 |
 |
 |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Remember the Puerto Rico Terrorist Pardons?
That was the first time Clinton sold pardons to buy votes for Hillary's senate race. But his motives weren't clear then, so he basically got away with it. I think getting away with that pardon sale emboldened him into more flagarant sales. I'd like to hear your thpoughts on that opinion.
Thanks.
George
* * * The Demos need a "pity party". We all need to say a long "ahhhh".
Ahhh for poor Hilary. She keeps denying and no one believes her anymore. She can't help it because she shares the same genes with her greedy brother.
Ahhh for poor Bill. He's holed up at chapaqua now. He didn't know that Mark Rich was a felon. Everyone is turning against him.
Ahhh for poor Algore. The counts been done by the Miami Herald and he is still the loser.
Ahhh for all those poor Democrats who put all their faith in Bill and he just let them down.
Ahhh for all those poor people in WPB who really thought the vote should be done again because they didn't know how to read a ballot. Pity poor Mark Rich. He really believes that he pulled it off but he'd better watch out if he comes to the US again. There's smarter people than he is.
Pity for those two silly women who are taking the fifth. They are so stupid that they still believe Bill's lies.
Thanks, Will be listening to you. Evelyn
* * * Denial by Hillary
On Feb 22 Hillary denied knowledge 23 times of her brothers pardon activities. If you listen closely, once she said I have no SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE, (how about general Knowledge), along with 22 other no knowledge responses. Depends on what the definition of what "is" is.
* * * PIMP Pardons(P ower,I nfluence, M oney, P ardons )
Clinton involvement in these pardons is simple, he is always a pimp. What else explains 100 visits from Denice Rich ? I am sure he had not seen Hillary 100 times in the same period . It is Monica all over again.
If they can they will want the attention on the brothers peddling his influence to take the attention away from his involvement with Denice.
Will anyone take time to see what pardons bypasssed the review process . And if reviewed ignored the Justice Dept recommendation ?* * * Media twist on Hillary
I have watched considerable media coverage of the Hillary press conference. She is a master at deception. Most in the media use the--I knew nothing about my brother accepting money for the pardons-- when she additionaly said--I was not aware my brother was involved in the pardons.
If you listen closely...she placed one phrase immediately behind the first...figuring the media would pick up on the "did not know about the money" issue. I suspect she figured if the media ran with the phrase that she didn't know he was involved in any pardons, the public would figure "what do you think we are stupid"....I guess they DO think we're stupid.
Thanks for being there to give us the facts
Garry
* * * PARDONS
Hypocrisy
WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?
All I heard for eight years was" IT IS FOR THE CHILDREN" - everything for the the children. Well what about letting out a drug kingpin into society to sell drugs again to the children?
Fondly, Marian Umhoefer
* * * I haven't heard anything about any black's who were pardoned. Were all the pardons white rich guys? For the man man who was the first black President, it seems there would have been some discussion of this side of the pardon question.
-Doug in MI
* * * The Clinton's have proved that if your a drug dealer you can easily buy a Presidential pardon..
* * * MORE ON PARDONS - Something to ponder:
Why woud any president pardon a drug dealer?
If Hugh Rodham gave the money back, that means that the felons got the pardons for free! What a deal! At least Rodham should have given the money to a worthwhile charity or something!
* * * Senator Clinton
Did I hear her correctly--"...people just slip her envelopes and things and she just forwards them...". Excuse me, but I was sort of the impression that the Secret Service was pretty good at protecting her from things like people getting close enough to touch her, and God forbid you should reach a hand out, why you'd probably pull back a bloody stub, wouldn't you?Every time I hear a Clinton quote, I want to clean off my shoes, and get a shovel.
John* * * I am so sick of hearing about the latest lies from the Clintons. What is so amazing to me is that everyone acts so surprised by their lies. They have doing this for the eight years "Silly Willy" was in office. Then we when we hear the latest from Hillary's brother that he accepted $400 thousand dollars for helping out in the pardon process, Hillary has the nerve o say she didn't know about it? Come on Lady, either you are the dumbest woman on earth or the naievest. She didn't know about her husbands exploits, now she doesn.t know about the recent pardon scandals. I don't believe she is that stupid, naive or is telling the American public the truth. She should be run out of office and sent back to lLittle Rock with the entire Clinton gang.
