Welcome to the
Third Clinton Administration
Friday, November 21, 2008
By Tom Fitton
Judicial Watch President
The news out of the fledgling Obama administration went from bad to worse.
Last week I told you about Valerie Jarrett, the corrupt Chicago politician
serving as co-chair of President-elect Obama's transition team. (This is in
addition to Clinton co-conspirator John Podesta as the other transition team
co-chair and Clinton attack dog Rahm Emanuel as Obama's Chief of Staff.)
Now we can add two other Clinton insiders to the list: Clinton impeachment
lawyer Greg Craig and former Janet Reno deputy Eric Holder, reportedly tapped
as Obama's White House Counsel and Attorney General respectively. These are bizarre
selections indeed for the man who promised to "bring change" to
Washington. Instead, it is like the Clinton Administration, Act III.
Someone asked me the other day, "What will Monica Lewinsky's job be?" Maybe
we should ask Greg Craig.
As I mentioned, Craig served as Clinton's impeachment lawyer. He defended
the very worst of the Clinton scandals, most notably the former president's
affair with Monica Lewinsky, in which Clinton was found guilty of perjury and
obstruction of justice by the House. Earlier this week I said to the press,
given Craig's defense of Bill Clinton's lies and obstruction, what sort of
legal advice will Mr. Craig give to President Obama? Will it all depend on
what the meaning of "is" is?
The leftist Craig also defended the violent government raid that delivered
Elian Gonzalez to Castro's Cuba. In fact, we believe that Craig was working
with communist Cuban government during the Elian affair. It was widely
reported Craig helped kill a deal that would have transferred custody of Elian
to his father as long as the father could freely choose where they were to
live.
Craig defended Ted Kennedy during the trial of Kennedy's nephew William
Kennedy Smith in the infamous Palm Beach rape case. He also defended Ronald
Reagan's would-be assassin John Hinckley, Jr. (Craig helped piece together
Hinckley's insanity defense.) He's also represented a war criminal or two.
That's quite a record.
Unbelievably, the Bush State Department hired Craig to defend it against
Judicial Watch litigation on behalf of a Clinton era State Department official
who blew the whistle on UN corruption. (The litigation ended in
settlement.)
Now Craig will be asked to run interference for the Obama
administration.
Eric Holder, Obama's choice for Attorney General, was also involved in the
Elian Gonzalez raid. As deputy attorney general under the craven Janet Reno,
Holder participated in planning the raid that not only traumatized Elian, then
six years old, but also led to the violent abuse of peaceful protesters
outside of the home of Elian's Miami relatives. The protesters, many of them
older women, were simply praying the Rosary when they were gassed and beaten
by heavily armed government agents. (You may recall Judicial Watch sued
Reno and Holder on behalf of the raid victims.)
Remember all of those last-minute, controversial pardons issued by
President Clinton in the waning days of his administration? Guess who was in
charge of approving the list, which included convicted felons who had paid
large sums of cash to the Clintons? That's right. You guessed it: Eric Holder.
He was the acting
attorney general at the time. That list, by the way, included two Weather
Underground terrorists and the infamous fugitive financier Marc
Rich, whose ex-wife made substantial contributions to the Clintons. Holder
not only personally helped Rich get the pardon, but he upended the rule of law
by undermining Justice Department procedures put in place to protect the
pardon process from abuse.
His record is dismal and includes support for commutations for members of
FALN, a Puerto Rican terrorist organization, and he derailed investigations of
the Clinton fundraising scandals while at Justice.
Holder admitted he should have handled the Rich pardon differently. As I
told Politico,
Holder "admits he's on the wrong side of an issue that ruptured Washington at
the last day of the Clinton administration, and he gets a promotion?"
Now Holder will be asked to serve as the highest law enforcement officer in
the land. It's frightening.
Pardons for terrorists may not bother Obama, given his close relationship
with Bill Ayers and company, but principled Senators ought to reject Holder's
nomination and give strict scrutiny to others.
Obama Violates His Own Pledge - Taps Daschle
for HHS
Here's one campaign pledge President-Elect Obama plans to toss out the
window right away. Check this out from The
New York Times:
President-elect Barack Obama's selection of former Senator Tom Daschle
for secretary of health and human services [sic] posed new questions on
Wednesday about how broadly the new administration would apply Mr. Obama's
campaign promises to limit potential conflicts of interest among his
appointees.
