Scandals continue around former U.S. President Bill Clinton.
Those who thought Clinton would no longer make the headlines
after leaving office are sorely mistaken. It appears that
the ex-president has left a sizable legacy of acts that
border on the criminal, so much so that Congressional
hearings are being held. Even a president who is no longer
in office can still be stripped of some of the outstanding
benefits he is otherwise eligible for, such as a
presidential pension, office expenses, and even
bodyguards.
During his final days in office, Clinton pardoned 150
Americans who were suspected of or convicted of crimes. It
is common for the outgoing president to grant several
pardons that have been approved by the various committees,
and are intended to make the president's last days in office
festive. However Bill Clinton circumvented all of the
committees, and granted a pardon to a U.S. millionaire by
the name of Mark Rich, who is accused of $48 million worth
of tax evasion. Rich fled from the U.S. tax authorities
almost 20 years ago, and has been living in Switzerland.
Senior Israeli officials have worked to assist Rich, who is
a major contributor to Israeli institutions. Efforts in
support of Rich were more effective than the efforts for
Jonathan Pollard for one thing because Rich (and his former
wife) also donated money to Clinton's Democratic Party and
to Clinton's presidential library.
Yet this was not the only pardon that has stirred
controversy. Clinton also reduced the sentence of a U.S.
drug trafficker who was supposed to serve 15 years in
prison, of which he has completed less than half. His
attorneys gave up on the possibility of clemency long ago,
but his father knew that the way to get his son out of jail
was through the party coffers. He donated vast sums to the
Democratic Party, members of Congress, mayoral candidates
and other senior officials who intervened on behalf of the
son. Was there a connection between the wave of pardons and
the large sums funneled into the Democratic Party?
So far there has been no suggestion that the pardons were
given for the donations. Even if a direct connection is
made, it is not clear if that is illegal. The U.S.
Presidential power to pardon is quite broad and there are no
evident restrictions on it. But it will certainly not endear
the former president to the people.
Clinton's retirement woes have just begun. His debts to his
attorneys and for the expensive home he bought in New York
come to millions of dollars. Clinton had hoped to raise the
money by giving speeches after his retirement. The fee for a
single lecture is $100,000. But the problems that have
remained with Clinton have led to the cancellation of many
of the scheduled lectures.
Take, for example, the statement made by a senior officer of
a large investment firm for whom Clinton had already spoken
and received the speaker's fee, who then apologized to his
clients, saying, "We ought to have been much more alert to
the sensibilities of our clients regarding Clinton's
personal conduct."
Even outside of the White House, Clinton has certainly not
lost his ability to garner headlines.
