Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

bill and the missus make Julius and Ethel look like patriots
Insight, brookesnews.com, The New York Times | 8.25.03, 6.19.03, | Scott L. Wheeler, Peter Zhang, Mia T

Posted on 08/25/2003 1:12:58 PM PDT by Mia T

bill and the missus make Julius and Ethel look like patriots

Clinton Gave PRC 'False Certification'


Insight
Aug. 25, 2003


Fox was pressured to revise his findings only days before Clinton and Zemin met.

Fox was pressured to revise his findings only days before Clinton and Zemin met.

Senior defense-intelligence analysts tell Insight that the Clinton administration falsely certified the People's Republic of China (PRC) as a nuclear nonproliferator despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Clinton officials went so far, sources say, as threatening to fire a senior defense analyst unless he changed his analysis, which was based on the overwhelming preponderance of all available intelligence sources that Beijing was proliferating nuclear technology and materials to rogue nations.

This magazine has obtained a copy of an analysis written by Jonathan Fox, arms-control specialist for the Defense Special Weapons Agency, dated Oct. 23, 1997, which states: "This assessment concludes that the proposed arrangement presents real and substantial risk to the common defense and security of both the United States and allied countries." According to Pentagon sources, the analysis was ordered to determine whether President Bill Clinton could certify to the U.S. Congress that China was a nonproliferating nation, thus qualifying it for an exchange of nuclear technology with the United States - an agreement that the analysis refers to as "a technology-transfer agreement swaddled in the comforting yet misleading terminology of a confidence-building measure."

Defense experts tell Insight that there was at the time so large a technology gap between the United States and China that the Chinese had little or nothing to offer the United States in such an exchange. So the agreement amounted to Washington providing a how-to treatise for Beijing's nuclear-weapons program. The ordered analysis was to assess the risk to U.S. national security likely to result from such an arrangement with China. And the analysis concluded, "It is further found that the contemplated action can result in a significant increase of the risk of nuclear-weapons-technology proliferation."

A senior Department of Defense (DoD) analyst, speaking on condition of anonymity, tells this magazine that since the Clinton administration ignored intelligence warnings and issued the "false certification" of China as a nonproliferating nation, "there has been undeniable evidence of transfers of nuclear technology from the People's Republic of China to North Korea and Iran." Both North Korea and Iran are considered by the Bush administration to be rogue nations already in possession of nuclear weapons or on the brink of having them. And the revelations concerning the Clinton "false certification" come at a time when Democrats are subjecting President George W. Bush to sharp criticism for allegedly manipulating intelligence to support a war against Iraq.

Some details of the incident were revealed in a June 1999 hearing of the House Government Reform Committee investigating whether the Clinton administration had allowed transfers of dual-use technologies to China in exchange for campaign donations from the People's Liberation Army that were laundered into the Democratic National Committee for Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign. Fox told the committee under oath that the order falsely to certify China as a nonproliferator came from his "superior at OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense]," Michael Johnson. "I completed my analysis recommending the nonapproval of the Chinese technology transfer," said Fox, who reported that he submitted his report on a Thursday evening and that by Friday morning Johnson had left several messages, finally reaching him at an "Interagency Subcommittee on Nuclear Export Controls (SNEC)." Fox described Johnson as being "quite upset," and testified that Johnson told him that the analysis was "not what was being looked for" and threatened him by saying "I would be lucky if I still had my job by the end of the day."

Fox told the committee that Johnson was under political pressure. "He indicated that, the matter having been decided far above our pay grade, he wanted me to change my memorandum in order to have it a more appropriate conclusion." According to Fox's testimony, Johnson told him the analysis should "reflect that there would be no inimical impact upon national security," a statement that Fox said would be "false and dishonest."

Johnson, who at the time of these developments was the deputy director for nonproliferation policy, told Insight when asked to explain his version of events: "I don't have a good answer," adding of the Fox analysis, "That may not have been what I was looking for." Johnson says he does not recall threatening Fox's job or recall from where the orders might have come to certify the PRC as a nonproliferator. Another senior defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, was present at key meetings on the subject with Clinton administration officials at the State Department and tells Insight the administration was "creating the analysis to fit the desired result" and "painted the facts in a completely false light."

