Indict Clinton for Bribery

Jack Thompson
Feb. 12, 2001

No one in the federal government and no one in the
"mainstream" media has dared publicly utter, regarding Bill
Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, the "i" word.

It is high time that someone do so. Bill Clinton should be indicted
for accepting a bribe to pardon Marc Rich.

There, I said it. You may not know how strong is the basis for an
indictment of Clinton, since the thousands of legal beagles on
leashes to the major networks and cable news channels are
muzzled on the matter. Why are they muzzled?

Because we live in an age in which criminality in high places is
treated as poor judgment that calls for yet another law. That is
why Senator Arlen Specter, the man who invoked Scottish law's
"not proven" acquittal language in the Senate impeachment trial
thinks we need a constitutional amendment to deal with
Pardongate.

Oh, Arlen, if only they had removed all the tumor and left the
brain. We need an indictment under a federal statute that
already exists, and here's the language that ought to be in that
indictment: Title 18, Chapter 12, Section 201, a federal bribery
statute, states: "Whoever, being a public official ... directly or
indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or
agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for
any other person or entity [which entity would include a
Presidential library], in return for being influenced in the
performance of any official act [like a pardon] ... shall be fined
under this title not more than three times the monetary equivalent
of the thing of value [3 X $400,000 = $1, 200,000] ... or
imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be
disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under
the United States." Now, there's a statute that doesn't even have
the word "is" in it. What do we now know about this most
forgiving of pardoning presidents?

According to Time magazine, we know that Denise Rich gave
the Clinton Presidential Library $400,000. We know she has
invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself with
her own testimony. What is the crime she is afraid of being
charged with? Wearing tacky, nearly topless gowns to
presidential galas, in order to offer sax to the president? No,
she's afraid of being indicted for offering a bribe. What else do
we know? The "smoking gun" e-mail that yesterday got powder
burns all over everyone involved in this bribery scheme reveals
that President Clinton was keeping the fund-raising folks at the
Democratic National Committee apprised of his progress on the
Rich pardon, over the objections of White House counsel.

Folks, the only way a documentary gun could get smokier is if it
had said this: "I sure do like bribes from big-breasted divorcees!
How about some more? Bribes, I mean!" If there is yet such a
thing as justice in this country, Bill Clinton should start thinking
about whether he wants his orange jumpsuit with or without cuffs
on the pantlegs. But that is a big "if," isn't it? But there should be
very few folks in America doubting that Bill Clinton was given
money (the quid) for a pardon (the quo).

Jack Thompson is an attorney who resides in Miami.

Related Products:
Express your opinion about this to top leaders, Congress and
the media – send an Urgent PriorityGram. It's easy and
powerful! Click Here now.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Clinton Scandals

Source:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/10/155141.shtml 

Jack Thompson