Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Crooked Ole' Clinton.  
User currently offlineN312RC From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 2683 posts, RR: 16
Posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 821 times:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former White House counsel Jack Quinn told a congressional hearing on Thursday that President Clinton's (news - web sites) controversial last-minute pardon of fugitive billionaire Marc Rich was merited by the facts and was not the product of improper influence.

Quinn, who represented Rich and shipped his pardon application directly to the White House in December, said he kept Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder informed of his actions and never discussed anything but the facts of the case with Clinton.

Critics have blasted Clinton for pardoning Rich in the last hours of his presidency and questioned if it was influenced by Quinn's role or by hundreds of thousands of dollars in Democratic campaign donations from Rich's ex-wife Denise.

``He made this judgement on the merits,'' Quinn said of Clinton, criticizing the prosecution case against Rich as a ''house of cards.''

At the first of what promises to be a series of hearings on Clinton's pardon of Rich, a beleaguered Quinn defended the pardon to the House Government Reform Committee and said he did nothing wrong or unethical in handling it.

In a letter from her attorney released on Thursday, Denise Rich refused to answer 14 written questions submitted to her by the committee, claiming her constitutional privilege against incriminating herself.

Committee Chairman Dan Burton of Indiana, one of Clinton's most vocal Republican critics, said Rich also gave ``an enormous sum of money'' to the former president's library fund, although it was unclear how much.

Burton said the committee would go to the Justice Department (news - web sites) to seek a grant of immunity for Rich in order to force her to testify.

Rich, who fled to exile in Switzerland 17 years ago, was given an irrevocable presidential pardon shortly before Clinton left office on Jan. 20, freeing one of the world's richest men from prosecution on more than 50 counts of racketeering, wire fraud, income tax evasion and illegal oil trading with Iran.

Committee Republicans, who conducted a contentious three-year probe of alleged campaign fund-raising abuses by Clinton, said Rich was an international fugitive who renounced his citizenship and illegally traded oil with not only Iran but also Iraq, Libya, Cuba and South Africa during anti-apartheid sanctions.

``On the surface, this doesn't look like a very good case for a pardon,'' Burton said. ``So the question we have is, how did this happen?''

Democrats did not defend the pardon, but ranking Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman (news - bio - voting record) of California questioned when the Republican pursuit of Clinton would stop. Waxman said he might not have granted a pardon in such circumstances, but ``there is a crucial distinction between bad judgement and a presidential scandal.''

``To date, I see plenty of bad judgement, but no evidence of criminal wrongdoing,'' Waxman said, adding the ``cottage industry'' of investigating Clinton scandals had to end.

Two of the federal attorneys who prosecuted Rich, Sandy Weinberg and Martin Auerbach, told the panel they felt ''outrage'' over the pardon and were convinced of Rich's guilt and his unworthiness for clemency.

``Whatever the reason for the pardon, surely the reason was not the merits of the case,'' Weinberg said. The conviction of Rich and his business partner for evading more than $48 million in taxes was the biggest tax fraud case in U.S. history.

``Fundamentally Flawed''

But Quinn said the case was ``fundamentally flawed,'' based on a meritless tax charge and a misuse of federal racketeering statutes by a prosecution team headed in the early 1980s by then-U.S. Attorney Rudolph Giuliani, now mayor of New York.

At a New York news conference, Giuliani said the case must have had some merit for Rich to ``run to Zurich, Switzerland, and spend $100 million to avoid extradition.'"
Quinn also denied allegations he made an end-run around standard pardon procedures by not submitting the application through the Justice Department's pardon officer, saying many pardons often originated at the White House and he kept Holder informed of his actions.

Holder said he paid little attention to the Rich case, but after White House counsel Beth Nolan told him on Jan. 19 that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak (news - web sites) had sought a review of the issue and she asked his opinion, he told her he was ``neutral, but leaning toward if it had a foreign policy benefit.''

Nolan and former Clinton aide Bruce Lindsey were asked to testify but were out of town and did not appear. Both will be subpoenaed for a future hearing, a committee aide said.

Allegations have surfaced that Rich provided intelligence data to Israel and other countries, and Burton said without explanation that briefings from intelligence agencies indicated ''the pardon has been raised to another level.''

Under questioning from Burton, Holder said he asked Quinn for his support, probably last fall, in getting the attorney general's job in a possible Al Gore (news - web sites) administration. Holder denied a ``quid pro quo'' between the talk and the pardon.

``My actions in this matter were in no way affected by my desire to be attorney general,'' Holder said.

The Senate Judiciary Committee also will launch hearings on the pardon next week. Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (news - bio - voting record), who will head the probe, has suggested he might call Clinton to testify at future hearings.

Specter sent a letter to Senate colleagues urging support for a constitutional amendment allowing Congress to overturn presidential pardons on a two-thirds vote of each chamber.




N/A
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 747 times:

Sing a new tune for once Insane


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 733 times:

BIG




* Y a w n ! *

mb


User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 729 times:

Wow, even I am getting tired of all this. I better check my pulse...  Wow!

Oh well, Smackdown is on in 5, better go.


User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 723 times:

....But wait folks..there's more....

-One late minute pardon was traced back to the former Clinton Secretary of Energy O'Leary, who reduced security around all of America's nuclear facilities 50% (!!!) before atleast one was infiltrated by the Chinese.

-Denise Rich plead the 5th Amendment concerning questioning about the "enormous" amount of money SHE gave to the Clinton Presidential Library Fund, AND many Democrats, namely Mr. Waxman, said there was no need to find out ANY more facts about it. Fishy?

-A lady by the name of Dorothy Rivers that was convicted of stealing federal money that was suppose to have gone to troubled kids, was pardoned at the last minute before anyone could review the papers. She reportedly bought furs for herself and bought a Mercedes for her son.

-Clinton received a huge amount of money from a liberal party he has ties to in Indonesia, whose finances come from a coal mining operation. The major competing plant, which is in Utah, was then shut down.

-Twenty two of the pardons came SOO late that the Justice Department did not even have time to review the paperwork, such as the actual typing in of the crimes they were being pardoned of. Except with Clinton, this scenario has happened very little with other presidential pardoning.

-Most of the pardons came without reference papers. These reference papers have been a part of all presidential pardons for the last 150 years. The reference papers reflect why other people think that the criminal should be pardoned, and not only just the president's reasoning in other words.

Fishy Fishy Fishy......

-Dustin


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 723 times:

Mx5_boy,

I dunno, I think i'm yawning bigger than you are...bigger, is that the right word? ::sigh::

 Smile Tzvika



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4229 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 721 times:

The crowd is about to start cheering woodshed..b/c Clinton is getting taken there..... Somehow it seems that when the libs get a whipping like this they start yawning? But yes..this is all getting beaten to death anways..back to aviation stuff.....


Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineBrissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 716 times:

But wait....there's more.

NO-ONE GIVES A SHIT FOR POLITIC BICKERING HERE.

GEEZUS


We're Nuts...you talk of a new tune....well if ya turn ya speakers up it isn't exactly a "new" tune, but a new way for it.

It is exactly how I feel at the moment. (If it doesn't play automatically...here it is)

http://www.geocities.com/brissie_lions/show.mid



User currently offlineN312RC From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 2683 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 710 times:

Of course, I should have known...

You stupid libs. do this all the time. How dumb of me.



N/A
User currently offlineBrissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 707 times:

No...it is just that this news is a bit old and we are know talking about the latest important news stories....

The most important of which is the Tom Cruise/Nicole Kidman break-up.....

Get with the times!!

Show me the way to go home..........


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 10, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 700 times:

N312RC, I've said it before and I'll say it again, Clinton is gone, so start using your energy on defending Bush... boy you're gonna need it!


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 698 times:

Were Nuts...How can you honestly judge Bush before he has done anything? Is it because you know Clinton was a screw up, and you want the Rep. president to be seen in the same light? How sad.....either way.

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29840 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 684 times:

I doubt that you will get a clear answer from those above. Most of them are blind to all but their side.

I just wonder about the shit that Clinton pulled that we don't know about yet.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineCstarU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 682 times:

I just wonder about the shit that Clinton pulled that we don't know about yet.

I think he was involved in the Lincoln and McKinley assasinations...and perhaps, Archduke Ferdinand.


User currently offlineN312RC From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 2683 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 677 times:

Real funny CStarU.

I will be the FIRST to laugh in your face when all the shit that Clinton did becomes known.



N/A
User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 675 times:

KROC, name me a President in the modern age who wasn't made fun of? Can't, can you. Then why do you think Bush will break the mold? Seems like through your eyes, the only good Presidents are the ones who fly the Elephant flag! Besides, the general consensus is that Bush is a babbling moron, but as long as he has a good staff....

Anyhoo, as I said, defending Bush will be a full-time job, so get comfortable!



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 673 times:

You think Clinton has baggage, just wait until all of Dubya's crap starts showing up. At least the people elected Clinton as the president, while the Supreme Court elected Dubya.

User currently offlineHairyass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (13 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 669 times:

Clinton was a scum bag! He lied under oath and to his wife. It's too late at night for me to remember all the crappy things that jerk did in the White House.

I am so glad Bush is the president! Even though he lost the popular vote, he won according to the laws of the Constitution.

Bush will bring common sense to the White House and put an end to the truth bending and investigations of the Clinton era.


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 18, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 661 times:

>Even though he lost the popular vote

HaHa, you're dreaming again. You conveniently forget that if Clinton lost the popular vote, so did Bush and everyone else!



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 658 times:

We're Nuts, you're right. Bush lost the popular vote, Gore lost the popular vote, Clinton lost the popular vote (twice)... the list goes on.

User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 658 times:

So why single one out? Everyone lost! We haven't had a President in decades according to Mr. Ass!


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 657 times:

No, We're Nuts, he said "[Bush] won according to the laws of the Constitution," just as Clinton did (twice), just as Bush did a decade ago, just as Reagan did before him...the list goes on.

User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 657 times:

It's not the fact that Gore won the popular vote. It's the whole Florida scandall. The republicans played a double standard here. Conservatives have always wanted less federal government power, and more power to the states and local governments. Well, the Florida Supreme Court granted Gore the recounts. The republicans then went to the Supreme Court. Why were they against the recounts? They knew that if the votes were counted properly, then Gore would be our president. According to their manufacterer, the voting machines have a 3% margin of error. Bush's lead in Florida was a small fraction of a percent. Before the recounts were stopped by the supreme court, Bush's lead dwindled from about 500 to a little over a 100 votes. We all know what wouldv'e happened if the rest of them had been counted.

User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 656 times:

>The republicans then went to the Supreme Court

Thats because when you appeal a ruling (as you know), it goes to the higher court. In this case, the US Supreme Court. I don't like Federal intervention, either, but when it is necessary, it's necessary, as in the case of a much confused Florida Supreme Court.

And all this 'election scandal' crap is a broken record. Yes, we know you think there was a scandal. No, there wasn't a scandal. No, no one was disenfranchised. And, yes, its time to get over it.


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (13 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 654 times:

>No, no one was disenfranchised.

I don't know how you can say that, there were ballots that were never looked at by human eyes.

Oh, and Cba, Bush's lead was 1/10th of 1%.



Dear moderators: No.
25 Cba : Oh I'm over it. I just like to bring it up every so often that Bush never won the election, just to remind all of you cocky republicans (and right ext
26 N766AS : >I don't know how you can say that, there were ballots that were never looked at by human eyes. Yes, you are right that there were ballots that were n
27 We're Nuts : N766AS, you're the one who said that on the Conservative scale, you were over Nova Scotia... or maybe you said Newfoundland. Either way, you are an ex
28 N766AS : No, I believe it was you (or one of the other sociocrats) who claimed that. No, I don't believe I am an extremist, but I am very, very far to the righ
29 Cba : It was me who called you a right extremist. I took your statement about the LAX-JFK scale of being over Newfoundland as a statement that you were an e
30 We're Nuts : It wasn't you? My apologies then. Anyway, in this country, if you aren't in the middle, you are extreme.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Chelsea Clinton's Getting Married This Summer? posted Fri May 1 2009 23:09:37 by StasisLAX
Clinton Signs Deal To Move US Marines To Guam posted Tue Feb 17 2009 07:23:17 by Aaron747
Bill Clinton Says "Don't Blame Me..." posted Tue Feb 17 2009 06:28:39 by Mike89406
Clinton Names Envoy To Handle Climate Change posted Mon Jan 26 2009 13:04:21 by Windy95
Is Sen. Hillary Clinton Ineligible For State Depar posted Thu Dec 4 2008 05:16:28 by Starbuk7
Hillary Clinton To Accept Secretary Of State Offer posted Mon Nov 17 2008 16:29:29 by Blrsea
Will Hillary Clinton Run For US Presidency Again? posted Thu Oct 23 2008 19:25:49 by United Airline
Does Michelle Obama Try To Follow Hillary Clinton? posted Tue Aug 26 2008 15:37:44 by JetBlueGuy2006
Friday Stupid Thread .. Bill Clinton posted Fri Aug 8 2008 13:31:48 by AGM100
Olbermann Slams Clinton posted Wed Mar 12 2008 20:12:32 by FriendlySkies