Source 1: Sworn testimony by American Sergeant in Congressional hearings

in 1969.

Source 2: Speech by American General touring the United States in 1969.

Which do you trust more? Why?

I trust "Source 1"

Explanation:

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.