Replies

List your accusations and I'll defend AG Ashcroft to the best of my ability. But don't give me this crap about his unwillingness to investigate Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, or Buddy the Dog. Anyone with half a brain knows about the unethical and immoral activities that the jackasses and scumbags who populated the last administration were involved in. Thats old stuff which has been debated time and again right here on FR. Clinton was impeached and found not guilty by the US Senate. I wasn't satisfied with that outcome myself. 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.

Also, don't try to twist Ashcroft's recent legal actions to bring those responsible for the 9-11 attacks, or his valid attempts to protect American's from further terrorist attacks, into something based on a distorted view of the world and a distorted sense of reality. Ashcroft is going after any and all individuals who want to harm America and the American way of life. Those subversive activities involving foreign nationals are at the top of his list.

Your remarks that Ashcroft is wanting to set aside the BoR is ridiculous. Don't give me this crap about how the word "people" is used, instead of the word "citizen". If your a foreign national in America on legitimate business, or visiting for personal pleasure, you've got nothing to worry about. However, during time of conflict and war, as the case is today, it is even more important that the federal government have the abilitites to protect the American people from any aggressions attempted against its independence and sovereignty, from hostile forces and enemies of freedom, liberty and our Constitutional Republic.

John Ashcroft isn't John Danforth, but it appears you have a serious problem with people who have strong religious beliefs. I don't see any evidence that Danforth covered for Clinton and theres absolutely no evidence that Ashcroft is covering for Clinton either. This is standard conspiracy theory nonsense. Theres no hard facts, or proof to such scurrilous allegations.

Your trying to stink up the place with your trash rhetoric. Shove that crap where the sun don't shine. It's clear you're anti-Bush, anti-Ashcroft, anti-religous freedom, anti-Republican and anti-conservative too. In fact, I consider your remarks un-American. You sound like a liberal Democrat, a libertarian anarchist, or some form of dangerous subversive nut case.

As an American citizen, you have right to spew all the venemous rhetoric you want and I have every right to call you an gormless twit for doing so.

While Clinton was in control of the DoJ, the only remedy for his crimes was a political trial. That is no longer the case, unless Bush and Ashcroft intend to be selective about which of their duties they'll devote their energies toward doing. Let's not try to pretend that only another sham political investigation and trial is possible, shall we? Clinton could be indicted on several charges tomorrow, and you probably know it.

A terrorist act is an act of war. When did prosecution of enemy operatives in civilian courts become our response to war? Since Clinton, of course. Don't you expect better from Bush and Ashcroft? Apparently not. You probably think those two are conservatives. What a hoot. I'll clue you in on something; the DoJ wasn't created to protect us from anything. It was set up to prosecute those who violate federal law. If Ashcroft is our front line of defense, we're doomed.

Here's an accusation: Ashcroft's first few cases, inherited from Clinton were the IBT seizure and the McVeigh motion for a stay. He handled both situations exactly as Reno had handled her cases, that is, he hewed to the Clinton line. What do you say about those cases? The IBT case was what earned him the moniker "Janet Ashcroft" among FReepers. Defend that one.

It most certainly is not ridiculous to observe that Ashcroft was fairly slavering over the Patriot bill. He wanted it desperately. Post a quote from him in opposition to that piece of tyrannical dreck if you can. You assume that I'm talking about equal rights under the law for aliens. I'm not. Aliens don't have a right to access to our courts in all cases. If they have violated the terms of their visas, they have no right to anything but a deportation hearing, no trial, no delays, no bail. If aliens are charged with terrorist acts of war against us, they have no right to a trial in our civilian courts, but only a trial by a military tribunal. That leaves Ashcroft, our "defender" out of the loop, doesn't it? It's absurd for you to even mention the DoJ and national defense in the same breath.

Ahscroft and Danforth are two peas in a pod. Both are publicly professing Christians who have made careers of politics. Danforth most certainly did cover for Clinton's DoJ with his sham of an investigation on the Waco FLIR evidence. I suppose you were busy on some Bush photo swoonfest thread for the week or so that Danforth's fraud was being discussed here. I'm a Christian and the public displays both those two frauds make of their Christianity offends me.

I won't respond to your dimwited attempt at insult, other than to say that I'm what you wish you could fool more people into thinking you are: a conservative. GOP pompom shakers are never conservatives.

Call me whatever names you like. You just reveal the weakness of your case when you do. You're right, I have a right to freely speak my mind on political issues. That right is protected from action by the government, not from other citizens. You're free to try to shut me up any time you think you're able. FRmail me and I'll give you directions to my house.

Reagan man indeed. Ahaha.

But don't give me this crap about his unwillingness to investigate Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, or Buddy the Dog. Anyone with half a brain knows about the unethical and immoral activities that the jackasses and scumbags who populated the last administration were involved in.

What matters is that MOST people do NOT know about the CRIMINAL activities of the last administration (to merely call them "unethical" and "immoral" is DISINFORMATION). Ask the average person on the street (especially democRATS) what they know about Filegate, Chinagate, Emailgate, the death of Ron Brown, the death of Vince Foster, the Riady non-refund, TempleGate, etc. etc. etc. and they will be clueless. That's because they've been deliberately kept in the dark by the media ... or do you want to disagree with THAT?

Thats old stuff which has been debated time and again right here on FR.

So you think that just because something is debated here on FR the average knows about it? Don't be ridiculous.

Clinton was impeached and found not guilty by the US Senate.

Not of ANY of the CRIMES I listed above. They used Starr to keep the ball focused on SEX SEX SEX and in so doing kept the TREASON, MURDER, BLACKMAIL, ELECTION TAMPERING, PRIVACY VIOLATIONS, ETC. ETC. ETC. off the front page and away from the public eye. ANYONE who claims that the US Senate found Clinton not guilty of the above is spreading DISINFORMATION and their motives are therefore suspect.

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.

Strength has nothing to do with it. The GOP is now in charge of the instruments of law enforcement. Their apparent unwillingness to use those instruments to investigate the SERIOUS crimes the DNC and Clinton administration committed says a lot about them. They are either corrupt or so afraid of their own shadow as to be ineffectial.

Ashcroft is going after any and all individuals who want to harm America and the American way of life.

If that were true he'd be investigating what happened the last 8 years and not just drop it like you've suggested in the past. Face it, terrorists can kill a few Americans but they can't do a tenth as much damage to the American way of life, our judicial system AND our freedom as a Attorney General and President who decide to ignore crimes as serious as treason and murder my members of the opposing party because it is viewed as politically expedient. That is only one step from committing and covering up crimes themselves in order to stay in power

theres absolutely no evidence that Ashcroft is covering for Clinton either.

Then you should have no problem indicating actions that suggest on-going investigations into the matters I listed above. For example, what is happening with regards to the Riady non-refund? The fact that you can't list ANY indications is in fact evidence that Ashcroft is covering for Clinton.

..."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!