Does Clinton have the "goods" on Bush???

[Flying_Pig]

I ask this question because, if you'll remember, one of the first things Bush did after stealing office, was to issue an executive order sealing all of the records of not only his father's administration, but also that of Reagans.

We know for a fact, contained within those records are prosecutable high-crimes and misdemeanors, relating to Iran-Contra, and probably dozens of other nefarious "black-ops".

Surely Clinton, quick study that he is, had reviewed most of these files before leaving office. I am sure he learned of enough dirt to not only bury the BFEE, but also most of the key players in the Republican party. So my question, is why hasn't Bill used this information in a way that might help the Dems, and/or the nation, by undermining the Republican party, and its efforts to destroy the foundations of this nation?

What is stopping him? Fear of retribution? Fear that the Repugs have similar information on the Dems? One would think, with our nation's civil liberties hanging in the balance, not to mention our economy, our foreign policy, and even the continued existence of our republican democracy, that Bill would not hesitate to use whatever information he has, to help save the country. And, after all the dirty shit they pulled on him, why would he hesitate? Your thoughts?

[Jack The Tab]

1. That's Clinton's ace-in-the-hole...

and I would imagine would only use that kind of information if they were going after Clinton or Hillary in any hardcore manner.

Unfortunately, I think we can safely assume that these liars and thiefs will get away with whatever high crimes they've already committed.

[meegbear]

2. Interesting question ...

He probably read them (hell, I would have), but I don't think he'd be partisan about it.

Also remember that *'s staff consists of members of daddy's and raygun's staff. You wouldn't want anything nasty to get out about them. I think * did it for that reason. Lord knows they'd love to throw out as much negative stuff about Clinton and release anything on him, but if they were gonna seal the old stuff, everything, including the shit he was/is planing, has to be covered.

[bahrbearian]

3. I was woundering why this hasn't ever been mentioned by

the media?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. Let's not be naive

Clinton has the goods on them, and I'm sure they have the goods on him.

[Flying_Pig]

5. So you think it's the ....

old "Mexican standoff", eh? And what "goods" would they have on Clinton, besides the already well known sexual peccadillos??

[arendt]

9. Bill Clinton - Standover Man

Its amazing how no one ever really investigated what
was going on at the Mena, Arkansas airport.

It is definitely known that Contra pilots were trained
there in violation of the Boland ammendment. It is
known that the notorious Barry Seale flew in and out
of there carrying arms to the Contras and drugs
back home.


This is all written up in a tin-foil-hat book by one of
the Mena pilots: Compromised - Bush, Clinton, CIA, Drugs.

This book alleges that Ollie North ran drugs through
there on behalf of George Bush Sr. and that Clinton
as governor A) looked the other way; B) managed to
ripoff about $100 M of drug proceeds.

Basically, Bill Clinton is a "standover man" - that's
Australian for "a gangster who steals from other
gangsters". Its a very dangerous business, which
takes brass balls. But, it is extremely profitable, and
your victims can hardly go complain to the police.

on edit- paragraphs out of order, fixed

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

13. Chinese and Indonesian money?

There was a fight over the Republicans getting their cash from the Koch billionaires, while Clinton was getting money from the Riadys. The parties decided to back off to protect each other's billionaires.

Clinton knew about Iran-Contra, and I suspect played a role.

[emad]

6. Whatever he's got, he can't/wont use it

cos he knows that if bush/cheney go down, he and gore will go down with them.
there's no way with hillary's manifest aspirations that clinton's ever going to blab, he's in deep just as they are.
you have to go back to the stinking rotten roots of corruption that culminated in Bush sr becoming CIA chief in '76.

just say halleluia! each time you see shrubland getting more and more confident. it's going to be game, set, match and worldseries grandslam to those who hold the evidence, irrespective of any presidential sealing order. most of this battle has already been won in private lawsuits, supreme court evidential testimony and security services' long term operations.

the shrubs are good at bluffing, but their tactical errors have been cataclysmic. they've no more shots to call.

[RandomKoolzip]

7. Listen, I'm as open as anyone when it comes to tinfoil

hats, but this is really just speculation, isn't it? I mean, we may as well be debating why Jupiter hasn't invaded Saturn yet. We don't really know what Clinton "has" on Bush, nor do we know what's in those records. Seems like a non-issue to me.

[Flying_Pig]

8. The crimes of Iran/Contra are pretty well documented,

and I am sure the documents that Bush sealed, would further implicate dozens of people, known and unknown, including Reagan, and his father. and yes, it is all speculation. Sometimes, speculation is fun....!
:evilgrin:

[papau]

10. unknowable so why worry - besides when only non conservative folk

have small plane problems and get anthrax letters, I am not sure you need to "have something" on someone in order for them to think that stirring up a bees nest that only the foreign press will notice is not a good thing to do (the US press is not controlled by RW GOP - they just act that way).

So we are into "future" and "optimism" and "values" and "likeability" - the items Rove has ordered the American Press to focus on for the 04 election. And I do not see the American press doing other than what Rove has ordered.

[Stanchetalarooni]

11. Good Cop, Bad Cop. (Caution: Stream-of-Consciousnes Rant ahead)

Cops are cops.
They are more alike than they are different.
They do what they are told.
They survive and thrive so long as they fulfill their duties.
They are not independent agents.
They work side by side.
They have common goals; only their means are different.
The most critical factors are hidden from external view.

We humans are so complex yet most of us choose to view humanity through a simple lens. The projective lens.
We try to understand what we see with a limited arsenal.

How does one come to know that which he can not perceive?

Do we trust only our personal perceptions and not those of others?

How can we trust the perceptions of others when we can not perceive them ourselves?

Does it take an act of trust, an act of faith?

Who to trust?

[ima_sinnic]

12. I've wondered the same thing about Kerry

n/t

[K-W]

14. Stupid Question,

but if he sealed the records, doesnt that mean they were open before? No one ever bothered to look at them?

[ComerPerro]

17. Not quite

For a long time, presidents could seal their documents and records indefinately.
After the Watergate mess with Nixon, it was ruled that presidential records could be sealed for only twelve years. After that, they must be opened for the public record.
Shortly after 9/11 (and by that I mean immediately) Bush used an executive order to seal the documents of Reagan and his father. He made it so once again Presidential records could be hidden forever.

Thereafter, though (and this is interesting) Clinton released a vast majority of his own documents.

[Widgetsfriend]

15. Here is a DU thread with one aspect of the Iran Contra information...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=11956&forum=DCForumID61

There are lots of links to plenty of information. The absolute best place to read is Rep. Henry Gonzales' testimony in the Congressional Record. I believe there are links from the DU page cited. He laid things out very well. So this stuff is NOT speculation. It is fact. I have read very compelling stuff about Clinton's involvement but have not read anything I consider definitive...like anyone saying that he was at the airport as shipments arrived (that doesn't mean he wasn't involved; I just haven't seen anything to prove it to me) or that copies of his bank statements with the $100 million in deposits showing up. But there are plenty of circumstantial articles out there (Google: Clinton Mena Iran Contra...that should get you something). However, there was a DU thread recently discussing our drug czar, Asa Hutchinson, who was Attorney General in Arkansas during the Mena airport fiasco and the controversy over his stifling investigations into Mena and the drug dealers involved. Here's a link. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/alexander_alleges_coverup.html

Anyway, in closing, as everytime I post something here I talk too much!!! I have this to say. The criminals who are running our country right now are willing to do anything to keep their jobs. They have much to hide and they have been successful so far. That goes for Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. Think about what they are guilty of and imagine them being willing to let someone, like say Howard Dean, get into the Oval Office and control the distribution of their many, many secret documents. It just isn't going to happen! That's why I am willing to believe that they would subvert the Supreme Court to get there and subvert electronic voting machines to stay.

[shrike]

16. According to Al Martin

You have to consider the source here -- although I'm not sure how much I'd trust an alleged Mena pilot, either -- but according to Al Clinton had the goods on Bush the elder when he took office, but decided not to act because it would cause such a crisis in the monetary system that the world economy could collapse. Again, this is crazy Al.

Whenever I've read Al he seems to come down a lot harder on the Bushes than Clinton.

[shrike]

18. Just did a search like you suggested

And none of those sources look too reputable to me.

Not that I think Clinton is a saint. But let's be careful not to buy into the thing that the right-wing has come up with over the years. Not all of them had to do with sex.

[Widgetsfriend]

19. If you mean the one about Clinton Mena, etc....

Reread what I said. I haven't read anything that convinces me of his involvement in Mena. He was governor at the time and that seems to be enough proof for lots of people to believe he was involved. Besides, by claiming Clinton's guilt in Mena, the Republicans seem to think it lets them off the hook. It's become too familiar a refrain to be even remotely believable. So I repeat: I've seen nothing to make me believe Clinton was guilty of anything to do with Mena. However, we must allow ourselves to read everything..as progressive thinkers we should not be afraid of the truth...no matter what that truth might be. The alternative is blind faith. (Look where blind faith has gotten those praying idiots in Alabama!)

[shrike]

20. I'm not dissing you, Widget

I've just read and heard so much crap about Clinton over the years I tend to be wary of ANYTHING that's said about him. And you ARE right, as liberal thinkers we have to keep our minds open and not take things on fate. And we have to keep ourselves educated; it's the only way to make intelligent decisions.

And as I said in the earlier post, Clinton is no saint.