SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
PLEASE NOTE: The following transcript is a portion of the official hearing record of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Additional material pertinent to this transcript may be found on the web site of the Committee at [http://www.house.gov/reform]. Complete hearing records are available for review at the Committee offices and also may be purchased at the U.S. Government Printing Office.
49–239 CC
1998
VENEZUELAN MONEY AND THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
AND OVERSIGHT
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
APRIL 30, 1998
Serial No. 105–125
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York
J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
CHRISTOPHER COX, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York
STEPHEN HORN, California
JOHN L. MICA, Florida
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia
DAVID M. MCINTOSH, Indiana
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio
MARSHALL ''MARK'' SANFORD, South Carolina
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
PETE SESSIONS, Texas
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey
VINCE SNOWBARGER, Kansas
BOB BARR, Georgia
DAN MILLER, Florida
——— ———
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
TOM LANTOS, California
ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
GARY A. CONDIT, California
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington, DC
CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
JIM TURNER, Texas
THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
———
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont (Independent)
KEVIN BINGER, Staff Director
RICHARD BENNETT, Chief Counsel
WILLIAM MOSCHELLA, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
JUDITH MCCOY, Chief Clerk
PHIL SCHILIRO, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
Hearing held on April 30, 1998
Statement of:
Castro Barredo, Jorge
Dawson, Joseph J., Assistant District Attorney, New York County District Attorney's Office
Preiss, Richard T., Assistant District Attorney, Senior Investigative Counsel, New York County District Attorney's Office
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Bennett, Richard, chief counsel, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight:
Exhibit VEN–1
Exhibit VEN–2
Exhibit VEN–3
Exhibits VEN–4 and VEN–16
Exhibits VEN–6 and VEN–5
Exhibit VEN–7
Exhibit VEN–15
Exhibit VEN–27
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Horn, Hon. Stephen, a Representative in Congress from the State of California:
Article dated February 23, 1997
Exhibit VEN–26
25Exhibit VEN–29
Mica, Hon. John L., a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida:
Article dated April 30, 1998
Background information
Waxman, Hon. Henry A., a Representative in Congress from the State of California, letter dated April 30, 1998
Wilson, James C., senior investigative counsel, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, exhibit VEN–12
VENEZUELAN MONEY AND THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
THURSDAY, APRIL 30, 1998
House of Representatives,
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Burton (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Burton, Morella, Cox, Ros-Lehtinen, McHugh, Horn, Mica, Sununu, Snowbarger, Barr, Waxman, Lantos, Kanjorski, Condit, Barrett, Kucinich, Davis of Illinois, and Turner.
Staff present: Kevin Binger, staff director; Richard Bennett, chief counsel; William Moschella, deputy counsel and parliamentarian; Judith McCoy, chief clerk; Teresa Austin, assistant clerk/calendar clerk; David Kass, deputy counsel; Dudley Hodgson, chief investigator; James C. Wilson and Uttam Dhillon, senior investigative counsels; Robert Dold, investigative counsel; Elliott Berke, investigative attorney, Robin Butler, office manager; Ashley Godwin, investigative administrative assistant; Tom Bossert, investigative staff assistant; Phil Schiliro, minority staff director; Phil Barnett, minority chief counsel; Kenneth Ballen, minority chief investigative counsel; David Sadkin and Michael Yang, minority counsels; Ellen Rayner, minority chief clerk; Sheridan Pauker, minority research assistant; and Jean Gosa, minority staff assistant.
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BURTON. The committee will come to order. Good morning, a quorum being present, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight will start its business.
Before the distinguished ranking member and I deliver our opening statements, the committee must first dispose of some procedural issues. I ask unanimous consent that all Members' and witnesses' written opening statements be included in the record, and without objection, so ordered. I ask unanimous consent that all articles, exhibits, and extraneous or tabular material referred to be included in the record, and without objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that questioning in the matter under consideration proceed under clause 2(j)(2), House Rule XI, and committee Rule 14, in which the chairman and ranking minority member allocate time to committee counsel as they deem appropriate for extended questioning, not to exceed 60 minutes, divided equally between the majority and the minority, and without objection, so ordered.
I'd like to start off my opening remarks today by once again drawing attention to the stone wall that we have over on the wall which shows some of the problems we've encountered with the investigation. The Speaker of the House has made some comments about this in the last few days, and at the White House yesterday, speaking for the President, Michael McCurry, responded to Speaker Gingrich, and here's what he said, and I quote: ''There's a lot of work to be done and we'll leave the politics to the Speaker. We're going to do the business of the people.''
So I just have a couple of questions for the President and Mr. McCurry. Is it the business of the people to have drug dealers and gun runners in the White House in exchange for contributions? Is it the business of the people to rent out the Lincoln bedroom and seats on Air Force One for campaign contributions? Is it the business of the people to stonewall investigations by not turning over documents, or delaying documents for long periods of time to the Congress? Is it the business of the people to conceal video tapes of the President at White House fundraisers for 6 months and longer? And is it the business of the people to abuse executive privilege, to block criminal investigations and congressional investigations? These are just a few of the questions I'd like to ask Mr. McCurry, and I think some of the words were two syllables and longer.
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Today, we continue to look into illegal foreign money that flowed into national campaigns through Florida. In March, we heard testimony about $400,000 in contributions from a German National, Thomas Kramer. We questioned Federal Election Commission officials who investigated this matter. More than $500,000 in fines were assessed, and Mr. Kramer was fined, and his lawyers were fined, and his secretary was fined, and the Republican party of Florida was fined.
One important person was not punished in any way. According to the Federal Election Committee General Counsel's Report, they obtained evidence that Democratic fundraiser, Howard Glicken, may have been involved in advising Mr. Kramer to illegally funnel contributions through his secretary. Despite the evidence, the Federal Election Commission decided not to investigate Mr. Glicken. They did not even call him to ask about it. One of the reasons they cited in deciding not to pursue Mr. Glicken was his close personal relationship to Vice President Gore.
Today, we will hear testimony about $50,000 in Venezuelan money that was contributed to the Democrat party during the Presidential campaign in 1992. These contributions were made by a prominent Venezuelan banking family headed by Orlando Castro Llanes. The evidence of these illegal contributions emerged during a bank fraud case being prosecuted by New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau.
Mr. Morgenthau won convictions against three members of the Castro family, including Orlando Castro and his grandson, Jorge Castro Barredo. During the course of this investigation, Jorge Castro became a cooperating witness. He revealed the conduit contribution scheme to the prosecutors. The contributions were made during the fall of the 1992 Presidential elections. They consisted of two $20,000 contributions to the Democrat National Committee, and two $5,000 contributions to State Democratic parties.
Today, we will make public bank records and other documents given to our committee by Mr. Morgenthau's office that show that the $50,000 was reimbursed by the Castro's family business overseas.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Well, what happened then? Mr. Morgenthau's office referred all of the information on the illegal contributions to the U.S. Justice Department. They informed the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami. They informed the Public Integrity Section of the Justice Department. They informed the Campaign Finance Task Force. They wrote letters. They made phone calls. The Justice Department interviewed Jorge Castro. They were given all of the documents. The case was practically gift-wrapped for the Justice Department, but for some reason, they simply decided not to pursue it. A year later, they wrote back to Mr. Morgenthau's office and told him that they had no plans to prosecute the case.
Now, here's what bothers me. In the Thomas Kramer case, the FEC had evidence that a DNC fundraiser was responsible for soliciting illegal conduit contributions. Mr. Kramer's secretary said that if she was given immunity, she would name that person. The FEC did not pursue it. They did not refer it to the Justice Department so they could pursue it. The DNC fundraiser, who was instigating illegal activities, gets off scot-free.
We have a similar situation with the Castro case. It will become clear during the course of the hearing that instructions for Jorge Castro's illegal contributions were coming from someone associated with the Democrat National Committee. Jorge Castro was getting detailed instructions about which State parties to make contributions to. Calls were being made to take one State off the list, and put another on in its place. These directions could have only come from a Democrat party strategist who knew which States needed money and which didn't. Since the Justice Department decided not to pursue this case, that person gets off scot-free.
What we are seeing is a disturbing pattern of Democratic operatives getting mixed up with illegal contributions. If the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission don't vigorously pursue these cases, we wind up with the conduit contributors getting punished, but the party operatives behind the contributions getting a walk. This is clearly not acceptable. If political party officials are behind illegal contributions schemes, they must be brought to light, and they must be punished. If the Justice Department won't do it, and if the FEC won't do it, then maybe the Congress needs to do it. That's one of the reasons we're holding these hearings.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Anyone who has attended these hearings has heard me talk about the unbelievable number of people who have taken the fifth amendment or fled the country. There are now 92 people and many of their pictures are on that wall over there. You can see on that ''Wall of Shame'' photos of the friends and associates of the President who have taken the fifth and fled the country. This committee has run into a stone wall of stalling and obstruction.
