-Caveat Lector-
-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Clinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics,talk.rumors
Date: Saturday, December 26, 1998 4:33 PM
Subject: Clinton Flynt Connection
found this over in alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
=================================================================
IS LARRY FLYNT BRIBING THE PRESIDENT AS BOTH FACE JANUARY TRIALS ?
December 25, 1998 Tom Flocco
TV MEDIA SILENT ON LARRY FLYNT'S JANUARY INTERSTATE PORN TRIAL AS CLINTON
TRIAL
CONFLICTS (Blackmail/Bribery?) INVOLVING IMPLIED SENATE 'OUTINGS' AND
SCORCHED
EARTH INVESTIGATIVE COSTS RECEIVE SOFT COVERAGE
PORN MAGNATE REFUSES TO DENY RELATIONSHIP TO WHITE HOUSE AGENTS LENZNER,
PALADINO AND CARVILLE (FBI FILES?) ON MSNBC/ABC
While it is not quite so obvious to most Americans, those who are familiar
with
the modus operandi of the rogue president will not be surprised to hear that
the financing of pornographer Larry Flynt's investigation of Clinton
congressional enemies was possibly a disguised political contribution to
encourage White House support and influence regarding the upcoming
multiple-count interstate pornography indictments facing Flynt and his
brother,
Jimmy, in Cincinnati.
The influence is possible as Clinton fired EVERY U.S. attorney and replaced
them with HIS people at the outset of his administration, just as he
politicized the Reno Justice Department in a effort to CONTROL the justice
system in America. Flynt refused to deny MSNBC/ABC questions as to whether
he
had a relationship to Lenzner, Paladino or Carville--or why he is not
'outing'
democrats.
Larry and Jimmy Flynt were indicted in April, 1998 on 15 counts of obscenity
violations, including the pandering of the video, "Pam and Tommy
Lee--Hard-core
and Uncensored" to a 14 year old boy at their downtown Cincinnati store and
the
interstate transportation of obscenity via a common carrier (Federal
Express),
according to a November Washington Times piece. The United States Criminal
Code
forbids obscenity to be mailed, transported or sold. Coincidently, the Flynt
brothers porn trial and the Clinton Senate trial BOTH begin in January,
1999.
The are a number of other potential areas of recent implied influence
involving
the pornography industry and the Clinton Administration. The Times also
reported that porn prosecutions of obscenity violations plummeted during Mr.
Clinton's first term. And while Janet Reno fights "kiddie porn" on the
internet, the adult hard-core and illegal porn is left UNPROSECUTED. Justice
Department spokesman John Russell said the emphasis is on child exploitation
"because Attorney General Janet Reno wants it there. That is where our money
and manpower are directed."
"President Clinton is a total supporter of the (porn) industry, and he's
always
been on our team," David Schlessinger of the adult-oriented Vivid Videos
told
TV Guide. "It's not that Clinton has been outwardly supportive of the adult
industry, but rather that he hasn't tried to quash it the way republicans
did
in the 1980s." The Times said that Clinton UNEXPECTEDLY OPPOSED the Child
On-Line Protection Act (giving children some protection from Internet smut)
during September and early October, 1998, but finally did sign the Act into
law
as one of the LAST items agreed to in the recent omnibus spending bill that
passed at the end of the 105th Congress.
And since Flynt markets porn videos, he would have interest in the Free
Speech
Coalition desire to mainstream the multi-billion-dollar adult entertainment
industry. The Los Angeles Times reported that the Coalition also filed suit
against the Reno Justice Department, CHALLENGING a law that prohibits the
production of simulated child pornography. For they felt the Child
Pornography
Prevention Act could brand even R-rated films as obscene. The L.A. Times
cited
a California legislator who branded the suit as "turning perversion into
politics."
Is Mr. Flynt blackmailing United States congressmen in order to force a
censure/adjournment? Is he bribing Mr. Clinton to avert a prison sentence
from
his porn trial? Will the Senate permit Mr. Clinton to offer "information"
provided by taxpayer-funded lawyers/private investigators and undisclosed
illegal possession of confiscated FBI files? And is "senatorial fear" a
factor
facing our sanctimonious symbols of sagacity as they contemplate possible
individual "indiscretions" and why it might be better to bring the
boy-president's trial to a speedy conclusion with censure--presidential
felonies or not.
Democrats will have a choice between facing voters in 2000 as the
pro-perjury
party if they choose to acquit; but worse, a conviction risks liberal wrath
at
the polls. Republicans have relatively little to fear unless they have
majority
moderate-liberal constituencies, have presidential aspirations OR have moral
and/or campaign finance problems.
So it would seem, in light of the above, that the all-around solution would
be
a quick censure and adjournment. But republicans have the most to lose in
that
their conservative base--the loyal constituency that puts them in office
every
election--WILL BE QUITE UNHAPPY IF SENATORS ARE NOT PERMITTED TO CAST THEIR
VOTES IN EITHER FULL APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF PRESIDENTIAL FELONIES AFTER
A
COMPLETE, AND UN-WATERED DOWN SENATE TRIAL WHEREIN THE PRESIDENT AND THE
OTHER
KNOWLEDGEABLE WITNESSES TESTIFY FULLY AND COMPLETELY IN FRONT OF THE
AMERICAN
PEOPLE.
This question is: Will the Senate have the courage to call Stephanopolos,
Flynt, Carville, Lenzner, Paladino, etc. as WITNESSES regarding the
'outings'
and scorched research (and whether taxpayers paid for it) that have
effectively
caused the senators to shy away from a trial?
AND WHICH SENATOR WILL HAVE THE COURAGE TO TELL THE WORLD AT THE TRIAL THAT
THE
SENATE/JURY IS BEING EFFECTIVELY BLACKMAILED/TAMPERED WITH?
For if he is able to help "save" a presidency by blackmailing the whole
Senate
in an implied manner, then that same president will owe him a great
deal--maybe
some heavy influence exerted upon the Cincinnati, Ohio U.S. Prosecuting
Attorney who was APPOINTED by Clinton after he fired everyone at the end of
the
Bush Administration at the outset of his presidency. The liklihood that this
attorney will go lightly on him or find some "out" at his January, 1999
trial
is probably very high.
The COST of purchasing presidential influence by paying for investigators to
BLACKMAIL the whole Senate right in front of these blind, intimidated and
uncourageous symbols of sagacity on both sides of the aisle is minuscule
when
Flynt is facing a possible prison term..
==================================================================
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
