The Clinton County War!

[Machiavelli's Apprentice]

This is my final post on this forum, so I put a little extra effort into it.

The Clinton County War


President William Clinton of the United States followed an age old presidential tradition - comitting political suicide in his second term.

Things certainly looked pretty grim for him - a crumbling administration and a list of scandals and conspiracies the length of his arm. His apparent demise appeared in the form of a looming impeachment hearing pushed through congress by his republican foes.

But a lucky break came up. Though they could have literally done a blind drawing and come up with a good scandal to get the president on, the Republican party apparently set their gaze on the weakest one imaginable. Guess what it was, Clinton's *ahem*, conquests, under the oval office desk! A sexual harrassment charge spearheaded by Monica Lewinski! Things still looked bad, but now he at least had a fighting chance, which he wouldn't have gotten if another incident had been chosen, like the Whitewater real estate fraud.

The Feminists make their policy quite clear concerning sexual harrassment charges - the man is always guilty, and the woman is always right. But naturally, they were willing to make an exception for their man in the white house. The feminist icons did their best to discredit Lewinsky, and at one point during the hearings, even tried to have her declared mentally unstable.

All of their efforts paid off. Clinton was acquitted and finished his final term of office as normal.


Lessons Learned

Now what can we learn from this political episode?

Well for starters, it is extremely important to keep a cool head in such a matter and not let your emotions rule you. The elephants failed to do this, and picked a charge for the impeachment rashly. They thought this kind of charge would do perfectly, but in the end it collapsed. Since when was having sex a crime, anyway?

There is a huge difference between a tactical short term victory, and a strategic long term victory, and the strategic is always more important than the tactical. This is seen quite clearly in war, where a victory appears to be won in the short term, but has disastrous consequences in the long term. For example, it is very useful to the Americans to bomb insurgent strongholds in Iraq. But this kind of indiscriminate firepower kills large numbers of civilians, so our popular support is severely weakened. So a tactical victory can turn out to be a strategic defeat.

This is what I think happened to the feminists. They hold strong to their principles when a political enemy is in trouble, but are too willing to drop them when one of their political allies gets into difficulty. In the short term, getting Clinton through the hearings was extremely useful. But in the long term, whether he was impeached or not turned out to be irrelevant. He was going to leave office in a couple of years anyway, and his conviction would have done little overall damage to the cause. But sacrificing their principles proved to be very foolish. This incident and others showed how truly insincere modern feminists are. Of course everyone still supports women's rights, but the feminist movement has been largely discredited on both the right and the left.

Remember when Awnold the Governator was running for governor in California? Several days before the election, his enemies unleashed a torrent of sexual harrassment charges at him. Did this hurt his popularity at all? Not at all, according to his landslide victory.

So a republican blunder had bad short term effects, but baited the feminist movement into making a two-faced political maneuver.

That is the story of how a tactical defeat became a strategic victory.

Thoughts, anyone?

[Erik]

Things still looked bad, but now he at least had a fighting chance, which he wouldn't have gotten if another incident had been chosen, like the Whitewater real estate fraud.

Wasn't the whitewater "scandal" a complete fantasy made up by the neo-cons?
And isn't the same true for all those other supposed scandals?

Or am I just under the influence of that fine video "the power of nightmares, part 2"?

Now what can we learn from this political episode?

That US politics isn't based on the issues but only on personalities?

[Francisco Montana]

Or am I just under the influence of that fine video "the power of nightmares, part 2"?

That would be the problem, yes.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Who are these nefarious Neo Cons we keep hearing of?

Since when was having sex a crime, anyway?

Well I could give you quite a few examples like rape or beasitality but thats not what he accused of. It was perjury. All he had to say is its none of your damn bussiness or claim his 5th amendment rights and that would have been the end of it. He chose to perjure himself. Other than that your pretty spot on.

[Guderian]

Who are these nefarious Neo Cons we keep hearing of?

Here you go a transcript for the documentary mentioned my Erik.

VO: By the mid-’90s, politics in Washington was dominated by one issue: the moral character of the President of the United States.

WOMAN IN TV COMMERCIAL : If you believe you’ve been a victim of sexual harassment by the President, we want to help.

VO: Behind this were an extraordinary barrage of allegations against Clinton that were obsessing the media. These included stories of sexual harassment; stories that Clinton and his wife were involved in Whitewater, a corrupt property deal; stories that they had murdered their close friend Vince Foster; and stories that Clinton was involved in smuggling drugs from a small airstrip in Arkansas. But none of these stories were true. All of them had been orchestrated by a young group of neoconservatives, who were determined to destroy Clinton. The campaign was centered on a small right-wing magazine called the American Spectator, which had set up what was called the “Arkansas Project” to investigate Clinton’s past life. The journalist at the center of this project was called David Brock.

CROSSFIRE ANNOUNCER : Tonight, the Arkansas allegations. In the crossfire: David Brock, of the American Spectator magazine.

DAVID BROCK : She was dressed in a raincoat and a hat, and came in at 5:15 in the morning, and had a liaison with Clinton in the game room in the bottom floor of the Governor’s mansion.

CROSSFIRE HOST : David, this is getting a little bizarre. Next thing, we’re gonna see… Jane Fonda’s gonna…

BROCK : It’s bizarre! But hey, Bill Clinton is a bizarre guy.

HOST : Wait a sec.

VO: Since then, Brock has turned against the neoconservative movement. He now believes that the attacks on Clinton went too far, and corrupted conservative politics.

INTERVIEWER (off-camera): Was Whitewater true?

BROCK : No! I mean, there was no criminal wrongdoing in Whitewater. Absolutely not. It was a land deal that the Clintons lost money on. It was a complete inversion of what happened.

INTERVIEWER : Was Vince Foster killed?

BROCK : No. He killed himself.

INTERVIEWER : Did the Clintons smuggle drugs?

BROCK : Absolutely not.

INTERVIEWER : Did those promoting these stories know that this was not true, that none of these stories were true?

BROCK : They did not care.

INTERVIEWER : Why not?

BROCK : Because they were having a devastating effect. So why stop? It was terrorism. Political terrorism.

INTERVIEWER : But you were one of the agents.

BROCK : Absolutely. Absolutely.

Source

[Francisco Montana]

Here you go a transcript for the documentary mentioned my Erik.



Source

Your source is a TV interview?


-------------------------------
1975 -- Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham marry.

1977 -- Mrs. Clinton joins the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas.

1978 -- The Clintons and the McDougals borrow nearly $200,000 from Citizens Bank to buy scenic though remote land along the White River in Flippin, Ark. Without telling Citizens Bank, they borrow $20,000 from another bank to make the down payment.

1978 -- Mrs. Clinton begins trading commodities with an initial investment of $1,000.

1978 -- Clinton is elected governor of Arkansas.

1979 -- James McDougal joins Clinton's gubernatorial administration as an economic advisor.

1979 -- Mrs. Clinton closes out her commodities account after making nearly $100,000.

1979 -- The Whitewater Development company is formed, with ownership shared between the Clintons and McDougals.

1980 -- McDougal quits his job with Clinton and buys a bank in Kingston, Ark., that he renames Madison Bank & Trust Co.

1980 -- Clinton loses his re-election bid for governor. Mrs. Clinton calls McDougal asking for money.

1980 -- Mrs. Clinton borrows $30,000 from Madison Bank to build a model home at Whitewater.

1982 -- The McDougals buy a savings and loan bank and rename it Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan.

1982 -- Clinton wins back the governorship.

1983 -- Clinton borrows $20,000 from the Security Bank of Paragould to reduce Mrs. Clinton's Madison Bank loan.

1984 -- Clinton jogs over to McDougal's office and asks him to help Mrs. Clinton by giving business to her at the Rose firm. McDougal agrees.

1985 -- Mrs. Clinton meets with McDougal, and he agrees to pay a monthly retainer to the Rose firm.

1985 -- McDougal barters the remaining Whitewater lots to Chris Wade for an airplane and the assumption of $35,000 in bank debt.

1985 -- Mrs. Clinton angrily rebuffs the McDougals' effort to have the Clintons sign over their interest in Whitewater.

1986 -- The McDougals separate.

1986 -- McDougal is forced to resign from Madison Guaranty.

1986 -- Mrs. Clinton ends Rose's retainer agreement with Madison.

1986 -- Mrs. Clinton again refuses to transfer the Clintons' interest in Whitewater to the McDougals.

1986 -- Mrs. Clinton balks at giving Susan McDougal a financial disclosure form for Citizens Bank, now renamed 1st Ozark National Bank.

1987 -- Mrs. Clinton deals directly with loan officers at 1st Ozark and assumes control of the Whitewater investment.

1987 -- Clinton signs a bill expanding branch banking, a statute that primarily benefits Twin City Bank, the parent of 1st Ozark.

1989 -- Madison fails in March, costing the taxpayers $60 million.

1989 -- McDougal is indicted on charges relating to the Castle Grande, a Madison-funded real estate project Rose attorneys, including Hillary Clinton, worked on.

1990 -- McDougal is acquitted of the charges.

1990 -- Clinton tells McDougal's lawyer he wants out of Whitewater, but Mrs. Clinton again balks.

1991 -- Clinton announces he is running for president.

1992 -- Mrs. Clinton again refuses to relinquish the Clintons' interest in Whitewater.

1992 -- Clinton is elected president.

