Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/03/2007 12:57:29 PM PDT by hardback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: hardback
``I believe that presidential pardon authority is available to any president, and almost all presidents have exercised it,'' Clinton said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

I'm sure her list is already of recordbreaking length.

2 posted on 07/03/2007 12:58:59 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (Life is an episode of Green Acres. THEN you die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
``I believe that presidential pardon authority is available to any president, and almost all presidents have exercised it,'' Clinton said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

How many presidents pardoned terrorists?

3 posted on 07/03/2007 12:58:59 PM PDT by b4its2late (Liberalism is a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

Yes Bill only pardons people who pay us with huge bags of cash.


4 posted on 07/03/2007 1:00:07 PM PDT by stockpirate (Juan` McCain and Jorge` W Bush, two birds of a feather!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
Her husband's pardons, issued in the closing hours of his presidency, were simply routine exercise in the use of the pardon power, and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy, she said.

Nor were they aimed at protecting the United States.

5 posted on 07/03/2007 1:00:24 PM PDT by b4its2late (Liberalism is a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy

Some sure put Americans at risk though...
6 posted on 07/03/2007 1:00:41 PM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

> Her husband’s pardons, issued in the closing hours of his presidency, were simply routine exercise in the use of the pardon power, and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy, she said. <

Bravo Sierra! Susan McDougal was certainly hushed up, and Roger Clinton was spared having the names of his cocaine customers (one of whom I expect was Billy Boy) revealed in court. Lying $itch!


7 posted on 07/03/2007 1:00:42 PM PDT by NoBullZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
Her husband's pardons, were simply routine and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy, she said......

Her husbands pardons had price tags affixed to them.

9 posted on 07/03/2007 1:01:15 PM PDT by rface (I love GW Bush .... but I don't always agree with him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

Of all the gaul...this woman is as shameless as her husband.. and that’s saying a lot!


10 posted on 07/03/2007 1:01:40 PM PDT by vigilence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

In March 1995, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno secured the appointment of an Independent Counsel, David Barrett to investigate allegations that Cisneros had lied to FBI investigators during background checks prior to being named Secretary of HUD. He had been asked about payments that he had made to former mistress Linda Medlar, also known as Linda Jones. The affair had been ‘public knowledge’ for a number of years - during the 1992 presidential campaign, U.S. Treasurer Catalina Vasquez Villalpando publicly referred to Cisneros and candidate Clinton as “two skirt-chasers” - but Cisneros lied about the amount of money he had paid to Medlar. The investigation continued for three and a half years.

In December, 1997, Cisneros was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. Medlar used some of the Cisneros hush money to purchase a house and entered into a bank fraud scheme with her sister and brother-in-law to conceal the source of the money. In January, 1998, Medlar pleaded guilty to 28 charges of bank fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and obstruction of justice.

In September, 1999, Cisneros negotiated a plea agreement, under which he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000. He did not receive jail-time or probation. He was pardoned by President Bill Clinton in January 2001 ( See: List of people pardoned by Bill Clinton). The independent counsel investigation continued after the pardon focusing on alleged obstruction of justice. In May 2005, Senator Dorgan (D-ND) proposed ending funding for the investigation; negotiators refused to include the provision in a bill funding military operations in Afghanistan. The funding at that point for the investigation totaled $21 million.

According to a New York Daily News report on October 3, 2005, “lawyers are fighting to suppress a potentially embarrassing final report from the probe that found Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros lied to the FBI about paying $250,000 in hush money to his ex-mistress. ... Lawyers at the Washington firm Williams and Connolly who work for Cisneros and both Clintons have argued to judges overseeing the case that allegations of illegal activity, for which no charges were filed, should be snipped before the report is made public.” [2].


12 posted on 07/03/2007 1:02:07 PM PDT by poinq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
``This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House. ... There isn't any doubt now, what we know is that Libby was carrying out the implicit or explicit wishes of the vice president, or maybe the president as well, in the further effort to stifle dissent.''

This is Hillaryspeak for 'the best way to quiet the SOB's is to off them'.

14 posted on 07/03/2007 1:02:42 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House.

Translation: Libby should have bought a pardon, fair and square.

15 posted on 07/03/2007 1:02:56 PM PDT by TChris (The Republican Party is merely the Democrat Party's "away" jersey - Vox Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

“Don’t those stupid Republicans know what a damned Pardon is sells for these days???? How DARE they Devalue the currency of the Democratic Party!!”-Hillary Clinton


16 posted on 07/03/2007 1:03:49 PM PDT by tcrlaf (VOTE Democrat! You don't those stinkin' Freedoms anyway!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
Pretty cheeky, considering the only reason her husband didn’t go to jail for perjury is Ken Starr knew he couldn’t get a conviction from a D.C. jury.
17 posted on 07/03/2007 1:03:53 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

Suprised the ‘smartest woman in the world’ decided to cross that minefield.


18 posted on 07/03/2007 1:03:57 PM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

Let me guess.

“Her Husband’s” pardons good.

Bush pardons bad.


19 posted on 07/03/2007 1:05:13 PM PDT by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

Yes, there is a difference, you obnoxious cow. No one was being paid for a presidential pardon in this case, which couldn’t be said of the pardons your worthless brothers sold at the end of the Fornicator-in-Chief’s presidency. I’ll stack Libby’s commutation up against Henry Cisneros’s full pardon any day. He should have been in prison for lying to the FBI, as I recall.


20 posted on 07/03/2007 1:05:18 PM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
``This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House. ... There isn't any doubt now, what we know is that Libby was carrying out the implicit or explicit wishes of the vice president, or maybe the president as well, in the further effort to stifle dissent.'

Yeah, that stifling sure worked well didn't it!

21 posted on 07/03/2007 1:06:47 PM PDT by Edgerunner (If leftists don't like it, I do. Keep your powder dry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

let ‘em try and undercut bush as much as they want

he ain’t running in the next election


24 posted on 07/03/2007 1:07:31 PM PDT by incredulous joe (Vote for Christian Bagge - www.energizerkeepgoinghalloffame.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback

...well ours were good and yours were bad. I don’t feel I need to explain myself to you.

Vote Hillary in ‘08...


26 posted on 07/03/2007 1:10:32 PM PDT by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hardback
``This (the Libby decision) was clearly an effort to protect the White House. ... There isn't any doubt now, what we know is that Libby was carrying out the implicit or explicit wishes of the vice president, or maybe the president as well, in the further effort to stifle dissent.''

The WH better get out in front of this one. If they just accept it, rather than aggressively rebutting her, they will be a bigger loser on this than we ever imagined.

27 posted on 07/03/2007 1:10:43 PM PDT by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson