Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (8130)	2/23/1998 7:07:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 20981

Good morning Christine! Glad to know you are well. >>I found some residual affection for Lyndon Johnson I too must admit he had a commanding presence and gave a great speech, but: exchange2000.com exchange2000.com exchange2000.com exchange2000.com Didn't Oliver Stone say the key question was Look who benefits? As for Nixon, I refer you to One of Us by Tom Wicker. search.nytimes.com RMN was not one of my favs - another one of those who wanted to be something, rather than wanted to do something. As for Vernon Jordon, Bill Safire targets that scenario in his op-ed today: February 23, 1998 ESSAY / By WILLIAM SAFIRE Closing In on Clinton WASHINGTON -- Ten lawyers in the coordinated Clinton defense marched into a grand jury room threatening to throw a cloak of "executive privilege" over the suspected plotting of Bruce Lindsey to keep Monica Lewinsky quiet. Missing from this motley minyan was the lawyer for Vernon Jordan. The First Friend may have done for deposition-bound Monica what he did for the jail-bound Webster Hubbell, and now wants it known he's not taking the fall for witness-tampering. Bill Clinton, who has regularly abandoned loyalists, should not be surprised that Vernon's for Vernon. The White House dread that the law is closing in was deepened by the guilty plea to fraud entered in a Little Rock courtroom by Jim Guy Tucker, who was Clinton's Lieutenant Governor and successor in Arkansas. That felon copped a plea with a promise to tell a Whitewater grand jury the truth, presumably about a five-year conspiracy to obstruct justice. Even in the scandal that a handful of us view as most serious -- penetration of the money-hungry White House by Chinese espionage agents -- the scales are falling from Justice's eyes. Now both Charlie Trie and Maria Hsia (pronounced shaw) have at long last been indicted for money-laundering to help Clinton-Gore. In this case, the Clinton strategy -- "deny, deny, deny" -- seems to have been adopted by the Democratic Party. Such partisan posturing in a national security affair is a mistake because the Democratic state of denial will affect U.S. politics long after Clinton and Gore have departed the scene. The party's head-in-the-sand stand is expressed in the minority objections to the report drafted by the Thompson committee investigating violations of the campaign finance laws. Senator Fred Thompson's majority, drawing on F.B.I. and C.I.A. intelligence, concluded that Ms. Hsia was "an agent of the Chinese government" and that this Los Angeles resident "worked in direct support of a PRC diplomatic post in the U.S." But see-no-evil John Glenn and fellow Democrats (though they had to admit they saw evidence "connecting some activities she undertook . . . to Chinese government officials") insist that no proof had been offered that those activities were connected to her money-laundering through a Buddhist temple. Simple logic won't do, nor is evidence to be treated as evidence unless it can be presented in court. Throughout its draft rebuttal, the Democratic minority acts as defense counsel to the Riady ring and its Beijing spymasters. Although admitting that the Riadys are in business with China Resources (identified in this space a year ago as a notorious front for PRC spying), our defensive Democrats state as fact that the Riadys' dealings do not "consist of foreign spy or similar intelligence activities." That misinterpretation of data presented in secret to the committee comes as a shock to the counterintelligence agencies that submitted it to Congress. The senators were told that the Riadys, longtime Clinton supporters -- in the majority report's words -- "have had a longterm relationship with a Chinese intelligence agency." That means the military intelligence arm of the Chinese Army or the Ministry of State Security. Why does a U.S. political party close its eyes to the obvious connection between (a) the China Plan to covertly influence U.S. policy, probably overheard by our electronic and human intelligence and (b) the illegal pouring of millions of dollars into our campaigns from Chinese banks through cutouts like the Riady ring? Because members of that ring met with the President in the Oval Office to raise that money, and it's embarrassing. Why has the Clinton Department of Justice dragged its foot for over a year, and finally -- when indictments were shamed out -- eschewed espionage and limited the charges to illegal fund-raising? One reason would be to protect our sources that intercepted the planning of Chinese leaders; but the politically compelling reason was to avert finding a connection here to a "covered person" that would mandate independent counsel. One hot pursuit heats up another. The Monica firestorm is already scorching Whitewater witnesses, and the ensuing meltdown will expose the Riady ring. Democrats cannot be faulted for grimly presuming their leader's personal innocence, but must they also associate their party with a national-security disgrace? nytimes.com

To: Grainne who wrote (8130)	2/23/1998 8:26:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Christine: here's a European view on Jordan's stance: Electronic Telegraph Monday 23 February 1998 Issue 1004 Former allies leave Clinton isolated in Lewinsky scandal By Hugo Gurdon in Washington External Links A Guide to the Monica Lewinsky Story - The Coffee Shop Times Paula Jones's case against Clinton - Court TV Clinton Accused: Special report - Washington Post Whitewater and Clinton scandal clips - The Progressive Review The A-Z Guide to Clinton Scandals - CJ Burke The White House PRESIDENT Clinton faced new danger yesterday as his confidant, Vernon Jordan, claimed that he deceived him about an alleged affair with a 24-year-old White House trainee. Mr Jordan's adherents are leaking information to the press that Mr Clinton told his friend that he never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. Since then evidence has accumulated suggesting that this is not so. When asking Mr Jordan to help find her a job, the President also hid the fact that she had been subpoenaed in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, according to reports. If this is what Mr Jordan tells a Grand Jury this week it could add to Mr Clinton's legal woes. Within days of Miss Lewinsky receiving her subpoena, Mr Clinton's secretary, Betty Curry, asked Mr Jordan to help find her a new job. Mr Jordan's camp is letting it be known that he kept the President minutely informed about his progress in advancing Miss Lewinsky's career. An intriguing picture is therefore emerging of Mr Clinton becoming increasingly isolated, and of Washington's upper crust distancing itself from him. Robert Strauss, Mr Jordan's mentor and law partner, Sally Quinn, the Georgetown hostess and wife of Ben Bradlee, editor of the Washington Post during Watergate, and Lloyd Cutler, a Democratic grandee, have appeared on television to support Mr Jordan. He is a wealthy lawyer whom the Washington elite regard as one of their own. The President is becoming reclusive, hiding away at Camp David, his retreat in Maryland. He is joined there by Arkansas friends such as Harry and Linda Thomason. Mr Strauss said on TV: "Vernon is a loyal, devoted friend . . . [but] not a man who does things he knows to be either conceivably illegal, improper." He would stand by Mr Clinton if possible, but was not prepared to sacrifice himself to save the President. Mr Jordan's gradually leaking account of his role in the Lewinsky affair suggests that Mr Clinton enlisted his help in a cover-up without telling him the truth of what he was concealing. If Mr Jordan feels that he was lured deceitfully into a dangerous legal web and is now prepared to let a rift open between himself and the President, Mr Clinton's prospects cannot but darken. telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=000114153517164&rtmo=a3R8wwpL&atmo=99999999&P4%5FFOLLOW%5FON=%2F98%2F2%2F23%2Fwcli23%2Ehtml&pg=/et/98/2/23/wcli23.html