[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6634-6638]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           CHINESE ESPIONAGE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the issues of 
Communist China's efforts to steal our most advanced nuclear secrets, 
their funneling of illegal contributions to President Clinton's 1996 
reelection campaign, and how the Clinton administration, either 
intentionally or through incompetence has irreparably damaged and 
compromised the security of every man, woman, and child in the United 
States.
  Mr. Speaker, last summer during President Clinton's trip to China, 
Jiang Zemin, the President of China, told him that he had no 
involvement in campaign fund-raising in the United States; and 
President Clinton took his word for it.
  In that July 2, 1998, press conference, President Clinton said, 
``They looked into that, and he was obviously certain, and I do believe 
him, that he had not ordered or authorized or approved such a thing, 
and that he could find no evidence that anybody in governmental 
authority had done that,'' giving illegal campaign contributions to the 
Democratic National Committee or the President's Reelection Committee.
  Why would President Clinton say that, Mr. Speaker? The New York Times 
reported in May that Johnny Chung was given $300,000 by Ms. Liu Chao-
ying, a Chinese aerospace executive who is a lieutenant colonel in the 
People's Liberation Army in Communist Army, and her father at one time 
was the head of the Chinese People's Liberation Army.
  In April of 1996, 27 months before President Clinton's meeting with 
President Jiang of China, Sandy Berger, the head of the National 
Security Council, was briefed that China had stolen W-88 nuclear 
warhead designs, neutron bomb data, and that a spy might still be 
passing secrets to China at Los Alamos, one of our nuclear research 
facilities.
  Now, the W-88 nuclear warhead design is a miniaturized nuclear 
warhead, and you can put as many as 10 of them on one missile. So you 
can hit 10 cities with one missile launched from China, thereby 
endangering as many as 50 or 60 million Americans. And the neutron bomb 
data, that kind of information, would allow an enemy of the United 
States, Communist China, to launch a missile at the United States with 
a neutron bomb warhead, and when it explodes, kills everybody in the 
city but it does not destroy the infrastructure, the roads, the 
bridges, or the buildings.
  Now, Sandy Berger, the head of the NSC, would have had to have told 
the President about this. Why would President Clinton say that he 
believed President Jiang of China?
  Mr. Speaker, on April 8, 1999, at a joint press conference with 
President Clinton, when Communist China's Prime Minister Zhu Rongji was 
here, he was asked about China's theft of U.S. nuclear secrets; and 
Prime Minister Zhu said, ``I have no knowledge whatsoever of any charge 
of any allegation of espionage or the theft of nuclear technology, and 
I do not believe such story.''
  And President Clinton responded, ``China is a big country with a big 
government, and I can only say that America is a big country with a big 
government and occasionally things happen in this country and in this 
government that I do not know anything about.'' And he was indicating 
that the stealing of this technology and the illegal campaign 
contributions that were authorized by the leaders of the Communist 
Chinese Government could have happened without their knowledge.
  If that happens in Communist China, they either shoot them or put 
them in prison. So it is disingenuous for the President to say that he 
believed him when he knew full well that this was taking place.
  In July of 1997, a year before his meeting with President Jiang and 
27 months before his meeting with Prime Minister Zhu, the 
administration acknowledges that NSC Director Sandy Berger briefed the 
President, told him about weaknesses in our nuclear laboratories and 
about China's spying.
  So when President Clinton met with President Jiang and Prime Minister 
Zhu, he had already been briefed by NSC Director Berger sometime before 
about the possibility of spying and espionage taking place at our 
nuclear facilities.
  Before the President met with Zhu, the L.A. Times reported that 
Johnny Chung had testified under oath that he was directed to make 
illegal campaign contributions to the President's reelection campaign 
by General Ji Shengde, who met with him three times and ordered that 
$300,000 be directed to Chung for political contributions, and that 
there were other conduits, other people that they were working with to 
get money into the President's reelection campaign and to the 
Democratic National Committee.
  Now, Johnny Chung was a friend of the President. He was in the White 
House 50 times. He brought other people in, Communist leaders, to meet

[[Page 6635]]

with the President. And he was one of the major conduits of bringing 
illegal campaign contributions into this country.
  General Ji Shengde was the head of the Chinese Communist military 
intelligence, the equivalent of our Defense Intelligence Agency in this 
country; and he was the one that was giving the order to funnel these 
illegal campaign contributions from communist China into the 
President's reelection campaign and into the Democrat National 
Committee.
  Now, why would President Clinton suggest that maybe the Chinese 
leadership did not know about the spying at Los Alamos? Why would he 
say that? Mr. Speaker, when they do something in China, as I said 
before, they either shoot them or throw them in jail.
  Now, regarding Chinese espionage. In April of 1996, 27 months before 
President Clinton accepted President Jiang's denial, and 3 years before 
he suggested that China's spying might be the fault of ``big 
government,'' the Department of Energy's chief of intelligence Notra 
Trulock told National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, the head of the 
NSC, that China had stolen both W-88 nuclear warhead designs, that is 
the miniature nuclear warhead that they can put 10 of them on one 
missile, and neutron bomb data; that a spy might still be passing those 
secrets to China from Los Alamos, our nuclear research facility.
  Mr. Speaker, according to Energy officials who took part in the 
meeting and read highly classified materials used to prepare for it, 
Sandy Berger was also told how the stolen technology could fit into 
Beijing's overall nuclear strategy and how the W-88 technology could be 
used as part of a plan to rely on the mobility of truck-launched 
missiles with small warheads to better survive a counter-nuclear attack 
by the United States.
  According to the New York Times, Energy officials said the briefing 
was a culmination of a 5-month interagency study of the W-88 theft and 
related issues and it was pretty was ``a pretty specific briefing.'' 
One American official who was present said that. Sandy Berger was even 
told that investigators had identified a prime suspect at Los Alamos in 
the theft and would shortly turn their information over to the FBI for 
a formal criminal inquiry.
  Why did Sandy Berger, the head of the NSC, appearing on NBC's Meet 
the Press last month, say the information he was told about 3 years ago 
was very general and very preliminary? Why did he say we did not have a 
suspect in the theft of the W-88 technology? Why did he say that we did 
not know who, we did not really know how, and we did not really know 
what?
  We know at the end of the briefing that I just talked about, 
according to officials that were present, Notra Trulock referred to a 
report from a Chinese source which had been provided to the Department 
of Energy by the FBI in March of 1996, over 3 years ago.
  Mr. Speaker, the Chinese source indicated that officials inside 
China's intelligence service were boasting about how they had just 
stolen secrets from the United States and had used them to improve 
Beijing's neutron bomb.
  The source further suggested that Chinese agents solved a 1988 design 
problem by coming back to the United States in 1995 to steal more 
secrets. The source, who in the past has provided reliable information, 
even detailed how the information was transferred from the United 
States to communist China.
  According to one official, the intelligence about the neutron bomb 
was hot off the press and it was included in the briefing to warn the 
White House of the possibility of continuing Chinese espionage.
  Mr. Speaker, in November of 1996, almost 1\1/2\ years after first 
suspecting the theft of nuclear secret from Los Alamos, Charles B. 
Curtis, the Deputy Secretary for Energy, ordered a series of security 
measures to be carried out on a straight timetable during the next 
several months. None of these measures were carried out until September 
of 1998, almost 2 years later, and there was a threat and a strong 
indication that espionage had taken place and our top secrets were 
being stolen by the communist Chinese. Why did we wait 2 years? Why did 
they not implement those series of security measures?
  Mr. Speaker, in March of 1997, 4 months before President Clinton was 
scheduled to visit China, the Energy Department's Acting Secretary for 
Defense Programs, Victor Reis, and the Acting Director for 
Nonproliferation, Kenneth Baker, prevented Notra Trulock, when he saw 
further evidence that the Chinese had other ongoing spy operations at 
the weapons lab and he asked to meet with Secretary of Energy Federico 
Pena, they kept him from briefing Secretary Pena for 4 months. Why?
  Mr. Speaker, in April of 1997, when the FBI requested a wiretap to be 
put on the phone of the conversations of Wen Ho Lee, the chief suspect 
in the theft of America's W-88 miniaturized warhead technology, the 
nuclear technology, they were turned down by the Justice Department.
  Why would the Justice Department turn down this request for 
electronic technology to be put on this gentleman's phone when they 
thought and highly suspected and even knew that he was giving top 
secret nuclear technology to the Chinese communists that endangered 
every man, woman, and child in this country?
  Why would the Justice Department not allow electronic technology and 
wiretaps to be put on his phone? Why? And who at the Justice Department 
turned down this request? This guy was accused of stealing America's 
most advanced nuclear technology. Why was this request turned down? 
Why?
  In August of 1997, FBI Director Louis Freeh told Energy Department 
officials that the Bureau did not have enough evidence to arrest Wen Ho 
Lee, but that Mr. Lee could now be removed from his position without 
harming their investigation and that DOE was to determine whether or 
not to keep Lee on since ``the case was not as important as what damage 
he might do or continue to do by accessing additional information.''

                              {time}  1815

  Why did the Department of Energy keep Lee on with FBI approval, 
retaining his security clearances until December of 1998, about 2 years 
later, when he was moved to a nonclassified area and took a lie 
detector test for the first time. Why?
  Mr. Speaker, again in 1997, in July, a year before his meeting with 
President Jiang and 21 months before his meeting with Prime Minister 
Zhu, Sandy Berger, the head of the NSC, received a second detailed 
briefing about China's spying and soon after told President Clinton 
about weaknesses at the laboratories and about China's spying.
  Mr. Speaker, in August of 1997, Gary Samore, the senior National 
Security Council official assigned to the China spy case asked, now, 
get this, asked the CIA director to seek an alternative analysis on how 
China developed its smaller warheads. In other words, he did not want 
to talk about them being stolen from Los Alamos through espionage. He 
wanted to find out an alternative analysis from the CIA on how they 
might have gotten this technology. Immediately after he got this 
briefing from Notra Trulock in August of 1997. Why, when presented with 
such overwhelming evidence of Chinese espionage, did Gary Samore at the 
National Security Council seek to downplay the significance of the 
information, asking the CIA to come up with another explanation about 
China's advances? Why?
  Mr. Speaker, in May of 1998, Notra Trulock, Energy Department's 
director of intelligence, was demoted to acting deputy director of 
intelligence after he made a third report to the Energy Department 
Inspector General about a steady pattern of suppression of 
counterintelligence issues. Somebody was trying to keep a lid on all 
this.
  Mr. Speaker, in July 1998, the same month that President Clinton was 
meeting with China's President Jiang, when the House intelligence 
committee requested an update on the spy case from Notra Trulock, 
Trulock testified that Acting Energy Secretary Elizabeth Moler ordered 
him not to go to

[[Page 6636]]

the panel for fear that the information would be used to attack 
President Clinton's China policy. Why did Elizabeth Moler do this?
  Mr. Speaker, the Chinese thefts of U.S. nuclear secrets, according to 
Paul Redmund, the CIA's chief spy hunter, were, quote, far more 
damaging to national security than Aldrich Ames--he is the spy who is 
now in jail--and the spying would turn out to be as bad as the 
Rosenbergs. Now you recall the Rosenbergs were the ones who gave 
nuclear secrets to the Russians and the Soviet Union back during and 
after World War II. Both of them were executed for giving that nuclear 
technology to the Soviets so that they could build their nuclear 
missiles that were directed at the United States. And he said, this Mr. 
Redmund, that this spying would turn out to be as bad or worse, or as 
bad as the Rosenberg case. You can see how really bad this is.
  Mr. Speaker, at the same time that China was conducting its highly 
successful espionage operations against the United States, the 
Committee on Government Reform, which I chair, for 2 years has known 
about and tracked millions of dollars that were given to the Democrat 
Party and the President's reelection committee that can be directly 
traced to Hong Kong, Macao, Indonesia, South America and Communist 
China. Mr. Speaker, long before President Clinton met with President 
Jiang and long before he met with Prime Minister Zhu, we knew for a 
long time that China's head of military intelligence, General Ji 
Shengde, had been pulling the strings for a massive conglomerate called 
China Resources which U.S. intelligence agencies have said operates 
fronts for the People's Liberation Army in Hong Kong and worldwide.
  Mr. Speaker, for a long time we have known that China Resources has 
joint ventures with the Indonesia-based international firm called the 
Lippo Group. We have also known that the Lippo Group is run by Mochtar 
and James Riady. We have known that the ethnic Chinese James Riady is a 
close friend of the President's and has frequently visited him at the 
White House. He was also instrumental in getting John Huang appointed 
to a very important position at the Commerce Department and later at 
the Democrat National Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, we have known that James Riady's chief adviser on 
political donations was John Huang, who is a former employee of the 
Lippo Group and who accepted this job at the Commerce Department and 
then left the Commerce Department to work at the Democrat National 
Committee where, with the help of James Riady and the Lippo Group and 
Mochtar, he collected nearly $3 million in illegal campaign 
contributions for the Democrat Party and the President's reelection 
committee.
  Mr. Speaker, we have in our possession checks, copies of checks which 
represent illegal contributions to the Democrat Party drawn from 
accounts in the Lippo Bank which is controlled by the Riady family.
  It is now being reported that Johnny Chung, who gave more than 
$360,000 to the Democrat Party, has told a grand jury that some of the 
money he contributed to the Democrat Party came from China's head of 
military intelligence, the very same people that wanted this nuclear 
technology, General Ji Shengde. General Ji is the man in the Chinese 
military most likely to be directing China's spy operations and most 
likely to be interested in America's nuclear secrets.
  Mr. Speaker, it now appears that General Ji was the mastermind behind 
China's efforts to get the Clinton-Gore team reelected. Johnny Chung 
has reportedly told a grand jury he was coordinating efforts to funnel 
money into the campaign, along with others, according to General Ji. Is 
it possible that he was working with John Huang and Charlie Trie as 
well?
  Mr. Speaker, Johnny Chung, John Huang and Charlie Trie together 
raised over $3 million in illegal donations, that we know of, that have 
been linked to the Bank of China.
  Mr. Speaker, it is important to repeat that on July 2, 1998 during 
President Clinton's trip to China when he was asked to comment on his 
discussions with President Jiang Zemin about China's involvement in 
campaign fund-raising in the United States, President Clinton said, 
``they looked into that, and he was obviously certain, and I do believe 
him, that he had not ordered or authorized or approved such a thing, 
the illegal contributions, and that he could find no evidence that 
anybody in governmental authority had done that.'' The President said 
he believed that.
  Mr. Speaker, President Clinton at his own press conference on March 
19, 1998, in response to the question, ``Can you assure us, the 
American people, that under your watch no valuable secrets were lost,'' 
and he said, quote: Can I tell you there has been no espionage at the 
lab since I have been President? I can tell you that no one has 
reported to me they suspect such a thing has occurred.
  Mr. Speaker, on April 8, 1999, at a joint press conference with 
President Clinton when China's Prime Minister Zhu Rongji was asked 
about China's theft of nuclear secrets, Zhu said, ``I have no knowledge 
whatsoever of any charge of any allegation of espionage or the theft of 
nuclear technology and I don't believe such a story.'' This is the 
prime minister of China.
  President Clinton responded, ``China is a big country with a big 
government and I can only say that America is a big country with a big 
government and occasionally things happen in this government that I do 
not know anything about.''
  Mr. Speaker, how could President Clinton, who knew at least 1 year 
before meeting with President Jiang and probably as early as April of 
1996 about Chinese spying, and had all this information about illegal 
Chinese efforts to funnel money into the 1996 Clinton-Gore reelection 
efforts, say, ``I do believe'' President Jiang? It is just almost 
disingenuous.
  Mr. Speaker, it is inconceivable that President Clinton did not know 
about China's espionage and China's funneling of illegal contributions 
into this reelection campaign when he met with Prime Minister Zhu.
  Mr. Speaker, how could the President who had been briefed by Sandy 
Berger in July of 1997 and probably as early as April of 1996 about 
Chinese spying suggest that maybe China's spying was the result of 
``big government'' and that maybe China's leadership did not know about 
their spying at Los Alamos? Wen Ho Lee we know had not only been 
involved in that spying, at least that is what we believe now, and he 
has already taken some lie detector tests and is still under 
investigation, we also know that he called convicted spy Peter Lee at 
the Livermore Laboratories where a neutron bomb was being researched 
some time ago. How could the President say that this was a result of 
big government?
  It is impossible that the Chinese leadership did not know about this 
spying. You get shot in China when you do something like that without 
telling the leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, on March 7, 1997, President Clinton said, ``I don't 
believe you can find any evidence of the fact that I had changed 
government policy solely because of a contribution.''
  Mr. Speaker, in February of 1998, 5 months before he met President 
Jiang and 14 months before he met Prime Minister Zhu, President Clinton 
ignored strenuous objections from the Department of Justice which was 
investigating the Loral Corporation for an unauthorized technology 
transfer to China and granted Loral a waiver for official transfers of 
essentially the same missile technology to China that Loral was being 
criminally investigated for giving to China without authorization in 
1996.
  Bernard Schwartz, the chairman of Loral Corporation, contributed over 
$1.365 million to various Democratic accounts, including the reelection 
of the President.
  Mr. Speaker, in a March interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, when 
questioned about China's spying at Los Alamos, Vice President Gore 
said, ``The law enforcement agencies pursued it aggressively with our 
full support.''

[[Page 6637]]

  On March 14, 1999, Sandy Berger asserted that upon learning of 
China's nuclear espionage, the administration, quote, imposed and 
enforced the strictest controls on China of any country except those 
for which we have embargoes, such as Libya, end quote.
  Mr. Speaker, if the Vice President and NSC Director Sandy Berger are 
right, why after showing deceptive answers in his first lie detector 
test in December of 1998 did it take the Clinton administration another 
2 months to give Mr. Lee a second test? After failing that second test, 
why did it take them another month to get rid of him?
  Why did Elizabeth Moler, who ordered Notra Trulock not to brief the 
House Intelligence Committee say that she could not recall being told 
about Trulock's request for a briefing even when a memorandum from Mr. 
Trulock concerning the briefing request was found in the safe in her 
office after she left her job at the Energy Department?
  Mr. Speaker, if what the Vice President and Sandy Berger say is true, 
why, within 2 months after becoming Energy Secretary in January of 
1993, when Keith Fultz, Assistant Comptroller General with the General 
Accounting Office, briefed Hazel O'Leary and strongly recommended that 
the Department of Energy improve controls over foreign visitors to DOE 
weapons laboratories and urged O'Leary to seek a further briefing about 
espionage at DOE laboratories from U.S. intelligence agencies, did 
Fultz say that O'Leary say she did not seem very interested in the 
matter?
  Why, according to the Washington Times, did a former contractor for 
one of the Department of Energy's three nuclear weapons laboratories 
recall that O'Leary, quote, decided in her infinite wisdom to lessen 
security at the labs? Nuclear technology is being stolen and she 
lessened security at the labs. The Cold War is over, the contractor 
says that she indicated, and in Mrs. O'Leary's mind it was not 
necessary to have so much money spent on security. We did away with the 
people in actual security guard forces, security clearances were deemed 
virtually unnecessary in all but a very few areas, former secure areas 
were opened up, and many documents and files were allowed to be seen 
which at one time were of a secret or classified nature.
  Why, according to the Washington Times, did the White House 
originally tell the Cox committee that the President was not told about 
Chinese espionage until 1998? We know he must have known back as far as 
1997 or 1996 when his NSC director, Sandy Berger, found out about it.
  Why did David Leavy, spokesman for the National Security Council, 
explain this discrepancy by saying, ``Well, after the Cox committee 
process, we've remembered more.''
  Mr. Speaker, on April 7, 1998, speaking at a U.S. Institute for Peace 
event, President Clinton implied that anyone critical of China was 
using, quote, caricatures and exaggerating the Chinese threat.
  Let me share a portion of the President's speech according to the 
record.
  ``Now, we hear that China is a country to be feared. A growing number 
of people say that it is the next great threat to our security and our 
well-being.
  ``They claim it is building up its military machine for aggression 
and using the profits of our trade to pay for it. They urge us, 
therefore, to contain China, to deny it access to our markets, our 
technology, our investment, and to bolster the strength of our allies 
in Asia to counter the threat a strong China will pose in the 21st 
century. What about that scenario? Clearly, if it chooses to do so, 
China could pursue such a course, pouring much more of its wealth into 
military might and into traditional great power geopolitics.
  ``This would rob it of much of its future prosperity, and it is far 
from inevitable that China will choose this path. Therefore, I would 
argue that we should not make it more likely that China choose this 
path by acting as if that decision has already been made.
  ``We have to follow a different course. We cannot afford 
caricatures.''
  Well, the President knew that they had been stealing nuclear secrets 
from our laboratories, our nuclear laboratories, neutron bomb 
technology, W88 technology, MRVing technology for warheads and it had 
been given to them by a person who worked for the laboratory. The 
President had to know this as far back as early 1997, and yet they kept 
the man on there for over 2 more years and the President said we do not 
need to worry about that?
  Why is China taking this additional nuclear technology if they do not 
really need it, if they do not have any intentions of using it? Just a 
couple of years ago, they fired some missiles into the Sea of China 
next to Taiwan. One of the leading military people in China said that 
he did not think the United States would worry too much about that 
because if we got involved, we would be much more concerned about Los 
Angeles than we would about Taiwan.

                              {time}  1830

  The implication was that there might be a threat that they would do 
something like launching a missile at Los Angeles if we stuck our nose 
into the Taiwanese issue.
  Mr. Speaker, on March 29, 1999, one week before President Clinton's 
press conference with Chinese Prime Minister Zhu, Newsweek reported 
that when the CIA recently showed data obtained from its sources on 
China to a team of nuclear weapons experts, they practically fainted. 
These are our nuclear weapons experts, and when the CIA recently showed 
that data that was obtained from its sources about China's stealing of 
that technology, our nuclear weapons guys almost fainted.
  The data, much of it written in Chinese and never read, had been 
stored in CIA computers and forgotten until now. It showed that Chinese 
scientists were routinely using phrases, descriptions and concepts that 
came straight out of U.S. weapons laboratories like Los Alamos. ``The 
Chinese penetration is total,'' said one official close to the 
investigation. ``They are deep, deep into the lab's black programs,'' 
and black programs are our most sensitive nuclear technology security 
issues, and they are deep, deep into them according to our experts.
  Newsweek even reported that China may have even recently acquired two 
U.S. cruise missiles that failed to detonate during last fall's U.S. 
attack on terrorist Osama bin Laden and may be attempting to copy their 
sophisticated guidance and avoidance avionics technology.
  Mr. Speaker, how can the President say that anyone who is critical of 
China and the threat are using caricatures?
  Mr. Speaker, over the last 2 years my committee has been conducting 
an investigation into illegal fund-raising including illegal efforts by 
the Chinese to influence our elections. We have had 121 people. Nothing 
like this in the history of the country: 121 people have either taken 
the Fifth Amendment or fled the country. A number of the most important 
people on this list are now in Communist China. When my staff attempted 
to travel to China to interview some of these people, the Chinese 
government denied us visas and said they would arrest anybody we sent 
over there to investigate this.
  Mr. Speaker, we asked the Bank of China to provide us with bank 
records that would show the origins of millions of dollars in foreign 
money that was funneled into the President's reelection committee and 
the Democrat National Committee. The Bank of China has turned us down 
flat. The Clinton administration has refused to do anything to help us 
get this important information.
  Mr. Speaker, when so many people take the Fifth Amendment or flee the 
country, it is obvious that a lot of laws have been broken.
  Mr. Speaker, the Clinton administration failure to investigate 
China's funneling of illegal contributions into the Clinton-Gore 
reelection campaign and China's theft of America's most advanced 
nuclear secrets are absolute tragedies. Either intentionally or through 
its own incompetence, the Clinton administration has caused irreparable 
damage to America's national security. It has compromised the

[[Page 6638]]

security of every man, woman and child in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, this has to be investigated. The American public has a 
right to know what is going on regarding these illegal campaign 
contributions, and the thefts of our nuclear technology, and whether or 
not there is any connection between the two. We can no longer accept 
the compromise of this nation's national security, and we intend to 
pursue it as hard as we possibly can. But we need the help of the 
Justice Department, which has been stonewalling us, and we need the 
administration to give us some assistance as well.

                          ____________________