WOW Clinton praised Libby back in 2000

[sanskritwarrior]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich

Apparently Libby was one of the lawyers that got Marc Rich off the hook............Damn insiders taking care of each other.......This is why I think Bush will feel no pain whatsoever from this travesty...........

[originalpckelly]

1. Of course he did, he's crooked like Bush is, though of course...

Bush has killed a hell of a lot of people, and Clinton just accepted campaign donations from the man he pardoned. (No quid pro quo!)

[originalpckelly]

2. I K & R'ed this.

People should know what kind of person Bill Clinton really is, a corrupt opportunist.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Exactly "big dog's" DLC provides us "little people" a more kinder and gentler transition to

the full realization of Fascism for, one each, The United Corporate States of the Americas! :patriot:

But, be assured, with republicans or DLCer's in charge - TRUE Fascism (merging of government and corporations) it WILL BE. :scared: :(

[originalpckelly]

4. It sucks too, I used to idolize Bill Clinton.

Had no clue about all this crap. It's a real let down, the more I find out about him and even her.

Just ask yourself why Rupert Murdoch raised funds for her if she's so great, and ask yourself why she would ever accept those funds.

[ShortnFiery]

6. You're not alone. I wanted to believe that he was not corrupt but I've learned much different.

The old adage, "I wish that I didn't know now, what I didn't know then." rings sadly true.

Sometimes it's depressing to be well informed and choosing to think through your past opinions in order to make appropriate modifications. It would be so much easier to stay rigid like right wing republicans and fundamentalist religious nut-cases. ;) :shrug: :hi:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

54. I never idolized Clinton but had great hopes. Then he bacame the best Republican President

we ever had. NAFTA, what he did to the welfare system..

Then there was the topping to the cake. When he looked directly at the camera and said "I never had relations with THAT woman". I cringed. It wasn't that he just lied, but in doing so, he took a real human being, Monica Lewinsky, and trivialized her into a That. It showed you something about his character, or lack of it.

And as to Hillary. After she voted to authorize the war, when the majority of people in my state were against it and I knew the reasons were a pack of lies, I swore that I would never vote for her ever again. In November, I pulled the lever for every single Democrat on the ballot except for her.

[The Backlash Cometh]

55. What I think is the most critical thing about Clinton and his triangulating,

is that the Republicans didn't reward him for it. Instead, with each Republican that he appointed to high office, Clinton ensured himself fewer allies, and more vicious attacks from high places. He just gave them the high ground.

And the thing that is most important to remember about this, is that as the Republican party attacked Clinton, they were also weakening the Democratic party because Clinton, whether you like it or not, was the most recognizable and charismatic Democrat at the time. And now you all are considering electing Hillary Clinton? Does she impress you as someone who plans to buck the Clinton formula?

The only credit I give to Hillary Clinton, is that she recognized the right-wing media for the attack dog it was. What I don't give credit to Hillary Clinton is that she seems to think the same way the old dawg did, embracing enemies, drawing them near to her where they can get the vantage point of digging the dagger in deeper.

I don't want to see history repeated. I'm tired of this shit and want to see someone with street smarts up there in the White House, and not from Wall Street, but from somewhere closer to home.

[iamjoy]

5. My, How Incestuous

Libby gets Rich off the hook, but who was the U.S. attorney who indicted Rich in the first place. Let's see...he's from New York, he's a Republican and he's running for President.

That should be sufficient, but read the wikipedia article if you can't figure out who it was.

very, very interesting...

[originalpckelly]

7. It's all damn interesting. And you know who investigated the pardon?

Fucking James Comey!

Small world, indeed!

[bluestateguy]

8. I consider the Rich pardon to be far worse than anything done in the Monicagate deal

And worse than all the other nonsense allegations Republicans threw at him for 8 years: "Filegate", "Travelgate" , "Whitewater", the campaign money in 1996. Oh, and I really loved that one with the White House Christmas card list. That was real helpful.

The Rich pardon, however, was the only time I approved of Republicans holding hearings to investigate his administration.

[Rage for Order]

11. He sold the pardon for $2 million, if i remember correctly

I think Marc Rich's wife (or ex-wife, estranged wife...whichever) gave $2 million to Hillary's Senate campaign & Bill's presidential library fund shortly after the pardon.

[iamjoy]

20. There's More To It

I approve of it being investigated too. Presidential pardons are certainly very easy to abuse.

However, in the case of Mark Rich, it wasn't just his wife and big Democratic donor asking for a pardon. Israeli Prime Minster Ehud Barak was as well. Apparently, Mr. Rich was a big donor to Israeli causes and other Jewish charities. That's very interesting considering Rich was making deals with Khumani.

I have to wonder if sometimes these seemingly controversial pardons are not as malicious or deliberately abusive as they may seem. We all know that in the political world big money gets you access. Once you have that access, you get to present your "problem" and ask for help. So, here's Denise Rich. Her contributions have gotten her access. She comes to Clinton and asks for help - she's very articulate and makes a very good case - good enough to "win" him over and he grants the pardon.

Now, in Dubya's case, I do believe he commuted Libby's sentence as gratitude for Libby being the patsy in the whole Valerie Plame case. Certainly if you believe Dubya is evil, that would make the most sense. But, what if you think he's more stupid than malicious. Then it may have been an "Aw, shucks, Scooter's a nice guy he shouldn't have to go to jail."

Mind you, I'm not defending it in either case, just saying we need to look at pardons and how they are given a little differently. We all know how easy it is to "judge" some one when presented with one set of facts and how that judgement can change when we get a different perspective.

[papau]

24. In the tax profession the pardon was seen as overdue as it was a GOP political WITCHHUNT as 60 other

cases were settled with fines - no one in the large American GOP donating companies were charge with crime but they all set up the same subs as Rich to run the Iranian oil and they all used the dual pricing model that was invented by our big 6 accounting firms for the oil industry.

Reagan's neo-cons did not like rich folk that donated to Dems in the industry they owned.

Also to say that he paid $2 million for the pardon is a lie - he continued to donate to Dems and indeed did donate more than a million to the Clinton Library. I am sure you believe Scooter told Clinton in the request for a pardon that he would donate to the Clinton Library if pardoned - right.

Man - does any one on DU discuss issues that they think Hillary is wrong on, or some personality problems of hers that will drive away voters - and why someone else is a better choice - or are we going to be all smear all the time for the next year so as to be indistinguishable from FreeRepublic?

[Rage for Order]

66. I don't think he came right out and said it

Of course Libby wouldn't "say" there would be a $2 million donation if the pardon was issued; that would be bribery. Those deals usually occur by innuendo through back channels. It's just another example of the rich (small r) taking care of each other. Clinton was not alone in this, as it is something that is done by almost all presidents. That said, it doesn't make it any less distasteful.

[merh]

9. Was that before Libby obstructed justice and covered this admin's

ass after they violated national security laws by outing a NOC of the CIA?

Keep things in perspective - Libby didn't do the crime for which he won't do any time when Clinton praised him.

I don't like either Bill or Hillary, I agree they are politico, corporatist - DLC/RNCwannabies (and I hate how close Bill is to Poppy) - but this tidbid is a nonstory given it was long before Libby broke the law.

Keep things in perspective, don't do the stretching like the right does.

:hi:

[sanskritwarrior]

10. As far as you know,,,,,,,,

[merh]

21. As far as I know - oh fer fux sack

Look at the dates of Libby's employment with Cheney and the date of the comment, look a the date that Plame was outed and the date of Clinton's comment.

Nuff said.

Christ, it's not uncommon for rich folks to hire the top DC lawyers out there, which is what Rich did. Look at the name Abbe Lowell, check it out and you will see he represents democratic and republican accused, they all have to pay his hefty fees and party doesn't matter if they can afford him. That's how it works (he was also one of Clinton's counsel during his impeachment proceedings).

Gawd, there is enough to hate the Clinton's for, this is just stupid.

[waiting for hope]

14. I hear ya - nobody here wants

to do any stretching - maybe it was a statement on the company you keep?

[merh]

23. A statement on "company you keep" is referring to Clinton

hanging out with Poppy, the grandfather of the neo-con, VRWC that tried to destroy him.

Statements made long before crimes were committed are just coincidence. Unless of course you think Clinton has some sort of magic ball he can use to predict shit. :crazy:

.

[waiting for hope]

62. I just made an observation about

the OP - sheesh, lighten up.

[Colobo]

12. Good post

[EFerrari]

13. Yes, they take care of each other. That's why we have to take care

of US.

[johnaries]

15. WTF are you talking about? Where does it say Clinton "praised"

Libby? Libby was no longer Rich's lawyer when Clinton pardoned Rich. I don't see anywhere on any site where Libby and Clinton were intertwined in any way.

I think this thread is just an excuse for Clinton bashing.

[sanskritwarrior]

16. Huh

Bill Clinton explained why he pardoned Rich, noting that U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center concluded that no crime was committed, and that the companies' tax reporting position was reasonable. <2>. In the same letter Clinton listed Libby as one of three "distinguished Republican lawyers" who supported Rich's pardon.

[papau]

19. not exactly "praise" to note that Libby was both GOP and a high priced lawyer in a world

where high priced equals "distinguished" as in known to many folks.

[johnaries]

25. "distinguished Republican lawyer" isn't "praise".

The accusations were coming from Republicans. Clinton was pointing out that three well-known or "distinguished" REPUBLICAN lawyers as well as 2 tax professors claimed that Rich was innocent.

To conclude from that statement that Clinton was "praising" Libby is a long reach, to say the least.

[sanskritwarrior]

28. LOL

Distinguished doesn't mean praise........Now I have heard it all......

[KAZ]

31. Why don't you hear some place else. n/t

[originalpckelly]

33. We're not going to let you corporate kiss asses take over our party.

[johnaries]

40. And what does that have to do with this thread?

I agree that too many in the Democratic Party are too cozy with Corporate interests. But that has nothing to do with this thread whatsoever.
If you want to bash Clinton for his corporate connections, then do so. But don't fucking MAKE UP shit! Republicans do that, and we should never lower ourselves to their level.

[sanskritwarrior]

34. Not very tolerant of free speech are we??

[originalpckelly]

32. The "distinguished" sanskritwarrior is correct.

At least that's what the dictionary says:
# (used of persons) standing above others in character or attainment or reputation; "our distinguished professor"; "an eminent scholar"; "a great statesman"

# used of a person's appearance or behavior; befitting an eminent person; "his distinguished bearing"; "the monarch's imposing presence"; "she reigned in magisterial beauty"

# set apart from other such things

[johnaries]

37. It was Libby's reputation that "disguished" him, not Clinton. nt

[papau]

48. standing above others in attainment - yep - that does seem to fit n/t

n/t

[johnaries]

35. Not in this sense. It is simply a statement.

Libby had a good reputation among other Lawyers. Or, at least, he was expensive. In that respect, he was distinguished.
Clinton wasn't praising him by calling him distinguished, merely noting that he was distinguished along with the other 2 lawyers he listed.
As I said, you are REALLY reaching.

[sanskritwarrior]

39. Your opinion

although it does seem a minority opinion on this thread, so I'll stick with I'm not reaching, you're trying to deflect. M'kay? Thanks

[johnaries]

43. NO! NOT opinion.

Obviously either you don't understand the proper usage of the term, or you are going out on a limb to bash Clinton at any cost.
Clinton isn't my favorite either, but I'd rather criticize the Clinton's for things they've actually DONE and not make shit up like Karl Rove does.

[sanskritwarrior]

52. Forgive me if I believe my opinion is valid over your objections.

[johnaries]

59. You can believe the world is 6000 years old if you like,

you're entitled to your "opinion" despite the facts. But you better expect to get called on it.

[Spazito]

41. Exactly, it is just like in the Senate, when Senators refer

to each other as "my distinguished colleague", even if they are referring to the worst repug scum in there. The also use "my honorable colleague", it isn't praise, it is more a professional phrasing.

[johnaries]

44. Thank you!

when referring to lawyers it could mean "reputable", "well-known", "expensive", or "not caught yet". :)

[creeksneakers2]

63. The word "praised" is very misleading

It sounds like Clinton made an endorsement of Libby. The facts are really being twisted here to look like something else.