Peter Leitner, a senior strategic trade adviser to DoD, was present at the October 1997 meeting of SNEC from which Fox was called to receive the call from Johnson. Leitner testified to the House committee that Fox returned to the meeting "visibly shaken," told him the substance of the call from Johnson and asked for advice. After conferring with other officials Fox insisted that if the analysis were changed he would not sign it.

Leitner turned over to the House committee a contemporaneous memo he wrote documenting the events leading up to the false certification of China. The memo stated in part, "My DoD colleagues and I were very disturbed by both the crude and threatening manner in which Mr. Fox was being intimidated and coerced into a reversal of his analytical position." According to the Leitner memo: "The timing of this incident was very interesting as it took place on Friday, October 24, 1997, just days before PRC President Jiang Zemin was to arrive in Washington for his Summit meeting with Clinton. This, undoubtedly, was part of the reason for the intense pressure brought to bear on Mr. Fox for the DoD position to be revised that very day."

An intelligence official tells Insight that the decisions made by the president are based heavily on analysis by career employees consistent with "the legend" of evidence - information accrued by intelligence professionals who, along with the analysts, "should be prepared to defend the decision." This intelligence official says the Leitner memo suggests the Clinton administration "cooked" the legend on the China analysis, adding: "The fact that a distorted memo was to play an important role in falsely certifying to Congress that China is not a nuclear proliferator remains a matter which I believe is of the highest importance."

A Pentagon insider tells Insight that "the certification was the key to obtaining U.S. nuclear technology for which the People's Liberation Army would have done literally anything, including passing very substantial sums to the president, his political friends and anyone else who might have influenced the deal." Another senior official says, "Getting off the list of nuclear proliferators was an enormous concession" that allowed China to have the type of technology that contributes to global instability - "technology worth a pretty penny to countries, nations and organizations seeking nuclear weapons"

James Woolsey was director of central intelligence (DCI) under Clinton from 1994 until 1996. In a 1999 interview Woolsey carefully observed that he was "somewhat surprised" by Clinton's certification of China as a nonproliferator. "There is enough leakage of nuclear technology from China that such a certification is on the side of being pro-PRC," Woolsey warned. He then added: "China has been engaged in proliferation of nuclear technologies for some time." The former DCI said the alleged Clinton attempts to stop it were "limited to diplomatic dÈmarches" and lacked "any strong pressure."

The Insight source who was present when the State Department was clearing Communist China to be the beneficiary of a U.S. nuclear-information exchange says, "We are still living with the Chinese threat, and that false certification made not only China, but rogue nations that China does business with, more dangerous to the United States."

Scott L. Wheeler is a contributing writer for Insight magazine.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: California; US: Illinois; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: clintontreason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Clinton in treason's shadow ANNOTATED
http://www.brookesnews.com ^ | Thursday 19 June 2003 | Peter Zhang

Seeing as Hillary Clinton's book has decided to mock history in an attempt to clear a path to the White House,

I think it behoves us to once again draw attention to the enormous damage her husband wilfully did to America's national security.

Several years ago I put forward the view that Clinton's cooperation with Beijing's intelligence operations were so extensive that it could be decided in the interest of saving the presidential office to suppress evidence that might directly incriminate Clinton and some of his associates. I also stated that "the damage to American national security is very deep and longstanding".

The release of the Cox Report tends to support the first statement and most certainly confirms the second.

play tape

In addition, FBI wire taps appear to have confirmed that Jiang Zemin approved the cover stories for the PLA's money conduits. Whatever Jiang did was done with the knowledge of Zhu Rongji and the rest of the leadership. It is now believed that FBI investigations also led to the conclusion that Clinton was fully aware of the details, including payments of what amounted to nothing less than bribes.

As I have said more than once: "The Americans gave Clinton the key to the candy store and he sold it to Beijing." And this, readers, is basically what the Cox Committee discovered. My old English teacher used to say that "the devil is in the details". I also said that "in accordance with my previous assessment, that it is these very details that will be withheld from the American public." This is exactly what has been done.

Despite the spin Clinton

and his horde of media friends


tried to put on this terrible situation, it still boils down to treason.

Observing the Clinton propaganda machine, even from this distance, I predicted that, using its media allies, it would launch a multi-pronged attack: 1. It would claim that most of the damage was done during previous administrations. 2. That most of spying occurred in nuclear facilities. 3. In any case, the loss of American military secrets to China represent only a marginal threat to national security. Again, I was right. What is more, none of these excuses can withstand an honest appraisal of the facts, which a quick examination will easily reveal.

Number one is simply not true. If it were, why was Chung given a top security clearance and access to the White House at the suggestion of Chinese officials? I made clear elsewhere that Beijing laid down conditions that gave it access to all of America's secrets. To fulfil this condition Clinton abolished Department of Energy internal controls that restricted access to sensitive facilities thus allowing Chinese intelligence operatives free reign.

In addition, and this is of critical importance, Clinton virtually abolished controls on exports to China of high-tech equipment that had important military applications. Moreover, to make it even easier to access this equipment and knowledge Clinton transferred responsibility for technology exports from defence to the Commerce Department. Why? Because this had the effect of removing these technologies classified status.

What is not classified cannot therefore be secret. This is the Clintons' devious legalistic logic at work. "How could I have sold secrets", he can now claim, "when they weren't secret?"

This allowed certain companies to sell formerly classified equipment to the People's Liberation Army in return for making heavy donations to the Democrats &emdash; especially one in particular. One would have to be incredibly naive, or fanatically partisan, to think all of this was due to administrative ineptitude. The important fact here is that previous presidents did not sell their country's secrets.

Defence number two that espionage of any significance only occurred in nuclear laboratories is made risible by a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Such a defence is the fruit of desperation. The third defence that any damage to US security is only marginal is worthless.

Marginal or not it would still have unnecessarily put at risk the lives of a great many Americans. Moreover, this too is a hollow defence. By selling this technology to the PLA Clinton strengthened the hand of China's crude nationalists at the expense of more liberal forces. The longer it took the PLA to develop these technologies the more time Chinese liberals would have had to consolidate their influence.

Clinton has also saved Beijing an enormous amount of time and resources, which can now be put to other military uses.

Even if the damage has been greatly over-stated, it should not be used to conceal the fact that treason is treason. An American who did far less by giving secrets to Israel is now serving a very long prison term. Clinton should do no less. Unfortunately this will never happen. I fear the American people could not live with the disgrace of knowing that a president had betrayed them, even though the networks apparently can.

Americans are now confronted with the spectacle of Hillary Clinton cynically trying lay down the foundations for a presidential bid. This woman is far worse than her husband ever was. God help America, not to mention the rest of us, should she manage to fulfil her overriding ambition.



The Manchurian Candidate?
Or Being There?

 

by Mia T

 

The Republicans' latest talking point is that the breach of national security enabled by clinton-gore must be simple incompetence, that the concept that anyone in government would commit treason is too outrageous even to contemplate.

If the Republicans believe what they are saying, then they are morons.
If they don't believe what they are saying, then they are traitors, too.

Outrageousness is an essential element of clinton-gore corruption. The clinton (and gore) crimes -- perjury, obstruction of justice, abuse of power, rape, murder -- and now treason -- are so outrageous that they allow clinton hacks to reasonably brand all clinton accusers clinton-hating neo-Nazi crazies.

Yet privately few clintonites would deny that bill clinton facilitated China espionage. Their only question: "Why?"

Some call clinton a quisling, a Manchurian Candidate, bought off in Little Rock by Riady and company decades ago (and much too cheaply, according to his Chinese benefactors), trading our national security for his political power. This argument is persuasive but incomplete; clinton, a certifiable megalomaniac, is driven ultimately by his solipsistic, messianic world view and by that which ultimately quashes all else -- his toxic legacy.

William J. Broad suggests (Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes, The New York Times, May 30, 1999) that clinton had another reason to empower China and disembowel America. Broad argues that clinton sought to disseminate our atomic secrets proactively in order to implement his counterintuitive, postmodern, quite inane epistemological theory, namely, that, contrary to currently held dogma, knowledge is not power after all -- that, indeed, quite the contrary is the case.

Broad writes in part:

Since 1993, officials say, the Energy Department's "openness initiative"

has released at least 178 categories of atom secrets. By contrast, the

1980s saw two such actions. The unveilings have included no details of

specific weapons, like the W-88, a compact design Chinese spies are

suspected of having stolen from the weapons lab at Los Alamos, N.M. But

they include a slew of general secrets.

 

Its overview of the disclosures, "Restricted Data Declassification

Decisions," dated January 1999 and more than 140 pages long, lists such

things as how atom bombs can be boosted in power, key steps in making

hydrogen bombs, the minimum amount (8.8 pounds) of plutonium or uranium

fuel needed for an atom bomb and the maximum time it takes an exploding

atomic bomb to ignite an H-bomb's hydrogen fuel (100 millionths of a

second).

 

No grade-B physicist from any university could figure this stuff. It

took decades of experience gained at a cost of more than $400 billion.

 

The release of the secrets started as a high-stakes bet that openness

would lessen, not increase, the world's vulnerability to nuclear arms

and war. John Holum, who heads arms control at the State Department,

told Congress last year that the test ban "essentially eliminates" the

possibility of a renewed international race to develop new kinds of

nuclear arms.

 

And the devaluing of nuclear secrets, highlighted by the rush of atomic

declassifications, was seen as a prerequisite to the ban's achievement.

The symbolism alone was potent, officials say. Openness let them

advertise a dramatic new state of affairs where hidden actions were to

be kept to a minimum, replacing decades of secrecy and paranoia.

 

"The United States must stand as leader," O'Leary told a packed news

conference in December 1993 upon starting the process. "We are

declassifying the largest amount of information in the history of the

department."

 

Critics, however, say the former secrets are extremely valuable to

foreign powers intent on making nuclear headway. Gaffney, the former

Reagan official, disparaged the giveaway as "dangling goodies in front

of people to get them to sign up into our arms-control agenda."

 

Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense

Council in Washington, a private group that has criticized the openness,

said the declassifications had swept away so many secrets that the

combination had laid bare the central mysteries.

 

"In terms of the phenomenology of nuclear weapons," Cochran said, "the

cat is out of the bag."

 

Even before the China scandal broke, experts outside the administration

faulted the openness as promoting the bomb's spread. Last year, a

bipartisan commission of nine military specialists led by former Defense

Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the "extensive declassification" of

secrets had inadvertently aided the global spread of deadly weapons.

["inadvertently" ???!!!!]  

 

The ultimate brake on nuclear advances was to be the Comprehensive Test

Ban Treaty, which clinton began to push for as soon as he took office in

1993, hailing it as the hardest-fought, longest-sought prize in the

history of arms control.

 

Broad would have us believe we are watching "Being There" and not "The Manchurian Candidate." His argument is superficially appealing as most reasonable people would conclude that it requires the simplemindedness of a Chauncy Gardener (in "Being There") to reason that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain...(or, alternatively, to fail to understand that the underlying premise of MAD (mutually assured destruction) is the absense of madness.)

But it is Broad's failure to fully connect the dots -- clinton 's wholesale release of atomic secrets, decades of Chinese money sluicing into clinton 's campaigns, clinton 's pushing of the test ban treaty, clinton 's concomitant sale of supercomputers, and clinton 's noxious legacy -- that blows his argument to smithereens and reduces his piece to just another desensitizing clinton apologia by The New York Times.

But even if clinton is a thoroughgoing (albeit postmodern) fool, China-gate is still treason. The strict liability Gump-ism, "Treason is as treason does"applies.

(The idea that an individual can be convicted of the crime of treason only if there is treasonous intent or mens rea runs contrary to the concept of strict liability crimes. That doctrine (Park v United States, (1974) 421 US 658,668) established the principle of 'strict liability' or 'liability without fault' in certain criminal cases, usually involving crimes which endanger the public welfare.)

Calling his position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty "an historic milestone" (if he must say so himself), clinton believed that if he could get China to sign it, he would go down in history as the savior of mankind. This was 11 August 1995.

According to James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times, "the legacy codes and the warhead data that goes with them" [-- apparently stolen from the Los Alamos weapons lab by scientist, Wen Ho Lee aided and abetted by bill clinton , hillary clinton , the late Ron Brown, Sandy Berger, Hazel O'Leary, Janet Reno, Eric Holder and others in the clinton administration (not to mention congressional clinton accomplices Glenn, Daschle, Bumpers, Harkin, Boxer, Feinstein, Lantos, Levin. Lautenberg, Torricelli et al.) --] "could be particularly valuable for a country, like China, that has signed onto the nuclear test ban treaty and relies solely on computer simulations to upgrade and maintain its nuclear arsenal [especially when combined with the supercomputers that clinton sold to China to help them finish the job]. The legacy codes are now used to maintain the American nuclear arsenal through computer simulation.