1992 -- McDougal and Vince Foster, representing the Clintons, sign papers selling the Clintons' interest in Whitewater to McDougal for $1,000.

1992 -- Clinton's presidential campaign, responding to pressure from the media, issues a statement that the Clintons did nothing improper with Whitewater dealings.

1993 -- Webb Hubbell removes several cardboard file boxes, including those relating to Whitewater, from the Rose firm and stores them in his Washington basement.

Jan. 1993 -- Clinton is inaugurated.

July 20, 1993 -- Foster kills himself.

October 1993 -- RTC investigator Jean Lewis makes nine criminal referrals stemming from her investigation of Madison Guaranty, including one that names Clinton's 1985 gubernatorial campaign.

Dec. 23, 1993 -- Clinton says he and Mrs. Clinton will release all records pertaining to Whitewater.

Jan. 12, 1994 -- Facing mounting pressure, Clinton requests a special prosecutor be appointed.

Jan. 20, 1994 -- Robert B. Fiske Jr., a New York attorney, is appointed by Attorney General Janet Reno as independent Whitewater counsel.

Feb. 24, 1994 -- Deputy Treasury Secretary Roger Altman, who oversees the RTC, acknowledges to the Senate Banking Committee he gave White House officials a "heads-up" on the RTC Madison criminal referrals.

Feb. 25, 1994 -- Clinton aides George Stephanopoulos and Harold Ickes have a conference call with Altman to discuss RTC's choice of Republican lawyer Jay Stephens to head the Madison investigation.

Feb. 25, 1994 -- Altman recuses himself from the RTC investigation of Madison.

March 4, 1994 -- Six of Clinton's senior White House aides are subpoenaed by the FBI to testify. Fiske later subpoenas 12 more officials.

March 22, 1994 -- David Hale, former municipal judge and owner of Capital Management Services, pleads guilty to two felony counts for defrauding the Small Business Administration. Hale implicates the president, saying Clinton pressured him to make a $300,000 loan in 1986.

March 24, 1994 -- The House Banking Committee's top Republican, Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa), gives a floor speech accusing the RTC of stonewalling on public documents, and says he has evidence of a coverup.

March 24, 1994 -- Clinton goes on national TV to defend Whitewater business dealings.

April 22, 1994 -- Mrs. Clinton holds press conference to address Whitewater concerns.

June 12, 1994 -- Fiske questions both Clintons under oath.

June 30, 1994 -- In a preliminary finding, Fiske rules Vincent Foster's death a suicide, and that White House-Treasury contacts had not broken any laws.

July 26, 1994 -- The House Banking Committee begins hearings on Whitewater.

July 29, 1994 -- The Senate Banking Committee begins Whitewater hearings.

Aug. 5, 1994 -- Former Bush Administration Solicitor General Kenneth Starr appointed as replacement for Fiske.

Aug. 29, 1994 -- Roger Altman resigns as deputy Treasury chief, after Senate hearings into White House-Treasury contacts reveal inconsistencies in his testimony.

July 18, 1995 -- Thirteen days of Senate Whitewater Hearings, chaired by Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-N.Y.) begin, looking into whether documents were removed from Vincent Foster's office the night he died.

August 7, 1995 -- House Banking Committee hearings, chaired by Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) begin, looking into whether White House officials improperly tried to influence the RTC investigation of Madison Guaranty and Whitewater. RTC investigator Jean Lewis testifies her superiors made "a concerted effort to obstruct, hamper, and manipulate the results of our investigation."

Aug. 17, 1995 -- Jim and Susan McDougal and Guy Tucker indicted by a grand jury for fraud and conspiracy.

Sept. 29, 1995 -- RTC investigator Jean Lewis resigns.

Dec. 21, 1995 -- The White House turns over disputed Whitewater notes to avoid a federal court challenge pushed by Sen. Alfonse D'Amato's Senate Whitewater committee.

Jan. 4, 1996 -- Carolyn Huber, longtime Clinton aide and White House assistant, finds Mrs. Clinton's long-subpoenaed Rose Law firm Whitewater billing records.

Jan. 27, 1996 -- Mrs. Clinton testifies for more than four hours before a federal grand jury regarding the appearance of her billing records.

Feb. 5, 1996 -- Clinton subpoenaed to testify in the trial of Jim and Susan McDougal and Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker.

Feb. 8, 1996 -- Senate Whitewater investigators review expletive-laden notes turned over by the White House which reveal a concern over what former Arkansas securities commissioner Beverly Bassett Schaffer might tell the Senate Committee about the Clintons' involvement in Whitewater. "Item by item, make sure her story is okay," the memo reads. "If the effort is botched, we're done."

