Segment 10 Of 22 Previous Hearing Segment(9) Next Hearing Segment(11)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 692 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Now, you didn't go back in the database at all during this time?
Answer. Not at that time, no.
Question. Did you ever consider talking to somebody else in the office to come and assist you; you were doing this all alone at this time?
Answer. Yes. At this point people had generally left, the holiday had started on, so Mr. Breuer was gone, and I spent approximately 2 hours or so down reviewing the tapes that they had pulled back.
Question. There was nobody else in the counsel's office after 5:30?
Answer. Well, Mr. Breuer was gone. He had been the principal person that I had been working with and that I had informed already. I don't recall checking whether Mr. Ruff was still in the office that evening or not. He might have been. He might not have been. But I did not check to see if he was there at that time. What I did is I took the tape and I left. When I had gotten back to my desk, I believe Mr. Bucklin had left a phone mail message raising several topics, one of which was following up on his message earlier, what the status was of finding the logs. I returned his call Wednesday sometime between 7:30 and 8, I would imagine. Did not reach him but left him a message that we needed to talk and that I wanted to give him a status report of what I had found so far. I had intended to let Mr. Bucklin know essentially what I had let Mr. Breuer know, which was that contrary to what I had understood before, there were at least two coffees that they had at least snippet videotape of. By this point I had seen the coffees and that they were, as you at this point realize, they were opening snippets. I did not reach Mr. Bucklin but left him a message that where he needed to talk and that I wanted to give him a status report. The next morning, I proceeded back down to the video unit of the White House Communications Agency.
Page 693 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. On Wednesday afternoon, no one aside from yourself and Mr. Breuer were aware of the tapes?
Answer. Certainly Mr. Breuer was the only one that I informed about the existence of these tapes. I don't know—I don't recall if there was anyone else in his office when I went in. There might have been, but I simply don't recall.
Question. Including Captain McGrath in that?
Answer. Certainly Chief McGrath.
Question. I'm talking about in your office. That is our understanding.
Answer. Fair enough. That is precisely accurate.
The next morning I returned to the WHCA video unit and set out to carry out Mr. Breuer's instructions, which was to find out what additional coffees and other events that the WHCA database held. I sat down with Chief McGrath and I recall one of the technicians, whose name I don't know, and sat down in the database and began asking questions apart from the date, what other ways can we search the database. I thereafter, after some discussions, tried to search for the word ''coffee'' in what is the, I believe the event field or the description field of the database and after searching that got a hit for, I got 49 hits. Paged through the hits on the database, discovered that a good deal were actually not the coffees as you and I speak. One or two, maybe more were coffees with President Bush and some foreign leader. There was a tea and coffee with someone, but that there were approximately somewhere, from my rough estimate, somewhere between 30 and 40 of the political coffees that occurred in 1995 and 1996 in the Map Room. I had at that point endeavored to print out the screens of those hits that contained the coffees, and either while the screens were printing out or immediately afterwards, set about to search for some other terms as well. I believe I searched for the word ''DNC.'' I believe I searched for the word ''Democratic National,'' and finally I believe I searched the word ''fund-raiser.'' Each of those searches came up with multiple hits. I don't recall the precise numbers of hits that each one of those responded to, but certainly there would be some overlap because an event that was a DNC fund-raiser would have been a hit for both DNC and for fund-raiser.
Page 694 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
At this point I took the tape that I had made the night before as well as the coffee hits and proceeded for Mr. Ruff's office. This was some time, as I best recall, after lunch, probably between 1 and 3 p.m. I don't recall the exact time but that's a ballpark figure, and let Mr. Ruff know, and this was the first conversation I've had with Mr. Ruff on this, that contrary to what I had understood before, at least apparently the snippets of the opening moments of somewhere between 30 and 40 of the coffees were on videotape, and proceeded to show Mr. Ruff some of the excerpts of the tape that I had made, that the WHCA professionals had made for me the night before, which included the opening snippets of, I believe, 4 coffees. Because on the tape that contained the April 1 coffee and the tape that contained the June 18 coffee, each contained an additional coffee of that week. And because these are week of tapes, they would end up getting 4 coffees on video. Mr. Ruff was concerned and instructed me to——
Question. What did he say?
Answer. I don't recall any specific words that Mr. Ruff used. Clearly——
Question. You went up to his office and he was there?
Answer. He was there.
Question. And you asked to see him?
Answer. Yes, that's right.
Page 695 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. You just sort of have walk-in rights at the office or sort of check with his secretary, knock and see if he's available?
Answer. It depends. Chuck prides himself on having an open door policy. Oftentimes he is in meetings and one cannot barge in when he is in a meeting. My recollection is he was not in a meeting and that I was able to go in either immediately or after a few moments into his office and let him know.
Question. And he was alone in his office?
Answer. He was. It was just the two of us.
Question. So when you told him, it was just the two of you?
Answer. That's precisely right. He was concerned and instructed me——
Question. Do you have any general recollection of what he said to you about it?
Answer. Mr. Ruff is a man of few words, and I believe he expressed his concern to me about this issue without using too many words.
Question. Was he upset?
Page 696 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I think concerned is really the emotion that I perceived. He instructed me to do everything I could to find out how many of these coffees were there, to get them duplicated, copied and produced as quickly as possible. I also informed him that I had a pending message from Mr. Bucklin in response to the message I left him the night before, you recall I said, saying that we needed to talk and that I wanted to give him a status report, and Mr. Ruff instructed me to call—to let Mr. Bucklin know what I had found at that point.
Question. To tell him that you had found these videotapes?
Answer. That at this point I wasn't sure what we had, but I had found at least 30 to 40 coffees apparently there's some videotape of, the opening snippets of. That's exactly right. So I left Mr. Ruff's office, proceeded to do several things, the exact order of which I'm not clear. But what I did is draw up—I went through the printout screens more carefully that they had printed out for me as I had gone through the database to develop a comprehensive list of what the political coffees were. I believe I used as a crosscheck the listing that we have produced to you, which was the listing that went to the press, the 3-page listing in chart form of the various coffees. And I had provided that list to Mr. McGrath and let him know certainly what needed to happen. And what needed to happen was he needed to get these tapes pulled back and we needed to set up a procedure whereby they could be reviewed, copied and made numerous copies of to produce.
Question. And who set up that procedure?
Answer. Mr. McGrath did. I gave him the list of tapes to be brought back. He arranged to have them brought back the next morning.
Page 697 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. So at your direction, Mr. McGrath ordered particular tapes from the national archives? When you say pulled back from the archives, you mean he's to go and request from the archives that they deliver particular tapes to his office?
Answer. That's more articulate but the same essence of what I have said.
Question. So then he could spend—was he to review them, Mr. McGrath?
Answer. No, I instructed him to pull them back so I could review them and identify the responsive items from those tapes and have them copied and produced as quickly as possible.
Question. And who determined that you were going to be the person to review them?
Answer. I don't know if there was an overt decision instructing—I mean that I was going to be the one. I was clearly the one involved in this from the beginning and Mr. Ruff instructed me to do everything within my power to have these reviewed, copied and produced as quickly as possible.
Question. Did he suggest that you have anybody join you in working on this from the counsel's office?
Page 698 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Yes. And I'll get into that in one second, just because that was the next morning. Apart from letting Mr. McGrath know that the list of tapes that we needed to be brought back, we also had—I also returned Mr. Bucklin's call sometime around 4:30 or so, let him know that contrary to what I had understood before and explained to him, there were at least snippets of somewhere between 30 and 40 coffees on video and that we were going to get them pulled back, reviewed and produced as quickly as possible. Mr. Bucklin explained to me that his committee's desire is to have copies of all of them, and I said that that's understandable and that I would be discussing it tomorrow with Mr. Breuer, who was not in the office at the time, that we would do everything we could to get them produced as quickly as possible.
Question. So you spoke with Mr. Bucklin on Thursday afternoon, then?
Answer. I did, yes. Sometime I think approximately 4:30 or so.
Question. After that discussion you had with Mr. Ruff, you said it was after lunch, were you aware of him going over to the Attorney General's office and meeting with the Attorney General that day?
Answer. I was not aware of it at the time. I have become aware of it now because of press reports, but I had no idea Mr. Ruff had a prescheduled meeting with the Attorney General at that time.
Question. Did you have any discussion with him about these tapes or records being responsive to any Justice Department subpoenas or requests?
Page 699 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Not in so many words. We certainly knew they were responsive to all the investigative bodies, including this committee, the Senate and the Justice Department, and Mr. Ruff's instruction to me was get them copied and produced to all 3 of the bodies.
Question. So when you had that discussion on Thursday, his response was to get them to all—get them to the Justice Department, the House and the Senate?
Answer. He did not delineate the 3 investigative bodies. He instructed me to get them produced as quickly as possible. I guess you could say it was understood that by getting them produced, it was getting them produced to all 3 investigative bodies.
Question. Did he instruct you to call anybody at the Justice Department to inform them?
Answer. He did not. He instructed me to undertake the process of searching, identifying and copying and producing the documents, or the videos. And he instructed me to, after I told him about Mr. Bucklin's pending call, of course to return his call and to give him a status report.
Question. So on Thursday——
Answer. Thursday, now we're sort of in the early evening on Thursday. At some point——
Page 700 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. This is Thursday, October 2?
Answer. That's precisely correct. Sometime after I spoke to Mr. Bucklin, I had a telephone conversation with Mr. Breuer. Mr. Breuer was in his car returning from religious services, I believe in Baltimore. I did not call him. I suspect he was calling in to the office to check the status of various things and had been patched into me. I don't recall if I told his assistant Mr. Smith that it was imperative that I spoke to Mr. Breuer. I believe that I did. And thus Lanny was patched in to me for that reason.
Question. So he was returning a message you had left?
Answer. That's my best recollection, yes. I then went about to explain to Lanny what I had already explained to Mr. Ruff and to Mr. Bucklin, which was contrary to what we had previously understood, there were videos of at least between 30 and 40 coffees, and that I was going—was in the process of trying to identify the universe of coffees, get them returned from the archives, reviewed, copied and produced.
Question. And what did he say?
Answer. He said similar much to what Mr. Ruff said, which was do everything I could to make it happen as quickly as possible.
Question. And what did you do?
Answer. Then I went back and I think it was at this point that I gave Mr. McGrath the list that I had checked and double checked carefully to make sure that I had all the events crosschecked against the master list and given him the list of coffees. I recall that it was after the 5 o'clock archive deadline, because I recall that they did not—they did not get pulled back until the next morning. I believe the rest of the evening I was working on a document production that we made on October 3, which I believe included a bunch of E-mails.
Page 701 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. The October 3 production to this committee?
Answer. Yes. As well as to—there was a mirror production to other committees.
Question. And in producing that, was there ever any discussion about informing—this is October 3, a letter from you to myself delivering documents. Was there ever any discussion of informing the committee of these points since you were summing up this letter, about these events?
Answer. Again, there was no specific discussion of informing the committee via letter, in this production letter. This is a fairly routine letter that sometimes gets drafted in conjunction with the document production and thus this letter might have been drafted prior to the documents—the advent of the video issue. But to answer your question, no, there was no specific—there was no specific discussion of informing this committee via letter during the document production.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Now, you had informed Mr. Bucklin on Thursday. Was there any discussion throughout the rest of Thursday and Friday of discussing this with the Justice Department or this committee; just informing them that documents that were long past due and responsive to our subpoenas had been located?
Page 702 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I will get into this in more detail. My role on Friday was a technical one, which was trying to identify the universe of videos, getting them produced and copied. I spent literally the entire day on Friday doing that task.
I was not involved in any discussions as to the notification and timing of such notification to this committee, the Senate and the Justice Department.
Question. Now, Thursday, you said—I guess these offices all sort of shut up at 5:00. The archives close down at 5:00, and the WHCA office you had kept there until 7:30 or 8:00, so they—on Thursday, how late did you stay working with them on Thursday?
Answer. I had kept them late on Wednesday, which was the night that I had reviewed the videos. On Thursday, I recall, did not spend much of the evening down there because I had given them the list of videos that needed to be retrieved from the archives, and they had agreed to set in motion a procedure whereby I could review the tapes the next morning and have them systematically copied onto a tape to be produced to the various investigative bodies.
And I believe I spent most of Thursday evening, as I think I testified, finalizing the document production that went out on October 3rd.
Ms. COMSTOCK. This is the October 3rd letter, and we will make that Deposition Exhibit Number 7.
[Imbroscio Deposition Exhibit No. MI–7 was marked for identification.]
Page 703 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Friday morning, then, is when the rest of these tapes were gotten from the archives?
Answer. Yes.
Question. As you just described, and they are copying them?
Answer. If I can, I will give you the full story. Sure. Friday morning I got a message from, I believe, Chief McGrath confirming that, as he had promised at 0900 or 0800, or some military time, tapes had been brought back and were ready for me to go through the process of reviewing and having them copied.
Friday morning we had a staff meeting with Mr. Ruff in which I briefed the rest of the Counsel's Office as to my findings over the previous 2 days.
Question. And who was at that meeting?
Answer. It was a meeting of all of the folks on the investigative team, so that would be Mr. Ruff, Mr. Breuer, Mr. Nionakis, I believe was there. Essentially, it was all—I don't know. I don't want my testimony today to establish the fact that some people were there. I recall Ms. Mills being there. It could have been that one or two of the attorneys from my office was not there, but it was generally a meeting of the attorneys in my office.
Page 704 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Okay.
Answer. At that meeting I had informed them of the nature of my discovery.
Question. And what was their response, the folks that were there?
Answer. There was a response of concern and of wanting to do everything we could to identify the universe and get them produced as quickly as possible. So at the conclusion of that meeting, I was tasked to go and start the reviewing and copying process at WHCA.
Question. Were any of the videotapes reviewed in that meeting?
Answer. I had at the meeting a sample tape I had shown Mr. Ruff earlier that we had made Wednesday night, October 1st, and I recall playing some, but perhaps not all, of that sample videotape.
Question. With the staff there?
Answer. With the staff present, yes.
Question. And were there any comments about the tapes?
Answer. I don't recall any specific words uttered, but there was a discussion as to the significance of this discovery.
Page 705 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Being what?
Answer. Well, that this was, in fact, a significant discovery and a fact we were not previously aware of, and that we had to do everything we could to get these—to identify the universe, make sure we had the entire universe, get them copied and produced as quickly as possible.
Question. Did anyone discuss about informing the President about the tapes?
Answer. No, not that I can recall at that meeting.
Question. Are you aware of anybody informing the President about the tapes?
Answer. The President—I had no firsthand knowledge of that. I have read press accounts of when the President said he was notified, but that exhausts my knowledge as to the notification issue to the President.
Question. Were you aware of Ms. Mills being tasked to discuss this with the President?
Answer. It's my understanding, from the press, that she was the one who spoke with the President. I have no firsthand knowledge if that was, in fact, the case.
Page 706 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. So other than——
Answer. Even to this day.
Question. So other than press accounts, you have not discussed that with anybody, or you did not hear that from anybody in your office?
Answer. That's correct. And again, just so it is clear, the first time that I communicated this to lawyers besides Mr. Breuer and Mr. Ruff was at that Friday meeting.
Question. Did people ask you about what was on the other tapes?
Answer. No, at this point I had not seen any of the tapes that was not on the sample tape. I let them know we were in the process of pulling back what we believed to be the universe of coffees and that we would get them copied and produced as quickly as possible.
Question. Did they ask you about the types of events that were videotaped?
Answer. I don't recall any discussion of any events other than the coffees. Certainly on the tape there were noncoffee—there was at least one or two noncoffee events, but again, that was not all that surprising.
We sort of had a general understanding that the President's remarks at such events were on tape, and that had been communicated to the Senate on September 9th. So coffees—to answer your question, coffees was the essential focus because that was really the new fact we had not known prior to that time.
Page 707 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Did anybody say anything about or ask how these had been found or why they had not been found before?
Answer. I don't recall there being a detailed question and answer as to the procedure by which I discovered these, as I just explained to you. I believe it was simply related to them that I had just discovered these had existed, without a detailed description as to the precise nature of that discovery.
Question. Was this a surprise to everybody, then, that these had been obtained? Was that your impression?
Answer. It was a surprise to everyone in the room, yes.
Question. As a result of learning about these various coffee tapes, was there any attempt to go to some of the people that had actually attended them to ask them about any other records that they knew about with regard to the coffees?
Answer. Not to my knowledge. Not to my knowledge. Again, during this time period, my primary role was, technically, to review the tapes and get them copied and produced.
Question. I understand you were tied up with that. Did anyone raise, well, maybe somebody else should go return back and find out do we have everything on these or other events, and either should go back and revisit some of the people who may know more about these events?
Page 708 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I understand your question, and not that I'm aware of.
Question. So there was no discussion in that meeting?
Answer. No, not that I can recall.
Question. And you're not aware of any efforts in the Counsel's Office to revisit with any of the people who attended these events any other records they may have?
Answer. I am not aware.
Question. Why don't you continue with the Friday.
Answer. So after that meeting on Friday morning, it probably broke up sometime between 9:45 and 10:00, I proceeded up to the fifth floor master control room, WHCA master control room, which was the location whereby Mr. McGrath had arranged for me to review and have the tapes copied. They had the tapes there, and I set about to review them and identifying for the professional staff there what portions of the tapes needed to be duplicated.
Again, as I testified earlier, these tapes contained numerous snippets on any given tape of events like the President goes to church, the President lands, the President takes off. And my role was to review the tapes, identify what, if any, responsive coffee portions existed, and to have those entire portions copied onto a single tape.
Page 709 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. So you were the sole person that was in charge of editing how the tapes would be edited for production to Congress?
Answer. I think that asks two questions. The first question, was I the sole person involved, the answer is no.
Question. Subjectively. Like, I understand there might be technical people who are going to tape. But were you the person making the judgment call on what should be taped and edited?
Answer. I was there, along with another lawyer in my office, Karl Racine, and the two of us together reviewed the coffees, reviewed the tapes, and identified the responsive portions of those tapes.
Again, these were not particularly close calls. They were tapes of events that appear on a master list that we released to the press and to the committee, and, thus, it became quite easy for us to identify what, in fact, were the responsive portions of the tapes.
And there was no—just so we are clear and so the record is clear, the tape that you received contained every portion of the coffees as they had been recorded. There is no portion of any particular coffee that you did not receive because of any editorial decision or decision not to provide that. If I am clear.
Question. So that would have been, whatever we have, say, on the February 6 coffee is everything that was taped that morning; that when it cuts off, that is when the camera crew was cut off?
Page 710 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. That is precisely right.
Question. And when it begins is when the camera crew begins?
Answer. That's precisely right. Just so it is clear. There is nothing on those tapes that you did not get. You have everything that was on the original tapes.
Question. And is that true also for not just the coffee tapes, but then the other fund-raising events and items that we received this week?
Answer. I am not in a position to answer that. I would presume that to be the case, but I have not been directly involved in this ongoing process. But certainly that would be the instructions given to the WHCA professionals.
Question. So you were only involved in reviewing the coffee tapes, then?
Answer. That's right. I have described my role in this.
Question. And why don't I get this clear for the record. In this meeting that you had Friday morning, was Mr. Racine then tasked to assist you in reviewing the tapes?
Answer. That's right, yes.
Page 711 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. And who asked him to do that?
Answer. I actually don't know because I had left the meeting momentarily, for what reason I don't recall, but I recall when the meeting broke up, I was informed that—I think Karl told me he had been asked to help me out on this project. So I don't know who tasked him to do it.
Question. And then the two of you went back down there and started going through the tapes, then?
Answer. We actually went back up there, because at this point we had been told to go up to the fifth floor, and we set about to review the tapes in chronological order and have them copied and put onto a master tape that could thereafter be dubbed and copied.
That process took some time. I recall approximately 1:15 or so we were not done, we were still sometime in the month of April, we broke for lunch and I took care of a few matters, including finalizing this document production, and returned sometime in the neighborhood of 2:30, and we wrapped up the reviewing process sometime around 4:00.
There was a natural time lag in getting the tapes that we had reviewed copied onto a master tape. And as I understand the process, and my understanding is not strong, that once they had this master tape, they would then—they were in a position to record VHS copies of the tapes that were thereafter produced.
Page 712 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
The first tapes were not available until early Friday evening, as I understand it.
Question. And how many tapes were then produced at that time? At that point there was just one tape? However many coffees there were were on one tape at that point?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And you say that was completed at that time?
Answer. That's correct. I'm on somewhat weak ground because I don't know the technicalities of it; left that to the WHCA professionals. All that I'm aware of is that we had finished our reviewing process sometime in the neighborhood of 4 o'clock and that the first tapes weren't available for review until sometime in the early evening. I don't recall the exact time.
Question. And did someone give them to you early Friday evening?
Answer. Yes. I mean, I recall receiving the tapes from the technical staff; receiving the first tapes from the technical staff on the fifth floor at WHCA.
Question. How many had you asked them to make?
Page 713 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I don't recall giving them a precise number; how many to make. I believe they have the ability to make several at one time, four at a time, once they have the master completed. And I asked them to basically produce, to start making copies of it.
The problem is there is a real-time problem in that they cannot make them any faster than it takes to play through it all. So you cannot do any high-speed dubbing.
Question. And do you recall how many copies you got that Friday evening?
Answer. No, I don't recall how many I got. It would have been—I don't recall. We had multiple copies, but I don't recall how many.
Question. And who delivered to it you, somebody from the office, WHCA office?
Answer. I don't recall whether they were delivered to me or whether I went back up to that room and picked them up. But I recall having them in my possession sometime during the early evening of Friday.
Question. And what did you do with them?
Answer. I believe—I don't recall. At this point there were several discussions about what was on the tapes, and I probably provided a—I don't recall. I don't recall what I did with them.
Page 714 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
[Witness confers with counsel.]
The WITNESS. I just don't recall.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Did anybody else look at them, or were they just sitting in your office?
Answer. No. Certainly I provided a copy—I recall providing a copy to Mr. Breuer. I don't know if he looked at it at that time or not.
Question. So Mr. Breuer was back to work, then, Friday?
Answer. Yes, that's exactly right. The holiday, as I understand it, ran from sundown on Wednesday to sundown on Thursday.
Question. Did you inform Mr. Breuer that documents were to be delivered to this committee on Friday evening?
Answer. I'm sure he was aware that documents were being delivered, but there was never a discussion drawing a nexus between the document production, which had been in the works for some time, and handling of the videotape issue.
Page 715 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. And so you gave a copy to Mr. Breuer? You're sure you gave a copy to Mr. Breuer?
Answer. No, frankly, I'm not sure. This was a point when there was a lot going on, and I want to be careful because I don't have a firm recollection of the precise timing of what went on that night and the next day.
Question. How late did you stay that evening?
Answer. I recall staying till approximately 8:30 or 9 o'clock. I left work for an engagement, prescheduled engagement, with my wife at a function of her office, and I believe I arrived sometime around 9 o'clock.
Question. And were you asked to come back in on Saturday to deal with any of these issues?
Answer. I don't recall specifically being asked to come back in. We typically work 7 days a week in our office. In fact, the few days I took off that I discussed earlier were probably 4 or 5 of the 10 to 15 days I took off since I started in March. So I was never asked to come in on a Saturday. I came in on Saturday because that was my normal course.
Question. And do you know what happened—can you just tell us the rest of your knowledge of what happened with those tapes that you had copied?
Answer. Yeah. My understanding is that Mr. Breuer had a meeting on Friday with the Senate staff. I was not at that meeting. Again, I was handling the technical aspects of it; and that we provided a copy of the video to the Senate and to the Justice Department sometime Saturday afternoon; and that we provided a copy to this committee, I believe, Sunday morning.
Page 716 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Sunday afternoon.
Answer. Again, I don't know the technical details of it.
Question. The copies that you got, do you know where they were kept on Friday night, what you did with them?
Answer. I believe I had them in my office safe.
Question. In your safe?
Answer. Yes, I have a safe in my office to handle national security documents, and I believe I put them in my safe. I recall putting them in my safe.
Question. Did somebody ask you to do that?
Answer. No, I did that on my own accord.
Question. Do you know why those tapes weren't turned over on Friday to any of the investigative bodies involved?
Answer. I don't know.
Question. Did anybody review them Friday night or Saturday, to your knowledge?
Page 717 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Again, I don't have a clear recollection of the order of events really starting Friday after my reviewing process. Certainly people in my office began to look at the tapes in anticipation of getting them produced over the next day or so.
Question. I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.
Answer. Let me restate it. As I said, I don't have a clear recollection of who reviewed the tape and who watched it at what point, but over this period people were reviewing the tape in anticipation of having it produced over the next day or so.
Question. So most of the people in your office were looking at copies of the tapes so that they knew what was going to be——
Mr. BALLEN. I think he said he doesn't have a clear recollection. He's said it three times now.
The WITNESS. As I said, I don't know who reviewed it and who didn't review it.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. So did you take your copies out of the safe, then, to share with people; or were there other copies that started to be produced and sent around to offices?
Page 718 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I certainly retrieved the copies from my safe on Saturday.
Question. Do you know who you gave them to?
Answer. I do not—I do not recall who I gave them to, whether I kept them in my own possession or whether I turned them over to anyone. But certainly we had those copies that were made the night before, and at some point on Saturday afternoon I think we received an additional set of copies.
If I said Sunday, I mean Saturday afternoon.
Question. Did there come a time, sometime Saturday afternoon or Saturday evening, when you learned that Time magazine was doing a story on these tapes?
Answer. I did not become aware that Time magazine was doing a story on this tape until I was awakened by a phone call on Sunday morning.
Question. And who called you?
Answer. I recall it was Lanny Breuer who called me.
Question. And what did Mr. Breuer say?
Answer. Mr. Breuer said they had begun to get press inquiries relating to the videotapes and that—asked if I could come to the office as quickly as possible.
Page 719 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Do you recall what time that was?
Answer. It was 8:30 a.m. And I should just note that I was unable to attend the Pittsburgh Steelers-Baltimore Ravens game that day because of this event, and I'm a huge Pittsburgh Steelers fan.
Question. Do you know any reason why on Sunday, when obviously you started getting press inquiries, if there was any reluctance to deliver this videotape to this committee for any reason?
Answer. No, I'm unaware of any such reluctance.
Question. When we inquired, when we called in Saturday and we called in Sunday, we were told we couldn't get it until Monday. Are you aware of any shortage of tapes on Sunday that we wouldn't be able to have a copy until Monday?
Answer. I'm aware of no such shortage, and I have no knowledge of the conversation which you describe. I would presume that in the normal course of events, typically we make productions on Monday. But, again, I know nothing about the conversation you just described. It was not with me, the record should be clear.
Question. What time did you go into the office, then, on Sunday?
Page 720 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Without unduly getting into my personal habits, I suspect——
Question. Just asking the time.
Answer. I suspect I arrived in the office sometime between 9:15 and 9:45 a.m.
Question. And who else was there when you arrived?
Answer. I don't have a specific recollection of the entire roll call of lawyers who were there at that time. I recall Mr. Breuer was there.
Question. And did you have a meeting with Mr. Breuer at that time?
Answer. Let me just think about that for a second.
[Witness confers with counsel.]
The WITNESS. I should just be clear. I am actually not sure that Mr. Breuer was there when I got in that morning. He might have very well called me from home, I just don't recall. But certainly at some point that day, on Saturday, he was in the office.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Page 721 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. On Sunday, you mean?
Answer. Yes, on Sunday.
Question. You said he called you at 8:30 Sunday morning?
Answer. I'm not sure if he was there when I arrived or got there sometime later.
Question. I understand. So at some point by Sunday morning you are in the office, and Mr. Breuer's there also?
Answer. Yes, without pinning a time on when Mr. Breuer arrived, that's correct.
Question. Can you just describe what you did on Sunday in regards to the tapes?
Answer. I recall very little, technically. I recall one of the things that I was asked to help out with was handling the various press inquiries that the office was getting, because I was the one who, as we have discussed here today, was the one who was sort of the principal person who discovered the tapes and was trying to answer press inquiries as best we could.
Page 722 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. At this point, when Mr. Breuer has called you at 8:30 in the morning and is asking you to handle the press inquiries, was there ever a discussion that maybe you ought to turn it over to a committee that has already subpoenaed it who doesn't have it yet?
Answer. I was not involved in any discussions on that front, basically.
Question. You didn't suggest to Mr. Breuer, wait, we haven't given it to everybody who has subpoenaed it yet?
Answer. There was a general understanding from the moment that I met with Mr. Ruff that this tape would be timely produced to all the investigative bodies that requested it, including this committee. I had no further discussions as to the particular timing of that production.
Question. But when Mr. Breuer called you on Sunday morning, did he mention anything about making sure a copy of this got up to this committee?
Answer. I don't recall that he did.
Question. So he was talking to you about press inquiries and responding to the press inquiries on Sunday morning; is that a fair characterization of why he wanted you to come into the office?
Answer. No, not quite; close, but not quite. I think he had asked me to come into the office because they were getting press inquiries, not so I could come in and answer the press inquiries. He asked me to come into the office because I was the person who knew the most about the discovery of the videotapes.
Page 723 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
It turned out that I spent a lot of my time that day dealing with press inquiries, but I was not tasked to come into the office to handle those press inquiries. It is an important distinction.
Question. Was Lanny Davis at the White House that morning also?
Answer. Again, he was certainly around that day. I don't know the precise timing of when he came in.
Question. Do you recall anyone else who was there on Sunday?
Answer. I recall that most people were there. If you were to tell me that you had evidence that someone wasn't there, I probably couldn't refute that. But generally people were there.
I don't recall specifically who was or who wasn't, but as best I can recall, people were there. And, actually, I actually do not think that Ms. Peterson was there that day, just to spare her. I don't think she was there.
Question. In the course of finding out about these videotapes, was there ever any attempt to go back and find out what other types of audio or video recordings may have occurred in any other events which may be responsive?
Answer. Clearly there was, in the days that followed, a decision to undergo the Herculean task of trying to identify what the universe of potentially responsive items might be. That was a process that I actually had little involvement in, but I did have a general understanding that process was ongoing. And I believe you received the fruits of that process sometime over the past day or so and will have a chance to see the log in a few minutes.
Page 724 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Now, were you not involved, then, with that second group of the hundred or so, 150, however many events it was, were you not involved in going through those records?
Answer. I had a very tangential involvement. Every lawyer in the office was working on it. There are a limited number of TVs in the control room that could be used to review it. There was never a point when there was a vacant TV. But because other lawyers had filled up the slate, so to speak, I did not have an active involvement.
I have reviewed a few of them, when there were down times and people needed someone to help review, but I was not an integral part of that reviewing process.
Question. So generally all the attorneys in your sort of investigative unit were involved in reviewing them?
Answer. It's safe to say at various times all of the line attorneys, and by that I mean Mr. Racine, Mr. Nionakis, Ms. Peterson, Ms. Popp, and to some degree Mr. Waitzkin had involvement in reviewing and identifying for responsiveness those various tapes.
Question. Now, Mr. Ruff had indicated to us that the Justice Department had also subpoenaed these records, so I would like to just ask any knowledge you have about whether there was any discussion about turning over the originals to the Justice Department; in lieu of you all reviewing them, turning them all over to the Justice Department instead?
Page 725 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
And maybe if you can divorce—if there is a general discussion. I am not going to ask you particularly the response to the subpoena, but if you just know of any discussion about turning these documents over to the Justice Department.
Answer. I am unaware of any——
Question. I'm sorry, records. The tapes. The videotapes.
Answer. I'm unaware of any new subpoena we have received from the Justice Department in the aftermath of this incident. I do know that there was at least a request, and the request might very well have been a subpoena, I simply don't know.
Question. And, I'm sorry, Mr. Ruff indicated they were due by Tuesday, so maybe it was an old subpoena or request.
Answer. I simply don't know. What I do know is that there was a request for certain of the original tapes by the Justice Department relating to coffees.
Question. And were they asked for by a date certain, to your knowledge?
Answer. I do not know the specifics of the request.
Question. Do you know if there was any discussion—I think what I want to get at more was the discussion in the office on how the handling of the tapes should be done in light of this being evidence.
Page 726 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I was not privy to any such discussions.
Question. So you were just directed to go review them and decide; of the ones you reviewed you decided what portions were responsive, and other attorneys would do the same?
Answer. I lost that one along the way. I apologize.
Question. I want to figure out how—I understand these are big reels of tapes—or not reels—or however they are produced to you, and you have to go through and figure out which sections are responsive; is that correct?
Answer. Yes and no. With respect to tapes emanating from the photo-op database, the photo-op tapes, you would have a series of snippets of unrelated events on any one given tape. With respect to tapes from the regular event database, you would have a tape that, for the most part, is unique to one event or more than one tape unique to that same event. So for those tapes there would be no ''this is in'' and ''this is out.'' The entire tape, if responsive, or tapes, would be in.
With respect to the coffee, the photo-op tapes on which the coffees existed, there were certainly portions that were not responsive. For instance, the President goes to church, the President arrives from Andrews Air Force Base.
Question. So would that be sort of, if it is morning, it started he went to church, then he's walking down the hall saying hi to people, then he's going to a coffee. Even though that's all on one tape, it would be cut sort of as he is going into the coffee, and that portion of the coffee to whenever the coffee tape cut off, that would be the portion of that tape that would be produced?
Page 727 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Again, these tapes covered not just a day, but usually a week, and sometimes one event a day sometimes two events a day. But, yes, the portions of the tapes that were produced were the portions, the entire portions, that related to the White House coffee.
And it is not—this is not a snippet, where it's one continuous shot that leads into the coffees. In between each snippet there is a break in the tape, whereby they put up the color bars to signify that it's a break and it is a new event. It's that portion that relates to the coffees on the photo-op tapes that were provided to this committee.
Question. Did you then narrow your search to these particular events? Not narrow it, but you said you went through all these coffee events and then different DNC fund-raisers. Was the search primarily oriented towards those events, or was there, as you reviewed these, sort of if John Huang is going to church with the President, for example, or something like that, would that be produced? Just to try to figure out how you would go through this.
Answer. I understand your question, and I think I need to divorce what I did with what was done in the days and weeks that followed for which you received the output.
What I had done is gone through the tapes that I had pulled back from the archives that had apparently had coffees on them. I would review those tapes, particularly the portions of the coffees, and provide those entire portions onto what I think ended up on a single videotape.
Page 728 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. So the tapes you looked at, though, you didn't look at them for other things that may have been responsive, like if there was a Webb Hubbell going-away party, and say, gee, that may be responsive? Would that be included, or was that not the universe of things you were looking for?
Answer. If it were included, it would have been by happenstance because it so happened to be on that same tape. I have a recollection of only one event that was on one of the photo-op tapes that I reviewed for the coffees. That was an event of a political luncheon in the White House for which there was, I think, 2 or 3 minutes filmed that, just by pure coincidence, happened to be on one of the tapes of the coffees that was pulled back. As I understand it, and I'm actually quite certain, that event didn't make it onto the coffee compilation but made it onto the compilation of 66 tapes you received this week.
But to answer your question, yes, there was an effort made to go through everything, and that's the effort that I assume you will learn more about in the next hour or so. But, again, I was not directly involved in that, so I can't speak to it too knowledgeably.
Question. Are you aware of any taping that the President does himself of events or things that he does that has been discussed in the Counsel's Office?
Answer. I'm not aware of any such statements.
Question. Are you aware or did anyone bring to your attention former Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers talking about the President dictating or taping into a tape recorder of events and things as he went through day to day?
Page 729 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. That's the first I have heard of it.
Question. Do you know if anybody in the Counsel's Office has sought such records or made a request from the President or the President's Office that would sort of alert them to turn over any such type records?
Answer. Not to my knowledge.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Let's go off the record for a minute.
[Discussion off the record.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. One of the things that I wanted to see if you know anything about is this is a Washington Post, October 6, article. Directing your attention to the third column on the bottom. It's highlighted on the copy you have.
Answer. Okay.
Question. Says, ''Within a week''—this is after the August 7th meeting with the Senate. It says, ''Within a week, according to a Senate staff member, White House lawyer Michael Imbroscio reported that the events videotaped were all public events, unless at the specific request of one of the principals, the President or the Vice President, they were asked to record a closed event.''
Page 730 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Is that your understanding of how the events actually are to be taped is that the President or the Vice President would make the request?
Answer. Again, I have no recollection of either learning that fact or reporting that fact to Mr. Bucklin.
Question. So this account in the Post on October 6 is not your recollection?
Answer. No, I believe——
Question. It does say a Senate staff member says this.
Answer. It probably goes to Mr. Bucklin, and it doesn't comport with my understanding.
Question. Do you have an understanding of how those people show up, the camera people? Somebody obviously tells them to show up?
Answer. Yeah. I don't have a firm understanding and can't speak as to what their procedures are.
Question. Do you know Steve Goodin, who works with the President?
Page 731 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I know of Mr. Goodin. I believe he is the President's aide, I believe is his title.
Question. Do you know if Mr. Goodin has anything to do with requesting that people come to events to videotape, the audiovisual crew?
Answer. It's my understanding that that is correct, that Steve Goodin has involvement in deciding which events are videotaped.
Question. And does he do this by making a formal request or a paper request?
Answer. Again, that's beyond my level of knowledge. I just don't know.
Question. So have you told us then your entire knowledge of what Steve Goodin's role is in getting the audiovisual crews to tape the President?
Answer. Yes, my general knowledge being that I understand he has some involvement. I don't know the precise nature of his involvement.
Question. And when did you learn of Mr. Goodin's role?
Answer. I think I learned of Mr. Goodin's role over a period of days that probably started with one of my initial discussions with Mr. McGrath, Chief McGrath, and my discussions in trying to figure out what they did and why they did it. I recall him using either Steve Goodin's name, or someone in Steve Goodin's position would have some say in what they did on a daily basis.
Page 732 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. And are you aware of anyone in the Counsel's Office talking to Mr. Goodin about this?
Answer. I don't have a specific recollection. I believe probably at some point, particularly when we were endeavoring to answer press inquiries, that someone from the Counsel's Office spoke with Mr. Goodin. But I did not speak with Mr. Goodin. I don't think I have ever spoke with Mr. Goodin, apart from one occasion when I said hi to him some months ago.
Question. But you don't know who in the Counsel's Office spoke with Mr. Goodin?
Answer. No, I don't have a recollection of who it would have been.
Question. And does Mr. Goodin decide this on his own, or does he consult with the President, to your knowledge, about this?
Answer. Again, that's way beyond what I know.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I guess we are running up against the clock here. So we do still have some additional inquiries, but we are just going to pick them up when we pick up the other general production matters that we wanted to revisit.
Mr. LYNCH. Okay.
Page 733 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. And I guess we can take this up over at the Counsel's Office also, but are you aware of ongoing efforts to locate any additional audio or videotape recording?
Answer. I'm aware there was a comprehensive effort over the past week or so to systematically identify, review and produce events that could potentially be responsive.
Question. To your knowledge, is the President aware of that effort also?
Answer. I have no personal knowledge of what the President is or is not aware of. I presume, since it has been reported widely in the press that this process is ongoing, that he has some understanding of it.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Do you all want to ask any questions at this time?
Mr. BALLEN. Yes, thank you.
I don't know what questions I had, but I wanted to put two things on the record.
First of all, just so it is clear, I talked to Mr. Bennett for about 15 minutes during the deposition this afternoon, and I think I can fairly state for the record, just so there is no misunderstanding, he and I have an honest and good faith difference of opinion over the conversation we had this past Tuesday, and we will leave it at that. I don't question his good faith, and I assume he does not question mine as to what the contents of our conversation was.
Page 734 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
The second thing I want stated on the record is to express our appreciation to Mr. Imbroscio for coming in here today and answering the questions fully and completely that have been posed to you. We can certainly take notice of the fact that you left a lucrative law practice at the early stage of your career to devote yourself to government service, and I think your integrity and competence are not, and character, are not what is at issue here in any fair reading of what has occurred.
So I just wanted to note that for the record and hope that in any respect that your desire to go into public service and make that kind of sacrifice is not impugned here today.
Nothing further.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I just have one additional inquiry.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you know if any memos have been sent around regarding or instructing staff not to delete or eliminate any potential records that they may have that would be responsive to subpoenas?
Answer. You mean generally?
Question. Generally.
Page 735 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Generally employees have an obligation under the Presidential Records Act to maintain the originals of any records that would potentially be defined as Presidential records. I believe the April 28th directive as well as other directives make that clear.
I am not aware of any memos sent around along the lines of what you just asked.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. You know, I think we will go ahead, since we did refer to this news article of October 6, and the witness did have a difference in the report, I think in fairness it would be helpful to put this into the record since this was not your recollection.
It is an October 6, 1997 Washington Post article entitled White House Video Crew Taped Coffees. And we will make that Deposition Exhibit Number 8, and that was one we just referred to a little while back which quoted a Senate staff member.
[Imbroscio Deposition Exhibit No. MI–8 was marked for identification.].
Ms. COMSTOCK. And we will end with that for today and have to meet again another time to finish up.
[Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the deposition was concluded.]
Page 736 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
[The deposition exhibits referred to follow:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 240 TO 277 HERE
[The deposition of Dimitri Nionakis follows:]
Executive Session
| Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, |
| U.S. House of Representatives, |
| Washington, DC. |
DEPOSITION OF: DIMITRI J. NIONAKIS
The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 1:15 p.m.
Appearances:
Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee: Uttam Dhillon, Senior Investigative Counsel; James C. Wilson, Senior Investigative Counsel; Robert Dold, Counsel; Michael Yang, Minority Counsel; Andrew J. McLaughlin, Minority Counsel; and David Sadkin, Minority Counsel.
Page 737 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
For MR. NIONAKIS:
W. NEIL EGGLESTON, ESQ.
Howrey & Simon
1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004–2402
Mr. DHILLON. Good afternoon, I'd like to begin by thanking you on behalf of the Members of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight for appearing here today. I would like to note for the record those who are present at the beginning of the deposition.
I am Uttam Dhillon, the designated Majority counsel for the committee. I'm accompanied today by Robert Dold, who is with the Majority staff. Andrew McLaughlin as the designated Minority counsel for the committee. And he's accompanied by David Sadkin, who was is also with the Minority staff. The deponent is represented by Mr. Neil Eggleston.
Mr. Nionakis, because you are an attorney, we're going to skip the usual preamble and ground rules and go straight into questioning, if that's all right with you.
The WITNESS. That's fine.
Page 738 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. DHILLON. The only thing I would ask, if there are any questions you don't understand, would you please tell me you don't understand, and I'll rephrase the question.
The WITNESS. Okay.
Mr. DHILLON. And, Mr. McLaughlin, do you have something to state?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. In honor of your skipping the preamble, I will skip my comment on the rules, too.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Mr. Nionakis, can you give us a brief rundown of your employment history from college forward?
Answer. I began working at a law firm downtown in the fall of 1991, a law firm. Would you like the name of the law firm?
Question. Yes, sir.
Answer. Howrey & Simon. And worked there from September '91 until about the end of February, 1997. At the beginning of March of 1997, I began at the White House as Associate Counsel to the President.
Page 739 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Who hired you? At the White House?
Answer. Charles Ruff, Counsel to the President.
Question. And who is your supervisor at the White House?
Answer. My direct supervisor is Lanny Breuer: Charles Ruff is the highest supervisor in that office.
Question. And where is your office physically located?
