O'Reilly: Bush Insider Claims Clinton Deal Torpedoed Pardongate

News max ^ | 06/21/2002 | With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[aristeides]

If the Clinton administration covered up Middle Eastern connections with the OKC bombing and TWA 800, I think that is much more likely to turn public opinion around than the Vince Foster matter. Let O'Reilly go after those other matters. If he turns public opinion on them, the Vince Foster matter will eventually take care of itself.

[berned]

Any variation of that would be A-OK with me. My point is that if O'Reilly was truly angry about this, HE has a unique forum the rest of us don't have. And there is a ton of evidence out there to nail clinton on. I wish O'reilly would start nailing.

[aristeides]

My quick take is Bush is doing everything necessary to win the House, Senate and Pres in 04. Then, watch out.

That would be quite a gamble. The unexpected can easily happen in politics. There's no guarantee he will succeed. It's particularly unlikely the Dems will sink below 40 votes in the Senate, and thus lose the power to filibuster. And, in the meantime, four years will have been wasted.

Whereas going after the Clintons from the start could very well have so discredited the Dems that they would do as badly as the Republicans did in the elections after Watergate.

[lewislynn]

It's not. If anything, it gives him a sorely needed excuse.

A President caving to wholesale threats is an indication of , among numerous other things, a poor excuse of a President.

[aristeides]

It's not clear that there need ever be a Democratic president again. If enough is made of the Clinton scandals, the party might die, and be replaced by a less corrupt opposition party.

Alternatively, if the Democratic Party were to succeed in purging itself of Clintonian corruption and thus in surviving, future Democratic Party presidents would presumably be as little like Clinton as post-Nixon Republican presidents have been like Nixon.

[Paulus Invictus]

Another obvious RAT disruptor appears and a new one at that. Out damned spot!

[varon]

"If you put this thing on the back track and just play the game the way we've always played it here in the Justice Department since Watergate, where the powerful protect each other - then we'll keep an open mind on your legislation."

"where the powerful protect each other"

The above excerpt is the whole thing in a nutshell. Once a political criminal reaches a certain level in the hierarchy then it's hands off.

[norton]

I think #35 comes to the correct conclusion.
Both the Bushes seem to have a knack for doing things I don't agree with out of very honest beliefs.

The father said he was not "after Saddam" and let Iraq off the hook when the limited goals of Desert Storm were met.
The son apparently believes that governance is more critical than .... revenge? .... pay back? ... maybe justice.

Taking a look around the world today it's very possible to make the case that punishment of former leaders is a current fad that will lead only to more punishment, false punishment, and turmoil.

As much as I'd personally like to see both clintons in stocks, I'd rather see Milosevic retired on a small farm somewhere.

[Hildy]

And we all know how we can "trust" the Democrats.

[linn37]

I'm trying to get the Easter Bunny on the phone to confirm this story,if he says its true I will believe it!!

[Donna Lee Nardo]

If this is true, shame on GWB for not exacting promises from the stupid a-hole dems to confirm all of his judicial nominees!!!!!

[palo verde]

Hi GBA
I love your post (#27)
Love, Palo

[aristeides]

If this is true, shame on GWB for not exacting promises from the stupid a-hole dems to confirm all of his judicial nominees!!!!!

Or not even all of them, but most of them. (i.e., such a deal could have allowed the Dems to shoot down a couple of the nominees to keep their base and funders happy.) As it is, the Dems are blocking almost all the nominees.

As this stall continues, I am increasingly puzzled by the administration's unwillingness to use its power to make recess appointment to fill those vacant judgeships.

[geologist]

# 21

So true, so true. The people I know say ... "what can I do about it?" They feel powerless. As individuals we are one vote, no influence of any consequence and completely overwhelmed by the medias. Bleak picture. This forum diffuses lots of angst and frustraton; yet knowing what we know it is a long way from being effective ... look at immigration, spending programs, especially education, ... anon ad nauseum.

I so agree we 'can', but 'how' ...? the corruption of our legislative branches, bureaucracies, The supreme court making and confirming unconstitutional laws, the power of the lobbists etc. etc. etc. we are so outnumbered by the blind minded who fall for the crap of the democratics and socialists.

It will take a new generation of aware and dedicated youth to replace the current band of hippies and degenerate community, state and national leaders to bring in a wave of effective change.

[sanjacjake]

I agree with you.....some of these RINO's will say
and plant anything to get "W".,....his advisors will
not let these type of things bring him down to their
level...remember the rumors before the--debates with
Gore???..how "W" would get stomped,etc....these are the
same guys..along with Alan Keyes..that keep using the
velvet hammer against him....success breeds more and more
jealousy and RINOINNUENDO...unfortunate but true. Jake

[Keyes For President]

We're not gonna do anything. You're not going to get any (legislation) passed if four years."

And we would have all been better off for it! Sigh...what could have been!

[#3Fan]

The talk host's highly placed administration source said Democrat leaders then explained to Bush, "If you put this thing on the back track and just play the game the way we've always played it here in the Justice Department since Watergate, where the powerful protect each other - then we'll keep an open mind on your legislation."

Looks like O'Reilly needs a new source. This one is BSing. Timed for the elections also.

[Quix]

That explains a fair amount!

[AGreatPer]

"Whereas going after the Clintons from the start could very well have so discredited the Dems"

I don't think so. People are just tired of hearing about Bill Clinton and his problems and it would turn into a hugh negative for the adm. I think Bush is being advised correctly to leave it alone for future consideration.

Oh, you could tell from the get go that this decision was made, deal or no deal, who cares. What I like about this strategy is if Bush gets a second term, the gloves are off.

[Satadru]

I am sorry, but you are wrong. I have seen some of those evidence from my friend who works for Mary Jo White. I am not at liberty to disclose it, but any decent person will be convinced by it. Furthermore, there is a jury selection process in a criminal case, by which the prosecution can get 12 people who will be unbiased. Bush did not want to go ahead with this prosecution because he lacks the courage to do what is right. Ever since he took office, all his moves are political. He is just as moral as a pedophilic priest who talks about God, but is a sleazeball in disguise. He did an aweful job in upholding the Constitution, which he claimed he would in every stump speeches before the election. But, that was before he got elected...