COMMUNISM'S LEGITIMATE VOICE
Posted on 04/20/2004 4:55:32 AM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast
Hats off to the Wall Street Journal for a spectacular observation, perhaps the Rosetta Stone of postmillennial national security.
Let its boiled-down essence not escape your attention: the ongoing dividends of Chinagate may well have included 9/11.
And history may be repeating itself. Let me explain.
To set the stage, recall that Bill Clinton ensured his loyal minions populated the US Attorneys' offices nationwide when he fired every last US Attorney at the dawn of his Administration, then appointed his own. Next, as we have seen through Jamie Gorelick's startling memo[1], he saw to it that domestic law enforcement was blinded to foreign intelligence information. He then methodically offered up White House access and key strategic technologies to the highest bidder: China, and Indonesian/Chinese billionaire donors with close ties to China's dictatorial regime. Intriguingly, Clinton's Department of Justice's signature assault on Microsoft also appears to have been to the benefit of Indonesian/Chinese billionaires, who just happened to be the originating funders of the private venture fund which was the largest shareholder in lead plaintiff Netscape at the time[2]
With the declassification of former Deputy Attorney General Gorelick's memo, the picture comes into sharp focus: the Clinton Administration was not just:
...but also:
Yes, the economy, Clinton's vaunted economy, with its skyrocketing stock-market and spectacular 5.6% 1996 unemployment rate (which of course puts George W. Bush’s dismal 2004 5.6% unemployment rate to shame). This unstoppable economy screeched to an ignominious halt in the second half of 2000 as the tech sector imploded[4] - a multi-trillion-dollar evaporation of shareholder wealth driven in significant part by the DOJ's pursuit of tech bellwether Microsoft, which put a measurable damper on enthusiasm for big-cap technology stocks and funding for new tech ventures alike.
Follow the money. The legacy of that Administration is not just one of incompetence and inattention culminating in an innocence-crushing September morning once it was safely out of office. It is one of malevolent, calculated wholesaling of loyalty for political gain, with Gorelick's Wall providing cover by blinding law enforcement efforts that might have made a difference.
Still, Chinagate was exposed, and in a sane world it would have hit the political world like one of the Chinese ICBMs it facilitated. But Clinton was untouchable - immunized! - after the Lewinsky obstruction-of-justice mess fizzled like the captivating but comparatively feeble bottle-rocket it was. Today the damage extends far beyond the smoldering pits of lower Manhattan and the Pentagon. The world now stands on the cusp of decades of global turmoil in the face of emboldened and metastasized radical Islamism, most recently including al Qaeda’s successful gambit towards reestablishing Moorish dispensation in Andalusia[5].
Is Chinagate old news? Water under the bridge? Something for the 9/11 Commission's Democrat partisans to pooh-pooh and ignore as they recklessly paint their anti-Bush pastiche?
Not if you continue to mourn the thousands dead on that grim September morning. And not if you consider what other reflexively anti-Defense politician currently angling for the Presidency has financial ties to some of the same scandalous campaign donors as Bill Clinton: John Kerry is today's victorious campaign-donation choice of Chinagate's Huang-linked George Chao-Chi Chu, described as having "unusual access to high-ranking Communist officials in China" [6]. And that is old news, in a way: for in 1996 John Kerry received cash from Johnny Chung and Liu Chaoying, daughter of a powerful Chinese military official, for providing high-level access to Federal securities regulators. Kerry's cash came from transfers sent to Chung on orders from the chief of Chinese military intelligence[7].
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana
Scott Jordan
1 A web-accessible transcription of the Gorelick "Wall" memo is at http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=659679
2 At the time of the DOJ's action against Microsoft was initiated, lead plaintiff Netscape's largest shareholder was the private venture fund of Amerindo Investment Advisors. "The name Amerindo came from the fund's first investors, a group of Indonesian Chinese who wanted [the founder, Cuban expatriate Alberto] Vilar to call the firm American Indonesian Singaporean Investment Co. but settled for an abbreviation." -- Fortune, October 25, 1999
3 Caspar Weinberger, Washington Times, Sept. 2, 2003, reviewing Miniter: "The president never supported Mr. Woolsey's urgent request for Arabic-language translators for the CIA in 1994. A separate feud between Mr. Woolsey and Sen. Dennis DeConcini, Arizona Democrat, was allowed to run its course without direction by the Clinton White House, which further set back the CIA director's appeal for Arabic translators." So, as the author concludes, "a bureaucratic feud and President Clinton's indifference kept America blind and deaf as bin Laden plotted."
