Transcripts For CSPAN3 James 20240703

Good evening and welcome to the National Press club the place where news happens im Eileen O Reilly the 2023 president of the National Press club and managing editor of standards and training and axios thank you for joining us both here at the National Press club and on cspan for our headliner book event. I wanted to take a quick moment to thank our wonderful staff and volunteers here at the National Press club for helping put this event together, including our headliners, team cochairs dan on line one, la jay and laurie russo and cecily martin, who is the clubs membership events and program coordinator. We have a very exciting tonight with our esteemed Panel Focused on a book just out called last honest man. The cia, the fbi, the mafia and the kennedys and senators fight to save democracy. So lets get started. Quote, if dictator ever took charge in this country, technological capacity that the Intelligence Community has given that government could enable it to impose total and there would be no way to fight back. That may sound like a statement from today, but it dates to 1975 from then senator. Frank church, a democrat from idaho. Church served in u. S. Senate from 1957 to 1980 and assembled a committee in 1975 to investigate abuses. The cia, the National Security, the fbi and the irs. Tonight, we are looking forward an exciting conversation with james risen, author of the last honest man and former senator gary hart, who served on the Church Committee. We also have with us former Church Committee Staff Members, peter fenn loch johnson, Frederick Baron and rick under firth. Im happy to say. We also have coauthor and National Club member tom risen. They were joining us and answering questions. These Congressional Staffers recently found themselves at the center news when they wrote an open letter to. Representative jim jordan, a republican from ohio. Jordan chairs the newly formed select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government. And these former Church Committee staffers urged jordan to change course, pursue a bipartisan inquiry which they felt had made the church successful and effective. Senator hart, who was the last surviving member of the Church Committee, also wrote an op ed in the New York Times calling jordans subcommittee a mockery. We are privileged to have both james risen and senator hart here to discuss some of the lessons from the Church Committee and how they are relevant today. Ryzens currently the intercept Senior National security correspondent. Prior to that was a reporter for the New York Times. He won the Pulitzer Prize in 2006 for stories about the National Security agencys domestic program. He was also part of a team that won a 2002 Pulitzer Prize for explanatory reporting for coverage of the september attacks and terrorism. Senator hart represented colorado in the senate from 1975 to 1987. A graduate yale law school. He returned to private practice after leaving the senate. He earned a doctor of philosophy from oxford in 2001. Hart also stayed active in government as chair of the u. S. State Departments International advisory council, chair of the u. S. Defense Departments Advisory Council and chair of the american security. Gentlemen, welcome to the National Press club. So i figured id start with senator and james risen for a couple questions and then broadening the topic out to the rest of the panel. But please feel free to pop in if you have any comments or suggest or, you know, quotes you want to give with a different question. And i would try to ask as many questions from the audience as possible. So just write them down a card and hand up to me. All right. So, jim, you spent decades doing investigate reporting and National Security issues, have written several of their books on the kgb. The cia and other topics. What prompted you to write about frank church specifically, and why now . Sure. Well, thanks again for having us. The reason i wrote tom and i wrote this book, the idea originally to me because i covered the cia, the New York Times for many years, especially. 911. And after 11, if you remember the Bush Administration started complaining very loudly and publicly, the 911 attacks had been made possible by the frank church and the Church Committee, which had existed 20 years before cheney, in particular, Vice President , constant. They complained that the problems in the Intelligence Community that had led to the intelligence failure of 911 had been caused by frank church by that time had been out of the senate for 20 years and dead for than 15. And so it was a weird, weird excuse, lets put it that way that they constantly made. And so i began to think at the time that i should learn more about the Church Committee. And as time went on and as republicans and the Bush Administration continued to make that refrain, saying that 911 was caused by frank church, i realized i should learn more about it. And then over the following years, when the iraq war went badly and bush and cheney lost popularity, a lot of americans began. Listen to what cheney had been saying, the Church Committee, and realized that that they had turned against cheney. Maybe they should have another Church Committee that. And so the idea of a new Church Committee became, something that people started talking about to investigate, the bush and cheney abuses of intelligence. And so that led me to begin to think about eventually a book about what the truth about the Church Committee. And then as i was writing about it and about publish the book, the the new Republican Party in the house started talking the need for and for a new Church Committee. And so its something i realized that has become part of the american political lexicon and the Church Committee is now a synonym for, a truth and reconciliation committee. And every time there is an a big scandal or a call for investigations everyone in washington now says we need a new Church Committee. And so i thought we needed a new history of what really happened with the Church Committee. Thats how some. Did you find any surprises . You were digging into this. Oh, yeah, lots of surprises. I mean, it was the thing that amazed the most is how much these guys investigated in one year, a span of just one year. You got remember going back into that time period and its its to watch so fascinating to me was getting back into the mindset of the 1970s to realize there were had never been any congressional of the intelligence prior to the Church Committee the cia had gone for 30 years with no supervision whatsoever and there were no rules in place no laws no rules really governed the cia or fbi, for that matter, or the nsa. And there was no public debate or public discussion of what the Intelligence Community do. And so everything the Church Committee did was brand new. And that is if you step back and you think you a committee and then you tell them you have to investigate 30 years of history, an agency, its pretty awesome. And i think they did a really Pretty Amazing job in one year. I agree. The book really details the work that you did put into it. Its amazing. And your book, as you just mentioned, the cia was around three decades old when they the committee was formed. How do you think it was able to amass so much power, operate without oversight for long . Well, thats a great question. It was something that maybe senator could talk about also. But i think there was a sense in the postworld world postwar era that americans didnt want to ask too many questions, especially after World War Two. And then the era hit in the early fifties, and there was a witch hunt for communists and for anyone was a dissident. And it was a i think in the fifties there was a sense that americans were taught to trust the government. And i think that all began to break down vietnam and the civil rights and then watergate. And i think watergate really opened the floodgates to questioning of the Intelligence Community and so that really think in a lot of ways, the Church Committee was a it seen at the time as kind of a sequel to whats with the watergate investigation, even though it ended up in a very different place. But it was it was a kind of a that was the beginning of a progressive and Reform Movement in the 1970s. And what do you think made senator church begin to question the inner workings of the American Government . Because you really did go through a transformation, didnt he . It was fascinating to learn about his background. Frank church was from idaho. He grew up in boise and in the 1920s and thirties he was know. And then when he got to the senate, when he was only 32, in 1956, he was really a very traditional liberal cold warrior. A lot like john kennedy, who he really looked up to. They were both in the senate at the same time, and he was typical 1950s democrat who believed in the the cold war fight against communism. But vietnam really radicalized him and he became one of the first opponents of the of the war in the senate. And it was largely because of his service in china in world two where he had seen how corrupt the regime ishan kaishek was that he saw in vietnam something very similar and he realized very quickly how corrupt the south vietnamese government was and that radical he eventually became radicalized by. The u. S. Involvement in the war and he he began see that United States was on the path of becoming militaristic empire. And he thought that the Intelligence Community was part of that. Senator hurt you knew senator church personally. Oh, sorry. Senator, you knew senator church personally. What was he like and what is your fondness memory of senator church. Well. We became very good friends out of that experience and a lot of democratic caucuses over the years. And when i became a National Candidate in the eighties he and nothing what i went out of the way to encourage me and me in their own way. And he was ailing at that. But if i may, id like to answer a question you have and ask him the first of many phone conversations that james risen i had. He called and said im going to write a book about the Church Committee. Are you willing to talk to me . And i said, of course, long overdue. Its almost 50 years now. And i said, why are you writing the book . He stunned me by saying, i think the Church Committee was the most important Congressional Committee in the history of the republic. Let me repeat. The author said, i think the Church Committee was the most important Congressional Committee in the history of this nation and simply said, based on and he said, because the Church Committee bill the bridge from 30 years of cold war and involvement the Intelligence Community in the cold war to the postcold war and certainly this cia, the fbi and others to to deal with a world beyond the socalled well, not socalled, but to communist threat that had been the central driving principle of almost all National Security in this country for three decades. So thats why this book is important, among other things and as a caution, im giving that you have us as a caution to anybody here whos going to review this book. Let me point out one thing that i think other early reviewers have missed and that is, i know at least one review where they said frank church the committee and then made himself chairman of it or like that. That is not what happened. You want to know how this happened . Turn to. Pages 162 to 167 in the ryzen book and you will find the author and the hero is my hero, mike mansfield. He had been trying for almost 25 years to bring oversight and accountability to this burgeoning intelligence network. And so the the rapper round of the committee about my friend, senator church friend, many of us here. Was the. We were all the product beginning in early 75 of senator mansfields efforts for almost a quarter of a century. Is that correct . Yeah. So its called the Church Committee because frank was chairman. There you are. But he didnt create the committee right. We a brief biography about mansfield in the book, too. Hes a really amazing guy. Yes. Yeah, thats true. Did you have any more thoughts about mansfield . Oh, man. Read the book is history. There have been entire books written about mansfield. Hes an amazing guy. So senator church grew into a left leaning progressive by the standards of that day. How does someone so to the left create a functioning Bipartisan Committee . You want me to answer . Sure. Yeah. Think, as senator hart just said, he didnt create it on his own. Right. And. Was a key. Was the Key Driving Force behind the the committee. And, in fact, is i talk about in the book, mansfield that first mansfield, who was the Senate Majority leader in 1975. And just step back one step. You got to remember that in the midterm elections of 1974, the democrats had a landslide victory. And so in 1975, the democrats had 60 seats in the senate and i think almost 284, 295 in the house. It was an overwhelming majorities. And so mansfield had the to much create this committee as whatever he wanted it but he decided to make it as bipartisan as and only gave the democrats one seat majority on the committee. And he picked a wide range of senators from, both parties. He wanted a balance because he thought this was so important that he didnt want it to be viewed as highly partizan and so he picked he originally wanted senator phil hart of michigan, to be the. Who and hart was known as the conscience of the senate. He was a liberal, but he was Close Friends with a lot of conservatives in the senate. But hart had just found out that he had cancer. And he he told privately told mansfield that he couldnt it because he had cancer. And but he recommended church because he knew church wanted it and he thought church be good at it and mansfield old church lobbied mansfield to some degree. They i can go. You want me to explain a little bit more about that . Because it was interesting. At the same time, the church wanted this job was also thinking about running for president and he had to kind of promise to mansfield that he wouldnt run president while he was Running Committee and. Mansfield and many others thought that meant that church would not run for president in 1976. But church interpreted what he had promised to mean that he would only not run until the committees work was done, which he thought mean he could still run in 76. As soon as committee finished its work. And that led that misinterpretation by both sides of what each other thought had been promised led to a lot of problems. Church over the throughout Church Committee and to the press criticism him. But i think one of the as i said they they tried it mansfield tried to balance all of the the membership of the committee. And i think senator hart told me a story about you got picked right after you were just been elected to the senate for the very first time. So then the first 30 days. Welcome you talk a little bit or member you told me about how mansfield came to you and. Well i hope a lot of people here knew mike mansfield. He was my hero and mentor and he was to an awful lot of other younger members of congress and senators. He he was also known as. Being sparse with words. So he walked up to me on the floor of the senate. I said, mr. Leader, he said, gary. Just form this committee with frank church is going to be chairman, want you on it, investigate cia, do a good job. He turned around and walked away. Id been there weeks. Let me answer another question. You have, which is you need a better question in a month or. Two. And jim, correct me if im wrong, i found employers that throughout this book, another reason why its so important and i think every person this room by now knows were in a tight Senate Struggle between democracy and authority. Arianism in this country and authoritarianism is real and serious threat implicit in it. And if it it is explicit, give me a page page in this book is a is a use of the Church Committee to demonstrate democratic government can work democrat government can work. You know i worked for us one simple reason six democrats and five republicans put the National Interest ahead of their interest that is the simple truth. And thats why it worked. And why, again its implicit in the book is. The authors comment on john tower being selected as the watchdog over the liberals and frank church and how almost if not overnight very quickly tower came to trust frank Church Church and work with him. No, i wrote a i wrote a not an obituary but a comment on franks passing. John towers passing. He didnt speak to me for the first term in the senate, and i was there not once, never would pass in the ways, but theres a story behind this later where i learned that tower was a real human being. I wrote wrote this in the washington and his former wife wrote me and thanked me, had to do with dinner in geneva with he was there with an arms control and one or two of his daughters came to visit him. And we were i was having a solo dinner. The restaurateur across from the city hall. And they went. One of the daughters came down and invited me to join them. And i said, no, you too. Dont get to see your father very much. You spend the time with him. That was his daughter. That died with john tower, the plane crash. But back to the theme this is a dutchmans situation of how democrats and republicans can Work Together in the National Interest. Yes. Yeah, i think that is that is implicit in the book. I, i tried i tried to. One of the things that in the narrative i tried to keep it in the time period in which it was and let the reader draw his own conclusions about the Current Events to much as possible. And i think so it worked. You picked up. One other sign of the wisdom and the savvy of mike mansfield, right constructing a committee in a bipartisan manner. Giving the republicans a higher proportion of members than than they held proportionately in the senate at moment. Was that when the vote occurred to constitute the committee, the vote was 82 to 4 in the senate and. That vote then had a had reverb effect for the entire life of the committee. It gave the committee a certain gravitas right out of the gate, you know, just so that people know what senator hart was mentioning, john was the ranking republican on the Church Committee, and he had been he although he he was widely disliked in the senate at the time. And the Senate Minority leader, hugh scott, had put him on there specifically because he was widely disliked and he was there to his job was to spy on frank church. In fact, he admitted that later a memoir that he wrote, but that eventually but as the senator just said, very quickly, got to realize that he agreed with a lot the Things Church was doing and the two of them actually formed a team together. And went to the white house, and jointly demanded that president ford turn, over classified documents to the Church Committee. And thats something that you would just never today know. He also the title of vice chairman which was not a normal thing in the senate you were Ranking Member but that him a certain stature which he enjoyed because he was about five foot six and but anyway which is how. You know thats but it wasnt just mans field and church that kind of led to the committee right. There was a growing movement and understanding amongst the american public. So when he wrote a comment or question if sy had not broken the family jewels in the late 1974 with the church have been formed, do you think it sounds like somebody has been reading book . Yes. That was what triggered the committee in 1974. Seymour, who is legendary Investigative Reporter for New York Times, broke a huge story in the New York Times about the cias domestic spying operations, especially against antiwar dissidents, civil rights leaders. And that triggered creation of the church. It led to calls for congressional investigations of the Intelligence Community and ultimately it was what mansfield used as kind of predicate to create committee that he had been wanting to create many years. And in the there was a house version of the same thing that eventually became known as the Pike Committee and the white house. The jerry had just become president a few months earlier, and they tried to slow down the congressional investigation by creating their own independent commission that was known as the Rockefeller Commission. But it very quickly became seen as something a whitewash. And so it didnt really slow down the efforts to have congressional investigations. And so sy is i think, was the most important story. Hersh ever wrote. Even more so than his my lai. And so i think it was its one of the few cases i know as a reporter. Its one of the few cases i know where writing a story made a difference. So i want to briefly note you mentioned the Rockefeller Commission where some of jerry ford tried to get preempts by having Vice President rockefeller, a committee to investigate frank Church Actually spoke here, the National Press club in february 1975, when the Rockefeller Commission was happening. And he said the executive branch cannot, with any credibility, investigate itself. And that is really legacy of the committee and frank Church General is reasserting the checks balances between congress and government. So i really salute you on that and very true. Um, senator church also said the United States must not adopt the tactics of enemy means or as important as and what do you think he meant by that . And how does that relevant today. Could you repeat that . Oh, sure. Senator church said the United States must not adopt the tactics of the enemy means are as important as the as the ends. I can talk about that. I think the church became, as i mentioned earlier, it became radicalize by vietnam. He began writing and speaking the late sixties in the early 70 is about how United States was on its way to becoming no different from the soviet union and. He wrote some if you read the text of his speeches from the late sixties and early seventies, they read like things that are would be considered wildly radical today. I mean, things that Bernie Sanders dare to say, things like, you know that he said that the vietnam war, the american role, vietnam was no different at all from soviet invasion of czechoslovakia and that the United States was trying to create an empire just like the soviet union, and that we were no better than moscow. And its amazing to me that he didnt get more blowback for some of the things he said at the time, especially in idaho. But he would repeat those same things in, idaho and, it didnt. And he still got reelected. So but i thought you could talk a little bit about kind of the thinking among the democrats at that time. What what was the what did you hope to accomplish with the committee . Well, you probably asking the wrong person, because i ironically have having worked for George Mcgovern and things like that, i always supported the agency i always believed in its original charter of collection and analysis of information. How how does great power exist in . The post World War Two World Without that capability and there of theres a branch of Democratic Party that just kind of majored in trying to run down the agency along with. Yeah, the fbi and others. Mr. Hoover had given a lot of ammunition and unhappiness unhappiness, but i have a theory that i think the only person around and has this theory, the Church Committee made the Central Intelligence agency stronger. And the reason for that is what we discovered and sy hersh, others have discovered is that almost, well, not all. Heres another study that could be done, how many of the covert operations that went bad started with overthrew a Foreign Government up to and including assassination of foreign leaders happened because of pressure from the house of one party or another. The image that liberals this country have had is the agency is at least back in the day, is out of control, making up things do and the more bizarre, the better. Thats not the way i read the agency back then. I. I find a lot culpability in various and president s and. Those around the president s. I dont know the spies if you will, what they want done. And dont tell us how youre going to do it. And so we by bringing accountability and oversight into the system, we, the cia because the director of the cia could come before the Oversight Committee and say ladies, gentlemen, ive we have received a finding one of our reforms that instructs us to do x, y and z. Are you okay with that . Well thats thats called oversight and accountability. And further i find it ironic because jim mentioned earlier about how very conservative in the Church Committee. Do went after not only but the whole committee. You know i was colorado back in the day wasnt a skiers paradise was a pretty conservative state and i was 37 years old. So i was game for the far right. But now. They want to they want to emulate the Church Committee. Same same as the children of those people now want to create their own church, which they were deriding 50 years ago, very ironic. So those of us who have covered Congress Know that of the real work of government happens, not in the hearing chamber, but behind the scenes. Tell us if the four of you maybe can tell us a little bit about how republican and democrat perceive the committee at the time its inception. How did that evolve as your research deepened and whistleblowers came forward. Is the expert . There is no question at all that the evolved and the staff. I remember one incident when i had just joined the committee and they said, well find out what kind of oversight is in the Armed Services where john stennis is the chairman and. So i said to them, well can i see these documents . So i get a very file and about the briefings that came from the cia in this case to the committee. One page with nothing on it because basically stennis and most of the committees said as senator hart said we really dont want to know you know you can talk to us in general terms but we really dont want to know. So that made it an impasse for us initially to get kind of information we needed. But the rest of the folks can speak also to that it was pulling teeth all the way along and it was it you know, we were amazed, think that we were able to uncover as much 15 months as we did. Now, not all of us like frederick slept on floor of the 308 every night to do its work and some us went home, but we did both us work seven days a week. Honestly, and the committee did to. The staff is meeting all the time and so we were to to to pull together heck of a lot of information rather. You guys. Well, someone told me to come down here and speak for 5 minutes, so if i may, thats what ill do. And i know i wont be any longer. But let me begin by saying good evening to everyone. This is a marvelous to have so many Church Committee colleagues all in the same together. I feel like all those College Reunions i miss being made up for tonight, so its good to see of you. Id like to congratulate jim on his excellent book, he and have really been i told earlier they must have gone back on a time machine because they really captured the essence of what we. Now, i also know what a pleasure it is to be with senator hart again. You know, there are often times our Committee Proceedings where there was some squabbling going on and his influence always sort of straightened down and moved us in the right direction again. And also, we had a lot of tangled ethical discussions at times, and gary hart always had him a moral compass was greatly appreciated. I think. In fact, we were blessed as a committee to have many talented senators. That panel so much legal, so much government experience and an abiding sense of among people, which is a lost art. We proceeded with a determination to follow the facts, no matter where they led. We worked, in a bipartisan manner. I can define that word if you dont know what that means. But you and we kept foremost mind what john adams liked to emphasize, that we were nation of laws. All of us remember as how effective bill miller and fritz were for its thoughts were in guiding, you know, after a bumpy beginning up between the two we smooth things out and they really worked well together i think to to bring us a blend of concern about the historical and policy questions we needed to know coupled with. And this is where fritz came in attention to the really legal violations perpetrated by these secret agencies. We needed to cover areas in our work and thanks to them we did. And our Task Force Leaders or four of them played enormously Important Role in guiding us. There leadership skills were just selfevident and david aaron over here was the Task Force Leader of the White House Task force. And and rick and i will remember well how adroitly he led us. Last but not least, staff has been mentioned already. Worked like mad. I mean, we didnt all stay overnight every night like frederick did. We often worked around the clock on weekends as well. It was an impressive demence duration of dedication and of intent. Now what about the practical results, this investigation, the period. 1787 to 1976 covers a span of 189 years. During that time, our government benefited from an system of checks and balances. Ambition, calendaring as as madison prescribe. With one exception, an intelligence. We operated under a doctrine intelligence. Exceptional design. The notion was that a secret agencies were in work that was just too sensitive be dealt with. The standard practices or so the argument went the abuse of power that resulted was, i suppose, predictable operation chaos. Cohen tell pro shamrock minaret. Hq lingual orwellian nightmares that severely eroded our claimed to be a free and open society. In 1975, when the newspapers across this country carried sy findings about cia domestic spying, it was evident that the time had come for us to bring the intelligence agencies into the American Government. The Church Committee led that dramatic change. Henceforth, there would be senate and house intelligence, along with new laws to back up our expectations, a new tone was set in washington, d. C. , bill colby wrote soon after an investigation, and im quoting him the Church Committee made clear that the rule law applies to all parts of the American Government in cluding intelligence. And then he added, and this is very soon, well, this will strengthen american intelligence. The single naysayer among these intelligence chiefs ive known over the years was william casey, an architect of the irancontra affair. Once when i sat next him at a dinner out at the agency, what he said to me in his mumbling way, the business of congress is to stay the f out of my business. So happily, his distorted of democracy has not prevail, or at least so far. I agree with you. And perilous times the moment Fritz Schwarz once observed that before the Church Committee, congress no oversight, was and embarrassed meant he recalled the cia general counsel admitting to him that agency, and im quoting, had become a little cocky. What we did around the world in the wake of our investigation. And fritz and frank church often the very first recommendation of our committee reports, and im quoting that there is inherent Constitutional Authority for the president or any Intelligence Agency to violate the law. Most members of our committee and staff understood that intelligence, accountability could play an Important Role in protecting human reducing the risk of foolish policies and enhancing efficiency that is what we were all about. Thank you you. Can i. Can i ask a question. Of course. Yeah. Were having a dialog. So. One of the things that i. That you that i wrote about in the book and that i think is really important was there was a moment pretty early on when it wasnt whether the Church Committee was really to do an aggressive investigation of the cia and the community or not. It was there was a divide within the staff and especially between Fritz Schwarz, who was the chief counsel, and bill miller, who was the staffer over whether miller wanted to do kind of a Lessons Learned type approach. And Fritz Schwarz, who was a new york lawyer, wanted to do a more aggressive investigative approach. So as wondering if some of the staffers, maybe senator hart, could talk a little bit about how that divide played itself out and how it ultimately got resolved an inch for schwartzs favor of a more aggressive. I can address that because i worked so handinglove with Fritz Schwarz all of that time. And and i think youre youre right that fritz was the cutting edge that generated the the facts that made the Church Committee and dramatic and and pinned down the witnesses and obtained and obtained the documents and knew how to do that because he was a master litigator. And he understood that if if the Church Committee to fully take advantage of the historic opportunity it had to a rethinking of where the intelligence agencies had gone and why theyd gone, and what kind of new checks and balances might be necessary. First, you had to dramatize the problem with the facts in this. He advocated senator church, who agreed him that the the allegations of assassination plots against foreign leaders by the cia was the most dramatic issue to put up front. It had been leaked out during the period of sy hirschs reporting and some subsequent stories that came out and and fritz advocated that. We put First Priority on that issue. Do in depth, do it dramatically, end up with public airings which would be unheard of at time on a subject like like classified cia covert operation. And and then he had the wisdom to, uh, to frame it the way you would litigation, meaning first start with the documents. The documents dont lie. There can be debates later about who remembers what, whos willing to fess up to what. But the documents will tell you what was actually happening. So with senator churchs support and critically with john support, who joined the senator church in going to see Nelson Rockefeller, who was referred to earlier the ford was ambivalent about whether to fully cooperate with the Church Committee. On the one hand, rockefeller and gerald ford and others in the white house like cheney did not want to make full disclosures and thought this could be injurious to the agencies. On the other hand, as you out, jim, in the book, ford did not want to be back tarnished in the watergate fashion where nixon refused to turn over certain documents and ultimately tapes and lost in the u. S. Supreme and was embarrassingly forced to do so. So he was supportive of, more cooperation and and at the critical moment, where where signals were being sent. But we werent getting documents then. Senator church was briefed by Fritz Schwarz, joined hands with john for a visit to Nelson Rockefeller and Fritz Schwarz as the chief counsel was there. But again, to send a very important signal to the Ford Administration not only was tower there as a conservative republican vice chair, but kurts mother, the republican counsel, was also there. I was there . But when the door closed for the meeting, i was on the outside it in the anteroom. Okay. What happened as a result, in short, was that. Within about three weeks we got note saying, okay will be five boxes of document, that we will let you look at. They will be in the situation room at the white house in the west wing, subterranean, windowless, famous space. And somebody can come over and see if there are a few things you might need, because in the attitude was you dont to worry because you just tell us what you want to know and then well tell you the answers the way wed like to. So, so fritz wirtz asked me at a very tender age, go over to the white house situation room to look at the five boxes. There was a large guard there standing over me the entire time. This was the situation room where, you know, a Nuclear Nuclear well that say the cuban missile crisis would have been discussed but i was alone in the room with the guards standing over me and idea was just just tell us if you think might be any one or two pieces of paper in here that you would like. I started flipping through the pieces of paper and this turned out to be the turning because what was in front of me, the minutes of the National Council and what was called the special, which was the senior level in the government cabinet, like the chairman of, the joint chiefs and the the secretary of defense and the head of the cia making decisions about covert actions on behalf of the government. So none of this had ever been seen by the legislative branch before. As i flipped through, im reading the minutes, these meetings and a lot it was in code. And at first blush, greek to me, but it became apparent during my rapid, you know, sweating it like use of my 90 minutes to i realize operation mongoose appears to be a secret war against cuba being conducted by the cia. Out of station jm wave, which is an installation of the cia in southern florida when the cias not not under the 1947 National Security act. Theyre not supposed to operate within the United States. So so somethings here and and there were minutes showing discussions of how much the president sitting at the National Security Council Meeting and his brother the attorney general and others felt there was a need to do something about castro, remove change the administrator in cuba. There were also earlier from 1960 in the Eisenhower Administration and where president eisenhower totally vexed about patrice role in the congo which had been a belgian colony and he viewed Patrice Lumumba as a threat to align with the soviet union. So there was language along the lines of we need to get rid of the mumbai. So after reading this, i told the guard, sorry, but im not going to. Im not going to request any specific document i dont want to limit the request. I have to go back and talk with the chief counsel because i knew this was this was the the kind of the holy grail. And i reported to fritz wards that that we had to have everything in the five boxes and it was couldnt have been more obvious that the five boxes would then lead to 500 requests for more documents down every trail to get all of the details, then bring in all of the witnesses. Thats what happened. Be a because Fritz Schwarz knew how to direct all of that and the rest of us did it. B because frank church it and john on on the republican side, the secret sauce was howard baker, richard schweiker, charles mathias. They were moderate republicans who were deeply committed to and john tower didnt long to be committed. Well, to the general notion that that legislative branch needed to have the facts and thats what happened. And it opened really. Thats amazing. I was hoping to hear from rick maybe as you were diving into all these boxes and all knowledge that must have been very eye opening and how did that feel . And what were your thoughts at that time . Well, i will try to limit myself as professor did to the 5 minutes. Let me add a post to what sort of heart had to say about his exchange with senator mansfield. All when he was notified that he was appointed to the committee and to do a good job. What senator hart didnt mention is that immediately after that, he came back to office in the dirksen building, and he called for all the staff to come into his office. And he asked a simple question does anyone here know anything about the cia . And there was silence and i ran. I raised my hand and i said, i dont. But like to learn. And he said, got a job. So how we off on the ground floor in this investigation . And it was a steep learning curve. I think it still is a steep learning curve with respect to the cia and slippery, but thats how it all began with myself as sort of harts designee on the committee staff. Youve heard a lot of serious comments being made about importance of the committee and the issues, the fundamental issues facing the country with respect to National Security and private. Rights, civil rights and the rest. But there was also with that committee, some humor and the political cartoonists of day had a field with doing cartoons about the work the Church Committee and brought just three to share with you. You cant see them all, but the first one has senator church. Before the tv and, a guy next to him entitled herman cover art cia agent and senator church is saying good evening, ladies and gentlemen. And to i had a secret. There was another one that weve youve heard about the assassination plots and castro i think there were nine different plots to get castro, including an exploding cigar and the rest. So wrote he did this cartoon in which you see castro here and a cia there with a sort of a and arrow and he is shot an arrow with a suction cup that hits castro right in the forehead. And the agent says, ah, its supposed to suck your brains out. And then i take back to washington and and castro is just and then the little person and oliphant cartoon says the cigar isnt working either. And then this is this is my favorite. There is one you know the committee into an james risen covers all of this in his great book got into the whole question all fact the title of the subtitle the cia the fbi the mafia and the kennedys. I mean this got into areas that we never expected to find in terms of our investigation and this cartoon because Frank Sinatra was also tied to the mob and also tied the mob to the. This one has Frank Sinatra coming into the committee room. A small Frank Sinatra surrounded by thugs, his bodyguards. And you see the the members, the committee ducking under the dais scattering. And the chairman says, the Church Committee calls Frank Sinatra. On the other hand, if mr. Sinatra would rather not. So there was humor amongst all the serious work being. Let me just end with this. The bipartisan insure shown by the committee and Fritz Schwarz mentioned this in his book about democracy in the dark was demonstrated by. The fact, as fritz says, republican senators Barry Goldwater and john tower dissented quite often. But there was no vote that divided. The committee on a party basis. Not a single vote was party line. There was always a bipartisan there would like to see those days again. The all the Committee Members signed the assassination report which it was senator senator Church Senator tower and staff that that worked that report and all senators on the committee. Barry goldwater and howard baker and fritz mondale. I mean this was this was an all star committee. They all signed this epilog to the assassination report. Im going to read two paragraphs. They said committee does not believe that the acts which it has examined represent the real american character. They do not reflect the ideals which have given the people of this country and of the world hope for a better, fuller life. We regard the assassination plots as aberrations, despite our distaste for what we have seen. We have great faith in this country. The story is sad. But this country has the strength to hear the story and to learn from it. We must a people who our mistakes and resolve not to repeat them. If we not, we will decline. But if we do, our future will worthy of the best of of past. I think all Committee Members and, all staff on the Church Committee to that and i think we obviously still do. So it was a remarkable experience. Thank you, hart, for allowing to raise my hand to join in this. And this experience of a lifetime. I think most of us up here and great many out of the science consider this to be learning the most important privileges of our lives. And one of the reasons is we came up with recommend that stuck. We most extreme republicans most extreme if youre going to do ideology. They worked together and we had we had what joint committee does not have. We had both sides witnesses. We had of information. We had something that was not a sham or a witch hunt or an outrageous political stunt. To be perfectly honest, was politics involved . Of course it was. But all of us had a mission. And and as lock said, we were following the facts. And thats what we ended up doing. I would say that i dont think there were any extreme democrats in those days. No. I asked one of the you talk about a couple of things. Thats right. That i talk about in the book, if thats okay. Sure. A related this first one was related to the assassinate plots. This, as it was suggested, as mentioned earlier, the first thing that the Church Committee focused on, the cias plots to assassinate foreign leaders, including fidel castro and others, and senator hart was one of three members of the committee who were part that smaller wasnt really a subcommittee, but was a smaller unit that was investigating that. And you told me, a great story about how you had found that the cia had a hitman. You wanted to meet him and how you. What happened then . And i thought, its a great story. Part of my freelancing freelancing. Could you just describe what that that story . A girl when found out that the agency been involved in assassination, including fidel castro, almost on a demented pattern. It opened up a lot of new doors and. Knows it. And the major one was that the cia used mafia figures to try to help in the plots against castro. Why . Well, because the cia, the mafia had owned and run both havana and, most of cuba for quite a number of decades. So when bill colby, then director of cia, opened up the socalled family jewels, that led to an awful lot of our investigations, here were three named mafia figures. So so the first thing we discovered was that a former director, alan dulles, a member of the Warren Commission had not revealed to chief commission. Those plots and use of mafia figures. Well, you dont have to be genius to understand the implications of that. So we set out, with the help, some people at this table to try to bring these three mafia figures in. We. One in Johnny Roselli and ended up bringing him in twice we had subpoenaed or prepared to subpoena. Sam g and collins. And heres what happened. Before we. Could subpoena john carter. He was killed in his basement with six bullet holes in the throat or thereabouts and murder never solved. After the second appearance of Johnny Roselli. He disappeared and, was found two or three months later. Its in the book, floating in. A 50 island drum or some such thing in dumbfounded bay. And off the miami coast, he had been killed. Rick. Rick came me and two other Staff Members from the republican side. We down with the approval of frank church to interview the dade county sheriff and the. Miami police department. They showed the first thing they did was show us pictures of roselli in the barrel. I still havent gotten over it. Its the worst thing you can. He was killed about any way you can kill a human being. Oh, go into the terrible details. So somebody wanted john connor dead and wanted roselli dead at a time when the church wanted to talk to them about plots against castro, which the word didnt know. Well, maybe i did freelance. Whatever that led me to be curious. And im still curious because neither murder has been solved. So i still think about who did it and why. But who wanted both of them silenced. And not to talk about the events against castro or the implications against kennedy. And then i was going to you. But you also tried to meet p. J. , when he was he was the plot to kill Patrice Lumumba, right . Yes well, we ran across a guy, professional assassin. Location, unknown with the codename q j win, i think that came up in colbys testimony. I recall and i was headed on the first parliamentary delegation to, russia, with a dozen other senators. And i talked to colby and. I said, when we come back, it wasnt me. It was the whole delegation transited back from moscow through overnight in amsterdam. And i dont know i had no evidence, but i somehow intuited that. Q jay, when was a european and then he might be somewhere nearby and that there was indication that he was also implicated, headed in one or more of the crew of the cuban plots. So i simply wanted to try to find him and talk him, ask him if he had anything to add about all of this. So bill colby said, ill do my best. And we were set after. Moscow spent almost a week and did transit back through amsterdam with our spouses. My dear late wife fleet and. I got a message from a man, a young man in. Moscow at our last press conference note, im sure he was with the agents there this station that said of our people will meet will contact to you in amsterdam. So flew to amsterdam. Went out to dinner. I was contacted at the dinner, came back to the hotel. I was told to go down to the hotel, wait till after oclock, go down to the bar and the cia men from washington who called be sent over there. Jim identified him, met, pulled me in a quarter and said, we contact, ted. Q jay, when he did, in fact live, i dont know why i knew that or thought that. So he and we had a drink earlier this evening and. This man said we a friend who wants would like to talk to you. Will you talk to our friend . And this codename guy said, does it have anything do with investigations in the United States . And the man, the agency man said, told him the truth. Whether he should have or not. Oh, you can read your own conclusion, but predictably huge. Qj was out of the bar and on his way home. I never got to see. Can i just had one thing that in senator harts memoir he has a let this in his memoir he says. Q jay, when if youre out there, i still want to talk to you, you can contact me through the publisher of the. So, i mean, you, you know, his name has been out here, you know, who knows . You never his he has been. There is some evidence of who he really was now. But its never been proven. So if i can talk about that and, you know, could i add something jim in passing mentioned few minutes ago about Getting Started and this was this was a bigger issue than i today we now think about it because this has never been done before and there were no ground rules. We were ad hoc were select committee not a permanent committee. And i dont think that the word subpoena was used in the whole 15 months. We were relying on people to cooperate. And im being by people leaders of the Intelligence Community and bill colby had already testified pretty to us about what he knew and some pretty deep secrets. So chairman Church Called a meeting of just the Committee Members. It was correct me if there was anyone else the room. I dont think so. This was in the first 30 days of our and the question on the table was what if the agencies refuse to deal with this . What if we asked for documents and they just dont give them . What if we ask them to come testify and . They dont come. What do we do . So we would run the. And it was kind of confusion and no quite knew how to crack this walnut and get started so i would being jurist in the committee it was the last so i said mr. Chairman i have idea why dont each of us. Ask the cia and the fbi for own personal files. Room got deathly silent. So you had 1110 others thinking it was quiet, quiet, quiet. The spell was broken by berrigan, who said of course, oath. And then i dont want to know what theyve got on me. And i was asked two or three of us did ask for our files its kind of interesting that you and barry had kind of a rapport, right . You were very. We developed we got me real negative. He wasnt for you. He showed up in colorado said some nice things when someone asked about you, said you had a high entitled to many stories already. But yeah. Is this. Lets go get him him. Barry and i served for. 12 years on the Armed Services committee and. And a year and a half on the church. So we got to know each other well. And we were pretty much geographical neighbors. And i found out, you know, liberal democrats of, he was mr. Of his age. And but he was hilariously funny. And he was invited by the Republican Party of colorado to come give their Lincoln Day Campaign speech, the theme of which was defeat gary hart. Now, if you if look at the roster of the 80 election, i think we lost ten or 11 democratic senators, including frank church and George Mcgovern and a host of others. So i was targeted. The coke or brother of that day was. The beer guy, of course was the worst cause bill coors. So barry was beginning to have his terrible with arthritis and so on he was on canes was ultimately on crutches. So he up from phenix about 5 00 that evening at the airport to go to the dinner and give a speech. The republican and he sent the press corps out to airport to interview him to try to get stories in the sunday papers because otherwise they just covered the speech. The itd be monday morning page eight below the fold. So barry was cranky and all the questions were youre here to defeat gary hart . Well, no, im going to talk to the republicans and were going to get together blah and the question after question, repeat it. He finally got fed up. He said, okay, im just going to say one thing. Gary is the most honest and moral man i have ever met in politics. Game set, and man. Monday we had 250,000 and copies of that story all over colorado. That was it. I just keep coming back to that because. You were a young liberal democrat. He is the elder concern ative granddaddy of modern america. But you thats a great case example of the bipartisanship of the Church Committee. Yeah, absolutely and barry barry ended up not being a doctrinaire conservative. He was is a libertarian. He and in life to the embarrassment of his party endorsed gay marriage and abortions and all of other stuff. And of course his former colleagues all said barrys gone senile. Well everyone we talked to on the committee when they mentioned Barry Goldwater, they all had nice things to say about and they said, oh, i didnt agree with, but he was very nice to me as everyone has and i am i have a question for the rest of you. You were talking about. Well, you were talking about you want to investigate the murders of the witnesses and, you know, thats youve never youve always been curious about that. I think its really impressive everything you did, because this is predigital 1975. This is they had to comb through lots and lots and lots of paperwork, government produces lots of that already. You had get the documents once you finally got the documents, you only had a year. So you spent months of that already getting the documents. Once you finally had them, you had to work fast with without the internet. I was born i, i am not. Yeah, i cant imagine that. So how how did you develop how did you develop a shorthand to find what you needed in the time that you had and you were there anything that you really to dig into more when people were coming around saying, hey, we have to finish up, we have to do hearings, you cant research anymore. Like, what did you want to . Dig into more. You go to the library and go to the card catalog. No. The interesting thing about this is that the word digital was not in the lexicon back. Then there was no such thing. You had to be so much more prescient. But it was done. It was the old gumshoe thing, right i mean, it was interviewing people, knowing the right questions to ask staying on them and know, hoping to god that they told the truth to you. And sometimes they did and sometimes they didnt. The nisei gave us a list of 1200 americans that were on the watch list that they were surveilling right. All the international communications. There were two names. But ten years ago, we discovered this, two names that were not on that list, howard baker, senator on the committee and frank church had they told us that . Then what do you think, senator . I mean, it would have blown things, but, you know, got what we got and. It was you dont perseverance, i guess. I mean, locke wrote a very fine book about the committee season of inquiry. You can see some of those cartoons in his book that rick brought like the Frank Sinatra was my favorite. So you really you really describe what the dirksen auditorium was like it was yet these very cramped cubicles and everyones on top of each other. And you can hear everyones it was like a bedlam and thats its so impressive what you did have you ever been in a small kitchen when the is blowing off sort of how it was. If i may take a couple of minutes i want to tell a gary hart, but i want to preface by saying that one of the saddest moments in the committee for me was to realize the assassination plot really occurred. And cointelpro, the fbi to destroy the lives of american citizens. And one of the people i interviewed was William Sullivan number three at the fbi. And i said, why didnt you blow the whistle on this cointelpro . Why did you let it go that way . And he looked at me rather sadly. And he said, i had three kids in college. I had a mortgage on my house. What was i supposed to do . Which gets me to the gary hart. So and that is, i can remember early on where frank church and fritz mondale, fabulous people, in my view, heroes, mine were beginning to speak out in public what the committee was doing and it was really wrecking havoc in the committee. And you said in a meeting, close meeting, if this i will resign from committee. And that was a sobering moment. And you had the courage to say that. I think i told it to mike mansfield. I remember bringing it up in committee, but i thought that what was at stake was the credibility of our committee and the potential for permanent oversight. That was what was at stake, no immediate political agendas and i loved both frank and fritz. And in being a competitor of later on, they were great senators and great human beings, but they theres just always that urge for the microphone. That was one of the turning points in the early committee. I think, and it was a tough call because you needed to get the public behind you you needed to get some publicity and some attention. You needed to get people in. In the postwatergate world saying, whoa, whoa, whoa. This is a very problem. But was a you know, it was a fine line to walk between, keeping your mouth shut. But we had no leaks out of that committee, no leaks out of that whole committee in 15 months. Now, i dont think that happens today. Much doesnt what do you think . I think there were some leaks. But we never admitted to that. Rick frederick, was there anything you want to dig into more with you had had more time. I would just the answer is yes. And and one area was i was on the the lumumba assassination from start to finish doesnt get enough attention. And senator hart had bird dogged the one of the International Assassins who had surfaced. There was another one. This is on a trail. There was something left over to investigate the end and major policy issues that we confronted. But on the International Assassin story, there was also agent y rogue addition to qj win and they were going to team up and they were both known as who knew how to get anything done and there was a cable i discovered using the technology of microfiche at the cia where we made a breakthrough. We negotiated for months to get access to the actual cables that cia headquarters sent to the cia station chief at the time surrounding the lumumba assassination plot. And it took forever to get them to say, okay, you can show up. And when i did. I was in a booth with it sounds illicit but i was in a booth with curtains next to me looking in a in a monitor, you know, turning microfiche on the spindle and seeing cia cable after cable. After cable. And were talking about thousands of looking for that. You know, the jewels that were there and secretly notes on a yellow pad because had to have some way to request those documents. I left because there was no such as pressing a button and making a copy one of those cables talked about what these guys might have a chance to do when they went to the congo where Patrice Lumumba was being held under house arrest in the jungle. At that point by the united nations. But there were many people after, him and the cable that was sent back to headquarters from the station chief in the congo and said recommend pouch soonest high powered rifle with telescopic hunting good here when lights right so the and that was in addition the poison toxins which were developed by a cia scientist who went down to the congo to deliver the syringe and the toxins and the cia station chief chief himself testified i mean discussed later in life the qualms had about what he was asked to do. He said who authorized you to tell me to, in effect, this this guy . And he said, and answer he got from the cia doctor was highest authority. And he said, does that mean the president , the United States . And the answer was yes now unclear whether that cia doctor actually knew that at that point, i think it was eisenhower had given the order. But but the larger point here at a policy was frank church early on raised the hypothesis that we need to understand if the cia a rogue elephant out operating doing all of these radical covert things without proper legal constraints or president ial authorization and that that stirred a furor later at the end of the process after looking at all documents and listening to all witnesses the committee a concluded that while cant find a piece of paper that signed Dwight Eisenhower or, John F Kennedy and the police assassinate Patrice Lumumba and fidel castro. Then, in fact, the cia was operating within the realm of authority. That was clearly signaled to them under the rules of time, which were plausible deniability. The president. It shall never be put in writing, but were unmistakably sending the message that we want this to happen. Nobody will ask any questions if it then finally, back to senator harts point about how none of us we were all getting into issues we never expected to see. You know, they didnt teach Assassination Law in law school and and so the you know what was the what was the ultimate policy issue we had surfaced here. It wasnt clear was this against the law should it be against the law . Maybe maybe assassination is equivalent to a declaration war or or authorization of some other covert action that could save thousands or millions of lives. So what the committee came to on this issue and there were similar with with a hundred other issues was that at the very least this needs to be considered by the congress in the light of constitutional checks and balances, setting up a process that that means that it will be considered not just for its propriety but also the effectiveness of the operation. Are we doing something will end up disgracing the United States and creating more problems for than than problems that resolve it. And then later as result of the committees recommendations, president , president s, both parties, ford and carter created a series president ial executive orders directly in response to the recommendations of the Church Committee to set a regulatory scheme. And then the attorneys general, griffin bell under carter and, ed levi under ford, did the same thing at the attorney general level. They were regulating the intelligence agencies could do that might have an impact on the rights american citizens. So these these bizarre episodes that we were investigate led to important rethink of the rules of the game for the intelligence going forward. Yes, as you can all tell, this book is very packed, full of lots of stories and really details. I was hoping we do one more question, but spin forward to present day and you know, what are the takeaways that i can you each me one takeaway from what you learned from that era and investigations that we apply to america now and starting with you rick. The need for congressional oversight of intelligence arguably could never be more important than today. We have seen on the intelligence committee. A very indepth looks at a number of abuses that continue to take place within the community, often directed by the white house. The torture report that came out under the Senate Committee looking at drones looking at targeted killings, looking at the world of surveillance in a world of now artifice intelligence, which makes everything fair game in terms of what are the guardrails for privacy civil liberties. So what comes out of me the lesson from the Church Committee is that it established a basis for oversight but oversight has never been more important and. We will see where that heads in the future i can bring it up to the president s as this afternoon i had a by happenstance a chance to talk with congressman dan goldman who was the lead counsel on one of the impeachments and is now on the house judiciary committee. And hes in the minority, the democratic minority on the of government subcommittee. And where jim jordan claimed at the outset dont worry about us because the new Church Committee and that 28 of us to sign letter saying if you are the new committee you would adhere to the following many bipartisan processes and principles and and place emphasis on fact based conclusions, not political conclusions. What he said was, were using that as the measuring rod and we know that the Church Committee is the model that should be followed on a Committee Like this. And he, he and his colleagues are dedicated, do everything they can to restore that form of congressional oversight and investigation. And at the earliest possible opportunity. Next month, in 1975, frank church appeared on meet the press, and he said that if the president was wrong minded and wanted to misuse these intelligence agencies, that the possibilities for tyranny be immense and. In his words, there would be place to hide. Now were all these years later. Technology has greatly increased and the dangers even stronger. I think so. I agree with my colleagues on this panel that oversight is more important than ever was. And ive also heard that a lot of it depends on whos in the right places. If you go back and read plato and aristotle all, they say that Good Government depends on picking good people to. Be in high office and thatll always be case. Youve got to gary hart on of these Oversight Committees is going to work. Youve got some of the other people have been on these committees and the committees failed completely. So its been up and down. And the bottom line is we have to work hard, to elect good people, to high office so youre turning this to the console that you elected earlier and not anymore. Im an old gray guy. Old gray horse. You know, if if democracy is going to survive and thrive, the 21st century, we to consider that one question and someones with which is you adopt the tactics of your opponents the last the church put after talking about that was you will become more like them and we have over over the world an attack on democracy and you know, we have to have, again people look up to us as as the purveyors of of of a real democratic order and thats going to take a lot of work and, like some good people to, nice on helping to create open secrets. Ah, by the way. Oh, thank you. Great stuff. Now i think that bipartisanship is really i dont want to say its a bygone era and or whatever, but its theres much talk about that that really drove the story of you and Barry Goldwater just because, like everyone talks about, Barry Goldwater is like, you know, mr. Conservative. I mean, this is such a great example of how people can Work Together in the greater National Interest interest. My title of this book is honest man and one of the best Congressional Staff is ever assembled. Thank you. I guess i would just say that i think its really important to remember when things actually work right. And when there are good people involved in government, just so we can compare and contrast against and its important remember that it doesnt always have to be like it is now. All good points. Thank you so much for speech tonight. Everyones perspectives, experiences has been really important for all of us to learn from and the book itself is very interesting if you have a chance to read it. I wanted to say thank you to our audience as well. We look forward to seeing a future National Press club events and if you havent gotten the book yet, highly recommend it. They will have some signings outside and thank you for taking the time to meet. All. April, because earlier far