|
|
 | WHAT WAS HUANG DOING?
July 17, 1997Transcript |
|---|
 The Online Explainers take your question on the investigation.  The NewsHour's coverage of the Congressional Investigation.  The inside stories on the political fight behind the public investigation.  The investigation is big news in Washington, but how's it playing around the country.  A closer look at the issues really under scrutiny by the Congress.
|
SEN. FRED THOMPSON, Chairman, Governmental Affairs Committee: The committee has learned that John Huang raised more than $1.6 million in contributions to the DNC that the DNC has returned. A substantial portion of that money constituted the illegal contributions and much of those illegal contributions were foreign. KWAME HOLMAN: Huang has not specifically denied those fund-raising allegations but has denied suggestions by Republicans that when he worked at the Commerce Department in 1995, he improperly shared classified information with his former employer, the Lippo Group, which has close business ties to the Chinese government. The committee had been negotiating over terms to get Huang in to testify to that. In the meantime, they've been doing the next best thing, bringing in witnesses who worked with and new John Huang. SEN. FRED THOMPSON: Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth-- KWAME HOLMAN: Today, that was Paula Greene. She was office manager at the Washington branch of Stephens, Incorporated, a major investment firm with longtime ties to the Lippo Group. In 1994 and '95, Huang frequently left his office in the Commerce Department and walked the one block to the Stephens office located in Washington's historic Willard Hotel. There, Greene testified, Huang would use the phone in a spare office and pick up packages and faxes, a courtesy offered by Greene's boss, A. Vernon Weaver. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS, (R) Maine: What instructions did Mr. Weaver give you regarding phone calls to Mr. Huang? PAULA GREENE, Former Employee, Stephens, Inc.: As best as I remember, I was told that if any faxes or anything came in for Mr. Huang, I was to contact him and to speak directly to him in regards to letting him know that he had something to pick up at the office. If he was not there, then I was just to leave a message for him to call him. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: Did Mr. Weaver specifically instruct you "not" to leave a detailed message with Mr. Huang's secretary? PAULA GREENE: To my knowledge, yes. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: He did? PAULA GREENE: Yes. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: He told you, in other words, that if you couldn't talk to Mr. Huang directly, to just leave your name and have him call back-- PAULA GREENE: Yes. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: To not leave a message saying that there was a package for him, or that he'd receive faxes, but to just leave your name, is that correct? PAULA GREENE: Yes, that's correct. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: Mr. Weaver didn't call directly very often. He would ask you to call for him, is that correct? PAULA GREENE: Yes. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: Did he say why he wanted you to call for him? PAULA GREENE: Yes, he did. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: Could you tell us why that was? PAULA GREENE: He did not want his name to appear on the logs very frequently. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS: So he asked you to call for him because he didn't want his name showing up on the message logs at the Department of Commerce for Mr. Huang, is that correct? PAULA GREENE: Yes, that's correct. KWAME HOLMAN: But Democratic counsel Jeffrey Robbins suggested other reasons for both Weaver's and Huang's actions. JEFFREY ROBBINS, Deputy Minority Counsel: Let's go back for a moment to the visits to the office. The--I take it that Mr. Huang and Mr. Weaver, having been friendly while Mr. Huang was in California, remained friendly after he moved to Washington, correct? PAULA GREENE: Yes, they did. JEFFREY ROBBINS: And they would see each other on a personal basis and talk to each other as they had before, correct? PAULA GREENE: Yes. JEFFREY ROBBINS: And I take it that Mr. Weaver was, in fact, a registered lobbyist during this period of time, is that right? PAULA GREENE: Yes, he was. JEFFREY ROBBINS: And I take it you told the staff that, from what you could observe, all that Mr. Weaver wanted to avoid was any improper and incorrect appearance that he was lobbying Mr. Huang, is that true? PAULA GREENE: Yes. KWAME HOLMAN: As a second witness today, the committee's Republican majority chose one of its own staff lawyers, who laid out the great lengths committee investigators have gone to to compile a detailed record of John Huang's phone calls, messages, and other contacts. SEN. THAD COCHRAN, (R) Mississippi: And the next exhibit you have, I understand, is exhibit 172. Could you tell us what that shows. JOHN COBB, Counsel, Special Investigations: Certainly, Senator. It's--again, it's another instance where there's some circumstantial evidence that raises the question at least to whether Mr. Huang might have been engaged in fund-raising at the Department of Commerce. KWAME HOLMAN: But as the presentation of charts and documents proceeded, it eventually drew the partisan ire of the committee's Democrats. SEN. MAX CLELAND, (D) Georgia: Were you subpoenaed for this investigation? JOHN COBB: No, Senator. That wasn't necessary. SEN. MAX CLELAND: Why are you here? JOHN COBB: I'm here because I participated in the project where we went through various phone records and appointment books, and that sort of thing, and had firsthand familiarity with it. SEN. MAX CLELAND: Correct me if I'm wrong. You went through the information that the committee already had, is that correct? JOHN COBB: That's correct, Senator. SEN. MAX CLELAND: Quite frankly. Not to whip up on you, I'm not interested in talking to a chart maker, where I can get the information myself, and I just--I wonder why you're here. I wonder why you're sitting here as a testifier, as a witness. You were not subpoenaed, and I'm not sure you can add a whole lot to what we already know. SEN. ROBERT TORRICELLI, (D) New Jersey: Like Sen. Cleland, I'm somewhat confused by your presence, though grateful for your testimony. I, nevertheless, believe that the charts have been misleading, and we are, as I have suggested, I believe we are doing a disservice to a serious inquiry by attempting to overstate the case, misrepresent facts, and continuing to place ourselves in a prosecutorial or a defense mode. SEN. BOB SMITH, (R) New Hampshire: I'd like to just make a comment. I've--between the House and the Senate--been in the Congress 13 years, and I've seen staff witnesses appear before committees on many occasions on both sides. And I want to compliment you, Mr. Cobb, because you took a lot of abuse here and you kept your composure and your dignity. Terms such as "dishonesty" and "misrepresentation" were used directly at you. I think it's uncalled for. It doesn't take a lot of courage--with all due respect to some on the other side--for a Senator to sit here and beat up on a staff person who has to maintain that dignity and respect. So I hope you all feel better about it, but that's No. 1. No. 2, Mr. Chairman, you know, these charts could use a little more amplification, I agree with you, and if Ms. Kanchanlak and Mr. Hubble and Mr. Middleton, and a few others weren't either hiding somewhere outside this country or taking the 5th Amendment, we might have more amplification. I hope some of the outrage that was displayed here today at Mr. Cobb could also be displayed at some of these witnesses, who refuse to come in and help us find the truth. KWAME HOLMAN: Late today, committee members tried to strike a more bipartisan note, promising to work together to agree on the granting of immunity to witnesses expected to appear later in the hearings. The committee reconvenes next Wednesday. |
| |||||
 | |||||
| |||||
|
|
| |||
| |||||
| |||||
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | |||||
