[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 20362-20367]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                             NIGHTSIDE CHAT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayworth). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) is 
recognized for 60 minutes.


                           Overview of Speech

  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, good evening. It is time for another 
nightside chat.
  This evening I want to cover a couple of areas with my colleagues 
here. First of all, a couple comments about the Olympics, and then I 
would like to move on.
  I had a discussion last week and in fact over the weekend I talked 
with a good close friend of mine, his name is Al, and we discussed a 
little about the situation with Wen Ho Lee, who is the spy, or the 
fellow who was accused of spying, but the gentleman in New Mexico, and 
I kind of need to retract my words there, I will not exactly call him a 
``gentleman'' from my point of view, you will see. I think the facts 
are going to be very interesting.
  Last week, as my friend Al and I discussed, I laid out what I thought 
was a very strong case that makes it very clear that this fellow in New 
Mexico, who has been accused of a crime, and, by the way, who is a 
convicted felon, in fact is not a hero. He is not a martyr. He is not 
somebody who has been victimized. He is not a victim of racial 
profiling. He is not a victim of the race card. I want to discuss that 
case in a little more depth, in fact in a great deal of depth tonight. 
So I am looking forward to that discussion.


             Disrespect Shown by American Olympic Athletes

  First of all, let us talk about the Olympics. That is an exciting 
event. All of us had an opportunity, I am sure, to watch the events, 
and we are very proud of our athletes and the sports people that we 
send over to participate in these events and the medals. I mean, of 
course, in the West we are absolutely thrilled about the wrestler out 
of Wyoming who beat that Russian wrestler. To me, that was probably the 
highlight of the Olympics.
  But let me say, first of all, I consider our athletes obviously very, 
very capable young people who I am proud to have represent the United 
States, in most cases. These athletes, in my opinion, while I would not 
call them heroes, you certainly would call them celebrities. They have 
spent a lot of hard years to represent the United States.
  But what I saw over the weekend dismayed me, and I want to be very 
specific about it, because it applies only to maybe four, maybe five at 
least, not the whole bunch. But, unfortunately, it kind of casts a 
shadow over all of our U.S. Olympic athletes, and that is those Olympic 
athletes representing the United States who thought it was kind of 
entertaining to show a lack of respect as they were receiving their 
medals and the Star Spangled Banner was played.
  Perhaps it would be good for my colleagues to continue to remind our 
constituents just exactly what that song, the Star Spangled Banner, our 
National anthem, what it means and where it came from and what it 
represents.
  Look, this is not some song by Metallica out there or some other 
group that is used for entertainment. This was a song that was written 
on sacrifice. This was a song written with the idea of patriotism. This 
was a song that was written in recognition of the many Americans who 
fought to preserve this country. They did not fight in Olympic games, 
they did not fight on a relay team to get the gold medal, they fought 
on a battlefield, and a lot of them gave their lives.
  I will tell you, to every veteran in this country, in fact, to every 
citizen in this country, those athletes, who in my opinion embarrassed 
the United States of America with their behavior, owe an apology to 
every citizen in this country, and they especially owe an apology to 
those veterans who really went out and fought the wars, who really have 
represented this country since its conception.
  Mr. Speaker, we all have an obligation, whether the moment is an 
exciting moment or whether the moment is at a funeral, or whether the 
moment is at the beginning of a basketball game or a football game, we 
have an obligation to citizens of this country to respect the history 
of the Star Spangled Banner.
  While we do not stand there and recite the history of the Star 
Spangled Banner, we as Americans have that song to kind of be a symbol 
to the world, and even as a reminder to ourselves, about what this 
great country is all about and to see that some of our outstanding 
young people in this country who have been given the privilege, and, by 
the way, it is not in reverse, it is not what the country could do, so-
to-speak, for those athletes, it is what those athletes can do to 
represent our country, and they do not represent our country when they 
stand there and make the kind of mockery or the kind of little 
professional side show they thought was entertaining for the cameras.
  I hope those individuals out there who give sponsorships and 
commercial contracts keep in mind what these particular individuals 
did, how they embarrassed, in my opinion, the rest of the Olympic team, 
and how they embarrassed our country, and, most of all, how they 
embarrassed the heritage of this country there during our National 
anthem.
  We have every right to be proud. Boy, one does not have to go very 
far on our streets to find people who would tell you just how proud 
they are of this country, what kind of opportunity this country 
offered. I am sorry to say that we saw that on national TV. In fact, 
the entire world saw it on TV, and it did nothing at all, it did 
nothing at all, to exemplify the fine athletes that we had over there 
representing our country. I think it is very unfortunate that that is 
what occurred.


