Segment 20 Of 22 Previous Hearing Segment(19) Next Hearing Segment(21)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1532 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And I ask that—maybe you can provide me a narrative answer. It is my understanding that the materials in the WHCA files—it is my understanding from your answers to earlier questions that many of the materials are listed by a date or an event name; and if there was material pertaining to an individual, there might be no record of that individual, and it would be known by everybody searching the materials there might be no record of the individual in the database.
Answer. Well, let me see if I understand your question, and try to answer it.
The issue is that, yes, in the audiovisual world, the date is the best thing to use when you are searching through it. However, there are titles in there. I don't know specifically if there are names, unless it is a name of an event, and the event might have a name of an organization, et cetera, okay?
But as to the other databases, the mainframe computers and the servers that—and the comm center database, as far as message traffic, and those types of databases, could possibly have names. So the dates are significant, and I think probably may have more meaning to the audiovisual and the—the audiovisual world as far as video- and audiotapes or the name of an event.
Question. Apart from the materials that are provided as attachment A, that we are looking at right now, did you ever receive, in the basic time frame of the April document request, any other information or instructions to either clarify or amplify this document request?
Page 1533 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No, sir, as far as I know.
Question. As far as you know, this is it?
Answer. As far as I know, this was it.
Question. Do you know whether your office ever made a request of Counsel's Office or anybody at the White House to provide any more clarifying information or any information that would help assist with searching for the material requested in this document request?
Answer. I do not. And I will amplify that question and my answer. If my organization receives and I rest assured they received attachment A, they would conduct a search as they had other correspondence from the Counsel's Office, and this was the only one where something did surface, so they probably would have said, well, it wasn't an exercise in futility.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. All I was going to say is, your question suggested that it was unclear when they got this. You said, seek clarification.
Mr. WILSON. That is an unfair implication, which I don't mean to leave. I am just wondering, and I will explain because it is hard to ask the question in one sentence.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Page 1534 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. In retrospect, as we have received copies of tapes that involved coffees, it strikes me as being very difficult—if you are trying to find a particular individual in one of the tapes, or as the subject matter of one of the tapes, it would be very difficult to find that, searching through the database, unless you actually viewed the tape or unless the database was so comprehensive as to have a list of all the individuals within the event.
So I am just sort of getting at the overview of when whoever was doing the searching looked at this, attachment A, and made a decision that they were going to do a search in a certain way, whether there was any other back and forth between your office and the people doing the search for your office or other offices in the White House, whether somebody said at any point in the process, it would be very difficult for us to know whether we have any information about individual A unless we know the date they came to the White House or more information.
And so I am just trying to bring out whether you know of any additional communications between either your office and the White House or any offices within WHCA to provide a full search for the information requested.
Answer. I know of no additional information or discussion on that.
Question. Once the search for information requested in the April 28th communication was completed, if you could, please describe the certification process or what WHCA did to indicate that it had completed that search and complied with the search.
Page 1535 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. I believe that there was an E-mail or a facsimile—it had to be handled a little bit differently because of the classified nature, and that's the only reason this particular memo comes to mind. We had alerts, the White House Military Office, and there was a form that we had to fill out as far as releasing this classified traffic because it would accompany a packet that was going to be enclosed and ultimately sent back to the general Counsel's Office. So I know there was correspondence from us back to the White House Military Office.
Question. Was that exclusively E-mail communication?
Answer. No, I'm not sure—I doubt if it would be E-mail, because of the nature of the messages and so forth. But I don't know specifically how it got back, but I know that it did.
Question. And that's because of the classified nature of the material?
Answer. That's right.
Question. That you would not have transferred that through E-mail?
Answer. That's right.
Question. Have you conducted any search of your files to determine or try to reconstruct what went on between your office and any office in the White House?
Page 1536 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Well, when this issue surfaced, I didn't even know about an April 28th memo because you don't carry dates in your head. And then someone said it was a four-page document and also that it had a cover memorandum from the Chief of Staff of the White House Military Office attached to it. And in my discussions with Colonel Campbell, he doesn't remember it, however, the list was in our file when we looked through it. A list of names and entities, and that was all that was there. And as far as his—and also his E-mail directing the other units within my organization to conduct a search on the attached names.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. Excuse me, was your question what did they do to show that they had done the search, certifying the search?
Mr. WILSON. Well, the question was just, subsequent to the tape issue coming to light, had either yourself our your deputy gone back and reconstructed in your files the exchanges between WHCA and the White House vis-a-vis this first document request.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. By the White House, do you include the White House Military Office or do you mean agencies other than the White House Military Office?
Mr. WILSON. I include any organization subsumed under the White House umbrella.
The WITNESS. Okay. Are you talking about when this was done?
Mr. WILSON. Yes.
Page 1537 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
The WITNESS. Okay. I know that the White House Military Office was notified about the results of this particular search, as other searches, because, and you will have to ask Colonel Campbell, I believe that he usually sent an E-mail back to the White House Military Office saying we have conducted a search. Because the memo that would accompany this from the White House Military Office would ask for a reply, either positive or negative, and negative replies were required.
[Simmons Deposition Exhibit No. JS–5 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. If you could take just a moment to review a compilation of pages that have been marked Exhibit JS–5. The first page is dated April 29. There are four pages in this document.
Answer. Okay.
Question. And bearing in mind that these are documents that come from different locations and that they don't include your name, I'm trying to get a sense of the certification process, WHCA's certification that it in fact completed searching for material that had been requested in the April 28 communication.
If you could, just give us an overview, a narrative of what the certification process entailed and how the documents that you have in front of you, these four pages, fit into the certification process.
Page 1538 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. I can't really speak to that, only because the deputy handled it, and I know that they were done and I was apprised of it if something did surface. I don't believe that's unusual in a military organization. I believe he would be the best person to speak with as far as what type of certification process.
I had, during the course of looking at this, of seeing some E-mails from members of our organization saying that they had a negative reply, as far as that. And I know—and I believe, as thorough as my deputy is, he would compile all that and then transmit something back to the White House Military Office via either E-mail or facsimile.
Question. Is it fair to say that your involvement in the certification process was limited to being told that the searches had been conducted?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Or that they had been completed and material responsive had been in fact forwarded to the White House?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Do you remember any or did you have any other conversations about certification, or do you remember anything else about it?
Answer. No.
Page 1539 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Was there ever any discussion about whether or not materials would have to actually be brought from the archives to be reviewed in order to check on whether compliance with the subpoena was completed or not?
Answer. I'm not familiar with any discussions about materials being brought from archives, no.
Let me go back and make sure I understand. You are talking about at that time; right?
Question. At the time; correct.
Answer. In April, no. Or previous other memoranda.
Question. And sort of the simplest way of looking at this is to think of it in terms of anybody coming to you, or anybody you know of, and saying we can't really comply with this unless we pull out all our material from the archives, review it and decide whether the people involved or the companies involved, corporations involved are in the tapes.
The question is directed at that, whether anybody came and said this is going to be really difficult for us to comply with without doing a lot more work.
Answer. You act like my agency is just one big video and audio agency. It is not. There are so many other pieces and parts. The information services that we provide are huge, so the searches—I know—I feel very confident that these searches were done, and I even feel more confident about this 28 April memo, that a search was done on attachment A, because documents surfaced. Those searches were conducted and people will do exactly what they are told.
Page 1540 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Now, in the video and audio world, they would also do those searches. And the only reason I know that is I asked them, and I have no reason to doubt them.
Now, the thing is, when you just know a small piece of a big picture, it's very difficult when you are a repository of many databases. So it seems like someone would sit down with you and discuss how they want to retrieve certain materials, if you wanted to do certain things.
And that's me speaking, and, yes, Monday morning quarterbacking and thinking about it now, because we can do these types of searches, and we will do them very rigorously, but if we don't know how it plays into the full picture, then you might not get the type of information you want.
Question. And that's what I'm trying to draw out here.
Answer. Maybe I'm going overboard.
Question. No, that's what I want to derive, and it is difficult to ask in a simple question.
But in retrospect, when you look at what has been received and the types of requests that were made, it seems to me that it is difficult to obtain information without actually having reviewed some of the underlying material. And I just, I don't have any experience with the database.
Page 1541 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Right. Well, there are numerous databases in the White House Communications Agency, and the only ones that were not generating hits at the time were the ones in the audiovisual unit, which is our topic of discussion right now.
Every one, and even they went through the process, but you weren't—you didn't retrieve what you have right now, and it would have required—one memo like this would not have done it. You would have to sit down with us and discuss the entire situation, and that's it, point-blank. So that then we can size the requirement and say, oh, we have these different types of databases. Well, you need to give me some dates and some events, because I'm not going to be able to do this on an audiovisual piece.
