Time: Sun Sep 14 05:34:29 1997
	by usr04.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA16187;
	Sun, 14 Sep 1997 05:31:20 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 05:31:11 -0700
To: snetnews@world.std.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Quo usque, Arlen Spectra?
Cc: iamcsquid@aol.com

Yes, Mr. Specter, there ARE partisan interpretations,
the Report of the Warren Commission being, perhaps,
the most illustrious example in your not-so-illustrious
career.  Tell me, Mr. Specter, do you really still believe
that Lee Harvey Oswald squeezed off 3 perfect shots
from a decrepid Italian rust-barrel, from an oblique
angle, with branchs and leaves obscuring the view?
Do you really still believe that Americans, as a group,
are now persuaded by your vicious contempt for their
fundamental values?  Really, Mr. Specter, your conduct
on the staff of the Warren Commission is destined to 
go down in history as a clear example of utter, and heinous, 

Quo, usque, tandem abutere, Arlen Spectra, patientia nostra?
Quem ad finen sese effrenata iactabia audacia?

/s/ Paul Mitchell

At 08:01 AM 9/14/97 -0400, you wrote:
>->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List
>New York times, politics section,September 13th,
>an illuminating highlight
>"The obvious answer is that there are partisan interpretations," said Sen.
>Arlen Specter, R-Pa. 
>end illuminating highlight
>all my best,
>craig E. gibson
>On China Intelligence Data, Senators See Yin and Yang
>  WASHINGTON -- Why do Republican and Democratic senators who have received
>the same classified intelligence briefings about whether the Chinese
>government influenced U.S. elections last year disagree so sharply about the
>same information they all have heard? 
>  "The obvious answer is that there are partisan interpretations," said Sen.
>Arlen Specter, R-Pa. 
>  Specter attended a two-hour briefing Thursday, the latest in a series that
>Attorney General Janet Reno, FBI Director Louis Freeh and Central
>Intelligence Director George Tenet have given over the last few months to
>senators investigating campaign finance abuses. 
>  "But more than that," Specter said Friday, "these briefings by their nature
>can't be precise and definitive because the information is not precise and
>  Suspicions of a covert Chinese government scheme to influence the 1996
>presidential and congressional elections have been the most explosive aspect
>of the inquiry by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. But reaching
>ground truth has proved maddeningly difficult. 
>  Republican investigators, led by Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, insist
>that the intelligence shows that China tried to affect the presidential
>election in 1996 with illegal campaign contributions. Democrats who have
>received the same top-secret information say the Republicans are exaggerating
>what federal sleuths have dug up. 
>  Thompson has yet to support his claims with any hard evidence, but he is
>not backing down from his assertions. 
>  The FBI and the CIA are caught somewhere in the middle, hedging their
>assessments of what they acknowledge to be largely fragmentary and sketchy
>  Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., who attended Thursday's briefing, said:
>"The dots are not linked and the evidence is circumstantial. We're like
>members of a jury weighing evidence differently." 
>  Democrats and Republicans say what is not in dispute is this: 
>  Upset that President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan was granted a visa to visit the
>United States in May 1995, the Chinese government hatched a plot to increase
>Beijing's influence over U.S. politics. 
>  The United States knows this because in early 1996 the National Security
>Agency monitored a series of communications between Beijing and Chinese
>officials here. 
>  One part of the plan was a legal lobbying campaign, similar to what many
>foreign governments wage to make their views known to the U.S. government.
>But the Chinese effort also called for Beijing to funnel money to U.S.
>politicians, in violation of federal law. 
>  As a result of this suspicion, the FBI last year prepared a list of about
>30 members of Congress who the bureau thought might be targets of the Chinese
>effort. The FBI advised seven lawmakers in June 1996. 
>  None of the lawmakers said they knew of any Chinese contacts. Erring on the
>safe side, one of the Democrats who were warned, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of
>California, returned about $12,000 in campaign contributions from donors
>associated with the Lippo Group, an Indonesian banking and real estate
>conglomerate with extensive business interests in China. 
>  China denies that it ever tried to buy influence in the elections. 
>  At this point, the intelligence trail gets thin. There is no conclusive
>proof that the Chinese plot was ever carried out. Nor is there any firm
>evidence that the 1996 presidential race was affected. 
>  But there are tantalizing morsels of information that look pretty fishy.
>Most of it involves suspicions as to whether some Chinese government money
>was directed to the United States through companies wholly or partly
>controlled by China. 
>  Congressional and Justice Department investigators are trying to determine
>whether any of the prominent Democratic fund-raisers central to the inquiry,
>like John Huang and Yah Lin Trie, received any Chinese government money and
>funneled it to political campaigns. 
>  What the senators heard Thursday illustrates the difficulty investigators
>face in making firm conclusions. The lawmakers received a briefing about Ted
>Sioeng, an Indonesian with businesses in Southern California. Republican
>investigators have suggested Sioeng may have been a conduit for illegal
>Chinese money. 
>  Investigators have reviewed contributions of $250,000 to the Democratic
>National Committee and $50,000 to the National Policy Forum, a Republican
>organization, that were linked to Sioeng or his businesses. He has repeatedly
>denied any impropriety. 
>  Thursday, two people at the meeting said, the senators received new
>information that someone at the Chinese Consulate in Los Angeles might have
>given Sioeng $3,000 to donate to a Republican candidate in a California
>Assembly race. The information was intriguing, but the intelligence officials
>said they could not vouch for its reliability. The senators were irked to
>learn that intelligence officials had known this for months but for some
>unexplained reason were only now telling them about it. 
>  The senators raised questions. If investigators concluded that Sioeng had
>funneled Chinese money to a state race, is it possible that his contributions
>to the Democratic National Committee and the Republican organization also
>came from China? It is possible but not certain, investigators said. 
>  The senators would not discuss details of the meeting, but each side
>evidently heard what it needed to hear. 
>  "I come to the same conclusion that Fred Thompson has," Sen. Thad Cochran,
>R-Miss., a committee member, said in an interview Friday. 
>  But Sen. John Glenn of Ohio, the committee's ranking Democrat, disagreed,
>saying: "I've seen nothing that would lead me to conclude that the 1996
>presidential campaign was affected by the Chinese plan. I stand by that
>statement today." 
>Copyright 1997 The New York Times
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: Iamcsquid@aol.com

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail