Posted on 01/04/2002 8:52:30 AM PST by editor-surveyor
There is something very wrong inside the Justice Department of the United States and there has been for some time.
Various newspapers are now reporting that under President Clinton, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was ordered to stand down on various terrorist investigations.
One of the most egregious examples is the failure of the bureau to investigate fundraising organizations like "The Holy Land Fund," based in Arizona, which allegedly funneled millions of dollars in donations to Middle Eastern terrorists.
Although the Bush administration has now frozen the assets of the fund, it was apparently allowed to operate for 8 years despite the FBI intelligence that was presented to Mr. Clinton and then-Attorney General Janet Reno. One bureau source told the press that Ms. Reno felt any investigation of "The Holy Land Fund" would lead to anti-Arab sentiment and therefore was opposed to such an investigation.
As always, Ms. Reno will not comment on any aspect of her tenure as attorney general that is at all controversial.
There is no question now that under Ms. Reno and then-FBI Director Louis Freeh, Americans were put at great risk. The Wen Ho Lee-Chinese espionage case still has not been explained, and the fact that the 19 Sept. 11 terrorists weren't even on the FBI's radar screen is about as frightening as Janet Reno's passion for political correctness.
The current attorney general, John Ashcroft, has made no attempt to examine Ms. Reno's bizarre behavior or update the public about the Marc Rich investigation or anything else. Mr. Ashcroft specializes in looking dour and stonewalling. While Congress is attempting to get documents about President Clinton's dubious foreign fundraising and FBI abuses in Boston, Ashcroft is refusing to cooperate at all.
And this isn't a political issue. Conservative Congressman Dan Burton and liberal Congressman Barney Frank have actually joined forces to try and pry this information from Ashcroft's hands. If that's not amazing, then nothing is.
The truth is that for nearly 8 years, the Justice Department has been corrupt and inefficient. Janet Reno botched nearly every important decision she had to make including Waco and Elian Gonzalez. Time after time, Ms. Reno refused to approve investigative initiatives sought by the FBI. And time after time, Mr. Freeh sat in his plush government office refusing to let the American people know what was happening.
Now Mr. Ashcroft is doing the same thing. There is no reason on this earth why the public should not know the status of the Rich pardon probe. Or the anthrax investigation. And what about Enron, Mr. Attorney General – are you going to look into that? Millions of Americans were hosed while some Enron executives made millions.
How about a comment on that, Mr. Ashcroft?
"As late as it is in the day,
and with as many O'Reilly fans as we have here,
I'm surprised not to find this already posted.
# 1 by editor-surveyor
************************
Most O'Reilly fans are also Bush fans.
They don't want to think
about corruption in the Bush administration.
It's a taboo subject.
Untouchable.
Seems like we don't have to wait.
I want the people we vote for to fix it. Isn't that why we vote?
To: editor-surveyor
O'Reilly had better let the air out of his head soon.
His uninformed "opinion"
of Ashcroft's job performance
is a shame..."
# 5 by caisson71
************************
Uninformed?
Bill O'Reilly doesn't always come
to an accurate opinion,
but you can't call him uninformed.
In this case, Ashcroft's "performance"
is sub-par to Janet Reno's,
but only by one Waco.
If all he cares about is if he can win another term, why should I care who is President?
Isn't that what we said about Clinton?
I tried to get help. I couldn't pass the test.
I don't want them to.
I just want them to at least appear to be on the right of the left.
It doesn't suprise me at all.
The Clinton crimes are the reason I didn't vote for Bush.
Bush avoided any question about Clinton
or the Justice Department during the campaign.
I pointed that out on this forum,
and was told,
"Bush is a good politician.
He's not saying anything
as a ploy to avoid controversy,
but after he's President,
you'll finally see investigations
into all of the Clinton administration crimes."
I didn't believe that.
I believed that Bush didn't speak out
against the Clinton administration
because he wasn't planning on doing anything
about the crimes.
I was right.
Now, Bush actively protects Clinton,
and he protects the Justice Department, too.
And Dan Burton,
instead of being an enemy of the Clintons,
is now demonized on FreeRepublic
as an enemy of President Bush.
Everyone on FreeRepublic
had such high hopes for Bush,
but he just hasn't delivered.
I'm glad that you aren't struck blind,
and can see that he has a little cleaning to do
before he can lay claim to the goodness
that he is supposed to represent.
BTW, the phrase you're groping for is "toe the Clinton line". You're a typical "converted" liberal who thinks that being a repuiblican makes you a conservative. Being a republican makes you a republican. Most of you boys are liberals.
How many times did you vote for Reagan, anyway? I voted for him both times. You probably cast your first presidential vote for Dole, if not for W. Toddle off and find someone you can whip, boy. You just had your little head handed to you here.
P.S. You might want to change your nick to "W boy". You're about as much a Reagan man as Chelsea Clinton is.
Now what if (hang in with me here)
What IF Ashcroft/Bush know there's monkey business they could expose BUT they're using this information as a sort of trump card against the Dems?
What IF holding this information would guarantee The Evil x42's woman never sees the inside of the White House again?
Just a thought....
If you don't like that scenario, use your own cast of characters and fill in the blanks.
I just think Ashcroft and Bush are Godly men and they're playing the hand they were dealt.
Great.
Not only does Bush protect Clinton,
his people take a page out of the Clinton playbook
and make bald-faced lies
that can easily be shown to be untrue.
There was no need to be dishonest.
Nothing was gained from the lies.
The whole world is going to look this way,
and see that a change in the administration
does not signal an end to corruption and lies.
Yeah, Team!!
Go-Go-Go!!
Lie-Lie-Lie!!
So our heros would be withholding evidence of treason,
evidence of purjury, witness tampering,
obstruction of justice, campaign finance violations,
and possibly other high crimes.
And the good guys
would be using that evidence of wrong-doing
to blackmail the Democrats
into vote fraud in Congressional sessions,
and to illegally influence the outcome
of the next Presidential race.
And then our mighty men of valor
would withhold their incriminating evidence
as per their understanding with the Democrats,
thus becoming accessories after the fact to treason,
purjury, obstruction of justice,
and every other crime committed
by the Clinton administration.
Go Team!!
Hey, sinkspur. Ashcroft is corrupt.
Um, SlightOfTongue? DUCK.
Heck with THAT.
Standing OVATION!!!
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.