RacerX
Old Rhapsody User
not.
Here is an interesting point. At what point did the Clintons involvement in the Whitewater land deal become so great that a special prosecutor was assigned? You may recall that the former partners of the Clintons had a land deal go very bad and after almost 6 years of investigation Starr was unable to find anything that the Clintons did wrong.
Now fast forward to the current Enron situation. The current administration has had very close dealings with Enron both during the campaign and after the election (Cheney's energy task force), but when asked if a special prosecutor was going to be assigned, Bush said he didn't feel that one was needed. Really? And at which point did Clinton feel the need to have one assigned? Bush said that he felt that the Department of Justice could handle that case without help from the out side. Mind you that this is the same DoJ that just gave up on a winning case against Microsoft (who was second only to Enron in overall campaign contributions to the current administration). Something tells me that the DoJ is far from being unbias in this matter.
Does anyone else find this disturbing?
Here is an interesting point. At what point did the Clintons involvement in the Whitewater land deal become so great that a special prosecutor was assigned? You may recall that the former partners of the Clintons had a land deal go very bad and after almost 6 years of investigation Starr was unable to find anything that the Clintons did wrong.
Now fast forward to the current Enron situation. The current administration has had very close dealings with Enron both during the campaign and after the election (Cheney's energy task force), but when asked if a special prosecutor was going to be assigned, Bush said he didn't feel that one was needed. Really? And at which point did Clinton feel the need to have one assigned? Bush said that he felt that the Department of Justice could handle that case without help from the out side. Mind you that this is the same DoJ that just gave up on a winning case against Microsoft (who was second only to Enron in overall campaign contributions to the current administration). Something tells me that the DoJ is far from being unbias in this matter.
Does anyone else find this disturbing?