If Kavanaugh's Dirty, Why Didn't Clintons Destroy Him When He Worked for Starr: Ingraham
For those still not convinced the attacks by Democrats on Judge Brett Kavanaugh are nothing but an 11th hour attempt to derail his confirmation to the Supreme Court, conservative TV and radio host Laura Ingraham would like to offer another bit of evidence.
“If Kavanaugh had done any of what he’s accused of, the Clinton War Room would have destroyed him in 1998 when he was a top official in Ken Starr’s Whitewater Investigation,” she said Wednesday via Twitter.
If Kavanaugh had done any of what he’s accused of, the Clinton War Room would have destroyed him in 1998 when he was a top official in Ken Starr’s Whitewater Investigation.
— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) September 27, 2018
Her reference is to the scandal involving former President Bill Clinton during his time as the governor of Arkansas. He and his wife, former first lady and two-time presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, were later investigated by a special counsel while Bill Clinton was president over suspicious real estate dealing in what became known as “Whitewater.”
The special counsel role for the Whitewater probe in the 1990s was filled by Kenneth Starr. NPR noted in an August profile of Kavanaugh that the Supreme Court nominee was also involved in the investigation, specially chosen by Starr.
“In 1994, Kavanaugh wasn’t even 30 years old. He was finishing up a Supreme Court clerkship and was recruited to a big deal law firm, when the guy who recruited him, Ken Starr, was drafted to take over the independent counsel investigation into Whitewater,” NPR reported.
“‘So, I immediately sat down with Brett over lunch and encouraged him to postpone the private practice of law by say, oh, six months or so, and come join my team in the Washington, D.C., office,'” Starr told NPR.
NPR outlined various ways in which Kavanaugh played an important role in the investigation. One being that he was part of what Starr labeled “the brain trust,” what NPR described as “the lawyers who puzzled through the many legal and constitutional questions that came up over the course of the investigation.”
Kavanaugh also “can be clearly seen over Starr’s left shoulder in C-SPAN’s recording of Starr testifying before Congress in 1998, as the House considered impeachment against the president.” Additionally, Kavanaugh “argued in favor of investigating the suicide of Vince Foster, the White House deputy counsel, even though two prior investigations had already concluded that his death was a suicide.”
Kavanaugh was also among those on Starr’s team who believed President Clinton should be asked intimate questions related to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which eventually became part of Starr’s probe.
Naturally, the Clintons were not happy about the investigation and hit back against all allegations. The New York Times wrote about “The War Room” of the Clintons in 2008, noting the moniker was created by Hillary Clinton to “send a message to Republicans,” according to Chris Hegedus, director of a documentary with the same name.
“The notion of a war room — let no attack go unanswered, let no opportunity go unexploited — is common now,” The Times wrote in its 2008 piece. “But in 1993, when ‘The War Room’ was nominated for an Academy Award, a rapid-response operation was still an exotic concept.”
The Daily Caller wrote in July that the Clinton media “War Room” during the Starr investigation “was created at Hillary Clinton’s request.” But there is more to it, and that’s why it’s particularly relevant to the events of today.
“The campaign ranged from repeated White House condemnation of Starr in the media to the creation of a media war room in the White House staffed with 12 full-time attorneys and even to the hiring of private investigators to pry into the personal lives of Starr’s attorneys, which included current Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who then was an associate independent counsel.”
And just days ago, Politco wrote that a former Clinton “War Room” member, Ricki Seidman, is “advising” Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford. She also advised sexual harassment accuser Anita Hill in her testimony “against Supreme Court Nominee Clarence Thomas.”
So despite the endless attacks by the Clinton “War Room” on Starr and others, and their investigation into the special counsel, nothing salacious about Kavanaugh or his past emerged at the time. Nothing about him being a potential rapist, a participant in serial gang rape or anything else of the sort came to light.
It was only on the verge of his confirmation vote that a letter that was held since July made headlines, and accusers begin to trickle in, one after another. As one accuser’s claim is discredited on social media, another one steps up with a more outlandish allegation against Kavanaugh.
Ingraham’s point is valid. With how effectively the Clinton “War Room” worked at attacking people (just ask Juanita Broderick and Lewinsky), why was there nothing remotely like what we are hearing about Kavanaugh uncovered by their investigators? Sexual assault allegations against someone involved in investigating Bill Clinton for sexual allegations would have been too good to pass up.
Six FBI background checks revealed nothing, all of his years as a judge have revealed nothing, and even the Clinton “War Room” didn’t find anything. But now we are supposed to believe he is a sexual predator of the worst kind who operated in a large-scale way in a town where everyone talks, but never was outed until now.
That’s why it’s only natural for Republicans to be cynical about the claims against Kavanaugh.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
