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...
A. Agencies whose mission statements give total control to the President.
1) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
2) National Security Agency (NSA)
a) Appoint a new director of the FBI - 9/1/93.
b) Position a key figure in the DOJ
e) 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.
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
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.
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”.
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.)
J. Appoint William S. Daley Secretary of Commerce, Clinton’s 1992 Illinois Campaign
Manager, who appears to have been involved in questionable activities in the Chicago area
involving fraud, the IRS and the FBI (http://www.crl.org/daleygeo.html). The lawsuit
against Daley and his firm Daley and George, which dragged on for 5 years, (1992-1997)
was suddenly dropped by the ‘prosecutor’ exactly one month after Daley was sworn in as
Secretary of Commerce on 1/31/97. Also, he may have misrepresented himself in his
Senate confirmation hearings. Mr. Daley is/was a partner in the international law firm of
Mayer, Brown & Platt where he was "concentrating in the area of corporate and
government relations matters" (paid lobbyist?). 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.
A. Executive Order #12946 – 1/20/95 – President’s Advisory Board on Arms Proliferation
Policy. (Established a board to advise the President on implementation of U.S.
conventional arms transfer policy and other issues related to arms proliferation policy.)
(The authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.)
C. Executive Order #12951 - 2/24/95 - Release of Imagery Acquired by Space-Based National
Intelligence. (Declassification of imagery acquired by the three space-based national
intelligence reconnaissance systems and review for future public release of intelligence
D. Executive Order #12958 - 3/21/95 - Classified National Security Information. (Prescribes a
uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security
E. Executive Order #12968 - 8/2/95 - Access to Classified Information (“This order
establishes a uniform Federal personnel security program for employees who will be
considered for initial or continued access to classified information.” “… in order to protect
our citizens, our democratic institutions, and our participation with the community of
nations. The unauthorized disclosure of information classified in the national interest can
cause irreparable damage to the national security and loss of human life.”) (Clinton, who
has never been investigated for a Top Security Clearance, carefully excluded himself from
this order; otherwise, under this EO, he would be denied access to classified information.)
V. As Vernon Jordan would say - "Mission accomplished".
Is it a coincidence that the two 'appointees', who have authority over the dissemination of information to the President regarding National Security, Berger and Harrington, are both partners in the same international law firm that has dealings with China and Russia? And that these two 'appointees' are currently listed as attorneys in the Washington branch of Hogan and Hartson (website updated August 1998), where they are, as partners, directly or indirectly, receiving benefits from dealings with China and Russia. This clearly is a conflict of interest (allegiances) which, by law, should deny them a security clearance and access to classified material.
Is it a coincidence that the Inspector General of the DOJ Michael R. Bromwich and the Secretary of Commerce William S. Daley were both partners in the international law firm of Mayer, Brown & Platt, working out of the firm's Washington office? The firm has offices in Moscow and Beijing, with emphasis on China. If they are still partners in the firm, on leave of absence or not, they are benefiting, directly or indirectly, from the firm's dealings with China and Russia and hence have a conflict of interest (allegiances) which, by law, should deny them a security clearance and access to classified material.
Also, George Tenet, Director of the CIA, and Sandy Berger, National Security Advisor, both served on Clinton's national security transition team - a totally failed exercise demonstrating, at best, no knowledge or concern for National Security and the appropriate clearances.
(Security irregularities during the ‘transition’ period are well documented. For example, WSJ 10/05/98 states “14 months into Clinton's first term, more than 100 staffers lacked security clearances”. House Report 104-862 states “In general, the FBI files issue shows a lack of respect by the Clinton administration for proper security procedures to protect both the President of the United States and the national security. This is all the more so since the White House ignored recommendations from a Democratic committee chairman of the U.S. Senate to take security precautions in response to reported security irregularities in the first years of the Clinton administration.”)
Intentional or not, this provides serious doubt about their ability to handle such high positions in our National Security system.
This summary of events does not begin to scratch the surface, as we do not have access to official information on all those appointees who 'resigned', 'died' or were indicted. An examination of the background and 'allegiances' of those individuals should be considerably more telling than those included here.
And then there are all the rest of Clinton's appointees who are still employed by our Government, whose 'bios' are not in the public domain - most of whom appear to be, at best, grossly incompetent and passing off on any and all of Clinton's plans, or at worst . . . . .
The information in this summary was obtained from official websites:.gov, AOL yellow pages, and webpages of the law firms mentioned herein, with limited use of the regular AOL search of highly reliable sources. While the information included herein is certainly believed to be factual, the readers are left to ponder the evidence and implications and to draw their own conclusions. While we do not state that any of the above mentioned persons are consciously involved in any illegal activity, the facts are certainly curious.
This outlined scenario is an attempt to bring to light the ease with which a corrupt President could destroy our National Security. Hopefully, Congress will exercise every option to stop the damage.
Add this information to the Cox Report, the Thompson Report, the Judicial Watch investigations, the cover-up of espionage, and other treasonous 'accomplishments' of this Administration and the question must be asked:
Is this a coincidence,
Or a carefully crafted plan to sell out America?
This summary was prepared by: Gretchen Glass
Please use this information ‘at your pleasure’!