The Clinton Administration, Part Deux

Just in case anyone had doubts, two new books, one by Carl Bernstein, confirm that Bill and Hillary have planned and schemed for decades their rise to power.

"A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton," by Carl Bernstein, reports that Clinton as first lady was terrified she would be prosecuted, took over her own legal and political defense, and decided not to be forthcoming with investigators because she was convinced she was unfairly targeted. While in Arkansas, according to Bernstein, she personally interviewed one woman alleged to have had an affair with her husband, contemplated divorce and thought about running for governor out of anger at her husband's indiscretions.

"Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton," by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., reports that during her husband's 1992 campaign, a team she oversaw hired a private investigator to undermine Gennifer Flowers "until she is destroyed." Flowers had said publicly that she had an affair with Bill Clinton while he was governor of Arkansas.

The book also suggests that Hillary Clinton did not read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq in 2002 before voting to authorize war. And it includes a thirdhand report that the Clintons had a secret plan after the 1992 election in which he would have eight years as president and then she would have eight years, although last night a key source disavowed the story.

I wonder if the plan also includes Chelsea's eventual rise the White house. Americans can then have the possibility of comfortably resting in the caring arms of Bushes and Clintons for a full half century. It could happen as follows: George W. Bush (1989-93); Bill Clinton (1993-2001); George H.W. Bush (2001-2009); Hillary Clinton (2009-2017); Jeb Bush (2017-2025); Chelsea Clinton (2025-2033); George P. Bush, Jeb's son of 1988 Republican Convention fame, (2033-2041). A thinking electorate no longer required.

[Photo by J. Scott Applewhite -- Associated Press]

Did The Administration Cherry Pick The Intelligence?

Reports are emerging today from the Senate Intelligence Committee that in the weeks and months prior to the invasion of the Iraq the CIA was providing opinions that pointed to the great difficulty to be faced in Iraq and the region after the overthrow of Hussein's government.

It is not yet clear how these, now isolated reports, fit into the full array of materials available to the White House when it finalized plans for the invasion. How they fit may be the key historical puzzle of these times, nothing less.

If, as charged by George Tenet and others, the administration determined to invade come hell or high water and ignored as "nervous nellies" (in Lyndon Johnson's terms) those who raised reasonable cautions, then America was clearly mislead by this President. One can argue that the screw up regarding WMD's was a genuine mistake. But if all the advise provided pointed toward great difficulty in a civil chaos that would follow, then Bush and Co. clearly chose to lie and dissemble. We need to find out if there were contemporaneous findings that pointed to the likelihood of a facile and positive outcome. If they don't exist, then it would seem we were guided solely by the rich fantasy life of Dick Cheney.

But in the end, does it really matter so much if the President knew the likely post-war difficulties? The fact is he should have known before committing our young people to be killed and maimed. The general incompetence of the Bush Administration, both at home and abroad is already certified as being of historic proportions.

Our apparent fascination, at this very early date, with the 2008 Presidential campaign is nothing so much as a way of denying the existence of this President. Dreaming of a future great President helps us believe that America can and will work again.

Firing US Attorneys - Sound And Fury Signifying What?

So far I have avoided writing about the developing "scandal" surrounding the firing of eight US Attorneys. I simply couldn't believe that this matter would have any legs. After all, US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. Every President has the right to have the Justice Department make its choices as to the use of resources and the focus of its efforts according to his or her political view. That is what elections are, in part, about. Further, when Billary came into office, like most recent Presidents of both parties, they fired 93 US Attorneys sight unseen.

Why then the ruckus over this event? If you scratch the stories in the MSM and read the blogs screaming the loudest you quickly learn that, aside from their delight in any opportunity to hammer the Bush administration, there is the whiff of a suspicion that at least one, and possibly two of the US Attorneys were discharged for either too lenient pursuit of charges against Democratic operatives or too aggressive pursuit of Republicans.

