[chicago charlie]

actually, in terms of indictments/convictions of members of an administration, Ronald Reagan's counts as the most corrupt of the last century. U.S. Grant's as the most corrupt ever. if you're interested in facts. Clinton's administration may have been greatly "investigated", but that means little, as none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes, and in the U.S., you are innocent until proven guilty.

[scholar]

...none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes,...

There's still time!

[prognostigaator]

.....none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes, and in the U.S., you are innocent until proven guilty.

no indictable crimes, -but indelible ones on blue dresses..the rest got washed down the sink.

[300winmag]

actually, in terms of indictments/convictions of members of an administration, Ronald Reagan's counts as the most corrupt of the last century. U.S. Grant's as the most corrupt ever. if you're interested in facts. Clinton's administration may have been greatly "investigated", but that means little, as none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes, and in the U.S., you are innocent until proven guilty.

Except for independent prosecutors (a screw-up on klinton's part), klinton's regime was investigated and prosecuted by klinton's own inJustice Department. Janet Reno proclaimed the unique doctrine of "no prosecution unless absolute proof of guilt". We also had a lot of "cases under federal investigation" that went on forever.

Reagan and his people were often charged in the media with "the hint of the appearance of impropriety". The democRATS of that era treated that as the equivalence of a felony conviction. The most solid stuff was things like $100 cufflinks and vague accusations of insider trading.

Stuff like that was nickel-dime for the klintons. Instead, we heard about heavy-duty felonies like perjury, obstruction of justice, bribery, and treason. And that was just the stuff that couldn't be suppressed by a corrupt and cooperative media and justice system.

[goodnesswins]

Ahem....I think it depends on the meaning of "crime" and "indictable".....

[CatoRenasci]

Your screen name gives you away - you hale from the home of corruption - Daley's Chicago, land of Jesse Jackson where corruption has been a way of life. Perhaps your standard is that if the evidence has been sufficiently well hidden or destroyed, there was no crime, but it is not history's.

It is not possible not to acknowledge that Clinton was a corrupt liar and still be considered a rational human being: those who defend Clinton fall into a very few categories (i) those who would tolerate anything, including rape, because he defends the feminist agenda or is the first "black president", (ii) those who personally profited from the corruption of his regime, (iii) those who do not believe in government of laws, not men, (iv) those who hate America and support our enemies or (v) the terminally stupid. Which category or categories cover you?

[sport]

.... Clinton's administration may have been greatly "investigated", but that means little, as none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes, and in the U.S., you are innocent until proven guilty.

13 posted on 4/9/02 5:51 AM Pacific by chicago charlie

The proof was there,Ray just ignored it and weaseled around it.

From his own lips, Ray stated that hillary,"Gave factually untrue testimony".

That is perjury by any other name.

As for bill, Ray weaseled around indicing him by saying something to the effect of since he admitted giving untrue and misleading testimony [perjury to anyone else] all would be forgiven.

If any other Freepers can recall Ray's exact words, please feel free to chime in.

When bill and hillary too for that matter get to hell they will have apologists there already defending them to Satan.

The only thing worse than the clintons are their apologists and aiders and abetors, for without them they could not operate and corrupt anything and everything that they come into contact with.

[jimt]

Clinton's administration may have been greatly "investigated", but that means little, as none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes...

Horsepoop.

Had the "injustice" department been run by someone other than a 'rat lesbian shill, or a 'nadless Rino more interested in "moving on" than in justice, say somebody like David Schippers, your buddy Klintoon would have been executed by firing squad for treason already.

[Shooter 2.5]

One of the most vicious scandals that clinton created was travelgate. To lead people away in handcuffs on trumped up charges because you want to get your friends in to loot the department was the worst and the least known scandal. Mike Royko wrote a good column about it in the Sun-Times at the time. You should do a little search and see if you can find that article.

[bluejean]

The level of non-stop scandal, chaos, uproar, coverups, public and private disasters, never-ending integrity issues, moral failures, stupid moves, asinine comments, public embarrassments and cheap hillybilly idiocies that never ended for 8 years is more than enough to convict these banana republic dicator wannabe's of complete failure as human beings. These ghouls left a trail of bodies and destroyed lives in their wake, proof enough that they were good at shutting people up.

This crap about 'no evidence' annoys me to no end. Circumstantial evidence alone could fill a library - Bill Clinton's liebrary - to the brim.

Some folks would stumble all over each other following the Clintons to Guyana, having song-alings all the way.

The most horrible fate I can think of is being lost my entire lifetime in the Clinton reality/dreamworld as one of their acolytes, completely convinced of their alleged good will toward all. It's how the Saddam Husseins of the world make it to the top. These people lift up the Pol Pots and Hitlers on their shoulders and carry them into power. It's really very spooky, watching this cult-following in action.

[bvw]

"means little, as none of the investigations turned up proof of actual indictable crimes, and in the U.S., you are innocent until proven guilty."

A chip off the Clinton block, you are. That's a bold lie that "none of the investigations turned up proof of incitable crimes" -- for they did, yet the prosecutors chose not to indict, for reasons unstated.

It's also a bold lie to say in this context of a discussion of general corruption that "you are innocent until proven guilty". By that measure Al Capone was an innocent who just ran afoul of the tax code.

Only in the narrow confines of a criminal trial are things established so that the judge and jury must presume an accused to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The everyday evidence and prevasiveness of corruption within the Clinton Administration are clear to any voter and citizen who looks fair and squarely at the history of it. To every working nostril came the scent -- and it stank.