The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE RUBY RIDGE INCIDENT” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S9833-S9834 on July 13, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE RUBY RIDGE INCIDENT
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought this special order for recognition this morning to renew my urging that the Senate conduct oversight hearings into the incident at Ruby Ridge, a subject that I have spoken on at length on the Senate floor--on May 9, 10, 11, 18 and 26--and on those occasions urged that hearings be conducted before the August recess because of what I view to be the urgency of the situation.
I renew that request in light of the release by the Federal Bureau of Investigation yesterday, and the extensive publicity in the news media today, reporting on the suspension of a ranking FBI agent involved in the Ruby Ridge incident, the suspension occurring ``after authorities allege that he destroyed a document that could have altered the official account of what happened at the standoff on August 22, 1992.''
Mr. President, it has been my judgment for some considerable period of time that the Congress has been derelict in failing to have oversight hearings on very serious matters involving Federal law enforcement operations in the United States, and that it is up to the Congress as a matter of congressional oversight to make sure that there is accountability at all levels of the Federal Government.
I have considered very carefully the very heavy responsibility of law enforcement officials, the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and others, agencies that I have worked with extensively over my whole career of public service--since I was district attorney of Philadelphia--and have a full appreciation of the very high risks that law enforcement officers at all levels undertake. But there is great concern in America today about excessive Federal authority, and about the incidents which have occurred not only at Waco but also at Ruby Ridge.
This is in line with the concern in this country, which is as old as the Declaration of Independence itself, in challenging the legitimacy of government.
That brought the revolution and the founding of the United States of America. Our history is full of challenges to be sure that the Bill of Rights is respected. It is no coincidence that the United States has had the longest record in world history for stable government, no coincidence that record is the result of having a Bill of Rights which has been meticulously enforced, and one of the agencies of enforcement is the constitutional prerogative and responsibility of the Congress of the United States to conduct oversight.
Mr. President, it is a matter of the utmost gravity when there are allegations that there has been the destruction of a document which could shed light on what happened at Ruby Ridge, and this is only another step along the way on matters which already were in the public record suggesting substantial impropriety.
In my statement on the Senate floor on May 26, I referred to a letter from FBI Special Agent Eugene Glenn, who was on the scene at Ruby Ridge, and who was disciplined, and Mr. Glenn had this to say on page 6 of an extensive letter which he wrote to Mr. Michael Shaheen of the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility:
On August 22, 1992, then Assistant Director Potts advised during a telephonic conversation with the special agent in charge that he had approved the rules of engagement and that he articulated his reasons for his adjustments to the Bureau standard shooting policy.
At that time, I called the attention of my colleagues to the fact that in my personal conversation with Mr. Potts on May 17, he said to me categorically, ``There was never a change in the rules of engagement.'' And Mr. Potts advised me further that there was ``no authorization to change the deadly force policy.''
Mr. President, as I have said previously in this Chamber, I have talked extensively to people who have participated, been involved in the incident at Ruby Ridge. I talked to Mr. Randy Weaver at some length back on May 13, 1995, and got his account of what was truly a tragic incident which resulted in the killing of a deputy U.S. marshal, the killing of Mr. Weaver's young son, Sam, who was shot in the back, and the killing of Mr. Weaver's wife, who was holding their infant daughter.
The entire incident involving Mr. Weaver occurred, according to Mr. Weaver, when he was approached by agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms asking if he could sell them sawed-off shotguns, which apparently he later did in a context where a court found it to be entrapment. I questioned Mr. John Magaw, the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and he conceded to me that there was what he called borderline entrapment in the Weaver case.
So that you have a sequence of events of Mr. Weaver living in Boundary County, ID, right next to the Canadian border, really wanting to be left alone, an incident with this issue of entrapment, and later the marshals coming to the premises of the Weaver household. And then you have an incident, tragic, the killing of a deputy U.S. marshal, two members of the Weaver family, and then a dispute as to whether the FBI acted properly under the rules of engagement; and then yesterday the disclosure that in fact there had been some indication of further wrongdoing.
