• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Death of Vince Foster - What Really Happened? (1995)

The usual ultra-right partisan crap. Galileo seems to actually be the reincarnation of Jerry Fallwell.

The Starr report is online. The 'evidence' claimed is a joke. The man suffered from clinical depression and had even told his doctor it had gotten real bad the day before.

Give it up and stop being a lackey for fanatics.
 
Last edited:
The usual ultra-right partisan crap. Galileo seems to actually be the reincarnation of Jerry Fallwell.

The Starr report is online. The 'evidence' claimed is a joke. The man suffered from clinical depression and had even told his doctor it had gotten real bad the day before.

Give it up and stop being a lackey for fanatics.

You are mixed up. I am saying Foster is innocent. YOU are making up the conspiracy theories.
 
You are mixed up. I am saying Foster is innocent. YOU are making up the conspiracy theories.

I am not mixed up at all. The evidence shows that Foster was very depressed and committed suicide. No conspiracy about it at all. Just evidence.
 
I am not mixed up at all. The evidence shows that Foster was very depressed and committed suicide. No conspiracy about it at all. Just evidence.

What evidence. Most evidence shows he wasn't depressed and did not committ suicide. His prints were not on the gun, and there is no evidence that he owned that gun. Nor was the bullet found, so there is no evidence that gun was the murder weapon.

This is all documented in the film.

Foster never had a fair trial either, by a jury of his peers. You can;t declare someone guilty until that is done.
 
What evidence. Most evidence shows he wasn't depressed and did not committ suicide.

Are you kidding me? He was practically non-functional with depression.

His prints were not on the gun, and there is no evidence that he owned that gun.

lack of prints means nothing. Very, very few investigations end up with prints on a gun.

Nor was the bullet found, so there is no evidence that gun was the murder weapon.

The bullet wasn't found because it went through his head and went who-knows-where, even if it were in one piece finding it would have gone beyond needle-in-a-haystack.

This is all documented in the film.

The film is doing nothing but nitpicking and whining over a very open and shut case. Occam's razor and the complete and utter lack of evidence that anyone else was involved, along with the nature of the wound, etc. is what is needed.

Foster never had a fair trial either, by a jury of his peers. You can;t declare someone guilty until that is done.

We don't do trials for suicide. Investigations determine that and three investigations determined that was the case.
 
Well Galileo, let's take a look at the people who created this film - after all, CTers are always telling us to "see who pulls the strings" and to "connect the dots" aren't they?

The company behind the film is called "Citizens for Honest Government" - something of a red flag given their previous movie was done in 1994 and called "The Clinton Chronicles". No other movie by them shows up in the IMDB database - could it be this group was created for the sole purpose of propagandizing anti-Clinton films?

It certainly looks like it.

let's take a closer look at Citizens for Honest Government, according to sourcewatch:

between 1994 and 1996 "covertly paid more than $200,000 to individuals who made damaging allegations" about President Bill Clinton's "personal conduct," as "part of a covert and sophisticated political propaganda effort to influence public opinion against President Clinton," Murray Waas reported March 1998 in Salon.[2] Documentation of the payments "detailed in the organization's confidential accounting ledgers and other internal records" were said to have been obtained by the journalist.
...
The ledgers listed them as 'expert witnesses'," Waas wrote. "A spokesman for Falwell, Mark DeMoss, said in an interview that Falwell was unaware of the payments made by Citizens to its 'expert witnesses'."[2]

However, DeMoss and CHG president Patrick Matrisciana "gave conflicting accounts of Falwell's relationship with Matrisciana and Citizens for Honest Government. Initially, he said, 'The Rev. Falwell and Pat Matrisciana have had a relationship for over 20 years, and Rev. Falwell thought that there might be merit to what Pat had produced.' But in a subsequent interview, Demoss said that Falwell and Matrisciana had only 'met each other about twice' in their lives.

"According to Demoss and Matrisciana, the two men agreed that Falwell would promote The Clinton Chronicles on Falwell's 'Old Time Gospel Hour' television show, as well as for a special half-hour infomercial," Waas wrote.[2]

"However," Waas wrote, "a direct-mail fund-raising appeal by Falwell suggests that Falwell was indeed involved with the video much earlier than he has acknowledged. The fund-raising appeal also shows that Falwell subsidized the production of the video as well. In the August 1994 direct-mail solicitation, Falwell asked supporters to 'help me produce a national television documentary which will expose shocking new facts about Bill Clinton.' The letter stated that Falwell was ready to make it available 'as soon a I can raise approximately $40,000 needed to produce this video​
More here from public eye:

The Jan./Feb. 1998 issue of Citizens Intelligence Digest featured a posed photograph of John Wheeler Jr., director of publications for Citizens for Honest Government, handing "The Citizens Presidential Impeachment Indictment," to Rep. Bob Barr, at a "Strategy Briefing Breakfast" held in Washington, DC on Nov. 7, 1997. Flanking the two was Howard Phillips, president of the Conservative Caucus, and a leading player in the hard core theocratic wing of the fundamentalist Christian Right. That same issue of Citizens Intelligence Digest also featured an article by Christopher Ruddy suggesting that Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was assassinated. Along with Ruddy, other "Contributing Writers" to the newsletter included Rep. William Dannemeyer, Joseph Farah, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Timothy LaHaye, apocalyptic fundamentalist author Chuck Missler, anti-gay author Dr. Stanley Monteith, and Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America, which is to the right of the National Rifle Association.

Citizens for Honest Government is an example of the practical linkage among the Republican Party, the conservative Christian Right, Christian Right theocrats, and hard right conspiracism.​
So you can go ahead and chide people who chose not to see this movie as being ignorant for refusing to do so, but then again, I don't have to read every Anne Coulter book to know whats in them, do I?

There are some times when your internal censor is actually useful - and in this case the exercising of this function will save anyone who implements it from the pain and suffering involved with watching any of these hit pieces manufactured by the far-right web of interests responsible for their production.

I am not sure if you are American or not (I am not either) but a deeper awareness of the American political scene may have given you the knowledge necessary to discern the source of this film and to therefore approach it with a little less gullibility than you have. I mean heck, even if you're a right-winger or what not there's plenty of sane, articulate, responsible conservatives you can source your info from - there's no need to dig in the Falwell ditch...;)
 
Last edited:
What a wonderful set of responses. Almost none of them have any value at all and ignore the topic completely and instead vomit sarcasm and thinly veiled insults.

Congratulation. Giving the JREF a good name.
 
Are you kidding me? He was practically non-functional with depression.



lack of prints means nothing. Very, very few investigations end up with prints on a gun.



The bullet wasn't found because it went through his head and went who-knows-where, even if it were in one piece finding it would have gone beyond needle-in-a-haystack.



The film is doing nothing but nitpicking and whining over a very open and shut case. Occam's razor and the complete and utter lack of evidence that anyone else was involved, along with the nature of the wound, etc. is what is needed.



We don't do trials for suicide. Investigations determine that and three investigations determined that was the case.

That's what you say, but give Foster a chance to defend himself with counsel in front of a jury. At the bare minimum, there is no proof and reasonable doubt he killed himself.

No suicide note either.

This should just be classified an an unsolved murder and possible suicide. Not likely, but possible. More investigation may be able to prove that suicide was very improbable.
 
What a wonderful set of responses. Almost none of them have any value at all and ignore the topic completely and instead vomit sarcasm and thinly veiled insults.

Congratulation. Giving the JREF a good name.

First, read Galileo's posts and how is he all but admitted to being a troll. We don't have to coddle such people's nonsense posts to fit some JREF quality requirement you invented.

Second, Vince Foster has been done to death. Its purely fueled innuendo from hard right wingers who don't give a damn about Foster and have caused his family much grief with their gibberish.
 
I think much of the sarcasm can be forgiven, given that this theory played itself out by the late 90's and was a favorite of the evangelical right. The most modern equivalent of this type of CT is the birther nonsense. The key to debunking the Vince Foster nonsense is to look at the organizations that originally pushed them, and what other nonsense got pushed. Hint: some of the groups pushing this CT also pushed the "government is using black helicopters to kidnap children for Satanic sacrifice"
 
Well Galileo, let's take a look at the people who created this film - after all, CTers are always telling us to "see who pulls the strings" and to "connect the dots" aren't they?

The company behind the film is called "Citizens for Honest Government" - something of a red flag given their previous movie was done in 1994 and called "The Clinton Chronicles". No other movie by them shows up in the IMDB database - could it be this group was created for the sole purpose of propagandizing anti-Clinton films?

It certainly looks like it.

let's take a closer look at Citizens for Honest Government, according to sourcewatch:

between 1994 and 1996 "covertly paid more than $200,000 to individuals who made damaging allegations" about President Bill Clinton's "personal conduct," as "part of a covert and sophisticated political propaganda effort to influence public opinion against President Clinton," Murray Waas reported March 1998 in Salon.[2] Documentation of the payments "detailed in the organization's confidential accounting ledgers and other internal records" were said to have been obtained by the journalist.
...
The ledgers listed them as 'expert witnesses'," Waas wrote. "A spokesman for Falwell, Mark DeMoss, said in an interview that Falwell was unaware of the payments made by Citizens to its 'expert witnesses'."[2]

However, DeMoss and CHG president Patrick Matrisciana "gave conflicting accounts of Falwell's relationship with Matrisciana and Citizens for Honest Government. Initially, he said, 'The Rev. Falwell and Pat Matrisciana have had a relationship for over 20 years, and Rev. Falwell thought that there might be merit to what Pat had produced.' But in a subsequent interview, Demoss said that Falwell and Matrisciana had only 'met each other about twice' in their lives.

"According to Demoss and Matrisciana, the two men agreed that Falwell would promote The Clinton Chronicles on Falwell's 'Old Time Gospel Hour' television show, as well as for a special half-hour infomercial," Waas wrote.[2]

"However," Waas wrote, "a direct-mail fund-raising appeal by Falwell suggests that Falwell was indeed involved with the video much earlier than he has acknowledged. The fund-raising appeal also shows that Falwell subsidized the production of the video as well. In the August 1994 direct-mail solicitation, Falwell asked supporters to 'help me produce a national television documentary which will expose shocking new facts about Bill Clinton.' The letter stated that Falwell was ready to make it available 'as soon a I can raise approximately $40,000 needed to produce this video​
More here from public eye:

The Jan./Feb. 1998 issue of Citizens Intelligence Digest featured a posed photograph of John Wheeler Jr., director of publications for Citizens for Honest Government, handing "The Citizens Presidential Impeachment Indictment," to Rep. Bob Barr, at a "Strategy Briefing Breakfast" held in Washington, DC on Nov. 7, 1997. Flanking the two was Howard Phillips, president of the Conservative Caucus, and a leading player in the hard core theocratic wing of the fundamentalist Christian Right. That same issue of Citizens Intelligence Digest also featured an article by Christopher Ruddy suggesting that Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was assassinated. Along with Ruddy, other "Contributing Writers" to the newsletter included Rep. William Dannemeyer, Joseph Farah, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Timothy LaHaye, apocalyptic fundamentalist author Chuck Missler, anti-gay author Dr. Stanley Monteith, and Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America, which is to the right of the National Rifle Association.

Citizens for Honest Government is an example of the practical linkage among the Republican Party, the conservative Christian Right, Christian Right theocrats, and hard right conspiracism.​
So you can go ahead and chide people who chose not to see this movie as being ignorant for refusing to do so, but then again, I don't have to read every Anne Coulter book to know whats in them, do I?

There are some times when your internal censor is actually useful - and in this case the exercising of this function will save anyone who implements it from the pain and suffering involved with watching any of these hit pieces manufactured by the far-right web of interests responsible for their production.

I am not sure if you are American or not (I am not either) but a deeper awareness of the American political scene may have given you the knowledge necessary to discern the source of this film and to therefore approach it with a little less gullibility than you have. I mean heck, even if you're a right-winger or what not there's plenty of sane, articulate, responsible conservatives you can source your info from - there's no need to dig in the Falwell ditch...;)

Whoa nellie. I focus on the evidence. It doesn't matter if Hitler told me about the evidence. If Hitler provided the evidence, that is thing, but if Hitler merely pointed me to the evidnece, then that is OK. You are the one claiming a conspiracy, I say Foster is innocent.

You should focus on evidence instead of character assassination and telling me conspiracy theories about who made the film.
 
First, read Galileo's posts and how is he all but admitted to being a troll. We don't have to coddle such people's nonsense posts to fit some JREF quality requirement you invented.

Second, Vince Foster has been done to death. Its purely fueled innuendo from hard right wingers who don't give a damn about Foster and have caused his family much grief with their gibberish.

I'm not a right-winger. What I am has nothing to do with the evidence of the case.
 
I think much of the sarcasm can be forgiven, given that this theory played itself out by the late 90's and was a favorite of the evangelical right. The most modern equivalent of this type of CT is the birther nonsense. The key to debunking the Vince Foster nonsense is to look at the organizations that originally pushed them, and what other nonsense got pushed. Hint: some of the groups pushing this CT also pushed the "government is using black helicopters to kidnap children for Satanic sacrifice"

What do alleged black helicopters have to do with this case? I am saying that Foster is innocent.
 
