|
It’s 1997: Suppose that Bill Clinton had got it in his head that Timothy McVeigh was aided and abetted by Uzbekistan on the way to the Alfred P. Murrah Building. Uzbekistan is ruled by a fierce dictator—Shavkat Mirizyoyev. The Uzbek government is known for its human rights violations which include such horrific practices as boiling people alive. Uzbekistan also sits on some (not a lot of) oil reserves. Hillary Clinton is convinced that there is a connection between Mirizyoyev and the Oklahoma City bombing and that, worse yet, Uzbekistan is developing weapons of mass destruction. Bill Clinton orders the CIA to develop a dossier. Unconvinced by initial results, Hillary and George Stephanopoulos pressure the CIA. William Cohen, with the aid of Sandy Berger, creates his own internal intelligence arm. The raw data is cherry picked and stove piped. They learn of a report by the British that Tajikistan was supplying Uzbekistan with aluminum tubes suitable only for nuclear warheads. Hillary hears reports that the evidence is shaky. She asks the CIA to investigate. The CIA sends Howard Baker to Uzbekistan to look into it. He reports back to the CIA that the tubes are too small to be compatible with use in a nuclear device. Bill Clinton gives his State of the Union address and makes the case against Uzbekistan, including the dubious aluminum tube report. Baker believes that the President (who he voted for) is taking the wrong path and prints an article in the Washington Times—“What I did not find in Uzbekistan.” Hillary Clinton is livid. She finds out that Baker’s daughter is a CIA agent (she doesn’t care, or bother to find out, if she’s undercover) working on WMDs. She concludes that Baker was sent on a boondoggle as a result of nepotism. She instructs Dee Dee Myers to “leak” the news to selective sources. Sandy Berger and George Stephanopoulos join in the fun. Finally, Robert Scheer prints an article exposing the young Ms. Baker and the cover firm she used—Scaife & Ailes. The CIA, naturally, is upset by this obvious breach of security and reports the matter to the DOJ. Janet Reno refers the matter to Patrick Fitzgerald—an independent attorney of impeccable credentials. An investigation ensues. In the process, Sandy Berger lies repeatedly and often to the Grand Jury and the FBI. He is indicted. Tried. Convicted. Question: how would Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Anne Coulter react? Would they say that it was a travesty that Berger was convicted and that he should be immediately pardoned? Would they say that Hillary at all times acted above board and simply is the victim of blogging moonbats? Would they say that it is simply off the radar to consider impeaching Bill Clinton for leading us into a foolish war against Uzbekistan? I thought not.
|