O'Reilly: Bush Justice Dept. Hamstringing Pardongate Probers

NewsMax ^ | February 3, 2002 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[MeekOneGOP]

NewsMax.com

 

Sunday, Feb. 3, 2002 11:51 a.m. EST

O'Reilly: Bush Justice Dept. Hamstringing Pardongate Probers

Investigators with the office of the U.S. Attorney for New York's Southern District are being actively discouraged from pursuing evidence of criminal wrongdoing in the Clinton Pardongate scandal, with one insider charging that any prosecutor who tries to build a case against the former first family may actually hurt his career.

So says Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, who made the startling cover-up allegation in his column this weekend.

"Although the Justice Department continues to say the probe is 'on the front burner', agents have told me there is little incentive to get things done," the Fox News commentator claimed. "In fact, one investigator said, if you push too hard on the case, you could find yourself in Fargo, N.D."

O'Reilly suggested that the Justice Department's go-slow regimen for probing the Clintons final White House scandal was likely instigated by the Bush White House.

"George W. Bush understands the way the game in Washington is played. You must make 'accommodations.'..... And what Bush may have given the Democrats is the assurance that he will not embarrass their party by aggressively pursuing the Marc Rich pardon investigation."

The first sign of Justice Department footdragging emerged last year, when New York attorney Ed Hayes, whose client Garland Lincecum had given prosecutors damaging evidence implicating former first brother Roger Clinton in Pardongate wrongdoing, expressed doubts about the probe.

In comments covered exclusively by NewsMax.com, Hayes told WABC radio's John Batchelor and Paul Alexander last June:

"The big issue now is does the government want to press the case. Because, for one thing, to really show whether or not there was a crime committed, you really have to question Bill Clinton. You really have to ask, 'Did Roger talk to his brother Bill about getting a pardon for Garland? Did Roger talk to anybody about getting a pardon for Garland?'"

Bill Clinton still has yet to testify. Even back then Hayes suggested that probers were being reined in on orders from Washington.

"You never know in these cases how dedicated they are to making the case. ... I think [lead Pardongate prober] Elliot Jacobson is a very conscientious prosecutor. But he does what he can do within the Justice Department."

Hayes hinted a political deal was already in the works: "You don't know whether [the Bush administration] is going to trade three federal judicial appointments in return for turning a blind eye to this." (See: Bush Justice Department Putting the Brakes on Pardongate Probe?)

O'Reilly now agrees, positing that Bush will reactivate the Clinton probe only if the GOP regains control of the Senate or if "things get rough."

"The Marc Rich pardon deal can always be used as a threat," he concluded.

Read Bill O'Reilly's full column on the Pardongate cover-up in NewsMax.com's magazine.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Bush Administration
Clinton Scandals
Pardongate
Sen. Hillary Clinton

[Irene Adler]

"I think Bush and Ashcroft are working on it, but they will drag it out only when it's needed rather than look partisan. Most of the evidence has probably been shredded or "dead" by now. They'll leak a little here, a little there. Just enough to keep the dems in chains. If all the info came right out, a few years ( heck, days!)from now people will forget. Might better use a slow drip, drip, drip until the dem party is considered the corruption party by all the people. Bush and Ashcroft will still look like the good guys without more Clinton fatigue, and it will keep the cost of Washington litigation down.

Leaking the info slowley will be more effective and cheaper for the taxpayer. And because most of the proof has been burried, an inditement probably wouldn't work anyway. Might better let it come out slowly. It's more powerful that way when litigation may not work."

This is worth repeating. I hope you are correct that this strategy is in place. I was puzzled by the Bush response to the Clinton theft and vandalism when they left the WH. Choosing not to make a major issue of it was one thing, but actually denying it happened, at times, then backing off the denial really puzzled me. I wish I knew why that initial inconsistent response by the Bush WH took place.

Anyway, I hope your reading of this is the strategy now, because you make a persuasive case for it.

[MeekOneGOP]

One thing I would guess about the Clintons is that they probably are smart enough not to have left much of a trail of really hard evidence. The dems. who sneer "prove it" about every evil and/or felonious action the Clintons take would make a Clinton hung jury a victory for the Clintons. This is sad, but I believe it is true, at least right now.

The phrase that comes to mind is "there's not one SHRED of evidence". . .Well of course NOT, they even burned the shredded paper!

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Pardons for Pesos" is not!

How do you prove that beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law?

Get Bill to confess? Marc Rich to admit to it?

That's the problem, you have to establish quid pro quo.

[Irene Adler]

I would guess you are correct, sigh...

[Mia T]

Q ERTY6 CLINTON NON-WAR ON TERROR TERROR

reality check BUMP!

Nothing less than humanity, itself, will forever be in the debt of Pres. Bush for having had the courage to take on terrorism FOR REAL. (See:The Real Danger of a Presidential Faker: Post-9/11 Reconsideration of The Placebo Presidency)

But that does not excuse Bush's less-than-courageous decision not to expend political capital to go after clinton corruption. Not to do so threatens democracy--perhaps more slowly--but just as surely as terrorism does. In fact, it would not be a stretch to call the clinton crimes "domestic terrorism."

Frankly, the incestuous, dynastic, professional nature of the current political structure, together with the clintons' limitless access to dark secrets via Filegate, etc., suggest an even less honorable reason than simple politics for Bush's apparent decision "to move on."

Personally, I'm sick of this rerun. How many times does history need to repeat itself before we, the people say "enough!"???

 

 

by Mia T

 

Not Joe Klein's Primary Colors. And not Jack Stanton.

bill clinton is straight out of

Stanley Kubrick's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.

 

clinton is Alex,

one of the few truly amoral characters in either film or literature;

not quite as Kubrick (or Burgess) had imagined him, however,

but rumpled, wrinkled, paunchy, edematous,

stripped of the youth-excuse

after 30 additional, pathetic, recidivistic years

of marauding, stomping, raping, gangbanging, deceiving and destroying.

 

Like A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, the story of bill clinton

is the story about a society that has lost its capacity for moral choice.

But unlike in the less fabulous and no more ironic fable,

clinton is not mere nascent symbol but nihilistic agent.

 

clinton, like Alex, is the leader of the gang, the "droogies."

Eerily prefigured by the rocking, crooked phallus,

clinton's a conscienceless sadist

who thrills at risk and gratuitous destruction,

whose sexual and non-sexual impotence

is at the root of his obsession with "the old inout."

 

When Alex kills a woman during a rape, Alex is sent to prison.

When clinton rapes women, girls, his country and God knows what else. . .

and kills? --- check out those fourscore-plus deaths, please!

And don't forget the wag-the-dog, desperately-seeking-a-legacy bombings,

or the cold-blooded Ricky Ray Rector execution---

not clinton but society is imprisoned,

imprisoned in clinton's

besmirched, semen-stained, feckless presidency.

 

A risible and repulsive result;

yet not even the punch line.

 

While Alex is conditioned in prison with aversion therapy,

transmuted into a moral robot who becomes nauseated

by the mere thought of sex and violence,

bill clinton and his Thought Police,

in a perverse reverse aversion,

have conditioned society's collective brain

into not mere acquiescence but twisted admiration.

 

In the end,

if clinton's arrogant, ruthless, reckless nature is restored to him,

it seems the joke will be on all of us,

for it will be a victory for infinite victimhood and irresponsibility,

for seduction, for violence, for nihilism, for anarchy.

 

We will have set apart clinton as the hero

by making his victims less human than he;

we will have allowed clinton to carefully estrange us from his victims

so that we can enjoy the rapes and the beatings

as much as clinton himself does.

 

 

[MeekOneGOP]

Bush has to "play the game."

Does he really HAVE to, when the game is more like a cover-up racket?

---

See my #74. . .

[palo verde]

hi no-s
good post, I agree with you
I never participated in the uproar about the Pardons at the time nor the tackiness 'bout stealing White House furniture
because Pardons are Constitutional, and tackiness was never the issue for me
What was illuminating 'bout the Pardons was who he gave them to
most were to international gangsters
which is how I finally put 2 + 2 together all the way
and realized he used his power to benefit gangster interests
If we had not succeeded in getting Bush in
he would have continued to rule behind the figurehead Al Gore
and we'd have had a complete gangster take-over of our government
As Head of Dem Party he will put up some other figurehead in 2004
he plots to get back all the power which was taken away from him
I think the Bush administration should bring this master criminal to Law
and investigate everything which took place in the darkness during his administration
but the GOP prefers another course
All choices have outcomes
I am curious to see the outcome of the choice GOP is making
altho I think the safest thing is to bring everything to Law
Love, Palo

[RJCogburn]

With regard to Chinagate, you ask:

What crime was committed, and what proof is there to that crime?

