Slow Burn: The Clinton Impeachment | Episode 3. Cred

Release Date: August 22, 2018
Host: Leon Neyfakh (Slate Podcasts)

Episode Overview

In this episode titled "Cred," Slow Burn examines the role of Cliff Jackson, a longtime acquaintance and eventual nemesis of Bill Clinton, in shaping the narrative around Clinton’s character and credibility during his political ascent—culminating in efforts to expose and publicize details of Clinton’s draft history and sexual misconduct allegations. The episode probes how personal motives, media strategy, and the quest for legitimacy turned the Clinton scandals into defining events of the 1990s.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Roots of Cliff Jackson and Bill Clinton’s Relationship

• Initial Connection:
  • Met at Oxford in 1968; both were ambitious Arkansans, Clinton on a Rhodes Scholarship and Jackson on a Fulbright.
  • Though their personalities diverged—Clinton was outgoing, Jackson more reserved—Arkansas roots and political ambitions made them friends.
• Political and Personal Differences:
  • Clinton, a Democrat, was seen as charming and persuasive; Jackson, a Republican, more of a loner.
  • Journalist David Maraniss described Jackson as “cold and lonely,” emphasizing the contrasting experience at Oxford.

Notable Quote:

"He was a gregarious, affable fellow, upbeat, very loquacious, loved to hear himself talk... But he was from Arkansas and I was from Arkansas. We're two Archies at Oxford, so we became friends."
— Cliff Jackson (01:27)

2. Early Political Paths and Diverging Ambitions

• Career Trajectories:
  • Jackson lost a race for district attorney in 1976, downplaying the defeat (“I lost because I really didn't want the job. I just let people talk me into it.” – Jackson, 02:44).
  • Clinton won Arkansas attorney general and soon became the youngest governor in America.
• Jackson’s Perspective from Afar:
  • Maintained contact but observed Clinton’s rise skeptically, believing Clinton was a master manipulator.

Notable Quote:

"Bill Clinton could be in a room with 12 different people... and persuade each one of the 12 when they leave that room... I know Bill is really with me.”
— Cliff Jackson (03:39)

3. Jackson as Clinton Critic: Motives and Early Moves

• Intentions and Public Image:

  • Jackson rejected the idea he was Clinton’s “enemy” but was driven by concern about Clinton’s authenticity.
  • In 1992, Jackson became a vocal anti-Clinton activist (“All he's trying to do is just provide a choice between reality and political image making.” – Jackson, 04:31).

• Attack on Fiscal Policy:

  • Founded the Alliance for Rebirth of an Independent American Spirit.
  • Took out a full-page ad: "Please Governor Clinton, don't do to America what you did to Arkansas."

4. The Draft Controversy: Personal Betrayal Goes Public

• Jackson’s Knowledge:
  • Clinton’s avoidance of the Vietnam draft became a point of contention.
  • Jackson had once tried to help Clinton avoid active duty; over two decades later, he revealed this to the media.
• Media Fallout:
  • Jackson’s disclosures made national news, including appearances on Larry King Live and Crossfire.
  • The revelations forced Clinton’s campaign into defense mode but didn’t prevent his election.

Notable Quote:

"I knew that if I told that story, I was crossing the Rubicon. I was burning all bridges with Bill Clinton."
— Cliff Jackson (05:53)

• Jackson’s Rationale:
  • He wanted Clinton to “admit that he has not told the truth to the American people” (06:22).

5. Transitioning to Scandal: Sex, Credibility, and Believability

• Escalating Allegations:
  • After the draft story, Jackson pivoted to issues of sexual misconduct.
  • He understood that in order for allegations to stick, they had to feel plausible to the public, not just be factually true.
• Critical Questions:
  • Explores the philosophical and practical questions: What gives an accusation legitimacy? What determines whose story is believed?
• Narrative Framing:
  • "The totality of all these accusations has a corrosive effect on the president."
    — Summary (07:30)
  • Hillary Clinton characterized the attacks as “trash for cash.”
  • The episode reflects on how believability and media saturation shape public perception and fate of political figures.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments (with timestamps)

• On Clinton’s Persuasiveness
  "He will talk to each one of those people, look them intently in the eye… and persuade each one of the 12 when they leave that room… I know Bill is really with me.”
  — Cliff Jackson (03:39)

• On Crossing Personal Lines
  "If I told that story, I was crossing the Rubicon. I was burning all bridges with Bill Clinton."
  — Cliff Jackson (05:53)

• On Motivation for Accusations
  "When a candidate is packaged in a manner that is 180 degrees from the truth, we need to know that."
  — Cliff Jackson (04:31)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:32–03:24 — Origins of Clinton and Jackson’s relationship and early political ambitions.
• 03:39–04:47 — Jackson on Clinton's political persona; beginning his public activism against Clinton.
• 04:47–06:40 — Jackson’s involvement in exposing Clinton’s draft history; consequences and public reaction.
• 06:40–07:56 — Shifting focus to allegations of sexual misconduct; discussions about credibility and believability.

Overall Tone & Approach

The episode preserves a tone of investigative curiosity, historical reflection, and personal drama. Through first-person interviews, archival clips, and candid admissions, the podcast blends intimate character study with broader questions about how truth and rumor intersect in political scandal.

Summary

“Cred” tells the story of how Cliff Jackson’s crusade against Bill Clinton began as a complicated friendship and ended as a public campaign to expose what he saw as Clinton’s core dishonesty. It’s an exploration of the nuances behind political credibility—how accusations gain traction, the importance of narrative plausibility, and how even those closest to power can become its fiercest adversaries. Through Jackson’s story, Slow Burn unpacks how much of history hinges on who gets believed—and why.