OOPS.. Bubba Did it AGAIN!!!

[Bonnie]

Shocking huh??

Last week, former President Bill Clinton told his staffer-turned-ABC talking head George Stephanopoulos that the U.S. government had "no evidence that there was any weapons of mass destruction [in Iraq]." And Clinton has the gall to accuse Bush of lying?

Here's Clinton on July 22, 2003, on Larry King Live: "When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for." And in October 2003, some six months after the war ended, Portuguese prime minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso discussed WMD with Clinton. Said Barroso: "When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."

Details, details. In an interview last month with Wolf Blitzer, Clinton said of the Iraq war: "I never thought it had much to do with the war on terror." Come again? In a speech on February 17, 1998, Clinton warned of threats from an "unholy axis" of terrorists and rogue states, and declared: "There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Later that spring came this passage from the Clinton administration's indictment of Osama bin Laden: "Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

That summer, no
fewer than six senior Clinton officials accused Iraq of providing chemical weapons expertise to al Qaeda in Sudan. It was this collaboration that administration officials cited to justify the destruction of the al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. Sandy Berger, Clinton's national security adviser, wrote in the Washington Times that the administration had "information linking bin Laden to the Sudanese regime and to the al Shifa plant."

Berger continued: "We had physical evidence indicating that al Shifa was the site of chemical weapons activity," allowing that al Shifa might have been a dual-use facility. "Other products were made at al Shifa. But we have seen such dual-use plants before--in Iraq. And, indeed, we have information that Iraq has assisted chemical weapons activity in Sudan."

Clinton's revisionism is hardly surprising. He has his wife's future in an increasingly antiwar Democratic party to worry about. But the next time Stephanopoulos hosts his old boss, we'd like to see him ask about al Shifa and the Iraqi collaboration with al Qaeda that the Clinton administration once claimed took place at the plant.

more

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/006/110onrch.asp

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Lying to protect the privacy of your family and lying to send innocent American young people to war are two entirely different things. The fact that you can't tell the difference says a lot about you and your ideology.

 

[no1tovote4]

Lying to protect the privacy of your family and lying to send innocent American young people to war are two entirely different things. The fact that you can't tell the difference says a lot about you and your ideology.

The fact that you cannot tell the difference or the dichotomy of saying there were unaccounted for WMD and then later 'no evidence' is simply disingenuous and shows a considered lack of reading comprehension.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

The fact that you cannot tell the difference or the dichotomy of saying there were unaccounted for WMD and then later 'no evidence' is simply disingenuous and shows a considered lack of reading comprehension.

The fact that you are disingenuous for ignoring the fact that UN inspectors reported no WMDs in Iraq and no nukes before the war started and that the Downing Street memo proves that our leaders knew there were none and proves that there were no attempts to validate suspect intelligence reports while our administration told us over and over again that Saddam had biological, chemical and nuclear WMD when there were none proves that you are disingenuous disingenous disingenous. And so is your unfaltering support for this incompetent administration and this incompetently managed, illegal war. And you are disingenuous for not caring enough about the troops to not care whether they live or die over a corrupt political agenda. And you are also disingenous for caring more about a president lying about getting a blowjob to protect his reputation on international tv than you are about caring that our administration blatantly lied to us all to coerce positive public support for a baseless war. You sir are disingenously disingenous in the most disingenous way possible.

 

[Annie]

The fact that you are disingenuous for ignoring the fact that UN inspectors reported no WMDs in Iraq and no nukes before the war started and that the Downing Street memo proves that our leaders knew there were none and proves that there were no attempts to validate suspect intelligence reports while our administration told us over and over again that Saddam had biological, chemical and nuclear WMD when there were none proves that you are disingenuous disingenous disingenous. And so is your unfaltering support for this incompetent administration and this incompetently managed, illegal war. And you are disingenuous for not caring enough about the troops to not care whether they live or die over a corrupt political agenda. And you are also disingenous for caring more about a president lying about getting a blowjob to protect his reputation on international tv than you are about caring that our administration blatantly lied to us all to coerce positive public support for a baseless war. You sir are disingenously disingenous in the most disingenous way possible.

and you should have been able to extrapolate that his 'lying to protect his family', not to mention the behavior served to embarass his family on a grand scale, as well as to endanger the country due to his loss of credibility through perjury and obstruction.

 

[no1tovote4]

The fact that you are disingenuous for ignoring the fact that UN inspectors reported no WMDs in Iraq and no nukes before the war started and that the Downing Street memo proves that our leaders knew there were none and proves that there were no attempts to validate suspect intelligence reports while our administration told us over and over again that Saddam had biological, chemical and nuclear WMD when there were none proves that you are disingenuous disingenous disingenous. And so is your unfaltering support for this incompetent administration and this incompetently managed, illegal war. And you are disingenuous for not caring enough about the troops to not care whether they live or die over a corrupt political agenda. And you are also disingenous for caring more about a president lying about getting a blowjob to protect his reputation on international tv than you are about caring that our administration blatantly lied to us all to coerce positive public support for a baseless war. You sir are disingenously disingenous in the most disingenous way possible.

The point of the story was showing the lack of consistency in Clinton's speeches after 2001 and currently. In 2003 Clinton says there was evidence.

You take a statement pointing out your lack of reading comprehension and attempt to assign me an opinion on WMD that is inaccurate.

Read the article again. It points out the dichotomy of Bill Clinton's stance on this particular issue, that you attempt to use the fact that I point this out to me to assign an opinion to me doesn't make this assignation any more coherent or correct. This points more to your ideological inanities and attempt to protect a "hero" of yours than it does to your intelligence.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

and you should have been able to extrapolate that his 'lying to protect his family', not to mention the behavior served to embarass his family on a grand scale, as well as to endanger the country due to his loss of credibility through perjury and obstruction.

Hey that's fine. Let's snicker about Clinton getting a bj from an intern. Nevermind the fact that American soldiers are being shot at by savages in a rubble pit in the middle east right now because the administration lied and that they don't have the necessary body armor to protect them because the war is being incompetently managed. But hey! I've got a magnet on my car that says "support the troops!" Slick Willie sure was an immoral guy. He got a bj in the white house! I sure do love Bush though. His administration lied to the public and then sent our young men in uniform over to be slaughtered so that we could all get better gas prices. But now gas is over three dollars a gallon so I guess we'd better "stay the course!" I sure do love that Bush!

 

[no1tovote4]

and you should have been able to extrapolate that his 'lying to protect his family', not to mention the behavior served to embarass his family on a grand scale, as well as to endanger the country due to his loss of credibility through perjury and obstruction.

Or the fact that in the tapes Monica mentions that he spoke to her about the fact that he believed the Chinese were attempting to gather information in order to blackmail him.

The position of the President should not be held by somebody so desperate to hide such a secret that he becomes blackmailable and later gives secrets involving rocket technology to the Chinese.

Or the fact that there were at the same time he "lied to protect his family" people in prison for the same crime.

 

[Annie]

Hey that's fine. Let's snicker about Clinton getting a bj from an intern. Nevermind the fact that American soldiers are being shot at by savages in a rubble pit in the middle east right now because the administration lied and that they don't have the necessary body armor to protect them because the war is being incompetently managed. But hey! I've got a magnet on my car that says "support the troops!" Slick Willie sure was an immoral guy. He got a bj in the white house! I sure do love Bush though. His administration lied to the public and then sent our young men in uniform over to be slaughtered so that we could all get better gas prices. But now gas is over three dollars a gallon so I guess we'd better "stay the course!" I sure do love that Bush!

Again, you seem incapable of letting go of the sex part, they do have therapy for that. Try the consequences of his attempted cover-up.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Again, you seem incapable of letting go of the sex part, they do have therapy for that. Try the consequences of his attempted cover-up.

Hey hey, you guys are right! It's Clinton's opinions on the war we should be discussing. Not the fact that our administration took us to war based on faulty intelligence and bogus public reasons! Clinton's the bad guy here all the way! God forbid a politician change his or her stance on an issue over the course of seven years! We want a politician who can stick to a decision no matter how foolhearty or ignorant it may be! Not some flip-flopping waffle-iron! Support the troops! Whoo hooo!

 

[Annie]

Hey hey, you guys are right! It's Clinton's opinions on the war we should be discussing. Not the fact that our administration took us to war based on faulty intelligence and bogus public reasons! Clinton's the bad guy here all the way! God forbid a politician change his or her stance on an issue over the course of seven years! We want a politician who can stick to a decision no matter how foolhearty or ignorant it may be! Not some flip-flopping waffle-iron! Support the troops! Whoo hooo!

Faulty intelligence, perhaps. Which was an ongoing process was the gist of the article. YOU hijacked it to Clinton sex scandal, which you are too hung up on:

Lying to protect the privacy of your family and lying to send innocent American young people to war are two entirely different things. The fact that you can't tell the difference says a lot about you and your ideology.

 

[no1tovote4]

Hey hey, you guys are right! It's Clinton's opinions on the war we should be discussing. Not the fact that our administration took us to war based on faulty intelligence and bogus public reasons! Clinton's the bad guy here all the way! God forbid a politician change his or her stance on an issue over the course of seven years! We want a politician who can stick to a decision no matter how foolhearty or ignorant it may be! Not some flip-flopping waffle-iron! Support the troops! Whoo hooo!

There, now at least you are speaking like you read the article. Even if you attempt to disregard the information like when it says that less than 2 years ago Clinton and many of his aides were saying that there were discrepancies in reporting that made many believe that WMD were there. This "lied" stuff about Bush is a disingenuous garbage and definitely revisionist history based on hindsight and not on valid information.

Now, I never believed that WMD was a good enough reason to go to war in Iraq, particularly because WMD of the types that they were speaking are not particularly dangerous even when dropped on people. Shoot Sarin gass was released in a closed environment in Japan with thousands of people around and very few lost their lives. It took over 1,000 trips by planes to kill all the Khurds he did when he gassed them....

 

[Bonnie]

Hey hey, you guys are right! It's Clinton's opinions on the war we should be discussing. Not the fact that our administration took us to war based on faulty intelligence and bogus public reasons! Clinton's the bad guy here all the way! God forbid a politician change his or her stance on an issue over the course of seven years! We want a politician who can stick to a decision no matter how foolhearty or ignorant it may be! Not some flip-flopping waffle-iron! Support the troops! Whoo hooo!

He Clinton puts himself in that position everytime he opens his mouth and lies about his past actions then to suit his criticisms of current presidents......GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bonnie]

The Clinton Legacy


The Progressive Review


This list was compiled at the end of the Clinton administration.


Our Clinton Scandal Index

RECORDS SET

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

* According to our best information, 40 government officials were indicted or convicted in the wake of Watergate. A reader computes that there was a total of 31 Reagan era convictions, including 14 because of Iran-Contra and 16 in the Department of Housing & Urban Development scandal. 47 individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes with 33 of these occurring during the Clinton administration itself. There were in addition 61 indictments or misdemeanor charges. 14 persons were imprisoned. A key difference between the Clinton story and earlier ones was the number of criminals with whom he was associated before entering the White House.

Using a far looser standard that included resignations, David R. Simon and D. Stanley Eitzen in Elite Deviance, say that 138 appointees of the Reagan administration either resigned under an ethical cloud or were criminally indicted. Curiously Haynes Johnson uses the same figure but with a different standard in "Sleep-Walking Through History: America in the Reagan Years: "By the end of his term, 138 administration officials had been convicted, had been indicted, or had been the subject of official investigations for official misconduct and/or criminal violations. In terms of number of officials involved, the record of his administration was the worst ever."


STARR-RAY INVESTIGATION

- Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas to date (including one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners): 14
- Number of Clinton Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5
- Number of Reagan cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 4
- Number of top officials jailed in the Teapot Dome Scandal: 3

CRIME STATS

- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

SMALTZ INVESTIGATION

- Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15
- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6
- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million
- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million

CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES
FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS
HAVE BEEN OBTAINED

Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.

OTHER MATTERS INVESTIGATED BY SPECIAL PROSECUTORS
AND CONGRESS, OR REPORTED IN THE MEDIA

Bank and mail fraud, violations of campaign finance laws, illegal foreign campaign funding, improper exports of sensitive technology, physical violence and threats of violence, solicitation of perjury, intimidation of witnesses, bribery of witnesses, attempted intimidation of prosecutors, perjury before congressional committees, lying in statements to federal investigators and regulatory officials, flight of witnesses, obstruction of justice, bribery of cabinet members, real estate fraud, tax fraud, drug trafficking, failure to investigate drug trafficking, bribery of state officials, use of state police for personal purposes, exchange of promotions or benefits for sexual favors, using state police to provide false court testimony, laundering of drug money through a state agency, false reports by medical examiners and others investigating suspicious deaths, the firing of the RTC and FBI director when these agencies were investigating Clinton and his associates, failure to conduct autopsies in suspicious deaths, providing jobs in return for silence by witnesses, drug abuse, improper acquisition and use of 900 FBI files, improper futures trading, murder, sexual abuse of employees, false testimony before a federal judge, shredding of documents, withholding and concealment of subpoenaed documents, fabricated charges against (and improper firing of) White House employees, inviting drug traffickers, foreign agents and participants in organized crime to the White House.

