[6815] in SIPB bug reports
exmh bug
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Omri Schwarz ocschwar@mit.edu 6172)
Tue May 5 15:17:21 1998
To: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 15:15:13 EDT
From: "Omri Schwarz ocschwar@mit.edu 6172259838" <ocschwar@MIT.EDU>
Exmh won't display this.
version 2.0.2 2/24/98
SunOS m2-032-9 5.5.1 Generic_103640-12 sun4m sparc SUNW,SPARCstation-5
Tk 8.0 Tcl 8.0
Received: from SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU by po9.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id
AA11130; Tue, 5 May 98 14:05:21 EDT
Received: from spork.callamer.com by MIT.EDU with SMTP
id AA15385; Tue, 5 May 98 14:04:54 EDT
Received: from cas0-153.snlo.dialup.callamer.com (cas0-153.snlo.dialup.callamer
.com [206.190.93.153])
by spork.callamer.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA01596;
Tue, 5 May 1998 10:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19980505103020.6357558e@callamerica.net>
X-Sender: tpd@callamerica.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16)
Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:30:20
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Wayne Mann <tpd@callamerica.net>
Subject: TPDL 4-L050598
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
THE POLITICAL DIGEST LITE =A9
"THE Internet Clipping Service"
1079 Farroll
Arroyo Grande, Ca. 93420-4136
tpd@callamerica.net
Vol 4-L050598
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Today's Quote:
"No one with a day's experience in government fails to realize that in all=
=20
bureaucracies there are three implacable spirits - self-perpetuation,=20
expansion and incessant demand for more power."
-- Herbert Hoover
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[02]
PENTAGON SPOKESMAN, LEWINSKY BOSS AND WHITE HOUSE COZY=20
KEN BACON EXPECTED TO BE SUBPOENAED FOR FILLING WHITE=20
HOUSE ORDER FOR ILLEGAL LEAK OF TRIPP EMPLOYMENT FILE!
SVL
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[03]
Say Starr Gave Hillary a Fair Shake!
SVL
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[04]
WHITE HOUSE RED HERRINGS
WP
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[05]
RELEASING TRIPP DIRT WAS 'A PRIORITY'
By DICK MORRIS
NYP
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[06]
On Breaking a Stonewall
WSJ
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[12]
Excerpts From Session That Led to the Indictment of Susan McDougal
NYT
[Editors Note: In my opinion, this woman deserves everything she gets!]
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[15]
Inside Politics
News and political dispatches from around the nation
By Greg Pierce
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[22]
Dan Burton vs. Judy WoodRuff: Release of the Hubbell Tapes
CNN
5/4/98=20
[Editors Note: If you didn't see this, you should know two things=20
about this. First before having him on as below, CNN had just run a=20
long diatribe that was only trashing and smearing Burton. It could=20
well have come directly from the spin meisters at the White House.=20
Second when this was over they went to Bernie asking Robert=20
Novak and Mr. Judy Woodruff (Al Hunt} in which Novak to some=20
degree, but Hunt in particular trashed him some more. It was=20
obvious to me that Hunt was very angry because of Burton=20
criticizing his wife so he was even more partisan than usual.]
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[23]
Samizdat News
Richclem@aol.com
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
SUBSCRIBERS NEEDED for TPD, TPDP, TPDL, TPDXTRA
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE BELOW AT END
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[02]
PENTAGON SPOKESMAN, LEWINSKY BOSS AND WHITE HOUSE COZY=20
KEN BACON EXPECTED TO BE SUBPOENAED FOR FILLING WHITE=20
HOUSE ORDER FOR ILLEGAL LEAK OF TRIPP EMPLOYMENT FILE!
SVL
Ken Bacon, Pentagon Spokesman and Assistant
Secretary of Defense, will likely be subpoenaed to describe his
role in illegally leaking Linda Tripp's confidential personnel
file to a reporter.
A Bacon employee, Clifford Bernath, testified under oath that
regarding the illegal leak, "Ken made clear this is a priority."
Bacon will be questioned about whose "priority" it was to
release the Tripp file, since he has no apparent personal
motivation to destroy Tripp. As Bacon has close ties to the
White House, it is expected that he will point in that direction.=20
This would not be the first time Bacon did dirty work for the
White House in return for a little something for him.
Bacon was personally recommended by Bill Clinton for
promotion to Assistant Secretary at the Pentagon in 1996.=20
Exactly two weeks after being promoted by Clinton, Ken
Bacon hired Monica Lewinsky in what now looks suspiciously
like a tit-for-tat babysitting job. Now, Bacon is accused of
doing more dirty work for the White House.
Ken Bacon has been implicated by a Pentagon
employee of his in ordering illegal leaks of
confidential personnel files of Linda Tripp.=20
Curiously, Bacon worked for a famously-liberal
Democratic Senator, Thomas McIntyre, in 1968-69
when McIntyre was heading the charge against the
Nixon administration for the infamous Nixon
"enemies list." Bacon's boss railed that the
executive branch of government should not be in
the business of leaking confidential personal
information from FBI and employment files to
destroy enemies.
Nearly thirty years later, Ken Bacon stands
accused of perpetrating the same invasions of
privacy-- the very same crimes he once took a
stance against.
The Pentagon's official statement on the matter said
that "Clifford Bernath didn't have any contact with
the White House or consult Pentagon lawyers
before releasing the answer from Tripp's
confidential file." Apparently, the Pentagon was
cleverly twisting words, because it wasn't Bernath,
but rather a superior of his, who had the direct
contact with the White House. It will be interesting
to discover how far up the chain of command the
request for damaging information on Tripp
traveled.
In the wake of the leak of Tripp's confidential files,
several government officials stated that if the leak
was malicious, it would warrant firing of the
individual responsible. With the fingering of Ken
Bacon, it looks like a firing or at least a sharp
reprimand, of him and others may be close at hand.
Bacon has yet to comment on his role in the matter
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[03]
Say Starr Gave Hillary a Fair Shake!
SVL
Use your brains today, boys and girls.
Democrats have been running around saying Ken Starr
would indict a ham sandwich to get at Bill Clinton.
Now, Ken Starr and his grand jury have decided not to
indict Hillary Clinton for her Arkansas law firm
dealings.
Yet.
But even if he indicts her later, the lack of charges can
be used to his advantage.
I want to see a Republican on a talk show tomorrow
stating that Ken Starr's a fair prosecutor, because he
let Hillary go after all that questioning. Ask those
Democrats if Ken Starr used bad judgement in THIS
instance. The obvious answer is "No, he made the
right call."
And here's the key: Therefore, Susan McDougal
can expect the same fair treatment, and she's an
idiot, and in criminal contempt, for not simply
telling Ken Starr the truth.
In fact, it would almost be a waste of good press to
use this advantage in the McDougal matter. Starr
should lock her up for good measure for five more
years while he prosecutes others. And every time he
calls a witness from now on, for example, Monica
Lewinsky, conservative commentators should point to
Hillary and say, "She told the truth, and she got off the
hook." That should put the pressure on other
witnesses like Lewinsky to do the same.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[04]
WHITE HOUSE RED HERRINGS
WP
In listening to the White House spinmeisters blast away
at Rep. Dan Burton's supposed misconduct in leading
his investigation of the First Couple, keep in mind the
four "Ds" that are their watchwords: deny, delay,
denigrate and distract.=20
The sound and fury last weekend concerned Burton's
alleged "altering" and "doctoring" of Clinton crony and
convicted felon Webster Hubbell's jailhouse
conversations with his wife. Don't expect the noise to
die down just because Burton began releasing all the
Hubbell tapes yesterday. You see, this flap falls into the
"distract" category.=20
Distract from what? From congressional Democrats'
continued stonewalling of legal and proper
investigations.=20
Burton's House Government Reform and Oversight
Committee is investigating the financing of President
Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign. But last week,
committee Democrats voted as a bloc, 19-0, to deny
grants of immunity to four witnesses - even though the
Justice Department said it had no objection to the move.
Two of these witnesses worked for Johnny Chung - the
fund-raiser who once compared the White House to a
subway turnstile, and who has now pleaded guilty to
conspiracy and money-laundering. Another is Kent La,
a business associate of the mysterious Ted Sieong, an
Indonesian moneyman whose family and business
interests contributed atleast $400,000 in 1996 to the
Democratic National Committee.=20
The Senate's campaign-finance probe found that some
$200,000 of this money came from "overseas
accounts." The conduit for this cash was the notorious
John Huang, who may well have acted as the eyes and
ears of Chinese intelligence while serving as a Clinton
appointee in the Commerce Department.=20
The committee would very much like to talk to Sieong,
his family, friends and business associates.
Unfortunately, almost all of them fled the country
shortly after the Indogate campaign-finance scandal
broke.=20
In fact, the vanishing Sieongs have plenty of company.
All told, an incredible 21 witnesses subpoenaed by
Congress have fled the country. A further 53 have pled
the Fifth. Eighteen have simply refused to cooperate in
any form with congressional investigations.=20
Burton hurt his own cause last week with comments
about President Clinton, but that hardly makes the quest
for more information on how the president financed his
campaign illegitimate.=20
The only thing preventing people like Kent La from
telling Congress what they know is the committee
Democrats' refusal to grant them immunity. The
committee will make one more effort to immunize these
witnesses this week. It needs eight Democratic votes.
Will Burton get them, and begin getting at the truth?=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[05]
RELEASING TRIPP DIRT WAS 'A PRIORITY'
By DICK MORRIS
NYP
"KEN made clear this is a priority."=20
That's how Clifford Bernath - the man who
released information from Linda Tripp's secret
personnel file - described the orders from his
boss, Ken Bacon, to pass the damaging
information to New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer.=20
The Clinton administration said it was just a
mistake by Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary
Bernath acting on his own. But now, in a
deposition before the conservative group Judicial
Watch, Bernath says he was acting on the orders
of his superior - chief Pentagon spokesman Ken
Bacon. And he has the contemporaneous notes to
prove it.=20
The disclosure of Bacon's involvement in what a
federal judge has unequivocally described as a
"privacy violation" thickens the plot.=20
On whose orders was Bacon acting?=20
Here's a clue: According to Mark Levin, president
of the Landmark Legal Foundation, "copies of
security clearance forms for former White House
staffers are, as a matter of course, kept at the
White House." Tripp is an ex-White House staffer.=20
The Justice Department has confirmed that
providing Mayer with the information that Clinton
accuser Linda Tripp had not disclosed her arrest
at the age of 19 on her Pentagon job application
was "a violation of the Privacy Act." The
Pentagon's Lt. Col. Dick Bridges says the release
of such confidential data won't happen again,
noting that "we've learned our lesson."=20
So who decided to violate the Privacy Act? Ken
Bacon on his own? Most unlikely. What are the
chances that a Pentagon press officer would
decide, without consulting his superiors, to release
confidential information on the president's chief
accuser? Somewhere between slim and none.=20
Ken Bacon's background indicates that he's a
man the White House can turn to. He's the one
who hired former White House intern Monica
Lewinsky when the White House needed to move
her out of Clinton's range but still keep her on the
reservation. Bacon hired her to a $33,000-a-year
job, and squirreled her away in his second floor
Pentagon office with a view of the Potomac River.
He insists that he decided to hire her "because
she had a lot of energy."=20
Energy or not, White House Deputy Chief of Staff
Evelyn Lieberman had bounced Lewinsky out of
the White House for "inappropriate and immature
behavior." She was said to be a poor speller who
couldn't write letters by herself and was easily
flustered by computers. The Washington Times
reported that her White House work was deemed
"lazy" and that she was "on the verge of being
fired."=20
Despite these drawbacks, Bacon set her to
"answering and returning phone calls, scheduling,
taking dictation and transcribing Mr. Cohen's news
conferences during trips abroad," according to the
Times. Apparently, the Pentagon is just the place
for "inappropriate and immature behavior" and an
inability to spell or use computers proved no
obstacles to taking dictation or transcribing news
conferences.=20
The Pentagon spin on the release of Tripp's file
information has been consistently inconsistent. At
first, Lt. Col. Bridges told The Post that "Bernath
was under pressure for a quick answer" to provide
to Jane Mayer. But according to Bernath, Mayer
called on Thursday, and he responded on Friday
afternoon. Since when does the Pentagon feel
under pressure to provide anything to anyone?=20
Bernath wrote the "Ken made clear this is a
priority" note on Friday morning. If Bacon made the
decision deliberately in order to harm Tripp - as
Bernath suggests that he did - he committed a
crime. Will he be disciplined or discharged?
Judicial Watch will likely subpoena him. If he
doesn't take the fall, we may learn that Bacon
checked with people upstairs at the Pentagon or
across the river at the White House.=20
While Mayer denies any White House involvement
in feeding her the story, the likelihood is that White
House private detectives - the "secret police" - dug
up the arrest record in the first place and fed it to
Mayer or to someone who got to Mayer. It's likely
they also suggested to Mayer that she ask the
Pentagon whether Tripp disclosed the arrest. They
probably knew the answer before suggesting she
ask the question.=20
The matter of Tripp's file is important because it
establishes an MO for the White House in the use
of files to discredit people. Remember that Billy
Dale, the dismissed head of the White House
Travel Office, found the contents of his file used
against him seven months after he was ousted
from his job. Recall, too that Craig Livingstone,
ex-bar bouncer, possessed files on hundreds of
top Republicans - which he claimed he had as a
result of another bureaucratic mistake.=20
The White House used the same MO to deflect the
charges against Livingstone - saying that he acted
on his own - that it used to cover up the release of
the Tripp file - when it blamed on Clifford Bernath.
But Bernath wouldn't, in Web Hubbell's immortal
words, "roll over one more time."=20
Bill Clinton is not the sort of person who would
authorize the release of confidential files to smear
people. Nor would he hire private detectives to
intimidate witnesses. So who did?=20
Judicial Watch, armed with its subpoena power, is
about to find out. The White House objected to
Judicial Watch attorney Larry Klayman's plan to
depose four top White House aides. But U.S.
District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth told
White House attorneys that he found
"troublesome" reports that White House "secret
police" tipped Mayer to the Tripp records. Noting
that this was "on its face" a privacy violation, the
judge noted that the White House performance in
the Tripp file episode "sounds very akin to the kind
of things" that Judicial Watch is saying went on
with the FBI files.=20
Remember, Mr. President: Nixon got in trouble for
his overreaction to his critics. Rein in your staff.=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[06]
On Breaking a Stonewall
WSJ
The steady din coming out of the White House is beginning to
sound like summer locusts high in the evening trees: unfair, unfair,=
unfair,
unfair. No matter the subject, source or substance, it's all unfair. Here's
Rahm Emanuel scratching over the weekend at House Oversight Committee
Chairman Dan Burton: "Never before in history has a chairman done what he
has done."
Well, never before in history has so much chutzpah carried so many so far.
The weekend doesn't pass that Kenneth Starr, Dan Burton or some other
critic of the Clinton compound isn't accused of violating Marquis of
Queensbury rules for the manner in which they chip and chisel at the vast
stonewall that now separates this White House from the rest of the country.
How else to break a stonewall built with the power
of the executive branch and the complicity of
Democrats in Congress?
We are reminded of the wonderful colloquy last
December between FBI Director Louis Freeh and
Rep. Burton.
Mr. Burton: "Over 65 people have invoked the Fifth
Amendment or fled the country in the course of the
committee's investigation. Have you ever
experienced so many unavailable witnesses in any
matter in which you have prosecuted or been
involved?"
Mr. Freeh: "Actually, I have. . . . I spent about 16 years doing organized
crime cases in New York City, and many people were frequently
unavailable."
Since that exchange, the number of the unwilling has risen to more than 90
witnesses. Among those pleading the Fifth are key Clinton operatives John
Huang and Mark Middleton, Democratic fund-raisers Nora and Gene Lum,
Florida witness Charles Intriago, and a gaggle of low-level figures tied
to the
Al Gore/Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple fund-raiser, to the shakedown of the
Arapaho Indian tribes, and to the Charlie Trie network. Mr. Trie's partner
Antonio Pan has fled the country, as have key probe figures Ted Sioeng,
Pauline Kanchanalak and others. Among those refusing to be interviewed
overseas by U.S. investigators are such central figures as the Riadys of
Indonesia and Mr. Trie's money source, Ng Lap Seng of Macau.
On April 23, Democrats on Mr. Burton's committee blocked grants of
immunity to four witnesses, even as the Justice Department expressed no
objection. The four were associates of Johnny Chung, the Lums and Ted
Sioeng. Clearly, the committee's 19 Democratic votes against immunity were
what caused an impatient Speaker Gingrich's criticisms last week. Still,=
what
seemed to most preoccupy the Beltway through that cycle was whether Mr.
Burton had violated community standards by calling the President a scumbag.
Washington's textual deconstructionists were similarly shocked at the=
release
of the Hubbell prison tapes, obsessing over the manner in which they were
edited, but showing less interest in the tapes' substance--"I guess I have
to roll
over again"--which more than hints at a coverup.
