The big difference in the actions of the two administrations (and parties) resides in the swindles of the American public which have gone down under Republican administrations, not Democratic ones.

Of course the Clinton administration had close ties with the energy giant, but the article does not present nor suggest any improprieties in these ties.

After all, Americans enjoyed the greatest prosperity in memory during the Clinton presidencies, and witch hunt investigations stretching over several years failed to uncover any financial wrongdoing by Bill or Hillary Clinton.

By contrast, consider the economic records of the Republican administrations preceding, and following Bill Clinton's.

No sooner does Bush II get in, and Swindle II ensues whereby privliged insiders begin quietly unloading huge blocks of their overvalued shares. I'll just mention in passing the extremely disturbing financial transactions which occurred on the very eve of 9/11, and my failure to find any innocent explanation for them.

Did you ever notice that the fat cats manage to sell out in time, but that millions of ordinary people see their entire life savings reduced to pennies on the buck?

These are masterful scams. The S&L caper cost the American People a large part of a trillion bucks, and other than a couple token sentences slapped on Millkin, Boesky and a few others, the rest of the scammers have made off with the loot. Even the two named individuals have managed to keep most of their ill-gotten gains after serving short sentences in country club prisons.

At the end of the day, no one would argue that there are no crooks or scams among elected Democrats, but the truly big capers always seem to occur during Republican administrations.

I didn't see anything like this under Carter or Clinton, but under Reagan and the two Bushes we've had two enormous financial swindles which will end up costing American citizens several trillions of dollars.

The contrast couldn't be more stark.

sp