Feb. 9, 1996 -- Arkansas financial regulator Beverly Bassett Schafer says she was pressured by White House aides to make a public statement favoring the Clintons in their role in Whitewater. According to notes of a January 1994 White House meeting, aides suggested sending someone to Arkansas to make sure Schaffer's story was "okay."

March 4, 1996 -- Whitewater trial of Jim and Susan McDougal and Gov. Tucker begins in LIttle Rock.

March 25, 1996 -- David Hale sentenced to 28 months in prison and ordered to reimburse the government $2.04 million.

April 2, 1996 -- Hale takes the stand and says Clinton pressured him to make an illegal $300,000 loan. Clinton had called the allegation "a bunch of bull."

April 8, 1996 -- Under oath, Hale concedes he can't recall the dates of various conversations he says took place.

April 8, 1997 -- His neutrality under fire, Starr defends his decision to keep private clients while working on Whitewater.

April 28, 1996 -- The president testifies by videotape from the White House, denying Hale's allegation he pressured him for a $300,000 loan.

April 30, 1996 -- Democratic Sens. Bennett Johnston's (D-La.) and Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) request for Starr to be removed from the Whitewater probe rebuffed by U.S. Court of Appeals. Johnston and Reid contend Starr is biased against Clinton.

May 1, 1996 -- Investigators identify inconsistencies in Mrs. Clinton's testimony about repayment of a loan to McDougal.

May 9, 1996 -- Clinton's testimony is played to the jury.

May 28, 1996 -- Jury finds Tucker and the McDougals guilty of 24 of the 30 counts against them.

May 30, 1996 -- Poll finds Americans believe 60 percent to 30 percent that Clinton is hiding something related to Whitewater.

May 30, 1996 -- White House surrenders Travelgate documents, avoiding contempt of Congress vote.

June 14, 1996 -- Senate Whitewater investigators ask Mrs. Clinton for more information regarding her work on the Castle Grande deal, the appearance of her Rose Law firm billing records, and the handling of documents by Webster Hubbell and Vincent Foster. She provides written responses on June 17.

June 17, 1996 -- Trial begins in Little Rock for Arkansas bankers Herby Branscum Jr. and Robert Hill, charged with 11 felony counts in their handling of Madison funds in connection with Clinton's 1990 gubernatorial re-election bid.

June 18, 1996 -- Senate Whitewater probe concludes. Republicans issue scathingly critical report of obstruction by first lady and White House aides. Democrats issue separate report concluding no wrongdoing by the Clintons or their associates.

June 19, 1996 -- House holds hearing into White House's improper collection of FBI background files.

June 19, 1996 Starr names close Clinton aide Bruce Lindsey as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hill and Branscum case.

June 20, 1996 Attorney General Reno asks Starr to look into the FBI files controversy.

June 25, 1996 -- White House turns over 2,000 Travelgate documents, averting a contempt of Congress vote for the second time.

July 7, 1996 -- Clinton testimony recorded by videotape in White House session.

July 16, 1996 -- Bruce Lindsey, an unindicted co-conspirator, testifies in Branscum and Hill trial.

July 18, 1996 -- Clinton's video testimony played before jurors. The president denies he, as governor, promised political jobs to Branscum and Hill in exchange for political donations.

Aug. 1, 1996 -- Little Rock jury acquits Hill and Branscum on four charges and deadlocks on the remaining seven.

Aug. 15, 1996 -- Jim McDougal begins cooperating with Whitewater prosecutors. His sentencing date is delayed.

Aug. 19, 1996 -- Jim Guy Tucker sentenced to four years' probation. On Aug. 20, Susan McDougal is sentenced to two years in prison.

Aug. 27, 1996 -- Contradicting Senate testimony of Clinton aides, a newly released memo indicates Mrs. Clinton was behind the 30-hour delay in releasing Vincent Foster's suicide note.

Sept. 4, 1996 -- Susan McDougal held in contempt of court for refusing to testify before federal grand jury in Little Rock, and sentenced to 18 months in jail.

Sept. 13, 1996 -- Starr decides not to re-try Arkansas bankers Herby Branscum, Jr. and Robert Hill on seven deadlocked charges.

Sept. 20, 1996 -- A bitterly divided House Government Reform and Oversight Committee approves its Travelgate report on the firing of seven longtime White House travel office workers, with committee members voting along party lines. "President Clinton has engaged in an unprecedented misuse of the executive power, abuse of executive privilege and obstruction of numerous investigations into the Travel Office matter," says Chairman William Clinger (R-Penn.). Democrats walk out of the hearing room.

Sept. 24, 1996 -- The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) issues report finding that a real estate document drafted by Mrs. Clinton when she worked at the Rose Law Firm was used by Jim McDougal's savings and loan on a "sham" transaction to evade regulations and pay $300,000 in questionable commissions.

