From 2000-2008, no Clinton in the WH, and no Obama.
So why no investigation then?
I’m not arguing against this piece. I think it is correct. TWA 800 should be re-investigated.
What I’m saying is, if there was a cover-up, why was there no un-cover-up during 2000-2008?
There are only 3 possible answers:
1. There was no cover-up and this is all conspiracy-theory fantasy.
2. Bush was as stupid as the liberals say he was.
3. Bush was as evil as some conservatives contend he was.
I know I’m going to get flamed for this, but seriously, if there are big questions about what the government did in 1996 under Clinton, then those questions only get bigger if left completely unanswered or even unasked under Bush.
I think Bush was just a little bit busy from 2000-2008 with a little thing called 9-11 and a couple of wars.
Also, not one member of the Clinton Administration was prosecuted for the crimes they committed while a member of the Clinton Administration. That was when I accepted the fact that the republicans and Democrats were cut from the same bolt of cloth and were in cahoots.
Recent events in the Cochran election should answer your questions. The GOP has been as evil and corrupted as the dems for a long time.
or 4} Bush did not want to open that can of worms since it would have pointed to the navy and naval operations which he was CiC of and in need of for his WoT post 911.
Bush and Clinton worked for the same people.
Have you heard the term "not on my watch"?
That's the response from the Senator conducting the Senate trial, I believe, used when he was questioned about the removal of the President from office after the House impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Nobody wanted to be part of that.
In today's political reality, almost nobody wants to be associated with the impeachment of America's first black president.
I think new presidents get briefed on what is REALLY happening ... (like ‘the football’ and stuff like that) and they find themselves with a threat .. “If you EVER say a word ... “