Secord...in May 1983, immediately upon his retirement, joined Hakim. Secord became Hakim's equal partner in a new company, Stanford Technology Trading Group International (STTGI), headquartered in Vienna, Virginia, outside of Washington, D.C. STTGI, relying on Secord's contacts, tried to develop contracts in the security field in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
references..329
18. FB389-92. The Principal source of Wilson's wealth turned out to be arms deals. During 1983, Wilson was convicted of conspiring to sell arms and explosives to Libya as well as conspiring to murder the federal prosecutor and 6 witnesses in his trial. Washington Post, 1/10/84, and A4. See generally, Washington Post, 3/14/83, at A17.
Figure 22╤4. Expenditures Relating to Contras ($16.5M)..340
The mideast:expenditures for the Iran operations..341
Worldwide projects..341
The North residence security system..341
Unexplained cash expenditures..343
Section 4: The Diversion╤How Much?..343
Section 5: Profits╤Who Made What..343
Breaking the code names..343
Korel assets..344
"Button"..344
The surplus..345
Figure 22╤5. Breakdown of $12.19M Surplus..346
The commissions..347
Table 22╤4.Mark-up on Arms Purchased for Contras (CSF Ledgers)..347
CSF = Compagnie de Services Fiduciaires. The Enterprise's records were maintained by CSF, a Swiss fiduciary company, owned and administered on a daily basis by Willard I. Zucker, a US citizen and former IRS lawyer who has resided in Switzerland for 20 years.
Table 22╤5. Commissions on Arms Sales to Contras..348
The proposed charter to the CIA for a covert operation..368
The odyssey of the Erria..368
Conclusion..369
references..370
+ Part VI Conclusions and Recommendations ch.24╤28
24 Covert Action in a Democratic Society..375
What Is Covert Action?..375
Covert Action & The Law..378
Misuse of Findings..378
"Stretching" findings..379
Dispensing with Presidential findings..379
Using findings to avoid laws..380
Not Playing It Straight With Congress..381
Misleading Testimony..381
Misuse of intelligence..382
Conclusions..383
references..385
25 Powers of Congress & President in Field of Foreign Policy..387
The Witnesses' Position at the Hearings..387
The Constitutional Framework..388
The words "foreign policy" do not appear in the Constitution, and the Constitution does not designate the President as the sole or dominant actor in foreign policy. The only foreign policy powers expressly granted to the Executive in the Constitution are the powers to nominate Ambassadors, to negotiate treaties, and to direct the Armed Forces as Commander-in-Chief. Two of these powers are specifically conditioned on Senate approval: the Senate, througn its power of advise and consent, can confirm or reject Ambassadors and ratify or reject treaties. On the other hand, the Constitution expressly grants Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce, to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, and to declare war. Congress is given the exclusive power of the purse. The Executive may not spend funds on foreign policy projects except pursuant to an appropriation by Congress.
Judicial decisions recognize a shared power..388
The Curtiss-Wright case..388
United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation - Supreme Court 1936: Congress, by statute, had delegated to the President the power to prohibit the slae of arms to countries in an area of South America if the President believed the prohibition would promote peace. The Curtiss-Wright Corporation claimed that the power to make this determination was a legislative power that Congress could not delegate to the President. ..The case involved the question of the powers of the President in foreign policy where Congress expressly authorizes him to act; it did not involve the questionb of the President's foreign policy powers when Congress expressly forbids him to act.
Circumvention of Congress' Constitutional Power of the Purse..390
..allowing foreign policy to be conducted with funds supplied by private parties and foreign governments is likely to create the expectation by the donor nations that they can expect something in return for their largesse. ..This clandestine financing operation undermined the powers of Congress as a coequal branch and subverted the Constitution.
Foreign Policy as a Shared Power..391
Conclusion..392
references..393
26 Boland Ammendments & the NSC Staff..395
Boland I: Sept. 27,1982, to Dec. 7, 1983..395
Limited Funding: Dec. 8, 1983, to Oct. 3, 1984..396
Boland II: Oct. 3, 1984, to Dec. 3, 1985..397
The evolution of Boland II..397
Boland II & the NSC staff..399
The meaning of "indirect" support..401
Humanitarian aid: Aug.8, 1985, to Mar.31, 1986..401
Exchange of intelligence..402
The permissibility of solicitation..403
Boland III: Dec. 4, 1985, to Oct. 17, 1986..404
Exchange of intelligence..404
Solicitation..405
Renewed assistance: Oct.18, 1986, to Sept.30, 1987..405
The Boland Amendments Were Violated in Letter & Spirit..405
..the NSC staff's ..support for the Contras was systematic and pervasive. As the CIA had done before Boland II, the NSC staff now ran the Contra insurgency. ..while the NSC staff started its support of the Contras at least in part with private funds, the diversion gave it control over funds that belonged to the United States. The profits that were skimmed were generated by the sale of weapons belonging to the United States. ..the Administration's activities in support of the Contras were conducted in direct contravention of the will of Congress. It strains credulity to suggest that the President has the constitutional prerogative to staff and fund a military operation without the knowledge of Congress and in direct disregard of contrary legislation.
references..408
27 Rule of Law..411
SIR THOMAS MORE: The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal..
WILLIAM ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of the law!
MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
MORE: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you╤where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast╤Man's law, not God's╤and if you cut them down╤and you're just the man to do it╤d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
╤A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt
Too many laws were "cut down" in the Iran╤Contra Affair by officials who, like Roper, decided that the laws inhibited pursuit of their goals...the Committees find that activities in the Iran╤Contra Affair, including the diversion, were conducted and later covered up by members of the NSC staff in violation of the Constitution and of applicable laws and regulations.
Use of Donated Funds to Evade Congress' Power of the Purse..411
Overview..411
The power of the purse & the Constitution..412
..The Constitution contemplates that the Governemt will conduct its affairs only with funds appropriated by Congress. By resorting to funds not appropriated by Congress╤indeed funds denied the executive branch by Congress╤Administration officials committed a transgression far more basic than a violation of the Boland Amendment. The power of the purse, which the Framers vested in Congress, has long been recognized as "the most important single curb in the Constitution on Presidential Power." The Framers were determined not to combine the power of the purse and the power of the sword in the same branch of government.. When members of the executive branch raised money from third countries and private citizens, took control over that money through the Enterprise, and used it to support the Contras' war in Nicaragua, they bypassed this crucial safeguard in the Constitution.
Use of the Enterprise to mask US Gov. control of donations..413
North was responsible, directly or indirectly, for virtually all the income of Lake Resources and the other companies in the Enterprise, and he had the power to direct its expenditures. Lake Resources was created for the very purpose of conducting Government operations while evading the Congressional appropriations power.
