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?
One of the comments on this thread that I believe has real merit is the one that says bureaucrats are CYA motivated--which they are. It will take years to root out the rot that has permeated our leadership down to the local levels. And it isn't limited to one party--witness Jeffords, a prime example of the "deep cover" of some of these people. Why can't we have a law that says an elected official must stand for re-election immediately if he/she changes parties?
FR in general, I guess. - There are few here who are not polarized, one way or the other on that issue.
GW BUsh needs to realize ( unless he is one of the causes of the problem) that it will become highly damaging to his reputation and public trust for his using executive privledge to block (stonewall) Ahscroft from testifying before and answering 13 subpoenas from Burton's committees FBi and DOJ corruption.
Keeping corrupt Clinton holdovers in DOJ and in the FBI that he could easily replace even without congresssional confirmation. is not the way for GW Bush to convince people that he himself is not corrupt. His choices of AShcroft and Mueller are an extremly suspect indication of his bad judgement at best and at worst of his own corruption.
And Bush's recent decisons to keep intelligence activites away from even a limited few in COngress , to use the CIA for domestic spying without adequate controls and to direct AShcroft ot wiretap conversations between attorneys and their clients without legal review (this was not an interim war time provison) further gives the impression that GW Bush is a corrupt gestapo dictator himself who is flagrantly violating the law and the Constitution
Bush is doing nothing adequate to restrain China and Russia but instead is proping them up economically (MFN, computers) and militarily (computers, missile defense operational details and tech,unilateral disarmament of our nuke missiles). Bush policy with China and Russia ,when it is well known they are strongly helping terrroist groups and nations, is another indication of the evil behind GW Bush.
The vast majority of "us" do NOT believe that the Bush administration is covering up for Bill Clinton.
That IS what you said, isn't it?
There are only two possibilities concerning Clinton: He's innocent or guilty of the things he was accused of. If he is innocent, then the Republicans in congress would have been aware of it and should have ended the "politics of personal destruction." The fact they didn't is damning.
On the other hand, if Clinton was guilty of even one of the many egregious things he's been accused of (my personal belief is he's guilty of all), then the Republicans who were in power should have convicted him after impeachment, or impeached him on many other things. At the very least, failing this due to lack of information, the investigation should have continued. The fact that this didn't happen is also damning, and the fact that Ashcroft appears to be obstructing further attemtps to get to the truth is even more damning. This is what is setting O'Reilly off.
To tell the truth, I feel lost. As a conservative, I can't abide the Democrats, don't agree with many of the Libertarian positions on drugs, abortion, etc. I feel completely let down by the Republicans which have been elected to office. What can we do? All I want is a little justice.
As luck would have it, Danforth wiped Clinton's and Reno's bloody hands clean under cover of election crisis on November 8, 2000.
Despite Clinton's public apology only weeks before the report's issue, HE DID NOTHING WRONG AFTER ALL!!
So ... turns out Bush was ever-so-wise to specifically refrain from mentioning the conflagration down the road a piece from "Prairie Chapel" lest it politicize the presidential campaign.
What a guy ... what a Texan.
Do you know what the term 'third rail' means?
It signifies a divisive issue, on which people have strong opinions. - Do you not see evidence on this thread that such is so?
I'm not trying to tell you, or anybody else here how to think. - I pinged you so you can tell us.
Dirtier.
Supposedly, they "know better".
Well, this ain't it. You may want it to be, but you'll have to keep digging.
Do you not see evidence on this thread that such is so?
As I said, most of us do not think the Bushes and their administration are criminals. A few of you do, but this is NOT an issue that will divide FR.
You, yourself, said you couldn't believe this article didn't get more reaction. That should tell you something.
"That W seems intimidated seems obvious. - The question is why?"
I'm sorry, e-s; when I cannot understand a person's mode of reasoning?
I can't in good conscious ccite their motive, "obvious." Merely not understood; to me.
"He is enjoying historically unparalleled public support..."
Yea; thanks to the towl head SOBs; only.
"...and I am convinced that the public is so radically anti-bureaucrat..."
Again; I [ respectfully ] disagree.
I only use, for example, the bold & shameless behavior(s) of Dashole as proof many are not radically anti-bureaucrat!
"Pro-American" at a time when she's threatened?
Yea, sure.
Don'tcha think it might be somewhat hasty to assume the average 'rat voter's support for Dubya is a statement of an anti-bureaucratic sentiment?
The main Lib pigs don't seem to think so.
Many of these pro-Dubya bozos are nuzzled-up to the public teet in one way or another; just remind 'em of that & watch what happens then, & methinks Dubya's aware of this finickiness.
Surely you remember the Yellow Stone Park vendor quoted here, there, and everywhere during the '95 (?) Thanksgiving budget showdown?? Hmmmm?
There're a lot of those type of people out there who're on the one hand very patriotic in their support of a POTUS during a time like this, and just as spirited in their support of the clymers who protect their place at the nipple.
Add to that, Dubya's got to plan his moves around an incredibly viscious, maniacal Liberal Lamestream media minefield on any & all things the Liberals lay claim to? (enviro-socio-racial et al issues)
Means, you, I, US are (probably) not going to know what the hell's happened with this guy's administration until after the fact?
Hell, look how he's running the war abroad to get a clue how he's got to run the one here at home.
"...that failing to act is a far more likely source of public displeasure."
To us; his base -- his shifting base. A base which is continually being minimized by one side, the other, or both at one time or another; depending what outcome they want?
...anyway; that's how it seems to me.
44 posted on 1/3/02 3:42 PM Pacific by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since you did not respond to my relpy to you on this thread of the other day?
I found a C&P appropriate; since, as far as the Ashcroft JD's concerned?
I see this POTUS having to deal with exactly the same problem: the same infestation within his JD of Liberally-motivated Leftist bureaucrats!!
It must be next to IMPOSSIBLE getting anything accomplished; which, makes working within the JD just as tricky as ALL the other departments noted in the other thread!!
~Perhaps even moreso!
These ignoramous quisling Leftist weasels are permeating our entire infrastructure; regardless what department we're speaking of.
I would like to see Bill O'Riely come up with some documents, people who're willing to talk, anything except his rhetoric & heated commentary [read: editorial] which although reflects MOST of OUR anger & reaal, genuine concerns?
Is just a guy who has a soapbox pissin' & moaning just like the rest of us; and, like many here assuming facts not in evidence, drawing conclusions based upon nothing more than personal cynacism, & smearing people without actually knowing what in the hell's going on.
Geeeeehezz.
The guy's not been in office a friggin' YEAR, yet -- back-off & let this whole thing play-out, for Christ's sake.
...NO, "Dubya Lover" here per se; UNLESS the definition for "lover" is giving him (or anyone else a chance) has come to mean that.
Was that sarcasm or irony? ;^)
The relevant fact is, they're ALL lawyers! lol.
You seem to advocate the perpetuation of official deception - fairy tales if you will - as a tool to preserve order. Truth is indeed the most dangerous weapon; it caused Pilate to quake when mentioned by the accused before him. The longer that the rot is covered and the decay is permitted to fester, the more explosive will be the consequences when the truth finally emerges.
A nation that shrugs its shoulders at a daily mass murder rate for human babies that surpasses the death toll of 9-11 is a nation that is too self-interested worry about accusations like those in this article.
Too, the years of lucipher's own pervert, x42, and his photo-op spouse, Mrs. x42, also produced a numbness about such accusations in our nation.
He's too busy shredding the Constitution.
Hmmm. Ashcroft closed down the campaign finance task force and sent Conrad, the head of the task force who wanted an IC to investigate Gore, out of town. Oh well, the campaign finance investigation only included things like Chinagate and therefore national security.
Sorry, I just missed it. (don't always have all day to scan a long list of repetitive pings for the unique ones)
"Don'tcha think it might be somewhat hasty to assume the average 'rat voter's support for Dubya is a statement of an anti-bureaucratic sentiment?"
You've made a leap of logic there. - The statement was based upon my daily experience with my own clients, most of whom express extreme distrust, and revulsion at bureaucrats in general.
Finally, as to giving him a chance, on most issues I am doing just that, but some things are temporally imperative; statutes of limitations are running out, time is the essence.
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.