The Discerning Texan

All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.
-- Edmund Burke
Saturday, February 02, 2008

Clinton Corruption Story #10,874 (and counting) UPDATED

Glenn Reynolds highlights yet another ethical question, which has more the appearance of something that Vladimir Putin would undertake than an ex-President of the United States--unless of course that President is William Jefferson Clinton:
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY EDITORIALIZES: "Is it just us, or is there something off about ex-president Bill Clinton using his influence overseas to enrich a pal and then accepting the pal's big donation to his foundation? This looks like a bribery racket."
From the linked story:

... a New York Times report details a 2005 incident of Clinton and a minor Canadian mining financier jetting into Kazakhstan, where the two met with the local strongman. Shortly afterward, Clinton's pal won a huge uranium-mining contract that left competing mining companies astounded.

Anything untoward? Clinton says of course not. After all, doesn't every ex-president jet in to Central Asia from time to time to check up on his charity projects and sample the gourmet cuisine? Nothing to see here, move along.

But the story doesn't end there. Clinton's friend, Frank Giustra, eventually ended up a billionaire from that "lucky" trip. He then donated $31.3 million to Clinton's $208 million foundation as its largest donor in 2006. Any connection? Nada, Clinton's defenders say. ...

Riiight... For all of the complaints (which naturally are not getting a lot of play in Big Media...) about the fact that Bill Clinton is purposefully withholding from the public Library documents which would ostensibly "prove" just how much of a "major player" Hillary Clinton was during her husband's Presidency (as she's claimed repeatedly to have been in her own campaign); when it comes to the Clinton Library, there seems to be a lot more uncharted territory--including the utter lack of information about the people who have donated enormous sums of money to build said library, and just exactly what those donors got in return...

For the sleaziest Administration in American history, the hits just keep on coming.

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal also wants to know about those Hillary records that are still under lock and key at the Clinton Library:
... in November 2002 Bill Clinton sent a letter asking the Archives to "consider for withholding" any "communications directly between the President and First Lady, and their families, unless routine in nature." He requested similar limitations on documents involving investigations by Congress, the Justice Department and independent counsels.

Mr. Clinton and his surrogates insist that this letter doesn't "block" the release of anything, and the implicit suggestion is that the Archives has discretion to release what it wants. However, a spokeswoman for the Archives in December acknowledged that it had already withheld 2,600 documents in accordance with Mr. Clinton's directive. Adding to suspicions of stonewalling is the fact that the Clintons' liaison with the Archives is none other than Bruce Lindsey. Readers may remember Mr. Lindsey as the longtime Clinton consigliere and keeper of the secrets going back to Arkansas.

The controversy flared briefly last year, after a Los Angeles Times editorial calling for the records to be released. Mrs. Clinton has responded by claiming she has nothing to hide and referring all questions on the records to her husband. Mr. Clinton, in turn, claims the Bush White House has slowed things down with its own review of the records. But the Administration denies this and there is no evidence it has interfered with the Archives. As for Mr. Lindsey, his explanation is that the archivists vetting the documents are moving as quickly as they can. The Archives are currently plowing through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in order of receipt.

This is all so, well, Clintonian -- arguing over what the meaning of "consider for withholding" is, and suggesting that the Clintons are merely prisoners of procedure. Mrs. Clinton is running for the highest office in the land, and voters have a right to expect that both she and her husband release everything possible about her record, subject to national security and the privacy concerns of third parties. The Clinton White House records may well contain information that would give voters insight into both her political philosophy and character.

Read the whole thing.

DiscerningTexan, 2/02/2008 07:20:00 PM |