you would notify the individuals against whom there are illegal files. Then the individual can instruct you as to whether the file should be destroyed or maintained. And you will have fulfilled your responsibilities under the Privacy Act.

Mr. BUSH. Improper records must be destroyed. To go out and do what has been suggested, we think would be a further invasion of the privacy of some people. So we simply have an honest difference of opinion as to what should be done.

Ms. ABZUG. I know what the real problem is. We should both contemplate this, as should all of the members of the committee and the Government. The problem is that those who have collected these files illegally are in charge of destroying these files. That raises a very interesting question.

Mr. BUSH. For one who has no confidence, it raises the question of whether it will be done properly. All I can do is recognize that I intend to fully cooperate with the Congress, to fully cooperate with oversight, and I would be called upon to certify, in as much detail as our oversight committees requested, this information. I am prepared to give it to them.

Also, we are reviewed by the Privacy Commission in terms of our compliance.

Ms. ABZUG. I know that the Director wants to leave, but Mr. Harrington has some questions which he would like to ask, if you would be good enough.

Mr. BUSH. Madam Chairwoman, I would be glad to stay. As I indicated to you, I flew back from California and got here at 3 this morning to make this appearance.

I indicated that I had twice changed a luncheon appearance which has some import with a member of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. But, certainly, I am here and I would be glad to respond to the questions.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Mr. Bush, narrowing your responses to the Chaos program, could you outline the methods used by the Agency, as you have been informed of them, to gather this information? What were the various bases that were relied on over the period of time this program was ongoing to establish the files that are the subject of this hearing?

Mr. BUSH. I do not have the information. It is covered in the Rockefeller report. I just have not been thoroughly briefed on what methodology was used.

Mr. HARRINGTON. You have around you people with a cumulative service of perhaps better than a century. Do you think they could help in specifically dealing with those questions?

Mr. CARY. Basically, Mr. Harrington, I believe we were asked to find if there were foreign links to some of these organizations in the United States.

Mr. HARRINGTON. What methods did you use in determining that? Mr. CARY. We used our foreign intelligence resources abroad. Mr. HARRINGTON. I am talking of the domestic setting which has been the subject of concern.

Mr. CARY. A lot of it, Mr. Harrington, is open literature.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Would you like to review the open literature for us, Mr. Cary?

Mr. CARY. Anything in the press items

Mr. HARRINGTON. I thought you meant it in a somewhat different sense. I thought you meant that it was widely known as to how the Agency conducted this activity. You are talking about access to established material or recognized material.

What else did you do?

Mr. CARY. That was essentially it.

Mr. HARRINGTON. There were no break-ins?

Mr. CARY. NO-not under the Chaos program. I think you asked your question with respect to the Chaos program.

Mr. HARRINGTON. And under the Chaos program, break-ins were not the basis for any of the information in these files.

Mr. CARY. That is correct.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Was there surveillance of any kind-electronic or otherwise?

Mr. CARY. That could well be. I cannot make a categorical statement on that to exclude that.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Were there informants from other agencies?
Mr. CARY. Yes.

Mr. HARRINGTON. When it comes to the concern that has been expressed not just about the problems posed for the Agency, but in dealing with the propriety of the conduct as it would affect the Justice Department role, where does all of this lead? Has there been a review of the files internally in terms of the basis for this information, and references, where it has been dubious, to the Justice Department for prosecution except in those one or two well-known instances involving conduct before the Congress?

Have you in fact conducted such a self-review that has led you to present material that is questionable in origin, as it affects our existing laws, to the Justice Department for further activity?

Mr. CARY. Mr. Harrington, all I can indicate on this is that a lot of this was identified in the review that Mr. Colby testified to before the committee in 1973 to determine what questionable activities might be going on. And in that connection and in that category, a review was made.

Mr. HARRINGTON. That was the internally induced Agency effort in the spring of 1973 under Schlesinger, I assume. I am talking about the broad programs that have been identified variously as Chaos, and the Office of Security files which apparently was responsible for conducting certain other activities against organizations.

I am talking about the use of material and how it was acquired, and whether or not any effort has been made in the period since that time to determine whether the Justice Department should be involved in proceeding, or looking at the need to proceed, as far as how that information was gathered.

Mr. CARY. I believe, Mr. Harrington, that the Chaos files were from an entirely separate program. The other activities which you mentioned, surveillance or entries or whatever, are matters which have been brought to the attention of the Department of Justice and are under review by the Department of Justice.

Mr. HARRINGTON. I conclude where I started, Mr. Bush. It is very difficult to exculpate you fully from the past that we are dealing with. However, I still remain puzzled as to how this exercise which you

describe, and which is reminiscent of the language of a predecessor of yours about trusting the good intentions of honorable men, is enough of an assurance to the American public. Will leaving it to the executive branch to engage in all of this self-reflection, agonizing thought it may be, satisfy the need which you perceive and apparently share: to reassure people that we can rely on this oversight approach? The apparent spottiness of memory and the inability to be forthcoming when it comes to these things leave me, frankly, very cynical when it comes to having any particular trust, when it comes to suggesting that we leave it your best judgments collectively as to how you deal with the activities of the last generation. You indicate that we should be assured by now that these things are well in hand and that you are satisfying a wide body of American public opinion which feel to the contrary.

Mr. BUSH. The Privacy Commission, Mr. Harrington, should satisfy some of your legitimate concerns because, as I understand it, they look into these matters.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Does the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board satisfy that, Mr. Bush? It is like a gathering of almuni.

Mr. BUSH. I did not suggest that, sir; you suggested that.

Mr. HARRINGTON. I will give you an example. The Lockheed Commission investigation structured by the executive branch to deal with the problems posed by scandals in foreign governments is an example. Why should we believe this sort of thing?

Mr. BUSH. Believe what sort of thing, sir?

Mr. HARRINGTON. Why should we believe the sort of thing that says in effect on the bottom line, "You trust us to engage in self-policing." Mr. BUSH. I am not saying, "trust us," sir. I hope you will trust. But I am saying the Privacy Commission will look into this to see that we properly comply with the law.

You are asking us to go out-I had better be careful that your position is as the chairwoman's-to go out and investigate other citizens to see if this is the same Harrington on there, and we do not want to do that. And I ask you to assign to us a certain bit of good will. We are not saying "trust us." We are following the procedures of the law. And whatever the House of Representatives, along with the Senate, enacts, we will follow the law.

And I am upset when I keep hearing these insinuations that we are not following the law or will not follow the law. I must take exception to that.

Mr. HARRINGTON. I am not making an insinuation, Mr. Bush, beyond the fact that I think people have had it up to their eyebrows when it comes to the executive branch's dealing with the problems posed by the mass of evidence which has been developed since 1973, and perhaps fleetingly before that, that says, in effect:

We will gather together the principals, present and past, that have participated in this activity, some with good will and some with philosophic differences, and have that suffice for the kind of basic restructuring and reorganization and reevaluation that we basically have a right to expect-given where this country has been in the last generation.

I do not think it is adequate. I expect that someone like yourself who has been in the political process in the past would be aware of that profound malaise.

Mr. BUSH. Mr. Harrington, you and I both share the critical concern for the cynicism and the lack of confidence in the institution. You cited the Congress; you cited the lack of confidence in the people in the executive branch; you certainly cited the lack of confidence in the Central Intelligence Agency.

Let me simply assure you that I will do my level best, based on a political past and based on a diplomatic past and based, hopefully, on some sensitivity, to do what we can to keep our house in order and to comply with the law.

We add to the cynicism if we suggest that the testimony I have had here today is an attempt to avert responsibility to the people. That is not what we are here for. If you think it is, then I think we are just simply far apart philosophically or far apart in terms of intent. This is not what we are intending.

We are intending to comply. We will comply.

Mr. HARRINGTON. Will you provide the Privacy Commission, which you have cited as your example of an objective third-party entity, with the files that are the subject of this kind of discussion and give access to them in terms of how you dispose of the material?

Mr. BUSH. I am advised, sir, that that is a requirement of the law. We will of course very thoroughly report to our oversight committees set up by the Congress. So there are two safeguards there with which we should certainly cooperate fully. And we will.

Mr. HARRINGTON. What is the other?

Mr. BUSH. The Congress itself.

Mr. HARRINGTON. And the Privacy Commission will have access to these files?

Mr. BUSH. Subject only to sources and methods, it will.

Ms. ABZUG. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HARRINGTON. That reminds me of some answers that I have heard before from a predecessor of yours. A broad, forthcoming statement is followed by a paragraph of qualifications.

Ms. ABZUG. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HARRINGTON. Certainly.

Ms. ABZUG. I assume that you will be prepared to provide similar information to this committee.

Mr. BUSH. I will look into that and check that with our oversight committees and get back to you on that, Madam Chairwoman. Ms. ABZUG. Check that with whom?

Mr. BUSH. All of our oversight committees. I am not familiar with the procedures as to whom and in what order we supply information requested. But if a request is made, certainly we will give it proper consideration.

Ms. ABZUG. You did point out earlier and you are aware of the fact that this committee has oversight and legislative jurisdiction over the Privacy Act. There is no other committee in the House that does. Mr. BUSH. Yes.

Ms. ABZUG. I just wanted to bring that to your attention. Therefore, if you are supplying information concerning the carrying out of the provisions of the Privacy Act, I find it a little difficult to understand why you should have to check.

In any case, we shall make a formal request and then you will have the question before you. And I would suggest that the jurisdiction is quite clear. That is set up by Congress.

I realize you have been most patient. We do have many more questions, but instead of keeping you from your duties which are important to be carried forward, we will instead ask unanimous consent of the committee to excuse this witness and propound questions in writing to the Director and his counsel for the record.

There are a great many questions for which it is important for us to have answers in order to properly determine what legislation will be necessary here and what oversight efforts have to be carried out by this committee.

Mr. BUSH. Madam Chairwoman, I hope I do not need to assure you of this; but, whatever law is passed by the House and Senate and enacted into law, we will comply with it.

Thank you very much for your courtesy.

MS. ABZUG. Thank you very much for coming.

Our next witnesses for the Justice Department appear to be Mary C. Lawton, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Legal Counsel; Irwin Goldboom, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division; Thomas S. Martin, Special Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division; and Michael E. Shaheen, Jr., Counsel on Professional Responsibility.

Would you please come forward and raise your hands.

Do you each solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

STATEMENT OF MARY C. LAWTON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; ACCOMPANIED BY IRWIN GOLDBLOOM, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL DIVISION; THOMAS S. MARTIN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL DIVISION; MICHAEL E. SHAHEEN, JR., COUNSEL ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY; AND PAUL DALY, AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS, FBI

Ms. LAWTON. I do.

Mr. GOLDBLOOM. I do.
Mr. MARTIN. I do.

Mr. SHAHEEN. I do.

Mr. DALY. I do.

MS. ABZUG. There is a sixth person at the table. Would you be good enough to identify yourself for the record. I do not believe you have been called forward here today.

Ms. LAWTON. It was at your request.

Ms. ABZUG. I would like to have his name.

Mr. DALY. I am Paul Daly, Agent in Charge of the Office of Congressional Affairs, FBI.

Ms. ABZUG. Were you sworn in, Mr. Daly?

Mr. DALY. Yes; I was.

Ms. ABZUG. I regret that the Attorney General of our great Nation has not seen fit to come before the committee this morning or any other time for that matter. I think his views on this very important subject would be extremely important for the deliberation of this committee. I look forward to the time when the Attorney General will respond to this committee. A number of requests have been made of