![\"\"](\"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/foster-clinton.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nby Hugh Turley
\nExclusive to Accuracy in Media<\/p>\n
Since the Clintons left office nearly 15 years ago, there has been little interest in the Vince Foster case, but Whitewater grand jury witness Patrick Knowlton and I continued our research at the National Archives uncovering evidence of the Foster murder cover-up. Internal documents from the office of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr confirm FBI agents and others undermined the Vince Foster death investigation. Accuracy in Media had been following the Foster investigation in the 1990s, and Reed Irvine suspected investigators had no evidence that Foster\u2019s car was at Fort Marcy Park when he was already dead. As Hillary Clinton moves closer to securing the Democratic Party nomination for president, her critics and supporters might wonder why she has no apparent interest in the ongoing cover-up of the murder of her close friend and confidant. The day after Foster died, Hillary had lunch at her mother\u2019s home in Arkansas with James Rutherford III, a friend and associate of Foster and the Clintons and dean of the Clinton School in Arkansas, and he\u00a0told the FBI<\/a>, \u201cHillary Clinton was in complete shock and disbelief at the thought of Foster committing suicide.\u201d And she\u00a0wasn\u2019t alone<\/a>. What changed her mind?<\/p>\n Twenty-nine year old Brett Kavanaugh replaced Miguel Rodriguez when he resigned from Kenneth Starr\u2019s Office of Independent Counsel. Associate Independent Counsel Rodriguez, an experienced prosecutor, thought he \u201cwas scoring big points\u201d for Ken Starr investigating the death of Vince Foster, President Bill Clinton\u2019s deputy White House counsel. Rodriguez\u2019s assistant Lucia Rambusch thought they \u201cwould be getting pats on the back\u201d for uncovering evidence Foster had been murdered. Instead, according to Deputy Independent Counsel\u00a0Hickman Ewing\u2019s notes<\/a>, Rodriguez said that Deputy Independent Counsel Mark Tuohey \u201ccancelled everything [he] was doing\u201d and \u201cundermined everything [he] had done.\u201d<\/p>\n Kavanaugh sided with the Democrat Tuohey in opposing efforts by Rodriguez to uncover the truth. For what it\u2019s worth, Tuohey is married to Marty Daley, the sister of Barack Obama\u2019s former Chief of Staff, Bill Daley, and the former Democratic mayor of Chicago, Richard Daley. Their father was the powerful Chicago mayor Richard J. Daley. Kavanaugh was willing to do what Tuohey expected to achieve the desired result. Rodriguez told Reed Irvine, the deceased former chairman and founder of Accuracy in Media, that \u201cthe young aspiring people, who I used to work with back in that office will say and do what they have to, to move up the ladder.\u201d<\/p>\n Ewing wrote in his notes, \u201cFBI refused to coop. w\/ [Miguel Rodriguez] on [Vince Foster] death.\u201d Rodriguez told Irvine the same FBI agents that did the Fiske investigation were working in Starr\u2019s office and they hid photographic evidence, intimidated witnesses, and threatened him.<\/p>\n On March 10, 1995, four days after Rodriguez\u2019s resignation was effective, an FBI agent sent\u00a0a memorandum<\/a>\u00a0to Kavanaugh that was copied to Tuohey. The memo presented a chronology: \u201c(16:15-16:30) Patrick Knowlton describes a small brown foreign car with Arkansas license plates in the Ft. Marcy parking lot. Knowlton also described a suit jacket and a briefcase inside this car.\u201d<\/p>\n The memo failed to mention that Knowlton was unwavering that the car he saw was not Foster\u2019s 1989 gray Honda.\u00a0\u00a0 The Arkansas license plate seen by Knowlton was used to make it appear that he saw Foster\u2019s car. Although it stated that Knowlton saw a brown car, it suppressed the fact that Knowlton was certain the car was an early 80s model and not a 1989. The chronology continued: \u201c(17:00 +\/-) Judy Doody identifies Foster\u2019s vehicle parked in the Ft. Marcy parking lot.\u201d This false statement was used to make it appear Foster\u2019s car was in the parking lot when Foster was dead.<\/p>\n In an FBI interview, Doody, \u201cnoted the only vehicle in the parking area was a relatively old (mid-1980s) Honda, possibly a Honda Accord, either tan or dark in color.\u201d\u00a0 Her companion Mark Feist told the FBI \u201che observed a vehicle, possibly a station wagon or \u2018hatchback\u2019 model, brownish in color.