Posted on 01/22/2002 3:53:43 AM PST by RJCogburn
Proof that Burton has become a fool. He couldn't, or wouldn't, nail Clinton in 8 years, but now he's investigating even older scandals?
And what about clymers like Waxman Barney Frank suddenly being concerned about "pretensions of executive privilege"? That didn't bother these boobs for 8 years.
FReepers please read, Jim Robinson home page Twice!
I did a search before posting....under a different title, perhaps?
Your criticism of the person, Novak, does not, of course, deal with the facts.
With all due respect, it is reminiscent of the approach of Clinton's defenders attacking the messenger (Starr, for example) rather than dealing with the facts.
As to Burton being disappointed because the Bush administration isn't interested in his committee investigating past sins of the FBI, he shouldn't be. We are at war, the FBI is crucial to the effort. Somebody tell Dan we have more important irons in the fire right now...and so does the FBI. We can expose past FBI rogue agents, and the inept, corrupt Reno Justice Dept when this crisis is over.
Burton's media image is buffoonish. Regretfully, for all his passion and good intentions, Burton simply wasn't (isn't) up to the task of committee chairman. He's weak, and no match for the likes of Henry Waxman who would use this as a platform for election year mischief. Burton should be grateful the Bush administration is sparing him more public humiliation.
The 'later, rather than sooner, less, rather than more' approach I guess.
Bad idea, IMHO. When corruption at the hightest levels of government goes unchallenged because we're facing some sort of "crisis", we will be virtually guaranteed a never ending stream of "crises" to be dealt with.
Yes, they have. I am confident that FReepers would have justifiably been outraged if the names Clinton/Reno were substituted for Bush/Ashcroft.
I find this whole issue gives me a bit better insight into the thinking of some of the Clinton defenders who were willing to ignore the obvious to defend their boy. I must say that there are a lot of people here who are supportive of Bush/Ashcroft in this matter just because of who they are.
To be sure, Clinton was/is an evil man while Bush is, I think, basically decent. Nevertheless, if we just kinda hunker down and support our guy just because he is our guy, we invite and allow government corruption and abuse to continue and if it doesn't quite put us in the Begala, Davis, Carville category, it is still a category I do not wish to inhabit.
Sure, it is. Still, that is hardly a reason to support what looks like, walks like, and quacks like a cover-up.
But if this wrongdoing had occured in this administration, under this Attorney General, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to bulldoze heaven and earth to expose it immediately.
You don't need to respect them. They're no different than Clinton Apologists.
Well, I did say with all due respect. :<)
Exactly. At least until the media forgets about this and moves onto something new.
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.