Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SUSAN MCDOUGAL IMPLICATES NEW YORK TIMES IN WHITEWATER BRIBERY
SCHEME
Claims Husband was Paid to Talk to Jeff Gerth in �92
Monday night (4/20) on the Charles Grodin Show, proponents of the �Vast
Right Wing
Conspiracy� theory finally overplayed their hand - bigtime. In a taped
interview with a Grodin
staffer, Whitewater convict Susan McDougal alleged that her husband, Jim
McDougal, was paid -
and possibly promised a job - for an interview with New York Times
reporter Jeff Gerth, who
broke the Whitewater story in March 1992 largely based on Mr. McDougal�s
account.
She leveled the bribery charge as her lawyer, Mark Geragos, along with
fellow Grodin guests Gene
Lyons, John Fund and Gil Davis, explored the allegations that another
key Whitewater witness,
David Hale, was also paid to tell prosecutors what he knew about
Whitewater. Mrs. McDougal
and Geragos hope those allegations taint Hale enough to win her a new
trial. And the parallel
charges implicating Jim McDougal and The New York Times appear to be an
attempt to illustrate
just how �vast� the conspiracy to destroy Bill Clinton really was. Mrs.
McDougal debuted her
explosive and bizarre allegations early in the Grodin program, when
asked about the origins of the
Whitewater scandal. She explained:
�I first knew that there was an issue when I was visiting my ex-husband
(Jim McDougal) and he told
me that he was going to meet with Jeff Gerth of The New York Times. And
he was very ebullient
that day and excited about it. And he made me understand that there was
something in it for him. He
was getting something out of this interview; money and the possibility
of a job or something. And he
said �I might need you to come in and back me up but I�m going to try to
keep you out of it if I
can.�
Well, from that interview with The New York Times - that Jim was clearly
motivated to say certain
things - grew Whitewater. And from my perspective Whitewater just never
existed. I knew about
that business deal; the small land deal in Northern Arkansas. I�d been
there. I�d talked to the
Clintons about it. I�d talked to Jim about it. And I never knew anything
that was remotely illegal
about that. So, to tell you the truth - I am as puzzled about how they
decided to go after
Whitewater as anybody else. Except I know that the very first story,
from the very beginning, was
not true. And I know that when Jim told that story, he was being paid -
or motivated in some way
to tell it.� Of the allegations that David Hale�s Whitewater story was
paid for, The New York Times
has said the charge is serious enough to merit a thorough official
investigation, even though the
supporting evidence is �scant�. Susan McDougal�s allegation that the
Times was a party to a
scheme to bribe the very man whose tale launched the Whitewater scandal,
Jim McDougal, would
seem to be far more serious than the allegations against Mr. Hale,
especially since it taints the
Times� own reportage. And though Susan McDougal may be a proven liar and
convicted felon
awaiting trial on seperate embezzlement charges, she does seem to have
established herself as a
credible source in the eyes of the mainstream press, given the fact that
they never tire of interviewing
her.
Will the New York Times call for Janet Reno or Ken Starr to investigate
this time?
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
