The Lingering Stench of the Clinton Culture of Corruption

“We have a Culture of Corruption. We have cronyism, incompetence… I predict to you that this Administration (of George W. Bush) will go down in history as one of the worst that has ever governed our country… When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation and you know what I’m talking about…”

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
MLK Church Gathering in Harlem
January 16, 2006

Meanwhile back in the real world, where people are investigated for crimes occasionally when Janet Reno is not stepping in the way, the revolting stench of the Clinton Administration is filling the air again today, nearly five years after the Bill-Hill team left office, with the planned release of the Barrett Report.

Here’s a wee bit of background on the lead up to the Barret Investigation:

Imagine the tragedy of waking up to some men’s worst fear, and what some might perceive as impending “payback” for an un-pure existence.

One day, you find that your lover, the woman with whom you have shared your soul, and your body in stolen moments. A woman you once planned to marry is, in fact, a hustler — willing to extort you for all your savings and all you can borrow, until you’re bled dry, lose your career and end up in prison.

Now, imagine this as well. On that morning, you’re about to be named the United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development by the newly elected President. The stuff of cheap novellas? No. It’s he stuff of former Housing Secretary Henry Gabriel Cisneros, if you believe the allegations of independent counsel David Barret, who unleashed a veritable blitzkrieg of grand jury indictments against Cisneros, his hustler ex-girlfriend , and two of Cisneros’s employees, December 16, 1997.

The Barrett Investigation then was ordered to look into the matter, including that Cisneros lied about adulterous relations, his payments to a mistress, the extent of his income and his IRS tax filings. The New York Times has a blurb on the investigation this morning. The last two paragraphs of the news article look most interesting:

Initially, the panel of three judges that oversees the lingering issues involving the independent counsel law agreed in October to the public release of Mr. Barrett’s report but said the section with accusations about Clinton officials must be deleted.

But after Congressional Republicans attached a rider to a Department of Housing and Urban Development spending bill requiring publication of the full report, the judicial panel in November ordered a full disclosure.

What were democrats trying to coverup this time about the Clintons? We ought to know more today.

And,… How does a First Lady get tangled up in a Texas Mayor turned Secretary of HUD investigation?

Update: (Thursday AM) Well, lookie, lookie… Bill Gets Blasted (printed yesterday, 1-18-06)

A special prosecutor’s long-delayed report charges that a coverup at senior levels of the Clinton administration killed a tax fraud case against ex-cabinet member Henry Cisneros, the Daily News has learned.
David Barrett’s 11-year, $23 million probe, which will be released tomorrow, states in stinging terms that this Clinton coverup succeeded.

Cisneros was forced to admit in 1999 that he had made secret payments to a mistress before serving as Clinton’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

Barrett investigated tax fraud charges stemming from those under-the-table payments.

Then-IRS Commissioner Peggy Richardson, a close friend of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), was involved in efforts to quash the probe, a source close to the case alleged.

More to come…

Update 2: (Thursday PM) Investigator David M. Barrett suggests another title for the report:

“WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING.”

This about sums it up:

Continued the independent counsel: “After a thorough reading of the report it would not be unreasonable to conclude, as I have, that there was a cover-up at high levels of our government, and it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other cover ups, this one succeeded.”

Former Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Peggy Richardson, a close friend of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has been linked to the efforts to squelch the probe. But Richardson’s role was one of the things cut from Barrett’s report, which went through 26 drafts, at the behest of Democratic law firm Williams & Connolly.

The law firm represents Cisneros, Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.

Here is a link to the final report.

Barrett defended himself from the mostly democratic criticism he has been getting:

Barrett defends the long years and money he has spent since the Cisneros affair, which he calls “tragic.” He told FOXNews.com that he has “been called every name in the book,” and has spent many days and nights away from his family over the course of the years. He said he has never taken his task lightly or from a partisan point of view.

“This has been very carefully done, ” he said, noting that the report went through 26 drafts before its completion.

Update 3: (4:00 PM CST) Joseph T., the lawyer/writer at Benedict Blog writes in with this news and more:

I am an attorney and a blogger, and for the last two days I have been following stories which bear directly on the profound corruption of the Clinton administration, especially in the Reno Justice Department. Yesterday’s post was inspired by the impending release of Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Michael Fortier.

Today, of course, we have the release of the Barrett investigation report, and (as I wrote) we see the same Clinton / Reno modus operandi: Take the matter away from the people on-site with the most knowledge and experience, narrow the focus of the inquiry as much as possible, and disregard any evidence inconsistent with the preferred political outcome.

Joseph has much more terrific insight on today’s Barrett Report release at Benedict Blog.

I heard Robert Novak on Sean Hannity about an hour ago. He also wrote about this investigation today and has been following the story closely for several years. This is what he offered on Hannity and in his article today:

The question is what was contained in 120 pages removed by the judges.

Any member of Congress can read it merely by asking. An
y such lawmaker, who believes American taxpayers should see the product of $23 million in expenditures, presumably could then publish the material without fear of legal sanction.

But will any senator or House member do it?

So will we see any lawmaker make this information known? Will the blogosphere put pressure on members of Congress to disclose the missing information?

One last word for Hillary…Democrats Ran Plantations.

Hat Tip Larwyn

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning