Posted on 04/21/2005 11:14:33 AM PDT by Republican Red
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats are quietly trying to kill a 10-year legal probe that implicates several senior Clinton administration appointees for obstruction of justice, the Daily News has learned.
The Democrats, saying that the $21 million investigation by Independent Counsel David Barrett should have ended long ago, succeeded in attaching an amendment to a spending bill Tuesday to cut off his funding by June 1.
But two sources close to the investigation said that if the legislation becomes law, it will thwart Barrett from making public a final report that names senior officials in the Clinton Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service who allegedly buried a tax fraud case involving former cabinet member Henry Cisneros.
"It's about obstruction of justice," said one of the sources. "People are willing to take drastic actions to kill this report."
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), who introduced the amendment with Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), said last week that the disgraced HUD secretary paid a $10,000 fine in 1999 for lying to the FBI and that then-President Bill Clinton pardoned Cisneros, so the probe "should have ended years ago."
Barrett's probe began in 1995 by looking into allegations that Cisneros, who was Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, lied to the FBI about payments to his mistress. It expanded years ago into a broader obstruction case involving alleged tax fraud, according to the sources.
The report will allege that Justice Department officials snuffed out a tax case against Cisneros and that the IRS sometimes audited Clinton critics without good cause.
Barrett's investigation was wrapped up two years ago, and his 400-page final report was submitted to a three-judge panel last August, said two sources.
Because those named in the report have until the end of June to refute Barrett's findings, Kerry and Dorgan's amendment would prevent its release.
WhiteWash!
I hate wehn that ahppens!
"the IRS sometimes audited Clinton critics without good cause."
To the contrary, the Clinton administration's idea of 'good cause' was anyone or any institution that criticized the Clinton administration. Remember Mr. & Mrs. Mendoza? W should invite them to the White House, and order an apology from both the Secret Service and the IRS.
You can anyway, this is not the only issue they wimp out on. Try immigration reform, something they are letting the dems capitalize on. Even Boxer is making points on this issue.
There. Fixed it for you.
If I wsan't so lzay I'd raed tehm frsit tehn psot
I chanted Jail, Jsil, Jail 3 times and I grew donkey ears and a tail! What's the chant to reverse the spell?
Good question, most here think it is all part of a Super Smart, Super Secret plan, cooked up by Rove an Bush. Me, on the other hand, I think they are just plain stupid, or sold out. Take your pick.
Well, Hugh Rodham is a disgusting POS tub of goo, related to a prominent demwit political figure. As far as the fund raising part, he (almost) raised about 400 large by getting brother in law crime to put his sig on a pardon...till his evil sis made him give the money back.
How would you have liked to be a fly on the wall for THAT little discussion? Priceless.....
Another coverup.
If Bush had even just 1 ball, he would veto this bill until the "poison pill" is removed. Remember how the f'n liberal media dems called everything the GOP put in a bill, a "poison pill"? Bush wouldn't dare.
bump / ping!
*snort* Bwaahahhhahhaa....
Slick reply, FRiend!! ;-P
Hannity just read an article from somewhere, I can't remember, The Sun something or The Something Sun, but it sounded like Hillery is the one the dems are trying to protect with this bill from what I heard.
"Don't you think the report should be made public?"
A B S O Freepin'L U T E L Y ! ! !
We paid for it...let's see it!
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my miscellaneous ping list.
and what about the ethics charges for "Baghdad" Jim McDermott? Seems I recall a little wiretapping incident down Florida way or there abouts....:o)
"succeeded in attaching an amendment to a spending bill Tuesday to cut off his funding by June 1"
How in hell does an issue like this get added as an amendment to s "spending bill" for our troops. By what process does an "amendment" of this nature get attached. Don't other senators have some say in what amendments are added ..?? I'm confused. I thought the repubs were the MAJORITY PARTY.
Do the dems believe Bush will NOT refuse to sign it because it's for the troops ..?? And .. will Papa Bush intervene on behalf of Clinton and encourage his son to sign the bill ..?? Very concerning.
Bill Clinton is already tied to Mark Rich (whom he pardoned) and Mark Rich is involved in the oil-for-food scandal; which explains why Bill pardoned him.
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.