                The Wen Ho Lee Case: Who is the Victim?

  Let me completely shift gears. Over the last several weeks I have 
about had it with what I am reading in some of the national media on a 
public relations campaign put forward, in my opinion, by some defense 
attorneys on an individual named Wen Ho Lee.
  As you may recall, Wen Ho Lee was the fellow who was arrested and 
held by the FBI on 59 counts involving some of the highest, most 
sensitive secrets this Nation has ever held, that is the secrets on our 
thermo-nuclear weapons.
  I used to practice law, and I learned a long time ago, although I did 
not do criminal law, I was acquainted with criminal law. I used to be a 
police officer, and there are a couple of things I want to point out at 
the beginning of

[[Page 20363]]

my comments about observations I made when I was a police officer and 
when I practiced law.
  Let me start, first of all, when I was a police officer. When I was 
an officer and I would arrive at the scene of an accident, a lot of 
people would have a lot of different stories. What I learned time and 
time and time again as a police officer is what you see when you first 
get there a lot of times is not really what you come up with after you 
have been there for a while. So what seems obvious to you when you pull 
up to the scene of an incident is oftentimes not as obvious as you 
thought it was.
  In other words, you may pull up to the scene of an accident and you 
may say, well, this is easy; that car crossed over that line and hit 
that car, so it is driver A's fault, because driver A hit B going the 
wrong way in the traffic. You may find out after further investigation 
that in fact driver B was in the wrong lane of traffic, spun out of 
control, had a collision, and the vehicles, by momentum, put themselves 
into the position that they were in. Point number one.
  Point number two that I think is important, that I learned in the 
practice of law, is that defense attorneys really have a few standards 
by which to defend their client. The easiest way to defend your client 
who has been accused of a crime is the facts. If the facts are on your 
side, obviously the easiest fact is your client did not do it. If your 
client did not do it, you focus your case on the basis of the facts; my 
client did not do it.
  If you do not have those facts on behalf of your client, then what 
you try and do is you try and attack the prosecution's witnesses. So 
you try and divert attention away from the fact that maybe your client 
did it, and you try and attack the credibility of the people who saw 
him do it or otherwise would testify to some type of circumstantial 
evidence that this individual is guilty of the crime alleged.
  If you cannot defend your client on the facts, and if you are not too 
successful attacking the credibility and the character of the 
prosecution, then you adopt what seems to be the most popular item of 
defense for the last 20 years, your client is a victim. Oh, my client, 
I know he went out and robbed a bank, but he was victimized; he had an 
abused childhood; or, you know, the police did not treat him right. 
Anything you can use as a defense attorney to make your client seem 
like a victim being picked on by society or being picked on by the FBI 
or being picked on by the cops or being picked on by his parents, or et 
cetera, et cetera, et cetera. You get the idea. You know where I am 
going.
  Well, what we have seen in the last several weeks is a massive public 
relations effort on an individual named Wen Ho Lee, trying to play this 
individual as a victim; trying to divert attention away from what this 
individual did.
  Some of the facts or defenses they are using for Wen Ho Lee are 
almost laughable. One, well, he was just resume building. He wanted to 
build his resume, so he wanted to accumulate a library of the most 
sensitive thermo-nuclear secrets ever held in the history of the world. 
He just wanted to have a resume. He said, I have a library with that.
  Two, this was just a coincidence. It was really accidental. He did 
not intend to copy over 400,000 pages of the most sensitive thermo-
nuclear material ever held by any person in the history of mankind. It 
was just an accident that he happened to get his hands on that and 
started transferring it around.
  One of the other defenses that in some cases have some merit and have 
some bearing is the race card. When you take a look the facts as I am 
going to present them to you, the other side of the story, you are 
going to find, I think, as I find, forget the race card. Throw that one 
out. This is not a race case. This case is based on hard, verifiable 
evidence. This case is based on the fact that the party is a convicted 
felon. This case is based on the fact that the secrets were found in 
his custody.
  So I want to present, and I think the first thing is at the beginning 
of my discussion that we ask the question, and this is what I ask you 
to think about this evening when I go through the facts of this case, 
this is kind of like one of those new detective shows on TV or some 
kind of criminal mystery. Let us try and solve the mystery. Let us look 
at the basic question: Who is the victim? That is what we want to 
determine tonight, because we have seen this massive effort, and, 
frankly, it is amazing to me, the national publications that have 
adopted the public relations effort of these defense attorneys to point 
Wen Ho Lee as the victim, instead of the United States of America and 
its citizens.

                              {time}  2145

  That is the question we are going to ask tonight. Who is the victim? 
Is it Wen Ho Lee, or is it the United States of America? That is the 
question we want to look at this evening.
  By the way, if my colleagues see my quote marks, this is testimony 
taken from the hearing that was given over in the Senate side; however, 
it is important to keep in mind that this is not an ordinary criminal 
matter. However, it is important to keep in mind that this is not an 
ordinary criminal matter. It never was. This is a national security 
matter of paramount importance.
  This is a national security matter of paramount importance. At least 
seven and possibly 14 or more tapes containing vast amounts of our 
Nation's nuclear secrets remain unaccounted for. This is not rhetoric. 
It is simple frightening fact.
  Mr. Speaker, let us all go back, kind of place ourselves in the 
laboratory in New Mexico. Let us get kind of an outlay of what that 
laboratory does. This is one of the most highly classified top secret 
locations for the United States. We have two labs that have this kind 
of classification. This lab in New Mexico contains within its computers 
not only the research, but the elements to put together thermonuclear 
weapons.
  This lab contains the elements so that you could compose and 
construct a weapon, the only real weapon known to mankind that one 
military could use against the military of the United States of America 
and successfully engage it and successfully destroy it. In other words, 
I cannot overstress the sensitivity of the material that is contained 
within those laboratory walls down there in New Mexico, nor can I 
overstress the responsibility, the high respect of these individuals 
who are given the utmost trust by the citizens of the United States of 
America to work in that laboratory.
  These citizens, they know exactly what they are dealing with. These 
scientists, these experts, these professionals, and every one of them 
is a professional. They know it. Of all 250 million or 300 million 
people in the United States and of all the hundreds of millions of 
people in the world, they alone down there have their hands on what is 
considered the most destructive weapons in the history of mankind.
  They alone down there, while they are in that laboratory, many of 
them have access that is entrusted to no other citizens in the United 
States outside of a handful, like the President of the United States, 
certain Members of Congress, certain Members of the Senate and so on 
and so forth. In other words, what we are dealing with is our entire 
design plan of our thermonuclear weapons. This is not what you call a 
missile-light or a criminal-light matter.
  During my career, I am not sure in my career of Congress I have ever 
witnessed a crime that I think is more of a threat to the national 
security of the United States but also a threat to the entire world. I 
want to point to my colleagues I am not sure I have ever witnessed a 
more clever defense design to take an individual who the facts will 
reveal intentionally and very methodically transferred these nuclear 
secrets.
  It is amazing to me that that kind of individual can get the kind of 
spin by our national media to play this situation into pointing it out 
like he is the victim, like somehow he innocently transferred these; 
that, in fact, all he was trying to do was build up his resume.

[[Page 20364]]

