Time: Wed Oct 30 12:26:47 1996 To: pmitch@primenet.com From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: OUT OF STEP Online #18 Cc: Bcc: >From: tab@hollyent.com >Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:41:24 -0700 >Subject: OUT OF STEP Online #18 >To: pmitch@primenet.com > >================[ Distributed Message ]================ > ListServer: TAB (Take America Back Mail List) > Type: Not Moderated > Distributed on: 30-OCT-96, 11:41:10 >Original Written by: IN:ftbrady@cosmoslink.net. >======================================================= > > >OUT OF STEP Online #18 >Insights & Strategies for the New Individualist Left >October 30, 1996 >Editor: Wally Conger >============================================ > >THE STARR INDICTMENTS II > >by J. Orlin Grabbe > >It looks like the mainstream media was right and I was wrong. Though perhaps >not for the reason they think. > >I had followed the progress of the Starr probe carefully and knew when the >first (unannounced) indictment was handed down in Arkansas. I also knew how >angry Starr was at press reports he had "promised" not to announce anything >prior to the November election, and how eager he was to get the indictment >particulars out into the public domain. I also knew of at least five people >who were indictment targets. > >But there were two glitches that affected the original timing. The first one >was good: more walk-in witnesses. (More accurately, the witnesses were >dragged in.) Their testimony greatly improved the conviction probability of >the charges against Hillary Rodham Clinton. The second glitch was legal in >nature. An outside review of the indictments as signed by the grand juries >both in Arkansas and New York made important criticisms of the wording. So >the indictments were rewritten both in Arkansas and New York earlier this >month. The revised indictments had to be re-presented to the grand juries. > But the revised versions had been signed in both locations by the end of day >Friday, October 18. > >I anticipated the indictment particulars would be made public the following >week. But no news was forthcoming. The first intimation I received there >might be a change in plans was when an individual connected to the Starr >investigation observed that the election wasn't really over until the state >electors had cast their votes in December. This was offered as a simple >observation, without elaboration. > >The second indication was when the Fifth Column said they would not be giving >Bob Dole a second incriminating financial package prior to the election. > (The first package induced Dole to resign from the Senate.) Explanation: > "So as to not be seen as playing politics." Of course, it wouldn't be >playing partisan politics if Clinton and Dole went out together. > >The final indication was the incarceration of Charles Hayes in Kentucky. > Hayes had reminded me more than once: "Before this is over, it's going to >get rough. Mark my words: It's going to get rough." > >I knew how rough it had already become. A silent war had been in existence >for the past two months. A committee formed under the Emergency Powers Act >was negotiating with Bill Clinton over his resignation, and Clinton was using >his powers as President to fight them every step of the way. And I knew that >this committee, not Starr, was in charge of the timing of the indictment >announcements. The committee was trying to deal with a Criminal Presidency, >on a neutral bi-partisan basis--but to keep things silently in the >background. Hayes, as a participant in this fight, had deflected so many >attempts on his life as to seem invulnerable. His incarceration showed how >massive the battle had become. > >Of course, it is times like this that give definition to the term >"fair-weather friends". But for the rest, here is what is important to keep >in mind: This is only a temporary setback. It is not the end of the war. > >And battleship-size Roto-rooters have been prepared both for Bill Clinton and >the U.S. Department of Justice. > >(October 27, 1996) > > > >======================================================================== >To subscribe: send a message to the Tab@hollyent.com >with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use UNSUBSCRIBE to >remove yourself from the list. Use HELP for a list of all commands. >Questions/comments/problems? > email: Not Moderated@hollyent.com or listmgmt@hollyent.com >For information about this system email: info@hollyent.com >======================================================================== >via: Holly Enterprises 602-922-1639 - www.hollyent.com > > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail