Tripping over Linda

By Jane Chastain

Linda Tripp is back in the news for the wrong reasons. The media is
transfixed on what appears to be a politically motivated case brought
against her by the state of Maryland for taping her telephone
conversations with Monica Lewinsky. The bigger story of Watergate
proportions is what happened to Kenneth Bacon, the man who leaked the
information from her confidential personnel file at the Pentagon. The
answer is … nothing.

Liberal columnists are agonizing over the fact that Howard County
Circuit Court Judge Diane O. Leasure knocked the props out from under
the state’s wiretapping case against Tripp by ruling that key points in
Monica Lewinsky’s testimony cannot be used. Tripp allegedly taped those
conversations to protect herself because she was being threatened.
Bacon has no such excuse.

Where was the angst over the fact that Bacon did to Tripp what Chuck
Colson did to Daniel Ellsberg and is going to walk, while Colson did two
years in the Federal penitentiary? Furthermore, Bacon’s crime is
compounded by the Privacy Act that was passed as a result of Colson’s
misdeed.

On April 6, in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, questions
by James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., revealed for the first time that the
Pentagon’s office of Inspector General essentially completed its
investigation on this matter within four months of the incident. In
July 1998, it referred its report to the Justice Department, having
found sufficient evidence that a crime had been committed. Justice sat
on this information all this time, while, as Senator Inhofe put it,
“essentially engaging in a cover-up.” Then, finally, on March 28, it
quietly returned the report, informing the Pentagon that it would not
criminally prosecute anyone in the case.

Inhofe first brought this to our attention in a statement he made on
the floor of the United States Senate on April 11. Inhofe went to the
floor again on May 8 to give us the response he received from Mr.
Bacon’s lawyer, who took exception to the Colson analogy. Mr. Bacon’s
lawyer notes that the court said Colson implemented “a scheme to defame
and destroy the public image of Daniel Ellsberg, with the intent to
influence, obstruct, and impede the conduct and outcome” of pending
investigations and prosecutions.

As Inhofe notes, “Bacon’s action easily can be seen as part of a
‘scheme to defame and destroy the public image of Linda Tripp, with the
intent to influence, obstruct, and impede the conduct and outcome’ of
pending investigations and possible prosecutions of the president and of
Linda Tripp herself.”

The media may not be watching, but, as Inhofe so aptly pointed out,
“Federal employees throughout our government are watching this case.”
What does that lack of accountability say to them?

Inhofe believes it will say, “No one’s privacy can ultimately be
protected, that the law is largely meaningless, and that the ideal of a
pubic service in support of the Constitution and the laws is forever
diminished.”

The ball is now in the court of Defense Secretary William Cohen, who
is charged with reviewing the Inspector General’s report and issuing
administrative discipline, short of criminal punishment.

Inhofe urged Mr. Cohen to act and he chastised the media for its
failure to respond to this story the way it responded to the actions of
Colson in the Watergate era. Can we afford to sit back and do less?
Does anyone care anymore about lawlessness by those in power?

Jane Chastain

Jane Chastain is a Colorado-based writer and former broadcaster. Read more of Jane Chastain's articles here.