Hillary Clinton is lying through her teeth and she knows it.

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

And she knows the press will not call her on it because she controls the access to the lone rock star of the Democrat Party, President William Jefferson Clinton. So like Easom Jordan and Saddam Hussein, there will be no outing of her lies…

But right now, you Democrats need to pay attention because she is blasting “The Chimp” for firing eight federal prosecutors when her husband fired them all. She is saying that Gonzales must be neutral and not take the President’s side after her husband sent Janet Reno out to explain why Web Hubbell needed all new lawyers. She is saying this is not normative when it in fact is; it was her husband’s act that was unprecedented. She knows you hate George Bush so much that you will not call her on her lie. She is also currently running for President.

You hate George Bush for being a liar. Do NOT vote for this woman, it is NOT a vote for Bill, it is a vote for a liar.

 

[Plasmaball]

here is a tissue you cry baby

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Ignoring the long standing tradition of State attorney's leaving office when the President that appointed them does... Those that Clinton fired did not. It was only unprecedented because those attorneys refused to leave office after Clinton won the Presidency. That had not happened before.

They also weren't in the midst of investigations into members of the President's political party, nor were they singled out for firing as these eight were. Clinton also didn't want to replace those attorneys with appointees not approved by Congress using a new provision in the Patriot act.

You don't have a fucking leg to stand on and neither does Gonzalez.

 

[Sir_Roger]

Get real man, she is a politician, their whole life is about lying.

It is what they do best, along with never giving a straight answer to a question.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Are you calling Barack Obama a liar?

Show me one.

 

[Lasher]

A politician? Lying? So it ain't so?

Excuse while I go watch to see if the sun actually rises today.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

They also weren't in the midst of investigations into members of the President's political party, nor were they singled out for firing as these eight were.

Ishmael and busybody are going to eat you alive; I'm not in the mood for nonsense.

 

[Lasher]

Are you calling Barack Obama a liar?

Of course.

Did you hear him in Selma?

That drawl was borderline Dukakis in the Tank.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

A politician? Lying? So it ain't so?

Excuse while I go watch to see if the sun actually rises today.

Show me one Obama lie.

 

[Plasmaball]

They also weren't in the midst of investigations into members of the President's political party, nor were they singled out for firing as these eight were.

Ishmael and busybody are going to eat you alive; I'm not in the mood for nonsense.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

When did McCain lie?

 

[Ishmael]

Ignoring the long standing tradition of State attorney's leaving office when the President that appointed them does... Those that Clinton fired did not. It was only unprecedented because those attorneys refused to leave office after Clinton won the Presidency. That had not happened before.

They also weren't in the midst of investigations into members of the President's political party, nor were they singled out for firing as these eight were. Clinton also didn't want to replace those attorneys with appointees not approved by Congress using a new provision in the Patriot act.

You don't have a fucking leg to stand on and neither does Gonzalez.

Bull shit.

What about the Fed. attorney that was 30 days out from indicting Rostenkowski? Hmmmm?

I'm going to have to go find where you get this shit from.

Ishmael

 

[Lasher]

When did McCain lie?

Apparently in during the 2000 primary campaign when he said he supported a woman's right to choose and was against overturning Roe v. Wade.

Cause know he's all for overturning Roe v. Wade.

Or is lying now and was telling the truth then.

 

[Plasmaball]

When did McCain lie?

when he said he wouldn't bow to the Evangelicals.
You know like Fawell and Pat, and then you know, made a speech at jerry's "school"

 

[busybody..]

Hey ISH

I told you

The latest REGIONAL polls show HRC is a freefall and MUSLIMHussein rising to almost a tie EVERYWHERE


The feeling amongst the insiders is that HRC speaks, says nothing and is just a walking soundbite and untrustworthy

And

As I told you also

When she will FALL behind in ONE or TWO regions or polls, her "support" will crater and she is dead

SHE WONT BE THE NOMINEE

Good,

The MUSLIM will be easy prey!

 

[Ishmael]

Hey ISH

I told you

The latest REGIONAL polls show HRC is a freefall and MUSLIMHussein rising to almost a tie EVERYWHERE


The feeling amongst the insiders is that HRC speaks, says nothing and is just a walking soundbite and untrustworthy

And

As I told you also

When she will FALL behind in ONE or TWO regions or polls, her "support" will crater and she is dead

SHE WONT BE THE NOMINEE

Good,

The MUSLIM will be easy prey!

Hey BB!!! Might want to go back and search my old posts where I predicted that HRC stood a good chance of NOT being the nominee. I'm pretty sure it was BEFORE the 2004 election. Or ask AJ, he'll remember.

Ishmael

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Still no Obama lie, but we proved why McCain won't be President...




If it's all politicval to CYA, why the hell didn't they fire Fitzmas? This all happened LAST year...



Clinton got his investigation stopped dead in its tracks. Scooter got fucked.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Not only that bro, but TWB even posted his dislike, I just want to see if any of our identified Democrats will come out and admit that if Bush is really doing something wrong, then the Clintons did far worse and don't deserve another shot to come in and fire the entire travel office and all the US attorneys. They would completely disrupt the war on terror by firing anything remotely labled as "Neo-con," or part of the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" that she is still touting (and Rush claims to be the leader of).

 

[Ishmael]

Jesus, I heard the sound bite where she trotted out the VRWC. Either she's run out of tricks, or she's a borderline paranoid. (Maybe not even border line.)

Ishmael

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Bull shit.

What about the Fed. attorney that was 30 days out from indicting Rostenkowski? Hmmmm?

I'm going to have to go find where you get this shit from.

Ishmael

It was at the beginning of Clinton's term when he dumped all of the SAs, not near the end of his second.. Show that it was politically motivated and that that ONE SA you mentioned was singled out because he wasn't bending to political pressure to investigate Republicans..

You're full of shit.

 

[Ishmael]

It was at the beginning of Clinton's term when he dumped all of the SAs, not near the end of his second.. Show that it was politically motivated and that that ONE SA you mentioned was singled out because he wasn't bending to political pressure to investigate Republicans..

You're full of shit.

Doesn't matter. Federal prosecutors are just like generals, they serve at the pleasure of the president.

They are political patronage positions. Everything associated with those positions is politcal. You are deluding yourself if you think otherwise no matter which party is in power. Unless you can come up with an iron clad 'obstruction of justice' charge you're just whistling in the dark.

Ishmael

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Doesn't matter. Federal prosecutors are just like generals, they serve at the pleasure of the president.

They are political patronage positions. Everything associated with those positions is politcal. You are deluding yourself if you think otherwise no matter which party is in power. Unless you can come up with an iron clad 'obstruction of justice' charge you're just whistling in the dark.

Ishmael

Nah, my guess is they're looking at conspiracy charges and ethics charges against the congresspersons involved.

Rats on a sinking ship.

 

[Ishmael]

Nah, my guess is they're looking at conspiracy charges and ethics charges against the congresspersons involved.

Rats on a sinking ship.

Three were fired for NOT pursuing election fraud invesitgations.

Ishmael

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Three were fired for NOT pursuing election fraud invesitgations.

Ishmael

Bullshit, they were fired because they didn't push the investigations ahead before the elections. The Democrats they wanted investigated were favored to win.

 

[Ishmael]

Bullshit, they were fired because they didn't push the investigations ahead before the elections. The Democrats they wanted investigated were favored to win.

Seems as if the facts destroy your hallucinations. ACORN wasn't standing for election as I recall.

The Hubbell Standard
Hillary Clinton knows all about sacking U.S. Attorneys.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:01 a.m.

Congressional Democrats are in full cry over the news this week that the Administration's decision to fire eight U.S. Attorneys originated from--gasp--the White House. Senator Hillary Clinton joined the fun yesterday, blaming President Bush for "the politicization of our prosecutorial system." Oh, my.

As it happens, Mrs. Clinton is just the Senator to walk point on this issue of dismissing U.S. attorneys because she has direct personal experience. In any Congressional probe of the matter, we'd suggest she call herself as the first witness--and bring along Webster Hubbell as her chief counsel.

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno--or Mr. Hubbell--gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

At the time, President Clinton presented the move as something perfectly ordinary: "All those people are routinely replaced," he told reporters, "and I have not done anything differently." In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition.

Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in the firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was "within 30 days" of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton's economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton.

Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the Clintons' Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint "Friend of Bill" Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information from another FOB, David Hale, on the business practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. Clinton. When it comes to "politicizing" Justice, in short, the Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the Clintons.

And it may be this very amateurism that explains how the current Administration has managed to turn this routine issue of replacing Presidential appointees into a political fiasco. There was nothing wrong with replacing the eight Attorneys, all of whom serve at the President's pleasure. Prosecutors deserve supervision like any other executive branch appointees.

The supposed scandal this week is that Mr. Bush had been informed last fall that some U.S. Attorneys had been less than vigorous in pursuing voter-fraud cases and that the President had made the point to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Voter fraud strikes at the heart of democratic institutions, and it was entirely appropriate for Mr. Bush--or any President--to insist that his appointees act energetically against it.

Take sacked U.S. Attorney John McKay from Washington state. In 2004, the Governor's race was decided in favor of Democrat Christine Gregoire by 129 votes on a third recount. As the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and other media outlets reported, some of the "voters" were deceased, others were registered in storage-rental facilities, and still others were convicted felons. More than 100 ballots were "discovered" in a Seattle warehouse. None of this constitutes proof that the election was stolen. But it should have been enough to prompt Mr. McKay, a Democrat, to investigate, something he declined to do, apparently on grounds that he had better things to do.

In New Mexico, another state in which recent elections have been decided by razor thin margins, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias did establish a voter fraud task force in 2004. But it lasted all of 10 weeks before closing its doors, despite evidence of irregularities by the likes of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn. As our John Fund reported at the time, Acorn's director Matt Henderson refused to answer questions in court about whether his group had illegally made copies of voter registration cards in the run-up to the 2004 election.

As for some of the other fired Attorneys, at least one of their dismissals seemed to owe to differences with the Administration about the death penalty, another to questions about the Attorney's managerial skills. Not surprisingly, the dismissed Attorneys are insisting their dismissals were unfair, and perhaps in some cases they were. It would not be the first time in history that a dismissed employee did not take kindly to his firing, nor would it be the first in which an employer sacked the wrong person.

No question, the Justice Department and White House have botched the handling of this issue from start to finish. But what we don't have here is any serious evidence that the Administration has acted improperly or to protect some of its friends. If Democrats want to understand what a real abuse of power looks like, they can always ask the junior Senator from New York.

Copyright © 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Ishmael