The Castro case has been no exception. Once again, we have a key witnesses take the fifth to avoid testifying. That person is Charles Intriago. Mr. Intriago is the Castro family's lawyer. He is a DNC trustee. We will introduce into the record today, the sheet of instructions that Mr. Intriago faxed to Jorge Castro on how to make these illegal contributions. It details to whom to make the contributions, and for how much. We will hear testimony from Jorge Castro that Mr. Intriago called him to change the instructions, to take one State off the list and put another State on the list. It is clear that Mr. Intriago was acting as a go-between for the Castro family and the Democrat National Committee. It seems clear that Mr. Intriago could inform us from whom he was getting these instructions, and whether that person was aware that illegal contributions were being made. Unfortunately, Mr. Intriago is not talking. He has taken the fifth amendment. One more stone on that wall.
What did the Castro family get for their money? They got a meeting with a high-level State Department official, and other officials, to discuss money-laundering. They got to attend the President's Inauguration. Apparently, Mr. Intriago was angling to be the United States Ambassador to Venezuela. Well, that at least didn't happen.
It is clear that the only way the American people are going to learn the truth is if we begin to immunize some of these witnesses and compel their testimony. Last week we voted on immunity for four important witnesses, a close business associate of Ted Sioeng, two employees of Johnny Chung, and a political associate of Gene and Nora Lum. In each case, the Justice Department was carefully consulted. In each case, the Justice Department had no objection to immunity. But in each case, every one of my Democrat colleagues voted against immunity. Immunity was blocked and the witnesses will remain silent because of this obstruction.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My colleague, Mr. Waxman, has consistently attacked this investigation. He will tell you in a few minutes that I have run a partisan investigation. He will say that I have abused my powers. Of course, none of this is true, but apparently my colleagues on the Democratic side voted against immunity to punish me. But the truth is, their votes don't punish me. When they block immunity, they are punishing the American people who have a right to know what happened. They have a right to know who broke the laws. When you block immunity, and you don't allow witnesses to testify, you keep the truth from the American people.
Now my colleague, Mr. Waxman, thinks I have my mind made up. He does not think I'm objective, and that's fine. He has a right to his opinion. But I don't think the American people have their minds made up. Let's let them hear the testimony of these witnesses and make up their own mind. Blocking this testimony by the Democrats only hurts the American people who we were sent here to represent.
Ted Sioeng has been accused of being a Chinese agent. Is that true? Kent La may be able to shed some light on this. Sioeng and his family have given hundreds of thousands to both Democrats and Republicans. This isn't partisan. It affects both parties. Let's give Kent La immunity. The Justice Department doesn't oppose it. Let's let the American people hear his testimony and make up their own minds.
We have a lot of good people on this committee, both Republicans and Democrats. I know that everyone, on both sides of this committee, have been shocked by some of things that have happened during the last election. I think everyone wants the truth to come out.
If you don't like me or if you don't like my style, that's fine. I'll accept that. But you're not punishing me, you're punishing the American people who have a right to know. We're going to vote on immunity for these same witnesses again next week, and I hope everyone on the committee will think long and hard about their vote over the weekend.
Returning to today's hearing, I would like to welcome our witnesses. Mr. Castro will provide a firsthand account of how these contributions were made and why. We have two prosecutors from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. These two gentlemen were involved in prosecuting the Castro case, and they were the people who were in communication with the Justice Department.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Welcome, Mr. Castro, I'm glad you're here. Before we hear from you, we will now hear from Mr. Waxman, the ranking minority member.
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to clarify the record on a couple of points about this investigation. At our last hearing on March 31, I reminded you that your investigation has already cost $6 million of taxpayer's money. You disputed that number, and agreed to provide a full accounting of the funds spent by the majority on this investigation by April 3. It's now 4 weeks later, and you still haven't provided that accounting. Mr. Chairman, the public does have a right to know all the information, especially how their dollars are being spent. This is already going to be the most expensive congressional investigation in history, and one that has produced the least amount of new information. I, again, ask you to provide to the minority, and to the public, a precise audit of all the tax dollars you've spent on this investigation since November 1996.
Mr. Chairman, by not providing that information, you're punishing the American people. Will you provide it to us?
Mr. BURTON. I think it's already a matter of pubic record, but I'll make sure that you get a complete accounting of the expenses.
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. You've also made it clear that you're intentionally violating the committee's rules and releasing transcripts and/or reportings of conversations that Webb Hubbell had with people on the telephone while he was in prison. It is also clear, however, when we read the newspapers that your staff, or you, told reporters that you haven't yet released the most relevant and detailed tapes.
Coincidentally, there's a tape that contains some exculpatory information regarding Mr. Hubbell and does have specific information that relates to this committee's investigation. Our serious objections to releasing the tapes is that most of these tapes, 99 percent of them, have nothing to do with this committee's investigation. They're personal. They're private conversations, in many cases, intimate conversations that Mr. Hubbell was having with his wife. I'm offended at the idea that they would be released. I think it's inconsistent with the rules for the chairman to release those tapes. I think they should be reviewed by the committee, and by our working group on document disclosure. But, Mr. Chairman, if you're going to be releasing tapes, I hope you'll release the transcripts of the September 18, 1996, conversation, with appropriate redactions for legitimate privacy concerns. I believe that this is tape 118B. Mr. Chairman, I hope you'll be releasing that tape if you're going to release others.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BURTON. If the gentleman will yield briefly?
Mr. WAXMAN. Sure.
Mr. BURTON. Let me just say that we're going to scrutinize Mr. Hubbell's types very carefully, and all these other tapes. We'll make sure that we don't release anything that's of a personal nature. Now, there may be a tape that there is something on it that's relevant to our investigation, which we'll have to release, but we're being very careful about getting into the personal aspects of Mr. Hubbell's family life.
Now, regarding what you're talking about, give me that one more time?
Mr. WAXMAN. It's tape 118B. It's a conversation that Mr. Hubbell had that related directly to the subject of the investigation, and if you're going to be releasing tapes of any sort, which we don't approve of, you ought to be releasing a tape that's helpful to Mr. Hubbell, not just those that are——
Mr. BURTON. I'll certainly——
Mr. WAXMAN [continuing]. Technically harmful to him.
Mr. BURTON [continuing]. Take a look at 118B and see if we can include that.
Mr. WAXMAN. I do want to point out, Mr. Chairman, that this whole issue of these tapes came to our attention when we read in the Wall Street Journal about a conversation Mr. Hubbell had with his wife about what he was going to eat, and how the food was not satisfactory to him, and subjects, of course, that had nothing to do with this investigation. Yet, that information has already been released by our committee to the Wall Street Journal. And others, I'm sure, will be appearing that have information not related to anything to do with this investigation and that are personal.
To date, Mr. Chairman, you've released 60 depositions and interrogatories, but only have provided 34 of these to the minority. The Democratic staff has repeatedly asked your staff for copies of this material which we must receive, under the rules, but your staff has refused to provide the information. And I'm providing you a list of 34 depositions and interrogatories we have not received, and I'd like to ask you to direct your staff to provide this information by the close of the business today. Mr. Chairman, here is this list. Review it with your staff. We're entitled to the information, under the rules. We request that you comply with the rules.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BURTON. If the gentleman will yield briefly, we certainly will comply with the rules, and I was just talking to my staff about this. If there has been anything that you haven't received, we'll make sure you get it right away. It's not intentional if that did occur.
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to raise a routine factual matter that I believe will be easy for you to correct. There have been, of course, individuals who are not cooperating with your investigation, and some have either asserted their fifth amendment right under the Constitution, or left the country. You've released a list of such individuals and repeatedly claimed that it's over 90 individuals. Even a quick review of your list, however, indicates obvious inaccuracies. You're still counting Manlin Fong, Joseph Landon, and David Wang, for instance, despite the fact that they appeared before our committee and answered every question that any Member asked of them. Whether they answered it accurately or not, is another question. But they have not refused to cooperate. Given that, is there any reason that you would include them on your list of individuals who've left the country, or are asserting their fifth amendment rights? I think it's a mistake. I think, in addition, there are at least 20 other individuals who seem to be inaccurately included in your list. Mr. Chairman, I'm sure you agree, that accuracy in this matter is important, and I'd like to ask you to direct your staff to revise the list accordingly.
Mr. BURTON. I'll be happy, Mr. Waxman, to give you a list and you can go over it and send me corrections if you think they're desired. If you would yield just a moment, regarding Manlin Fong, and the others that you mentioned. They did take the fifth amendment, and we had to immunize them, as you know, before they would testify. That's why they were included on the list.
Mr. WAXMAN. They, nevertheless, have already testified so they shouldn't be in the category of people who are not cooperating with this committee. They did cooperate. I also want to correct a series of misstatements that have been made about the cooperation you've received from Democrats on this committee. You seem to have forgotten some basic facts, and I want to take a moment to refresh your memory.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
You might remember, that as soon as the committee convened last year, I wrote you and asked that you structure this investigation so that we could work in a bipartisan way, and investigate all fundraising abuses. You might also remember that you specifically rejected that request, and told me you wanted to pursue your own investigation. You promised to keep me informed of your actions, but you didn't want to work with me or the minority in any form or way.
But you might also remember that, in a New York Times op-ed, which I'll be glad to give to you for your memory to be refreshed, in that New York Times op-ed, in February of last year, I called for an independent counsel to investigate the President and other fundraising abuses, and proposed creating a joint House/Senate committee to conduct one comprehensive campaign finance inquiry. It was obvious at the time that the administration wasn't pleased with my decision, but I thought it was the right thing to do, and Republicans didn't waste any time trying to exploit my views on an independent counsel for their own political purposes. At the same time, the Republican leadership refused to combine the House and the Senate investigations and coordinate their work which resulted in redundant investigations and a lot of taxpayers' money being wasted, a lot of witnesses having to respond separately to two different committees.
In addition, last April you adopted rules for the conduct of this investigation. It was on a straight party-line vote. The Democrats all voted against it because the Republicans delegated to you, as chairman, powers that had never been given to any chairman before. It gave you the power to unilaterally go out and issue subpoenas and release information. As a result, we've had over 600 subpoenas issued unilaterally by you, Mr. Chairman, without concurrence from the Democrats in any way, shape, or form. And not even a vote of the committee. You might also remember that last October, you asked Democrats on this committee to vote for immunity. Well, even though you had never extended any gestures of bipartisanship to us, we agreed, and we immunized three witnesses. We voted for it. Because you are conducting this investigation in an unprecedented way, and control all the power yourself, that vote was the only time Democrats had a voice in your investigation. And, notwithstanding how partisan you have been, we voted with you.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
You might understand then, Mr. Chairman, that it is odd, with that factual backdrop, to see you pretend that none of that happened. If you want Democrats to consider your request for immunity votes, you should go back and review a letter we sent you last October. All the committee Democrats signed that letter. That letter set out procedural reforms that we believe are necessary for this committee to conduct a fair, bipartisan, and effective investigation. That letter was sent to you, all the Democrats signed it, and the response we got was, ''go take a hike, it's a partisan investigation by the Republicans.'' You were not interested in changing the way the investigation was being conducted.
Now, today's hearing, today's hearing is about an issue from a 1992 campaign contribution, and I look forward to hearing the testimony that we'll receive. The hearing we had before this one was about a 1994 campaign finance issue. Although, it seemed to me, that what we were supposed to be investigating are abuses from the 1996 election.
Now, last time, you accused the Federal Election Commission of acting improperly because in their discretion, they didn't prosecute a matter that they didn't think was reasonable for them to pursue. Today, you're going to accuse the Justice Department of not pursuing a prosecution for a 1992 contribution.
Your statements this morning are filled with unsubstantiated allegations. They're theories. They're accusations. The test ought to be what the facts are, not what the theories are. The test ought to be what the truth is, not what you believe the truth to be. I now understand what you meant when you said, back home, if you could prove 10 percent of what you believe to be true, the President would be out. But the question is not whether it's 10 percent of what you believe to be true, but whether it's actually true, whether we're really getting information that is accurate.
This hearing today is unusual because it goes all the way back to 1992. At this rate, Mr. Chairman, it will probably be some time in June, I expect, that we'll be focusing on the 1960 election, and I suppose the topic will be whether President Kennedy stole that election.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I look forward to hearing the testimony today, and seeing whether the facts, in any way, bear out all the accusations that you've made which I think are unfounded.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BURTON. I've just been informed that there's a vote on the floor, and before we start talking to Mr. Castro, I think we probably ought to go and make that vote and then come back. So the committee will stand in recess until we return.
[Recess.]
Mr. BURTON. The committee will reconvene.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, before we hear from the witness—during the break, I was informed that two networks played tapes of Webb Hubbell, conversations he had from his prison, and I'm confused, in light of that statement you made earlier that you were going to review these tapes very carefully before any of them are released. Could you give us an explanation on how these tapes got to the networks, and whether they had been reviewed to remove privacy information?
Mr. BURTON. I'm pretty sure, and the gentleman might double check this, but during the hearing, when you were absent, when a number of tapes were entered into the record, and then subject for disbursal to whomever, the media or anybody else in the public area, I think those are the tapes that you're referring to. Those are already in the public domain. What I was referring to last night on ''Larry King Live,'' and ''The Today Show,'' are the tapes that we're reviewing very thoroughly, and we're going to make sure, as I said, that personal things are not in there unless, along with them, there's information that's relevant to our investigation. But we're being very careful now. I don't know what tapes you're referring to, but I believe they're the ones that previously have been released.
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, I don't. I checked the transcript of our hearing record very carefully, and I don't believe that we ever gave authorization for releasing any tapes. But I can't understand which tapes—if you think we gave authorization for some, and not others, how you would delineate those tapes? Maybe, you can tell us which one's are already out in the public, which one's you think you had authorization to release?
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BURTON. Well, I gave you documents that showed that they were put into the record and subject to disbursement at our last meeting. I don't think I'll belabor the point, but my staff and your staff can get together and show you exactly what tapes were released at that time.
Mr. Castro, would you rise, please?
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. BURTON. Mr. Castro, I understand you have an opening statement?
STATEMENT OF JORGE CASTRO BARREDO
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BURTON. Proceed.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. My name is Jorge Castro Barredo, and I am currently incarcerated in the Mid-State Correctional Facility—is that OK? I'm currently incarcerated in the Mid-State Correctional Facility located in Upstate New York. I am serving a sentence with a mandatory minimum term of 3 1/2 years and a maximum term of 10 1/2 years in prison, upon my conviction in New York State Supreme Court of grand larceny and related crimes. I have already served more than 2 years of that sentence, and I am currently eligible for work release.
In 1992, a person named Charles Intriago, whom I believed to be a prominent, well-regarded attorney, asked me to make certain political contributions. Since Mr. Intriago was a lawyer and family—and my family trusted to represent my family's interests in the United States, and since I believed that he was a knowledgeable—that he was knowledgeable about matters of that sort, I did as he asked.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
They don't have these where I'm incarcerated at so I'm not used to them [referring to the microphone].
On September 15, 1992, I drew one check for $5,000 to the Ohio Victory Fund 1992, and one check for $20,000 to the DNC Victory Fund 1992. Subsequently, Mr. Intriago told me that the Ohio check had not been, and would not be cashed, and asked me to write a $5,000 check to the Kentucky Democratic party, which I did on September 29, 1992. Later, Mr. Intriago asked me to write a check—a $5,000 check to the Florida Democratic party, and I did so on October 13, 1992. Mr. Intriago told me that the Kentucky check would not be cashed, and I asked him why we were doing this, and he told me that, that's the way they wanted it. I now understand that this conduct may not have been appropriate.
I have been told that if I cooperate fully with this committee and testify truthfully, the chairman will make the fact known to the New York State Department of Correction. As I am presently eligible for work release, it is my hope that my voluntary and truthful cooperation will be considered as a factor in deciding whether I should be placed in a work release program.
Mr. BURTON. Thank you, Mr. Castro. We'll now proceed with the questioning. Mr. Bennett.
Mr. BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, for the record, I'll take 20 minutes of the allocated 30 minutes now, and reserve 10 minutes at the conclusion of Members' questioning.
Mr. WAXMAN. I don't understand. You're allocated 30 minutes, oh, you want to reserve——
Mr. BENNETT. Yes, Congressman, I was just going to take 20 minutes for staff questioning, and then I'll reserve the other 10, perhaps, to followup after Members' questions, perhaps not.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, I thought what we agreed to—the way we've always proceeded is that we have 60 minutes divided equally between both sides, and it's up to the chairman if he wants to allocate his time to you, and it's up to me to allocate the time on our side.
Mr. BURTON. That's fine.
Mr. WAXMAN. And I suppose when we do our rounds, people can allocate that time to you at that point.
Mr. BURTON. Proceed.
Mr. BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Congressman Waxman. Mr. Castro, I want to thank you for your cooperation and your appearance before this committee today. With respect to your opening statement, sir, clearly, those contributions involved foreign money, didn't they?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. They involved Venezuelan money from your grandfather's companies?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And in fact your grandfather, Orlando Castro Llanes, and your uncle, Orlando Castro Castro, were convicted with you in connection with the administration of a bank in Puerto Rico, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And your incarceration now is for bank fraud and larceny, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And, indeed, you were prosecuted by the office of New York City District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. Representatives of his office are here today and will testify later. Is either your grandfather or your uncle, those individuals with whom you were convicted, is either one of those gentlemen an American citizen?
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, they're not.
Mr. BENNETT. And with respect to your cooperation with the committee, you understand that your cooperation with State and Federal authorities is apparently including cooperation with respect to your testimony as to political contributions of foreign money in 1992, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And, again, Mr. Castro, as you've noted in your statement, and Mr. Chairman, as chief counsel for the committee and for Congressman Waxman, as the ranking minority member, I would just note, Mr. Castro, that you have been advised that the chairman of this committee, with a copy to Congressman Waxman, will write a letter on your behalf to the appropriate officials when notified by your attorney at the appropriate time, do you understand that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I do understand.
Mr. BENNETT. And for the record, I'm sorry, Mr. Austin Campriello, from the State of New York, is here as your defense counsel. Mr. Campriello, welcome, sir.