This is a matter, Mr. President, in which it seems to me it is imperative that the Congress of the United States exercise its oversight responsibilities.
We have had on the record for some time glaring conflicts which need to be investigated, inquired into by the Congress--the disparity between Special Agent Glenn, who is in charge of the FBI office in Salt Lake City, and the account of Mr. Potts, who has since been promoted to the position of Deputy Director of the FBI.
As noted in this morning's Washington Post:
Last year, a Justice Department task force sharply criticized the FBI action during the incident.
Referring to Ruby Ridge.
The task force concluded that the Bureau's conduct
``contravened the Constitution'' and that criminal charges should be considered against the responsible agents. The task force report was forwarded for comment to the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility and the Civil Rights Division. Those offices in their evaluations held that no criminal conduct took place.
Now, Mr. President, I submit that in the context of a task force report saying the Constitution has been violated and suggesting criminal prosecution, and a disagreement within the Department of Justice itself, that we have is the quintessential circumstance where the Congress of the United States has oversight responsibilities. And yet we sit by idly and do nothing.
I have said on the Senate floor that in my judgment Congress has been derelict in its duties. I think it is a matter of nonfeasance, the failure to perform a positive obligation and a positive duty. And for the Congress, the Senate, the Judiciary Committee to continue to turn its back would amount to more than nonfeasance, perhaps misfeasance, perhaps malfeasance.
There is great unrest in America today, Mr. President, as we all know, with the development of extensive militia around the country and a vivid, active distrust for what goes on in Washington. I can understand that distrust in the face of what I see personally as a Member of the Senate and as a Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I not only understand that distrust and skepticism, but I share it in the absence of any oversight having been undertaken by the Congress, the Senate, and the Judiciary Committee on these important matters.
I made an effort to hold these hearings with the Subcommittee on Terrorism, the subcommittee which has jurisdiction over these matters, and I was thwarted in that attempt to do so. And I took the highly unusual step of bringing the matter to the floor of the Senate in a resolution calling for hearings on Ruby Ridge, among other things, in advance of the August 4 recess.
I had no doubt, Mr. President, no naivete that that resolution was not going to be adopted in the face of our standards as to prerogatives of chairmen, but it seemed to me sufficiently serious to bring it to the floor of the Senate and to bring it to a head.
In my capacity as chairman of the Terrorism Subcommittee, I have had a series of hearings, four hearings on the subject, one of which involved the militia where law enforcement officials from the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the State police chief from Missouri, and prosecuting attorneys from Phoenix, AZ, and Musselshell County, MT, came forward and testified about the dangers of the militia and at the same time, same hearing, a second panel testified about the reasons why the militia are growing in the United States, members of the militia talking about the distrust of what goes on in Washington,
accusing the committee, accusing the Senate, accusing this Senator of corruption, and a very heated exchange followed in which I did not take that accusation lightly. And I do not. But I must say, Mr. President, that I worry about our country when this kind of information is open and notorious and there is no response from this body, from the Judiciary Committee, to have these oversight hearings.
I think that when you now have, beyond the issues which I have raised, where you now have the lead story in this morning's Washington Post, under the banner headline, ``Probe of FBI's Idaho Siege Reopened,'' detailing the destruction of documents on top of the contradictions and problems in this investigation, that this is highly likely to produce the kind of public pressure which it appears is the only way to get any results on a matter of this sort.
Mr. President, I think it is a matter of the utmost gravity and the utmost seriousness, and we sit really on a powder keg with a lot of distrust and anxiety and anger welling up across the country as to excessive action by the Federal Government. Accountability at the highest levels is absolutely mandated, and it is the responsibility of the Congress and the Senate and the Judiciary Committee to conduct these oversight hearings and, in addition to having discussed these matters privately with the appropriate authorities within our own body, I think it absolutely necessary to make the statement as forcefully as I can to urge that these hearings be conducted, conducted promptly and, in any event, before we adjourn for the August recess.
____________________
