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: lazarre who wrote (15709)	6/7/1998 7:27:00 PM
From: halfscot	Respond to of 20981

This is easy lazarre. The truth is in the answers which they obfuscate at every opportunity. All they/Clinton have to do is answer the questions under oath. Simple enough. halfscot

To: lazarre who wrote (15709)	6/7/1998 8:37:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

China arms sale inquiry 'blocked' by White House by IVO DAWNAY in Washington Sunday Telegraph; INTERNATIONAL; Pg. 29 June 7, 1998, Sunday CLAIMS of a concerted effort by senior United States officials to stifle a government inquiry into sales of missile technology to China are to be aired today. According to investigators, Marc Reardon, a Commerce Department officer, was told by unnamed bosses not to inquire too closely into the sale of sophisticated machine tools. Instead, for the first time in his career, he was explicitly instructed by his superiors as to what he could and could not ask. "Someone really didn't want the truth to come out," Mr Reardon told a CBS 60 Minutes television investigation to be broadcast across the US tonight. The programme also says that a Pentagon arms expert, Dr Peter Leitner, was told to reverse his recommendation that the technology - crucial for making missiles - should not be licensed for sale to China. When he refused, he was told that his obstinacy would make no difference, the decision to authorise the sale having been made at "high levels within the government". The latest claims that Washington not merely turned a blind eye but actually promoted huge transfers of militarily sensitive technology could hardly emerge at a worse moment for the Clinton administration. The report comes only a fortnight before the first visit to China by a US president since the bloody crackdown on Beijing democracy protesters in 1989. President Clinton's trip follows last month's report in the New York Times that the Chinese military had directly contributed to the Democrats' 1996 electoral campaign. Neither the newspaper nor the CBS has established conclusive evidence that the White House was aware of Beijing's $ 300,000 ( pounds 190,000) gift to their election coffers. But the fact that the conduit was a Taiwan-born Californian businessman, Johnny Chung, who visited the White House no fewer than 49 times between 1994 and 1996, has caused alarm in the Democrats' leadership. Foreign donations to US political parties are illegal. Yet for years it seems Mr Clinton's Oval Office carpet was worn thin by the constant passage of Chinese businessmen, anxious to be friends. Mr Chung's Chinese connection was Liu Chaoying, a female colonel with close links to the technology-hungry aerospace industry. She is the daughter of the most powerful military figure within the Beijing regime. The nature of this relationship is now the subject of at least five investigations by Congress, the Justice Department and by intelligence agencies. Many passionate defenders of the Clinton administration's fund-raising activities appear to be running for cover, fearful of what may emerge before November's congressional elections. As the weeks have passed, signs of a systematic liberalisation of technology transfer, particularly of equipment related to missiles, have emerged. That process began under presidents Reagan and Bush. But under Mr Clinton - who attacked Mr Bush's China policy as "coddling dictators" - it has accelerated. US knowhow has not only modernised the Chinese missile industry, but has helped its exports to countries such as Pakistan and Iran. Back in the Eighties, the State and Defence Departments drew up rules requiring strict monitoring of information exchanges. But with the Challenger Shuttle disaster curbing the nation's satellite-launch programmes, US industry was anxious to develop an alternative capability elsewhere. Companies such as Hughes, the General Motors subsidiary, quite legally transferred "clean room" knowhow to China - technology that enables the construction of more sophisticated launchers (and, as it happens, those capable of accurately releasing nuclear warheads). As soon as Mr Clinton took office, the industry pressed the new government for less monitoring. But the really significant moment came in the election year of 1996 when the President transferred control over technology exports from the State Department to the less militarily minded men at the Department of Commerce. Henry Sokolski, Mr Bush's leading non-proliferation official, recently described this decision as the defining moment. "It was tantamount to a complete overthrow of the old export-control regime," he said. With China now capable of perfecting extremely accurate long-range missiles, it leaked from CIA sources in March that 13 US cities were now targeted by Beijing's Long March rockets. Some will no doubt blame much of this on Loral Space and Communications, a Manhattan-based technology firm which, in 1996, "mistakenly" transferred classified research on a Long March rocket failure to its Chinese clients. Its chairman, Bernard Schwartz, has insisted: "If anything occurred here, it was an honest, low-level mistake." The company has pointed out that it immediately alerted the authorities to its error and has fully co-operated with a Justice Department inquiry. But the press has paid more attention to the revelations that Mr Schwartz has turned out to be one of the largest single contributors to the Democrats' campaign war chest, donating more than $ 1 million ( pounds 610,000) since Mr Clinton's election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: lazarre who wrote (15709)	6/7/1998 8:39:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20981

SENATOR HATCH ON 'MEET THE PRESS': IF CLINTON LIED, HE SHOULD BE IMPEACHED UPI Sunday June 7 1998 10:55 AM EDT Sunday June 7 10:55 AM EDT Hatch: Prez stonewalling until election WASHINGTON, June 7 (UPI) - Senate Judiciary Commitee chairman Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, says President Clinton is blatantly stonewalling independent counsel Kenneth Starr's investigation so his findings will not harm Democrats in the November elections. Hatch, speaking this morning on NBC's ''Meet the Press,'' also said even if the investigation only reveals that Clinton lied about his sex life under oath, that should be grounds for his impeachment, even if he did not suborn perjury. Hatch also said he resents ongoing attacks against Starr for the length and scope of his investigation. Hatch said the investigation would have been over long ago, but ''it does look at this time as though the president, and the people who are advising him, are stonewalling for one reason _ they want to bet through the November election....and possibly through the 2000 presidential election.'' Hatch added, ''I think starting to dawn on the American people that what's been happening, the stonewalling, the lack confirmation, that all of that is really the president's fault.'' Even if Starr's investigation reveals only that the president lied under oath about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky or others, Hatch said the offense would still be perjury. But, he said, Starr is ''going to have to have awfully strong facts in order for impeachment trial to go forward.'' Copyright 1998 by United Press International. All rights reserved. Copyright c: 1994-98 Yahoo! and UPI. All Rights Reserved.