Gina Gershon

Jemel Countess/

Whether or not Bill Clinton had sexual relations with that woman is apparently irrelevant. Vanity Fair is sticking by its story.

The glossy has shot down calls from Gina Gershon's reps to retract its bombshell July cover story that links the former president to the Bound star.

"We don't believe that any correction is warranted," Vanity Fair spokeswoman Beth Kseniak said in a statement.

"Todd Purdum's article does not indicate that former President Bill Clinton had an improper relationship with Gina Gershon. The story merely examines the concerns of some of Clinton's aides about reports of his behavior."

Purdum's scathing profile of Clinton, titled "The Combeback Id," cites "dinner party gossip" that the former commander in chief has been less than faithful to Hillary since recovering from heart surgery in 2004.

Purdum alleges that unnamed aides to Clinton were nervous about the former president's reputed sexual dalliances, suggesting he made stops in California to "visit" Gershon.

And that prompted an immediate outcry from the 45-year-old actress' camp.

"Todd Purdum's insinuation is a lie and is irresponsible journalism," said publicist Mara Buxbaum. Lawyer Lynda Goldman wrote a threatening letter to Vanity Far demanding a full retraction.

"Through the innuendo-laden assertion that Ms. Gershon has been 'visiting' with President Clinton in California, the article outrageously insinuates that Ms. Gershon has had an inappropriate sexual relationship with President Clinton. This is absolutely false...and she is extremely offended by the false and defamatory inference that she engaged in an adulterous relationship with the president."

Clinton himself was ticked off, quoted earlier this week calling Purdum a "dishonest reporter" and a "scumbag," remarks that his wife's presidential campaign later said he regretted.

For his part, Purdum has rejected the criticism, telling CNN that he was "very careful to say there is no clear-cut evidence that President Clinton has done anything improper."

Of course, this all hinges on what Purdum's definition of is is.

  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Share

We and our partners use cookies on this site to improve our service, perform analytics, personalize advertising, measure advertising performance, and remember website preferences. By using the site, you consent to these cookies. For more information on cookies including how to manage your consent visit our Cookie Policy.