Amid scandals, Bush White House takes a risky path, placing loyalty over public duty.

Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 7/17/2002 | Jonathan Turley

[dirtboy]

The White House is reeling from allegations that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney engaged in business practices that are disturbingly similar to those of executives at Enron and WorldCom. Like administrations before it, this White House now must choose between serving the greater interests of the office of the presidency or the narrower goals of the current officeholder. If last week was any indication, Bush officials have chosen a dangerous path of personal devotion over public duty, a path that has led previous administrations to disaster.

The recent allegations - which may prove overblown under closer scrutiny - center on transactions by Bush and Cheney when they were executives at Harken Energy Corp. and Halliburton Co., respectively. Among the unproven allegations are insider trading, questionable personal loans and fraudulent dealings. The White House staff has put on a full-court press to refute these allegations of private misconduct. In doing so, the administration is drifting into the troubled waters in which the Clinton administration found itself...

Click here for the rest of the article, as this was originally published in the LA Slimes...

[Howlin]

Dirt, you bought into this crap; you're already admitted you haven't kept up with the stories and other articles on Halliburton. Don't deny you're playing into the Democrats hands when you fail to do YOUR homework.

[sauropod]

Fleischer may have been stating his opinion of the charges. If that was so, he should have stated it as such. You have a point about not being snared in such a morass.

I still am of the opinion that the Halliburton stuff is nonsense. Based on what i know to date anyway.

[Fred Mertz]

Go take your meds. I'm outta this thread. TaTa.

[Howlin]

He admitted he doesn't KNOW anything about Halliburton, he just picked this up and ran with it.

We ALL oppose corruption; I'll be more than glad to oppose any corrupt that comes to light in this administration.

But first I'd like to SEE some, if you all don't mind.

[Howlin]

Then why is it in the title?

[habs4ever]

You upbraided me earlier this year when I said Turley was a liberal and you assured me otherwise.I will accept a nice bouquet of freesias, tiger lillies, cash, or you can blow me a kiss.Try to get Fred Mertz first ;-) It maybe like holy water to him!!lol

[mrsmith]

"having Fleischer claim that the charges against Cheney are "without merit" is not the proper use of his office. "

Saying Fleischer shouldn't state the administration position on any issue is as silly as saying the press shouldn't ask it of him.

[SGCOS]

This piece is nothing more then to get the authors name 'out there'.

"This may have happened, bu t I don't know. It's possible, but it's undetermined. Everythign may prove false."

This is not an article, this is a vanity in the Philly Enquirer. It's bullshit. Period.

[dirtboy]

Barging? Well, why don't you invite who you want to post on your threads?

Well, I would appreciate it if people bothered to read the article in question first before commenting on it. I know that's asking a lot of some folks, but, hey, that's just the way I am.

Did it ever occur to you that there are those of us who HAVE done our homework on Halliburton and don't need to be told, yet again, that something might be wrong by somebody who hasn't kept up with what's going on?

Uh, Howlin, once again, Turley's commentary is not about the relative merits of the two matters (he did use the word "unproven", as you pointed out), but instead is about how the matter has been handled. So far, the Bush Administration hasn't gone very far down the Clintonista path, and the similarities are superficial. But it should still be contingent upon Bush supporters to say, Don't go there! That is my point.

[Howlin]

I'm not arguing about what Turley is; I find him very amusing, in fact.

I'm talking about piling on. It's insulting to imply that the White House shouldn't reply to these specious charges.

[sinkspur]

But I also think that having Fleischer claim that the charges against Cheney are "without merit" is not the proper use of his office.

Klayman filed a lawsuit against Cheney BECAUSE he is the vice-president. If Cheney were in private life, Klayman could have cared less.

A politically-motivated litigation against the vice-president has to be answered by the political people. Ignoring false accusations or sending out Mary Matalin (whom nobody knows) to refute them would have been unwise; they must be slapped down and slapped down hard!

[Howlin]

You haven't answered MY questions: what EXACTLY do you think the response from the press and the Democrats would have been if Ari had given it a big "No Comment?" That is, after all, the sum total of Turley's article, that nobody at the White House should respond.

Should they just sit back and let the press and the Dems characterize the allegations as true since they aren't responding?

I believe that those of us who were here then DEMANDED that from Clinton; we never got it, but we WANTED it. Now we're getting it and you all are carping about the way it's handled??

[dirtboy]

You said this, Howlin:

"the administration is stone walling."

YOU put it into quotes, but Turley never used that in the article.

Dirt, you bought into this crap; you're already admitted you haven't kept up with the stories and other articles on Halliburton.

Please show me where I have said that. That's two misquotations on your part, Howlin.

Don't deny you're playing into the Democrats hands when you fail to do YOUR homework.

Howlin, knock it off. I would expect better, you have already misquoted Turley and misquoted me.

[habs4ever]

So what, its all Turley opinion that he doesn't like how it's being handled, and is anyone but he and his syndicator supposed to care?

[Howlin]

Klayman filed a lawsuit against Cheney to lay the groundwork for the biggie, whatever he can find to claim Bush has done. He said "He's looking into the Harken matter." I'm SO relieved, aren't you?

[Howlin]

No, I said that if the administration did NOT respond, you and Turley would be here, carping because the administration was stone walling.

[dirtboy]

So what, its all Turley opinion that he doesn't like how it's being handled, and is anyone but he and his syndicator supposed to care?

Well, that generally is the point of an Op-Ed column.

[sinkspur]

I don't think it is a proper use of the official White House spokesman to deal with matters that happened while both Bush and Cheney were in the private sector.

I think it is. The "matters" would never have surfaced if Bush and Cheney weren't heading the executive branch.

As I said above, this is politics, and I don't have any problem using the political people to answer them.

I also didn't have a problem with Mike McCurry handling questions about Whitewater for Clinton.

You simply can't allow these accusations to go unanswered!

[dirtboy]

No, I said that if the administration did NOT respond, you and Turley would be here, carping because the administration was stone walling.

Uh, Howlin, you put it into quotes. Quotes, last I checked, imply a direct quotation. Don't rail on me for your own errors. Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to show me where I admitted that I don't know what is going on about Halliburton.

[Howlin]

You said "but I haven't seen enough yet to call it a scandal."

Did you mean you were looking for more to satisfy yourself it IS a scandal? If you had read all the threads on this, you'd KNOW there is nothing there.