I guess that you have not been paying attention. Perhaps the names of persons who have been sentenced in court (though only limp wrist slaps, to be sure)will help others, if not you.....Huang, Trie, Hsai, Riady, Chung, Loral Corp.....

[Mia T]

QEI: One thing I would guess about the Clintons is that they probably are smart enough not to have left much of a trail of really hard evidence. The dems. who sneer "prove it" about every evil and/or felonious action the Clintons take would make a Clinton hung jury a victory for the Clintons. This is sad, but I believe it is true, at least right now.

 

Meek: The phrase that comes to mind is "there's not one SHRED of evidence". . .Well of course NOT, they even burned the shredded paper!

 

clinton: "There isn't a shred of evidence."

"I did not have any involvement in the pardons that were granted or not granted," insisted Sen. KnowNothing, seeming to forget her presence at the New-Square/Oval-Office schmooze that secured pardons for the four Hasidic felons who set up a phony school in Brooklyn to swindle the government out of millions intended for the poor.

Mia T, Sen. KnowNothing Victim Clinton Effectively Pleads 5TH in Press Conference by Invoking Spousal Privilege

Actually, of course, when the Clintons say there is "no evidence" of their wrongdoing, there is in reality an abundance of admissible evidence of whatever they are trying to deny. Consider, for example, the following standard jury instructions on the admissibility of evidence:

Jury INSTRUCTION NO. 2.00

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE; INFERENCES

Evidence means testimony, writings, material objects or other things presented to the senses and offered to prove the existence or non-existence of a fact.

Evidence is either direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence proves a fact without an inference and, if true, conclusively establishes that fact. Circumstantial evidence proves a fact from which an inference of the existence of another fact may be drawn.

An inference is a deduction of fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact or group of facts established by the evidence.

The law makes no distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence as to the degree of proof required; each is a reasonable method of proof. Each is respected for such convincing force as it may carry

Jury INSTRUCTION NO. 2.26

ADMISSIONS IMPLIED FROM SILENCE OR EVASION

If you find that following the incident involved in this case that a party (1) [failed to reply] [or] [made an evasive answer] to a statement concerning such party's conduct in relation to the incident ;(2) heard and understood the statement; (3) had a reasonable opportunity to reply; (4) was in such physical and mental condition that a reasonable person in such condition could be expected to reply; and (5) the statement was made under such circumstances that it would normally call for an answer, you may, but are not required to, infer that the party adopted the statement or believed it to be true.

If you do not find each of the five circumstances to exist you must disregard any evidence of the party's silence or evasive answer

****

That the Clinton's accepted massive donations from Denise Rich, that plausibly were channeled from her ex-husband on whose behalf she sought a pardon from Clinton. The fact that a Clinton crony was involved in the last minute scheme to by-pass standard procedures for scruting of a pardon application. The fact that it is indefensible to pardon a multimillionaire fugitive on any grounds when he is unwilling to present his case in court on the merits, all combined with the fact that Clinton has been unable to present a coherent explanation of why he gave the pardon, even mistakenly, and the fact that such explanations as he has given are inconsistent and incomplete, these facts are all credible, admissible evidence of a criminal conspiracy to solicit and accept a bribe in return for undertaking an official act.

10 Posted on 02/17/2001 14:41:45 PST by Gail Wynand

 

 

HEY, HEY MARY JO!

 

So many pardons 4 sale.

 

So many rodhams & clintons to nail.

 

Hey, hey Mary Jo!

 

Can you spell R-I-C-O?

 

 

 

 

Q ERTY1 helen thomas syndrome REALITY CHECK!

 

clinton: "There isn't a shred of evidence."

 

One of the most intriguing facets of this case revolves around questions pertaining to the mechanism by which attorneys representing the traitors, the tax cheats, the drug kingpins, the money-launderers and other assorted beneficiaries of Clinton's last minute presidential pardons became aware that the normal procedures for attaining such pardons and commutations could be circumvented in the first place.

From the circumstantial evidence, we deduce that Clinton had set up a black market apparatus, and the sale of presidential pardons and commutations was its chief marketable commodities...

