'Tis Only my Opinion!

February 1999 - Volume 19, Number 2

When politics are conducted by polls, the mobs rule!

The Lewinsky affair is not about sex, but Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, and the future of this country.

The lock-step mentality of Democratic Senators in refusing to vote for impeachment of an admitted perjurer makes a mockery of the rule of law. The efforts of the majority to present an aura of fairness to the Democratic minority has resulted in hamstringing the House Managers presentation of the case. While the Democratic Senators agree that what the President has done is "wrong, irreprehensible, and deserves condemnation and censure" yet they don't want to remove an admitted felon from office for perjury and obstruction of justice as described in the Articles of Impeachment.

Because the polls appear to say that the President is popular, Democratic Senators are reluctant to vote to impeach this President. Seems to me that the mob wanted Barabbas rather than Jesus so Pontius Pilate sent him to the cross. Well, the mob is often wrong. Senators are supposed to be statesmen but today's members on both sides of the aisle are mostly only politicians.

Sadly, the impeachment trial of William Jefferson Clinton is a farce!

Rather than confronting the issues and calling witnesses to the dock to judge their credibility directly, the Senate has shown itself to be willing to change its procedures in this impeachment to impede the House Managers case. Charles Ruff and Cheryl Mills can make significant errors of omission and commission in their presentations but are rebuked only mildly by the Chief Justice and the press. Yet, let one of the House Managers refer to the Senate as a Jury and Democratic Senator Harkin from Iowa raises a point of order. I hope the voters in Iowa are listening to their Senator's bid for a 10 second sound bite and decide to retire him at the next election.

In every previous impeachment trial, witnesses were called and questioned by the House Managers and cross-examined by lawyers for the defense. To not allow the House Managers that opportunity in this case handcuffs the presentation significantly.

This case is not about whether Clinton is guilty or not.

Everyone agrees he is guilty! The real issue is not whether Clinton deserves to be removed for sexual improprieties and all the other scandals from the "most ethical administration in history" but to keep power for the Democratic Party. It is about the retention of power . . . Rather the Democratic Senators are willing to keep a felon as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the US rather than removing him from office. Makes me wonder if the old joke that Al Gore is Clinton's best insurance policy is really true!

The silence is deafening from the liberals who champion women's rights.

If any other Chief Executive Officer of any public or non-public company in the US had a sexual relationship, consensual or not, with an intern or low level employee, the odds of their remaining in office are slim or zero. But William Jefferson Clinton is apparently above the law which he signed into law. But for the Democrats, their position on sexual harassment is exposed as only political, not real! Where are the liberal religious leaders, the media and journalistic pundits, and the academic ethics professors calling for the resignation of this President? They have loudly proclaimed their belief in women's rights and the need for laws to protect women from abusers and sexual harassment.. If this were a Republican President, the howls for the President's scalp would be loud and angry. But for William Jefferson Clinton, the majority of these supposed moral leaders are strangely silent. Maybe they believe that two standards should apply, one for the President and one for ex-Senator Robert Packwood and Supreme Court Justice Thomas.

Blumenthal's Lies or misrepresentations

When Sidney Blumenthal can testify before the grand jury and then immediately appear on the Court House steps and misrepresent (defined as "lying") the questions which were asked in the grand jury without having to resign from his taxpayer-funded office is simply beyond my understanding. Moreover, Anthony Lewis, columnist for the New York Times which likes to call itself the "paper of record" runs his column that slams the Starr investigation based upon Blumenthal's representations.

In his June 29, 1998 column -- slugged "Questions that Degrade" -- Lewis wrote:

"Sidney Blumenthal, assistant to the President, made his third appearance before Kenneth Starr's grand jury in Washington last Thursday... Mr.
Blumenthal decided to tell me about the experience, as a grand-jury witness may do... Prosecutors asked Mr. Blumenthal to leave the room so
they could consult. After five minutes he was called back, and Mr. Wisenberg asked him: 'Does the President's religion include sexual
intercourse?'"

