Clinton and Chinagate

• QuakerOats

  http://www.theoptiontrader.com/pt/PT_103.htm
  1. Sandy Berger - National Security Advisor and head of the National Security Council. Berger is perhaps Hogan & Hartson’s most infamous partner. He sat in on fundraising meetings involving illegal donations from John Huang and others, and was involved with Huang during his illegal activities at the Commerce Department and at the DNC. Now his firm is representing Mr. Huang. Mr. Berger was a paid lobbyist for the Chinese Communists while he was a partner at Hogan & Hartson, where he headed the firm's international trade group. Yes sir, he ‘worked’ for the Chinese Communists. Only in America, in a corrupt and treasonous administration, would the person in charge of national security be an agent for a Communist country that has missiles pointed at us. Mr. Berger is still listed as an attorney with Hogan & Hartson. Therefore, as a partner, he is still receiving benefits, directly or indirectly, from dealings with China and Russia. This clearly is a conflict of interest (allegiances) which, by law, should deny him a security clearance and access to classified material - but, as with all of Clinton’s appointees with ‘questionable’ allegiances, a security clearance is only a presidential phone call away. Mr. Berger not only participated in illegal Chinese fundraising, promoted and facilitated the transfer of sensitive technology to Communist countries, but he also facilitated the cover-up of Chinese espionage, pushed for the transfer of the Long Beach Naval base to the Chinese intelligence operation COSCO, and dutifully supported Clinton's China 'policy'. Mr. Berger is also chief advisor in charge of the humanitarian disaster in Kosovo, and was second in charge of Clinton's totally failed transition team for National Security. And, don’t forget, Mr. Berger will be in charge of us, our freedom and our Country, if a national emergency and/or martial law are declared (PT102). (Berger is still listed as a Partner with Hogan & Hartson.)
  
  http://www.prorev.com/connex.htm
  http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110003549
  http://www.alamo-girl.com/0331.htm
  
  John Huang / Charlie Trie / Johnny Chung / Sandy Berger et.al. ---------- the story is incredible ..... The crimes colossal .....
• QuakerOats

  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127565/posts
  
  "You know that Jamie Gorelick is a member of the 9/11 Commission. You also probably know that she was an Assistant Attorney General in the Clinton Administration And .. you might know that she is the Clinton official who wrote that memo that pretty much eliminated any possibility that the CIA and the FBI would cooperate and share intelligence on terrorism. But .. do you know why Gorelick wrote this memo? Simple. To protect Clinton from an investigation into Chinese involvement in his campaign finance scandal."
  
  Damaging / criminal ............. but swept away by a complicit media...........
• eersandbeers

  The best thing to ever happen to Clinton was the Lewinski scandal. Deflected a great deal of attention away from other things.
• Bigdogg

  eersandbeers wrote:

  Bigdogg wrote: Page one of the report:
  
  The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has stolen design
  information on the United States’ most advanced
  thermonuclear weapons.
  • The Select Committee judges that the PRC’s next generation
  of thermonuclear weapons, currently under development,
  will exploit elements of stolen U.S. design information.
  • PRC penetration of our national weapons laboratories spans
  at least the past several decades and almost
  certainly continues today.
  
  Why is this thread continuing? I could site a blog that claims GW Bush was from mars. Here is a report that lays blame on Reagan. Take it with the same grain of salt I did with the one about Clinton.
  
  http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/110305.html

  
  I don't care about your partisan hurt feelings. I think it is clear I am also quite far from a conservative so I don't know what to tell you over your hurt feelings due to Clinton's illegal actions.
  
  And I hardly cited a blog. I cited Congressional testimony from a Senator, and I provided a book that details all of the Chinese connections for Clinton.
  

  ptown_trojans_1 wrote:
  I don't deny the links, but question the strong language saying Clinton personally knew and purposely covered it up. That is like trying to link Reagan to Iran contra, it is simple to do, but hard to prove.

  I guess it would be more fair to say he hampered investigations from the Justice Department.
  

  ptown_trojans_1 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Cox report, as i think it takes a very hard line on the Chinese, worst case assessment. It is interesting, but I take it with a grain of salt. As Jefferey Lewis writes, (the original form back in 2004, but can't find any updated one online) http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/the_minimum_means_of_reprisal.pdf, the U.S. intelligence community has a history of overstating the Chinese threat.
  
  That said, while this was and is an issue, it by no means dramatically changed the strategic nuclear doctrine or posture of China.
  
  While the designs are a huge loss, the fact is I'm not sure China can actually replicate the modern warheads, given the use of the top secret Fogbank material http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1814/fogbank Since, the U.S. has a hard time making this stuff, I'm not totally sure the Chinese can make and mass produce it as well.
  
  Also, I have yet to come across any information about China selling or dealing off the design to other countries.
  
  You are not overly dramatic at all, in fact it is good to bring the issue of Chinese espionage to light, both Clinton and Bush years.

  
  Fair enough. I don't know enough about the nuclear technologies presented in the Cox Report to say one way or another. I can only rely on the report.
  
  I just thought it was interesting they said China went from 1950's nuclear weapons to being on par with ours.

  Might surprise you but I did not vote for Clinton and my feelings are not hurt. Fact is that you and I and the rest of us tax payers spent millions of dollars on a partisan hack job investigating the Clintons and the best we came up with was a soiled dress?
  I has under the impression that one of the forum rules was to cite a CREDITABLE SOURCE. I pointed out that the source stated on page one that spying had occurred under every president. I am not a Clinton fan. I would never vote for Hillary. But come on this stuff about the Clintons is old and a waste of time.