COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D.C.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
:
In the matter of: :
:
WHITE HOUSE TRAVEL : DEPOSITION OF
: WILLIAM HOLDEN KENNEDY, III
:
:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Tuesday, April 9, 1996
Washington, D.C.
The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn
House Office Building, commencing at 10:15 a.m.
Appearances:
Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee:
Barbara Bracher, Chief Investigative Counsel; Laurie Taylor,
Investigator; Barbara Comstock, Investigative Counsel; Donald
Goldberg, Assistant to Counsel, Minority; and Daniel Hernandez,
Minority Professional Staff.
For WILLIAM HOLDEN KENNEDY, III:
WILLIAM F. COFFIELD, ESQ.
JOHN CONRAD HANKS, ESQ.
Sharp & Lankford
1785 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Ms. Bracher. Good morning. We are on the record this morning for the
deposition of William H. Kennedy, which will be administered under
oath.
And if I can identify the people in the room, Mr. Kennedy is here with
two of his counsel, Mr. Bill Coffield and J.C. Hanks. Majority counsel
is here, myself, Barbara Bracher; as well as Laurie Taylor and Barbara
Comstock. Minority counsel is here, Don Goldberg and Dan Hernandez.
Before you are sworn in, Mr. Kennedy, I would like to provide you some
background information concerning this investigation and your
appearance here.
As you know, pursuant to its authority under Rules 10 and 11 of the
House of Representatives, the Government Reform and Oversight
Committee is investigating the White House Travel Office matter. This
matter refers to all events that lead up to the May 19, 1993, firings
of the White House Travel Office employees and includes all
information which was provided about the White House Travel Office and
any employees of the White House Travel Office at any time from
January 1, 1993, to the present. Our investigation also encompasses
the activities of Harry Thomason, Darnell Martens and Penny Sample at
the White House, as well as all allegations of wrongdoing concerning
the Travel Office employees.
The committee investigation is reviewing all actions which were taken
by the FBI and the Department of Justice, both prior to and after the
firings, which would include the actions by any field office personnel
and any White House involvement in coordination or attendance of
interviews.
The investigation includes but is not limited to the investigation and
prosecution of Mr. Billy Ray Dale and all investigations and
subsequent reviews of the Travel Office firings by any agency, which
include but aren't limited to the White House management review, the
FBI Weldon Kennedy/I.C. Smith review, the FBI-OPR review, the
Department of Justice-OPR review, the IRS internal review, the IG
review, the GAO review and as well as the proposed House of
Representatives resolution of inquiry which was considered and voted
on in the House Judiciary Committee in July of 1993.
We are reviewing all actions relating to or describing the criminal
investigations into the White House Travel Office matter, which
include any subsequent actions or activities of any kind as a result
of the above-mentioned events by the White House, the Treasury
Department, the IRS, the GSA, the GAO, the FBI, the independent
counsel, which include Mr. Fiske, as well as Mr. Starr, and the
Department of Justice up to the date of this request, unless it's
otherwise limited.
Do you understand that your answers would include all this
information?
Mr. Kennedy. Would you repeat that?
Ms. Bracher. Do you understand that your answers would include --
Mr. Kennedy. No. All what information? I'm teasing, Barbara. I'm
testing you. The answer is yes.
Ms. Bracher. Okay. The committee has been granted specific
authorization to conduct this deposition pursuant to House Resolution
369, which was passed by the House of Representatives on March 7, 1996
and pursuant to committee Rule 19, which has been provided to you
previously. Both Majority counsel and Minority counsel will be
afforded an equal opportunity to pose questions to each witness.
Have you received committee Rule 19 before this date?
Mr. Coffield. I believe that you received committee rule 19 from Paul.
Ms. Bracher. Mr. Castellitto.
Mr. Kennedy. Possibly, but go ahead.
Ms. Bracher. Would you like us to provide you with another copy at
this time? Castellitto.
Mr. Kennedy. Might as well.
Mr. Coffield. We might as well take a look at it. We might as well
take a look at it real quickly.
Ms. Bracher. I will continue on and we will provide you with a copy of
that to look over before we begin.
Committee counsel will proceed with equal rounds of questioning, each
lasting up to one hour, until both counsel have completed their
questioning. The only exception to this rule is if a member of this
committee is present and wishes to pose questions to you, Mr. Kennedy.
If so, the member will be afforded an immediate opportunity to pose
their questions, and committee counsel will then resume questioning
when the members have completed all their questioning.
You are here today voluntarily and not by subpoena; is that correct?
Castellitto.
Mr. Kennedy. That's right.
Ms. Bracher. You understand this deposition is under oath. You will be
allowed to confer with your attorney. If you do not understand a
question, please tell me. I will try to rephrase that question.
However, I ask that all objections which are raised by your attorney
be stated for the record with the reason for the objection clearly
explained. At that point, committee Majority counsel will confer with
Minority counsel and determine whether to accept the objection as a
proper objection in this deposition. If Majority or Minority counsel
does not believe the objection to be proper, we will hold it for later
and confer with the chairman. The chairman ultimately may present his
views on the objection and offer a ruling concerning that objection.
You will be given a five-day time frame in which you and your attorney
may review your deposition, once it's been transcribed, to correct any
technical problems that you perceive occurred in the transcription and
to clarify any matters.
Do you understand that? Castellitto.
Mr. Kennedy. I do.
Ms. Bracher. At that time, you will be asked to signed the deposition,
or your attorney to sign the deposition in your stead.
You are accompanied by your counsel this morning. I ask that you be
sworn in at this time.
Mr. Coffield. Can we go over one matter before he is sworn?
Ms. Bracher. Certainly.
Mr. Coffield. You are -- you all find yourselves in a pecking order
that is unenviable from the standpoint of Bill personally. He has been
through a lot of this.
Ms. Bracher. I understand.
Mr. Coffield. I am sure you all understand that. And he is tired of
it. It's affecting his personal life. It's affecting everything he has
to do. I just want to make clear that he is tired of this, and there
are a number of questions that have been addressed to him before and
he is here voluntarily and he does want to do this and he does want to
provide you with this information.
But he may appear to be a little tired of it at some point. I just
want to make clear that that's not a reflection on his willingness to
participate in this and to provide you with the answers that you are
seeking.
Ms. Bracher. Thank you.
Would you please be sworn.
Mr. Goldberg. Ms. Bracher, before he is sworn, I just want to make my
record.
Ms. Bracher. You want to make your record before the oath?
Mr. Goldberg. Yes. Minority staff does not necessarily concur in the
scope as described by Majority staff.
Mr. Kennedy. Neither does the witness.
Ms. Bracher. I am glad there's not a vote.
If you will take the oath now, please
WHEREUPON,
WILLIAM HOLDEN KENNEDY, III,
a witness in the above-entitled matter, was called as a witness, and
having been first duly sworn or affirmed to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, was examined and did testify as
follows:
EXAMINATION BY MS. BRACHER:
Q One of the things I want to advise you is that we have reviewed not
only the reports mentioned above that were produced as a result of
these interviews, but we have also reviewed the interviews that you
have provided to the various investigators. We have, in reviewing
these interviews, discovered what some might perceive as discrepancies
between the interviews involving others involved in the Travel Office
matter. We will be asking you about those interviews.
The purpose is to clarify for the record what your statement is now,
now that you are under oath, so that we will have an accurate picture
of events as they actually occurred, as well as your perception of
those events.
The object is not to try to create a situation where a false or
misleading statement is exposed, but we hope to the extent that this
is the case, that you realize that any statements that were false or
misleading, for whatever reason at the time, will be acknowledged
today and that you will tell us exactly what occurred, to the best of
your current recollection, for record under the oath.
A If you present any such questions to me like that, I expect you to
produce the written transcript, the 302s, what have you. I expect you
to identify precisely the words that you think may be misleading or
may be discrepancies.
Q As I said above, these interviews were not necessarily with you
personally, but involve many witnesses. The discrepancies may be just
a matter of perception of the different witnesses. We are asking you
for your perception.
A I understand. But for whatever reason you think there's a
discrepancy to anything and you refer to something in writing, I want
you to produce at the time you ask your question whatever you base the
discrepancy upon.
Q That will be done.
A Thank you.
Q Do you understand?
A Yes.
Q Thank you.
Okay. Perhaps we could just start with your -- just a brief resume
prior to you joining the administration in February of '93.
A What you would you like to know?
Q Just from law school, just a brief review of the different positions
you have held in and out of the Rose Law Firm.
A Well, I joined the Rose Law Firm right after law school. I left the
Rose Law Firm and went to Washington. I stayed here for 2 years. I
worked for the Senate. I returned to Little Rock. I was with the Rose
Law Firm until 1993 at which time I joined the administration.
Q Did you work on the campaign?
A I did not.
Q Okay. When you were at the Senate working for Senator McClellan,
what -- did you serve on a committee or in his personal office?
A I served on his personal office as a summer intern several summers.
When I was here full-time, I worked on the committee.
Q And which committee was that?
A Appropriations.
Q Okay. And I take it you are an attorney?
A You take it correctly.
Q Okay. And what States -- what bars do you belong to?
A Arkansas.
Q Okay. When you came to Washington in February of '93, can you just
describe how you came to join the administration?
A I was asked to join the administration.
Q By whom?
A By Vince Foster.
Q And can you tell me in what position you joined the administration?
A Associate Counsel to the President.
Q Did you have contact with Vince Foster while he was in the White
House and you were at the Rose Law Firm, prior to joining the
administration?
A Did I have contact? I probably assisted him with some
transition-type stuff, but that would be it.
Q Do you recall what type of transition materials you would have
assisted him with?
A Not specifically, no.
Ms. Bracher. Okay. I would like to stop right now so that you can
review rule 19, which is the committee rule.
Mr. Goldberg. All the committee rules available.
Ms. Bracher. Also, the book that we have just given to counsel for Mr.
Kennedy includes House Resolution 369, as well as the other committee
rules.
Mr. Kennedy. Let my counsel review it. You keep on going.
Ms. Bracher. Okay.
Mr. Coffield. As long as we are still on background stuff, go ahead.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. Did you have contact with Web Hubbell during the period while
you were at the Rose Law Firm before you joined the administration?
A Similar type things, transition stuff.
Q And do you recall what type of transition matters?
A Not specifically. I mean, they were winding up their law practice
and moving up here, and I assisted them in doing that.
Q Did you ever have any discussions concerning documents that might be
at the Rose Law Firm?
A Absolutely not.
Q Okay. When you started at --
Mr. Coffield. I just want to make sure that we are -- this is all
going to be related to the Travel Office, correct?
Ms. Bracher. Is there an objection to that question?
Mr. Coffield. Well, I am just -- I don't know, has there ever been --
is there a concern that there were some documents related to the
Travel Office at the Rose Law Firm?
Ms. Bracher. There is a concern about documents in general that relate
to the two individuals that I have talked with, and it is related to
the Travel Office. If you have an objection --
The Witness. Object.
Ms. Bracher. I certainly will entertain your objection and would like
your basis.
Mr. Coffield. I am simply objecting that I don't know what that has to
do with the scope of what I understand this deposition to be about.
Ms. Bracher. Okay. I will go through the scope again.
The Travel Office matter does include all prior and subsequent
investigations which were held by the FBI OPR and Department of
Justice, as well as Public Integrity. It also includes documents and
document retention by the White House concerning Travel Office
documents which were in the possession of Mr. Web Hubbell, as well as
Mr. Vince Foster.
There will be questions that will go into those documents. It has
already been established that they, in fact, did have Travel Office
documents. We are limiting the questions only so far as we are not
intending to go into any Whitewater matters. But insofar as there were
documents which also concerned the Travel Office, we will be asking
questions about those individuals.
Mr. Coffield. Okay. That's fine. I just -- I'm just --
The Witness. So I take it your previous question was not related to
documents regarding the Travel Office but was, simply stated -- would
you read the question again, please, ma'am.
[The reporter read back as requested.]
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q That was with Mr. Web Hubbell.
A I am interested; are those documents related to the Travel Office?
Q Those are documents in general.
A Okay.
Q Those are not just limited to documents in the Travel Office.
Mr. Coffield. We have addressed the objection. That's fine.
The Witness. The short answer is there were no documents related to
the Travel Office, nor documents that I can recall we discussed at
all, other than client related matters which are privileged.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. Can you please describe what you mean by client related
matters which are privileged?
A Matters that they were working on as lawyers at the Rose Law Firm.
Q Okay. When you started at the White House in February, can you tell
me when did you receive your White House pass?
A I couldn't answer that. I don't know.
Q Did you ever --
A Sometime in February.
Q And would that have been February of 1993?
A It's possible, yeah. I just don't remember precisely.
Q And did you participate in obtaining the White House passes for the
other members of the administration?
A The short answer is, yes, I did.
Q Okay. And can you tell me who you worked with at the White House in
the FBI concerning White House passes?
A Say that again?
Q Can you tell me who you communicated with in the FBI concerning your
work on White House passes?
A Jim Bourke, primarily.
Q Okay. Is there anyone else that you would have communicated with or
worked with concerning White House passes, in the FBI?
A All of Jim Bourke's staff.
Q Do you recall any people that you can identify as his staff?
A I don't recall their names right now.
Q Were there any other FBI agents that you dealt with on White House
passes?
A Well, there were some local agents inside the OEOB.
Q And were these FBI agents?
A Uh-huh.
Q And did you talk with them on White House passes?
A From time to time, yeah.
Q Do you know who these agents are?
A I can't recall their names right now.
Q Can you recall how many of them there were?
A What period of time are we talking about?
Q During the period that you were working on White House passes, I
assume February, March, April, May.
A I worked on White House passes the whole time I was with the
administration.
Q Well, then I would like my question to include that entire time.
A I can't remember. They changed. The FBI agents changed. They rotated
in and out of that position.
Q Do you recall any of the agents that were at the OEOB?
A I think one of them name was Dennis. I can't remember his last name.
I'm sorry. I don't.
Q Okay. And, please, I apologize for my confusion. When you dealt with
Carl, he was at FBI headquarters; is that correct?
A What is Carl's name?
Q Tom Carl?
A And we are talking what period of time?
Q This is a question I need to ask you. You said you dealt with an FBI
agent named Carl dealing with White House passes.
Mr. Coffield. He didn't say that.
The Witness. I didn't say that. For purposes of clarity, let me give
you an overview.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q That will be helpful.
A Evidently, it will. In connection with the issuance of White House
passes, the FBI ran background investigations on people who were going
to get the passes. Okay? So I dealt with the unit in the FBI that did
that. Okay?
In addition, there are a small group of FBI personnel -- who they are
assigned to, I don't know -- that are located in the OEOB, that
conduct the necessary interviews with people within the OEOB and the
White House so that the passes can be issued. Okay?
And so I dealt with all of those people, and I am sorry I can't
remember their names because there were a lot of them. Okay? There
were a lot of them.
Q Okay.
A And also I do want to clarify my answer earlier. I dealt -- most of
the time when I was employed with the administration I dealt with
White House passes, not all of them.
Q Okay. And it was Jim Bourke which was the White House FBI
headquarters person you dealt with on White House passes?
A Your question is imprecise. He was at the FBI. He was not at the
White House.
Q And was he at FBI headquarters or field office?
A I believe he was at headquarters.
Q And other than Jim Bourke and his staff, do you recall any other FBI
agents that you would have dealt with at headquarters or field offices
on the passes issue?
A The agents that were at the OEOB.
Q That's why I said headquarters or field offices. Do you recall any
other agents?
A I also told you I don't know who they were assigned to. I mean, I
don't know if they were part of the field office or part of
headquarters. I just don't know.
Q Okay. You said you had a White House pass. Did you have a temporary
pass or a permanent pass?
A Both.
Q Okay. Do you recall when, each?
A I have already answered that. The answer is no.
Q Okay. And did you deal with the same FBI agents on your own pass or
was it a different set of agents?
A Well, I mean the short answer is, I don't recall. I think that I was
interviewed by one agent. I'm not sure who it was. I just don't
remember.
Q Okay. When was the first time that you heard any mention of the
White House Travel Office?
A Shortly after I arrived in Washington.
Q Okay. Would that have been after you began at the White House in
February?
A Uh-huh.
Q Is that yes?
A Yes.
Q Okay. Can you tell me, the best of your recollection, what you
heard?
A Craig Livingstone, who was also new at that point, mentioned to me
one day that he had heard rumors of -- I can't remember his precise
words -- either wrongdoing or things not being up and up inside the
Travel Office. He had only hearsay. He had only rumors, no
substantiation for these rumors.
Q And what was Craig Livingstone doing at the White House at that
time?
A He was the director of White House personnel security.
Q Did Craig Livingstone ever mention anyone he had spoken to as a
source of these rumors?
A I don't recall him doing so at this point, at this point. We had a
kazillion -- I would spell that for you, if I knew how -- other things
to do. This was right after I got there. And I don't recall him saying
-- he was just saying he was hearing rumors to that effect.
Q Did you relay that information to anyone else within the White
House?
A I did not consider the information to be other than the worst kind,
third party hearsay. So, no, I did not.
Q Okay. And you said at that time Mr. Livingstone didn't identify the
source. Did at any time he identify the source of these rumors to you
or to anyone else that you heard of?
A After, long after, the events which have come to be known as the
Travel Office affair occurred, I learned that the source of his
information -- I believe, and don't hold me to this because I don't
know this for a fact -- was Clarissa Cerda who was living at one point
with Catherine Cornelius.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN VASSELO
Q And did you hear that from Mr. Livingstone or just from others?
A I'm sorry. I can't recall. I mean, I may have even read about it in
the press. I just don't know.
Q Okay. Did Vince Foster ever mention any rumors or problems in the
Travel Office during this same early period of early February or
March?
A He did not.
Q Okay. Did you ever hear that he had talked about the Travel Office
or that he was concerned about the Travel Office during February and
March of '93?
A Not that I recall, no.
Q Okay.
Ms. Bracher. I will identify, if that's okay, just so everybody knows,
the person who has come in.
Do you want to just identify yourself?
Mr. Stroman. Ron Stroman.
Ms. Bracher. Minority counsel.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q There is a Vince Foster Travel Office file, which subsequently this
committee came into possession of and learned of. Do you recall the
first time you ever heard about Vince Foster's Travel Office file?
A I don't recall the first time, no, I mean, when it was. Press
reports, whenever that came out.
Q Okay. Were you aware that Vince Foster had a Travel Office notebook
inside of a Travel Office file prior to July of '93?
A You put a time limit on it. I don't think I knew that such a file
existed until press reports, which were either in '95 or '96.
Q Okay. So Vince Foster had never discussed his Travel Office file
with you that he was keeping or his notebook that he was keeping prior
to his death?
A Not that I recall, no.
Q Okay. Did Mr. Nussbaum or anyone else in the counsel's office ever
discuss Mr. Foster's Travel Office notebook or file with you?
A Not that I recall.
Q Okay. Other than press reports, did you have any other discussions
concerning Mr. Foster's Travel Office notebook and Travel Office files
--
A The --
Q -- with any other individuals in the White House?
A With individuals in the White House? No, I have not. I have talked
about it with my counsel.
Q Certainly I would exclude any conversations you had with your
counsel.
Q Do you know Marsha Scott, who worked in the White House?
A I do.
Q And when did you first meet her?
A I couldn't tell you precisely. I have known her for awhile.
Q Okay. Did Ms. Scott ever discuss her meeting that she had with Mr.
Foster on the afternoon of July 19th?
A No, not that I recall. She may have told me that she met with him. I
know there have been press reports to that effect. I don't recall her
discussing the specifics of that meeting.
Q Do you recall her ever discussing any of the substance of that
meeting with you?
A No.
Q Okay. You have described the first time you heard about rumors being
from Mr. Livingstone in the February/March time frame. Can you tell me
when was the next time you heard anything about the Travel Office in
the White House?
A When Vince Foster stopped by my office and asked me to attend a
meeting with him, which I think was on May the 12th, but don't hold me
to that.
Q Did he at that time describe any background on the Travel Office or
any information concerning rumors or wrongdoing in the Travel Office?
A No. He said he wanted me to attend a meeting because there was a
problem in one of the offices, and I asked him if it was the Travel
Office. And he was surprised by my question, and I explained to him
that I heard rumors about it when I first got here.
Q Did you tell him where you had heard the rumors or go into any
detail concerning these rumors?
A I think I may have said that we had heard rumors that I had gotten
from Craig Livingstone when we were walking back over to attend this
meeting.
Q Did Mr. Foster, if you especially recall, tell you that he had heard
similar rumors or give you any information concerning those rumors?
A No. I got the clear impression that this was a new matter to him.
Q At this meeting, which I believe was May 12th, was this the first
time you had met Catherine Cornelius?
A No. I had seen her around the OEOB.
Q Were you aware of what position she had in the administration?
A No. I mean, unequivocally, no. I didn't know what she was doing. I
had just seen her around the OEOB. I knew who she was.
Q Had you ever attended any meeting that she sat in on or had any
other relations on other matters with Catherine?
A No, not that I recall.
Q Did you know David Watkins prior to May 12th?
A I did.
Q Can you just describe how you knew David Watkins?
A I had met him in Little Rock. I cannot tell precisely when. I have
known David for some time.
Q In Little Rock, would this have been prior to the election or after?
A This would have been way prior to the election.
Q So this would have been during the period when Mr. Watkins was in
private business --
A Uh-huh.
Q -- in Little Rock?
A Uh-huh.
Q Had you done business with his company?
A I had not.
Q Okay.
A Now, with the qualification other lawyers inside the Rose Law Firm
may have and I would be unaware of that. But as far as I know, I never
did any work for Dave.
Q Okay. Are you personally aware or had you ever asked David to do any
work for you in the -- during this time period?
A For me?
Q Yes.
A No.
Q Or for the Rose Law Firm at your request?
A No, with the same qualification, which is that the Rose Law Firm is
a relatively big place and somebody else may have asked him to do
something.
Q Okay. And certainly my questions are limited to knowledge that you
have and personal directions that you may have been involved in.
A As you understand, Barbara, these events are now 3 years old and
they have been the subject of more investigations than I care to
count. But particularly when you are talking back in the mid-eighties
or whatnot or whenever I first met David, I just simply am not going
to know when I first met him, that sort of thing.
Q Certainly. Were you aware of any representation of World Wide Travel
by the Rose Law Firm during any period?
A The same qualification. Personally, no. But has the Rose Law Firm
ever done any work for World Wide? I can't answer that, not without
checking the records.
Q But as you sit here today, did you ever direct or were you ever
involved or did you have any knowledge that you recall today of
representation of World Wide Travel?
A Not that I know of. Not that I can recall.
Q Okay. Do you recall had you ever met Harry Thomason before this May
12th meeting?
A No, not that I recall. It's possible that I met him, you know,
around the time of the election, the actual election, but I don't
believe I did.
Q So to the best of your knowledge, did you have any dealings with
Harry Thomason before that period?
A No.
Q Okay. During this May 12th meeting, do you recall anything that
Harry Thomason may have said or added during this meeting that you had
in Vince Foster's office?
A No. I am sorry to do this to you but you have got to restate that
question because I didn't follow it.
Q Okay. In the May 12th meeting that you had with Vince Foster --
A Yes.
Q -- maybe I should say who do you recall being at that meeting?
A Myself, Vince Foster, Catherine Cornelius, Harry Thomason, David
Watkins.
Q Okay. Do you recall anything that Harry Thomason may have said at
that meeting?
A I think he reported on the contacts that one of his either friends
or associates had had with the Travel Office and how they had been
rebuffed under circumstances that were -- I don't know what the -- I
mean suspicious is as good a word as any. That was basically his
contribution to the meeting.
Q Did he provide any documents or any other paper or any materials at
that meeting for anyone?
A He had a memo, I think, from a guy named Martens at that meeting.
Q Did he give you or anyone else a copy of that memo at that time or
at any other time?
A Yes. I had a copy of that memo.
Q Okay. Did you leave the meeting with a copy of the memo at that time
or did you acquire it later?
A I'm not -- I'm not sure about that. I mean, I don't remember if I
carried a copy away or if I got one later. I just don't recall.
Q And do you recall what was in that memo that Mr. Thomason had from
Mr. Martens?
A It basically was a report by this fellow Martens on his contact with
the Travel Office about how he had been told that there was no way he
was going to get the business; that the business was locked up and
that competitive bidding and pricing would not get it for him.
Q And at that same meeting, do you recall what Catherine Cornelius
would have said or did say?
A Well, Catherine Cornelius basically reported on the way she had been
treated in the Travel Office and what she had noticed and what she had
found and she had some documents with her.
Q Okay. And did she hand over any documents to anyone during that
meeting?
A She showed documents to us. I don't -- I think she kept them in her
possession when the meeting broke up.
Q And do you recall where these documents were from, what they
concerned?
A I don't know if they were copies or originals, but they were
represented to be from the Travel Office.
Q Okay. Were any discussions held during that meeting that you
recalled concerning the propriety of Ms. Cornelius having Travel
Office documents in her possession?
A Well, if I remember correctly, David Watkins had said that he was
conducting sort of an analysis of the efficiency and the operations of
all of the offices within the Executive Office of the President, of
which the Travel Office was one, and that Catherine Cornelius had been
assigned there to basically take a look at it and see what was going
on.
Q Specifically, though, would the fact that Ms. Cornelius had
documents in her possession in a meeting, did anyone discuss whether
or not she should have White House Travel Office documents in her
possession and what she should do with those documents?
A She worked in the Travel Office. It simply wasn't an issue.
Q Okay. Did she ever discuss having taken those documents home?
A No. I don't recall her ever saying anything like that.
Q Okay. Were you aware that she had removed these documents and taken
them home?
A I mean, obviously she had the documents in her possession, so I
don't know what you mean by "removed," but it was totally proper for
her to have those documents. She worked in that office.
Q Okay. And did she discuss how she came to be in possession of those
documents?
A No. There was no issue here. There was no issue here.
Q So --
A There were no discussions -- on this particular issue, there were no
discussions. It wasn't an issue.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN MAYER
Q Okay. And please correct me if I am wrong, but according to you, it
wasn't an issue because she -- you believed she had authority to have
possession of these documents that she was showing you in the meeting?
A I had no reason to question her authority. Absolutely, I thought it
was proper for her to have them.
Q Okay. Did she ever discuss whether her boss, Billy Dale, knew that
she had these documents?
A The clear import of what she was doing was that she -- that they did
not necessarily know that she had these documents.
Q Okay. Did you see any problems with that situation?
A Not based on what she was showing me, no.
Q And can you explain why?
A She had evidence of large checks written to cash, large checks
written to Billy Dale in cash. She had evidence of poor documentation.
She had evidence of sloppy bookkeeping.
Q Did you look on her as an investigator in the Travel Office?
A I looked upon her as a White House employee.
Q Okay. And you felt that it was within her duties as a White House
employee to have taken the actions that she did in the Travel Office?
A I don't know what her instructions were, do not know now, don't know
then, what her instructions were -- didn't know then.
So whatever she was doing, I assumed that she had the authority to do
it. David Watkins, her indirect superior, was in the room with her and
he didn't say anything about it.
I want to say again, it was not an issue.
Q Okay. As a member of the White House Counsel's Office, do you deal
with ethics issues within the White House?
A The White House counsel's office did, yeah.
Q Okay. And was there anyone who might have any knowledge of ethics in
that meeting?
A I mean, you -- quantify what you mean by "knowledge of ethics."
Q That you know of that certainly dealt with ethics issues within the
White House that was in that meeting.
A Well, I mean, both Foster and I were lawyers in the White House
Counsel's Office. So ostensibly, we dealt with ethics issues.
Q And were there any ethics issues that you felt were raised by Ms.
Cornelius in that meeting?
A Barbara, hindsight is 20/20. Okay? And you have the luxury of
sitting here posing these questions. I am going to say it the same way
I said it before.
She came in with documents that she had obtained in an office she was
working in. Okay? If you had told me there was some issue as to why
she shouldn't have those documents, I would have said, Barbara, what
in the world are you talking about? Do you have something to hide?
So the answer is, she had -- whatever instructions she had, I assumed,
she was operating under. We also felt like -- that it was totally
proper for her to have those documents because she worked in the
office.
Q Okay. And the same question I would like to pose about Harry
Thomason. Did you ever question his activities concerning the Travel
Office or the fact that his partner had had activities concerning the
Travel Office at this time?
A Okay. At what time?
Q At this time, during this meeting.
A During the meeting?
Q Yes.
A No. I mean, this is the first I had heard about all of this and I
was learning what in the world was going on.
Q Did the information that Harry Thomason gave to you and others in
that meeting raise any ethics issues in your mind at that time?
A Mr. Harry -- Mr. Thomason made a flat statement in this meeting,
which was that he was not looking for business, that he was not
interested in obtaining any business, that he had no pecuniary or --
he didn't use that word, of course -- but he had no financial interest
in these matters. Okay?
Q Were you aware that he was a partner in TRM Incorporated at that
time?
A No.
Q Okay. When he talked about his partner that had written a memo, were
you aware that that was a partner with his TRM company at that time?
A I don't -- I don't -- I don't recall exactly what Harry said, how he
described Martens. I don't -- I can't recall if he said that he was a
friend, an acquaintance, someone he knew, you know, somebody connected
with the campaign. I am sorry; I just don't remember. But whatever it
was that he said did not trigger any -- did not trigger the sort of
questions in my mind as to what was going on, no.
Q Okay. Did he mention anything about UltrAir at -- during that
meeting?
A I don't recall that he did, no.
Q Do you recall him discussing kickbacks discovered by his partner or
himself or his friend?
A Well, the general thrust of what he said, as I testified before, was
-- is that the contact that Mr. Martens had had, had been rebuffed
under circumstances and in a way that Harry considered suspicious or
not on the up and up.
Q But at that time, would it be correct to say that you did not know
that this was a person who was in partnership with his company, which
had a charter company?
A I don't -- I am relatively certain that at that meeting, I did not
know that there was any relationship between Mr. Thomason and whatever
Martens' name is.
Q Darnell Martens.
A Other than they knew each other somehow.
Q Okay. And Mr. Thomason, when he made the statement that he did not
have any interest in -- any pecuniary interest, or however he worded
it, in the Travel Office, did he relate that to any companies or any
other activities that he was involved in?
A Uh-uh. His contribution to this meeting was pretty small.
Q Did you question why he was at the meeting?
A No. I mean, he was talking about this contact and the way they had
been rebuffed.
Q Had you seen him at the White House prior to this meeting?
A No, I don't recall doing so.
Q Okay. Did you -- during this period in May, do you recall seeing Mr.
Thomason very often in the White House?
A Remember, I worked in the OEOB and I was over there most of the
time. It is possible that I may have seen Harry in the hallways,
traveling back and forth, but I don't recall seeing him at all.
Q Were you aware that he had an office at the White House during this
period?
A At this time?
Q Uh-huh.
A At this time?
Q Not during May, but subsequent to that meeting.
A I learned from press reports later on that he had an office in the
White House. At this time, I didn't know it.
Q Okay. Did you know any of the staff that he had brought in to the
White House at that time?
A I did not.
Q Were you aware of his relationship with others in the White House
during this period?
A I knew he was a friend of the Clintons, yeah. I knew that.
Q Other than that information, did you have any knowledge of his
relationship or position within the White House?
A No.
Q Were you ever asked to look into his status in the White House?
A At what time?
Q At any time.
A No, I was not.
Q Did you ever -- do you know if anyone in the White House Counsel's
Office was ever asked to look into his status in the White House?
Mr. Coffield. Can you repeat the question? Can she read it back for
the record? We have got a privilege issue --
Ms. Bracher. Okay.
Mr. Coffield. -- that we are just trying to deal with.
[The reporter read back as requested.]
Mr. Coffield. To the extent that he had conversations with other
members of Counsel's Office about this particular issue, unless
there's something more, I think he has got to assert the privilege at
this point.
Ms. Bracher. For whom? Because -- I mean, I would like you to explain
privilege, because we have been told that the White House is not
asserting a general privilege.
The Witness. Okay. Let me -- I have had notice -- I have had no
instructions on this one way or the other. I think, based on what's
gone on in the past, I can answer this question, okay, if you are
asking about legal work performed by the White House Counsel's Office.
So I would like to answer the question with the understanding that the
privilege has been waived. You know, I am going to take your assertion
that basically it is fact.
Ms. Bracher. Well, I also would like counsel to call the White House
just to make sure, because our information has gone -- is not
extremely clear, and I don't want to misrepresent the White House
position.
Mr. Coffield. Why don't we do this: Can we move on beyond this? Can we
go back after we have a break? I will go ahead and call the White
House and see if he can go ahead and answer the question, because
obviously he cannot waive the privilege.
Ms. Bracher. No.
Mr. Coffield. It is only their privilege.
Ms. Bracher. I also ask that, when you call, if you would ask them
generally about conversations Mr. Kennedy had with others in the
Counsel's Office because these will be questions that will come out --
up throughout the day, since he was a member of the White House
Counsel's Office, and I will be asking various questions about work he
performed as well as work he has knowledge of that was performed not
only for Harry Thomason, but certainly about Billy Dale and any of the
other matters that I mentioned as part of this investigation.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. I am going to go back then to Wednesday, May 12, this meeting.
After this meeting, did anyone suggest that you call the FBI that
evening?
A Nope.
Q Okay. Can you just, please, in your own words tell us how you came
to contact the FBI.
A I picked up the phone and called them.
Q What basis did you have for calling them?
A I don't understand your question, Barbara, and I am not being
evasive. What do you mean what basis did I have?
Q Why did you call the FBI?
A I was looking for help.
Q Why did you call the FBI?
A I was looking for help.
Q Was there anyplace else you knew of that you could get this help
that you were looking for?
A No, not that I knew of.
Q Did anyone suggest that you call the FBI?
A No.
Q Did you run this by anyone or discuss it with anyone before you
called the FBI?
A No.
Q Okay. Can you just tell us whom you called at the FBI?
A Jim Bourke.
Q And I know we have touched on it earlier, but if you could, just
describe why you chose Mr. Bourke at the FBI.
A I was in day-to-day contact with him every day, day in and day out.
Q You said you had also been in contact with some other OEOB FBI
agents?
A From time to time, yeah.
Q Did you consider calling them about this matter?
A Uh-uh.
Q Why not?
A They were agents -- I don't know how -- I don't know the proper FBI
terminology, but they were agents -- in military terms, grunts. Okay?
I had a specific question which I needed to pose to someone about
where to go to get some help, and I felt like Mr. Bourke was the
appropriate person to ask.
Q These White House FBI agents, can you describe just basically what
types of matters they handled that you were aware of at that time?
A They conducted primarily the -- the interviews, so that the
background investigations on White House people could be completed.
Q Did you know of any other matters that they handled or were involved
in in the White House?
A They interfaced with the Secret Service. I mean, that was generally
what they did.
Q Would you have considered them pretty knowledgeable about White
House matters?
A Absolutely not.
Q Why not?
A Why should they be?
Q These agents were assigned to the White House?
A I think they were assigned technically to the Executive Office of
the President. But, Barbara, I don't know who they were assigned to.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
Q Were they new to the administration, or did you know if they had
been there previously?
A I don't know.
Q Did you know if they had experience in the FBI before you came to
the White House?
A I assumed they did. I had no reason to ask them about it.
Q Did they appear, these people that you called grunts, did they
appear to be knowledgeable about the White House and its internal
workings?
A First of all, let me be clear on one thing for the record. Grunts is
not a pejorative or a demeaning term. I mean, these were agents that
did the legwork. I want to be clear for the record on that. I didn't
like the way you said that.
Q I'm using your term, Mr. Kennedy. So please, it's fine to clarify,
and I do like the fact that you are clarifying, but I am not putting
words in your mouth.
A No, you are not, but the way you said it was not the way I said it,
and I would like the record to reflect that.
Q Certainly. I apologize if you think I used a pejorative term.
A Okay. Now, I don't know what these people's experiences were. They
were on the scene when I arrived. They rotated in and out. They did
what they were supposed to do. I don't necessarily think that they had
any superior knowledge about the workings of the White House than
anybody else.
Q You said you went to Mr. Bourke because you needed someone who had a
higher level. I don't know your exact terms but a higher level. Can
you just explain why you thought this needed a higher level of
experience than the people at the White House?
A You didn't characterize my answer properly.
Q Okay.
A Okay?
I knew that Mr. Bourke was not the right person to go to, but I
thought he could direct me to the right people.
Q Okay. And why did you go to him?
A I worked with him every day, every day.
Q Okay. Did you ever discuss the Travel Office with the local White
House FBI agents in the OEOB?
A At what point in time, Barbara?
Q I mean, at any point. Certainly I am talking about this May period,
May 12th, May 13th, in the early part of May when you are learning
about the Travel Office.
A I don't recall, you know -- sort of while these events were going
on, I don't know what a good cutoff date was. I remember that after it
happened, and don't hold me down as to when, but not too much after
all this happened, I had a conversation with this guy named Dennis
whose last name I can't remember. And he told me that he thought that
Mr. Dale had probably taken this money so he could pay bribes, that
that's why he was pocketing the money.
Q Do you recall any other conversations you might have had with any of
these FBI agents, even -- I mean, I want to go back to your beginning
at the White House -- leading up to this May 12th meeting?
A I don't know. I don't recall any conversations with -- as I have
testified earlier, with regard to the Travel Office, with regard to --
the conversations with the FBI agents with regard to the Travel
Office.
Q Did they ever provide any advice --
Ms. Bracher. This is Christy Remington, who is also on our staff. She
is an attorney on our staff, who is just sitting in.
The Witness. Yes.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Did the FBI agents provide any advice on any other internal workings
at the White House that you recall?
A Christy, be specific on --
Q I am Barbara.
A I mean Barbara.
Mr. Coffield. I am sorry. I just want to clarify something. I think
the record will show that he hasn't testified that they gave him any
advice on the inner workings of any of the White House.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Other than this comment about Billy Dale having probably --
A What do you mean by specific workings at the White House?
Q Well, any advice on how the White House worked, who to call, what
type of departments reported where, any type of general information on
the White House.
A Well, Barbara, when I first got there, they said, you know, that
this is sort of what we do and this is sort of how we do it.
Q Okay.
A Okay? And --
Q Well, let me stop with that. Was that an official meeting that was
set up between you and these White House FBI agents?
A No, not that I recall, uh-uh.
Q Do you know who else was there when they gave you this sort of
overview of what they do?
A Uh-uh. No, I don't. I don't remember -- I mean shortly after I got
there, they may have come by to introduce themselves. I may have asked
them to come by to say hello, you know, just to get acquainted with
them, that sort of thing.
Q What kind of overview did they tell you that they handled, other
than obviously the White House pass interviews that you have already
told us about?
A That's primarily what they said; that also if they learned of
wrongdoing that they would bring it to our attention, that sort of
thing.
Q So as best as you recall, you did not have any regular discussions
with these gentlemen about the White House administration or how
things worked, or periodic --
A Regular or periodic? No, I don't recall such things, no.
Q Did you tell them about calling FBI headquarters prior to the
firing?
A I don't recall doing so, no.
Q Did you have any discussions about the firings with these FBI agents
that are assigned to OEOB?
A No, not that I recall.
Q Specifically, did you tell them that they would be happy that you
hadn't brought them into this matter prior to the firings?
A I may have made a comment like that, for example, when I was talking
to Dennis, whatever, just a throwaway comment. But at the time, no,
not that I recall.
Q Can you tell me, if you did make a throwaway comment like that, can
you please explain why you would have made a throwaway comment like
that to one of the FBI liaison agents?
A It's called a joke, Barbara.
Q A joke? I don't understand. Maybe you can explain how it's a joke.
A I don't see how you can ask that question with a straight face.
Okay?
If I had brought any of those guys or women into this, then they would
have all this fun.
Q This was prior to the firings?
A I didn't talk to anybody prior to the firings.
Q Okay. I want to be very specific. This conversation that I'm talking
about is in a time frame before the May 19, 1993 firings.
A Okay. And I have previously testified that I don't recall any such
conversation.
Q Okay. So you don't believe that you would have told them that the
firings -- that something was going to occur on May 19th, and they
would be very happy that you had not brought them into it?
A I do not recall having such a conversation. Nor do I believe it
exists.
Q Did you ever discuss Mr. Foster with any of these agents?
A At what point in time, Barbara?
Q Well, I will be more specific.
A Please.
Q Because I don't want to put it at a point in time. It's at any time.
Mr. Foster's problems or condition in the context of his suicide.
A You know, the short answer is, not that I recall, but it is possible
clearly that one of those people stuck their head in the door and told
me how sorry they were and we discussed it briefly. But I do not
recall doing so.
Q Do you recall having periodic conversations with any of these agents
concerning White House matters?
A No.
Q Would you have considered any of these White House liaison agents to
have been either confidants or individuals that you would share
information concerning the Travel Office or Mr. Foster?
A Absolutely not.
Q Okay. And so to sort of move from this area, you never had any
inclination to call them rather than Mr. Bourke when you needed to
call someone for guidance on the Travel Office?
A Repeat your question, please.
Q Did you ever have any thought to call these White House FBI agents
rather than Mr. Bourke on May 12th?
A Uh-uh. No.
Q Were you aware that part of their job description that they give
every administration is to handle these very kinds of issues that
arise within the White House?
A First of all, the answer is no, but I would also disagree with that.
I would disagree with the facts that are contained within your
question.
Q Okay.
A The assertion that you are making.
Q Can you please tell me what the basis is of that disagreement with
that statement?
A I don't think that's -- that's not the way that any of them
described their jobs to me -- okay? -- that they were supposed to
ferret out these matters in any way, shape or form.
Q And so in the introduction that they gave you, they never gave you
any indication that they would handle initial investigations or
wrongdoing or petty thefts within the White House?
A The short answer is no. My understanding of what they were supposed
to do is, if in conducting a background information they learned of
something, okay, they were to bring it to the Counsel Office's
attention; but ferret it out on their own, no.
Q If, for example, someone had a wallet stolen, would you have gone to
them or would you still have called Mr. Bourke at the FBI if that
happened?
A I don't think that's within their jurisdiction. I think that's
within the Secret Service's jurisdiction, but don't hold me to that.
Okay?
You need to keep in mind, Barbara, as you ask these questions, and I
think it's important as a matter of clarification, that the
jurisdiction of the FBI within sort of the White House complex is not
extensive. The Secret Service is in charge of most of the physical
security and other security aspects of the building.
Q Did you ever think to contact the Secret Service regarding the
Travel Office matter on May 12th?
A Uh-uh, I did not.
Q Why not?
A Because I didn't think they had the expertise that I was looking
for.
Q And what kind of expertise was that?
A Audit capability, financial audit capability.
Q Can you tell me what caused you to believe that you needed someone
with financial audit capability?
A It became apparent, based on what Catherine Cornelius both had and
the way she talked, that at least there were allegations of financial
mismanagement inside the Travel Office. The best way to get to the
bottom of those allegations, in my mind, was to conduct a financial
audit of the operations and see what was going on.
Q Did you believe that there was further investigation that needed to
be done in addition to what Ms. Cornelius had uncovered?
A Absolutely.
Q And was --
A A financial audit, yeah, absolutely.
Q Did you question Ms. Cornelius just about the basis of the
information or the completeness of the information that she had
gathered at that time?
A Sure. We asked her a couple of questions about what she had
overheard, what she had seen, what she had uncovered.
Q Did you have anyone do a background check or give you any
information about the financial status of those working in the Travel
Office at that time?
A I did not.
Q Were you aware if any of the individuals in the Travel Office had
inherited a great deal of money at that time?
A No idea whatsoever.
Q Did you have any idea whether they had working wives --
A No idea whatsoever.
Q -- who may have large incomes?
A No idea whatsoever.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN VASSELO
Q Did anyone, during this meeting, ever think to ask those questions?
A Are we talking about the meeting on May the 12th?
Q Yes.
A We never got that far. I mean, the short answer is, is what made
sense at the time was to try to find some way to conduct an audit of
the office.
Q As you sit here, would it have made a difference concerning the
credibility of the information Ms. Cornelius had given you if you had
known the background or the financial status of the Travel Office?
Mr. Coffield. I just want to object that you are asking him to
speculate at this point.
Ms. Bracher. I am asking for his opinion.
The Witness. The -- I am sorry. You are going to have to restate your
question.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Ms. Cornelius just had given you information, I take it, of
lifestyles and activities of the Travel Office employees. Is that
correct?
A A better way to say it is that she made allegations.
Q Okay. She made allegations. And is it true that those allegations
were that they were living beyond the means of what one would expect
of a government employee?
A What she said was that she had overheard conversations that made her
think that might be the case.
Q Okay. And my question is, based upon that information, is it your
opinion that that would be important to know their backgrounds in
order to assess the credibility of that information?
A Well, you know, at what time are you asking me to give my opinion?
Now?
Q Uh-huh.
A Or back then?
Q Well, you are looking at it now. So your opinion obviously can only
be now.
A Well, but, I mean, are you asking me what I thought at the time?
Q Yes.
A Or are you asking me what I think now?
Q What did you think at the time? Is it your opinion now that, at the
time you had done that, you would have been able to assess the
credibility of her information?
A I think the answer to that question is that my thinking didn't
encompass that possibility at this point in time.
Q And none of these questions came to mind before you called the FBI?
A The short answer is, is that I didn't know the Travel Office
employees from Adam, didn't know anything about them; thought there
might be a perfectly plausible explanation, a perfectly rational,
legal and totally aboveboard explanation for everything that Ms.
Cornelius had said; did not know what the facts were; felt like there
was enough there to warrant a financial look at the Travel Office's
operations.
Q Were you aware at that time of the gravity of calling in the FBI to
investigate a matter?
A I didn't call the FBI in to investigate the matter.
Q What did you call them in to do?
A I called them to ask for help, for guidance.
Q Can you explain what kind of help and guidance you asked for?
A Sure. We were told at that meeting by David Watkins that the White
House and the Executive Office of the President did not have internal
audit capability, which I have to admit I was dumbfounded by, but that
there was no way for the White House to conduct a financial audit of
the Travel Office, in this meeting.
We discussed in the meeting where we might go to get such expertise,
because we were all in agreement that that was the way to go.
Q And what types of places did you discuss?
A We mentioned a number of different places within the government: the
Comptroller's Office, the GAO, the FDIC, the RTC, the IRS, the FBI,
wherever we thought there might be audit capabilities.
Q Specifically, the GAO, did you consider calling them rather than the
FBI?
A Sure.
Q Was there a reason why you would call -- you called the FBI rather
than the GAO?
A I had a working relationship with the FBI on a day-to-day basis. I
didn't know anybody at the GAO.
Q Had you had any contact with the GAO prior to May 12th?
A Had I?
Q Uh-huh.
A No.
Q Or anybody in that meeting that you knew of.
A Not that I know of, no.
Q Were you aware of GAO audits that had been going on in the White
House during that period --
A On May the 12th?
Q -- concerning the telephone system, concerning Remix or Resumix?
A I don't know that -- I know that those audits occurred. I don't know
the timing of them.
Q Did you know they were GAO?
A Probably, yeah.
Q Was there a reason that you wouldn't also call GAO to come in and
perform an audit, since they were already auditing the White House?
A Well, first of all, from my experience on the Hill, the General
Accounting Office is an arm of Congress, Barbara, as you know so well.
It's not an arm of the executive branch. I knew enough to know that.
Okay? That's one of the answers to your question.
The other answer to your question is the one that I have given you
consistently. I called the FBI to ask for help, and I did so because I
talked to them every day.
Q Were you aware that the FBI primarily concerns itself with criminal
investigations?
A Well, I don't necessarily agree with that. Okay? I mean, the FBI
also concerns itself with civil investigations, I believe, if
necessary. One of the things you learn in law school, as you did, is
that the FBI is full of accountants.
Ms. Bracher. Why don't I break now and you can ask any questions that
you may have. I am going to go on to another area.
Do you want to call the White House? Let's go off the record, if we
can.
(Off the record)
EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDBERG
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q Mr. Kennedy, I would like to refer to this report of interview of
302 done by the FBI, I guess on behalf of OPR, and make this an
exhibit for the record, if you could pass one on to the reporter.
Mr. Coffield. Do you want her to mark this?
Mr. Goldberg. Unfortunately, the numbers at the bottom didn't come out
too well. It is either CZ000517, or CZ000527, and I am not sure on all
the copies it came out all right. The numbers are way at the bottom.
You can mark that as Exhibit 1.
Mr. Coffield. After she marks it, I want to look at it.
(Kennedy Deposition Exhibit 1 was
marked for identification).
Mr. Coffield. After she marks it, I would like to look at it and give
it back to you.
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q Mr. Kennedy, have you had a chance to review this prior to today?
A No.
Q I would like to ask some questions based on this. Do you want to
take some time to review it?
A No. Go ahead. But I haven't seen it before.
Q Well, let me figure out a way to start this to put it in context for
you. I want to talk about the conversations you had with the FBI on
May the 10th of 1993. Let me just read a couple of sentences from this
on the first page from the second paragraph.
A Excuse me. What date did you say?
Q Well, I will just read the paragraph. There's a date in the
paragraph, and I will ask you to look at that if that corresponds.
A Okay.
Q It's the first page, the second paragraph.
"Mr. Kennedy advised that on 2-10-93 he assumed the position of
associate counsel to the president." I am sorry. I got the date wrong.
Let me just read this, and I can ask you questions.
"Mr. Kennedy advised he first became aware of troubles in the White
House Travel Office during the second or third week of February 1993
after a discussion with Craig Livingstone, director of White House
personnel security." I think they meant Craig Livingstone?
A Yes.
Q "Mr. Livingstone related to Mr. Kennedy rumors which had been
circulating concerning employees in the White House Travel Office, Mr.
Kennedy considering the rumors to be very outrageous. The rumors
indicated the possibility that some employees were not on the, quote,
up-and-up."
Is that your recollection?
A Yeah. I don't remember using the word "outrageous," but, yeah.
Q Is this the first time you had heard rumors while you were in the
White House about the Travel Office?
A Uh-huh. Yes.
Q All right. Let me move on to page 3. The last sentence of the second
paragraph, and again this, I think, if you back up to the beginning of
that paragraph, has to do with your conversations on May the 13th,
1993.
A What page are you on?
Q Page 3, second paragraph.
A Okay.
Q You are talking to the FBI. The last sentence in that paragraph,
"Mr. Kennedy offered to meet at FBIHQ. UCs Foran and Apple said they
would come to the Old Executive Office Building."
Is that your recollection?
A Yes.
Q Let me move to the following page, the third paragraph. The next
contact with the FBI was approximately two hours later. "Mr. Kennedy
received a telephone call from UC Rick Wade and SSA Thomas Carl. Mr.
Kennedy recalls that they were both on the phone at the same time. Mr.
Kennedy volunteered to come to FBI headquarters, but, according to Mr.
Kennedy, they suggested that they could visit him in his office in the
Executive Office Building."
Is that your recollection?
A Yes.
Q So on two separate occasions that day you personally offered to
travel to the FBI offices to obtain the assistance you were looking
for, and in both cases the FBI stated that they would rather come to
the White House, is that correct?
A Yeah. I mean, it wasn't that big a deal, Dennis. It was, you know, I
will be glad to come over there and he said, well, we will come over
there. It was like that.
Q So they obviously were not reluctant to come to the White House,
would you agree?
A No, they were not reluctant to do that, and I am sorry I called you
Dennis.
Q That's quite all right.
Mr. Coffield. There has been a lot of talk about a guy named Dennis,
and I want to make sure who we are talking about.
Mr. Goldberg. I get called all sorts of things. That is not one of the
worst things I have been called.
The Witness. Me, too.
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q If it was your intent to somehow force the FBI to conduct some sort
of criminal investigation, would it have made sense to ask any of
these FBI agents to begin an investigation during these meetings,
these two meetings that we have discussed?
A First of all, it was never my premise to force any sort of
investigation, period, end of story. So I hope --
Q You certainly had the opportunity during those two meetings if it
had been your intention?
A Absolutely.
Q And during those meetings, you did not ask the FBI to conduct a
criminal investigation, is that correct?
A I did not.
Q Let me go back to page 4, the fourth paragraph. Let me read it
again. "Mr. Kennedy does recall that UC Wade and SSA Carl discussed
predication in their conversation. Mr. Kennedy believed that he and
Mr. Foster believed the same way, that they were not certain there was
enough information to constitute an investigation at that time. They
were both skeptical of the information they had received."
Is that your recollection?
A Yes.
RPTS STEWART
DCMN VASSELO
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q In fact, you cannot even believe there was an FBI investigation at
this point?
A I wasn't -- I am learning about predication, as these guys talked
about it. In other words, they said that predication was their term of
art for the threshold level that they had to get to before they could
take any sort of action.
So the short answer is that, I mean, I would never presume to advise
them or disagree with them about predication. I didn't know what they
were talking about. But we were very skeptical about the allegations
at this point.
Q Let me go to page 5, the bottom of the page. They told Mr. Kennedy
that they believe that predication existed in this case, based on
their interview of Cornelius, and they were ready to start an
investigation. Is that your answer to the question?
A Yes.
Q And to continue down there, "Misters Kennedy and Foster were
surprised." Regarding predication on the following page, "According to
Mr. Kennedy, their suspicions were heightened by the information they
received from Ms. Cornelius. At that time, Misters Foster and Kennedy
still believed an investigation by the FBI was premature".
Is that your recollection?
A Yes, absolutely.
Q So let me just ask a few questions based on that. You had heard
Cornelius' allegations about the Travel Office and were skeptical of
the information you received; is that correct?
A Well, let's be clear here. We thought she was credible. We thought
she knew what she was talking about, but we didn't know if there was a
good explanation for what she had found, what she was hearing. We just
didn't know.
And so were skeptical about whether there was fire where there seemed
to be smoke; absolutely. We didn't know what we are dealing with.
Q But the FBI, upon hearing the same information, told you they
believed predication existed based on the --
A Yes, yes. They had interviewed Catherine directly.
Q Did you discuss with the FBI agent at this time you did not agree
with their assessment concerning predication?
A As I said, I would have not have phrased it in that way. We would
not have said we don't think you have predication because there was,
on a telephone call Mr. Foster and I were on, we didn't know quite how
they viewed predication. I had never really heard the term until I met
with them the first time.
But we did not feel at that time that an investigation by the FBI was
warranted. We preferred, as subsequently happened, that the audit be
conducted to find out what the hell was going on.
Q What was their response?
A They were respectful of what we had to say and ultimately abided by
it.
They did point out to us and press us on a couple of issues, such as
statements that might be made during the course of the audit. If FBI
agents were there, auditors wouldn't have to testify about that.
They were concerned about certain other issues.
They were not surprised about the destruction of documents, the
petition of evidence, those type issues. They pointed out that, with
the audit, it might harm them; and we said, "We hear you, but we sort
of disagree."
Q With all the reasons the FBI was giving you to conduct a criminal
investigation, you still went ahead with the review of the Travel
Office?
A That is correct.
Q So it wasn't you or other members of White House staff that were
pressuring the FBI to conduct an investigation of employees at all; in
fact, the FBI agents themselves were ready to begin a criminal
investigation?
A That is a fair statement; they were ready to go.
Q That is all I have.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. I want to do a couple of follow-ups on that since that is a
little bit of an area -- I know -- did the FBI ever do an audit of the
Travel Office during this period?
A During what period?
Q During this May '93 period when you were calling them for an audit?
A Did they do an audit?
Q Yes.
A You'd have to ask them. I don't know.
Q Are you aware of any audit that the FBI performed on the Travel
Office?
Mr. Coffield. I just want to interrupt for a second just to correct
the record. I don't think he ever said he asked the FBI to do an
audit.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Can you tell us for the record again what was your intent in calling
the FBI?
A To ask for help in how to deal with this problem.
Q And what kind of help were you looking for?
A I was hoping they could tell me where I could go find some auditors.
Q Did they tell you where you could go find some auditors?
A They did not.
Q You said earlier that you knew the FBI was full of those type of
people; isn't that correct?
A I believe that to be the case, yes.
Q Did they ever tell you why they couldn't do an audit, or did they do
an audit?
A You have to ask them what they did, Barbara. I don't know what they
did.
Q Did they ever tell you they would perform an audit?
A The short answer is, before they could get back to us with their
conclusion, we discovered that we had audit capability. So the issue
became moot.
Q You were just discussing about the FBI determining they had
predication that you thought was premature. Do you have any memory at
that time about why the FBI was so quick to find predication?
A I don't know if they were quick or not, Barbara.
Q You said you thought it was premature. Doesn't that mean quick?
A No.
Q What does that mean to you?
A It means that, based on what I knew and based on my own experience,
it seemed to me we needed a little more concrete evidence. But whether
they were premature in what they did, you will have ask them.
Q Did you feel you knew more than the FBI about when an investigation
should start?
A Absolutely not.
Q Why do you think it premature?
A I just told you, based on my experience and what I knew, it seemed
premature to me. But I don't do that for a living.
Q What is your experience in financial investigations or audits of
this type?
A I am a civil lawyer, primarily concentrating on business issues, and
I have seen audits done and been a part of audits.
Q As an attorney?
A Yes.
Q And have you been a part of auditing process from a major auditing
company, such as KPMG Peat Marwick?
A What do you mean be a part?
Q Have any of your clients either participated or had audits while you
were representing them?
A I have lots of clients who have audits.
Q So you are aware of the procedures that are normally gone through in
a civil context regarding an audit of a client?
A Yes, generally.
Q When the FBI -- you said they abided by your decision, yours and
others', that an investigation wasn't warranted, that you wanted an
audit. Did you think that was unusual for the FBI to abide by the
decision of White House lawyers?
A I didn't have an opinion on it one way or another.
Q Did you tell them that they were going to have to abide by your
decision?
A Did I tell them that they were going to have to? Absolutely not.
Q What caused them to abide by --
A They simply respected our wishes.
Q How did you confer these wishes? How did you communicate these
wishes to them?
A Over the telephone.
Q Can you just tell me as best you recall what was said to them?
A I think I just did with Don, but I will go through it again.
I mean, basically, they said that after talking to Catherine Cornelius
they thought they had predication to proceed with an investigation.
While they were doing that, we had learned that we had audit
capability. Okay. And so we said we hear you, but we think it would be
better if we proceed with an audit. And they basically agreed with
that; after we discussed the possibilities, the pros and cons, they
agreed with that.
RPTS STEWART
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
Q And was that the position that you had dealt with the FBI before in
other investigations such as background checks where they would
proceed on your advice?
A I don't understand your question, Barbara, please be more specific.
Q The FBI is abiding by your decision on an investigation; is that
correct?
A You have to ask them what was in their minds. I don't know.
Q You just said that they did abide by your decision?
A But you asked me a question, "How they perceived what they're
doing." I don't know.
Q I am only asking for your perceptions. I apologize if my questions
tend to say that I'm asking what the FBI perceives. I only want to
know what you perceive.
A What I perceived was that we discussed the pros and cons with
conducting an investigation. Vince Foster and I did not believe that
the situation warranted an investigation. We hadn't asked for it. We
weren't looking for it. We hadn't tried to engender one. We felt like
it ultimately was the case that an audit would be the way to go.
Q And did you believe that that was your call rather than the FBI's
call in this case?
A You are asking me to speculate.
Q No, I am asking you at that time did you believe that was your call?
A You are asking me to speculate as to what they thought. Had he
pressed the issue, I don't know what would have happened.
Q I am not asking what they thought. I am asking what you believed,
Mr. Kennedy.
A You are asking me something I didn't have a belief upon. What we
said, we think, Vince Foster and I think the way to go is an audit.
They agreed.
Q And at this point you have an FBI agent who's saying we have a
predicate to start an investigation; is that true?
A That is correct.
Q An is it true you said we believe we want to do an audit, not an
investigation; is that true?
A That is correct.
Q Was it your opinion that you had the authority to tell the FBI how
they should proceed?
A I didn't have an opinion on whether I had the authority to do that
or not. We never got there.
Q In fact that was what you were doing; isn't that true?
A No, we were expressing our view. We were not ordering the FBI to do
anything, Barbara.
Q Do you think the White House expressing its view carries any weight
to the FBI?
A You'd have to ask the FBI.
Q Do you think at that time that the FBI expressing its view carried a
significant amount of weight with the FBI?
A I think you didn't ask the question the way you wanted to. I think
you mean the White House. Okay. You'd have to ask the FBI.
Q Mr. Kennedy, I want to know your view at that time. I don't want to
know the FBI's. What did you think?
A About what?
Q When you told the FBI you wanted an investigation not an audit? Did
you believe the FBI would do what you said?
A I didn't have an opinion on it one way or another. You are asking me
did I have an opinion, and the answer is no, I did not. What happened
is this, and I will go over it again. We started out thinking that we
needed an audit. Okay. Period. We never wavered from that one iota. We
thought then, I think now that an audit of that office was the way to
go.
They concluded that they had enough predication to conduct an
investigation. We said we hear you. This is what we think should be
done, okay. We discussed in a reasoned, measured way the pros and cons
of going both ways. And we basically said, we hear you, but this is
what we still think, and they said okay.
Q So the guidance you were seeking remained just guidance. You did not
consider the FBI to have any actual final say-so into how this matter
would proceed; is that true?
A You think I am evading your question, but I am not. We are talking
about this point in time, okay. The short answer is that these issues
did not occur to me. And to my belief, although he is not here to ask,
they did not occur to Vince Foster. We were not in any way, shape or
form in a position, or perceive we were in a position, to order the
FBI to do anything.
Q Were you aware of the status of the FBI director at that time with
your administration? I believe it was William Sessions.
A I can't say with particularity that I was. I mean, I think I was
aware that he was either a holdover or he was coming up, but I can't
say I knew for sure exactly what situation he was in.
Q Were you generally aware that his job was certainly in question with
the current Clinton administration at that time when you were talking
to the FBI?
A We are talking May -- I think I knew generally that sort of the
status was open. I think I knew there had been a lot of criticism
about his actions, I think in the previous administration.
Q Did you have any opinion about the effect the director's status
might have on your conversations?
A Absolutely not. I mean absolutely not.
Q It never entered your mind that the FBI might be quick to please the
White House in order to enhance their position with the White House?
A Whose position?
Q The FBI's.
A The FBI as an entity's position with the White House?
Q Yeah.
A Uh-uh.
Q Were you aware of any inter government -- strike that.
Were you aware that the FBI had concerns about their position with the
White House vis-a-vis being an investigative body?
A Barbara, I must ask for specificity. If we are talking about the FBI
as the governmental agency of the FBI, your answer is absolutely not.
It never entered my mind.
Q Were you aware of Web Hubbell's interactions with the FBI during
that period?
A With regard to judgeship candidates and candidates for
presidentially appointed positions within the Department of Justice,
yes, I knew that he interfaced with the FBI.
Q Other than the judgeships I am talking about, Web Hubble's
interactions with the FBI concerning the directorship as well as the
top positions at the FBI?
A No, I don't recall any such knowledge.
Q Was there any other reason, other than what you have given, that you
had for wanting to go to someone at headquarters?
A It is no fancier than that. I had a good working relationship with
Jim Bourke. I talked to him every day or almost every single day about
the status of presidential nominees. I have the highest regard for his
character, the highest regard for his professional competence, and I
knew I needed help. But I didn't know where to go, and I was certain,
as proved the case, that he would get me there.
Q And there was no intent on your part to go to headquarters because
you knew they would react to the White House in a different matter
than the FBI at the White House?
A No.
Q Did you have any problem with going to the FBI field agent at that
time?
A I am not sure I knew at this time that there was a difference
between headquarters and the -- I don't know if it's WFMO or WMFO,
Washington Metropolitan Field Office. I am not sure I knew it existed
at that point.
Q At this point during those first days that you first contacted the
FBI, do you recall them suggesting that headquarters was not the
appropriate place to go for guidance?
A No, I don't recall that.
Q Do you recall ever having it be suggested that you should actually
be contacting an FBI field agent?
A You know in the various investigations that had gone on, there had
been reports and press reports and whatnot that they suggested I go to
a field agent or to the WFMO or the WMFO. I simply don't recall that.
But you know I am not saying it did not happen or did happen.
Q You said a few minutes ago that you discovered you had audit
capability within the White House so it became moot. Can you describe
what audit capability you discovered you had?
A I never, until after the fact, I didn't quite know the precise
details of where these people had come from. But I guess on -- I am
trying to get the day straight. I think it was the next day following
the May 12th meeting I learned from Vince Foster that David Watkins
had found that there was a capacity he could call on to conduct an
audit.
Q And if you can just explain what that capacity was and how you came
to learn about KPMG Peat Marwick?
A At what point in time are we talking about?
Q When did you learn that David Watkins had a capacity to conduct an
audit?
A I think it was the Thursday following the Wednesday meeting.
Q That would have been May 13; that is Thursday?
A Okay.
Q Do you recall Mr. Watkins complaining what that capacity was?
A No -- well, other than the fact that KPMG Peat Marwick was a name I
was familiar with, was going to do it, okay.
Q Did he explain how he came to find KPMG Peat Marwick?
A He did at some point, okay. The way I learned this was from Vince
Foster and Vince said something along the lines of we located some
auditors, okay. I don't think at that point in time I knew on this
particular day that I knew where these people had come from or what
they were doing or anything like that. Later I did.
Q Had you ever worked with KPMG Peat Marwick before?
A Sure, in their previous incarnations.
Q What do you mean by that?
A I had worked with Peat Marwick before. It came to KPMG Peat Marwick,
I don't know when that merger occurred, but in the course of my law
practice, you bet.
Q In the course of your law practice had you ever encountered their
auditing procedures?
A Sure.
Q And can you just briefly tell us what's the normal procedure, when a
client is going to be audited, that occurs?
RPTS STEWART
DCMN MAYER
A I cannot. It varies from client to client. They do different things
depending on who the client is, to conduct an audit. There are certain
general principles that apply in the area, but if you are a
manufacturing concern, they are going to audit you differently than if
you supply temporary employees -- temps.
Q What I am asking is, every time you ever had any contact with a
client having an audit, were you aware that there was an audit
engagement letter, usually confirmed before the audit?
A I wouldn't say that I know that that is, you know, a prerequisite
for conducting an audit each and every way -- each and every time, but
I know about audit engagement letters, yeah.
Q Have you ever heard about an audit being done without an audit
engagement letter?
A I have to say yes.
Q In private practice?
A Uh-huh.
Q With a major accounting firm?
A I believe so, yes, and with minor accounting firms as well.
Q Are you aware of the standards that all major auditing firms operate
under?
A No.
Q There is a code that they follow.
A Are you talking about -- the short answer is, I am generally
familiar with the auditing process. I would not say that I know the
specifics of it.
Q So your belief is that auditing companies can go in and perform an
audit without an audit engagement letter and without any prerequisites
to perform the audit?
A What do you mean by prerequisite?
Q I mean bookkeeping activities that have to take place before the
auditing company comes in.
A Sure, absolutely.
Q They will walk in without a financial statement and perform an
audit?
A When you say "walk in without a financial statement," what do you
mean?
Q Without the individual company having prepared financial statements
or other materials in preparation for an audit.
A Sure, absolutely. There always has to be a first audit.
Q Can you describe what you mean by a "first audit"?
A Everybody always gets audited for the first time, okay? And they may
or may not have formal financial statements when they undergo their
first audit, yeah, you bet.
Q Can you describe what you think an audit is?
A I think an audit is a detailed accounting review.
Q Where they actually go in and go through the books?
A Absolutely. What do you think an audit is, if you don't mind my
asking?
Q I will refer to the standards that all auditing companies comply
with, Mr. Kennedy, but I really want to know your understanding of an
audit.
So your view is that a first audit would be an auditing company coming
in and actually going through the books of the company and preparing
statements?
A Let me just give you an example.
Q Okay.
A Okay. Let's take a company that wants to issue securities -- which
is something I know a little bit about; we will use this an example --
and let's suppose that Barbara wants to get into the widget business
and Barbara has identified a group of investors that Barbara wants to
sell widgets to -- actually, Barbara wants to bring in investors into
the Barbara Widget Company.
Under certain circumstances, under the rules of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, your little start-up company would have to have
an audited balance sheet before it could offer those securities. Your
little company may not have even commenced business yet -- indeed, in
all probability it wouldn't have -- and they will come in and audit
you. If you didn't have financial statements prior to those audits,
one of the things the auditing company would do is create them for
you, okay; or else assist your financial officers or you in my example
in creating those statements.
Q When they create those financial statements, that is called an
"audit" under your definition?
A No, "audit" is much broader than that.
Q What would an "audit" include?
A Are you asking for what I know or --
Q Yes, what do you believe an audit includes.
A In general terms, I understand an audit to be a detailed review of
the financial practices of the entity to be audited. It encompasses
management review, it encompasses accounting reviews, inventory
practices, bookkeeping practices; it encompasses controls, it
encompasses checks and balances, and on and on and on.
Q KPMG Peat Marwick, were you told they were going to come in and
perform an audit?
A Yes.
Q Who told you that?
A Vince Foster.
Q And had Mr. Foster summarily worked with auditing companies in
private practice?
A I presume so. I don't know that for sure. He was a litigator by
trade.
Q Did you or Mr. Foster ever discuss the engagement of Peat Marwick to
perform this audit that you were told about?
A It was not in our bailiwick.
Q Whose bailiwick was that in?
A I couldn't answer you precisely; I presume David Watkins.
Q Did you realize that the White House Counsel's Office was the entity
engaging Peat Marwick at that time?
A The short answer is, no, I don't know whether we knew that or not.
Q Do you know why correspondence and engagement letters were initially
going to the White House Counsel's Office?
A Presumably because at the point where this documentation began to be
produced, it looked like there was going to be an FBI investigation
and we were going to interface with the FBI.
Q Do you know why it was changed at the Office of Administration after
the first draft?
A No, I do not.
Q From what you just said, wouldn't it have gone toward being with the
White House Counsel's Office, as the investigation proceeded, rather
than the other way around?
A Barbara, I don't know; I don't remember it being changed, to be
honest. I thought all of them were addressed to me, but I don't know.
Q The final engagement letter, do you recall?
A I never saw the engagement letter. I don't believe I ever saw it. I
saw the report that they produced, which again I believe is addressed
to me.
Q Were you aware that the final engagement letter was a month after
the end of all of the reports?
A No.
Q Were you aware it was not to you, it was to the Office of
Administration at that time?
A No, but I wouldn't be surprised by it.
Q Is there any reason why the first draft went to you and final drafts
did not go to you?
A As I say, I don't know that final drafts didn't go to me. If you say
so, I will take your word for it. But -- I didn't have anything to do
with changing that, but I am not surprised by it.
Q And can you tell me why you are not surprised?
A Well, the White House Counsel's Office didn't have the ability to
pay these people, so --
Q You said they were addressed to you because you realized, as it
proceeded along, there was going to be an FBI investigation?
A That is correct.
Q Can you please make that distinction, why you were not surprised
that they didn't change over to the Office of Administration?
A The short answer to your question is, I don't know and cannot
comment upon how or why that change occurs; I just don't know. I do
know that I was the primary interface with Peat Marwick with regard to
these matters as they sort of -- in their inception.
Q Were you the person that asked them to come in and perform an audit?
A I did not.
Q Do you know who actually instructed them about what kind of review
they were going to do at the Travel Office?
A No, I can't tell you if anybody instructed them or not. I believe it
sort of worked out on a general basis.
Q Were you aware Peat Marwick has two divisions, one is an auditing
division and one is a management review division?
A No.
Q Were you aware that the auditing division did not come into the
Travel Office?
A No, I don't think I was aware of that distinction.
Q Do you know a person named Larry Herman?
A I do.
Q Do you know what division he works in?
A Uh-uh, I don't. He worked for Peat Marwick; I know that.
Q Do you know whether he is in the auditing division or the management
review division?
A I think I just said, I don't know what division he is in.
Q How did you first know about Larry Herman?
A I think I met him for the first time the next morning Friday
morning.
Q Had you seen him at the White House earlier, doing any other
activities?
A I don't recall so, no.
Q Were you aware that he had been doing in an NPR speech on a pro bono
basis?
A Barbara, at some point, I learned -- and I can't tell you precisely
when -- he had been part the NPR process, okay? I don't know when I
learned that, but that is how I came to learn -- that is how he was
identified as somebody who might do this.
Q Do you know if anyone else in the White House was aware of the fact
that he had volunteered to help on NPR before he came into the White
House?
A I assume somebody was, but I don't know who or on what basis.
Q Did you ever discuss Peat Marwick with Patsy Thomasson or David
Watkins?
A At this time, yes.
Q Do you recall what they told you about Peat Marwick?
A Patsy Thomasson, if I remember correctly, was there when we met the
next Friday, the following Friday, to figure out what they were going
to do.
Q Did she give you any background on Peat Marwick?
A She may have been the person who told me about them later. That is
entirely possible, but at that time, no.
Q During this period, May 12th and 13th, when you were talking to the
FBI, did you ever mention that you were under pressure to act on the
Travel Office?
A No.
Q Were you feeling pressured to act?
A Just the normal pressure.
Q Can you describe what you mean by "normal pressure"?
A If -- you can call on your own experience to answer that, but since
I have to answer questions, I will answer it.
The short answer is, there weren't enough hours in the day. The Travel
Office, while looming large in your mind, was not large in my mind. It
was one of many things I had to do on any particular day. And so I was
pressured to get on with it, as I was pressured to get on with
everything else I was doing.
Q Speaking specifically to May 12th and 13th, which contains a lot of
activity coming from you and your office for phone calls and meetings,
were there any identifiable pressures that you were feeling on those
days?
A Just the normal pressures.
Q Were you receiving any pressures from any individuals above you,
working in the White House?
A Well, I mean, the short answer is that Vince Foster was interested
in what was going on, okay, but it was the normal interest.
Was I feeling any particular kind of pressure from him? No.
Q Did he ever tell you what kind of pressures he was feeling?
A He did not.
Q You mentioned that you had a lot of other activities going on, that
this was just one of many. What other activities were going on at the
time?
A Business at the White House, Barbara, didn't stop. We were still
clearing nominees; we were still issuing passes; we were still -- the
Counsel's Office was doing what the Counsel's Office did. This was one
of many things we were fooling with.
Q On Thursday the 13th there is in -- the reports mentioned that Jim
Bourke said he had to call you back in 15 minutes or you'd go
somewhere else. Do you recall ever saying that to Jim Bourke?
Mr. Coffield. Do you have a report or something he can refer to?
Ms. Bracher. This is generally done in all the reports.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Do you recall that conversation being reported?
A Can you show me any example of what you are talking about?
Q Sure.
A Please do.
Q I will show you that one. In the FBI report Bourke does state that
--
Mr. Goldberg. Would you identify what report that is?
Ms. Bracher. I am sorry. IC Smith FBI Internal Review, which was
issued by the FBI on June 1, 1993. Mr. Apple -- and it's reported in
this report, which I will show you, on page 5 -- said you noted that
it was being directed by the highest level of the White House. I think
that is also reported in the White House management review that you
had mentioned several times, the "highest level."
Do you recall saying that to anyone at the FBI?
A As you know, Barbara, I have disputed this allegation every time it
has come up. I will be glad to dispute it again. The answer is, no, I
didn't say that --
Q Did you --
A -- and both reports you mentioned, both say that I disputed that.
Q I am aware. I am just asking you -- you do not recall saying it was
being directed at the highest level, coming from the highest level, or
ever mentioning the highest level to anyone at the FBI during this
period?
A Absolutely.
Q Did you have a personal belief that it was coming from, quote, "the
highest level"?
A Well, to me, Vince Foster and David Watkins are high levels in the
White House. Director of White House Administration -- absolutely,
they are high-level White House, senior White House employees.
So the short answer is, I knew it was coming from high levels in the
White House, but let's be clear, I am not talking about pressure or
anything. These were people that I was to come reporting to.
Q I understand. Had you ever used that term, "coming from the highest
level," in any other situation while you were at the White House, that
you recall?
A No.
Q Was it a term you used?
A No, it is not a term I would have used.
Q Had you read a book with that title prior to coming to the White
House?
A It is possible, Barbara, but I don't think so.
Q Are you aware of this book that is called "At the Highest Levels"
that was written?
A No, but I need to read it, don't you think?
Q It is on the Nixon Administration.
A The short answer is, no, I do not.
RPTS STEWART
DCMN VASSELO
Q The previous question that you needed to hear back from Mr. Bourke
within the next 15 minutes is reported in the White House Travel
Office management review at page 8 at the top of the page.
Do you recall telling Mr. Bourke that he needed to call you back in 15
minutes or else you would have to go somewhere else?
A Well, the short answer is no, I don't recall just this statement.
But I have, of course, told Jim when I called him if they were going
to be unable to help me, then I would have to go somewhere else. That
is a fact.
Q And did you ever mention where you might have to go if they couldn't
help you?
A I think I just said some other agency, okay. But I had discussed
with Jim before the laundry list of agencies where I thought maybe we
could go.
Q And what was that laundry list?
A Comptroller FDIC, GAO, RTC, IRS.
Q And specifically with the IRS, do you recall ever mentioning the IRS
in that laundry list to Mr. Bourke?
A Yes. I am certain I said the IRS in that laundry list.
Q Are you aware of the relationship with the IRS and the FBI?
A No. I mean I know there must be some relationship. But I am not
aware of it, no.
Q Are aware of any competition between the IRS and the FBI for
investigations in criminal matters?
A No.
Q Were you aware of any type of heightened sensitivity that the FBI
might have about someone at the White House saying they might go to
the IRS at that time?
A Heightened sensitivity? No. I mean -- what do you mean?
Q That it might register with an agent when someone from the White
House says that the IRS was a possibility for this investigation.
A No, huh-uh. I mean, just mentioning of the IRS came up in the
context of these are the places we have considered going. Help us out
here.
Q And in that same context, did you also tell the FBI that if they
couldn't help you out, you would go to these other places?
A In the context of not in, "By God, you guys had better perform."
Absolutely not. Absolutely not. What I said was, "Jim, I need to know
if you guys can help us. If you can't, I need to go somewhere else. "
Q And is that statement consistent with Mr. Bourke's statement saying
that you gave him 15 minutes or you are going somewhere else?
A No, it is not.
Q Do you think Mr. Bourke must have remembered incorrectly?
A You'd have to ask Mr. Bourke what he thinks.
Q You absolutely know you did not give him a 15-minute window?
A Absolutely did not; do not recall doing so in any way, shape or
form.
Q Do you have any idea where these FBI agents came up with these
15-minute windows or highest-levels window?
A It may be what they remember.
Q Would that memory in any way be correct or accurate according to
what you remember?
A The short answer is no, my memory is what I just testified about.
Q On Thursday, the 13th, when you were having conversations with the
FBI, were you in contact with anyone at the White House with about the
travel situation?
A Vince Foster.
Q This would have been while you were calling the FBI. Do you recall
what Vince Foster would have talked with you about on that date?
A I mean, let's see; I gave him a status report.
Q Of the FBI situation?
A Uh-huh.
Q Did Mr. Foster ever mention going anywhere else besides the FBI?
A In the May 15th meeting, where we had learned that there was not
audit capability within the White House or the Executive Office of the
President, at that meeting we sort of kicked around where we might go.
So, to that extent, yes.
Q Was there a concern at the White House at that time that the Travel
Office employees were becoming aware of what was going on? This is the
-- Wednesday, Thursday?
A Yes.
Q Where was that coming from? Who --
A I got it from Vince Foster where he got it. I don't know. I don't
know exactly the source of his information.
But in the phone call when I reported to him basically about the first
FBI contact, which was the wrong guy to be followed by the right guys,
he mentioned that the people in the Travel Office were becoming more
aggressive to Catherine, they were becoming even more secretive, even
more hostile, and she thought they might have begun to destroy
documents.
Q Did you relate that information, the destruction of documents, to
anyone?
A No. I don't recall doing so. I may have mentioned it to the FBI not
in exactly those terms when the two agents came over.
Q Did you consider that to be an important element if documents were
being destroyed.
A It was part of the landscape of the entire panoply of allegations
that Catherine Cornelius had come up with. If it were going on, would
it be serious? You bet. Absolutely.
Q you Were told it was going on, weren't you?
A I did not know. Absolutely not. Can you repeat my answer, please?
[The was read back as requested.]
The Witness. Vince Foster did not say to me that Catherine said they
were destroying documents. He said something along the lines of she
thought they might be. So, no certainty there.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q And did you follow up and find out any information on whether they,
in fact, were or weren't; or was your basis of knowledge just that
they might be?
A The short answer is I don't know if they ever did or didn't. Okay. I
just don't know.
Q Do you recall any specific conversations about documents with the
FBI being destroyed in that early period?
A I don't recall specifically saying that to the FBI. But I did say to
them in the context sort of outlining what they were going in through
the laundry list of allegations that Catherine had made with them.
Q Did the White House wind up securing the documents for the FBI
during this initial period?
A I can't answer that. I mean, when the audit started, I think that
David or his people took action to secure the office. But I can't
answer that with particularity.
Q Who do you mean by David or his people?
A His staff. Patsy Thomasson. His staff.
Q Do you recall the FBI having questions about the security of the
documents?
A Sure. I testified about that previously.
Q Were they allowed to come in and secure documents at that time?
A At what time, Barbara?
Q During the period when the audit was going on.
A Was the FBI allowed to come in --
Q And secure documents.
A At what time?
Q During the period of the audit. From the time they wanted to start
an investigation and told you they had predication, which was on May
13th, until the conclusion of the firings, at anytime was the FBI
allowed in to secure documents?
A The short answer is I object to the word allowed. As I previously
testified to you about we said let's do an audit. One of the issues
and concerns they raised about going that route as opposed to allowing
them to commence the investigation was that documents might be
destroyed or lost. We said we hear you, we think we can adequately
safeguard against that measure, and we want to proceed with the audit.
We said fine.
Q What was your basis for telling the FBI that you thought you could
adequately secure and safeguard the documents?
A Just my knowledge of the way the capabilities of the Office of
Management Administration. I thought they could do that.
Q David Watkins and Patsy Thomasson?
A His staff.
Q Any other people? You named those two.
A Anybody else on his staff, which was large.
Q They were -- to your knowledge, were they all involved in securing
the documents?
A I don't know who was involved in securing the documents.
Q How were you telling the FBI that they were being secured?
A I didn't say that about the FBI at this point in time. What I said
was I thought we could adequately deal with the issue.
Q Did that seem to be sufficient for the agents you were talking to?
A I don't know. You'd have to ask them.
Q During this period -- it was May 13th --
Mr. Coffield. Can we get some more water? Sorry.
RPTS STEWART
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Were you aware that the IRS had called the Travel Office on May
13th?
A I was not.
Q Were you aware they were going to conduct an excise tax audit of the
Travel Office during this period?
A Absolutely not.
Q When did you become aware of that audit?
A Only from press reports.
Q Do you know who in the Counsel's Office was working on that issue?
A At what time?
Q I assume May 13, very early on?
A If you tell me that they had called, I will accept it. If you tell
me they had commenced an audit on that date, I will accept that. I
don't know if that is a fact. If you are certain as such, no. I don't
know anybody in the Counsel's Office that was working on that matter
at that time.
Q And by press reports when would you have found out about the excise
tax audit?
A Whenever the press reports came out.
Q Would that have been before the firings or after the firings?
A I am not sure, whenever they came out. Probably after, would be my
guess.
Q Had anyone from the IRS contacted, prior to the firings, concerning
any White House audits or White House counsels or just White House
general matters?
A I dealt with the IRS on almost a daily basis.
Q In what capacity?
A They do a portion of the investigation with regard to the clearances
of nominees and issuance of White House passes.
Q And who did you deal with at the IRS on the White House passes
issue?
A Sorry, I cannot remember his name, but it can be easily found out.
Q Was he a Washington IRS person?
A Yes.
Q Did you ever have any conversations with this person or anyone else
at the IRS outside of the area of the passes prior to the firings?
A Say that again.
Q Did you ever have any conversations with anyone at the IRS outside
of the pass issue?
A With regard to --
Q Prior to the firing?
A With regard to what?
Q Travel office issues.
A Prior to the firings? No, uh-uh.
Q Other than the White House passes, did you ever speak with the IRS
on any other issues?
A No. Phrase your question again. Did I ever speak to the IRS?
Q You have now stated you talked to the IRS daily on White House
passes. Did you ever talk to the IRS for anything else in your
capacity at the White House?
A In connection with presidential nominees, yes.
Q Other than presidential nominees and White House passes?
A Is there a limit on the matters you are talking about?
Q I want to know how much contact you were having with the IRS. We
know you have got it on the White House passes on almost a daily
basis. I am asking you if you have other contacts with the IRS which
would have calls to go back and forth between you and the IRS prior to
the firings?
A Other than presidential nominees, no.
Q You have presidential nominees and White House passes?
A Uh-huh.
Q Would you have been in daily or weekly contact with the IRS on
presidential nominees?
A No. No, Peggy Richardson, I know her socially as a friend, and I
would see her socially, but my primary contact with the IRS arose from
those two areas.
Q Did you see Ms. Richardson socially prior to the firings?
A Yes.
Q Did any issues on the Travel Office come with Ms. Richardson prior
the firings?
A No.
Q Did you ever discuss any of the other business issues with Ms.
Richardson when you were seeing her socially prior to the firings?
A When you say business issues, what do you mean?
Q Other than social did you ever discuss White House business with Ms.
Richardson when you would have these social visits?
A Sure. She would ask me about the status of some of our nominees for
her agency.
Q You said you were in daily contact with the IRS on White House
passes. Were you working on White House passes during this period of
May?
A Was I?
Q Uh-huh.
A Sure.
Q What phase? There are no approvals at that period. Do you recall
what phase you were working on White House passes during the May time
period?
A Barbara, I hate to ask you this, but you have to be specific when
you say working on White House passes; what are you talking about?
Q What I'm asking you is, what were you doing?
A We were issuing White House passes.
Q May?
A Yeah.
Q Temporary passes?
A Temporary, permanent, sure.
Q Did you work on Harry Thomason's pass?
A Uh-uh, I did not. It was issued before I came to the White House.
Q Penny Sample?
A I don't know when her pass was issued. I can't answer that.
Q Darnell Martens?
A I don't know when his pass was issued, so I can't answer that. Did I
work on it directly? No.
What you need to understand and why the answer to your question is so
complicated is that Craig Livingstone, the director of the White House
Personnel Security Office, reported to me, which I think you already
know. That is why the answer to your question is complicated.
Q So, if Darnell's pass was issued in May, would you have worked on it
and just not recalled it, or what capacity were you handling White
House passes and what capacity was Mr. Livingstone?
A If Mr. Livingstone was in charge of the day-to-day issuance of
passes, it was his office and his staff that kept up with the
paperwork, okay. But he reported to me, and I would troubleshoot for
him. We would strategize. We would be sure we were doing what we were
supposed to do.
Q Do you recall an issue during May concerning the status of Darnell
Martens' pass?
A When you say "May," you are not encompassing the period after the
firings which there was a huge question about?
Q Let's go before the firings.
A I don't recall any issue.
Q Was the fact that Mr. Thomason and Mr. Martens were not White House
regular employees ever raised prior to the firings?
A As I said, I know that Mr. Thomason's pass was issued before I came.
I don't know when Darnell Martens got a pass if indeed he had one. I
don't know. The short answer is, I can't answer that question. I don't
recall any issue crossing my desk as to either one of their status.
Q Or the renewal of their passes and questioning the status of their
activities at the White House?
A At what point in time?
Q Before the firings.
A Not before the firings, do I ever recall?
Q I'm assuming after the firings I need to wait until you talked to
the White House, is why I'm limiting all of these to the firings. They
will be revisited once we find out if the White House is going to
claim privilege.
A I can't wait.
Q Why don't we break for lunch.
[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., a luncheon recess was taken.]
RPTS McCALLEY
DCMN VASSELO
Ms. Bracher. We are back on the record after a lunch break. Counsel
has just communicated that they spoke to the White House, so I will
pose some questions that I had posed previously to Mr. Kennedy.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Did you ever speak with anyone in the White House Counsel's Office
concerning the status, employment status, of Harry Thomason?
A I know that the White House Counsel's Office, after the press
firestorm occurred, took a look at Harry Thomason's status.
Q And when was that?
A I couldn't tell you precisely. I mean, it was after the firings.
Q Was it immediately; a year? Do you recall in what --
A It was shortly thereafter, but I can't be more specific than that.
Q Do you recall what areas regarding his status they were looking at?
A Well, there were immediately allegations raised by Republicans and
by the press that Harry Thomason was a special government employee and
therefore had broken every law known to man. So I believe that his
status was analyzed from that viewpoint.
Q And who analyzed his status?
A I think Beth Nolan did.
Q Do you know anybody else that was looking at that with her?
A She may have had other members of the Counsel's Office assist her. I
don't know for sure.
Q And are you aware of what information she received concerning her
analysis of his status?
A No.
Q Are you aware of who asked her to look at his status?
A No. I presume it was Bernie Nussbaum, but I do not know for sure.
Q Did you ever participate or have any discussions with anyone in the
White House Counsel's Office concerning the status of Harry Thomason
at the White House?
A Well, as I said, I knew this was going on.
Q Uh-huh.
A But otherwise, no, I don't think so. I mean, it may have been
discussed generally at staff meetings shortly after the Travel Office
went on, but Travel Office matters occurred, but I don't recall
anything specifically.
Q Do you know if anyone ever looked at the status of Penny Sample or
Darnell Martens at the White House?
A I do not know. I don't know if they were encompassed in this overall
review or if a question was posed. I don't know.
Q Do you know if there were final memos drafted concerning the status
of Harry Thomason?
A I believe Miss Nolan reduced her conclusions to writing.
Q And are you aware of what her conclusions were?
A I don't remember ever seeing a copy of that memo. I believe that I
know from press reports that he was found to be not a special
government employee.
Q Is that solely from press reports, or do you have any information as
a member of the White House Counsel's Office?
A I don't remember this being discussed in staff meetings and whatnot.
I don't remember that.
So I mean, I just don't recall specifically discussing it with Beth.
But I am pretty sure that I know from reading the paper that it had
been announced that a review was conducted and he was not found to be.
They may have brought the Office of Government Ethics in on that, but
I don't know.
Q Did you ever have any dealings with the Office of Government Ethics
regarding any other ethical issues arising out of the Travel Office?
A No, not that I recall. I have had dealings with the Office of
Government Ethics, but I was not normally the person that did that.
Q And who was the person who normally did that?
A Miss Nolan.
Q Did you or anyone else in the Counsel's Office discuss or
participate in any way in any other ethical issues arising out of the
Travel Office matter?
A Well, I don't -- that question's so broad. I mean, you could argue
that me sitting here today, you know, has ethical overtones. But the
short answer is, I don't -- the way you phrase your question, I'd have
to say no.
Q Specifically, there were some issues communicated to Mr. Podesta and
Mr. Stern during their interviews in the White House management
review. Did you or anyone else in the White House Counsel's Office
that you would have knowledge of participate in any issues that arose
from those interviews concerning ethical matters?
A Barbara, I'm sorry, your question is too broad. You've got to be
specific.
Q I'm asking you if you know of any ethical issues that arose from the
White House management review.
A With regard to what? I mean --
Q Interviews.
A Are you talking about me or did --
Q No. You are certainly included in the question.
A I know, but I don't understand your question, and I'm not trying to
be evasive. I do not understand it. When you say "issues arose," are
you talking about issues raised by interviewees, issues raised, what?
What do you mean?
Q I'll break it down.
A Okay.
Q There was information which was communicated by the interviewees
during the White House management review concerning actions taken by
other employees of the White House. Were you aware of any ethical
considerations arising from the information given during these White
House management reviews that would have been acted on by the White
House Counsel's Office?
A I'm still not sure I understand your question, but I'm going to
answer it as best I can. I'm going to interpret your question to mean
did the White House Counsel's Office do anything similar to what it
did with regard to Harry Thomason's status?
And I mean, you know, for example, the White House made some changes
in the way its passes were issued and stuff like that, I guess, could
you argue they have ethical overtones?
Q The way that passes were issued, can you please explain what was the
basis of making changes for the way passes were issued?
A I can't remember the specifics of the change that was made. The
primary change was made that any passes to anyone who was not formally
on the payroll had to be approved by the chief counsel's office -- I
mean the chief of staff's office.
Q And would that have been a change that you participated in?
A No, I was busy being interviewed, stuff like that. So, no, I didn't
participate, I don't recall, in those discussions. I may have been
asked to comment on them, but I don't remember like going into the
chief of staff's office and talking about it.
Q Were you involved in any discussions about Harry Thomason's
appearance on White House directories?
A No.
Q Were you involved in any discussions having his name removed from
all White House directories or documents listing him as being present
in the White House?
A The short answer is no.
Q Were you aware that that was occurring?
A No, not -- not with specificity, no. I mean, it wouldn't surprise
me. A whole bunch of people had their pass status changed after the
Travel Office.
Q Were you aware that when their pass status was changed that they
were generally taken off the directory?
A Was I aware specifically? No. Doesn't surprise me a bit if they were
on the directory, uh-uh.
Q The other ethical issues that came up during the White House
management review, such as the destruction of documents, were
communicated to the White House management review and interviewers.
Were you involved in any discussions concerning these actions taken by
Members of the White House?
A Barbara, you've got to be more specific. I don't know what you're
talking about. I don't know who communicated allegations of
destruction of documents. I don't know what you're talking about.
Q Were you ever told that anyone destroyed all their Travel Office
documents once this hit the press?
A No.
Q The fact that Mr. Eller communicated that to the White House
management review, would that surprise you?
A The fact that he told them?
Q Uh-huh.
A No.
Q Okay. Were you ever asked to look into that or, to your knowledge,
was anyone else in the Counsel's Office ever asked to look into the
fact that he told them he had destroyed his documents?
A All I can tell you is I was not asked to look into it.
Q Do you know if anyone else was?
A I do not know one way or the other.
Q Were you aware that Patsy Thomasson took certain actions against
Catherine Cornelius following the firing of the Travel Office
employees?
A Actions against Catherine Cornelius?
Q Uh-huh.
A I do not know.
Q Were you ever made aware of any actions that she took against
Catherine Cornelius?
A I don't know what you're talking about.
Q Were you told that Patsy Thomasson was trying to have Miss Cornelius
and Miss Cerda's mess privileges pulled?
A Absolutely not.
Q Was information ever communicated to you that Miss Cornelius was
afraid that she was about to be fired because of Miss Thomasson?
A Because of Miss Thomasson?
Q Uh-huh.
A No.
Q Because of anyone else connected with the White House Travel Office
matter?
A I think the record will show that Miss Cornelius was reprimanded in
the White House Travel Office matter.
Q Yes. Aside from the reprimands, were you ever asked to look at or to
provide any legal opinions concerning the propriety of Miss
Thomasson's actions toward Miss Cornelius?
A Barbara, as my answers have indicated, I am unaware of any actions
that you're talking about. I don't know what you're talking about. So
the answer is no to your question.
Q Did Mr. Podesta or Mr. Stern ever have any discussions with White
House counsel concerning ethical improprieties that they uncovered
during their interviews?
A I don't know.
Q Were you ever a party to any of those discussions?
A You're -- I have sort of acquiesced in this, but I want to make a
statement when I give my answer.
When you talk about ethical issues, that is in the eye of the
beholder, and you've said it over and over again. Now, as I pointed
out, for example, you could properly characterize why I'm sitting here
as an ethical issue; therefore, I don't know the answer to your
question with particularity. If they brought something to the
attention of Counsel's Office, I may or may not agree with you as to
whether or not it was an ethical issue. Okay? So that's it in a
nutshell.
I don't know. I don't recall of anything similar to the actions that
were taken with regard to Harry Thomason's status arising out of the
White House internal management review. That is not to say, however,
that they didn't happen, such actions didn't happen. I just don't know
about them. In addition, there may have been things that arose from
that review which I may not have considered to be ethical issues and
you might.
Q I have given you three or four examples, and I guess the reason I
keep asking is I don't understand what your "I don't know" means. If
it means that you personally did not hear about these --
A What?
Q And therefore have no knowledge of the issues.
A Did not hear about what, if I may ask?
Q The three or four issues that I have described.
A And they were? They were?
Q Jeff Eller's destruction of documents; Patsy Thomasson's remarks to
Catherine Cornelius regarding her mess privileges and her position at
the White House. Your answer "I don't know," I'm asking you whether or
not that answer means that you don't recall or that you never were
involved in any issues such as that brought to your knowledge.
A Okay. As I testified, I don't know and to this day don't know for
sure that Jeff Eller destroyed documents. Okay?
Number two, I'm totally unaware of any actions by Patsy Thomasson
against Clarissa Cerda, so I hope that's as clear as it can be.
Mr. Coffield. Catherine Cornelius.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q And Catherine Cornelius?
A And Catherine Cornelius. Okay.
Q That's fine.
On May 13th, when you met with FBI Agents Apple and Foran, they recall
that you had a Travel Office folder on your desk in your office. Do
you remember having some kind of folder with information on the Travel
Office at that time?
A No. No. The two things that I had were my notebook and a copy of
this memo that we alluded to earlier.
Q That would have been the Martens memo?
A Uh-huh.
Q Do you recall showing them any documents when you met with them in
your office on May 13th?
A I'm not sure whether I showed the memo to both groups or just the
second group; I just can't recall. But I showed the memo to one group.
RPTS McCALLEY
DCMN MAYER
Q Did you ever see a memo that Catherine Cornelius drafted in either
the May 12th or May 13th time frame with Harry Thomason outlining the
allegations against the Travel Office employees?
A No, do not.
Q When you were meeting with Agents Apple and Foran on May 13th, did
you ever discuss --
A Hang on a second. Help me out here because you know this better than
I. Apple and Foran are the first group or the second group?
Q Apple and Foran were the --
A I think Wade and Carl were the second group --
Q Right.
A -- but I have trouble keeping them straight.
Q I'll tell you in just one moment.
Apple and Foran were the first.
A Okay. So we're talking about the first group?
Q First group.
During the meeting with Apple and Foran on May 13th, do you remember
describing a business that was interested in getting a contract for
the Travel Office functions?
A Sure.
Q Would that have been the information contained in the Martens memo?
A I believe that was what the Martens memo was about, yeah.
Q And --
A He was reporting on his contacts where he'd been rebuffed.
Q And when you were telling that to the FBI, would it be true that you
were still not aware that Harry Thomason had an interest in Mr.
Martens' company?
A Yes. I didn't know that until after the fact.
Q Did the FBI ever object to you bringing in this other audit company?
A Object?
Q Voice any objections, concerns about bringing in this other auditing
company?
A As I've testified, they saw some downsides to it, yes.
Q Did they suggest that they could do the audit themselves at any
time?
A No. The audit issue, as I previously testified, sort of became moot.
They were ready to proceed with an investigation. Whether that
encompassed an audit, I don't know. You'd have to ask them.
Q Did you discuss with them having them present during the Peat
Marwick review?
A Yes, we did.
Q And once again, was it yours or Mr. Foster's decision that they
shouldn't be present?
A I characterized it the same way before. We felt like -- as before,
we felt like it would be better to conduct the audit. We felt like it
would be better to let the auditors come in and do their work without
the presence of FBI agents while that work was going on.
Q There was a session of meetings that were held in the evening before
KPMG came in on Friday, so that would have been the evening of
Thursday, May 13th. Did you attend any meetings -- I think they were
in Patsy Thomasson's office, or directed by Patsy Thomasson -- before
the auditors came in the next morning?
A Barbara, I don't recall doing so. I know I met with them the next
morning. I don't --
Q The auditors.
A Yes, and Patsy Thomasson. I don't believe that I attended meetings
that night. I do not believe so.
Q Okay. There was a group that Patsy and others have characterized as
a SWAT team. Were you aware that there was an S-W-A-T team organized?
A No. I mean, I assume she's talking about the performance review team
that they had, but I don't know that for a fact. You would have to ask
her. I didn't hear them characterized that way.
Q And you just -- you don't recall being at meetings the night before
KPMG came into the White House?
A It's possible, but I don't believe I did. I do not believe I did. I
believe the first time I met those guys was the next morning at 7 or
7:30.
Q Okay. On Friday, May 14th, after they came in around 7:30 and you
met with them, did you receive information during the day on the
status of their review?
A I did.
Q And who did this information come through?
A Well, it first came from Patsy and I think Jennifer O'Connor. I
think they came once or twice. I think later on in the day, they came
along with Larry Herman. I may have talked to Larry twice; I'm not
sure.
Q And were you communicating that information to anyone else after you
received it?
A Yes. I talked to Vince Foster, and then I talked to the FBI about
it.
Q Did you ever speak with the First Lady that day?
A I did not.
Q Did Vince Foster ever discuss that he had spoken to the First Lady
on Friday, May 14th, with you?
A He did not.
Q Did you talk to Mack McLarty that day about the Travel Office or
KPMG's activities in the Travel Office?
A I did not, not that I recall.
Q Do you recall anyone reporting events on the Travel Office to the
First Lady that date, on Friday, May 14th?
A I do not know. The short answer is, no, I do not recall that
happening. I didn't know it if they did.
Q Did you see Harry Thomason at the White House on Friday, May 14th,
while KPMG was there?
A No, I don't believe I did. I mean, it's possible, but I know I had
no conversations with him. I mean, I may have seen him in the hallway
or something.
Q Or meetings, did you attend any meetings that he was at or were you
told of any meetings?
A I don't believe so, no.
Q On Saturday, May 15th, were you at the White House, which would have
been the second day that KPMG was there?
A Yes.
Q Did you attend any meetings at the White House that day?
A I did. At about 5:00 in the afternoon.
Q And who all was at that meeting? We know KPMG was at a meeting.
Would that have been the same meeting that you were at?
A Well, Barbara, I can't -- when you say "would that have been the
same meeting," I don't know what else they did, so I can't answer
that.
Q Right.
A But two KPMG people were there, Jack --
Q Kelly.
I'm sorry, not Kelly.
A I think it is Jack Miller and then Larry Herman were there, I think.
And then I think Patsy was there. I think -- I don't remember if David
Watkins had come back yet or not. I think Jennifer was there, and
there may have been a couple more folks.
Q Do you think Vince Foster was there?
A No, I know he was not there.
Q Okay. Had he already left the White House? Is there a specific
reason you know he wasn't there?
A I'm trying to -- there was -- I had to baby-sit, and I couldn't free
myself up until late in the afternoon.
Foster was there a part of the day on Saturday. How much of it, I
don't know. But he called me at home and asked me to come in for a
meeting at 5:00 and he said he was going home. That's why I know --
first of all, I know he wasn't there because I know he wasn't there,
but I also remember the sequence of events, because it was unusual
that I was prohibited from coming in; but I had to baby-sit.
Q Was the FBI at that meeting?
A Yes.
Q On Sunday, May 16th, were you at the White House that day?
A No, I don't believe so.
Q Did you attend any meetings having to do with the Travel Office on
Sunday?
A I don't believe I did.
Q Were you aware of any meetings that happened at the White House
Sunday evening?
A Contemporaneously, after the fact? What's your time frame?
Q This would have been Sunday evening, May 16th, right before the
draft of the Peat Marwick report was given to you on Monday.
A I don't -- I don't recall. I mean, I may have known about it at the
time. I mean, it wouldn't -- based on what they were doing, it would
not have surprised me at all if there had been a series of meetings.
But I don't think I came in that day. I may have gotten a telephone
report, but if I had -- if I had any interaction with what is now
referred to as "the Travel Office affair," it was minimal on Sunday.
Q Were you aware of any meetings with the President late that Sunday
evening in the residence?
A No.
Q Were you aware of or were you subsequently told about meetings with
Vince Foster and the President on Sunday evening?
A No.
Q Did you ever meet with the President on any matters connected with
the Travel Office?
A No, ma'am.
Q Did you ever have any meetings in the residence on any matters
connected to the Travel Office?
A No, ma'am.
Q Did you ever meet with the President on matters concerning Harry
Thomason?
A No, I did not.
Q And, similarly, did you ever meet with the First Lady on any matters
concerning Harry Thomason?
A I did not.
Q Did you ever have any discussions with either the President or the
First Lady on matters concerning Harry Thomason?
A No, ma'am, I did not.
Q On Monday, May 17th -- it's the date that the KPMG draft report was
delivered. Do you recall about when you got that report?
A No, not precisely. I think it was pretty late in the day.
Q Do you recall who you forwarded it to, if anyone?
A No, I can't remember that with specificity. If my memory serves me
right -- and don't hold me to this -- I mean it was distributed -- I
mean, I got one of a number of copies and I don't -- I don't recall
distributing it to anybody. I think it had gone where it was supposed
to go.
Q Did you attend any meetings on that Monday relating to the Travel
Office?
A Yeah, I think I did. There was a mention of it at our normal staff
meeting. It seems like we got together, Foster, Watkins, maybe Patsy
and the Peat Marwick guys, and talked about where they were. And I
think I talked to the FBI a couple of times, but --
Q Did you talk with Peat Marwick about the draft of their report?
A Yes.
Q Can you just describe sort of what actions you took concerning the
draft of this report?
A We discussed it in terms of the substance of it and how they had
gotten where they had gotten, where they stood in the audit process,
because this was an interim report. They were still working. The
methodologies they had employed and what they had that remained to be
done to sort of button things up.
Q On Monday, it was your impression that they were still reviewing
documents and working in the Travel Office?
A I believe that's correct.
Q And so after you got the draft report, your memory is that they were
still doing more of the review of the Travel Office?
A You would have to ask them exactly where they stood because I -- I
can't recall. I think they were still doing, you know, the tail end of
what they were doing. How substantive it was, you would have to ask
them.
Q Did you suggest changes to the draft report?
A I think I commented on some of their language, but the comments were
not substantive. I mean, they did a fine job on their own.
Q The draft report copy that we have, and the final omits several
descriptions of activities in the Travel Office. Were you responsible
in any way for the deletions of information in the draft report, that
you know of?
A Well, we -- yeah, we discussed that. I mean, there were several
drafts that went on over the next couple of days, and I think that
they had concluded that some of their initial conclusions as -- the
further they got along, were not necessarily justified, so they were
omitted.
Q And these, a lot of the conclusions, where in the draft report they
state that there was reconciliation with documents and that the
payments and documents matched up, were deleted. Were you aware that
those were being removed from the draft report?
A I'm sure at some point I was. I couldn't tell you precisely when.
Q Did you ask that they remove positive material concerning the
activities in the Travel Office before they went to final report?
A No. I asked them to do a professional job and to lay out what they
found.
Q Did anyone in the meetings that you attended, or that you had
knowledge of, suggest that Peat Marwick revise its draft report to
contain less positive information on the Travel Office?
A It's sort of an eye-of-the-beholder issue, okay? I mean, if you had
been there, you might have disagreed with how I would characterize
something. I don't recall anybody doing that. I do recall that we made
changes as the thing progressed because some of their initial
conclusions were not borne out by some of their follow-up work, okay,
but --
Q Would those have been changes you suggested?
A No. In most part, I think they would have come from them.
Q So your knowledge is that their changes were due to incorrect
initial conclusions regarding the Travel Office?
RPTS MCCALLEY
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
A I don't know if I would characterize them as "incorrect." I mean,
it's more along the lines of this is what we think we see. We're still
looking, okay, and it ultimately turned out that what they thought was
there may not have been there. I'd have to look at the actual
documents to really respond to any of these questions.
Q On Monday, May 17th, did you receive a call from Air Force One from
Bruce Lindsey?
A I may have, Barbara. I don't recall it specifically.
Q Do you recall any conversations with Bruce Lindsey in this initial
period while he was out of town concerning the Travel Office?
A No, I don't recall any. It's not to say they didn't happen, but I
don't recall them.
Q Did you talk with Bruce Lindsey or anyone else about any of the
other projects that Harry Thomason had in the White House during this
period before the firings?
A No, I don't believe I did, uh-uh.
Q Were you aware of what, for a better name, has been called the ICAP
project?
A ICAP. No.
Q The Interagency Commercial Aviation Project.
A I don't think I've ever heard that term before.
Q Were you aware that Darnell Martens had met with Bruce Lindsey to
get business for TRM concerning government aircraft prior to the
firings?
A Prior to the firings, no. I know that from subsequent press reports,
but prior to the firings, no, uh-uh.
Q So on May 17th, do you have any recollection of discussing any of
those issues with Bruce Lindsey?
A I do not recall discussing those issues. I don't recall Bruce
talking to me about the Travel Office, but it's a blurry time. He may
have.
Q Had you gotten other calls from Air Force One?
A I think probably during the course of the time I was doing the
clearance work, I probably did. People calling to ask about status of
presidential nominees, yeah.
Q So that would not be a singularly unique event.
A Uh-uh. It sounds like it when you talk about a phone call from Air
Force One. But no, I was responding to questions about nominee status
all the time. I can think of at least a couple of occasions where
people on Air Force One called and said, we're fixing to go somewhere,
what's this guy's status?
Q Did you see Susan Thomases at the White House on Monday, May 17th?
A I don't recall doing so, uh-uh.
Q Did you ever meet with Susan Thomases about the Travel Office or
about Harry Thomason?
A No, I don't think I did, uh-uh.
Q Or have any discussion with her concerning what should be done about
those issues?
A No, ma'am.
Q On Tuesday, May 18th, Harry Thomason was at the White House. Do you
recall seeing him that day?
A I don't believe I did. As I have said repeatedly, I may have seen
him in the hallway somewhere; but I don't remember seeing him, no.
Q Do you recall any meetings the day before the firings that would
have included Harry Thomason?
A No, ma'am, I did not.
Q And similarly, did you hear any mention of discussions or did you
have any discussions with the First Lady the day before the firings?
A I did not.
Q Or do you know of anybody else who may have communicated that they
had had discussions with the First Lady before the firings?
A I'm going to give you the obvious answer. There have been numerous
press reports about this, but at the time and as of my own personal
knowledge, I don't know if any of that stuff is true.
Q So rather than ask it for any of these dates, up until the firings,
did you have any knowledge that anyone had discussed this with the
First Lady?
A No.
Q Okay.
On Wednesday, May 19th, when were you first told of the firings?
A Seems like it was really early in the morning. I mean, almost as
soon as I hit the door.
Q So it was before they occurred?
A Oh, yeah.
Q And did you contact anyone as a result of that?
A Well, no -- well, yes. I'm trying to figure out how to answer your
question. I mean, obviously somebody called me. David Watkins called
me and told me he was going to terminate them. I thought I had better
advise the bureau of that and did so. They said, gosh, we really wish
you all wouldn't do that. I said, it's sort of out of my control but I
will inquire. So I talked to David Watkins again and said we got an
investigation that's probably going to happen and this may not be a
good thing. He said, well, we're going to do it anyway.
Q Did he tell you why he was going to do it anyway?
A Uh-uh.
Q Did he ever communicate any pressure that he was feeling?
A Uh-uh. He did not.
Q On that morning when you called the FBI, did anybody tell you to get
lawyers and run for the hills?
A What?
Q Just as a statement. Maybe it was meant in jest or as a joke, but
did anyone ever -- do you recall that statement being made by you or
to you?
A No, ma'am, I do not.
Q Does that statement have any relevance to anything that was going on
that morning?
A Off the record please, ma'am.
[Discussion off the record.]
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Going back to May 19th, does that statement have any relevance as
you sat there on May 19th?
A No. I do not remember anybody saying that to me, you know, at any
time around this period of time.
Q All right.
Did you have any belief as to why David Watkins was firing them in
light of the advice you had given him and that others had given him?
A You're talking about the advice from the FBI?
[Attorney nods in the affirmative.]
The Witness. No. But this was David's job. This is what he did, okay?
His job in the White House was to make the trains run on time and,
believe me, on Wednesday morning we had plenty of evidence that this
office was a shambles, and so from my perspective it made sense to me.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Did you have the final KPMG report on Wednesday, May 19th?
A I don't know, Barbara. I do not know. I can't tell you right now
when the final report came out. Sorry.
Q That's okay.
After the firings, did you attend the meeting that was held in Mr.
Stephanopoulos' office?
A The answer is yes, but that meeting was going on when I got there.
In other words, the full cast was assembled. I walked into a meeting
that was in progress.
Q And during that meeting, did you know who Mr. Collingwood was from
the Department of Justice before you went into that meeting?
A No.
Q Did you learn during the meeting who he was?
A I picked up that he was somebody connected with the bureau, but I
did not know what his status was; I did not know.
Q Okay.
During the meeting, did you observe Mr. Stephanopoulos speaking to
Larry Herman from KPMG?
A Yeah, I think he did. I think he did.
Q Do you recall him making statements, any specific statements during
that meeting to Larry Herman?
A I think he asked Larry, and I don't remember the specifics of it,
but I think he asked Larry what their policy was with regard to, you
know, press releases. I mean, did they have limitations on what they
could and couldn't do, that sort of thing.
Q Do you recall Mr. Stephanopoulos or Dee Dee Myers asking Larry
Herman where the hell's the report?
A No. I don't recall that, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me.
Q And were you aware that KPMG Peat Marwick called in their New York
partners that day to help out?
A No. I mean, I remember, like I said, this sort of question, you
know, what can you guys do? You know, we need to make reference to
this, can we do it? And I assume that somebody went and checked with
somebody, but I don't know. I remember Larry saying, well, I'll check
on that, or I'll deal with that or something.
Q Was the dynamics as you have just described questioning, or did you
believe that there was an amount of pressure being put on KPMG to come
up with information and help to the White House concerning what was
going on in the afternoon?
A Questions.
Q Questions?
A Questions. No pressure.
Q So if KPMG had stated that they called in their New York partner
because they were being pressured to do things that they didn't feel
were appropriate, would that surprise you?
A Yeah. It would.
Q Did you observe any actions that would lead you to believe that was
true?
A No.
Q During that meeting that was going on in Stephanopoulos' office, did
you discuss predication with the FBI and the investigation by the FBI?
A No, I don't recall in any way, shape or form. I mean, that train had
left the station.
Q It had already been announced that the FBI had predication to
investigate?
A No. When I talk about that, I mean the FBI was getting its ducks in
a row to conduct its investigation.
Q Is that what you meant by that train had left the station?
A Uh-huh.
Q Were you aware the White House had also announced that there was an
FBI investigation?
A Well, the short answer is yes, I was aware that that news had gone
out.
Q And did you discuss any of that information with Mr. Stephanopoulos?
A No. I mean, he already knew that.
Q I guess I'm asking you because you were the one who would know the
status of the FBI's predication at that point, isn't that correct?
A No. Mr. Foster was in that meeting and he knew it as well, and Mr.
Nussbaum was in that meeting and he knew it as well. I mean, so did
other folks.
Q When you did your September 15th, 1993, your OPR interview, which I
think Mr. Goldberg read to you earlier, can you tell me why Bernard
Nussbaum, Cliff Sloan and Neil Eggleston were present at that
interview?
A Why?
Q Hm-mmm.
A I mean, you'd have to ask them as to exactly why they perceived they
were there. They were sitting in on -- I mean it's like Bernie's boss
sitting in on an interview of his employee.
Q And according to your belief, during that interview, what capacity,
who were they representing during that interview? Whose interests were
they representing?
A I presume the President of the United States.
Q So they were not representing you --
A Absolutely.
Q -- in that meeting?
A Absolutely not.
Q So your belief was it was the White House, the President of the
United States?
[The Witness nods in the affirmative.]
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Do you know if they discussed your interview that you had with OPR
with anyone else?
A I do not know.
Q Did you discuss your OPR interview with them after it was over?
A I'm sure I said something like, how did it go? And they said
something like, "fine" or something like that, your normal human being
interaction. But no.
Q I mean, any significant substantive review of your interview?
A No, I don't recall anything like that.
Q Do you recall sitting down with anyone and discussing the substance
of your interview in any manner?
A Barbara, I mean again, this all seems to irritate. I'm not being
evasive, but the substance of that interview, I've told this story a
hundred times, I'll tell it to you right now. I don't know where
you're headed.
Q Did you discuss your interview with anyone in the White House
following September 15th when you gave that interview?
A Okay. Now --
Mr. Coffield. Sixteenth.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q September 15th.
A You understand where I'm headed. If you're talking about the events
that I was questioned upon, if you're talking about the events that I
was questioned upon, I've discussed that with more people than I care
to count, including you. Now, if you're talking about how the
interview went, I mean the answer to the question is no, other than
Bernie and Cliff and Neil.
Q Were you aware that others in the White House were being interviewed
by OPR during that period?
A Sure.
Q Was there ever any effort or any request that you sit down with
others and go through the events and the chronology in preparation for
these interviews?
A No. You're talking about as a group? No. Uh-uh.
Q Following the firings, did you sit down?
RPTS McCALLEY
DCMN VASSELO
Q And create any chronologies for use by the White House?
A No. The closest that -- the closest that I would have come to that
is some time after the events in question, Vince asked to see my
notes, and I gave him a copy of those. And then subsequently, I think
Neil Eggleston asked to see or it may have been Cliff, I forget, asked
to see a copy of my notes and I gave him my notes.
But, no, I don't remember, you know, formally creating a chronology or
anything like that.
Q On September 27th, 1993, you were interviewed by the GAO. Do you
know why Bernie Nussbaum and Neil Eggleston were present at the GAO
interview?
A Same, same reason. Same reason.
Q Did they ever discuss with you why they were sitting in on your
interviews?
A No. I mean, I was glad to have them there, and I wasn't surprised by
them being there. I thought it was totally appropriate; still do.
Q Did you similarly have any briefings before the GAO interview with
anyone to discuss how you were going to answer questions or to discuss
previous answers concerning the Travel Office?
A Let's do this the short way. I mean, I'm assuming you have the same
series of questions. No, there was no organized effort to shape or
prepare testimony. I didn't prepare any chronologies. But obviously
the same comments about my notes apply, which is that I had given them
to Foster and either to Eggleston or Sloan or somebody. But I didn't
prepare a chronology. I didn't meet with anybody to prepare. I didn't
meet with anybody afterwards other than your normal human being
comments, how did it go, that sort of thing.
Q You mentioned in your GAO interview that you had private experience
with the IRS. Would that refer to experience you had had in private
practice?
A Can you show me that comment? I don't recall that comment.
Q That's fine. If you don't recall it, that's just fine.
Mr. Coffield. Is it something that's documented?
Ms. Bracher. Yes. It's in a GAO interview and I don't feel like
pulling it out. If he doesn't recall the comment, that's sufficient.
The Witness. Well, I, just to make the record clear, I'll be glad to
answer that question if I can see the context of the remark. I don't
recall making it just that way.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. I'll pull it out.
I'm showing you the GAO interview, which was on September 28th, 1993,
and on page 3, I've underlined a sentence where you had said in your
private experience you have had experience with the IRS.
A Well, this would -- the way this is used, the full sentence says,
quote, in his experience, comma, Mr. Kennedy said that he had a lot --
excuse me, in his private experience, Mr. Kennedy said he had a lot of
experience with the IRS.
That would refer to my private practice of law.
Q Okay. You also mention at one point that you saw Peggy Richardson at
a party after the firings. Do you recall what you would have talked
with Miss Richardson at a party after the firing?
A Barbara, I don't remember testifying that way. I mean what I told
you was is I knew her socially, okay. I'm talking about testifying
about that today. I don't remember testifying about that.
Q On page 5 of your GAO interview, you said three weeks after the
Travel Office employees were fired, Mr. Kennedy met IRS Commissioner
Peggy Richardson at a party. She told Mr. Kennedy that there had been
a lot of press interest at the IRS with the Travel Office. Mr.
Kennedy's only response was something like, that doesn't surprise me.
He did not discuss any details about the Travel Office with the
commissioner.
A That is correct.
Q Do you recall that party?
A Which one? No. I mean, I saw Mrs. Richardson a number of times that
summer and a number of times sort of during the April, May, June, July
time frame, and I don't know which time.
Q And when issues about the press coverage of the Travel Office came
up, I guess what I just read from the GAO was basically that you would
say something like, "It doesn't surprise me."
A Yeah.
Q Do you recall saying something like that to Miss Richardson?
A Yeah. She said something along the lines that they were inundated,
just inundated with press inquiries. I said, "Peggy, that doesn't
surprise me." I mean, you know, they're claiming that I have
manipulated the world, so...
Q Do you recall telling Miss Richardson that -- I mean Miss Richardson
telling you that the IRS was on top of the situation?
A I think she probably, you know, said we got a bunch of press
inquiries and we're dealing with it, something along those lines. And
she may have used the words "on top of it", but that's the same,
that's the thrust of it.
Q Do you recall going back to the White House and relaying any of that
conversation to anyone else at the White House?
A Barbara, at the -- I'm pretty sure that at the time I didn't. But
some time after this conversation and some time later on, I think I
mentioned at a staff meeting that she had mentioned that they had all
these press inquiries and they were dealing with them, yeah.
Q Did you ever at any time -- the GAO is only focusing on this one
party three weeks after the firings, and my question is much broader.
Did you ever discuss the Travel Office matter with Peggy Richardson?
A Other than this right here, no.
Q Other than this one mention at the party three weeks?
A Uh-huh. Yes.
Q So, to this date, you've never had any discussions with Peggy
Richardson concerning the Travel Office matter?
A Other than this, that's correct. She's a friend of mine, and I'm
sure at some point she commiserated with me about all the crap I've
gone through. But the specifics of it, no.
Q Do you recall how the issue of the Travel Office came up at a party
with her?
A Just that way. She just mentioned that they were just being killed
by the press.
Q At this time after the firing, were you aware of the IRS's audit of
the White House on excise taxes?
A No. I don't think I knew at the time that this was a possibility.
Q When did you become aware that the White House was being audited by
the IRS?
A Barbara, some time, you know, shortly after all this stuff. But
again, as I told you this morning, I don't think that that audit was
going on. You probably know better than I, but I don't think that
audit was going on at this time.
Q Can you put it in any kind of time frame when you learned of the
White House audit by the IRS?
A I can tell you it was some time after all these events. When, I
can't tell you.
Q Do you recall how you found out about the IRS audit?
A No, I cannot. I'm sorry. Either through press reports or, you know,
somebody's comments somewhere, but no.
Q Did you ever receive any information that anyone had been in contact
with the IRS around the time of the firings?
A No. Uh-uh.
Q Did the FBI ever tell you they had been in contact with the IRS?
A At the time of the firings, no, and thereafter, no.
Q Did there come a time when you did find out that the FBI was in
contact with the IRS?
A I know from press reports that the FBI, or I guess a better way of
saying it is, the Department of Justice had done a number of look-sees
at the FBI's contact. I think there had been press reports that the
FBI had contact with the IRS, I think, to see if the FBI had contact
with the IRS. But otherwise, no.
Q So other than the press reports, you did not receive any other
information about contacts between the --
A I don't think any --
Q -- the FBI, the Justice Department and the IRS?
A No.
Q At one time you were talking about the Peat Marwick report being
done as a part of NPR. Did you believe at the time that Peat Marwick
was coming in to the Travel Office as part of NPR?
