I found this to be an odd article. It includes, for instance, the rebuttal of an anecdote about Clinton working on a Panther case by showing that the time frame is wrong, but brings it up in such a way as to first imply that she did work on the case. It buries comments about few internships being available for women and about her being a "grind" at Yale who was anything but a left-wing groupie. It almost suggests that a 527 take the story on in a smear campaign, since Bush I forewent the story because she was not the candidate. I can just see the excerpts taken out of context as I write this. The very oddness of the story made me curious and I decided to look up some information on the publication, as I'm not a regular reader. ... More »

First, remember that Josh Gerstein was the first to say John Edwards would be the "first woman president" if he were elected. He writes for Campus Watch, California Conservatives for Truth, and the Investigative Project on Terrorism, among other ultra-conservative groups. Then, note that the article starts by using a quote from the 1950's House Unamerican Activities Committee as if that were a valid source. Finally, note that there are a lot of inconsistencies, surrounded by innuendo. This is no more "journalism" than were the writings of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth."

A serious journalist, if he or she considered this story important enough to report, would have taken the time to find out what cases Clinton actually had worked on; this story is more innuendo than reporting: it mentions well-known left-wing cases the firm handled, saying "she may have worked on" this or that only because they were among the cases the firm handled, not because the reporter has even a clue as to what she did when she was there.

This report focuses in great detail on Senator Clinton's clerkship in 1971 at Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein, a law firm associated with left-wing causes. This comprehensive account provides ample factual evidence and appears well-sourced. However, it seems a bit weak on context, and it's not clear that this old topic is all that important to the public interest.