So I posted this video...

[Coexist]

in the Political Video forum, thinking that some really knowledgeable DUer would point me to a great article, or give me a synopsis of this situation. Yes it is the toe-sucker in chief on the film, and I took that into account when I first watched it.

It turned into quite a conversation, over there. Totally unexpected on my part. Not terribly productive, I must say, but that is DU sometimes. At first I felt really bad, and apologized - I am still sorry I offended people with the video, but I am no longer sorry I posted it - seeing how things were going there, I felt I needed to check it out more on my own.

So I start Googling it - and found a few articles that say Hillary Clinton was against the pardons. Fine, I think. The video has no real implications. There is one thing that stands out, though... they all mention that she was laying down the groundwork for a NYS Senate run, which makes the entire situation more interesting... I keep clicking on articles (its hard to Google this without getting hits from weird Rightwing websites), but all that led me to this article from September of 1999. Its from John King, Jonathan Aiken and Bill Mears from CNN. And it contains this statement:

A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton's campaign said she supports the clemency offer - provided those covered renounce violence.

Even the most die-hard Clinton supporter has to admit, that is a campaign-ending position in a "Post 9/11" world. Very poor judgment after 8 years in the White House.

Yes, I know that Carter and others supported the clemency, but there is no way you are going to be able to spin "we should release convicted terrorists if they denounce violence" position she took, in this day and age. This is not her Pastor, this is her and her husband. And as Clinton supporters are fond of pointing out, "it is a fair preview of what they will be hitting her with in the GE."

No, those offered pardons did not personally kill anyone, but they are the equivalent of Al-Qaeda bomb makers and planning partners, even if they weren't going to plant the bombs themselves.

...side note:

Please read this stunning comment from JDPriestly on that thread:

What interests me is that we had a very serious terrorist threat here and yet we had no panic. These events were not used to deprive Americans of their civil rights. Thus, the current laws against our civil rights are not necessary. The current terrorist threat is probably not as great as the one involving the Puerto Ricans. The number of Al Qaeda supporters in the U.S. is minimal, far less than the number of supporters of Puerto Rican independence at the time of this horrible bombing.

Another reason to stop the Bush administration's infringement on our civil rights.

Flame away, but this could be really big in the "electability" argument.

[babylonsister]

1. I'm so glad you brought this up; I have numerous times but

no one seems real interested. I am. Here's an article I came across that explained what went down that I found very interesting:

http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120277819085260827.html

[Bonobo]

3. Someone should start a proper thread here with a more explanatory title IMHO.

I nominate... you!

[Coexist]

5. I read that article when I was doing some reading

but there was no quote in it. I was looking for a Hillary Clinton quote - but the "spokesman for the Clinton campaign" was pretty damn close.

I'm sorry I missed your threads on this. You are welcome to start a thread with a proper title - PM me if you do so I can read it.

I cannot believe that this has not been brought up.

[babylonsister]

6. Don't be sorry. I can't remember if I started a

thread about Clinton/FALN, but have inserted that link to that story with little to no comment. I figured people were more concerned with the now, but if the big dawg's whole reasoning was to garner votes for his spouse's Senate run, this stinks to high heaven. And I can't really think of any other reason he even considered pardons for these thugs.

[MH1]

7. Wow. Kind of puts Ayers in perspective, doesn't it?

[Bonobo]

10. It is like comparing a campfire to a nuclear blast.

[babylonsister]

11. Absolutely. And begs the question why George S. or Charlie

didn't think to mention the FALN to Clinton, something similar and a lot more current than what Ayers did when Obama was 8. No obvious motives there. :sarcasm:

[Coexist]

12. was George still working for the Clinons then?

or had he already resigned?

Either way - he was probably very familiar with the details.

[Bonobo]

2. Why are we being so coy about this!? I daresay if it was Obama, well... Fuggedaboudit.

This is an incredibly damning (if only politically) event.

In the parlance of certain Hillary supporters on this board:

"Does anyone think the Repukes won't use this against us in the GE?"

[Coexist]

8. exactly - at first I was just curious

then I dismissed it, but deeper down, this is a really big issue.

[Bonobo]

9. She needs to address it. As I said, a new thread should be started.

It should be by a DU member with some weight and perceived objectivity IMHO.

Any ideas?

[Coexist]

13. no - but I hope someone does.

[TheDoorbellRang]

4. I saw that video you posted, and wondered, too

Why were these people singled out to be pardoned? Cui bono? If not to help her campaign, then what reason? I guess I didn't buy the excuse Clinton spouted at the time, that it was supposedly to help Gore in his run. I would think such a decision would have detracted more votes from Gore than added to his total, which is why I think Bill said Gore was the reason he did it.

The more I learn about Bill and Hill, the more I am appalled.

[barack the house]

14. I don't feel we shall do guilt by association BUT it is hypocrisy. What we had under the GOP.

[Bonobo]

15. It is much more than "association".

[barack the house]

17. Yeah actually it is I wasn't thinking straight. But we should highlight the hypocrisy the most.

[Bonobo]

16. Kick

[eridani]

18. Why knock her for being right about something for a change?

Knock her for the Ayers hypocrisy--an entirely different matter.

[FlyingSquirrel]

19. There is one problem with this

(But in general I like it) and that is, since it's not a direct quote from Hillary herself that was recorded somehow - either an actual recording, a memo in her handwriting, etc.) all she has to do is say that her spokesman was mistaken about her position. End of story.

[Coexist]

21. I know - she was campaigning, so there is probably a Q&A somewhere

but, like I said, I had to sift through lots and lots of questionable websites to find good ones.

[stillcool]

20. I read about this..

ironically it came from ABC..long before the Debate. It is amazing that they play with fire this way. It is almost as though they feel they are 'untouchable'.

ABC News
Clinton Camp Pushes O-Bomber Links: Ignores Her Own Radical Ties
Clinton, Obama Spar on Ties to Radicals
By JUSTIN ROOD

Feb. 22, 2008—

The Hillary Clinton campaign pushed to reporters today stories about Barack Obama and his ties to former members of a radical domestic terrorist group -- but did not note that as president, Clinton's husband pardoned more than a dozen convicted violent radicals, including a member of the same group mentioned in the Obama stories.

"Wonder what the Republicans will do with this issue," mused Clinton spokesman Phil Singer in one e-mail to the media, containing a New York Sun article reporting a $200 contribution from William Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground, to Obama in 2001. (Obama's ties to the radical group first surfaced last week in a Bloomberg News article.)

In a separate e-mail, Singer forwarded an article from Politico.com reporting on a 1995 event at a private home that brought Obama together with Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, another former member of the radical group.

Opting to leave any attacks on the issue to the GOP may be wise, as attacks from Clinton could backfire. In his final day in office, President Clinton pardoned another one-time member of the Weather Underground, Susan L. Rosenberg, after she had served 16 years in prison on federal charges.

Rosenberg had been arrested in 1984 while unloading 740 pounds of dynamite, a submachine gun and other weapons from the back of a car.
---------------------------------------------
And in 1999, President Clinton also pardoned 16 violent Puerto Rican nationalists responsible for more than 100 bombings of U.S. political and military installations, after they promised to renounce violence. The attacks reportedly killed six people and wounded dozens more. In justifying the pardons, President Clinton noted none of the men had been convicted of crimes that resulted in death or injuries.