Segment 4 Of 4 Previous Hearing Segment(3)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1204 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
For MR. PHILLIPS:
RANDALL E. DAVIS, ESQ.
Stuntz & Davis
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 819
Washington, D.C. 20044-0798
Ms. COMSTOCK. Good morning. We can go on the record here.
Thank you, Mr. Phillips for coming in this morning. On behalf of the members of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I appreciate and thank you for appearing here today.
This proceeding is known as a deposition. The person transcribing this proceeding is a House reporter and notary public. I will now request that the reporter place you under oath.
THEREUPON, JOHN R. PHILLIPS, a witness, was called for examination by Counsel, and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
Ms. COMSTOCK. I would like to note for the record those who are present at the beginning of this deposition. My name is Barbara Comstock. I am the designated Majority counsel this morning for the committee. I am accompanied today by Bob Dold, D-O-L-D, who is also with the Majority staff.
Matthew Joseph is the designated Minority counsel this morning; is that correct?
Mr. JOSEPH. Yes, that's correct.
Ms. COMSTOCK. And he is accompanied by Ken Ballen, Mr. Barnett and Mr. Raphael, who are also with the Minority staff.
Page 1205 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The deponent is here this morning with his attorney, Mr. Randy Davis.
Although this proceeding is being held in a somewhat informal atmosphere, as you have been placed under oath, your testimony here today has the same force and effect as if you were testifying before the committee or in a courtroom. If I ask you questions about conversations you have had in the past and you are unable to recall the exact words in the conversation, you may state that you are unable to recall those exact words and then you may give me the gist or the substance of any such conversation to the best of your recollection.
If you recall only part of a conversation or only part of an event, please give me your best recollection of those events or parts of the conversations that you do recall.
If I ask you whether you have any information upon a particular subject and you have overheard other persons conversing with each other regarding it or have seen correspondence or documentation regarding it, please tell me that you do have such information and indicate the source, either a conversation or documentation or otherwise, from which you derive such knowledge.
Before we begin the questioning, I would like to give you some background about the investigation and your appearance here today.
Pursuant to its authority under House Rules X and XI of the House of Representatives, the committee is engaged in a review of possible political fund-raising improprieties and possible violations of law and related matters within the committee's jurisdiction. Pages 2 through 4 of House Report 105–139 summarizes the investigation as of June 19th, 1997, and encompasses any new matters which arise directly or indirectly in the course of the investigation. Also, pages 4 through 11 of the report explain the background of the investigation.
All questions related either directly or indirectly to those issues, questions which may have the tendency to make the existence of any pertinent fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence, are proper.
Page 1206 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The committee has been granted specific authorization to conduct this deposition pursuant to House Resolution 167, which passed the full House on June 20th, 1997.
Committee Rule 20, of which you received a copy, outlines the ground rules for the deposition. Majority and Minority counsels will ask you questions regarding the subject matter of the investigation. Minority counsel will ask questions after Majority counsel has completed its initial round of questioning. After the Minority counsel has completed questioning, a new round of questioning may begin.
Members of Congress who wish to ask questions will be afforded an immediate opportunity to ask their questions at any time when they may be present. When they are finished, committee counsel will then resume questioning.
Pursuant to the committee's rules, you are allowed to have an attorney present to advise you of your rights. Any objection raised during the course of the deposition shall be stated for the record.
If the witness is instructed not to answer a question by his attorney or otherwise refuses to answer a question, Majority and Minority counsel will confer to determine whether the objection is proper. If Majority and Minority counsel agree that a question is proper, the witness will be asked to answer the question. If an objection by the witness' attorney is not withdrawn, the Chairman or a member designated by the Chairman may decide whether the objection is proper.
This deposition is considered as taken in Executive Session of the committee, which means it may not be made public without the consent of the committee pursuant to clause 2(k)(7) of House Rule XI. You are asked to abide by the Rules of the House and not discuss with anyone other than your attorney this deposition and the issues and questions raised during this proceeding.
Finally, no later than 5 days after your testimony is transcribed and you have been notified that your transcript is available, you may submit suggested changes to the Chairman. The transcript will be made available for your review at the committee office. Committee staff may make any typographical and technical changes requested by you.
Page 1207 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Substantive changes, modifications, clarifications or amendments to the deposition transcript submitted by you must be accompanied by a letter requesting the changes and a statement of your reasons for each proposed change. A letter requesting any substantive changes, modifications, clarifications or amendments must be signed by you. Any substantive changes, modifications, clarifications or amendments shall be included as an appendix to the transcript conditioned upon your signing of the transcript.
We can make arrangements to go beyond that 5-day period if your schedule—you need additional time. The Minority has consented in doing that when the witness asks us for additional time; or if you need to have the deposition mailed to you, we can mail it, but we need to have it signed and agreement that it will not be copied or disclosed to anyone, because this is Executive Session material. But by agreement with the Minority counsel, they have agreed that with a signed agreement, we can do it in that manner if the witness needs.
Do you understand everything we have gone over so far?
The WITNESS. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Do you have any questions about anything we have gone over so far?
The WITNESS. No.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I just wanted to go through a few ground rules before we begin.
If you don't understand a question that I ask, I would ask that you please let me know and I will repeat it or rephrase it so that you do understand the question. The reporter will be taking down everything we say and will make a written record of a deposition. You must give verbal, audible answers because the reporter cannot record what a nod of the head or other gesture means.
Do you understand that?
Page 1208 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The WITNESS. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. If you can't hear me, please say so and I will repeat the question or have the reporter read the question to you.
If you don't know the answer to a question, simply say that you do not know. We are not asking for mere speculation or guess. We are asking for your best recollection of the events.
Do you understand that?
The WITNESS. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Please wait until I finish each question before answering, and I will wait until you finish your answer before I ask the next question.
Your testimony is being taken under oath as if we were in court, and do you understand that if you answer a question, it will be assumed that you understood the question and the answer was intended to be responsive to it?
The WITNESS. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Are you here voluntarily today or as a result of a subpoena?
The WITNESS. Voluntarily.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Do you have any questions before the deposition begins?
The WITNESS. I do not.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK
Question. Could you please state your name for the record and your current address?
Answer. John R. Phillips, [redacted].
Question. Thank you.
Page 1209 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Can you give your work history from college forward?
Answer. Well, I went to law school at—graduated in 1969, University of California at Berkeley. My first employer was the law firm of O'Melveny & Myers in Los Angeles from 1969 to 1971.
1971 to 1988, I worked for—I was the director of—co-director of the Center for Law in the Public Interest in Los Angeles.
In 1988, I formed a private law firm named Hall & Phillips. Until 1993, the name of that firm—or we dissolved that firm and began a new firm, named Phillips, Cohen & Goldstein, in Washington, D.C. The name of that firm changed in June, 1994, I believe, to Phillips & Cohen in Washington, D.C., which is where I currently operate out of.
Question. How long have you been in Washington, D.C.?
Answer. Since January 1, 1993.
Question. Have you spoken with anyone, other than your counsel, about this deposition today?
Answer. Well, yes. I mean, the fact that my deposition was being taken, I probably mentioned it to a number of people.
Question. Okay. And with whom have you spoken?
Answer. Just the fact that my deposition was being taken? Just the fact that my deposition is being taken?
Question. Well, anything about the substance of the deposition, actually; contact about any of the testimony that you may be giving.
Answer. I spoke briefly with Michael Cardozo.
Question. What did you speak with him about?
Answer. Not about the substance of the deposition, but just the conclusion of his deposition, we had a discussion; and I think he suggested that if I wanted to have my attorney call his attorney that that would be okay.
Page 1210 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Is this in regards to Mr. Cardozo's deposition before this committee?
Answer. No. It was just the fact that he had his deposition—after his deposition was concluded.
Question. And he indicated to you that your attorney could call his attorney?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. About his deposition before this committee?
Answer. No, just about any information that might be useful to him.
Question. All right. Did he discuss with you any of the subject matters that came up in the deposition?
Answer. Not really, no.
Question. When you say ''not really,'' I mean——
Answer. We didn't discuss—I don't recall questions asked of him.
Question. Did you discuss with him any of the events that you may have mutual knowledge about?
Answer. No.
Question. Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No.
Question. Did you discuss any of the general topics about some of the investigation matters that are being looked into?
Answer. To the best of my recollection, we didn't discuss anything of substance, just that if my attorney wished to call his attorney, he would be willing to talk to him.
Question. And when did this conversation occur?
Page 1211 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Oh, within the last 10 days or 2 weeks.
Question. Is there anybody else that you have discussed this with?
Answer. The substance of the deposition, of what I would be saying?
Question. Or just generally.
Answer. Well, I probably mentioned to many people that I was going to be deposed by this committee, when the subject might have come up. It will take me some time to go through all the names of conversations that I might have had with people.
Question. Have you discussed it with anybody at the White House, who is currently employed at the White House?
Answer. No.
Question. Have you discussed it with any former employees at the White House?
Answer. No.
Question. Other than Mr. Cardozo, do you know any other people that you may have generally discussed some of the matters with——
Mr. JOSEPH. What time frame are you talking about?
Ms. COMSTOCK.—about this deposition?
Mr. DAVIS. Could we identify these people?
Ms. COMSTOCK. We have two Majority staff members who are also present here.
The WITNESS. If your question is, did I have discussions with anybody about questions that are likely to come up about the substance of the deposition, other than my counsel, I don't think I had such discussions.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Page 1212 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have you reviewed any documents in preparation for this deposition?
Answer. I have been over the documents that were turned over to the committee this morning.
Question. Okay. I wanted to ask you about a number of people at the White House, starting with the President and the First Lady; and if you have knowledge of them, just tell me what your relationship with them is.
Do you know the President? Have you met him?
Answer. I don't think he would recognize me or know who I was. I have met him over the years several times, but I have never engaged him in any conversation except for a few sentences or to be in a receiving line.
Question. Mrs. Clinton?
Answer. The same.
Question. And Webster Hubbell?
Answer. I know Webster Hubbell.
Question. When did you first meet Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. I got to know Mr. Hubbell when he—when we moved here to Washington, and he came shortly after or about the same time. That would be around January, 1993.
Question. And how did you meet him?
Answer. I don't remember the exact occasion that I met him in Washington, but it was probably through Mickey Kantor, who was a close and old friend of mine. He and Mr. Hubbell had known each other for many years.
Question. Did you meet him at Mr. Kantor's house or a social engagement?
Answer. A social engagement, right.
Page 1213 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Is your wife also friends with Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And your wife is—could we have her name for the record?
Answer. Linda Douglas.
Question. Are you both also friends of Mrs. Hubbell?
Answer. Yes.
Question. How long have you known Mrs. Hubbell?
Answer. Since—she arrived in Washington with her family, I recall, somewhere around March or April, 1993.
Question. Did either you or your wife know Mr. or Mrs. Hubbell before January of 1993?
Answer. I may have met him, but I never really talked to him, briefly in Little Rock. My daughter was visiting the Kantors—their daughter and our daughter are good friends. I stopped in to pick her up somewhere around August of 1992, and—I think there was a party, I was staying at the Kantors' home, and think Mr. and Mrs. Hubbell were among the various people that stopped by that evening.
Question. How long have you known Mr. Kantor?
Answer. Oh, about 25 years.
Question. And how did you first come to know him?
Answer. I first got to know him when I called him back in Washington when he was working for the Office of Legal Services. I was trying to arrange funding for a new organization that I was setting up, the Center for Law in the Public Interest.
I later met him face-to-face when he moved to California, I believe around 1973 or '74. And thereafter, we were pretty good—we became social friends and have been friends throughout the years.
Page 1214 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have you had any business relationship with Mr. Kantor?
Answer. No.
Question. How long have you known—or do you know Mack McLarty?
Answer. I have met him a few times. I don't know him. I don't think he would recognize me or know who I was.
Question. Erskine Bowles?
Answer. I think I have met him once or twice, but I don't think I have ever talked to him. Nor do I think he would recognize me or know who I was.
Question. John Emerson?
Answer. I know John Emerson very well. I have known him for probably 15 years from California.
Question. And how do you know Mr. Emerson?
Answer. Well, I knew him more socially. He was a young attorney in California working at the Manatt Phelps firm. I don't recall exactly where, the occasion that I met him, but I would see him from time to time, get together occasionally, socially, in California.
And when he came here, being one of the few Californians who came here, I saw him much more.
Question. Did you know Mr. Emerson from the campaign in 1992 or from any work done on the 1992 campaign?
Answer. I knew he worked on the campaign, but I knew him long before that.
Question. Did you work or assist in the 1992 campaign in any way?
Page 1215 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I did not.
Question. Do you know Maggie Williams?
Answer. I do not.
Question. Do you know Bruce Lindsey?
Answer. I have met Bruce Lindsey. I don't know him well. I have met him on several occasions, maybe three or four times.
Question. All right. Do you know Marsha Scott?
Answer. I know Marsha Scott.
Question. How long have you known her for?
Answer. I met her here, when she came here, socially, maybe met her—talked to her 5 or 6 times over the—maybe more than that, 5 or 10 times over the course of the last 4 years.
Question. Do you know Mary Leslie?
Answer. I have met Mary Leslie several times. I don't know her well.
Question. Or Kim Wardlaw?
Answer. I have met Kim Wardlaw. I knew her husband slightly in Los Angeles. I have met Kim Wardlaw a couple of times over the years.
Question. Do you know Mark Middleton?
Answer. No.
Question. Or William Kennedy?
Answer. I have met, several times, Bill Kennedy when he was here in Washington, but don't know him well.
Question. Harold Ickes?
Answer. I have met Harold Ickes several times, as well, but don't know him well at all.
Page 1216 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And Frank Hunger?
Answer. Yes, I met Frank Hunger—I have talked to him on several occasions.
Question. Nancy McFadden?
Answer. Yes, I have met Nancy McFadden.
Question. How do you know her?
Answer. I met her—I think I met Nancy—I am not sure—when I went to Little Rock. She was working on the campaign when I was staying at the Kantors, and I saw her several times when she was here in Washington.
Question. Did you meet her when she was working for Mr. Hubbell at the Justice Department also?
Answer. No, I met her before that.
Question. Did you interact with her at all when he was at the Justice Department?
Answer. I may have occasionally had some discussions with her in the Justice Department—Frank Hunger, as well. I mean, he was the head of the Civil Division. I have seen him a couple of times socially, but I have seen him also in his capacity as head of the Civil Division.
Question. You mean in the course of your work?
Answer. Yes.
Question. You would run into both of them?
Answer. Yes. Mr. Hunger more, since he is directly in the Civil Division.
Question. Okay. Do you know Truman Arnold?
Answer. I do not.
Question. Or Vernon Jordan?
Page 1217 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I have met him a few times, but never really had any conversations with him. I don't think he would recognize me.
Question. Okay. Is it—I guess you are friends with Mr. Cardozo?
Answer. Yes.
Question. When did you first meet Mr. Cardozo?
Answer. Sometime over the last 4 years. We have gotten together socially 3 or 4 times.
Question. Okay. And how did you meet him through Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. I think I may have, yes.
Question. Were you——
Answer. I may have met him at Mr. Hubbell's house. I can't recall the exact circumstance. He was a friend of Webb's.
Question. Do you know Michael Berman?
Answer. Yes.
Question. How did you meet him?
Answer. A lot of mutual friends here in town. I think I met him first in Little Rock the weekend I was there, when he was working on the campaign, and I would see him socially here occasionally, he and his wife.
Question. Okay. Going back to in 1993, how often did you see or speak with Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. When he first arrived here sometime in January, he was here alone without his family. Mickey Kantor was here also; his family came later to Washington. So occasionally, every couple of weeks or so, Mickey and Webb would come by for dinner together; we used to have a dinner for friends who were here without their spouses. That was through January-February.
Page 1218 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
And when Webb's family arrived, I think in March or April—it could have been later—his wife Suzy and his children, we met them very early on when they came. We became pretty good friends during their stay here in Washington. Our families were quite good friends, and over the years, I would say we spent a lot of time together.
Question. Okay. Would you see each other once a week?
Answer. What time frame are you talking about?
Question. After the families arrived, say in March of 1993, throughout 1993-1994?
Answer. I would say, the beginning of summer we would see them probably every couple of weeks.
Mr. JOSEPH. That's summer of 1994?
The WITNESS. 1993.
Mr. JOSEPH. 1993?
The WITNESS. 1993. And I am sure they considered us among their closer friends here in Washington. We would see them pretty regularly. Our children are friends, too.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Okay. In 1993—your wife is a reporter; is that correct?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. And in 1993, was she covering the Justice Department?
Answer. No.
Mr. DAVIS. Can I lodge an objection here on pertinency grounds. Can you give me some idea of where you are heading? I mean, John is the one that is being deposed. What relevance does his wife's occupation have with the investigation?
Page 1219 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. We had a number of phone messages from Mrs.—from Linda Douglas to Webster Hubbell in the 1993-1994 time period. I was trying to determine if she was interacting with him socially or professionally, if she covered the Justice Department, and any knowledge you may have about what that involved, her work or personal matters.
The WITNESS. Well, she covered——
Mr. DAVIS. Well, I think I am going to have to insist on the objection on pertinency grounds.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Well, we are looking into matters relating to Mr. Hubbell, and we have records indicating that your wife had a lot of contact with Mr. Hubbell, as well.
Talking with you today, to the extent that it is possible to determine your knowledge of your wife's interaction with him, we may or may not need to talk with her about her knowledge. So I am just trying to establish here what the nature of that relationship was, to determine her knowledge about these activities that we are discussing.
Mr. JOSEPH. Let me just jump in here for the Minority. Again, I mean, you haven't really justified the pertinency of questions relating to her profession and what she was doing professionally.
You know, you have already asked about the contact of Mr. Phillips' wife with Mr. Hubbell, and anything about her professional relationship, you just haven't justified yet. So we also want to object on the grounds of pertinency and relevancy.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Well, the question still stands.
Mr. DAVIS. Can I confer?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Sure.
[Counsel confers with client.]
Mr. JOSEPH. Can I just say one other thing before Mr. Davis speaks. I just want to make sure that you have consulted also with regard to the issue of privilege in terms of any information that he would get through his wife.
Page 1220 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Mr. DAVIS. Spousal privilege, sure.
Can I ask a clarification of where you intend to go with the questions? I mean, I guess I am prepared to withdraw the objection at this point but not if it is going to lead us into waiving whatever spousal privileges we have and any other privileges I might have later to object to something that's—that's on pertinency grounds. So I guess I would like to have some idea of how much further down the road we are going to get in terms of questions regarding Linda Douglas.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I am asking the witness about his knowledge of Mr. Hubbell and Mr. Hubbell's activities from any source from which he has that knowledge. That would include individuals such as Mickey Kantor, Mr. Cardozo, his wife or others. I mean, if there is an objection, obviously you all can decide that, but I am asking for his knowledge from all sources about Mr. Hubbell's activities.
Mr. JOSEPH. That's not the pending question. The pending question relates to what she was doing professionally. It has already been established that they were social friends. You are asking questions that are not along the lines that you just indicated.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I think the—you have withdrawn the objection; is that right?
Mr. DAVIS. As I said, I am prepared to withdraw the objection if I have some sort of idea how many more questions we are going to have relating to Linda Douglas.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I guess it is going to depend on your knowledge of Mr. Hubbell from your wife as opposed to your own personal knowledge.
Mr. DAVIS. I will withdraw the objection, but clearly we are uncomfortable in this area of—that involves spousal privilege and the question of pertinency. But I withdraw my objection.
Page 1221 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I believe the pending question was, your knowledge of Linda Douglas' interaction with Mr. Hubbell during the 1993-1994 time period.
Answer. I have testified previously our families were friends.
Question. And do you have any knowledge as to whether she was also contacting him professionally in her capacity as a reporter?
Answer. I really couldn't address that. I don't know what the substance of those conversations were.
Question. All right. Did there come a time when you learned that Mr. Hubbell had problems with his law firm about his billings?
Answer. Yes, I did.
Question. And do you recall generally when that was?
Answer. Well, it was some time ago. Having passed 50, my memory isn't as good as it used to be, so I will try to remember the time frame. I think it was somewhere around the time that—close to the time that Webb resigned from the Department of Justice.
I was shocked by his resignation, and I had conversations with him about that resignation; and he explained to me, as I think he explained to others, that he really had a dispute with his former law firm related to expenses on a case that he had representing his father-in-law and that he decided to—he decided to resign to go back and get this clarified; and he wasn't going to be—allow himself to become a lightning rod for criticism or distraction for the President or the Department of Justice and that he was going to take care of this now and go back to take care of whatever problems there were.
Question. Do you recall if you had that conversation before or after he resigned?
Answer. Well, I didn't recall precisely. It might have been right around there. If I had a discussion with him before about problems he may have had with his firm, it was nothing that registered to the point where I would have ever expected him to resign, because I was truly surprised when I learned of his resignation.
Page 1222 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And how did you learn of his resignation?
Answer. I think it was—I think it was either announced or I may have learned the—just very shortly before or when he announced—I can't remember exactly. I didn't talk to Webb directly until, I think, after he resigned.
Question. Okay. In this conversation that you have just described, you don't recall if that was before or after, but can you place it in time somewhere?
Answer. It was right close to when he resigned. As I say, I was shocked when I found out about the fact of his resignation, based on all that I knew.
Question. Had you read any of the newspaper accounts of what claims his law firm had made about him?
Answer. You know, I must have read those at the time, because I would have been interested and I had, I am sure, some conversations with Webb about them. But he tended to dismiss them as just problems that developed among partners in a law firm, which I am familiar with as with any other law firms with a dispute of a contingency case that has been successful and you look around to see who is going to pay the expenses and costs, and recollections are different as to who had what obligations. That's how he described it to me.
Question. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Kantor about Mr. Hubbell's resignation?
Mr. JOSEPH. What time frame are we talking about?
Ms. COMSTOCK. I am talking about when he resigned.
The WITNESS. I am sure I did. I don't recall what they were, other than I can't believe Webb resigned or something like that.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Did Mr. Kantor tell you about any conversations he had with Mr. Hubbell?
Page 1223 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No. I don't recall him giving me any, you know, more information about the substance and circumstances surrounding the resignation.
Question. Did Mr. Kantor ever tell you about any conversations that he had with the President about Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Well, around that time frame, no, I don't recall any such conversations.
Question. Or at any time?
Answer. He may have later said that he talked to him—it must have been sometime later—to the President to say that Webb—something to the effect that Webb had assured him that there really isn't any problem, that he will be able to take care of whatever problems there were and that it wasn't anything to worry about.
Question. That Mr. Hubbell had indicated to the President that there were no problems, that he was going to be able to work them out, that was the gist of the conversation?
Answer. Yes, or that Mickey had talked to the President, something to that effect. That would have been sometime afterwards that I think I learned of that conversation, and I can't remember exactly how it came up, if Mickey mentioned it to me. But I understood there was such a conversation.
Question. Did Mr. Kantor indicate to you whether he had talked to the First Lady about Mr. Hubbell's legal situation?
Answer. What time frame?
Question. At any time.
Answer. You know, he may have. I can't recall. I don't think he would share—Mickey would share with me conversations that he would have with the President and the First Lady. That's not how he operates.
Page 1224 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell ever tell you anything about any particular partners at the Rose Firm, or any problems he was having trying to resolve matters with the Rose Law Firm in the 1994 time frame?
Answer. I recall, after his resigning, trying to work out whatever disputes there were with his partners. And at some point, he told me he was proposing an arbitration, binding arbitration, where they would have all the facts presented to an arbitrator and they would—the arbitrator would determine what he owed, if anything, to the firm; and that the firm refused such request.
Question. Were you aware of him making settlement offers in the months after he resigned from the Justice Department, making settlement offers to the Rose Law Firm?
Answer. I know he was in discussions with them about trying to resolve this, and I recall the arbitration proposal specifically. As to whether there were specific offers of dollar amounts at the time, I am not aware that he would have told me those. I only had a general sense, as I described, of what his problems were.
Question. Did you ever discuss—aside from discussions with Mr. Kantor, was there anyone else you ever discussed Mr. Hubbell's legal situation with, or the matters related to his resignation?
Answer. Well, I don't—Webb was a good friend and we had lots of friends in common. I doubtless had many conversations with people about the difficulties that Webb was having.
Question. Did you have any conversations with Mr. Cardozo?
Answer. Not that I can recall, no. I may have, but I can't recall any conversations at the time.
Question. Were you aware, after Mr. Hubbell left the Justice Department, of him setting up offices in Mr. Cardozo's shop?
Page 1225 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Yes, I was, yes.
Question. And how did you know that?
Answer. Well, I knew where Webb was when he left, and he was looking for an office space that was right down the street from where I was. I stopped by there once or twice to see Webb when he was there.
Question. And what was your understanding of what he was doing there?
Answer. Oh, I think Michael Cardozo just basically gave him an office to operate out of. I saw him answering the phone. And Webb was trying to figure out what he was going to do with his professional life.
Question. Were you aware of any discussions about helping to find Mr. Hubbell some work or consulting arrangements in the months after he resigned from the Justice Department?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, no, I wasn't involved with any.
Question. Did Mr. Kantor ever talk to you about Mr. Hubbell needing work or how he would get work?
Answer. Not in any specific way. I think we probably had discussions, since we were friends, about what Webb is going to do from this point forward. I don't recall specific conversations of trying to find work for Webb.
Question. Were you aware of Mr. Kantor ever approaching his law firm about hiring Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No.
Question. Were you aware of Mr. Kantor approaching any law firms about hiring Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No.
Page 1226 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. All right. Did Mr. Hubbell ever speak with you about working at your firm, with your firm?
Answer. No, no. I mean, it was a very small firm. It's not the kind of—it is a very specialized kind of practice. I never considered Mr. Hubbell as working with my firm.
Question. Or did Mr. Kantor ever ask you about, if you had any work for Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No.
Let me correct that. I considered, but decided there wasn't, in my firm.
Question. Your firm?
Answer. I considered, but I decided that there really wasn't any work.
Question. Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about that?
Answer. He never asked me about it, and I—you know, it was never discussed as a serious possibility.
Question. Were you aware of anybody ever indicating that law firms were reluctant to hire Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. I know that—I know Webb was interviewing to join some law firms——
Question. Do you know what firms?
Answer. At the time. And I know that he talked to Latham & Watkins about joining their firm.
Question. And how did you learn of that?
Answer. I think he must have probably told me. And I know some—you know, that's a firm I deal with. In fact, I recall—it was to join the firm. It wasn't to get work with the firm. I recall talking to a partner there about, you know, Webb, close around that time, that Webb was a capable guy.
Page 1227 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And did this partner call you or did you call the partner?
Answer. It was a guy I have been dealing with in some litigation, so I think I—I am sure I called him about Webb.
Question. And who was that?
Answer. His name is Tom Patton.
Question. And what did you discuss with Mr. Patton?
Answer. All I said was, I knew that Webb had talked with them about employment possibilities in the Washington office and that I knew Webb, that I had worked with Tom; and I, at that time, thought Webb was a very intelligent person with good judgment and that he might be a good—I mean, if they are considering him, I thought that he was a pretty capable guy.
Question. Did Mr. Patton indicate whether there was any reluctance, given the reports about Mr. Hubbell's legal problems, to hire him?
Answer. I don't think he said—no, I don't think he said to me anything like that, no.
Question. Did you ever hear anything like that about Latham & Watkins or any other firm?
Answer. This—I am not sure exactly what the time frame was, but probably several months after he resigned, I—as the clouds started gathering over Webb's—Webb, I am sure that law firms would have reservations.
Mr. JOSEPH. Are you speaking from your personal knowledge or are you just speculating on that?
The WITNESS. I am speculating. I am speculating.
Mr. JOSEPH. Because I don't think any of us here want you to speculate on questions.
Page 1228 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The WITNESS. Right. I am speculating.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you recall any conversations that you had with people about recalling that firms were reluctant to hire Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No. It was probably just me speculating that Webb's possibilities of getting hired by—or getting hired by a law firm were not very good in light of the unfavorable developments.
Question. Okay. Did there come a time when—well, let me back up first. You are affiliated with a group called the Consumer Support and Education Fund; is that correct?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Could you tell us what that is?
Answer. Oh, it's a small 501(c)(4) fund that was set up in California as a result of settlement of a case that I handled. At the end of the case—it was a consumer case against Toyota Motors, I believe, in which we were able to get relief for many—everybody who owned a certain style of Toyota automobile that needed some repair work of a substantial nature. And as part of the settlement, instead of paying us more in attorneys' fees, they just paid our statutory attorneys' fees, and I proposed as part of the settlement that they put some monies available into a foundation to do good—to do good work to educate the public on various issues, consumer issues, and they agreed to that; and that led to the formation of this Consumer Support and Education Fund.
Question. And when was that established?
Answer. I believe it was 1988-89, that time frame.
Question. Okay. How much money was placed in the fund at that time?
Page 1229 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I believe it was about $750,000 or $800,000.
Question. And the purpose of the foundation was to educate on consumer issues; is that right?
Answer. It was pretty general. It had a very general clause in it that gave broad latitude to the board, but its principal focus was consumer issues.
But it really wasn't limited to that. It had fellowships; it could work for education programs of various sorts.
Question. Okay. From its inception in 1988 to 1989, how many fellowships were involved in that, if you know?
Mr. JOSEPH. What you are asking for is over a certain period of time?
Ms. COMSTOCK. From 1988 to the present.
The WITNESS. Well, this was the first one—the discussions might be the beginning of an annual grant or something like this, but given the disastrous first grant to Mr. Hubbell, the fund has not renewed that type of grant.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Okay. So there have been no fellowships aside from Mr. Hubbell's?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Okay. From 1988, then, to 1994, what type of disbursements of funds—generally what was the fund doing?
Answer. I would have to—I really don't know the details. My best recollection is it was to support litigation that had consumer connections.
It did a lot of work for the implementation of the insurance reform measure that was adopted in California, supporting consumers appearing before the Insurance Commissioner. It supported some, I think, political activities: a campaign finance reform initiative on the California ballot, it made a small grant to, if I recall. More recently, it supported legal services groups to help educate people about consumer issues and other issues.
Page 1230 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Generally, were you disbursing funds, then, to groups?
Answer. Groups.
Question. Organizations?
Answer. Individuals. There was one—I mean, on Proposition 103, intervenor funding, the insurance initiative, there was a grant, I believe, also to an individual.
Mr. JOSEPH. Mr. Phillips, we have to have the ability to object to certain questions, and I am afraid that you are not being responsive enough to the questions.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Mr. Phillips has an attorney present here to object to any questions.
