Posted on 03/01/2003 11:34:22 AM PST by HAL9000
Stephens was faked out of underwritng ADFA fake loans.The loans from $500 Thousand to $15 Million,many to comapnies which did not exist excep to in order to get the loan, were never intended to be paid back and weren't. All the bonds were handled by Lasiter and Company (Dan Lasiter and Bill Clinton pulled off one of the greatest financial scams in American history. They used the fake ADFA...Arkansas Development FInancial Authority... to launder Lasiter's coke money) No one will ever know how much .... $300-$500 Million? All of the bad loans, which included kickbacks to Bill'n'Hill on every cent, will be made good to the bondholders by the people of Arkansas. Foolproof.
Stephens, a financial power house, despite its Hee-Haw location in Little Rock, wanted in on the action, so they started laying the largesse on Bill, and throwing a lot of work to the Rose Law Firm. They probably (indirectly) set up Hillary's commodities trades, as well.
This is the story Larry Nichols was trying to tell the American Public about the Clintons. This was the story known chapter and verse by Bush I in '92. This is the story for which many an Arkansan died for knowing.
Clark has plan for catching bin Laden
"Nov. 12, 2003 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- Criticizing President Bush's efforts, Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark says he would press Saudi Arabia to provide commandos to accompany U.S. troops in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders.....
That is indeed a pathetic ploy. Not a plan, at all.
Does he really expect to be taken seriously? Or is he just in this thing for comedy relief?
According to the New Yorker article by Peter Boyer posted yesterday, the Army Chief of Staff called Clark's plan for a ground war in Kosovo "ludicrous". Inasmuch as I grew up with Dennis Reimer, I'm inclined to trust his judgment in such matters.
Clark peaked out as a division commander in peace time -- to be endured until he retires.
That he is being considered a serious contender for the POTUS and Commander-in-Chief is, to use Denny's word, "ludicrous".
20 Masked Attackers Storm Soros Institute (Soros on war path)
Here's clark on Soros at yesterday's debate. I provide the fisking. Of special note, Clark said he "worked" on Soros projects in Eastern Europe. What does he mean? And most importantly, was he paid (off)? And isn't the operator of those projects in the Balkans none other than Mabel Wisse Smit?
...BROKAW: Senator Kerry, if I could just hold you for one moment, I want to go to General Clark. We're running a little bit behind on time here.
Let me just read to you something that George Soros, the international financier, has said. He's a great patron of the Democratic Party. I think he's met with most of the candidates here probably. (undoubtedly!)
He said that he thinks that George Bush is a danger to the world in the means and in the way that he's conducting his foreign policy. And it reminds him of what he was hearing out of Nazi Germany when he was a youngster.
Do you agree with his characterization of the administration's foreign policy in those terms, General?
CLARK: Well, I haven't seen everything George Soros has written, but he's a very responsible man. He's done a lot of good in the world. I've worked with his projects in Eastern Europe.
And let me tell you this about George Bush's foreign policy: It is reckless and it is irresponsible. (Standard Demo talking point to appeal to the chattering class ignorati. They haven't learned Carville's lesson about the economy...)
CLARK: I think this party's making a great mistake by trying to make a litmus test on who would have or did or didn't vote for that resolution last October. (Remember that - "litmus test")
The real issue in front of us is that this president misled the American people and the Congress into war. (Is it really?) It's wrong. If you wrote this script in a movie, it would be rejected as being outrageous. (Wes shouldn't make movie allusions...given his family's possible corrupt connections with moviemaking in Bosnia) Here we are, with the United States Army half committed in Iraq, no success strategy, $150 billion. ("No success strategy" These dems just can't help dig their own graves.)
This administration took us to war recklessly and without need to do so and it was wrong. (Different than his "we should have waited for the French" line.) And that is the issue in this election and that is the issue we should be taking to the American people. (In other words, Clark's own litmus test.)
(APPLAUSE) (Applause? No unemployed here, evidently.)
BROKAW: With all due respect, General Clark, why then did you have so much trouble in the opening days of your campaign trying to decide whether you would have voted for or against the resolution in Iraq and spend the time that you did in Republican gatherings praising not just the president, but his team, as well? (Good question!)
CLARK: Well, I'm glad you asked, Tom.
(LAUGHTER)
With respect to the opening of my campaign, I want to tell you, I bobbled the question on the first day of the campaign in the back of an airplane. ( Good start for Clark, he frames his multiple contradictory statements as a single occassion in an uncomfortable setting)
BROKAW: Not just any question. It was a big question.
CLARK: But my record has been very consistent. (Big lie technique) I have got 250,000 words in print. (Early on "Mary" chastized the press for reporting what he says, and not limiting themselves to what he wrote). I warned against giving George Bush a blank check in the summer and fall of 2002. (That's not anti-war) I warned against the course he was taking in the Christmas period of 2002. (Still, no statement that he was against the war) I warned against it after Christmas. (What's "it?" What did he warn against?) And I warned we were going to war without a real plan as to what to do next and without adequate forces. (Just copying what others said, and, again, not an anti-war position)
CLARK: Now we see the consequences. We have an American president who visits the families of bereaved Britons and won't visit our own families in this country. What is this coming to? (Coming to a patent lie about Bush, it seems.)
(APPLAUSE)
We need leadership. We're in a mess in Iraq. (Maybe. Clark's not the one, though.)
Shermy should be asking the questions, not Brokaw. As in "Just what kind of projects, General? And with whom?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.