So far, there is not a shred of proof of any such behavior. In todays NY Times there is an extensive review of the case of David Iglesias, the former US Attorney in New Mexico. What this investigative report reveals...alert the rest of the media pack...is that politicians and their operatives sought to influence the behavior of the government in a way that would favor their party's interests. That is as universal and time honored a behavior as exists in American politics. There is nothing new or criminal in any of these revelations.

In fact, this report seems to show that Attorney General Gonzales ignored the pleadings of Sen. Pete Domenici. Here is the time line presented as a graphic in the Times' piece:


(Check this link of the image is not readable.)

Look particularly at the following dates:

Sept. 2005, Domenici calls Gonzales about the matter. Gonzales does nothing.

Jan. 31, 2006, Domenici calls Gonzales again. Gonzales does nothing.

April 2006, Domenici again calls Gonzales. Again, Gonzales does nothing.

October 26 or 27, 2006, Domenici gives up trying to get something done through Gonzales and calls Iglesias directly.

November 15, 2006, Iglesias' name is released on a list of US Attorneys to be fired. How his name got on that list is not known, although Harriet Miers' deputy logically assumes that Domenici will be happy, and presumably will stop harassing the White House about this matter.

Up to this point in time, the prime target of the press and the blogs has been Gonzales. The report by the Times would seem to demonstrate that there is no available evidence that Gonzales was involved directly in the decision.

The other perspective that is relevant to this discussion is the pursuit of political targets by other US Attorneys. I live in the NY media market. Here, in the Southern District of New York, the US Attorney's office is pursuing corruption in the Republican led City of Yonkers, where supoenas have been issued. Last year the same office opened an investigation into an alleged conspiracy between former Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro and former nominee for to head the Department of Homeland Security, Bernie Kerik, to bug Pirro's husband's boat seeking evidence of his philandering. Pirro's eventually dropped out of the race for NY Attorney General and her political future and that of the NY Republican party were destroyed by revelations about this investigation. The US Attorney for NY's name did not appear on the hit list of USA's to be fired. I am willing to wager that there are dozens of other political investigations ongoing throughout the country, given the dishonesty of the political class. How many districts have such prosecutions under way? Why where none of these other USA's fired? Was it only because Domenici made such a pain in the ass of himself? That certainly seems likely.

The truth is that the goal of all this noise has nothing to do with some great principle about how the independence of the Justice Department is to be maintained inside a highly charged political environment. This is simply this year's example of got'cha politics. The hoped for Fitzmas gift of Rove or Chenney's head on a platter has not panned out. This is just round two.

It is also true that the Bush Administration, no surprise here, has mishandled this affair from the get go. Instead of simply quickly demanding the full story from the involved players and then putting that full story out to the public, the White House and Justice Department have performed like the equivalent of the Keystone Cops. They have changed the story at least two or three times so far.

Like all other such efforts in our sorry time, Whitewatergate, Blowjobgate, etc., this effort will result in no substantive charges or reforms. What its advocates hope for is the investigation itself. For it is the slow drip of daily reports that gives the impression that some serious misdeed has been committed. More important than the predictable degradation in the public's regard for the Administration, (and by the way, could it possibly go any lower?) there will be the all important testimony under oath before Congressional committees. The jackals surrounding the current episode, in this version they happen to be Democrats, hope and pray for some fool (God wouldn't it be great if Bush pulled a Clinton on this one?) to tell a lie under oath. That will produce the evidence necessary for the appointment of another Special Prosecutor, or the redirection of Fitzgerald's dwindling efforts. That in turn will provide the background of alleged scandal the party out of power can flog as another reason for electing them right through to the 2008 election.

The clearest evidence of this is the presence of New York's Sen. Schumer, the head of the Democratic Senatorial Election Committee, at the head of the pack.

The only policy reform likely to eventually emerge from our sad political process of the last three decades is for us to bite the bullet and institutionalize the office of Special Prosecutor as a standing fourth branch of our government. Think how much easy material would be available every day for the media to churn. And think of the joy over at the Jon Stewart, Leno, Letterman and Co. The fact that we are slowly murdering a once great nation's political institutions is of no concern to any of the current players.