Oct. 4, 1996 -- Starr defends his decision to address an audience on legal issues at Regent University, a law school run by conservative evangelist Pat Robertson.

Oct. 25, 1996 -- A federal court authorizes Starr to investigate whether former White House counsel Bernard Nussbaum lied to Congress about the FBI file flap.

Dec. 15, 1996 -- Starr tells the Economic Club of Detroit it has been difficult finding cooperation to get at the truth. As the cost of the investigation approaches $9 million, Starr says, "It is time-consuming and therefore expensive to investigate" and dismisses as "utterly wrong" the allegation that he's out to get the Clintons.

Nov. 11, 1996 -- Jim McDougal's sentencing delayed until Feb. 24, 1997, while he cooperates with Whitewater lawyers.

Dec. 3, 1996 -- Democratic strategist James Carville announces on national TV his intention to launch a campaign against Starr.

Jan. 30, 1997 -- Arousing speculation that payments to Webster Hubbell from Clinton allies are being investigated, Starr subpoenas the White House for documents on 14 people and six companies with connections to the wealthy Riady family, which controls the Indonesia-based Lippo Group.

Feb. 6, 1997 -- Sources say Starr's team is assembling a memo to review the evidence assembled against key figures including the president and first lady. "Evaluation time is here," a lawyer tells The Associated Press.

Feb. 9, 1997 -- The New Yorker magazine reports Jim McDougal has reversed himself, and will now testify Clinton did engage in a conversation about an illegal $300,000 loan.

Feb. 12, 1997 -- From his jail cell in Texarkana, Texas, David Hale tells The Associated Press he has only told investigators "a small, small part" of the whole Whitewater saga, and that "a lot more information will come out by the time this investigation is all over."

Feb. 17, 1997 -- Provoking speculation over the future of the Whitewater probe, officials of the Pepperdine University School of Law announce that Kenneth Starr will become dean of the school effective Aug. 1, 1997.

Feb. 22, 1997 -- After intense criticism, Starr flip flops and announces he will stay on the Whitewater investigation until any resulting prosecutions are "substantially completed."

Feb. 23, 1997 -- The Los Angeles Times reports that Starr has concluded Vincent Foster's death was a suicide.

March 5, 1997 -- News reports about earlier White House subpoenas show that Starr is investigating some $400,000 in payments from Clinton allies to Webster Hubbell for unspecified legal work in 1994 before he went on trial. The White House acknowledges on March 11 that the president was aware some of his friends had hired Hubbell. Linking the Whitewater inquiry to the flap over Democratic fund-raising, reports surface that $100,000 came from James Riady, an Indonesian businessman and longtime associate of the Clintons.

March 24, 1997 -- Starr asks a federal judge to reduce David Hale's prison sentence, saying that Hale "continues to provide information material to the grand jury's ongoing investigation into highly complex financial arrangements."

April 2, 1997 -- The White House acknowledges that Erskine Bowles and Mack McLarty contacted associates in March 1994 in an effort to get work for Webster Hubbell.

April 14, 1997 -- Jim McDougal is sentenced to three years in prison, one year in house arrest, and fined $10,000 for his Whitewater crimes. McDougal had faced as many as 84 years in prison before he decided to cooperate with Starr, who described the former Clinton business partner as at the "epicenter" of his case. McDougal claimed last year his testimony absolved the Clintons of Whitewater wrongdoing, but asked by a reporter if that was still the case, McDougal said, "I wouldn't go to the bank on that."

April 15, 1997 -- White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles testfies for about seven hours before the Whitewater grand jury in Little Rock, Ark. regarding efforts he made in 1994 to help Webster Hubbell find work.

April 22, 1997 -- At Kenneth Starr's request, a federal judge extends the term of the Little Rock federal grand jury by six months. Starr cites "extensive evidence" of possible obstruction of justice provided by Jim McDougal and other sources. The night before, McDougal repeats his claim on CNN's "Larry King Live" that Bill Clinton had discussed an illegal loan, and suggests Hillary Clinton has perjured herself. (Transcript of King show).

May 2, 1997 -- The White House indicates it will appeal to the Supreme Court a lower court's ruling that Hillary Clinton must turn over to Starr notes taken by former White House deputy counsel Jane Sherburne on Jan. 26, 1996, after the first lady's testimony before a federal grand jury in Washington.

May 5, 1997 -- The New York Times reports the Clintons were warned by their friend Jim Blair in March 1994 about the gravity of Webster Hubbell's legal problems, and that their personal attorney David Kendall was also aware. The White House denies the report undermines previous assertions by both Clintons that neither they nor any others at the White House were aware of the extent of Hubbell's woes at the time business calls were made on his behalf.

May 6, 1997 -- Starr defies a Los Angeles Superior Court judge's order to appear in his court to testify on why Susan McDougal is being held in jail.

May 6, 1997 -- In documents released by the federal judge in Little Rock, Independent Counsel Starr "candidly states ... Mrs. Clinton's testimony on several issues under investigation 'has changed over time or differs from that of other witnesses' and that she is a 'central figure' in his investigation."

May 12, 1997 -- White House lawyers petition the Supreme Court to protect the secrecy of conversations that Hillary Rodham Clinton had with former White House Deputy Counsel Jane Sherburne on Jan. 26, 1996, and with administration attorneys on July 11, 1995. Earlier, a federal appeals court ruled the attorney-client privilege does not exist for government lawyers, and that the notes had to be turned over to a Whitewater grand jury. In rare public comments, Starr says the administration is "duty-bound" to turn the notes over, while the White House accuses Starr of engaging in a "fishing expedition." Starr also says Susan McDougal, in demanding immunity from perjury charges as a precondition to testifying, is seeking a "license to lie."

May 15, 1997 -- A Washington-based federal grand jury investigating Whitewater is dismissed. On May 17, Whitewater investigators disclosed they are using another federal grand jury in Washington to on their probe.

May 18, 1997 -- ABC-TV reports that John Bates, an aide to Kenneth Starr, told an appeals judge that "we certainly are investigating individuals, and those individuals -- including Mrs. Clinton -- could be indicted."

May 19, 1997 -- A federal judge in Little Rock, Ark., rules that Jim McDougal must report to jail to begin serving his three-year sentence. Four days before reporting to prison, McDougal predicts Hillary Clinton may join him there.

May 29, 1997 -- In a 30-page brief, Starr objects to the White House appeal to the Supreme Court to deny his investigation access to Hillary Clinton's Whitewater notes taken by former deputy White House counsel Jane Sherburne. "What the case presents, at bottom, is a bold assertion of a governmental privilege against a federal grand jury's interest in securing relevant evidence," Starr said.

June 3, 1997 -- David Kendall, the Clintons' Whitewater lawyer, accuses Starr's office of violating grand jury secrecy rules to inflict "leak-and-smear damage" on his clients. In a letter to Starr, Kendall says a news article that quoted unnamed prosecutors on Starr's staff contained "plain violations of grand jury secrecy" rules. "The comments of you and persons in your office directly and indirectly quoted in the magazine article flout all these obligations," Kendall wrote. "...Grand jury secrecy rules are aimed at preventing precisely this kind of leak-and-smear damage." Starr later says that since the comments were made in court proceedings, they were proper.

June 7, 1997 -- In court papers, Starr suggests that the president might urge Susan McDougal to testify.

June 16, 1997 -- Jim McDougal reports to prison to begin his three-year sentence. Ever theatrical, he predicts Hillary Clinton may join him there.

June 20, 1997 -- Starr adds four seasoned prosecutors to his team.

June 23, 1997 -- The Supreme Court without comment refuses to consider a White House appeal of a lower court's ruling that Whitewater notes taken by government attorneys for Hillary Clinton are not protected by attorney-client privilege and must be turned over to Starr.

June 25, 1997 -- The Washington Post reports that Starr's team has questioned Arkansas state troopers about possible affairs Clinton may have had while governor of Arkansas. Democrats cry foul while Starr defends the interviews as standard prosecutorial procedure.

------------------------------------------

Source CNN (I chose CNN so you wouldn't think this was from a right-wing group)

That sure doesn't look like it was made up. There were shadey dealings going on in there, I think that's fairly evident. To be sure, there were convictions.

Whether the Clintons 'got away' with one, we'll never know. But to say this was all created by a right-wing conspiracy and neocons is disengenous, at best --and only serves to discredit your beloved Nightmare series even further.

[danzig]

Wasn't the whitewater "scandal" a complete fantasy made up by the neo-cons?
And isn't the same true for all those other supposed scandals?

Or am I just under the influence of that fine video "the power of nightmares, part 2"?

Whitewater was a case similiar to CIA Plame one imo, where there is alot of smoke (the old saying where there is smoke there is fire) but ultimately the real guilty ones in it get off and scapegoats get punished. Much like with Whitewater where a bunch of them were eventually pardoned by Clinton as one of his last acts I assume Plame will end the same way. As always tends to be the case with US political scandals the opposition siezes upon it and attempts to make it more then it really is and actually harm the case. Only in America!

[Guderian]

Your source is a TV interview?

No that was what was in the documentary. Rush I belive was curious as to who these neocons were...

Who is David Brock?

In the January 1994 issue of The American Spectator, Brock, by then on staff at the magazine, published a story about Bill Clinton's time as governor of Arkansas that made accusations that bred Troopergate. Among other things, the story contained the first printed reference to Paula Jones, referring to a woman named "Paula" who state troopers said offered to be Clinton's girlfriend. Jones called Brock's account of her encounter with Clinton "totally wrong," and she later sued Clinton for sexual harassment, a case which became entangled in the Independent Counsel's investigation of Whitewater scandal and eventually led to impeachment charges against the president.

And this man claims that all of it was false, what credibility do these accusations have then?

And you forget to add that both the Independant inquiry and reports from investigators could not find evidence to prove wrongdoing on behalf of the Clintons.

Kenneth Starr's successor, Robert Ray, released a report in September of 2000 that stated "This office determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either President or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct." Ray's report effectively ended the Whitewater investigation.

The Clintons were cleared of any wrongdoing in two reports subsequently prepared by the San Francisco law firm of Pillsbury Madison and Sutro for the Resolution Trust Corporation, which was overseeing the liquidation of Madison Guaranty.

Plus a timeline is not evidence of anything. It is just detailing what happened..

[danzig]

Who is David Brock?

Someone who is a prime example of what is wrong with journalism, he was the THEN right winger behind the whole Paula Jones scandal then flipped side to the left wing to write a book.

[Francisco Montana]

[A] timeline is not evidence of anything. It is just detailing what happened..

Do you honetly not see the contradiction in your statement here? A time line is not evidence of anything. It just details WHAT HAPPENED. I won't even laugh. I'll be nice.

And you forget to add that both the Independant inquiry and reports from investigators could not find evidence to prove wrongdoing on behalf of the Clintons.

CNN didn't forget to include that at all. Did you read the whole post? Did you see the Clintons found guilty in that post?

Sometime it's best to concede than to continue losing face.

(BTW, you do realize not all documentaries are based in fact. Many times, especially political docs, are myred in bias and inuendo.)

[Guderian]

Someone who is a prime example of what is wrong with journalism, he was the THEN right winger behind the whole Paula Jones scandal then flipped side to the left wing to write a book.

True that, but yet he claims he flipped because he was sick of the (neo) conservative "media machine". Now the guy is hated by both conservatives and liberals both left and right...hate to be him.

[danzig]

True that, but yet he claims he flipped because he was sick of the (neo) conservative "media machine". Now the guy is hated by both conservatives and liberals both left and right...hate to be him.

Yeah probably because his conversion seemed so fake and full of bs. I mean come on he got sick of necon media machine when he was at the very heart of that 'machine' his conversion seemed more based on his bank account then anything else. Besides what next Karl Rove will retire because he is sick of politics being dirty? Ted Kennedy quitting politics sick of the 'royal' Bush family having too much influence in the US?

[Guderian]

Do you honetly not see the contradiction in your statement here? A time line is not evidence of anything. It just details WHAT HAPPENED. I won't even laugh. I'll be nice.

So a timeline is evidence of what? I suggest you look up the definition of evidence and how to use it in context. Did I deny that the whitewater scandal happened? no, so what issue exactly is the timeline "evidence" meant to address?

CNN didn't forget to include that at all. Did you read the whole post? Did you see the Clintons found guilty in that post?

If you are going to post a timeline i would expect you to post a timeline that covers the enitire time of the scandal, not just of what suits you. I don't even know why you posted the timeline...my post was addressed to Rush.

[EDIT]

Yeah probably because his conversion seemed so fake and full of bs. I mean come on he got sick of necon media machine when he was at the very heart of that 'machine' his conversion seemed more based on his bank account then anything else. Besides what next Karl Rove will retire because he is sick of politics being dirty? Ted Kennedy quitting politics sick of the 'royal' Bush family having too much influence in the US

Either way the David Brock evidence that contributed to the Kenneth Starr inquiry (i.e Paula Jones) is nullified...if you belive David Brock then it's all false, if you belive the attacks on David Brock, that he is a questionable character then it is hard to belive his Paula Jones accusation.

[Francisco Montana]

The timeline of events is from 1975 - 1997. That's 22 years. I gave you the link to the CNN site for you to see if I selectively chose things to omit.

Evidence - A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment.

If an account of event and what happened doesn't fit that description, then I don't know what would (not to mention we may want to rethink our judicial systems). CNN (I HATE CNN!!) gave a detailed account and it debunked your theory that this was all 'made up'.

As for you addressing Rush, well excuse me, sir. Last I checked this was a public forum. If you would like a private conversation, take it to PMs or MSN.

You have completely lost all crediablitiy with me here tonight -- and that's a shame!

Have a nice day.

[Guderian]

If an account of event and what happened doesn't fit that description, then I don't know what would. CNN (I HATE CNN!!) gave a detailed account and it debunked your theory that this was all 'made up'.