Now, I can search through here, and I would do a name search on an audiovisual piece just in case a name came up, but if you really want to know, I have people that film that have no idea who is in attendance. So I need a date, if you can cite a date. And, ultimately, that's how these tapes were derived, dates were given, events were specified and, bam, it happened.
So if someone had laid out the full thing to us, this whole issue would not have surfaced. So we weren't brought in, and I'm just speaking from the heart, the way that I think that we should have, and the agency has taken a lot of hits before that, and I think unfairly. And when someone just brought you into a small piece and said look at this, and we did, we did the job. We didn't—we don't hit wrong keys at WHCA. We'd be out of a job.
So we did what we were told. We thought that was sufficient. We certainly felt good about this memo because something did happen. And until now, you know, I really don't understand it, and I'm probably getting a little bit too emotional, but you have got—any communicator knows that in order to support his commander he has to understand the intent. If you don't give me that, I can't provide the communications you need or the support.
Page 1542 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Following from the April 28th communication and the materials that you provided, did you receive any ensuing requests or information from the White House about that document request? Was there anything that followed up from that?
Answer. This?
Question. That's the next thing.
Answer. To my knowledge, no, sir, I did not.
Question. And prior to relatively recently, when White House counsel did come back to WHCA and did ask for additional information, was there any other communication from the material we've looked at in Exhibit JS–5 to the first time White House counsel came back and made such a request about coffee tapes?
Answer. Let me make sure I understand. The only reason I remember this correspondence is because there were some hits on it that we compiled during our search.
Until August, and the only reason I remember that date is because I was coming back from Martha's Vineyard, it was August 29th, my chief of operations officer, Mr. Smith, told me that he had a meeting with Mike Imbroscio and there seemed to be some concerns.
And I didn't—you know, I trust my operations officer. He said he had to go to a meeting, and I understand, and I left it at that. And it was from the Counsel's Office. And only through subsequent conversations with him did I determine that—I can't give you the exact time frame, the exact dates, but I will start with the 29th of August because I remember that's the first time.
Page 1543 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. If you could keep going with the narrative.
Answer. Right, 29th of August is when I heard the name Mike Imbroscio and a meeting, and as a result of some discussions, and I can't give the date, we're at the end of August so it had to be sometime in September, I was told by Mr. Smith there was a question from him if we did any clandestine taping or recording, and the answer would be no, as I stated to you.
And then there were some discussions—the next date that I can give you was 30 September. I had returned from a meeting in the White House and Mr. Imbroscio and Mr. Smith were discussing an issue, and they were just wrapping up their session, and that's when Mr. Smith told me that the issue of tapes came up. And this is the first time that it was brought to my attention that we had a concern about videotapes. Tapes in general, I will say that.
Question. Where was the meeting between Imbroscio and Smith?
Answer. It was in Room 592 in the Old Executive Office Building.
Question. And at that time did you have a clear understanding or did anybody give you a clear understanding of what the White House was asking for in terms of giving them WHCA material?
Answer. My understanding of that discussion that Mr. Smith had with him, I believe that Mr. Imbroscio understood that we had a database and that you give us a date or a specific event, and realizing the date, we could probably see if we had the information that was being requested, and he offered him the opportunity to see that, that database.
Page 1544 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And later on, and I believe it was 1 October, is when he actually sat down and started putting in dates and events and started getting hits.
Question. Do you know whether prior to that time any media representatives had ever made requests about material that WHCA kept pertaining to coffees or any of the campaign finance investigation subject matter?
Answer. At least none of those requests were funneled directly to me. Now, you know, my audiovisual people, as I have stated before, are in contact with media people, and you would have to ask the supervisors, but that's usually not the norm for them to request from us.
Question. Does WHCA have a media relations office or an office that deals with the media?
Answer. No, we do not have an office other than we interface with the media affairs in the Press Office of the White House. The White House Press Office.
Question. Your narrative was good because it allowed me to go through a lot of questions here and eliminate them. So that is a positive thing.
From the time that Mr. Imbroscio and Mr. Smith were talking to each other about possible responsive material and videos kept by WHCA, who was involved from that point on in the responses to White House Counsel's requests?
Page 1545 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. What time frame?
Question. From September 30th through the ultimate copying of the tapes.
Answer. Legions of people.
Question. That's going to be a lot of people?
Answer. That's going to be a lot of people.
Question. But to the extent you can direct towards offices or supervisors, Smith——
Answer. The supervisors would be, well, Mr. Smith is my chief of operations, who had the discussion with him; Chief Petty Officer McGrath, Staff Sergeant VanKareun, and a staff sergeant—those would be the main ones that would be involved. And then there are legions of other troops that make this whole thing happen.
Question. And I think it would be quite helpful, actually, if you could continue the narrative from the time Imbroscio and Smith were talking through the searches and up until the point where materials were copied. If you could provide additional narrative on that, it would be very helpful.
Page 1546 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Okay. I know that the issues of tapes came up the first of October, and didn't really hear anything until the following week and then there was—that's when I was informed about an April 28th memo by the Counsel's Office and it said that it had coffees in it. And I said I don't remember anything and all of this.
I guess a lot of people were upset. I was upset because it looked like it was being projected that we were holding back tapes, and that is not the issue at all. The issue is that we were responsive to the request and we provided that.
And then it was decided that the tapes needed to be retrieved, and so we just conducted—pulled everyone in in the audiovisual unit, in the event productions, and went up to master control. We had several interfaces with the White House Counsel; more people—I didn't know they had so many people. Every time I turned around it was a different face. And they were asking to understand—and this was all during the week of the 7th, I think, through the 10th. Or 6th through the 10th. Maybe the 5th. I'm a little fuzzy. But, anyway, through that period, and we started retrieving material.
We had to put guys through 24 hours almost nonstop, getting two and three hours sleep. And we have reviewed, that I know of, over 600 some tapes. These are Beta cam tapes.
Question. And when you state we reviewed, was that reviewing the tapes——
Answer. We retrieved the tapes from the archives and members of the White House Counsel viewed them and identified the ones that they wanted.
Page 1547 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. And where did the viewing take place?
Answer. That was all conducted on the fifth floor in the master control facilities in the Old Executive Office Building, my facility.
Question. Did WHCA have, or at least WHCA personnel have custody of the tapes at all times during the review process?
Answer. Yes, we did. And as a compilation, when we compiled all the tapes, and the ones that were identified by the counsel, my people went through a process of converting those Beta tapes to VHS, which is a lengthy process. I'm sure Chief Petty Officer McGrath will take you through it step by step, and the labeling.
And as a result, the initial number was 66. Because you can—the Beta tape is usually 30 minutes. And when you put it through our devices, you can load four hours' worth of Beta tapes onto one single tape and then eventually dub it to a VHS tape. And we signed, we identified all those tapes by number in conjunction with the counsel and had a chain of custody inventory of which we now have record of.
Question. Where did the copying take place?
Answer. It took place up in my master control facility on the fifth floor.
Question. Just to finish off on sort of the pre-coffee controversy period, the April 28th memo was sent out and received, or received in part. Between that time and the time that material was copied and produced to congressional and Department of Justice, to the extent it was produced to the Department of Justice, was any other campaign finance related investigatory material produced to anybody?
Page 1548 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Between the period of your furnishing information pursuant to the April 28th correspondence and the tapes that have recently been provided.
Answer. To my knowledge, no.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. You need to clarify what you know or don't know about the production from the Counsel's Office to the agencies.
The WITNESS. Oh, I don't know about that. I only know as far as WHCA. From the time we sent our correspondence back to the White House Military Office, reference this memo, which I believe was the 4th or 5th of May—and the only reason I know that is because we were one day ahead of their suspense, and I guess the first of October, when we knew about the tapes. And then the following week when we started copying the tapes, we didn't provide, to the best of my knowledge, any other material to the Counsel's Office.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Correct me if I'm wrong, my understanding from what you have said is that once you provided that material and the certifications were made, that was the end of WHCA's involvement in document requests until the next requests were made?
Answer. Well, really, until the 29th of August. Then it seemed that—and the only reason I cite that is because it seemed around the 29th of August we had not heard anything from the Counsel's Office relative to what we do.
Page 1549 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Turning your attention again briefly to the April 29 JS–5 material, is the final page of that, which is from Alan Sullivan to Charles Ruff, would that be considered the certification made on behalf of WHCA?
Answer. Yes. See, as you know, WHCA has other entities involved, and when a tasking comes to the White House Military Office, it usually involves the entire military office. They disseminate that tasking to each entity that resides under the White House Military Office's umbrella, and this is the authentication that would go back to the White House saying that it was done.
Question. So was Alan Sullivan the principal signatory for correspondence between WHCA and the White House in an official nature of this kind? He was the final sign-off on this type of certification?
Answer. From our perspective, yes, sir.
Question. Do you know who was involved from White House staff in reviewing the WHCA materials that were reviewed from the beginning of October on?
I say that because I don't want to limit it to just—well, let me divide it up into two things, the audiovisual tapes and then the audio tapes, and we can talk about them in a moment.
But as far as the audiovisual tapes are concerned, who from White House Counsel's Office was involved in reviewing those tapes?
Page 1550 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Involved, as you are saying, looking at the tapes and sitting down?
Question. Yes.
Answer. You would have to ask my people exactly. I can only tell you the people that I have discoursed with in the Counsel's Office. But I did not physically see them sitting down viewing the tapes.
Question. Do you know whether any non-White House Counsel's Office personnel were involved in reviewing any of the tapes?
Answer. I usually try to stay away from absolutes, but when this whole incident surfaced, there is a Sergeant, first class Dixon who is, as I'm sure you can relate to this when you talk to him, he is OD green. I walk into a room and he snaps.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. Can you say that again.
The WITNESS. Okay. Olive drab green. That describes Army because of the uniform.
He comes to attention. And when you talk to him he's always at attention. I have to put him at ease and say ''Stand at ease, Sergeant Dixon.'' But it is not an act, it's just the way he is.
Page 1551 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
I told him, I said, Sergeant Dixon, don't let anybody in that master control facility that is not a member of the White House General Counsel. He says, yes, sir, I got it.
I received a call from Sergeant Dixon. He said, ''Sir, the counsel wants to bring in some Senate investigators to review it.'' I said, ''Sergeant Dixon, you have your orders.'' ''Yes, sir.'' They went away.
So I feel fairly sure, and my organization functions on trust, that only counsel people got in there, outside of the people that work in that setting, because Sergeant Dixon, if you ever met him, he's a tough nut.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Do you know when that exchange took place?
Answer. I can't remember the date. I just know that I gave the order and he gave me a call when someone made a request out of the norm and I told him no and he said—it had to be during—it wouldn't be during this week, or it would have been last week or the week before last?
Answer. Prior to——
Answer. Well, we're in this week. So last week.
Page 1552 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Kind of hard to know what week we're in now exactly.
Answer. Right.
Question. But just trying to key in on that specifically. Prior to——
Answer. When they were reviewing the tapes and requesting these, right as we were beginning to do it, and there was a request made and I had outlined to him that no one, and had talked to the Counsel's Office, and I spoke directly to Cheryl Mills. She said, no, only White House Counsel people and that's it.
Question. And do you know who the individuals were that the attempt was made to bring in?
Answer. Well, I believe they—and let me clarify that. A member from the Counsel's Office made a request to see if they could do it. The individuals were not standing outside the door, because there had to be a whole process to get there, but asked if we could. And then Sergeant Dixon, as dutiful as he is, called me up direct. I called to the Counsel's Office and spoke to Cheryl Mills personally and she said no, and that was it.
Mr. WILSON. Can we go off the record for just a moment, please.
[Discussion off the record.]
Page 1553 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Mr. WILSON. The record should reflect, and so that you know, this is David Bossie, who is one of the majority committee staff.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Turning your attention to the timing of the release of the tapes, do you know why the tapes were released to different bodies, congressional bodies, at different times, or tapes produced to the media, to different congressional investigative bodies and perhaps to the Department of Justice? Do you know why they were released at different times?
Answer. No, I do not.
Question. Were copies of the tapes made all at the same time so that X number of copies—well, actually, let me ask you that. How many copies of tapes were requested?
Answer. The last number that I was told, and I believe there had been some subsequent, but the last number was 66 and six copies of 66 tapes were made.
The first increment that was delivered to the White House Counsel was 50, and they picked up those 50, which would have been 300, and signed for them. And then the last batch ended up to 66. But I believe, I understand that there has been requests of two. I don't know if it's another tape or what.
Page 1554 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. So that the actual—that's the video—physical copies of the videotapes were all made at the same time?
Answer. Yes.
Question. They weren't made on a rolling basis?
Answer. Well, when the 50 were handed over, they were beyond 50 and ultimately they got to the number 66.
Question. And turning to the audiotapes, how many copies of audiotapes were made?
Answer. I don't know how many copies. I just—I said the number 126, and I don't know if that's times something, what multiple that is or what. But I was told 126 audiotapes.
Question. You mentioned six copies of the body of audiovisual tapes that were made. Did WHCA personnel make multiple copies of the audiotapes as well?
Answer. You would probably have to ask my technician about the audiotapes. My focus was mainly on the video because that was the most intensive effort because of the whole process that had to be set up as far as getting it from a Beta to a VHS, and whereas with an audio it was very easy to dub and you can do it very quickly.
Page 1555 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Who is the one individual that was ultimately in charge of producing the copies of the tapes?
Answer. There was no one—well, I guess, to whom did I—there were two people I spoke to, Chief Petty Officer McGrath and Chief Petty Officer Fischer. Those two technicians can probably tell you just everything.
Fischer is an engineer type. He's the one that—we had a limited number of VHS machines that we could use, and we had another rack in a room, and he even set up a special operation for this and he wired that together. He was the technical piece. But he was also the one that would call me as far as the number of tapes that were being done and where they were and so forth, because there was concern about meeting a deadline, and Chief Petty Officer Fischer kept me apprised of that along with some other senior people. I had majors, lieutenant colonels in there also. But as far as the technicians that were there from in and out, it would be McGrath and Fischer.
Question. Do you know who made the decision to take individual tapes and record them into a compilation? Take individuals and put them into sort of a multiple tape?
Answer. You would have to ask McGrath and Fischer. That was part of the process.
Question. But that was not something that was discussed?
Page 1556 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No, it wasn't discussed. I knew they were up there and I knew there was viewing going on, but I didn't walk in on the process.
Question. Do you know whether Webster Hubbell appears on any of the tapes that were in WHCA's control?
Answer. I have not viewed the tapes, other than the ones I have seen on television.
Question. Have you either received or had produced a written report of the materials that have been produced to White House Counsel's Office?
Answer. I know there are a chain of custody documents that we have of what we have provided to the White House Counsel.
Question. And does that chain of custody documentation indicate with any specificity what has been provided or is it just listing the date?
Answer. Well, the tapes—let me tell you one process that I was directly involved in. I was involved in delivering 39 original—I won't even say original, because I wasn't in the archives and retrieved them, but they came from the archives. They were in Beta form, 39 of them. I inventoried them personally, Mr. Smith and I, and we hand carried them over to the White House Counsel's Office and inventoried them to show them those and handed them over there.
Page 1557 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And I know that process was implemented throughout with the tapes that I was producing as a result of the screening. And it listed the number on the tape. There is a little serial number. Also matching the number inside the Beta film number. And it listed those numbers and it had a signature for the person who had it and then who we released the chain of custody to.
Question. And you gave those tapes directly to Ms. Mills?
Answer. Certainly did. She even locked them up in the safe.
Question. So at that point the chain of custody, the tapes came out of the archives, you had control, you gave them to Cheryl Mills and she put them in a safe?
Answer. That's right. And I know that for a fact, because when you query Chief Petty Officer McGrath, he called me when those tapes arrived from the archives and I went down there immediately, and we went—Chief McGrath and I did an inventory. There were more inventories done that night than anything. And both of us were involved.
And it was just checking, because we knew there were 39 tapes. And then Mr. Smith, Chief McGrath and I compiled a list and developed this form and did an immediate chain of custody. And this was in conjunction with Cheryl Mills, because she wanted it just like this. She said this is the way to handle it. So it went from—it came from the archives, to us, to counsel.
Page 1558 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. But they had not been reviewed at that time?
Answer. I don't know what the status of those tapes were, but I was just very sensitive about, as any one of our people, and especially with all the discussions about videotapes coming out of the archives, I didn't want anything to happen in between and somebody—so there is a chain of custody for those tapes.
Question. And where did Ms. Mills put the tapes?
Answer. She said that she was going to put them in a safe. I didn't physically see her place them in the safe.
Question. And with those 39 tapes, do you know what happened next to them?
Answer. I understand that they were supposed to go to the Department of Justice.
Question. Now, I'm at a bit of a loss. I'm a bit confused here because here we have tapes coming from the archives through you to Cheryl Mills to a safe to the Department of Justice.
Answer. That was my understanding.
Question. But you hadn't reviewed them at this point and no WHCA personnel had reviewed them at this point; is that correct?
Page 1559 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Those tapes that came from the archives, and you will have to ask Chief McGrath, my understanding they had not been—I won't say—I don't know if bits and pieces of them had been or were the result of the query that Mr. Imbroscio did, because there's a number 44 out there, there's a number 40, but I know I took 39 and that's all that I can vouch for.
There were 39 tapes that I took over to the White House Counsel's Office from the archives. I don't know what the process was, as to why they were asked for and why they had to be over at the Justice Department.
Now, well, things start coming when you start talking. I understand they had to go to Justice—well, I heard a discussion about Justice Department amplifying the audio on some of the Beta cam tapes. I don't know whether they went over there for that purpose or what.
Question. How did those 39, to the extent you know, how did those 39 tapes fit into the universe of tapes that were ultimately reviewed and copied and turned over to congressional committees?
Answer. I guess you'd have to ask Counsel's Office. I have no idea. I was a little bit—I'm still confused about it, but maybe there are certain things that—you know, I just know how the chain of custody came, and I know that the—you can ask McGrath, because I asked him. I was a little—I said we're doing this upstairs, now these are coming from the archives, you know.
Page 1560 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
But I know I was told by—well, I hate to put names on it—Dimitri Nionakis that some tapes coming from the archives had to be at the Department of Justice, and it was the day prior to or the day that Attorney General Reno went and spoke before the House Judiciary Committee. I hope I'm not confusing things.
Question. Well, that was last Tuesday. It was Tuesday of this current week?
Answer. Yes. That was my understanding. But I could—I know that if you talk to the Counsel's Office they could explain it to you. But there was an effort ongoing, and I remember distinctly talking to Dimitri Nionakis, who was concerned about us completing the requirement because I guess initially there was a suspense. And I don't know whether it was extended.
But then Counselor Ruff knew or was apprised of an effort that our people were giving to this whole issue, and you just can't push people nonstop, and so we had to implement sleep hours for them and ensure they received some rest so they could work efficiently and do this job. But Mr. Nionakis stated that the most important, and he even said, Colonel, this is what we must do, is we must get the videotapes that are coming from the archives to the Department of Justice.
And that's when I was informed that, and I informed my Petty Officer McGrath, and he was aware of it, he was already aware of it, he says that's the most important thing; that has to happen. And as far as the time we were taking to go through our process of copying the tapes, this had priority.
Page 1561 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Because these were original——
Answer. I believe they were original.
Question. The original tapes, and they could well be the subset of tapes that had already been reviewed and copied?
Answer. Correct.
Question. And you recall something about the digital enhancement?
Answer. That's right. That's right.
Question. I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but you don't know whether this was part of the Department of Justice's efforts to follow up on materials they already had?
Answer. That's right, I don't know.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. To be clear, it is your recollection that that was around Tuesday of last week?
The WITNESS. Yes.
Page 1562 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Tuesday being about, what, five days ago now?
The WITNESS. Yes. When did Reno go up?
Mr. WILSON. Tuesday.
The WITNESS. Tuesday? So Monday night is, I believe it was Monday night when I took the tapes over to the Counsel's Office. It was the night before. It wasn't the same day.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. And you have a log of the tapes that were transmitted?
Answer. Oh, yes. Oh, yes.
Mr. WILSON. Would it be possible to furnish this committee with a copy of that log, Counsel?
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. I will have to find out.
Mr. WILSON. Okay.
Page 1563 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Just a final area I want to spend a little time on is just the integrity of the tapes that have been turned over to various bodies interested in the tapes.
I was actually going to play you a couple of examples and ask you some questions about those, but are you able to, do you feel you are able to affirm that the tapes that have been provided to this committee are exact copies of what WHCA recorded at the time the tapes were made?
Answer. The only thing that I can affirm to is that, and that's because I have trust in my people, that the copies that were furnished to the counsel were the ones that were there. I can't account for the ones from counsel.
Question. I'm actually not keying in on the 39 specifically.
Answer. No, I'm talking about as far as the handing over of tapes. Here is another number. Sixty-six tapes ultimately to the Counsel's Office. The 66 times 6, I guess is what, 396 tapes. I know how those were done, and I believe my people and what was done was—they did it.
Question. Have you been involved in any conversations about gaps or breaks in any of the taping of the specific events? Have you gone back and specifically been involved in the individual tapes?
Page 1564 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No, I have not.
Question. Have you been part of any discussions involving breaks or gaps in tapes?
Answer. Only through my counsel.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. For the record, I did inform Colonel Simmons of the fact he might be viewing the same tapes that Mr. Sullivan viewed yesterday. To that extent.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Just sort of as an overview. Outside of actually sitting down and looking at tapes with anybody, have you been involved in any conversations about whether the tapes are complete or not complete?
Answer. No, I have not.
Question. Do you know at present whether this committee has everything that WHCA has produced to White House Counsel's Office, that WHCA has produced pursuant to the document requests?
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. Again, he's not involved in the process of the Counsel's Office's producing things to you.
Page 1565 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Fair enough. To summarize, is it fair to say you know what you have given to the White House Counsel's Office but beyond that you have no knowledge of what has happened to the materials, where they have gone and where they have been produced; is that correct?
Answer. No, no, I do not.
Question. If we could, let us just run one of the tapes. Hopefully, technology will not fail us and we will get through this real quickly. Three tapes. The first tape is an excerpt of a conversation between Mr. Riady and President Clinton. It is tape number 63.
Mr. WILSON. Before the tape commences, let me say that we will provide a copy of the tape to Mr. Sparks and we will provide a copy to Minority, and we will provide a copy to the reporter for inclusion in the record as an exhibit.
[Tape played.]
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. That which we were hoping you would have an opportunity to look at is what appears to be a conversation between the President and an individual, and what appears to be a break in the taping and then resumption of taping shortly thereafter.
Page 1566 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
You have testified that you have not seen any of the tapes. Have you had any discussions about this particular example?
Answer. No, I have not.
Question. Do you know of any information indicating any breaks or editing of any of the tapes that have been provided to this committee?
Answer. As it relates to the White House Communications Agency?
Question. Correct.
Answer. Editing; is that your question?
Question. Yes.
Answer. We don't edit tapes. We do not edit tapes. In view of that, you need to understand how they operate, and once you get a technician in here I'm sure they can be a little bit more articulate and succinct about how we film.
They are usually competing for space, because there are people in rooms, and I only know this from traveling with them, and then there are still photographers that just are trying to get the angle of the particulars. So you have someone with a camera that is filming, then all of a sudden somebody will stand right in front.
Page 1567 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And if you notice that someone almost walked directly into the camera, the first one there, so it looks like he probably positioned himself. The only reason I know this is because we had an event on the road and the camera people, they have a very, very difficult job, they set up to film, the still photographers came in and positioned themselves right in front of the camera, and the photographer had to change his angle. And he has a person, in some cases, with him with a boom mike, so they had to move around. And it is almost like you have to fight for space.
So that one looks like he just repositioned himself so that he probably shut his camera off. And the only reason I know that is because I have done a little filming myself, because it looks like it is at a different angle when he is there with the President.
But as a policy, anything we record, as I stated before, is a Presidential record. So we will not do any editing to it. It goes—what is filmed or what is recorded, that's the way it goes to the National Archives. That's it.
Mr. WILSON. Let us set the second one up.
[Tape played.]
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Again, I know you have not seen the tapes, but——
Page 1568 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No.
Question. But this is tape number 64, which was a radio address, labeled as a radio address from March 11, 1995, and again it appears that the tape has been cut off at one point in that.
Discussing earlier radio addresses, you indicated that a lot of the radio addresses were taped audio, actually.
Answer. Yes, it has to be on audio because it goes on a radio address.
Question. Right. Do you know whether the preliminaries to radio addresses were also recorded? What generally was recorded for radio addresses?
Answer. The presidential remarks were what was recorded. What will go in, and Sergeant VanKareun can guide you through it, is they do a test to get a feel for the amplification, but everything is very structured.
There is an announcement, depending on if it's a live address, if it's a live address and it is going to be on air, they make sure that the people in the room, even when it is not live—I have been in a couple of radio addresses—they tell you exactly, they give you a countdown and announce, ''Okay, anybody who has any pagers, turn them off, cell phones, turn them off,'' so that there is no noise, because, you know, all that will be picked up because of the audio portion.
Page 1569 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
So the mike is not live until the crew receives a nod that the President is about to come in, and then he sits down and usually he looks at his text, even though he has seen it before, but he will look through it and then he will say, ''Are we ready?'' And then that is when they hit it and go live. And then, as soon as he finishes, boom, that is it, because we know it is a radio address.
Question. If you could run, the final tape has been numbered in the production we received, Tape No. 4.
[Tape played.]
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Then there is a break in that tape. Have you any suggestions as to why there might be that break, or have you discussed breaks like that?
Answer. No, I have not discussed breaks like that.
Question. Have either yourself or members of your office had any discussions with White House personnel to attempt to refine an official—a story or a uninformed version of events as to why tapes were found recently and not back in March or earlier this year?
Answer. You are saying has anyone from the White House discussed with me why we have not found——
Page 1570 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. No, just——
Answer. Why we didn't find tapes?
Question. Well, discussed the public rationale for the discovery of tapes now and not earlier. Aside from the conversation with Imbroscio, have there been any official meetings to try and come up with a uniform version of what happened with the tapes?
Answer. There have not been any meetings, no.
Okay. Now let me—I am not sure, maybe I don't understand your question. Meetings, I know there have been discussions. You know, people have not come into the room in which the White House Communications Agency is a part, and people sitting around the table, and said, ''What happened?'' That has not been done.
Question. Well, in terms of just discussions, what discussions have taken place?
Answer. Well, when the issue surfaced about the tapes, there was a discussion as to this memo, the 28th of April memo, and that is when it was brought to my mind. I said, ''What memo of the 28th?'' In other words, coffees, this seemed to be the whole thing. He says, ''Well, coffees was mentioned in the April 28th memo.'' And I said, ''I haven't seen the memo that mentioned coffees.'' And so eventually I found out what this 28th of April memo looked like, and it still wouldn't have produced what they wanted.
Page 1571 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Who was involved in that discussion?
Answer. Pardon me?
Question. Who was involved in that discussion?
Answer. Well, I just had some—I talked to the White House Military Office, Lieutenant Colonel Greg Raths, I called Mr. Sullivan up when the date of this memo surfaced. I said, ''They are referring to a 28 April memo, sir.'' I said, ''I haven't received it, at least I haven't seen it, and they are talking about coffees,'' and I said, ''I have never seen a memo that came out and just talked about coffees,'' and so I just—I was at a loss.
I didn't know what was going on, and I knew there was a lot of turmoil being created in saying WHCA all of a sudden had tapes that related to coffees, and it was told to me that they were asked for and the Counsel's Office said that they had forwarded it. And I said, ''I don't even see the memo,'' and I had this discussion with Cheryl Mills, and she can tell you, I was a little upset—more than upset, I was furious, and I said I hadn't seen it.
And so that is the—and I have had discussions with Mr. Smith, and it has sort of just been terrible that something like this would happen. But I am concerned about the White House Communications Agency, our organization, and we are the ones that sort of like, well, they hit the wrong key, when Mr. Ruff said that I wanted to jump through the television and grab him. But it seems like everybody gets air time, talking about June 13, 1996.
Page 1572 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Well, Congressman Zeliff got air time when he said I procured equipment that doesn't fit on a C–141 because someone told him that, the IG. And then when I brought him a picture, frame-by-frame, of it going on a 141, he says, ''Well, that is why we have committee hearings like this, Colonel.'' But it was too late, he had his 15 minutes of fame already on ABC. And now the word is out that WHCA, you know, hit the wrong key, and that is all the people focus on and that is not true.
Question. I have one more question. A couple weeks ago when one of the investigators, one of my colleagues called you up to discuss various matters, he was told that he should contact the chief Counsel's Office at the time. Why was that?
Answer. The White House Communications Agency does not, as a policy, interact with any other agency unless it gets approval from the White House Military Office, and that is just the policy. So before we say anything or give any type of correspondence whatsoever, it has to go through the White House Military Office, and that has always been in existence.
Mr. WILSON. Okay. For right now I have no further questions.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I have a few.
EXAMINATION BY MR. MCLAUGHLIN:
Question. Let me preface my questions by thanking you for coming here. On behalf of the Minority, we appreciate your very forthright and direct answers to the questions posed. And I also just want to note, on behalf of the Minority, we recognize that you have a record of remarkable accomplishment and integrity and service to this country and we thank you for that.
Page 1573 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
I just want to follow up, first of all, on a remark that you just made and sort of ask you about it. In no way do I want to imply that I am aware of any kind of human error on the part of your men. I'm not. There could be all kinds of ways that communications—what somebody thought happened didn't happen, but I want to explore briefly how it might have happened.
To be clear, you know for sure that Attachment A of the April 28th, 1997 directive from Counsel's Office arrived in your office, is that correct?
Answer. Yes, somehow, that is correct.
Question. All right. It arrived one way or another, either by fax, by hard copy?
Answer. Right.
Question. And your assistant, I am blanking on his name?
Answer. Colonel Campbell.
Question. Colonel Campbell recalls seeing Attachment A. He does not recall seeing any of the other 2 pages, either of the other 2 pages of this directive, although he may have. Is that your understanding of this?
Answer. That is my understanding, and the reason he recalls receiving Attachment A, we do a lot of transactions. If someone mentioned this memorandum from general counsel and so forth, we would probably draw a blank. The reason he recalls it is because he has a copy of this e-mail with Attachment A going out, and that is it, the other 2 pages are not there.
Page 1574 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Okay. And to your satisfaction, the men and women under your command did proper searches for the terms and names and entities that are listed on Attachment A?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Had they been requested to do searches of any other matters, any other names, you were confident they would perform those searches, is that correct?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. When a directive like this comes down in e-mail form from Colonel Campbell, it is in the nature of an order, is that correct?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Your organization is military hierarchy?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. And when an order is issued, it is your experience that the men and women under your command follow and execute those orders, is that correct?
Answer. That is correct.
Page 1575 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Now, you stated on the record, and I just want to be careful so we have a clear record, you said something to the effect that had you received this April 28th memo, and I assume by that you mean the first 2 pages of it, and it would not have produced the tapes that are now at issue in this deposition.
Can I direct your attention to Page 2 of the memo? It is Exhibit 4. And let me particularly refer you to the paragraph that is numbered 1(b). Is it your belief that had Colonel Campbell received this page and reviewed these items here, that he would have been able to frame an e-mail to the men and women under your command that would have directed them to find, and I am quoting, ''any documents or materials referring or relating to White House political coffees.'' To repeat the question, is it your belief he could have framed an e-mail that would have passed that request along to the men and women under your command?
Answer. He could have done that. But our duties, you know, and I will try to explain, as a headquarters element you try to streamline the process to your subordinates, such that they understand exactly what you want, and we—and I am just speaking of my headquarters. I would never send out a directive like that because I know that I would have to give my people some detail and explain to them the intent of this. Just by mentioning coffees and knowing the number of databases, I could probably conduct a search but I would probably go back and say, ''I need some more information, I need to clarify.''
Question. So had this come to Colonel Campbell, do you believe he would have sought clarification from you?
Page 1576 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. I believe there is a possibility, and this is all in hindsight.
Question. I understand this is Monday morning quarterbacking.
Answer. You're right. I know what the issue is now. I can't put myself in the time of the up tempo of the organization and what we were doing. As I stated, we had deployments outside of the agency, missions ongoing, day-to-day. This comes through, I don't know.
Question. Okay.
Answer. I know he is a very thorough person and he reads things, and it might have caused some question or concern, and maybe—but then since the other memorandums came down, you know, and all that they had on them were names and entities, I am only assuming, and I drilled myself, he says paragraph 1(a), referring or relating to any individuals in Attachment A, and maybe quickly just looking through this and saying, ''Well, I will send this out to the subordinates because this is something that they can conduct a search on.''
Because we have not sat down until recently, you know, since this whole issue, and actually scrutinized the database of the video and audio people. So as leaders, you know, we wouldn't know that the names weren't in there. You know, we know now, okay, but we wouldn't know that. We would know you need a date and maybe a title of an event, because the technicians do it, and it is not—you talk about a layer up here, and we are looking down at a database and an audiovisual unit, just don't have that visibility.
Question. Now had the first 2 pages come through to Colonel Campbell, you don't believe that he would have ignored these directives, do you?
Page 1577 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No, he would not.
Question. He would have done something to comply with them?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. He would have either composed an e-mail or sought guidance from you or someone else?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. And, again, there are entities listed on the second page of this memo that are not listed on the following list of individuals?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. I will represent that.
Answer. That is correct, I noticed that too.
Question. And do you have any knowledge whether the entities that are listed on the second page, but not on the attachment, were included in Colonel Campbell's e-mail?
Page 1578 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. I know that Attachment A, with the entities, these last 2 pages were the copies that were in the file.
Question. Okay.
Answer. Okay.
Question. So it is your understanding that Mr. Alan Sullivan's office faxed the full four-page document to your office?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. They believe, at least, they faxed the document to your office?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Colonel Campbell recalls only receiving the last 2 pages, doesn't deny receiving the first 2, may have, may not have?
Answer. Correct.
Question. But I just wanted to be clear because you said if you received this, it would not have produced the tapes. But I just wanted to get your opinion as to whether, had you received it, it would have been maybe a back-and-forth process?
Page 1579 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. It would have caused some question. In other words—and then, like I am saying, I know now, really reading this thing closely and knowing the full intent, and I guess that is what I want to impart to this body of what is going on, then I would know exactly what to do. This piece of paper is not going to give you the products of the tapes alone, without sitting down in a body and understanding. I have given you a Berlitz course on WHCA in the course of a few hours, and just for you to do your investigation, so it seems like counsel would have done the same thing to understand the databases that I have. That is all I am saying.
Question. Okay. So just so I am clear, you don't believe that Colonel Campbell would have ignored any part of this?
Answer. No, he would not.
Question. He would have done what was necessary to comply with the directive?
Answer. Correct.
Question. And if I could direct your attention to the first page, the very last sentence on that page, I am quoting in part, quote, ''If you have any questions, please call Mike Imbroscio or Dimitri Nionakis,'' and there is a phone number. Had he received this, do you believe he would have read that sentence?
Answer. I believe so.
Page 1580 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. And known he could call them if he had questions?
Answer. That is true.
Question. If there were difficulties in framing an e-mail?
Answer. Uh-huh.
Question. And that was a yes, just so the reporter can pick it up?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Okay. Let me turn your attention to what has been marked as Exhibit JS–3. This is the subpoena from this committee. Can I ask you just to sort of quickly thumb through the document and sort of look at it?
Answer. I believe it is over there.
Question. My question for you, and we will figure out if there is anything I need to do to make this more specific or more exact, my question is whether, had you received a copy of this document, which contains 45 items and is 7 pages long in particulars, whether this would have produced better responses than the White House Counsel's directive. In other words, would this have been more clear to Colonel Campbell as to what was to be included in his e-mail, or no more or less clear, or less clear?
Page 1581 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And let me direct your attention in particular to item 16 on page 5, which does not provide dates, but does instead say ''all records relating White House Political Coffees'' and then says ''including but not limited to,'' and then it goes on and speaks for itself. Do you believe that this would have given more particular guidance to Colonel Campbell than the White House Counsel's directive?
Answer. Yes, I do. And the only reason I am saying that is because then that would have engendered a response from him as to further explanation, and I guess we work fairly closely, we would have received it and perused through this. And then we would have naturally called the White House Military Office and said, okay, now what do they want us to do, and maybe we need to fully explain to them our capabilities.
Question. Okay.
Answer. This would have probably given us a big picture and at least a start point, a better start point from which to work.
Question. That is because it contains more items?
Answer. It contains more items, and they are asking for records. It would just, to me—and I can't speak for Colonel Campbell, I can only speak for myself, I would really—I would probably pick the phone up and call Mr. Sullivan and say, ''Sir, okay, I have this document here and there is something going on, can you fill me in on it,'' you know.
Page 1582 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. So just to be clear, it is not the text that is contained in No. 16 that is more specific, it is in fact the fact there are many more items listed here of much greater breadth?
Answer. That is right.
Question. Would have caused you to call someone for guidance?
Answer. That is correct.
Mr. WILSON. If I can interject there, there are a number of——
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Let me just finish my line. I will be happy to let you follow up. Just to summarize, and then you can have him for as long as you need him.
EXAMINATION BY MR. MCLAUGHLIN:
Question. Similarly, it is your belief that had Colonel Campbell or you seen the first 2 pages of the April 28 request and reviewed it, you would have also sought guidance on the meaning or the means by which to search for political coffees?
Answer. Would have sought guidance, yes.
Question. That was a confusing question but I think you understood.
Page 1583 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. That is correct.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Mr. Wilson?
Mr. WILSON. That is fine. Finish up.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Okay.
EXAMINATION BY MR. MCLAUGHLIN:
Question. You stated that you consider videotapes taken by the audiovisual unit of the White House Communications Agency to be presidential records?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And the same is true for audio tapes?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. So let me direct your attention to the first page of the April 28 directive, which is Exhibit 4. The directive states, in the second sentence, ''We ask that you conduct a thorough and complete search of ALL,'' that is capitalized, capital A, capital L, capital L, ''of your records,'' paren, ''whether in hard copy, computer or other form,'' closed paren, et cetera.
Page 1584 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Is it your understanding that the phrase ''all of your records, whether in hard copy, computer or other form'' would have included videotapes created by the audiovisual unit of the communications agency?
Answer. I am not sure I understand the question.
Question. Does the phrase ''all of your records,'' as used in this memo, include videotapes?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Does it include audio tapes?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Let me ask you one final question. You stated that there has been created a chain of custody inventory in the recent weeks as these videotapes have been produced. Are you aware of any efforts by any White House personnel to doctor or alter the tapes?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you believe that your men would have committed such an effort to take place or succeed, had they become aware of it?
Page 1585 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. Absolutely not.
Question. Do you believe they would have informed you had they become of any efforts to doctor, alter or otherwise edit the tapes?
Answer. I know they would have.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. No further questions at this time.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Just a couple follow-up. You indicated before that you had discussions with one of the members of the White House Counsel's staff, Cheryl Mills. When did you have discussions with Ms. Mills?
Answer. I have had numerous discussions with her. What time frame?
Question. Well, in the most recent time frame related to the coffee tapes, from September 30 on?
Answer. I know from September 30th, I would say starting—commencing once the tapes were discovered, and I guess reading the newspaper on that first Monday in October, I had a discussion with her, and that is only because WHCA was in the newspaper.
Page 1586 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Did you call her or did she call you?
Answer. One of the discussions resulted from—I can't remember. There were so many phone calls between the two of us, I can't remember who initiated it.
Question. Going back to the first one in the series, do you recall what was discussed?
Answer. Well, the issue revolved around tapes, and I stated that no one had requested tapes or videotapes. And then that is when she said there was a 28 April memo, and I said I have never seen anybody ask for the word, i.e., videotapes or tapes.
And then she referred to this particular memo and said they had referenced coffees, and I was trying to figure out—I said, ''Well, first, I don't remember seeing this memo and I don't know where coffees came up.'' So then the discussion ensued and then we—I just told her—she knew I was very upset and concerned about the press release on the White House Communications Agency and hitting the wrong key.
And, you know, I told her we did the search based upon the names and we even received hits on the document, but I was not aware of any reference to coffees and not aware of anyone, until, you know, our discussion, until recently, of anyone asking for tapes. And it was, you know, it was conveyed that WHCA held these tapes from the time this memo came out until October, until the tapes surfaced, had held the tapes a secret and it wasn't—it wasn't any secret at all.
Page 1587 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. And you indicated you had a number of conversations with her. What were such subsequent conversations?
Answer. Well, it involved this whole process, the retrieval process. She wanted to make sure it worked correctly, and she told us that she had discussions also with Mr. Smith. Both of us would talk to her. Then that is when I met Dimitri Nionakis, and she says that we ended up working with Nionakis and a number of other people, and we were just setting up the whole procedure as far as retrieval of tapes.
The agency, even though we were disappointed about the press statements on us, we still are a very proud organization, and we were going to ensure that this operation worked correctly, because we knew what the issue was and we were involved in it from the beginning, and that was it. And anytime that I would have some concerns, I wanted to know what the time lines were.
I wanted to know how many tapes needed to be done, because I wanted to be able to articulate to my people what was required and what the mission was and what the demands were, so they could size their operation based upon that. And I wanted to give her an appreciation for what we could do, and I say ''her,'' I was speaking to a number of counsels, not just her singularly.
Question. Who else?
Answer. Dimitri. Is there a Walt somebody. You don't know. I have seen so many of them, it is unbelievable. They're like rabbits. I definitely selected the wrong profession. I should have been a lawyer. But there were—I didn't know they had so many people in their office. I could identify their faces. I just—I know Dimitri. I knew Mike Imbroscio, but all of a sudden he vanished and I didn't see him, while we were doing this thing.
Page 1588 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
But there were a number of lawyers up there, and I didn't want to go in—I give a mission to my people and I want them to know—they felt bad about this whole incident because of the whole issue of WHCA. So as they were viewing the tapes for the Counsel's Office, I wanted them to know that I trusted them. And that is why I let them do that operation, and all I did was oversee and make sure that they were doing a good job, and I would go up there and encourage them and that is it. I don't stand over people and watch them do work. And they did it and I am very proud of them for doing that, too, because they did it. It was an excellent job, getting this stuff done.
Question. How many individuals were working on the production process? The White House indicated only six people were working on responding to various subpoenas. How many people have——
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Six people or six lawyers?
The WITNESS. You mean in my agency?
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Okay. My question is completely out of bounds. Let me start from the beginning.
Answer. Okay.
Page 1589 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. The White House indicated six lawyers had been working on the compliance process with the coffees issue.
Answer. Okay.
Question. Apart from the individuals you have mentioned, who else can you—can you identify anybody else, or do you have an approximate number of how many people have been working on the compliance issue?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I want to note for the record before you answer, I think that the representation that was made to us, without disclosing testimony from another deposition, I think the representation that has been made to us is there were six lawyers on the subpoena compliance team. I don't think a representation was ever made only six lawyers have ever worked on this issue, just so the record is clear. Cheryl Mills, for example, we have already heard her name mentioned. She is not a member of the six-lawyer subpoena compliance team. We have already heard she was involved in this.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. So if you can, you have given us a sort of very broad number in your characterization, but are you able to provide any clearer indication?
Answer. No, I can only tell you that I know that Dimitri Neonakis, and I can identify three of the people in addition to him that I saw up in our master control facility, and then including Cheryl Mills.