A Okay, pardon me, but at what time?
Q When they came in to the Travel Office before the firings on May
17th.
A As I testified previously this morning, I mean, I came to learn
where they had come from, but at that time, I didn't know.
I think that -- I remember that on the Friday morning, the 7:30
meeting or so, that somehow the strategy had been worked out that
their, quote, cover, close quote, would have been the NPR, that they
were coming in as part of the NPR. But that they had any kind of
formal relationship with it, I didn't know, I don't think, at the
time. I came to learn that later.
Q And by, quote, cover, you mean "cover" to be what they were going to
tell the Travel Office employees?
A As to why they were there. As to why they were there.
Q How did you find out about the reprimands?
A Bernie Nussbaum told me.
Q Was that your first notice that you had of the reprimands?
A Well, the reprimand's sort of an evolving story. I'm trying to
remember quite how that went down. At some point, Bernie told me that
he, Vince and I were going to be reprimanded.
Q So this was prior to the actual announcement of the reprimand?
A Uh-uh. But close on it. I mean within either the day before or that
same day. Then it was supposed to be that Foster and I were going to
be reprimanded. I didn't know it was going to be just me till it was
announced.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN JACKUBOSKY
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q When you were first told that it was going to be the three of you,
were all three of you together?
A I think it was just Bernie and me. I don't think Vince was there at
that time. Don't hold me to that. I can't remember specifically. He
may have been there.
Q Was there any discussion that you knew about as to why Mr. Nussbaum
and Mr. Foster weren't reprimanded?
A I don't know anything about that decision. I don't know how that was
arrived at.
Q So the first time that you realized it was just you was when you saw
it on television?
A Yes.
Q And how far before that were you first told that it was going to be
the three of you?
A As I said, it was either the day before or that morning. I just
cannot recall precisely.
Q Did Vince Foster ever discuss that with you?
A Yeah.
Q What did he say about the reprimand?
A He thought it was unwarranted. He also thought he should have been
reprimanded as well, if anybody was going to be. And that's the same
way Bernie felt.
Q But you don't have any information as to why they were not included
in the final reprimand?
A You will have to ask somebody other than me.
Q I have a series of questions which concerns gathering documents.
There was an independent counsel subpoena in May of '94. Were you
requested to gather documents in response to that subpoena?
A Okay. Was this subpoena directed to whom?
Q It wasn't directed to you. It would have been directed at the White
House for documents.
A The answer is yes.
Q And do you recall what you did in response?
A Tried to comply with the subpoena.
Q I guess I'm asking more specifically, did you go through documents
in your files, in your desk, in your home? Can you just take us
through the steps of what you did?
A Okay. I am going to do that with one caveat. I have been hit with
more subpoenas than Carter has pills. Some came from you or, actually,
your committee. A number have come from the independent counsel's
office. A number have come from the Senate. Some have come from the
Department of Justice.
The response is always the same. I made a good faith effort to comply.
I looked in my office. I made sure I had nothing at home, which in the
normal course I would not have. And I responded however I was directed
to.
Q Do you remember specifically -- and obviously I am limiting it to
the Travel Office documents. Do you remember who was in charge of the
Fiske subpoenas at the White House or who was a contact person that
you had?
A I am going to draw a distinction for you. For example, I think on
the first Fiske subpoena, I mean Mr. Fiske called me and I handled the
actual delivery of the subpoena. As far as who responded, I don't
know. I think it was Neil Eggleston, but I do not know. I am sorry. I
don't know if it was Neil or Cliff or some combination of them or
what. I just don't recall. Somebody coordinated it.
Q Were there any discussions concerning the independent counsel's
subpoena about withholding documents or sensitive documents that might
have been in possession of you or others in the counsel's office?
A I think there were discussions about privilege, whether, you know,
some of the stuff they wanted was privileged.
Q And who would have been involved in those discussions?
A I think Mr. Nussbaum and whoever was in charge of responding to that
particular subpoena.
Q Was it you in charge of responding to that subpoena, though, from
Mr. Fiske?
A No. I said I was the one that effectuated the delivery. You know,
you just -- I don't have to tell you this. You don't walk up to the
White House and serve a subpoena. It's kind of hard to do. So --
Q Were you aware of what the basis for the privilege issues were for
the Fiske subpoena?
A Barbara, the short answer is no. I mean, I don't know what was
considered privileged, if anything, you know. The answer is, I know
that there were discussions about privilege because the subpoenas were
all broader than you can imagine.
I will take that back. You can probably imagine it.
Q Were you involved in any of the discussions to narrow the subpoenas
to the White House coming from Mr. Fiske?
A No.
Q When you delivered the documents to Mr. Fiske, was the letter sent
to Mr. Fiske under your name delivering those documents?
A No. As I testified, I wasn't in charge of, in any way, shape or
form, responding to the subpoenas.
Q Were you aware of the Vince Foster notebook at that time?
A No, ma'am.
Q Were you aware of any review being done of Mr. Foster's Travel
Office files at that time?
A What's our time frame?
Q This is the Fiske subpoena, which would have been in May of '94.
A I am sorry. Repeat your question. What was the question? Was I aware
of what?
Q Were you aware of any discussions about the Vince Foster Travel
Office file?
A No. No. In terms of compliance with the subpoena? No.
Q The Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice finally
issued a subpoena in September of '94. Were you aware of that
subpoena?
A Issued to who?
Q To the White House.
A Probably, but I can't say for certain. There have been so many of
them.
Q They were requesting documents concerning Harry Thomason.
A I don't think I knew about that at the time.
Q Okay. Do you recall being told to search again for documents
concerning Harry Thomason or Darnell Martens or Penny Sample?
A I believe I was, because I used the same methodology, you know. Here
is a subpoena. If you have got any documents responsive, return them
to X.
Q Maybe you could go through the general methodology. Would it be to
show all the people in the counsel's office the subpoena? Or was there
a standard methodology that you could tell us?
A Well, a subpoena directed to the White House was a subpoena directed
to the White House. And so the subpoena would be summarized, I think,
by memo and the memo would go out.
Q Do you recall actually seeing copies of the subpoenas going out to
the individuals in the White House?
A Uh-uh. No. I don't think that -- I think the methodology was to
summarize what was required by memo.
Q Did you sign any documents that you had done a thorough search of
all of your files in response to any subpoenas?
A I believe they employed that methodology most of the time. I think,
as it began to mount up, they quit doing that. But don't hold me to
that. I remember that you were supposed to certify that you had done
that.
Q A complete search of all records --
A Right.
Q -- responsive to the subpoena?
And do you recall ever signing one of those for any of the subpoenas?
A I believe I did, yes.
Q The Public Integrity subpoena in September of '94 that came through,
were you aware of the Vince Foster Travel Office files at that time?
A No. I mean -- look -- see, this is -- you have something specific in
mind. If you ask the question, would it have surprised you that Vince
Foster had a Travel Office file?, the answer is, absolutely not,
absolutely not. It would have surprised me if somebody told me that he
didn't. And, you know, he wasn't around at this point so -- I mean, I
can't talk to you about the handling of that in any way, shape or
form. But I'm certain that he had materials on the Travel Office, you
bet.
Q Why?
A Why?
Q Why do you say that?
A He asked me for my notes.
Q So you knew he had copies of your notes early on?
A Uh-huh.
Q At one point you were sent all of his files, weren't you?
A Yes.
Q When was that?
A I can't tell you specifically. It was when Joel Klein came in.
Q It was before the Public Integrity subpoena, wasn't it?
A I don't know.
Q Did you ever do a search of the files that you were sent from Vince
Foster to see if there was anything responsive to any of the
subpoenas?
A Uh-uh. Uh-uh. And I am not sure your timing is correct, by the way.
And the long answer is, also, I don't know if I got all of Vince
Foster's stuff. I got a bunch of boxes that were represented to be out
of Vince's office.
Q But did you ever do a search of any of those boxes at any time in
response to any of the subpoenas?
A Did I personally?
Q Uh-huh.
A No.
Q Did you direct anyone to search Vince Foster's boxes that were in
your possession?
A They were searched.
Q By whom?
A I believe by Chris Cerf, but I don't know that for a fact.
Q Where were these boxes kept that you had received?
A In my office.
Q Okay. So you have got boxes of Vince Foster's sitting in your
office. I don't understand why you wouldn't have searched them
yourself for documents responsive to the subpoena.
A The short answer is, I'm not sure -- I want to make this clear --
that your timing is correct; period, end of story. I don't know when I
got those boxes versus subpoenas.
Q Okay. We believe you got the documents in the fall of '93.
A No, I don't think so. I think I got them sometime in '94 but, again,
I don't know for a fact. It would be whenever Joel Klein took office.
It should be pretty easily verifiable.
Mr. Coffield. Do you have anything you can show him?
Ms. Bracher. No.
The Witness. And I just don't recall. I mean, it's not something I put
in motion. They just appeared one day.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Do you know who had them sent to you?
A Not for sure. They were -- they were brought over by a guy named
Tom. I am trying to think of his last name. It's one of those things
that escapes me. Tom -- what the hell is his name? Sorry.
Q Taggart?
A No.
Q Okay. I guess the timing is less important than your memory of the
Fiske investigation, which you remember it did include the Vince
Foster suicide and the reasons for the suicide and discussed the
Travel Office in that context. Is that true?
A Well, for example, you just told me that the Fiske subpoena came in
in May.
Q Right.
A Which doesn't seem right to me. But if it did, Vince was still
around.
Q May '94, not '93.
A Okay. Now, that's better.
Q I am sorry. I should have said '94. I just assumed you knew it
didn't come before the firings. It was the year following that.
A Now, your question is?
Q With the activities that Mr. Fiske was conducting and your knowledge
of those activities, did you ever search any of the Foster documents?
A No, I did not.
Q Was there any reason that you didn't search the Foster documents?
A It was not my job to do so.
Q Did you consider anyone else to have possession of the Foster
documents in your office other than you?
A The White House Counsel's Office had them.
Q And how did you make that assessment?
A I didn't have to make that assessment. It was a fact.
Q How was it a fact?
A I worked for the White House Counsel's Office.
Q They are sitting in your office.
A I still worked --
Q Do people come in regularly and go through your files?
A If they want to. If they are authorized to do so.
Q Was anyone authorized to ever go through your files?
A Yes.
Q Who?
A To go through my files?
Q Yes, your files in your office.
A No.
Q Okay. Were Mr. Foster's files in your office?
A They were.
Q Did people walk in and go through them in your office?
A Mr. Cerf did.
Q In response to a subpoena?
A Both in response to a subpoena and in the process of properly
cataloging those documents, you bet.
Q And was that back when Independent Counsel Fiske was doing his
review?
A I don't know. I am sorry. I just don't know.
Q Do you know when Mr. Cerf started?
A I do not know.
Q Was it '94?
A I don't know. It was either late '93 or early '94, I believe.
Q Were these documents ever sent to Mr. Cerf's office?
A I don't know if he came and took them to his office but he came and
got them, yes.
Q And you never at any point knew who ordered the documents be sent
into your office?
A Barbara, it went down like this: These documents had been searched
by the Park Police, all the stuff that you know, Bernie Nussbaum, all
the stuff that has been played up in the press ad infinitum. They were
put in boxes by somebody -- whoever, I don't know. I don't know who
catalogued them, who put them in boxes, who inventoried them. I don't
know any of that. I did not know they were coming to my office until
they arrived one day. And they came because Joel Klein, the new deputy
White House counsel, came and occupied Vince's office.
Are you with me so far?
Q Uh-huh.
A Now, they sat in my office, unopened, untouched, until they were
removed by Mr. Cerf, whenever that occurred, as part of a response to
a subpoena, I believe -- which one I can't tell you -- and also as
part of properly cataloging them.
Q Okay. Now, when you knew of the subpoena from Mr. Fiske in May of
'94, you knew that Vince Foster at least had your notes concerning the
Travel Office?
A I didn't know that -- I didn't know that for a fact. I knew I had
given them to him. I didn't know what he had done with them.
Q Did you tell anyone else in the Counsel's Office that they might
want to search the boxes in your office?
A Look, what you want to do is gloss over something, which is that
those records had been gone through by the time they got to me, I
don't know how many times. Okay? Period, end of story.
I thought they had been catalogued over and over again.
Q And did you think somebody else was checking the catalog to respond
to the subpoenas?
A You bet.
Q Who?
A I don't know. There were different people assigned to respond to
different subpoenas.
Q Well, when you say, "you bet," that sounds as though you had a
specific recollection in your mind that somebody had to be taking care
of this other than you.
A That's correct.
Q Where does that come from?
A It comes from the fact that somebody had boxed those things up and
somebody had made an inventory of them.
Q And somebody had sent them to your office to sit?
A That's right.
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN MAYER
Q Did you ever have any meetings where his documents were discussed in
response to any subpoenas that were served on the White House?
A No. I don't recall any, uh-uh.
Q Did Neil Eggleston tell you about his conversation with Lloyd Cutler
regarding the Travel Office file of Mr. Foster?
A No, I don't recall him doing so.
Q Did he discuss the fact that he knew about a Travel Office file back
in May of '94, when the Fiske subpoena was served?
A He did not.
Q Did anyone else in the White House Counsel's Office tell you about a
Travel Office file in May of '94?
A No, ma'am.
Q Were you involved in any way in determining whether Foster's files
were responsive to the independent counsel's subpoena?
A No, ma'am.
Q Our subpoena was sent to you on February 7th of 1996.
A Uh-huh.
Q Did you -- can you just tell us what you did to collect documents
for our subpoena?
A I went -- I did exactly the same thing I have done before. I went
through all of the documents under my control to see if I had anything
responsive, and you got our response.
Q Did you send any documents back to the White House that were White
House documents in response to our subpoena?
A I did not.
Q Is there an index of the documents that you retained after you left
the White House that would be responsive to our subpoena?
A An index? No.
Q That you have?
A Uh-uh.
Q In the letter, which is by your attorney at the time, it states that
the White House Counsel's Office had provided you with courtesy copies
of documents and that you believed that these documents had been
produced to us. And I would just ask if you have a copy still of any
of the documents -- of all the documents that the White House provided
to you as a courtesy copy?
A I'm going to have to ask my counsel to respond to this. The short
answer is, if I understand your question --
Mr. Coffield. Wait a second. Let me just --
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q I am asking you if you have. I would really just like to know, what
knowledge do you have about documents that the White House sent you
courtesy copies of?
A Well, they didn't come to me. They went to my lawyers.
Q Did you receive copies of them at any time?
A I am going to have to ask my lawyers to respond to that.
Q Is it because you don't remember or you feel -- I don't understand
why --
A You are getting awfully close, Barbara, to attorney/client
privilege. That's my hesitation. I am waiting for him to catch up.
Mr. Coffield. Can I just review this? Let me just read this.
Obviously, I did not write this. I would just like to read it.
Ms. Bracher. Let's take a moment for you to read it.
Mr. Coffield. Yes, if we could.
[Discussion off the record.]
Ms. Bracher. Let's go back on the record.
Let's proceed with the questioning.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q On this letter that you received from your attorney on February
26th, did you keep an index of any of the documents that the White
House sent to you as courtesy copies?
A Did I?
Q Uh-huh.
A No.
Q Did you ever receive copies of the documents that the White House
sent to your attorney, which are characterized as "courtesy copies"?
Mr. Coffield. I am going to object because you are asking about things
that were shared between him and his counsel.
Ms. Bracher. I am not asking the substance. I don't think asking
whether Mr. Kennedy received copies of White House documents is within
the attorney/client privilege but, of course, if you feel it is, then
you can so state for the record.
Mr. Coffield. I do believe that the substance of any documents that
were shared -- the fact that he may have received documents is
something. Where he got those documents obviously clearly goes to the
substance of what those documents are and, as such, for him to
identify where he may have gotten -- where the documents that he
received and what those copies -- what those documents were copies of
do go to the substance of them.
So I would object.
Ms. Bracher. Does this privilege include the White House? Is it your
private attorney/client privilege you are asserting?
Mr. Coffield. If I receive any documents and share them with him, the
mere fact that I have shared -- I mean, we get into these privileges
just on actually giving privilege logs to the extent that the
privilege logs ask for information that could reveal their substance.
It's a very common issue that we have dealt with.
Ms. Bracher. I will ask it another way. You can certainly object if
you feel appropriate.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Did you receive courtesy copies from the White House of documents?
A Did I receive them?
Q Uh-huh.
A I did not.
Q Did you at any time receive documents that had come from the White
House, which they have characterized as courtesy documents relating to
you?
A Did I receive them, Bill Kennedy?
Q Uh-huh.
A No, I did not.
Q Okay. Are you aware of any documents that you have not produced to
this committee responsive to the subpoena that you were issued on
February 7th, 1996?
A I am not.
Q Okay. There is a document which was sent to us as part of your
October 7th production. I show you this. It's got a letter of October
18th, as well as some handwritten notes. Do you recognize that
document?
A Now, you say I was -- I produced it to whom?
Q To this committee, in response to your subpoena of February 7th,
1996.
A Do I recognize this document, this document here?
Q Let's start with the first page of the documents that were produced
to this committee. The first page of the documents that were produced
--
A Ask your question.
Q -- is this page, and I ask you again, do you recognize that
document?
A I have not seen that letter before, no.
Q All right. So you have not seen that document that was produced to
this committee in response to your subpoena?
A Let's describe the document, Barbara. I will take -- I will do that
for you. This is a letter on the letterhead of Sharp & Lankford. It is
addressed to Stewart Goldberg, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice.
"Dear Mr. Goldberg, At your request, my client, William H. Kennedy,
III, has reviewed the copy you provided of his handwritten notes.
He believed the highlighted entry reads as follows: Quote, 'focused
on petty cash notebook with envelope in the front in locked
credenza behind Billy R. Dale. Anyone in the office can make entry
to petty cash,' closed quote. Please call if you require further
assistance. Yours truly, Paul V. Castellitto."
Q I have the same question. Have you ever seen that document?
A Which document?
Q The document you just read, Mr. Kennedy.
A Be specific, Barbara. Ask your question. Are you talking about the
letter I just read?
Q Yes, I am?
A Okay. No, I do not believe I have seen this letter before.
Q Did you receive a copy of our February 7th, 1996 subpoena which was
addressed to you personally?
A Yes.
Q Did you authorize your attorney to accept service of that subpoena
in your name?
A I believe I did.
Q Okay. And did you make a full response to that subpoena?
A Yes.
Q Okay. Are there any documents -- what did you do to respond to that
subpoena?
A I have already told you. I have already told you, Barbara.
Q I am sorry. I didn't remember.
A Then you can go back and ask this lady to review my answer. I have
already told you. I decline to answer that question twice.
Q Okay. Was any documents submitted to this committee without your
authorization in your name?
A I don't know who sent the committee -- I do not know who has sent
what to this committee.
Q Do you realize the subpoena named you?
A That's correct.
Q And you are an attorney also, is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q Okay. The second page of the documents produced to this committee in
response to the subpoena on February 26th, do you recognize those?
They have a Bates stamp number which has been obliterated.
A Yes. These are notes of mine.
Q Okay. Do you recall when you wrote those notes?
A They have to do with the Travel Office, yes.
Q When was that?
A The precise date, I can't tell you. The date's been obliterated.
Q Were these notes that you retained in your possession after leaving
the White House?
A No.
Q Okay. Do you recall how they came to be produced to this committee
from you?
A I assume that my counsel got them back from the White House. I
assume that. The originals of these notes were in the possession of
the White House, Barbara.
Q Did you participate in the production of documents at all to this
committee?
A Yes, as I have previously testified.
Q Okay. Can you tell me what your notes say in the paragraph that is
circled and an arrow is pointing to it?
A There on the first page?
Q I would like you to read from your notes, please.
A I am reading from my notes. "Focused on petty cash notebook with
envelope in the front in locked credenza behind Billy R. Dale. Anyone
in the office can make entry to petty cash."
Ms. Bracher. May the record reflect that Mr. Kennedy is not reading
from his notes, but is reading from a letter which he has identified
as being from Mr. Paul Castellitto.
The Witness. Now, let the record reflect --
Mr. Coffield. No, no.
The Witness. No, no.
Mr. Coffield. Let me make an objection here. He has obviously been
through the process of trying to read that before and that's the
reason that that letter is there. If -- I mean, I understand --
Ms. Bracher. Are you objecting to my asking the witness just to read
what his notes actually say?
Mr. Coffield. I'm simply objecting that if there's no point in doing
it, if obviously he has been through the exercise before and it's in
black and white, then it serves no other purpose than to badger him.