Most of Lee's transfers occurred in 1994 and 1995, just before China signed the test ban treaty in 1996, according to American officials."

Few who have observed clinton would argue against the proposition that this legacy-obsessed megalomaniac would trade our legacy codes for a rehabilitated legacy in a Monica minute and to hell with "the children."

 

 

Why bill "it was the TERRORISM, stupid" clinton would have been an utter failure even if he weren't a corrupt, cowardly, vacuous, self-serving, balkanizing, opportunistic RapistThug
And why the little missus deserves no less than half the credit
The Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent
clinton/Democrat Debacle of '02
Q ERTY8BUMP

Thou art arm'd that hath thy crook'd schemers straight.
Cudgel thy brains no more, the clinton plots are great.

Mia T, On Neutered and Neutering
by Mia T and Edward Zehr (EZ)

THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992*

CNN's favorite general, Wesley Clark, has also been heard to opine that our troops are getting bogged down in Iraq. His competence to judge American generals is questionable since his command was limited to working for NATO. We prefer to hear from American generals. Clark's contribution to international relations consisted of mistakenly bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. In his zeal to prevent troop casualties, he ordered pilots to fly at such high altitudes that the pilots complained that they were being forced to incur unnecessary civilian casualties.

The enemy within

 

hear

*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio

 

LEHRER: President Bush, your closing statement, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.

(Applause)

play tape

 

THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992*

 

 

PART 1
PART 2

by Mia T, 1-21-03

Hear clinton stupidity, smallness, banality, fecklessness, ineptitude, prevarication, corruption, perfidy and utter failure directly from the rapist, himself. clinton provides the perfect foil for Bush, who makes a cameo appearance or two.

Pay special attention to Dan Rather's little story about terrorism hitting the U.S. "bigtime" during the clintons' tenure.

In particular, connect the following dots: the '93 WTC bombing. a certain bin Laden protégé and clinton's admission that he passed up bin Laden. Note clinton's spurious argument for this monumental failure.

To this day, clinton seems not to understand that bin Laden is -- and was in 1996 -- an enemy of the state, not a simple criminal.

clinton still seems not to get it -- the same terrorist --the terrorist he refused to take--hit the same building in '93.

Notwithstanding this, to hear clinton tell it, his disastrous decision not to take bin Laden when offered on a silver platter by Sudan, (arguably the worst decision ever made by a president), derived from his scrupulous avoidance of abusing power and trashing laws...

Yeah, right.

 

HEAR:

  • the attacks on America

 

  • Dan Rather ruminating on the terrorism that came to America "bigtime" during clinton years

     

  • Dan Rather relating OBL protégé, Ramzi Yousef threat to clinton FBI that the terrorists WILL complete the job

     

  • the clinton non-response to terror

     

  • FDR response (says national security a president's raison d'être)

     

  • Bush response:
    "I can hear YOU...,"

    "I [as opposed to clinton] will not wait on events, while dangers gather," etc.

     

  • Mike Moran "Osama bin Laden, you can kiss my royal Irish ass" battle cry

     

  • "go home hillary!" chant, etc.

 

hear



 

1 posted on 08/25/2003 1:13:22 PM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth; Gail Wynand; looscannon; Lonesome in Massachussets; Freedom'sWorthIt; IVote2; ...
Q ERTY6clinton treason ping
2 posted on 08/25/2003 1:29:28 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Mia, I'm sorry but after waiting 10 minutes and downloading 1.5MB of your graphics, I had to click my browser's Stop button.

The article by Scott Wheeler is very interesting. Thanks for posting it!

The Clinton's have been, are and always will be grifting scum.

3 posted on 08/25/2003 1:36:25 PM PDT by upchuck (I will pay big bucks for a tag line good enough to make the next "Taglinus FreeRepublicus" post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Great stuff, as usual!
4 posted on 08/25/2003 1:38:07 PM PDT by ErnBatavia (40 miles inland, California becomes Flyover Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Good lord, woman, you need to get a life. Thanks a lot for clogging up my computer with that download.
5 posted on 08/25/2003 1:41:04 PM PDT by kegler4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kegler4
If you can make assumptions about 'my life,' certainly I can make some about your hardware. Sounds like you need to get a better computer or broadband... or both. ;)
6 posted on 08/25/2003 1:50:16 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Love your postings...but is it necessary to repost almost everything you have ever posted to post something new? Really chews up time and space.

