The only officials of the CIA to provide testimony to the Warren Commission were John
McCone and Richard Helms.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN A. McCONE AND RICHARD M. HELMS beginning at 5H120...
The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order.
Director McCone, it is customary for the Chairman to make a short
statement to the witness as to the testimony that is expected to be given. I will read it
at this time.
Mr. McCone will be asked to testify on whether Lee Harvey Oswald was
ever an agent, directly or indirectly, or an informer or acting on behalf of the Central
Intelligence Agency in any capacity at any time, and whether he knows of any credible
evidence or of any conspiracy either domestic or foreign involved in the assassination of
President Kennedy, also with regard to any suggestions and recommendations he may have
concerning improvements or changes in provisions for the protection of the President of
the United States.
Would you please rise and be sworn? Do you solemnly swear the testimony
you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. MCCONE. I do.
The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please? Mr. Rankin will conduct the
examination.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, will you state your name?
Mr. McCONE. My name is John Alex McCone.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official position with the U.S. Government?
Mr. McCONE. Yes, sir; I am Director of Central Intelligence.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you been Director for some time?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; a little over 2 1/2 years.
Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live, Mr. McCone?
Mr. McCONE. I live at 3025 Whitehaven Street in Washington.
Mr. RANKIN. Are you familiar with the records and how they are kept by
the Central Intelligence Agency as to whether a man is acting as an informer, agent,
employee, or in any other capacity for that Agency?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; I am generally familiar with the procedures and the
records that are maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency. Quite naturally, I am not
familiar with all of the records because they are very extensive.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you determined whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald, the
suspect in connection with the assassination of President Kennedy, had any connection with
the Central Intelligence Agency, informer or indirectly as an employee, or any other
capacity?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; I have determined to my satisfaction that he had no
such connection, and I would like to read for the record----
Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly the extent of your inquiry?
Mr. McCONE. In a form of affidavit, I have gone into the matter in
considerable detail personally, in my inquiry with the appropriate people within the
Agency, examined all records in our files relating to Lee Harvey Oswald. We had knowledge
of him, of course, because of his having gone to the Soviet Union, as he did, putting him
in a situation where his name would appear in our name file. However, my examination has
resulted in the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was not an agent, employee, or informant
of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Agency never contacted him, interviewed him,
talked with him, or received or solicited any reports or information from him, or
communicated with him directly or in any other manner. The Agency never furnished
120
Page 121
him with any funds or money or compensated him directly or indirectly in any fashion, and
Lee Harvey Oswald was never associated or connected directly or indirectly in any way
whatsoever with the Agency. When I use the term "Agency," I mean the Central
Intelligence Agency, of course.
Representative FORD. Does that include whether or not he was in the
United States, in the Soviet Union, or anyplace?
Mr. McCONE. Anyplace; the United States, Soviet Union, or anyplace.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, is that the affidavit you are going to supply
the Commission in connection with our request for it?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; this is the substance of the affidavit which I will
supply to you.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I ask leave to mark that Exhibit 870 and have
it introduced in evidence as soon as we receive it from Mr. McCone as a part of this
record.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 870 was marked for identification and received
in evidence.)
Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us about your procedures in regard to having
an agent or informer or any person acting in that type of capacity? Does that have to pass
through your hands or come to your attention in the Agency?
Mr. McCONE. No; it does not have to come through my personal hands.
Mr. RANKIN. Without disclosing something that might be a security
matter, could you tell us how that is handled in a general way in the Agency?
Mr. McCONE. Mr. Helms, who is directly responsible for that division of
the Agency's activities as a Deputy Director, might explain. Would that be permissible?
Mr. RANKIN. Could we have him sworn then?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand and be sworn. Do you
solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. HELMS. I do.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, you heard the inquiry just directed to Mr.
McCone. Could you answer the question directly?
Mr. HELMS. Yes; we have a specific procedure which we follow in all
cases where the Agency is in contact, for the purposes of acquiring intelligence or
whatever the case may be, with an individual. We not only have a record of the
individual's name, but we also usually get information of a biographical nature. We then
check this individual's name against our record. At that point we make a determination as
to whether we desire to use this man or not to use him. It varies from case to case as to
how many officers may be involved in approving a specific recruitment. May I go off the
record?
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, did you have anything to do on behalf of your
Agency with determining whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was acting in any of the
capacities I have described in my questions to Mr. McCone?
Mr. HELMS. Yes; I did.
Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you did in that regard?
Mr. HELMS. On Mr. McCone's behalf, I had all of our records searched to
see if there had been any contacts at any time prior to President Kennedy's assassination
by anyone in the Central Intelligence Agency with Lee Harvey Oswald. We checked our card
files and our personnel files and all our records.
Now, this check turned out to be negative. In addition I got in touch
with those officers who were in positions of responsibility at the times in question to
see if anybody had any recollection of any contact having even been suggested with this
man. This also turned out to be negative, so there is no material in the Central
Intelligence Agency, either in the records or in the mind of any of the individuals, that
there was any contact had or even contemplated with him.
121
Page 122
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms----
Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Do you recall or do you
know at what time the name of Lee Harvey Oswald was carded, first came to your attention
so it became a matter of record, in the Agency?
Mr. HELMS. Sir, I would want to consult the record to be absolutely
accurate, but it is my impression that the first time that his name showed up on any
Agency records was when he went to the Soviet Union.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, in connection with your work you have supplied
information to the Commission and we have requested many things from your Agency. Can you
tell the Commission as to whether or not you have supplied us all the information the
Agency has, at least in substance, in regard to Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. HELMS. We have; all.
Representative FORD. Has a member of the Commission staff had full
access to your files on Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. HELMS. He has, sir.
Representative FORD. They have had the opportunity to personally look
at the entire file?
Mr. HELMS. We invited them to come out to our building in Langley and
actually put the file on the table so that they could examine it.
The CHAIRMAN. I was personally out there, too, and was offered the same
opportunity. I did not avail myself of it because of the time element, but I was offered
the same opportunity.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, can you explain, according to the limitations of
security, the reasons why we examined materials but did not always take them, in a general
way?
Mr. HELMS. Yes; I can.
In our communications between individuals working overseas and in
Washington, we for security reasons have a method of hiding the identities of individuals
in telegrams and dispatches by the use of pseudonyms and cryptonyms. For this reason, we
never allow the original documents to leave our premises. However, on the occasion when
the representatives of the Commission staff looked at these files, we sat there and
identified these pseudonyms and cryptonyms and related them to the proper names of the
individuals concerned, so that they would know exactly what the correspondence said.
Mr. RANKIN. By that you mean the representatives of the Commission were
able to satisfy themselves that they had all of the information for the benefit of the
Commission without disclosing matters that would be a threat to security; is that right?
Mr. HELMS. It is my understanding that they were satisfied.
Representative FORD. Mr. McCone, do you have full authority from higher
authority to make full disclosure to this Commission of any information in the files of
the Central Intelligence Agency?
Mr. McCONE. That is right. It is my understanding that it is the desire
of higher authority that this Commission shall have access to all information of every
nature in our files or in the minds of employees of Central Intelligence Agency.
Representative FORD. On the basis of that authority, you or the Agency
have made a full disclosure?
Mr. McCONE. That is correct.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, I have handed you Exhibits 868 and 869 directed
to you acting for the Agency, the first one being from the Commission to you and the
second one, 869, being your answer in regard to your full and complete disclosure in
regard to your records; isn't that correct?
Mr. HELMS. That is correct. May I say, Mr. Rankin, that any
information, though, subsequent to this correspondence which we may obtain we will
certainly continue to forward to the Commission.
Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to have those two
exhibits, 868 and 869, received in evidence at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers.
122
Page 123
(Commission Exhibits Nos. 868 and 869 were marked for identification
and received in evidence.)
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, if I may return to you, I will now ask you if
you have any credible information that you know of or evidence causing you to believe that
there is any or was any conspiracy either domestic or foreign in connection with the
assassination of President Kennedy?
Mr. McCONE. No; I have no information, Mr. Rankin, that would lead me
to believe or conclude that a conspiracy existed.
Representative FORD. Did the CIA make an investigation of this aspect
of the assassination?
Mr. McCONE. We made an investigation of all developments after the
assassination which came to our attention which might possibly have indicated a
conspiracy, and we determined after these investigations, which were made promptly and
immediately, that we had no evidence to support such an assumption.
Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency have any
contact with Oswald during the period of his life in the Soviet Union?
Mr. McCONE. No; not to my knowledge, nor to the knowledge of those who
would have been in a position to have made such contact, nor according to any record we
have.
Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency have any
personal contact with Oswald subsequent to his return to the United States?
Mr. McCONE. No.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, your Agency made a particular investigation in
connection with any allegations about a conspiracy involving the Soviet Union or people
connected with Cuba, did you not?
Mr. McCONE. Yes, we did. We made a thorough, a very thorough,
investigation of information that came to us concerning an alleged trip that Oswald made
to Mexico City during which time he made contact with the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City in
an attempt to gain transit privileges from Mexico City to the Soviet Union via Havana. We
investigated that thoroughly.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you also include in your statement that you found no
evidence of conspiracy in all of that investigation?
Mr. McCONE. That is correct.
Mr. RANKIN. And also the investigation you made of the period that Lee
Harvey Oswald was in the Soviet Union?
Mr. McCONE. That is right.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone----
Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Does your answer, Mr.
McCone, include a negation of any belief that Oswald was working for or on behalf of the
Soviet Union at any time when you were in contact with him or knew about his activities?
Mr. McCONE. As I have already stated, we were never in contact with
Oswald. We have no evidence that he was working for or on behalf of the Soviet Union at
any time. According to his diary, Oswald did receive a subsidy from the Soviet Red Cross
which we assume had the approval of the authorities. Such a payment does not indicate to
us that he even worked for the Soviet intelligence services. Furthermore, we have no other
evidence that he ever worked for Soviet intelligence.
Representative FORD. Is the Central Intelligence Agency continuing any
investigation into this area?
Mr. McCONE. No, because, at the present time, we have no information in
our files that we have not exhaustively investigated and disposed of to our satisfaction.
Naturally, any new information that might come into our hands would be investigated
promptly.
Mr. HELMS. I simply wanted to add that we obviously are interested in
anything we can pick up applying to this case, and anything we get will be immediately
sent to the Commission, so that we haven't stopped our inquiries or the picking up of any
information we can from people who might have it. This is on a continuing basis.
Representative FORD. In other words, the case isn't closed.
Mr. HELMS. It is not closed as far as we are concerned.
123
Page 124
Mr. RANKIN. Would that be true, Mr. Helms, even after the Commission
completed its report, you would keep the matter open if there was anything new that
developed in the future that could be properly presented to the authorities?
Mr. HELMS. Yes. I would assume the case will never be closed.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, do you have any ideas about improving the
security provisions for the President that you would like to relate to the Commission?
Mr. McCONE. Well, this is, in my opinion, a very important question
which I am sure this Commission will--has and will--devote a considerable amount of
thought to, and undoubtedly have some recommendations as part of its report.
Mr. RANKIN. Your Agency does have an important function in some
aspects.
Mr. McCONE. We have a very important function in connection with the
foreign travels of the President, and I would like to inform the Commission as to how we
discharge that responsibility by quickly reviewing the chronology of the Central
Intelligence Agency's support of President Kennedy's visit to Mexico City from the 29th of
June to the 2d of July 1962.
Mr. RANKIN. Will you please do that.
The CHAIRMAN. Director, is that a security matter?
Mr. McCONE. No. I think I can handle this for the record.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well.
Mr. McCONE. If I have to make a remark or two off the record I will ask
that privilege.
That visit, as I said, started on the 29th of June. On the 28th of
April, in anticipation of the visit, instructions were transmitted to Mexico for the
Ambassador to coordinate planning and informational guidance for the advance party of the
Secret Service.
We asked that the Secret Service be given information on local groups
and persons who would cause disturbances, embarrassments or physical harm, an estimate of
the determination and. ability of the Mexican government to prevent incidents, and
preparation for special briefings to the Embassy officials and the Secret Service, and
such additional support and communications personnel that might be required.
These instructions were given two months before the trip.
On the 15th of May, we received confirmed information that the
President would visit Mexico on the specific dates. On the 1st of June the Secret Service
was supplied by the Agency with the detailed survey of Mexican security forces that would
be called upon to protect the President.
Friendly and allied governments were informed of the visit and their
cooperation and pertinent informational support was solicited. From this date through the
2d of July daily information reports were furnished to the State Department, the Secret
Service, the FBI and the military services.
That is from the 1st of June to the 2d of July, a period of 31, 32
days. On the 8th of June the Secret Service advance party was briefed in detail by a group
of officers of the Agency on the Mexican government's plans for the protection of the
President, including current information on the size, strength and capabilities of
potential troublemakers.
Hazardous locations and times in the planned itinerary were identified,
political and economic issues that might be invoked by hostile elements for demonstrations
were specified.
On the 11th of June, the Secret Service advance party left for Mexico
supported by additional security personnel to assist in coordinating an informational
report and the followup activity required.
Especially prepared national intelligence estimates on the current
security conditions in Mexico was approved by the United States Intelligence Board on the
13th of June.
On the 15th of June arrangements were completed to reenforce
communications facilities. On the 24th of June a conference at the State Department was
held at the request of the President for reviewing security measures, and this meeting I
attended personally, and reported to the State Department on the essence of all that had
gone before.
Emergency contingency plans were discussed and a consensus was reached
that the President should make the visit as scheduled.
124
Page 125
On the 27th of June, a final updated special national intelligence
estimate was prepared, and this indicated no basic changes in the security assessment that
Mexican government was prepared to cope with foreseeable security contingencies.
On the 28th of June, a final briefing report was prepared for the
Director's use which indicated the security precautions of the Mexican government had
effectively forestalled major organized incidents, and our informed estimate was that the
President would receive a great welcome.
The report was presented to the President personally by the Director at
noon in a final meeting prior to departure on this trip.
From the 29th of June to the 2d of July in Washington headquarters,
headquarters components remained on a 24-hour alert for close support of the embassy and
the Secret Service.
So, not only was the Central Intelligence Agency and its various
components involved in this for a period of 2 months in close collaboration with the
Secret Service, but by bringing in the United States Intelligence Board we brought in all
of the intelligence assets of the United States Government in connection with this
particular trip. I thought this procedure which is followed regularly on all trips that
the President makes out of the country would be of interest to the Commission.
The CHAIRMAN. That is the normal format of your procedures?
Mr. McCONE. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. When the President goes abroad?
Mr. McCONE. Yes, I selected this one. The same was true of his trip to
Caracas or Paris or elsewhere.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, in your investigation of the Oswald matter did
you use the same approach or a comparable approach to a liaison with the other
intelligence agencies of government to try to discover anything that might involve your
jurisdiction.
Mr. McCONE. Yes. We were in very close touch with the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and with the Secret Service on a 24-hour basis at all points, both domestic
and foreign, where information had been received which might have a bearing on this
problem.
Mr. RANKIN. Assassination?
Mr. McCONE. Assassination.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an opinion, Mr. McCone, as to whether or not
the liaison between the intelligence agencies of the United States Government might be
improved if they had better mechanical, computer or other facilities of that type, and
also some other ideas or methods of dealing with each other?
Mr. McCONE. There is a great deal of improvement of information that
might be of importance in a matter of this kind through the use of computers and
mechanical means of handling files, and you, Mr. Chief Justice, saw some of our
installations and that was only a beginning of what really can be done.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I did.
Mr. McCONE. I would certainly urge that all departments of government
that are involved in this area adopt the most modern methods of automatic data processing
with respect to the personnel files and other files relating to individuals. This would be
helpful. But I emphasize that a computer will not replace the man, and therefore, we must
have at all levels a complete exchange of information and cooperation between agencies
where they share this responsibility, and in going through this chronology, it points out
the type of exchange and cooperation that the Central Intelligence Agency tries to afford
both the Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in matters where we have a
common responsibility.
I would like to emphasize the very great importance of this exchange,
which is not always easily accomplished because it is cumbersome.
Sometimes it becomes involved in distracting people from other duties,
and so on and so forth.
I have given a good deal of thought to the matter of some incentives to
bring out informers, thinking about the old informer statutes in which some of them are
still on the books, in which people were rewarded for informing when others conducted
themselves in a damaging way.
125
Page 126
Mr. DULLES. Smuggling cases?
Mr. McCONE. Smuggling cases. But I believe that something could be
done. I call to the attention of this Commission one of the laws relating to atomic
energy, namely the Atomic Weapons Reward Act of 15 July 1955 wherein a substantial reward
is offered for the apprehension of persons responsible for the clandestine introduction or
manufacture in the United States of such nuclear material or atomic weapons. It is
suggested that the Commission may wish to recommend that original but similar legislation
be enacted which would induce individuals to furnish information bearing on Presidential
security by offering a substantial reward and preferential treatment. Substantial reward
could represent a significant inducement even to staff officers and personnel of secret
associations and state security organs abroad who are charged with assassination and
sabotage. We have information that such personnel and police state apparatuses have
expressed. and, in certain cases, acted upon their repugnance for such work and for the
political system which requires such duties to be performed.
Mr. RANKIN. Is it your belief, Mr. McCone, that the methods for
exchange of information between intelligence agencies of the Government could be
materially improved.
Mr. McCONE. I think the exchange between the Central Intelligence
Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the Secret Service is quite adequate. I
am not informed as to whether the exchanges between the Secret Service and the FBI are
equally adequate. I have not gone into that. I would have no means to know. Certainly it
is most important that it be done.
Mr. DULLES. Looking back now that you have the full record, do you feel
that you received from the State Department adequate information at the time that they
were aware of Oswald's defection and later activities in the Soviet Union, did you get at
the time full information from the State Department on those particular subjects?
Mr. McCONE. Well, I am not sure that we got full information, Mr.
Dulles. The fact is we had very little information in our files.
Mr. HELMS. It was probably minimal.
Representative FORD. Why did that happen?
Mr. HELMS. I am not sure, Mr. Ford. I can only assume that the State
Department had a limited amount. Interestingly enough, it is far enough back now so that
it's very hard to find people who were in the Moscow Embassy at the time familiar with the
case, so in trying to run this down one comes to a lot of dead ends and I, therefore,
would not like to hazard any guess.
Representative FORD. Whose responsibility is it; is it CIA's
responsibility to obtain the information or State Department's responsibility to supply it
to Central Intelligence and to others.
Mr. McCONE. With respect to a U.S. citizen who goes abroad, it is the
responsibility of the State Department through its various echelons, consular service and
embassies and so forth.
For a foreigner coming into the United States, who might be of
suspicious character, coming here for espionage, subversion, assassination and other acts
of violence, we would, and we do exchange this information immediately with the FBI.
Representative FORD. But in this particular case, Oswald in the Soviet
Union, whose responsibility was it to transmit the information, whatever it was, to the
Central Intelligence Agency?
Mr. McCONE. Well, it would be the State Department's responsibility to
do that. Whether there really exists an order or orders that information on an American
citizen returning from a foreign country be transmitted to CIA, I don't believe there are
such regulations which exist.
Mr. HELMS. I don't believe they do, either.
Mr. McCONE. I am not sure they should.
Representative FORD. It wouldn't be your recommendation that you, the
head of Central Intelligence Agency, should have that information?
Mr. DULLES. In a case of an American defecting to a Communist country,
shouldn't you have it?
Mr. McCONE. Certainly certain types of information. What we ought to be
126
Page 127
careful of here, would be to rather clearly define the type of information which should be
transmitted, because after all, there are hundreds of thousands or millions of Americans
going back and forth every year, and those records are the records of the Immigration
Service, the Passport Division.
Mr. DULLES. I was thinking of a person who having defected might, of
course, have become an agent and then reinserted into the United States and if you were
informed of the first steps to that you might help to prevent the second step.
Mr. McCONE. Well, certainly information on defectors or possible
recruitments should be, and I have no question is being, transmitted.
Representative FORD. What I was getting at was whether the procedures
were adequate or inadequate, whether the administration was proper or improper in this
particular case, and if some files you have that started when he attempted to defect are
inadequate why we ought to know, and we ought to know whether the basic regulations were
right or wrong, whether the administration was proper or improper, that is what I am
trying to find out. I would like your comment on it.
Mr. McCONE. Well, I think the basic regulations should be examined very
carefully to be sure that they are copper-riveted down and absolutely tight. What I am
saying, however, is because of the vast number of Americans who go abroad and stay in
foreign countries for indefinite periods of time, it would be an impossible task to
transmit all information available in the State department and Immigration Service as
files to the Central Intelligence Agency. It would not be a productive exercise. What must
be transmitted and is being transmitted, while I cannot recite the exact regulations is
information that is, becomes, known to the various embassies of suspicious Americans that
might have been recruited and defected, and then returned so that they would be agents in
place.
Representative FORD. In this case, Oswald attempted to defect, he did
not, he subsequently sought the right to return to the United States, he had contact with
the Embassy. Was the Central Intelligence Agency informed of these steps, step by step, by
the Department of State?
Mr. McCONE. You might answer that.
Mr. HELMS. Mr. Ford, in order to answer this question precisely I would
have to have the file in front of me. I have not looked at it in some time so I don't have
it all that clearly in mind. But it is my impression that we were not informed step by
step. When I say that there is no requirement that I am aware of that the State Department
should inform us and when I said a moment ago that we had minimal information from them,
this was not in any sense a critical comment but a statement of fact.
But an American going to the American Embassy would be handled by the
Embassy officials, either consular or otherwise. This would be a matter well within the
purview of the State Department to keep all the way through, because we do not have
responsibility in the Central Intelligence Agency for the conduct or behavior or anything
else of American citizens when they are abroad unless there is some special consideration
applying to an individual, or someone in higher authority requests assistance from us. So
that the State Department, I think, quite properly would regard this matter as well within
their purview to handle themselves within the Embassy or from the Embassy back to the
Department of State without involving the Agency in it while these events were occurring.
Representative FORD. I think it could be argued, however, that the
uniqueness of this individual case was such that the Department of State might well have
contacted the Central Intelligence Agency to keep them abreast of the developments as they
transpired. This is not--and when I say this, I mean the Oswald case---is not an ordinary
run-of-the-mill-type of case. It is far from it. Even back in the time, well, from the
time he went, and particularly as time progressed, and he made application to return,
there is nothing ordinary about the whole situation.
Mr. McCONE. That is quite correct; there is no question about that.
Representative FORD. And I am only suggesting that if the regulations
were not adequate at the time and are not now, maybe something ought to be done about it.
127
Page 128
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, when you said that supplying all of the
information about U.S. citizens who went abroad and came back to the country would not be
a profitable exercise, did that comment include the thought that such an intrusion upon
all citizens would be questionable?
Mr. McCONE. Such an intrusion?
Mr. RANKIN. Upon their right to travel.
Mr. McCONE. Well, I think this would have a bearing on it. I did not
have that particular matter in mind when I made that statement, however. I was just
thinking of the----
Mr. RANKIN. Burden?
Mr. McCONE. Of the burden of vast numbers involved.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any thought in regard to whether it would be an
intrusion upon their rights?
Mr. McCONE. Well, that would be a matter of how it was handled.
Certainly, if it was handled in a way that the counterpart of providing the information
was to impose restrictions on them, then it would be an intrusion on their rights.
Mr. RANKIN. Yes.
Senator COOPER. May I inquire?
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper.
Senator COOPER. I missed the first part of Mr. McCone's testimony; I
went to answer a quorum call. Perhaps the question has been asked. It has been brought
into evidence that a number of people in the Embassy talked to Oswald when he first
defected and the various communications with the Embassy and, of course, when he left to
come back to the United States. Have we been able to ascertain the names of officials in
the Embassy or employees with whom Oswald talked on these various occasions?
Mr. McCONE. I am not familiar with them; no.
Mr. HELMS. Neither am I, sir.
Mr. McCONE. I presume that the Department's inquires have covered it.
Senator COOPER Is it possible to ascertain the names of those
employees?
Mr. RANKIN. Senator Cooper, I can answer that. We have inquired of the
State Department for that information, and are in the process of obtaining it all.
Senator COOPER Taking into consideration your answers to the previous
question, would it have been possible in your judgment to have secured more comprehensive
information about the activities of Oswald in Russia?
Mr. McCONE. It would not have been possible for the Central
Intelligence Agency to have secured such information because we do not have the resources
to gain such information.
The CHAIRMAN. Anything more? Congressman Ford?
Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency investigate
any aspects of Oswald's trip to Mexico?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; we did.
Representative FORD. Can you give us any information on that?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; we were aware that Oswald did make a trip to Mexico
City and it was our judgment that he was there in the interest of insuring transit
privileges and that he made contact with the Cuban Embassy while he was there.
We do not know the precise results of his effort, but we assumed,
because he returned to the United States, he was unsuccessful. We have examined to every
extent we can and using all resources available to us every aspect of his activity and we
could not verify that he was there for any other purpose or that his trip to Mexico was in
any way related to his later action in assassinating President Kennedy.
Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency make any
investigation of any alleged connection between Oswald and the Castro government?
Mr. McCONE. Yes; we investigated that in considerable detail, because
information came to us through a third party that he had carried on a rather odd
discussion with Cuban officials in the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City. The allegation was
that he had received under rather odd circumstances a substantial amount of money in the
Cuban Embassy, and the statement was made by one who claimed to have seen this transaction
take place. After a very thorough
128
Page 129
and detailed examination of the informer, it finally turned out by the informer's own
admission that the information was entirely erroneous, and was made for the purpose of
advancing the informer's own standing with the Central Intelligence Agency and the U.S.
Government and it was subsequently retracted by the informer in its entirety.
Representative FORD. Was there any other evidence or alleged
evidence----
Mr. McCONE. Parenthetically, I might add a word for the record that the
date that the informer gave as to the date in time of this alleged transaction was
impossible because through other, from other, information we determined that Oswald was in
the United States at that particular time.
Representative Form. Did the Central Intelligence Agency ever make an
investigation or did it ever check on Mr. Ruby's trip to Cuba or any connections he might
have had with the Castro government?
Mr. McCONE. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. HELMS. We had no information.
Mr. McCONE. We had no information.
Representative FORD. Central Intelligence Agency has no information of
any connections of Ruby to the Castro government?
Mr. McCONE. That is right.
Representative FORD. Did you ever make a check of that?
Mr. HELMS. We checked our records to see if we had information and
found we did not.
Representative FORD. What would that indicate, the fact that you
checked your records?
Mr. HELMS. That would indicate that if we had received information from
our own resources, that the Cubans were involved with Mr. Ruby in something which would be
regarded as subversive, we would then have it in our files. But we received no such
information, and I don't, by saying this, mean that he did not. I simply say we don't have
any record of this.
Representative FORD. That is all.
The CHAIRMAN. Director, thank you very much, sir, for coming and being
with us and we appreciate the help your department has given to us.
(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)