  He thought it would be impressive to have a library of the world's 
most sensitive thermonuclear weapons. Let us go through some of the 
facts. Wen Ho Lee worked for the X Division at the Los Alamos National 
Laboratory. The X Division, and that is important to remember, this is 
the top secret division, the X Division is responsible for the 
research, design and development of thermonuclear weapons; and it 
requires the highest level of security of any division at Los Alamos.
  This week I intend to go into even more depth in this case with the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr), who used to be, by the way, a U.S. 
Attorney. He is an expert I think in prosecution, and it will be 
interesting to have his comments in regards to the Los Alamos lab and 
what level we can consider this breach of security.
  The X Division scientists, and that is what Wen Ho Lee was, he is an 
X Division scientist. Now the scientist most familiar with the 
downloaded information would have testified that Wen Ho Lee took every, 
not some, not a little here, not a little there, every significant 
piece of information to which a nuclear designer would want access. It 
gets worse.
  Before Wen Ho Lee created these tapes, only two sites in the world 
held this complete design portfolio, the secure computer inside the 
highest security division at Los Alamos and the secure computer system 
inside the highest security division in another one of our national 
laboratories. Now, this is what one of the defenses they are using is 
that, look, accidents happen, poor Wen Ho Lee was in there working on 
his computer. He was a computer buff, kind of a computer geek; and as 
he is working it by accident he happens to transfer a couple hundred 
thousand pages, pretty soon 300,000, pretty soon 400,000 pages of 
thermonuclear weapons from a classified position to a nonclassified 
position, from a nonclassified position to the computer at his desk.
  I will walk through those steps, and we will see why it takes a 
methodical and well thought out process to complete what Wen Ho Lee did 
to do what he did. Let us go on. It is not a simple task for Wen Ho Lee 
to move files from the closed to the open system. The CFS tracking 
system reveals that Wen Ho Lee spent hours unsuccessfully trying to 
move the classified files into unclassified space; eventually, Wen Ho 
Lee worked his way around what was designed to be a cumbersome process.
  In other words, here is what is going on. The computer with the 
thermonuclear secrets accounts is here, and contained within that 
computer are documents which are an entire library on thermonuclear 
weapons; and when I say our entire library, it is the research. It is 
the construction. It is the impact, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
  In order for one to move a document from this top secret computer, 
you have to declassify it, because if the document is classified top 
secret, you cannot move it from that computer to a nonclassified 
computer. So the first step that you need to take is you need to take 
these documents that are classified top secret, and you need to 
declassify them to a declassified document. And what this is saying 
right here is that in order to do that, we wanted to make sure we had a 
fail-safe system. In a fail-safe system, we wanted to make the process 
very cumbersome. In other words, it took a lot of study; it took a lot 
of processes to get through it.
  It had several what you might call barriers built into the computer 
programming, so that you could not automatically or by accident hit a 
button and classify a document from classified to nonclassified or from 
secret to nonsecret.
  So when Wen Ho Lee went through this, it took him hours to figure out 
the system, how do I move it from classified to nonclassified. He 
studied it and eventually he mastered it. And that is what he did. He 
first moved it from the top secret computer, changed the classification 
of the documents; then moved the documents to his other computer at his 
desk, because they can move his unclassified documents and put them on 
to his personal computer and who knows where those secrets are today. 
Although, there are many suspicions of where those secrets are today.
  Let us go on. Wen Ho Lee worked to command the computer to declassify 
the files when he was well aware that the files contained some of the 
most sensitive information at Los Alamos, and this process over here 
just kind of tells us what was necessary. First, you had to have an 
input deck, file information. Now this information was a blueprint of 
the exact dimensions and the geometry of the Nation's nuclear weapons, 
including our most successful modern warheads.
  The data files included nuclear bomb testing protocol, nuclear 
weapons bomb test problems, information related to physical and 
radioactive properties. And the source codes included data used for 
determination by simulation the validity of nuclear weapon designs. So 
the information that Wen Ho Lee worked with on his computer, he knew, 
he knew how secret that information was. He knew exactly what keys that 
information provided for somebody who wanted to get their hands on it 
to build their own nuclear arsenal. Yet, he continued over a period of 
time, and I am going to show us some of the interesting facts about 
that period of time. He went over a period of time and continued to 
declassify top secret material for the sole purpose of transferring it 
out of that computer into his own computer and copying it into his own 
personal library, which now he has. We do not know where those 
documents are.
  Before we go further, let me point out that it has been very easy to 
criticize the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They were the lead 
investigator here. The Department of Justice, Janet Reno, as I said, in 
fact, in my discussions with Al this weekend, my constituent that I 
visited with, in my discussions, he reminded me of how critical I had 
been of the Federal Bureau of Investigation with Ruby Ridge.
  I think Ruby Ridge and the conduct by the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation was a shame. I think it was shameful. They know it was 
shameful. I think it was unfortunate that some of the people who were 
involved with the FBI who did wrong ended up with promotions.
  I have had disagreements with Janet Reno, the Attorney General. 
Although I am an ex-police officer, I am not coming in here with a bias 
in favor of the FBI. I am not coming in here with a basis in favor of 
Janet Reno. I am coming in here, I believe, well studied in the facts; 
and I am telling my colleagues do not let them divert Wen Ho Lee's 
activity and his behavior by putting the blame on Louis Freeh, the 
director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Do not let them divert 
from the facts what Wen Ho Lee did by bringing Janet Reno into the 
equation and saying for some reason she misbehaved.
  The facts are clear in this case. I am going to present some more to 
you.
  Let us go on further. It is critical to understand it; and I think 
this is so important, so important, for us to pay attention to. It is 
so critical to understand that Wen Ho Lee's conduct was not 
inadvertent. It was not careless, and it was not innocent. Over a 
period of years, Lee used an elaborate scheme to move the equivalent of 
400,000 pages of extremely sensitive nuclear weapons files from a 
secure part of the Los Alamos computer system to an unclassified, 
unsecure part of the system, which could be accessed from outside of 
Los Alamos, indeed, from anywhere in the world.
  In fact, at one point Lee attempted to access that from overseas. He 
could not quite get the connection down, so he contacted the computer 
help system, which had a tracer on it, and in asking for help on the 
computer, how do I do this, I am not being successful in transferring 
in this country, I believe he was over in Taiwan.
  In order to achieve his ends, Wen Ho Lee had to override default 
mechanisms that were designed to prevent any accidental or inadvertent 
movement of these files. His downloading process consumed approximately 
40 hours of 70 different days. Do not let people tell you he did it by 
accident. There are default mechanisms built into this computer 
program. You have

[[Page 20365]]

to go around it. You have to go under it. You have to go above it. You 
have to go sideways.
  There are a lot of computer safeguards placed in there, so somebody 
who is handling this sensitive material cannot inadvertently send it to 
a computer system where it can be accessed around the world. His 
behavior was not inadvertent. It was not careless, and it was not 
innocent.
  Let us go on. Nor was this all. Wen Ho Lee carefully and methodically 
removed classification markings from documents.

                              {time}  2200

  He attempted repeatedly to enter secure areas of Los Alamos after his 
access had been revoked, including one attempt at 3:30 in the morning 
on Christmas Eve.
  Think about that, how many people would attempt to get into a top 
secret part of a lab at 3:30 in the morning on Christmas Eve; in the 
morning, a.m., 3:30 a.m. on Christmas Eve? Oh, what a coincidence, he 
just happened to stumble down to the top secret portion of the lab and 
try to gain access through a starewell.
  He deleted files in an attempt to cover his tracks before he was 
caught. As soon as he found out the FBI was on him, as soon as he 
failed a lie detector test, as soon as he figured out that the computer 
was tracking him, he began immediately to delete files. He tried to 
cover his tracks, not by an accidental push of the button, of the 
keyboard, but by an intentional, well-designed method to delete not 
only his current files, but delete any record of those files ever being 
made at all.
  Wen Ho Lee created his own secret, portable electronic library of 
this Nation's nuclear weapons secrets. So first he took them out of the 
top secret computer, moves them to a nonclassified computer, where he 
can then access them from his own computer. In fact, anyone in the 
world could access those secrets.
  He stood before a Federal court judge, admitted his wrongdoing, and 
pleaded guilty to a felony. Contrary to some reports, there is nothing 
minor or insignificant about that crime. The restricted data that Wen 
Ho Lee downloaded into 10 portable computer tapes included, and keep 
this in mind, it included the electronic blueprint of the exact 
dimensions and geometry of this Nation's nuclear weapons.
  These are just some of the steps that are required to access, for him 
to go in there.
  First of all, he has to log into a secure computer system by entering 
a password, and not only enter a password, you have to put a Z number 
in behind it. Then you have to access data in red partition, then type 
save, then you go CL-LU, classified level included unclassified. So 
look at the steps we already have so far.
  Then you have to access C machine and type commands to download 
partition from secure partition to open Rho machine. Then you have to 
access that machine. Then you have to log into a colleague's computer 
outside of the x division. Then you have to access the open directory 
and copy the files.
  My point in all of that is that there were numerous steps that Wen Ho 
Lee took to obtain from all of us, from all of the citizens of the 
United States, to obtain our highest secrets, in dereliction, not only 
dereliction of his duty, that is too light, but in my sense, a 
betrayal. I do not think I am using too strong a word.
  Anybody that would go in with those kinds of secrets, with those 
kinds of weapons, and would intentionally transfer the information of 
those weapons so that it can be accessed elsewhere, and we do not know 
where most of those tapes are, by the way, Mr. Lee has not cooperated, 
he has not told us where those are the tapes are, tell me that is not a 
betrayal in the highest form. I think it is. I think it is disgraceful.
  Let us go through this. Make no mistake about the scope of this 
offense and the danger that it presents to our Nation's security. Make 
no mistake about the scope of this offense and the danger it presents 
to our society.
  As an expert from Los Alamos testified in this case, the material 
that was downloaded and copied by Wen Ho Lee represented the complete 
nuclear weapons design capability of Los Alamos at that time, 
approximately 50 years of nuclear development.
  Mr. Speaker, for those who have been kind of coming in and out, 
following me a little here and there, this will bring Members entirely 
up to speed, this one paragraph. And make no mistake about it, the 
scope of this offense and the danger it presents to our Nation's 
security, as an expert from Los Alamos testified in this case, the 
material downloaded and copied by Wen Ho Lee represented the complete 
nuclear weapons design capability of Los Alamos at that time, 
approximately 50 years of nuclear development.
  They had an expert come in and testify, a Dr. Younger, and tell us 
exactly what he thought was the extent of the material that Wen Ho Lee 
transferred. Please, please, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to listen 
very carefully to this.
  ``These codes and their associated databases and the input file, 
combined with someone that knew how to use them, could, in my opinion, 
in the wrong hands, change the global strategic balance.''
  In other words, if these get into the wrong hands, and we know they 
are out there now, we know that the secrecy has been broken by Wen Ho 
Lee, that in betrayal to his country he has copied those and moved 
those out into that world, and that if somebody gets those who knows 
what they are doing, it could change the global strategic balance.
  ``They enable the possessor to design the only objects,'' ``They 
enable the possessor to design the only objects that could result in 
the military defeat of America's conventional weapons;'' the only 
threat, for example, to our carrier battle groups. ``They represent the 
gravest possible security risk to the United States,'' what the 
President and most other presidents have described as the supreme 
national interest of the United States.
  Look at that sentence, Mr. Speaker. Just look at that. ``They 
represent the gravest possible security risk to the United States.'' 
They represent the gravest possible security risk to our country, to 
our constituents. In fact, if it is a security risk to the United 
States, it is a security risk to our friends throughout the world.
  One individual, one individual, has done this much damage. Yet, our 
national media, some of our media, portrays him as a picked-upon 
victim. Some of our national media decides to focus on the FBI or on 
Janet Reno and kind of shove it aside, just brush it aside, as if it is 
a minor traffic ticket, what Wen Ho Lee has done to this country? Where 
is the justice here?
  Now, some will say, okay, you made some pretty strong statements, 
Congressman. Really, what do you have to point out? Show us a little 
more detail. Let me give kind of a chronological chart. I think at the 
end of this chart Members will be very amazed, very interested in the 
innocence of Wen Ho Lee.
  A chronological events or a calendar of events between December 23, 
1998, and February 10, 1999. Let us take a look at these. This is on 
December 23rd, 1998, on Wednesday.
  At 2:18, they completed the polygraph of Wen Ho Lee. At 5 o'clock, 
approximately 5 o'clock, Wen Ho Lee is advised that his access to the 
secure areas of the X division, remembering that the X division is the 
top secret area, and to both his secure and open X division computer 
accounts has been suspended.
  So about 5 o'clock they told Wen Ho Lee, ``Your privileges, your 
permission, your ability to go into any of these secret areas is hereby 
suspended.'' So there should be no question that Wen Ho Lee knew that 
he was attempting to get into areas he was not supposed to be into, 
that he was specifically prohibited from entering.
  At 9:36 that night, and by the way, way past his shift, Lee makes 
four attempts to enter the secure area of X division through a 
stairwell, up through stairwell number 2, and makes four attempts to 
get into the secure area.
  At 9:39, approximately 3 minutes later, he tries another access point

[[Page 20366]]

through the south elevator and attempts to enter the secure area.
  On December 24, at 3:31 in the morning, he is back again, once again 
through the south stairwell number 2, which by the way, as you know, 
Christmas Eve, he attempts to enter the secure area of the X division.
  On January 4, on Monday at 9:42, Lee succeeds in having his open 
computer account reactivated, and deletes three computer files.
  On January 12, 1999, he deletes one computer file.
  On January 17, 1999, between 1 and 5, they interview Lee at his 
residence. The very next day Lee, in an attempt to cover his tracks, 
deletes 47 computer files. The following day Lee goes to the computer 
desk and asks for help, why he is not able to successfully delete these 
files to hide his tracks.
  At 10:46, he attempts to enter the secure area again, this time 
through stairwell number 3.
  On January 30 at 2:54, Los Alamos officials deactivate Lee's open 
computer account and secure area of X division after discovering that 
it has been improperly reactivated. So they deactivate it and oh, what 
a coincidence, here is Wen Ho Lee attempting on several times to go 
through, to go up through a stairwell or elevators to gain access to an 
area that he had been specifically and openly and he acknowledged 
having no right to go into.
  The next thing you know, they also say, we are also taking your 
computer access away. Somehow, just like he was able to move classified 
documents to nonclassified documents, somehow he is now able to 
reactivate his computer access to the top secret area, so they 
deactivate it.
  At 4:52, not long after they detected his computer has all of a 
sudden been reactivated, at 4:52 he attempts to enter the secure area, 
this time through a south door.
  On February 2 at 9:42 in the morning he attempts to enter the secure 
area of X division through the south door. A little after 1 o'clock he 
attempts again through the south door. About 2 o'clock he makes four 
attempts to enter the X division, again through the south door.
  On February 8, they contacted him and asked to meet with him to 
discuss conducting interview and a polygraphs. Shortly thereafter, he 
once again attempts to enter the secret division, this time through 
stairwell number 2. Between 4 and 6 they meet with him. They arrange to 
have the polygraph. Shortly after he arranges to have another polygraph 
with the FBI, he once again attempts through the south door to enter 
into the access of the X division.
  On February 9, Lee deletes approximately 93 computer files. The FBI 
interviews him at 1 o'clock that day and they obtain his permission to 
undergo a polygraph. At 9:03 that night he is back again at the lab and 
once again he is trying to access through the south door.
  On February 10, he undergoes the polygraph. Immediately after the 
polygraph, he deletes 310 computer files. Once again later that evening 
he attempts to enter the secure area of the X division through the 
south door.
  Mr. Speaker, these are hard facts. It is simple to figure out what is 
going on here. It would be an injustice to our citizens, it would be an 
injustice to the national security of our country, it would be an 
injustice to the global strategic balance of this world, to just look 
the other way and dismiss this as a minor altercation by a scientist 
who wants to build his resume.
  There is a lot to look at here. For gosh sakes, do not take for 
granted what this individual was attempting to do. Do not ignore the 
fact, despite the fact that there are many national publications that 
want to play this off as a race card, want to play it off as an 
innocent mistake, want to play it off as kind of an accidental 
scientist who kind of bumbles around, doesn't have a lot of common 
sense, and wanted to build his own library for his personal enjoyment, 
the fact is we have suffered a major loss in this country.
  We know who is responsible for this major loss. Every newspaper and 
every critic of the FBI and every critic of Janet Reno has an 
