Skip to comments.“I Did It ... Because I Could” -- Bill Clinton Writes His Own Epitaph
Posted on 06/26/2004 9:55:35 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
As God is my witness, I did not want to write about Bill Clinton ever again. But he is a persistent cuss. Like Jack Torrance (Nicholson) said in The Shining, as he used an axe to chop through the door, Little pigs, little pigs, let me in. Not by the hair of your chinny-chin-chin? Well then I'll huff and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house in. Is there any doubt, by now, that Clinton (him) is equally persistent? That as long as he has life and breath he will continue to break into the present to upstage all other politicians?
So now hes on a book tour, trying to persuade the gullible to buy his book, and having bought the book, to buy the bit. Therefore, anyone who cares about the long-term health of the American Republic must deal somehow with Clinton (him).
Clinton claimed in the sycophantic interview conducted by Dan Rather last Sunday that the Monica matter was the only one on which he was not cleared. Of his sexual abuse of his employee, Monica Lewinsky, Clinton said it was a terrible moral error." Bill explained to kindly, understanding Dan, "I did it ... because I could."
Should any man in public office be judged by his sexual peccadillos? The Roman poet and philosopher, Lucius Seneca, wrote, No man is free who is a slave to the flesh. Seneca added, Most powerful is he who has himself in his own power. In short, sex is only a symptom of the larger problem, which is a lack of self-control.
Since the one error that Clinton (him) confesses is to molesting Monica, lets begin there in judging the character of this (apparent) man from Arkansas. Is this an isolated incident, or a lifelong character defect?
In 1969, 19-year-old Englishwoman Eileen Wellstone said Clinton raped her after she met him near Oxford University. An American diplomat investigated the matter, concluded that Clinton probably did this, and urged him to leave Oxford immediately to avoid an international incident. Clinton then dropped out of the Rhodes Scholarship Program without completion, and returned to the US. Was this Clinton act immoral? Did he do this because I could?
What about Elizabeth Gracen, former Miss Arkansas and Miss America, who once said that Clinton raped her in a limousine in 1983? Was that also because I could?
What about Juanita Broaddrick, a businesswoman in Arkansas, who said Clinton raped her when he was Arkansas Attorney General? Was that also because I could?
And Kathleen Wiley? And Paula Jones? And Denise Rich? You get the point.
It is true that public policy is the standard on which history judges any national leader. So lets talk about various aspects of public policy that somehow did not make it into Clintons 957-page tell-all book. When James Riady promised $1 million to Clintons election efforts, was that immoral? No; once kept, that promise constituted a series of major felonies.
The money was paid. The Democrats benefitted from it. All of the money came from foreign sources, including communist China. In the closing month of the Clinton regime, Janet (the Just) Reno struck a deal with James Riady that he would come to the US, plead guilty, pay a whopping fine, but not be required to tell all about his agreements with Clinton. Did Clinton engineer all that because I could?
As part of the Riady deal, Clinton took on a Lippo Group/Riady associate, John Huang, first as a high official in the Commerce Department and later as a high official in the DNC. While in government with a top-secret clearance, Huang repeatedly crossed the street to a private law office to fax documents of unknown content to China. In return for Huangs employment, several other individuals with Chinese connections made large, illegal contributions to the Democrats. Most of these donors were convicted, but none ever turned states evidence on Clinton. Did Clinton engineer all that because I could?
Early in Clintons Administration, Bernard Schwarz became the largest single donor to Democrat fund-raising, giving more than $2 million. Schwarz was CEO of Loral Corp., which in the course of doing major business with China, transferred information to China so their long-range missiles stopped exploding during the separation of first and second stages. Unlike other American corporations doing illegal types of business with China, Loral was not prosecuted. Did Clinton engineer all that because I could?
How about the stack of literally last-minute pardons to assorted sleazoids in the closing days of the Clinton regime? The worst of a bad bunch was Marc Rich, a multi-millionaire fugitive from the US, charged with a long list of major felonies. But large amounts of Richs ill-gotten gains passed into Clintons hands (by way of the foundation to support the Clinton Library, with major benefits to Clinton himself). Theres also a suggestion of non-monetary benefits from Marcs friendly ex-wife, Denise (shes Clintons type). The Justice Department had recommended against most of these pardons. Some it did not even know about. Did Clinton engineer all that because I could?
When Ron Brown, then Secretary of Commerce and a long-time close associate of Clintons, started selling seats on government-paid trade missions to other countries for $50,000 and up in contributions to the DNC, was Clinton aware of this extortion scheme? Likely he was, since all three parties were FOBs; Friends of Bill were at Commerce, at the DNC, and in the private sector making these contributions. Again, this wasnt a matter of immorality. These constituted multiple federal felonies. It was very convenient of Ron Brown to die in a mysterious plane crash, just as the investigators were closing in on him. Was all this engineered by Clinton because I could?
This barely skims the surface of public policy actions of the Clinton Administration which, if proven in court, would have constituted major felonies under federal law. And this concentrates on those policy disasters done entirely by Clinton (him), with no involvement by Clinton (her). As the Nixon and Harding Administrations had demonstrated, its helpful to have a corrupt Attorney General, possibly to keep the other corrupt officials from being caught for their crimes.
The Attorneys General under both Harding and Nixon went to jail for assorted crimes. There is no hint in Clintons book that his Attorney General, Janet Reno, risked jail herself in protecting other Administration officials from the consequences of their acts. Clinton offers high praise for Reno, which as far as it goes is accurate. Without Reno, its doubtful that Clinton could have accomplished all that he did, including getting reelected, avoiding impeachment conviction in the Senate, and avoiding jail time for various felonies.
Clintons continuing presence on the national scene, including publishing his book, demands an overall appraisal of his value, vel non, as a public official. The other inadvertent truth that Clinton committed in his Rather interview was to refer to himself as conflicted. His situation is more than conflicted, its schizophrenic.
In becoming the first black President, it seems that Clintons models were the two Shakespearian characters of Othello and Iago. Was this Iago who used his passions to drive this Othello mad merely another part of Clintons mind? Is Clinton simply the world's greatest carny barker, hawking his own self as they say hereabouts, as an all-in-one freak show?
Is the conflicted Clinton actually a Geppetto to his own Pinocchio, but with a different ending? Has the lying little boy prevailed and taken over? Has the moral grown-up simply been sublimated into non-existence? Has Clinton, in short, driven himself mad?
And if he has, how long will the American press, and we the people, allow the public airways and the public presses to be used as a perpetual psychiatrists couch for just one, fatally defective man? And how many of those who line up at Clintons funeral will be carrying mirrors to hold to his lips, to make certain hes deceased?
After all, Clinton (him) came back from the dead politically so many times that it would be careless not to think he might have vampiric talents in life as well as politics.
In six words on Sunday evening, Bill Clinton spoke the correct and conclusive epitaph for his (not so) private life and his failed public career, the words that should be chiseled on his tombstone:
I Did It ... Because I Could.
It isnt pretty, it isnt moral, it isnt legal. But it is true. We havent even gotten to his wife, Lady Macbeth. But thats a story for another day.
About the Author: John Armor is an author and civil rights lawyer who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains. CongressmanBillybob@earthlink.net
That is what my husband said all week during the Ronald Reagan national mourning and funeral.
"And how many of those who line up at Clintons funeral will be carrying mirrors to hold to his lips, to make certain hes deceased?"
He said He WANTS to see this for Clinton and he wants to look in the casket and make sure Clinton is in it and DEAD. We won't mind a week of CEREMONIES for it.
George Will allowed his erudition, unnecessary historical perspective (nothing, not even the passage of time, can elevate this aberration) and a faux objectivity get in the way of the truth.
When push came to shove, he hedged his bet; he pulled his punch; he wimped out.
What trusty ol' George actually said was this:
Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational.
People who lack authenticity, seek and are corrupted by power.
bill clinton said - he did it because he could.
It is up to us to see that hillary clinton doesn't say the same!!!!!!
I think she does. . .every day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.