At issue is Mr. Daschle's work since leaving the Senate four years ago as
a board member of the Mayo Clinic and a highly paid adviser to health care
clients at the law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird.
In a detailed list of campaign promises, Mr. Obama pledged that "no
political appointees in an Obama administration will be permitted to work on
regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior
employer for two years."
The New York Times notes that the Obama administration would likely
ask Daschle to recuse himself from "any matter" involving the Mayo Clinic or
any of the clients serviced by Alston & Bird, which "represents dozens
of?concerns including pharmaceutical companies, health care providers, and
trade groups for nurses and nursing homes."
Daschle's main responsibility, if confirmed, would be to push through
Obama's planned healthcare system overhaul, which would most certainly have an
impact on all of the industries served by Daschle. It is beyond reason to
think that Daschle, as Secretary of HHS, would recuse himself from leading the
charge for healthcare reform. If Obama sticks with Daschle, Obama must
jettison a key campaign promise.
Of course, in addition to Daschle's personal conflicts of interest, there
is also the matter of his wife, Linda Daschle, who has been a lobbyist for
many years. As The
Associated Press noted, "One area of [Tom Daschle's] review will
include the lobbying connections of his wife, Linda Hall Daschle, who has
worked mostly on behalf of airline-related companies over the years." (You may
recall that following the terror attacks of 9/11 Judicial Watch investigated
Tom and Linda Daschle for their role in selecting faulty bomb detecting
equipment for the airline industry. We also raised ethics questions about Mrs.
Daschle's lobbying of the Senate while her husband was in office.)
Can anyone seriously believe that Linda Daschle's lobbying firm won't
benefit from her husband being the Cabinet member charged with effectively
nationalizing nearly 20% of our economy?
I understand that most of his friends from Chicago are too corrupt to run
his new government, but can't Obama find anyone not corrupted by the game here
in Washington to help him?
Stevens Loses Re-Election Bid
At least one convicted felon won't be going back to Washington. It appears
that Alaska Republican Senator Ted Stevens has lost
his reelection bid to Democrat Mark Begich. According to The Associated
Press:
Sen. Ted Stevens, the longest serving Republican in Senate history,
narrowly lost his re-election bid Tuesday, marking the downfall of a
Washington political power and Alaska icon who couldn't survive a conviction
on federal corruption charges. His defeat by Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich
moves Senate Democrats within two seats of a filibuster-proof 60-vote
majority.
Stevens' ouster on his 85th birthday marks an abrupt realignment in
Alaska politics and will alter the power structure in the Senate, where he
has served since the days of the Johnson administration while holding seats
on some of the most influential committees in Congress.
The crotchety octogenarian built like a birch sapling likes to encourage
comparisons with the Incredible Hulk, but he occupies an outsized place in
Alaska history. His involvement in politics dates to the days before Alaska
statehood, and he is esteemed for his ability to secure billions of dollars
in federal aid for transportation and military projects. The Anchorage
airport bears his name; in Alaska, it's simply "Uncle Ted."
Just days before the November 4th election, "Uncle Ted" was
convicted by a federal grand jury of lying on his Senate financial disclosure
regarding $250,000 he had received in improper gifts. He now faces a potential
prison sentence of 35 years. However, he won't have to suffer the inglorious
distinction of being thrown out of the Senate by his Republican colleagues.
The voters took care of that. Republicans continue to pay the price for
allowing Stevens-style corruption to fester.
While Stevens received the fate he deserved, other shady characters in
Congress have not, including William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson, Charles Rangel,
John Conyers, and Nancy Pelosi, all of whom return to Capitol Hill despite
being linked to serious scandals.
There's a disconnect between what voters say they want and their behavior
on Election Day. According to a Judicial
Watch-Zogby poll conducted on October 16-19, 2008, 91.9% of likely voters
said that corruption is a serious problem in Washington. And yet two weeks
later they voted to send corrupt politicians back to Washington to continue
the cycle.
"Uncle Ted" appears to be the exception this year and hopefully his defeat
represents the start of a trend.
Until next week...
Tom Fitton
President
Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to
fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics
and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible
contribution in support of our efforts, click
here.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