This isn't meant to be critical, just asking for pratical purposes.

Meanwhile, keep up the good work!

7 posted on 08/25/2003 1:56:13 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
So true about the clintons. (Why are they still at large, I wonder...)

Sorry about the graphics... I totally overlooked file size. clinton treason can do that to you. ;)
8 posted on 08/25/2003 1:56:34 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
There's no doubt the Clintons are scum but there's no way anybody makes Julius and Ethel look good, even by comparison. They deserved what they got and more.
9 posted on 08/25/2003 2:03:51 PM PDT by caltrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
thx.
"Gestalt meets Madison Ave somewhere in cyberspace" determines the structure of my posts.

Generally, tho, you are right and I have been somewhat better at limiting file size... Until now, that is ;)
10 posted on 08/25/2003 2:06:17 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: caltrop
I agree. My point is that the clintons HAVEN'T gotten what THEY deserve. Why are they still cruising?
11 posted on 08/25/2003 2:08:11 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
I took poetic license with the title... ;)
12 posted on 08/25/2003 2:10:07 PM PDT by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All; Mia T; Carl/NewsMax; Joy Angela; conservogirl; Alamo-Girl; kristinn; Angelwood; Mo1; ...
NEVER FORGET


WHY haven't the CLINTONS gotten just what they deserve..?

WHY did the CLINTONS refuse 3 Free Offers from the Sudan during the 1990's to extradit our No. 1 Terrorist Enemy OSAMA bin LADEN to the custody of a U.S. Jail & Trial that would have prevented the Attacks on us on September 11, 2001..?



'Remember the Lost and Suffering on September 11, 2001'

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33


'.."IS it SAFE?" = HILLARY on Senate Armed Services Committee..'

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=629


NEVER FORGET
13 posted on 08/25/2003 2:25:09 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Bill and the missus

You are much too kind. I guess anthropomorphism is making a comeback.

14 posted on 08/25/2003 2:31:57 PM PDT by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Taking license is what the political pornographers of the Left do daily- Moore, Franken, Penn, Streisand etal.

I forgive you. The Clintons are a menace to society any way you cut it and hopefully Republican leadership will fix that in 06.

15 posted on 08/25/2003 2:54:42 PM PDT by Helms (Meet The Press ..And Get The Jump on The Lefts Talking Points)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Glad to see you back in the saddle, Mia!

I'm wondering if the Clingon's, if defeated in 2004 (assuming HRC runs) will lose the last of the mantle of protection that the organized left has deliberately cast over them and their treason.

For now, their brazen shystering IS a form of leadership in a vast collective of hollow pretenders and political harlots. For no other reason than the fact that they convincingly steal and lie in front of the camera, they are an inspiration to their dark servants.

Of course, there is good reason to believe that the J-E-L-L-O spined Republicans wouldn't persue and kill their enemies even if they were down and crippled, but, we can always hope that some of them have been growing the stones needed to really lead. Part of leadership is the administration of justice to the wealthy and powerful as much as to the average citizen.

Nonetheless, if HRC is dealt a blow in a presidential race defeat, it would be the prime moment to deliver the coup de grace since the Philistines will be helpless, hopeless, demoralized and in shock that their savior has fallen.
16 posted on 08/25/2003 3:40:39 PM PDT by WorkingClassFilth (Defund NPR, PBS and the LSC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
These two need to be in jail.
17 posted on 08/25/2003 3:45:48 PM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T; autoresponder; yall


He Touched Me ...


18 posted on 08/25/2003 4:21:56 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
There is a reason we call Clinton a rapist. There is a reason we call him a traitor.
19 posted on 08/25/2003 7:07:42 PM PDT by doug from upland (Why did DemocRATS allow a perjuring rapist to remain in the Oval Office?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
The "Blumenthal pen" is a hoot.

Can you put Sid's head on a squid and have it expell an ink cloud to hide something labelled "Clinton's Crimes" and when the cloud disipates have his book show up?

20 posted on 08/25/2003 8:40:11 PM PDT by Doctor Raoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson