Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What's this about the "Barrett" report?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 11:48 AM
Original message
What's this about the "Barrett" report?
The long-awaited final report by independent counsel David Barrett, to be released today, was severely censored by court order but not enough to sufficiently obscure its importance. As long forecast, it alleges serious corruption in the Clinton administration's Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service. The question is what was contained in 120 pages removed by the judges.


These allegations explain why Barrett finally has closed down after 10 years the last prosecution under the lapsed independent counsel statute. Its target, Henry Cisneros, long ago resigned as secretary of Housing and Urban Development in a plea bargain after admitting he lied to FBI interrogators to gain Senate confirmation. What kept Barrett in business was what he and his prosecutors contend is a Clinton administration cover-up of income tax evasion charges against Cisneros.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/3596679.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mrcheerful Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. OBL is back in the news, much more important then anything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is an editorial hit piece by RWer Bob "No Facts" Novak - pure crap.
The whole slant of the article is trying to insinuate that the evil Clinton administration is covering up a tax evasion by Cisneros, which has long ago been found to be without merit.

The crap the judges forced to be redacted were wild-ass, completely fabricated stories about the Clinton administration that a desperate Barrett simply wanted to get into print somewhere.

This editorial should be used for toilet paper, just like everything else that hateful old crank writes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frustratedlady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. Maybe He Figured He'd Milked Enough
money out of the project, and it was time to move on?

I still think they have a pantry of issues they can walk into, find an issue that will balance one of their latest scandals or take attention away from them, and make it public. Like OBL?

10 years? That's obscene!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. This prosecutor should have folded this a long time ago.
Pathetic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. One more multi-million dollar investigation of the Clinton Administration
that comes up with no wrong-doing found - just repub whining.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuffleClaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. yeah, but you just KNOW the freepers will
claim that those missing pages contain evidence about bigfoot, the grassy knole, and clintons secret satan worshiping, soylent green eating gay commie socks with sandals club meetings...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC