Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Hillary's Newly Empowered FBI
NewsMax.com ^ | 6/03/02 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 06/03/2002 11:19:19 PM PDT by kattracks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

1 posted on 06/03/2002 11:19:19 PM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
What ever laws, rules and regulations were in place during the Clinton era, which Mr Limbacher seems to think were much stricter than the new, didn't seem to hinder Hillary then and I don't suppose it would make any difference what safeguaards are in place in the future.

If she ever gets to be President and is not restrained by the public, then she would ride rough shod over anything she wanted to in any event. She must never be elected to the Presidency.

2 posted on 06/03/2002 11:36:23 PM PDT by wingnuts'nbolts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
The real danger isn't the FBI's new powers in the hands of good people. It's the lack of accountability in both the media and the courts for those responsible for orchestrating the bureau's old abuses.

With the media and thus the uninformed masses and the courts on Hitlery's side, now that's a scary thought.

3 posted on 06/03/2002 11:52:20 PM PDT by Balata
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"will she abuse the FBI's expanded surveillance powers that were announced by Attorney General John Ashcroft last week?"

This is my biggest fear concerning all these new regulations and statutes. No one seems capable of looking twenty years down the line and pondering if this is still a good idea. We musn't let terrorism destroy our country by eliminating all the very rights we hold dear. Can you imagine what Reno and the Clinton's could have done with these new powers at their disposal? I shudder to think.

4 posted on 06/03/2002 11:56:28 PM PDT by brat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Don't just speak of Hillary. Sooner or later a Dem will be president.
5 posted on 06/04/2002 12:20:41 AM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wingnuts'nbolts
If she ever gets to be President and is not restrained by the public, then she would ride

Hah!, by the time her first year ended she would have given away everything to special liberal interest groups, other DemoncRATS,NOW, China, NATO, UN,Mexico, etc. There would be NO country left.

6 posted on 06/04/2002 12:21:05 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: brat
I truly wish our elected before proposing leglislation would ask themselves "What will Hillary do"? If not her another Bill Clinton? This article fails to mention it wasn't the courts who let Bill Clinton walk away unpunished from his abuses. It was a house and senate who ignored those grave issues. A clock can be right twice a day. Trafficant was right about the way of going after Clinton. Till the majority of the Leglislative Branch from both parties gains some constitutional common sense we are wide open for more abuses from anyone at any time.
7 posted on 06/04/2002 12:23:33 AM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"I am not voting for Bush, he's no different than Gore. Let's have Bush the RINO loose to punish him and teach other RINO's a lesson.

What idiots!

8 posted on 06/04/2002 3:02:15 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
will she abuse the FBI's expanded surveillance powers

Hadn't thought of that. Kind of puts our nation between a rock and a hard place. Can't deal with foreign terrorists without the powers and can't deal with Hillary with them.

9 posted on 06/04/2002 4:44:16 AM PDT by Tom Bombadil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
What amazes me when I read some of the comments about our "civil liberties" being violated is the total lack of awareness that unless we track, profile terrorists, we're not going to have a country for Hillary or any other RAT to govern.
10 posted on 06/04/2002 5:29:45 AM PDT by Elkiejg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Good read!

Be afraid, be very afraid!

11 posted on 06/04/2002 5:45:22 AM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Well, half the posters on FR should be enjoying this one. They seem to be finally showing their colors in support of the Clintons. If Clinton's remain in political power, it is a sign (IMO) of God's continuing judgement on America. What else could itbe?
12 posted on 06/04/2002 5:47:44 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
bump
13 posted on 06/04/2002 8:27:12 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
The terrorist threat is not new by any means. I remember this one very well. Did we surrender our rights then? BTW these are now free men. I read an article on one of them recently. But here's an article another freeper found concerning that event.

The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York brought back memories of the hijacking of a Southern Airways DC-9 in November 1972. The three Americans who hijacked the plane after a stopover in Birmingham, Alabama, threatened to force the pilots to crash the plane into the Oak Ridge facilities. (One of the hijackers had worked at Oak Ridge.) They demanded $10 million “ransom.” Promised $2 million, they forced the pilots to fly to Havana, where the plane landed safely. (Frank Munger, Knoxville News-Sentinel, 9/14/01; Duncan Mansfield, Associated Press, 9/19/01)

End of article

IMO they are not better or worse than the ones who flew the planes into the WTC. They are still terrorist. Arm the pilots, hire more Marshalls, arm the cabin crew but stop using it as a means to pass more laws to further inflict more limitations upon those who are not terrorist.

14 posted on 06/04/2002 3:38:57 PM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
bump
15 posted on 11/20/2002 11:06:53 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Before Bill and Hillary got married, Bill was running for congress and was 'friendly' with some girls working on his campaign. Hillary wrote Bill a letter to remind him that only she could help him with his desire to be president. She also refreshed his memory of their pact, that she would help him get to be president for eight years and then he would help her become president.

I jes don't want nobody fergettin'.

16 posted on 11/20/2002 11:20:21 PM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox
WE haven't forgotten!!
17 posted on 11/20/2002 11:47:15 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: timestax
We will Never forget!
18 posted on 11/21/2002 1:19:28 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: muggs
bump
19 posted on 11/21/2002 10:17:09 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: aShepard
Good read!

Be afraid, be very afraid!

Amen!

20 posted on 11/21/2002 10:21:14 PM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson