Congressional Record: September 18, 2000 (Senate)
Page S8641-S8642






                               WEN HO LEE

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here on the floor at this
particular time to ask the President of the United States who "they"
are, and I hope the word "they" includes the President of the United
States. I hope the President of the United States is the chief
"they." I hope we don't get into a position of debating what the
definition of the word "they" is. The Constitution is pretty clear--
the President of the United States has all the executive power that
exists in our Government.
  That is the background for my visiting with you about the Wen Ho Lee
case, the President's comments last week in regard to the release of
Wen Ho Lee, and how the executive branch treated this Chinese American.
  This is the latest instance of President Clinton failing to take
responsibility and refusing to hold himself accountable for the actions
of his administration.

[[Page S8642]]

  The background of Wen Ho Lee--for those who may not have been
following this over the last year--is that the Government has recently
agreed to let this former nuclear scientist at Los Alamos Laboratories
plead guilty to a relatively minor charge and go home with a slap on
the wrist.
  I think we all agree that his release is the justifiable thing to do.
But it was only a short time ago that the executive branch was claiming
that Wen Ho Lee was such a serious threat to American national security
that he belonged in solitary confinement and in shackles with
practically no ability for Mr. Lee to even contact his family. Now,
after this long period of time in confinement, he gets a slap on the
wrist and his freedom.
  Obviously, the executive branch of Government couldn't back up its
allegations with proof or this case would not have settled as it did.
Despite the dire pronouncements made to the public about Wen Ho Lee,
the fact is the Government didn't even have a case. It had only
suspicions. Mr. Lee has, of course, paid a very high price for the
suspicions of some in the executive branch.
  Maybe because Lee is Asian American, there is not the outcry over the
loss of civil liberties that there would be had Lee been a member of
some other minority group. The same people who speak up against some
minorities being mistreated because of civil liberties evidently don't
seem inclined to speak up in the case of an Asian American.
  Mr. Lee's treatment has caused widespread public outcry. How can this
happen in America where we treasure freedom and where the rule of law
has been the basis for our country's law going back to the setting up
of the colonies? How could the government damage the reputation of a
citizen by labeling him as a spy for the Communist Chinese, lock him
away for 9 months of solitary confinement, and then just simply drop
the case? Our Government has damaged its reputation by the way it
handled the Lee case.
  The American people are outraged. Pundits and political observers
have raised legitimate questions about the abusive way in which Mr. Lee
was treated by the executive branch of Government.
  In the midst of this justifiable criticism, President Clinton decided
that it was time for him, as President of the United States, to chime
in. President Clinton happens to be the Chief Executive Officer of the
country. He thinks, like the rest of us, that the executive branch of
Government may have abused its power in the way it went after Mr. Lee
and kept him confined for such a long period of time.
  What troubles me about President Clinton's comments is that he acts
as if he, as President of the United States, is just some sideline
observer who doesn't have anything to do with the way the laws in this
country are enforced.
  As every high school student learned in their civics classes, the
executive power of the Government is vested in the President of the
United States, article II, section I:

       The executive power shall be vested in the President of the
     United States of America.

  This is pretty simple language and pretty definitive. These words
means the President is in charge of law enforcement. The President is
in charge of protecting our national security.
  So, even if the President delegated some of his power to the Attorney
General, the President is responsible for what happened to Mr. Lee.
  I hope the President can just once before he leaves office, and as
part of his legacy, say he is responsible for what happened under his
watch. I would like to have him say: I and the people I appointed are
responsible for what happened to Mr. Lee.
  But, no. He said in his news conference "they" did this--"they"
held him; "they" had these charges. It was always "they," "they,"
"they." I happen to think President Clinton is the chief "they." He
is above all the rest of the "theys."
  It happens that President Clinton seems to think the Justice
Department is some agency of government outside of his control. Surely
the President knows better than this. The Washington Post certainly
does. This past Saturday, the Post editorial page commented on the Wen
Ho Lee case:

       President Clinton asks us to see him as one more
     commentator troubled by the case, rather than as the head of
     the government that brought it.

  In other words, I think the Washington Post is saying the President
is, in fact, the chief "they;" or he is in charge of all the rest of
the "theys." Of course, as far as I am concerned, the Washington Post
is right on this point.
  The nation is waiting for real leadership, not another evasion or
more misdirection. President Clinton may be an "artful dodger," but
this is one dodge that just won't work. The American people elected
President Clinton to be in that office so he could lead, not blame
subordinates.
  The Constitution is crystal clear that the President has the ultimate
responsibility of leadership and the ultimate power of our executive
branch. It is high time for President Clinton to follow the
Constitution and take responsibility for the sorry actions that took
place in regard to Mr. Wen Ho Lee during this administration.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kyl). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________