Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. A voice of reason, which is the highest compliment I can pay and used to pay regularly to Barbara Olson. Schippers claims that no one in Congress wants to listen to the few FBI agents who have "evidence". All they need to do is contact the Washington Post, who would NEVER give up a source, and the story would be front page news within a few hours.

Mr. Schippers voted for Bill Clinton not once, but twice. I can barely forgive anyone who voted for X-42 in 1992, but for anyone to vote for him in 1996 and then stand up in 2001 as a pillar of integrity is an utter disgrace.

When Judge Schippers acted as counsel for the Republican congress during the Klinton impeachment he learned more about the IMPOTUS then he ever knew. I imagine that is when his mind was changed regarding the rapist.

I wouldn't necessarily believe Schippers if he was a lone voice in the wilderness. But there are a lot of other very persuasive accounts, including those of Evans-Pritchard and General Partin. OKC was a very, very fishy business, typifying the kind of thing that happened so often in the clinton years. And it was VERY convenient to his election campaign.

What does Schippers possibly have to gain by these statements? He will probably end up destroying his career as a prosecutor. He will be unemployable by either Dems or Republicans. And even those of us who have ideas about OKC don't really expect the truth ever to come to light. Schippers is beating his head against a stone wall by doing this, although I honor him for his persistence.

You forgot to put this in "breaking news."

DS knows what evidence on Clinton is locked in the Ford Building. The very evidence that made Tim Russert throw up.

I take DS on is word.

What does DS have to gain? A book deal and huge sales among the conspiracy minded.

When Judge Schippers acted as counsel for the Republican congress during the Klinton impeachment he learned more about the IMPOTUS then he ever knew. I imagine that is when his mind was changed regarding the rapist.

I don't buy that explanation, because by 1996 what Schippers and everyone else already knew about Bill Clinton would have been enough to make any honest man vomit. If what you say is true, then Schippers is only slightly less corrupt than anyone else in the Democratic Party. What you are saying is that corruption and criminal behavior was perfectly acceptable to Schippers, but once Clinton's history of sexual violence was revealed then all bets were off. Pillar of integrity, my @ss.

If I could speak to Schippers now and ask him one question, it would be this:   "Be honest, Mr. Schippers -- You didn't learn anything about Bill Clinton in 1998 that you didn't already know, did you?"

You make some interesting points. As I recall the book thing was used against Linda Tripp and a number of other people too. I guess it's hard to fathom, but there were hundreds of witnesses in the TWA 800 incident that were never called to make a statement before the FBI. We already know that there were early reports of middle-east connections in the OKC case. Then again, let's not forget Carol Howe. Carol, and two other informants lived at Elohim city. All three were feeding information to the FBI and none of them were being listened to.

I'm very comfortable believing Shippers.

What does Schippers possibly have to gain by these statements? He will probably end up destroying his career as a prosecutor. He will be unemployable by either Dems or Republicans.

Please note item #1 in my original post. Schippers knows his career as a prosecutor is over, and he knew it as soon as he accepted that position as the lead counsel for Congress during Clinton's impeachment -- that's why he has embarked on a lucrative career as a best-selling author.

1. ...I suspect his "evidence" is going to be presented in an upcoming New York Times bestseller...

That is just a suspicion, you have little evidence of his commercial interest in this.

2. Mr. Schippers voted for Bill Clinton not once, but twice...

As did half the country. An astounding number of people fell for Clinton, remember Clinton was aided by the entire media and even many Republicans failed to show enough revulsion. I don't know if you had the experience I did at that time, but I argued with many many apparently otherwise intelligent people who would just plain back up Clinton no matter what: it was extremely frustrating, but I didn't entirely discount them as human beings. The fact that Schippers voted for Clinton does little to refute any of his "evidence" - though it would be sure nice to see real evidence.

3, 4. Mr. Schippers also claims that he knew an awful lot of details about the September 11th attack a month in advance, but somehow this was never mentioned during the month before September 11th. ...Who the hell has credible evidence of a nuclear attack in New York City and leaves the matter in the hands of a janitor at the Justice Department?.

I think that is your best point.

Still, OKC seems extremely fishy, and Schippers is VERY FAR from being the only one questioning the official story.

I wouldn't discount him for the above reasons, but simply let him present his evidence and evaluate it.

Don't you think those 100's of witnesses could have/should have contact the media, who would have welcomed the chance to uncover explosive information to show how inept the FBI is? The media generally jump at that chance and if I had a story to tell that was different than what was being presented by the FBI and local media, you bet I'd call someone like the Washington Post. There isn't a shred of proof offered by Schippers - not one iota.

I take DS on is word.

I'll take DS on his word, too, but only after he tells us exactly what he found out about Clinton. Don't tell me about how this information is sealed, either. Any honest man would publicize this information under threat of prosecution before allowing Clinton to go on his post-presidency sympathy tours.

In fact, Clinton's career making speaking appearances would seem to obligate Schippers to come clean here. Anyone who considers paying Clinton $100,000 for a speaking engagement should know exactly who it is they are inviting.

I'll go one step further -- Clinton on the street (as opposed to Clinton in jail) is worth more to Schippers because Schippers will be able to write books about him every couple of years for the rest of his life.

As I recall the book thing was used against Linda Tripp and a number of other people too.

The difference here is that Schippers has a best-selling book to show for it, while most of the others do not.

I bought Schipper's book on the impeachment and felt that he spent far far too much time blaming republicans and praising demonrats. Sorry, but any man who considers himself astute and voted for clinton the first time has no credibility IMHO. He put his party before his country and September 11th. is the legacy of that despicable vote.

DS knows what evidence on Clinton is locked in the Ford Building. The very evidence that made Tim Russert throw up. I take DS on is word

For those of us relatively-newbies, what are you talking about? that made Tim Russert throw up??? Please explain.
And I say this as a person who switched parties to after having voted (yuck) for X42 in '92--I'j thoroughly disgusted with him. I seriously would like to know.

More important than anything else is that Schippers is that has not presented one shred of evidence to support his unbelievable claims. The more unbelievable the claims the more important it is, generally, to present some sort of evidence. Even third rate attorneys know this.

Peach, with every post you make, you sound more like James Carville. The facts are known about the witnesses in the flight 800 case. Many of them phoned the FBI to report what they saw. They gave their contact information and never heard from the FBI again. This isn't open to debate and attempting to state that they could have gone public is no excuse for the lack of interest by the FBI. These people did make contact with Commander Donaldson and registered their observations with him. Those observations were made public and promptly dismissed by people sounding a lot like you for numerous reasons.

My point is not necessarily that Schippers is incorrect about Oklahoma City, but that he does not have the credibility to present this evidence and expect to be taken seriously.

Your comment about the number of people who voted for Clinton twice is a valid one, but based on my own experience I can say that I do not know a single person of integrity with any intelligence who voted for him twice. Everyone I know who voted for him twice was either politically ignorant or shamelessly liberal (to the point that I wouldn't trust them with a nickel of my money).

Please keep in mind that Schippers is a career political hack from that bastion of integrity known as Chicago.

What you are saying is that corruption and criminal behavior was perfectly acceptable

No I am not saying that at all. Schippers spent a good part of his career cleaning up organized crime in Chicago, but I really think he was unaware of just how corrupt our government is. Not just the dems but the republicans too. I truly believe that he wasn't prepared for what Washington had sunk to in the past few decades.