Malcolm Wallop: “I thank the Chair. Madam President, these facts and details have gone largely unreported in much of the media, but they…”

“I thank the Chair. Madam President, these facts and details have gone largely unreported in much of the media, but they have not been ignored by everyone. The New Republic magazine in its May 9 issue discussed these revelations and their import: The [Los Angeles] Times reports that whitewater's own corporate documents suggest that the Clinton's invested a mere $13,000 in Whitewater--not several times that amount, as they first claimed. The Clinton's own tax returns claim $46,636 in payments. There are two possible explanations: either the Whitewater documents are in error or the Clintons dissembled the amount on their tax returns. More interestingly, the original Lyons report, put out by the Clinton campaign two years ago to lay Whitewater to rest, had access to the development corporation's documents--yet it concluded that the venture took a far greater loss than the documents show, as well as claiming that it was taking losses in years the newly released documents show it to have been making profits. For example, the corporate returns indicate that Whitewater was bringing in as much as $60,000 annually from land sales during years in which the Lyons report said no sales were made. Once again, there are two possible explanations: Either the Clinton campaign and Mr. Lyon's team of accountants simply misread the returns, or they deliberately dissembled about their contents. Madam, President, why is this particular facet of the Whitewater controversy important?”