Skip to comments.How Clinton's Beijing deal endangered America
Posted on 08/10/2003 7:04:41 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
How Clinton's Beijing deal endangered America
Monday 11 August 2003
Seeing as so many democrats and their allies in the media have been screaming about intelligence failures and the President Bush's foreign policy, I think it's time to once again turn to the Clinton administration and its dangerous dealings with Beijing.
I completely confess to being fascinated by Clinton's Chinese spying scandal. It's like a form of mental super glue I just don't seem to be able to let go. That he was able to get away with it is still a source of amazement to me, and others acquainted with his Chinese dealings.
So what did Beijing get from the Clintons? I think the answer is obvious. Clinton gave Beijing a free reign and a guarantee that its activities would not be interrupted during, what he quaintly calls, his "watch" so that China could clear out America's military and high-tech secrets. Simple.
Questions regarding Clinton, particularly on this matter, only lead to more questions. How could Beijing be certain that Clinton, even as president of the United States, could make good such a guarantee? One, I think, should start with his governorship of Arkansas. There seems little doubt that Clinton ran it as his personal fiefdom, replacing or shoving aside those who could prove troublesome.
Some would argue that this is the norm. That is probably true in American politics, but not to the corrupt and ruthless extent that Clinton practised it. His approach to power and people is truly Machiavellian. Given this fact, and his support in the media, it is not surprising that reports made out to Chinese intelligence suggested that Clinton would be favourably disposed to dealing with Chinese representatives for a price.
Intelligence assessments were supported by Clinton's action, shortly after entering (or is it soiling?) the Oval Office, in asking all US Attorneys General to resign. This unprecedented and dictatorial move gave the Clinton administration control over the prosecutorial machinery of the federal government in every judicial district in the US. No need to tell you who was impressed by this breathtakingly brazen move.
Why Clinton even tried to appoint Webster Hubbel to the post of Attorney General. Imagine where that would have led. But what struck a particular chord was the way the American media acquiesced to the Clintons' manoeuvres. Beijing does not underrate the power of the Western media, especially in America. That the media, with the exception of a few lone voices, was prepared to collaborate with the Clintons gave further assurance to Beijing that Clinton was able to deliver.
But what of the CIA and the FBI, asked some readers? I have no wish to be patronising, but the naiveté of the American public is almost touching at times. It didn't even notice that William Sessions, FBI Director, a man noted for his integrity and opposition to political interference in the Bureau's affairs, was removed as quickly as Clinton moved into the Oval office.
There is no doubt that Clinton deliberately acted to chain the CIA and the National Security Agency as well as the FBI. One method was to have Clinton supporters in sensitive positions so that they could delay, if not derail, any budding investigations into Clinton's China operations. Many of these supporters are still in place and owe their loyalty to the Clinton political machine.
With these bodies virtually rendered ineffective by the Democrats Chinese intelligence had a field day. Now being ineffective does not mean uninformed. These agencies new very well what Chinese intelligence was up to but were largely powerless to do anything about it. After all, what could they do when the commander in chief, the president himself, had, by his actions, made it clear that investigations into China's spying activities would not be welcomed.
One of the reasons that Janet Reno was appointed to head the Justice Department was that the Clintons believed she could be relied on to sabotage any investigations into Chinese intelligence operations.
I should point out at this stage that several Chinese officials let it drop that they believed Clinton was blackmailing Reno over certain activities concerning her personal life. Whatever the truth of the matter, Reno's role as the last of Clinton's gatekeepers, so to speak, more than satisfied Beijing's expectations by thoroughly corrupting the Justice Department and blocking FBI requests.
No wonder Beijing was so satisfied with its part of the deal that if felt sufficiently in command to 'request' that Clinton see to it that John Huang be given top security clearance and placed in a favourable position, favourable to Chinese intelligence, that is.
Thus we find Huang being given a position in the Commerce Department, at the insistence of Clinton, where he was able to use his security clearance to directly obtain information from the CIA.
I was told that CIA officials were in no doubt about Huang's activities but were held in check by Clinton, despite CIA complaints. Does any reader honestly believe that Clinton is so innocent that he had no idea why Beijing wanted a security clearance for Huang?
So did Beijing really think it was going to get away with spying activities? Of course it did. And it has. Chinese intelligence expected eventual exposure but calculated that by the time it occurred the damage would be done. It was right. Clinton, not China, emptied the Candy store with devastating results for American security. The consequences will be felt for many years to come.
It's time Americans woke up to what the Clintons and the majority of congressional Democrats did to American security
BINGO!! .. This guy nailed it
This is the same excuse the traitors and spies used when they gave our atomic secrets to Russia.
That mentality prevails today within the leftist elites who presume to know what is best for us.
Yep .. this one going out in email
Isn't Dean basically saying the same thing?
IMO .. the media is just as guilty as Clinton
"This is the same excuse the traitors and spies used when they gave our atomic secrets to Russia.
"That mentality prevails today within the leftist elites who presume to know what is best for us."
All true. But Clinton's actions had nothing to do with liberal elitist philosophy. His motivation was a.) money and b.) power. He sold out his country for his own benefit, not somebody else's abstract philosophy.
Next to Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon was a piker.
Every once and awhile a report, or article, like this surfaces. Unfortunetly the source is obscure ... even if something like this were reported in the NY Times (at this point) ... although true, would have little impact. The Clinton's made a mockery of U.S. security during the 90's ... they were bought and paid for by the Chicoms.
We bitched about this when it was happening, but it fell on deaf ears. The liberals would retort "Well, you're just bashing the president because you don't like him."
What really harps me is that our president won't do any housecleaning of those moles still left in the agencies by X42.
This article goes along with what I've thought for years. Too bad I'm a dope, and can't collect my thoughts well enough to write stuff like this.
Thanks for the post.
He can't .. before Clinton left office many of them became civil empployees and they can't be fired