Mr. JOSEPH. We have a right to object also, and I can't object if the answers are not going to be responsive to the questions.
The WITNESS. What was the question again? I will try to keep my answer——
Ms. COMSTOCK. Could we read back the question? I think the answer was responsive, and the client is represented here by counsel, who is certainly fully capable of objecting.
Mr. DAVIS. Could we have the question read back?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes. If we could go back to the question.
[The reporter read back as requested.]
The WITNESS. Generally, yes.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. We were discussing the way the funds were disbursed.
Answer. I did think I said in the last answer, I think there was one grant to an individual who was a head of the group enforcing the insurance initiative measure, to support his efforts.
Page 1231 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Was there a board for this education fund?
Answer. Yes, there was a board.
Question. All right. How many people were on that board?
Answer. Were on it, or are on it, at the time?
Question. Why don't we pick up when it started and then move to 1994.
Answer. I believe there were five members initially on the board. I really can't trace the history through. I was not on the board. I was more of an informal advisor and informal counsel to the board, unpaid. I think there was five initially.
Question. Okay. What was the process by which grants would be made to organizations or groups?
Answer. Well, based on the collective knowledge of the board, they would, given the smallness of the fund, try to target their grants to those issues that they thought were worthy of support.
Question. Okay. And do you know how the board would learn of these organizations or groups?
Answer. I think they knew of the groups since they were people in the community, in the area, in Los Angeles, California.
Question. Was there a form or an application that one needed to make if they were to get a grant from the fund?
Answer. Yes. I think usually there was a—maybe a request from the fund, typically, that would be interested in supporting some activity, and there would be some proposal and a budget of some sort prepared and reviewed. The fund did not really want unsolicited proposals, it being small, and it didn't have a staff, and it would decide among its board members as to who they thought was worthy to give grants to.
Page 1232 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did you usually get written proposals or requests?
Answer. There was always something in writing that would support what the grant was for.
Mr. JOSEPH. I am going to have to object to these questions, because Ms. Comstock hasn't established Mr. Phillips' foundation for knowing this information. I am unable to tell whether he is speculating or operating based on personal knowledge through his relationship with this organization.
It would be helpful, when you ask him the questions, to ask him to clarify whether he is, in fact, knowledgeable enough to answer the questions that are being asked of him.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Mr. Joseph, you will have an opportunity to clarify the matters that you are not knowledgeable on at that time. Again, the witness is trying to answer the questions. I don't think we need to lengthen this deposition unnecessarily on the matters that you do not have knowledge on.
Mr. JOSEPH. I think it is—it is going to unnecessarily lengthen this deposition to ask him questions for which you haven't established a foundation of his knowledge.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I believe we discussed that Mr. Phillips established the foundation at the beginning.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Is that correct, Mr. Phillips?
Answer. Yes. I played a major—I played an important role in setting it up, yes.
Question. Okay. I believe that answers the question.
Do you know approximately how many grants per year the foundation would give?
Page 1233 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I would be speculating. Not——
Mr. DAVIS. Don't speculate.
The WITNESS. Not many. It would—I have identified a few that it gave sizable grants to, the implementation of which I know about.
Mr. JOSEPH. I have to continue to object if you are not responsive to the question.
Ms. COMSTOCK. If we could go off the record for a minute.
[Discussion off the record.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. To your knowledge, how many grants were provided per year?
Answer. Well, I would be speculating. I would be guessing as to how many. I mean, not many.
Let me explain. I will be as helpful as I can to the committee to explain this fund and how it was operated.
It was a small fund. I set it up, as I explained, as a result of a settlement of this case. I really considered it more attorneys' fees that we could have kept personally that I essentially gave up to set up a fund to do good works.
I selected initially, as you have to to set up a nonprofit organization, initial board members. I asked people to serve on the board. It would take a fairly limited amount of effort. These were people who were prominent in their fields. They would consider various proposals.
I would recommend to them from time to time projects I thought were worthy undertakings for the fund. I think they would listen to me carefully, give me considerable deference in the proposals that I would make, but ultimately they would review an application submitted and decide whether to support the grant or not, because it is not a large fund; there aren't many grants.
Page 1234 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
They tried, when they could, to support activities that had a chance of being self-sustaining, where they would both do good work, accomplish the objective and have a potential of returning some of the funds back to the Consumer Support and Education Fund. They were able to do that on support of some litigation, some intervenor funding, where they were successful in getting a favorable result, and then funds would be repaid.
But there were maybe—up until this time, maybe a total of 10 different grants or so that they may—I am guessing about that many. That's how it operated.
Question. Okay. Are there any kinds of public filings regarding this fund?
Answer. Oh, yes, there are public filings that are required of the State of California with the Attorney General's office, the IRS. They are publicly available.
Question. Would those reports indicate all of the grants that were made and how much money was given to each grant?
Answer. I believe they would. The accountants would do that.
Question. To your knowledge?
Answer. They would do that. I wouldn't do that. I know they complied with all the filing requirements, and they are publicly available.
Question. Okay. Did there come a time where you recommended a fellowship for Mr. Hubbell in connection with the Consumer Support and Education Fund?
Answer. Yes, I did.
Question. And could you tell us when that was?
Answer. Oh, I think it was in the April-May 1994 time period.
Question. And how did that come about?
Answer. Well, I am not sure when, but I had previous discussions with the chairman, the then-chairman of the board, Robert Wolfe, about a topic that interested me, and I think interested him as well; and that's problems with public service today, the difficulty of getting good people to come to Washington for government, generally because of the intense scrutiny they face through the public media, through the hearing process, the predatory press that can look for every angle of a person's life and past life. And it deters so many good people from coming, and it is a very unfortunate outcome; and as a consequence, it deters a lot of good people from coming to Washington.
Page 1235 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
We had those sort of general discussions.
Question. With Mr. Wolfe?
Answer. Mr. Wolfe.
Question. Do you recall generally when those discussions were?
Answer. Oh, it would be probably in the preceding year, some period of time.
So when Webb resigned, at the time I was shocked about the fact of his resignation, it struck me that it was yet the latest example of someone who had served their country well, who had come to Washington with strong credentials—Chief Justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court, Mayor of Little Rock.
He had, to my knowledge, received excellent reviews on his performance at the Department of Justice. He was well liked by the career people. There were articles in the Washington Post about how upset people were in the Department of Justice, with Webb feeling somehow he had to resign because of the swirl of controversy that had been raised about his former law firm.
It seemed to me, knowing Webb and at that time not being aware of the very serious problems that he had, that he didn't tell me about, that Webb would be a good person, a good candidate to receive the first fellowship like this.
So I brought it up with Webb. Afterwards I said, is this something that you think that you would—you could contribute to and take a substantial period of time and reflect on this experience that you have gone through and talk about the perils of public service? It would give you a time to sort of step back from it all, write something that could even be a book. I think it would be something of great interest. I think it would have potentially tremendous educational value for people to read and for the press and everybody else, part of this Washington scene, to understand how they—they may be discouraging good people from coming to public service.
Page 1236 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Webb was enthusiastic about the suggestion. He said he thought he could do that and do it well, he would like to do it. And I said I would recommend that he be considered, to the board, because I—this is something that I had been thinking of, that I and the chairman had; and I had discussions with Bob Wolfe about this idea of creating a Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship, and that I thought Webb would be a good candidate because of his own experience and who he was and what he could write about. And also Webb is a good writer.
He was interested in doing it. He subsequently met with—personally came to Washington, had conversations with him about the project and writing it, and then requested that Webb write—write a letter requesting an application for the structure of the program, which followed; and then the board considered that application and reviewed it and approved the grant with certain conditions attached, including the fact that if this was successful and it was turned into a book, a book form of value and something that could be publishable and he could get an advance on that, any funds that he was to receive for that would go first to repay the funds for the grant.
And he agreed and accepted those terms, I believe back in May. That was at the time that, certainly, I had no idea of the real problems Webb had not disclosed to me or the board. In that respect, I think he misled us. Had we known that, the seriousness of his problems, I would certainly never have recommended this grant, and he never would have received it. But you learn from experience.
Question. Did you talk with anybody about his alleged problems before recommending him for this, aside from Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No, I didn't, and it probably was a mistake on my part. I believed Webb when he told me. I always thought Webb to be at that time truthful and honest and straightforward. When he told me the problems, as he described them to me, about his firm, I understood them; and they were—there were some articles written, I think, at the time that I may have read. But I think probably, in retrospect, I was mistrustful of much of what is in the press and probably discounted them, and to my regret today.
Page 1237 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And as we have indicated earlier, your wife is a member of the press corps; is that correct?
Answer. Yes, yes.
Question. I just wanted to show the witness a couple of articles from March of 1994 about Mr. Hubbell. This is a March 15th, 1994, Washington Post article.
Mr. JOSEPH. Do you have a copy of that for the Minority staff?
Ms. COMSTOCK. No, I do not have a copy of this document.
Mr. JOSEPH. Before he answers any questions on it, I would like to have an opportunity to look over the document.
Mr. DAVIS. What is the date of this?
Ms. COMSTOCK. March 15th, 1994, The Washington Post.
The WITNESS. Well, I have glanced at it quickly.
Mr. JOSEPH. Before you answer any questions, the Minority wants to have a chance to look at the document.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Could we just go off the record for a minute?
[Discussion off the record.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Why don't we proceed on the March 15th article.
The March 15th Washington Post article that the witness has just reviewed, in that, it indicated that the Rose Law Firm had raised serious questions about possible improprieties in Mr. Hubbell's client billings and expense reports resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses for the firm and excessive bills to some of its clients.
Do you recall having any knowledge of those matters in March of 1994?
Answer. No, I don't recall specifically reading it, but I do recall my discussions, as I testified earlier, with Mr. Hubbell about problems with his firm; and I think he believed that there were elements within his firm that were hostile to the administration and were using this as an occasion to try to embarrass both him and the administration, and that he was going to resolve these problems that centered on this case that he had for his father-in-law, Seth Ward, that involved hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Page 1238 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
There were expert witnesses. He described several hundred thousand dollars that the firm had advanced that they now wanted him to repay in various out-of-pocket expenses since the case was unsuccessful.
The question was, at that time, whose responsibility was it? Webb's understanding was that this was a firm matter, the firm took it as a risk on a contingency basis and that there was no obligation, certainly for him as a lawyer, to repay it, or his father-in-law, and that these were overheated comments coming out of this firm where people, as I mentioned, were internally, within the firm, trying to embarrass the administration, trying to embarrass him.
I accepted his explanation. I discounted these swirls of controversy as raised in these articles, which I probably did read, as part of the problem of why you—when you come to Washington, you have sometimes reckless reports being raised by journalists that force a person to feel they have to leave office. I put this in that category.
In retrospect today, in light of everything that's come out, obviously Webb did not tell me the truth, and he did not square with me or others at all about the seriousness of his problems; and they were far different than his characterization to me. And had I known that, I would not, under any circumstances, have recommended Webb Hubbell for a Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship.
Question. Have you had any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about his misrepresentations to you, to this date?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And what have you discussed with him?
Answer. Well, I—when I paid the money back ultimately, he was——
Question. You are referring to the money, the foundation grant?
Page 1239 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. The foundation grant.
Question. We will go into that later.
Answer. That's when I discussed it with him.
Question. Okay. We will move on to that a little later then.
This March 15th——
Mr. DAVIS. You still have a question outstanding.
Did you answer, did you have any discussions?
The WITNESS. I did around the time I paid the money back.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I think it might be easier to go through the establishment of Mr. Hubbell getting the money, and so I will return to that at a later time.
Mr. JOSEPH. Ms. Comstock, in the next few minutes, if it is possible, I would like to take a quick break.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Why don't we go on for a few minutes.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. In this March 15th, 1994, article, there is also a discussion about Federal agencies, such as the FDIC and RTC, investigating Mr. Hubbell. Do you recall learning that the FDIC and RTC were also investigating Mr. Hubbell for billing problems?
Answer. Vaguely. I can't recall the details. I recall Webb strongly defending his conduct and believing that there was no basis for this.
Question. Okay. I am showing the witness a March 19th, 1994, Washington Post article. Do you recall the Rose Law Firm—that all 28 partners at the firm agreed to send a complaint to the Arkansas Supreme Court on Hubbell?
Mr. JOSEPH. What is the question?
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you recall learning in March of 1994 that all 28 of the Rose Law Firm partners had filed a complaint against Mr. Hubbell?
Page 1240 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I vaguely recall that, yes, about that time frame.
Question. All right. And you learned that all 28 of these partners had contended that Mr. Hubbell owed them and his former clients, including the Federal Government, hundreds of thousands of dollars?
Answer. I think I recall, and I am trying—to the best of my recollection, Webb's characterization was that it was very split internally with the firm. There were others who felt that it was wholly inappropriate, they shouldn't do it, but they had to, based on, I think, an opinion they received from somebody about ethical questions raised, that they had to come up with a unanimous position even though there was sharp division within the firm as to the proper course they should take.
Webb defended again his conduct, saying this was very much a political maneuver within the firm, designed largely to embarrass the administration and to embarrass him; and I believed him.
Question. Did he indicate who was involved in this plan or effort?
Answer. No, he didn't. I don't know the members of that firm, so the names wouldn't make any difference to me.
Question. So did you ever talk to anybody at the Rose Law Firm about any of these matters?
Answer. No, I did not.
Question. At any time?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you know Jim Blair?
Answer. No.
Question. From your discussions with Mr. Hubbell, were you aware of the First Lady talking to anybody at the Rose Law Firm about any of Mr. Hubbell's legal billing problems?
Page 1241 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Not that I can recall.
Question. Did he ever mention to you these partners, any action they were taking in regards to Mrs. Clinton?
Answer. No.
Question. Or what they were doing and how it impacted upon Mrs. Clinton?
Answer. I don't believe he—I don't recall.
Question. Okay. Why don't we return to the area of discussing the grant for Mr. Hubbell.
Mr. JOSEPH. If you are going to move on to a different topic or back to a different topic, I think that would be a good time to take a break.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Would the witness like to take a break? I am sorry.
The WITNESS. Well, a break is fine. My general objective would be to complete, as soon as possible, the process.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Mine also. So if we can keep it as brief as possible, I will just stay here and we can go back on the record as soon as Mr. Joseph returns.
[Recess.]
Ms. COMSTOCK. We can go back on the record.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. We were discussing the fellowship that was awarded to Mr. Hubbell. You indicated that Mr. Hubbell was interested in this fellowship, and can you tell us what he envisioned he was going to be doing as part of this fellowship, if he were to apply for it?
Answer. Well, I think he was going to step back, take several months, work full-time was my understanding on reflecting on his experience in Washington, much of his—the problems and difficulties of serving in the public eye and his own personal sort of account of this, of why he did what he did; to also talk about others who came from Arkansas, had similar experiences.
Page 1242 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Certainly, Vince Foster is a close—and an old friend's tragedy would presumably be part of what he would write about. He would go back and review all of his files, pull everything together, try to write as compelling a piece as he could. Not just a piece but a long body of work.
Question. Okay. And when you discussed this with him, did he say whether or not he would have other work that he was doing at this same time, or was this going to be an exclusive thing that he was working on?
Answer. I understand this grant he would be receiving, this for was full-time work for the equivalent of 3 months, that could be extended over some time; but it was not—it was at least that amount of effort and probably, as these usually end up doing, they take a lot more time than you submit. So I wouldn't have been surprised if he spent 4 or 5 months' equivalent for the time doing this work.
