Starr Could Shed Some Light on the 'Talking Points'." New York Times, February 19, 1998. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=95OCEOD8 123FF93AA25751COA%E958260(accessed September 18, 2007).

--. "The Nation: The Price of Being Lewinsky; Dream Team, Nightmare Tab." New York Times, June 7, 1998. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/ fullpage.html ?res=9EOCE6DD1F3BF934A35755COA96E958260 (accessed September 18, 2007.)

Adams, Lorraine. "Into the Spotlight: The familiar Washington script for scandal casts the Other Woman as nothing but the instrument of a public man's potential disgrace. But the real story line is shaped not only by lust and greed, but also by questions of class and power." Washington Post, August 9, 1998.

Aldrich, Gary. Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House. Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing, 1996.

Alvater, Dennis. Interviews with author, June and July, 2007.

Andersen, Christopher. American Evita: Hillary Clinton's Path to Power. New York: HarperCollins, 2004.

--. Bill & Hillary: The Marriage. New York: William Morrow & Co., 1999.

Archibald, George. "Lindsey planned to discredit Willey year before 60 Minutes." Washington Times, July 21, 1999.

Associated Press, "Anita Hill: Judge Clinton by his policies, " USA Today, 1999. http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/clinton/clin264.htm (accessed September 19, 2007).

Baker, Peter. "Clinton Unveils Agenda Heralding Contentious Fall." Washington Post, August, 7, 1997.

Balz, Dan. "Prosecutor, President Face Off: Lewinsky's Immunity Deal Sets Stage for Historic Confrontation." Washington Post, August 2, 1998, p. AI.

Bastin, Jerry. Interviews with author, July and August, 2007.

Bennett, Bob. Interview by Larry King. Larry King Live. CNN. March 16, 1998.

Bernstein, Carl. A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007.

Blitzer, Wolf with Janet Moore and Pierre Thomas. "White House Strikes Back Against Willey: Clinton says he is 'mystified and disappointed' by former supporter's allegations." CNN, March 16, 1998.

Blumenthal, Sidney. Response to Interrogatory No. 42. Civil Action No. 96- 2123/97-1288 (RCL) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Responses and Objections to Plaintiff's Interrogatories to the Executive Office of the President, May 13, 1999.

--. The Clinton Wars. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.

Bolton, Bennet. "Clinton Affair!" National Enquirer, August 19, 1997, p. 37.

Broaddrick, Juanita. "An Open Letter to Hillary Clinton: Do You Remember?" originally published on Drudge Report, October 15, 2000. http://www. freerepublic.com/forum/a3geb43637d6f.htm (accessed September 7, 2007).

Brown, L.D. Official deposition taken at the DoubleTree Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas on November 10, 1997, and released on Friday, March 13, 1998. Excerpt published in the Washington Post, March 13, 1998. http://www. washingtonpost.com/wp-srv /politics/special/pjones/docs/brown031398. htm (accessed September 19, 2007).

Burros, Marian. "The New Presidency: Social Scene; A Highly Sensitive Post is Filled by the Clintons." The New York Times, January 12, 1993. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/full page .html ?res=9FOCE4DB113AF931A2 5752COA965958260 (accessed September 19, 2007).

Citizens United. Transcript from interview with author, June 27, 2007.

Clinton, Hillary. Living History. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.

CNN, "Willey Says Clinton Lied About Groping Her: White House statement reiterates president's denial, " March 15, 1998.

--. "First lady to officially announce Senate bid February 6: Faces questions on her marriage." January 19, 2000.

--. "Clinton says 'clean sweep' needed at White House," June 30, 2007. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ite-house/ (accessed September 19, 2007).

Collins, Nancy. 'I'd do it All over Again: Linda Tripp, the George Interview." George, December/January, 2001.

Coman, Julian. "Shock! Canada's politics gets interesting with arrival of rich divorcee." UK Telegraph, March 13, 2004.

Coulter, Ann. High Crimes & Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1998.

Crowley, Monica, Ph.D., "Hillary the Anti-feminist." Interview with author, June 16, 2007.

Dealey, Sam. "A Vast Left-Wing conspiracy?" New York Post, January 22, 1999.

Dowd, Maureen. "Liberties, Sinners & Spinners on the Equator." The New York Times, March 25, 1998. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res= 9EODE4DEIE38F936AI575OCOA96E958260(accessed September 19, 2007).

