[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 102 (Thursday, July 17, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1451-E1452]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       WAS JOHN HUANG DEBRIEFED?

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. GERALD B.H. SOLOMON

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 17, 1997

  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, our worst fears about the depth and 
significance of the administration's scandals are being realized.
  Is there anyone who still thinks this is just about campaign finance 
reform? We read in today's Washington Post column of Robert D. Novak 
the headline ``Was John Huang Debriefed?'' Was he, indeed? I raised 
this question quite some time ago with Commerce Secretary Daley and was 
met with the delays and stonewalling that have characterized this 
administration. What else are we to conclude, but that at the very 
least when it comes to Mr. Huang and security matters this 
administration has something to hide.
  I place the Novak column in today's Record.

               [From the Washington Post, July 17, 1997]

                       Was John Huang Debriefed?

                          (By Robert D. Novak)

       A previously missing government form that should have 
     indicated whether John Huang was debriefed by a security 
     officer before he left the Commerce Department two years ago 
     turned up last Friday. But the place where the now infamous 
     Democratic fund-raiser was supposed to have signed is blank.
       Any government official with top-secret access--Deputy 
     Assistant Secretary of Commerce Huang included--must attest 
     to the return of all classified information when debriefed as 
     he leaves the government. But Huang's unsigned debriefing 
     document underlines questions about what he did with 
     government secrets and how well they were protected.
       Complete answers can come only from investigators with 
     subpoena powers. Contrary to the White House mantra, current 
     Senate hearings concern much more than campaign finance 
     reform--such as Huang's security clearance, dubious on its 
     face. Immediately following CIA briefings, Huang would 
     regularly contact the Chinese Embassy. Yet, even after 
     resigning from the government and going to the Democratic 
     National Committee (DNC), he received another security 
     clearance. The CIA, which had given him documents, was not 
     alerted to Huang's change of status.
       Under the Freedom of Information Act, the conservative 
     weekly Human Events several weeks ago obtained from the 
     Commerce Department Huang's ``Separation Clearance 
     Certificate,'' noting that his ``effective date of 
     separation'' was Jan. 17, 1995 (though he actually went to 
     the DNC in December). Commerce officials signed the document 
     on Jan. 22, noting Huang's return of government charge cards, 
     his parking permit and his diplomatic passport. ``Security 
     debriefing and credentials'' was noted and signed by a 
     Commerce Department security officer named Robert W. Mack.
       At that debriefing, Huang should have signed a Standard 
     Form 312 acknowledging return of classified material. But an 
     official Commerce spokesman told Human Events editor Terrence 
     Jeffrey two weeks ago: ``The recollection of our security 
     personnel is that he [Huang] was debriefed but that a 
     Standard Form 312 has not been located.''
       What's more, there are indications it was never given to 
     congressional investigating committees. On July 3, Rep. Jerry 
     Solomon (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Rules Committee, 
     wrote Commerce Secretary William Daley demanding the Form 312 
     by July 9.
       That deadline came and went, but late on Friday, July 11, 
     the piece of paper was dispatched to Solomon. It showed that 
     on July 18, 1994, Huang signed for his security briefing. But 
     Huang never signed the debriefing acknowledgment that ``I 
     have returned all classified information in my custody.''
       If security officer Mack signed off for the debriefing, why 
     didn't Huang? ``For reasons

[[Page E1452]]

     that we have not determined,'' Commerce press officer Maria 
     Cardona told me. I called Mack himself, but he said he could 
     not reply. ``When you're as low on the totem pole as I am . . 
     .'' he said, trailing off.
       However, an unsigned Commerce document of Dec. 9, 1996, 
     supplied to Solomon earlier this year, quotes Mack as saying 
     that ``he personally briefed Huang and had him sign a SF-
     312'' in July 1994 but adds: ``Mack has no recall of the 
     debriefing'' the following January. The memorandum continues 
     that ``he does recall'' a call from a high-ranking official 
     ``to make sure that Huang did not lose his top-secret 
     clearance'' but kept it as a ``consultant.''
       ``Mack said to the best of his knowledge, Huang never 
     worked as a consultant, but DISCO [Defense Industrial 
     Security Clearance Office] did issue a top-secret clearance 
     to Huang. . . . DISCO has never been notified to cancel the 
     clearance,'' the memo continued. The memo writer said the 
     clearance, issued on Dec. 14, 1995, was still valid on Dec. 
     9, 1996.
       Yet another mysterious document: Commerce security officer 
     Richard Duncan--Mack's colleague--on Feb. 13, 1995, wrote an 
     internal memo listing Huang among other officials as signing 
     SF-312s. Was this an attempt to create a paper trail?
       This is the curious conclusion of John Huang's access to 
     secret information. It began with the official request Jan. 
     31, 1994 that the required background investigation for Huang 
     be waived because of ``the critical need for his expertise . 
     . . by Secretary [Ron] Brown.'' When Huang resigned a year 
     later, Assistant Secretary Charles Meissner proposed the 
     consultant's role, in order for Huang to retain access to 
     classified documents. Brown and Meissner both perished in the 
     tragic plane crash in Croatia, but their patronage of John 
     Huang remains a fit subject for scrutiny.

     

                          ____________________