[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 146 (Saturday, October 8, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: October 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
ATTACK-DOG JOURNALISM
______
HON. ROBERT K. DORNAN
of california
in the house of representatives
Friday, October 7, 1994
Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Speaker, it has often been said, and rightly so, that
if a man loses his good name he loses everything. And with the advent
of attack-dog journalism it has become harder and harder for those of
us in public office to defend our good names and reputations. When
accusations are made they are front page news. When those accusations
turn out to be false, the corrections--if you get one that is--will be
tucked away deep in the bowels of some obscure section that nobody
reads. As former Secretary of Labor Ray Donovan said after being
acquitted on bogus charges, ``Where do I go to get my good name back?''
I remember when terrorism specialist Steve Emerson totally
demolished, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Time magazine's outrageous
story on the now infamous phony October Surprise conspiracy theory.
Emerson proved that Time had been shamelessly used by agent
provocateurs and con artists. Yet, incredibly, Time stuck by its story.
When a major news magazine refuses to admit its most obvious and
blatant errors, something is drastically wrong. But it is a perfect
example of how difficult it is to get satisfaction from the media.
I have certainly had my troubles with the Los Angeles Times over the
years. It seems they simply cannot get over the fact that the people of
central Orange County would want to be represented by a conservative,
and they have done their best over the years to see me defeated, all to
no avail. During that time the L.A. Times has written many stories
about me. For the most part they have been somewhat fair, though many
have been biased. But in a certain few cases they have exhibited a
reckless disregard for the truth and have distorted facts to conform to
their biased notion of who Bob Dornan is. Tonight, I want to take some
time to set the record straight on three falsehoods that the L.A. Times
continually perpetuates. For the sake of my honor and my good name.
Recently, I was explaining to an L.A. Times reporter who was writing
a short political piece on me, why I have always been leery of speaking
with L.A. Times reporters during in all of my eight previous House
races. Now in race number nine I am on my guard again. I have never
really had a skilled, focused, mature and competitive Democratic
opponent. So young L.A. Times reporters take it upon themselves every
election year to go after me, and close up the point spread in my re-
elections. The result? Times articles on me always become the number
one weapon used by my opponents in their campaign literature and phone
banks. Every even numbered year I ask the L.A. Times reporters, ``Why?
Did God designate you and the L.A. Times to attempt to take me down? To
defeat me? To end my political career?''
I advised Times editors on the House floor during special orders that
I was going to correct some major distortions and lies they have
printed in the past before they repeat them again this October. There
is an article from October 10, 1992 that contains several lies about
Bob Dornan. The Times prints quotes from my opponents that are not
true, adds quotes that are untruthful, hearsay statements from people
I've never met, and then rolls these lies over every 2 years into a
running negative profile that makes me so unbelievable, colorful, and
flamboyant that Gen. George S. Patton, dead or alive, could not match
the image the L.A. Times has created of me.
Three of the most outrageous lies were repeated in a short profile
feature done 3 weeks before the election of 1992. I am now going to try
to correct the lies contained therein once and for all. They spring
from the 1980 general election, the 1982 primary, and the 1986 general
election. I now publicly ask the L.A. Times if they are going to
continue to perpetuate these three vicious untruths in the closing days
of the 1994 elections.
Eric Bailey and Bob Stewart wrote an October 18, 1992 so-called
biographical update on me. After the election I pointed out to them the
major gross lies. They promised that they would correct them. Bob
Stewart moved on, so he cannot correct them. But Eric Bailey can and
should ask his editors to correct the historical record.
Eric, please heed and hear my words. Lie number one is from my third
congressional campaign in 1980. Here are the exact words out of the
October 1992 L.A. Times: ``During his 1980 battle for his old Santa
Monica-area district against Carey Peck,'' (Peck seemed to disappear
off the face of the Earth the next year) ``son of actor Gregory Peck,
it took a Justice Department investigation to clear the challenger''
(Peck) ``of Dornan's allegations that Peck accepted $13,000 in illegal
cash campaign donations from James H. Dennis, a convicted felon serving
time in an Alabama Federal prison for fraud. Dennis said he agreed to
make the accusations when Dornan visited him in prison and promised to
get the felon better prison status. Dornan denied that any deal
existed.''
A vicious, foul untrue story, I have never to this day 14 years later
corrected this garbage on the House floor. I should have years ago. I
will now.
