Skip to comments.Last Independent Counsel Report Set For 'Release'; Focus On Clinton Administration
Posted on 01/15/2006 5:22:51 PM PST by wagglebee
In Monday's edition of the NEW YORK SUN, reporter Brian McGuire and contributor R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., break the first look at the long-anticipated report from Independent Counsel David Barrett, whose investigation lasted 10 year and cost taxpayers $23 million.
The SUN outlines the report's details surrounding the alleged illicit activity and cover up that involving former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros before and during his time in the Clinton Administration.
The Sun reveals that the Barrett report connects the dots that allege that senior officials of the Clinton Administration hindered investigations by the IRS in both Texas and Washington, as well as the investigations of a grand jury examining the independent counsel's evidence.
The full report, more than 400 pages line, with more than 100 pages of redacted material, hits the street on Thursday morning at 9 am.
Democrats in the House and Senate have been fighting for months to block the release of the report and keep the 100 pages of highly damaging redacted material from ever seeing the light of day.
Yay, another whitewash. Can't have the people knowing what their government is up to.
THis may work against the upcoming dem assertions about pubbies being a culture of .... what is it they say?
When and how, do you know something the rest of us don't?
Where's the NY Times and their leakers on the missing 100 pages?
Barrett report ping
Remember, the republicans aren't the Clinton's ONLY enemies.
We'll see them alright, and probably leaked by a democrat.
But you don't understand!
It's a heinous crime that President Bush would authorize warrantless survellience of al Qaeda contacts, and his doing such merits a full Congressional inquiry and possible impeachment.
But Bill Clinton's meritless use of the IRS to intimidate political enemies should be buried.
I'm shocked that you cannot grasp the Democratic consistency in those two arguments.
Sh*t....sorry....but it's the 100 redacted pages that we MUST have published......where is a LEAKER when you NEED THEM????
DING DING DING!
and what does Nancy Pelosi have to say about this culture of corruption?
The 100 pages WILL be released, but they will be redacted. Let's see the unredacted versions. But we will probably see enough in the redacted version to see WHAT was going on, but not WHO did it or TO WHOM. Still, this is a great win for Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA). Thank him for standing up to the bullying, lying Dems.
Then the question becomes, will charges be filed based upon what is in the full report?
Perhaps it will be "accidentally" released in Word document or .pdf format-- and the "deletions" will have been hidden-- but not really deleted.
Privacy...how about good American's right to know....we paid for Barretts investigation...
Oh, SO NOW they don't want transparency in the White House. Fair game is fair game.
Bill Clinton could rape a 14 year old on the Capitol steps, and the MSM and Democrats would not bat an eyelash.
But what really makes Democrats nervous is that the redacted material could implicate those who are currently in power, or those seeking higher office. Moreover, previous Clinton toadies have moved on to be staffers for Democrat Senators and Congressmen, as well as other positions in Washington (lobbyists, etc).
What I really hope is exposed is the Clinton administration tactic of using the IRS to harass anyone who got in their way, and the manipulation of Reno's pathetic "Justice" Dept.
The MSM will hate this because it will undermine all their hyperactive attempts to paint the Bush administration as "out of control" and "abusing power." The Clinton files could (and I emphasize could) weaken the blatant MSM strategy to help Democrats in 2006.
But, then again, everything associated with the Clinton's is covered up or ignored, and they skate free and clear every time. So, who knows.
I wonder if somebody will "leak" the redacted pages?
Since when do "privacy considerations" extend to the concealment of clinton abuse of power and other clinton crimes? Aren't we the people entitled to know that the clintons abused their power and sicced the IRS on the opposition?
Does anyone know if the redactions can be legally challenged?
And was it really malpractice, i.e., stupidity, on the right that allowed this to happen? Or was it malfeasance?
Looks like the mutual protection racket writ large is alive and well in DC.
We must make sure that every voter understands what hillary clinton did. The vengeful IRS audit is an easily understood concept.
Right to know what?
That the independent council thinks you are a crook? I think it's totally improper for the IC to say that. If he thinks someone is a crook he should indict and prosecute. Otherwise he should just shut the hell up.
What happened to Libby wasn't right.
Nobody has a lower opinion of the Clintons than me, but I don't think what the IP did to Hillary was right either. If the IP thought she commited a crime he should have indicted her. If he can't or won't than he should keep his opinion to himself. His job is not to casually opine on someones guilt. His job is to prove it.
So you don't want to know what's in the redacted Barrett report?
Try looking in the shrubbery in Ft. Marcy Park. s/
You might be right, but if the government has a written report, I want to see it.
They allow the rich and powerful in Washington to control potential damaging evidence and the exposure of criminal acts committed by our government leaders and their rich patrons.
They subpoena[ tie up] all documents,evidence and witnesses to make sure the public or any legitimate investigator can't get to them.
.They make sure no one who is in either party who dances the Potomac two-step ever goes to jail or if money is involved [aka The UN Oil Scandal] any money is recovered.
The worst is they make the American people think they are really going to nail someone while they use our tax money to pay the legal eagles to make sure that they and no one they know gets named or goes to jail.
They can't afford to send anyone important to prison because they might blow the whistle on everyone else's game.
In other words we just spent 23 million dollars over ten years to make sure nothing happened or nothing was found out they didn't want us or a grand jury to know.
The next time you hear "congressional investigation" think damage control and cover up and watch witnesses and documents disappear in the "Black Hole" of subpoena,gag orders and endless delay.
Nothing to see here, just move along.
I'm putting it on the calendar. (And keeping my fingers crossed!)
Actually I do want to know. I just think it's better for all of us if we don't. We have a process for determining someones innocence or guilt. That process includes a fair trial. If that part is omitted than it's nothing more than a witch hunt.
Tony Snow has promised that HE would make sure he lets us know what is going on....I have a feeling he has a "source" that will reveal the redacted part...hope, hope.
Boy oh boy...first the Dems CRASH during Alito hearing and now THIS....
2006....starting off with a BANG.
Thanks for the ping, A. Hun!
What makes you think we'll ever see that 100 pages?
I think what you really mean is "officially" exposed. There's nothing here that well read conservatives out here in the hinterlands don't already know. Or practically everyone of both parties inside the beltway.
However BC will never get his just rewards in this lifetime. It's time we all acknowledged that. Our job is to stop Hillary and let God mete out justice to Bill.
A-The spineless pubbies have done their usual and "stood up to" the DIMs by grabbing their own ankles (redacting the 100 pages)
B-Even if the 100 pages were released, it would be so poo pooed by the MSM that no one that doesn't already know and believe it would take it seriously anyway.
C-For its own reasons, I believe that the Bush administration has and will put the kabosh on any serious legal action against Bill or Hillary. Why? Although I diasagree, I think they are concerned that it would boomerang and martyr-ize the Clintons.
It's time for a courageous whistleblower to come forward and share the information that's not being released to the public.
This sounds like a job for Mark Levin's group..to get a FOIA paper submitted...
ping a ling..
Go Tony! I hope he comes through.......
This should be very interesting!
I hate to say this...because I am a hugh Cornyn fan...and I HAVE received snail mail that couldn't have been a form letter from him....
But, I also received that same e-mail response to my request for the release of the Barrett Report....
The good news is...there must be a LOT of people e-mailing him...if he has made a "form response"...and surely that means he will be cognizant of the report's release...and make sure that we the people get the chance to read all of it..
I couldn't have said it any better myself.
YOU NAILED IT.
We must get rid of the professional politician in DC.
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.