Question. After you talked to Mr. Hubbell, he indicated that he was interested in this?
Answer. Yes.
Question. When you discussed this, what did you then decide to do to pursue this?
Answer. Well, I spoke to Mr. Wolfe, the chairman of the board. Mr. Wolfe personally met Mr. Hubbell when he was here in Washington. They discussed it further, and that led to the request that he submit a letter of application. As I testified to, that was submitted and the board considered it and approved it.
Question. Okay. I am showing the witness an April 7th, 1994, letter to Mr. Hubbell from Mr. Wolfe regarding the Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship. It is on Consumer Support and Education Fund letterhead. It discusses this—is this the follow-up, to your knowledge, to the discussion you had with Mr. Wolfe?
Page 1243 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Yes, I believe it is.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. I will mark that as Exhibit 1. The Bates stamp at the top says 2-001.
[Phillips Deposition Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.]
[Note.—All exhibits referred to may be found at end of the deposition.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Could you tell us, who is Robert Wolfe?
Answer. He is an attorney in Los Angeles.
Question. In what areas does he work?
Answer. His specialty was appellate litigation.
Question. How long have you known Mr. Wolfe?
Answer. Oh, 25 years.
Question. And after you spoke with Mr. Hubbell, you then—you set up this meeting that Mr. Wolfe had with Mr. Hubbell. How did that meeting come about?
Answer. Well, to the best of my recollection, Mr. Wolfe was going to be in Washington and wanted to have a chance to talk personally with Mr. Hubbell. I don't know whether I set it up or he called him, but I know he met Mr. Hubbell in his office.
Question. And did you discuss this April 7th, 1994, letter with Mr. Wolfe at all?
Answer. I probably did.
Question. And do you recall what you discussed with Mr. Wolfe about this letter?
Page 1244 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Well, just in terms of the formatting and procedure, that it should lay out exactly the scope of the project that the board had in mind in written form. And so there was a clear statement of the goals and objectives, and that's what this letter appears to be.
Question. Okay. Was this fellowship then, the Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship, designed—was it going to be directed to Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. I don't understand.
Question. The fellowship was going to be created for Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Well, I think, as I previously testified, there was a discussion about beginning a Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship, and this would be the first. If it worked out well, there would be more.
Question. Were there any other people at the time that you were considering for the Distinguished Public Servant Fellowship, aside from Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. No. It was my recommendation that Mr. Hubbell, precipitated by Mr. Hubbell's situation, that I thought he fit the criteria well that we had discussed before.
Question. Do you know how the payment, the monthly statement of $15,000 a month for 3 months, was arrived at?
Answer. Oh, I think it was an attempt to come up with an amount that was appropriate for the assigned task, that was generally consistent with what think tanks and these kinds of grants provide for people in Washington, for this kind of work, for this period of time.
Question. Do you know who came up with that figure?
Answer. It was probably my discussion with Mr. Wolfe as to what the appropriate amount would be. We probably discussed it back and forth and arrived at this number as a number to propose.
Page 1245 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And did you discuss with—did you have any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about the amount of the stipend?
Answer. Oh, I don't recall. I may have.
Question. I am showing the witness an April 12th, 1994, letter; the Bates stamp on the top is 2-002. It is a 2-page letter from Mr. Hubbell to Mr. Wolfe.
Answer. I have read it.
Question. Okay. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Hubbell in between him getting the initial letter from Mr. Wolfe and writing this letter back—if you recall, any assistance you provided Mr. Hubbell in drafting the letter to Mr. Wolfe?
Answer. I don't believe I did.
Question. Was it your understanding at this time that Mr. Hubbell wouldn't be doing any other work except for this initially?
Mr. JOSEPH. I think you already asked that question.
The WITNESS. My understanding is, this was payment for full-time work, or its equivalent, over maybe some extended period of time, that this would be his primary, even exclusive, focus of his work for the period in question.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Did there come a time when you learned that Mr. Hubbell had other clients during this time frame?
Answer. Sometime over that summer I think I was aware that Webb was looking beyond this 3 months and trying to figure out—develop some sort of practice for himself; that he was trying to get clients or work that he would be able to perform.
Question. All right. Were you aware or did you become aware that Mr. Hubbell also had clients at or around April of 1994 at this same time frame——
Answer. No, I was not.
Page 1246 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. When you testified that you thought he was exclusively working on this?
Answer. I was—not that I can recall. I wasn't aware of any clients that he had at that time.
Question. When you say you learned sometime in the summer that he had some other clients, what was your knowledge about those other clients?
Answer. That he was trying to develop some client base that could sustain a practice that he was trying to put together.
Question. And what was your understanding of the practice he was trying to put together?
Answer. Well, law practice, generally consulting work in Washington, you know, fairly vague general sense of lobbying, advocacy.
Question. Did you have any knowledge of any of the clients he had?
Mr. JOSEPH. I believe he testified so far that he was aware that he was trying to develop a practice.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I am asking if you had any knowledge of any particular clients that he had.
Answer. I think the only one I learned sometime later that he told me, in passing, that he did have the City of Los Angeles at some point down the road. I am not sure. It may have been months, several months later, the airport—he had some work he was going to do for the city.
Question. What did he tell you about that work?
Answer. Just that—something about the airport and trying to secure funds from one account to another account for the city. I don't know. He didn't tell me any details about it.
Page 1247 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Do you recall how that conversation came up, what the context of it was?
Answer. Just probably general conversation of how he is doing, what he is doing.
Question. And what was your understanding, during the spring of 1994, of Mr. Hubbell's financial resources?
Answer. I personally thought they were very limited. I thought that he was facing, based on what—this is speculation on my part, nothing that he told me, that he was facing severe financial hardships, potential hardships down the road with no visible source of income, for he or his family.
Question. Did he discuss that with you—Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. He didn't discuss in any detail what his financial conditions were, except that he was obviously concerned about his ability to provide for his family and what he was going to do now that he has left the Department of Justice.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I would like to enter this April 12th, 1994, letter, as Exhibit No. 2.
[Phillips Deposition Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I am showing the witness Bates stamp number 2-003. It is minutes of meeting of board of directors of Consumer Support and Education Fund, dated April 13th, 1994. Can you tell us, how often does the board of directors of the Consumer Support and Education Fund meet or have conference calls?
Answer. Oh, I think in my experience, whenever there was any business to be done, they would arrange to have a conference call—several times a year, probably.
Question. Okay. And these notes, on page 1, a little ways down the page, it indicates the board adopted the minutes from the previous meeting of December 4th, 1993. Would that have been the last meeting prior to this April 13th, 1994, meeting, to your knowledge?
Page 1248 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Most likely. I am just basing that on reading this, this document.
Question. Would it be the practice of the board normally to adopt the previous—whatever had been the last board meeting minutes at the next board meeting?
Answer. I think that is the usual practice, yes.
Question. Do you recall how this conference call came about?
Answer. No. It is probably—no, I don't. I mean, it was probably set up to consider and approve this grant, which is the subject matter of the minutes.
Question. Okay. Do you know who set up the conference call?
Answer. No. Probably Mr. Wolfe, is my guess, but I would be speculating.
Mr. JOSEPH. Again, Mr. Phillips, no one here wants you to speculate on these topics, on these questions.
The WITNESS. I am speculating.
I don't recall. Most likely, the Chairman.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. The minutes indicate that you, Mr. Wolfe, Mr. Jacoby and Mr. Budetti participated in the conference call?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Could you tell us who Mr. Budetti is, Dr. Budetti?
Answer. Dr. Budetti, he is a doctor and a lawyer. He is now head of some health policy institute at Northwestern University. I think at this time he was the head of a health policy institute at George Washington. His specialty is, he is both a lawyer and a doctor, is health policy issues.
Question. I am sorry. I indicated that Mr. Jacoby participated in this conference call, but the notes do indicate that he was absent and forwarded his proxy to the Chairman. So I just wanted to correct that for the record.
Page 1249 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The minutes here indicate that this was something—a reference to the board of directors of Taxpayers Against Fraud, which was convened on April 13th, 1994. Is that another name for the fund? Or what is that referring to there, if you know?
Answer. I don't know. I mean, that doesn't make any——
Mr. JOSEPH. Where are you reading from?
Ms. COMSTOCK. I am reading from the first paragraph. It says, pursuant to written waiver of notice and consent to holding a special meeting.
The WITNESS. It appears to me that is probably a typographical mistake that they have.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. You don't know what the Taxpayers Against Fraud is?
Answer. It's another organization. It's not this organization.
Question. Okay. To your knowledge, who would have—who prepares the minutes of these board of director meetings?
Answer. I would be speculating. It would be——
Question. Okay. Do you know——
Answer. I would be speculating.
Question. Did you prepare these minutes?
Answer. I don't believe so.
Question. Is there a formal secretary of the organization who was responsible?
Answer. Someone may have the title ''secretary.'' You mean as an officer, secretary?
Question. Yes.
Answer. I don't think there is a secretary in the sense that they have the responsibility for preparing the minutes.
Page 1250 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Okay. Other than the minutes that are reflected here, do you recall any discussions about Mr. Hubbell getting this fellowship that was engaged in the course of this conference call?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you know if prior to this conference call anybody had talked with you about any of the legal problems that Mr. Hubbell had?
Answer. Anybody on the board?
Question. Yes.
Answer. No, I don't believe they did.
Question. So Mr. Wolfe had not talked to you at any time prior to this conference call about any legal—any legal problems that Mr. Hubbell had?
Answer. No, not that I recall, but I am certain that a discussion about the whole reason for doing this project, writing this book, was based on, in this case, Mr. Hubbell's experience, as I testified to earlier. I don't recall any specific discussions about legal problems of Mr. Hubbell with Mr. Wolfe.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 3.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Okay. You had indicated earlier that Mr. Wolfe did come to Washington and had occasion to meet with Mr. Hubbell. Were you in that meeting at all?
Answer. Yes. I introduced him.
Question. Okay. And can you just tell us about that meeting?
Answer. It was a meeting in Webb's office. I introduced Mr. Wolfe to Webb. They discussed the project, his sense of what he would be writing about, how he would do it. That's about the sum and substance of the meeting.
Page 1251 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Okay. Were you there for the entire meeting with Mr. Hubbell and Mr. Wolfe?
Answer. I don't recall if I was there for the whole meeting.
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell indicate he was going to gather his papers together and review through papers?
Answer. Yes.
Question. All right. What was your understanding of what those papers were going to be that he was going to be reviewing?
Answer. Oh, whatever—generally, what he had at the Department of Justice, his experience there, the matters that he worked on, papers from Arkansas, his sort of history of working in public service, how he—what he did, how he was really committed to doing public service work and the difficulties he encountered in Washington, any papers that would relate to that.
Question. I am showing the witness an April 15th, 1994, letter from Robert Wolfe to Mr. Hubbell regarding the distinguished public servant fellowship. This is a letter indicating that the board had approved this fellowship; is that correct?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. Do you recall having any discussions with Mr. Wolfe about preparing this letter or anything having to do with this letter?
Answer. I don't recall. It is obviously a follow-up to the board's meeting.
Question. Okay. Was it your understanding that Mr. Hubbell was going to provide progress reports on an interim basis about how this was—this report was progressing?
Answer. I think that was a condition of the grant, the letter grant, yes.
Page 1252 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And did there come a time where Mr. Hubbell informed you about his progress on this project?
Answer. I talked to him on and off over the first several months about the work he was doing, outlines and the focus and general substance. I had the impression he was working on it, gathering materials together, preparing outlines, thinking of it. I was impressed based on what he told me that he was turning his attention to this in a major way.
Question. Okay.
Answer. But I had not seen anything written from him.
Question. At any time did you ever see anything written that he prepared?
Answer. No.
Mr. JOSEPH. Are you talking about a letter?
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. At any time to the present did you see any anything regarding this project, the report that he was going to provide, this series of articles that he intended to write?
Answer. I don't recall having—it is not necessarily that I would see them. I wasn't really in charge of overseeing this, but I don't recall having seen any written reports other than his letters that he sent.
Question. Were you copied on these various letters that he sent?
Answer. I don't——
Question. At the time?
Answer. I have seen these letters and I don't really know whether I saw them at the time or when I saw them afterwards when they have become a subject of interest of your committee's and others.
Page 1253 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make this April 15th, 1994, letter, Deposition Exhibit No. 4.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. During this time in April and May, this 1994 time frame, this first few months after Mr. Hubbell left the Justice Department, did you have any knowledge of the kind of hours he was keeping at his office?
Answer. No.
Question. Did you have any knowledge about the amount of time that he was putting into this particular project?
Answer. Well, I had the impression that he was putting a good deal of time in it based on general discussions I had with him during that time.
Question. Did you have a general idea of how many hours a week he was devoting to this project?
Answer. No, but I assumed to the extent that a work week is 40 hours, that I was assuming he was devoting a substantial portion of that time to this project. That's certainly what the expectation was.
Question. You are saying your expectation was he was putting something like a full work week into working on this report?
Answer. Uh-huh. That was my expectation.
Question. All right. Did you ever talk with Mr. Cardozo about the type of hours that Mr. Hubbell kept at his offices?
Answer. I don't recall having ever talked to him about that.
Question. Or at any time to the present ever discussing with Mr. Cardozo, gee, was Mr. Hubbell around, was he there, you know, during the time?
Page 1254 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No, I don't recall any such discussions.
Question. All right. Showing the witness a calendar entry, which is a calendar entry of Mr. Hubbell, I believe.
Mr. DAVIS. Excuse me. Is this Mr. Hubbell's calendar?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes. This is Mr. Hubbell's calendar for April 20th, 1994.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. It indicates a meeting with Bob Wolfe at 5:00 p.m. that day.
Mr. JOSEPH. Can you explain what the source of this document is?
Ms. COMSTOCK. This is from Mr. Hubbell.
Mr. JOSEPH. Are you aware of whether the Majority has ever provided this document to the Minority prior to today?
Ms. COMSTOCK. I believe these documents may have been obtained in 1996, so you all may not have a copy.
Mr. JOSEPH. I am sorry?
Ms. COMSTOCK. You all may not have a copy of this particular entry. I am not sure. These were documents that were obtained during the course of a committee investigation in 1996.
Mr. JOSEPH. I am going to object just for the record for a use of a document from an earlier investigation that you have not provided to this staff or identified or given us any indication prior to today that you are planning to use such a document with the witness.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Your objection is noted.
Page 1255 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you recall if Mr. Wolfe ever—okay. I am sorry. On this calendar entry for April 20th, 1994, there is also a reference to a lunch with Truman Arnold at noon on that same day that Mr. Wolfe was meeting with Mr. Hubbell. I know you have already testified to there was a meeting with Mr. Hubbell and Mr. Wolfe at which you were present. Your name is not indicated here on this particular entry. Do you know if there were other meetings that Mr. Wolfe had with Mr. Hubbell alone that you weren't part of in this April 1994 time frame?
Answer. I don't know.
Question. And do you recall in your meeting if—that you had with Mr. Wolfe, if Mr. Hubbell had made any reference to meeting with Truman Arnold?
Answer. I certainly don't recall that.
Question. Okay. And did Mr. Wolfe ever indicate to you any references that Mr. Hubbell made to working with Mr. Arnold?
