Could the Press Grow a Spine?

(WalterM140) wrote in message ...

This dirty tricks organization went full tilt in an effort to keep Clinton
from governing. They did this with the White Water scandal -- nothing there.

Ahem. Last I heard somewhere around 20 folks went to prison in the
Whitewater cases. Jim Tucker, the sitting Governor of Arkansas
went straight from the governor's house to the big house.

"Nothing there" is an incredibly arrogant lie. I'm disappointed
that you believed it.

And Vince Foster -- nothing there. As President Clinton said, Ken Starr was
determined to drive him out of office regardless of the facts -- to -negate-
the decision of the voters.

Another lie. Ken Starr exhonerated Clinton IRT Vince Foster and also
IRT whitewater and a few other allegations that I'm too tired to
recall for now. He did prepare the best case he could for impeachment
because that is part of the job of the OIC and one factor that
distinguished it from a Special Prosecutor. IMHO, and that of a
majority of Senators that best case did not justify removing Clinton
form office but Starr would have been remiss in his duties, to
put it mildly, had he refused to make that case.

As you may recall, the OIC was tasked with the dual duties of
criminal investigatrion and investigating any basis for impeachment
to avoid the conflicts that arose in the separate Justice Department
and House of Representatives investigation of the Iran Contra
Scandal. That criminal investigation was brought to a standstill
when the House granted immunity to key witnesses who then happily
claimed to be the ringleaders and skated.

As you know (and certainly as Clinton knows) each investigation done
by every independent counsel was approved, in advance, by the Attorney
General and a panel of three Federal Judges. Wheras in the past,
the Attorney General had assigned different independent counsels to
investigated independant allegations, Reno chose to keep assigning
investigation to Starr, rather than creating new independent councils.
I'm not clear on why she did that, maybe for economy, it was probably
cheaper to have one OIC pursuing a half dozen different investigations
than to have a half dozen OICs all operating independently and often
redundantly with each other.

OTOH, it worked out well for CLinton as every time Reno assigned a
new investigation to Starr a whole bunch of lying sycophants would
start proclaiming that Starr was out of control and operating without
restraint.

Of course there were other OICs during the Clinton years, but they were
investigating persons other than the Clintons themselves.

I don't know how successful they were, but I bet that if you use some
sort of statistic like how much the government spent on prosecution
for every day someone convicted by a Special Prosecutor/Independent
Counsel spent in prison Starr would rank second only to Leon Jaworski.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...
(WalterM140) wrote in message
...

This dirty tricks organization went full tilt in an effort to keep Clinton
from governing. They did this with the White Water scandal -- nothing there.

Ahem. Last I heard somewhere around 20 folks went to prison in the
Whitewater cases. Jim Tucker, the sitting Governor of Arkansas
went straight from the governor's house to the big house.

"Nothing there" is an incredibly arrogant lie. I'm disappointed
that you believed it.

In the context that the initial purpose of the probe was to get the goods on
Clinton, it was not a lie. They never uncovered sufficient involvement to
warrant an indictment against him. So, as far as Clinton was concerned, there
was nothing there.

George Z.

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message ...

In the context that the initial purpose of the probe was to get the goods on
Clinton, it was not a lie. ...


That misstatement of the charter of the OIC is also a lie.

Somehow, Clinton was better at using one lie to convince people
that another lie was true, than is Bush. Maybe it was those
bedroom eyes vs the dear inthe headlights look.

--

FF

are you kidding?


Like pornographer Ken Starr and CNN, who thrived on the opportunity to
introduce the words "oral sex" into everyday usage the way the
initials, H.B. (Horny *******) are currently being magnified, the
media is having another salacious field day. I think the real initials
that merit widespread circulation are S.M. (Stupid Morons) because
they apply to the media and to all the authorities who still think
that this is all about sex. This is about the murder of Laci Peterson
and about all the unindicted whores (feel free to be vulgar now that
the media has lowered expectations) who blame an innocent man to cover
up their own incompetence or involvement. At the very least, these
S.M.'s are obstructing justice by distorting the truth about the
murder of Laci Peterson. If it wasn't for the investigative reports of
David Sween, who has been one step ahead of the effort to frame an
innocent man, Scott Peterson would have been dead and buried by now,
just like Richard Albert Ricci was. The fact that David Sween is
responsible for saving Scott Peterson became graphically plain
recently, when the disgraced prosecution tried to save the reputation
of the incompetent, Detective Allen Brocchini. The detective had
gotten a call about how Scott dumped Laci in the ocean on April 19,
2003, a day after Scott Peterson was arrested, but Detective Allen
Brocchini did not follow up because, in his words,

"I just couldn't corroborate it, and I just didn't put a lot of stock
in it."

In retrospect, such a call is consistent with the persistent effort to
frame Scott Peterson, and investigator, David Sween, had virually made
that crystal clear when he wrote the following report:

http://www.geocities.com/botenth/scott.htm

So you see, if David Sween did not methodically and systematically
expose every absurd plot to frame Scott Peterson, the prosecution
might have fraudulently "cemented" the case against Scott early on,
and he may have died in prison, just like Richard Albert Ricci did.
The April 19 telephone call tip that Brochini dismissed is the very
same one that the prosecution has currently embraced, and that is a
clear indication of the fact that earlier efforts to frame Scott
Peterson were discarded because David Sween exposed every fraudulent
effort to "cement" the case against Scott Peterson.

If Scott has a guardian angel looking over his shoulder, his name is
David Sween, and I seriously believe that in the absence of his
brilliant reporting, Scott Peterson would be dead.

How long is the prison torture of innocent people going to be
tolerated? Why are we not charging Ken Starr for torture? With Susan
McDougal and her husband, did Starr not use cruel and unusual
punishment, did Starr not obstruct justice, did Starr not tamper with
witnesses, did Starr not violate the racketeering statutes with the
far right wing, did Star not...??? If Starr's look-a-like, Distaso,
manages to turn Scott Peterson into another Jim McDougall, are we
going to applaud this license to murder an innocent man? Jim McDougal
was convicted on May 28, 1996 of 18 charges against him. Facing up to
84 years in prison and $4.5 million in fines, McDougal agreed to
cooperate with Starr's office. His cooperation netted a reduced
sentence, and in April 1997 he was sentenced to three years in prison
and a year of house arrest, three years of probation and a $10,000
fine. Jim McDougal conveniently died in jail in March 1998. His
cooperation produced the allegation that Susan McDougal and Bill
Clinton had been lovers. Was that statement, (true or not), worth 81
years in jail and almost 4.5 million dollars? Pornographer, Ken Starr
evidently thought so. McDougall's death denied the opportunity to
prove that his original indictment was a consequence of his refusal to
lie. Perhaps, if somebody paid a hefty price for the torture of Jim
McDougal, the murders of Chandra Levy and Laci Peterson would have at
least been investigated in a competent manner, because as long as
justice is about harrassing innocent people, it doesn't exist.

http://www.geocities.com/botenth/scott.htm

(Madelin McKinnon) wrote in message . com...
are you kidding?


WTF did you come from?


... This is about the murder of Laci Peterson


No, this thread is about the American Press going soft on Bush
for fear that they won't be invited to any more of the press
conferences he doesn't give anyhow...

We go sidetracked into a discussion of Bill Clinton and Ken Starr,
evidently because some folks have yet to notice that the president of
the United States is George W Bush, Not Bill Clinton.

In that context you wrote:



... Why are we not charging Ken Starr for torture?

Perhaps because there is on reason we should? If there is
a reason we should, perhaps you can point it out to us.

With Susan
McDougal and her husband, did Starr not use cruel and unusual
punishment, did Starr not obstruct justice, did Starr not tamper with
witnesses, did Starr not violate the racketeering statutes with the
far right wing, did Star not...??? ...

Indeed, to my knowledge he did not. Have you evidence that he did?

Jim McDougal
was convicted on May 28, 1996 of 18 charges against him.

Yes, McDougal, his wife and a few other associtates of the
Clintons were disgusting frauds who stole the life savings
from innocvent people who had trusted them.


Facing up to
84 years in prison and $4.5 million in fines, McDougal agreed to
cooperate with Starr's office. His cooperation netted a reduced
sentence, and in April 1997 he was sentenced to three years in prison
and a year of house arrest, three years of probation and a $10,000
fine. Jim McDougal conveniently died in jail in March 1998. His
cooperation produced the allegation that Susan McDougal and Bill
Clinton had been lovers. ...

How so? I do not recall him ever having been quoted as saying that.

McDougall's death denied the opportunity to
prove that his original indictment was a consequence of his refusal to
lie. ...

That assumes that said proof was not alredy barred by reality.

But if you'd like to discuss this somewhere approriate, like
misc.legal or alt.politics.clinton, please go ahead.

--

FF