Capital Scene

FROM his perch high on the third tier of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee’s stacked hearing room, Rep. Tom Lantos (D., Calif.) is waving his arms and talking of a GOP effort to smear the Clintons. “Isn’t it true [that] in conducting an FBI investigation of you,” he asks a Republican witness whose FBI file has been obtained by the White House, “you initially granted your consent?” Therefore, Lantos reasons, “these were not files that were obtained without your consent.” When the witness tries to reply— he never, obviously, consented to having a Democratic operative rifle through his FBI file—Lantos cuts him off, maintaining that he hadn’t asked a question. Other Democrats pipe up on Lantos’s behalf and he is able to continue uninterrupted. For committee Democrats, it is one of the highlights of the day.

Defending the latest, burgeoning Clinton scandal—hundreds of Republican FBI files in the hands of the White House security office—is becoming a barely sustainable exercise in bluff and sophistry for even the best of Clinton partisans. Consider Ann Lewis, one of the Administration’s more adroit spinners. In a June 13 memo to “friends,” she explained that the FBI-file scandal resulted from a “career civilian employee of the Army” (obfuscation #1) updating White House files with “a computer-generated list from the Secret Service” (#2) that, “we have since learned, included previous Reagan and Bush appointees as well as current employees” (#3). Moreover, Mrs. Lewis suggests, the White House never tried to keep secret the fact that it had the files (#4), and it was Rep. Bill Clinger (R., Pa.) who created the illusion that it had by “demanding] a formal assertion of executive privilege that would cover all [Travelgate] documents” (#5).

About the Author

Rich Lowry

Rich Lowry is the editor in chief of National Review.

Featured Tags

FROM his perch high on the third tier of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee’s stacked hearing room, Rep. Tom Lantos (D., Calif.) is waving his arms and talking of a GOP effort to smear the Clintons. “Isn’t it true [that] in conducting an FBI investigation of you,” he asks a Republican witness whose FBI file has been obtained by the White House, “you initially granted your consent?” Therefore, Lantos reasons, “these were not files that were obtained without your consent.” When the witness tries to reply— he never, obviously, consented to having a Democratic operative rifle through his FBI file—Lantos cuts him off, maintaining that he hadn’t asked a question. Other Democrats pipe up on Lantos’s behalf and he is able to continue uninterrupted. For committee Democrats, it is one of the highlights of the day.

Defending the latest, burgeoning Clinton scandal—hundreds of Republican FBI files in the hands of the White House security office—is becoming a barely sustainable exercise in bluff and sophistry for even the best of Clinton partisans. Consider Ann Lewis, one of the Administration’s more adroit spinners. In a June 13 memo to “friends,” she explained that the FBI-file scandal resulted from a “career civilian employee of the Army” (obfuscation #1) updating White House files with “a computer-generated list from the Secret Service” (#2) that, “we have since learned, included previous Reagan and Bush appointees as well as current employees” (#3). Moreover, Mrs. Lewis suggests, the White House never tried to keep secret the fact that it had the files (#4), and it was Rep. Bill Clinger (R., Pa.) who created the illusion that it had by “demanding] a formal assertion of executive privilege that would cover all [Travelgate] documents” (#5).