That's what you say, but give Foster a chance to defend himself with counsel in front of a jury. At the bare minimum, there is no proof and reasonable doubt he killed himself.

Again, in this nation (and probably most nations) we don't do anything like that.

No suicide note either.

So? Very few suicides have notes. 12% to 37% of suicides leave notes.

This should just be classified an an unsolved murder and possible suicide. Not likely, but possible.

Nonsense. There is no evidence that anyone else was involved. None. Zip. Nothing. Without such evidence you cannot begin to suggest criminal intent. We don't work that way, at least in this country.

More investigation may be able to prove that suicide was very improbable.

Three investigations already disgree with you. Like most CT'ers you ignore the evidence they came up with and instead dream up fantasies with zero evidence.

You couldn't even come up with your own tale, you had to grab one from some theorcratic group, not very 'Galileo' of you, galileo.
 
Again, in this nation (and probably most nations) we don't do anything like that.



So? Very few suicides have notes. 12% to 37% of suicides leave notes.



Nonsense. There is no evidence that anyone else was involved. None. Zip. Nothing. Without such evidence you cannot begin to suggest criminal intent. We don't work that way, at least in this country.



Three investigations already disgree with you. Like most CT'ers you ignore the evidence they came up with and instead dream up fantasies with zero evidence.

You couldn't even come up with your own tale, you had to grab one from some theorcratic group, not very 'Galileo' of you, galileo.

most murdered people don't leave suicide notes either. Close to 0% of them.

The investigations were done by the government, not by an impartial panel.

The defense had no chance for voir dire to determine this.

Sorry, there is too much missing evidence to prove a suicide.
 
What a wonderful set of responses. Almost none of them have any value at all and ignore the topic completely and instead vomit sarcasm and thinly veiled insults.

Congratulation. Giving the JREF a good name.

Here's a link to the Starr report, 143 page PDF.


If you go to page 110, under "conclusions" you will see the statement "The available evidence points clearly to suicide as the manner of death."

You will also see "all this evidence, taken together, leads to the conclusion that the shot was fired by Mr. Foster where he was found in Fort Marcy Park".

And "The evidence with respect to state of mind also points to suicide".

And finally "In sum, based on all of the available evidence, which is considerable, the OIC agrees with every official entity that has examined the issue: Mr. Foster committed suicide by gunshot in Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993"
 
most murdered people don't leave suicide notes either. Close to 0% of them.

Well then by your logic all suicides that don't leave notes are porbable murders. Better call your local law enforcement and tell them they need to do this.

The investigations were done by the government, not by an impartial panel.

Impartial panels don't do this. Three very different agencies investigated, one of them independent prosecutor and determined it was a suicide.

The defense had no chance for voir dire to determine this.

This was not a trial. Ergo your comment is irrelevant.

Sorry, there is too much missing evidence to prove a suicide.

There is more than enough evidence, whereas there is exactly zero evidence that it was murder beyond the slanderous whispers of fanatics.
 
What do alleged black helicopters have to do with this case? I am saying that Foster is innocent.
This time re-read the post, and understand what is being communicated. Remember, a response that lacks the ability to communicate a relevent counterpoint the original post is not really a response at all.

I am refering to the those who originated these theories. And Foster is not on trial, except in your own mind.
 
Here's a link to the Starr report, 143 page PDF.


If you go to page 110, under "conclusions" you will see the statement "The available evidence points clearly to suicide as the manner of death."

You will also see "all this evidence, taken together, leads to the conclusion that the shot was fired by Mr. Foster where he was found in Fort Marcy Park".

And "The evidence with respect to state of mind also points to suicide".

And finally "In sum, based on all of the available evidence, which is considerable, the OIC agrees with every official entity that has examined the issue: Mr. Foster committed suicide by gunshot in Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993"

The conclusion was not made by an impartial panel, it was made by a government bureacrat.
 
Well then by your logic all suicides that don't leave notes are porbable murders. Better call your local law enforcement and tell them they need to do this.



Impartial panels don't do this. Three very different agencies investigated, one of them independent prosecutor and determined it was a suicide.



This was not a trial. Ergo your comment is irrelevant.



There is more than enough evidence, whereas there is exactly zero evidence that it was murder beyond the slanderous whispers of fanatics.

by your logic, all those who don't leave suicide notes committed. What about those who did, were they murdered?
 

Back
Top Bottom