Answer. No.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 5.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Showing the witness a document that's a payment to Mr. Hubbell from the Consumer Support and Education Fund, the Bates stamp at the top is 2-005 and the bank statement is on the top and then the check itself for the monthly stipend is on the bottom.
Do you recall how, in your discussions, the payments were going to be made, if they were going to be before or after he had given you any progress reports or product?
Answer. No, I don't recall. I mean, it wasn't spelled out in the agreement. This didn't govern when the payments were going to be made.
Page 1256 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will mark that as Deposition Exhibit No. 6.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 6 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. This is a May 18th, 1994 letter to Robert Wolfe from Mr. Hubbell. I believe this letter is a progress report of sorts that Mr. Hubbell was giving. Do you recall seeing this letter at or around May of 1994?
Answer. I really can't remember if I had seen it then. I have seen it since, but I don't know whether or not I saw it at the time.
Question. Do you recall if you received any progress reports at the time?
Answer. I don't think I was copied on these letters. I may have seen them. At some point, I read these letters, but I just don't recall.
Mr. JOSEPH. Are you talking about in preparation for this deposition you have read these or some earlier time?
The WITNESS. In the last year or so, since this has been a matter of controversy, I have seen these documents sometime—recently I have, but I don't know—if your question is, did I see them contemporaneous with them being sent, I don't recall.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I am asking you if, in the time frame of 1994, you ever recall receiving any progress reports?
Answer. I may have seen them, but I just don't recall.
Question. Okay. And Mr. Hubbell here indicates that he did a written—recreated a written history of his public service. Do you recall ever seeing anything like that that Mr. Hubbell showed to you that—that he showed to you?
Page 1257 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No.
Question. Do you recall him ever telling you about a written history of his public service that he was preparing?
Answer. Well, I mean I recall him telling me he was working, I thought, diligently on this project, but I don't recall that he had a particular document that he had prepared.
Question. In No. 4 on this letter, he said he started a series of interviews with individuals who joined or considered joining the Clinton Administration. Do you have any knowledge as to who those interviews were with?
Answer. I do not.
Question. Did he ever indicate to you any particular individuals he was going to attempt to interview?
Answer. I don't recall specific names, other than he wanted to write an article about his experience in Arkansas coming to Washington. It may well have included the experience of others similarly situated.
Question. Okay. At the end of this letter to Mr. Wolfe, he indicates that he was looking forward to visiting with him soon about this project. Do you know if he ever met with Mr. Wolfe—I think he was indicating that he might see him in California, after this May 18th letter.
Answer. I am not aware that he met him in California.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 7.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 7 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. If you know, do you know at this time—it doesn't indicate on this letter, but do you know sort of in the April/May time frame of 1994 of any written product, besides letters, saying what he was doing was ever—the actual product that you all expected, if that had been produced to anyone at the Foundation?
Page 1258 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I am not aware that it was produced.
Question. This is a May 20th, 1994, letter to Mr. Hubbell from Bob Wolfe.
Mr. JOSEPH. I just want to note for the record that there is no signature at the bottom.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I believe these documents were produced by, I guess, Consumer Support and Education Fund and this was the way they were produced to us.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Bates stamp number on the top is 2-008. The first paragraph of this letter indicates that they are sending the second installment on the monthly stipend. Do you recall any discussion in this May time frame of anybody asking you any questions about, you know, should we be continuing this; you know, should we continue paying the stipend at this time?
Answer. You mean were questions raised as to whether it should be continued?
Question. Yes.
Answer. No, I don't recall.
Question. Okay. In this letter, which is not signed by Mr. Wolfe, but in the third paragraph it indicates that he is inviting him to visit with him at his house in California. Again, you have no knowledge about whether or not Mr. Hubbell ever visited with Mr. Wolfe in California; is that correct?
Answer. No. That's right. That's correct.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 8.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 8 was marked for identification.]
The WITNESS. To the best of my knowledge, he did not visit him.
Page 1259 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. There is also—this is a May 18th check for $15,000. I will go ahead and make that Deposition Exhibit No. 9. That was the second installment, payment, that we were just discussing that was referred to in the letter.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 9 was marked for identification.]
Mr. JOSEPH. You are characterizing it as connected or as a second installment.
Ms. COMSTOCK. It says, second monthly stipend on that check there. That's how it is characterized on the check.
There is a reference in the letter to enclosing a second installment.
And this is a June 18th, 1994, check attached to a June 30th, 1994, bank statement from the Consumer Support and Education Fund. This check indicates that it is a monthly stipend number three.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you recall if there was any discussion between May and June about continuing to pay Mr. Hubbell this stipend?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, I don't recall during the course of these payments any questions raised as to whether they should not be paid.
Question. Okay. Do you know if by June 18th, 1994 or at or about that time you received any work product from Mr. Hubbell at this time?
Answer. I am not aware of any, other than these letters that were sent reporting on his progress.
Ms. COMSTOCK. All right. We will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 10.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 10 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Page 1260 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. This is a September—I am sorry. I have got the wrong letter here for you. This is a little later. Excuse me.
The next letter that we have that was received from Mr. Hubbell is a September 12th, 1994, letter. Before I ask you about that I wanted to ask you during the summer of 1994, where we don't appear to have any contact between the Consumer Support and Education Fund and Mr. Hubbell, except for the stipend checks in May and June following the initial one in April, are you aware of any discussions with anybody at the Foundation about what Mr. Hubbell was doing throughout the summer on this project?
Answer. No. I mean—no, I am not. I mean, there may have been some general discussions, but I can't recall them.
Question. Do you recall if there was ever any concern about his—any growing legal problems he had in the summer of 1994?
Answer. Well, yes, there were concerns that began to surface, and I am not exactly sure when. I think it was around September, sometime after he had received the three installments, it became increasingly clear that he obviously had some serious and major problems that he had not told anybody about.
Question. You say in the September 1994 time frame is when you learned that there might be some serious problems?
Answer. Well, I think there was some discussions at that time, that I had with Bob Wolfe, that Webb's problems seemed to be getting much more serious, and I think the question in my mind was raised, would he ever be able to complete this assignment given—if he is—if it turns out that he had serious problems in terms of his own conduct. He would hardly be a distinguished public servant if that was the case.
Question. Were you aware of Mr. Hubbell traveling throughout the summer of 1994?
Page 1261 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Traveling?
Question. Yes, to foreign countries.
Answer. Yes.
Question. How did you learn about that?
Answer. He accompanied—the families took a vacation together and joined us for about 2 weeks.
Question. And where was that?
Answer. In Greece.
Question. Okay. Your families both traveled for 2 weeks together to Greece in the summer of 1994?
Answer. His daughter and my daughter were friends, right.
Question. Could you tell us who was on that trip?
Answer. Webb and Suzy and their daughter, Kelly, flew over to Greece; myself, my wife and my daughter. And I had rented a small boat and we—it turned out to be very small. We spent about 10 days, I believe, traveling around the various islands.
Question. On this boat that you had rented?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Did you pay for this trip?
Answer. I paid for the boat, yes.
Question. All right.
Answer. And I invited them to join us.
Question. Who paid for their air travel, if you know?
Answer. I believe the way we did that, I had a lot of frequent flyer miles and if they would buy my daughter's ticket, which was expensive at the time, without any discount rates, I would use my frequent flyer miles to get Webb and Suzy a ticket. That's, I think, what we did.
Page 1262 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. All right. So they had—they paid for your daughter's ticket?
Answer. Right.
Question. And then the rest of the——
Answer. I think it was about $1,400, something like that. It was not insignificant. And I used my miles to get them tickets.
Question. All right. And were you on this boat the entire time, then?
Answer. For 10 days, yes.
Question. All right. And who paid for the expenses while you were traveling around?
Answer. I paid for the boat. That was the expense. We shared expenses for meals. We usually ate in a small tavern, these places that we would dock for the night and we would have our meals at the local restaurant. I didn't pay—we all split it up.
Question. What was the time frame of this trip?
Answer. I believe it was maybe late July, early August, 1994.
Question. And at that time, did Mr. Hubbell indicate to you any of his growing legal problems?
Answer. No, he didn't. You know, I am trying to remember. Webb—I continued to believe him. I think it was more in the September, post-September time frame that I became very concerned that Webb's problems were quite serious and very different than what he had told me.
Question. Did your wife, in her reporting, cover any Whitewater matters or anything that gave you any knowledge in particular about any growing legal problems that he had?
Page 1263 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Not that I recall.
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell tell you anything about his—any other foreign overseas travel he had during the summer of 1994?
Answer. I know he went to the Far East later in the summer.
Question. After this trip that you took together?
Answer. Yes.
Question. How did you learn about that trip?
Answer. I think he—I think he and his wife probably mentioned it to us that they were going to take this trip.
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell tell you that he was doing any work for the Riadys at the Lippo Group?
Answer. Yes, the first time I had heard that name, the Riadys, the Riadys that he knew in Little Rock, he was doing some—going to do some work for them or something and they were arranging for a trip for Webb and his wife. That's the sum and substance of what—he didn't tell me what the work was and I didn't know what it was.
Question. So this was in the summer of 1994 that he told you about this work for the Riadys?
Answer. Well, whenever he was leaving to go, whenever that trip occurred. He was telling me they were taking this trip and he said he was—the trip was being arranged by this Riady family from Little Rock, or James Riady, I think his name was.
Question. Was his wife going on that trip?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And what was your understanding of the nature of that trip?
Answer. I have just a vague sense that maybe it would be introductions to people who may—maybe introductions to people who are associated with them; nothing specific, that they have business interests in Indonesia and elsewhere.
Page 1264 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Okay. Did he indicate anything about how much money he was making from working for the Riadys?
Answer. No.
Question. Did you have an understanding that he was being paid for this—his work with them?
Answer. I really—I obviously learned later that I was paid a lot of money. I am trying to remember at the time. I don't know whether I knew whether he was then retained by them, paid by them at all. I don't think—I certainly had no idea of the amounts that subsequently came out. I don't know at the time whether I knew he was being paid anything.
Question. Okay. You indicate that there did come a time that you did learn that he was being paid by the Riadys?
Answer. Yes, in the press.
Question. And when you say the press accounts, would that be last fall then you learned about it?
Answer. Whenever they came out.
Question. I am showing the witness an October 7th, 1996, op-ed by William Safire entitled ''The Asian Connection.'' In it, at the bottom of the article, it references—it is about four paragraphs from the bottom. It says—begins, the Riadys did, quote, ''I am told that between resignation and indictment a Lippo affiliate paid Hubbell over $250,00.''
Mr. JOSEPH. What is the date of this article?
Ms. COMSTOCK. The date is October 7th, 1996. It is a New York Times op-ed by William Safire entitled the ''Asian Connection.''
Mr. JOSEPH. I don't know whether the copy for the record is as mine is, which is cut off at the bottom.
Page 1265 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes, it is cut off a little bit on the bottom. Just one line on the second column is cut off. Actually, I think a line on the first column is cut off, too, just one line on the bottom.
Mr. JOSEPH. Mr. Phillips, you should feel free to read the whole article. I don't know if those missing lines are significant or not.
The WITNESS. Okay. I have read it.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. When you said you learned it from the press, do you recall this particular article at all?
Answer. I think I do. I think I recall it.
Question. Okay. Do you recall discussing this with Mr. Hubbell, anything about the payments?
Answer. I recall him—I remember reading this—first of all, Mr. Safire isn't the most, in my view, credible person. So—I think he may have made some remark about I only wish it were that much money when I had a conversation with him from prison the last time this came up.
Question. A conversation you had with Mr. Hubbell at about the time that this article came out last fall?
Answer. I just vaguely remember Webb saying something like I only wish what William Safire said—I never asked him how much he made or what he got. I have no knowledge of—he never told me how much. Nor did I ever ask him, except that comment, I only wish—something to that effect.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make this article Deposition Exhibit No. 11.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 11 was marked for identification.]
Page 1266 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. You had indicated that at some time in the fall of 1994 that you started thinking that Mr. Hubbell may not be in a position to complete this project. Given that you learned, I guess, sometime in August of 1994, that he was doing some work for the Riadys and traveling and given that you hadn't seen any work product yet throughout the summer, did you ever have any concerns about whether or not he was doing any work on the Foundation?
Mr. JOSEPH. I am going to object. That's mischaracterizing his testimony and assuming facts not in evidence. He hasn't testified about work that he was doing for—that Mr. Hubbell was doing for the Riadys.
The WITNESS. I don't know if he was doing work for the Riadys. I knew he took this trip.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. He took a trip for the Riadys?
Answer. Yes. Well, I think I testified earlier around the fall, and I am not sure of the exact dates, when the—when Webb's problems became more pronounced and clear that he had serious, serious legal problems, I, at that point became concerned that there is no way he could possibly complete this task, because he couldn't meet the basic conditions of being a distinguished public servant.
Question. Did he—you said—I am sorry. I can't recall. Did you discuss these concerns with Mr. Wolfe?
Answer. I think—well, over the period of time, I am sure I had discussions with the unfortunate turn of events for Webb and the embarrassment for all of us who—for me recommending him, for the Fund who gave him this grant.
Question. As of—I will show you, this is a September—did I give you a copy of this?
Page 1267 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Mr. JOSEPH. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. September 12th, 1994 letter.
The WITNESS. Yes. You gave this to me.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. In this letter, again, Mr. Hubbell talks about having completing—he talks about completing the assembling and organization of his papers in the first item, number one there, and then number two, he says, I have created a chronological history of my public service and, number three, I have completed the assembling of the documentation. I want to go to one. Did you ever see any evidence that Mr. Hubbell had, quote, ''completed my assembly and organization of my papers, notes, reports and other documents from the Justice Department?''
Answer. The answer is, no, I have seen no other—no materials that he may have developed as work papers in preparation for this article and no materials that he has referred to have I seen.
Question. Okay. So that would apply, then, for paragraph number two and the chronological history?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Or number three paragraph?
Answer. Right.
Question. And then number four, he talks again about completing interviews of certain individuals who joined or considered joining the Clinton Administration. And, again, you have no knowledge of any particular individuals that he interviewed?
Answer. No.
Question. He indicates here, he hoped to interview Jean Hanson and Roger Altman because of their involvement in congressional hearings. Did you ever discuss with him interviews of Jean Hanson or Roger Altman?
Page 1268 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No, not that I can recall.
Question. And then number 5 he discusses a rough draft. Again, you did not ever see any evidence of a rough draft of any of these reports?
Answer. I have not—did not.
Question. To this date?
Answer. To this date.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 12.
We have another majority staffer who has joined us.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 12 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. This is a November 18th, 1994, letter, to Robert Wolfe from Mr. Hubbell. And again this is providing the further update. Again, the first paragraph, Mr. Hubbell is repeating that he has completed his work of assembling, but he does indicate in the second paragraph that the project is still incomplete, but indicates he is still trying to complete it.
By November of 1994, did you have any discussions with him about where this project was at at this point?
Answer. I may have, but I must tell you, I was very discouraged based on where things were that this project would ever be completed, around about that time; certainly after the indictment.
Question. You would be referring to the December 1994 guilty plea that Mr. Hubbell made?
Answer. Yes. There was virtually no way he could complete it.
Question. On this letter, November 18th, Mr. Hubbell indicates that there is an enclosure. The bottom of the page, the first page, it says, I am finally set on the format, but would appreciate your thoughts. I have enclosed a draft of the introductory article.
