Florence Graves

It’s been almost two years since millions of Americans sat riveted in front of their televisions, witnessing the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings before the Senate Judiciary committee. That’s a long time ago by Washington standards, where big stories can become ancient history within weeks if not days. Anita Hill Baucus said she called members of the Senate Judiciary committee because whe couldn’t tolerate seeing Anita Hill “suffering at the hands of a bunch of thugs, and that was how they were treating her. It was frightening to see them all gang up on her.” AP/Wide World Photos Wanda Baucus Wanda Baucus, a former Harvard professor who is now an artist, says “there is no place where women self-censor the way they do in Washington.” AP/Wide World Photos But Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, who chaired the Supreme Court nomination hearings, isn’t the least bit surprised that interest in Anita Hill has not gone away. “I argued from the day the hearings began that the reason why the nation was energized and fixated was because” the hearings

Like the Kennedy assassination, Watergate and the Vietnam war, the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings have become a defining event in history that promises to be be reexamined, replayed and reevaluated for decades to come. Clarence Thomas and Angela Wright Photo courtesy of AP Wide World Photos Part of the reason is that even though millions of people witnessed the hearings, the public still doesn’t believe it has gotten the full story. Why wasn’t Angela Wright, the “other woman” subpoenaed by the committee and standing by in Washington, ever called to testify about inappropriate sexual remarks she said Thomas made to her? What’s the real reason Anita Hill didn’t testify a second time? Why didn’t Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Joe Biden defend Anita Hill more aggressively? The hearings so inflamed the country that most of the principals, including Hill and Thomas, have refused to give interviews. Now two key players, Sen. Biden and one of Anita Hill’s lawyers, Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, respond in taped interviews to some of the most controversial aspects of the