Drudge, Matt. "White House First Learned Willey Was Talking During Online Chat!" Drudge Report, March 15, 1998. http://www.drudgereportarchives. com/dsp/speciaIReports_pc_ carden_ detail.htm ?reportlD=%7BEFC06A59- 502F-4477-806C-954B06564DIA%70 (accessed September 7, 2007).

Edsall, Thomas B. "Strains in a Key Constituency: Some Women Reassess Clinton in Light of Willey Accusations." Washington Post, March 17, 1998, page A6.

Fitzpatrick, Kelly Ann with Chris Matthews. Hardball with Chris Matthews. MSNBC, March 16, 1998.

Flowers, Gennifer. Passion and Betrayal, Del Mar, California: Emory Dalton Books, 1995.

Gecker, Dan. Interview with author. July 5, 2007.

Gedda, George. "Official's kin in unauthorized, secret talks with Bosnian leader." Associated Press, November 11, 1998.

Gergen, David. Eyewitness to Power: The Essence of Leadership, Nixon to Clinton. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000.

Graves, Florence and Jacqueline E. Sharkey. "Starr and Willey: The Untold Story." The Nation, May 17, 1999. http://www.thenation.com/docprint. mhtml?i=1999517&s=graves (accessed September 7, 2007).

Hannity & Colmes, "Presidential Legal Troubles." Fox News Channel, Feb. 25, 1999.

Harris, John. The Survivor: Bill Clinton in the White House. New York: Random House, 2005.

Healy, Patrick. "For Clintons, Delicate Dance of Married and Public Lives." The New York Times, May 23, 2006. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/ 23/nyregion/23clintons.html? _1- l&adxnnl= l&oref=slogin&adxnnlx= 119 0267371-xBljEOXh1gZ83Gnt95KP5Q (accessed September 19, 2007).

Helvarg, David. "All the President's P.I.s." Mother Jones, March 24, 1998.

Hitchens, Christopher. Interviews with author, June 26 and July 8, 2007.

Interview with former CBS News producer, conducted on the condition that this source would remain anonymous. July 10, 2007.

Interviews with former Prudential contractor, conducted on the condition that this source would remain anonymous. June 2007.

Investor's Business Daily, "Not-So-Secret Police?" May 20, 1999.

Ireland, Patricia. MSNBC, March 16, 1998.

Isikoff, Michael. "Clinton Team Works to Deflect Allegations on Nominee's Private Life." Washington Post, July 26, 1992, p. A18.

--. Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter's Story. New York: Crown Pub., 1999.

Jackson, Candice E., Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine, Los Angeles: World Ahead Publishing, 2005.

Judd, Jackie and Chris Vlasto. "Witness Backs Willey Claims: Starr Probes Obstruction Allegations." ABC News, January 29, 1999.

Kelly, Kate. "Meet the Smart New York Women Who Can't Stand Hillary Clinton." The New York Observer, January 17, 2000. http://www.free republic.com/forum/a387c1dff5c1c.htm (accessed September 7, 2007).

Kessler, Ronald. Inside the White House. New York: Pocket, 1996.

Klein, Ed. The Truth About Hillary What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll Go to Become President. New York: Sentinel, 2005.

Kuiper, Thomas, D. I've Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words. Los Angeles: World Ahead Publishing, 2006.

Lauer, Matt and Ann Curry. Today. NBC News, March 17, 1998.

Lemire, J. "Stalk rap for Monica prober: Married & chasing mistress, says sister-in-law." New York Daily News, May 13, 2006. http://www. nydailynews.com/news/2oo6/05/13/2oo6-05-13 _stalk_rap _for_monica_ prober_married _ cha _print.html.

Levin, Jerome. The Clinton Syndrome: The President and the Self-Destructive Nature of Sexual Addiction. Rocklin, California: Prima Publishing, 1998.

Lindsey, Bruce. Response to Interrogatory 15. Civil Action No. 96-2123/97- 1288 (RCL) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Responses and Objections to Plaintiff's Interrogatories to the Executive Office of the President, May 13, 1999.

Liasson, Mara. "Clinton's Christmas woes." All Things Considered, NPR, December 21, 1993.

Milton, Joyce. The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton. New York: Harper Paperbacks, 2000.

Morgan, Melanie. Interview with author. San Francisco, July 13, 2007.

Morris, Dick. "Bill's Sexgate Rx Might Kill Him: Alarming 'Secret Police' Operations." New York Post, October 1, 1998.

Morris, Dick. "Who Knocked Out Rudy?" New York Post, May 22, 2000.

Morris, Dick with Eileen McGann. Rewriting History. New York: Regan Books/Harper Collins, 2004.

Nagourney, Adam and David Colton. "Tapes Still Entangle Clinton." USA Today, January 30, 1992, page 1A.

New York Times, "The Nation: The Price of Being Lewinsky; Dream Team, Nightmare Tab, " June 7, 1998. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage. html?res=9EOCE6DDlF3BF934A35755COA96E958260 (accessed September 19, 2007).

Newsmax, "Clinton Questions Dwarf Deep Throat's ID." NewsMax.com, June 1, 2005. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ ic/2oo5/6/1/93644.shtml.

National Organization for Women. "NOW President Patricia Ireland Challenges Livingston to Rein in Conservatives and Calls upon Women to Lobby against Impeachment." NOW press release, December 11, 1998. http://www.now .org/press/12-98/12-11-98.html.

Olson, Barbara. The Final Days: The Last Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2001.

--. Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing, 2001.

Patterson, Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz, " USAF (Ret.). Dereliction of Duty: The Eyewitness Account of How President Bill Clinton Endangered America's Long- Term National Security. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2003.

Plante, Bill. CBS Evening News. CBS, March 16, 1998.

Prudhomme-O'Brien, Katherine. "Today I Met Hillary in Nashua, N.H. also known as 'The Gate City.''' FreeRepublic.com, July 13, 2007. http://www. freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/ 1865782/posts (accessed September 7, 2007).

Ross, Andrew. Interview by Marshall Frady. "Civil rights movement: R.I.P? In a time of crisis, Jesse and other black leaders are unheard." Salon.com. http://www.salon.com/news/ news960624.html.

Royko, Mike. "Talking Trash; The Class Warfare Against Paula Jones is A Media Disgrace." Pittsburgh-Post Gazette, January 19, 1997.

Schippers, David. Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

--. Personal interview, July 5, 2007.

Serrano, Barbara A. "Steinem Fires Back- The Feminist Icon Replies to Criticism of Her Remarks Regarding the President, Monica, Paula and Others." Seattle Times, April 17, 1998.

Shapiro, Bruce. "A new woman? New bankruptcy documents make the murky finances of Ken Starr's key witness look even shadier." Salon.com, July 12, 2000. http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2 ... 12/willey/ (accessed September 7, 2007).

Sheehy, Gail. Hillary's Choice. New York: Random House, 2000.

Shiflett, Dave. "Media Selective With Its Scandals." Rocky Mountain News (Denver), February 21, 1994.

Sperry, Paul. "A Bully in the White House?" Investor's Business Daily, March 11, 1999. http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp ?secid= 1501&status=article&id=161263&secure=6896 (accessed Sept. 7, 2007). Stem, Jared. Interviews with author. April to July, 2007.

Stout, David. "Federal Judge Rules President Broke Privacy Law by Releasing Letters." The New York Times, March 30, 2000. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9 A04E2DA 153CF933A05750COA966 9C8B63 (accessed September 19, 2007).

Thompson, Doug. "Bill Clinton is a violent, profane man who wants to 'kill' his enemies." CapitolHillBlue.com, April 8, 1999.

Tripp, Linda. Interview by Larry King. Larry King Live. CNN, Feb. 15, 1999.

United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Motion filed in Case No. 98-1991 (WBB), June 28, 1999.

USA Today, "Starr decides not to pursue retrials for McDougal, Steele." May 26, 1999, p. 8A.

Walsh, Joan. "The Salon Interview with Elizabeth Edwards." Salon.com, July 17, 2007. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007 /07/17/elizabeth_ edwards/ index.html (accessed September 7, 2007).

Walsh, Kenneth T. "Air Force One: The inside story of how the presidential aircraft helped change the course of history." US News and World Report, May 11 2003. http://www.usnews.com/snews/news/articl ... 90ne_4.htm (accessed September 7, 2007.)

Weinraub, Bernard. "Hollywood Investigator Gets 30-Month Term in Weapons Case." New York Times, January 24, 2004. http://query. nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html ?res=9A06E4DFI F39F937A15752COA9629 C8B63 (accessed September 19, 2007).

Weisman, Jonathan. "Scandal throws women a curve; Democrats' reaction raises a question of double standard." Baltimore Sun, March 17, 1998.

Woodward, Bob. Shadow: Five Presidents and the Legacy of Watergate. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999.

WorldNetDaily, "Clinton dirty trickster faces 110-count indictment: Private investigator Pellicano allegedly wiretapped Sylvester Stallone's phone." WorldNetDaily.com, February 6, 2006. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ news/article. asp ?ARTICLE_ID--48693.

Young, Cathy. "Who says women never lie about rape? The 'believe the woman' zealotry promoted by Juanita Broaddrick's defenders is bad for feminism." Salon.com, March 3, 1999. http://www.salon.com/news/1999/ 03/cov _20news.html.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Cli

Postby admin » Sat May 28, 2016 7:47 am

NOTES

Preface


1. "The Big Smack, " Style Weekly, February 9, 1998.

Chapter Two: The First Campaign

1. Shapiro, "A new woman?"

2. Sheehy, Hillary's Choice, 226.

Chapter Three: The First Term

1. Shapiro, "A new woman?"

2. Clinton, Living History, 134.

3. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 315, 318-319.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Burros, "The New Presidency."

7. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 316.

8. Ibid., 129.

9. Ibid.

10. Collins, ''I'd do It All over Again."

11. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 282.

12. Ibid.

13. Collins, ''I'd do It All over Again."

14. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

15. Collins, ''I'd do It All over Again."

16. Ibid.

17. Schippers, interview with author.

Chapter Four: Assault in the Oval Office

1. Collins, ''I'd do It All over Again."

2. Ibid.

3. "The Cocaine Candidacy." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RAN CHO/ POLITICS/ARTICLES/CC.html.

Chapter Five: Promises, Promises

1. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

2. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 115.

3. Andersen, Christopher, "Hillary Clinton: 'They Were Terrified of Her'" ET Online interview, July 7, 2004. http://www.etonline.com/celebrities/ 33967/index.html.

4. Gergen, Eyewitness to Power, 274.

5. Aldrich, Unlimited Access, 192.

6. Patterson, Dereliction of Duty, 68.

7. Andersen, American Evita, 90.

8. Kuiper, I've Always Been a Yankees Fan, 3.

9. Milton, First Partner, 259.

10. Aldrich, Unlimited Access, 139.

11. Broaddrick, "Open Letter to Hillary Clinton."

12. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 165.

13. Olson, Hell to Pay, 308.

14. Andersen, American Evita, 68.

Chapter Six: Exposed

1. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

2. Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 123.

3. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

4. Ibid.

5. Drudge, "White House First Learned Willey Was Talking During Online Chat!"

6. Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 156.

7. Ibid., 367.

8. Baker, "Clinton Unveils Agenda."

9. Bolton, "Clinton Affair!"

Chapter Seven: Terror Campaign

1. Alvater, Interviews with author.

2. Gecker, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

3. CNN, "Willey Says Clinton Lied."

4. Gedda, "Official's kin in unauthorized, secret talks with Bosnian leader."

5. Blumenthal, Clinton Wars, 625, 627.

6. Collins, ''I'd do It All over Again."

7. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

8. Morris with McGann, Rewriting History, 212.

9. Ibid., 214.

10. Ibid., 206.

11. Abramson, "Testing of a President."

12. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

13. Ibid.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid.

16. Collins, ''1'd do It All over Again."

17. Gecker, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

18. Bennett, Larry King Live interview.

19. Abramson, "The Nation."

20. CNN, "First lady to officially announce Senate bid."

21. Gecker, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

22. Former CBS News producer, Interview with author. July 10, 2007.

23. Fitzpatrick with Chris Matthews, Hardball, March 16, 1998.

24. Patricia Ireland, MSNBC, March 16, 1998.

25. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

26. Bill Plante, CBS Evening News, March 16, 1998.

27. Patricia Ireland, MSNBC, March 16, 1998.

28. Fitzpatrick with Chris Matthews, Hardball with Chris Matthews, March 16, 1998.

Chapter Eight: Smear Campaign

1. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 225.

2. Ibid., 496.

3. Blumenthal, Clinton Wars, 365.

4. Ibid., 364.

5. Ibid., 438.

6. Blumenthal, Response to Interrogatory No. 42.

7. Archibald, "Lindsey planned to discredit Willey."

8. Blumenthal, Response to Interrogatory No. 42.

9. Lindsey, Response to Interrogatory No. 15.

10. Hitchens, Interview with author, June 26, 2007.

11. Ibid.

12. Blumenthal, Clinton Wars, 627.

13. Ibid, 601.

14. Blumenthal, Response to Interrogatory No. 42.

15. Hitchens, Interview with author, July 8, 2007.

16. Ibid., June 26, 2007.

17. Lindsey with Mike McCurry, Responses to Interrogatory No. 15.

18. Blitzer with Janet Moore and Pierre Thomas, "White House Strikes Back Against Willey."

19. Kurtz, Howard. "Bennett Angry at '60 Minutes', " Washington Post, March 23, 1998, page E1.

20. Lauer and Ann Curry, Today, March 17, 1998.

21. Gecker, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

22. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

23. Blumenthal, Clinton Wars, 437.

24. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 120.

