WEEKLY MEDIA AVAILABILITY
WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL JANET RENO
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
WASHINGTON, D.C.

9:33 A.M. EDT -- THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2000


Q: Ms. Reno, was Dr. Wen Ho Lee treated fairly both during the
investigation and the prosecution which led to this week's events?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I think, on all the circumstances, we tried to look at
it very carefully. We went over the evidence. We looked at the law. We
made the best decision we could, based on the evidence and the law,
and I feel very comfortable about that.


Q: Ms. Reno, I'm going to pose a similar question, but actually in
Judge Parker's words. Because he asked the question, I think his
deserves to be answered. "What I believe remains unanswered is the
question: What was the government's motive in insisting on your being
jailed pre-trial, under extraordinarily onerous conditions of
confinement, until today, when the executive branch agrees that you
may be set free, essentially unrestricted? That makes no sense to me,"
close quote.


I wonder if you could respond to the judge's question.



ATTY GEN. RENO: We had tried from the beginning to make sure that if
he had something to say, if he could explain what he had done with the
tapes, if he could tell us if he had conveyed any information from the
tapes or who might have access to the computer, the unsecured
computer, and would do that, subject to us being able to confirm his
statements, that we would reconsider detention, and that we would
consider charging decisions. We tried very hard. And in this instance,
we now have what we sought then.


Q: Ms. Reno, the judge apologized repeatedly in court to Mr. Lee. Do
you think he deserves an apology from the Justice Department?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I think we have tried to do everything we could to
address the issue, based on the evidence and the law and the concern
for national security. The judge recognized that Mr. Lee -- that Dr.
Lee had violated the criminal law, had taken -- I mean, in this
instance, evidence was taken off a secured computer, downloaded, put
into an unsecured computer, which people could have access to. And
there was no explanation for what the man did with the information
that was so sensitive and subject to so many concerns. And I think, in
that situation, you have to look at the consequences of doing that.


Q: But in the end, though, I mean, as the judge said, I mean, do you
feel like he's entitled to an apology, after all is said and done?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I think Dr. Lee had the opportunity from the beginning
to resolve this matter, and he chose not to, and I think he must look
to himself.


Q: (Off mike) -- and you say that an apology is kind of out of the
question here, but what regrets, if any, do you have about this case?
And secondly, would you support any disciplinary action against the
FBI agent who provided false testimony in the case?


ATTY. GEN. RENO: I'm not aware, based on Judge Parker's comments, that
there was any conclusion that testimony was false in the terms of the
law. With respect to issues of whether apologies are out of the
question or -- who, what should have been differently, I with all my
heart and soul wish that Dr. Lee had come forward, said, "This is what
I did with the information, this is what I did with the tapes. I made
copies, I didn't make copies, and here, I'll sit down with you and
we'll work it out and I'll try to give you as much information as
possible to permit you to confirm and corroborate it."


(Cross talk.)



Wait a minute.  You all are getting too stereophonic.



Q: Do we understand correctly that the plea bargain that was reached
yesterday could, in fact, have been reached before Dr. Lee spent eight
or nine months in confinement? That his attorneys were basically
offering this deal last winter, and the government turned it down? Is
that your understanding?


ATTY. GEN. RENO: No. My understanding is that the attorneys offered to
make information available and then we were not able to carry through
with it and did not have access to it. And in January, we were writing
them again saying, "If you will answer these questions and give us an
opportunity to corroborate it, we will reconsider the detention
issues."


Again, you had significant information that related to this nation's
national security. We went over the evidence carefully. The judge has
his role as a trier, determiner of fact. We have our responsibilities,
both to make sure that we feel like we have evidence sufficient under
the law to charge and that then we do everything we can to protect the
national security; i.e., to find out what happened to the information.


Q:  Ms. Reno, was --



Q: (Inaudible) -- their offer, early on, to do this. What was wrong
with their offer to sit down?


ATTY. GEN. RENO: I don't think there was ever the ultimate
follow-through in terms of what we asked for in the subsequent letter
that we wrote. We gave very specific questions that needed to be
answered and essentially laid out what we now have.

...

Q: I just wanted to go back to Wen Ho Lee for a moment. Is there any
internal review underway about the department's conduct or the FBI's
conduct; specifically the early questioning of him when he was
questioned without an attorney present and he, according to his
lawyers, was threatened with electrocution if he didn't answer the
questions? It seems to hark back to the days of Richard Jewell when
the investigation -- the questioning wasn't handled properly.


ATTY GEN. RENO: I will review it and see if there is any basis for it.

...

Q: And you're quite sure that Mr. Wen Ho Lee going free is not going
to be a security risk, that he is going to come forth as he has
promised?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I have decided that this is the best way I can find to
try to get to the truth as to what happened to the tapes and the
information.


Q: Are there any indications that he's coming forth with that
information?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I think we have already been able to obtain some
information that was not previously available, and we're going to
continue to try to pursue it, as we had tried early on to make sure
that we understand exactly what happened.


Q: On this question about the embarrassment, the judge said that the
top decisionmakers in the Executive Branch, especially the Department
of Justice -- and at one point, he actually mentions you by name --
have embarrassed our entire nation and each of us who is a citizen in
it. Would you respond to that?


ATTY GEN. RENO: As I said, I regret deeply that Judge Parker feels
that way. But I know what I've had to do based on the evidence and the
law. I know what I've had to do to address the national security
issues and to address information that is of real concern to this
nation, and what we tried to do up front. I'm not embarrassed. I will
say that the issues before us are not easy issues, and it is one that
I take to be one of my great responsibilities, to try to do it the
right way. To try to determine how to charge consistent with our
constitutional principles, how to protect our national security, how
to address constitutional issues of detention, are all very difficult.
And I just trust that all the branches of government understand the
role that each has to play.


Q: Will you concede any missteps by the government, either from the
U.S. Attorney's Office out there, from the FBI, from the Justice
Department?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I would like to look at everything, and if there are
missteps, then review them and consider them.


Q: (Off mike) -- to those who suggest that Congressional pressure
somehow influenced the department's decision to pursue the case?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I had been criticized by Congress on many occasions
for not doing things. In this instance, people talked about
congressional pressure, and I said this is one thing that is not going
to sway me; I'm going to do it if I have evidence sufficient to
charge, and I'm going to do it based on what I understand the law, as
applied to these facts, will permit us to do. And if I can't charge,
then I'm prepared to go back up to Congress and sit there and answer
questions as to why I didn't charge. And I am equally prepared to go
up to Congress and answer questions as to why I did.


Q: Ms. Reno, as you look back at the case in terms of not evidence
that he gave the information to anyone from the onset, and the fact
that he initially still faced, in the 59-count indictment, charges
that could have put him in jail for life, was there a disconnect
between the level of what the government brought and what the
government knew at the time that it decided to prosecute?


ATTY GEN. RENO: What the government knew was that he had intentionally
downloaded very sensitive classified information concerning our
nation's nuclear secrets. He had not done that just accidentally or in
a flash of the three-minute period; he had done it over time, taking
some 40 hours to do it. He had made it available on an unsecured
computer, subject to hackers and the like. He had, based on the
information we had, done this carefully, deliberately, willfully. He
had no need for it in his work. He had no obvious need for it in this
unsecure setting. There was no explanation for why somebody who knew
the sensitivity of this information would remove it from a secure
computer and make it accessible to intruders, hackers, or other
governments who could hack into that computer.


We offered him the opportunity to provide an explanation, not just
"yes" or "no," or "I destroyed it," but "did you do anything with the
information that you downloaded? Did you give it to anybody? What has
been done with it? How did -- if you destroyed the tapes, how did you
destroy the tapes? And we want time to be able to corroborate your --
the information you provide us." He didn't do that.


The conclusion then was that he had willfully downloaded the computer,
put the information out in an unsecure setting, retained it without
explanation. And we felt that there was evidence sufficient to charge.


Now people may disagree with us, but this is what we tried to do. And
here you have extensive information concerning the nation's nuclear
secrets out there, available. What happened to it? That was what we
needed to know.


Q: Do you have any idea what in fact his motive may have been to do
the downloading?


ATTY GEN. RENO:  No, I don't.

...

Q: Is it in the best interest of justice and the United States
government in this case with Wen Ho Lee that he now should be
protected? And, conversely, that he should be discouraged from flight?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I think it's in the best interest of everybody that we
sit down, get the information that he has, follow up on it,
corroborate it, and take appropriate action.


Q: What do you think of all of the allegations that the government
somehow had a racial bias in going after Dr. Lee?


ATTY GEN. RENO: I can be very clear to you that there was no racial
bias in anything that we did with respect to Dr. Lee, in terms of my
decision-making and in terms of what I was concerned about.


Q: Ms. Reno, I'm curious. You said that one thing that you will need
to know, that you want to know, is what happened to those tapes. How
do you kind of prove a negative? I mean, he says he destroyed them.


ATTY GEN. RENO: I can't comment on the evidence that we have, and so
it would not be appropriate for me to comment while we are preparing
for the briefing.