Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Petition Against Bill Richardson

Please sign this petition against President-elect Obama's nomination of Gov. Bill Richardson to be his Secretary of Commerce. Even though the nomination is now official, we want to continue to collect signatures showing our opposition. Thank you.

http://www.petitiononline.com/GovBillR/petition.html

Bill Richardson summarily fired WHL without due process, ruining Lee's career and reputation and is widely believed to be responsible for leaking WHL's name to the press. Congressional Records state that his Energy Department requested solitary confinement and shackling of WHL, something Amnesty International called "unnecessarily punitive and contravene international human rights standards". Judge Parker specifically named the Department of Energy for misleading him in his open court apology to Wen Ho Lee. These three articles clearly show Dr. Lee was innocent and that he was singled out because of his Chinese ethnicity:
Jude Wanniski memo to Bob Novak, Aug 9, 1999, Recapping the China Spy Story
Bob Drogin, Sep 13, 2000, How FBI's Flawed Case Against Lee Unraveled
Robert Scheer, Oct 23, 2000, How the NY Times convicted WHL

Here are more reasons why Gov. Richardson should not be confirmed by the Senate, besides his bungling of the Wen Ho Lee case.
▸ Pay for play investigation (Pay for play)
▸ Sexually harassed his Lt. Gov. (sexual harassment)
▸ Disloyal (Judas, quid pro quo)
▸ Lied to Congress and lied on his resume (lies)
▸ Will never be confirmed by the Senate (Sen. Byrd, confirmation chance)
▸ No ethics (situation ethics, self-promotional hack)
▸ Poor judgment (poor judgment)
▸ Give illegal immigrants amnesty and driver's licenses (immigration)


Mallard Fillmore/Bruce Tinsley


Cartoon from December 23, 2008. Does Mr. Tinsley think Gov. Richardson traded a promised appointment with then Sen. Obama for his support over Sen. Clinton during the primary? After all, President Clinton appointed Bill Richardson UN ambassador to the United Nation followed by Secretary of Energy.

Friday, December 19, 2008

WHL and Chancellor Tien

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/12/28/letters-to-the-editor-wen-ho-lee-and-chancellor-tien-healing-victims-of-trauma/
The Wen Ho Lee case, taking place between 1999 and 2000, did not affect Chancellor Tien’s chance of being appointed secretary of energy by Clinton (“A Nobel Laureate in the White House,” Dec. 19). Instead, it was John Huang and the 1996 campaign finance scandal that torpedoed Tien’s chance. Bill Richardson was appointed secretary of energy in 1998 and he, among other officials, was the one responsible for the prosecution and persecution of Dr. Wen Ho Lee.

L. Ling-Chi Wang
Professor Emeritus, Asian American Studies,
UC Berkeley
San Francisco, Calif.,
Dec. 19

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Petition Is Not Racial

http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=b41d133bd12d7bf17afb688747904dda&from=rss
New America Media, News Analysis, Jun Wang, Posted: Dec 17, 2008

Editor’s Note: President-elect Barack Obama’s nomination of Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce sparked a wave of protest in the Chinese American community, because of Richardson’s connection with the Wen Ho Lee case – but Chinese American media denies that their cause has anything to do with anti-Latino sentiment. Jun Wang is an editor with New America Media.

This Monday, President-elect Barack Obama officially nominated Nobel Prize winner Steven Chu to be U.S. Energy Secretary. Chinese American media reports that, to some extent, this nomination makes up for the Wen Ho Lee debacle, when Chinese American scientist Lee was wrongly accused of espionage and imprisoned for nine months.

But Chinese Americans continue to circulate a petition – initiated by Chinese scholars and human rights activists – against the appointment of Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce because he was involved in Lee’s persecution, and are outraged over what they call “misleading, racial” coverage by mainstream media about this issue.

On December 2nd, the San Jose Mercury News published a story with the headline "Chinese American Activists Oppose Any Bill Richardson Cabinet Nomination," reporting that the petition is "bound to create political tension between Latinos and Asian Americans."

The article also states: "Chinese Americans say they realize that challenging the nomination of Richardson, 61, the nation's most high-profile Hispanic politician will ruffle the Latino community, many of whose leaders felt he should have been named secretary of state instead of Sen. Hillary Clinton."

The Sing Tao Daily, one of the leading Chinese-language newspapers in the United States, published an editorial on Dec. 3rd calling the San Jose Mercury News' reporting on the petition biased.

For Chinese Americans, the rift created by Lee’s case is still not completely healed, especially when it comes to Richardson. Former President Bill Clinton, Judge James Parker and mainstream newspapers – including the New York Times – have apologized to Lee since the incident. Yet Richardson – the U.S. Secretary of Energy during the Clinton Administration, and seen as responsible for the witch hunt that brought Lee down, has refused to apologize or voice his regrets.

The Sing Tao editorial argues that coverage of Chinese American protests has falsely portrayed this as a racial issue. "The Mercury News called the protests a ‘potential racial conflict,’ which is not only misleading, but also provokes racial conflict itself."


The San Jose Mercury News did not respond to requests for comment.

Yu-ru Chen, editor-in-chief of the World Journal, another prominent U.S. Chinese-language newspaper, agrees that the petition is a human rights issue, and does not pose a threat to relations between ethnic communities. Chen said to cover the issue from a potential racial conflict angle reveals "hidden motives" aimed at undermining the union among ethnic communities.

The World Journal was the first newspaper to support the petition challenging Richardson's nomination, according to Chen.

The Chinese community acknowledges Richardson's service and contribution to the country, Chen says. However, Chen says, Richardson's response to the Lee case has been inappropriate and unjust. 



"The petition has only been signed by Chinese Americans so far, but what if people in China join?" he asks. "Won't it be an embarrassment to the United States, which has long been a human rights leader in the world?"

Chinese media based in California expect senators to question the nomination based on human rights considerations. As Commerce Secretary, especially in the current global economic crisis, Richardson will have to deal with China, one of the United States' most important partners. With the Chinese community around the world calling on Richardson to apologize for his role in the Lee case, Chen believes that Richardson will have no choice but to address the issue.

In Chinese philosophy, crisis and opportunity are two sides of the same coin. "If [Richardson] positively responds to the Wen Ho Lee case, the current crisis could turn into an opportunity for him," Chen says. “However, if Richardson doesn't handle the issue well, more tough issues will be waiting for him when he takes his position as Commerce Secretary.”

"It's true that Richardson is of Latino descent and those who are protesting (his appointment) are Chinese. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's a racial conflict," Sing Tao Daily editors write in the editorial. "Can't the Chinese community voice their opinion about a national issue other than for racial reasons? Is it necessary to see everything (related to the Chinese community) through a racial lens?"

