Posted on 01/25/2007 10:58:20 AM PST by windchime
As I watched these events unfold two years ago, I presumed that the Bush DOJ chose not to exploit these stories for reasons of national security. Although seemingly unrelated, both of these stories lead to the same larger secret, a secret that Berger risked his career to conceal, a secret that if revealed had the potential to destabilize the nation during a time of war.
As I have since learned, however, the Bush White House is not fully in control of its own Justice Department and FBI. In truth, the decision to protect Berger may have more to do with saving the Clinton legacy than with stabilizing the nation.
(Excerpt) Read more at familysecuritymatters.org ...
bttt
In 1940 William Shirer toured the invasion routes of recently occupied France, courtesy of the Germans. He noted that the Germans' motorized advance was along paved roads, and a mere fifty feet off the roads the fields were untravelled and basically untouched. Although some bridges had been blown, the roads were undamaged, as no mines had been laid. There were very few signs of casualties, considering the scale and significance of the invasion. Shirer, with a discerning eye, concluded the obvious, Shot through with fifth columnists, the French Army had refused to fight.
ENRON-Bush-ENRON-Bush-ENRON-Bush........ there just wasn't media space available for a dem, Terry McAuliffe, and his giant windfall from GLOBAL CROSSING.
Seriously though, Don't think the Justice Department handled it. I think the SEC determined there was no evidence of wrongdoing by Winnick.
With this DOJ, I'll bet it's one of those "Yeah, we'll have to do that one of these days." *winkwink nodnod*
I don't know about the specific people in this article, but I understand that among Clinton's 'final days' drama he converted a number of political appointee positions to civil service positions (by executive order) so that the new administration could not just replace them.
bookmark for later read..
And he can say it with a straight face!
Can someone point me to the laws that indicate the President is to control the Justice Department and FBI?
The left rules with sound bytes :P
Good history lesson. Thanks!
Marc Ginsberg is going 'Clinton Ballistic' on Hannity and Colmes. Topic: Sandy Berger and the soon to be revealed ABC 9/11 movie clip Clinton threw a fit over.
Lots of good sound bytes!
I just read this article.
Unbelievable. I wish.
That was a curious statement. Cashill has a part three to the series, so perhaps he will explain further.
Know what you mean.
You'd have to be squarely in the confines of the Zanies if you seriously buy that nonsense.
On the other hand your post makes a bit of sense to me.
On the other other hand, I think that the current President is quite a bit more naive than the Clinton Monster, but more akin to most (not Lyndon) chief executives who served before.
"... the reason the GOP got drubbed so badly in '06. They were scared to fight the lamestream media. They were scared to fight back against near traiterous libs." I'm certain it has never dawned on you that the democrats and their planted clinton minions instituted a campaign to turn the Bush Presidency into a defensive bunch of paranoids and that reacting to every piece of steaming crap the democrats and their media whores and gov't leakers could create would have accomplished just that. Berger's job in the Archives was to eliminate the margins evidence which showed the clintonista's plans to set traps for the incoming administration, in typical disregard for the American people's safety and disdain for doing the right thing. Democrats are about empowering democrats, nothing else. Nothing else, the nation be damned so long as the democrats are empowered by disaster.
It's not even necessary to enact censorship laws.
At the very least, GWB and or the Republicans should stand up (call a press conference) each and every time a hate-mongering Democrat or reporter claims that "Bush lied when he accused Iraq of the 9/11 attacks" or that "Bush should be Impeached for manufacturing bogus evidence" or any other slanderous crap.
Call a press conference and "call out" the offender by saying, "I am tired of having my administration slandered and lied about. Either put up the evidence or shut up!!"
I really believe much of the public, and most of the Conservative Republicans, would stand up and cheer if GWB even stood up to these slandermongers.
But instead, Bush has been turning the other cheek so long he is now viewed as a lame whipping boy.
And by not fighting back, the public at large has come to figure that these accusations must be true or Bush would have refuted them.
NO ONE is (or was) a bigger GWB supporter than myself, to the point I have been in shout downs and near fistfights these past six years.
But I simply cant take the wimpy White House attitude anymore. I mean, a third grader could do a better job at defending themselves than the WH.
Even Tony Snow seems to be losing his edge, and falling into the wimped out frame of mind.
I am so disgusted I cant even watch cable news shows any more.
It's like, "Wake me up in 2016 after the Republicans have handed over another eight years to the anti-American, tas-raising, voucher hating, terrorist coddling, UN respecting, race baiting Democraps.
Please. Tell me which battle he is fighting!
Because if he did, I cant see it.
I watched that......in amazement. The guy was just nuts. And Colmes was just beside himself with excitement.
Something sure does stink with all of this.
See my post 102 on this subject, WHY Bush does NOT reveal Clinton covering up terrorists attacks in the 1990's?
Bush II must see his hands are tied by the setup that Clinton left. Clinton empowered the Arabs by showing us to be a paper tiger. One response to my post 102 brought up that Clinton kept us on airlines, kept us spending and believing in our economy.
But the Arabs escalated the stakes into 9/11.
Clinton should have responded to the terrorist attacks during his presidency but he didn't. Clinton treated the attacks as criminal events, not attacks on the United States by a foreign government. If you look at the ad in post 95, WHY IS THE NTSB, THE CIA, THE FBI lying?, you'll see hundreds of witnesses spending their money trying to expose the coverup but obviously they failed. But the fact is hundreds of witnesses with many having excellent military backgrounds who would surely be able to recognize a missile hitting an airliner.
The point is, the Democrats and the Republicans are all in the same house of cards. IF they are ever exposed in any of these charades, then the house of cards is going to come crumbling down, and it's going to hit everyone there. Virtually nobody believes the obvious, but when the going gets rough the lying starts, and the members of the press are too stupid, or spineless, to call them on it.
I wrote a story on Sandy Berger in 2004 when the story first broke. IT was obvious to me then and it remains obvious today that Clinton simply made a decision to coverup the terrorist attacks during his presidency.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1175272/posts
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.