Rich - AK
* * * Hiliary "I know nothing"
When I first heard Hiliary say "I know nothing," I broke out laughing. My wife thought I was crazy. I was remembering Sgt Shultz in Hogan's Heros, when he would always say in the German accent "I know nothing." Your montage today accentuated the memory.
* * * She's Disappointed!
I'm seeing red! Hillary's disappointed! She should know how all of America is disappointed in her beloved husband and embarrassed by him!
Mary* * * Hillary's Slip of the Tongue while discussing Hugh
I may be seeing something that wasn't really there, but when I heard parts of Hillary's news conference yesterday, she made a comment that I felt was most interesting. She said she knew nothing of the pardons that her brother was working on but if she did know about them, she would "haved possibly put a stop to them." Okay, HILLARY, let me get this straight - you had nothing to do with any of the pardons OR you had something to do with all the pardons that you knew of OR you had something to do with some of the pardons that you knew of OR you had something to do with the pardons that seem okay OR WHAT?!?!?!
I feel like she admitted that she had the power to influence these pardons and used it!!
Ceci
Austin, Texas* * * PIMP Pardons (P ower, I nfluence, M oney, P ardons )
Clinton involvement in these pardons is simple, he is always a pimp. What else explains 100 visits from Denice Rich ? I am sure he had not seen Hillary 100 times in the same period . It is Monica all over again.
If they can they will want the attention on the brothers peddling his influence to take the attention away from his involvement with Denice.
Will anyone take time to see what pardons bypasssed the review process . And if reviewed ignored the Justice Dept recommendation ?
* * *CHECK THE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 4,SECTION 3, PARAGRAPH 2.
IT SAYS THAT ONLY THE CONGRESS MAY FORGIVE A FEDERAL DEPT SUCH AS INCOME TAX, AND THAT NO OTHER PART OF THE CONSTITUTION MAY OVERIDE IT AND THIS INCLUDES A PRESIDENTIL PARDON. THE PRESIDENT MIGHT PARDON THE CRIME BUT THE DEBT MUST BE PAYED OR FORGIVENESS CANNOT BE GRANTED BY THE CONGRESS.CHECK IT OUT AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK.
BERNIE FROM PELETIER
NUFF SAID GOD BLESS AND THANKS* * * Since the liberals use the old story "tax breaks for the Rich". would it not be reasonable that the pardon of Marc Rich constitutes a "tax break for the rich?" Marc is the biggest tax evader in US history...When the dems proposed a prescription drug plan for ALL, including D Trump and R Perot, is this not a tax break for the rich? I asked som liberal dems the above questions, but have not received a reply..hmmm....
LM* * * Pardon Me?
Maybe the Arkansas "presidential" lie-brary could be converted to the presidential penitentiary. What better place for the former commander and thief and his fraudulent friends.
Joe
* * * Slimed by Clinton
Our country continues to be slimed by Bill Clinton! We have had to put up with this man's antics for 8 years. Please give me some hope that this will end. First, there was Inauguration Day 2001 (when he seemed to never leave). Second, there was the pardons. Third, there was the lavish office space in Manhattan. Fourth, there was the "looting" of the White House. Fifth, there was the gentrification of Harlem for different office space after he had time to "reflect" on his original decision. Sixth, there was more on the pardons. Oh, and I forgot about the trip to the Chappaqua deli for breakfast in his yellow jacket. (Where should that fit in?!?)
This man is self-righteous, self-important, patronizing, trailor trash who has a creepy sense of entitlement. I just can't take it anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ceci
Volleyball, football, basketball and track mom from Austin, TX who is tired of continuingly having to explain to my very impressionable teenagers how a man, like Bill Clinton could have ever been President and remain so for 8 years.* * * Marc Rich Pardon
Do you think it is possible that the New York Attorneys office is now going to carry out it's own investigation of the Marc Rich pardon as a back handed way to prevent congress from immunizing her, thereby preventing her from testifying in the house and senate hearings? Sounds like a "slick" way to go!!
