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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (12144)	4/7/1999 2:38:00 AM
From: Diane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Abetting Espionage: DOJ turned down request for wiretap on Lee (This was the only request denied out of over 2000) Investors Business Daily March 30, 1999 editorial Not for commerical use. For educational and discussion purposes only. It's almost too fantastic to believe. But evidence has surfaced that the administration may have turned a blind eye toward Red Chinese espionage - if not actually abetted it. The lethal drama unfolding in Kosovo has helped keep the charges that Red China stole nuclear secrets out of the spotlight. But some journalists - in particular Jeff Gerth and James Risen of The New York Times - have made some very disturbing discoveries. Not only did the Clinton administration take its sweet time in investigating the alleged theft after learning of it, there's reason to believe that the Justice Department failed to follow its usual procedures in overseeing the FBI probe of the matter. The result? The Chinese have a vastly improved missile force and no one has been held accountable. After trying to shift blame for the theft to previous administrations (the first instances did take place in the mid-1980s), the Clinton administration went into damage control. It claimed loudly and longly that it aggressively tried to get to the bottom of the matter. And, of course, the White House has pledged to investigate. But media spin notwithstanding, the administration has failed to guard the nation's secrets. Indeed, it took steps to put these secrets more at risk. And it blocked the FBI from fully probing the security breach. Central to the story is Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwan- born American. He worked for the Los Alamos National Lab, which develops nuclear weapons. Soon after the theft was discovered, Lee became the prime suspect. Yet he was not only allowed to keep his job, reports the Times, he got promoted to a more sensitive post. He was also permitted to hire a Red Chinese national as an assistant. Authorities can't find him. These infractions would be bad enough. But the Justice Department's actions regarding the FBI's probe of Lee border on the criminal. As part of the probe, the bureau requested a wiretap on Lee. Justice denied it, arguing it did not have sufficient grounds to take to a federal court to get the tap approved. But a look at the Justice Department's record on wiretaps calls that argument into serious question. >From 1993 to 1997, federal officials requested 2,686 wiretaps. For all its concern for probable cause and legal standards, the Justice Department turned down one request in those four years - Lee's in 1996. The Clinton administration's defense that it had few grounds to wiretap Lee might carry weight if most of the wiretaps Justice OK'd resulted in incriminating evidence. That would suggest Justice was setting and meeting high standards for wiretaps. But again the record suggests Justice is talking through its hat. In 1997, 21.4% of federal wiretaps produced incriminating information. Indeed, through the first four years of Clinton's term, only one in five wiretaps revealed shady actions. Yet in the case of Lee and alleged Chinese espionage, the department seems to think that it needed cold proof of illegal activity before approving a wiretap. Several conclusions can be drawn from this case, each one more and more incredible. One is that key officials in the Clinton administration are incredibly naive. Another is that they are criminally incompetent. Both answers are plausible, given this administration. But it's not too big a leap to ask if some officials were more than naive or incompetent. Were they intentionally ignorant? Did the push for campaign cash in 1996 - some of it coming from Chinese sources - take precedence over national security? An even more disturbing speculation is that someone in the administration was actively working for the Red Chinese. Sure, it sounds like a Tom Clancy novel. But why did Justice deny the wiretap request? Why did the Energy Department promote Lee to a spot where he could learn more secrets? How did a Chinese national get hired for such a sensitive job? The administration has its hands full now with Kosovo. But it must not be allowed to duck these questions on Red China's espionage. (C) Copyright 1999 Investors Business Daily, Inc. Metadata

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (12144)	4/7/1999 9:55:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Isikoff's Clinton Weekly Standard Book Review April 5/April 12, 1999 The Weekly Standard has a review of the Isikoff book. Sounds like it will be quite interesting with "fresh" material per the reviewer. The review mentions a call Isikoff received from another woman shortly after the Kathleen Willey story surfaced. Isikoff recounts the story, in part, as follows: Later that week,I was sitting at my desk when the phone rang. A woman was on the line. You know that story you had in the magazine this week about the woman Clinton made sexual overtures to in the hideway office? she asked. "Yes," I said. "What about it?" "That's exactly the same thing that happened to me," she said. She paused. "It was pretty awful." [snip] The story she told was chilling. She had met Clinton over the years at political events and would get invited to come see him at the White House when she was in Washington on business. Clinton's attention was "pretty flattering ....He's very charming." One day, about a year and a half before, she had gone by to see him and he had taken her into the hideaway office--the same one described in my article. They chatted. Clinton started getting physical trying to kiss her, touching her breasts. The woman said she was stunned. She had no idea how to respond. "I've never had a man take advantage of me like that," she said. "I haven't felt that way since high school." As Clinton pressed himself on her, she said, she resisted--and finally pushed him away. She hesitated, and she said softly and with apparent discomfort. "I think he finished the job himself." The image lingered. The woman left the White House, humiliated and repulsed. Clinton acted as if nothing had happened. freerepublic.com