 |
|
| Email this article | Printer friendly page |
| For Immediate Release | |
| Sep 2, 1997 | Contact: Press Office 202-646-5172 |
|
IN PRESS CONFERENCE JUDICIAL WATCH UNVEILS EVIDENCE THAT HUANG WAS MORE THAN A LOW LEVEL BUDGET CLERK Despite attempts by the White House, the Clinton Justice Department, and the Clinton Commerce Department, all attempting to portray John Huang as a low level paper pusher at Commerce, evidence continues to come to light as to his real role. Judicial Watch has recently uncovered Commerce Secretary Ron Brown’s Schedule for November 28, 1995 that lists a meeting between Brown and Huang just hours before a reception in honor of the Chinese Ambassador -- scheduled to be attended by both Brown and Huang. (Furthermore, John Huang’s calendar for that day lists a meeting with John Dickerson, while Brown’s lists a meeting with Mr. Gallagher.) Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman stated: "What possible reason would a ‘Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary’, such as Huang, have to meet with the Commerce Secretary, John Dickerson, and the ambassador to China all in the same day? In light of Huang’s over 100 meetings at the White House and now public evidence that he may have met with the Commerce Secretary and former DNC Chairman Ron Brown and John Dickerson before meeting with the Chinese ambassador, this raises further serious questions which must be answered. "To prevent questions such as this from being answered, the Clinton Commerce Department sought to buy Judicial Watch off by offering to immediately pay Judicial Watch’s attorney’s fees in Commerce’s recent motion to enter judgment against itself. However, Judicial Watch, unlike the Clinton Administration, cannot be bought and will continue to fight to uncover for the American public the actions of John Huang and other Clinton friends." Judicial Watch will make available to the press both the recently uncovered John Huang document and its response to the Clinton Commerce Department motion to have judgment entered against itself. The latter document puts the campaign finance scandal in perspective and shows that there is a concentrated effort to cover it up. |
|
