But anyway, historically and until recently (maybe still going on),
the presidents
of Mexico acted as a corruption club, with professional courtesy of
thieves
keeping any of them from going after their predecessor.
Now, for some reason, Clinton behaved the same way toward his predecessor
Bush (41), refusing to have DOJ look into IraqGate, the truth of the
Iran/Contra
matter, the cocaine trafficking of the Contras aided by the CIA, etc.,
etc.
Very early on, Reno signalled these decisions not to proceed on any
of these things,
and Clinton didn't demur or order her to proceed. Clinton also decided
not to blow
the whistle on the October Surprise matter, even though he had updated
info from
foreign sources offering the proof of what had gone on.
Robert Parry covers this failure of Clinton to act in one of his fine
articles, and more
or less says it was done out of naivete, as a kind of peace offering
to the right. If so,
as Parry says, it didn't work, showed weakness or at least the lack
of a mean streak,
and so the right was off to the races to continue their rewriting of
history project,
covering their own crimes, and manufacturing charges against Clinton.
We can only imagine how differently the Clinton years might have turned
out if he had
properly used the law to fully inform the unwashed propagandized masses
as to the truth
of the enormity of their fascist rulers' past misdeeds. Perhaps the
GOP would have
dissolved, but if not, surely their leadership structure would have
been forced into
retirement, and a generation in the electoral wilderness would have
ensued. Instead, the
curtains were drawn in finality over those episodes, the coverup allowed
to remain in place,
those people involved left with their reputations publicly intact.
Interestingly, Mike Ruppert of copvcia.com points out that at the height
of impeachment
(just after the articles of impeachment had been voted out of the House,
I think), Clinton
had the CIA's Inspector General's report on Contra related cocaine
trafficking issued,
in what Ruppert claims was a shot across the bow of the VRWC, to threaten
(finally) to
blow open those facts to the general public. Whether Ruppert is correct
on that,
I don't know, but the timing is suggestive indeed.
I think the probable conclusion is that Clinton was a junior associate
member of the BFEE.
He has been said to be CIA from an alleged recruitment at Georgetown
U. (a happy hunting
ground for the CIA second only to the Ivies in general). Roger Morris's
*Partners in Power*
makes this assertion, including claims from several (unnamed, but known
to Morris)
intelligence community members who said they saw his CIA 201 personnel
file. This is said
to be the reason he went overseas as a student (to infiltrate the anti-war
movement to look
for Communist influences), and to explain how he travelled behind the
Iron Curtain and
stayed at the swanky, expensive hotel, without any obvious way to come
up with that cash.
It is said to be the reason for his early high-level patronage, which
fast-tracked him to a rise
to prominence (Arkansas being a one-party political machine state at
the time, and a
Rockefeller power center). And it would explain why Clinton, possibly
alone among
governors at that time (to my knowledge, the only one), sent his Arkansas
National Guard
down for joint training with the Contras in Central America, and the
various cooperative acts
he took to help quash investigations into the goings on at the Mena
airstrip.
If you haven't read Terry Reed's book 'Compromised: Clinton, Bush, and
the CIA,' it is quite
a read, and seems credible to me (which see). Reed is no knee-jerk
Clinton basher, reserving
his worst criticism for Bush & Co., and stating that if the electoral
choice was between Bush or
Clinton, he would vote for Clinton as far less a criminal than Bush.
A friend of Barry Seale's,
he recounts Seale's claim of the aborted DEA sting at Opa-Locka Airport
in Florida, wherein
a couple of kilos of coke were picked up by Jeb and George W. Bush
(George piloting the plane).
Still, he puts then-Gov. Clinton in on Reagan/Bush era Casey/North/Contra
Mena money
laundering and cocaine smugglingactivities, by his own puported eye-witness
evidence.
There has been a long-rumored 'mutual assured destruction' situation
between the Bushes and
the Clintons, and this could be the nexus from which it arises. My
own reading of political history
is that since the removal of JFK and the prevention of RFK from reaching
the Oval Office, only
the secret government/fascist-approved candidates are allowed to reach
the presidency. They are
approved either because they are so stupid they can be controlled or
immediately replaced
(Reagan, almost dead by March of his first year), or they are insiders
in the fascist ruling clique
(Nixon (hired for Congress by Prescott Bush)), Ford (known as a CIA
asset on the Warren
Commission and throughout his career), Bush & Bush), or can be
controlled since they owe
their political careers to their fascist patrons (all of the above,
plus Carter, who was put into
the presidency by David Rockefeller's patronage and propaganda, and
Clinton), and/or have
blackmail material against them to enforce their going along.
If any of them decide that they are really the president, and have the
power regardless of the
circumstances to do things contrary to the fascists' desires, they
are swiftly brought to heel.
And the most surprising example of that is having Nixon removed from
office by a CIA sting,
after his landslide victory in '72 had led him to the conceit that
he could really eliminate his
power rivals, including the severe pruning back of the CIA, and his
repeated demands of
DCI Richard Helms that he turn over the CIA's JFK assassination files.
He asked for the
resignations of the entire government (except that of George H. W.
Bush, whom he said
'would do anything we want'), to be cashed at his whim and convenience.
At least in the
case of Nixon, they were able to manufacture an actual obstruction
of justice case, instead
of a pitiful perjury trap in a wholly illegitimate civil case about
a blow job request.
...phil