America is justifiably proud of it's political systems. One person, one vote; an equal voice for all. Like the equality of the vote, laws governing campaign financing are designed to make the process of raising campaign funds as representative of the will of the people as possible, with the campaign war chest a direct measure of the number of a candidate's grass roots supporters. This is the reason for a fixed upper limit on the amount of money any single individual or corporation may donate to a candidate.

This measure is complicated by the issue of "soft money", given to a party instead of a candidate. No limits are imposed on the amount of such contributions, but the law clearly states that such contributions must originate with citizens, or with corporations which maintain offices inside the United States. The same rule applies to contributions to a candidate.

The reason for the citizenship/residency requirement is the same as the amount limits on direct contributions. It's to ensure that a parties campaign war chest is indicative of it's real support among citizens and corporations, and not just a well-financed grab for power.

The theory behind the laws is that a candidate who cannot raise enough money to win his campaign lacks the support to effectively govern. Campaign financing allows corporations and the wealthy to become involved in the process of selecting the leadership, but always subject to the veto power of the ballot box. Overall, a preferable system to the wealthy raising armies to settle leadership issues more "directly". That's what the American political system is, abstracted (and bloodless) warfare among the landed gentry.

Of course, the system breaks down if the rules are not followed, and as it is the nature of power that it attracts the very type of human who really should not have it, it is inevitable that candidates can become quite creative at circumventing those rules, bypassing the inherent guarantee that a candidates funding represents the will of the people.

Such appears to be the case with the political career of William Clinton.

Over the years from the 1992 campaign to the present day, a series of unusual occurrences surrounding the financing of Clinton's rise to power reveal a clear pattern of abuse of campaign finance laws.

Just recently, Arkansas Lawyer Mark Cambiano was charged with 31 Federal indictments of money laundering and conspiracy involving drug money. Part of that drug money was donated to the Clinton campaign.

This is the second time that drug money has been positively verified to be flowing into the Clinton Campaign coffers. The first was from convicted cocaine smuggler Jorge Cabrera, whose posed photograph with Hillary Clinton in front of the White House Christmas tree has become something of an internet legend.

It is hardly surprising that Janet Reno is reluctant to launch an Independent Council into the Democratic fund raising scandal. It hardly takes Sherlock Holmes to figure out just what skeleton lurks in that particular closet.

Keeping that particular closet closed may be why four campaign finance officials from the 1992 Clinton campaign have died under suspicious circumstances.

The most famous case is that of Former DNC fund raiser and Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown who, and the eve of being indicted, died in a plane crash. The claim that the crash as the result of bad weather, in addition to having been proven a lie, fails to account for why the aircraft lost all of it's cockpit radios and radar transponders while still 7 miles from the crash site and 1/2 mile above the Adriatic Sea.

Another fellow 1992 fund raiser was C. Victor Raiser II, co-chairman of Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign finance committee. He and his son, Montgomery Raiser, died in a plane crash in clear weather. Associates report that he had become disillusioned by the campaign.

Another member of Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign finance committee was Herschel Friday, who also died in a plane crash.

Ed Willey, the manager of the Clinton 1992 presidential campaign finance committee, and notable for handling large briefcases full of cash, reportedly avoided airplanes. He died of a gunshot wound which was declared to be a suicide (not unlike Vincent Foster).

Speaking of Vincent Foster, it is worth noting that the single most anomalous activity he was engaged in at the time of his murder was the Clinton Presidential Blind Trust. Legally required to be in place on inauguration day, the Clinton blind trust was six months late when the trust declarations were completed, three days _after_ the murder of the preparer, Vincent Foster. That the trust is less than complete was verified by the testimony of Carolyn Huber to the Whitewater Committee. That assets kept out of the trust would include cash whoes source does not bear close scrutiny is inevitable.

The Lippo Group, long time Clinton supporters in Little Rock, are founded on the fortunes made by WW2 gun and drug running. The Los Angeles branch of Lippo Bank has been cited for money laundering activity by the Treasury Department.

To borrow a phrase from law enforcement, probable cause exists (even without the allegations surrounding the Mena, Arkansas airport) to wonder, and to fully investigate, whether the President of the United States, as was the case with the President of Mexico and the President of Columbia, financed his campaign in part with drug money.

This is a rhetorical question, of course. That Bill Clinton's campaign took money from drug runners is a proven fact. It's not a question of whether he took drug money, it's merely a question of how much.

All businesses seek to buy political influence. The drug business is no different, certainly to judge by it's actions in other governments. And to judge by the actions of drug lords in other countries, that money is not given for free. Favors are expected in exchange.

So, what favors has Bill Clinton done for his loyal supporters?

During his first weeks in office, Clinton revoked random drug testing for White House staff members, reinstating it only when it the FBI complained that several staffers had recent histories of drug abuse.

Clinton, shortly after taking office, eliminated 121 positions at the Office of National Drug Control (roughly 80% of the staff).

The net result of these and other actions is that during Clinton's time in office, cocaine usage among our young people has DOUBLED, according to the government's own statistics.

Bill Clinton is taking care of his political donors.

When I still lived back in Los Angeles, there was a "Strawberry" living on the block. In street-talk, a strawberry is a woman so hooked on cocaine that she will barter any sexual act for whatever amount of money she needs for that next dosage, even if all she needed to make the buy was another five dollars.

Homeless and pregnant when we moved away, only a few years have passed since she was somebody's little daughter. The baby's father, until recently somebody's son, now an addict, is in jail.

Those of you with children should take a drive through the bad part of town and look at the lives ruined because of drugs. Look at the men and women who sell themselves on street corners for that next high, or pick pockets or hustle their own drugs, or steal, or even kill. It is from this misery that the money given to Bill Clinton's campaign came from. That he would even touch money from such sources is a scandal in and of itself.

Now look at your children and consider this. The chances that they will wind up on that street corner have doubled since Bill Clinton took office.

Bill Clinton is taking care of his political donors.

Back To The Top.

Back To The Political Page.

Back To The Articles Index.

Mail to:

drupal statistics