<........................................................................................EXPAND YOUR BROWSER FOR THE BEST READ........................................................................................>
FEATURE
Pundit Pap- PART ONE
for Sunday, April 5th 1998
TUESDAY APRIL 7th 1998 -- New York (APJP) -- Because our editorial board feels that tracking pundits re the Clinton situation is so important, we have decided to submit Pundit Pap to our readers in two parts. Covering the four shows we do creates large files which are difficult to send in bulk and tiring for readers. Pundit Pap will therefore cover Fox News Sunday and McLaughlin on Tuesdays and Meet the Press/ The Week on Wednesdays.
The pundits were raising the stakes against the White House this week. They were also raising the stakes on their jobs. Continuing to insult the Clintons and build new reputations for Paula Jones, Ken Starr and others who are engaged in a loose conspiracy to defame others is a mistake -- a big one which will stop careers spectacularly and result in some firings. If Snow, Russert, McLaughlin, Donaldson and Roberts want to end up branded as McCarthyists, they should keep on the same track.
Fox News Sunday
Forget everything nice we've said about Tony Snow -- well maybe not everything. However, we sensed a change in the somewhat level attitude of FNS this week with the entire team, made up of Lightweight Juan Williams, who can't decide what he wants, Mara Liasson, who must have been told she was far too liberal for the show, Brit Hume -- who's as cranky and mean-spirited as ever and, of course, Snow himself who seems to amuse himself by tossing out questions designed to spin the response.
Hume, after the tragic passing of his son Sandy, was back in form yesterday, grumbling, taking pot shots at the White House and obviously angry that his own party can't seem to get it together. Hume, who likes to pretend he is a poster boy for "family values" and is anything but, tried to pin Ann Lewis over an ambush question the four idiots and Ailes had cooked up behind the presidential spokeswoman's back. The question was a slam-dunker and first asked by Snow with follow-up from bratty Hume who was actually angry that Lewis wouldn't fall for this adolescent nonsense.
Snow asked Lewis, "If you are in the work place and your boss invites you up, exposes himself, etc., would you feel harassed?"
What was Lewis to say? We must say that she was momentarily at a loss for words, but it was a mean thing to do to her since she is always such a lady and appears prudish to begin with. Lewis phumphaed along calling such action by a male "nunctious""bunctious" or "unctuous" -- we couldn't tell which - even though Hume and Snow repeated her characterization a few times to make fun of her. It was really inner-city high school banter and Hume, especially, should know better.
But then again...
Lewis made the point that while the behavior might be consider boorish, it is not actionable under Federal law. Of course Hume, one step away from Pope, would not take that on its face and kept insulting Lewis with, "Oh, so doing it ONCE is okay?"
We suppose Hume's own obviously wanting youth may not have allowed him the rights of passage that normally include fumbled attempts in the back seat of Daddy's Ford, but to suggest that men and boys don't engage in outrageous machinations to attract the opposite sex is ludicrous. How many men have been slapped in how many drive-in theaters over the past 50 years?
Lewis ignored him, which only makes a brat like Brit more angry. What she should have said was this: "Hey Hume, what if your wife - a lovely woman - called a male employee up to her office, pulled off her sweater, and made a pass? Would that be harassment?
We ask you Brit. Is that harassment? Or women different. Because we hate to tell you, most men love women who take the time to seduce them, and most women at least are flattered by men who take that time as well. Now we're not saying whipping out the jewels is kosher, but we are saying that only Paula Jones and her side of the street could even come up with that scenario. Whipping is out is a typical ghetto class "move" as pointed out by more than one sexologist. We don't think the President of the United States did that. But we do think the lie fits the teller -- also a ghetto class lass. And in case you don't think other men have tried the same move, we have read, in a best selling "Guide" to seducing women that more than one woman has fallen for the "thing" Paula Jones described as putting her on a psychiatrist's couch -- five years later.
Snow asked Lewis whether the so-called "Rutherford Institute" should lose their tax exempt status for having engaged in what we believe was a classic abuse of judicial process for purely destructive purposes - so heavily underscored by their dumping of nearly 1,000 pages of ridiculous hearsay on the court as part of their "filing" against Mr. Bennett's motion for dismissal - granted so wisely by Judge Susan Webber Wright.