First, young Carey Peck, son of Gregory, did take 13 sequentially
numbered, $1,000, illegal donations written to him from ``dead people,
and 3- and 4-year-old children.'' Gregory Peck, the Academy Award
winning actor, and I say this sincerely, probably unknowingly brought
an envelope from Alabama to L.A. with this dirty, $13,000 worth of
phony cashiers checks using the names of children and dead people
inside and gave it to his son. I charitably assume he did not open the
envelope. The checks all originated in Alabama. Then-Senator Alan
Cranston, who I also think was unwitting in all this, had asked Gregory
Pack to come to Alabama to help a young Senator named Donald Stewart
who was appointed after the death of Senator James Allen. James Dennis
sent this dirty money to young Carey as a favor to Gregory Peck for
coming to Alabama. This James Dennis had embezzled $1\1/2\ million from
people in the State of California. I went to visit him in an Alabama
prison to get at the root of the $13,000 of dirty money that the Carey
Peck campaign took in 1978. I took with me my wife, my lawyer, the U.S.
attorney from southern Alabama, and an FBI agent from their Alabama
office. We all met in the warden's conference room at Talladega Prison
to get to the bottom of this scandal. The warden stayed throughout the
meeting.
James Dennis told us everything about political corruption in
Alabama. He never asked me for special treatment and I never gave any
to him. How could I? A month later his brother was involved in a fatal
car crash. As he lingered near death, I was in Israel on a Narcotics
Committee investigation trip at the time, Dennis called my staff from
prison to ask if they could help him to visit his dying but conscious
brother in the hospital. Prison officials said there was nothing my
staff could do to help James Dennis. His brother died. The warden, on
his own, did allow Dennis to go to his brother's funeral in leg
shackles and handcuffs. Weird.
Quite a character this James Dennis, an Elvis Presley look-a-like. He
looked more like Elvis than any professional Elvis impersonator I have
ever seen. He was even more handsome. But at age 28 he embezzled one-
half million dollars and put 13 phony $1,000 checks into young Peck's
campaign. Did the Justice Department clear Peck. They did not! They
never even investigated, as the Times alleges. When I brought the case
to Jimmy Carter's Justice Department, I was told to go to the Federal
Election Commission. The FEC fined Dennis $30,000, a record fine at
that time, and ordered Peck to return the money. Peck claims he did. I
repeat. The Justice Department in 1980 under Jimmy Carter said they did
not want any part of an investigation. After all, the election was over
and I had won by 51 to 46 percent and Carter had lost to Ronald Reagan.
Do you have those facts straight, L.A. Times?
Those are the facts, and I will flesh them out in person anytime the
Times wants to hear the truth.
Here is the second big lie. This is from the L.A. Times of Oct. 18,
1992:
While making an unsuccessful run for U.S. Senate in 1982,
Dornan accused Barry Goldwater Jr. of being involved in a
drug scandal on Capitol Hill and assisted law enforcement
officials in an investigation.
Lie, lie, on two points. The story on Barry and cocaine broke in
September 1982. Our primary race was over on June 8, 1982. And besides,
I never had any knowledge whatsoever about Goldwater's private life.
The Times goes on to say, ``Goldwater was never charged.'' Go look at
the files from the ethics committee investigation here in the House on
that case in 1983, which is after I had been gerrymandered out of my
seat. I did not serve in the 98th Congress.
Joseph Califano wrote the final report and said he believed Goldwater
to be guilty. I never bothered to learn either side of the story. It is
a dirty vicious lie for the L.A. Times to write that I accused or
investigated a friend and had him busted for cocaine use. I was with
Barry in England in September 1982 when an Air Force colonel handed me
a Newsweek magazine with the breaking story of cocaine use on Capitol
Hill in which Barry was named. I asked him about it. He denied the
story and I believed him. Barry and I had both been bested in the June
primary by Pete Wilson, now California's Governor.
Are you listening L.A. Times? Are you aware of these facts Shelby
Coffey or Marty Baron? Are you reading about blatant lies that your
paper has never corrected?
Vicious lie number 3. There are many more little mistakes and
untruths in the October 1992 profile that I will go into in the future.
Again, here is the L.A. Times of October 18, 1992:
At a debate during the 1986 race, Dornan launched a furious
series of character attacks on his opponent, then-Assemblyman
Richard Robinson. He accused the democrat of influence
peddling.
``Influence peddling'' are words the L.A. Times' used in their
investigative report. They are not mine. They were used in an
investigative piece about Richard Robinson. Yet the L.A. Times dredged
up its own words from years earlier and put them in my mouth 10 years
later. Wow, what chutzpah.
Again, the full L.A. Times quote continues:
Dornan accused the Democrat of influence peddling, bribery,
extortion, and dealing with teenage prostitutes in
Sacramento.
Good grief. All of that is in single quotes because it came from a
front-page L.A. Times story that of course I printed in a brochure and
mailed to every home in my district. Who wouldn't do that in a
campaign? Was I wrong to believe in the accuracy of the reporting of
the Times? Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely outrageous to attribute their
investigative conclusions to me, as if I were the one who conducted the
investigation.
Mr. Speaker, I have every right to take out a point of personal
privilege and do an hour in the middle of our congressional day or
this. I chose to do it this way and not interfere with our legislative
schedule.
But I will speak on this next year, Mr. Speaker, after I win with
over 55 percent of the vote in my district. That is, I will again try
to correct my personal career record with the truth unless the L.A.
Times has honorably corrected the record in the interim.
Thank you Mr. Speaker, have a nice election.
I submit for the Record the January 21, 1985 L.A. Times investigative
report.
[From the Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1985]
Ex-Aides Tie Moriarty to Political Sex Parties
(By Tracy Wood and George Frank)
Former top aides to Anaheim fireworks manufacturer W.
Patrick Moriarty say they have given criminal investigators a
detailed account of how Moriarty provided prostitutes for
state and local officials in an effort to gain political
clout.
The former aides also have told the story in interviews
with The Times, providing a growing list of governmental
officials, bankers and others the one-time aides said were
provided with prostitutes paid for by Moriarty.
Those named by former Moriarty associate Richard Raymond
Keith, 47, include former Assemblyman Bruce Young (D-
Norwalk). Assembly Democratic Leader Mike Roos of Los Angeles
and Assemblyman Richard Robinson (D-Santa Ana).
independent inquiry
Also listed by Keith and another former Moriarty aide, John
E. (Pete) Murphy, 62, were two local Southern California
officeholders--Los Angeles City Councilman David Cunningham
and Orange County Supervisor Ralph B. Clark.
The involvement of these officials was independently
checked by The Times with authoritative sources including
people who say they were present on occasions when
prostitutes were provided.
Roos, 39, said ``I'm just not going to respond.'' Robinson,
41, called the allegations ``ludicrous.'' Young, 38, who was
identified by The Times last September as allegedly having
been provided with Moriarty-paid prostitutes, has denied the
allegations.
Cunningham, 49, would only say the charges are
``ridiculous.''
Clark, 67, denied ever having engaged in sex with any
prostitutes. He did say he had attended several routine
luncheons in Los Angels with Keith and Orange County lobbyist
Frank Michelena. At one of the lunches, he said, there were
some ``public relations women'' and he gave them his card.
``This could be the cause of all this,'' Clark said.
The 53-year-old Moriarty, through his Sacramento attorney,
Donald Heller, denied any involvement with prostitutes.
Heller earlier had denied all allegations by Keith,
describing the former close associate of Moriarty as a person
who is ``trying to create a false defense for his own
conduct.''
Keith has been indicated on 13 counts of bankruptcy fraud,
income tax evasion and making false statements to a bank. He
is tentatively scheduled for trial next month.
Charges that Moriarty used prostitutes to influence public
officials and others first surfaced almost a year ago in an
affidavit containing information provided by California
Canadian Bank executive Jonas T. Gislason of El Toro to
Orange County district attorney's investigators.
Gislason accused Moriarty of providing prostitutes to him
and other bank officials who handled millions of dollars in
loans for the Anaheim businessman.
Gislason also told the investigators that he ``believed''
that Moriarty once provided a prostitute at the Anaheim
Sheraton Hotel for former Los Angeles Fire Chief John C.
Gerard, who supported a 1979 proposal to allow sale of safe-
and-sane fireworks in sections of Los Angeles lying within a
mile of other cities that allowed the sale of such fireworks.
Responding to Gislason's contention, Gerard said: ``To the
best of my recollection, I did not have sex with anyone at
the Sheraton Hotel.''
In response to the Gislason charges, Moriarty issued a
statement through his attorney, saying: ``It's unfortunate
this secret . . . investigation is retrogressing to a fishing
expendtion into the sewer.''
Last May, not long after Gislason's disclosures, state Sen.
H.L. Richardson (R-Glendora) told The Times that Moriarty
asked him to help stop the criminal investigation into the
fireworks manufacturer's political activities, particularly
the allegations about providing prostitutes for state
legislators and other public officials.
Richardson said he immediately reported Moriarty's overture
to Orange County Dist. Atty. Cecil Hicks, who was directing
the investigation.
Moriarty, Richardson said, ``wanted me to intercede (with
Hicks) and see if it (the political investigation) could be
dropped. He asked me to look into the matter and see if I
could be of some assistance. He wanted my advice. The best I
could give him was, `Well, let me look into it. . . .' He
(Moriarty) was trying to get it all (the investigation)
dropped.''
Richardson said Moriarty told him that the problem could
hurt ``innocent people,'' particularly families of public
officials.
Casual Reference
The senator quoted Moriarty as saying: ```Well, we had some
parties and you know how some of those whores and prostitutes
show up. . . .''' Richardson said Moriarty ``made it sound
like they just stumbled by, like it's a normal occasion for
them to show up at those things.''
Moriarty refused to respond to Richardson's charges.
The most recent disclosures by Moriarty's former associates
add new momentum to the prostitution aspect of a widening
inquiry being conducted jointly by the U.S. attorney's office
and the Orange County district attorney. The probe already
has resulted in the indictment of Moriarty on racketeering
charges in connection with licensing of a City of Commerce
poker parlor.
Keith, formerly Moriarty's closest business associate,
recently told a television interviewer why using prostitutes
was effective.
``It gave you the ability to not only socialize and develop
a cronyism with the individual but also (it was) a mild form
of extortion at certain points when the investigation became
involved and focused on the girls,'' Keith said in the
report, aired recently by KCBS-TV in Los Angeles.
In his interviews with The Times, Keith told of arranging
prostitutes for 10 public officials, eight bankers and dozens
of other friends and associates. The encounters, he said,
occurred in a variety of settings.
beverly hills parties
He and Murphy, both of whom say they also arranged paid sex
for themselves, gave accounts of frequent sex ``parties'' in
a Beverly Hills penthouse where guests also were treated to
hot and cold buffets and a well-stocked bar.
``It was like a New Year's Eve party,'' Keith said. ``If
somebody fell in love, fine.''
Keith and Murphy also listed liaisons that took place at
hotels in Anaheim, Buena Park, Fullerton, Los Angeles,
Sacramento and such faraway places as New York, Washington
and London.
Keith said he would pay for the prostitutes initially and
then Moriarty would reimburse him. Most times, Keith said, he
would cash a check and deliver the cash directly to a Los
Angeles madam or he would pay some of the prostitutes
directly.
He said he delivered between $300,000 and $400,000 to the
women for their services. Keith estimated that since 1978
Moriarty and his associates have paid between $600,000 and
$750,000 for prostitutes. Former Moriarty associate Murphy
said Keith's estimates ``sounded pretty close.''
To get reimbursed, Keith said, ``I would say, `Pat, I need
money.' I would put down on a slip of paper, I would . . .
say whatever hookers were involved in that week's activities
`needs $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, $5,000 or $10,000' or whatever
it was. (Or) I would say, `I need $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000'
to cover whatever political contributions I made (for
Moriarty).
``He (Moriarty) would issue a check for $5,000 or $25,000
or $50,000 to cover whatever we needed,'' Keith said.
Keith said he has given investigators the names of all
those he can recall providing with prostitutes. The Times has
reported only the names of officials whose participation
could be independently checked with authoritative sources
including people who say they were present when the
encounters occurred. These sources have declined to be
identified.
Keith made a distinction between the politicians to whom he
said prostitutes were provided.
He said Supervisor Clark and Councilman Cunningham
requested prostitutes `'directly as prostitutes and at all
times knew they were prostitutes.'' Assemblyman Young, Roos
and Robinson, according to Keith, could have thought the
prostitutes were ``friends of Dick Keith's'' and that the
Beverly Hills penthouse where they has sex ``could have been
Dick Keith's apartment.''
The assemblymen, Keith said, ``could have thought they were
party girls or good time girls.'' He added that there was
never any money exchanged in front of any politicians.
Over the years, dozens of prostitutes were used, Keith
said, including part-timers he described as ``pro-ams.''
Murphy spoke almost paternally of the professional
prostitutes he called ``my soiled doves.''
Moriarty began hiring prostitutes in the early 1970s as a
way of entertaining businessmen, according to Murphy.
That worked so well, Murphy said, that Moriarty decided to
use prostitutes in the political arena.
``It worked with other things so let's try it with them
(public officials),'' Murphy explained of Moriarty's original
practice of providing prostitutes for businessmen.
``After a while, the politicians, like the businessman,
felt they were entitled to this. They felt we were obligated
to entertain them. After they went once, they expected it
regularly,'' Murphy said.
____________________