obligation to stand up.
  That is not to say they should not criticize our law enforcement 
agencies if they misbehave, but it is to say that in that criticism, do 
not let it overshadow or in such a way divert them away from what has 
occurred and the victims of what has occurred.
  Wen Ho Lee is not the victim in this case, it is us, the citizens of 
the United States. It is those thermonuclear secrets. Where are they 
today? Mr. Wen Ho Lee had many opportunities to cooperate with the FBI. 
He makes it sound like he was really cooperating. He did not cooperate. 
For months he would not say anything. He lied to the FBI until they 
showed him the evidence. Then he changed his stories. He and his 
defense attorneys did not know the kind of evidence that the FBI had. 
Now all of a sudden these tapes, he just lost them. He is not sure what 
happened to them.
  He is a convicted felon now, and part of the agreement is he has to 
disclose. But do we think we can trust him?
  Let me point out one other thing that I found of some interest. In 
some of the newspaper articles that I saw, I noted that they said Wen 
Ho Lee was taken like a prisoner of war in some Third World country and 
he was isolated, put in shackles. He was not allowed to see people. He 
was abused.
  Even the President of the United States, in a comment of his policy, 
questioned whether or not, is this guy a victim? Come on.

                              {time}  2015

  Let us take a look at his imprisonment. I got this out. We would like 
to emphasize, we sought to be responsive to complaints brought to our 
attention by Wen Ho Lee's attorneys concerning the conditions of his 
confinement. I want to go ahead and get this out. This is not an issue. 
Let us just look at it and throw it out.
  For example, we arranged a Mandarin language speaking FBI agent to be 
present so Wen Ho Lee could speak to his family in that language. 
Similarly, we made special food arrangements for Wen Ho Lee. We 
arranged for exercise on weekends, and we built at significant 
government expense a special secure facility in the courthouse where he 
could consult with his lawyers and where, in fact, he spent up to 6 
hours per day on over 90 days of his incarceration. In numerous 
respects, then, Wen Ho Lee was treated better than others who were held 
in an administrative segregation at this facility.
  This is Director Freeh. Let me be clear about some misconceptions. 
Wen Ho Lee was held in solitary while in the facility; but as I have 
noted, in fact, he spent a good part of over 90 days outside the 
facility with his lawyer. He was not shackled in his cell but only when 
he was transported or otherwise outside his cell, as were others in 
similar circumstances.
  So this picture they are trying to give us of some individual who was 
shackled and put in isolation, one, he was in isolation, but he had 
access to his family, he had access to his attorneys. Sure his outside 
communication was confined because he will not tell us where the tapes 
are. He will not tell us who he has communicated to. He will not tell 
us if he has given those thermonuclear secrets to the Chinese, for 
God's sakes.
  Well, of course we are going to treat him with some concern. But the 
only time he had shackles on is when, like any other prisoner, he was 
transferred from location to location. As the Director of the FBI 
noted, he even got special treatment. He had a special facility built 
for him. During the first 90 days of his incarceration, he spent 6 
hours a day with his lawyers. And it goes on.
  To claim that a light was kept on in his cell, that is another claim. 
They said, well, he had a light over his cell that was never turned 
off. We would like to point out that this claim first surfaced, so far 
as we are aware, after the plea. To the best of our knowledge, no 
complaint was made to us through Wen Ho Lee's lawyers about the 
lighting condition in his cell.
  Significantly, we informed Wen Ho Lee's attorneys that we would 
respond to any reasonable request regarding

[[Page 20367]]

the conditions of his confinement. So this light deal, about him being 
in a cell with just a single light he could not turn off, that did not 
even arise as a complaint until after he plea bargained, when the 
public relations effort began by the defense attorneys, when the public 
relations effort began by this, I guess, this individual's friends.
  Some of the coverage I have seen, it made me think, oh, my gosh, 
maybe we ought to put background music on, tie a yellow ribbon around 
that tree. You know, one feels sorry. He has done his time. He is 
coming home.
  Let me tell my colleagues something, this could not be the furthest 
from that. This man has transferred the most sensitive secrets in the 
history of this country. And for our national media, not all our 
national media, but for some of our national media to treat this as if 
he is the victim, as if our authority, as if our government is somehow 
overstepping its bounds to come down on an individual who has taken 
these types of secrets with the kind of evidence that we have, and 
obviously he has now acknowledged it, is in itself an injustice.
  So it comes back to the basic question. My colleagues heard the facts 
tonight, the facts as given by sworn testimony, by the Director of the 
FBI, by Janet Reno. The evidence is hard evidence. This is not 
circumstantial evidence. This is not evidence that is imagined. This is 
evidence that, in fact, Wen Ho Lee himself admitted to some of it when 
he plead guilty to this felony.
  Now, some people said, well, gosh, there were 59 charges. Why did 
they drop 58 of them? It is pretty simple why they dropped 58, because 
in order to pursue the 58 charges, they had to make further disclosure 
of national secrets.
  So it was the opinion of the FBI and of the Department of Justice and 
the other individuals involved that it was better to get him on one 
charge than have to disclose any more secrets, especially since we do 
not know to what extent Wen Ho Lee allowed other individuals to put 
their hands on the material that he had taken from our secret labs.
  So the question comes back, who is the victim? I hope that, after my 
discussion with my colleagues this evening, that on the answer to that 
question, this is not even considered as one of your multiple choices; 
that the only multiple choice you have, and you volunteer to take it, 
is that it was the United States of America who was the victim in this 
case, that it is the citizens of the United States of America who are 
the victims in this case, that it is the future generations of this 
country who have become the victim of one individual who absconded with 
American secrets, who, held in the highest level of trust by his fellow 
citizens in this country, betrayed his citizens, who went in and in a 
methodical process transferred, first of all, changed ``top secret'' 
classification to ``nonsecret'' classification, and then put it out to 
his own computer.
  This is an individual who was evasive, who did not tell the truth on 
occasion, who, through his attorneys, tried to mislead the FBI, who 
went out on his own and went into the computer and tried to cover his 
tracks, who on numerous occasions, as I went over, tried to get back 
into an area of the lab, the secure part of the lab where he knew he 
was denied, he was not allowed those privileges anymore. And you tell 
me who is the victim.
  It is clear to me, and it ought to be clear to my colleagues, and I 
am pretty sure it is going to be clear to their constituents that the 
victim here is us. So keep that in mind as my colleagues hear further 
information on Wen Ho lie.
  In conclusion of these remarks, let me say that later this week I 
hope I have the opportunity to sit down with Bob Barr. I have asked Bob 
Barr, and Bob and I had a lengthy discussion about this, about the 
policies and what a U.S. attorney looks at, what kind of evidence the 
government looks for, and why the government, I am going to be very 
interested in what Mr. Barr has to say, about why the government at 
times is not allowed to pursue charges because they would have to 
reveal secrets, and the pluses and the minuses and what kind of thought 
process goes into that.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is a responsibility of ours when we go on 
this recess to go out to our constituents and be fully informed on this 
case. This case obviously has had devastating impacts so far, and it 
could be much, much more severe. We need to know what we are talking 
about. We need to have the facts at hand.
  So I think the subsequent discussions that I have with Mr. Barr on 
this floor will also be of some benefit to my colleagues as they go out 
and visit with their constituents as to what occurred and what did not 
occur with Wen Ho Lee at the Los Alamos labs.

                          ____________________