\u201d They did not describe Foster\u2019s 1989 gray Honda. On October 22, 1995, the\u00a0London Sunday Telegraph<\/em>\u00a0reported the FBI had inaccurately reported what Knowlton told them he had seen at Fort Marcy Park.<\/p>\n \u201cThey went over it about 20 times, telling me that this was Foster\u2019s car,\u201d said Knowlton. \u201cBut I was quite adamant about it. I saw what I saw, and I wasn\u2019t going to change my story\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n The article also reported that Knowlton and two other witnesses [Judy Doody and Mark Feist] had not been subpoenaed to testify before the Whitewater grand jury.<\/p>\n Four days after the\u00a0Telegraph<\/em>\u00a0article was published, Thursday morning, October 26, 1995, Knowlton was served a subpoena to testify before the Washington, D.C. federal grand jury on the following Wednesday, November 1, 1995. FBI Special Agent Russell Bransford, assigned to Starr\u2019s Office of Independent Counsel, personally served the subpoena at Knowlton\u2019s home.<\/p>\n The name of John D. Bates, Deputy Independent Counsel, appeared on the front of the subpoena. The name of Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Counsel, was on the back. Harassment of witness Patrick Knowlton began later that same evening.<\/p>\n For several days prior to his grand jury appearance Knowlton was intimidated and harassed on the street and in his home by dozens of men, including FBI agent Bransford. Kavanaugh interrogated Knowlton before the grand jurors and had little interest in what he witnessed at Fort Marcy Park. Kavanaugh\u2019s questions seemed designed to make Knowlton appear to be homosexual and someone seeking publicity.<\/p>\n Toward the end of the questioning Kavanaugh said, \u201ctell us about the alleged harassment.\u201d Knowlton responded that it \u201cwas not alleged, it happened.\u201d He then repeatedly asked Kavanaugh who sent FBI agent Bransford to his home. Twice Kavanaugh responded that they were not there to answer Knowlton\u2019s questions. When Knowlton asked a third time, Bates, who had been seated behind Knowlton said that they (\u201cwe\u201d) sent Bransford.<\/p>\n Knowlton then explained the harassment he received from Bransford and summarized the intimidation from the previous Thursday and Friday. He was angry that Kavanaugh and Bates were not interested.<\/p>\n At the end of his testimony Kavanaugh asked Knowlton a series of questions about a man he had seen in a blue-gray sedan at the park, including one question of a graphic sexual nature. Starr\u2019s office has denied Kavanaugh asked any question about \u201cgenitals,\u201d but Knowlton has repeatedly said that one of the questions Kavanaugh asked with regard to the suspicious looking man he saw in a car at the Fort Marcy parking lot was, \u201cDid he touch your genitals?<\/p>\n In 1997, Kavanaugh concluded his investigation of Foster\u2019s death and the Office of Independent Counsel Report was released on October 10. The Report stated, \u201cAccording to the reports of their interviews at the scene on July 20, 1993, [Doody] and [Feist] did not see anyone in or touching Mr. Foster\u2019s car.\u201d This statement is true only because Mr. Foster\u2019s car was not there. This sentence cleverly made it appear Foster\u2019s car was at the park by saying that no one touched it.<\/p>\n Reed Irvine carefully studied the Report and\u00a0spoke with Kavanaugh<\/a> in the spring of 1998.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>: How do you prove that Foster\u2019s car was in the park before his body was, what is your evidence?<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Well, I\u2019m not going to debate.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 It is not a debate.\u00a0 It\u2019s a question.\u00a0 Tell me what is the evidence?<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 I\u2019m going to stand by the Report.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 The Report doesn\u2019t answer that question.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 The Report does talk about what all the various people in the park saw.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 Yeah, it said none of those people had anything to do with Foster\u2019s death.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 It does point out what [Knowlton] saw in the park.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 But it doesn\u2019t make the point. Intellectual integrity would require an investigator to put down what these people said, what they saw. What is totally ignored is what Doody and Feist said they saw.