Mr. Coleman. And we think, from what we know, that as of June 24 or 25 no one looked at the file, so, therefore, there is no reason why the passport wouldn't go out.
Mr. Seeley. I would presume from looking at this file, that that is absolutely correct.
Mr. Coleman. But our problem is that if on June 24 or June 25 someone had looked at the file, would you have issued the passport based upon what was in the file as of June 24 or 25, or would you have at least talked to people to see whether some action should be taken?
Mr. Seeley. If I had seen this application on June 24 or 25, before it had been issued, I think I probably would have discussed it. But that would have been the end of it. We have no basis upon which to deny him or hold up his passport. There would have been a discussion.
Mr. Coleman. Are you saying, then, it is your opinion that after reviewing the file that if the request for a passport had come in and you had looked at the file before the passport was issued, there was no regulation or legal basis on which you could refuse him a passport?
Mr. Seeley. That is correct. That is absolutely correct.
Mr. Coleman. And, therefore, I take it then, that the only additional information you got in the October CIA telegram was that he was in Mexico City, and he had visited the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.
Mr. Seeley. That is correct.
Mr. Coleman. And it is your position that he had the right to go back to Russia if he wanted to go anyway; is that correct?
Mr. Seeley. Yes, sir.