I think you have misunderstood my reason for posting the documentary link. Rush was curious as to why everyone was babbling on about the neo cons so I posted the transcript.

Do I think whitewater was made up? no. Please show me where I said it was all "made up". As far as I know all I said was "Here you go a transcript for the documentary mentioned my Erik" (and made a type too)

But the actual accusations made against the Clintons in whitewater seem to me to be exaggerated, what it does look like is that the Clintons got caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time. And this exaggeration is also what the documentary is claiming, it is claiming that all these scandals involving the Clintons were exaggerated by the neo cons in America. It does give very good motives for thier reasons as to why they do these things. Trust me Im not going to belive it if it was just some Micheal Moore inspried witch hunt.

I aslo belive you think that I base all my opinions on the documentary, which Im telling you now is not true.

[Francisco Montana]

Wasn't the whitewater "scandal" (1)a complete fantasy made up by the neo-cons?

And isn't the same true for all those other supposed scandals?

(2)Or am I just under the influence of that fine video "the power of nightmares, part 2"?

Addressing (2):

That would be the problem, yes.

Addressing (1):

Who are these nefarious Neo Cons we keep hearing of?

Addressing (1):

Here you go a transcript for the documentary mentioned my Erik.



Source

From that transcript:

Quote from Brock:No! I mean, there was no criminal wrongdoing in Whitewater.


Further suggestion by you and your posted transcript that it was all made up, like Erik origianlly suggested, and you were attempting to support.

---------------------------------

Again this is a multifacited forum with more than two people talking. If you want to jump in to support your Comrade, that's fine. But your Comrade's assertions are bunk. And your attempted support of it are bunk aswell.

If all you really wanted to do is say Rush, these are the guys, then you could have ended this a long time ago and pointed out that you agree Whitewater was NOT fabricated by neocons. Instead, as the thread clearly shows, you kept trying to challenge me and my sources and the legitimacy they held towards 'evidence'.

It wasn't until I had you backed up in the corner with reason and facts that suddenly you cry 'uncle' and say, "No No, whitewater wasn't made up by neocons, I was just replying to Rush."

Amature Hour.

Once again, and in french (with a very good french accent if I do say so myself), I say, "Salute".

[Guderian]

That is suggesting Erik thinks that it is all made up, I on the other hand just wanted to show Rush the transcript of the documentary in the very unlikely hope that he will actually be interested and watch it.

If you had actually bothered to read the transcript it nevers says it was made up. Brock claims that the Clintons were innocent of any wrongdoing in the Whitewater scandal...it also say "stories that Clinton and his wife were involved in Whitewater, a corrupt property deal; I mean what more do you want? Your building up a strawman here.

If i were to suggest it was made up I would say "This is the reason I think the whitewater scandal is compltely false and nothing but neo con propaganda" which I clearly did not say. But you seem to be the expert of what I say and what Im thinking...

And Erik him self was asking a question I don't think he beilves it is completely false either...but then again I don't know what he thinks.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Rush was curious as to why everyone was babbling on about the neo cons so I posted the transcript.

I wanted to know who all these neo cons were and you guys come up with one whos neo con credentials I have yet to see. Besides that you want to believe him when he says Cliton was innocent but hes lying when he said they were guilty. I think the man lacks credibility no matter which side you take. Once more who were all the neo cons who were out to get Clinton. My main point here is this has becaome a term that is thrown around all to freely now days. Heck I ve been called one myslef.

[Guderian]

I wanted to know who all these neo cons were and you guys come up with one whos neo con credentials I have yet to see.

The neo cons are ones mentioned in the documentary The Power of Nightmares by Adam Curtis. In the documentary it is claimed that the neo cons have an agenda against individualism and relativism, and that they have been influencing American politics with thier ultimate goal being to stop these two from flourishing in American society. The main influence on the neocons themselves is a theorist by the name of Leo Strauss.

Besides that you want to believe him when he says Cliton was innocent but hes lying when he said they were guilty. I think the man lacks credibility no matter which side you take. Once more who were all the neo cons who were out to get Clinton.

I agree but that can be applied both ways...i.e the man has no credibility in his claims about Paula Jones.

Once more who were all the neo cons who were out to get Clinton. My main point here is this has becaome a term that is thrown around all to freely now days.

Watch the documentary...it is quite interesting. :wink: downloadable and free here:

http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000753.html

That link also has a transcript of the third episode, but I strongly recommend watching the first two before watching the third.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Look I well know who the Neo Cons are. My point again is that this term is over used, The other point is you cant blame them for Clinton.

PS I take anything from the BBC with a grain of salt. And you people call Fox biased So basicly this guy Strauss was another Nazi. This is nothing new. You do realise this is a pretty old method of controlling the population.