Answer. My office is in the OEOB.
Question. And is that the office?
Answer. The Old Executive Office Building.
Question. And are there any other members on the Counsel's Office at the same floor or near you at the OEOB?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And let me ask you first, what floor are you on?
Page 740 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I'm on the fourth floor.
Question. And who is—who from the Counsel's Office is also on the fourth floor near your office in the same vicinity as your office?
Answer. The lawyers in the Counsel's Office on that floor, Karl Racine, Karen Popp, Michelle Peterson, Michael Imbroscio.
Question. And where is Mr.——
Answer. I think that's it.
Question. Where is Mr. Breuer's office located?
Answer. He is located on the first floor.
Question. Of the Old Executive Office Building?
Answer. Of the Old Executive Office Building.
Question. And Mr. Ruff's office?
Answer. He is in the west wing of the White House.
Question. Now, what are your duties at the White House?
Page 741 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I primarily work on investigative matters for the White House.
Question. Have your duties been the same since the time you began in March of 1997?
Answer. I think that's correct, yes. I think that's accurate.
Question. When you say investigative matters, what exactly are you talking about? Well, let me rephrase the question. What exactly do you do with respect to investigative matters?
Answer. I handle responding to inquiries from a variety of investigative bodies.
Question. What investigative bodies have you responded to since you began working in March of 1997?
Answer. This committee, the Senate committee, and the Department of Justice. So basically the Hill and the Department of Justice.
Question. Well, are you also responsible for responding to any civil requests, involving civil litigation?
Answer. Yes. They have come through the Department of Justice.
Page 742 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. So there are no civil requests that come directly to the White House. They all come through the Department of Justice.
Mr. EGGLESTON. I think you—of the ones—you're asking of the ones he was working on?
The WITNESS. Right.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Let me rephrase the question. Of the ones you're working on, you're aware of civil requests, but the request came through the Department of Justice?
Answer. The one that I'm working on, the request came through the Department of Justice.
Question. With respect to the requests through the Department of Justice, are there multiple kinds of requests that have come in from them that you've worked on?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And what are those kinds of requests?
Page 743 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Let me take one step back. Could you clarify what you mean by multiple requests?
Question. Are there requests from different entities at the Department of Justice that the Department of Justice is funneling through itself and, if I can ask you sort of a compound question, are there criminal and civil mixed in in those requests?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I'm a little bit confused here.
Mr. DHILLON. Let me back up.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. With respect to the Department of Justice, have you responded to requests that are both criminal in nature and civil in nature?
Mr. EGGLESTON. Well, he—now I'm confused, too, because he told you he responded to the Hill in connection with investigations that are going forward. And he's also told you that he's responded to request for documents from the Department of Justice that are civil in nature. He's already answered it.
Mr. DHILLON. That's only—that's not——
Mr. EGGLESTON. If you're asking a new one, then I don't understand what you're trying——
Page 744 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. DHILLON. No, I'm not. I am trying to establish that that's the only route that those come through. Let me just ask the question this way.
Do you respond to requests for civil actions that come from the Department of Justice?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Is it do you or have you?
Mr. DHILLON. Have you.
The WITNESS. I have worked on a matter that is a piece of civil litigation. The plaintiffs in that matter have made requests of the White House. Those requests have come through the Department of Justice.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Is that the only civil matter you've worked on?
Answer. To the best of my recollection, that is correct.
Question. Are there other requests that come from the Department of Justice, excluding that matter?
Answer. I'm not aware of any.
Page 745 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Are there any——
Answer. There may be. I don't know.
Question [continuing]. An investigation by the Department of Justice into various activities that are similar to the—this committee's investigation?
Answer. Yes. There are.
Question. Okay. So that's another line of requests from the Department of Justice that you've responded to?
Answer. That is a different request from a different part of the Department of Justice.
Question. Okay.
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Now, we've identified two—you've identified two for us, that line of request and then that civil litigation. Are there any others—any other requests you responded to from the Department of Justice?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I'm sorry. Can we just be clear. There is one line of request from the Campaign Task Force from the Department of Justice.
Page 746 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. DHILLON. Why don't you ask him that question?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Yes. Let's pin down his visions.
Mr. DHILLON. Mr. McLaughlin's question, could you answer that?
The WITNESS. Yes. The task force that is investigating the campaign financing issue has made requests.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. All right.
Answer. Separate from the requests that have come through another branch of the Department of Justice with respect to that civil litigation.
Question. All right. Other than those two, is there anything else from the Department of Justice that you've responded to, any other requests?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, no.
Question. Okay. Now, how is communication between the various offices—between the Counsel's Office handled? Between members of the Counsel's Office handled?
Page 747 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I'm not sure I understand the question.
Question. Do you have regular meetings?
Answer. We have meetings, yes.
Question. How frequently do you have those meetings?
Answer. We have at least one meeting a week.
Question. Who attends?
Answer. There are staff meetings of the entire Counsel's Office in which all lawyers in the Counsel's Office attend. And there are smaller meetings where people who work on investigative matters may attend those?
Question. Okay. Let's go to the big picture. How many attorneys are in the counsel's office?
Answer. Approximately 12 to 14.
Question. Are there any paralegals?
Answer. Yes.
Page 748 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. How many?
Answer. The paralegals, I'm familiar with the paralegals who work in the investigative matters, and there are 3.
Question. Three.
Answer. Three.
Question. Any interens?
Answer. Yes. We have interns who come through our intern program, who spend some time working on investigative matters, but also work on other matters in the counsel's office.
Question. Okay. You hit on this a little bit before. I would like to now ask you what the structure of the Counsel's Office is in terms of top to bottom and where do you fit in on that. So let's start with the first question. Let's start with the structure of the Counsel's Office.
Answer. As a nonexpert on the structure, I'll tell you to the best of my knowledge. Charles Ruff is Counsel to the President. There are two Deputy Counsels, Cheryl Mills and Brucy Lindsey. Lanny Breuer is the Special Counsel. I believe there's another special counsel. And I may not be exact on that title. And there are several associate counsels. I'm one of the associate counsels. I should say the bulk, in those titles, the bulk of people are associate counsels, hold that title.
Page 749 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Now, you spoke of meetings with the entire Counsel's Office and then separate group meeting. Are you in a separate group?
Answer. I wouldn't necessarily call it a separate group, but because I work on investigative matters, those people who work on investigative matters often have meetings.
Question. How many people are in that group? Is calling it a group okay or would you prefer—what would you call it? Task force?
Answer. No. I'm fine with group.
Question. Okay.
Answer. I'd say approximately six.
Question. And who are they?
Answer. Lanny Breuer, myself, Michelle Peterson, Michael Imbroscio, Karen Popp, Karl Racine. I think that's it.
Question. And what's the objective of this group? What are they tasked with doing?
Answer. Pretty much what I described earlier is what my role is.
Page 750 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. In terms of the investigative, responding to investigative inquiries?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Now, who's in charge of that particular group or team?
Answer. Lanny Breuer.
Question. Now, is Cheryl Mills involved in any aspect of the review or production of documents in response to requests or subpoenas from investigative bodies?
Answer. No. I would say, no. Not on a direct day-to-day basis, no.
Question. Who does Ms.—do you know who Ms. Mills reports to in the Counsel's Office?
Answer. I don't know. I've never asked her.
Question. What's your understanding of what her duties are and responsibilities are?
Answer. I know—my understanding is that she has a broad range of responsibilities and duties. I have not sat down and asked her exactly what those are.
Page 751 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Is Mr. Brucy Lindsey involved in any aspect of the review or production of documents or things in response to request or subpoenas from investigative bodies?
Answer. To the best of my recollection, I don't believe he is.
Question. What's your understanding of what Mr. Lindsey's duties and responsibilities are?
Answer. My best description of his duties would be as a senior advisor to the President.
Question. Do you have any interaction with Mr. Lindsey?
Answer. I do not have any regular interaction with Brucy Lindsey, no.
Question. When you do have interactions with Brucy Lindsey, what are they regarding generally? Is there a specific area or topic that you have interactions with him on?
Answer. No. It's typically, hi, Bruce, how are you.
Question. What process does the Counsel's Office follow when responding to a subpoena or other requests from this committee from beginning to end?
Page 752 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. The entire process of responding to a subpoena?
Question. I can break it down if you would like. I would prefer if you can give me a synopsis, and then we can sort of go over it, the parts that——
Answer. Generally, we receive a request. We review the request. To the extent that we believe it's overbroad or unmanageable or unduly burdensome, we try and work with the investigative body to modify it, if possible. After that, we sit down and determine where responsive documents may be located. We set out to gather those documents. We receive them or we gather them. We review them. We produce them.
Question. From the beginning, at the beginning of the process, who in the Counsel's Office accepts a subpoena or document request?
Answer. I don't believe there's any particular individual who accepts a subpoena or document request. They simply come in.
Question. Are the subpoenas or document requests logged into a database or computer of any kind?
Answer. To my knowledge, no.
Question. Is there any written logging in of a subpoena or document request?
Page 753 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I don't believe so.
Question. Who decides who will respond to a subpoena or a document request?
Answer. I would say Lanny Breuer typically determines how he will allocate the resources, given the demands on the office.
Question. Are there—you said typically. Are there times when Mr. Breuer doesn't do that and it's done in another manner?
Answer. In the—when we get a very specific, narrow request, for instance, could you please provide the WAVES records for a particular individual, that is something that, when it comes in, I and the other associate counsels can simply just do it. It's not something that Lanny Breuer needs to necessarily think about and allocate.
Question. So there are some subpoenas that are sufficiently narrow that you or another associate counsel would know how to obtain the responsive information without going through your supervisor.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Just for——
The WITNESS. Actually——
Page 754 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN [continuing]. Just for clarification, I think he also mentions subpoenas with regard to WAVES records.
The WITNESS. That's absolutely correct.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Do you mean to encompass subpoenas, document requests, and formal letter requests together; or do you want to separate those out one by one? I'm not sure where you're going on this.
Mr. DHILLON. My questions have been both subpoenas and document requests or subpoenas and other requests.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. I'll ask this question. Do you treat a subpoena, a document request, or an informal type of request any differently in terms of how you respond to it?
Answer. With respect to subpoenas, Lanny Breuer will definitely have some weighing in as to who will respond to it. The example I gave you was a subpoena, narrow, informal request for the WAVES records of a particular individual. And that example covers that exact type of request.
Question. What do you mean when you talk about an informal request?
Page 755 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Barbara Comstock might call me up and say may I have the WAVES records for a particular individual.
Question. And your response would be to personally or have somebody, one of your fellow associates obtain those and produce them to the committee without going through a formal assignment process?
Answer. Generally speaking, that's right.
Question. And since we're on the subject, do you treat a written document request in, say, the form of a letter differently from a subpoena? Are those handled differently by your office?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I just want to—one more thing for clarification. As I understand it, there are subpoenas, there are document requests in the nature of a subpoena, in other words, with lengthy definitions and instructions and so forth, and then a series of items. There are also just simply letters that request information. You.
Know, in my own mind, there's a distinction between those last two things. I think of the last category as being somewhat more informal. I want to be clear because, in other depositions, we've been trying to draw distinctions between those three kinds of requests.
Mr. DHILLON. Then I'll ask that question.
Page 756 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
The WITNESS. I think it's more of the breadth and the scope of the request that determines whether or not it is something that needs to be allocated among several individuals or something that is so narrow and targeted that can be done fairly quickly and by one person. It's not really by the nature of, you know, whether it's a subpoena. We can get document requests that are much broader than subpoena requests.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. So the form of the request is less critical than the breadth or the size of the request?
Answer. I don't know if that's the case either. I don't—I don't know if that's really the case.
Mr. EGGLESTON. Mr. Dhillon, another individual has just entered the room. Could you identify him?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I will. He's on my staff. His name is Michael Yang. He's also counsel on minority staff.
Mr. EGGLESTON. Thank you. I have no objection, I just want to know who people are as they come.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. It's good practice.
Page 757 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Is it safe to say that requests are handled on a request-by-request basis, and there are different ways of handling them just depending on all the circumstances surrounding the request?
Answer. That's very fair. Yes.
Question. Now, what do you do—what's the next step after you've obtained, let's say, for example, a subpoena from this committee? What's the next thing that the Counsel's Office would do?
Answer. We sit down and review it.
Question. And then what?
Answer. Determine whether we should try to or need to modify some of the requests to make them even more manageable. Sometimes they're overbroad. Sometimes they're a little bit unclear. All document requests tend to be that way sometimes.
Question. And how do you do that?
Answer. We consult with the committee, the investigative body.
Question. And once you've reached an agreement—I take it in the past you've reached agreements about the language or the scope of subpoenas.
Page 758 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. We've made every attempt to do so, yes.
Question. Once you've gotten to that point, what's the next step?
Answer. We try to determine where responsive documents may be found.
Question. Okay. How do you do that?
Answer. By looking at the nature of the request, by looking at the various offices within the executive office of the President, trying to match the two up.
Question. And what do you do once you've determined which offices are the offices you believe are likely to contain responsive documents?
Answer. If it—if our conclusion is that it is probably many offices that may contain responsive documents, excuse me, then we will send out a directive that is EOP-wide. If it is one that we think is targeted—that is targeted, we will do a targeted search.
Question. Now, do the people who receive this, let me back up. What's a directive?
Answer. A directive is, in essence, a document that notifies the recipient that there has been a request for information and documents, and that they are asked to search their files and—for certain documents. And the documents are described. And to send them to the Counsel's Office.
Page 759 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Do the people who receive these directives ever sign any forms or in some way attest that they've done a search and they could or they did or did not find files—or I'm sorry, find responsive documents?
Answer. In some instances, they do do that.
Question. Is there a requirement or a form that the Counsel's Office has to make that—and that's made available to the individuals who receive the directive?
Answer. In some instances, yes.
Question. When is it—when is such a form given to the people who receive the directive?
Answer. When we send out a very large EOP-wide directive, that is one—that I believe, to the best of my knowledge, is when we've done it.
Question. And when did you not do it?
Answer. If it's a targeted search where we will go to maybe one or two offices and we pretty much deal directly with those individuals and is more of a go over, get the documents, or have them provide the documents and make sure that the search has been completed.
Page 760 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Who would sign such a document?
Mr. EGGLESTON. Are you talking about the certification?
Mr. DHILLON. The certification, yes.
The WITNESS. I believe the person in charge of a particular office will sign the certification.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Now, how—when you do a large request, and you—that justifies a directive, how do you ensure that all of the offices have complied?
Answer. Well, one way is usually the certification process that I just described.
Question. What—does the certification process or—is there a form that you prepare, or is the form prepared by the office responding?
Answer. The form is prepared by the Counsel's Office.
Question. And does that form allow——
Answer. Generally the form is prepared by the Counsel's Office, yeah.
Page 761 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. And do you receive that form from every office, in the case of a directive, from every office the directive was sent to?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, I believe that we do do that.
Question. So just so I'm clear, you ensure that—my question to you is how is compliance assured. And is the answer that you ensure that you received a form from every office that the directive was sent to?
Answer. I personally, no. The Counsel's Office receives the certifications from the various offices after the certifications have gone out.
Question. Who verifies that those certifications have been received from every office in the case of response to a request from the Counsel's Office, to a directive from the Counsel's Office?
Answer. One of the—one of the Counsel's Office members.
Question. An associate counsel?
Answer. I don't know if it's particularly an associate counsel, but one of the Counsel Office's members.
Question. Have you personally ever done that?
Page 762 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I have not.
Question. Do you know of anyone in the Counsel's Office who has?
Answer. I believe Karen Popp did.
Question. And in what circumstance or in response to which directive did she do that?
Answer. I believe she did it in response to the April 28 directive.
Question. And that was a directive sent out by Mr. Ruff?
Answer. I believe his name is on it, yeah.
Question. How are the documents—let's talk in the case of a directive—let's not. Let's talk in the case of a targeted request, and you used WAVES records as an example. Do you——
[Pager interruption.]
Answer. Sorry. I'm fine.
Page 763 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. With respect to a targeted request——
Answer. Uh-huh.
Question [continuing]. You indicated that, if the request is, for example, WAVES records, you or one of your fellow counsels may go and simply obtain the records; is that accurate?
Answer. In some instances, yes.
Question. So there are times when you actually go digging through and—or go into the office and requesting—and actually physically requesting the records yourself?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. With respect to a directive, do you typically work in that manner, also?
Answer. Typically not, because if the directive goes out, usually the person receiving the directive will send us the documents. There are instances where we will review documents in a person's office at their request.
Question. Are the documents sent through interoffice mail or through couriers or interns? How do the documents physically get from one office to the Counsel's Office in response to a directive?
Page 764 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Typically, they are hand-delivered.
Question. Now, what happens when documents that are responsive to a directive are received? Where are they received, and where—where are they received? Where are they sent to?
Answer. Generally, they are sent to one of the associate Counsel's Offices.
Question. Where do they go from there?
Answer. They are either reviewed by that associate counselor, they are placed in a workroom where somebody—one associate counsel will review them.
Question. Is there a specific workroom that you have for reviewing the responses to directives and other document requests?
Answer. We have a workroom that we use.
Question. Do you use that for storing the documents, also?
Answer. Storing, viewing, preparing.
Question. Now, have you personally ever received documents responsive to a directive?
Page 765 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. Yes.
Question. And what process did you follow with those documents?
Answer. Either I would review them, or they would go to the document room where I or somebody else reviewed them.
Question. And what would happen after the review process?
Answer. Responsive documents are flagged for production.
Question. When are they given their EOP number?
Answer. When? Some—I don't mean to be flip, sometime before they're produced.
Question. Okay.
Answer. And prior to the copying obviously.
Question. When the final decision has been made on production?
Answer. Once they're deemed responsive.
Page 766 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Okay. You said that you review the documents, and you flag the ones you think are responsive. What's the next step after that with respect to your production?
Answer. Generally speaking, they are Bates stamped and, at some point, they go out.
Question. Are you, for example, in—for documents you've received in response to a directive, are you the final person to review those documents before they're produced to this committee?
Answer. Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.
Question. Under what circumstances are you the last person to review them?
Answer. It's not really a formal process. It would just be that I was the last person to look at them.
Question. Okay.
Answer. Versus another associate counsel.
Question. Do you have Mr. Breuer look at documents before they're produced?
Page 767 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. EGGLESTON. Would——
Mr. DHILLON. I'm sorry. Jim Wilson of the Majority staff just entered the room.
Mr. EGGLESTON. Thank you.
The WITNESS. Sometimes he does, yes.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. And under what circumstances does he look at documents before they're produced, Mr. Breuer, that is?
Answer. An example would be if a particular—if a production is going out, he may want to just get a sense as to what kind of documents are going out.
Question. Okay. Was there ever a time when you specifically flagged a document for Mr. Breuer to review before sending it out?
Answer. I need to confer for a second.
[Witness confers with counsel].
Page 768 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
The WITNESS. Don't believe I've done that, no.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Was there ever a time when Mr. Breuer came through and asked you just generally to review documents before they went out?
Mr. EGGLESTON. I'm sorry. Those are documents he's not collected and someone else has collected?
Mr. DHILLON. Yes. I'm sorry.
Mr. EGGLESTON. Because otherwise——
Mr. DHILLON. Yes. Documents you've collected that he asked you to review them before they went out.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Review a second time. I'm sorry, I'm confused. Documents he's already reviewed?
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. I'll rephrase the question. Was there ever a time that Mr. Breuer asked you to provide to him documents for his review after you had reviewed them.
Page 769 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I can't recall a time where he would do—where he has done that.
Question. When has Mr. Breuer reviewed documents after you've reviewed them before they were sent to this committee?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. You want dates? Do you want kinds of documents? I'm not sure what you mean by when.
Mr. DHILLON. When means when.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Meaning what date and what month?
Mr. DHILLON. When.
The WITNESS. I actually don't recall.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. All right. Do you recall that event ever occurring?
Answer. I don't.
Question. So is it your recollection, then, that Mr. Breuer never has reviewed documents after you've reviewed them?
Page 770 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I don't think that was his testimony earlier.
The WITNESS. I'm sorry. Was that the question?
Mr. DHILLON. Yes.
The WITNESS. Mr. Breuer has reviewed documents—has looked at documents after I have reviewed them.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Under what circumstances did that occur?
Answer. It would be under the circumstances where I would say, Lanny—as I said before, I think it would just be a circumstance where he would like to get a sense of what kinds of documents were going—have been produced.
Question. So that the request to review those documents that you reviewed come from Mr. Breuer?
Answer. Are you saying—are you asking me if Mr. Breuer is the one who asked me?
Question. Yes.
Page 771 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I believe so, yeah.
Question. And how often has that occurred?
Answer. Not often. And I believe after documents have been produced.
Question. Has Mr. Breuer ever asked you to review documents—has Mr. Breuer ever requested documents from you that you have reviewed prior to production to this committee or another investigative body?
Answer. I don't recall his ever doing that.
Question. When memos or directives are sent out by the Counsel's Office, who typically writes them?
Answer. I think typically one of the associate counsels draft them.
Question. Have you ever done that?
Answer. I assisted in drafting. I've reviewed drafts of directives, yes.
Question. Now, with respect to responding to specific document requests or subpoenas, does your team or group have regular meetings or—to discuss the response?
Page 772 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. If you're asking if our team meets regularly when we're responding to subpoenas or document requests, the answer is, yes.
Question. What do you talk about at those meetings?
Answer. The status of production.
Question. Do you ever talk about specific documents and whether they should or should not be produced?
Answer. I don't believe so, no.
Question. Has the frequency of meetings remained relatively the same and stable since you arrived at the White House Counsel's Office?
Mr. EGGLESTON. These are investigative team meetings?
Mr. DHILLON. Yeah. That's correct.
The WITNESS. I think so, yes.
Mr. EGGLESTON. They meet a lot over there.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. We do over here, too.
Page 773 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Now, when you receive a subpoena or a document request or a letter request, do you send out the actual request to the various offices or units or groups?
Answer. Could you repeat that question.
Question. When the White House Counsel's Office receives a subpoena or document request or letter request, is that—is an actual copy of that sent to the various offices or units or entities within the White House?
Answer. I don't believe so.
Question. How do you advise the various entities within the White House of the subpoena, document request, or letter request?
Answer. Generally, it's using the directive.
Question. Which is a document created by the Counsel's Office?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Do interns review any documents that are responsive or potentially responsive to committee subpoenas?
Page 774 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. At times, they will do an initial overbroad first cut.
Question. And when you say ''first cut'', what does that mean?
Answer. They will take a very large universe of documents, and using an overbroad scope, review those documents.
Question. And using the scope, the overbroad scope, will they eliminate some documents from that universe of documents?
Answer. I don't know. They might. I don't know.
Question. Have you ever given interns instructions on how to review documents and what they were looking for, how they should——
Answer. I have not.
Question. Have you ever been present when anyone in the Counsel's Office gave an intern such an instruction or instructions?
Answer. I have not.
Question. How do you know that interns review documents?
Page 775 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I have walked into the workroom and seen interns reviewing documents.
Question. Are these interns that are working with the investigative group?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. And do you know what their names are?
Answer. Actually, I don't know their full names.
Question. Do you know who—how about first names. You know first names?
Answer. Yes. I know one first name.
Question. And that is?
Answer. Erica.
Question. Is Erica still employed as an intern at the White House Counsel's Office?
Answer. I believe that she is.
Page 776 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Do you know who assigned the interns to review these documents?
Answer. I don't know.
Question. Have you ever assigned interns to do a first cut on documents responsive to this committee's subpoena or subpoenas?
Answer. I don't recall ever doing that.
Question. Now, what was the status—let me back up. When you arrived in March of 1997, was Mr. Quinn still there?
Answer. No, he was not.
Question. And what was the status of document gathering at the time you arrived?
Answer. We were anticipating receiving a subpoena from this committee.
Question. Did Mr. Quinn leave any memos or explanations of what he had done at that point?
Answer. I don't know if he did.
Page 777 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Did you ever see any such memos?
Answer. I did not.
Question. Do you know who was in charge of responding to subpoenas or other requests under Mr. Quinn?
Answer. I don't know.
Question. Does the President see subpoenas from this committee?
Answer. I don't know.
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. EGGLESTON. He said he didn't know.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. Do you know if the President is on the list to—I'll back up for a second.
What about directives? Is the President provided with directives from your office?
Page 778 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I don't know.
Question. Now who——
Answer. Now——
[Witness conferring with counsel.]
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. I'm sorry?
Answer. I want to clarify one response, and that was to your question as to whether Lanny Breuer has ever asked to review documents after I reviewed them before they have gone out. I just want to make it clear that I don't recall his ever doing that. He may have, I just don't recall, okay?
Mr. DHILLON. Okay.
Mr. EGGLESTON. I just couldn't remember whether that's—he gave an answer close to that before, but I didn't remember. But I didn't take him——
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Page 779 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Okay. Who would provide the President with a copy of a subpoena or a directive?
Answer. I really don't know who would. I assume one of his advisors.
[Witness conferring with counsel.]
The WITNESS. And, also, your question kind of presumed that he is provided with one. And as I said earlier, I don't know that he's provided with one.
Mr. EGGLESTON. With one.
The WITNESS. With a subpoena.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Question. I was asking about a couple of things.
Answer. With a directive.
Question. Subpoena or directives.
Answer. Okay.
Question. Who do you represent in your capacity as Associate Counsel to the President?
Page 780 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Answer. I represent the President and the White House and the Executive Office of the President.
Question. All three?
Answer. Well, they are all part of the administration.
Question. You do that as one entity or multiple entities?
Answer. In the broad sense, yes.
Question. Now, have all the responsive documents in the President—of the President's been turned over to this committee?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, yes.
Question. Who certifies from the President's Office the documents that have been turned over?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I'm sorry, in the President's possession, do you mean in his personal capacity or Oval Office operations or Executive Office of the President or immediate Office of the President? I'm not sure what you mean by that.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DHILLON:
Page 781 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 10 Of 22
Question. Let's start off with personal capacity. I'll reask the question. Thank you. Have all responsive documents in the President's personal possession been turned over to the committee?
Next Hearing Segment(11)