|
Creating Conditions for Presidential Treason
Connecting the Dots . . .
What would a President have to do to create an "enabling environment" for the accomplishment of a mission he had in mind...
I. Review current mission statements of intelligence organizations to assure direct presidential control.
A. Agencies whose mission statements give total control to the President.
1) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
2) National Security Agency (NSA)
B. Agencies or entities whose mission statements could cause problems for the President's future plans; they have to be modified or changed, and/or key appointees must be placed in high level positions to increase presidential control.
1) The Department of Justice (DOJ), the FBI which reports directly to the DOJ, and the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) which reports to the DOJ and the President.
a) Appoint a new director of the FBI - 9/1/93.
b) Position a key figure in the DOJ
c) Issue Executive Order #12863 - 9/17/93 which revoked EO #12537 - 10/28/85 that established the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) and EO #12334 - 12/4/81 which established the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB). Clinton's new EO establishes the IOB as a committee of the PFIAB and states that the IOB "shall consider and take appropriate action with respect to matters identified by the Director of Central Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency or other agencies of the Intelligence Community." It is at the discretion of the IOB to report, or not report, to the Attorney General activities that the IOB believes may be unlawful or contrary to Executive order or Presidential directive.
d) Position a key figure as Chairman of the IOB who now has the discretionary authority over intelligence information brought before the PFIAB.
2) National Security Council (NSC).
a) Position a key figure as the National Security Advisor.
II. Select the key figures for future placement in critical positions supporting the mission.
A. National Security Advisor: Samuel R. Berger, a paid lobbyist for the Chinese while he was a partner in the international law firm of Hogan and Hartson where he headed the firm's international trade group. Mr. Berger is still listed as an attorney with Hogan and Hartson, therefore, as a partner, he is still receiving benefits, directly or indirectly, from dealings with China and Russia.
B. Chairman of the IOB: Anthony S. Harrington, is a senior partner of the international law firm of Hogan and Hartson (with Berger) and, as a senior partner, receives benefits, either directly or indirectly, from dealings with China and Russia. Mr. Harrington is still listed as an attorney with Hogan and Hartson.
C. Chairman of the PFIAB: Warren B. Rudman, is a partner in the international law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison with offices in Communist China and who, as a partner, receives benefits, either directly or indirectly, from dealings with Communist China.
D. Department of Justice with jurisdiction over the FBI
1) Appoint Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell whose strong ties to the Chinese Communists and John Huang (formerly of the Commerce Department) and his other criminal activity are well documented.
2) Inspector General of the DOJ: Michael R. Bromwich who is/was a partner in the Washington D.C. office of Mayer, Brown & Platt. The firm has offices in Moscow and Beijing, with emphasis on Communist China. If he is still a partner, on leave of absence or not, he is benefiting from the firm's dealings with China and Russia.
III. Further revamp Executive Branch to create an "enabling environment" for easy transfer of sensitive technology - legal or covert.
A. Issue Executive Order #12938 - 11/14/94 Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, where Sec.3. reads: "Department of Commerce Controls. (a) The Secretary of Commerce shall prohibit the export of goods, technology, or services subject to the Secretary's export jurisdiction that the Secretary of Commerce determines, in consultation with the Secretary of State."
B. Load the Commerce Department with loyal 'appointees'.
1) The Washington Post 1/23/97: "revived allegations that the department is a dumping ground for political appointees."
2) The Washington Post 1/24/97: "Federal personnel data suggests that the Commerce Department may have been overstocked with political appointees".
3) The Washington Post 2/11/98: The Commerce Department's policy, under the Clinton Administration, has been to issue "automatic security clearances for political appointees".
C. Appoint Ron Brown as Secretary of Commerce - the 'late' Ron Brown - whose China
'trips' and legal problems are well documented.
D. Appoint John Huang as an official at the Commerce Department, whose activities are well documented. He was a DNC fundraiser with strong ties to China, Clinton and Web Hubbell and was a key figure in the illegal Chinese campaign contributions with open access to the President and the White House. He operated with an illegal security clearance to enable him access to highly classified information.
E. Appoint William J. Perry (no bio available) as Deputy of Defense Secretary and then as
Defense Secretary. To quote the New York Times 10/19/98: "The Pentagon was traditionally the strongest voice against technology exports, and Clinton made several appointments calculated to change the culture. William J. Perry, an executive at a Silicon Valley company was vocally opposed to the existing system of export controls".
F. Appoint John M. Deutch (no bio available) to a senior post at the Pentagon and then to
Director of Central Intelligence. According to the New York Times 10/19/98: Mr. Deutch was "a professor with similar views (to those of Perry)".
G. Relax existing export rules to enable Communist China to obtain a wide range of sophisticated technology - including high-speed computers and satellite guidance systems. According to the New York Times 10/19/98: "In 1995, Central Intelligence Agency analysts wrote a report warning of the military implications of technology transfers to China." "Senior officials acknowledge that President Clinton decided to change the rules without a rigorous review by intelligence officials or other national security experts."
H. Overturn Secretary of State Warren Christoper's classified order of 10/9/95. (As the
New York Times 5/17/98 put it: "President Clinton took the unusual step of reversing Christopher's decision." The order was overturned March 1996.)
1) The New York Times 5/17/98: Christopher's order had preserved "the State Department's sharp limits on China's ability to launch American-made satellites aboard Chinese rockets."
2) The New York Times 5/17/98: Christopher had signed this order, on the advice of "the Defense Department, the intelligence agencies and some of his own advisers, who noted that embedded in commercial satellites were technological secrets that could jeopardize 'significant military and intelligence interests.'"
3) The New York Times 5/17/98: After Clinton overturned Christopher's order, "Control of export licensing for communications satellites was shifted to Commerce Department, then run by Ronald Brown."
4) New York Times 10/18/98: Clinton's action opened "the way to billions of dollars of satellite sales to Chinese companies. Clinton decided to fulfill his pledge to the Silicon Valley executives and relax the restrictions." "The new rules took effect in early 1996."
5) New York Times 10/18/98: "Soon after, Chinese companies bought 77 of the supercomputers which can be used to scramble secret communications or design powerful nuclear weapons."
|
|