Bill
Bath, PA
* * * Continuing Clinton Harassment
What's up with Republicans? Wild Willie is no longer in office. Personally, I didn't care for a man with such lousy morals being in the white house, but what was simply was, and cannot be changed. But, now that he's no longer in the white house, he is no longer a "problem", so why the continued attacks from republicans? I am just as conservative as Rush, but let's keep it real: Enough is enough. So he pardoned someone. Big deal. Why the commotion? His actions in that regard were his own, and such actions are answerable to absolutely no one. Live with it. Let it go. The man is out of office and can't embarass or muddy our image any longer, no matter what he does. If he comitts a crime, prosecute him. But if his actions were only "suspicious" or merely questionable, leave him alone, and stop wasting our tax dollars pursuing him in a pointless vandetta. I think the main reason republicans are still going after Clinton, is that it really sticks in their craw that he was more popular than any president since Kennedy.
* * * The difference btwn Clinton & people like Earnhart is that the heroes don't lie to you. You know that they are coming STRAIGHT at you.
Jay
Dinuba, Ca
* * * Quid was planned just like a Puzo novel !
Lets just say for a moment that Rich put this whole plan in motion. Wanted a pardon in order to freely travel around the world with no fear of being arrested as a fugitive. Never intended to return to US and face charges either civil or criminal. So just like a Mario Puzo story he puts together a plan he knows Bubba can not refuse. First he determines what Bubba's weakness is, that was easy the attention of women. So he sends Denice 42 to get his attention and introduce her friend Dorrence or whatever her name is . Together they work over Bubba's ego and possibly other body parts which gets his attention. It would be a perfect plan because we all know he thinks with the little head in these situations. And he certainly was not getting any sex from Hillary. So they give him sex and attention like he has never seen since Monica and Bubba just wants to deliver to keep the goodies and attention coming even as he exits the White House. And they pull it off easily, Billy is known to be corrupt and just does it !
Everyone knows of his corruptibility , the word gets out and the pardon requests flood in. Rich gets his pardon, the quid was attention and sex with beautiful ,rich, powerful women ,very hard to prove ! So true to their oath the women take the 5th and the saga ends. Why else would Bubba have over 70 visits with theses babes ? Think Hillary met with them as well ? Not a chance, she did not know a thing about it !
* * * Subject: 1978 Law makes it ilegal for SLICKSTER to pardon ROGER!
Check out 1978 Fed Law that makes it crime for a GOVT. EMPLOYEE to use his position to benefit a family member. Also, AN AMERICAN FIRST! Presidential pardon for a family member! Maybe on Worldnet.
* * * Clinton Library - What's in it for me question!
I have always wondered as to what is the benefit to the Clintons of a "Clinton Library". Naturally, there is the pride of an ongoing testament to the Clinton accomplishments (if any). But seeing what type of persons they really are, the "what's in it for me" question keeps popping up in my mind.
My question is, once established, will he /she/ or both be able to draw off salaries, fees, retainers, etc from this foundation. If so, it serves as a conduit for direct payoffs.......etc.
Any thoughts?
Craig
* * * Why did Clinton pardon Pincus Green ?
Rush , everyone focuses on the pardon of Marc Rich . Clinton hides behind the excuse of the Israelis lobbying for Rich . Did they lobby for Green , too ? If not , then why did Clinton pardon him if it wasn't a 2-for-1 'deal' ? Don't think he threw him in for good measure. Seems obvious to me yet I haven't heard anyone question this 'Green' part of the deal .
Pincus Green's pardon is overlooked . I believe that his pardon is the key . Read Clinton's NY TImes piece again . He fooled us again with his 'wording' . He starts out by mentioning both Rich and Green in his first 7 flimsy Quinn excuses. Then he says for '# 8 ' , "and importantly " that past and present Israeli official and Rabbis , both both in Israeli and US have lobbied for Marc Rich .... By this point when reading the article we've missed the omission of Green from his last most important reason . Typical Clintonian diversion . His most touted excuse , #8 , doesn't apply to Green, yet he gets the same treatment as Rich . Once again ,that , to me , is the 'smoking gun' of the 2-for-1 deal . Please read Clinton's piece again and you'll see how obvious it is . The answer is always in what he doesn't say .
Thank you , Rick Ct.
* * * Please call for Slick Hilly to resign! She is a congenital liar and has been corrupt for years. She sullies the American Senate. Of course she will not resign so justice must be pursued so that she can be impeached for selling pardons for votes and family pay-offs.