With respect to Mr. Intriago, the Miami attorney whom you just mentioned in your opening statement, Mr. Castro, what relationship did Mr. Intriago have with your family, the Castro family?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Mr. Intriago, for many years, besides being the legal adviser family, he was the person in the United States that was always asked in every business transaction to repeat advice that we ever had.
Mr. BENNETT. And I understand that your grandfather is presently incarcerated in a New York State prison, but prior to his conviction and incarceration, he was, in fact, a resident and citizen of Venezuela, is that correct?
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And what about your uncle, was he Venezuelan or Puerto Rican in his residence?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Venezuelan.
Mr. BENNETT. And with respect to your own citizenship, you have dual-citizenship, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I'm a U.S. citizen. I was born in Miami, and I've always been a U.S. citizen.
Mr. BENNETT. But with respect to your dealings with Mr. Intriago, where were you residing at the time, or where were you when Mr. Intriago contacted you—and I'll get into more detail in a minute?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I lived in the Dominican Republic. I was approximately 10 years old.
Mr. BENNETT. And with respect to Mr. Intriago's representation of your grandfather's business interests, where are those business interests?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Can you repeat that?
Mr. BENNETT. With respect to Mr. Intriago's representation of your grandfather, Orlando Castro, where are his business interests? They are in Venezuela, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And in Puerto Rico?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. And the Dominican Republic.
Mr. BENNETT. And is it safe to say that he handled all legal matters, Mr. Intriago, handled all legal matters for your grandfather in the United States?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. With respect to your own political involvements, you're here before this congressional committee testifying to illegal foreign campaign contributions in the 1992 Presidential election. As to your own political involvement, have you been politically active yourself, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Not in the United States, no.
Mr. BENNETT. Have you ever made any political contributions in the United States prior to 1992, when requested by Mr. Intriago?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I have not.
Mr. BENNETT. Have you made any political contributions since?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I have not.
Mr. BENNETT. In terms of your own personal financial situation in 1992, were you in a financial position to make contributions totaling $25,000 in September 1992?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I was.
Mr. BENNETT. And with respect to those contributions, again, we'll get into more detail later, but you were, in fact, reimbursed by a Venezuelan company immediately by your grandfather, correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you have any particular interest in politics, apart from the fact that you haven't been a contributor, have you been active politically in the American political process?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Not in the American political process, no.
Mr. BENNETT. Have you ever voted in an election in the United States?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I have not.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. Directing your attention to 1992, you did, in fact, write checks out to the Democratic National Committee and you were reimbursed by your grandfather with respect to those contributions. When and how quickly did you determine that you were going to be reimbursed for your contributions?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I knew it beforehand.
Mr. BENNETT. It was even before you wrote the checks out, you knew you were going to be reimbursed?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. By your grandfather?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I was going to be reimbursed by one of the companies owned by the family, yes.
Mr. BENNETT. Companies owned by your grandfather?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And who told you that, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Mr. Intriago.
Mr. BENNETT. Now, going through the dealings with Mr. Intriago in terms of his relationship with you, would you—can you determine exactly when you believe you were first contacted by Mr. Intriago with respect to making these contributions?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It was the, either the first week of September, or the second week of September 1992.
Mr. BENNETT. And where were you at that time, I believe, according to our notes, around September 15, 1992?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I was in the Dominican Republic in my office.
Mr. BENNETT. And how long had you been in the Dominican Republic at your office? Were you working for that period of time in September 1992?
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes, I was. Yes, I was.
Mr. BENNETT. And did you contact Mr. Intriago, or did he contact you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He contacted me.
Mr. BENNETT. And exactly what occurred when he contacted you? I gather he was calling from the United States?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He called from Miami, from his office, and he spoke to me and told me what I was supposed to do.
Mr. BENNETT. And exactly what did he say to you when he called, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He told me that there was some certain political contributions to be made. At that time he, over the phone, he told me to—where to write the checks to.
Mr. BENNETT. Did he make any specific reference to a political party, or to President Clinton?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Not President Clinton, the Democratic party, he just told me the name of, to what entities to write the checks to, and I told him to fax me a document because I was always a very busy person so I wouldn't make a mistake.
Mr. BENNETT. I'll get to the facts in a minute, sir, but let me just ask you something else. The representation, then, was not with respect to the President, or at that time, President—or Governor Clinton's election campaign, but was in reference to the Democratic party?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And did he make any reference to whether or not your grandfather was to make these contributions?
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. In what sense?
Mr. BENNETT. I mean when he called you, you weren't politically active? According to the notes the committee has, you've indicated that there was some representation that your grandfather wanted you to make contributions at this time?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And what was the basis of Mr. Intriago having that authority to tell you that your grandfather wanted to make contributions?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Just knowledge that, of what he meant, represented to the family group.
Mr. BENNETT. Was there any discussion about any other member of your family also being utilized to make contributions?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes, my uncle. He lived in Dominican Republic with me.
Mr. BENNETT. And also your aunt, I believe, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. His wife.
Mr. BENNETT. And what is her name, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Maria Castro.
Mr. BENNETT. And is she also a U.S. citizen?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I believe so.
Mr. BENNETT. Was there any discussion about the importance of you and your aunt being a U.S. citizen with respect to the making of these contributions?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It wasn't a thorough discussion, it was just curiosity and when I asked, I was told that because I was a U.S. citizen and that's the way it had to be done. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BURTON. Mr. Castro, when Mr. Intriago asked you to make these contributions, did he tell you why? I mean, with $50,000 in contributions, there's got to be some reason. Why did Mr. Intriago ask for that money for the DNC?
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I know $50,000 sounds like a lot of money, and it probably is, but coming from Mr. Intriago, it had the authorization from my grandfather. I wasn't supposed to question, and——
Mr. BURTON. So he did not give you any reason, he just said he wanted $50,000?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I was told that because I was a U.S. citizen and it couldn't be done any other way. That was basically a reason.
Mr. BURTON. But there was no reason given?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. BURTON. In your opening statement, you said ''that's the way they want it.''
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Correct.
Mr. BURTON. Did Mr. Intriago ever define who ''they,'' were?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, he did not.
Mr. BURTON. Did you ever ask him who ''they'' were?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I did not. I just thought it was the Democratic party because that's who we were writing the checks to.
Mr. BURTON. OK.
Mr. BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Looking at, you have an exhibit up there before you, Mr. Campriello, for Mr. Castro to review, and there's also a TV monitor here in the hearing room, but first of all, looking at exhibit VEN–4 for the members of the committee, and then also VEN–16, looking at VEN–4, that's in fact the check you made payable to the Democratic National Committee for $20,000 is that correct?
[Exhibits VEN–4 and VEN–16 follow:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 1 TO 2 HERE
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct, that's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And then VEN–16 contains a copy of another to the Ohio Victory Fund for $5,000, do you see that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes.
Mr. BENNETT. How quickly were you to be reimbursed for these checks?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. How——
Mr. BENNETT. How quickly were you to be reimbursed for these checks?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I actually wasn't given a time span because I had the money, I had money in my account, or, if not, I wasn't going to starve if I didn't receive the money immediately. But I was promised and told that I was going to be reimbursed. It wasn't going to come out of my personal account.
Mr. BENNETT. Did you take—you mentioned a fax communication and taking steps to make sure you had the instructions, correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Looking at VEN–2, exhibit VEN–2, is that, in fact, a copy of the fax communication which you received from Mr. Intriago?
[Exhibit VEN–2 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 3 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes, yes, that's correct.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. And you, in fact, were in the Dominican Republic when you received that fax?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes.
Mr. BENNETT. And then, I note that there are, for the record, Mr. Chairman and Congressman Waxman, these are among the documents that we were provided by Mr. Morgenthau's office. I notice there's Spanish writing at the bottom so, perhaps, if we can go over to exhibit VEN–3 in the exhibit books, for the members of the committee, there is a translation of the Spanish at the bottom of that exhibit and I want to make sure we have that correct, Mr. Castro. According to the committee staff, that Spanish sentence reads to the effect: ''I want you to send me these today by Federal Express,'' is that a correct translation?
[Exhibit VEN–3 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 4 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And did you know what the urgency was, why Mr. Intriago wanted these checks?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know what the urgency was at that time? Everything we did was urgent so it was just another——
Mr. BENNETT. But for some reason there was some urgency on September 15, 1992, as to these checks, is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. There was an urgency but, I repeat, everything we did was always in urgencies and I wasn't surprised that this had to be done yesterday.
Mr. BENNETT. Looking at exhibits VEN–2 and VEN–3, the fax communication, did you have communications with any other member of your family as to the checks to be prepared by your Aunt Maria, $20,000 to the DNC Victory Fund, separate from your check, as well as $5,000 to the Maryland Victory Fund 1992? Did you talk with any other member of your family?
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. After I received the phone call, I spoke to my uncle, and I told him what to do because I was told what to do, and that's the way it was done.
Mr. BENNETT. And did you also explain that this had been authorized by your grandfather and that they were to be reimbursed as well?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Now looking at, then, reviewing exhibit VEN–6, then VEN–5, in the exhibit book, for the members of the committee, they are in fact the checks, copies of checks prepared by your Aunt Maria, do you see those?
[Exhibits VEN–6 and VEN–5 follow:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 6 AND THEN 5 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes, I do.
Mr. BENNETT. And are they consistent with the instructions you gave her and your uncle as to $5,000 to the Maryland Victory Fund and $20,000 to the Democratic National Committee?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. At any point in time did you have specific discussions with Mr. Intriago about the illegality of this process?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. At that time?
Mr. BENNETT. Yes.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. BENNETT. You knew that they were using you as an American citizen to make foreign campaign contributions. Did you, yourself, know that this was illegal at that time?
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I did not.
Mr. BENNETT. Looking back at exhibit VEN–16, which has two checks on that exhibit, Mr. Intriago, Mr. Castro, excuse me, sir, I apologize. I won't make that mistake again. I apologize.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I appreciate that.
Mr. BENNETT. I didn't mean to defame you. I'm sorry.
With respect to the $5,000 check to the Ohio Victory Fund, for the record, that check was never, in fact, cashed, was it?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, it was not cashed.
Mr. BENNETT. You sent it to Mr. Intriago, but it was never cashed, according to your records.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's right.
Mr. BENNETT. Now looking at the second check, on the bottom of VEN–16, the second check to the Kentucky State party, I note that that's dated about 2 weeks later. Do you recall the circumstances surrounding your preparing that second check to another State Democratic party?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes, he called me again.
Mr. BENNETT. He, Mr. Intriago?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Mr. Intriago called me again, I would say, no more than a week later and he gave me instructions to change the check from Ohio to Kentucky. I didn't receive a fax for that because it was quite obvious it was just a change of State.
Mr. BENNETT. And you can identify your handwriting on both of those checks; you, in fact, prepared those checks, correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct, yes.
Mr. BENNETT. Then, in fact, Mr. Intriago, according to our interview with you, Mr. Castro, and, for the record, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Waxman, Mr. Castro was interviewed jointly by counsel for both majority and minority yesterday, isn't that correct, Mr. Castro?
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. In fact, Mr. Intriago called you again, and if you will look at exhibit VEN–7 in your exhibit books, this check is made payable to the Florida Democratic party and it is dated October 13, 1992.
[Exhibit VEN–7 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 7 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you see that check, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes. Yes, I do.
Mr. BENNETT. Did you—to sort of followup on what Chairman Burton asked, you went ahead and you wrote this check. Did you ask Mr. Intriago why you were getting these phone calls in terms of making changes as to what State you were to make these checks payable to?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The first change from Ohio to Kentucky, I didn't bother to ask. But when the third call came in to change another check to Florida, I asked him and that's when I was told by him that it was not a big deal it was just the way they wanted it to be done.
Mr. BENNETT. And again, he didn't—he, Mr. Intriago—did not indicate who they were?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, he did not.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you have any knowledge of who, with whom at the Democratic National Committee, or any State Democratic structure Mr. Intriago was dealing with?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I do not.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. Looking at VEN–7, just for a minute if I can, Mr. Castro, I note that there is handwriting on the top of that check.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Is that your handwriting at the top of the check?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, it is not.
Mr. BENNETT. I note there is an address, a Florida address. That's not your handwriting, but is that a correct Florida address for you at that time?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I can't read the first part where it says before Brickell, but if it's 520, it is mine. It looks like 501, which is not mine, but if it says 520, it's mine.
Mr. BENNETT. What about the telephone number at the top there?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, that is not my telephone number.
Mr. BENNETT. In fact, to your knowledge, is that Mr. Intriago's telephone number?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you have any knowledge as to why his telephone number would be listed on your check in his handwriting?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. BENNETT. Just so the record is clear, the checks to Ohio and Kentucky, reflected by VEN–16 were never, in fact, cashed, correct? The two checks were the check for $20,000 to the DNC——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That was cashed.
Mr. BENNETT [continuing]. And $5,000 to the Kentucky State Democratic party.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That was not cashed.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. OK. What was the total amount of your contributions for which you were reimbursed?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. $25,000.
Mr. BENNETT. And, to your knowledge, your aunt was also reimbursed for her checks.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Now, in terms of the reimbursement. Looking at VEN–15, for the record, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Castro, in fact VEN–15 reflects a wire transfer into your account for the $25,000 and it is from Inversiones Latinfin, if I'm pronouncing that correctly?
[Exhibit VEN–15 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 8 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And what is that entity?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's a premium finance company we owned in Caracas, Venezuela, at that time.
Mr. BENNETT. That is a premium finance company in Venezuela?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And who owns that company, sir?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It was owned by my grandfather and the family.
Mr. BENNETT. Does it derive any income in the United States?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, it does not.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENNETT. Does this Venezuelan company have any United States operations?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. BENNETT. As to the activities of your grandfather and family with any members of the Clinton administration, do you have any knowledge of any meetings attended by your family, particularly your grandfather, after these contributions were made, after President Clinton's election in 1992?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes.
Mr. BENNETT. And to your knowledge, how many—were there any trips made to Washington?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. After he was President, or——
Mr. BENNETT. After President Clinton was elected, yes.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. One trip, after he was elected. No, no, two trips after he was elected. One for the inauguration and another one when he visited the White House.
Mr. BENNETT. And with respect to the inauguration, you and your family attended one of the inaugural balls? Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Not the inaugural ball. It was the big—the small gathering in front of the Capitol Hill with about 3 million other people.
Mr. BENNETT. OK. For the record, there are a few Republicans who have also been pretty far away from the action as well, during the events of the inauguration, but I mainly want to focus in on the second family visit in October 1993. Your grandfather, you, and others of your family came to Washington in October 1993. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And do you have knowledge of your grandfather and Mr. Intriago being invited to a White House reception for Democratic National Committee donors?
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I know he was invited to the White House. I didn't know the purpose of the trip and who invited him.
Mr. BENNETT. I believe the exhibit in the books, VEN–1, as well as a blow-up that is here in the committee room, that is, in fact, a picture of your grandfather with President Clinton, is that correct?
[Exhibit VEN–1 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 9 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you have any knowledge as to whether he directly received an invitation to that event?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know if he directly received it but he was given and told, in front of me, by Charlie Intriago, when we were in the lobby of the hotel here in Washington.
Mr. BENNETT. And do you know he would be on some list because your grandfather's name would not appear, should not appear on any contribution list. You're the one, technically, according to the records, that made the contributions.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. Do you know why he would be attending that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. BENNETT. Just directing your attention to exhibit VEN–27, this is a letter which was provided to the committee pursuant to a subpoena issued to the Democratic National Committee, and it's a letter from an official of the Democratic National Committee. Do you have any knowledge of your grandfather's association with any officials of the Democratic National Committee?
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[Exhibit VEN–27 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 10 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I'm sorry?
Mr. BENNETT. I'm asking in light of this letter to Mr. Intriago, which made reference to your grandfather, I'm just asking do you have any personal knowledge of your grandfather's association with any officials of the Democratic National Committee, apart from Mr. Intriago having those contacts?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I don't think he had any other contact.
Mr. BENNETT. And, then, finally, sir, in October 1993, when your family was here in Washington, there was a meeting at the State Department. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. BENNETT. And what was the purpose of that meeting at the State Department?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. We just came and visited, I don't remember the name of the person that we visited at that time and we were just discussing the events that were occurring in Venezuela, the financial district in Venezuela, regarding our family's business, and so on and so forth.
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. Chairman, I see my 20 minutes is out, and I'll reserve the other 10 minutes.
Mr. BURTON. The 10 minutes are now reserved.
Mr. BENNETT. Thank you, sir.
Mr. BURTON. Mr. Waxman.
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Castro, I want to review and summarize some of the testimony that you have given today and I want to make sure it is correct.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In September 1992, Charles Intriago called you and asked you and your aunt to make political contributions. Is that right?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He called me. I told my aunt afterwards.
Mr. WAXMAN. OK. And you knew Mr. Intriago because he was your grandfather's attorney and adviser. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. And according to your testimony, Mr. Intriago told you that you would be reimbursed. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. Do you have any evidence, aside from your own testimony, that Mr. Intriago knew you would be reimbursed?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That he knew that I would be reimbursed?
Mr. WAXMAN. The only evidence we have that you were going to be reimbursed is your statement here. Is there any other evidence of that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Just—I can tell you that I wouldn't have given $25,000 to the Democratic, the Republican, or any other committee if I wouldn't have been reimbursed. I had no interest in the United States and no business in the United States to give out $25,000 of my personal money.
Mr. WAXMAN. But your grandfather's attorney and political adviser sent you a fax.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. And in that fax he said, I want you to write checks to the following Democratic party organizations.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. And you did it.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes.
Mr. WAXMAN. Did he ever ask you to write checks for any other purpose?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. WAXMAN. For business purposes?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, but I did give him $100,000 about a year afterwards, and I do have that fax somewhere and my attorney probably has it. I gave him $100,000 that was instructed by my grandfather directly for personal purposes, so it was nothing out of this world.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I want to put in the record a letter from Robert Plotkin, from the law firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky, & Walker. They represent Charles Intriago. It's a letter to you and he says,
Dear Chairman Burton, I'm counsel to Charles Intriago. According to press releases issued by the Committee as well as news reports and editorials, the Committee's hearing on April 30, 1998, will accuse my client of campaign law violations, charges that he vigorously denies.
This letter, and there is a statement attached to it from Mr. Intriago's lawyers, says Mr. Intriago denies the allegations against him.
[The letter referred to follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 11 TO 13 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. BURTON. We will allow this in the record, but let me just point out that Mr. Intriago has taken the fifth amendment.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. But his attorney is giving you a statement that he is denying it, and, I guess, refusing to answer further questions.
Mr. BURTON. He is denying it but he is taking the fifth amendment. We've asked him to appear and he won't do it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Intriago denies that he told you you were going to be reimbursed. You say you were going to be reimbursed. So basically it comes down to your word whether or not you are telling us the truth. Isn't that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I'm here. He's not here.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Castro, why are you currently in prison?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Why? I was convicted in Manhattan of grand larceny scheme to defraud.
Mr. WAXMAN. Let me ask you directly, Mr. Castro. Do you believe that you are guilty of the crimes you have been convicted of?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I took this matter to trial and I was convicted by 12 New York citizens. And I live with that.
Mr. WAXMAN. Your uncle, Orlando Castro Castro, and your grandfather, Orlando Castro Llanes, were also convicted of bank fraud, weren't they?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Now, before the three of you were prosecuted by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, your family controlled the Banco Progresso Internacional in Puerto Rico. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. In fact, you served as president of that bank, didn't you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. How old were you when you became president of the Banco Progresso Internacional?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I would say 25, 26-years-old.
Mr. WAXMAN. Here's what Assistant DA Richard Preiss said about you. I'm quoting him, ''Simply put, these defendants were individuals who thought they could fool other people, their employees, their customers, their regulators, and their auditors,'' end quote. Do you think that is a fair description of you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. If that is what the prosecutor says, that is what was taken to trial. I won't—I don't want to comment about it after it's done.
Mr. WAXMAN. According to prosecutors, you took $300,000 from the bank for your personal use. I understand you bought a yacht, repaired your executive jet, and purchased a number of other luxuries. In other words, you are accused of taking your customers' deposits and spending them to live a lavish lifestyle. Is it correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Is it correct that I was accused of that? I was accused of that. I was convicted of that.
Mr. WAXMAN. But you're not admitting it.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Admitting that it was done?
Mr. WAXMAN. Yes.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The members of the jury found that it was true.
Mr. WAXMAN. But you don't admit that you took bank money and used it for your yacht, your jet, and other luxuries. Do you deny it?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It goes further than that. It is more complicated than just accepting that that was done. But that was what the indictment originally was brought up by the Manhattan prosecutors, and I was convicted of it.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. But you were convicted of it.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes.
Mr. WAXMAN. And you can't be tried again on the same offense, so don't worry about what you say, but what I want to know is did you take money from the bank and use it for your own personal purposes?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes. Let's just say yes.
Mr. WAXMAN. All right. Mr. Castro, we spoke to your grandfather's attorney who told us that your grandfather fired you when he found out that you had been stealing from the bank. He also told us that you blamed this on Mr. Intriago because it was Mr. Intriago who showed your grandfather the audit that proved that you had been using the bank's deposits for these personal luxuries.
Would you like to respond to that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That I would be blaming Mr. Intriago for what? For this?
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, he said that you blamed Mr. Intriago for your grandfather firing you when you were 25 years old, president of the bank, and using bank money for your luxuries.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't blame Mr. Intriago for anything that was ever done. I didn't like him professionally, that I would admit, but I wouldn't blame him for anything.
Mr. WAXMAN. You're not hostile to him because your grandfather fired you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, of course not. I don't think he had anything to do with it.
Mr. WAXMAN. You talked to the staff of our committee and you told the committee staff, at least I understand that you did, you didn't really care for Mr. Intriago. Is that a correct statement?
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I'm sorry. Can you——
Mr. WAXMAN. Did you tell the staff when they interviewed you that you didn't care for Mr. Intriago?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No. I never did. Professionally. I was friends with him. We had Marlin tickets together in the baseball stadium. We had dinner once in a while, but professionally I don't think he was worth what he was selling to my grandfather and my family.
Mr. WAXMAN. Your grandfather's attorney suggested that you may be implicating Mr. Intriago as a way to get even. What do you respond to that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Get even with him? To get even with Charlie? I have nothing against him. I don't have to get even with him or anybody. So it's not a personal, it's not a personal thing between him or any other person that I can think of.
Mr. WAXMAN. After you were convicted of the bank charges——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Right.
Mr. WAXMAN [continuing]. You told the district attorney you wanted to cooperate in exchange for a recommendation that you get a lenient sentence. Isn't that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. It was then that you decided to accuse your grandfather of reimbursing your political contributions. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Accuse? I didn't accuse my grandfather of anything.
Mr. WAXMAN. You didn't accuse your grandfather of reimbursing the money that you contributed?
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I didn't accuse him. I just said that I was reimbursed by him in one of the companies. I didn't accuse him of doing anything of that sort. Accusing is admitting that something is wrong, and——
Mr. WAXMAN. You're here today to tell us that money you contributed to the Democratic party was reimbursed to you by your grandfather.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. OK. That was first mentioned by you after you were convicted of bank fraud, and you did it in the context of getting a more lenient sentence. Is that right? You were trying to be helpful——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. To myself.
Mr. WAXMAN. To yourself.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. So, instead of facing 40 years in prison, you got a sentence of 3 1/2 years.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. And, I guess this is a question: Should this fact affect your credibility?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That—in what sense?
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, that you came up with the story about getting reimbursed.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It's not a story.
Mr. WAXMAN. It's a story, maybe it's true or not true, but it's a story. You would say, presumably, it's a truthful story.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The only thing I can say, Mr. Waxman, is the gentleman that is saying, is denying this, is taking the fifth amendment, which I didn't know, and he's not here to say the truth or not.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. Nor is your grandfather. Where is your grandfather?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He's serving time in a correctional facility.
Mr. WAXMAN. You got a more lenient sentence because you were willing to come forward and talk about this campaign contribution when you were originally sentenced. Now Chairman Burton has told you that he'll write a letter on your behalf to get you released on a work-release program for coming here today——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Which I am already eligible for.
Mr. WAXMAN. You are eligible for it, but still it is a question of discretion, and the chairman has offered to help you get that work release as a reward for helping the committee get this information.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Any letter that is always sent to the correctional facility or parole board helps. So, that's an incentive.
Mr. WAXMAN. Did Chairman Burton promise to help you get out of jail before you agreed to come before the committee?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No. I was never promised anything.
Mr. WAXMAN. Would you have agreed to appear today if he had not promised to help you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Maybe.
Mr. WAXMAN. Maybe?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yes. I didn't get promised anything, first of all, but I would have probably been here anyhow.
Mr. WAXMAN. But, on the other hand, you thought it might help you.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Of course.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. When this investigation began last year, Chairman Burton told us this committee would be, quote, ''investigating a possible massive scheme of funneling millions of dollars in foreign money to the U.S. electoral system and that we are investigating allegations that the Chinese Government, at the highest levels, decided to infiltrate our political system.'' That's a quote. I didn't read it as well as I might have, but the chairman says that is what we're doing. We're going to look at this massive scheme of contributions from Chinese Government and people at the highest levels trying to infiltrate our political system.
Do you have any evidence of a massive scheme to funnel millions of dollars into the U.S. elections?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Do I have any evidence?
Mr. WAXMAN. Yes.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, I do not.
Mr. WAXMAN. OK. Do you have any evidence about a Chinese Government decision to infiltrate our political system?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I do not.
Mr. WAXMAN. Do you have any evidence that the Democratic party or the Clinton-Gore campaign knew that you were going to be reimbursed for your contribution or that the money came from outside the United States?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. WAXMAN. In fact, you made this contribution because you are a U.S. citizen and it would appear to them that this was a legal contribution. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Appear to whom?
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, it would appear to the Democratic party, to President Clinton, the Clinton-Gore campaign, or anybody who got your money that you are a U.S. citizen writing a check to the Democratic party.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. On the surface, to them, it would appear to be legal.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I don't know how much time we have, but I'll reserve the balance of my time, and let me yield to Mr. Lantos if he wants to pursue questions at this point, and, go on to other Members.
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much. I want to discuss this promised letter from Mr. Burton. I'd advised that there was a discussion between your attorney and the majority's attorney during the course of your deposition with respect to that letter. And Mr. Bennett assured your attorney that Mr. Burton will write a letter that would facilitate your release. Were you present during that discussion?
Mr. CAMPRIELLO. Excuse me. There was no deposition so I'm not sure——
Mr. LANTOS. There was an interview? Did you have any discussion—were you present at any discussion during the course of which your attorney and Mr. Bennett discussed the letter by Mr. Burton?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I met Mr. Bennett yesterday and——
Mr. LANTOS. I understand that. Was there any discussion of a letter Mr. Burton was going to write on your behalf during that meeting?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Yesterday? No, there was nothing talked about that.
Mr. LANTOS. There was no discussion of any letter?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. There was discussion—they said the chairman and somebody on the Democratic side would write letters to the correction department saying that I was here and I was saying the truth, but nothing more than that.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. LANTOS. Who from the Democratic side was going to sign that letter?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know. I have no idea.
Mr. LANTOS. Who said that someone from the Democratic side would write the letter?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know. There were seven people in that room. I don't remember.
Mr. LANTOS. Was there a letter discussed during that meeting?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, there was not.
Mr. LANTOS. You just said a moment ago that Mr. Burton and someone else——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It was referenced to because I am very interested in the letter. That's my main objective, is the letter, obviously.
Mr. LANTOS. But a minute ago, you said there was a reference to a letter that would be sent by Mr. Burton and someone on the Democratic side.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. LANTOS. Who said that, that someone on the Democratic side would sign the letter?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No one on the Democratic side said anything, or I don't remember who said it exactly, or maybe I heard things, maybe I'm hearing too many things.
Mr. LANTOS. So you think this may not have happened at all?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, no. I do remember, not a discussion about any letter, but it was talked, it was mentioned.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Burton will write a letter.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know who would write the letter. I have no idea who was going to write a letter, I don't know who the letter was going to go to, I don't know who was going to handle it. I have no idea.
Mr. LANTOS. But a minute ago you said something very different, Mr. Castro. Do you want to consult with your attorney?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know what I said. Right, I know I am going to get a letter, but I don't know if Mr. Burton is going to sign it, or Mr. Bennett was going to sign it, or they were going to New York, or I don't know where they are going to send it or to who. I have no idea who the letter is going to be sent to. I know it is going to be sent to the New York State Department of Corrections, but to who I don't know.
Mr. LANTOS. Now Mr. Intriago, who is the attorney for your grandfather, was the attorney——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Who was the attorney, that is correct.
Mr. LANTOS [continuing]. Did he indicate to you that he's acting on behalf of the Clinton-Gore campaign?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. At that time?
Mr. LANTOS. Yes.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know if he said the Clinton-Gore campaign or the Democratic campaign. I don't remember. It was 6 years ago.
Mr. LANTOS. Do you have any personal knowledge that the Democratic National Committee advised Mr. Intriago to obtain a contribution from you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. From us? No, I have no knowledge of that.
Mr. LANTOS. So the only contact you had with respect to this contribution was Mr. Intriago.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. LANTOS. You said earlier in your testimony that you had adequate resources to write such checks.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. LANTOS. Can you give us a ballpark figure of what your assets were at the time?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I have no idea.
Mr. LANTOS. Well, was it $1 million or less, or more?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Or less, or more.
Mr. LANTOS. Well, what do you think it was?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. We include what, liquid assets or stock assets? Maybe more.
Mr. LANTOS. You know, I find it remarkable that you can't remember the discussion you had yesterday, but you have a vivid recollection of a discussion you had 5 years ago. Or 6 years ago. Could you explain that discrepancy to us?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Well, what is to remember of yesterday that is so memory lapsing? I was asked questions. There were four members of one side there, two members of the other side, and that was basically it. They were asking questions and I was answering them.
Mr. LANTOS. Well, you raised the issue of the letter being sent by Mr. Burton and someone on the Democratic side. We didn't raise that question. You did, a couple of minutes ago. Presumably you remembered it from your conversation yesterday.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. LANTOS. So there was such a discussion yesterday.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The letter was mentioned. There was a letter mentioned because I have asked my attorney many, many times about letters and things like that.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. LANTOS. I'll be glad to yield.
Mr. WAXMAN. I just wanted to raise a point here. I asked my lawyers who worked on this why did Mr. Intriago take the fifth amendment and the answer they got back from Mr. Intriago's lawyer, I presume, was, that even though the statute of limitations is passed in terms of any offense that might have been committed, he could still be prosecuted for some conspiracy charge, or something like that; not that he said he was guilty, but he could be prosecuted. People have a right, under the Constitution of the United States, not to come in and give evidence against themselves or to answer questions and have people try to use that evidence in some way or other.
Mr. Intriago didn't come here because he didn't think it would do him any good. Mr. Castro is here because he thinks this might do him a lot of good. I do want to read the statement, if the gentleman will just permit, because I think we ought to have this, not just in the record, but people ought to know about it in the audience.
This is a statement to the committee by Robert Plotkin, counsel, for Charles A. Intriago, dated April 30, 1998.
Charles Intriago is a private citizen who, during the 1992 Presidential campaign, exercised his fundamental right under the United State Constitution to make a campaign contribution from his own personal funds. He also solicited contributions from a number of well-off American citizens with whom he was acquainted, and who he believed had the personal financial capability to make such contributions. As a consequence of those activities, he now finds himself unwillingly drawn into a nasty and vindictive political conflict that is unfettered by rules of fairness and is immune from the laws of defamation.
Mr. Intriago is not a government official. He has never held a high elective or appointive government position. He has never been an employee of, or consultant to, the Democratic National Committee. He is not a ''friend'' or ''associate'' of the President, the Vice President, or any other high ranking Democratic party official. He has not applied for, been interviewed for or considered a government job. He has never had nor sought a government contract. Mr. Intriago simply is a respected private lawyer with a previously unblemished record of conduct.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
On the other hand, Jorge Castro Barredo, Mr. Intriago's principal accuser, is a convicted felon who left behind him a wake of corruption in the Dominican Republic. Indeed, it was Mr. Intriago who first learned of and disclosed Castro Barredo's wrongdoing, which led to his ultimate termination from the family's business. Jorge Castro Barredo has a vested interest in inventing things about Mr. Intriago in order to curry favor with New York City prosecutors and return to his several homes in Santo Domingo. This ''testimony'' is well-suited for a Committee whose basic investigative tactics include leaks, smears, and innuendos.
The Committee's sanctimonious use of legitimate government authority to obtain illegitimate political advantage has now claimed Mr. Intriago's reputation as its most recent victim.
This is what Mr. Intriago's lawyer has written to us. Since he makes an accusation about you, do you want to respond to it in any way? To be fair, do you want to say anything in response to this?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. In response to?
Mr. WAXMAN. What I just read from Mr. Intriago.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. First of all, he had nothing to do with discovering anything on my behalf that would affect my position in any bank or in any family business that I had. That I don't know who it came up, because it is not true.
Mr. WAXMAN. You don't think he told your grandfather that you were running the bank into the ground——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Of course not.
Mr. WAXMAN [continuing]. And using it for personal purposes?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No. I think that is coming up now. He is saying that now, to create an atmosphere of revenge or hostility, but it is not true.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, your grandfather did fire you from the bank presidency, didn't he?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Of Puerto Rico. I was president still of the Bank of Dominican Republic, so if Charlie had so much information of one bank, why didn't he have so much information of the other bank?
Mr. WAXMAN. I don't know the answer to that.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. We're still going to baseball games together so if we were so hatred, you'll have to ask him that.
Mr. WAXMAN. Well, he, his statement speaks for itself. I just wanted to give you a chance to respond.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. OK.
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you.
Mr. LANTOS. You were prosecuted by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office—I just would like to finish this question if I may.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. LANTOS. Do you know about the political affiliation of the Manhattan District Attorney?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I have no idea.
Mr. LANTOS. You have no idea?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. LANTOS. He's a very prominent Democrat.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Mr. Morgenthau?
Mr. LANTOS. Yes.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Castro, when did it first come to your attention that you were actually involved in a potential violation of campaign contribution laws? When did you first realize this, and how did you realize it?
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. When I was in the middle of the material that was given to us for our trial.
Mr. KANJORSKI. So, this would have been in February 1997, last year, about 14 months ago?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No. It would have been the end of, it would have been the fall of 1996.
Mr. KANJORSKI. OK, the fall of 1996. How did this information come to your attention? Did your attorneys give it to you?——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It was given to us by Mr. Morgenthau's office as part of the discovery material, I think is what they called it.
Mr. KANJORSKI. OK. This is the very first time in your life that you learned of this, that your attorney in Miami had 5 years before advised you to commit a crime.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. He didn't advise me to commit any crime.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Well, you learned that it is a crime if you improperly give foreign money to a campaign.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I learned that when I looking at these documents and I asked my attorney at that time.
Mr. KANJORSKI. So, I return. In late 1996, for the very first time in your life, you learned that your attorney, some 4 years before, had advised you improperly to participate in a conspiracy to commit a fraud and a crime under the Federal Election Act of the United States. Is that correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I learned that in 1996 when——
Mr. KANJORSKI. Now, at that time was Mr. Intriago still representing you?
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. KANJORSKI. OK. Are you still seeing him on a friendly basis? Going to ball games together still?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I've been in jail for 2 years, so it is quite far from——
Mr. KANJORSKI. Do you ever hear from him? Do you write to him?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Never.
Mr. KANJORSKI. OK. Now have you talked to your attorneys about this?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. About what?
Mr. KANJORSKI. Your present attorneys about this situation?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Which——
Mr. KANJORSKI. A situation which might be conceived by a lawyer to commit a crime. What I want to know is, did you sue him, given the statue of limitations? Did you bring disbarment proceedings or sue Mr. Intriago?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Why?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't see a reason why to.
Mr. KANJORSKI. He committed probably one of the greatest torts a lawyer can commit against his client: advise him to commit a crime.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's up to him.
Mr. KANJORSKI. What do you mean that's up to him? You're the guy doing time.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't have anything against him. I don't have anything again Charlie Intriago. I would not——
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. KANJORSKI. So you're not offended by what he told you to do, and you didn't mind that he told you to do something that you now consider improper?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Offended? In a sense, I would say yes, because I was told to do something at that time that we thought was very normal and then we found out it wasn't normal. But to take that to a level of lawsuit and disbarment and legal process, I wouldn't do it.
Mr. KANJORSKI. I see. What's our recourse now? The statue of limitations on all of this has run. It's run on you, conveniently at the end. That's when the information was coming to the Justice Department. You've taken no action against your attorney; although you have a clear action against him. You've brought no proceedings against him, so he's possibly still advising people out there, possibly, to do the same thing he advised you to do in 1996.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That could be.
Mr. KANJORSKI. And you feel as an American citizen no compunction to stop that activity?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The last 2 or 3 years I've gone through so many hardships and lost so much money and spent so much time in jail——
Mr. KANJORSKI. How old are you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Thirty years old——
Mr. KANJORSKI. You really have a tough life; $350,000 to fix your luxury aircraft and the yacht, and participating in the transfer of $13 million of depositors' accounts. You're really under a hardship and, instead of getting 40 years, you got 3 years, and you are ready to get out. If only Willie Sutton had known about you. He didn't have to use a gun. Do you know who Willie Sutton is?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. KANJORSKI. He's a very famous bank robber. He made the mistake of going into banks with guns. You didn't make that mistake. You went in as an officer of a bank and defrauded your depositors, and therefore defrauded the U.S. Government.
But you seem to be without remorse. I mean, Mr. Waxman asked you——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Remorse in what sense?
Mr. KANJORSKI. Did you commit this crime or didn't you?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I stated, and if you look at the transcripts——
Mr. KANJORSKI. I know you were indicted and you were convicted. I'm not asking you the formal process of the law. You are asking the State of New York to exonerate your sentence, and you are asking this committee's chairman to recommend that you're so helpful. And yet you can't tell us straightforward on the record, did you or did you not commit the crime?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I feel sorry for everybody who lost their money. I told that to the sentencing judge. I feel sorry to all the employees who lost their jobs. And that is as much as I can say.
Mr. KANJORSKI. You just feel sorry for people who lost their jobs and the depositors who lost their money. Do you feel that you committed the act you were convicted of or are you improperly incarcerated in New York, in your estimation? [Pause.]
It seems like the simplest question I've ever asked a witness.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It's not that simple, sir. It's not that simple when you have family out there with wife and kids and you're coming out in front millions of people, national TV, it's not that simple, especially when you've been in jail——
Mr. KANJORSKI. You're continually claiming, as a convicted felon, that a reputable attorney—who is for all purposes that we know, in Miami—conspired with you to commit a crime against the U.S. Government. You don't find that's offensive at all and take no action to prevent that from happening in the future. But, you can't reconcile in your own mind something you were convicted, and they could have given you 40 years, and by this soft shuffle you got yourself down to 3 1/2 years and only 1 year after conviction you are getting the chairman of this committee to get you released.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Two years I've been in jail, not 1 year. Two years. And being in jail is hard enough.
Mr. KANJORSKI. That was prior to the conviction, Mr. Castro. You've only been in jail 1 year since you've been convicted. The fact is you were held——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's incorrect. I've been in jail since April 1996. We are now in May, or late April 1998. That——
Mr. KANJORSKI. You mean I am mistaken here with the committee that tells me you were convicted in February 1997?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I spent all that time, since the day of the indictment, the day of arrest, I was denied bail and I was in jail.
Mr. KANJORSKI. The State of New York didn't think they could allow you out on bail because what you said is you have no association with the United States and you can't wait to get out of jail, use this committee to get you out of jail, and get out of this country.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I'm eligible for work release right away, as it is. I'm eligible for work release as it is. That's a program of the New York——
Mr. KANJORSKI. Will that be cleaning the yacht or the jet plane?
Mr. BURTON. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr. Horn, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sort of bemused by some of the actions we've heard here in the last 15 minutes and it sounds like they are the defense counsel for Mr. Intriago.
I congratulate you for having the guts to come here when you've got this wall of shame of people who take the fifth, leave the country, and don't cooperate with us, and say, just like that I've said before, the Mafia, and you're a brave person to come here and take those assaults from the other side which are simply trying to destroy you as a credible witness as they protect people that are hiding behind the fifth amendment or out of the country or wherever. And so I thank you for coming here; you deserve a reward for that.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I am looking at some of the recent developments in the case and, I believe, in the meeting, you, Mr. Castro, recall saying that the October 15, 1993, meeting at the Department of State where there was a grievance that your family had against a Venezuelan businessman, Thor Halvorssen, I believe that's correct?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That is correct.
Mr. HORN. Now Mr. Halvorssen was hired, I am told, by the Banco de Venezuela to investigate Castro's.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. HORN. I take it the feeling is you recall saying that was worth $25,000 after the State Department meeting. Now did your access to the Department of State mainly come through the donations you gave to the Democratic National Committee? What did you feel on that?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I have no idea—confirmed—give us $25,000 and you're going to the State Department, but I've been involved in politics in the Dominican Republic, not directly as a politician but as a businessman, and I have my personal opinions of many things.
Mr. HORN. Yes. It doesn't hurt you to have been a donor and a friend of so-and-so.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. It doesn't.
Mr. HORN. Who arranged the appointment for you for that October 15, 1993, meeting with the State Department and who arranged it?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Charles Intriago.
Mr. HORN. Pardon?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Mr. Intriago. He's the one who arranged for my grandfather, and basically for him to go to the State Department.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HORN. Now is he an attorney here in Washington?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. No, he's an attorney in Florida.
Mr. HORN. In Florida, so he knew how to get an appointment at the State Department.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. HORN. Was there any White House involvement in that, to your knowledge?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. In?
Mr. HORN. Getting the appointment for you at the State Department?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. HORN. OK. And so it was simply arranged through an attorney in Florida. With whom did you deal in the Department of State? Was it a desk officer for Venezuela?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't remember his name, but we were told, or I was told, that he was the representative of South America in the State Department.
Mr. HORN. OK, maybe the Assistant Secretary was it for Inter-American Affairs?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Could be.
Mr. HORN. What was it that you wanted the State Department to do in your battle for control of the bank with Mr. Halvorssen? What were you seeking?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. Basically, my grandfather's goal at that time was to advise the State Department that the Embassy, the United States Embassy in Venezuela, was being used by certain United States employees there to be part of this smear campaign against us. And it was an opportunity to him to explain to a United States official what was going on on our side of the problem.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HORN. To your knowledge, did the State Department ever do anything in relation to the allegations you are making about the Embassy in Venezuela? Do you know, did the attitude change as a result——
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. I don't know. I didn't even ask afterwards.
Mr. HORN. OK. Now the question was raised early to the degree to which you knew anybody at the Democratic National Committee. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to just note that in our witness book here, under VEN–26, there is a letter from Charles Intriago, the attorney for his grandfather, to Ronald Brown, chairman, Democratic National Committee.
''Dear Ron, Just a brief note to tell you that I enjoyed meeting with you during the campaign in Little Rock and Middleburg. Apparently I am now a 'trustee' of the DNC,'' Democratic National Committee, ''and I am looking forward to assisting in any way I can.''—this is dated December 2, 1992—''So that you know a little more about me, I enclose a recent issue of my publication, 'Money Laundering Alert,' together with some background information. I think this is an issue on which President Clinton can make some headway in dealing with the drug and white-collar crime problem.''
So I take it Mr. Intriago, who is a publisher, as well as your father's attorney, is the one who was trying to be helpful in tracking drug money. Was that correct?
[Exhibit VEN –26 follows:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 14 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. That's correct.
Mr. HORN. Yes, I think that sounds like an excellent journal. We all ought to be subscribing to it to see where the money's going in Florida, and I will start looking it up. I'm fascinated by it.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Then you've got on exhibit VEN–27, Eric Sildon, director, National Membership Services, to Dear Charlie. So you have the leader of the Democratic National Committee calls Mr. Intriago who has taken the fifth who we hear letters from the lawyer, but he hasn't had the guts to stand in that witness chair under oath.
Mr. BURTON. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. HORN. You're welcome.
Mr. BURTON. Mr. Barrett.
Mr. BARRETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize for missing some of the proceedings, so what I may be asking may be redundant, but my friend Mr. Horn was complimenting you for your bravery for coming here today.
The reason you are here today is you want to get out of jail isn't it?
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. The reason I'm here today is?
Mr. BARRETT. You want to get out of jail.
Mr. CASTRO BARREDO. <