Hillary Clinton’s entire career has been about skirting scandal. From her curiously successful commodity-trading, her disappearing and reappearing billing records, and of course her private email server—she always seems to be in danger of a career-ending disaster. And yet, she always walks away.

In former independent counsel Ken Starr’s new memoir, he writes that he considered bringing perjury charges against Hillary after a 1995 deposition in which she repeatedly claimed not to remember anything. From Fox News:

“I was upset over Mrs. Clinton’s performance, and was even considering bringing the matter before the Washington grand jury for possible indictment on perjury,” Starr wrote in “Contempt: A Memoir of the Clinton Investigation,” which hits bookshelves Tuesday.

Fox News obtained an advance copy of the book. In it, Starr recounts a Jan. 22, 1995, deposition with both then-President Bill Clinton and the first lady about the suicide of White House adviser Vince Foster and other issues stemming from the Whitewater land deal investigation…

“In the space of three hours, she claimed, by our count, over a hundred times that she ‘did not recall’ or ‘did not remember,’” Starr wrote. “This suggested outright mendacity. To be sure, human memory is notoriously fallible, but her strained performance struck us as preposterous.”

So why didn’t Starr drag Clinton before a grand jury? He ultimately believed it would be impossible to prove that she knowingly lied.

“[P]roving that someone knowingly lied when they said ‘I don’t recall’ or ‘I don’t remember’ is extremely difficult, especially if that person is the First Lady,” he said. “What was clear was that Mrs. Clinton couldn’t be bothered to make it appear as if she were telling the truth.”

And that’s another familiar element of the Hillary mystique. It’s not just that she lies when confronted, it’s that she can’t disguise her contempt for the little people who expect her to do otherwise.

There are basically two views of Hillary Clinton. The left’s view, generally speaking, is that she’s secretive and private and that those qualities attract bogus charges that she’s up to something. The right’s view, again, generally speaking, is that she’s secretive and private because she’s up to something that is ethically dubious and barely legal (at best).

Does anyone really believe Hillary had forgotten everything she claimed not to remember during that 1995 deposition? Not really. I don’t think most people on the left believe she’s innocent so much as they admire her ability to always skate away from any real consequences, especially when she’s facing off against people like Ken Starr who they dislike. Hillary is the Harry Houdini of political escape artistry. Her one great political skill isn’t campaigning, or firing up a crowd, or personal charisma, it’s that they have yet to make the straight-jacket that can hold her. If she runs in 2020 that could be her campaign theme.

Starr appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show last night and talked about Hillary’s 1995 deposition: