Posted on 01/04/2002 8:52:30 AM PST by 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?
So you think Bush is doing the politically WISE thing in not investigating a MOUNTAIN of evidence pointing towards very serious crimes committed by democRATS (many of whom are STILL in positions of power) the last 8 years. Gee ... sounds to me like you think Bush is JUST LIKE THEM! Or are you just RUNNING from the facts like democRATS are prone to do? Any one else want to argue that finding a bullet in Brown's head or evidence that proves that Foster did not die as the government claimed wouldn't be "positively damning"?
How very original of you two. Almost as original as a boss having an affair with his secretary. How'd you EVER think of it?"...
Hmmm, er.....exodus....did you ever get a response on how she can back up ever single thing she posts? This is starting to get interesting.....I'm interested to see how she is aware not only of cyberaffairs, but bosses and their secretaries having affairs!
This is NOT just about the Clintons. This is about DOZENS of high level democRATS who committed serious crimes ... perhaps even mass murder, treason and blackmail. They definitely tried to undermine our election system using money from the Chinese communists and other illegal sources. They did other things that might constitute election tampering. Yet you want to just ignore that?
No matter how much WE wish to see the Clintons in jail, the process for that is NOT in the now president's hands.
Yes it is. Ashcroft and the FBI are under his thumb and to suggest otherwise is nothing short of spin.
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 " !
Yet if he is willing to ignore credible evidence of crimes as serious as mass murder and treason by democRATS, many of who are STILL in power, why should we believe he and the GOP will not break the law and cover up those misdeeds in order for Republicans to stay in power. As you said, you can't have it both ways!
Either we have a Representative Republic ( which I do believe that President Bush IS bringng this country back to ) , or we don't.
Either we are a nation where the laws apply equally to everyone or they don't. And if they don't then we don't have a "representative republic" ... we have a totalitarian government.
Immediate cures are NOT possible.
Agreed but how long does it take to start ANY investigation. Why you and I could go out and dig up Ron Brown and probably know within a week whether he was shot or not. Time is not the issue. A willingness to uphold the laws is.
Incrimentalism go us to where we are now, and it is the ONLY way to turn back the clock.
But ONLY if the trend is in the direction of upholding the laws. I see no movement in that direction. I'll challenge you like I have all the other "move-on'ers". Provide one indication that Bush/Ashcroft have or are investigating ANY of the following: Filegate, Chinagate, Emailgate, the death of Brown, the death of Foster, the Riady non-refund (i.e., campaign finance illegalities), election tampering. Just ONE.
President Bush is far more intelligent than most ( even Conservatives ! ) are giving him credit for being.
I know he's intelligent. But so was Clinton.
And you claim to be a court reporter?
To Darlin': 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?
That would only happen after it was proven that they had broken serious laws ... like murdering Foster. And before that would happen, DOZENS of other democRATS would be taken away "in chains". By then the public might be RELIEVED to see that the "elite" are also subject to the same laws. By then their supporters might have decided that they were indeed crooks and feel utterly betrayed by them. We survived Nixon ... they would survive Clinton.
To Darlin': 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.
No you don't because you've said you don't think he was murdered (yet you REFUSE to say why). The fact is, his family and the black community were the ones demanding his death be investigated. The FACT is, his daughter decided not to exhume the body based on a LIE told to her by a private investigator (who was, perhaps, recommended by someone in the DNC). Argue the facts, Howlin, rather than simply trying to "imagine" the harm that exposing a MASS MURDER would cause.
To Darlin': 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.
BOGUS argument. You are still RUNNING from the facts Howlin. Why do you fear a simple autopsy so much?
To Darlin': It's the same with the "deport all immigrants" group.
BOGUS argument, trying to link one issue to another. I've said NOTHING about immigrants. And there is a big difference between the LEADERS of our country committing crimes, and covering up those crimes, and bunch of poor people crossing borders trying to better their own lives.
As for Vince Foster, I'll take Ken Starr's word over yours, if you don't mind. He doesn't seem quite as PARANOID as you do.
There's that word, incrementalism, again. Perhaps you can help me out here. I've had a devil of a time finding where the right side of the aisle, or the 'consersative' side, if you will, has made incrementalism work.
We just recently had the case of the education appropriations bill. Because I can't remember exact figures, let's use these: FY 2001 Education Budget was $1 million dollars; President Bush asked for an 8% increase ($80,000); the Demoncraps asked for 15% ($150,000). In conference and in discussions with the White House, it was agreed that the education budget would increase by 11% ($110,000).
Seeing as how government never reduces spending, we can fairly well assume that next year will be the same, maybe a little more or even a little less....regardless of the % up, its for sure, they will not base their budget on -0- dollars (recall that the Constitution does not list Education as a power of the federal government)...rather, they will start from $1,110,000.
So, my question.......when does the right start the 'incremental' stage?
Do you ever get out of the house at all? I mean, other than the liquor store?
Look, I am not personally attacking you here, but you are a political naif. You don't seem to understand much of anything about politics, and appear to want the three ring circus, that was Clinton ; for the excitement. IT DOESN'T USUALLY WORK LIKE THAT; THAT GOD !
This isn't a soap opera, a three hanky movie, nor " WEST WING " ! President Bush got MORE done, during his FIRST year as president, than most presidents get done in one term. He has fulfilled almost ALL of his campaign promises, and if THAT alone, doesn't please you, then...T-O-U-G-H !
Just as this forum is NOT meant to be a chat room, nor a place of assignation ( please DO keep your kissy kissy / love endings etc. OFF THE THREADS ! ), it is supposed to be a place of INTELLGENT discourse and debate. I'm happy that you are now taking an interest in things political; really I am . I just wish that you would stop " feeling " and use your head. Learn what a president may and may NOT do, and what he is responsible for. Try to educate yourself about ALL aspects of governance , as well as history. Oh, and PL$EASE , PLEASE, PLEASE stop trying diametrically opposed opinions. Otherwise, yu are going to just keep gettng people answering you in ways that you aren't going to like at all. : - )
Well then, I guess I can say you just admitted to being an adulterer.....after all, you state it with such authority and you've told us you're able to back up everything you post.
Thank you.
BTW, is adulty overrated? Are you just referring to cyber affairs or the bosses and secretaries stuff?
Well then, I guess I can say you just admitted to being an adulterer.....after all, you state it with such authority and you've told us you're able to back up everything you post.
Thank you.
BTW, is adulty overrated? Are you just referring to cyber affairs or the bosses and secretaries stuff?
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.