Of course they should lose their tax exempt status, and so should those who took deductions for their contributions this year.
Lewis went through the Rutherford players. Richard Mellon Scaife, now the reported subject of an FBI investigation, the "Arkansas Project," which he and his loony right wing friends funded, and the Rutherford Institute itself - a clearinghouse for ultra-right-wing freedom bashers and breeding ground for gay-bashers like Jones attorney Donovan Campbell whose bill is being picked up by Whitehead.
The most pathetic demonstration of ignorance was Brit Hume's sneering question to Lewis, "Was Scaife behind Dorothy, Gennifer, etc?" Of course he was, you moron, directly or indirectly. Here we have the leader of Fox News' political desk DEFENDING Scaife and attacking Clinton at the same time. Is this really America and is Hume really an American journalist? One wonders whether he is also on the Scaife payroll.
Hume went on playing "The Fool" asking, "What's the difference between payments to David Hale (made by Scaife operatives) and payments to Webster Hubbell - made openly and by his friends to help support him during his crisis. The difference Mr. Hume, is that Hubbell didn't hide his payments and they weren't made in the dark, in cash, by some low-life bait store owner. Hubbell was also not protected by Malibu Ken Starr. Jeez, are you for real?
Of course, Snow sneakily brought on John Whitehead, chief of the Rutherford "Institute" whose staff is telling potential contributors they will appeal the Wright decision, but who told Snow that they won't unless Paula agrees. Who is lying?
Snow put on Whitehead last to ambush Lewis. He could shoot at her, but she was gone and could not reply to his absurdities. Snow laughingly asked Whitehead this loaded question:
"Are you part of a right-wing conspiracy?" -- Well of course he is Tony. Who are you kidding.
Whitehead replied:" That's all been disproved." Sure Whitehead, and you're a real Christian as well. Whitehead mumbled something about Time Magazine doing a parody on Clinton's right wing conspiracy theory as this "proof." Of course he failed to mention that Time laughs at the Rutherford Institute between the lines and had to spook Clinton to protect it's own involvement in the Get Clinton frenzy.
Among other lies, Whitehead said:
1. We don't receive money from right wing big shots.
2. He said it was a FACT that the president stroked Paula, sat down and "revealed" himself."
3. That he and his legal teams were up against 1,300 lawyers on Clinton's team. 1,300!!!
4. That the lie he put in his pleadings about the president raping someone showed that his people were "good lawyers."
"We had to put it out , we are good lawyers, it was a mistake. . . " but then went on and stated as fact that the president was engaged in witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and perjury. And Hume, Snow, Juan and even Liasson just let him get away with it.
What was amazing, is that not one panel member asked even one snide question of the poseur Whitehead. Not one.
We submit, Fox News is part of the problem -- pounding Clinton and hoping he cracks. Hosting Whitehead and pretending he has any credibility whatsoever is lower than anything we've seen in a long time.
Next on was Hockey Puck Joe deGenova - once the top Ed Meese butt-kisser, and subject of a House investigation on his and his wife's billings and conflict of interest and, of course, introduced on FNS only as a former federal prosecutor. He was pitted against gentleman lawyer Lloyd Cutler who was no match for pit bull deGenova who is only eclipsed in chutzpah by his wife - Victoria Toensing - who is our nominee for the Lucille Ball "separated at birth" but just as bitchy award. Toensing and deGenova are reportedly reputed to be the two clowns leaking stuff from Starr's office at Starr's request.
De Genova was hot to allow the Secret Service to testify about the President's movements in and outside the White House to Kenneth Starr's grand wizard jury. This, he claimed, was because, "No other president has raised this question." We have news for you, no other president, including Nixon, had his secret service protectors subpoenaed -- something tantamount to testifying against oneself. Only desperate Starr would demand such a thing.
Hume, talked about the President as if it was proven fact that Clinton had sex with dozens of women in the Oval Office. Snow piped in that Starr was going to indict Lewinsky and also go after the president as an "un-indicted co-conspirator."
