down our new President [Bush]. We have tried throughout this proceeding to avoid partisan
attacks. Indeed, Republicans and Democrats alike have sought Mr. Gregg's withdrawal as one
way to avoid casting aspersions on the [Bush] White House.... [emphasis added].
Mr. Gregg remains steadfast in his loyalty to his boss, then-Vice President Bush, and to his long-
time friend, Felix Rodriguez. Mr. Gregg has served his country in the foreign policy field for more
than three decades. By all accounts he is a loyal American.... As Mr. Gregg himself conceded last
month, there are substantial reasons for senators to suspect his version of events and to raise
questions about his judgement. It does not take a suspicious or partisan mind to look at the
documentary evidence, the back channel cables, the `` eyes only '' memos, and then to conclude
that Mr. Gregg has not been straight with us. Indeed, I am informed that more than one
Republican senator who has looked at the accumulated weight of the evidence against Mr. Gregg,
has remained unconvinced and has sought Mr. Gregg's withdrawal.
Mr. Gregg, this committee has a fundamental dilemma. If we are to promote a man we believe to
have misled us under oath, we would make a mockery of this institution. We would invite
contempt for our enquiries. We would encourage frustration of our constitutional obligations. ...
[It] has been established that when you are confronted with written evidence undermining your
story, you point the finger of blame elsewhere. At our last hearing you said Gorman's cables were
wrong, North's notebooks were wrong, Steele's memory was wrong, North's sworn testimony [that
Gregg introduced Rodriguez to him] was wrong, you concocted a theory that your aide, Watson,
and your secretary erred by writing Contras '' instead of helicopters '' on those infamous
briefing memos for the Vice President. In sum, you have told a tale of an elaborate plan in which
your professional colleagues and long-time friends conspired to keep you ignorant of crucial facts
through days of meetings, monthly phone calls and nearly two years' worth of cables and memos.
Incredibly, when senators confront you with the documentary evidence which undermines your
story, you accuse us of concocting conspiracy theories and you do so with a straight face. ... I
think it is clear by now that many important questions may never be answered satisfactorily,
especially because we have been stonewalled by the administration. The National Security Agency
has rejected our legitimate enquiries out of hand. The Central Intelligence Agency provided a
response with access restrictions so severe ... as to be laughable. The Department of Defense has
given an unsatisfactory response two days late. The State Department's response was utterly
unresponsive. They answered our letter after their self-imposed deadline and failed to produce
specific documents we requested and which we know exist. This Committee has been stonewalled
by Oliver North, too. He has not complied with the Committee subpoena for his unredacted
notebooks. The redacted notebooks contain repeated January 1985 references to Felix Rodriguez
which suggests North's involvement in Rodriguez' briefings of the Vice President. No member of
the Senate can escape the conclusion that these administration actions are contemptuous of this
Committee. I find this highly regrettable, with potential long-term ramifications, but I
recognize the will of the majority to come to a committee vote soon, up or down, and to move
on to other pressing business [emphasis added]....
Sen. McConnell: ... During the period of the Boland Amendment, were you ever asked to inform
the Vice President's office or lend his name to private, nonprofit efforts to support the Contras?
Gregg: Yes. I recall one instance, in particular, where there was a request--I guess it was probably
from one aspect of the Spitz Channell organization, which had a variety of things going on in and
around Nicaragua. We got, on December 2nd, 1985, a letter to the Vice President, asking him to
get involved in something called the Friends of the Americas, which was aid to the Meskito
Indians ... in Nicaragua that had been badly mistreated by the Sandinistas.... And so I have a
document here which shows how we dealt with it. I sent it to Boyden Gray, the counsel of the
Vice President and said, Boyden, this looks okay as a charity issue, but there is the question of precedent. Please give me a legal opinion. Thanks. '' ... Boyden Gray wrote back to me and said,
No, should not do. Raises questions about indirect circumvention of congressional funding limits
or restriction, vis-a- vis Nicaragua. '' That is the only time I recall that we had a specific request