My two cents..
FReegards, "JohnHuang2"

1 Posted on 02/16/2001 23:49:53 PST by John

Motive Is Everything in the Marc Rich Pardon

15. Mr. Grafeld told me, referring to Judicial Watch's allegations that Commerce Department trade mission seats were sold in exchange for campaign contributions, that "(Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel) Klayman is right on target" but that he believes that the trade mission issues were "only the tip of the iceberg -- that the really big money went towards Presidential access." Mr. Grafeld indicated to me that he believes that Ms. Moss was asking for political contributions in exchange for seats on Commerce Department trade missions, likely at the direction of Hillary Rodham Clinton, but that documents showing this illegal activity had "left the building." In fact, there were effectively no security procedures at the Commerce Department to ensure that sensitive and secret documents and/or any documents which might evidence criminal activity stayed in the building. The purported letters referenced by Mr. Grafeld and Nolanda Hill could easily have "left the building" absent sufficient procedures to secure them.

---from DECLARATION OF SONYA STEWART

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 (UPI) -- President Clinton [upon the discovery of the body of Barbara Wise in the Commerce Department offices] briefly interrupted his Thanksgiving holiday weekend at Camp David Friday with a quick trip to the White House to gather data...and then returned to the mountaintop retreat...

The president, still suffering from a raspy voice, and ordered by his doctor to rest his vocal chords, carried a briefcase as he strolled to the waiting helicopter to return to Camp David. He wore a leather jacket and was followed by an aide carrying a huge box ...

Clinton reviewing inaugural plans, Helen Thomas, 29-NOV-1996

 

 

Helen Thomas Syndrome: THE SYMPTOMS

Mia T, January 3, 2002

 

The complex of symptoms associated with Helen Thomas Syndrome, (also known as 'habituated doyenne-iosis'), includes the following:

• delusions of importance
• tunnel vision -field of vision is so severely constricted that evidence of Pulitzer-quality stories are invariably missed...evidence like:
  • an absurd reason ("to get a book of poetry") for a Thanksgiving trip from Camp David to DC and back by a corrupt president under subpoena
  • a dead body: a Ron-Brown-posthumous, Ron-Brown-related, Thanksgiving-Day corpse in the Commerce offices
  • the deposition of Sonya Stewart, which tells us that "the trade mission issues were "only the tip of the iceberg -- that the really big money went towards Presidential access." Mr. Grafeld indicated to me that he believes that Ms. Moss was asking for political contributions in exchange for seats on Commerce Department trade missions, likely at the direction of Hillary Rodham Clinton, but that documents showing this illegal activity had "left the building."
  • "a huge box" hauled back to Camp David by said corrupt president under subpoena.
  • the Gestalt--the synthesis of the evidence -- the absurd reason for the president's Thanksgiving-Day Camp David-DC-Camp David trip; the Ron-Brown-posthumous, Ron-Brown-related, Thanksgiving-Day corpse; the Sonya Stewart deposition informing us that evidence of illegal Commerce activity had "left the building;" and "a huge box" hauled back to Camp David by said corrupt president under subpoena.
• left-lateral curvature of the spine -combines synergistically with tunnel vision and delusional tendencies to result in a grotesque, dysfunctional reverence for the cowardly, inept, narcissistic, seditious, corrupt rapist-pig proximate cause of 9/11.

[RJCogburn]

Does anyone remember the FBI files that the Clinton's hold?

Are we still using the lame FBI files excuse for every time the Republicans turn tail? Time to give that one up.

[Attillathehon]

<Don't think it needs to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" test. But the way to prove it, is to investigate it - vigorously. I believe that's what the discussion is about.

[palo verde]

The GOP has free will to do what it wants, but I won't vote for it again because of this

hi cap
I am the one who said the above statement
If you think I didn't vote GOP in the last election, guess again
I campaigned for Bush and GOP ceaselesslessly
I prayed for them constantly
Al Gore was merely a figurehead
If we had not succeeded getting Bush in, clinton would have been our dictator
We never would have gotten clinton out
Getting Bush in is how we saved our country from a tyrant
And it wasn't easy, clinton fixed the election
a million votes for Bush were ''lost''
one third of votes for Gore were from non existent voters
it's a miracle we overwhelmed the voter fraud
And when we succeeded clinton architected the attempt to steal the election from Bush
which very nearly succeeded
I do respect voters' free will
I didn't try to influence FReepers who chose to vote for Buchanan or Libertarian in this election
but I walked on broken glass to vote straight GOP ticket
I won't vote again
I have lost inspiration for federal politics when GOP chose not to bring clinton corruption to Law
For me the Rule of Law is everything
Love, Palo

[bayourod]

"bill clinton and his Thought Police, in a perverse reverse aversion, have conditioned society's collective brain into not mere acquiescence but twisted admiration"

Bill Clinton was booed at the Super Bowl. His polls are the lowest of any ex-president. His speaking fees are embarrassingly low except for appearances before one ethnic group. He hasn't been invited to join the boards of any major corporations. No one is anxiously awaiting the publication of his autobiography. He has to crash weddings because no one will invite him. His dog died trying to escape from him. Rodney dangerfield gets more respect than Clinton.