[papau]

17. On DU tonight telling a lie so as to bash Clinton seems the rule - this thread is just another one n

n/t

[KAZ]

26. Over and over again. Good "cred" building seems to..

.. immunize them.

[LostinVA]

57. BINGO

[johnaries]

27. I believe you. Am I on the right site? n/t

[sanskritwarrior]

30. You need to check yourself and look at my post history

I have stated on numerous occasions I am voting for Hillary Clinton.............until I read this............I have been one of the Clinton's biggest defenders on this site.......but not anymore after this..........So please know who you are talking about before you accuse someone of just bashing the Clintons.

[KAZ]

36. "but not anymore". Oh no! What will we do!

FWIW, not a Hill supporter, but this is transparent. Good run, dude.

[sanskritwarrior]

38. Yeah a 6 month run.........

:eyes: my entire time at DU I was a Clinton supporter, anyone that would associate with Libby and praise him in such a way is definitely not worthy of my vote.

I imagine a lot of people will get disgusted by such insider protection BS that it appears the Clintons are in on........

[KAZ]

47. Oh, you just learned of Bill's "support" of Libby.

How convenient. I suggest you look up the term "feint praise". And your "entire time at DU I was a Clinton supporter". Please, do you think we fall for that crap?

[LostinVA]

58. Like glass since post one

[papau]

45. You may want to read up on the pardons that were granted rather than

accept GOP media shorthand that they were sleazy.

But feel free to feel Bill's character flaws, the real ones and the ones that are only GOP assertions, disqualify Hillary if that is the logic you want to use.

[johnaries]

50. Exactly! Hillary is my last choice, but I'm not going to spew RW

bullshit or make up shit to bash her or Bill. Bill had his faults, but he was still a great President. As I said, Hillary is my last choice but I will take her over the GOP pack ANYDAY. And if she is elected I think she will make a fine President. I would prefer someone who would go after the Big Corporations, but that may not be possible until we reform campaign finance.

[papau]

60. I agree - the GOP will claim a raid on the Treasury as they oppose federal financing - but that is

the only way to reduce corporate control.

[johnaries]

46. Why in hell would THIS make you change your mind?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

[LostinVA]

56. It doesn't

[mitchum]

18. Oligarchs (n/t)

[Phrogman]

22. Well Duh...Slick Willy's Daddy Bush's buddy-buddy....

When Clinton(part2)gets in, they'll both whitewash each others history.

[tularetom]

29. The enemy of my enemy is my friend

The only thing I can say in Clinton's behalf is that he is the devil incarnate to most wing nut repubs. They hate him worse than Hitler. They froth at the mouth at the mere mention of his name. I like that.

Other than that I have little or no use for either Clinton.

[merh]

42. Clenis Envy

they don't make pills for it and it is very real, can screw up the vision and all that. :silly:

[trumad]

49. What a flyrtap of fucking idiots in this thread!

[johnaries]

51. Welcome! I see you got caught, too!

:hi:

[ShortnFiery]

53. Yes Citizen, stay blind to The Clintons' corruption: Play Fleetwood Mac and party like it's 1995 ...

Unfortunately the TRUTH hurts. Especially "The Clintons" have networked and bought off (promises and cash donations) all of the power insiders on the DLC political and journalistic elite ... plus Clinton's cronyism of pardoning his own Brother in front of hundred of those who may actually have been railroaded through the system. Oh! I almost forgot the most egregious pardon of all ... the true "fuck you working class people" coup de grace pardon ---> big dog's pardon of Fife Symington, III., an shameless ex-republican Governor and a Union Busting Grandson of an old steel Robber Baron.

What's disgraceful isn't the fact that "The Clintons" have a D after their names but that they use the trust of us "little people" to pardon some of the most egregious criminals for "profit (contributions to his library) and power."

No The Clinton's mighty DLC machine is buying off "less than honorable" politicians left in right with cash or "sweet whispers" of lauded positions IF ONLY they'll dupe us peasants of the Democratic Party to blindly and blissfully vote for Saint Hillary of Pseudo-Right wing Victim-hood.

Both Clintons have had their day in the "political sun" and the economy ain't what it used to be. They've run their course and need to realize that The People are not stupid.

