Clinton's power grab....what a shame!

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:48 am

Wow, talk about the coming police state in America.

Lee was savaged by a media fueled by government rumors that he was spying for China, an accusation he was never officially charged with. Lee was imprisoned in solitary confinement for nine months in 1999/2000 and ultimately received an apology from the judge who heard his case.

The federal government will pay Lee $895,000 to drop his lawsuit, filed in 1999, which said officials in the Clinton administration had disclosed to the news media that he was under investigation for spying for China while working at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Thanks Zipper Boy!

thepieman · Post by **thepieman** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:26 pm

Its not entirely the Clinton admins fault. It was leaked by a republican congressmen.

This was taken from your link

There are too many low points in the history of this nation's journalism to permit one easily to employ superlatives about the Times's startling transgression. I don't know if it makes the all-time Top Ten list, but the trial and conviction of Lee in the pages of the Times--both in its news columns and on its editorial page--is certainly right up there. A leak from a Congressional committee chaired by California Republican Christopher Cox regarding the alleged theft of secrets about the W-88 nuclear warhead (a sophisticated, miniaturized bomb that fits on a MIRVed launcher) by Chinese spies--a nonevent that was never substantiated and was scoffed at by most experts--along with the contentions of a controversial and much-disputed source, was used by the newspaper to smear a Taiwan-born US citizen singled out for vilification simply because of his ethnic background

Of course, the Times couldn't have done it alone. But what makes this primarily a media story is that without the backing of the Times, whose stories set the tone for TV journalism, not much of anything would have happened. If properly vetted through the normal channels, the case, based largely on the zealous pursuit of Lee by one disgruntled former government security sleuth and amplified by the ambitions of a right-wing Congressman, would have come to naught. Instead, the Clinton Administration, recovering from impeachment and mired in a campaign finance scandal linked to Asian funds--including the charge that Beijing had secretly funneled money to the Democrats--panicked. Cowed by its fear that the China issue could be used effectively against Gore in the election, the Administration was willing to play along, and it did so through its Energy and Justice departments

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20001023/scheer/2

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:57 pm

Pie, spin it anyway you like. The buck stops at the Whitehouse.

Isn't it nice that under the Clinton Admin. an American citizen was locked away in solitary confinement for nine months.

From my link:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/22/scotus.wenholee/

Government officials, including then-Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, publicly named Lee as a target of a probe into the alleged theft of highly secret documents from the lab, and investigators suspected he was spying for China.

Lee was later cleared of espionage and nearly all the other serious charges

From your link:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20001023/scheer/2

"I sincerely apologize to you, Dr. Lee, for the unfair manner [in which] you were held in custody by the executive branch."

again from your link:

the Clinton Administration, recovering from impeachment and mired in a campaign finance scandal linked to Asian funds--including the charge that Beijing had secretly funneled money to the Democrats--panicked. Cowed by its fear that the China issue could be used effectively against Gore in the election, the Administration was willing to play along, and it did so through its Energy and Justice departments.

Shameful I tell ya just shameful.

Lee sat in jail for one reason and one reason only: The Administration wanted to prove to its critics that it was tough on Chinese spying, whether or not that spying existed and whether or not it had anything to do with Wen Ho Lee.

Remember the buck stops with the Whitehouse and to let a citizen of the U.S. sit in jail knowing he was innocent is just shameful.

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:25 pm

Cybo, what's the difference here then what Bush is doing? only a handfull of US citizens acused of being Al Quida have been tried? how long have they been held over without trial all the while Bush claiming they are NOT entitled to their constitutional rights?

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:09 pm

CiscoKid wrote:Cybo, what's the difference here then what Bush is doing? only a handfull of US citizens acused of being Al Quida have been tried? how long have they been held over without trial all the while Bush claiming they are NOT entitled to their constitutional rights?

CiscoKid the topic is Clinton not Bush. It's about the mistreatment by the Clinton Admins. of a U.s. citizen for political gain. Try to stay on topic please.

the Clinton Administration, recovering from impeachment and mired in a campaign finance scandal linked to Asian funds--including the charge that Beijing had secretly funneled money to the Democrats--panicked. Cowed by its fear that the China issue could be used effectively against Gore in the election, the Administration was willing to play along, and it did so through its Energy and Justice departments.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:24 pm

Scream when they arrested him that this could only happen under the Clinton reign and then spin it the other way when the neocons can use this to make the Bush team look like they are "somewhat" better.

Man o man it's hard to believe that over 6 years have past since Clinton left office and he's still the whipping boy of special right wing interests.

That said, I do understand completely that the Clinton haters are never going to stop the spin.

I'm AM curious though as to who leaked the misinformation. Given that Tenet was in charge of the CIA and was a close friend of the Bush family.

How's that for spin, Cybo?

David · Post by **David** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:39 pm

And now for something completely different...

Prey sings the Star Spangled Banner...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=foTXvKuVh1U& ... =2&t=t&f=b

(Yes, I sank to the depth of YouTube faux funnies)

Bo Riddick · Post by **Bo Riddick** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:48 pm

downhill wrote:yuck, yuck, yuck.............................................he's still the whipping boy of special right wing interests.

and more yuckitty yuck.....

It's the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy bub, get it right!

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 12:23 am

Bo Riddick wrote:It's the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy bub, get it right!

Thanks......

Only it's not much of a conspiracy anymore...

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:49 am

cybotron r_9 wrote:CiscoKid the topic is Clinton not Bush. It's about the mistreatment by the Clinton Admins. of a U.s. citizen for political gain. Try to stay on topic please.

Oh? So it's perfectly fine for Bush to do it to several dozen US citizens, but something that happened almost ten years ago and has been beat worse then Rodney King is more worthy of debate?

cho · Post by **cho** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:53 am

cybotron r_9 wrote:CiscoKid the topic is Clinton not Bush. It's about the mistreatment by the Clinton Admins. of a U.s. citizen for political gain. Try to stay on topic please.

Nice deflection...I'll assume since you couldn't properly reply it means CiscoKid is correct.

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:59 am

*cho* wrote:Nice deflection...I'll assume since you couldn't properly reply it means CiscoKid is correct.

WTF...? that's a first...I was right about something?

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:51 am

CiscoKid wrote:Oh? So it's perfectly fine for Bush to do it to several dozen US citizens, but something that happened almost ten years ago and has been beat worse then Rodney King is more worthy of debate?

You can think it's perfectly fine for Bush to do anything...those are your words not mine.

Whether it's worthy for debate is up to me now isn't it....it's my thread and if you can't stay on topic please refrain from posting.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:52 am

Hell_Yes wrote:And now for something completely different...

Prey sings the Star Spangled Banner...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=foTXvKuVh1U& ... =2&t=t&f=b

(Yes, I sank to the depth of YouTube faux funnies)

Thanks for the intermission David, it was hilarious! Had to be chopped as no one could possibly be that stupid

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:06 am

[quote="cybotron r_9"]You can think it's perfectly fine for Bush to do anything...those are your words not mine.

Whether it's worthy for debate is up to me now isn't it....it's my thread and if you can't stay on topic please refrain from posting. ]
I'm asking you because you refuse to justify your demonization of Clinton when the sins of Bush are a thousand times worse the Clinton, it directly relates. Though in the case you stated, the man was only held 9 months. Meanwhile, there's US citizens being held today, in what human rights groups have stated is crual and unusal conditions, for more then two years

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:35 am

CiscoKid wrote: it directly relates.

Only if you're using the "they did it too" excuse.

the man was only held 9 months.

Gee i'm glad it was only 9, I don't feel so bad now...a small price to pay for Clinton's power grab.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:53 am

Cisco did he say that clinton was better or worse? so when we complain abotu a president do we have to compare them to bush everytime?

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:28 am

My point is that if you wish to hang one president for an action, be mindfull that your preffered president is not quilty of the same if not worse crimes. That's what happened after Kenny Starr had his investigation. The right tried so hard to hang Clinton for geting his pole smoked that Gingrich and several others affairs came to light. Some resulting in children as old as their early 20's.

9 months or 29 years still doesn't make false imprisionment any worse.

saturnaleo77 · Post by **saturnaleo77** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:41 am

My people is still ready to declare war against USA to be possibile our quickly colonization, for becoming same as you . I think everybody does mistakes but who is resolving all problems only punishing is doing exactly this kind of mistake , let him doing what he knows better - taking care at his people

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 12:05 pm

CiscoKid wrote:My point is that if you wish to hang one president for an action, be mindfull that your preffered president is not quilty of the same if not worse crimes. That's what happened after Kenny Starr had his investigation. The right tried so hard to hang Clinton for geting his pole smoked that Gingrich and several others affairs came to light. Some resulting in children as old as their early 20's.

9 months or 29 years still doesn't make false imprisionment any worse.

Where does he say his prefered president si buch, this thread was about something that happened under clintons term, you're the one that brought bush in here.

thepieman · Post by **thepieman** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:24 pm

cybotron r_9 wrote:Pie, spin it anyway you like. The buck stops at the Whitehouse.

Why do you say Im spinning it. I just said what I read. It was a republican that leaked it, so of course with the Chinese $ scandal they were going to go after clinton about it. Maybe if the story wasn't leaked normal jurisprudance would have allowed him to go free. It was the republicans that wanted to hang clinton and they used that guy to show there was a connection between Clinton and The Chinese. He's been in jail all this time under Bush admin. , so it didn't seem like they were in a rush to release him if it took like 6 years

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:32 pm

thepieman wrote: He's been in jail all this time under Bush admin. , so it didn't seem like they were in a rush to release him if it took like 6 years

Oh nooo's.......It can't be! That would be a power grab!

saturnaleo77 · Post by **saturnaleo77** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:11 am

100% you right , i m talking about presidential institution , it has right to remain silent about delicate actions , of course the person who knows better why happens something strange there is B.Clinton himself , and he is also silent , why not ?