Page 1269 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
We did not receive, I guess, from the Fund or from you an enclosure. I mean, this letter was not to you. I want to make that clear. It is to Mr. Wolfe. Do you know about any enclosure or draft that he ever sent to the Fund?
Answer. I do not.
Question. Have you ever talked with Mr. Wolfe about any such draft that Mr. Hubbell may have provided him at any time?
Answer. I think I recall Mr. Wolfe saying that—well, referred—that he said he was sending a draft. It didn't accompany the materials.
Question. So in your——
Answer. My recollection was that he did not receive the referenced material.
Question. So in your discussions with Mr. Wolfe, Mr. Wolfe informed you that even though this letter in particular said there was a draft, that Mr. Hubbell just sent the letter without the draft?
Answer. That's correct.
Question. All right. Did you know if Mr. Wolfe ever—did Mr. Wolfe ever tell you if he called Mr. Hubbell to tell him the draft wasn't in the letter you sent me?
Answer. No, I don't recall. He probably did.
Question. Do you recall if anyone had any concerns that by November 18th or November 1994, thereabouts, Mr. Hubbell had performed any work for the $45,000 he had been advanced, yet was sending a letter saying he gave the Fund a draft that is not enclosed? I mean, anything to that effect that was discussed with Mr. Wolfe or any board members?
Answer. Well, I can only give you my sense. My sense was that he had done work, a lot of work, based on conversations that I had with him, but in the fall it became increasingly clear to me that it would be unlikely that he could complete this assignment in the way that the board expected. And so—that's my answer.
Page 1270 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about your increasing concern that he wouldn't be able to complete the project?
Answer. You know, probably not as direct as I should have in retrospect. I may have.
Question. Do you recall expressing any concern to him that you had set this up for him essentially and now he wasn't producing the work?
Answer. Well, I did have subsequent discussions with him. I don't know exactly when they occurred. It was a difficult situation, especially after he pled guilty, where he received this money, I had recommended him, he had not performed, he couldn't perform, and I assumed he didn't have the capacity to repay the money.
Question. Did you discuss with him repaying the money?
Answer. Yes, I did.
Question. And what did he say?
Answer. Well, I told him—I told him, when I was going to repay the money, that I felt obligated to do so and I think he was surprised. Somehow, he just thought this was free money. I don't know. I told him I was going to repay the money. I didn't have to, I didn't have a legal obligation, but I vouched for him. He didn't perform. I was going to pay the money back. I told him that in prison.
Question. You had that discussion with him when he was in prison?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And what was his response?
Answer. He was very emotional. I think he was moved to tears. He was, I think, humiliated, embarrassed. I think he genuinely didn't realize I would have to pay the money back. I think he genuinely felt that he had treated me very badly and everybody else associated with this.
Page 1271 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. At the time of that conversation, which is some—I believe the record is that you paid the fund back at some point in December of 1995; is that correct?
Answer. Yes. I think sometime in November I had this conversation with him.
Question. Okay. Why don't I get that for you.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will go ahead and make this November 18th, 1994 letter, deposition Exhibit 13 before we move on to the next one.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 13 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. This is a December 14th, 1995 memo, and I guess a personal check of yours to the Consumer Support and Education Fund for $45,000. Your recollection, then, is you had this discussion with Mr. Hubbell about repaying the loan prior to your writing this check?
Answer. I believe it was November.
Question. Now, Mr. Hubbell had pled guilty in December of 1994, and this was in December of 1995. I am wondering, within that year time period, did you have discussions with the Foundation about what was going to go on with the repayment of this by Mr. Hubbell or you?
Answer. Yes, I mean generally I think—well, you know, what a terrible predicament it was, having taken this money, not that—he really couldn't do the work in prison; what are we going to do about it, just sort of—I mean, ultimately I knew, beginning when he went to prison in some way or another I wanted to see the Fund be made whole.
Finally, I would just step up to it and do it at the end of the year. I put it off longer than I should have, but because it was apparent that he would not be able to complete the work and I assumed he had no capacity to pay the money back; perhaps in error, but I assumed he didn't.
Page 1272 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell tell you he didn't—he wasn't able to pay it back himself?
Answer. Yes. He said he would pay it back at some point, when he was able to. He felt terrible about the situation. He would—I saw him in prison. He——
Mr. JOSEPH. Weren't we talking about the pre-prison time period?
Ms. COMSTOCK. No. We are talking about the discussion he had in November of 1995 with Mr. Hubbell when he is telling him that he was going to repay the money to the fund.
The WITNESS. Yes. I believe he said, in essence, he didn't have the capacity to repay that money, which I understood given the demands that I assumed to be no income and the demands of his family. He asked that he give me some security, I said, well, why don't you write me a note, a promissory note. That would be fine.
Later, I thought I should reduce it more to a formal letter, which I received back from him and then his accountant called—because Webb had discussed giving me security interest in some art work that he had, that he thought was some equivalent value. And I, in talking to his accountant, said, yes, I would be interested in having such a security interest.
I prepared an estimate of the value from an appraiser of the art work and my secretary prepared—the lawyer prepared the appropriate UCC forms and filed those forms with the District of Columbia to secure my interest in repayment of that money.
Question. Okay. Who was Mr. Hubbell's accountant?
Answer. Oh, somebody in Little Rock. I don't remember his name.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Now, I will make this repayment Deposition Exhibit No. 14.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 14 was marked for identification.]
Page 1273 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. In repaying this loan to the Fund, can you tell me how that works tax-wise for your purposes? Is this a tax-deductible donation to the Fund by you or is this just a repayment to the Fund?
Answer. I wish it were tax deductible, but it absolutely is not tax deductible. There was no tax basis upon which I could deduct it.
Question. I believe this is the financial statement that I believe was provided the committee that you were referencing earlier about the art work.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Okay. Did you have to also pay to have all of this—these assessments done on the art work?
Answer. No, I did not. This was provided by Mr. Hubbell's—I guess Mr. Hubbell's appraiser.
Question. And did there come a time when you collected any of these items that were placed as collateral in order to recover any of your money?
Answer. Well, I had a lien on all of these items legally. When they had to get—sell their house and when Suzy moved into a small apartment, they had no place to have—to put many of these items so we took—at her invitation—at their invitation, at Suzy's invitation, I have custody of several of these in my house.
Question. To this date?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Okay. Did you take those for purposes of storing them for them or for purposes of security for your own money that you were out for Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Well, I think I have the right legally to sell these items. I took them to use. I picked the pieces that we liked, that I liked, and I have them in my home.
Page 1274 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did you pick them up at their home?
Answer. At the apartment, yes.
Question. At Mrs. Hubbell's apartment?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Did you get them from the Macomb Street home or she had them at her apartment at that point where you picked them up?
Answer. I think it was at the apartment—I believe it was the Macomb Street.
Question. You went to the home to pick up the—or if you recall whether you physically picked up the paintings?
Answer. I don't know if I did or not.
Question. Do you know if someone else had picked them up?
Answer. Suzy brought them over or—I just don't recall. When I came back from work, they were thereafter selecting them out.
Question. Do you know if your wife had picked out some of the paintings?
Answer. I think she did. I was aware of some of these that I had seen at their house.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that Deposition Exhibit No. 15.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 15 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. We have an undated letter that was to Mr. Wolfe from Mr. Hubbell. It is unclear when it is from, but it does indicate, I apologize for not communicating earlier, quote, ''as you are aware, I was under severe restrictions in my communications for the last 7 months. I was also prohibited from communicating or publishing anything in the media until my period of cooperation with the independent counsel is completed. I hope you and the other trustees understand. The prohibition is now over and I fully intend to complete the work I set out to do. I have asked my wife to copy the box of documents that have been produced to date and send them to you.''
Page 1275 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
From the facts, I think as you have described and from just the public record, it seems to indicate that this is sometime around in 1995, after Mr. Hubbell has pled guilty and he has been working with the independent counsel. It is unclear whether—I mean, well, the address is at home so it appears to be that it is before he went to jail in August of 1995.
Mr. JOSEPH. I am going to object to that testimony.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Your objection is noted.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you have any knowledge of, from your reading of this—first of all, do you recall seeing this letter at any time or reviewing this document?
Answer. I really can't recall. I mean, I have seen this but—I have seen it probably in the last year. Whether I saw it at the time, I don't recall.
Question. Okay. In 1995, at any time in 1995, after Mr. Hubbell's guilty plea in December of 1994, do you recall having any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about him completing his work before this November 1995 discussion you had with him where you indicated you were going to repay the $45,000?
Answer. Oh, I may have. I didn't really, as I mentioned—testified earlier, I didn't really believe Webb was in a position to do the work.
Question. Do you think he had done any work at this time?
Answer. Yes, I thought he had put in a lot of time organizing and all the things he had said. He may not have, but I believed that he had, based on his representations to me.
Question. Do you believe——
Answer. But Webb has turned out to be not always very truthful.
Question. Do you believe today that he did do any work on this project?
Page 1276 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I don't know. I mean, he may well have done a lot of work that he said he was doing in organizing, he may well have. I don't know. I find Webb's statements less credible today than I did at the time.
Question. About his work for you, for the Foundation?
Answer. About anything.
Question. About anything?
Answer. Yes.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make this Deposition Exhibit No. 16.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 16 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. You are aware that Mr. Hubbell has taken the Fifth Amendment in regard to these and other matters before this committee?
Answer. I read about it, yes.
Question. Do you have any objection to Mr. Hubbell discussing what he did for the Foundation?
Answer. No.
Question. Are you aware of any of the board of directors having any objections to Mr. Hubbell discussing the work that he did for the Foundation?
Answer. I am not aware of any objection, no.
Question. When you all had given him the grant and the $45,000, was the intent to make his work public?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you ever discussed with him why he is taking the Fifth Amendment on these or other matters?
Answer. I did talk to him once after he was out of prison. I don't know——
Page 1277 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Mr. JOSEPH. The question is, I guess, whether you ever discussed him taking the Fifth Amendment?
Ms. COMSTOCK. You can let the witness answer the question.
The WITNESS. I am trying to remember if we specifically discussed Fifth Amendment or whether it was more of a general statement that he said he felt he had cooperated fully for a year and a half with all sorts of committees and testified numerous times before grand juries and congressional committees and all it has gotten him is more problems. The cooperation hasn't led to any benefit to him. It didn't appear to be in his interest to continue on that basis, to cooperate.
Now, I don't know if that was in the context of taking the Fifth Amendment or not, but it was just a frustration that he expressed.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Do you recall—did you ever have any discussions with him about discussing his clients and work—in particular, in discussing work he did for you with any investigative bodies?
Answer. No.
Question. Did you ever have any discussion with him about whether or not he could disclose anything about his clients or just the issue of, you know, whether or not he was reluctant to discuss his clients?
Answer. No. I mean, I think his position is ethically he can't, without his client's approval, I assume, discuss matters of an attorney/client nature.
Question. Was it your understanding that he was doing attorney—legal work for any of the other clients that he had?
Answer. I don't know what he was doing. I don't know. I am speculating.
Mr. JOSEPH. Speculating.
Page 1278 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
The WITNESS. I shouldn't speculate.
Generally, when asked questions of an attorney/client relation, it is raised, it is the client's privilege not the attorney. It is nothing he told me. That's just my understanding of it.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Okay. You had mentioned, in regards to the Safire article, when you had a discussion with Mr. Hubbell, that he had said something to the effect of, you know, he wished he had made as much as the article said.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you recall him ever remarking about anything having to do with how much he made from other clients?
Answer. No.
Question. Did you ever discuss with him whether or not he could disclose how much he made from a client?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you recall him ever—Mr. Hubbell ever venturing an opinion on whether or not the amount of money he made from a client, whether or not that was privileged?
Answer. No.
Question. No, you don't recall the discussion or, no, you didn't have such a discussion?
Answer. I don't recall any such discussion.
Question. Okay. This is a September 6th, 1995, letter to Webb Hubbell from Robert Wolfe. It thanks him for his progress report regarding the fellowship.
Answer. Yes, I see it.
Page 1279 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. We don't have a progress letter regarding the fellowship. Again, I will note that the—or perhaps we do. The Bates stamp numbers that we received these are 4922 and then 4923—or actually, these came in sequentially and the undated letter that we previously referred to, which I believe was Deposition Exhibit No. 16, the letter from Webb Hubbell that is undated, it appears like—I will just offer my opinion that it appears that it may be the Webb Hubbell letter regarding the fellowship because we didn't receive any other one and this was the document.
Mr. JOSEPH. Which are you referring to? You are just pointing to a document which is not the one that I am looking at.
Ms. COMSTOCK. September 6th, 1995, the previous Exhibit No. 16, which was the undated letter from Mr. Hubbell, that I believe you objected to my characterization on, these two were produced together simultaneously as 2-012 and 2-013.
Mr. JOSEPH. You gave me 2-014. I don't have 2-102.
Ms. COMSTOCK. It's the same letter.
Mr. JOSEPH. They are a different letter.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. I am talking about 2-012 right now and 2-013.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Have you seen these letters before, the 2-O12, the September 6th, 1995 letter?
Answer. I don't have a copy. Can you give me a copy here?
Question. This is a letter to you and to Mike Geraghty and Tim Geraghty?
Answer. I see it, yes.
Question. Okay. Number one in this letter says, attached for your records are the following, number one, a letter from Webb Hubbell regarding his fellowship.
Page 1280 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Just putting this letter and the previous letter we were discussing from Webb Hubbell in context, does that refresh your recollection as to whether or not these two letters came to you together?
Mr. JOSEPH. Well, are these addressed to him?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes. This September 6th, 1995 letter, is addressed to Phillips & Cohen, which is Mr. Phillips is part of Phillips & Cohen and then his name is on the second line, John Phillips.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. That is you, Mr. Phillips; is that correct?
Answer. That is correct. It would appear that this is an accurate reference, just looking at the documents, makes sense.
Question. Then number two indicates, my response to Webb Hubbell's letter, and then 2-014 is a September 6th, 1995 letter to Webb Hubbell thanking him for his progress report. It is a letter to Hubbell from Mr. Wolfe.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Okay. Referencing now—I thought I would just make sure we have all of these letters as exhibits. 2-013 is already as Exhibit 16. I will make 2-012 Exhibit 17 and 2-014 Exhibit 18.
[Phillips Exhibit Nos. 17 and 18 were marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. In this September 6th, 1995, to Mr. Hubbell from Mr. Wolfe, he indicates that he still hoped Hubbell would complete the project. In September of 1995, was that the thinking of Mr. Wolfe, to your knowledge?
Answer. Well, I don't—I can't speak for Mr. Wolfe. I have read the letter here. It certainly wasn't my thinking. I mean, he might have thought he could transform it into some sort of letters from prison or something. I don't know. But, you know—he probably was hoping to get some product from him. I am just speculating. The letter speaks for itself.
Page 1281 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. The letter says, I would greatly appreciate a timetable from you as to when we can expect your article or articles and your thoughts about the journal or periodical where we might expect to see them published.
At this time, do you recall making—you making any efforts to see where anyone would be publishing Mr. Hubbell's articles?
Answer. I was of the opinion that there was no possibility that he could produce anything that would meet the terms of the grant.
Question. Okay. And prior to this November 1995 conversation that you had with Mr. Hubbell, where you indicated you were going to repay the $45,000, did you have any discussions with Mr. Hubbell about your thoughts that he was not going to be able to do this project?