It's well beyond time for those with surnames of Clinton and Bush to move the f**k on and allow new blood to enter the Executive Branch. It was bad enough tolerating Poppy's boys, just because they may be a modicum of "less corrupt" we don't need a re-run of Bubba's boys running our country. Enough Already!

[johnaries]

61. Jeez! Once again, I'm not blind to the faults of the Clinton's.

Hillary is my last choice. I'm a Gore man, but if he doesn't run I'm leaning toward Edwards with Obama as a close third.
BUT, don't be MAKING UP stupid shit to bash Clinton with. Focus on the REAL things that he did.
Yes, the Clinton's are much too close to Corporate Interests for my tastes, but that is the nature of Politics today, and that won't change until we have true Campaign Finance Reform. That is the reason they have been successful. Dean and Obama have opened up the netroots as a campaign finance source, but before that you HAD to court corporate funds if you wanted to be able to run.
Pull your head out of the sand. The problem is NOT the Clintons, the problem is that SCOTUS effectively declared money as "Free Speech" giving those with more money a louder voice.
Go ahead and demonize the Clintons just like a RW'er would all you want, but everyone must recognize that the problem is not the Clintons but our current system.
Hell, in 2000 some of Al Gore's biggest investors were Credit Card companies and investment companies. I like to assume that's because they trusted him more on the economy - but I don't know that.
So, if you folks want to Bash Clinton for what he's actually DONE, feel free to do so with my blessings and I may even join you. But don't make up stupid shit that isn't true or parse and spin adjectives like a Karl Rove Spin machine. We're SUPPOSED to be better than that!
:rant:

edit: spelling, of course!

[ShortnFiery]

64. Again, it's not The Left or The Right, it's corporatist cronyism that's trashing our country.

And both parties have "far too many" stooges who believe it's their job to serve their Corporate Contributers before the needs of their constituents.

Why is every criticism of your beloved Clintons taken as "bashing" them. Both Political Parties are capable of greed. Albeit I'm A Democrat I'm not an unthinking nor blind one. This aura of a "Cult of Personality" and every critique of HRC is labeled "Hillary Haters" or "Clinton Bashing" seriously freaks as it is reminiscent of the rantings of Right Wingers every time we dare criticize King George. :shrug:

The Clintons have embarrassed our beloved Democratic Party enough and IMO it's beyond time for them to settle down in NY State and hopefully political obscurity. It's well past time for NEW BLOOD. ;)

[johnaries]

69. Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Did you even READ my post?

"Why is every criticism of your beloved Clintons taken as "bashing" them."

I have criticized the Clintons myself MANY times. I told you, Hillary is LAST on my list.

But this charge in THIS thread is simply ridiculous and IS pure Clinton bashing. As Merh said earlier, we have plenty of reasons to hate the Clintons, no need to make new ones up!

I agree with you on Corporate Cronyism, but this thread takes a simple, meaningless adjective out of context and spins it into something ridiculous. That is a Karl Rove tactic and I won't stand for it! As I said, we're SUPPOSED to be better than that. Also, it makes legitimate complaints look less credible as well.

If you want to argue that Cronyism is the problem then I'll agree with you! I HAVE BEEN AGREEING WITH YOU! Read my posts about Campaign Finance Reform. But that is not what this thread is about.

That being said, if Hillary DOES get the nom (and I sincerely hope she doesn't), I will still vote for her. Her cronyism isn't nearly as bad as what we see on the Right.

But I'm still hoping Al will hear the call before October (please note my avatar).

[book_worm]

65. All the Clinton's want is power--they aren't as bad as the Bush's but they

don't really believe in anything except getting more power.

[Hideboh]

67. Is this really matter?

Who cares anyway?
Every single American knows this guy is corrupt to the bone.
After all, he was impeached for his criminal acts.
Bush hasn't even been impeached:sarcasm:

[creeksneakers2]

68. Clinton was not impeached for criminal acts

They found no definite lies in Clinton's testimony to the grand jury.

There was circumstantial evidence of obstruction of justice but no real proof.

Bill Clinton was impeached because right wingers have no respect for the law or elections or anything like that. Wingers treacherously tried everything they could to get rid of Clinton from day one.