By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources
September 18, 1998
Any of us who have been actually monitoring the Clinton-Lewinsky-Filegate-Travelgate-Chinagate-Campaign Financegate story coming from the White House knew it was only a matter of time before we started getting some real or imagined "scandal" stories planted by the White House. After all, James Carville publicly ANNOUNCED that this would happen if the Republicans didn’t stop their investigations of Bill Clinton.
Does anyone remember the incident, back in January 1996, when billing records from Hillary Clinton’s law firm, records that had been subpoenaed by Sen. Al D’Amato, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee that was investigating Whitewater? The records had been subpoenaed in 1994 and never produced and they just sort of "mysteriously appeared on a table in the White House residence," Clinton aide Carolyn Huber testified to the Committee.
Carolyn Huber told the Senate Whitewater Committee she went to the book room in the residence every two or three days, and one day unexpectedly found the billing records from the first lady's law firm there early last August. She said they were folded but in plain view, on a pile of books on the corner of a table where they hadn't been just days earlier.
"They appeared there," Huber testified. "I thought it had been left there for me to take down to put in the file -- you know, to file in the filing that I do." She said she was certain the records had not been there earlier. "I don't think I would have missed them," she said.
Huber testified the book room was mainly for the Clintons and their guests, but was accessible to herself and some other White House aides. She said she immediately realized they were Hillary Clinton's billings to an Arkansas savings and loan at the center of the Whitewater affair that had been under subpoena for two years.
In spite of that extraordinary example of contempt of Congress, not too long after that, Al D’Amato’s investigation sort just fizzled out. Every since the White House has claimed that "no wrongdoing has ever been connected to the Clintons."
Was that Senate investigation halted because Al D’Amato, who is not an angel in every aspect of his public and personal life, was blackmailed specifically? Perhaps by someone relaying to him raw data from his FBI file? Just a thought.
The strange appearance of subpoenaed material two years after the fact, in the residence of the person subpoenaed would have landed most of us in jail on contempt of court. This was clearly contempt of Congress. As the Detroit News reported at the time, "The disclosure came as two congressional committees are questioning the first lady's honesty on two fronts: the Whitewater land deal as it pertains to a failed savings and loan run by the Clintons' real estate partner, and the White House travel office firings in 1993. Hillary Clinton says she did very little work on Madison; the newly discovered records show she worked 60 hours on it over 15 months. She denies having ordered the travel office firings.
"Committee Chairman Alfonse D'Amato called the latest revelations ‘troubling.’ " ‘Do you really believe the butler did it?’ he said.
Now, with the news stories which have cropped up about Dan Burton, Helen Chenoweth and now Henry Hyde, we see exactly what Bill Clinton meant at the prayer breakfast last week when he announced he had "repented" in literally the same breath he announced a "vigorous defense." This is part of the "vigorous defense" compartment, folks, not the "repentance" compartment.
The media, of course, has blasted all over the front pages a story about Henry Hyde that they got from the supposedly aggrieved husband of 30 years ago, Fred Snodgrass. While the Hyde marriage survived the event -whatever it was, we learn today that the Snodgrass marriage, was actually already on the rocks before Sherie Snodgrass even met Henry Hyde. Now we learn that Sherie has a different recollection of the story. She told the Express-News in Texas that her ex-husband was publicizing her affair with Hyde out of ``revenge.'' ``He was a blamer. He could never accept responsibility for his own actions and blamed everything on Hank,'' she said. At the time "Hank" Hyde was a lawyer. He was not in public life and whatever they were doing it was not being done on the job at their place of employment on government property. Sherie (now Soskin) told the Express-News that her marriage was dissolving when she met Hyde, whom she called Hank. ``I was in the process of starting divorce proceedings,'' she said by phone. ``I was no longer living with my husband.'' Ms. Soskin said she was worried publicity about the affair with Hyde would damage her life. She had planned to decline requests for interviews today, but may speak about the subject at a later date, ``as soon as I have time to think.'' So far, the person probably the most damaged by this story is a woman who is simply trying to get the past behind her, who has no animosity toward Henry Hyde, and her children. From Henry Hyde we hear, "Suffice it to say Cherie Snodgrass and I were good friends a long, long time ago. After Mr. Snodgrass confronted my wife, the friendship ended and my marriage remained intact.
"The only purpose for this being dredged up now is an obvious attempt to intimidate me and it won’t work."
Who dredged up this bit of old news about Henry Hyde, who heads the House Committee that will consider impeachment? Was it peddled by the White House? The White House says "NO!" However, ABC News reported Wednesday that two unnamed journalists say a senior White House official had peddled to them a story that Hyde once had a girlfriend. Apparently Mike McCurry called ABC and demanded that it named the White House source, which ABC refused to do.