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:09 am

Clinton......Bush .....they're all the same ....

rareq · Post by **rareq** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:43 am

, so arresting someone involved in a espionage case is a power grab now?

Keep in mind that the FBI did believe that he was guilty.
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/law.an ... freeh.lee/

Among the activities Freeh is expected to cite, according to a source familiar with his testimony, is information that in 1982 Lee made contact with a suspected spy. Freeh is expected to say that authorities suspected Lee was less than truthful when questioned about that contact.

Freeh also will describe how the FBI began a preliminary investigation of Lee in 1994, after it became known that he had an alleged relationship with the head of China's nuclear weapons design program and did not report the relationship.

Freeh will tell congressional investigators that in 1998, Lee acknowledged in an interview that he had been approached by Chinese nuclear scientists.

And also keep in mind that this case was about one individual that was arrested because of cirsumstancial evidence; the Clinton administration did not rounded up every scientist working at Los Alamos to find the suspected spy. Under the Bush Administration, OTOH, we arrested a bunch of people from Afganistan with no evidence of wrongdoing, no due process, etc. Do you see a difference?

, you can just tell how desperate the right is becoming, heh.

cybotron r_9 · Post by **cybotron r_9** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:16 pm

[quote="rareq"]

, so arresting someone involved in a espionage case is a power grab now?

Keep in mind that the FBI did believe that he was guilty.

And also keep in mind that this case was about one individual that was arrested because of cirsumstancial evidence]

Another Clinton apologist says it's OK to fire somone from their job then throw them in solitary confinement for nine months because we believe that person is guilty.

Again, stop with the "they did it worse than we did so it's OK" excuses.

BTW, where was the due process for Mr. Lee?

rareq · Post by **rareq** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:26 pm

cybotron r_9 wrote:Another Clinton apologist says it's OK to fire somone from their job then throw them in solitary confinement for nine months because we believe that person is guilty.

Again, stop with the "they did it worse than we did so it's OK" excuses.

BTW, where was the due process for Mr. Lee?

believe that person is guilty? Read my link again. There was evidence of wrongdoing on Wen Ho Lee's part. Why are you ignoring that?

If Mr. Lee was suspected of a lesser crime, firing him and keeping him in solitary confinement might be harsh. But he was suspected of espionage. Something that people has been sentence to the death penalty for it.

Question: If you had evidence of an American nuclear scientist committing illegal activity in Los Alamos National Laboratory, what would you do? You're telling me that removing his security clearance is a BAD thing? You're telling me that you'll keep him on the streets so his handlers can extract him to safety?

As for Lee's due process, do you know what due process means? The entire time Mr. Lee was arrested he had lawyers. Your link:

Lee was imprisoned in solitary confinement for nine months in 1999-2000 and ultimately received an apology from the judge who heard his case.

A judge heard his case. Get it yet? That's part of due process. Also there was a plea bargain, in which he plea guilty on one count and everything else was drop. Do you think that would have happened without due process? Do you really think that any of the charges would have been drop if it weren't for due process? Without due process Lee would still be in jail, with no charges, no court case, etc

And again what power grab? How is firing someone and putting them in solitary confinement a power grab?

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:27 pm

cybotron r_9 wrote:Another Clinton apologist says it's OK to fire somone from their job then throw them in solitary confinement for nine months because we believe that person is guilty.

Again, stop with the "they did it worse than we did so it's OK" excuses.

BTW, where was the due process for Mr. Lee?

Did Lee get a lawer? Did Lee see a judge? Did Lee get accused of a death penalty offence?

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:06 pm

CiscoKid wrote:Did Lee get a lawer? Did Lee see a judge? Did Lee get accused of a death penalty offence?

The repubs will do just about anything at this point to make their guy look good ...feeble as it may be it's business as usual with these clowns .... each side defending each other while nothing gets done, money gets wasted and they get rich .....face it..Bush is soo bad he'll go down as the worst POTUS in the history of this country ...take solice in that

CiscoKid · Post by **CiscoKid** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:27 pm

Izzo wrote:The repubs will do just about anything at this point to make their guy look good ...feeble as it may be it's business as usual with these clowns .... each side defending each other while nothing gets done, money gets wasted and they get rich .....face it..Bush is soo bad he'll go down as the worst POTUS in the history of this country ...take solice in that

Oh, I know that. I'm just waiting for Cybo to b!tch at me again