All that activity is over in the House of Representatives. The Senate,
meanwhile, has been in conversation with career U.S. Attorney Charles La
Bella. The air has filled up the past 48 hours with attempts to
delegitimize the
weekend disclosure of Mr. La Bella's recommendation to Janet Reno in
November that she appoint an independent counsel for campaign finance.
Against these rationalizations, Senate Republicans should here follow the
House's cue and play hardball. And with good reason.
Janet Reno is using the independent counsel law as a shield. In fact, the
Attorney General has always had the power to make such an appointment;
this is precisely what was done during Watergate and Teapot Dome. The law
was created to further enable such a decision, not to erect Ms. Reno's
casuistical barriers.
Kenneth Starr, for his part, exists as a court officer under that same law,
appointed by a decision of the Attorney General and named by three federal
judges. This office of independent counsel, in the course of its history,=
has
met with Susan McDougal's contempt of a federal court (leading to a second
indictment yesterday), with the White House's inability to disclose Rose=
Law
Firm billing records that later just appeared, with former Associate=
Attorney
General Webster Hubbell's welshing on promised cooperation after pleading
guilty to two felonies, and with at least three separate White House
claims of
privilege.
Each of these is a large stone in the White House stronghold. The serial
claims of privilege are especially egregious, given the context. To date,
Judge
Norma Holloway Johnson has kept Secret Service privilege and executive
privilege litigation under seal. Defensible, perhaps, under normal
circumstances, but set against the White House's record of suppression, we
strongly think these proceedings should be open.
On this page recently, attorney Douglas Caddy, who represented E. Howard
Hunt and other Watergate plumbers, described how Judge John Sirica used
outrageous sentences to compel co-operation, which is to say, compel the
truth. We don't recall screams from civil libertarians then, recognizing we
suspect that it takes a hardball to break a stonewall mounted by a=
President.
One more point about then and now. Eventually in the course of Watergate,
GOP politicians who cared deeply about the integrity of public institutions
stepped forward and helped justice take its course. Where are such
Democrats today? When a Congressional committee has received permission
from Justice to immunize four useful witnesses, why is Henry Waxman able
to get 19 Democrats to stand solidly in opposition, like a stonewall?
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[12]
Excerpts From Session That Led to the Indictment of Susan McDougal
NYT
[Editors Note: In my opinion, this woman deserves everything she gets!]
WASHINGTON -- Following are excerpts from the
Whitewater grand jury session in Little Rock, Ark.,
on April 23, when Susan H. McDougal declined to answer
most questions posed by Julie Myers and Mark J. Barrett,
both of the independent counsel's office, and by grand
jurors, whose names were not disclosed.=20
A transcript of that session was included in Ms.
McDougal's indictment Monday, which said that since her
first grand jury appearance, in September 1996, the
independent counsel had located a check in the amount of
$5,081.82, dated Aug. 1, 1983, drawn on the James B.
McDougal Trustee Account, payable to Madison Guaranty
Savings and Loan, and signed by Susan H. McDougal. The
words "Payoff Clinton" were written in the notation section
of the check. There are no markings on the check that
would indicate that President Clinton or Hillary Rodham
Clinton knew anything about it.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, the last question pending
was, Do you understand that Judge Wright ordered you to
come today and testify before the grand jury?=20
A. I will not answer any question you make to me, because
I believe you're conflicted and you have no right to ask me.
MS. MYERS Do you understand that Judge Wright
considered that argument yesterday and rejected it?=20
A. You do not have any right to ask me questions. You are
totally conflicted. ...=20
MS. MYERS O.K. I am going to hand you what's
previously been marked as Grand Jury Exhibit 1892. And,
Ms. McDougal, this appears to be a check dated Aug. 1,
1983, payable to Madison Guaranty from the Jim
McDougal Trustee Account and signed by Susan Henley
McDougal. Since your last appearance before the grand
jury, in September of 1996, we have been able to obtain a
copy of this check and confirm that it's your handwriting
on the check. You signed this check, correct? Ms.
McDougal, you signed this check. Is that correct?=20
A. May I go out and see my attorney?=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, would you please answer the
question first?=20
A. May I go out and see my attorney, sir?=20
MS. MYERS Yes, Ms. McDougal.=20
A. May I take that?=20
MS. MYERS No, you may not. ...=20
GRAND JURY FOREMAN. Ms. McDougal, you are just
being reminded that you are still under oath.=20
A. Thank you, sir. I won't answer your questions you ask
me, because I believe your office is conflicted and that you
should not be investigating this.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, what did you mean by the
notation "Payoff Clinton" on the check that's been marked
as Grand jury Exhibit 1892?=20
A. I don't believe your office has the right to ask me any
questions.=20
MS. MYERS Judge Wright rejected that argument
yesterday, Ms. McDougal. You've been ordered to come in
here and testify truthfully today. What did you mean by the
notation "Payoff Clinton"?=20
A. I think because you are so conflicted, it would be the
honorable thing to do is to get someone else to investigate
this. It would be honorable and right. ... If you really
believe there's a crime, let somebody investigate it who
might not be so prejudiced.=20
GRAND JUROR Can you tell us exactly what that check
was for? It does say, "Payoff for Clinton."=20
A. I would love to tell you. I would love to tell you
everything I know about it, but not with these people
running the investigation. I don't believe they're interested in
the truth. I really don't.=20
GRAND JUROR Do you know who makes the ultimate
decision of whether this is correct or not correct? Do you
think it's Judge Starr, or do you think it's the 23 members
that are in here?=20
A. I went to trial believing that that was true, and I was
convicted and I was not guilty. And I can't believe that
again, because they brought prejudiced testimony up at my
trial that was untrue. They put on David Hale, who lied at
my trial.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, Ms. McDougal, the point the
grand juror, I believe, is trying to make is, They make the
decision. We won't make any decision about how any of
this information is -- .=20
A. But they only tell you what they want you to know. You
don't know everything.=20
GRAND JUROR You are the witness. You are going to tell
us what we want to know.=20
A. But they only show you what they want you to see.
That's what I'm afraid of. And they believed David Hale,
and they believed Jim McDougal, and they both lied to you.
