Posted on 03/06/2002 8:03:51 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:39:49 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Try my new term.
AN=the lack of.
ORCH=Greek for orchid (testes).
Obstruction of Highways
Accessory to Arson
Accessory to Criminal Negligent Burning
Obstruction of Highways - What do you think Clinton did when he choked up
the streets in New York when he was shopping for Christmas gifts?
Accessory to Arson - He participated in the burning at Waco. Didn't exactly
throw the switch but did have something to do with the decision.
Accessory to Criminal Negligent Burning - Ditto at Waco.
Care to convince us that DOZENS of other democRATS and Clinton administration lackies couldn't have been convicted ... couldn't BE convicted NOW, after a PROPER investigation instead of what we got under Clinton? Why are you "move-on"ers so obsessed with Clinton? This is about DOZENS of high level democRATS, many who are still in government doing damage, who committed serious crimes.
Care to explain why NOTHING has been done about the Riady non-refund by Ashcroft? This is about whether the current administration is going to investigate and uphold the law where democRATS are concerned ... because if they are not then why should we believe they wouldn't commit crimes themselves and try to cover them up?
Care to tell us the current disposition of the Filegate files. How many were taken? Whose were taken? Is the data in them still on DNC computers? We need to know whether our GOP representatives (and some democRAT representatives) are being BLACKMAILED. Or don't you care?
Care to explain the failure of the GOP to do ANYTHING to clear up the many questions that exist in the Foster and Ron Brown cases? In the latter, MILITARY PATHOLOGISTS stated that Brown might have been shot and there is are x-ray and photos to support that contention. Instead of investigating, Clinton's people just destroyed the careers of those officers. Is Bush going to correct that injustice and find out what really happened? Do you care or are you just "moving" on ... even in the face of a mountain of evidence suggesting murder, mass murder and treason.
It saddens and sickens me that he skated, almost as much as now hearing Joe Klein tell us how much X42 accomplished during his eight years in office. I'm listening to Bill Press ask Bob Barr why we spent millions on a worthless investigation when we should have been investigating terrorism. They simply don't understand the meaning of perjury or obstruction of justice after 4 years!
Generally, there's no question a crime was committed, but sometimes that's not even clear. Unless you have the proof to win a case, a prosecutor won't pursue it.
I don't have all the facts in these cases at my disposal and neither do you. Our desire to convict people for these crimes is irrelevant to the analysis of whether you can actually do it.
I'm not defending the decision not to actively seek indictments for every past wrong. I'm not in a position to judge. If you want to speculate about it, go right ahead, but it's still speculation.
Well let's just look at the Riady non-refund. Riady said in court under a plea agreement that if lies he looses, that the Clinton and DNC campaign funding organizations did NOT return the illegal contributions that he gave them ... despite their having publically claimed that they did. It should be easy to prove this true or false as there must be, by law, a paper trail for those campaign contributions. If Riady lied then his plea agreement should be voided. If the campaign officials that said they returned the money lied, then they should be indicted. Those are the only two options I think. And IF the Bush administration has a reason that one of those two possibilities hasn't happened, then they need to tell us. Otherwise, we are perfectly justified in questioning what is going on and suspecting the worst ... that our political election process is CORRUPT.
And the same goes for all the cases I mentioned. We need an accounting of the FBI files from Filegate. If there isn't enough evidence to prosecute those people that have been named (although we have sworn testimony that clearly shows some broke the law) then fine but we still need to know WHY Ashcroft doesn't think that information is still on DNC computers BLACKMAILING GOP representatives. A stonewall of silence BY BUSH is not going to cut it.
The same goes for the Foster and Brown matters. Those military officers whose careers Clinton's people destroyed need justice. We need to know why the Bush administration is not even investigating this matter. Ignoring our questions is not going to make us go away. The questions are going to get more direct and be directed more at the Bush administration than the democRATS. We understand why the democRATS wouldn't investigate. We do not understand why the GOP is putting up a wall of silence and letting those military officer whistleblowers hang. NO EXCUSES.
Unless you have the proof to win a case, a prosecutor won't pursue it.
OK but how can you get the proof if you don't investigate? You are not trying to suggest that Clinton's DOJ did a good job of investigating these matters are you because only a democRAT would suggest that. There is enough evidence ALREADY to justify exhuming Brown and Foster's bodies so that we can clear this matter up. Otherwise, we may be justified in LINKING the Bush administration and GOP to the coverup of these potential MURDERS and asking WHY.
I don't have all the facts in these cases at my disposal and neither do you.
We know enough to know that crimes were committed and that investigations were NOT done properly. To suggest otherwise is to suggest you are a democRAT. It seems to me that you and a bunch of other "move-on"ers are HIDING behind the actions of Clinton's CORRUPT investigatory bodies and that makes people like me suspicious. All I want is an investigation that I can trust. I'm willing to trust Ashcroft IF he investigates but that hasn't happened. You can't show us ANY evidence to suggest it has and in an investigation of the size needed there is NO WAY that we wouldn't know by now that some of these matters were looked at. At the very least some of the people who are criminals would have lawyered up. At the very least some of the people on our side would have given us a clue that something was up. ALL of us at FreeRepublic should know by now that we can NOT trust what Reno's DOJ did withregards to any of these matters. Don't play us for fools because we are not fools.
I am also certain that the Vince Foster case won't be re-opened, at least by this administration. It has been the subject of intense investigation and while questions obviously remain, there's not the slightest hint of evidence linking a particular gunman. The best that can be said for that is that the circumstances don't confirm that it was a suicide.
Another formal investigation into that would probably be unsuccessful in pinning the crime on anyone, but the political damage to the Administration would be unacceptable.
It's possible that Bush doesn't want to commit political suicide and destroy the things he wants to accomplish for the country in an effort to seek vengeance and justice on the Clinton Administration. That is what it would be, wouldn't you agree? He might have made the calculation that seeking indictments early in his term might be both fatal and futile based on the evidence assembled so far.
I simply don't know, and without the press being willing to ask him, we're not going to find out.
You could've fooled me.
You are such a one-note-Charlie, BAC. Quite boring, actually.
But here is a more rational perspective: The OIC deserves a lot of credit for exposing the truth about Clinton. Without the OIC, Clinton would not have been impeached, and Al Gore would likely be the President today. Without the OIC, Clinton would not have been exposed as a rapist and a liar.
In the weeks before the Lewinsky investigation started, Clinton was on the verge of going on a three-year rampage of disasterous liberalism. He would have been unstoppable, and the country would have been ruined. Fortunately, the OIC essentially shut Clinton down for a year, and he was crippled for the remainder of his term.
If the Senate had voted to convict Clinton in the impeachment, it would have been more feasible to prosecute Clinton in criminal court. The Senate failed to do their duty, but that was not the fault of the OIC.
Exposing the truth about Bill Clinton was a great achievement, even if it didn't land him in jail. So for all of the good things they did manage to accomplish, I say thanks to Kenneth Starr, Robert Ray, Jackie Bennett, Hickman Ewing and the rest of the OIC team.
There are still a few matters that Clinton must deal with. Juanita Broaddrick's lawsuit against the EOP was dismissed in circuit court, but the appeals court will take up the matter next month. A grand jury in New York is still investigating the sale of pardons and diplomatic passports in exchange for contributions to the Clinton Library. There is still a chance that Clinton will face justice in a court of law.
I think practically every congress person out there breathed a sigh of relief when "monica" became the focus.
I'm really impressed < /sarcasm>. Lewinski was nothing, UNLESS she was granted a clearance, obtained access to classified information, and then engaged in espionage. The charge of perjury is also nothing.
FWIW, my belief is the whole impeachment thing was carried out for the wrong reasons, and with the wrong charges. X42 was a Traitor, pure and simple. He allowed highly classified data to be both sold, and leaked to the ChiComs, pardoned terrorists for political gain, and the worst of all, totally ignored what eventually blossomed into the tragedy of 9/11. The entire 8 years were spent in nothing but repeated cover ups of treasonous behavior.
Incidentally, with the record that man had,(He was, a draft evader, and had made false statements under oath while still in college [the Holmes affidavit] to avoid military service) I don't know how he obtained a clearance himself, especially one which would have given him access to the football. Frankly, he shouldn't have been allowed to see the toilet paper in the WH let alone other data. He was also IMHO, a construct, to get votes and let the Hildebeest run things from behind the curtain. Incredulously, he was allowed to pretty much do what the heck he wanted.
I think besides the Treason thing, there is enough evidence surfacing concerning his personal involvement in the "grand market manipulation" of the last 8 years, and especially the artificial support of the dotcoms, as well as other stocks to be able to say "it's the economy. stupid", until the bottom dropped out, to charge him with countless Fraud charges. Enron happened on his watch, not President Bush's. The CA energy crisis was precipitated by his inaction. To sum up, the guy was a walking violation, and in any other case, probably would have been indicted with charges serious enough to become a Capital case. In a perfect world, it would have been the scaffold, the rope, and the high jump into eternity, but this isn't a perfect world, and justice does not triumph.
Too many deals, were, unfortunately, made. This guy walks, the Beest carpetbags her way into a Senate seat, and the crimes go unpunished.
Keep the Faith for Freedom
MAY GOD BLESS AND PROTECT THIS HONORABLE REPUBLIC FROM THE CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGERS NOW FACING HER BOTH FROM WITHIN, AND OUTSIDE, HER BORDERS.
Greg
The evidence is not that clinton executed Vince Foster, the evidence is that the administration covered up the facts and destroyed evidence. But you already knew that. So why the spin? HUH?
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.