Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kaliico who wrote (9512)	12/17/1998 9:53:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

Kaliico, Neal Boortz is going into syndication for nationwide distribution after the 1st of the year. Be sure to tune in. The Neal Boortz Show -- News Talk 750 WSB -- Atlanta Thursday, December 17, 1998 The Question --- Just how far will Bill Clinton go to preserve his political power? SCOTT RITTER'S WORDS NOT GETTING MEDIA COVERAGE Was the attack on Iraq the right thing to do? Probably so. Was it the right time to do it? Now there's a good question. It does seem to be a rather odd coincidence that the bombings started the day before an impeachment debate in the House – and just hours after House leadership announced that they would delay the impeachment matter if there is an attack on Iraq. There is one very knowledgeable person out there who is absolutely convinced that the timing of this attack has everything to do with the impeachment effort. That person's name is Scott Ritter. Ritter was the former chief U.N. arms inspector in Iraq. He quit in protest of the weak efforts on the part of the U.N. and the United States to demand compliance with Iraq in the inspection efforts. Ritter is the inspector whom the Iraqis feared the most. Today's New York Post reports that Ritter says that "you have no choice tut to interpret this as a ‘wag the dog' scenario." Here are some of the points made by Ritter: In mid-November, after Hussein again promised full cooperation with the inspectors, and after Clinton called off air strikes, U.N. inspectors rushed back into Iraq. Ritter claims that the U.N. knew there were no weapons at the selected inspection sites. Ritter notes that while the report of chief inspector Richard Butler said that Hussein was not complying with the inspections, another report by the International Atomic Energy Commission said that Iraq was complying. Ritter states that Butler's report was necessary, but that there seemed to be a political motivation behind the report. Ritter claims that U.S. government told him about three weeks ago that when the inspections resumed there would be two considerations at work. One would be the Ramadan Islamic holidays, the other would be the impeachment hearings. Perhaps Ritter's most revealing statement is that Butler talked to Clinton's National Security Advisor no less than four times by telephone while he was drafting his report detailing Hussein's failure to cooperate. According to Ritter, Butler was receiving instructions to "sharpen the language in his report to justify the bombing." You will remember that several months ago Ritter claims that Clinton was using his authority to cancel surprise inspections that were almost guaranteed to expose Iraq's weapons program. You may feel differently, but I think Scott Ritter is very credible on this issue. He has yet to do anything to harm that credibility. Sorry, you just can't say the same for Clinton. So --- why did Clinton stymie the inspection programs several months ago only to start the bombing now? The reality here is sobering. The reality is that Clinton has shown that he will do absolutely anything to save his political skin. Anything. He will trash the reputations of innocent people. He will commit perjury. He will obstruct justice. He will destroy and hide records. He will collect confidential FBI files. He will allow the entire country to sink into political turmoil in order to preserve his power. Who can say he wouldn't time an attack on Iraq to further delay these impeachment hearings. Sorry, folks. I'll go with "Wag the Dog." MILITARY MORALE During his media briefing yesterday the Secretary of Defense said that a debate in the congress on the issue of impeachment at the present time would be bad for the morale of our military. Nonsense. The men and women in uniform in this country have not forgotten Clinton's professed loathing of the military; nor have they forgotten that Clinton has virtually decimated the military with spending cuts. If you want an immediate boost in the morale of our armed forces, vote for impeachment. I'll tell you who's morale would be affected. The takers of our society, that's who. The insipid whiners who moan "Leave our president alone." Oh, and Hillary. Her morale might take a beating too. How unfortunate. CLINTON'S SPEECH TO THE NATION See if you can find the text of Clinton's speech to the nation yesterday. Read it, line for line. While you are reading it see if you can transpose Hussein's name with Clintons. Replace references to the UNSCOM inspectors with references to Kenneth Starr's prosecutors … Here. I'll give it a try for you. First, the excerpt from Clinton's speech. Second, in italics, my translation. "Iraq has failed to cooperate (with the inspections). Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspections." Bill Clinton has failed to cooperate with the independent counsel. Indeed, he has actually placed new restrictions on the availability of documents and the testimony of White House staff. "Iraq has repeatedly blocked Unscom from inspecting suspect sites." Clinton has repeatedly blocked Kenneth Starr from interrogating witnesses. "Iraq repeatedly restricted Unscom's ability to obtain necessary evidence." Clinton has repeatedly restricted Starr's ability to obtain necessary evidence through his lies and misleading statements. "Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors, indeed we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of the Unscom inspection." Clinton has failed to turn over documents requested by the independent counsel. In face, we know that many records of the Rose Law Firm relating to Whitewater were ordered destroyed in anticipation of impending investigations. "Saddam's deception has defeated (the inspectors) effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors." Clinton's deception has hindered the investigation. Instead of the independent counsel investigating Clinton, Clinton has attempted to discredit the independent counsel. "This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf." This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of our system of justice and the rule of law. "If we turn out backs on his defiance the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed." If we turn out backs on Clinton's defiance of the Constitution and our rule of law, the credibility of our system of law will be destroyed. "We are delivering a powerful message against Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay the price." We are delivering a powerful message against Bill Clinton. If you act recklessly, you will pay the price. It would seem that Clinton and Hussein understand each other quite well. THE MIND OF JOE LOCKHART He's the president's new press secretary. Here's a direct quote from the transcript of yesterday's press briefing. "And I think if you read closely what many of the members who are coming out and are saying, that they view this vote as some sort of mechanism to punish the President because they don't like him." So, there you have it. The Republicans are pushing for impeachment because they don't "like" Bill Clinton. He also said, though it wasn't included in his transcript, that the Republicans were pushing for impeachment because they are "mad" at Clinton and they "don't like the way he talks." HOW ABOUT A "KNOW YOUR CALLER" PROGRAM? Over the past few weeks we have discussed the FDIC "Know Your Customer Program" at length. Under this plan banks and other financial institutions are required to gather quite a bit of information on their customers. Very few people seem pleased with this government intrusion into our financial affairs. It occurred to me yesterday that this "Know Your Customer" program is not unlike another program that was proposed by bureaucrats some years ago. We could call it a "Know Your Caller" program. The idea was proposed as a way to get a handle on the growing threat of talk radio! Washington was just waking up to the reality of tens of thousands of Americans trading ideas and thoughts on government on the federally controlled airwaves. Under this proposal talk stations would have been required to make a positive identification of every caller, including name, address and telephone number, before they could be heard on the air. And those records would have to be preserved! The "Know Your Caller" program didn't get very far back then. With the ascendancy of talk ratio to American's number one radio format, who knows? Maybe some bureaucrats will dig that puppy out again. boortz.com