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Well, we put that in.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 No, it\u2019s not in there. It is not in there. Doody and Feist were absolutely ignored\u2026nothing, nothing, nothing, about the color of the car, the age of the car, none of that is described.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Irvine then quoted from the Report of Kavanaugh\u2019s investigation:<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 \u201cThe three cars belonging to Mr. Foster [gray Honda], C4 [Doody\u2019s white Nissan], and C6 [Jean Slade\u2019s blue Mercedes] are the only cars positively identified by law enforcement and the OIC that were in the Fort Marcy parking lot\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Do you disagree with that?<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 Yeah, as a matter of fact the evidence is when the fire engine arrived there was another car there.\u00a0 There was a brown car.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Look the Report was trying to be honest about a few things and I thought the Report at least laid it out there.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 But it doesn\u2019t really. Let\u2019s take page 69, you say three cars belonging to [Doody], [Slade], are the only cars positively identified\u00a0etcetera<\/em>, [Knowlton] saw a man in the car next to him. It doesn\u2019t say anything about the color or the age and that [Knowlton] believes strongly that the car he saw was not Mr. Foster\u2019s car. That\u2019s not in here. It\u2019s nowhere in here.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 It says it\u2019s different color rust brown. That is in a different spot [in the Report].<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 This is what I\u2019d say is intellectually dishonest about the Report. It does not lay out the fact that Doody, Feist, and Knowlton were all describing what would certainly appear to be a different car from Foster\u2019s.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh:<\/strong>\u00a0 It all comes down to that brown car issue right?<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 It\u2019s not just the brownishness, it\u2019s the age\u2026to get the color and the age wrong is a different matter.\u00a0 Plus, the fact that Knowlton has a lot of details in addition to the color and age. For example, [Foster\u2019s] car had decals on it, Vanderbilt and TCU parking stickers and so on, and damage to the right quarter. All things that he insists were not on the car he saw. So what do you think?<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Well our Report tried to take all that into account\u2026the Report tried to make the most reasonable judgment based on the facts. That\u2019s not to say other people can\u2019t disagree with the inferences. I do think it is important on the color issue, which is different from the age issue, I told you\u2026all the police and medical personnel that were in the park described it as brown.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 The question that I propose to you is this, what evidence do you have that [Foster\u2019s] car was in the parking lot at 4:30 and at 5:30?<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Well we know there was a car there.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 What evidence do you have that it was Foster\u2019s car?<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Other than no one saw it being moved out and it had Arkansas plates, ah, I guess that is an unanswerable question.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n At this point Kavanaugh may have thought he talked too much.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0\u00a0 You don\u2019t tape these calls do you Reed?<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 Are you kidding? (laughs)<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 Is that a yes or a no?<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>:\u00a0 Why of course, I tape virtually all my calls.<\/p>\n Kavanaugh<\/strong>:\u00a0 You tape virtually all your calls.<\/p>\n Irvine<\/strong>: Yes, as Mike Wallace knows.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Irvine studied the official government documents concerning the death of Foster and tried to get journalists and media executives to report the facts. He lent his support to grand jury witness Knowlton, who was a key witness at Fort Marcy Park because did not see Foster\u2019s car.<\/p>\n