Bill O'Reilly blasts Ashcroft and Reno for Corruption

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | January 4, 2002 | Bill O'Reilly

[editor-surveyor]

There is something very wrong inside the Justice Department of the United States and there has been for some time.

Various newspapers are now reporting that under President Clinton, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was ordered to stand down on various terrorist investigations.

One of the most egregious examples is the failure of the bureau to investigate fundraising organizations like "The Holy Land Fund," based in Arizona, which allegedly funneled millions of dollars in donations to Middle Eastern terrorists.

Although the Bush administration has now frozen the assets of the fund, it was apparently allowed to operate for 8 years despite the FBI intelligence that was presented to Mr. Clinton and then-Attorney General Janet Reno. One bureau source told the press that Ms. Reno felt any investigation of "The Holy Land Fund" would lead to anti-Arab sentiment and therefore was opposed to such an investigation.

As always, Ms. Reno will not comment on any aspect of her tenure as attorney general that is at all controversial.

There is no question now that under Ms. Reno and then-FBI Director Louis Freeh, Americans were put at great risk. The Wen Ho Lee-Chinese espionage case still has not been explained, and the fact that the 19 Sept. 11 terrorists weren't even on the FBI's radar screen is about as frightening as Janet Reno's passion for political correctness.

The current attorney general, John Ashcroft, has made no attempt to examine Ms. Reno's bizarre behavior or update the public about the Marc Rich investigation or anything else. Mr. Ashcroft specializes in looking dour and stonewalling. While Congress is attempting to get documents about President Clinton's dubious foreign fundraising and FBI abuses in Boston, Ashcroft is refusing to cooperate at all.

And this isn't a political issue. Conservative Congressman Dan Burton and liberal Congressman Barney Frank have actually joined forces to try and pry this information from Ashcroft's hands. If that's not amazing, then nothing is.

The truth is that for nearly 8 years, the Justice Department has been corrupt and inefficient. Janet Reno botched nearly every important decision she had to make including Waco and Elian Gonzalez. Time after time, Ms. Reno refused to approve investigative initiatives sought by the FBI. And time after time, Mr. Freeh sat in his plush government office refusing to let the American people know what was happening.

Now Mr. Ashcroft is doing the same thing. There is no reason on this earth why the public should not know the status of the Rich pardon probe. Or the anthrax investigation. And what about Enron, Mr. Attorney General – are you going to look into that? Millions of Americans were hosed while some Enron executives made millions.

How about a comment on that, Mr. Ashcroft?

Here is the whole article.

[exodus]

To: exodus
I wasn't talking about what you consider bad form,
I was referring to standard FReeper posting etiquette.
# 1359 by Darlin'
************************

If you talk to me, you'll get MY opinion.

Do you really want me to put words
into the mouths of my fellow Freepers?

[Darlin']

Fred, Fred, Fred, Fred, Fred,
There you go again, intruding on matters that have nothing at all to do with you. If you insist on knowing may I direct your attention to post # 1346 by exodus, please ask that same question of him. This new little habit of picking on women late at night is beginning to be somewhat troubling please try to curb that tendancy, it's unbecoming as well as disturbing.

[exodus]

I've got a new, fresh topic.
Remember?

Please respond to my new, fresh topic.

[Darlin']

No need, I lobbied for her confirmation.

[Darlin']

LOL. No she happens to be a very good friend and fellow freeper. She would speak up on my behalf in a similar situation. Frankly, I'm sure all of us have read and enjoyed about all of this that we can stand for one day. Why don't we just drop it ?

[exodus]

Well?
I say Gail Norton is incompetent, at best.

She may very well be corrupt,
based on her treatment of the Klamath farmers.

[Mo1]

Well?
I say Gail Norton is incompetent, at best.
She may very well be corrupt,
based on her treatment of the Klamath farmers.

As I will admit .. she may not be the best choice .. I don't think I would call her corrupt

[habs4ever]

You are far too liberal with the word corrupt.Use it wisely,as all you do is diminish any point you try to make.

[Darlin']

I say you are spoiling for a fight. She is no more corrupt than I am. It is ludicrous to label everyone and everything you disagree with as corrupt.

[exodus]

To: exodus
You are far too liberal with the word corrupt.
Use it wisely, as all you do is diminish any point you try to make.
# 1369 by habs4ever
************************

(Okay, I'll amend my post. Try this--)

Well?
I say Gail Norton is incompetent, at best.

She may very well be evil,
based on her treatment of the Klamath farmers.

[ValerieUSA]

It truly appears to me that an evil spirit is influencing people and attitudes at FR now, making us touchy and snide and harsh when it isn't necessary to make a point that way, or to take another person's point like that. It's especially apparent on this thread.

People who are for truth and justice and freedom have a common enemy - and it isn't each other. He is the master of confusion and dissension. He's winning. He has you at each other's throats instead of fighting against him.

[exodus]

As I will admit .. she may not be the best choice ..
I don't think I would call her corrupt
# 1368 by Mo1
************************

I didn't call her corrupt yet.
I think that she's incompetent, myself.

If she's not corrupt,
and she's not incompetent,
there's only one other choice.
She was ordered to deny water to the farmers.

That brings up the question of who her boss is.
Who has the power to order the Secretary of the Interior
to deny water to hard-working farmers?

[exodus]

To: exodus
I say you are spoiling for a fight.
She is no more corrupt than I am.
It is ludicrous to label everyone and everything
you disagree with as corrupt.
# 1371 by Darlin'
************************

I'm spoiling for a discussion, Darlin'.

I only label violations of law corruption.
Everything else I disagree with I consider bad judgement on their part.
That's okay, I'm here to correct that.

[ValerieUSA]

So frequently when I am debating and someone tries tactics or says things that really infuriate me personally, I want to do a big long cut/paste thing like that, too. But I don't. And I don't regret not doing it either. You have not restrained yourself and that is your responsibility - not to restrain others. Your arguments on the topic were not enhanced in the least by that move.

[Mo1]

That brings up the question of who her boss is.
Who has the power to order the Secretary of the Interior
to deny water to hard-working farmers?

Ok ... Second verse .. same as the first

Here we go again .. let's just face facts .. you don't like President Bush and regardless what he says or does on ANY matter/issue .. you still will not like him

[Mo1]

May I step in here ... As I can't speak for Letitring ..

But it might be a Post like #1102 where you said "Why, the only time you ever did speak, or plan to, did you sound like the south end of a north-bound horse? Didn't your mama bring you up better than that?" ... that she may have felt was uncalled for

I could be wrong .. but heck what do I know