To: tejek who wrote (133539 ) 2/23/2001 9:53:43 PM From: hmaly Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570742 Ted.....Re,,? They could not possibly have anticipated the brouhaha in the press over these pardons? They thought no one would read the pardons in spite of the fact that they are a matter of public record? They convinced themselves that everyone would understand how much work goes into reviewing pardons and would realize that they deserved the additional pay? <<<<<<< Ted. It probably is none of the above, but I would put no 1 with arrogance. Arrogance in that he believed from his press clippings and polls that his popularity would overcome everything; arrogance in that he believed that all he had to do was deny, and without proof of a direct connection (all politicians are well versed in accepting money and denying a connection.); his denial; just as it did in the whitewater affair, would be enough to carry the day. Arrogance to think that as he had done before, he could once again parlay the charges by the republicans into another triumph. Did he do it for the money? No, but he got other benefits. He got a lot of money donated toward his monument to his greatness, his library. By acceding to the Braswell and Vignoli pardons, he did a favor for his brother in law, and made a couple of donors for the dems. happy; which increased his power within the party. After all, by controlling the party by putting McAuliff in charge, and increasing their donations, Hillary could be a shoe in for the democratic nomination. So, my answer is arrogance combined with the fact that he didn't anticipate the brouhaha in the press over the pardons. When he was president, Bill had the bully pulpit to control the press. He doesn't have it anymore. I doubt it it was money, so much as using the pardons to gain friends and to consolidate his base for 2004.