"Actually Chinese and Latinos have the same standing point," Chen says. "We're all struggling to be treated equally by mainstream society. If the human rights of someone from the Latino community gets violated, we (Chinese) will stand up for him or her."

Covering the petition from a racial conflict perspective is equivalent to breaking apart a united country, Chen says. "How they deal with the petition based on the Wen Ho Lee issue is not only a test of Bill Richardson, but also a test of our character as U.S. citizens."

Related Articles:

Steven Chu—Smart Policy, Not Politics

Push for Diversity in an Obama Administration

China Spies And The Wen Ho Lee Hangover

What We Have (Not) Learned from Wen Ho Lee

The Price of Wen Ho Lee

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/12/17/the-price-for-wen-ho-lee/
President-elect Obama has designated two APA cabinet members: retired Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki for Veterans Affairs and Cal’s Nobel Prize winner Steven Chu for Energy, which is a makeup for President Clinton getting cold feet over U.C. Berkeley Chancellor Chang-Lin Tien after the “Chinagate” witch hunt. But Obama’s selection of Bill Richardson for Commerce raises hackles over the New Mexico governor’s unrepentant role in the espionage prosecution of nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee, who won a $1.6 million civil settlement from the feds and five major national media outlets in 2006. The Richardson selection is symptomatic of the Obama transition team’s vetting process. While sensitive to Latino political influence (note the expected pick of Colorado Senator Ken Salazar for Interior), the team is downplaying APA anger over Richardson’s handling of the Lee case. Petitions are nearing 10,000 in opposition to his appointment at wenholee.org. However, Obama is already committed to Richardson and is unlikely to risk embarrassment by pulling his name or having Congress reject the nomination. Richardson could defuse the issue at his Senate confirmation hearing by publicly apologizing and pledging to elevate APAs into major management positions to avert future Wen Ho Lees…

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Grand Jury Investigates Contributions to Richardson

The FBI has been investigating Gov. Richardson since August, see additional links at
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-richardson17-2008dec17,0,4246219.story
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/us/politics/19richardson.html

Asked whether the probe focused only on CDR's actions in securing or executing the contract, the person with knowledge of the investigation said, "It is more than that."
Also read the comments at http://www.topix.net/forum/source/krqe/TN9DGK1CH1O359SAR and http://www.topix.net/forum/source/santa-fe-new-mexican/T1MEBC8F557QJ9NR4. One of them wrote, "Trust me, as I have some information on this. It was not a No Bid Contract. They issued an RFP for the work. The company wasn't going to be the top pick for the RFP. Then they made a donation to the Gov. 4 days later, they had the contract."

Gov. Richardson ducked a reporter's question from KRQE TV and when the station reported that, the Governor's deputy chief of staff, Gilbert Gallegos, had the nerve to send an email accusing the reporter of misconduct. You can watch the news clip and read the email exchange between Gallegos and the TV station at http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/politics/politics_krqe_santa_fe_gallegos_complaint_200812171333. Michael Herzenberg from KRQE also reported that "One contribution reportedly was made just after CDR got the first deal. The other donation was made four days before it got the second job."

In a KOAT TV article, http://www.koat.com/news/18313553/detail.html, titled, "Donor Probe Could Impact Richardson's Confirmation Process", it says, "Calls to the Obama transition team for a comment on the grand jury probe were not returned."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/15/AR2008121502940.html
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 16, 2008; Page A04

A federal grand jury is investigating whether a financial firm improperly won more than $1.4 million in work for the state of New Mexico shortly after making contributions to political action committees of Gov. Bill Richardson (D).

The probe focuses on whether the governor's office urged a state agency to hire CDR Financial Products. The probe is in a highly active stage at a time when President-elect Barack Obama has chosen Richardson as his nominee for secretary of commerce, according to two sources familiar with the investigation.

The grand jury in Albuquerque is expected to hear testimony today from several key witnesses, including officials at Richard's political action committees and bankers at J.P. Morgan who worked with CDR on the state's investments.

The inquiry is part of a long-running nationwide investigation into "pay-to-play" practices in local government bond markets. In other cities, federal investigators are questioning whether financial firms have lavished politicians with money and gifts in exchange for fee-paying work advising municipal and local governments on investments. Authorities indicted the mayor of Birmingham, Ala., this month on charges of taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and loans from a firm that led the city into toxic investments and massive bankruptcy.

In the New Mexico case, the FBI and federal prosecutors are investigating how CDR, based in Beverly Hills, Calif., won lucrative fees from the New Mexico Finance Authority in 2004 soon after donating $100,000 to two Richardson organizations.

From 2003 to 2004, CDR Financial gave $75,000 to Sí Se Puede, which paid for expenses at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. CDR's president and founder, David Rubin, also gave $25,000 to Moving America Forward, which funded Richardson's efforts to register Hispanic and American Indian voters.

Rubin was generous to Obama's campaign as well, giving $29,000 to help elect the senator to the White House. Yesterday, the Obama transition office declined to comment on the development.

Gilbert Gallegos, a spokesman for Richardson, said the governor was "aware of questions surrounding some financial transactions at the New Mexico Finance Authority" and expected state officials to cooperate fully. Gallegos declined further comment.

The U.S. attorney's office in New Mexico also declined to comment on the investigation, which began in the summer. Several Finance Authority board members have publicly confirmed being interviewed by the FBI. Paul Kennedy, an attorney for Richardson's former chief of staff, David Harris, confirmed that his client had been interviewed by the FBI in the summer but declined to comment further.

CDR's attorney, Richard Beckler, declined to answer questions about the probe's focus.

"CDR has always tried to abide by these byzantine campaign finance regulations and is cooperating fully with this investigation," Beckler said in a telephone interview yesterday.

CDR made $1.48 million advising the authority on interest-rate swaps and refinancing of funds related to $1.6 billion in transportation bonds issued by the agency, state officials confirmed. Interest-rate swaps are financial contracts based on the value of commodities, loans or other assets, and debtors sometimes use them to lower borrowing costs. But many swaps have recently proven unwise as the assets upon which they were based plummeted in value.

The state hired CDR after requesting proposals for a bond adviser on Dec. 30, 2003. Sources familiar with the investigation said CDR initially did not make the list of the top three bidders. But the authority committee considering the bids redid the selection process and split some work, eventually hiring CDR for a part.

Committee Chairman Rick Homans was Richardson's economic development secretary at the time. He is now Richardson's taxation and revenue secretary and has declined to comment.

Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

WHL case will forever haunt Richardson

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/12/14/letters-to-the-editor-richardson-and-wen-ho-lee-michael-wong-responds-oppression-nothing-new/#more-9972
Richardson and Wen Ho Lee
The Wen Ho Lee case will forever haunt Richardson (Emil Amok, Dec. 5).

China is one of America’s biggest trading partners and creditors. Richardson, if confirmed, would have a very difficult time dealing with the Chinese, as they all remember the inhumane, cruel and unusual treatment Dr. Lee received while incarcerated. The Obama administration needs to reassess this nomination.

Guy M. Wong
Sacramento, Calif., Dec. 6

To me the whole issue is not about race but about the person who did not have courage to apologize for his mistake (“Commerce Secretary Appointment Draws Ire From Asian Americans,” Nov. 28). What happened to Dr. Lee has also happened to people of other races: whites, Hispanics, blacks. My concern about Richardson is that he misses very important traits of a leader. Have courage to apologize when you made a mistake.

Anand Shaw
Sunnyvale, Calif., Dec. 9]

Monday, December 8, 2008

Robert Vrooman's Statement

Governor Bill Richardson is a poor choice for Secretary of Commerce or, for that matter, any position in the Obama Administration. President-elect Obama has stated many times that he wants people in his administration who are willing to tell him things that he does not want to hear. This is not the way Governor Richardson operates. I have personal experience with Bill Richardson when he was Secretary of Energy. I opposed his decision to railroad Dr. Wen Ho Lee on bogus espionage charges. Secretary Richardson was not willing to listen to minority opinions on Dr. Lee, and he punished me and others who defended Dr. Lee. We were proven correct when the government settled with Lee for $1.6 million.

The Chinese-American community has correctly claimed that Dr. Lee was identified as an espionage suspect because of his race. I know more about this subject than any other person in the US and agree with this assessment. This is not, however, Bill Richardson’s real problem. Secretary Richardson made three mistakes that raise serious questions about his judgment and character. First, because of political pressure, he refused to listen to minority opinions on Lee. Secondly, even after it was abundantly clear that Lee was not guilty, Secretary Richardson supported pursuing the prosecution. Finally, Secretary Richardson has never apologized to the people that he punished for “not aggressively pursuing Wen Ho Lee.”

Selecting Governor Richardson to serve in the Obama Administration is not “change we can believe in.”
______
Dr. Robert Vrooman was the counterintelligence director at Los Alamos National Laboratory who fiercely objected WHL's arrest. Vrooman himself was reprimanded by Bill Richardson for continuing to oppose the charges and actions against WHL. He supported the campaign to free WHL through many speeches and the media.

See Vrooman's declaration at http://nobillrichardson.blogspot.com/2008/12/investigation-and-treatment-of-whl.html. His declaration stated he believes "the failure to look at the rest of the population is because Lee is ethnic Chinese."

Poll on Richardson

Please click on the link below and vote on this Richardson poll
http://news.aol.com/main/obama-presidency/article/richardson-to-be-commerce-secretary/257746

Remember Richardson's sorry role in Wen Ho Lee case

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/08/ED1G14IQH0.DTL
George Koo
Monday, December 8, 2008
Many, including Bill Richardson himself, are probably wondering why anyone would object to him serving in the Obama administration. They surely have forgotten the Wen Ho Lee case and Richardson's role in one of America's most disgraceful cases of miscarriage of justice.

The objection to his nomination as President-elect Barack Obama's secretary of commerce arose from the fact that Richardson, while serving as Clinton's energy secretary, never owned up to his responsibility in the case of the United States vs. Wen Ho Lee. Until he does, he cannot be allowed to forget.

The organized opposition to the appointment originated in the Bay Area and, as of last week, had more than 4,000 signatories to a petition asking Obama to reconsider Richardson's nomination.

In March 1999, as secretary of energy, Richardson fired Wen Ho Lee without cause from his job as an atomic scientist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and falsely identified him as a spy for China, which led to Lee's arrest and solitary confinement without the benefit of due process.

Even after the FBI apologized for lying under oath, and the presiding judge apologized to Lee for the arrest on behalf of the federal government for judiciary misconduct, Richardson has continued to defend his actions in the case as proper.

He justifies his conduct by pointing out that Lee is a now a convicted felon, conveniently overlooking that 58 of the original 59 counts of the indictment were thrown out by the court.

The final count was a face-saving way out for the government. Federal prosecutors had Lee plead guilty on a count of downloading information to his computer against laboratory regulations in exchange for the nine months of jail time already served. Because no individual can withstand indefinitely the full legal weight of his own government, Lee copped a plea despite the injustice of the circumstances.

Richardson's actions legitimized racial profiling as practiced then, and now, by the law enforcement agencies. To this day, the FBI continues to assert that ethnic Chinese are potential spies for China.

Those of us protesting Richardson's appointment are asking him to disavow racial profiling as an accepted practice. He should do this, and he can do so by simply admitting he made an error in judgment, and in no way condones racial profiling.

The protest has nothing to do with Richardson becoming the highest ranking Latino appointee in the Obama administration. We applaud the appointment of the most talented and able men and women, regardless of ethnicity, to serve our country.

However, so long as the Wen Ho Lee case is a blot on Richardson's record, we challenge the notion that he is among the most qualified to serve.

Perhaps the Obama transition team is unaware of Richardson's baggage. It is our duty to call this matter to its attention.

As the first African American president-elect, Obama has electrified the world. However, if Richardson's confirmation is not preceded by a public apology, the act would only confirm that politics as usual prevail.

Friday, December 5, 2008

Richardson's 2nd Least Likely to be Confirmed

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/12/the_friday_line_ranking_the_ca.html
The Friday Line: Ranking the Cabinet Confirmation Prospects

With President-elect Barack Obama having filled roughly half of his 15 Cabinet appointments by the end of this week, we thought now would be a good time to take a closer look at the confirmation prospects for each of the seven Cabinet members already chosen.

In truth, most of the soon-to-be president's picks are likely to be approved by the Senate barring some sort of glaring problem (see Baird, Zoe) with their backgrounds. Historically the pattern has been that the Senate generally defers to the president on his picks for the Cabinet but, according to the Post's indispensable Al Kamen, there always seems to be one person -- Linda Chavez, Baird, John Tower -- who doesn't make it through the confirmation process.

Who is this Administration's Tower/Baird/Chavez? We won't hazard a guess and, remember, that with eight Cabinet officials still not named, the nominee most likely to go down in flames may not even be known yet.

Below you'll find our rankings of the squirm factor for the seven men and women Obama has selected to fill Cabinet jobs in his Administration. The number one ranked person is the one likely to squirm the most under questioning from the Senate. To be clear, all seven of these people seem likely to be confirmed today but some of them will cruise to confirmation while others will stumble to it.

As always, the Line is meant to spark conversation so use the comments section to agree or disagree with our picks or rankings.

7. Robert Gates (Defense): Gates is already the Secretary of Defense. So, he doesn't need to be confirmed by the Senate. Done and done.

6. Tim Geithner (Treasury): Geithner's credentials as head of the New York Fed are impeccable, and, given the current economic strife gripping the country, it's hard to imagine any senator risking his or her political life by delaying this confirmation in any way, shape or form.

5. Janet Napolitano (Homeland Security): The strong support of Sen. John McCain for his home state governor's nomination to the post would seem to clear the decks for Napolitano. Party operatives who know her also speak highly of her political acumen and smarts so don't expect any flubs here. (Napolitano would almost assuredly welcome a lower profile given the hubbub over comments made about her this week by Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell.)

4 (tie). Tom Daschle (Health and Human Services)/Hillary Rodham Clinton (State): Both Daschle and Clinton have their enemies in the Senate but the world's greatest deliberative body generally protects its own -- Tower being a high-profile exception -- and it's hard to imagine either nominee getting too bad a grilling from their colleagues.

2. Bill Richardson (Commerce): Working in the New Mexico governor's favor is that he spent nearly two decades in Congress -- building relationships that should help him during confirmation. Richardson's role in the Wen Ho Lee case during his tenure as Energy Secretary in the Clinton Administration is already being mentioned as an issue and almost assuredly will come up during confirmation hearings.

1. Eric Holder (Justice): Holder, who led Obama's vice presidential search earlier this year, seems to be the one nominee thus far about whom Republicans are publicly raising questions. The central issue for Holder is the pardon by President Bill Clinton of financier Marc Rich whose ex-wife was a major donor to the Clintons and the Democratic Party. During the Rich pardon, Holder was serving as deputy attorney general and played enough of a role for the Post's own Richard Cohen to insist in a recent column that Holder should be disqualified for the AG post.

By Chris Cillizza | December 5, 2008; 5:45 AM ET


Thursday, December 4, 2008

Best of China Blog

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinajournal/2008/12/03/best-of-the-china-blogs-december-4/

–Chinese-American activists are gearing up to protest Obama’s nomination of Bill Richardson for commerce secretary, calling into question his role in the handling of the Wen Ho Lee case. In 1999, Lee was wrongly accused of spying for China during Richardson’s tenure as energy secretary. [Huffington Post]

Sen Byrd on Richardson

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/us/politics/04richardson.html
His tenure at the Energy Department was marred by reports of nuclear security lapses at Los Alamos National Laboratory. At one contentious hearing, Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, told him that he would never again “receive the support of the Senate of the United States for any office to which you might be appointed.”

Lest We Forget

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/12/04/a-slap-in-our-face-we-can%E2%80%99t-forget-what-richardson-did-to-wen-ho-lee/

A Slap in Our Face: We can’t forget what Richardson did to Wen Ho Lee

December 4, 2008

Wen Ho Lee is as close as it gets in contemporary Asian Pacific American history to a mythic victim of racism in our nation.

Unlike a symbol of injustice like a Rosa Parks, Lee was no activist and did not seek to challenge society. He was merely an ordinary Asian American scientist doing his life’s work. And solely because of his race was he wrongly suspected of being the most heinous kind of criminal to democracy — a spy.

For his ordeal, Lee rarely receives the respect he deserves and now lives in quiet obscurity after being stripped of his livelihood as a nuclear scientist. To add insult to injury, some still don’t think Lee is innocent.

Meanwhile, Bill Richardson, secretary of energy in the late 1990s and the man who fingered Lee and presided over his public flogging, remains in the limelight and is now being honored as President-elect Obama’s new secretary of commerce.

That may be the ultimate injustice to Wen Ho Lee.

Simply for his lead role in the Lee case, Richardson should have a karma deficit so huge that he should be happy to remain ensconced as the popular governor of New Mexico, far from the national stage.

But politics and ambition being what they are, Richardson has apparently rehabilitated himself to glory in the last eight years. His recent unsuccessful run for president seemed to be waged on the basis that someone who was Latino had to do it. Yet it’s likely he never saw himself with a real shot to win, and instead used the campaign to position himself to fail upwards.

Sure enough, at this year’s Democratic National Convention, the also-ran spoke on that last memorable night at Invesco Field and achieved what his failed presidential run could not — a real shot at national prominence and a place in Obama’s inner circle. I mean, there’s got to be a Latino in there somewhere, right?

Too bad it’s someone responsible for what is arguably the most prominent case of racism and xenophobia against Asian Americans since the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

Richardson, the charming politician, would love for us all to forget Wen Ho Lee. But we must insist that APAs and all Americans go back to the memory vault and re-experience the pain of that episode, which caused a ripple effect from the white towers of academia to the dim sum houses of Chinatown and everywhere in between where Asian Americans were.

For a time in our country, every Chinese American was seen as a suspect. Whether student or professor, Asian or Asian American, just enough doubt was cast to impact all working relationships.

Wen Ho Lee’s pain suddenly became all our pain. We were all suspects. Before Sept.11 and the terrorist fear, the profiling standard was not a man with a turban, but a brainy Chinese or Asian American scientist or student with access to some form of technology, top secret or not. It really didn’t matter. All that mattered was your Asian heritage.

Richardson’s disgusting role
These days, the modern memory vault seems to be YouTube (check out this short recap of the Lee saga at: tiny.cc/BGHDZ). It’s a painful reminder of Richardson’s adamant defense of his role in the Lee case. The clip includes Richardson being grilled on 60 Minutes, as well as Lee being interviewed on NBC. There’s a shot of the cell where Lee spent nine months in solitary confinement, waiting for the trial that would exonerate him from espionage charges.

The broadcast clips unfortunately do not represent the overall media coverage, which was as close as it gets to a modern “yellow journalism.” The media and the government were in lockstep, feeding on each other. There were so many leaks to the media from federal sources that it could not have been done without some orchestration from the top of the Department of Energy. The New York Times was so gung-ho about being leaked upon, it lost its sense of ethics.

But even The Times was able to see its error. It ran a massive apology to Lee for its failure to present a fair human portrait of Lee and admitted to an over reliance on a few government sources.

The Times had no choice but to apologize. Even Judge James Parker, the presiding judge in the Lee case, issued an apology to Lee upon his release for how badly government prosecutors had bungled the case.
One man should have had the moral courage to change all of that history: Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. But he didn’t.

Now he hopes we’ve forgotten all about it. It would be quite the norm to forget what happens to Asian Americans; we have constantly been ignored, overlooked. How many Asian Americans do you see mentioned in the Obama transition? So why should we expect anything different now? Because America cannot afford to forget what happened to Lee.

President-elect Obama should not give in to Richardson’s charm or to the large Latino vote he claims. Latino activists have propped Richardson up as the “Latino guy.” But how many people outside a small circle even know Richardson is Latino? Besides, his race is irrelevant; ours isn’t.

A Richardson selection is purely a matter of ambition and political payback, not the public good. Surely there is someone better for the commerce job who doesn’t have a history of trading in xenophobia?

President-elect Obama shouldn’t dismiss concerns of Asian Americans who overwhelming supported his campaign. The choice sends a negative message to APAs everywhere. Richardson represents a regression. He is simply unfit to be part of any “cabinet of change.”

On-line petitions are being circulated at http://www.wenholee.org/ and
petitiononline.com/GovBillR/petition.html. For updates and other musings on the Obama transition, David Chiu and more, check out amok.asianweek.com.

A modern-day Simon Cameron

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/12/022228.php

Bill Richardson, president-elect Obama's choice for Secretary of Commerce, has dismissed the idea that the Obama cabinet is a "team of rivals." Richardson is correct to this extent -- he does not rival Obama and never has. "Team of self-promoting hacks" would better fit Richardson's case, but it's not very catchy. If this really is, somehow, Lincoln's Cabinet redeux, then perhaps we can cast Richardson as Simon Cameron. This relatively undistingushed (to my knowledge) Pennsylvania Senator ran for president in 1860, threw his support to Lincoln at the convention, and was rewarded with the job of Secretary of War. He lasted a year.

If my assessment of Richardson seems harsh, consider that, despite being the nation's leading Hispanic politician, Obama had nothing better to offer him than Secetary of Commerce. You can also consult my past posts about Richardson.

The Washington Post notes that Richardson' selection "breaks with tradition" by "putting a longtime public servant in a position that has recently been held by private-sector executives." Stated differently, Obama has put the Commerce Department in the hands of someone who, as far as appears, knows little if anything about business. Richardson entered the political world straight out of college, becoming a staffer for a Massachusetts Congressman. He has never really looked back at the real world.

The Post notes that Richardson has considerable diplomatic experience, which includes face-to-face meetings with Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, and "a host of North Korean officials." What these meetings accomplished is unclear. How they translate into a qualification for Secretary of Commerce is equally unclear, but also largely irrelevant. What matters is that Obama has found a place to park the modern-day Simon Cameron.

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Betrayal

I couldn't say it better. Below is a comment posted by Barbara on a Los Angeles Times blog when Richardson was officially nominated:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/03/obama-nominates-richardson-for-cabinet/
December 3rd, 2008 5:16 pm ET
The appointment of Richardson to the Cabinet is absolutely mind-boggling. Richardson has already shown himself to be disloyal as per his deflection from the Clinton camp when something better came along. Bill Clinton made this made and he repaid him with his betrayal. Does Obama think he has the magic lantern? Richardson will betray him just as easily! And to make matters worse, Richardson used his position as former Energy Secretary to further feather his nest by working for the oil companies after leaving the White House. What a dirt bag! Judas.

Bill Clinton says Richardson told the Clintons 5 times that he would not endorse Obama and ABC's Mark Halperin reported that Richardson said Obama could not beat McCain. Yet, when it looked like Obama would beat Hillary, he endorsed Obama.

James Carville, described Richardson as a "Judas" who was cashing in "30 coins of silver" to win favor with Obama. And in a March 25, 2008 NY Times article by Patrick Healy, Carville said "he stood by his comment on Good Friday in which he compared Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico to Judas for his endorsement of Senator Barack Obama." Carville declared, "I was quoted accurately and in context, and I was glad to give the quote, and I was glad I gave it. I'm not apologizing, I'm not resigning, I'm not doing anything."

BBC on Bill Richardson

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7763366.stm
James Carville, a close aide and friend to the Clintons, compared Mr Richardson to Judas Iscariot.

At the time, some commentators accused Mr Richardson of making his endorsement in the hope of landing a senior position in any future Obama administration - possibly even the role of Secretary of State, a role that Mrs Clinton is set to occupy.

Sunday, November 30, 2008

Richardson's stand on immigration

http://www.ontheissues.org/Cabinet/Bill_Richardson_Immigration.htm
Allowed giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants
Q: In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, do you support driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?

A: My answer is yes, and I did it. Because the Congress and Bush failed miserably to pass comprehensive immigration. My legislature sent me a bill. I signed it. My enforcement people said it's a matter of public safety. What we need is public safety, a reduction in traffic fatalities. When we started with this program, 33% of all New Mexicans were uninsured. Today, it's 11%.
Source: 2007 Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Nevada Nov 15, 2007

Driver's license for illegals helps public safety
Q: As governor, you signed a law making New Mexico one of only eight states in the country that allows illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses.

A: Four years ago, the legislature sent a bill to me and, at the request of my law enforcement leaders, I signed it, which allows licenses for undocumented workers. The reason I did this is because there's a failure of an immigration law in the Congress and the president. It's a matter for us in New Mexico of public safety on the roads. At the time that I signed the bill, 33% of drivers were uninsured. Today it's 11% uninsured. This law has helped.

Q: Is there any security provision in the law, anything, that prevents illegals from using these driver's licenses that you give them to get on airplanes, like many of the 9/11 terrorists did?

A: There are valid certificates of identification that they have to provide to the motor vehicles department of New Mexico. I believe it's the right decision for my people. What we need is comprehensive immigration
Source: Fox News Sunday: 2007 "Choosing the President" interviews Nov 11, 2007

Declared state of emergency in NM's four border counties

Because of his Mexican roots and his governorship of a border state, Richardson is in a position to play a particularly important role in the politics of immigration.

In 2007, he first supported Bush's compromise plan, which calls for a fence on the Mexican border & a controversial guest worker program, plus a plan that allows illegal immigrants living here to buy their way to citizenship. Then he reversed himself and took a stand against the fence.

In general, he argued that whatever happens on the border should be aimed at keeping families together and not breaking them apart. But he also seeks to show that he is tough on illegal immigration, highlighting "securing the border" as the first point in his immigration plan and pushing for increase enforcement on the Mexican as well as the US side. In 2005, Richardson declared a state of emergency in New Mexico's four border counties, which released $1.75 million in state funds for overtime pay to local forces to fight illegal immigration.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.186-187 Nov 11, 2007

We pay for immigrant healthcare; have them pay into system

Q: Will your health-care plan cover illegal aliens?

A: Well, today, we're already paying for undocumented workers when they go into emergency rooms. It's the law. Under my plan, what you would do is everybody that pays into the system would be covered. Now, what we need is comprehensive immigration reform, which the Congress and the president refuse to do, which would set the appropriate standards for health care. On immigration, what we need to do is secure the border, & secondly, those that knowingly hire illegal workers should be punished. Third, there has got to be a stronger relationship with Mexico so that they don't send their poor to our country. And lastly, an earned legalization process where you establish those standards. Like, you don't give them amnesty, you don't give them automatic citizenship, but if they learn English, if they pay back taxes, embrace American values, pass a background check, they can stay and eventually apply for citizenship.
Source: Huffington Post Mash-Up: 2007 Democratic on-line debate Sep 13, 2007

Increase H-1B visas to permit more skilled workers

Q: Would you change visa policy with respect to people who come here to study and might be willing to stay if they had their visas?

A: Yes. That means H-1B visas, that means looking for workers in this country that we need in certain sectors. This mean focusing not just on illegal immigration, but legal immigration. There's a huge backlog of enormously talented people and workers that, because of red tape and bureaucracy, can't get in, especially in the computer sector, especially in health-care areas. Yes, I would. Those H-1B visas, I believe, need to be increased to permit more skilled workers to come into our work force. This enhances our competitiveness.

Q: What have you learned about education as governor?

A: What I've learned is that I am hands-on. I have hands-on experiences that a lot of these other candidates don't. They all have their 10-point plans. I've actually done a lot of good things in education that involves helping a child and making us more competitive.
Source: Huffington Post Mash-Up: 2007 Democratic on-line debate Sep 13, 2007

Border wall is horrendous example of misguided policy
Q: Would you commit to immigration reform during your first year of the presidency?

A: Yes, I would do it my first year. I want everybody to look at the Statue of Liberty. This symbolizes freedom, diversity, and that we're a nation of immigrants. This is what we need to do in immigration my first year.

1. Yes, more border security, technology at the border.
2. A stronger relationship with Mexico and Central America, to create jobs so that flow doesn't come here.
3. Enforce the law. Those that knowingly hire illegal workers should be punished.
4. But what is fundamental is a path to legalization, a path to citizenship for the 12 million that are in this country that just want to make life better for the families.
5. This wall is a horrendous example of Washington misguided policy. Congress only funded half of the wall. And in addition that, if you're going to build a 12-foot wall, you know what's going to happen? A lot of 13-foot ladders. This is a terrible symbol of America.

Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

Federal raids are ineffective; we dehumanize immigrants
Q: Some 60,000 families have been separated in federal raids. Would you be willing to suspend the raids?

A: Yes, I would, because it shows that a dysfunctional relationship between the Congress and the president caused the breakdown of a potential compromise. Now we have to wait till 2008 and 2009, and these raids are ineffective, they're a symbol of what's wrong with a broken immigration policy. I also object to the fact of dehumanizing immigrants. You know, when the media pictures them crossing the border, swimming across a river, doing something like jumping a fence--why don't they depict the Latinos that today are fighting for America in Iraq and are dying for this country, or the Congressional Medal of Honor winners? And I object to the dehumanizing of people that are part and that want to be part of an American dream.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

Sanctuary cities ok until we have comprehensive policy

Q: Would you allow " sanctuary cities" to ignore the federal law and provide sanctuary to these immigrants?

A: The answer is yes. The problem we have is the lack of a comprehensive immigration policy. This is a federal responsibility. We need to fix the immigration system that is broken. We need to first find ways to increase security at the border with more detection equipment, more border patrol, not this silly wall.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 6, 2007

Include same-sex couples in binational marriage sponsorship
Q: Under our current immigration laws, one spouse can sponsor another to become a US resident. Same-sex couples are not covered by this law. What would you do to help binational gay couples torn apart by the current immigration system?

A: I believe that when you have expansion of domestic partnership, of civil unions, it should be to all people, regardless of where you are -- overseas, underseas, anywhere. There's a bill [proposing this] in Congress, which I have already said I would support.
Source: 2007 HRC/LOGO debate on gay issues Aug 9, 2007

Comprehensive reform needed; but McCain-Kennedy bill flawed
Q: Are you happy that the compromise, bipartisan legislation, which Pres. Bush, Sen. Kennedy & Sen. McCain all endorsed, has effectively collapsed?

A: No, I'm not happy, because I wanted them to push comprehensive legislation and fix the main problems. And the main problems were a fence between Mexico and the US, which I think is not sustainable. Secondly, they had an amendment that broke up families; third, a lack of labor protections when it came to the guest worker program. It makes sense to have comprehensive legislation, but they have to fix that main provision, the flaw in the bill that breaks up families. That's not been the standards in our immigration laws in the past.

Q: And if they revise that, would you support this compromise?

A: Yes, I would. If they take care of the not dividing up families, if they get rid of some of those provisions relating to the wall, look at this wall, dividing two countries up.
Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Jun 10, 2007

McCain-Kennedy bill is not amnesty; it has strong standards

The Republicans have been promoting this policy of fear, that the McCain-Kennedy bill is an amnesty bill. This is not an amnesty bill. In fact, in the provisions in the legislation, what you see is, it's going to take almost 12 years for citizenship, nine years for a green card, almost $9,000 in fines, no criminal record. They've got to learn English. There's some strong standards there.
Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Jun 10, 2007

A wall on Mexican border is not America
Look at this wall [on the Mexican border], dividing two countries up. Like Ronald Reagan said when he went to Berlin, he said, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall." That's not America. Let's have more Border Patrol. Let's double the number of Border Patrol, more technology.

But right now, this is one of the most pressing domestic issues because it divides this country. It has 12 million people living under the shadows.
Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Jun 10, 2007

A wall divides families and doesn't solve the problem
I'm a border governor. Two years ago, I declared a border emergency because of the tremendous flow of drugs and illegal workers coming into my state. I deal with this issue every day. Here's my position: I would not support legislation that divided families. I would not support legislation that builds a wall, a Berlin-type wall between two countries, the way the bill in the Congress exists today. Now, what are the essential components of any good, sensible immigration bill? One, increased border patrols--double the size of border patrols and technology. That makes sense. Don't reduce the National Guard that's there. Secondly, an earned legalization program. Yes, I support that, one that is based on learning English, paying back taxes, passing a background check, getting behind those that are trying to get here legally, obeying laws and bracing American values. And then lastly, finding ways that we penalize employers that knowingly hire illegal workers. That is essential in an immigration bill.
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

The 2007 immigration bill is not an amnesty bill
The 2007 immigration bill is not an amnesty bill because it sets standards that I mentioned--learning English, passing background checks. There's a touchback provision--the head of household has to go back and then apply. I believe that is unworkable. It divides up families. But you don't immediately get an amnesty, you don't immediately get citizenship; it's a process that takes about 13 years. They should have labor protections. We don't want to create a permanent underclass in those workers.
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

Opposes compromise immigration bill: it tears apart families
Q: The newspapers reported last week about the compromise immigration bill that "Richardson praised the bill, [saying] 'This legislation makes a good start towards re-securing our Southern border.'" A few days later we heard, "Richardson said that after reading the immigration bill in detail, he decided to oppose it, saying the measure placed too great a burden on immigrants, tearing apart families that wanted to settle in the US, creating a permanent tier of second-class immigrant workers and financing a border fence. 'This is fundamentally flawed in its current form and I would oppose it.'" How can you be for it and 72 hours later against it?

A: I saw a summary that contained essential elements: 1) Tougher border security. That's good. 2) A legalization program for the 12 million that are here. 3) It also contained penalties for employers that knowingly hired illegal workers. I thought that was all good. The bill is then presented & I read it the next day, and it contained those problems.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 "Meet the Candidates" series May 27, 2007

Border fence hasn't worked; border patrols & tech have

Q: Has the border wall worked?

A: No, it hasn't worked. This wall is a terrible symbol between two countries that are friends. If we have a 10-foot wall, there'll be 11-foot ladders going over that wall.

Q: Anywhere along the border, the fence hasn't worked?

A: It hasn't worked. What has worked is more border patrols. What has worked is some National Guardsmen. What has worked is some technology. It's made the program better. But we've got to talk to Mexico, our friend, get them to do more. In fact, get them to stop giving maps to illegal workers on the most porous areas. And we also need to raise the legal immigration limits, the backlogs of workers that we need--H1B visas for job competitiveness skills.

Q: In New Mexico, you declared a border emergency, and yet you're against the fence. It seems as if you're on both sides of the issue.

A: I'm a governor. I have to deal with this issue every day.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 "Meet the Candidates" series May 27, 2007

Driver's licenses & scholarships for illegals; not amnesty
Q: You were for illegal immigrants obtaining driver's licenses, and you were for illegal immigrants' children getting college scholarships.

A: A driver's license helps with traffic safety; they all get insured; they don't leave the scene. On education: yes, if they fulfill the same academic requirements, to be eligible for a scholarship. I believe we have to bring the 12 million undocumented workers out of the shadows, set up a standard where they speak English, if they pass background checks, pay back taxes, obey the laws, embrace American values, give them a chance, a path to citizenship, not amnesty.

Q: That is amnesty.

A: No, it isn't amnesty.

Q: Would you send them back?

A: They have to go back, under the law, to reapply.

Q: But you would want people who came here illegally to be able to stay here with their legally-born children?

A: Yes, over a 12-year period.

Q: Is that rewarding breaking the law?

A: They have to pay a fine for breaking the law.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 "Meet the Candidates" series May 27, 2007

Legalization plan, not this stupid wall being proposed
Q: One of the most controversial aspects of the plan that Gov. Schwarzenegger just recently unveiled in California is his proposal that illegal immigrants be covered under his plan.

A: We should cover children, as long as [their parents] pay their fair share with everybody else. An essential component of my plan is that we all pay: Employers, employees, the government. But we help each other pay the fair share. The way you deal with immigration, one, yes we have to secure our borders, no question about it. Not with this stupid wall that is being proposed. But you also set up a legalization plan for the 12 million undocumented workers that are in this country. Maybe it's not very popular, but it makes sense based on setting a path to legalization that involves dealing with issues like health care that involves if they learn English, if they pay back taxes, if they pass a background check. They don't get ahead of the line of those that are trying to get here legally.
Source: SEIU Democratic Health Care Forum in Las Vegas Mar 24, 2007

Declared state of emergency on Mexican border
In Aug. 2005, Gov. Richardson declared a state of emergency on the New Mexico-Mexico border to ensure that law enforcement officers received the resources they need. He made $1.75 million in state funds immediately available to assist efforts in policing the border. New Mexico then agreed to allow the National Guard to deploy to the border. New Mexico is still waiting on the Federal government to fulfill their commitment to send 265 Border Patrol agents to the New Mexico-Mexico border.
Source: Campaign website, billrichardson2006.com, "Issues" Nov 7, 2006

Path to legalization if illegals pay taxes & learn English
Gov. Richardson believes we can strengthen our borders and still deal fairly with those who want nothing but the American dream. The only realistic solution is to create a path to legalization for immigrants who are paying taxes, learning English, and contributing to our society. He also believes that the US must engage Mexico and build up its border economy to make a better life possible for Mexicans in Mexico. Also, a plan to crack down on employers who knowingly violate the law is imperative.
Source: Campaign website, billrichardson2006.com, "Issues" Nov 7, 2006

Reduce immigration; no automatic citizenship for kids

* Indicate which principles you support regarding issues relating to immigration. Further limit the number of immigrants allowed into the country.
* Children of illegal immigrants, born in the United States, should not automatically receive US citizenship.

Source: 1996 Congressional National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 1996

Guarantee human services to illegal immigrants

* Indicate which principles you support regarding issues relating to immigration. Prohibit states from passing laws that deny human services (medical care, education) to illegal immigrants or their children.
* Ease citizenship requirements in order to make it easier for immigrants to become United States citizens.
* Provide extra federal aid to states with higher numbers of immigrants for necessary medical and social services.

Source: 1996 Congressional National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 1996

Friday, November 28, 2008

Richardson Draws Ire

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/11/28/commerce-secretary-appointment-draws-ire-from-asian-americans/

Commerce Secretary Appointment Draws Ire From Asian Americans

November 28, 2008

Community looks back at Richardson’s role in Wen Ho Lee Case

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson’s appointment this week as President-elect Barack Obama’s commerce secretary is being greeted with anger and disappointment by some who remember the former energy secretary’s role in the botched investigation and prosecution of scientist Dr. Wen Ho Lee.

In 1999, Richardson and several other Department of Energy officials publicly accused the Taiwanese-born Lee of stealing classified nuclear-related documents from the Los Alamos Laboratories.

Lee, who had been employed at Los Alamos for 21 years, was indicted and spent 278 days in solitary confinement. Meanwhile, the case became a national story as suspicions formed that Lee was performing espionage for the Chinese government.

In the face of insufficient evidence, Lee pled guilty to a substantially reduced charge and received a public apology from President Bill Clinton for his mistreatment at the hands of the federal government.

The future New Mexico governor came under fire for his role in the case, as allegations surfaced that it was Richardson who leaked damaging classified personal information about Lee in an apparent attempt to smear the 69-year-old doctor in the press. Lee eventually received a multimillion-dollar settlement from the federal government and several media outlets in 2006.

Richardson’s new appointment has drawn fierce criticism from members of the Asian American community, many of whom still blame the New Mexico governor for perpetuating a harmful image of Chinese Americans.

“Richardson inflamed the stereotype that Americans of Chinese descent are easily disloyal citizens of our country,” said Henry Der who was Executive Director of Chinese for Affirmative Action in the 1990s. Der called upon members of the Senate Commerce Committee to investigate Richardson’s conduct as secretary of energy during Richardson’s confirmation hearings.

For critics like Der, Richardson’s refusal to acknowledge his own misconduct during the scandal remains a bitter sticking point.

“[He] needs to… apologize for the grave, calculated mistakes and harm he perpetrated against Lee and our nation’s sense of justice,” Der said.

Guy Wong, a member of a group of Chinese Americans who supported Wen Ho Lee during his imprisonment, went further in his criticism of the former energy secretary.

“Bill Richardson is simply a ruthless opportunist,” said Wong, who circulated a petition urging President-elect Obama to deny Richardson any cabinet position prior to Tuesday’s announcement. Wong criticized Richardson and other government officials for being “willing to lie, not just to Dr. Lee, but also in open court, in order to gain advantage over an innocent and powerless man.”

That Richardson’s appointment comes at a time of unprecedented economic turmoil concerns Asian American business leaders like John Jin Lee, chairman of the Asian Business League of San Francisco.
“Mr. Richardson’s association with the well-documented mishandling of the Wen Ho Lee case at the very least raises the question as to his qualifications,” said Lee.

Shien Biau “S.B.” Woo, former lieutenant governor of Delaware and co-founder of the prominent 80-20 Initiative, an Asian American political organization, had a different view.

“I doubt if we want to burn our political capital opposing the appointment of Richardson,” Woo said, questioning the notion that the Wen Ho Lee case was an important issue to Asian Americans.

In lieu of opposing the appointment and risk angering the Hispanic community, Woo proffered that the Asian American community should work to increase its influence instead of focusing on negatives.

“The politic way of doing things has always been not to be concerned with what others are getting,” said Woo. “We have to be politically astute. Otherwise we’ll never succeed in enlarging our political clout.”

Also Read: A Slap in Our Face: We can’t forget what Richardson did to Wen Ho Lee

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

His Baggages

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/us/politics/18webrichardson.html
New York Times, 11/18/2008
He has no landmark achievement as a diplomat and has said, in hindsight, that he was wrong on several important issues: the first invasion of Iraq (which he opposed), the second (which he supported), and the North American Free Trade Agreement (which he helped pass). In the late 1990s, he also was secretary of the Department of Energy during the disastrous security breeches at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the widely criticized prosecution of scientist Wen Ho Lee.

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Drogin, Vroomer and Clark interview

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/july-dec00/wenholee_9-13.html
A few excerpts below:
BOB DROGIN: Gwen, this has been the incredible shrinking prosecution from the start. As you said, he was originally cited, although never charged as a spy, he was branded the spy of the century. By the time they finally got an indictment nine months later, they had something very different. They accused him of downloading, copying a great deal of classified information. It turned out very soon after that that information was classified at the time, or even now is classified at such a level that it essentially could be sent through the US mails. So that was a big problem. Secondly, of course, the defense was able to find a number of experts who were able to challenge and in some cases ridicule the government claims that this data was as crucial and indeed the crown jewels. And then the government had a tremendous problem when their chief witness, the chief FBI investigator in this case, recanted crucial testimony. So they had a tremendous credibility problem with the witness. And then you had a judge who was openly skeptical of government claims. There were a couple of other issues, but essentially the case began crumbling all around them.

BOB DROGIN: It was stunning. It was a very emotional kind of hearing. And afterwards, it was marked by a great deal of laughter and tears. It was quite a statement that he made. It went on for about 30 minutes and he just repeatedly apologized to Dr. Lee. He repeatedly said how sorry he was that he had been put in jail under what he called demeaning and inhumane conditions. He said he had been misled by the government. He said he had been led astray by the government, and particularly singled out what he called the top leadership at the Justice Department, Attorney General Reno and the Energy Department. And then he also singled out a former U.S. Attorney here who brought the original prosecution. So it was a very powerful denunciation of government prosecutorial tactics.

BOB DROGIN: The only thing we do know is that Wen Ho Lee wasn't the source of that.

ROBERT VROOMAN, Former Chief, Counterintelligence, Los Alamos Laboratory: Well, the original case against Dr. Lee was flawed from the beginning. And yet there was an insistence that the case should be pushed forward even though every FBI agent that I worked with said it was flawed, including Mr. Messemer, who used the term to me that it was intellectually flawed.

GWEN IFILL: And I'm curious if you have a sense about what he did, how damaging is the information that he actually downloaded and copied on to unclassified computers?

ROBERT CLARK: Well, although I don't know the exact details of every file that he put on those tapes, in general, the computer codes that we're talking about, although they are used for simulating nuclear weapons, what happens to a nuclear weapon when you ignite it, the stuff that's in the codes is used for thousands of other things, and the methods that are in there are readily available in open literature, and worked on by people at universities and everywhere. The only thing that's really classified about Robert Clarkthem is that when you compile them into a single code and you tell a foreign power that this is the way we do it, they would be interested in knowing that's the way you do it and then they'd look at it and study it. But they certainly -- I certainly do not believe, let's call a spade a spade, we're talking about China, I certainly do not believe the Chinese would ever take these codes and try to design a weapon with these codes. So, I think, I heard the testimony both ways and I believe it was exaggerated both ways. The codes are useful and valuable, but the fact is the vast majority of this stuff is unclassified by vast, almost all, but several lines.

ROBERT VROOMAN: That's a nice choice that you give me. If I have to take one of the two, I would say that he's a naive bungler. He's not a spy. I have maintained that for many years. And I'm very comfortable with that and today I feel vindicated about that.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Clark, you worked with Mr. Lee in the Los Alamos laboratories. Do you have any sense that the man you worked with, in the laboratory you worked in, would have made him a target because of his ethnic heritage?

ROBERT CLARK: I... I hate to say he was made a target, but clearly, as soon as they found a Chinese-American that had done basically exactly the same things that I had done, I went to China with Wen Ho Lee on one of those trips. I worked on the same codes that Wen Ho Lee worked on. We were good friends. I had access to everything that Wen Ho Lee had access to. But someone obviously felt that he was more likely to be a spy than I was.

ROBERT CLARK: I have to, I have to say that in the real world, justice in the sense of he admitted to a crime, and has been punished, may be true, but the actual crime to which he admitted, I do not believe, is that rare that it deserves a felony on one's record. And if everybody in the country that had ever done something like that had a felony conviction, I would be surprised if anybody in the country who has done something similar to that has a felony conviction for it. So I'm not so sure that this was really justice.

Monday, April 7, 2008

quid pro quo

It's no secret that Gov. Richardson wants to become Secretary of State. This GQ Magazine interview shows the reason why Gov. Richardson came out to support then Senator Obama for his presidential run, even though it was President Clinton who appointed him to the UN and then the Energy Department:

http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqeditors/2008/04/title.html
So if Barack Obama were to win the nomination and he offered you the vice presidency…
What would I do? Well, I wouldn't preclude anything. [laughs] You know, I love my job.
Okay, but—
Well, you can't, you know, you can't, uh, turn your back on something like that. But I didn't endorse him because of that.
Or secretary of state.
You can't turn your back on something like that.