Are the "Talking Points" Bogus?
Two Scholars Raise Serious Questions That the Press Should Have
TUESDAY, June 16th 1998 --- New York (APJP) -- Over the weekend, a regular reader of American Politics Journal emailed a lengthy essay to our editorial offices.
The essay, entitled Point "Talking Points", created a sensation among our editorial board and staff.
Written by scholars John F. X. Gillis and Skip Fox, the essay contains painstaking analysis of the content of these so-called "talking points." Gillis posted the essay to his web site late last week.
Their carefully considered conclusions not only raise surprising and serious questions about which parties actually authored the "talking points," but they also raise troubling questions about a combination of press complicity and negligence -- complicity in uncritically flogging the points as a supposedly "damaging" piece of evidence against President Clinton, and negligence in failing to reveal (let alone explain) dramatic inconsistencies, including telling omissions, found in various versions of the points which have circulated to various press organs.
The thorough analysis by the authors leads to four especially devastating conclusions: that there at least two extant versions of the points "which calls its provenance and transmission into question," that "neither Lewinsky nor 'the president's men' could have drafted the document," that at least three and possibly more people had a hand in authoring the document, and that the document itself was fraudulently submitted in an effort to create an "obstruction of justice" scenario.
I had the pleasure of speaking with both Gillis and Fox last night. Both were surprised and pleased at the strong and mostly positive reaction their efforts have yielded, given the essay's limited circulation to date. Fox feels that the entire story of the "talking points" has been mishandled by the media and "if even only ten percent of the conclusions we reach can be proven, the 'Talking Points' will be blown out of the water."
| With the permission of the authors, American Politics Journal is reprinting the entire essay. The essay runs some 28 printed pages; on our web site, we have split it into five HTML pages in order that our readers may easily access and compare all of the relevant data. The essay itself is lengthy and the scenario presented detailed and thorough. It is admittedly not a quick read. But we encourage you all to give it not only a careful read but critical consideration. |
And hats off to Gillis and Fox for a scholarly job well done!
Gene Gaudette
American Affairs Editor
American Politics Journal
Search American Politics Provided by Hot Bot |