Meanwhile, the Landmark Legal Foundation Thursday accused the Internet magazine Salon, which broke the story, of having very close connections - financial and otherwise - with President Bill Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Landmark president, Mark R. Levin, said, "Salon attempts to portray itself as a non-partisan, web site journal when, in fact, its patrons are millionaire Democrat activists and many of its reporters have long-time links with top White House official Sidney Blumenthal." Sidney Blumenthal is the one who had previously threatened to reveal dirt on any in Congress who "attacked" Clinton.
Levin added, "Salon writer Murray Waas colluded with the head of Clinton's legal defense fund, former Arkansas Sen. David Pryor, to improperly instigate an investigation of fabricated allegations of witness-tampering. These efforts are intended to undermine key Whitewater witness David Hale's testimony against President Clinton, sabotage Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's Whitewater investigation, and damage the reputations of the American Spectator and philanthropist Richard Mellon Scaife."
Landmark also mentioned two major backers of Salon, · William Hambrecht, who hosted a major fund-raiser for Democrat House candidates at his San Francisco home with President Clinton and Steve Jobs, Apple Computer chief. The Clintons stayed at Jobs’ Woodside, California home at a recent golf weekend.
All this suggests that Bill Clinton and the Democrats really do believe that the American people are simply stupid. After years of convincing us that "character doesn’t matter" and a recent barrage of propaganda calling the revelations in the Lewinsky situation "Sexual McCarthyism," where the "Sex Police" are invading the President’s "privacy," we are supposed to be revolted by a vague story about Henry Hyde and a girl 30 years ago? Dan Burton and an affair while he was separated which resulted in the birth of a child who is now grown? Helen Chenoweth and a youthful indiscretion?
What is very different about these recent stories, planted obviously to try to silence Clinton critics, is that in each case - Dan Burton, Henry Hyde, Helen Chenoweth - the behavior was STOPPED. They turned their lives around. Henry Hyde and Dan Burton did what was necessary to save their marriages. Dan Burton VOLUNTEERED to take a blood test and, finding it indicated he actually was the father of the child, fulfilled his moral responsibility, with the support of his wife, towards raising that child -
The big news is not that these individuals, who are now national leaders, have sinned. The big news is how they handled the sin. Clinton claimed, less than a week ago, that he had "repented" - yet his spin team has moved into high gear in an attempt to save him from ANY consequences or restitution for his sin. Burton, Chenoweth and Hyde, changed their behavior. Clinton, obviously, has not changed his behavior.
Biblical references seem to be popular these days. The Biblical reference on this story might be the Apostle Paul, who tried hard to stamp out a new threat to the authority of the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. He arrested and imprisoned many. He was there and in a position of authority when Steven was stoned to death. But, he was given some new information about the truth of the matter one day on the way to Damascus to arrest a group of Christians. Jesus Christ gave Paul some correct information about the issue.
And, Paul repented. That means, Mr. Clinton, that he stopped persecuting Christians. He realized they were right and he even started helping them spread the word. Today most people think about Paul as a major source of New Testament Scripture and a righteous man. Paul publicly testified, before Herod, that he had been wrong, and the Christians had the story right.
There are other figures in Scripture that reacted differently. One was King Ahab, husband of Jezebel. He was so determined to continue his lifestyle that he was not moved by one of the most remarkable miracles in Scripture when the True God of Israel bested Baal in a contest over providing fire for a sacrifice. I mentioned this story in an earlier column Ahab and Jezebel NEVER repented. On a couple of occasions, Ahab was disturbed by the prophet Elijah and his warnings. However, instead of repenting, he tried to kill the prophet.
At issue in the two Biblical stories was the difference in the way Paul and Ahab responded to the truth. One embraced it, repented, and changed sides. The other was angered by it, swore vengeance and continued in his reprehensible behavior.
Of course, in the end, both Paul and Ahab died. All either of them have left is his spiritual legacy, his history. Ahab is known as the most evil king Israel ever had. Paul is revered as the most righteous of men in Scripture, even after killing all those Christians.
Mr. President, the legacy of Bill Clinton is mostly written. All you can change at this point is what history will say about you. Do you want to continue your efforts to destroy Ken Starr and other critics, or do you want to accept the truth and do what is right?
While you are trying to decide, try to remember that the United States of America is really not a monarchy. In the end, the people are going to decide this issue - quite possibly at the polls in about six weeks. You may have to find out the hard way that the obvious and public attempt to blackmail Henry Hyde may backfire. The public may respect these men MORE than before - because they changed their lives and became honorable men. Sort of like the Apostle Paul. As Gavin Grooms observed a few days ago, "Mr. President, Teach My Children." Now is the time to decide whether you want a King Ahab or Apostle Paul legacy. Only you can decide that.
To comment: mmostert@originalsources.com