...=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, so you are refusing to
answer the grand juror's questions?=20
A. I told you I would not answer you. If you want to resign
and you want to get an independent counsel to investigate
this, I will answer their questions. But not this man. He had
decided from the first day, decided that he would do this.
And it's been a long road for me, and I'm sorry to be so
nervous and so scattered in what I'm trying to say to you.
But I have to tell you, from the first day with these people
all they wanted was something on Clinton.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal -- .=20
A. From the very first day.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal -- .=20
A. I'm happy to answer your questions. I'm sorry that I
can't. But they're the ones who are in the way, not me.=20
MS.MYERS O.K. O.K. Ms. McDougal, the reason that
we're asking you questions about this check, and we have
more checks that we could show you if you'd like to see
those -- .=20
A. I'll see anything you've got. I won't answer your
questions.=20
MS. MYERS The reason we're asking you these questions
is because during the trial of the United States v.
McDougal, Tucker, McDougal, the trial that you were just
referring to, President Clinton testified via deposition
during that trial and gave direct testimony that was to
questions asked of him by Sam Heuer -- you know Sam
Heuer, correct? Are you refusing to answer my question?=20
A. I'm refusing to answer any question that any of the three
of you pose to me. I would love to answer the grand jury's
questions, but they don't have anyone in here that will take
this investigation where it should go.=20
BARRETT Mrs. McDougal, excuse me, you were just
posed questions by two members of the grand jury. And if
I -- .=20
A. You know very well what you've done.=20
BARRETT May I finish?=20
A. You know very well what you've done.=20
BARRETT May I please finish? Earlier in the proceedings,
you said you'll answer questions from "you all," indicating
toward the grand jury. When Ms. Myers was unsuccessful
in getting you to answer any questions, she turned it over to
the members of the grand jury. Two members of the grand
jury asked you questions. Are you refusing to answer?=20
A. Resign and I'll answer your questions.=20
BARRETT Are you refusing to answer the questions from
-- .=20
A. If Ken Starr will admit he has a conflict
-- .=20
COURT REPORTER Ma'am, if you'll just wait until he
finishes his question before you answer, so I can write it
down.=20
A. I shouldn't have to listen to his sermons, though, do you
think?=20
COURT REPORTER I just have to write down everything.
A. Please. What?=20
GRAND JUROR We're listening to your sermons, and
we've got some questions to be answered.=20
A. You're right. I'm sorry. You're absolutely right. I'll listen
to it.=20
GRAND JUROR This has been going on for two years,
too, for us.=20
A. It's been since 1985 for me. O.K.? You think I don't
want it over? You think I don't want to answer your
questions? You think it's not serious for me? These people
are wrong in what they're doing. They have been on this.
And from the very first day when I told them, "Let me just
answer, let me tell you what this check is about," they said
to me: "Susan, we want a proffer from you. We want
something on Bill or Hillary Clinton." That was at my very
first meeting, with them. And they have done this
investigation exactly the way they wanted to do it.=20
MS. MYERS Ms. McDougal, we're not -- .=20
A. I won't answer your questions. That's it.=20
BARRETT And we're not going to permit this usurpation
of -- .=20
A. No, because you don't want them to hear from me. ...
Get another independent counsel, and I'll answer every
question.=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[15]
Inside Politics
News and political dispatches from around the nation
By Greg Pierce
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Blumenthal's slur
Gary Bauer, president of the Family Research
Council, yesterday accused presidential adviser Sidney
Blumenthal of anti-religious bigotry and called for his
dismissal.
Mr. Blumenthal, in a recent address at Harvard
University's Kennedy School of Government, referred
to Whitewater deputy independent counsel Hickman
Ewing as "a religious fanatic."
Mr. Bauer, in a letter to the president, said Mr.
Blumenthal's charge was "based on no more evidence
than a highly biased New Yorker magazine article. That
piece described Ewing as a born-again Christian who
prays daily, attends an Evangelical fellowship weekly
and does not drink. I know that you are aware that that
description could characterize tens of millions of
Americans."
Mr. Bauer added: "Blumenthal's slur is intolerable. If
his outrageous conduct is condoned by you, we will
enter a new and dark period of our history in which the
deeply held religious beliefs of millions of loyal
Americans will be held up to sneering disdain by high
White House officials with impunity. Bigotry has no
place in America, and certainly not on the president's
staff. Evangelical Christians are among the millions of
faithful citizens who pay this man's salary."
Watch out, Newt
Steve Malzberg of WABC radio in New York has
been replaying a sound bite from CNBC's "Geraldo"
program in which host Geraldo Rivera threatens to slug
Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.
Mr. Rivera had just finished showing a tape of Mr.
Gingrich referring to White House spin doctors and
those who would obstruct independent counsel Kenneth
W. Starr's investigation as "unpatriotic," according to
Mr. Malzberg.
Mr. Rivera said the term smacked of McCarthyism
and warned that "if Newt ever calls me unpatriotic, he'd
have a fist fight on his hands."
Meet you at Tiananmen
Rep. Christopher Cox, California Republican, is
upset that the Chinese plan to receive President Clinton
at Tiananmen Square in June.
Meeting the Chinese in Tiananmen, where an
estimated 2,000 advocates of democracy were
slaughtered by the People's Liberation Army,
"represents a nadir in the Clinton administration's
insensitivity to ongoing human rights abuses by
Beijing," Mr. Cox said yesterday.
"The Clinton Administration would be desecrating
the ground where freedom fighters stood up to tanks,"
Mr. Cox said. "President Clinton, having welcomed to
America with a 19-gun salute the general who ordered
the Tiananmen massacre, would now complete the
insensitive gesture."
Leftovers
National Journal reports that political tomes
dominate the bargain bin in at least one bookstore in
Washington.
"A recent drop-by at B. Dalton's bookstore on K
Street revealed that almost all of the 20 or so
remaindered books were tomes by capital scribes or
pols of some status (at least within the Beltway)," the
magazine said.
"'The Choice' and 'The Agenda,' both by Bob
Woodward, David Maraniss' Clinton bio, James B.
Stewart's 'Blood Sport' and Newt Gingrich's 'To Renew
America' could each be had for less than the cost of a
grande double skinny decaf almond latte."
Liberalism betrayed
The cigarette taxes that liberals are so determined to
boost fall most heavily on the poor, notes the New
Republic's Jonathan Chait.
"Ordinarily, such punishment of the lower classes
would evoke stirring denunciations from the Ted
Kennedys and Marion Wright Edelmans of the world.
Yet nothing of the sort has happened. On the contrary,
liberal Democrats are championing cigarette taxes far
larger than the ones they grudgingly and conditionally
acceded to in 1990, and they have made no effort to
counterbalance the huge costs such a tax will impose
upon the poor," Mr. Chait writes.
"Indeed, they have blithely shrugged off the clear
class ramifications of taxing tobacco and, with barely a
word of protest, proceeded headlong toward a dubious
experiment in government paternalism. Conservatives
with ties to the tobacco industry -- who are practically
the only ones speaking out against this effort -- have
lambasted this proposal as liberalism run amok, but it
would be better described as liberalism betrayed."
Mr. Chait added: "The hard choices come when the
demands of economic justice and personal liberty
collide. On the matter of cigarette taxes, the two values
dovetail. How did liberals wind up on the other side?"
Drug testing
House Speaker Newt Gingrich plans to begin testing
his staff for illegal drug use, his spokeswoman said
yesterday.
It was not clear when testing would begin and
whether the tests would include Mr. Gingrich himself
and staff members outside Washington, the Associated
Press reports.
"All of those details are under discussion," said the
spokeswoman, Christina Martin.
Members of Congress are free to test their own
staffs, but Republican Reps. Joe Barton of Texas and
Dan Burton of Indiana are the only ones who say they
do so.
Mr. Barton, who said Mr. Gingrich's decision is a
"positive step," is a co-sponsor with retiring Rep.
Gerald Solomon, New York Republican, of a measure,
to be introduced soon, that would require drug testing
for all House members and their staffs.
The plan by Mr. Gingrich, Georgia Republican, was
first reported by the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call.
Making enemies
As Alabama Gov. Fob James heads into the June 2
Republican primary, one of his former Cabinet
members is running against him, two of his former
aides are managing an opponent's campaign and three of
his former Cabinet members are supporting candidates
who want to oust him.
"I have never seen a situation where an incumbent has
so much opposition as this candidate, whether it's
governor or U.S. senator. It's like a picture that speaks a
thousand words," said political consultant Sonny Scott,
who worked for Mr. James last year but is now
managing the campaign of a GOP opponent.
Once a Republican, Mr. James switched to the
Democratic Party before he won his first term in 1978,
then switched back to the GOP in 1994 to win his
second term. Recently, he backed a Democrat's choice
of appointees for a university board, prompting his own
campaign chairman to declare it was time for Mr. James
"to stand up and be a Republican."
Mr. James, 63, said he feels no animosity toward
those who left his side to fight him politically, the
Associated Press reports.
"If you look back at contributors since I first ran and
served as governor, there are people who have
supported me and not supported me and supported me
back again, so it's irrelevant," he said Friday.
Chelsea's boyfriend
In a telephone interview with the San Jose Mercury
News, Matthew Pierce identified himself as Chelsea
Clinton's boyfriend, the newspaper reported yesterday.
The young man seen with Miss Clinton during the
president's weekend visit to Stanford University is a
religious studies major and champion swimmer.
According to a biography provided by the Stanford
athletic department, Mr. Pierce is a 20-year-old junior
from The Woodlands, Texas, a small city north of
Houston. He was a National Merit Scholar.
In March, Mr. Pierce won the 200-meter butterfly to
help Stanford capture this year's NCAA men's
swimming championship. He also competed in the
backstroke and participated in the 1996 U.S. Olympic
trials.
Neglectful '90s
Former Republican presidential candidate Steve
Forbes yesterday accused the Clinton administration of
"systematically dismantling" the nation's defense
structure and reducing military readiness with spending
cuts.
Mr. Forbes said the United States spends less on
defense as a percentage of the economy than it has
since before World War II. "We're spending a wee bit
more than 3 percent of [the gross domestic product] on
defense, the least we've spent since the neglectful
1930s," the business magazine publisher told the Center
for National Policy in New York.
"By balancing the budget on the back of defense, by
neglecting modernization and by blocking missile
defense, the Clinton-Gore administration is
undercutting global stability," Mr. Forbes said.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[22]
Dan Burton vs. Judy WoodRuff: Release of the Hubbell Tapes
CNN
5/4/98=20
[Editors Note: If you didn't see this, you should know two things=20
about this. First before having him on as below, CNN had just run a=20
long diatribe that was only trashing and smearing Burton. It could=20
well have come directly from the spin meisters at the White House.=20
Second when this was over they went to Bernie asking Robert=20
Novak and Mr. Judy Woodruff (Al Hunt} in which Novak to some=20
degree, but Hunt in particular trashed him some more. It was=20
obvious to me that Hunt was very angry because of Burton=20
criticizing his wife so he was even more partisan than usual.]
Inside Politics
Dan Burton Discusses Release of Hubbell Tapes
Aired May 4, 1998 - 5:12 p.m. ET=20
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN
ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.=20
JUDY WOODRUFF, CO-HOST: Now joining us, the man at the
center of the Hubbell tapes controversy, the chairman of the House
Government Reform & Oversight Committee, Dan Burton,
Republican of Indiana. He joins us now from Indianapolis.=20
Mr. Burton, thank you for being with us.=20
REP. DAN BURTON (R-IN), HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM
& OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: You're welcome,
Judy. I'd like to start off saying that when I do interviews on shows
like yours and Bernie's, I really expect to be treated fairly, and I
want you to know that that pre-interview piece that you showed was
very biased, and I think your producers know it. All I ask out of you
and CNN is a modicum of fairness. Regarding my subpoena power,
I didn't get that out of the air. That was granted to me by the U.S.
House of Representatives.=20
WOODRUFF: Mr. Burton, we appreciate that. As you know, we try
not to be biased in our reporting. We identified that as flashbacks to
some of the more controversial moments on your committee. But if I
may, I'm going to go ahead and launch into these questions today.
As you're aware the ranking Democrat on your committee, Mr.
Waxman, had said the release of these tapes today would be a
serious invasion of the privacy of Mr. Hubbell and his wife and their
friends and associates.=20
Did you take that into consideration?=20
BURTON: I certainly did. We had over 150 hours of tapes, Judy,
and we condensed them down to about an hour. Then we were
criticized because they said we altered the tapes and altered the
meaning of the tapes. We can't have that. The credibility of this
investigation is so important that even though I don't want to divulge
personal things about Mr. and Mrs. Hubbell, in order to keep the
integrity of the committee intact, and the investigation intact, I had
no choice but to release those tapes.=20
WOODRUFF: Does this new material on balance cast Mr. Hubbell
and the Clintons in a better light?=20
BURTON: Oh, I don't think so. I think that when any objective
person listens to these tapes, they'll know that Suzy Hubbell and
Webb Hubbell were very concerned about Suzy Hubbell losing her
job, and that Webb Hubbell said very clearly "I guess I have to roll
over one more time" in order that she wouldn't be jeopardized.=20
WOODRUFF: If that's the case, then why didn't you go ahead and
release all this material to begin with?=20
BURTON: Because, as I said before, on those tapes and I'm sure
you're going to listen to them, you'll hear personal things between
Mr. Hubbell and his wife. I didn't think those things should be in the
public domain. So we tried to edit those things out. But
unfortunately, the media and the Democrats said oh, my gosh we
altered the tapes to alter the meaning, and I don't want that to be the
case whatsoever. So I had no choice but to go ahead and release the
tapes in question.=20
WOODRUFF: So when Mr. Waxman, Congressman Waxman says
quote, "there was a systematic effort to mislead the public," he says,
quote, "crucial passages that appear to exonerate the president and
the first lady were deleted." Your response.=20
BURTON: My response is that should be laid to rest right this
minute because you got the tapes. You can listen to every single
word on them. The American people will know for sure very clearly
what was said by Mr. Hubbell and his wife.=20
WOODRUFF: Did you or your staff again, as Mr. Waxman charges,
intentionally alter the transcripts?=20
BURTON: Of course not. When you've got 150 hours of tapes and
you condense it condense down to one hour obviously you're going
to do things people will be concerned about. They'll say you left too
much in or took too much out. I'll tell you in this, anybody who
came in and wanted listen to those tapes and the transcripts we were
allowing them to listen to the tapes. The tapes were there and they
looked at transcripts and stopped where the transcripts were instead
of listening to the tapes.=20
WOODRUFF: Mr. Burton, what do you say to these new reports
late today that Democrats are considering announcing that they will
go along with immunity for some witnesses for Whitewater
witnesses if you will step down as chairman of the committee?=20
BURTON: Let me just tell you, every single person who has
investigated this administration, whether it's Mr. Starr, Senator
Thompson, myself, Congressman Clinger (ph) or Congressman
Leach, every single person who has even raised one issue about this
administration has been attacked, vilified and they've tried to
destroy them, and that includes the women that are involved as well.
All I can say to you is that I'm not going to be intimidated by Mr.
Waxman or the Democrats. We're going to continue with our
investigation. We're going to do it in an honorable way because the
American people have a right to know the truth. They have a right to
know whether or not our foreign policy was compromised because
of campaign contributions, and they have a right to know if our
defense was jeopardized because of campaign contributions.=20
WOODRUFF: What about, Mr. Burton, the so-called growing
worries among Republican ranks in the House about how your
investigation has been conducted? We're told that some aides to
Speaker Gingrich went to members of your staff, asking that
communications be improved, and saying that they were very critical
of the way these tapes were released last week.=20
BURTON: Well, let me just tell you this. You guys always come up
with unnamed sources. You name them. The fact of the matter is I
meet with the speaker on a regular basis and you and everybody in
the media says unnamed sources said this and unnamed sources said
that. I'm still the chairman. I'm going to be the chairman. I'm working
with the speaker and I'm working with Representative Thomas to get
to the bottom of this scandal, and I'm not going to change and I'm not
going to back off.=20
WOODRUFF: So is it not the case then that some aides to Speaker
Gingrich met with members of your staff to discuss the way this
investigation is going now?=20
BURTON: I meet with the speaker on a regular basis. My aides
meet with aides to the speaker on a regular basis, so that's not an
uncommon thing.=20
WOODRUFF: Well, let me ask you about this, Mr. Burton. You
have become, to a large degree now, the center of a controversy
here, the focus of a controversy. Is that -- and one has to assume that
wasn't your initial intent. What has gone awry here?=20
BURTON: Let me ask you what has gone awry with Mr. Starr's
investigation? You guys report on TV all the time that his numbers
have been driven down to 11 percent. Some of do you it with glee.
