Bill O'Reilly blasts Ashcroft and Reno for Corruption

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.

Would finding a bullet in the head of Ron Brown do it? Would finding that the wounds in Foster's head don't match the description provided by Fiske do it? If not, then what would be REALLY incriminating evidence?

I'm not the prosecutor so I don't know. I do know that the Great Impeached and his co-conspirator spouse have an uncanny ability to slither away from criminal allegations. If there isn't any positively damning evidence out there... if we're going to get into a another four-year pissing contest with the clintons, the Republicans will pay the price at the polls. I think that's what GWB is thinking about.

To: BeAChooser
"...I do know that the Great Impeached
and his co-conspirator spouse have an uncanny ability
to slither away from criminal allegations.
If there isn't any positively damning evidence out there...
if we're going to get into a another
four-year pissing contest with the Clintons,
the Republicans will pay the price at the polls.
I think that's what GWB is thinking about.
# 443 by RightRules
************************

It wouldn't be a "pissing contest"
if we had a President who used the Justice Department
for investigation instead of cover-ups.

The evidence against the Clintons
is un-deniable, and extensive.

Bush would have beaten Gore easily
if he had spoken out
against the corruption of the Clintons.

I voted against Bush,
because he said nothing.

Thank you for the clarification. What you've now posted, is the exact opposite from what I first responded to. That's why this medium can be a bit of a problem ... in real life, the quizical look on my face, would have garnered an immediate clarification, and we would not have seemed to be at cross purposses. : - )

I think that President Bush saw that after the impeachment, NOT throwing Slick out, was unfortunately the mood of the majority of the country. Prosicuting the malfiesence of the Clintons, is NOT part of the job description, of the president. No matter how much WE wish to see the Clintons in jail, the process for that is NOT in the now president's hands. Those who scream about the Constitutionality of every step, can't have it both ways. Those of us who are SO relieved to have President Bush in the Oval Office, must allow him to be president, and NOT wish for him to be an " avenging angel " !

Either we have a Representative Republic ( which I do believe that President Bush IS bringng this country back to ) , or we don't. Immediate cures are NOT possible. Incrimentalism go us to where we are now, and it is the ONLY way to turn back the clock. President Bush is far more intelligent than most ( even Conservatives ! ) are giving him credit for being.

I can and will defend conservative John Ashcroft from simpletons like you and O'Reilly. Besides O'Reilly isn't a messenger, he's a ratings slut and you don't have a clue.

Reagan would never insult people the way you do. You are a disgrace to his reputation. Change your screen name, for his sake. Or, is it really your intent to discredit him?

Thank you. I've read this entire thread and I thank you for having the stamina and willingness to stick with it. Long ago I lost all patience with trying to address the lunacy that the President ought to pursue every lamebrain single issue or cause that some folks feel he should. You were exactly right when you pointed out last night that the President never once mentioned or implied that he would pursue Clinton's crimes. That may have been a "perception" in the minds of a few but perception isn't reality or truth. Had any of those folks really listened to his speeches, had they actually been involved in his campaign, done something productive to help him then they would have known what his positions and goals were. Of course, I suppose it has escaped the attention of these broken hearted ones that this President isn't a showboat who lives for the camera or public adoration. He doesn't tout his every feeling or give empty lip service to every cause. It's too bad some are disappointed in him as a President, that puts them in a mightly small 15% bracket. It must be so lonely and confused there. I, like you and 85% of the rest of the country, am very happy with this President. I like him and respect his judgment. Why on earth would I want him and his Presidency to become bogged down and tainted by trying to ferret out Clinton wrongdoing ? Haven't we been there and done that ? The Rule of Law argument is a fine branch to grab when you're drowning in disatisfaction of your own making. It is a difficult one to maintain with any validity. Again, thanks for your effort, my hat is off to you.

I just never can understand what it is they want or expect. Does the thought of Ashcroft's DOJ dragging Hillary and Bill off in chains in front of the entire national press, live on TV no doubt, not send chills up your spine? Imagine what it would do to this country? We've barely got a hold on things now, but that action would blow this country apart, IMO.

I try to imagine them DEMANDING that Ron Brown's body be exhumed -- probaly live, too -- against the wishes of his family, no doubt, just so they can try to prove their unfounded theories. And I wonder what their "next" theory will be when whoever does the autosy they so much want declares that there is NO bullet wound.

The ramifications of just those two acts are enough to send me running from the room! I just cannot understand why they all have ONE agenda and they hold Bush responsible for something that NOBODY could do, even though he always said he was going to restore the dignity of that office.

It's the same with the "deport all immigrants" group. I do believe our laws should be ENFORCED, but imagine the spectacle of hordes of people in handcuffs being tossed over the border.

The really scarey thing is, the people that have this as their only agenda probably would be DELIGHTED to sit back and watch it all, the country be damned.

I'm just so thankful that I don't believe that every single person that doesn't agree with me is a liar and/or conspiratorial and unAmerican. It seems so sad to me.

hi nopardons
I agree with you 'bout Bush's intelligence
I think he is exceptionally intelligent
which is why he is sensible
plus he demonstrated serenity in crisis
he has free will to do what he wants
and I respect his free will to do it
whatever decisions he makes, we will live out
if they are good decisions, they will solve problems
if they are poor decisions, they will add to the problems
Love, Palo

We've barely got a hold on things now, but that action would blow this country apart, IMO.

How would it blow the country apart?

I believe I read somewhere that at least half the citizens that are eligible to vote are not registered. Of the registered ones half didn't vote.

Of the ones that did vote, about half voted for Bush and about half voted for Gore.

How would it blow the country apart if there was an investigation? Why do Bush and Ashcroft not let Dan Burton's commitee have the documents? That is not hauling the Clintons off in chains. I would love to see that, though.

I read here that a lot of us thought GWB did not want to seem as though he was "going after" Clinton.

Now it seems GWB is covering up for the Clintons/his father/FBI/ and/or fill in the blank.

What has happened that we don't want the truth to be known?

Is it only because a Republican is in the White House?

If Republicans are doing the same thing the Democrats are doing or have done, what difference does it make what party has control of the House and Senate?

My Rep. Charles Stenholm (D) voted guilty on all 4 articles of impeachment. Lendsey Graham (R) voted not guilty on 2 of them.

It was a shock to me. He was one of the house managers and was wonderful in the hearings. I have the hearings taped from C-Span.

"The really scarey thing is, the people that have this as their only agenda probably would be DELIGHTED to sit back and watch it all, the country be damned. "

Unfortunately, I agree. It isn't about truth, justice or the Rule of Law, it is about their very narrow and selfish perception. They are, indeed, sad as well as boring and tedious. For some to say this thread has been about genuine debate or an honest exchange of ideas is truly laughable. Perhaps it has for a few but for the most it has been about personal agendas with a great deal of whining and angst. Frankly, I wonder how many of the gloomies even bothered to vote for President Bush or anyone else for that matter.

"Is it because they don't know how to handle the corruption? "

You may be partly right there. - It's huge, involving a majority of our elected officials.

The question, as I see it is "where does W stand." - Is he part of it, or is he going to attack it, or would attacking it alienate him from his power base?

..."A few less RINO's and few more conservatives would have made the difference. But this is politics and sometimes those on the right side of the political spectrum don't have the strength to win all the battles"....

How soon we forget......it was reported by David Schippers, the handpicked by Henry Hyde counsel for the GOP House Managers, and there have been NO denials, that the entire GOP caucus voted to a man and to a woman to go along with the Democraps idea for a ~~mickey mouse~~kangaroo court impeachment trial of the Pervert....in other words every single stinking Republican Senator voted to give the SOB a pass! Few RINOs my arse! They were in something like a 55 - 45 majority position!

All during the clinton thing I kept wishing we had a fine man like Bush's dad in Office instead of creep like clinton
But now that we do -- I find returning to the past doesn't work for me
Once Henry Hyde, the Impeachment Managers, the couragous trustworthy Pubbies who followed them, and the 5 courageous Dems who voted to Impeach
pioneered putting principle before politics
I wanted to live at that level
for me personally my experience of this Bush administration is dismal
Love, Palo

Hi editor
there are now far more Independent voters than either Pubbies or Dems
whoever wins the Independent vote wins the election
George won the Independent vote in this election
I'm guessin' the decision to sweep the clinton corruption under the rug -- is based on not wanting to alienate the independent voters
The GOP forbade its House Members from continuing with Impeachment
after they did poorly in the '98 elections
Henry Hyde and the House Managers defied their Party -- when they did not abort Impeachment
I personally think this is why George won in 2000
I do not believe doing the right thing costs elections
I think it wins them
Love, Palo

"It's the same with the "deport all immigrants" group. I do believe our laws should be ENFORCED, but imagine the spectacle of hordes of people in handcuffs being tossed over the border."

As I recall, you're from a part of the country that doesn't have a real illegal immigrant problem. - Texas, Arizona, and California, are being inundated by them. In California, 4 million of our voters are illegal immigrants, and growing faster than legal ones. - Something to think about?

"I'm just so thankful that I don't believe that every single person that doesn't agree with me is a liar and/or conspiratorial and unAmerican. It seems so sad to me."

That coming from the person who attacked me just for posting a thread for discussion?

You're way off. - I voted for Bush, and have defended his actions far more often than I have challenged them. - Who set you up as an authority here?

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.