Page 1590 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. Just finally, you indicated that you had numerous contacts with Ms. Mills pursuant to the coffee issue, but prior to September 30 or prior to the coffee issue surfacing, had you had any contact with Cheryl Mills?
Answer. Yes.
Question. On what issues?
Answer. Logs.
Question. When did those contacts take place?
Answer. That was around the 25th or 26th of September. I was in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Question. And prior to that time period, had you had any conversations with Ms. Mills?
Answer. Yes. Not about matters of this nature though.
Question. On what?
Answer. Just saying hello, that is it, just in passing her.
Page 1591 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. And as far as the telephone log exchanges go——
Answer. Well, let me—maybe I don't understand your question.
[Witness confers with counsel.]
The WITNESS. Okay. That is what I thought. Okay. I had had discussions with her, let's see, I can go back to 1996, and probably—'96 comes to minds, and early January, and even late 1995, and it was about campaign versus official support, and what the White House Communications Agency provides.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. Okay. Moving forward from that to the phone log exchanges, what was she asking you to do at that time?
Answer. Asking for a point of contact to talk to her about our telephone log and billing process. It seemed to focus more on bills, what actually was on a bill that we received, versus communications, you know, telephone communications. And I gave her Steve Smith as a point of contact, and then I explained to her what I knew of it, because I know I had a switchboard and we don't receive bills from a number to a certain number, we receive bills from our switchboard to a number. In other words, all calls that access my switchboard that are operator-intercepted, the call record only exists for the switch to the number called. And she just wanted to make sure she understood that because she had indicated she was responding to some type of correspondence.
Page 1592 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. I was going to ask you, why did she ask that?
Answer. That is right.
Question. You think it was in response to correspondence that she——
Answer. That is right, referenced telephone bills.
Question. Okay. Do you know whether there was any response to a request for information or a subpoena?
Answer. I wasn't apprised at the time when I spoke with her of a subpoena.
Question. Just one last thing. You indicated that Ms. Mills and yourself had had conversations in '95 and '96, matters that were campaign versus nonrelated campaign issues?
Answer. Yes, political versus official.
Question. What was the substance of those conversations?
Answer. We knew that the campaign was—in '95, we at WHCA knew that the campaign was going to happen, and no one had ever supported President Bill Clinton. People that had been in the agency knew and heard what he did during 1992 with just a small group, and it was a very, very rigorous effort.
Page 1593 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
And having supported him just in the role of conducting his duties and the demands there, we envisioned that the campaign effort was going to be very rigorous, and we also knew that there had to be a distinction to what we could do, since we are a DOD agency, and what we couldn't do. And Cheryl Mills, in previous meetings that I would have with the Director of Management and Administration, that somehow was introduced to her, would surface the issue and preface it by saying she was concerned about how we would support.
And this is in relations to primary communications, telecommunications support, because we would be using a series of platforms from an airplane which is always in existence, to a train, to a bus, and wanted to ensure that we understood what we could and could not do as far as telephone lines and speechwriter support for a campaign and public address systems.
Never during that time did anything come up about videotaping or taping. That was not a topic of discussion. It was more from a macro level. I don't want to leave you with the impression—there is more than to WHCA than videotaping and taping. That is just a small part of our mission, very minute. So when you have to request services for communication lines in a particular city, you have to deal with the local telephone company.
She had apprised us that there was this element called the DNC that would be competing for services in the same area, and she wanted to make sure there was a distinction between the two and wanted to ensure that the political people would use resources, communications resources available to them by the DNC, and that those traveling in an official capacity would use the resources that we provided.
Page 1594 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Now as we said, the President is always the President, so that is why we are there. So we went through a very determined effort to ensure that when we went to various locations, the public address system was contracted by the DNC, and usually during the campaign that was the course. That was all set up. Yes, we would record him, but we did that with our mix, tying into this contracted public address system, and the contract was initiated by the DNC.
The only reason we did the audio record and the video record is because it was a matter of presidential record, and that was it. But those details, we didn't get into the details of recording and filming and all of that. It was more or less trying to set up a line of demarcation as to what was our piece of the pie and what was the DNC, and what we could do and what we couldn't do.
Question. You stated that you did not discuss videotaping?
Answer. No.
Question. So let me summarize to make sure it is correct. She didn't make any requests of you to determine how or whether WHCA could provide any videotape or audio tape or photographic information for any of the campaign-related purposes?
Answer. No, she did not.
Question. Okay.
Page 1595 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. WHCA is a very, very—you would probably have a better feel if you would see our operation, but it is a very, very complex organization, and it is not uncommon for someone to not know all that we do because it blends in with everything. You would think that the taping and the—particularly the videotaping was being performed by the press because there is nothing that distinguishes them from the press, other than a small device, which I won't even tell you that, that they wear, and that is it. Otherwise they blend in perfectly. So you would not know in all cases that—that a WHCA person was there, you know, just by the crowd, and because even the White House Press Corps, they have the same equipment we do.
Question. Which I have said this in my last question about five times, but it comes from what you just said about blending in. From a layman's perspective, there was a lot of filming going on of events that have recently been the subject of a lot of controversy, the coffees being among them, and obviously individuals with cameras were in situations where they would not blend in with the press.
Have you had any discussions with any of your colleagues at WHCA about whether White House individuals who were present at events that were taped should or should not have pointed out to WHCA personnel that there were tapes made of issues that were very much the subject of document requests?
And cutting through a long question, there were lots of people at these events, presumably, who knew that there were WHCA personnel filming the events, and has it ever been the subject of any speculation among you and your colleagues as to why White House personnel didn't come back and make a directed request, given the fact the cameras, in closed situations, would not have blended in?
Page 1596 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. I don't think that is a proper question at all. You are asking him to speculate.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. I am asking you to recount discussions, not whether you should have talked about the things or not, but I am asking whether you have had any conversations with colleagues about the subject.
Answer. I have had conversations with colleagues about the subject. The type of events that you are talking about and we focused on are coffees. Just prior to this inquiry, I knew that those events were closed events, and I knew also that there were exceptions—there are exceptions to policies on closed events, that we will be there even though the event is closed to the press.
But I didn't have any knowledge at all that my people were at coffees until we engaged in this dialogue, because a coffee was a small piece of a rigorous routine operation that occurs. That is one event and that is where your focus is, but there are probably many, and I am sure that the President's schedule when he is in town, a coffee was not the singular event that occurred: press conferences, statements from the Rose Garden, something happening in the Roosevelt Room, something going on in Room 450, the one we talked about, the press lobby. So it was just a whole series of activities ongoing, of which a coffee happened to occur.
Page 1597 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Question. But, specifically, have any of your colleagues discussed with you whether individuals who actually attended these events might or might not have seen television cameras there or video cameras there, should have come and pointed with specificity to these types of events, to WHCA?
Answer. No.
Question. The overview is it is—I am not going to characterize it as fair to blame WHCA when they don't know quite what they were looking for, but if there were other people who might have known there was something to look for, it would be incumbent on them to point it out?
Answer. No one pointed that out to us.
Question. No one from the White House pointed that out?
Answer. No.
Question. Have you had conversations with your colleagues where you discussed this matter?
Answer. I guess I am failing to understand your question, and I am trying to. I have talked at length about this matter. We do videotaping and we do audio taping; there is no secret about that, and we will be at certain events. And there are certain events that take place, and even when they are open press events, we check and see what is required because, as I stated in that document that you had, you showed me, that is a planning document. Things will change; requirements will change.
Page 1598 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Now not everybody on the White House staff is fully knowledgeable of all the capabilities we have. There are certain entities that I am sure—certain people that do know that we do audio taping and videotaping. I don't want to leave you with that impression, either, but it is not uncommon for someone not to know.
Question. That is a given, but I am just trying to clarify this one thing as much as possible.
Answer. Okay. All right.
Question. Among your WHCA colleagues, not White House personnel but among your WHCA colleagues, has anybody ever expressed any concern or consternation that WHCA was never—WHCA personnel were never specifically approached or informed of the potential existence of coffee tapes by the people who were actually being filmed or were participating in the tapes?
Answer. To my knowledge, no one has approached any of my colleagues about coffee tapes, you know, prior to this investigation.
Question. I am not pointing out that they knew in advance, but now that we know that they do exist and now that they have been disclosed, has there been discussion among your colleagues as to whether somebody might have come forward at some point and said, ''We were there, we know there are tapes, why haven't you been able to give us tapes of coffees?''
Page 1599 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. No one has come forward and said that.
Question. Okay. That concludes my questioning.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I have just one question.
EXAMINATION BY MR. MCLAUGHLIN:
Question. You were recounting a conversation, your first conversation with Cheryl Mills on this issue, when you said your reaction was you weren't aware of any request for videotapes?
Answer. That is correct.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:
Question. You later learned, however, the audiovisual unit served the videotape database for the names on Attachment A, so you weren't aware at that time. However the AV unit did do a search for videotapes?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. For the names on Attachment A, is that correct?
Page 1600 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr. WILSON. Before we go off the record, I wanted to recount, I believe, four things that we discussed that you might be able to provide for us in the short term.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. All right.
Mr. WILSON. One was names of individuals who were on the WHCA taping crews for the coffees. The second was the February of 1996 document request. Then there is the matter of the classified information that we did not go into in this deposition; and the fourth was a copy of the tape log, the audio tape log we discussed.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. The inventory, is that what you all were talking about?
Mr. WILSON. Yes, inventory of the audio tapes.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. The chain of custody?
Mr. WILSON. No, there was apparently a log for audio tapes, of what constituted audio tapes.
The WITNESS. A database. You should have that.
Page 1601 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. I thought you needed the request—I thought you were requesting the log for the 39 tapes.
Mr. WILSON. That is the final thing. Well, two other things. One is the log for the 39 tapes—actually, let's just discuss for a second the audio tapes. I did want some information on the audio tapes, but is it an extensive database?
The WITNESS. Yes, we provided—I know I was present when we provided 4 years worth of information.
Mr. WILSON. What I would like is not so much of the extensive, all-inclusive, but the material that has been provided to the White House, the audio tapes, there is a log of the tapes.
The WITNESS. There should be a record of the number of tapes we provided to the White House.
Mr. WILSON. And whatever materials contained in the log. And you are correct, the 39 videotapes that were transferred directly to Cheryl Mills.
The WITNESS. So you want the serial numbers on those, or whatever number identifies the tapes.
Mr. WILSON. Yes, whatever you have. And one other thing that occurred to me, if it's possible to get a copy, I am not aware of whether we have or not, the e-mail that went from Colonel Campbell to WHCA personnel, pursuant to the Attachment A that was transmitted.
Page 1602 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. And one outstanding request that I believe we have made is for, first of all, to know what kind of logs exist from the Reagan and Bush administrations, and then to figure out a way to get us a copy of those database printouts. I know the records go back at least to '89, because the White House made available to us the printouts of the records, there was an RNC fund-raiser from '89, so we would be interested from January 20, 1981, through January 20, 1993. First, if you could just let us know as to the existence of those records, then we will figure out where to go from there in terms of which ones we actually need copies of.
Lieutenant Colonel SPARKS. I guess we can go off the record.
Mr. WILSON. That concludes my questioning, and before we go off the record, I would like to thank, on behalf of everybody here, Colonel Simmons for coming here today voluntarily. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 3:08 p.m., the deposition was concluded.]
[The deposition exhibits referred to follow:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 481 TO 501 HERE
[The deposition of Alan Sullivan follows:]
Executive Session
Page 1603 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
| Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, |
| U.S. House of Representatives, |
| Washington, DC. |
DEPOSITION OF: ALAN P. SULLIVAN
The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 9:45 a.m.
Appearances:
Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee: Richard Bennett, Chief Majority Counsel; Barbara Comstock, Chief Investigative Counsel; Dudley F.B. Hodgson, Chief Investigator; J.T. Mastranadi, Staff Assistant; Andrew J. McLaughlin, Minority Counsel.
For MR. SULLIVAN:
LIEUTENANT COLONEL JOHN SPARKS, ESQ.
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Mr. BENNETT. Good morning, Mr. Sullivan. I have to just go through a certain preamble just to make sure we put certain things on the record, and I want to begin by saying on behalf of the Members of the House on the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I thank you for appearing here today.
Page 1604 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
This proceeding is known as a deposition, and the person transcribing this proceeding is a House reporter and notary public. I will now request that the reporter place you under oath.
THEREUPON, ALAN P. SULLIVAN, a witness, was called for examination, and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
Mr. BENNETT. I would like to note for the record those who are present at the beginning of this deposition. I am Dick Bennett, Chief Majority Counsel for the committee. I am accompanied by Butch Hodgson, Chief Investigator, and J. T. Mastranadi from our staff. Mr. Andrew McLaughlin is the designated Minority counsel for the committee attending this deposition.
I believe you are also accompanied by your attorney, Lt. Col. John Sparks from the National Security Council.
Is that correct, Colonel Sparks?
Colonel SPARKS. That is, sir.
Mr. BENNETT. Although this proceeding is being held in a somewhat informal atmosphere, because you have been placed under oath, your testimony here today has the same force and effect as if you were testifying before the committee or in a courtroom. Do you understand that, sir?
Page 1605 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
The WITNESS. I do.
Mr. BENNETT. If I ask you about conversations you have had in the past, and you are unable to recall the exact words of the conversation, you may state that you are unable to recall those exact words, and you may then give me the gist and substance of any conversation to the best of your recollection.
If you recall only part of a conversation or only part of an event, please give me your best recollection of those events or parts of conversations that you recall.
Do you understand that, sir?
The WITNESS. I do.
Mr. BENNETT. If I ask you whether you have any information about a particular subject, and you have overheard other persons conversing with each other regarding that subject or have seen correspondence or documentation about that subject, please tell us that you do have such information and indicate the source from which you derived such knowledge.
Do you understand that?
The WITNESS. I do.
Page 1606 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
Mr. BENNETT. Before we begin the questioning, I want to give you some background about this investigation and your appearance here.
Pursuant to its authority under House rules X and XI of the House of Representatives, the committee is engaged in a wide-ranging review of possible political fund-raising improprieties and possible violations of law. Pages 2 through 4 of House Report 105–139 summarizes the investigation as of June 19, 1997, and describes matters which have arisen in the course of the investigation.
Also pages 4 through 11 of that report explain the background of the investigation. I say that for benefit of your counsel if for some reason he would want to look at those materials.
All questions related either directly or indirectly to these issues or questions which have the tendency to make the existence of any pertinent fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence are proper.
The committee has been granted specific authorization to conduct this deposition pursuant to House Resolution 167, which passed the full House on June 20, 1997. Committee Rule 20 outlines the ground rules for the deposition.
Majority and Minority committee counsel will ask you questions regarding the subject matter of the investigation. Particularly with respect to today, it relates to compliance with the subpoena issued by the committee on March 4, 1997. Minority counsel will ask questions after Majority counsel has finished. After the Minority counsel has completed questioning you, a new round of questioning might begin.
Page 1607 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
For the record, procedurally Majority counsel will go first and then Minority counsel will follow. Mr. McLaughlin, at certain points in time, if you desire a follow-up on a question, while I don't waive the right to assert the procedure to have Majority counsel ask all questions first before questions from Minority counsel, as a courtesy to you this morning I will extend you the opportunity, as we get into certain subject areas, if you indicate you want to follow up on a certain subject area before I finish, I will afford you the courtesy to go to that without having to wait until the end of my questioning.
If at any time a Member of Congress wants to ask a question, that Member is afforded then an immediate opportunity to ask his or her questions, and we would stop and allow the Member to ask questions, and then we would proceed.
Pursuant to committee rules, you are allowed to have an attorney present to advise you of your rights.
And, Colonel Sparks, you are here today in that capacity; is that right?
Colonel SPARKS. I am, sir.
Mr. BENNETT. You are with the National Security Council?
Colonel SPARKS. I am.
Mr. BENNETT. Any objection raised by your counsel during the course of the deposition shall be stated for the record. If your counsel instructs you not to a question or you otherwise refuse to answer a question, Majority and Minority counsel will confer to determine whether the objection is proper.
Page 1608 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
If we think the question is proper, either one of us, we will ask you to answer the question. If the objection is not withdrawn, then the chairman of the committee, Congressman Dan Burton, may decide whether the objection is proper.
This deposition is considered as taken in executive session of the committee, which means the contents of the deposition will not be made public without the consent of the committee pursuant to clause 2(k)(7) of House rule XI. Do you understand that?
The WITNESS. Yes. I understand what you said.
Mr. BENNETT. Colonel Sparks, do you understand that we don't release a transcript of this deposition? You will be given an opportunity to review it with your client, but this is in executive session, so no one is going to release, Mr. Sullivan, your deposition to anybody after the deposition concludes today.
Colonel SPARKS. That's right. When would we have that opportunity?
Mr. BENNETT. I would think by Monday. I believe the court reporter, they have been pretty fast with their responses, so I think by Monday you would have an opportunity to do that.
As I have just mentioned, no later than 5 days after your testimony is transcribed, you may submit suggested changes to the chairman. You will have an opportunity to review it, and the transcript will be available for your review at the committee office.
Page 1609 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 20 Of 22
We have made arrangements also, Colonel Sparks, pursuant to which the deposition transcript can be sent to you, and you can review it and certify the safety of its contents, so to speak, and then send it back to us. We can arrange for that.
Next Hearing Segment(21)