Answer. Well, of course, he was in prison. Communications were, therefore, fairly limited. I may have just in passing, but in my own mind I didn't think there was any realistic possibility he could do the work. He couldn't do it in prison. He couldn't write what he was supposed to write. He was no longer qualified to write such an article.
Question. So——
Answer. So I probably didn't want to just bang him over the head in prison and keep harping on this. In my own mind, as I testified to, I didn't think he had the capacity to do this work.
Question. So in September of 1995, you didn't think it was going to be feasible for Mr. Hubbell from jail to be participating as a distinguished public service fellow; is that correct?
Answer. Yes. You bet.
If they wanted to change the title to undistinguished, I would have certainly——
Page 1282 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Did you ever have any discussions with Mrs. Hubbell about these—about Mr. Hubbell's work on this project?
Answer. Yes, briefly. I think she was of the opinion, I think, obviously from Webb, that he had done the work and was surprised when she learned that I repaid the money, because he hadn't done the work. So Webb had obviously told her he had done everything that he was supposed to do.
Question. He had told——
Answer. His wife.
Question. Mrs. Hubbell, that he had done all the work for the Fund?
Answer. Yes. She was surprised to learn, when I paid the money back, that he had not done the work that he was required to do, which led me to conclude that he obviously had told her he had done the work.
Question. Okay. And in this undated letter that was previously entered as Exhibit 16, it says, I have asked my wife to copy the box of documents produced to date and send them to you. Again, you have no knowledge of any documents that were sent to the Fund?
Answer. No knowledge.
Question. Did you ever discuss with Mrs. Hubbell any documents that she was supposed to prepare or get together to send to the Fund?
Answer. I don't recall my discussion with her. These documents at that point would be somewhat useless.
Question. This is a December 7th, 1995, letter. We have already discussed the December 14th check that you forwarded so we are getting a little out of order here, but I wanted to return to this December 7th, 1995, letter that you wrote to Bob Wolfe.
Answer. All right.
Page 1283 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. So obviously this was following your conversation with Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And then when you said you had a discussion with Mrs. Hubbell, was that after the discussion with Mr. Hubbell about repaying the loan?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And was it shortly within that time frame after?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Did she call you to express concern about your repaying the loan?
Answer. No. She asked me whether Webb had done the work, and I was taken aback by the question because implicit in the question was she thought he had. Clearly he had not. And I said, no, Webb had not done the work.
Question. And she expressed surprise at that?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Did she say anything else?
Answer. She was just very upset, knowing that I paid the money back and that it was obviously very painful for me financially to have to pay for his failure to complete his work.
Question. Did she indicate whether he had deceived her about the work that he had done?
Answer. No.
Question. Make any comments to the effect that——
Answer. Nothing more than I have described to you. It was implicit in her question that she thought he had done the work.
Page 1284 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Okay. In the second paragraph of this December 7th letter, you write, I made a personal commitment to the Fund that I would repay the grant given to Mr. Hubbell if he had not delivered on his commitment or repaid the amount by the end of 1995.
Earlier, I am sorry, in the first paragraph, you had indicated that last fall that it had become clear that he couldn't complete the work. Who had he made the commitment to and who had you talked to about this commitment that you were going to repay the money?
Answer. Oh, I think it was more of a general commitment in my discussions with Bob Wolfe, you know, figuring out how to deal with this problem; Webb hadn't done the work that he was paid to do and how we were going to deal with it. I had mentioned, I believe, that if it ultimately came to that I would be the one responsible for paying the money.
Question. Do you know if that commitment was made part of any board minutes?
Answer. No.
Question. Or any formal——
Answer. It was an informal commitment. It wasn't a formal statement that I will do this. It was based on my own—my own sense of what was right and my general suggestions that I had with Bob.
Question. Okay. Were you aware, at or around in the fall of 1995, stories coming out about Mr. Hubbell's work that he had done for the L.A. airport?
Answer. I knew he had done some—as I mentioned, testified earlier, that he had the airport as a client earlier. And I became aware at some point of the issue of—this was 1995?
Question. September of 1995, actually, the L.A. Times had an article about Mr. Hubbell's receiving $24,000 to lobby on LAX airport issues for the City of Los Angeles?
Page 1285 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I think I was aware of those articles, yes.
Question. Do you recall ever having any discussions with anyone at the board, after hearing about the LAX contract and some other controversy there, about anything related to your—the Fund having given money to Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Not specifically. I mean, we all—we all, obviously, faced the fact that this was a very unfortunate development and circumstances here. We had those discussions on several occasions. I don't know if it was in connection with the L.A. Airport. No, I don't think they were connected.
Question. Do you know if in the fall of 1995 there were any discussions about returning the money as a result of some of the, you know, continued negative publicity that Mr. Hubbell was getting?
Answer. No, absolutely no connection.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make this Deposition Exhibit No. 19.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 19 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Again, in the last paragraph, you indicate that he is not in a position to return the grant now. Earlier this year, when stories came out that Mr. Hubbell had earned somewhere in the neighborhood of half a million dollars in 1994, what was your reaction to that?
Answer. I was shocked. I had no idea, if those reports were true, that he had earned that kind of money.
Question. Nothing he had ever told you gave you any indication that he was earning that kind of money at that time?
Answer. Nothing.
Question. Were there any discussions of anybody else reimbursing the Fund from any other sources on behalf of Mr. Hubbell, aside from yourself?
Page 1286 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No.
Question. This is an undated letter to Mr. Phillips from Mr. Hubbell, which reads, quote, ''you have told me you intend to reimburse the trust Fund the $45,000 fellowship I received.'' As we discussed, I am unable to fully complete the parameters of the project as outlined and thus you feel obligated to make the Fund whole. I want to assure you and commit to you to pay this amount as soon as I am able.
Has Mr. Hubbell repaid you in full at this time?
Answer. No.
Question. How much have you been reimbursed in total of the $45,000?
Answer. $10,000.
Question. And would that be a $10,000 check that Mrs. Hubbell gave to you?
Answer. Yes.
Question. In early 1996?
Answer. Yes.
Question. I am showing the witness a January 24th, 1996, check from Suzanna Hubbell to John Phillips for partial loan repayment.
I will make this check Deposition Exhibit No. 20.
This is a January 24th, 1996, letter to you from Suzanna Hubbell.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 20 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. The letter from Mrs. Hubbell indicates that they were going to repay the debt in its entirety by March 31st, 1996; is that correct, on the third paragraph?
Page 1287 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. May 1st.
Question. March 31st?
Answer. Yes. Uh-huh.
Question. Do you know how you arrived—was that a date that you had agreed upon with Mrs. Hubbell?
Answer. Well, in talking to her, that's a date that I think they were either going to sell the house or—I think it was really geared more towards the sale of the house. It was on the market. They might be in a position at that time to pay that.
Question. Your testimony is that they have not repaid anything other than the $10,000?
Answer. They have not.
Question. And what is your arrangement at this time for repayment of the remaining $35,000, plus the, I believe, 7 percent interest on that?
Answer. Okay. This was—this letter was superseded by that UCC lien on the art, which was a secured interest that I have in that art that has a value, if you add it up, close to the indebtedness.
Question. So is that the——
Answer. Right now, that's my security interest in it.
Question. Have you discussed with them at any time, since the January '96 payments, and the February agreement on the art, how you are going to get additional payments?
Answer. No, I have not.
Question. Do you have any plans on how you are going to recover the additional funds?
Answer. I think once they gave me the UCC interest in the—security interest in the art, that I am—I can foreclose and sell the art for what it is worth. I think that's probably my only option.
Page 1288 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have you had any discussions with Mr. or Mrs. Hubbell about selling that art work?
Answer. I have not.
Question. Have they made any requests to you not to do so?
Answer. They have not.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make Mr. Hubbell's letter to Mr. Phillips Deposition Exhibit No. 21, and Mrs. Hubbell's letter Deposition Exhibit No. 22.
[Phillips Exhibit Nos. 21 and 22 were marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I am showing the witness a January 25th, 1996, fax from Manning, Marder & Wolfe to John Phillips. Attached is an LA Times news article about Mr. Hubbell and your repayment of the $45,000 grant.
Answer. Uh-huh.
Question. Do you recall receiving this fax?
Answer. Yes, I recall seeing the article, yes.
Question. Did you talk to the reporter on this article prior to it appearing in the paper?
Answer. Yes, I did.
Question. When were you first contacted about this story?
Answer. Well, several days before it appeared, I believe.
Question. Did you have any discussions with anybody at the Fund about how you were going to respond to the reporter?
Answer. I am sure I talked to Bob, yeah.
Question. Did they provide you with any official statements that the Fund wanted to make or how they wanted to deal with it?
Page 1289 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I think the discussions we had, first, was should they say nothing. They are not obligated to respond in any way. I think our conclusion was, you should say everything, tell the whole story of how this came about, start to finish. There is nothing—it is embarrassing, but there is nothing to hide, and that's the—that's what we did.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I will make that article Deposition Exhibit No. 23.
[Phillips Exhibit No. 23 was marked for identification.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I just wanted to go through a few of the other employers. I know you testified that you generally didn't know, but I just wanted to name a few of them to see if you had any knowledge or had ever heard from Mr. Hubbell in passing references to any of the other employment contracts that have come to the attention of the committee and for which we have received documentation.
Do you know a Jack Williams?
Answer. No.
Question. Who is a lobbyist here in town?
Answer. Do not.
Question. Do you have any knowledge about Mr. Hubbell doing any work for Pacific Telesis?
Mr. JOSEPH. Are you talking about independent of articles that he has read?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes. I am talking about other than news articles that you have read.
The WITNESS. No.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Page 1290 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Or other than after these stories appeared if Mr. Hubbell has told you about anything or if others have told you about anything having to do with his work.
Answer. I think my knowledge of these clients that Webb had are pretty much from the news.
Question. Just so I am clear, if others have indicated to you that, yes, I gave Mr.—you know, after the stories appeared, yes, I hired Mr. Hubbell, anything like that, I am always referring to those types of conversations.
Answer. Okay.
Question. Are you aware of any work that Mr. Hubbell did for Sprint?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you have any knowledge of any work that Mr. Hubbell did for McAndrews and Forbes?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you have any knowledge of any work that Mr. Hubbell did for Mid-America Dairymen?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you have any knowledge of any work Mr. Hubbell did for Sun America?
Answer. Nobody.
Question. You have testified that you know Michael Berman; is that correct?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you ever discussed with Mr. Berman any work that he passed on Mr. Hubbell's way from Time Warner?
Page 1291 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Yes.
Question. And could you please tell us what those discussions were?
Answer. After the fact, Michael Berman is a social friend and when the reports, I think, came out that some small amount of money had been paid by Time Warner and that Michael referred Webb to them, we discussed how he is basically trying to do something very innocent, help Webb out as a capable guy, probably could do some work for the client and that's what motivated him to do it and how ridiculous it was that people were drawing all of these conspiracy connections.
Question. Did Mr. Berman ever tell you he was upset about when—that he had gotten work for Mr. Hubbell prior to his guilty plea and hadn't known about Mr. Hubbell's problems or hadn't been described to him to the extent that he felt he should have, that Mr. Hubbell should have?
Mr. JOSEPH. Is that question clear to you?
The WITNESS. Yes. Yes.
I think, I, in general discussions, I believe he—I believe he does think he was misled, that he wasn't straight with him, like he wasn't straight with a lot of people.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. So in your discussions with Mr. Berman, he has indicated that he didn't believe Mr. Hubbell was honest with him?
Answer. Oh, I don't know if you could—I would characterize it that way. Obviously, it has turned out to be—had he known the circumstances, just as I know—I am speculating again.
He was obviously upset that—he wasn't aware of the full extent of his problems when he made the recommendation.
Page 1292 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Do you know Ted Stein from California?
Answer. No.
Question. Were you aware of Mr. Hubbell signing a contract with Harper Collins to write a book?
Answer. I know he had some book deal that he had, yeah, after—long after the fact.
Question. Do you recall when you learned about the book deal?
Answer. I think when I read about it in some press account.
Question. So when you had conversations with Mr. Hubbell that you have discussed, you know, while he was in jail, he never mentioned that he was writing a book or had signed up to write a book?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, not until it became a matter of public record.
Question. Were you surprised to learn that he had a contract with somebody else to write something?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And to this date, has he ever discussed with you anything about that book?
Answer. Not the substance of it so much; that he worked on it and wrote long drafts from prison and for whatever reason it wasn't an acceptable product for the publisher.
Question. Do you know a woman named Lisa Specht from California?
Answer. Yes, I do. I have known her for many years.
Question. Can you tell us who she is?
Answer. She is a lawyer at the Manatt Phelps firm in Los Angeles. I knew her before she went to law school many years ago.
Page 1293 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And do you have any knowledge about her talking to people in the City of Los Angeles about paying Mr. Hubbell for his LAX Airport work?
Answer. Not that I can recall.
Question. To your knowledge, is Lisa Specht a friend of Mickey Kantor?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you know how often Ms. Specht sees Mickey Kantor or talks with him?
Answer. I think they stay in touch. When she comes to town, she would usually stop in to see him.
Question. What is her area of practice, if you know?
Answer. She worked for Mickey at the firm when he was there doing—working with city agencies, city governments, mainly City of Los Angeles, county of Los Angeles, expediter, lobbyist.
Question. For the City of Los Angeles?
Answer. No, for clients dealing with the city.
Question. And to your knowledge, she is a good friend of Mr. Kantor?
Answer. Yes.
Question. All right. Do you have any knowledge as to why she would be discussing payment to Mr. Hubbell about work he did for the L.A. Airport?
Answer. I would be speculating if I did.
Mr. JOSEPH. Don't speculate, please.
The WITNESS. No.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Page 1294 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have you discussed with Mr. Kantor any—to this date, work that Mr. Hubbell did for the LA Airport?
Answer. I am sure we have talked about it since it has been in the public news.
Mr. JOSEPH. What was the question again? Have you talked to Mr. Kantor?
Ms. COMSTOCK. Yes.
The WITNESS. Yes. At what time frame?
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. At any time to the present, have you discussed with Mr. Kantor Mr. Hubbell's work for the LA Airport?
Answer. Yes.
Question. All right. And could you describe those discussions?
Answer. Well, fairly general in nature; that Webb—Webb was doing—he had kind of a contract for them, for a specific contract that he was ultimately successful in terms of the objective being accomplished and that the city, because of, whatever reasons, was not political issues—articles being written wasn't—hadn't paid him. I remember that's the first time it surfaced, hadn't paid him for what he was doing. And that's pretty much it.
Question. Did Mr. Kantor have any knowledge about what Mr. Hubbell was doing for the city?
Answer. You mean the kind of work he did?
Question. Yes.
Answer. I don't know.
Question. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Hubbell the ongoing investigations into his various employers and consultants?
Page 1295 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No.
Question. You haven't discussed with him anything—any questions of you or others about his employment?
Answer. Oh, with me? Yes—I mean—I thought you meant the others.
Yes, I have discussed with him some time ago that special counsel requested various documents.
Question. Have you ever discussed with Mr. Hubbell his—any grand jury appearances that he has made on these matters or other matters under investigation?
Answer. You mean the substance of what he said?
Question. Yes.
Answer. No.
Question. Have you had discussions with him about his appearances before the grand jury in general?
Answer. Just that he had been hauled around before many grand juries. That was part of his, what he thought, was cooperation.
