Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Some dare call it treason: Jack Cashill reveals how Clinton sold America's security to China ^ | Wednesday, May 5, 2004 | Jack Cashill

Posted on 05/05/2004 1:49:44 AM PDT by JohnHuang2

No American had more sway over Clinton administration foreign policy than Loral honcho Bernard "Bernie" Schwartz. His money spoke with such clarity that, in early February 1996, the White House dispatched Ron Brown to collect a major chunk of it in person. No doubt, Schwartz could have mailed it in. But by sending a Cabinet member, the White House signaled both its respect for Schwartz and its recognition of his intent, namely to secure waiver approval for Loral's satellite launches.

In return for staying "on board" Brown's sinking ship, his confidante Nolanda Hill, who had also been targeted by Brown's independent counsel, insisted on being apprised of any action that might threaten her freedom. Brown welcomed a second opinion. On his February trip to New York to see Schwartz, he needed one.

The meeting was brief and to the point. Hill met with Brown immediately afterward. Still reeling, Brown showed her the two checks Schwartz had given him. Hill could not believe what she was seeing. Combined, they totaled $1.2 million. Hill does not "think" the total was $1.2 million, she "knows" it was and told the Justice Department as much in a pre-sentencing interview.

The checks must have unnerved even the Democratic National Committee, as they were never logged in. Still, Schwartz got his point across, and before this election cycle was over, he would officially donate more than $630,000 in soft money to the DNC – 50 times what he had given in the last presidential election. No Democrat gave more.

In February 1996, Schwartz's money mattered. The Clintons were just beginning to smell victory. To secure it, they had to continue feeding the TV beast. They had fully ignored all Federal Election Commission restrictions and were using soft money as though it were hard.

Much to Schwartz's frustration, however, the Pentagon was standing firm on the question of commercial satellites. Given the vital technology contained therein, much of it secret, the military had convinced Secretary of State Warren Christopher to keep the satellites on the so-called ''munitions list,'' an inventory of the nation's most sensitive military and intelligence-gathering equipment.

Almost immediately, Deputy National Security Adviser Sandy Berger had begun plotting to undermine Christopher. In November 1995, Berger sent a memo to Christopher's deputy and long time Clinton buddy, Strobe Talbott. Berger claimed that Ron Brown, who "was far more sympathetic to the satellite makers," would appeal Christopher's ruling to Clinton. Berger was clearly setting Brown up for the fall, should there ever be one.

Still, despite Berger's machinations, the serious professionals within the National Security Agency, State and Defense were resisting the wholesale transfer of licensing authority for these satellites to the Commerce Department. Once moved to Commerce, the military feared it would lose veto power over exports. In time, Berger would justify their fears as he eventually finessed control to the Commerce Department.

Nolanda Hill was appalled. For all the compromises of her Washington life, she retained her red-blooded Texan vigor. She loved her country, warts and all, and damned if she didn't know where those warts were. What Brown and Schwartz were doing was treasonous, she thought, and said so in no uncertain terms.

Just a week or so after Brown's New York meeting with Schwartz, a Chinese Long March 3B rocket carrying the Loral-built Intelsat 708 satellite crashed just after liftoff and killed or injured at least 60 people in a nearby village. This was the third Long March failure in the last three years involving U.S.-built satellite payloads.

Confident of his relationship with the president, Schwartz up and dispatched a Loral-led review team to China to assess the failure of the rocket and suggest refinements. The Cox Committee would later describe Schwartz's actions as "an unlicensed defense service for the People's Republic of China that resulted in the improvement of the reliability of the PRC's military rockets and ballistic missiles."

So serious was the offense that in 1998 the Criminal Division of the Justice Department launched an investigation. Incredibly, while the investigation was in process, Berger, now national security adviser, sent a memo to the president urging him to "waive the legislative restriction on the export to China of the communications satellites and related equipment for the Space Systems /Loral (SS/L) Chinasat 8 project."

This waiver would present a huge problem for the prosecution. Berger admitted as much: "Justice believes that a jury would not convict once it learned that the president had found SS/L's Chinasat 8 project to be in the national interest." But Berger was not about to let that stop him: "We will take the firm position that this waiver does not exonerate or in any way prejudge SS/L with respect to its prior unauthorized transfers to China." Berger was blowing smoke, and he knew it. A waiver would make prosecution all but impossible. Under pressure from Schwartz, the president approved the waiver, and the prosecution came to naught.

This story merits its own book, but what deserves immediate comment is the willingness of the Clintons to risk everything to keep the cash pipeline open. Schwartz kept it open and full. Before he was through, Schwartz and Loral would donate roughly $2 million to the Clinton cause. Whether Schwartz gave additional money or favors off the books is a question that deserves asking.

A second question that deserves asking is just how much damage Schwartz, Berger and the Clintons did to America's national security.

A third question worth asking is whether Ron Brown's very real threats to expose these machinations led to his death.

TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bernieschwartz; fundraising; impeachedx42; loral; ronbrown; sellingoutamerica; x42

1 posted on 05/05/2004 1:49:45 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
Clinton sure lucked out when Ron Brown died. Here are some points regarding Ron Brown's alleged and unresolved accident:

Ron Brown Crash/Wound/X-ray photos:

Ron Brown Reports by Christopher Ruddy [1997-1998] :

Ron Brown’s Death Still a Mystery
February 24, 1999

A Shocking Analysis of a Deadly Crash
March 5, 1999 Releases Secret Clinton Administration Documents on Ron Brown's Death
October 8, 1999

Witness in Brown Case May Have Been Murdered
December 29, 1999

John Huang's Letter to Ron Brown
Thursday, Feb. 1, 2001

Five Years Later, Brown Case Whistleblower Janoski Has No Regrets
Wednesday April 4, 2001; 12:55 p.m. EST

Letter From Motorola to Ron Brown
Thursday, May 16, 2001

CIA Documents on Ron Brown Declared Secret
Charles R. Smith
Saturday, May 26, 2001

Arms Sales by the Commerce Department [Note Ron Brown was head of Commerce]
Charles R. Smith
Tuesday, May 7, 2002

The Idiot's Guide to Chinagate
Richard Poe
Tuesday, May 27, 2003
Backhoe's Ron Brown link list
Sean Hannity Wrong about Ron Brown [vanity]
How 'minority capitalism' undid Ron Brown
Did Ron Brown die for Enron's sins? Jack Cashill begins explosive series on man 'who knew too much'

Were the dates a coded message?

King died April 4th:

"At 6:01 p.m. on April 4, 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was fatally shot while standing on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, TN. "

Ron Brown was confirmed dead on April 4th, 1996. Both confirmed dead on the same date.

Here's another odd coincidence: 'On April 3, 1968, King spoke of having "been to the mountain top and seen the Promised Land."'

On April 3, 1996, Secretary Ron Brown crashes into the mountains of Croatia.

Another possible coincidence: King was shot. Brown has a head hole consistent with a gunshot wound, chunks of silvery metal in his scalp, and what appears to be a lead snowstorm in his head, according to x-rays.

Another post coming.

2 posted on 05/05/2004 2:04:30 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (Backhoe's Gorelick links:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

-Hillary Clinton- archives, comments, and opposition research --

-The Clinton Files--

-Murder, Inc.--


-Women in the Clinton Era: Abuse,Intimidation and Smears--

Hillary's delegates spit on and taunt Police Honor Guard at her Convention

Catastrophic intelligence Failure - Clinton's Bin Laden GATE

CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong – Clinton to Blame


3 posted on 05/05/2004 2:05:05 AM PDT by backhoe (--30--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawnn
4 posted on 05/05/2004 2:09:17 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
That Clinton sold out America in favor of Chinese interests is old news. Cashill just connects the dots and makes the trail of betrayal and deception more solid.
5 posted on 05/05/2004 2:19:43 AM PDT by DustyMoment (Repeal CFR NOW!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Another perfect article to post your Clinton/Sax/Towers jpg.
6 posted on 05/05/2004 2:30:17 AM PDT by CIBvet (It's about preserving OUR Borders, OUR Language and OUR American Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I'm sure this will be in Slick's memoirs...
7 posted on 05/05/2004 2:41:01 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The democRATS are near the tipping point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
The reason the Brown Matter is considered 'resolved' is because Kelly, AFIP spokesman, said there was a unanymous decision by an AFIP internal panel. Members of that panel spoke out contradicting that report. The Washington Post never had the journalistic integrity to retract the lie. If members of that panel say the decision was not unanymous, I believe it safe to say that the Washington Post is sub-tabloid, merely an agenda driven propaganda rag, light years behind the integrity of Matt Drudge. Here we are in 2004, several years later, and the Washington Post doesn't retract the proven lie.

Worse still, one of the forensics specialists who disputed the now-proven false report was Hause. He saw the body personally. Combine that with this: the orginal x-rays and photos went missing. It is only the curiousity of Janoski that prompted her to take extra photos of the bodies and the x-rays that we know anything about this.

Parsons was also on that panel. He also was not part of that 'unanymous' conclusion. There you have it. Two who prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Washington Post has zero credibility. And yet, FReeping Thomases and kookophobes continue with the the lame mantra about a 'kamakazi shooter', based on this false report.

To top this off about the Washington Post "article", the AFIP never provided any written material about the "unanymous" internal panel.

Here are the four forensics specialists who dispute the AFIP:

Hause: He personally examined the wound and said it looks like a bullet hole. He proved that the Washington Post article was a hoax because it could not have been unanymous without him being part of that unanymity.

Janoski: She saw the body and took photos of the body and x-rays. Janoski was a registered and active democrat. She was also in the military for a very long time.

Parsons: An Air Force major and forensic pathologist, Thomas Parsons was a member of the internal panel.

Cogswell: He was the forensics specialist Janoski gave the photos to.

In page 52 of a Newsmax Special Report about Ron Brown, Cogswell was evaluated in 1995 by both Gormley and Dickerson as being the AFIP's top expert in gunshot wounds. Gormley and Dickerson later disputed Cogswell over Brown. Cogswell had nothing but sterling evaluations prior to the Brown crash. Cogswell and Dickerson cited him as the Number One forensics pathology consultant in the Department of Defense.

Cogswell led the investigation of the plane wreckage and never could find any object that could have made a .45 inch hole, inwardly bevelling, perfectly round, in the top of Ron Brown's head. But the x-rays that seem to show a lead snowstorm helped him conclude that there should definitely be an autopsy.

On page 23 of that special report by Newsmax, Gormley ADMITTED that he would have preferred to have an autopsy, but he claimed he didn't have the authority to perform one. But he did have the power to get that authority, through the Presidential Assassination Statute, which covers cabinet members.

So the kookophobes and FReeping Thomases even dispute Gormley, at least regarding a desire for an autopsy. There are only two legs left on the stool of their dissent:

1. The utterly discredited Washington Post article.
2. The kamakazi shooter mantra. I have a pat response to this mantra now:

"What if the shooter was on the ground? The beacons were reportedly moved, which is apparently what caused the crash. If someone is on the ground, moving the beacons, then he need not have ACME spring shoes like Wild E. Coyote to jump up on board the plane and be a kamakazi shooter. Nor does he need supernatural powers to walk up to the wreckage and check over the bodies. Do you guys have some kind of manual you go by? "Chapter 1, the Kamakazi Shooter Theory"."
8 posted on 05/05/2004 3:04:26 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (Backhoe's Gorelick links:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
We're on the same page. Appreciate the info.
9 posted on 05/05/2004 3:28:26 AM PDT by backhoe (--30--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DustyMoment
He wasn't alone though. Israel tried to sell them Phalcon.
10 posted on 05/05/2004 3:31:52 AM PDT by KingKangaroo (If only it was a choice between good and evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CIBvet
11 posted on 05/05/2004 7:50:25 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
read later
12 posted on 05/05/2004 8:58:33 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson