 | ||
| Dr. David Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 71 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
| ||
| Dr. David Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 71 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
30 December 2000
** Seeks to Improperly Use White House Resources to Fund Post-Presidency Operation
Judicial Watch has learned through sources that Bill Clinton is seeking improperly to use White House funds to help pay to set up office space in government townhouses across the street from the White House. Clinton plans, according to sources, to use the space for his post-presidency offices. The space, part of the White House complex, is in a Jackson Place townhouse once used by Teddy Roosevelt after he left the presidency. Normally, such offices are for the use of the current administration, and not for the use of a past administration. In other words, according to Judicial Watch's sources, Clinton is trying to ensconce himself in White House complex offices that normally would be used by the incoming Bush Administration.
According to these sources, Clinton is trying to use White House funds, rather than lawful funds designated for his post-presidency, to pay for key aspects of his White House complex offices. (Normally, an ex-president uses private office space after he leaves the White House.)
Judicial Watch's sources on this story are well-placed and have proved reliable in the past.
"In essence, Bill Clinton has no intention of leaving the White House after his term ends. He seems intent to set up a shadow presidency within the White House complex itself. His improper plan to use White House resources to further his scheme is outright theft of government property. Even in the waning days of his regime, Clinton's lawlessness continues," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
[ Judicial Watch ]
Executive Order 12834 contained such crucial mandates that President Bill Clinton felt compelled to issue it the same day he was inaugurated, in January of 1993.
Thursday, however, the ethics pledges the newly elected Clinton had forced his appointees to abide as a condition of holding office became a thing of the past, as he revoked the order.
Called the Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Appointees, the 1993 mandate basically stipulated that those in certain positions under the jurisdiction of the president refrain from various lobbying and trade activities until five years had passed from their dates of resignations.
Specifically, the nearly seven-page document called for "every senior appointee in every executive agency appointed on or after Jan. 20, 1993" to sign, and become "contractually committed to," those ethics rules, which required a stricter code of behavior than outlined in federal law.
Craig Shirley, president of Craig Shirley and Associates law firm in Virginia, said federal ethics regulations already mandate a one-year waiting period on certain activities for terminated government employees.
He also questioned the timing of Clinton's revocation, which comes just three weeks before he leaves office.
"It sounds like what he wants to do is take care of himself and his people when they leave the White House," said Shirley, a Constitutional law attorney.
[ CNS ]
TCN Editorial Comment - Clinton/Gore is far from over. With Clinton setting up shop across from the White House in federally owned buildings and the clearing of anti-lobbying regulations, it is clear that he and his staff will be major players for years to come. The only hope of cleaning the corruption out of the federal government lies in putting both Clintons, Al Gore, and all of their accomplices in prison where they belong. Let's pray that Clinton has not stacked the judicial system so completely that justice cannot be found for this "most ethical administration".
Rev. Jesse Jackson was pressured to curtail his vituperative attacks on President-elect George Bush by his financial backers on Wall Street, one of whom told him to call Bush personally to make amends.
That's the charge from Village Voice reporter Peter Noel, who argues in this week's issue that Jackson has been compromised by his ties to monied interests who don't want to alienate the new administration in Washington.
"Even before the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled in favor of Bush on the night of December 12," writes Noel, "Jackson was promising to 'take to the streets' with a 'civil rights explosion.'" After the court certified Bush's victory, Jackson vowed to oppose the Republican president "with every bone in my body and every ounce of moral strength in my soul."
When a Bush presidency became inevitable, Noel says "sources in the financial community" told him that "major movers and shakers muzzled Jackson and other Gore loyalists crying thievery."
"These contributors told Jackson, 'You better hold this down because we won't back you anymore if you are adverse to the new administration in Washington. We certainly can't give you the floor of the New York Stock Exchange and all these other perks if you are out there taking shots at the new president..."
And so on Dec. 14, Jackson called Bush and talked about "healing the nation and bringing it together."
Noel learned that the Bush-Jackson conversation came as a complete surprise to members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other civil rights leaders. "He didn't touch base with anyone," one exasperated politician said.
Florida Congresswoman Corrine Brown even went so far as to publicly describe Jackson's attitude adjustment as a "shameful turnaround."
We remembers well the last time Jackson was caught in such amazing flip-flop on an issue near and dear to African-Americans, since NewsMax.com Executive Editor Christopher Ruddy broke the story that prompted his involvement.
When Ruddy reported in Dec. 1997 that the body of the late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was not autopsied after it was retrieved from the plane crash that had presumably taken his life -- even though four highly trained military medical officials noted he had a suspicious .45 caliber headwound -- the story set of smoke alarms in the black community.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters demanded an investigation, saying her office had been deluged with "a firestorm of inquiries."
