国会纪录：2000年9月15日（参议院）
Page S8625.温豪·幽灵先生。主席先生，我已经寻求认可对若干事项发表评论。首先，与文浩李博士的情况绘制了国家 - 真正的，国际 - 关注，特别是在光之中克林顿总统昨天的发言他对司法部和能源部的行为深感困扰。总统把自己的手指放在关键问题上;也就是说，有一天，温浩·李博士的一天博士是对国家安全的重大威胁，并在第二天上，政府同意在一项课程中同意辩诉，没有监禁或没有缓刑，让他允许他免费走路吗？总统急剧批评，特别是律师将军的行动昨天对媒体进行了一次非同寻常的采访。她被问及文豪李案，她说，李博士与政府合作，在披露录像带发生的情况下，这一结果可能已经实现了很长一段时间。但是这个答案的问题是，辩方正准确提出政府终于得到了什么;也就是说，Lee博士的合作就是那些下载的材料发生的事情。该报价是几个月前的，但政府从未回复过那份。因此，对于律师公司雷戈说，李博士很久以前就是借口，很久以前就已经解决了。然后，她被问及有关任何错误的问题或任何在处理Wen Ho Lee博士的情况下做错的问题。她说她要审查记录来回答这个问题 - 这是真正非凡的，因为她是律师将军，这件事是在她的直接，个人监督下。这是我们所知道的，因为1997年8月，联邦调查局主任路易斯弗里夫派遣了他的一位顶级代表，助理主任约翰·刘易斯，就个人授权要求授权向法院提交外国人的逮捕令情报监测法。 At that time, the FBI had provided a statement of probable cause which was more than sufficient to have the warrant issued. Attorney General Reno then referred that request to a man named Daniel Seikaly in the Department of Justice, a man who had no prior experience with warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The wrong standard was applied. This has all been documented in司法机构小组委员会提交的报告由我担任主席，负责监督司法部。最终，尽管联邦调查局局长通过司法部长的一名高级副手亲自提出了请求，但申请FISA搜查令的请求被拒绝了。司法部长雷诺不需要进一步研究这个问题就能承认这个错误。然后，联邦调查局一直到1998年12月都没有进行任何积极的调查。直到考克斯委员会即将发表报告时，能源部才下令使用测谎仪。1998年12月下旬有传言称，今年1月初，考克斯委员会对李文和案的处理方式提出了尖锐批评。测谎仪不是由联邦调查局采集的，而是由外部承包商Wackenhut采集的。那是在1997年12月23日。最初的报告是，李博士通过了测谎仪，没有欺骗——这是停止调查的理由。仅仅过了几周，联邦调查局就拿到了录音，并对其进行了审查，发现瓦肯胡特的结论并不准确;李医生并没有被免罪 Then it appears that, finally, when the Department of Justice was thoroughly embarrassed, they really threw the book at Dr. Lee by holding him in detention in really extraordinary circumstances, in leg irons. I have seen prisoners held in leg irons. I witnessed that in Pennsylvania's correctional institution when I was district attorney. Do you know the reason you hold somebody in leg irons? Because they are so violent they threaten risk of bodily injury or worse to the guards who have to deal with them. What possible justification was there for treating Dr. Lee in that manner? And the restrictions which the Government imposed on Dr. Lee? There has been comment, unattributed sources, to law enforcement officials, that what was really in mind here was to coerce a guilty plea from Dr. Lee. The Government apparently thought he was guilty and they were thoroughly embarrassed with the way they had botched the case. What other explanation is there for the way Dr. Lee was treated? These are fundamental questions which our subcommittee will look into, on oversight of this matter. There are two aspects of this matter, really. One aspect is what, if anything, did Dr. Lee do to endanger national security? In the application for a search warrant, the Government laid out a long list of reasons stating probable cause for the issuance of that search warrant. Matters that had gone back as early as 1982 involving a great many suspicious activities, so that when the warrant was not issued, notwithstanding the request directly to Attorney General Reno, and when the investigation was, in effect, dropped--really languishing, but in effect dropped for some 15 months--we do not know, on this state of the record, what the quality of the evidence was which led to the indictments. It is not a sufficient answer, any of them which have been given, because the issue of national security is of the utmost importance. The subcommittee has in final stages a report on Dr. Peter Lee, who confessed to giving the People's Republic of China key information on nuclear secrets and also on detecting our submarines. That case was another comedy of errors, except it wasn't so funny--"comedy of errors" I think is the wrong words--horrendous errors, where there was miscommunication between the Justice Department in Washington and the assistant district attorney who was trying the case. Dr. Peter Lee finally walked out with probation, notwithstanding the very serious charges brought against him. Beyond the issue of national security, there is the question as to the treatment of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, his constitutional rights, and whether he was fairly treated. There have been calls for Attorney General Reno's resignation, and the resignation of Secretary of Energy Richardson. I was asked about that earlier today on television and I declined to call for those resignations. I think it is too often that Members go to the klieg lights and make those demands. I was then asked what would be effective, what could be done. And I was asked whether the President ought to fire the Attorney General. Based on what the President has said, and the very troubled record which Attorney General Reno has had with Waco and with her decisions on independent counsels, that is something which would be meaningful, if the President really is concerned. ____________________
FAS|政府保密|国会|||指数|搜索|加入FAS