4 For a graphical econometric analysis of the recession's onset, see http://www.speakeasy.org/~dervish/recession.pdf
5 London Telegraph, "Bin Laden makes an offer that he cannot deliver",http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fopinion%2F2004%2F04%2F18%2Fdo1806.xml
6 The Hill, "Fundraiser resurfaces from 1996", Sam Dealey, http://www.hillnews.com/news/073003/fundraiser.aspx
7 NewsMax, "Kerry Took Cash From Chinese Military Intelligence", http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/2/124555.shtml
Bump to #58 ....
In questioning National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, Commissioner Gorelick pointed to a report from 2001 that indicated, in her own words, that 'we have big systemic problems. The FBI doesn't work the way it should, and it doesn't communicate with the intelligence community.'
In the ensuing dialogue, Rice seemed to implicate Gorelick in the allegation.
Gorelick: Now, you have said that your policy review was meant to be comprehensive. You took your time because you wanted to get at the hard issues and have a hard-hitting, comprehensive policy. And yet there is nothing in [the policy review] about the vast domestic landscape that we were all warned needed so much attention. Can you give me the answer to the question why?
Rice: I would ask the following. We were there for 233 days. There had been a recognition for a number of years before - after the '93 bombing, and certainly after the [thwarted] millennium [attack in Los Angles] - that there were challenges inside the United States, and that there were challenges concerning our domestic agencies and the challenges concerning the FBI and the CIA. We were in office 233 days. It's absolutely the case that we did not begin structural reform at the FBI. ~ Ethan Wallison, Wrong Side of the Table, National Review Online, April 12, 2004, available at http://www.nationalreviewonline.com/comment/wallision.
One of the more troubling aspects of the war on terror is how to treat the prisoners of that war. Whether the prisoners are foreigners captured on the battle field, or Americans citizens captured in Chicago, the Administration has often been reluctant to allow enenmy combatants to meet with lawyers.
One reason for the reluctance is that the administration is concerned that the lawyers might become conduits for information from the prisoners to be passed along to others.
What is needed to find highly competent counsel for the enemy combatants who the administration trusts implicitly with the most sensitive information.
The solution is for the high powered Washington law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering to be appointed to represent all enemy combatants.
Now, Wilmer, Cutler may at first seem an odd choice for the job. After all, Wilmer Cutler represents Prince Mohammed al Faisal in the suit by the 9/11 families. The families contend that al Faisal has legal responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. The Prince allegedly had a part in the finances of Al Qaeda.
Despite that representation, it is clear that the administration trusts Wilmer Cutler with the most sensitive of information. Wilmer Cutler partner, Jamie Gorelick is a commissioner on the 9/11 commission. In addition to being a commissioner, Gorelick is also a witness before her own commission.
According to UPI , Gorelick is one of the two officials to whom the White House has granted the greatest access to the most secret and sensitive national security documents, the presidential daily briefings. Thus, the White House does not worry about providing information to the law firm of a Saudi Prince accused of being the financier of Al Qaeda when the firm in question is Wilmer Cutler.
Today, President Bush appointed the allegedly independent commission to investigate pre-war intelligence failures. Among those appointed to the commission was former Clinton White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler. Yes, Lloyd Cutler is the Cutler of Wilmer Cutler.
That commission will have to have access to the most sentitive information about our intelligence gathering. Once again, the White House in unconcered about the law firm for person accused of being Al Qaeda's banker having access to the most sentitive intelliegnce information.
That commission will have to have access to the most sentitive information about our intelligence gathering. Once again, the White House in unconcered about the law firm for person accused of being Al Qaeda's banker having access to the most sentitive intelliegnce information.
So Wilmer Cutler represents a Saudi against the 9/11 victims families. Wilmer Cutler is on the 9/11 commission. Wilmer Cutler is on the prewar intelligence commission. It seems only fitting that Wilmer Cutler also represent the enemy combatants. It is hard to believe that the White House would worry that Wilmer Cutler would pass sentitive information from Gitmo prisoners to Al Qaeda.
Perhaps Wilmer Cutler could also represent Scooter Libby with regard the Valerie Plame matter while it also represents Bob Novak before the grand jury. It could then represent Valerie Plame in a civil suit against Scooter Libby.
It appears that I must have missed the day of law school when they explained the Wilmer Cutler exception to the conflict rules.
Even Clinton might have a hard time sinking lower than Woodrow Wilson, the man on whose watch we got the income tax, the Federal Reserve, direct election of senators, the League of Nations, and the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