After weeks of silence, Jackson finally spoke out, telling New York radio host Gary Byrd:
"There is everything to be gained from pursuing an investigation (into Brown's death). First we need to relieve people of reasonable doubt and anxiety. It may only prove that he was not murdered. But even that would relieve people of reasonable doubt.... I think Maxine Waters, as chair of the (Congressional Black) Caucus and Kweisi Mfume and Dick Gregory -- their appeal for a full revelation of relevant information is the right thing to do." (WLIB-NY radio -- Jan. 5, 1998)
But two weeks later, Jackson had abruptly changed his mind. Appearing on CNN's Crossfire, Jackson told host Bill Press:
"It's inconceivable to me that Brown was on a plane with 40 other people and shot. Or the plane crashed and he was walking around and was shot by some other crash victim. That does not stand to reason to me.... I said if there must be (an investigation) to satisfy peoples' anxiety -- so be it. But that's not an issue I'm focused on.... I've not called for an investigation." (CNN -- Jan. 19, 1998)
What happened to cause Jackson to drop his call for a Brown death probe? No one can say for sure.
But it may be worth noting that in between his call for an investigation and his subsequent retraction, Jackson was feted on Wall Street by some of the Clinton administration's biggest economic guns.
The President was there for the Jan. 10 through 14 event, dubbed by Jackson, "The Wall Street Project." So was Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt as well as AFL-CIO honcho John Sweeney. All encouraged the big financial houses to get behind Jackson's effort, billed as community outreach to minority businessmen.
Two weeks later, when Attorney General Janet Reno announced there was no cause for further investigation of Brown's death, nary a peep of protest was heard from the Rev. Jesse Jackson.
Here in the land of pontificators and tolerance preachers, a hateful crime goes unpunished. President Clinton, our lame duck lip-biter, is nowhere to be found. Neither are the chest-beaters at the New York Times. And the rainbow coalition of loud-mouthed minority leaders, always on the ready to exploit racial divisions, seems to have vanished into thin air.
One month ago this week, cowardly goons firebombed the A-1 grocery store in Northeast Washington. No one was injured. But the pipe bomb, tossed into the store's entrance, roasted the front of the building. The vandals also spraypainted racist epithets and threats all over the establishment's outer wall.
If the owner of the store had been black, and the neighborhood white, this violent incident in the nation's capital would have undoubtedly made front-page headlines and the nightly news. Instead, it merited a grand total of two stories in the mainstream press -- one in each metro section of the Washington Post and Washington Times -- and a brief editorial in the Post. "It just didn't get a lot of media attention," Lt. Scott Dignan of the D.C. police told me this week.
Dignan surmises that the presidential election might have overshadowed the firebombing. But he also notes that the case didn't lend itself to the "easy soundbites" that often accompany other high-profile hate crimes. That's because the victim of this assault is of Asian descent -- Korean immigrant Frank Han -- and his vocal enemies are members of the hatemongering New Black Panther Party, founded by ex-Nation of Islam official Khallid Muhammad.
The New Black Panther Party had been boycotting the grocery story since Nov. 22, when Han tried to stop a black teenage girl from shortchanging him over an ice cream bar. According to the store owners, the item was 65 cents, but the 14-year-old put only a quarter on the counter and then attempted to leave.
Surveillance video reportedly showed Han trying to detain the girl -- who then initiated a melee by punching Han in the face. Han struck back in self-defense, he says, and the girl's two friends (all of whom had ditched school) joined in attacking him. Others entered the scene, ransacking and stealing from the store.
Instead of condemning the youths for breaking school rules and terrorizing a local, law-abiding business, radical black activists demonstrated at the store chanting "black power," "shut 'em down," and "death to the bloodsucker." The Washington Times reported that one "field marshal" for the group shouted into a megaphone: "We will use all means necessary, any means necessary, to shut this store down." Malik Shabazz, a New Black Panther attorney, accused the store of "stealing" in an "exploitive relationship, or what some people call 'bloodsucking.'"
"Bloodsucker" is a pet term of the New Black Panther Party, hurled at Asians, Jews, whites, and anyone else making an honest living instead of carping about racism.
Shabazz said his group had nothing to do with the firebombing. Yet, the message of the boycotters was the same message the bombers left at the store: "Burn them down, Shut them down, Black Power!" The group's leader, Khallid Muhammad, is infamous for his embrace of race-based violence. He advised the new black-led government of South Africa to murder all whites who refused to the leave the country: "We kill the women. We kill the babies, we kill the blind. We kill the cripples. We kill them all." He also praised Colin Ferguson, the Long Island commuter train gunman who slaughtered whites and Asian-Americans in a racist rage.
From New York to Los Angeles, black resentment against Asian-American entrepreneurs has boiled into violence. Few dare to denounce it for fear of antagonizing a politically protected group that disguises its hatred behind a cloak of victimhood. This corrupt racial double standard must end.
An FBI spokesman told me the agency completed an investigation into the firebombing last week. The incoming Bush administration can show its commitment to civil rights -- and begin the "healing" -- by prosecuting the hate-filled perpetrators in the A-1 grocery store case to the full extent of the law.