But according to transcripts of Blumenthal's grand jury testimony, released four months after the NEW YORK TIMES column ran, that question
was never asked by prosecutors!

Lewis continued: "There was another sexual question in last week's grand-jury session, conducted by two new prosecutors. It was, 'Does the
President believe that oral sex is sex?' It was just that -- a general question not tied to any particular matter."

No. It was a general question not tied to any particular reality. Another question that prosecutors never asked!

Lewis summarized: "What we have here, I think, is third-rate prosecutors full of hubris and obsessed by sex... It is sneering, smart-aleck stuff,
the tone of Clinton-haters on cable television and the Internet."

The NEW YORK TIMES even worked some of the phony questions into its news copy.

"In two recent visits to the grand jury, Mr. Blumenthal said, he was asked, 'Does the President believe that oral sex is sex?' and 'Does the
President's religion include sexual intercourse?'" -- JAMES BENNET's "The Titillating, Zigzagging Focus on Sex at 1600" June 30, 1998,
Section A; Page 17.

Seven months later, Bennet still has not informed his readers that Blumenthal's statements were false.

And columnist Lewis has never straightened up his mess for the "newspaper of record." Of course not, these are liberals and accountable only to themselves.!

Ms. Smeal . . . where are your principles!

How my former high school classmate, Ms. Smeal, the President of NOW, can continue to support the antics of this President makes me question the entire agenda presented by her organization and others like it. Ms. Smeal's support of President Clinton shows the hypocrisy of the feminist agenda. Either you believe in something all the way, or you are willing to accept a double standard. And double standards are dangerous to the future of this country. By supporting the President, NOW has set back sexual harassment enforcement many years.

But of course, the Lewinsky affair was about consensual sex so "who cares." Well, many Americans do care that a sitting President can debase our Oval office in this manner. As one of my HBS classmates recently said, "You don't do that."

A Defining Moment in the History of America

At the founding of the Republic, Benjamin Franklin said, "We have given you a Republic, if you can keep it." The current impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton is a defining moment in our history. Either the President is impeached and removed from office, or the Senate has agreed to retain an admitted felon as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the U.S.

The nation will no longer have one set of rules for all people (albeit, sometimes imperfectly applied) but will have officially acknowledged that some citizens, particularly, those in power will be permitted to decide which laws that they may obey! If this is the outcome, the fall of the Republic will not be long in coming.

If, however, Senators on both sides of the aisle decide to impeach and remove President Clinton, a loud message will be sent to the citizens that no one is above the law. Parents will not have to explain how a President, an admitted felon, does not have to obey laws which they have.

The effect on the moral fabric of this country of either decision will be significant for years to come. History will be the final judge of whether the U.S. will regain its standing as a world leader, or continue along its slide into third-world status.

What failing to remove this President really means.

If the Senate fails to impeach and remove this President from office, it means that this President will:

continue to appoint judges who will continue to rewrite the Constitution.
continue to write Executive Orders implementing policies to which the Congress has not agreed, e.g., the provisions of the Kyoto treaty, continuing the "state of emergency" which allows him to impose martial law at any time, etc.
implement the Home Defense Force under FEMA.
decide unilaterally who and/or what constitutes is a "terrorist organization."
execute this nation's foreign policy and implement "wag the dog" confrontations which further alienate Third World and Middle Eastern countries against the U.S. and its citizens.
continue the Presidential Secret Police to intimidate the opposition.
implement the "vast right wing conspiracy" defense to shut down any additional investigations into his promised "most ethical administration" in history. (Guess we will have to define "most ethical.").
continue to rule this nation via polls and focus groups rather than providing a clear-cut vision for the 21st century.
continue policies that have reduced the morale of the military to an all-time low, and reduced our ability to fight a one-theatre police action let alone on two fronts simultaneously.

But the real case against Clinton is still under wraps!

The secrecy surrounding the Cox Committee report suggests that Clinton is in deep trouble for his Chinese campaign contributions and the quid pro quo which he had to deliver to obtain them. In his January 1999 remarks before the RNC, Representative Christopher Cox in effect called William Jefferson Clinton a "traitor" to America. The transfer of sensitive missile technology, encryption algorithms, etc., have thrust China's military into a major military superpower. Some might even consider these transfers as traitorous acts. And to make it even worse, the Clinton Administration has provided training by the Green Berets to the Chinese Army. Yet, the Chinese Communist party continues to jail reformers and dissidents without even a trial. I guess that the Americans want their low-cost prison made garments and toys so badly that they are willing to overlook the human rights offenses. Well, why not, the populace is supposedly not worried about having a felon as President.

What the Chinese really want.

Peter Windram, a MSNBC producer, says it well . . .

The key to understanding Chinese motivations is not just the access the campaign contributions obtained for Chinese officials, but the visas Chinese businessmen and women could obtain from the State Department under the business investment exemptions of U.S. immigration law. The visas, sources said, could give Chinese military intelligence the ability to set up or expand espionage networks. Source: Peter Windram, MSBNC News 2/1/99

It may already be too late!

The transfer of technology to the Chinese has advanced their military capabilities by several years. Today, the DF-31 missile can hit many of our Western Cities from bases in China. According to Bill Gertz writing in the January 13, 1999 issue of the Washington Times, (the entire article)

"According to the officials, the DF-31 is the first Chinese ICBM capable of being moved on roads. Only Russia operates road-mobile long-range missiles, the SS-25s, which are extremely effective strategic weapons because they can be moved easily and fired quickly. Deployment of the DF-31 is expected around 2002 depending on the outcome of the testing. The DF-31 missile will have a maximum range of about 5,000 miles, enough range to hit Hawaii, Alaska and the northwestern part of the continental United States, the officials said. The new missile will use solid fuel, which makes it capable of being launched within minutes. It also will be equipped with a "second-generation" thermonuclear warhead with a yield of about 500 kilotons, or 500,000 tons of TNT, the officials said."

"China rarely, if ever, makes public information about its strategic nuclear weapons programs, which have been undergoing a steady modernization from older, liquid-fuel missiles to highly accurate mobile ICBMs. Besides the DF-31, China is building a missile with a range of up to 8,000 miles that is known as the DF-41. It also is working on conventional and nuclear cruise missiles. Concern over the timing of the upcoming DF-31 flight test was prompted by China's past use of strategic missile developments and flight tests to send political signals."

"In July, China test-fired the DF-31's rocket motor while President Clinton was in China on an official visit. Intelligence reports about that test were sent to Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, who was traveling with the president. The timing of the test was viewed by U.S. intelligence as a political signal toward the United States."

"A CIA report from earlier this year said 13 of China's 18 long-range nuclear missiles were targeted on the United States. The report contradicted Mr. Clinton's often-used phrase there are no nuclear missiles aimed at the United States."

The Chinese have recently taken steps to reinforce their presence in the Spratley Islands thus compromising the shipping lanes between Japan, Taiwan and the Port of Singapore and beyond. Economic conditions in China are deteriorating with the collapse of the Pacific Rim countries. China's birth control policy has created an large surplus in the number of men (e.g., foot soldiers) available for its expansion forces. The China nation is truly awakening and beginning to stretch its might.

As one individual stated on the Free Republic bulletin board recently,

"I would like to personally thank Bill Clinton for allowing the technology transfer that made this all possible. Especially for the
supercomputers that will allow for increased yields from the next generation of Chinese thermonuclear devices. "

The Panama Canal is controlled by the Chinese

For over 80 years, the ability of the United States to operate as a two ocean Navy with significant sea-lift capacity has hinged largely upon our having access to the Panama Canal. In any future scenario, our access to the Canal may be seriously compromised unless we are willing to use immediate force to take control of the Canal. In WorldNetDaily 10/19/98 Edward G. Oliver writes

"…Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, USN (Ret.), a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in closed session last summer that the U.S. is heading toward a confrontation with China over the Panama Canal, according to testimony obtained by WorldNetDaily. "I'm an old sailor now, but I know trouble when I see it, and Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this committee, I see big trouble in Panama -- trouble that could evolve quickly into a conflict in our own hemisphere with world-wide implications," said Moorer.

"Mr. Chairman, I speak of the transfer of the Panama Canal to the Panamanian government under the circumstances which now exist. There's far more going on there than meets the eye."…."Mr. Chairman, I have been honored to serve as this nation's commander in chief of the Pacific Fleet; commander in chief, Atlantic and Atlantic Fleet; chief of naval operations, and chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff," said Moorer. "I truly can't remember a time when I have been more concerned about the security of our country. ..."

Moorer pointed out that Panama Ports Company (PPC) controls four of Panama's major ports. He identified PPC's principal owners as: Billionaire Li Ka-Shing (reportedly an ally "as close as lips and teeth" to Beijing, which offered Ka-Shing the governorship of Hong Kong ); Li Ka-Shing owns PPC's parent company, Hutchinson-Whampoa Ltd., China Resources Enterprise, an arm of the Chinese government identified as an "agent of espionage" by Sen. Fred Thompson. The entity is also a solid partner with the Lippo Group, owned by the Riady family of Indonesia, also identified as possible espionage agents for the People's Liberation Army. He also pointed out that the deal granting sweeping concessions to Hutchinson-Whampoa states that the company has the right to pilot all ships through the canal, raising the specter of the Chinese piloting U.S. Navy ships -- or refusing to -- after the U.S. hands over complete control next year.

Moorer attacked as illegal Panama's "Law #5," which permits other military forces, defense sites and installations in the canal zone and raised concerns about infiltration of Panama again by drug lords. In contrast to the indifference displayed by the State Department about Hutchinson's grip on the canal ports, the admiral expressed grave concern before the committee. "Hutchinson-Whampoa controls countless ports around the world," he said. "My specific concern is that this company is controlled by the Communist Chinese. They have virtually accomplished, without a single sot being fired, a stronghold on the Panama Canal, something which took our country so many years to accomplish -- the building and control of the Panama Canal, along with military and commercial access in our own hemisphere…..Moorer expressed frustration with the Clinton administration's approach to national security as the date Dec. 31, 1999, nears -- the date the U.S. relinquishes the last vestiges of control over the canal….

Moorer continued:

"We are not talking here about an ill-funded Nicaraguan effort against the Communists in the late '80s; we are talking about the control of a strategic part of the world in our hemisphere, shortly to be controlled by the largest country on earth, Communist China, financially flush and people-strong with a growing imbalance of men over women. ... I can tell you honestly and truthfully, with strong conviction, that somebody needs to take a long, hard look at our vulnerability in the Panama Canal Zone."

The Navy is in trouble.

Our navy has been reduced in size under Clinton from over 600 ships to today's 300 ship fleet. Almost every ship that sails is seriously understaffed. In 1998, the Navy failed to meet its quota of new enlistees for the first time since the all-volunteer force was created. Force reductions and extended deployments have also caused the reenlistment rate to be the lowest in 20 years. Or as James Webb said in a speech at the NAVAL INSTITUTE CONFERENCE at the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD on April 25, 1996.

"I resigned as Secretary of the Navy after repeated arguments over force structure reductions that I believed were strategically unwise. I had presented the New Secretary of Defense three alternative ways of meeting an 11 billion dollar budget reduction, without taking apart the Navy's shipbuilding program. . . ."

"The bases in Subic Bay are gone, with no visible movement to replace them elsewhere. Our bases in Japan and Okinawa are in jeopardy. The Korean peninsular is a tinderbox, even on the verge of war. China is mocking American power as it builds its economy with the help of American business and at the same time develops a strategic axis with the Muslim world, intimidates its neighbors, proliferates nuclear weapons, and aggressively grows its own fleet. Libya is building a massive poison gas facility. Pakistan and Iran are increasing their military and even their nuclear aspirations bidding to become major powers."

"These events are occurring against a backdrop where the fleet is moving toward 300 ships, one third the size of the Navy when I was commissioned and half of the nearly 600 we were able to rebuild during the Reagan era. Not surprisingly, over the past seven years our national presence in Pacific Asia has become even more tenuous. Our allies are wondering whether and for how long we will be dependable. Our competitors and potential enemies have begun to discount us, both politically and militarily."

"Few in Asia missed the significance of China's recent warning that American naval vessels not sail through the international waters of the Taiwan Strait, and the Clinton Administration's compliance with that warning."

"In case anyone cares to notice, these issues play along the most vital sea lanes of our country and its key allies. And who among the leadership has been willing to bet his reputation and his career on the need to preserve the Navy force structure?"

Tailhook - the cost to the Navy and the country caused by the feminists who still stand by this admitted felon.

The Tailhook fiasco crippled many of the fleets finest fighting officers and today's Admirals are primarily political admirals who have acquired politically correct agendas. Webb also discussed the effect on Navy morale of Tailhook.

"When Paula Coughlin's commanding officer, who had previously received dual honors as the Navy's outstanding fighter pilot and as commander of its outstanding fighter squadron, was relieved of his command based on a letter she wrote, without being given so much as five minutes to explain his own actions in her case to the admiral who summarily dismissed him, who dared to risk his career by taking Jack Snyder's side?"

"When one of the finest candidates for Commander in Chief of the Pacific in recent times, a man who flew more than 500 combat missions in Viet Nam and then in the Gulf War commanded the largest naval armada since Word War Two, is ordered into early retirement by the Chief of Naval Operations, because one senator asked on behalf of a constituent why Stan Arthur as Vice Chief of Naval Operations had simply approved a report upholding a decision to wash out a female officer from flight school, who expressed their outrage? Who fought this? Who condemned it?"

"When a whole generation of officers is asked to accept the flawed wisdom of a permanent stigma and the destruction of the careers of some of the finest aviators in the Navy based on hearsay, unsubstantiated allegations, in some cases after a full repudiation of anonymous charges that resemble the worst elements of McCarthyism, in effect turning over the time-honored, even sacred promotional process which lies at the very core of military leadership, to a group of Senate staffers, what admiral has had the courage to risk his own career by putting his stars on the table, and defending the integrity of the process and of his people?"

"When the captain of a ship experienced a significant pregnancy rate while deployed overseas stands in front of the entire world and announces that none of those incidents happened at sea, is there a sailor in the Navy who honestly believes him? Indeed, what would have happened to the captain's career had he said otherwise? How does that reality affect loyalties, and even one's own belief in a code of ethics?"

Whether they can command the respect of their subordinates is of little importance to today's civilian Pentagon officials, all that matters is whether they meet the politically correct requirements.

Today's newest carrier, the USS Truman, is undergoing sea trials with a crew that is seriously undermanned. As a result, its officers and men are routinely putting in 12 hour days, seven days a week. Our continental U.S. borders are guarded by only 16 alert aircraft and half of these are National Guard units. Here's hoping they don't have to sortie.

Our reduction in force since 1992 under Clinton would have made the third largest armed force in the world. Scary thought!

Clinton's real legacy is what?

For the admitted felons real legacy is a demilitarized country unable to meet its commitments to our own national security thanks to the Chinese espionage scandal and a country which has lost its moral compass that the rest of the world admired throughout most of the 20th Century. Only the removal of this President from office via the impeachment process will retard the momentum of the decay of this country.

Anything less, censure and/or statement of facts is tantamount to a slap on the wrist and says to our children and our citizens, lying and/or perjury, defining words so narrowly that only the verbalizer can know their meaning, obstruction of justice and selling out your country and its ideals is o.k. What a legacy, Bill Clinton will have left us in his desperate quest to retain power.

But then - - 'Tis Only My Opinion!

Fred Richards
February 1999

This issue of 'Tis Only My Opinion was copyrighted by Adrich Corporation in February 1999.

Tis Only My Opinion is intended to provoke thinking, then dialogue among our readers.

'Tis Only My Opinion Archive Menu

Last updated - July 3, 2008