Anyone who is investigating the president is going to be attacked,
and I'm no exception.=20
And I fully expected that when I started. Newt fully expected that I
would be attacked, and I have. But I have a job to do, just like the
president says he has a job to do. I have a job to do to try to get to
the bottom of this, just like Mr. Starr does, and I'm not going to shirk
my responsibility.=20
WOODRUFF: Do you have any intention of reconsidering your
royal as chairman of the committee? Do you plan to stay on in that
position?=20
BURTON: Of course. You don't stop an investigation like this right
in the middle of it. When you hear the other side squealing like a
bunch of pigs then you understand you're getting somewhere near the
truth. And they're all screaming to high heaven they want me out of
there because they're feeling the pressure. Mr. Hubbell's comments
themselves are pretty dog gone revealing, and they don't want that
sort of thing out in the public, because they don't want the people to
know what's going on.=20
WOODRUFF: And among your own Republican ranks, are you not
concerned that some of your own colleagues in your own party may
be having misgivings about the way this is going?=20
BURTON: Who are you talking about?=20
WOODRUFF: Well, for one Congresswoman Connie Morella, who
did not vote for immunity the last go-around.=20
BURTON: Well, Connie has been a very good member of my
committee and Connie and I work very well together. We have had
differences of opinion like all members do, but she's a good
committee member and I have no problem with our work
relationship. So I don't know where you're getting that.=20
WOODRUFF: All right, Congressman Dan Burton, chairman of the
House Reform Oversight Committee -- Government Reform &
Oversight Committee, we thank you very much for joining us.=20
BURTON: Thank you.=20
WOODRUFF: When we come back, who is winning the political
battle over the Hubbell tapes? Two members of CNN's "CAPITAL
GANG" will weigh in. And if you want to hear all the Hubbell tapes
being released today, look for them on the CNN-"Time" all politics
Web site.=20
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[23]
Samizdat News
Richclem@aol.com
Well, it's Starr-Day minus 3 and counting. The grand
jury in Arkansas expires on May 7th, and sometime
between then and the end of May, Ken Starr will release
the first part of his report.
Could we have a sound of trumpets, please?
Something that has been downplayed by the liberal
media is that he's had roughly 40 investigators working
for about 4 years now. That's an awful lot of people to
work on nothing, as Pres. Bill and the Dem's are
hoping.
I mean, unless these guys were sitting around
answering phones, there's going to be evidence about
an awful lot of corruption in Arkansas, and not just
about a small-change bank fraud scheme.
Considering Bill was governor, much of it will
have his fingerprints on it, maybe even literally
speaking. Hah, can anyone see the FBI entering
the White House to take Bill's prints?
--------------------------------------------------
>>"Give Bill a second term, and Al Gore and I will be turned
loose to do what we really want to do."--Hillary Clinton,
Democratic Fundraiser<<HarryPike
Uh, by this, does Hillary mean a second prison term?
Is she planning to convert the inmates to Socialism or
something?
Just wondering, I mean.
------------------------------------
It's very hard work for Bill's grovelling toadies in the
media not to notice what's really happening, but when
the going gets tough, the tough get going.
Here's tough Tony Lewis of the NYTimes:
>>If there has been a slimier political act in Washington
in recent decades, I do not remember it. Representative
Dan Burton, Republican of Indiana, reached depths of
degradation in publishing transcripts of telephone conv-
ersations that Webster L. Hubbell had, from prison, with
his wife, friends and lawyers. <<Anthony Lewis
Poor Tony seems to have severe memory problems, heh.
I guess according to little Tony, it's not "slimy" for the
President to bring Chinese espionage agents into
important government positions and into the White
House.
It's not "slimy" to send private detectives to dig dirt
about federal investigators in an important ongong federal
probe, in order to intimidate them.
It's not "slimy" to send a photographer to try and take
pictures of a duly appointed federal prosecutor, Ken Starr
having an affair in order to discredit him.
It's not "slimy" to intimidate American citizens into
silence about affairs they had with Pres. Bill, or even that
Bill made unwanted advances toward them.
It's not "slimy" to grossly violate just about every
campaign finance law ever written, in order to cheat
Americans out of a fair election.
It's not "slimy" for a sittting president to tell lie after
lie after lie after lie to the American people, in order to
hide his gross and illegal conduct.
Little Tony himself, is coated with slime.
RichClem
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
The POLITICAL DIGEST is essentially an Internet "Clipping=20
Service." We gather many "Political News Articles" and "Political=20
Columns and Editorials" that are on the Internet and combine them into=20
one text file, just as a "Clipping Service" does for people with=20
"Hard Copies" of newspapers. We do NOT charge for the material.=20
NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
TPD (THE POLITICAL DIGEST) which contains political=20
articles only and will average about 200 K. Cost is $90.00 per year.
TPDL (THE POLITICAL DIGEST LITE) which will average=20
about 50 K and will be selected articles out of the TPD & TPDP.=20
TPDP (THE POLITICAL DIGEST PLUS) which is all=20
Commentary's and Editorials from all over the nation, plus selected=20
other articles that we find interesting. This will average about=20
250K. TPDP costs $90.00 per year.
TPDXTRA (THE POLITICAL DIGEST XTRA) which is FREE=20
but sent out on an infrequent basis. It contains things too large=20
for TPDL and doesn't fit into TPD & TPDP very well.=20
Usually TPDXTRA will contain only one item.=20
To subscribe to TPD and/or TPDP mail Cash, Check, or money=20
order to:
Wayne Mann
1079 Farroll
Arroyo Grande, Ca. 93420-4136
To receive THE POLITICAL DIGEST LITE=20
just send an e-mail message with the word subscribe TPDL=20
in the subject line to tpd@callamerica.net.=20
To stop receiving the TPDL just send an e-mail message with=20
Unsubscribe TPDL or in the subject line to tpd@callamerica.net.=20
Thank you. No Charge, it's FREE.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
\\/ayne //\ann
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of=20
ordinary Americans ..."
-- (President Bill Clinton
USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A)