TCN Comment-When the liberal establishment ignores such blatant violations of their "hate crime" laws they reveal the true intent of the laws. They are nothing more than tools for them to use against those who run contrary to their agenda. The liberals love racist division. They played it well during the recent elections. By pursuing and publicizing as "hate crimes" those violations against blacks and ignoring black violations against other racial groups, the divide widens and they have more control of this large voting block.
** Attorney for men fired over gun policy says AOL leases lot from Ogden
OGDEN -- Attorneys for three men fired by America Online for having guns in their vehicles parked at work are challenging AOL's contention that the parking lot belongs to the company.
The three, Luke Hansen, Paul Carlson and Jason Melling sued AOL for wrongful termination after the company dismissed them in September for violation of company policy which bans guns in the workplace. Two of the men were off- duty and the third was on a two- hour approved break when they met in the parking lot at 2261 Grant Ave. and transferred guns to Hansen's car. The men planned to go target shooting in Eden later.
Tuesday, attorney James D. Vilos argued against AOL's motion to dismiss the suit in 2nd District Court saying the company does not own but merely leases space from the city in the public parking lot.
Furthermore, Vilos states, AOL may have had only a right to park in a certain number of spaces but no right to park in a specific or identifiable area.
"We haven't had a chance to do discovery," Vilos said. "That's one of the reasons why the courts should let this go forward."
Nicholas Graham, the AOL Inc. spokesman in Dulles, Va. could not be reached for comment Tuesday afternoon. The company has the right to respond to the men's motion before Judge Roger Dutson decides whether to dismiss the suit or let it go forward.
The case will likely become a historic fight over a company's ability to restrict its employees' rights to bear arms.
"This particular issue has not been specifically decided in any state I'm aware of, including Utah," Vilos said.
Vilos is asking for a jury trial because he said Westerners understand the value of gun ownership.
"Westerners have a right to have their state legislature establish the public policy and not a 800-pound gorilla Internet provider trying to enforce East coast values on Westerners." he said.
The Salt Lake attorney is considered a gun rights expert and is the author of the book "Utah Gun Law: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly."
Vilos' motion also maintains that Utah law protects employees from termination when it constitutes a violation of "clear and substantial public policy."
In this case, Vilos said Utah's constitution shows a clear public policy allowing Utah residents to possess, control and transport firearms without interference by government or private employers.
In earlier statements, Graham maintains that AOL's no-gun policy in the workplace is part of the standard employment agreement signed by its 15,000 employees.
Vilos hinted that AOL's no-gun employment policy is part of a company bias against gun ownership.
"This strong 'anti-gun' policy has drawn wide comment on the Internet. Internet articles and other communications indicate that AOL blocks, filters and censures communications relating to firearms and prohibits users from advertising the sale of guns or ammunition treating them as pornography," Vilos' motion reads.
The attorney maintains that AOL's censorship is tantamount to a telephone company telling people they can't use their telephones to voice opinions about individual freedoms.
[ Ogden Standard Examiner ]
TCN Comment - Unless AOL is making their employees work in the parking lot, the guns were not in the workplace! Do they really think that they have the right to say an employee cannot carry a gun in his car? This is the most ridiculous thing I have heard since the idea that Microsoft was going to be required to market Netscape Navigator. To enforce this stupid plan, AOL is going to have to search every employee's car before they pull onto the parking lot, or be guilty of selective prosecution. The whole concept is totally void of logic… But that is AOL.
For a limited time TCN is able to help you enroll in The National Rifle Association. No other organization has done more in support of Second Amendment rights than the NRA. Now it couldn't be easier to become a member. Your membership will let Washington know where you stand on the US Constitution.
Send your name and address to theconservative@usa.net (or reply to this newsletter) and we will rush ( by US snail mail ) an enrollment package to you. It's just that simple.
As always at TCN, your information is never used for anything other than that for which you intended it.
Two friends met on a Miami street. One looked forlorn, and almost on the verge of tears. The other man said, "Hey, how come you look like the whole world caved in?"
The sad fellow said, "Let me tell you. Three weeks ago, an uncle died and left me forty thousand dollars."
"That's not bad."
"Hold on, I'm just getting started. Two weeks ago, a cousin I never knew kicked the bucket and left me eighty-five thousand free and clear."
"Sounds like you should be grateful."
"Last week my great aunt passed away. I inherited almost a quarter of a million."
"Then how come you look so glum?"
"This week...nothing!"
The homepage and archives for The Conservative Newsletter are located on the WWW at http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn/
This newsletter is sent by subscription only. If you do not wish to be on the mailing list, please let us know and you will be removed immediately. To be removed from this mailing list, simply reply to this newsletter with the word REMOVE in the body of your reply. You may also send your request to theconservative@usa.net .
Thank you.