Question. Again, in the context of, you know, whether or not he should discuss his various employers or things like that, did he ever discuss with you the pros and cons of whether he could discuss work he had done for various clients?
Answer. No, other than his—at some point, his belief that he could not, consistent with attorney/client privilege, discuss any matters.
Question. All right. Okay. Did you visit Mr. Hubbell when he was in jail—I think you indicated you did?
Answer. Yes, I did.
Question. Do you recall how many occasions you visited with him?
Page 1296 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. I think three times.
Question. All right. And did you have—were any of those visits after you had that November '95 conversation with him, where you were telling him——
Answer. Yes, one of them.
Question. And did you have any discussion about the repayment of the loan or where you were out on that loan?
Answer. I don't think we did.
Question. All right. Can you tell us what you discussed with him—those would be visits in 1996 or one visit?
Answer. Just life in prison. You know, understand, Webb was a friend of mine. He considered me a very good friend. I felt very sorry for his family especially, and for Webb. I mean, he is a very likeable guy. He turned out to have serious flaws, but he certainly has gone through an ordeal. And it is my view, he was a friend before he had his trouble and he is—many people in this town aren't around when somebody is having hard times, and I wasn't going to be included among them.
Question. Did you speak with Mr. Hubbell often when he was in jail, too, phone calls?
Answer. He would call periodically.
Question. And it is the process they reverse the charges to you?
Answer. I think I gave my number as a number he could call with—through the prison system, however he did it.
Question. Did he ever discuss with you any matters related to his law firm or any ongoing negotiations he had with his law firm?
Page 1297 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Well, I think I previously testified back—at the time he was trying to resolve the problems, that we had some—that we had some general discussions and he wanted to submit this to arbitration.
Question. Did you have conversations with him the previous fall of 1996, before he was released from prison?
Answer. When?
Question. In the fall of 1996?
Answer. You mean did he call me on the phone?
Question. Yes.
Answer. I can't—my guess is he did maybe once a month or so he would call, a couple of times.
Question. Did he ever discuss with you what he was going to do when he got out of jail?
Answer. Yeah. I mean, I talked to him about—how is he going to get his life back together, what he is going to do. He had terrible prospects.
Question. Did he ask you for any help on getting work when he got out of jail?
Answer. We had some discussions about what he would do and should do, and I think I—I was willing to see what I could help him with, but my recommendation to him in the discussions with him is that he work for some charitable group, nonprofit group. He considered a couple—it wouldn't pay probably more than minimum wage, but that he should go through a period of redemption and just give him time to step back and think what he is going to do.
I think I suggested several different groups that I might be able to help him with, an AIDS group, a group that works with the homeless and an athletic group that works with inner-city youth, did those sound interesting to him, was there a way that I could help him get in touch with those people that run that?
Page 1298 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
I mean, Webb has sort of a liability, but this is something that he would be good at to get his feet on the ground. He wouldn't make any money, but it would give him an opportunity, then, to see how he could consider what he is going to do with the rest of his life. Those are the sum and substance of my discussions with him about what he should do.
Question. Did you ever have any discussions with any other friends of his, like Mr. Cardozo or Mr. Berman or Mr. Kantor about Webb's post jail employment?
Answer. Yes, I think Michael Berman, we chatted about what would be good for Webb to do. I think we both sort of agreed that some sort of charitable group would be best for him.
Question. Did you ever have any meetings or anything with anybody about what to do to help him or anything?
Answer. The only time I—Michael Berman and Tom Nides and I had a discussion once about what possibilities there might be for Webb and we all talked in terms of these charitable positions. And nothing ever came of it. Webb really got on his own through some other, I think his lawyer, a job working for this sentence reform group where he is—I think he is making minimum wage.
Question. Were you aware of his interest—did you ever hear about an interest he had in doing white collar crime or fraud consulting?
Answer. Yeah. I think he felt he has learned a lot about that work, especially consulting on issues about prison, sentencing and the like. I think he—thinking through to himself, he couldn't practice law. He lost his license to practice so it would be more like paralegal work, working, I assume, with lawyers. He did raise that as something that he, generally speaking——
Question. Were you aware of him contacting any firms or anyone contacting firms on his behalf to do that kind of consulting work?
Page 1299 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Not specifically that kind of work. It may have been with his own lawyer that he does white collar work. I am speculating. I don't know.
I think there was a thought I always had maybe afterwards that Webb, you know, he was a trained lawyer. He could do some paralegal work possibly somewhere down the road. Maybe that's the next sort of transition that he would move to. But it never got to any point of any job prospects. I mean, the focus, what I told him was I think he really needed to find his charitable position and spend however long is necessary to get his feet on the ground.
Question. Have you seen Mr. Hubbell since his release from prison?
Answer. Yes. I have seen him on two occasions.
Question. Okay. Can you tell us when those occasions were?
Answer. One—once when he—shortly after he was out, about a week, I stopped by his apartment and once I went out to see him for lunch where he was working out in Alexandria. We had a quick lunch. That was the last time. That was, gee, somewhere around February, January/February. I haven't seen him since.
Question. January or February of this year?
Answer. Yes.
Question. 1997?
Answer. Uh-huh.
Ms. COMSTOCK. Can we just take a brief recess? I think I am getting close to getting done.
The WITNESS. Sure.
[Recess.]
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Back on the record. You had indicated that last time you had been in touch with Mr. Hubbell was very early this year. Why haven't you talked to him since?
Page 1300 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. Well, several reasons. One, he really, you know, let me down a lot and put me in a very difficult, and many others in a difficult positions, and the more I have learned about what has been going on as far as money received, you know, he wasn't very truthful with me, so I feel not so inclined to want to keep up the relationship, even though I wanted to stand behind someone in a time of trouble. I felt he didn't treat me or others properly.
Secondly, with the ongoing controversy in these investigations, I don't want to be in a position where I am going to constantly be asked about conversations I have with the guy, here or anywhere else.
Question. When you had those conversations, did you tell Mr. Hubbell you felt he hadn't been truthful with you?
Answer. Webb has said that, he said I am in denial, I was terrible, I exposed one of my closest and dearest friends who tried to help me through this whole ordeal and what I did was wrong. I mean, he has no excuse and he has misrepresented a lot about himself, and Webb is a very appealing guy. He is a very thoughtful, likable person. He is a terrific father, you know, there are many, many endearing qualities about Webb. And he has acknowledged that he simply wasn't facing up to the facts of what he had done and he is now accountable for them and he put a lot of his friends in the situation of great disruption, expense, embarrassment and the like, like me.
Question. Now——
Answer. What can you say when he says that, you know.
Question. Well, you had indicated, apparently sometime at or around, when the Safire article appeared in October of 1996, that you had a discussion with him saying he hadn't made that kind of money. He said he wished he made about half of that, which would have been about $125,000?
Answer. Mind you, this was just a slant passing reference, then we went on to something else. We didn't discuss it. It was something like, boy, I wish I would have made that much.
Page 1301 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Mr. JOSEPH. I want to object. That is not at all accurate as to what the testimony is. The transcript will read what it is.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. When you reference—when you were both talking about that article, was it your impression that he was saying he did not make anything like what was represented in the article?
Answer. Something to that effect. Or he wished he would have made some amount of money, something like that. And I didn't ask him what he made, he didn't tell me, I don't know what he made.
Question. And at that time, I am trying to understand the progression of when he is sort of doing these mea culpas to you, if they are ongoing as new facts coming out or if there is some point where he told you everything that he had been misrepresenting to you to date, or if this is still an ongoing process with Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. I have not spoken to him for a considerable period of time. I guess I am giving you an impression of various conversations with him over time, in prison and the few times I have seen him out of prison.
Question. And in these conversations, did he indicate to you where he—other than bringing people into things, because of, you know, whatever connection they had to him, did he indicate any remorse for acts that he had done that had caused that to happen?
Answer. Which acts?
Question. That he had misrepresented something. I mean, you gave him a $45,000—your fund, in your recommendation, gave him that $45,000 grant; is that correct?
Answer. It turned out I did. I didn't plan on it that way.
Page 1302 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. And you are still out $35,000 gathering interest at this point?
Answer. That is correct.
Question. Now, that had nothing to do with any of these investigations or anything that you gave him, that grant or anything like that; is that correct?
Mr. JOSEPH. When you say he——
Ms. COMSTOCK. The fund gave him the grant.
Mr. JOSEPH. At the time—.
The WITNESS. I'm not clear of the question.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Let me back up. The fact that Mr. Hubbell reneged on his agreement with you——
Answer. With the fund.
Question. With the fund?
Answer. Okay.
Question. And that you ended up personally paying for that, he has expressed remorse to you about that he failed to live up to those commitments; is that correct?
Answer. Yes.
Question. And that he is not blaming others for that action?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you know if your wife continues to be in touch with Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. She does not.
Question. Are you aware of any contact that Webster Hubbell had with Charlie Trie at any time?
Page 1303 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No.
Question. All right. Your wife recently interviewed Charlie Trie; is that correct?
Answer. No.
Question. Or Mr. Ng Lap Seng?
Answer. No.
Question. There was a report that she did on the news recently about Mr. Ng Lap Seng; is that correct?
Answer. Right.
Question. She has not met with Mr. Ng Lap Seng?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you know the circumstances——
Mr. JOSEPH. I object to these questions. These are way off the charts. If you can connect these to the investigation.
Ms. COMSTOCK. If we can connect Charlie Trie or Ng Lap Seng to the investigation.
Mr. JOSEPH. Connect his knowledge about his wife.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. I am asking if you have any knowledge about how your wife, any knowledge that you have, whether it came from your wife or others, about Mr. Trie or Mr. Ng Lap Seng being interviewed on ABC news?
Answer. She did not interview them. They were interviewed by some producers in China who work for ABC. She just packaged the piece and put it on the air.
Question. Do you have any knowledge as to where Mr. Trie is in China?
Page 1304 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Answer. No.
Question. You can't assist the committee in any way in finding Mr. Trie?
Answer. I think she said in her report, if I remember, he was listed in a hotel under his right name in Beijing, so it wouldn't be hard to find.
Question. Well, the State Department apparently has been having trouble, but ABC news is apparently doing a little bit better. But to your knowledge, do you have any knowledge of Mr. Trie was ever introduced to you or your wife at any time by Mr. Hubbell?
Answer. Never.
Question. Have you ever met John Huang?
Answer. No.
Question. Do you have any knowledge about John Huang or any of his fund-raising activities?
Answer. Other than what I read in the press, no.
Question. Other than what you have read in the press?
Answer. No.
Question. Were you aware of Mickey Kantor helping Mr. Hubbell's son get a job?
Answer. Well, I am aware of reports to that effect. I don't know—I don't know what he did. I don't think he did much, from what I understand.
Question. Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Kantor about that?
Answer. I mean, we know his son, Walter. We both know him. I think we have known Walter since he was 10 or 12 years old. I guess it is just generally the fact that someone would help a son——
Page 1305 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Mr. JOSEPH. What is the pending question?
Ms. COMSTOCK. His knowledge of Mickey Kantor assisting Mr. Hubbell's son.
Answer. I don't have any knowledge of what Mr. Kantor did to assist.
Question. Do you have any knowledge of how Mrs. Hubbell came to get a job at the NTRA department?
Answer. No.
Question. Did Mr. Hubbell ever tell you at any time that his law firm was going to be filing any additional charges against him in the past couple of years?
Mr. JOSEPH. What time frame?
Ms. COMSTOCK. In the past couple of years.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Has he ever told you in the past couple of years of any still outstanding charges the firm might file against him?
Answer. I think there was some time ago, some question about how to resolve remaining issues on the expense items, yes. I vaguely remember something about that. He was still trying to work things out with his firm.
Question. And has his attorney ever been in touch with you about various matters as to the consumer support and education fund?
Answer. No.
Question. I'm sorry, if I could return a little bit to your last conversations last time you met, did you leave things—how were things left? What were the discussions you had in your last meetings with him?
Answer. Well, I had lunch with him, a sandwich at the cafeteria where he was working. I can't recall specifics about it. It was just general, how his life has been, that for him it has been a very lonely, difficult time. He is pretty isolated.
Page 1306 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have you been in touch with Mrs. Hubbell at all during that time frame?
Answer. No.
Question. Okay. I believe that is all I have at this time.
Mr. JOSEPH. If you could wait one second.
EXAMINATION BY MR. JOSEPH
Question. Mr. Phillips, I have very few questions for you, I wanted to thank you on behalf of the Democratic members of the committee for the amount of time you have given today to have to answer questions from about 10:00 a.m. to, I guess, now it is 2:00 p.m., without even a lunch break.
There are just very few questions that Representative Condit, who is on the committee, has asked us to ask all the witnesses who are being deposed, and then we will let you go. And really, they are just yes or no questions is all that is required.
Question. Have you been asked——
Ms. COMSTOCK. I object, the witness can answer more than he wants to yes or no, that is his decision.
EXAMINATION BY MR. JOSEPH:
Question. Have you been asked by any other official investigative body to testify or provide evidence on any of the fund-raising or other matters being investigated by this committee?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you provided documents to, been interviewed by or given a deposition to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Department of Justice or Independent Counsel, Ken Starr?
Answer. Independent Counsel, Ken Starr.
Page 1307 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Have any requests for information by this committee overlapped with the requests by other investigative bodies?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you provided documents, information or testimony to this committee that you have previously provided to other investigative bodies?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you received any requests to provide documents to be interviewed or deposed in the future by any other investigative body?
Answer. No.
Question. Can you estimate how much of your time you have spent in responding to requests from this committee for testimony and information or documents?
Answer. Well, 4 or 5 hours in preparation for this over the last several weeks, plus today.
Question. And any additional time with regard to testimony, information or documents prior to preparation for this deposition?
Answer. You mean other than this committee.
Question. No, for this committee, but with regard to the producing of documents?
Answer. No, that is pretty much it.
Question. Okay. Have you taken time from your job in responding to the matters of the committee?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Have you or your employee incurred expenses in responding to the demands from this committee?
Answer. Yes.
Page 1308 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Question. Has this committee offered to reimburse you for your time or your expenses?
Answer. I haven't submitted a bill yet. No, no, they haven't.
Question. Would you seek reimbursements from the committee for your expenses related to this investigation?
Answer. If there is a mechanism available, I will utilize it.
Mr. JOSEPH. Mr. Phillips, thank you very much.
The WITNESS. You're welcome.
Ms. COMSTOCK. I had a few more questions.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Has Mr. Hubbell—I think we established earlier Mr. Hubbell has not fully repaid the $45,000. Has he offered to reimburse you for any cost you have incurred as a result of any of these matters that have been investigated?
Answer. No.
Question. All right. And I think we have gone over this, I just want to double check. Is there anybody else besides Mr. Cardozo and Mr. Berman that you discussed Mr. Hubbell's employment, as well as other consulting arrangements that he had——
Mr. JOSEPH. We have been here for 4 hours.
The WITNESS. I don't know what more I can add.
EXAMINATION BY MS. COMSTOCK:
Question. Other than the people you have testified to, are there others you discussed his——
Answer. His employment?
Question. Any employment that he had.
Answer. Not that I can recall.
Page 1309 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 4
Ms. COMSTOCK. Okay. Thank you. We can go off the record.
[Whereupon, at 2:08 p.m., the deposition was adjourned.]
[The exhibits referred to follow:]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 718 TO 756 HERE
[The official committee record contains additional material here.]