 |
 |
 |
|
|
Letters to the Editor Dear Editor: Every JW newsletter gives details about the "criminal acts" by the Clintons --- and I believe them. You also talk about the seventy or so lawsuits pending against them and I believe it. However, other than the readers of your newsletter, I rarely meet anyone who is knowledgeable of the extent of the allegations that you are bringing against the Clintons and their administration. Is there a possibility that you people are spreading yourselves too thin? Perhaps it would be a better strategy to concentrate your efforts on three or four of their misdeeds that might be considered a "sure thing," prove them, see to it that the proper punishment is meted out, and then let the national media inform the public. Hy Rosenfeld Arizona Editor response: We greatly appreciate receiving comments, suggestions and advice from our supporters. When we began our first legal actions against the Clintons seven years ago, we had no doubt that they would eventually justify more than 80 legal actions against them alone. Admittedly, some of their crimes are far more serious than others, but all deserve to be prosecuted. If we set a standard that we only went after them for treasonous behavior (like selling national security secrets to the Communist Chinese for campaign contributions) and ignored say, lying about affairs with interns or selling access to the Lincoln Bedroom, then we would allow for the acceptance of a lower standard for them and all future Presidents. Thanks to the generous support of our contributors, we have had the resources to pursue legal strategies effectively. Unfortunately, the media largely ignores reporting of our work, although lately that too has changed. The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and other national outlets have recently covered our work more consistently and in depth, which complements Judicial Watch's own media education efforts through its radio and television programs. Mr. Rosenfeld is right, however, that we do not generally receive as much mass media coverage as would be generated by a liberal group suing a conservative President. However, let me assure everyone that inside the Washington beltway, Judicial Watch is well known among its potential adversaries. While we have yet to reach our 8th birthday, the thought of facing one of our investigations typically strikes fear in the mind of all but the most diabolical corrupt public official. Thank you to all who make this possible. Dear Editor: I am a strong supporter of Judicial Watch, wanting to see that the corruption and crimes of the Clintons and his administration are formally brought to completion with deserving criminal convictions. It also appears that Congress has abandoned their effort to resolve the Clintons’ corruption problem. It appears that Judicial Watch is the only one to continue trying to bring them to court to resolve the problem. Therefore, they are preparing cases against the Clintons and his Administration, and they have requested from the Bush Administration various papers and files. However, their efforts to obtain them have not been forthcoming. I consider this as a continuation of the Clintons and his administration. I therefore resolve, that I will no longer support any Republican for election or reelection, nor the Republican Party and any groups that support them. What funds that I may have contributed will be given to Judicial Watch. Chris J. Walker, Jr. Georgia Editor Response: Mr. Walker notes that he has also sent this letter to other newspapers. While we certainly welcome and appreciate his financial support, we need to remind everyone that Judicial Watch is non-partisan. We investigate and pursue charges of corruption against Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike. It is a shame neither party is interested in rooting out government corruption.
info@judicialwatch.org • 1-888-JW-ETHIC
Site hosting and technology by Cory Consulting, Inc. © 1997-2004, Judicial Watch, Inc., All rights reserved. |
