Fun_People Archive
4 Nov
Whitewater Ravings

Content-Type: text/plain
Mime-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v118.2)
From: Peter Langston <psl>
Date: Tue,  4 Nov 97 12:29:17 -0800
To: Fun_People
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Whitewater Ravings

Forwarded-by: Nev Dull <>
Forwarded-by: "Keith E. Sullivan" <>
Forwarded-by: David A. Rinke II <>

Did you hear that they are having trouble finding jurors for the Whitewater
case?  It seems that they've only found two people who know nothing of the
case.  Of course, it's Bill and Hillary.....


OXFORD, ENGLAND (DWPI) -- Whitewater Special Prosecutor, Kenneth Starr, has
failed in his quest to uncover any confessions by President Clinton of
financial misconduct, even after interviewing women alleged to have had
relationships with Clinton during his years as Arkansas governor.  So now
Starr has begun interviewing Clinton's old classmates at Oxford, in hopes
that Clinton may have confessed his future Whitewater plans to his school
chums during late night bong sessions.  Said one of Starr's investigators,
"I don't know what was going through Mr. Starr's mind when he sent me over
here to get stoned with a bunch of 50-year-old guys, but hey, I got a trip
to England and some really wicked weed."

Reported by Jonathan Colan
The Daily Weekly, August 15, 1997 <>

Excerpted-from: SHOOTING STARR
		By Tony Kornheiser, The Washington Post, June 29, 1997

If I understand the Whitewater investigation correctly, Kenneth Starr is
asking women in Arkansas if they've had sex with Bill Clinton.  At press
time, it was not clear if he was asking all women in Arkansas, or if he was
working from some sort of list.

I thought Whitewater was about banking, not boinking.

(Actually, I am a little vague on the details of Whitewater.  Who wouldn't
be?  It's either a Ponzi scheme or a log flume ride at a theme park.  The
investigation seems to have been going on for a very long time with very
little progress, like that TV show "Step by Step," with Suzanne Somers and
Patrick Duffy.)

Have you been following this thing?  There are several disturbing factors:

1. Starr's head looks exactly like a light bulb.  (How many presidents does
   it take to change a light bulb?  None.  The light bulb is totally
   independent, and beyond the reach of presidents.)

2. Starr seems to be on what could be called a fishing expedition, if you
   fish with dynamite.

3. Starr is so sleazy he is actually on the trail of a Clinton love child!
   One Arkansas state trooper was reportedly asked whether a certain woman
   had given birth to a child, and "did it look like" Clinton?

Lessee.  Chubby cheeks, a red face, a nose like silly putty.  What baby
doesn't look like Bill Clinton?

Maybe Starr feels he has to do something dramatic because he made such a
fool of himself a few months ago when he announced he was leaving Whitewater
to become dean of the law school at Pepperdine University, which he
described as a "once in a lifetime" job offer.

Pepperdine is in Malibu, Calif., overlooking the Pacific Ocean.  Other
schools award PhDs.  Pepperdine awards SPFs.  Starr may as well have become
dean of french fries at McDonald's Hamburger University.

Going after someone important for seemingly minor, unrelated charges is a
tried-and-true tactic of law enforcement officials; remember that the feds
didn't nail Capone for murder or racketeering -- they got him for income
tax evasion.  But this is ridiculous.  Focusing the Whitewater investigation
on Clinton's sex life is like going after O.J. Simpson by trying to prove
he illegally disconnected the catalytic converter on his Bronco.

Starr's tactics are so cheesy that next to him, Clinton looks like Gandhi.

Starr says his rationale is that a person might spill intimate criminal
details during pillow talk.  This seems improbable to me.  It is hard to
imagine the conversation:

"Oh, baby, you make my knees knock.  Your teeth are like pearls.  Your eyes
are like limpid pools.  Hey, did I tell you that I just made $230,000
selling a nine-acre tract of barren land in violation of Banking Regulation
RM-8750, Subsection 1-W?"

I don't think so.

	Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company

prev [=] prev © 1997 Peter Langston []