Hi Jesse How are you you my names Dnice I'm a big fan and I watch your show Conpiracies Theories. Me and my friends would like to see more shows, so please try and bring it back on the air. I have some conpiracies I like you to check first is the Bill Clinton conpiracies on the death of Vincent Foster and the two kids it call the Clinton Body Count. On the bottom is some information I got off Wikipedia, and please contact me back by phone or email me at daryl2day@yahoo.com my cell number is 908-803-8943 I have very important information that you and the everybody are going to want to hear thank you.

The Clinton Chronicles: An Investigation into the Alleged Criminal Activities of Bill Clinton is a 1994 film created by Patrick Matrisciana. This video explored the deaths of Vincent Foster and an alleged cocaine-smuggling operation purportedly involving BCCI, Dan Lasater and then Governor of Arkansas Bill Clinton.[1][2] Deaths were part a conspiracy theory known as the "Clinton Body Count", which started and grew around the time of the documentary, as connections to Clinton were added with varying degrees of allegedly suspicious circumstances surrounding the deaths.[3] Some of the names in the Clinton Body Count are referenced in the documentary. Deaths of Kevin Ives and Don Henry spawned two other documentaries listed below.

Obstruction of Justice: The Mena Connection
Pat Matrisciana, and Creative Ministries also released a 1996 video titled Obstruction of Justice: The Mena Connection. This film claimed that, amongst others (namely Don Harmon, Richard Garrett, Jim Steed, and Danny Allen), Jay Campbell and Kirk Lane, both law enforcement officers, were connected to the murder of two teenage boys, Don Henry and Kevin Ives. Supposedly these two officers killed the teenagers when they came across a cocaine smuggling ring in Mena, Arkansas Clinton was tied to. The two officers sued against the false claims. A judgment in their favor was reversed by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in an in-depth 26 page decision by a group of several judges. [8]

The decision states that "the record does not refute... a list [of] 'suspects implicated in the Ives/Henry murders and cover-ups'" (pg. 11), that "[Campbell and Lane] failed to prove the falsity of even the most damning interpretation" of the evidence (pg. 11), that "law enforcement records... revealed that purported eyewitnesses implicated law enforcement officers in the deaths of the Ives and Henry boys, including the appellees, either by name and/or, more tenuously, by description" (pp. 11-12), that "statements and rumors corroborating... implicating them as suspects emanate, in varying degrees of detail, from multiple sources" (pg. 21), and that "given the corroboration by multiple sources, we do not see obvious reasons to doubt the accuracy of the various reports" (pg. 23).

The decision also stated that Campbell and Lane failed to prove the falsity of the allegations and that "[e]ven if we assume Campbell and Lane satisfied their burden of falsity, we find their claims still fail" because "a public-figure plaintiff must do more than prove falsity to prevail in a defamation claim... [but] must also prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with actual malice." (pg. 13)

At some point, Jon Brown, "an investigator for the Saline County Sheriff's Department from 1992 to 1994" (pg. 7) that arrived at conclusions similar to those of Matrisciana, also testified that... when he first became involved with this investigation, as an employee of the Saline County Sheriff, he found the file had been 'totally destroyed' and 'a lot of documents were missing' [,] ... [that] Ives' [mother's] collection of documents was the most comprehensive and he acquired the most pertinent documents from her[,] and that Ives and Duffey (a former deputy prosecuting attorney and director of a drug task force (pg. 6) that investigated the case and arrived at conclusions very similar to those of Matrisciana) had more thoroughly reviewed the documents." (pg. 17)

The judges agreed that the case was riddled with intrigue and allegations of corruption when it said, amongst other things: "The record indicates [Dan] Harmon... who was [originally] appointed special prosecutor on the case" (pg. 3), and who Mrs. Ives and others believed was aiding in the cover-up, "... had credibility problems because he was either implicated in the deaths himself or because he was trying to subvert [Campbell and Lane's] investigation of one of his associates for drug offenses." (pp 19-20) In regards to Dan Harmon, the judges noted that "Harmon had credibility problems in that he was being investigated for involvement in drug offenses, Sharline Wilson had placed him at the scene of the deaths, and, he had been convicted of various crimes." They also made note of the statements by Campbell and Lane that "[they believed that Harmon made rumors about them] detract attention... from his illicit drug activities." (pg. 22)

In defense of Campbell and Lane, the decision stated that "because of First Amendment considerations, the burdens we have placed on Lieutenants Campbell and Lane are great. That they 'cannot surmount these obstacles implies no condemnation of [them]' [and] should not undermine their accomplishments." (pg. 26) The judges also showed some sympathy to Matrisciana and his affiliates: "[W]e suppose that if Matrisciana's assertions were true, there would be 'inherent difficulties in verifying or refuting' [evidence], given the alleged pervasive involvement of law enforcement in his theory." (pp. 25-26)

[edit] See also
The Arkansas Project
Jerry Falwell
Troopergate
"Vast right-wing conspiracy"
Vince Foster
Whitewater controversy
[edit] Sources
1.^ New Questions About Roger Clinton's Slippery Schemes, Time, 2001-06-30
2.^ a b c The Falwell connection by Murray Waas Salon.com
3.^ a b c The Clinton Body Count Snopes.com January 2001 Barbara Mikkelson
4.^ Fred Clarkson. The Clinton Chronicles Video
5.^ Lois Romano (1998-03-02). "A Core Collection of Clinton Enemies". The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/s....
6.^ Philip Weiss (1997-02-23). "Clinton Crazy". The New York Times. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res....
7.^ Linda Satter, "Ex-Arkansas State Trooper Larry Patterson sentenced for lying to FBI agent," Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, March 12, 2005
8.^ http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/001411...
[edit] External links
Jeremiah Films
The Clinton Chronicles at the Internet Movie Database
The Clinton Chronicles DVD DVD produced by Pat Matrisciana
Clinton Body Count
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Chronicles"
Categories: 1994 films | Clinton administration controversies | Conspiracy theories | Urban legends | Films based on urban legends
Hidden categories: Film articles using deprecated parameters | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from May 2007Views
ArticleDiscussionEdit this pageHistoryPersonal tools
Try BetaLog in / create accountNavigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Search
Interaction
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Donate to Wikipedia
Help
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Printable version
Permanent link
Cite this page

You're the only one who can decide what is useful and what is not according to your actions and the results you get from those actions.

David & H!hai, I wonder the same thing. How much social media interaction is useful and how much is taking attention away from the real work?

For companies with a staff, I could see the value of having a dedicated social media person who interacts with the community. But for 1-man companies or a person who's building his/her brand, how do you know what's useful and when to stop?

One things I can say about your question, is that this task can be really overwhelming sometimes, because the more you grow the more relationships you have to keep, and you are only a human with 24 hours.

Andrew,

I'd be interested to hear more specifics... I do do a little social media, I bump into some people occassionally, but it's just a heck of alot. I sometimes log into my google reader, often to sphinn, and almost never to friendfeed... and I don't drive much traffic to my blog, and nor do I have alot of relationships, rather keeping to a few - mainly business partners...

Of course, I would like to do more of social media - I'd love to hear what actionable idea you took out of this interview.

David J