The Last Time Clinton Dodged Indictment
THE phrase “And Justice for All” just got another black eye. Hillary Clinton did a whole lot of wrong things with her State Department e-mails. But she won’t have to pay the price legally, FBI Director James Comey announced Tuesday.
Clinton might be singing “Happy Days Are Here Again.” She almost got indicted once before — when she was first lady — for more than a dozen cases of fraud and perjury and whatnot.
In fact, it was widely reported in 1999 that prosecutors looking into the Clintons’ Whitewater real-estate transaction had drafted an indictment of Hillary. That revelation came from Hickman Ewing, second in charge of the Whitewater prosecution, who told Congress in March of that year that an indictment of Hillary Clinton had been drafted. Ewing didn’t give details. But I already know what the charges were going to be. I have a load of Whitewater documents right here at The Post that I accumulated in the ’90s. And one of those documents contains this handwritten note on the cover page: “These are extremely sensitive docu- ments . . . that are being used as the basis for the possible indictment of Hillary Clinton.”
Back then I was spending a lot of time on this case, and I wrote many columns on the alleged financial wrongdoing of the Clintons. So let me quote one of those columns from June 18, 1999.
“There were around a dozen charges that were contained in the indictment that Ewing, a professional prosecutor from Memphis with a reputation for being tough, had drafted against Mrs. Clinton. Twelve felonies,” I wrote back then. “I say around a dozen because the Independent Counsel hadn’t decided on how many perjury charges to go after, which could have gotten the count to about 15, or even 100 if they decided to be sticklers.”
The charges revolved around real-estate deals that included Whitewater, Castle Grande, Flower-wood Farms and Saltillo Heights. The Clintons and their partners — including White House counsel Vince Foster, who killed himself — were playing fast and loose with the rules by moving money here and there between deals and lying about it.
Ultimately Ewing and his boss Ken Starr didn’t indict her. Reports at the time said they ran a mock trial and decided they couldn’t convict her in Arkansas, where the crimes took place. I always thought the case was dropped because Starr believed he’d punish the Clintons enough on the Lewinsky matter.
Either way, Hillary was getting that kind of special treatment because of her and Bill’s status and celebrity. Ordinary people wouldn’t have been treated that generously. So what now? The FBI saved the Obama Justice Department from having to prosecute the presidential candidate of its own party.
But Hillary Clinton isn’t off the hook yet. She could lose the election, thanks in part to Comey’s harsh assessment of her behavior Tuesday.
And she could also be indicted if Trump wins, although maybe not for the exact same offense as looked into by the FBI. Trump could easily start an investigation of the Clinton Foundation and any conflicts of interest there during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.
The e-mail mess might even be more troubling to Clinton because of personal messages. And if Trump were to get control over the White House (and the Justice Department) it wouldn’t be a shock if personal email became public.
If Trump wins in November, Hillary’s only hope would be for President Obama to give her a pardon on his way out the door. But that’ll create major problems for the Democratic Party — not only in the near term but also down the road.
So Democrats would be wise to have a fallback candidate just in case.
If the Democrats stay with her later this month at their convention, they’ll be on edge until November waiting for the next Secret Service agent or former pal who knows about the e-mails to come forward.
It’s going to be very exciting for the Democrats — and not in a good way — if they stick with Hillary.