The Clintons have finally shown who they are and must be forced out of power and to go away. They do not need to go to jail; being out of money,power, and prestige will be hell enough for them.
Cynthia
Houston, TX* * * Could you please tell me if there is any listing of former Air Force personnel and where they may be now. I am looking for 2 buddies last known to be at FEAMCOM Air Force Base , Tachikawa, Japan around 1950. Names of Tommy Finch and Charles R. Dilly. Thank you. John W. Sweet , email address: itzsweet@ntrnet.net.
* * * FROM: JERRY FALWELL
A LEADER THIS TAINTED SHOULD RESIGN: I have always attempted to be politically consistent. If a Republican administration were ever a corrupt and dishonorable as the Clinton administration, I truly believe I would be just as vocally critical against it as I have been against the recently-departed White House command.
In 1998, when it became evident that House Speaker-designate Bob Livingston had participated in extramarital relationships while serving in the Congress, I immediately announced that he was unfit to serve as speaker. Days before the House impeachment vote in December 1998, Mr. Livingston - aware that Hustler Publisher Larry Flynt had funded the investigation of his sexual dalliances - announced that he was stepping down from his House post, encouraging President Clinton to do the same. It was the right thing to do. It was the honorable thing to do. President Clinton - unfamiliar with honor - remained in office.
No matter how much I may appreciate the policies of a political leader, if they betray their trust with their constituency and the American public, it is imperative that I do not compromise my position as a religious leader by attempting to strike a political balance and justify their actions. If such compromises are struck, the expectations our nation has for its political leaders are weakened and our citizens begin to forgive deeper and deeper levels of transgressions.
We have been eyewitnesses to such a scenario. The majority of supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton have, for eight years, continued to turn a blind eye to escalating examples of the first couple's political profiteering. As long as their wallets remained thick, many of our fellow Americans were content to enable the Clintons' habitual misconduct.
I believe the present "Pardongate" scandal can be directly traced to the enabling of the Clintons. Since he believed that a large percentage of Americans would sustain their support of his administration - seemingly no matter what sins he embraced - Mr. Clinton felt empowered to grant last-minute pardons to the most shocking array of criminals this side of a Quentin Tarantino film.
In addition to the high-profile pardon of fugitive-billionaire Marc Rich, pardons were furnished to cocaine distributors (Carlos Vignali and William Kennedy III), money launderers (Harvey Weinig), embezzlers (Arnold Paul Prosperi), kidnappers (Harvey Weinig), frauders (John Bustamante), defrauders of government programs (four men from a Hasidic Jewish community), tax evaders (Dorothy Rivers, who stole federal money intended for programs to help homeless families to buy herself furs and a Mercedes-Benz for her son) and child molesters (former Democrat Rep. Mel Reynolds).
The list of pardoned individuals prompted DeRoy Murdock to state, "Bill Clinton's soft spot for hardened criminals is a national disgrace." But Pardongate is not just the president's problem. New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has also found herself squarely in the middle of this disgraceful pardons-for-cash scandal. Her brother profited $400,000 following the pardons, before claiming he gave some of it back. While Mrs. Clinton has denied influencing the decision of her husband in pardoning her brother's pals so her brother could profit, she has incessantly been at the center of the fund-raising scandals at the White House.With that in mind, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton recently asked how likely it is that Mrs. Clinton was completely out of the pardons-for-cash loop? "Not very," was his uncomplicated reply. Even some of the Clintons' most ardent supporters have a similar notion and are now calling for Mrs. Clinton's scalp. On Wednesday, the New York Observer editorialized, "With the nation and indeed the world watching, we [New Yorkers] entrusted her with the U.S. Senate seat once held by Robert F. Kennedy and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. It is clear now that we have made a terrible mistake, for Hillary Rodham Clinton is unfit for elective office. Had she any shame, she would resign. If federal officeholders were subject to popular recall, she'd be thrown out of office by springtime, the season of renewal."
The notably liberal newspaper warned that the Clintons have "fooled the public before. They believe they can do so again. ... And so it will be up to New York, finally, to foil the calculations of this coarse and manipulative couple." Those are powerful words - words the Clintons are not used to having hurled in their direction.
