WSJ: but but but Clinton did it too

[sabra]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117383831796236349.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

The Hubbell Standard
March 14, 2007; Page A14

Congressional Democrats are in full cry over the news this week that the Administration's decision to fire eight U.S. Attorneys originated from -- gasp -- the White House. Senator Hillary Clinton joined the fun yesterday, blaming President Bush for "the politicization of our prosecutorial system." Oh, my.

...

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno -- or Mr. Hubbell -- gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

...

Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in the firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was "within 30 days" of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton's economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton.

...

The supposed scandal this week is that Mr. Bush had been informed last fall that some U.S. Attorneys had been less than vigorous in pursuing voter-fraud cases and that the President had made the point to Attorney General Albert Gonzales. Voter fraud strikes at the heart of democratic institutions, and it was entirely appropriate for Mr. Bush -- or any President -- to insist that his appointees act energetically against it.

:rofl:

[saltpoint]

1. If dragging Bill Clinton in is the best they've got, we've already won this one

and Abu should book a moving van.

[xultar]

2. If I hear that one more fucking time I'm gonna blow chunks all over everyone

within a 60 mile radius of my position.

[Critters2]

3. Where are you, exactly?

Just in case.

[xultar]

15. Atlanta GA.

[babylonsister]

4. Oh, my.

:rofl:

[Old and In the Way]

5. Do they really want to dredge up the details on what Rostenkowski got nailed on?

This was the infamous PostOffice/Check kiting scandel. He was cashing post dated checks and cashing stamps. A real crime, like lying about sex. Certainly not anything like we are seeing today.

http://www.answers.com/topic/dan-rostenkowski

"Rostenkowski's political career was shattered in 1994, when he was indicted on corruption charges, for his key role in the House post office scandal, and was forced to step down from all Congressional leadership positions. In elections later that year, Rostenkowski lost his seat and retired from political life. Charges against Rostenkowski included keeping "ghost" employees on his payroll, using Congressional funds to buy gifts such as chairs and ashtrays for friends, and trading in officially purchased stamps for cash at the House post office<1>. In 1996, he pleaded guilty to reduced charges of mail fraud. He was fined and was sentenced to 17 months in prison, of which he served 15. Rostenkowski was pardoned in 2001 by US President Bill Clinton, in a flurry of last-minute pardons as Clinton left office.

Rostenkowski's downfall in 1994 was portrayed by Republicans as emblematic of Democratic corruption. The scandal helped fuel the Republican victory in the House, led by Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America. "The rise and fall of Dan Rostenkowski tracks the rise and fall of Democrats in the House," concludes Richard E. Cohen in his book on Rostenkowski <2> . "It is a story of power, accomplishments and, ultimately, failure and humiliation."


He did outstanding work for the working man in his years on Ways and Means, particularly on Social Security. I'd take a Congress-ful of Dan Rostenkowski's over the righteous scumbags and con-artists who populate the Republic Party today.

[Fridays Child]

6. Whenever the GOPMedia™ says that these USAs didn't want to investigate voter fraud...

...the Democrats need to stop the conversation and correct the record: these USAs refused to engage in voter suppression.

[blm]

8. They are already controlling the spin on election fraud as a DEMOCRAT scandal.

.

[Catherine Vincent]

7. A c-span democratic caller gave it a perfect name....

"The Clinton crutch"

LOL!

[ComerPerro]

9. Anyone who can't see the difference between purging ALL

and purging just the ones who are either investigating you or who won't go to bat for you, is an idiot.

[mvd]

10. Um, Clinton fired them at the BEGINNING of his term

Typical WSJ here.

[Rydz777]

11. Oh, what a gotcha!

Ho hum, it's apples and oranges. Clinton fired the Republican attorneys from their political appointments. Normal procedure when a new party takes over. What Bush/Gonzalez have done is to fire Republican appointees - their own people - and that is highly suspicious.

[NoPasaran]

12. If Bill Clinton jumped in a lake... n/t

[louis-t]

13. WSJ editorials have been picked up by local papers lately

WSJ is editorializin' re: local issues, too. Same pattern: spin a few details, but leave out anything that might make a republic look bad. Note they don't mention that they were only targeting Dem "voter fraud" where no evidence existed. Detroit Free Press ran one criticizing Dem Gov. Granholm. The article mentioned that MI had lost 362,000 jobs since 2000 (Granholm began her term in '03). It neglected to mention that 240,000 of those jobs were lost in just 2 years under her republic predecessor, who gave huge tax breaks to manufacturers who left the state anyway. That's OK though because he got a high paying job out of it. He (John Engler) is now the president of the National Association of Manufacturers. The writer also opined that unions were causing the demise of the big three, apparently thinking workers should take huge pay cuts. In the next breath, they complain that per capita income in our state is the lowest in 75 years! I sent off a fiery response, but I didn't keep a copy. Shoot.

[sinkingfeeling]

14. Does anybody on the WSJ editorial board have a brain? Can they not do research before they put out

crap like that? Can't they do a google search? Or can't they read?

[depakid]

16. The Wall Street Journal's editorials lack credibility

and no one with any critical thinking ability takes them seriously.

That's what happens when you lie and distort as often as they do. Eventually, you lose your credibility.