ARKANSAS ALZHEIMER'S

Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar.

Bill Kennedy 116
Harold Ickes 148
Ricki Seidman 160
Bruce Lindsey 161
Bill Burton 191
Mark Gearan 221
Mack McLarty 233
Neil Egglseston 250
Hillary Clinton 250
John Podesta 264
Jennifer O'Connor 343
Dwight Holton 348
Patsy Thomasson 420
Jeff Eller 697

FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES: In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.

I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2 I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1

THE CLINTON LEGACY:
LONELY HONOR

Here are some of the all too rare public officials, reporters, and others who spoke truth to the dismally corrupt power of Bill and Hill Clinton's political machine -- some at risk to their careers, others at risk to their lives. A few points to note:

- Those corporatist media reporters who attempted to report the story often found themselves muzzled; some even lost their jobs. The only major dailies that consistently handled the story well were the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times.

- Nobody on this list has gotten rich and many you may not have even heard of. Taking on the Clintons typically has not been a happy or rewarding experience. At least ten reporters have been fired, transferred off their beats, resigned, or otherwise gotten into trouble because of their work on the scandals. Whistleblowing is even less appreciated within the government. One study of whistleblowers found that 232 out of 233 them reported suffering retaliation; another study found reprisals in about 95% of cases.

- Contrary to the popular impression, the politics of those listed ranges from the left to the right, and from the ideological to the independent.

- We have not included victims of the Clinton machine, some of whom have acted with considerable danger and at considerable risk to themselves. They will be included on a later list.


PUBLIC OFFICIALS

MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ was a prosecutor on the staff of Kenneth Starr. His attempts to uncover the truth in the Vincent Foster death case were repeatedly foiled and he was the subject of planted stories undermining his credibility and implying that he was unstable. Rodriguez eventually resigned.

JEAN DUFFEY: Head of a joint federal-county drug task force in Arkansas. Her first instructions from her boss: "Jean, you are not to use the drug task force to investigate any public official." Duffey's work, however, led deep into the heart of the Dixie Mafia, including members of the Clinton machine and the investigation of the so-called "train deaths." Ambrose Evans-Pritchard reports that when she produced a star witness who could testify to Clinton's involvement with cocaine, the local prosecuting attorney, Dan Harmon issued a subpoena for all the task force records, including "the incriminating files on his own activities. If Duffey had complied it would have exposed 30 witnesses and her confidential informants to violent retributions. She refused." Harmon issued a warrant for her arrest and friendly cops told her that there was a $50,000 price on her head. She eventually fled to Texas. The once-untouchable Harmon was later convicted of racketeering, extortion and drug dealing.

BILL DUNCAN: An IRS investigator in Arkansas who drafted some 30 federal indictments of Arkansas figures on money laundering and other charges. Clinton biographer Roger Morris quotes a source who reviewed the evidence: "Those indictments were a real slam dunk if there ever was one." The cases were suppressed, many in the name of "national security." Duncan was never called to testify. Other IRS agents and state police disavowed Duncan and turned on him. Said one source, "Somebody outside ordered it shut down and the walls went up."

RUSSELL WELCH: An Arkansas state police detective working with Duncan. Welch developed a 35-volume, 3,000 page archive on drug and money laundering operations at Mena. His investigation was so compromised that a high state police official even let one of the targets of the probe look through the file. At one point, Welch was sprayed in the face with poison, later identified by the Center for Disease Control as anthrax. He would write in his diary, "I feel like I live in Russia, waiting for the secret police to pounce down. A government has gotten out of control. Men find themselves in positions of power and suddenly crimes become legal." Welch is no longer with the state police.

DAN SMALTZ: Smaltz did an outstanding job investigating and prosecuting charges involving illegal payoffs to Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy, yet was treated with disparaging and highly inaccurate reporting by the likes of the David Broder and the NY Times. Espy was acquitted under a law that made it necessary to not only prove that he accepted gratuities but that he did something specific in return. On the other hand, Tyson Foods copped a plea in the same case, paying $6 million in fines and serving four years' probation. The charge: that Tyson had illegally offered Espy $12,000 in airplane rides, football tickets and other payoffs. In the Espy investigation, Smaltz obtained 15 convictions and collected over $11 million in fines and civil penalties. Offenses for which convictions were obtained included false statements, concealing money from prohibited sources, illegal gratuities, illegal contributions, falsifying records, interstate transportation of stolen property, money laundering, and illegal receipt of USDA subsidies. Incidentally, Janet Reno blocked Smaltz from pursuing leads aimed at allegations of major drug trafficking in Arkansas and payoffs to the then governor of the state, WJ Clinton. Espy had become Ag secretary only after being flown to Arkansas to get the approval of chicken king Don Tyson.

DAVID SCHIPPERS, was House impeachment counsel and a Chicago Democrat. He did a highly creditable job but since he didn't fit the right-wing conspiracy theory, the Clintonista media downplayed his work. Thus most Americans don't know that he told NewsMax, "Let me tell you, if we had a chance to put on a case, I would have put live witnesses before the committee. But the House leadership, and I'm not talking about Henry Hyde, they just killed us as far as time was concerned. I begged them to let me take it into this year. Then I screamed for witnesses before the Senate. But there was nothing anybody could do to get those Senators to show any courage. They told us essentially, you're not going to get 67 votes so why are you wasting our time." Schippers also said that while a number of representatives looked at additional evidence kept under seal in a nearby House building, not a single senator did.

JOHN CLARKE: When Patrick Knowlton stopped to relieve himself in Ft. Marcy Park 70 minutes before the discovery of Vince Foster's body, he saw things that got him into deep trouble. His interview statements were falsified and prior to testifying he claims he was overtly harassed by more than a score of men in a classic witness intimidation technique. In some cases there were witnesses. John Clarke has been his dogged lawyer in the witness intimidation case that has been largely ignored by the media, even when the three-judge panel overseeing the Starr investigation permitted Knowlton to append a 20 page addendum to the Starr Report.


OTHER

THE ARKANSAS COMMITTEE: What would later be known as the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy actually began on the left - as a group of progressive students at the University of Arkansas formed the Arkansas Committee to look into Mena, drugs, money laundering, and Arkansas politics. This committee was the source of some of the important early Clinton stories including those published in the Progressive Review.

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SCANDALS E-LIST: Moderated by Ray Heizer, this list has been subject to all the idiosyncrasies of Internet bulletin boards, but it has nonetheless proved invaluable to researchers and journalists.


JOURNALISTS

JERRY SEPER of the Washington Times was far and away the best beat reporter of the story, handling it week after week in the best tradition of investigative journalism. If other reporters had followed Seper's lead, the history of the Clintons machine might have been quite different.

AMBROSE EVANS-PRITCHARD of the London Telegraph did a remarkable job of digging into some of the seamiest tales from Arkansas and the Clinton past. Other early arrivals on the scene were Alexander Cockburn and Jeff Gerth.

CHRISTOPHER RUDDY, among other fine reports on the Clinton scandals, did the best job laying out the facts in the Vince Foster death case.

ROGER MORRIS AND SALLY DENTON wrote a major expose of events at Mena, but at the last moment the Washington Post's brass ordered the story killed. It was published by Penthouse and later included in Morris' "Partners in Power," the best biography of the Clintons.

OTHERS who helped get parts of the story out included reporters Philip Weiss, Carl Limbacher, Wes Phelan, David Bresnahan, William Sammon, Liza Myers, Mara Leveritt, Matt Drudge, Jim Ridgeway, Nat Hentoff, Michael Isikoff, Christopher Hitchens, and Michael Kelly. Also independent investigator Hugh Sprunt and former White House FBI agent Gary Aldrich.

Sam Smith of the Progressive Review wrote the first book (Shadows of Hope, University of Indiana Press, 1994) deconstructing the Clinton myth and the Review developed a major database on the topic.

The Clintons, to adapt a line from Dr. Johnson, were not only corrupt, they were the cause of corruption in others. Seldom in America have so many come to excuse so much mendacity and malfeasance as during the Clinton years. These rare exceptions cited above, and others unmentioned, deserve our deep thanks.

THE CLINTON LEGACY
The Hidden Election

USA Today calls it "the hidden election," in which nearly 7,000 state legislative seats are decided with only minimal media and public attention. The paper took brief notice because this is the year the state legislatures perform their most important national function: drawing revised congressional districts based on the most recent census.

But there's another important national story here: further evidence of the disaster that Bill Clinton has been for the Democratic Party. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Democrats held a 1,542 seat lead in the state bodies in 1990. As of last November that lead had shrunk to 288. That's a loss of over 1,200 state legislative seats, nearly all of them under Clinton. Across the US, the Democrats control only 65 more state senate seats than the Republicans.

Further, in 1992, the Democrats controlled 17 more state legislatures than the Republicans. After November, the Republicans control one more than the Democrats. Not only is this a loss of 9 legislatures under Clinton, but it is the first time since 1954 that the GOP has controlled more state legislatures than the Democrats (they tied in 1968).

Here's what happened to the Democrats under Clinton, based on our latest figures:

- GOP seats gained in House since Clinton became president: 48
- GOP seats gained in Senate since Clinton became president: 8
- GOP governorships gained since Clinton became president: 11
- GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254
as of 1998
- State legislatures taken over by GOP since Clinton became president: 9
- Democrat officeholders who have become Republicans since Clinton became
president: 439 as of 1998
- Republican officeholders who have become Democrats since Clinton became president: 3

NATIONAL CONF OF STATE LEGISLATURES
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legman/elect/hstptyct.htm
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legman/elect/demshare2000.htm

http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

 

[Hagbard Celine]

He Clinton puts himself in that position everytime he opens his mouth and lies about his past actions then to suit his criticisms of current presidents......GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey, I totally agree with you Bon Bon! The real issue here is that Clinton is a flip-flopper, not that the Iraq war is baseless or that no WMD have or will ever be found in Iraq. "support the troops!" "Dubya, STILL the President!" Whoo hoo!

 

[Bonnie]

Hey, I totally agree with you Bon Bon! The real issue here is that Clinton is a flip-flopper, not that the Iraq war is baseless or that no WMD have or will ever be found in Iraq. "support the troops!" "Dubya, STILL the President!" Whoo hoo!

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: ANNND you still don't get it..
Oh well......that's life

 

[no1tovote4]

Hey, I totally agree with you Bon Bon! The real issue here is that Clinton is a flip-flopper, not that the Iraq war is baseless or that no WMD have or will ever be found in Iraq. "support the troops!" "Dubya, STILL the President!" Whoo hoo!

Of course this is the left talking points that totally ignore that WMD were only one of the reasons expounded upon for the reasons to go to war. They attempt to make one speech by the President be the whole of the argument and ignore the fact that among evidence of WMD provided at the UN were also the violations of treaty and UN Sanctions that were also expounded upon in that same visit.

They also ignore other speeches by other Administration officials giving other reasons as well. This is simply political posturing, ideologically sound in its base, significantly incorrect in fact.

 

[Annie]

Hey, I totally agree with you Bon Bon! The real issue here is that Clinton is a flip-flopper, not that the Iraq war is baseless or that no WMD have or will ever be found in Iraq. "support the troops!" "Dubya, STILL the President!" Whoo hoo!

I guess we can take it you are a bot from DNC? "It's all about Clinton".

 

[Bonnie]

Of course this is the left talking points that totally ignore that WMD were only one of the reasons expounded upon for the reasons to go to war. They attempt to make one speech by the President be the whole of the argument and ignore the fact that among evidence of WMD provided at the UN were also the violations of treaty and UN Sanctions that were also expounded upon in that same visit.

They also ignore other speeches by other Administration officials giving other reasons as well. This is simply political posturing, ideologically sound in its base, significantly incorrect in fact.

See Doug the whole thing is this............Clinton being a liberal could walk into an orpahange and shoot every child in it and his loyal devotees would still bow in blind homage to his excellence, but with GWB he can't do anything right because he's not a liberal or aClinton.........It's simple logic for simple minds really.......

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Of course this is the left talking points

"stay the course"

"mission accomplished"

"axis of evil"

"forces of evil"

"remember 9/11"

"We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud"

"Saddam has WMDs"

"Satellite images show mobile chemical weapons factories."

Don't be so "disingenuous" no12votefor.