In addition, Bob Herbert, whom Fox News Channel identified as the most liberal columnist at the New York Times, has implicated Mrs. Clinton in the scandal. Mr. Herbert wrote that the Democratic Party fabricated "the equivalent of a pact with the devil" in supporting Mr. Clinton and "in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul."
"The Clintons can spin this however they want," he said. "But the simple truth is that the way in which some of the pardons were granted seems to fit neatly with the standard definition of a bribe, which is the promise of money or gifts - something of value - to influence the action or behavior of an official. ... The Clintons may or may not be led away in handcuffs someday. But whatever happens with the criminal investigations, it's time for the Democratic Party to wise up. Ostracism would be a good first step. Bill Clinton should be cut completely loose."
Furthermore, a surprising number of New York voters say they don't believe Hillary Rodham Clinton was unaware of the involvement of her brother and her campaign treasurer - in presidential pardons, a new poll said, with a majority thinking she acted unethically or illegally (Marist Institute for Public Opinion). Of course, politicians frequently recover from poor public opinion polls, but it is readily apparent that Mrs. Clinton's image has been seriously and quite probably permanently - tarnished.
Mrs. Clinton should indeed - for once - do what is in the best interest of her constituency and step down. However, I imagine that, like her husband, she will continue to tout her purity of heart and maintain her innocence while the residue from the pardon-for-cash venality continues to reek to the high heavens.From: Carole
* * *
Hey, Bill and Hillary, how low can you go? - There may be no floor when it comes to Clinton scandals, just a bottomless pit!
Saturday, February 24, 2001
It's starting to look like the Clinton-haters were onto something. You know, those in Congress and the media who for the eight years of the Clinton administration did little but accuse the president and first lady of one bit of corruption after another? They're in the process of being vindicated.
And, ironically, Bill and Hillary Clinton are doing the vindicating. After years of the Whitewater investigations, the questions about firings in the White House Travel Office, law firm billing records in the pre-White House years, improperly obtained FBI files on political opponents, renting out the Lincoln Bedroom for political fund-raising, the Monica Lewinsky scandal, the December-January rush of gift-giving and furniture and fixture removing from the White House, stripping Air Force One, and the last-minute pardons of Marc Rich and others, who knew it could get any worse?
But it has. Hillary Rodham Clinton's brother, Hugh Rodham, was paid $400,000 in fees by two men who received a presidential pardon and a prison commutation, respectively, in the waning hours of the Clinton administration. Hugh Rodham, at the public urging of his sister and brother-in-law, has reportedly returned the money. Improper? Yes. Illegal? We'll see.
It's bad enough that the president's brother-in-law participated in the quest for clemency for either Carlos Vignali or Almon Glenn Braswell. But it's even worse that he received a fee for successfully lobbying in their favor.
Vignali, whose father has contributed lots of money to the Democratic Party, was convicted of smuggling 800 pounds of cocaine to Minnesota to be processed into crack cocaine. The U.S. Justice Department, it is being reported, actually recommended that Vignali not be freed, especially after serving only six years of a 15-year sentence. Braswell was convicted of fraud in regard to bogus cancer cures nearly 20 years ago. Unbelievably, his pardon came as he was under investigation once again, this time for tax evasion and money laundering. Legal experts are pondering whether the president's pardon will also excuse his alleged recent crimes.
What are we to make of all this?
Well, we might just have added something new to the language that future generations will use as shorthand for corruption in public office: Clinton's Law. As we all know, there's Newton's (Third) Law of Motion: "For every action force on an object, there is an equal but opposite force by the object." And there's Murphy's Law: "Anything that can go wrong, will."
Now there's Clinton's Law: "It's OK to take everything you can lay your hands on until you're caught. Then you just give it back and say, "Give me a break.'" Life's pretty simple on Planet Clinton. And obviously corrupt, too.
Firemark
A bostonherald.com article from earnwings1@juno.com
Richard Nixon, step aside. The debate is over, and the decision is unanimous - Bill Clinton is the most corrupt president in U.S. history.
You can't even get a good fight going on cable TV anymore. Poke at the War Hero's most fawning sycophants - Margaret Carlson, Eleanor Rodham Clift, David Corn - and most of them immediately go into the fetal position.
Hugh Rodham - the man isn't a lawyer, he's a laundry.
He weighs 400 pounds, he grabs 400 large.