Silly rumor yes, fact no. There isn't a reputable lawyer in the nation that thinks that would be a good idea.
De Genova also dismissed Cutler, so much more highly respected than deGenova that it's laughable, as a "good soldier" and said that "executive privilege had to do with affairs of state, not affairs of the heart." He must have been rehearsing that sound byte in the mirror all morning.
In one swoop DeGenova indicted both the President and Vernon Jordan saying neither were "above the law," but de Genova himself may have to prove his own innocence over charges of fraudulent billing whispering not so quietly around the House floor.
But de Genova surprised even far-right Snow with this line: "I don't know why people are so upset over wiring someone to go in and talk to the president. If he has something to hide, he should be wired."
Well, Joe, in that case, may we put a wire on you and Vicky and listen in on your conversations. We're sure they are indictable.
Tom DeLay came on opposite Carol Mosley Braun next. Needless to say, right-of-Hitler DeLay spouted off about how "sad" he was that the country is redefining sexual behavior as unctuous. He also said the nation was denigrated by making Lloyd Cutler defend the President.
Chuckle. A two sided compliment or insult?
DeLay said that "the truth is that Bill Clinton is a sexual predator." We wondered how long it would take for some nut to come out with that one. DeLay, who looks like the wrong end of a head-on collision is another like Starr who suffers from Clinton penis envy and is livid that American women like a cad.
Snow was a riot trying to correct Senator Braun's $40 million expenditure on the Clinton investigation. The GOP had, this week, released pap that it was ONLY $35 million. Actually, it is more like $100 million when you figure the cost of related departmental and White House expenditures made to answer Starr's witch hunt.
QUOTE OF THE WEEK
Tom DeLay: "You see Tony, the truth is not important. It's the spin, the spin and nothing but the spin. They avoid the notion that the president of the United States is a sexual predator They are pushing that I can grab a woman's breasts and I all have to do is back off."
Ha, ha, ha, he was twitching as he dreamt it, er, said it.
THE PANEL
The panel was boring with Snow almost immediately quoting the beleaguered gnome of legal punditry - Stuart "Odie Colognie" Taylor as saying "the Jones decision is bad news" for the President. (More on Taylor later.)
Brit Hume thought there was a fair chance she would appeal, only he doesn't seem to realize that no one will represent her in that appeal. There is no money left, and Dick Scaife, now a federal investigation target won't be coughing up his spare change any longer - especially to Jone's incompetent legal team.
Hume laughingly thought that the "world will change when Starr dumps his evidence into Congress." Only problem is that Starr has nothing to dump but lies, innuendo, and rumors. Most started by the GOP.
But even Mara Liasson had her instructions to turn on the President, and she did, agreeing with Hume more yesterday than on a previous 6 months of shows.
Hume said that "untold damage has been done" to Clinton.
Snow pointed out that George Stephanopoulos and top-weasel Leon Panetta were also turning on the President, both suggesting he "come Clean" this week.
But we have to hand it to Snow and Ailes for this one. They devoted the FNS "Spinterpretor" to Kenneth Starr's psycho-babble over the haggard television show "Dragnet." Starr waxed eloquent and long about Jack Webb last week saying he "missed Webb and Dragnet." The spinterpretor? "All I can think of is Jack Webb." FACT: Jack Webb is dead. Ha, ha, haha
Juan Williams actually stood up for Clinton a few times -- or at least tried to. But with Mara turning gestapo on him, it was difficult. Hume said that he thought House Democrats would not be able to save the President after the Starr 'evidence' "Dump" because their defense will be "trumped by major pieces of evidence." Right Brit, MAJOR.
Our sources say Starr has not even one major or even minor piece of "evidence" - only conjecture and we saw, last week, how much that did for Paula Jones.
There was some King Family bashing over their pleas for a new investigation into Martin Luther King's murder. Hume, Williams and Liasson don't get it -- even if King was shot by the man they now say may be innocent -- more people were involved. That's what we and the Kings want to ferret out.
Snow then wrapped it up with "The Women's Movement from one man's point of view."
It was hilarious. Snow saying generally that rapists are now protected under Judge Wright's ruling and that under the "Steinem Rule" men can "grope until you say nope." "Call me a door-opening troglodyte, but I think the definition of a gentleman is a man that you don't have to worry about pushing away."
Okay, Tony, you're a door-opening troglodyte and according to some women in Virginia - you had to be pushed away - plenty.
The McLaughlin Group
McLaughlin was so badly formatted yesterday that we'll only quote the most unforgettable lines:
Fred Barnes: : "Starr is planning to indict someone and show that Clinton has committed perjury, withheld witnesses, and withheld testimony."
Pat Buchanan: "This is not a sex matter."
David Gergen (acting smarter this week) " I don't think there is going to be a trial against Monica Lewinsky for perjury on an affidavit in a moot case."
Buchanan (fuming) "This is perjury, suborning perjury. It's an attempt to destroy a trial!"
Gergen - "I am not wiling to speculate that Starr has the hard evidence. He must prove there is something more than Lewinsky.
McLaughlin: "I read a brilliant article by Stuart Taylor and I am convinced he has the evidence of perjurous statements by the President. I think, to put this sick saga to rest, I'd do it if I were Ken Starr."
We have news for you John. We believe Stuart Taylor is a whore for Ken Starr, and has been so for quite some time -- maybe long before he wrote the article which put Paula Jones back on the map. Not to mention the fact that Taylor engaged in negotiations with Starr recently to go to work for him, agreed to do so, and then withdrew after thinking about it and how it would destroy his career as a television legal pundit. Your purposeful failure to mention this Sunday was so irresponsible you should lose your sponsors and your show.
McLaughlin also focused on Dick Morris's statement that the White House had engaged in file keeping on political enemies. However, he focused on it so poorly that the audience could not have known what he meant.
"IS CLINTON NOW BLACKMAILING THE HILL?" asked McLaughlin.
Word is out that the White House is doing opposition research on members of the House Judiciary Committee. We think that's smart. After all, we've been doing that for two years. First on the list seems to be Congressnut Bob Barr who has a shaky marital past complete with some shocking allegations from is ex-wife and family. Gingrich and Canon are also special targets according to The Hill newspaper and McLaughlin.
In the end, in the street fight called Washington politics -- it IS the slime the White House has on these goofballs that will force them to laugh Starr out of Congress and get on with the elections.
What's good for the goose... ? Of course, McLaughlin labels this as the White House trying to "intimidate" members of the House Judiciary Committee. It's amusing that he doesn't see the attacks on the President by these same men and women as "intimidating" or worse.
American Politics Journal knows that the White House is NOT engaged in any formal head-hunting in Congress. They don't have to be. A steady stream of dirt is pouring into 1600 Pensy from myriad Clinton supporters and people upset with the direction the country and the legal system has taken.
All staffers have to do is sort the wheat from the chaff.
On McLaughlin's question whether the worst is yet to come for Clinton:
Banes - the worst is yet to come.
Clift - the best if yet to come
Buchanan - before it was Antietum - now it will be Gettysburg!
Gergen - probably not
McLaughlin - the worst is yet to come.
We agree with the worst. Republicans, although weakened and afraid, will continue their unrelenting attack on the White House until the garbage starts flying the other way -- toward them. They will lose control of the House and perhaps the Senate in November because of it. Then they will stop. Typical idiots. They had it all, and are yet willing to waste it on groveling garbage.
Who said the GOP wasn't dying slowly?
- The Editors
Remember, Meet the Press and This Week with Sam & Cokie is featured Wednesday! - Don't miss it.
 Provided by Hot Bot | Searchfor |
", a client, a friend, and one of the keenest minds in American politics, told me one afternoon: 'A good place to begin thinking critically about American and Western European democracies to ask yourself: What kind of man or woman would choose to run for public office? Think about that.' - I did."
- Eliot Janeway ,1991 New York
From an Introduction to JK's essay and speech, "Washington - The New American Babylon"
Copyright©AMERICAN POLITICS JOURNAL INC 1996-1998 Reader Services Post Office Box 0409, Navesink, NJ 07716 FAX: 908.872.7604
NEED HELP? E-MAIL: reader@americanpolitics.com
