Thread: About the Furniture - 2001-Clintons Began Taking White House Property a Year Ago

Clintons Began Taking White House Property a Year Ago


February 10, 2001|

From the Washington Post

WASHINGTON — President Clinton and his wife started shipping White House furniture to the Clintons' newly purchased home in New York more than a year ago, despite questions at the time by the White House chief usher about whether they were entitled to remove the items.

The day before the items were shipped out, chief usher Gary Walters said he questioned whether the Clintons should be taking the furnishings because he believed they were government property donated as part of a White House redecoration project in 1993, during Clinton's first year in office.

But Walters was told by the White House counsel's office that the items he asked about--which included an iron-and-glass coffee table, a painted TV armoire, a custom wood gaming table and a wicker table with wood top--were "personal gifts received by the Clintons prior to President Clinton assuming office."

Personal property brought to the White House by an incoming president does not have to be disclosed on financial reports. As a result of the counsel's determination, the furnishings were sent on to the Clinton's new home in Chappaqua, N.Y.


However, government records show that the gifts that concerned Walters did not arrive at the White House until after the Clintons moved in. At least one of these items, a Ficks-Reed wicker table, was logged in at the White House on Feb. 8, 1993. The widow of the manufacturer, Joy Ficks, said last week that it was meant for the White House, not the Clintons.

This week, the Clintons returned the four items to the White House, along with other furnishings, after questions were raised about whether they actually belonged to the Clintons. All the furnishings had been designated official White House property by the Park Service in 1993.

Julia Payne, a spokeswoman for the former president, said the Clintons wanted to be "over cautious" in light of the concerns that had been raised. Despite the questions posed by Walters, Payne said the Clintons or their interior decorator acquired the four items in Little Rock, Ark., before they came to Washington.

Kaki Hockersmith, the interior decorator, did not return repeated calls this week seeking comment.

The Clintons came under strong criticism after disclosing that they were taking with them $190,000 in gifts received over the last eight years. GOP lawmakers and others criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton in particular for accepting many presents just before she joined the Senate and became covered by strict ethics rules that prohibit accepting gifts worth more than $50.

Bowing to such criticism, the Clintons decided Feb. 2 to pay for $86,000 worth of gifts given them in 2000. This week, they agreed to return another set of gifts, including the four items questioned by Walters, and $28,500 more in furnishings identified by the Washington Post this week as having been legally designated as White House property by the National Park Service.

Walters said he accepted the determination of the counsel's office that the gifts were personal Clinton property without a fuss. "I'm not a lawyer. I didn't feel I was in a position to argue with the counsel's office." He said he'd been troubled all along by the lack of donor letters.

Payne said, "No item, nothing, was removed without the approval of the usher's and curator's office."

Walters blamed himself for not raising questions when the rest of the furnishings were taken from the White House last month. He said an aide to Sen. Clinton had told him these too were "the Clintons' personal property."

"I should have asked for more specifics on these items," he said. "I shoulder the blame for not saying, 'Hey, wait a minute.' "

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/feb/10/news/mn-23723

Before The Clintons Left The White House, They Did Something MUCH Worse Than Stealing Furniture

In 2001, the Clintons were moving out of the White House to make way for the Bush Administration. Not only did the Clintons steal furniture on their way out of the White House, but they did something far worse. It’s yet another reason why they should not be allowed to step foot in the White House AGAIN!

Besides the stolen furniture, Hillary Clinton and her lackeys defaced walls, stole a presidential seal dating back to the Eisenhower years, damaged furniture they deemed not expensive enough to take, and left a huge mess in the offices, making it look like a rave party had taken place there.

They left behind offensive and derogatory statements about Bush, defaced keyboards so the letter W could not be used, stole doorknobs and other small items, and left behind prank signs as well as many other immature acts. Apparently, the Clintons are petty, reckless, and have no respect for the taxpayers or the donations they give to for president’s household and office.

A complete list of all the damages is in the GAO 02-360 ‘The White House: Allegations of Damage During the 2001 Presidential Transition,’ an official document of the aftermath of the Clinton Administration. So, liberals can’t chalk this up to a conspiracy theory.

And the Democrats want someone this immature and disrespectful back in the White House?

The Clintons stole or destroyed thousands of dollars of donated items in the White House, a place We the People provide for THEM as they lead this country.

In no way do any of those items belong to one president—whether they are taken or destroyed is not up to them.

The Clinton family claims they returned the furniture they had mistaken as being personally donated to the Clinton family, while other items reported missing at the end of Bill Clinton’s administration were never returned.

Of course, this has Hillary written all over it. I can’t think of another person who would steal from and deface the White House. Her greed is apparent with these actions, and it’s almost a guarantee that if she’s elected, some of the missing items will suddenly reappear in the White House.

Hillary was the first person to condemn Donald Trump for his “reckless temperament,” stating further that he is not suitable to be commander-in-chief, and yet evidence of her own reckless and overall immature behavior further shoves her into a hypocritical light.

What will happen to the White House when she’s done with it the second time around? Will she burn it down next time? Make sure no one else can use it once she’s knocked off her high horse?

The Obamas may be gunning for Hillary to win the election in November, but one can only hope for America’s sake this doesn’t come happen. Not only will our beloved White House be brought down, but so will our great country. We the People cannot allow this to happen!

http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/...clintons-left/