Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

President's women disagree over the honourable member

Mary Dejevsky
Friday 06 June 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Under other circumstances, it might be regarded as the ultimate female put-down: a lady named Gennifer Flowers has come forward to say that the self-styled leader of the free world has no particular distinguishing mark around his private parts. To President Clinton, however, her "revelation" - and a few more in the same spirit - could bring at least temporary salvation.

For Ms Flowers, whose claim during the 1992 presidential campaign to have been Mr Clinton's mistress has never been denied by the president, may be well qualified to know.

Interviewed on a national radio programme about the ongoing saga of the President and Paula Jones - who alleges that Mr Clinton made improper advances in an Arkansas hotel room six years ago - Ms Flowers did as much as she could to rescue the president.

Would he have done a thing like that? said the woman immortalised as Gennifer with a G: "I find it hard to believe that he would drop his pants and expose himself to someone who had not clearly let him know that that's what she wanted him to do."

And of perhaps Ms Jones's strongest suit, her sworn testimony (several copies of which have been deposited for safekeeping across America) that Bill Clinton - then governor of Arkansas - had "distinguishing characteristics" in the genital area, Ms Flowers said: "I have no idea what she means by that ... There is no mark there that I remember."

Now memory is a fickle thing, as Mr Clinton's $450-an-hour lawyer, Robert Bennett - who says the President has no recollection of any encounter in an Arkansas hotel room - well knows. Nor does her reply disprove Ms Jones's claim. Only a medical examination of the president can do that but his lawyer says that is a humiliation he will fight up to the Supreme Court to prevent.

Temporarily, though, in a Washington that now sees sex wherever it used to see Reds, Ms Flowers' intervention could help to calm the mood. It could also help Mr Bennett. He emerged clearly shattered from a meeting with Mr Clinton earlier this week, and went on all the talk shows to take back the threat he had issued three days before to delve into Ms Jones's sex-life.

Whatever happened that day at the White House - and no one suggests it was anything improper - Mr Bennett is now of the view that an investigation of Ms Jones's earlier career is in no one's interests. Was he told it could then be open season on the president?

Enter, right on cue, Ms Flowers. Her silence since 1992 has often prompted speculation about a deal. But perhaps she just loved him.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in