25. Ireland, Patricia. "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, " NPR, December 9, 2002. http://www .npr .org/programs/w aitwait/ archquiz/2oo3/030705.html.

26. Young, "Who says women never lie about rape?"

27. Patricia Ireland with Lisa Meyers, CNBC, March, 1998.

28. Edsall, "Strains in a Key Constituency."

29. NOW, "NOW President Patricia Ireland Challenges Livingston."

30. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 5.

31. Serrano, "Steinem Fires Back."

32. Jackson, Their Lives, 168.

33. Dowd, "Liberties, Sinners and Spinners on the Equator."

34. Edsall, "Strains in a Key Constituency."

35. Weisman, "Scandal throws women a curve."

36. Associated Press, "Anita Hill: Judge Clinton by his policies."

37. Crowley, Interview with author, June 16, 2007.

38. Simon, Roger and William Neikirk. "Cover-Up Charges Embroil Clinton; Taping of Intern Key to Inquiry." Chicago Tribune, January 22, 1998.

39. Jackson, Their Lives, 256-257.

40. Crowley, Interview with author, June 16, 2007.

41. Jackson, Their Lives, 258.

42. Ibid., 247.

Chapter Nine: Obstruction of Justice

1. Clinton, Bill, Transcript of grand jury testimony, August 17, 1998, at: http://www .pbs.orglnewshour/starr_report/clin ton9- 21.html.

2. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 27.

3. Schippers, Personal interview, July 5, 2007.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. Collins, 'Td do It All over Again."

8. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

9. Graves and Sharkey, "Starr and Willey."

10. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

11. Ibid.

12. Alvater, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

13. Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 148.

14. USA Today, "Starr decides not to pursue retrials for McDougal, Steele."

15. http://www.juliehiattsteele.com/.

16. Schippers, Interview with author, July 5, 2007.

17. Lemire, "Stalk rap for Monica prober."

18. David Stout, "Judge Rules Clinton Broke Privacy Law."

Chapter Ten: A Third Clinton Term?

1. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 83-84.

2. American Spectator, August, 1996.

3. Kuiper, I've Always Been a Yankees Fan, 69.

4. Klein, Truth About Hillary, 98-99.

5. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 93.

6. Ibid.

7. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 220.

8. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 479.

9. Milton, First Partner, 216.

10. Judd and Vlasto, "Witness Backs Willey Claims."

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Stern, Interviews with author.

14. Judd and Vlasto, "Witness Backs Willey Claims."

15. Interview with former Prudential contractor.

16. Ibid.

17. Stern, Interviews with author.

18. Ibid.

19. Interview with former Prudential contractor.

20. Stern, Interviews with author.

21. Interview with former Prudential contractor.

22. Prudential Associates website, http://www.prudentrisk.comlbioslbio- Stern.html.

23. Interview with former Prudential contractor.

24. Stern, Interviews with author.

25. Interview with former Prudential contractor.

26. Stern, Interviews with author.

27. Jackson, Their Lives, 230.

28. Ibid., 241.

29. Ibid., 247.

30. Motion filed in The United States District Court For the District of Columbia, Case No. 98-1991(WBB), June 28, 1999.

31. Shiflett, "Media Selective With Its Scandals."

32. Jackson, Their Lives, 28-29, 35.

33. Ibid., 67.

34. Sperry, " A Bully in the White House?"

35. Jackson, Their Lives, 73.

36. Jackson, Their Lives, 79.

37. Sheehy, Hillary's Choice, 13.

38. Jackson, Their Lives, 83.

39. Ibid., 84, 91.

40. Ibid., 108.

41. Liasson, "Clinton's Christmas woes."

42. Jackson, Their Lives, 115.

43. Jackson, Their Lives, 123.

44. Newsmax, "Clinton Questions Dwarf Deep Throat's ID."

45. Kuiper, I've Always Been a Yankees Fan, 42.

46. Thompson, "Bill Clinton is a violent, profane man."

47. Morgan, Interview with author.

48. Tripp, Larry King Live interview.

49. Ibid.

50. Morris with McGann, Rewriting History, 206.

51. Ibid., 216.

52. Balz, "Prosecutor, President Face Off."

53. Milton, First Partner, 196.

54. Investor's Business Daily, "Not-So-Secret Police?"

55. Dealey, "A Vast Left-Wing conspiracy?"

56. Milton, First Partner, 244.

57. Ibid.

58. Dealey, "A Vast Left-Wing conspiracy?"

59. Ibid.

60. Milton, First Partner, 244.

61. Investor's Business Daily, "Not-So-Secret Police?"

62. Helvarg, "All the President's P.I.s."

63. Blumenthal, Clinton Wars, 419-420.

64. Ibid., 412.

65. Interview with CBS News producer, July 10, 2007

66. Adams, "Into the Spotlight."

67. Citizens United, Interview with author.

68. Isikoff, "Clinton Team Works to Deflect Allegations."

69. Helvarg, "All the President's P.I.s."

70. Ibid.

71. Newsmax, "Clinton Questions Dwarf Deep Throat's ID."

72. Helvarg, "All the President's P.I.s."

73. Morgan, Interview with author.

74. Nagoumey and Colton, "Tapes Still Entangle Clinton."

75. Morris with McGann, Rewriting History, 204.

76. WorldNetDaily, "Clinton dirty trickster faces 110-count indictment."

77. GQ, January, 1992.

78. WorldNetDaily, "Clinton dirty trickster faces 110-count indictment."

79. Weinraub, "Hollywood Investigator Gets 30-Month Term."

80. WorldNetDaily, "Clinton dirty trickster faces 110-count indictment."

81. Weinraub, "Hollywood Investigator Gets 30-Month Term."

82. WorldNetDaily, "Clinton dirty trickster faces 110-count indictment."

83. Olson, Hell to Pay, 5.

84. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, p. xii.

85. Ibid., 100, 117.

86. Ibid., 80-82.

87. Ibid., 106.

88. Ibid., 143.

89. Ibid., 137, 138, 145.

90. Harris, Survivor, 229.

91. Patterson, Dereliction of Duty, 86-87.

92. Jackson, Their Lives, 129, 134.

93. Morgan, Interview with author.

94. ABC News, 2000, available at: http://www.pbs.orglwgbh/pages/ frontline/shows/clinton/interviews/gergen2.html.

95. Walsh, Kenneth, "Air Force One."

96. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 51, 61, 73.

97. Ross, Interview with Marshall Frady.

98. Healy, "For Clintons, Delicate Dance."

99. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 134.

100. Healy, "For Clintons, Delicate Dance."

101. Coman, "Shock!"

102. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 96-97.

103. Ibid.

104. Flowers, Passion and Betrayal.

105. Jackson, Their Lives, 216.

106. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 87.

107. Coulter, High Crimes & Misdemeanors, 80.

108. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 238.

109. Brown, Deposition.

110. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 103.

111. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 220.

112. Kessler, Inside the White House, p. 243.

113. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 80-82.

114. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 98, 103.

115. Ibid., 84.

116. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 83-84.

117. Ibid., 48, 84.

118. Bernstein, A Woman in Charge, 88, 89.

119. Levin, Clinton Syndrome, 48.

120. Andersen, American Evita, 173.

121. Andersen, Bill & Hillary, 247.

122. Ibid., 100.

123. Morris with McGann, Rewriting History, 264.

124. Woodward, Shadow, 247.

125. Morgan, Interview with author.

126. Walsh, Joan, "The Salon Interview with Elizabeth Edwards."

127. Ibid.

128. Morris, "Who Knocked Out Rudy?"

129. Kelly, "Meet the Smart New York Women Who Can't Stand Hillary Clinton."

130. Ibid.

131. Ibid.

132. CNN, "Clinton says 'clean sweep' needed at White House." 133. Prudhomme-O'Brien, "Today I Met Hillary in Nashua, N.H."

Afterword

1. Widdicombe, Ben. "Hoping to give Hi! the Willeys." New York Daily News, August 29, 2007.

2. Frosch, Dan. "Judge in Colorado Sets Bond of $5 Million for Democratic Fund-Raiser." New York Times, September 14, 2007.

3. Jordan, Lara Jakes. "Clinton to Return $850, 000 Raised by Hsu." Associated Press, My Way News, September 10, 2007. http://apnews. my way .com/article/20070911/D8RIVR8GO.html

4. Moore, Art. "David Schippers: Clinton gang broke into my house, too." WorldNetDaily.com, September 9, 2007. http://www.wnd.com/news/ article. asp ?ARTICLE_ID=57556

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to A Growing Corpus of Analytical Materials

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests