I would trust the Source 1 i.e., the “Sworn testimony by American Sergeant in Congressional hearings in 1969” more because a sworn testimony is a gold evidence for the Congressional hearings. It won’t affect a person i.e., the Sergeant in any way. Maybe the testimony can get corrupted by lying, forcing and constraining, and the shaking the human memory. But in a speech by the General can affect his reputation as he can hid the truth and lie in his speech. So, the sworn testimony is more reliable than the speech.
when France's expansion into the Ohio River valley brought repeated conflict with the claims of the British colonies, a series of battles led to the official British