[Luis Gonzalez]

What crime was Loral found guilty of?

Maybe it's you that hasn't been paying attention.

[bayourod]

Every element of a criminal case must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury. The jury is specifically asked to state their finding on each element. Unless they unanimously answer "we do" to each element, the court has to enter a judgment of not guilty.

A prosecutor's criminal case is like a chain. It doesn't make any difference how strong most of the links are, the measure of its strength is how strong is the weakest link.

Even circumstantial evidence has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. (you won't find a jury instruction defining reasonable doubt. It's left up to the attorneys to tell the jury what they believe the definitions could be.)

All of the investigations in the world won't prove a quid pro quo if the actors knew in advance how to avoid creating any evidence of one. I doubt that Clinton put anything in writing. It's all done with winks, nods and whispered ambigious code words. And remember that the testimony of a co-conspirator is insufficient as a matter of law.

You see, it's that pesky U.S. Constitution that keeps us from hanging Clinton from the closest tree.

[thinden]

I doubt there is anything on Dubya in those files.

maybe the election revalation about dub's 20+ year old DUI at kennebunkport was just a shot across the bow?

"the files" have made weaklings out of many of our strongest pols.

[MamaK]

I don't believe most of what Bill O'reilly says. He has become so proud of himself , his heaad is just too big.

[Eva]

The FBI files are very real and Hillary still has them. Anyone who thinks that she wouldn't use them for her own benefit is naieve. The end always justifies the means, where Hillary is concerned.

[Mia T]

Fear not. While we may not get the clintons for the treason or the murders--the clinton crimes without statutes of limitations--(NB: there is a movement afoot to add rape to that list), we will have endless opportunities to nail them.The clintons are constitutionally incapable of behavior that is not criminal. As long as there are the clintons, there will be clinton crimes.

Capone consults attorney, Mike Ahern, in 1929. Ahern, with

other Capone attorneys, filed several appeals to stave off Capone's

11-year sentence for tax evasion. The last one was rejected in May,

1932. (photograph by Jun Fujita, ICHi-14414)

 

 

"My client had nothing to do with the low-rent, trailer-park trash politicians who infested our country for the past eight years."

--Michael Rosen, lawyer for Thomas Gambino, son of late Mafia boss Carlo Gambino

New York Post via The Wall Street Journal

(Michael Rosen was understandably eager to distance his client, a convicted loan shark, from the clintons. Another Thomas Gambino reportedly paid $50,000 to roger clinton in an unsuccessful effort to get a pardon for his father, Rosario Gambino.),

It's not easy to play fair against Mr. and Mrs. Clinton, who, in the words of the authors, "operated like a crime family, expecting friends and aides to protect them even against their own best interests." What's amazing, of course, is that's exactly what Clinton friends and aides have always done, from Susan McDougal to Webster Hubbell to flocks of nameless White House special assistants. Even Jim McDougal died just in time to deprive the independent counsel of a key witness against Mrs. Clinton, thus derailing what the authors report to have been her likely indictment for perjury and obstruction related to the Whitewater investigation....     

Reading the tumultuous events of the Lewinsky probe in a comprehensive narrative is unlike attempting to make sense of it in daily doses. Something different comes through the heavy accumulation of detail of, for example, the duplicity of the Justice Department, or the sharklike behavior of the White House. One begins to get a choking sense of the atmosphere of corruption and ruthlessness the Clintons inhabit -- and, worse, have forced the rest of us to inhabit. Taken in one piece, the habitual, even casual abuse of power on display begins to resemble conditions one normally associates with a state of totalitarianism, where such concepts as truth and justice are only paid lip service. In the end, then, it makes you wonder when there will be fresh air again.

-----Crime-family values

 

 

Don't lose

Your head

To gain a minute

You need your head

Your brains are in it.

--an old roadside ad, Pushme-Pullyou

 

 

 

 

 

HEY, HEY MARY JO!

Can you spell R-I-C-O?