He's a whale of a lawyer, and he was just trying to put the fat back in fat-cat. He couldn't stomach his clients doing another day in prison. So he bellied up to the bar.
Too bad the reporters didn't ask Hillary yesterday, ``Does this look like a bribe?'' The bad news for Hugh Rodham ! is, there's a posse coming after him. The good news is, if they catch him, stripes do make you look thinner.
And now rumors spread that Clinton is shopping a two-book deal - one a memoir, the other a novel of the White House. The Washington Post is already running a contest to name the novel. Catcher in the Thigh. Devil with a Blue Dress On. Bedtime for Bubba. From Rags to the Riches. It Takes a Pillage. White Trash Christmas. Fast Times at 1600 Pennsylvania High.
Clinton's bumkissers in the media still can't believe how thoroughly they've been had. Suddenly they're like Bogart in ``The Maltese Falcon,'' telling Mary Astor: ``I won't play the sap for you!''
So who's left of the Clintons' pep squad? Well, there's Bryant Gumbel, when he's not cavorting with babes young enough to be his daughter. And Geraldo Rivera, when he's not cavorting with babes young e! nough to be his granddaughter. And Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone, when he's not cavorting with boytoys young enough to be his sons. And of course the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who just hired a child molesting ex-Congressman pardoned by Clinton. . . .
Do you detect a pattern here?
Of course it was the National Enquirer that broke this latest scandal. None of the Beautiful People who summer together on the Vineyard could possibly deign to sully their hands with such . . . tabloid trash for cash.
But given what we now know about the Clintons, perhaps James Carville's famous line about Paula Jones should be amended: ``It's amazing what you get when you drag $400,000 through a trailer park.''
Clinton says he made all these pardons on their merits. That's easy to understand. Glenn Braswell - a felonious snake-oil salesman, pardoned by a felonious snake-oil salesman. P! rofessional courtesy is what that is.
The War Hero says he is ``deeply disturbed by these reports.'' Not by the payoffs for pardons, but by the reports about them. He didn't know Rodham was working on the pardons, even though Baby Huey was freeloading at the White House at the time.
On Morrissey Boulevard, a deep gloom pervades the newsroom as their hero reels from one sordid scandal to another. Any day now, Matt Storin will be back on the front page with another apology ``To Our Readers.''
Over the past eight years, the Globe published thousands of stories that left the clear impression that Bill Clinton was the greatest president in U.S. history. However, in light of the current pardons-for-payoffs scandal, our sources now concede that this greatest-president theory is not correct. We now express regret for the pain our coverage caused, and we have confiscated Tom Oliphant's shoelaces, belt and bow tie to prevent any further tragedies.
Buck up, Matt. It could be worse - he could have pardoned Patricia Smith.
Some of us, when we first saw Clinton back in 1992, instantly knew how terrible this cracker flim-flam man was. This morning, those of us who were right from the start could stand up and beat our chests and yell at all you ignorant Clintonites out there, ``We told you so!'' But that would be rubbing it in, that would classless, that would be - oh, what the hell.
We told you so!
* * * Carter calls Clinton's Rich pardon 'disgraceful'
http://www.nrsc.org/cgi-data/newsdesk/509.shtml
Carter calls Clinton's Rich pardon 'disgraceful'
By Donald Lambro
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 22, 2001Former President Jimmy Carter accused Bill Clinton of selling his presidential powers with his "disgraceful" pardon of fugitive tax-evader Marc Rich. Saying he believes the Rich pardon was influenced by huge donations from Mr. Rich's ex-wife, Mr. Carter became the most prominent Democrat thus far to condemn what he called Mr. Clinton's "quite questionable" Inauguration Day pardons.
Such criticism from Democrats - including some who were Mr. Clinton's strongest defenders during the Monica Lewinsky scandal - has now become a daily routine, highlighting the ex-president's loss of power within his party.
"I think Bill Clinton is finding out how cold it is outside the White House in February," said Charles Lewis, executive director of the Center for Public Integrity.
[Excerpted]
"A lot of Democrats think Clinton is to blame for losing the White House and our not being able to win back the Congress," a Democratic pollster said. "The criticism you're hearing stems from their deep frustration with last year's elections and the belief that it's Clinton's fault."
