Clinton Was Sued for Intimidating Black Voters in Arkansas

In 1989 then-Gov. Bill Clinton was sued as one of three top Arkansas officials responsible for the intimidation of black voters in his state as part of a legal action brought under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, NewsMax.com has learned.

And a year earlier the U.S. Supreme court ruled that Clinton had wrongfully tried to overturn the election of a black state representative in favor of a white Democrat.

In the 1989 case, "the evidence at the trial was indeed overwhelming that the Voting Rights Act had been violated," reported the Arkansas Gazette on Dec. 6, 1989. (The paper later became the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.)

"Plaintiffs offered plenty of proof of monolithic voting along racial lines, intimidation of black voters and candidates, other official acts that made voting harder for blacks," the Gazette said.

A federal three judge federal panel ordered Clinton, then Arkansas Attorney General Steve Clark and then-Secretary of State William J. Mc Cuen to draw new boundaries to give maximum strength to black voters.

"Until last year," the Gazette complained at the time, "in more than a thousand legislative elections, the (Arkansas) delta region sent not one black to the legislature. Last year, the federal district court split a multimember district in Crittenden County that had submerged the large number of black voters in the county."

In a related 1988 case, Clinton had tried to replace duly elected African-American state representative with a white candidate, only to be stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court.

"The court, by an 8-0 vote, ruled against an appeal by Gov. Bill Clinton and other Arkansas officials that had challenged the election of Ben McGee as a state legislator," the Associated Press reported on Dec. 12, 1988. McGee is an African-American.

"The case began when blacks in Crittenden County filed a voting rights lawsuit attacking the county's at-large system for electing two House members. The suit contended that the system deprived black voters of a chance to elect a black to the House.

A special three-judge federal court had agreed earlier in the year that the system violated the federal Voting Rights Act.

The three-judge court threw out the results of a March 8 primary election in which the black candidate McGee, was defeated by James Stockley, the white candidate handpicked by Gov. Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

"That was tantamount to election on Nov. 8, since no Republican ran for the seat," the AP said.

Clinton and the other state officials had argued that the federal court improperly threw out the results of the first primary and ordered a new election.

The Supreme Court ruling came as the then-governor was fighting another court battle to preserve racial profiling in his state, a tool that Clinton later criticized while president as a "morally indefensible, deeply corrosive practice."

But a decade earlier he approved the profiling of Hispanics by Arkansas State Police as part of a drug interdiction program in 1988, the Washington Times revealed in 1999.

"The Arkansas plan gave state troopers the authority to stop and search vehicles based on a drug-courier profile of Hispanics, particularly those driving cars with Texas license plates," the Times said.

"A federal judge later ruled the program unconstitutional, the paper reported. "A lawsuit and a federal consent decree ended the practice - known as the 'criminal apprehension program' the next year."

Then Gov. Clinton, however, not only criticized the profiling ban, "at one point, (he) threatened to reinstate the program despite the court's ruling," the Times said.

"The state's position was to give away a . . . program that we're now trying to get back," Clinton announced at the time, saying the race-based stop and search program was more important than even airport security measures.

Three years later in 1991, Clinton actually did implement a modified version of the profiling program that prohibited the use of ethnic screening but allowed troopers to continue to stop cars on the highway at their discretion.

Hearing Clinton's condemnation of racial profiling in 1999, Roberto Garcia de Posada, executive director of the Hispanic Business Roundtable, complained that the then-president "had been a strong supporter of racial profiling against Hispanics in the past."

"He does not have the moral authority to lead a national campaign on this issue. If President Clinton truly meant what he said . . . he should apologize to all those Hispanics who suffered this 'morally indefensible' practice, which he publicly supported," de Posada said.

On Thursday and Friday both ex-President Clinton and his wife, Democratic Party presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton, criticized Republicans for trying to suppress the black vote in states like Arkansas and Florida. But reporters declined to ask either Clinton about the well documented record of black voter disenfranchisement in Arkansas while they ran the state.

First of all, this piece seems to have been written for people with the reading comprehension and knowledge level of about a fifth grader, and I suggest you tell your friend so.

dropping crime rates in most places, and vastly reduced welfare roles.

This was due to the Republican Congress' welfare reform. The first two years he was in office before the Republicans' 1994 election victories his party controlled Congress, and he proposed no welfare reform of any kind. Most Democratic members of Congress voted against the legistlation, and he signed it only to help himself get reelected.

He proposed the first balanced budget in decades, and actually achieved a budget surplus

The budget surpluses were largely the result of (1) The fact that his and Hillary's health care proposal was never enacted, and (2) The late nineties stock market boom driven by what is now understood to have been an unsustainable "bubble" based on grossly exagerrated expectations of revenue from the new "internet economy". In other words it was sort of a mirage. This bubble burst in March 2000 while Clinton was still in office, at which point the stock market entered the now three year bear market, taking with it the huge tax revenues it was generating.

He bombed Iraq, when Saddam Hussein stopped United Nations inspections for evidence of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.

It was the Clinton administration that completely GAVE UP enforcing weapons inspections. The inspectors were THROWN OUT in 1998 and have returned for the first time since then because the Bush administration is understood to be serious about cracking down with real military force, as opposed to Clinton's nothing response of lobbing a few cruise missiles (largely to take Monica Lewinsky off the front pages) AND THEN FORGETTING ABOUT IT!! Crediting him with bombing Iraq even though IT DID NOTHING is at best stupid and perhaps delusional.

After the Republican Congress defeated his proposal for a huge program of health care reform, Clinton shifted emphasis, declaring "the era of big government is over."

