Clinton Accused Special Report
Navigation Bar
Navigation Bar

 Main Page
 News Archive
 Key Players

  blue line
Judicial Watch Responds

Monday, June 8, 1998; Page A22

As I predicted to reporter David Segal before his profile "Pursuing Clinton Suits Him Just Fine" [front page, May 30], this latest rehashed version of Judicial Watch's and my accomplishments was typically slanted toward the left. After having published its first profile, "To Gadfly of the Right, Clinton Administration Is Unsafe at Any Speed" [news story, Nov. 17, 1996], it would have been nice if The Post had given its readers some new material and insight into Judicial Watch's goals and accomplishments.

In initially uncovering John Huang and sparking the Chinagate scandal, our accomplishments over the past year and a half in exposing other corruption in the Clinton administration and elsewhere in government show that the hard work and dedication of our attorneys and staff are not fleeting. Why, then, was only one of our numerous supporters -- supporters who are not limited to the conservative movement -- quoted in the article? I am aware that Mr. Segal obtained favorable quotes from a number of sources.

The Post's latest hit piece also failed to reveal that it came at a time when Judicial Watch -- which had just uncovered the illegal release by Clinton political appointees of information in Linda Tripp's Pentagon file -- was seeking to depose Jane Mayer, the wife of William Hamilton, The Post's national editor. In trying to persuade the court to allow her testimony over a claim of journalist's privilege, Judicial Watch had argued that Ms. Mayer, a reporter at the New Yorker, held relevant unprivileged information about the violation of Ms. Tripp's privacy rights. Although The Post mentioned that Mr. Hamilton was the husband of Jane Mayer in a May 1 news story, it did not disclose this information in its profile of me, which ran in the section of the paper in which Mr. Hamilton is a senior editor. This is not fair reporting, particularly because the publication of the article can influence public opinion and the courts about Judicial Watch's activities.

In short, The Post again has demonstrated why conservatives do not trust it to present a balanced account of their goals and accomplishments.

Judicial Watch Inc.

© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company

Back to the top

Navigation Bar
Navigation Bar
yellow pages