THEY LEFT AS THEY CAME -- CLASSLESS
Even the mainstream liberal media can no longer hold their noses and smile, singing the praises of the most corrupt couple to ever occupy the White House.
Jeff Jacoby, who has now returned to The Boston Globe, noted in his Jan. 25, 2001 column that Clinton refused to keep a low profile for his successor's swearing-in, making one more radio broadcast, a 90-minute rally at Andrews Air Force Base promising his hangers-on "We're not going anywhere!" and then an impromptu press conference in Chappaqua.
This tacky behavior was even too much for Chicago Democrat Mayor Richard Daley. According to Newsday.com on Jan. 25, 2001, Daley criticized Clinton for trying to steal the spotlight on inauguration day. "In the past, they shook hands, the (former) president went to a helicopter, and that was it. . . . This was different. He had a rally at the airport, a rally in New York and a rally at his home. . . . That's his style. He wanted two or three more parties."
Daley also noted Clinton's last minute deal with Independent Counsel, Robert Ray in which he admitted he made false statements under oath about Monica Lewinsky to escape prosecution. "We got in this quandary for two years, and the Friday before (he leaves), he says, 'I did it,' and walks away. He left a lot of people disappointed," the mayor said.
He didn't disappoint everyone. In his last hours, he pardoned an astonishing 140 convicts - including a Weather Underground terrorist, Whitewater criminal Susan McDougal, his brother Roger, Patty Hearst, and a fugitive billionaire racketeer and tax cheat whose family just happened to contribute $1.3 million to the Democratic Party.
Fortunately, reported the American Spectator Online Prowler on Jan. 31, two alert presidential ushers managed to remove the busts of FDR and Kennedy which are part of the permanent White House collection from boxes which were headed from Chappaqua. A former Clinton aide was quoted saying: " The White House is always careful about what stays and what goes when presidents are leaving. But they seemed extra careful with him."
In separate columns in the New York Daily News on Jan. 25, Michael Kramer and Kenneth Bazinet commented on the former first couple.
Kramer said: " I won't use the label superior Northerners pejoratively use to describe Southern crackers. I won't call them 'white trash.' But if not that, then what?
The Clintons are more than mere garden-variety political opportunists. They're bigger-than-life, world-class users who give only when they get and who never give more than they've gotten."
Speaking of the almost $200,000 in furniture, china, flat ware, TV's, sculpture and assorted other "necessities" they removed from the White House, Bazinet provides some background. Hillary Clinton had registered her choices for gifts in November, just like a bride. A friend and Clinton contributor, Rita Pynoos of Beverly Hills, California, then urged potential contributors to send a $5,000 check to the store quickly, before a Senate ethics deadline that bans senators from receiving gifts. The donors had no idea what their money bought, according to NBC.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Clinton-Gore supporters were busy trashing the White House and Old Executive Office Building. The story first broke on the Drudge Report on Jan. 24, 2001. Follow up stories the next day were appearing in the press all over the world, including the Washington Post and New York Post. The vandalism is estimated to exceed $200,000 in damage and includes sliced phone and computer lines, obscene messages left in copy machines and voice mail. Desks were turned completely upside down and trash was deliberately left everywhere. Graffiti was written on office walls.
The worst of the damage was in the Old Executive Office Building suites that defeated Al Gore's staff turned over to Vice President Dick Cheney. Republican strategist Rich Galen said: "My understanding is when Mrs. Gore found out about the condition in which the offices were left, she called Mrs. Cheney to apologize on behalf of a staff that had no adult supervision."
Help is here.
Return to Index
CLINTON'S PARTING SHOTS
While some publicity has been given to Clinton's abuse of the Constitution by appointing Roger Gregory to the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals without Senate confirmation, there is more to the story.
As Thomas L. Jipping pointed out in the Jan. 2, 2001, The Washington Times, the US Constitution, in Article II, gives the president power to fill vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session. This particular judgeship has been vacant since it was created in 1990 because the workload of the Circuit did not require it. The only reason Clinton filled this position now was to create a racial issue which he could throw into President Bush's lap. This appointment will last for only one year.
However, as the Washington Post reported on January 5, 2001, Clinton resubmitted nine judicial nominees (including Roger Gregory) on which action had not been taken at the close of the 106th Congress.
Not content to stop with the judiciary, Clinton also made recess appointments on December 29, 2000, to a number of other positions. He appointed Donald L. Robinson and Paulette H. Holahan to the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science; Dennis P. Walsh to the National Labor Relations Board; Isi A. Siddiqui as Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the Dept. of Agriculture; Peter F. Romero as Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the Dept. of State; and, Geoff Bacino as a member of the National Credit Union Administration. He also named ten members to the National Council on the Humanities.
On December 28, 2000, Clinton issued an Executive Order revoking Executive Order 12834 of January 20, 1993, "Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Appointees" effective January 20, 2001.
This was the Executive Order for the "most ethical administration in history" which would prevent leaving federal appointees from lobbying their old agencies for 5 years after leaving office. This leaves the old one-year rule in effect, just when Clinton appointees are most in need of new employment.
In the waning days of this administration, there has been a flurry of regulations covering activity in 61 Federal departments and agencies, Business Wire reported on December 27, 2000. The Rochester Institute of Technology has estimated that Americans spent over $750 billion to comply with various rules and regulations.
Among the more than 29,000 pages of regulations printed in the Federal Register between the election and the inauguration are rules limiting timber harvests in millions of acres of federal forest, requiring that public housing be integrated by race and income, mandating the use of cleaner diesel fuel that the oil industry says it cannot produce, and a major new regulation requiring employers to take steps to protect workers from repetitive motion injuries, according to UPI on January 5, 2001.
In addition to issuing a report on January 5, 2001 touting the rejected Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and urging Congress to pass it, Clinton signed a controversial treaty establishing and international war crimes tribunal which opponents fear could lead to the prosecution of American service personnel.
Return to Index
CLINTON WON'T GO QUIETLY
Even after election day, Clinton continues to make mischief. According to Reuters, November 9, 2000, Clinton signed proclamations "protecting" nearly 1 million acres in Arizona and Idaho.
While local officials and Western lawmakers were not consulted, the environmentalists were pleased. He proclaimed Vermilion Cliffs National Monument covering 293,000 acres of federal land on the Colorado Plateau in Arizona and expanded Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho by 661,000 acres.
Return to Index
CLINTON'S SCHOOL REFORM TOUR
Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report on May 8, 2000 showed a map provided by the White House on its website outlining President Clinton's "School Reform Tour".
One stop on the tour, Owensboro, Kentucky was shown in a location that falls in what is commonly known as Tennessee -- the claimed home state of Vice President Gore.
The embarrassed White House officials scrambled to remove the
map from the site during the evening of May 7. There was no one
immediately available to correct the map.
The website declares: 'President Clinton and Vice President Gore: An Unprecedented Commitment to Education... dramatically increasing accountability.'
Back to basics, boys.
Return to Index
CLEANING UP THE LEGAL PROFESSION
The Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct has finally acted on allegations raised by the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a conservative public-interest law firm based in Atlanta.
According to Fox News in a Feb. 10, 2000 article, the complaint seeks to have President Clinton disbarred from the Arkansas State Bar immediately. It is the first time in US history that a sitting president has been made the subject of formal professional ethics violations and brought up on a formal complaint before a bar.
The complaint states that the referral made by the Office of Independent Counsel to the House of Representatives during last year's impeachment proceedings shows, "His conduct involves lying, deceit, perjury, fraud, dishonesty, untrustworthiness, obstruction of justice, subornation of perjury, tampering with witnesses and other forms of misconduct inimical to and destructive of the administration of justice. As a man and as a lawyer, Mr. Clinton is utterly without shame and utterly without honor."
The complaint goes on "His conduct brings great discredit and great disgrace to the Arkansas legal profession. His status as a member of our Bar is an intolerable affront to the rule of law. Mr. Clinton should therefore be permanently disbarred."
Normally it takes two to six months to resolve disbarment cases.
Return to Index
CLINTON'S "WAG" WILL COST TAXPAYERS A BUNDLE
Last August, three days after Clinton admitted to the nation that he had an "inappropriate relationship" with Monica Lewinsky, he bombed Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical plant and Sudan.
After continually claiming that this plant was involved in chemical warfare weapons construction in some vague way or another, the administration quietly lifted a freeze on the $24 millions in assets which the owner, Saleh Idris, had deposited in US banks, The Washington Times Jerry Seper reported on May 5, 1999.
According to the London Independent via WorldNetDaily on May 4, 1999, Mr. Idris hired Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld (Vernon Jordan's law firm -- ed. note) to file a lawsuit for him to require the US to release Idris' assets. Another is contemplated for compensation for the damage caused. Akin, Gump et. al. hired top private investigators to clear Idris. They found no ties between Mr. Idris and Osama bin Laden, as had been alleged by administration officials.
Seper reports the administration still maintains the plant was targeted based on "physical and circumstantial evidence" and those involved were "totally confident" the information was correct. However, rather than filing an answer to the suit filed on behalf of Mr. Idris, the administration quietly lifted the freeze.
So far, no value has been reported for the plant which was totally destroyed.
Return to Index
EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW
One of the most basic premises of our Constitutional system is that all citizens, humble or great, rich or poor, regardless of background or state in life are equally entitled to the same rule of law -- the same rights, the same responsibilities.
In the debate which is presently engaging the country, some argue that the President should not be impeached or removed from office because "it's all about sex." It is not about sex. It is about the obligation of every citizen, when put under oath, to tell the truth. This obligation does not extend only to courtrooms and grand juries. It is a basic tenent which is used every day on deeds, wills, every document which must be notarized. If one can no longer rely on notarized documents, our businesses would not be able to function and no property right will be safe. Certainly, people should tell the truth all of the time, but our system of justice only criminalizes lies under oath. These are actionable under perjury statutes and if convicted of this felony, the miscreant can be imprisoned.
The arguments are reminiscent of those made by the Democrats in the "Campaign Finance" scandal. Because the Democrats had abused campaign finance laws, the laws should be changed to limit "soft money." Why would one think that someone who had disobeyed less strict laws obey the more stringent ones?
This type of thinking seems to be general in the Democrat party. "We pass laws for other people to obey; we are special, so we don't have to obey them." For example, Michigan has political finance disclosure and contribution laws. The Bureau of Elections has now scanned in campaign finance disclosure statements on the Secretary of State homepage. You can check on these filings on line. See www.sos.state.mi.us/election/elect.html. If you check these pages, you will find that the Iosco County Democrats and the 5th Congressional District Democrats have violated the reporting requirements of these laws. Oh well, some pigs are more equal than others. . . .
Return to Index
THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY
On October 8th, the U.S. House of Representatives deliberated a priveleged resolution to begin an Inquiry of Impeachment with respect to President Clinton's actions. When this Resolution was debated in the House Judiciary Committee, the vote to report it to the floor for action was resolved on a strictly party line basis with the 21 Republicans voting for the Resolution and the 16 Democrats voting against it.
When the matter came to the floor of the House, Democrats who spoke mostly favored a Resolution which would set a strict time limit (by December 31st) and would limit the issue to be considered to the Monica Lewinsky matter, the subject of the Starr Report. In addition, the Democrats wanted to decide what an impeachable offense was before deliberating Mr. Clinton's fate.
The Republicans opposed the Democrat proposal, citing the experience of the Senate Committee which was to investigate campaign finance offenses headed by Sen. Fred Thompson (R.-Tenn.). In that investigation, the White House simply stalled in responding to subpoenas or requests for information so that it could not be reviewed by the Committee. Generally, they argued the "Fool me once. . ." position. Since the Democrats wanted to discuss what an impeachable offense was, they knew that if the Democrat plan passed, the time would be run out trying to establish for all time what is and what isn't an impeachable offense, without ever getting to Mr. Clinton's actions. The other problem with the Democrat proposal is that it would have limited the inquiry to the Starr Report without the possibility of dealing with Travelgate, Vince Foster's papers, Whitewater, Campaign Finance problems, selling technology to the Chinese Communists for campaign donations, the 1000 plus FBI files which mysteriously appeared in the White House, Hillary Clinton's billing records, release of Linda Tripp's FBI file information or any of the other scandals which are linked to this administration.
The Democrats also wanted to make certain that only information which was turned over by Ken Starr was considered. This was to ward off any inquiry into the issues raised by Judicial Watch in its Interim Report which was introduced into the Judiciary Committee record. Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch has had several suits pending against the Administration for various abuses of power and has deposed many witnesses which the Justice Department under Janet Reno has not contacted. He has documented abuse of IRS files, FBI files, sale of Commerce Department trips for campaign contributions, illegal campaign contributions, the Chinese Communist connections and abuse of the President's Trust to cover his litigation expenses. (This report can be obtained from Judicial Watch at http://www.JudicialWatch.org or by contacting them at (202) 646-5172, Fax (202) 646-5199. The Democrat proposal would also have precluded investigation of the abuse of government property and funds relating to the White House Data Base (WHODB), which has been documented by Rep. David MacIntosh.
When the vote was finally taken, 258 Representatives voted in favor of the Republican proposition. This included 31 Democrats. Most of the Democrats (including Rep. James Barcia) voted for the Democrat plan only. Six Democrats voted against any inquiry at all. It is expected that the Inquiry will take place after the election. It may or may not extend into the next Congress, depending upon the information uncovered and the level of cooperation which is extended by the White House.
Return to Index