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