Public opinion also has turned against Mr. Clinton. A poll this week by John Zogby showed that the pardon has sent his approval scores plummeting, with a 51 percent majority disapproving of his conduct.
"If there was not substantial outrage around the country, you would not hear this outrage within Clinton's own party," Mr. Lewis said.
Mr. Carter's denunciation of the Rich pardon was the strongest signal to date that Mr.Clinton no longer can depend on his party to rally around him in time of trouble.
"I think President Clinton made one of his most serious mistakes in the way he handled the pardon situation in the last few hours he was in office," Mr. Carter said Tuesday during a speech at Georgia Southwestern State University. "A number of them were quite questionable, including about 40 not recommended by the Justice Department. "I don't think there is any doubt that some of the factors in his pardon were attributable to his large gifts. In my opinion, that was disgraceful."
Denise Rich, Mr. Rich's former wife, gave $1 million to the Democratic National Committee, $450,000 to the Clinton library fund and $70,000 to Hillary Rodham Clinton's Senate campaign in New York.
Mr. Carter's broadside came on the same day that his former White House chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan, attacked the Clinton pardons in the Wall Street Journal. "It is difficult for the average citizen to comprehend how outrageous Bill Clinton's pardons are to those of us who have worked in the White House," Mr. Jordan wrote. If he had suggested to Mr. Carter that he grant a pardon "to someone who contributed generously to our campaign and even promised to contribute to the Carter presidential library, he would have thrown me out of the Oval Office and probably fired me on the spot," Mr. Jordan wrote.
Mr. Jordan accused the Clintons of being calculating, "self-absorbed," "arrogant" people, driven by "their own egos, appetites and ambitions," who "developed a feeling of invincibility . . . after his impeachment trial."
[Excerpted]
"There's no excuse for what he did for Marc Rich. This should not have been done," said Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat.
Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, who staunchly defended Mr. Clinton in the Lewinsky scandal, has called the Rich pardon "outrageous." "It was a terrible thing he did," Mr. Frank told the Boston Herald. "It was just abusive.These are people who forgot where the line was between public service and what was personally convenient for them."
[Excerpted]
Perhaps the most telling criticism came from Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland Democrat, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, which has been a solid base of Clinton support. "The little guys that I represent really have a problem with [the pardon] because they sit here and say, 'Wait a minute, I'm sitting in jail for 20 years. I may have done one-millionth
of what was allegedly done here, but I'm sitting in jail. And I didn't have the money to go off somewhere else. I didn't have the money to hire the big-time lawyers,' " Mr. Cummings said.Source: www.washtimes.com
* * * Congressional probes of pardons winding down
By Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON - Congressional inquiries into the last-minute clemencies granted by President Clinton are winding down amid calls for investigators to finish their work. The House Government Reform Committee led by Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., a longtime Clinton adversary, is tying up loose ends in anticipation of ending its 5-week probe and writing its report. "No hearings have been scheduled," committee spokesman Mark Corallo said. He said the panel is "weighing its options."
The House panel was the first to hold hearings on Clinton's pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich. It subsequently expanded its probe to include other clemencies by Clinton that were brokered by his brother-in-law Hugh Rodham and others with access to the president.
Though four congressional hearings have revealed possible evidence of influence-peddling to obtain pardons, GOP leaders say they feel that investigations by the House panel and the Senate Judiciary Committee have run their course.
"I'm inclined to move on," Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Monday.
Asked whether Congress should seek Clinton's testimony because he turned down a Judiciary Committee invitation for a private interview, Lott said, "I don't think we should get into trying to force him to appear."
Lott said he does not want the hearings to become a Clinton witch hunt, a concern shared by other GOP leaders. The goal of any new hearings should be to determine whether lawmakers need to take "remedial action" to prevent abuses of the presidential pardon process, Lott said. "I assume they've already had enough hearings to decide that," he said.
Lott's comments echoed those made earlier by President Bush, who has said he prefers Congress to concentrate on his agenda. Bush indicated three weeks ago that he was not happy about congressional investigations of Clinton's pardons. "It's time to move on," he said.
The House panel has been a dogged opponent of Clinton since Republicans took control of the House in 1995.
But many of its GOP members now want to declare victory on the pardons issue and move on. They are facing resistance from conservatives on the panel.
Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., the former Judiciary Committee chairman who ran the Clinton impeachment hearings in 1998, said the House committee should continue to investigate only if it truly suspects more evidence of wrongdoing would be found. "When you have people pleading the Fifth (Amendment), that is very disturbing," Hyde said, referring to the refusal of key witnesses to testify.
However, Hyde cautioned against holding hearings without any foundation. "I'm all against piling on. That creates a victim status for people who don't deserve it," he said. Some Republicans also say they're nervous that congressional focus on pardons is clouding Bush's legislative agenda on Capitol Hill. "When is this going to end?" Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., asked. "Bring it to a conclusion."
Rich fled to Switzerland 17 years ago to avoid prosecution on racketeering, wire fraud, income-tax evasion and illegal oil-trading charges. Clinton pardoned Rich and his business partner, Pincus Green, on his last day as president over the objections of top White House aides.
House investigators were scheduled to get more information on donors to the Clinton presidential library Monday. The list will have names of some of the individuals who pledged or donated more than $5,000 to the library. Investigators will try to match the donations to any quid-pro-quo for Clinton pardons.
The slowdown by the House and Senate committees also has been prompted by a shift of dynamics to the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, which is presenting evidence of possible wrongdoing in the clemencies to a grand jury. The federal probe is freezing potential witnesses and is in better position to conduct a more extended investigation, Republicans said.
Denise Rich, Marc Rich's former wife, reportedly has been granted immunity. She has met at least twice with the U.S. Attorney's office, according to persons with knowledge of the probe.
She exercised her constitutional right against self-incrimination when called to testify to the House panel. Her donations of more than $1 million to Democrats and $450,000 to the Clinton library helped spur the investigations.
Also pleading the Fifth Amendment was Beth Dozoretz, a major Democratic fundraiser. Her cooperation also is being sought by the U.S. Attorney. Dozoretz, a former finance chairman for the Democratic National Committee, has pledged to raise $1 million for the library.
As the congressional investigations appear to be winding down, Clinton is adjusting his strategy, current and former aides said.
Last week, aides said Clinton was seriously considering consenting to a high-stakes television interview as a way of fighting back against the avalanche of criticism against him and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y. But after a quiet weekend, and given the fact that last week's House hearing produced no bombshells, the former president is leaning toward saying nothing about the issue for months, aides said.
Staffers said the former president has no interest in an offer from Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who is chairing the Judiciary Committee hearings, to answer questions in a private meeting with Specter.
Instead, aides said Clinton wants to concentrate on building a record of philanthropic work. He also wants to put together a series of high-profile trips abroad, including India and, possibly, Africa. Clinton leaves for a weeklong visit to Europe this weekend, where he will do a combination of paid speeches and charity work.
Contributing: Bill Nichols and Kathy Kiely * * * How can anyone, even liberal left-wingers, excuse marc rich for activities with Iran? Look how much hell there was to pay for using covert tactics to get hostages released from Iran. But okay to trade with them during same time period? I don't think the American public has been made aware of rich's
treasonous activities and by association, clinton's conspiring with the enemy after the fact --- that charge works for me. Tax evasion people seem to understand and for some reason, if they are a rich left-winger, it's okay.(I still don't understand why there is not more outrage about one of the other people pardoned, woman who stole funds from a taxpayer-funded program to help the poor and needy.)
But even the dimwits don't take it well when someone is treasonous, except for jane fonda and fortunately, she is still paying for that stunt during Viet Nam. (Until recently, I knew very little about all that she did during that time period ---- I think I thought she was misguided back then; now I realize how horrendous (and possibly, life-threatening) her activities were.
I digress, however; back to present: would clinton have issued pardon if denise rich had not made contributions to party and clintonistas? Would denise rich have made these contributions if she didn't want to buy pardon?
Did anyone who asked for pardon and did not make contribution of some kind or was related to someone like jesse jackson, not get? Do you know where I can look up the pardon requests and grants? Would be very interesting. I doubt a newspaper has undertaken this full study. I'm going to look up Washington Times and see what they have. I wish there was some way to get one of the networks to do an in-depth program about exactly what marc rich was accused of and indicted for and how his pardon was "bought." A program like Dateline would be a perfect venue, fat chance. But since people won't believe it unless coming from a left-wing newscast, station which might do it like Fox would be ridiculed for its bias. What a joke.
Patti
   |