And the title makes a fine subject for a poster or bumper sticker.
“I Did It ... Because I Could”
-- Bill Clinton Writes His Own Epitaph
Posted on 06/26/2004 9:55:35 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
“As God is my witness,” I did not want to write about Bill Clinton ever again. But he is a persistent cuss. Like Jack Torrance (Nicholson) said in The Shining, as he used an axe to chop through the door, “Little pigs, little pigs, let me in. Not by the hair of your chinny-chin-chin? Well then I'll huff and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house in.” Is there any doubt, by now, that Clinton (him) is equally persistent? That as long as he has life and breath he will continue to break into the present to upstage all other politicians?
So now he’s on a book tour, trying to persuade the gullible to buy his book, and having bought the book, to buy the bit. Therefore, anyone who cares about the long-term health of the American Republic must deal somehow with Clinton (him).
Clinton claimed in the sycophantic interview conducted by Dan Rather last Sunday that the Monica matter was the only one on which he was not “cleared.” Of his sexual abuse of his employee, Monica Lewinsky, Clinton said it was “a terrible moral error." Bill explained to kindly, understanding Dan, "I did it ... because I could."
Should any man in public office be judged by his sexual peccadillos? The Roman poet and philosopher, Lucius Seneca, wrote, “No man is free who is a slave to the flesh.” Seneca added, “Most powerful is he who has himself in his own power.” In short, sex is only a symptom of the larger problem, which is a lack of self-control.
Since the one error that Clinton (him) confesses is to molesting Monica, let’s begin there in judging the character of this (apparent) man from Arkansas. Is this an isolated incident, or a lifelong character defect?
In 1969, 19-year-old Englishwoman Eileen Wellstone said Clinton raped her after she met him near Oxford University. An American diplomat investigated the matter, concluded that Clinton probably did this, and urged him to leave Oxford immediately to avoid an international incident. Clinton then dropped out of the Rhodes Scholarship Program without completion, and returned to the US. Was this Clinton act “immoral”? Did he do this “because I could”?
What about Elizabeth Gracen, former Miss Arkansas and Miss America, who once said that Clinton raped her in a limousine in 1983? Was that also “because I could”?
What about Juanita Broaddrick, a businesswoman in Arkansas, who said Clinton raped her when he was Arkansas Attorney General? Was that also “because I could”?
And Kathleen Wiley? And Paula Jones? And Denise Rich? You get the point.
It is true that public policy is the standard on which history judges any national leader. So let’s talk about various aspects of public policy that somehow did not make it into Clinton’s 957-page “tell-all” book. When James Riady promised $1 million to Clinton’s election efforts, was that “immoral”? No; once kept, that promise constituted a series of major felonies.
The money was paid. The Democrats benefitted from it. All of the money came from foreign sources, including communist China. In the closing month of the Clinton regime, Janet (the Just) Reno struck a deal with James Riady that he would come to the US, plead guilty, pay a whopping fine, but not be required to tell all about his agreements with Clinton. Did Clinton engineer all that “because I could”?
As part of the Riady deal, Clinton took on a Lippo Group/Riady associate, John Huang, first as a high official in the Commerce Department and later as a high official in the DNC. While in government with a top-secret clearance, Huang repeatedly crossed the street to a private law office to fax documents of unknown content to China. In return for Huang’s employment, several other individuals with Chinese connections made large, illegal contributions to the Democrats. Most of these donors were convicted, but none ever turned state’s evidence on Clinton. Did Clinton engineer all that “because I could”?
Early in Clinton’s Administration, Bernard Schwarz became the largest single donor to Democrat fund-raising, giving more than $2 million. Schwarz was CEO of Loral Corp., which in the course of doing major business with China, transferred information to China so their long-range missiles stopped exploding during the separation of first and second stages. Unlike other American corporations doing illegal types of business with China, Loral was not prosecuted. Did Clinton engineer all that “because I could”?
How about the stack of literally last-minute pardons to assorted sleazoids in the closing days of the Clinton regime? The worst of a bad bunch was Marc Rich, a multi-millionaire fugitive from the US, charged with a long list of major felonies. But large amounts of Rich’s ill-gotten gains passed into Clinton’s hands (by way of the foundation to support the Clinton Library, with major benefits to Clinton himself). There’s also a suggestion of non-monetary benefits from Marc’s friendly ex-wife, Denise (she’s Clinton’s “type”). The Justice Department had recommended against most of these pardons. Some it did not even know about. Did Clinton engineer all that “because I could”?
When Ron Brown, then Secretary of Commerce and a long-time close associate of Clinton’s, started “selling” seats on government-paid trade missions to other countries for $50,000 and up in contributions to the DNC, was Clinton aware of this extortion scheme? Likely he was, since all three parties were FOBs; Friends of Bill were at Commerce, at the DNC, and in the private sector making these contributions. Again, this wasn’t a matter of “immorality.” These constituted multiple federal felonies. It was very convenient of Ron Brown to die in a mysterious plane crash, just as the investigators were closing in on him. Was all this engineered by Clinton “because I could”?
This barely skims the surface of public policy actions of the Clinton Administration which, if proven in court, would have constituted major felonies under federal law. And this concentrates on those policy disasters done entirely by Clinton (him), with no involvement by Clinton (her). As the Nixon and Harding Administrations had demonstrated, it’s helpful to have a corrupt Attorney General, possibly to keep the other corrupt officials from being caught for their crimes.
The Attorneys General under both Harding and Nixon went to jail for assorted crimes. There is no hint in Clinton’s book that his Attorney General, Janet Reno, risked jail herself in protecting other Administration officials from the consequences of their acts. Clinton offers high praise for Reno, which as far as it goes is accurate. Without Reno, it’s doubtful that Clinton could have accomplished all that he did, including getting reelected, avoiding impeachment conviction in the Senate, and avoiding jail time for various felonies.
Clinton’s continuing presence on the national scene, including publishing his book, demands an overall appraisal of his value, vel non, as a public official. The other inadvertent truth that Clinton committed in his Rather interview was to refer to himself as “conflicted.” His situation is more than conflicted, it’s schizophrenic.
In becoming the “first black President,” it seems that Clinton’s models were the two Shakespearian characters of Othello and Iago. Was this Iago who used his passions to drive this Othello mad merely another part of Clinton’s mind? Is Clinton simply the world's greatest carny barker, hawking “his own self” as they say hereabouts, as an all-in-one freak show?
Is the conflicted Clinton actually a Geppetto to his own Pinocchio, but with a different ending? Has the lying little boy prevailed and taken over? Has the moral grown-up simply been sublimated into non-existence? Has Clinton, in short, driven himself mad?
And if he has, how long will the American press, and we the people, allow the public airways and the public presses to be used as a perpetual psychiatrist’s couch for just one, fatally defective man? And how many of those who line up at Clinton’s funeral will be carrying mirrors to hold to his lips, to make certain he’s deceased?
After all, Clinton (him) came back from the dead politically so many times that it would be careless not to think he might have vampiric talents in life as well as politics.
In six words on Sunday evening, Bill Clinton spoke the correct and conclusive epitaph for his (not so) private life and his failed public career, the words that should be chiseled on his tombstone:
“I Did It ... Because I Could.”
It isn’t pretty, it isn’t moral, it isn’t legal. But it is true. We haven’t even gotten to his wife, Lady Macbeth. But that’s a story for another day.
-30-
About the Author: John Armor is an author and civil rights lawyer who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains. CongressmanBillybob@earthlink.net
-30-
John / Billybob
Well written, Sir.
Bumped and Bookmarked...
Kinda like "Stroke of the pen- Law of the Land!"
thanks, Great post.
They say rape is about power not sex.
Excellent read BTT, because I can ...
Nope. Ya never did! Good one bump!
I'm still holding out for, "Listen good cause I'm only going to say this one more time. I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky!"
Why do I like this statement? I like it because it is the real Bill Clinton in a nutshell. Even his closest confidants and friends could never trust the guy. His own cabinet went outside the White House to reinforce this statement. He sold them out. What nut-job could miss the clear unmistakable meaning of this? If he'd lie to his wife, his daughter, his closest confidants, his closest friends, his political party leaders and his own staff, why should even one U.S. citizen believe a thing the man says? You can't. Nobody can.
Bill Clinton was so prolific at telling lies, that he can't even grasp the truth to this day, hence all his problems were caused by those who investigated him, not him for installing spys into our government and facilitating the transfers of U.S. strategic secrets to Communist China.
I'll hold out for the 'liar in chief' concept. That is the Bill Clinton legacy. Never was a better liar than the Dope from Hope.
I was thinking that his book should have been named "Because I Could." I like that as an epitaph better.
How corny is that?
“I Did It ... Because I Could”
-- Bill Clinton Writes His Own Epitaph
The same quote could be attributed to Idi Amin, or Papa Zach or Caligula, or .............
Power corrupts.
Clinton is no better than these. Everyone knows.
(Mr. Meek. Please ping your list.)
I am referring to the "cattle trading" charade. I know that the bribe went to Hillary. She was was just the bag lady [bag man?]. Just another sleazy lawyer married to a public official. Bill took the money because he could and established that he and his wife could be bought for as little $100,000.
Why does this bother me so much? Because Hillary is much more dangerous than Bill. Most of the damage Bill was going to do has already been done.
Hillary, the crypto Marxist / not so crypto fascist is still a threat. To top it all off, if Hillary does not have enough ideological baggage or her own, she is wide open to blackmail on this and other felonies.
FMCDH(BITS)
But as I said at the end, Lady Macbeth is a story for another day. LOL.
John / Billybob
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.