What the above is saying in essence is that you can credit the GOP win in the 1994 election to whatever economic results followed, including budget surpluses. A steady drop in interest rates ensued literally as soon as the Republicans won the 92 election. If you trace long term interest rates' decline in the mid-nineties, it coincides exactly to the Republican victory in the mid-term election.

Under Clinton's leadership, the United States was able to reduce military spending, since we did not need a large military. We had so few enemies, because we had allies instead of enemies..

Without saying so explicitly, the author seems to be suggesting he turned some enemies into friends. It would be nice if the author of this B.S. would name what countries he was talking about. This is a total fantasy. There was no country that was turned from enemy into friend by the Clinton admin. The Soviet Union ceased to exist during the first Bush administration. The nations of eastern Europe who were enslaved by the Soviets and had been officially military opponents were freed also during the Bush administration and became our friends. This all occured largely because of the Reagan administration's policies of getting the Soviets into an arms race they could not sustain, a policy that was bitterly opposed by liberals like Clinton. It was those developments that enabled Clinton to make meat-ax cuts in defense without seeming to pay any price for it, at least not immediately.

Israel and the Palestinians were talking peace, and hostilities were limited.. Peace was achieved through diplomacy instead of threats and a huge arms buildup. Clinton's flights abroad kept the United States at the forefront as a peacemaker and as an effective negotiator.

What peace where was achieved? Again the author of this bizarre piece doesn't say. No peace was achieved in the Middle East. It was during Clinton's last year in office that the situation deteriorated badly in Israel. Clinton's policy was essentially to try to compel Israel to trust and make huge concessions to Yassir Arafat, a corrupt, evil person, while asking him for no concessions of any kind. In Korea, the Clinton administration negotiated a bizarre agreement to give N. Korea a nuclear reactor, and then didn't demand that we could monitor their weapons programs to see whether they were making nuclear warheads. We've recently learned the N. Koreans have been busy making nuclear warheads ever since.

Simple solution:

Buy and read Ann Coulter's "Slander" and then give/lend it to your friend. The obvious and well documented conclusion is that Clinton supporters (liberals) are either liars or fools. Ask your friend which catagory he/she falls in.

A couple of quickies as all of Clinton's "accomplishments" are smoke and mirrors. (His net impact was a huge negative):

As others have said, his economic numbers were a facade. The illusary stock market was driven by his friends on Wall Street, guided by his ex-Goldman Sachs Secretary of Treasury, Robert Rubin, and a rewriting of the accepted accounting practices which allowed them to falsely state their numbers. There was also false reporting by the government itself to make the economy look better than it was. Clinton took a robust economy that was producing government tax surplusses and turned it into a phoney disaster. As usual, they blame everyone else.

The Oslo Accords were a facade gained at the expense of Israel. The agreement with North Korea was a facade facilitated by Jimmy Carter, another Democrat if your friend doesn't know. Look at the status of both now. If your friend doesn't know, each was immediately violated by the other side.

The invasions in the Balkins were alos a facade based on the trumped up charges of genecide against the Muslims. Clinton threw the power of NATO, basically us, behind the terrorists. He promised they would be home by Christmas, 1999. They are still there.

Clinton vetoed Welfare reform twice before Dick Morris told him the public wanted it. He then signed it and took credit for it.

Clinton, when he was governor, allowed a retarded black man to be executed to show he was tough on crime during the 1992 election campaign. The man wasn't even aware what was happening to him, saying he would finish his last-meal desert when he came back.

Clinton was a small time hustler who made it big as a pawn for others and for his own agrandizement. He then raped and pillaged his way through eight years of the near destruction of the greatest country in the world. His kind can only exist through The Big Lie. Read Ann Coulter and see.

To begin with, he changed the criteria for measuring unemployment, crime and many other indexes to make himself look better. Secondly, he over estimated the projected GNP by hundreds of billions (some ungodly amount, I believe it was over 30% - criminal if done in corporate circles.)

Racism? See this article, and the book Openheimer wrote when Hillary uttered "fu##ing Jew Bastard.

Republicans rejected healthcare? I think you should check the Dems headcount on this...

More money for Education? Did you hear O'Reilly report that the Department of Education cannot account for something like $200 BILLION dollars?

Stregthen environmental rules? The first thing that comes to mind is the multi-million dollar housing development near San Bernardio CA. that was stopped because it endangered some type of fly....

Sexual indiscretion (BS)? He denied a US citizen (Paula Jones) the right to a fair trial by suborning perjury (To Betty Curry - he asks a day before she is deposed, "I was never alone with Monica, was I? - knowing damn well he was because of the blue dress) - Lying under oath -("I was never alone with her in the White House - you didn't say the oval office" and "That depends on what the definition of "is" is. - Oral sex is not sexual relations etc. etc.)

Tried in the Senate ? (BS) If you read Schipper's (the prosecutor) book "SELLOUT" You'll read that our infamous Trent Lott, Daschle and others denied him and the House Managers the right to bring in witnesses to show the country how he lied under oath and should be removed from office. Could the Senate's reluctance to vote against him be from sheer embarrasment for the country, or because of those FBI files Clinton stole when he first entered office.

He interferes in a civil war against a country who does not threaten us, yet allows Iraq (a country that supports terrorism) to kick out the weapons inspectors and does nothing.

Peace was achieved through diplomacy? Sort of like in North Korea where he gave them billions of our tax dollars to build power plants in exchange for them not building any more nukes? Guess what's happening now?

I could go into so much more detail - but this is a perfect example of the liberal media feeding so much BS to those who want an excuse to like Clinton - just like Johnnie Cochran did to the OJ jury.....

Send me Private e-mail if you really want to know how I feel...

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.