Ms. Bracher. I apologize if Mr. Kennedy is having to do something
again. However, those notes have never been read by Mr. Kennedy to
anyone. There has been a letter which was signed by an attorney, that
Mr. Kennedy has now represented he has very little information about
the basis of the attorney's statement.
I am simply asking for Mr. Kennedy to actually read his own notes so
that he can identify what is stated, rather than his attorney. I do
apologize if you feel you have been through this before, Mr. Kennedy,
but we are attempting to have a complete record by you, under oath,
and not your attorney.
Mr. Coffield. I understand that. But this letter clearly states that
this has been reviewed with him and that he believes the highlighted
entry reads as follows; and then it quotes in black and white what he
believes the entry read.
Ms. Bracher. Are you instructing your witness not to read from his
notes? Because I will certainly respect that, and I will --
Mr. Coffield. Yes.
Ms. Bracher. -- take that to the Chairman.
Ms. Bracher. Yes.
The Witness. I think this is utter nonsense.
Ms. Bracher. Then I will go to the next question.
The Witness. I will respond to your question, okay, but I am going to
read the exact words that I read before: "Focused on petty cash
notebook with envelope in the front locked credenza behind Billy R.
Dale. Anyone in office can make entry to petty cash." Now I have read
it twice.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Now, can you please describe the circumstances under which those
notes were brought to your attention back in October -- I assume back
in October of 1995.
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Coffield. It's a privilege.
Ms. Bracher. Can you please state the privilege and the basis for the
privilege?
Mr. Coffield. It's an attorney/client communication.
Ms. Bracher. Can you tell me who that communication is between?
Mr. Coffield. Between Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Castellitto.
Ms. Bracher. Okay. Were there any third parties involved in that
privileged communication such as Mr. Goldberg from the Department of
Justice?
Mr. Coffield. I believe that Mr. Goldberg, at least -- and I will tell
you sitting here right now, I know nothing about this. I just saw this
for the first time when you handed this document over, but it's clear
to me, being someone who is just looking at the documents, that Mr.
Goldberg may have had some conversation with Mr. Castellitto; but what
you are asking about is the substance of a conversation with Mr.
Kennedy and Mr. Castellitto, and that's a privileged communication.
Ms. Bracher. Which was obviously then communicated to Mr. Goldberg,
who is a third party outside of the attorney/ client relationship. Is
that correct?
Mr. Coffield. I think that to the extent, if you want to ask him if he
read that letter, if he -- if he read that letter to Mr. Castellitto,
read that note and put what's on there, you can certainly ask him, but
it doesn't make any sense because it's in black and white. But
anything beyond that is privileged.
Ms. Bracher. I believe my question was a little broader. I asked him
the circumstances of him reviewing his own handwritten notes.
The Witness. Let's take a break. I want to take a break. I want to
discuss this matter with my counsel.
Ms. Bracher. Certainly.
[Recess.]
Ms. Bracher. Let's go back on the record.
Mr. Coffield. We had a short discussion and anything having to do with
the communications with his counsel, he is going to maintain the
privilege.
Ms. Bracher. And certainly I don't want to go into communication --
you mean all communications, whether they pertain to his
representation or not? You are going to claim a privilege over
everything ever said to his counsel?
The Witness. Give me a break.
Mr. Coffield. No, I mean --
Ms. Bracher. I guess I need you to define the privilege.
Mr. Coffield. We are going to assert the privilege when it's proper to
assert the privilege. We think this is a circumstance where the
privilege is being properly asserted.
Ms. Bracher. Okay.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Putting aside the conversations to which you have asserted
attorney/client privilege, can you describe the circumstances that you
reviewed the notes that are attached to the February 26th letter?
Mr. Coffield. He is not going to be able to answer that because that's
privileged.
Ms. Bracher. Okay.
Everything having to do with him reviewing his own personal notes in
response to Mr. Goldberg is privileged?
Mr. Coffield. Is privileged.
Ms. Bracher. Okay. For the record, Majority counsel objects.
Obviously, this is an issue that will be resolved by the Chairman of
the committee. If he makes a ruling, he will confer with the Minority
member, and a ruling will be handed down, in which case we may present
questions at a later date for Mr. Kennedy to answer concerning these
issues.
Mr. Coffield. Okay.
Mr. Goldberg. As Minority staff, let me just state that the witness is
here voluntarily and there are lots of steps before that process takes
place, and only the Chairman, after consultation with the Ranking
Minority Member, can rule on objections.
Ms. Bracher. I think that's what I said, Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Goldberg. I am just making a statement for the record that this is
a voluntary interview and we need not resolve these issues at this
time and place.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q At any time, was it ever suggested to you that the copy of your
notes that you have just read from said something other than
"focused"?
A Did anybody suggest that to me?
RPTS COLCHICO
DCMN VASSELO
Q Yes, sir.
A No.
Q Did you ever have any discussions about the relevance of this
statement concerning the petty cash notebook?
Mr. Coffield. To the extent they are not privileged.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q To the extent that it's not privileged.
A No. To the extent that privilege does not apply, no.
Q Okay. Did you ever have any discussions with anyone concerning these
notes outside of the privilege claims you have made?
A Say that again.
Q Have you ever had any discussion with anyone concerning these notes
outside of the privilege claims your attorney has raised for you?
A I have been questioned about those notes repeatedly.
Q Can you please explain?
A I have been questioned about those notes repeatedly. You have cited
me some of the interviews in which I have been questioned about them.
Q So it's your testimony that the OPR interview questioned you about
these notes?
A Which notes are you talking about? I'm talking about my notes taken
on the Travel Office generally.
Q I am sorry. I am talking about this specific page of notes that you
read.
A I am sure that I have gotten questions from people about those
notes, yeah.
Q Do you recall the questions?
A I can't recall the specifics, no.
Q Outside of the privilege you have claimed, can you recall any
discussions whatsoever about the specific page of notes occurring in
connection with the Billy Dale trial?
A Occurring in connection with the Billy Dale trial, outside the
privilege, no.
Q Did you ever talk with the White House about these notes?
A Okay. Are you talking about that page of notes?
Q Yes, I am.
A I did not talk to the White House about that page of notes in
connection with the Billy Dale trial.
Q Did you talk with the White House about this page of notes at
anytime in connection with anything, Mr. Kennedy?
A When you say, "Talked to the White House" --
Q Any individual who has worked at the White House or currently works
at the White House.
A The short answer to your question is, as I previously testified, I
gave Vince Foster a copy of these notes. I am pretty sure I gave Neil
Eggleston a copy of these notes. Or maybe it was Cliff Sloan; I am not
sure.
Q Did you discuss this page of the notes with any individual that
currently works at the White House or previously worked at the White
House?
A Obviously, I don't know all the people that currently work at the
White House. But I don't recall discussing this page of notes with
anyone at the White House currently.
Q How about anyone who previously worked at the White House?
A I have previously testified that I gave these notes to Vince Foster.
Q I am talking about discussions, Mr. Kennedy.
A Discussions with regard to what? I mean, Vince Foster asked me, can
I have a copy of your notes? I consider those discussions. So the
answer is, yes, I did.
Q Other than that discussion, do you recall any other discussions
concerning this page of the notes that we have been talking about?
A No, I don't recall anything specifically as to that page.
Q Do you recall anything generally as to this page?
A I think a couple of people -- I think Vince even asked me what my --
my handwriting is kind of hard to read -- what some of the words
meant.
Q Did it have to do with petty cash notebook?
A No.
Q Would it have to do with anything else on this page of notes that I
have shown you?
A I don't recall any such discussion.
Q Okay. Were you aware that the Department of Justice was preparing a
case against Billy Dale concerning the Travel Office?
A You bet.
Q Did you ever go through any of your notes or files to see if you had
any documents that might be relevant to the preparation of the case
against Mr. Billy Dale?
A Only in response to subpoenas.
Q So if a subpoena wasn't served on you, you did not go through your
notes in preparation -- to look and see if there was anything relevant
to the Billy Dale trial, is that accurate?
A Other than matters covered by privilege, that's correct.
Q Do you know what Brady versus Maryland stands for?
A Uh-uh.
Q Do you understand that if you had exculpatory documents concerning
Billy Dale, that those would have to be produced by the Department of
Justice?
A If you say so, I'll take your word for it.
Q Okay. Did anybody ever ask you if you had any documents relating to
the Billy Dale case?
A Only by way of subpoena, and then matters covered by privilege.
Q Okay. Other than subpoena and matters by privilege, you never
received any instructions to review your documents?
A With regard to what?
Q With regard to the Billy Dale trial.
A Other than subpoena and matters covered by privilege, no.
Q Okay. I have a message slip which was written to you on July 21st,
from a Skip Clements, which I am showing you. Do you recognize that
name?
A I do.
Q Who is that?
A It's a guy named Skip Clemens.
Q And can you please tell us who he is?
A He is a friend of mine. He works for Stevens, Inc.
Q What is Stevens, Inc.
A It's an investment brokerage firm in Little Rock.
Q Does he live in Little Rock?
A He does.
Q And how long have you known this gentleman?
A I couldn't tell you. Five, 6 years. I have known his family a lot
longer than that.
Q Was he calling relating to any matter that's been under
investigation by this committee?
A I have no idea of all the matters your committee has investigated.
Ask your question a different way, please.
Q Perhaps you can tell us what he was calling about, if you know.
A He was probably calling to express condolences about Vince.
Q Did he know Mr. Foster?
A Yes, he did.
Q Do you recall this phone call specifically?
A I do not. It was not a good time.
Q Was there anything that he was participating in concerning White
House matters?
A No.
Q That you are aware of?
A No.
Q Okay. On May 11th, 1993, you received calls from Mike Berman and --
I am sorry. On May 11th, you called Web Hubbell, Department of
Justice, in the morning. Do you recall if you were talking -- what you
were calling Web Hubbell about at the Department of Justice?
A I do not recall with specificity, no, I do not.
Q Do you know if it has anything to do with the Travel Office matter?
A I am relatively certain that it does not.
Q Okay. Earlier, when we were talking about Vince Foster's files and
you were talking about indexes that had been created about those
boxes, had you ever seen any of those indexes?
A No. I was told when the boxes were developed -- excuse me-- when the
boxes were delivered, that there were indexes inside of them.
Q You never saw any of those indexes that you were relying on?
A I'm not relying on any indexes.
Q Or that you testified that you were sure other people were going
through in response to subpoenas.
A I'm testifying that that's what I thought was happening.
Q Okay. But you never saw any indexes for these documents?
A I was told that there were indexes inside the boxes.
Q Who told you that?
A Incidentally, his name is Tom Castleton. He told me.
Q Okay. At anytime, did anyone else mention that the documents had
been indexed and that they were relying on indexes to go through the
documents that had been delivered to your office?
A I think that I knew that someone had gone through an effort to index
Vince's files. Okay? I think I knew that before the boxes were
delivered.
Q Other than Mr. Castleton's handwritten index, are you aware of any
other indexes or alleged indexes of Mr. Foster's files?
A I believe, but don't hold me to this, that there were computerized
indexes of these files, I believe.
Q Did you ever see them?
A No.
Q Did Mr. Cerf ever have any indexes that you were told of?
A I can't recall whether he said -- I mean, if there were indexes in
the box, he got them. So he had those. And I can't recall whether he
ever said that these computerized indexes ever existed or not. I don't
know. I just think they did.
Q Do you know -- I mean, can you tell me anyone that you believe might
have told you that they exist or might have had them in their
possession at any time?
A Well, the -- it seems like to me, and maybe this comes from press
reports, that these documents were catalogued sort of shortly after
the initial run-through, which had been the subject of so much intense
focus by Bernie. It seems like that's what I remember, that they were
catalogued at that time. I didn't do it myself.
Q I guess I'm asking in the context of the fact that you weren't
opening these boxes and reviewing them because you believed there were
indexes. So I was just wondering what basis you had for believing
there were indexes?
A I was told by Mr. Castleton, when they were delivered, that there
were indexes. I also remember that -- you know, but I can't remember
the source of it, with particularity, that there were other indexes
created.
Q Okay. Do you have in your possession any indexes?
A I do not.
Q Have you ever had any of those indexes in your possession at any
time?
A When they were in the boxes, I guess you could argue that they were
in my possession, although I would dispute you on that.
Mr. Coffield. Surprise.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q On May 13th, there's a series of telephone calls between you and Mr.
Hubbell. Do you recall what you would have been calling Mr. Hubbell
about on May 13th?
A Not with particularity, but I'm willing to bet you they had to do
with nominations.
Q Okay. Do you recall if you mentioned the Travel Office during this
period to Mr. Hubbell?
A I do not believe that I did.
Q Okay. Do you know a Mr. Seigle from the White House?
A Seigle?
Q Uh-huh.
A Do you know his first name?
Q Peter Seigle.
A Peter Seigle?
Q I believe he worked in the Office of Administration.
A Peter Seigle? The name is not ringing any bells, but that's not to
say that I didn't know him. I just don't remember it. Peter Seigle.
RPTS STEWART
DCMN PARKER
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Did there come a time when you learned that KPMG did not perform an
audit but that it was a management review?
A They told us at the time when it was going on that the Travel Office
records were in such a shamble that an audit was not possible.
Q Did they use the word, "shambles"?
A Uh-huh.
Q You specifically recall them telling you the records were in such a
shambles?
A Uh-huh.
Q Do you recall who told you that?
A Probably Larry Hermann. May have been Jack --
Q And until that time you believe that they were trying to perform an
audit at the Travel Office?
A That is what they started out to do is perform an audit. After they
got into it they realized they couldn't do it. It was such a mess.
Q What is your basis of your belief that that is what they started out
to do, an audit?
A That is what they were asking.
Q By whom?
A White House counsel's office, David Watkins.
Q By White House counsel's office would that have been you that asked
them to do an audit?
A As I testified before, it would have been me or Vince Foster, yes,
telling David Watkins that's what we needed to do and him agreeing to
that.
Q If someone were to tell you that they never intended to do an audit,
in fact, never sent in an audit team to the Travel Office, would that
surprise you?
A Are you talking about something internally at Peat Marwick?
Q No, I am talking about auditor and management review personnel.
A Are you saying that somebody said -- I can't remember your question
specifically. You said something along the lines of if somebody said
that they never intended to do an audit would that surprise me, yes.
Q Did there come a time when you learned there wasn't an audit?
A Yes.
Q When was that? Was that only when they told you they couldn't do it
because of the disarray?
A They basically told me in the first case they didn't think they were
going to be able to on Friday and they confirmed it on Saturday, if I
remember correctly.
Q When the press reports were coming out that an audit had been
performed did you try to correct those statements as incorrect since
you knew it wasn't an audit?
A I don't know for sure that they finally determined this until
sometime later than that, then at that point the train had left the
station.
Q What do you mean by the train had left the station?
A I mean the announcement of the audit had already gone out, I guess.
Q Let me put the press reports in time on May 19th after the firing
when the White House press, namely Mr. Stephanopoulos and Miss Dee Dee
Myers were stating there had been an audit performed by Peat Marwick.
You were aware at that time it wasn't an audit?
A That is correct.
Barbara, I am not sure. Probably so. I remember, as I said, on Friday
and Saturday they said they didn't think they could do one.
Q And after the firing, were you in any meetings, in fact, where Mr.
Hermann made statements that he had not performed an audit and that
these press reports coming out of the White House were incorrect?
A Not close on the events at hand, no, I don't remember that.
Q Did that happen at some later time?
A I mean, I had it in my mind they were going to be unable to conduct
an audit from Saturday on, but I didn't have confirmation of that
until some point later on. I can't tell you exactly when.
Q What did you think they were doing if they weren't doing an audit?
Did you know they were doing a management review?
A There are levels of basically auditing processes below a full audit.
I figured they would do whatever they could. They did not know when
they went in that they would be unable to conduct an audit. At least
that is what they said.
Q That is information that KPMG Peat Marwick said to you?
A That is what Larry Hermann or Jack Miller said to me.
Q You know a difference between the audit in the lower levels because
of your prior experience; isn't that true?
A I am familiar generally with them, yeah. But the longer answer to
your question is I would not have considered it a distinction worth
making to try to go back and correct the press reports.
Q That there had been no audit would not have been a distinction you
would have thought was important?
A Uh-uh. There is not a whole lot of difference between an audit and a
management review in my opinion.
Q What is that opinion based on?
A Previous experience in the practice of law.
Q So if you were advising your client that they were going to have an
audit or management review, that would not be a great distinction in
your mind?
A That is basically true; it is a difference of degree.
Q Did there come a time you called them a performance review team
rather than auditors?
A Me?
Q Uh-huh.
A No, not that I recall.
Q Similarly calls that happened on the day of the firing between you
and Mr. Hubble, would those have had anything to do with the Travel
Office matter?
A Not that I recall, Barbara. I am pretty certain they had to do with
either judicial or Justice Department nominees.
Q On May 20th after the firing, did you have a discussion with Mr.
Nussbaum where you told him to the effect there was a slippery slope
and he should get involved in the Travel Office matter?
Mr. Coffield. Are we reviewing his notes at this point?
Ms. Bracher. I am not sure if they are his notes or a statement. I am
just asking if he recalls making that statement.
Mr. Coffield. The last couple of questions you asked seemed to ring a
bell with me about specific entries in notes. If that is what we are
going to be asking him questions on in order to facilitate you getting
the answers that you want, it would probably be easier to let him look
at those note entries.
Ms. Bracher. I would rather not refresh his recollection if he had a
present memory. I would rather see if he has any present memory of a
discussion with Mr. Nussbaum.
Mr. Coffield. I thought earlier when we talked about the parameters of
how this was going to be done, if you were going to be referencing
portions of notes or things like that that he would be given an
opportunity to look at them.
Ms. Bracher. Certainly, if I am going to ask him questions about his
notes specifically, I will show him the notes to ask him the
questions. I am asking if he has any present recollection about that
conversation with Mr. Nussbaum.
Mr. Coffield. All I am saying is --
Ms. Bracher. Are you asking a question that I am asking if he has any
recollection of a discussion with Mr. Nussbaum?
Mr. Coffield. All I am trying to do is that we stated earlier when
this began if there were references to things that were in writings
and documents he be given an opportunity to look at those.
Ms. Bracher. There was an oral conversation with Mr. Nussbaum.
Mr. Coffield. I think the source of your -- I believe, and correct me
if I am wrong, it sounds to me like you are going down a laundry list
of notes he has taken. If that is the case, I think it is fair to him
to have the opportunity to look at those notes. Then he can, number
one, use it to refresh his recollection, get to the heart of the
matter quicker.
Ms. Bracher. I don't think we found out his recollection wasn't fresh.
I don't want to refresh it if he has a present recollection. If you
have an objection to me asking him about his present recollection of a
conversation with Bernie Nussbaum, please state it for the record.
Otherwise, I would like to ask him if he has any present recollection.
Mr. Coffield. But I just want to make clear for the record we are
deviating from what we discussed earlier.
Ms. Bracher. Fine, let the record reflect that we are deviating from
what we discussed. I am not sure when we discussed this. I assume this
was a discussion prior to this deposition.
Mr. Coffield. Uh-huh.
Ms. Bracher. Okay.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Do you have any recollection of any conversation with Bernie
Nussbaum where you were asking him to get involved in the Travel
Office matter the day after the firings?
A I recall asking Bernie to get involved. I don't recall slippery
slope, and I don't recall the date but, yes, I did.
Q Why were you asking him to get involved?
A Because he hadn't been involved before.
Q And what specific involvement did you feel was necessary at that
time by Mr. Nussbaum?
A Basically the interaction with regard to the Travel Office -- up to
that point whenever that conversation occurred, you know, Vince may
have been talking to Bernie but I was not, did not, and I just felt
like things were reaching a stage that he needed to get his arms
around it and get involved. I don't know if it was on the day of the
firings, the day after the firings, or whenever it was determined over
the weekend that the investigation was going to go forward, but I felt
like he needed to get a more heavy involvement.
Q There were calls that you made on the day after the firing about
seeing Bruce Lindsey and meeting with him at 4 o'clock. Do you recall
meeting with Bruce Lindsey the day after the firings? I think it was
approximately 4 o'clock.
A Not specifically, but it is certainly possible that that would have
happened, and it probably had to do with nominees.
Q Do you -- were you dealing with Bruce Lindsey the day of the firings
on any matters that have to do with the Travel Office investigation
which would include Harry Thomason?
A I don't recall doing so. Bruce at the time was head of the
Presidential personnel, and I asked him many times about nominees.
Q Lorraine Voles made a call to you on the day after the firing and
left you a message that said re: FBI investigation. What
participation, if any, did Lorraine Voles have in the FBI
investigation?
A I am probably certain it had either to do with his own investigation
or the investigation of someone he was responsible for. I don't
remember who Lorraine was with at that time.
Q Can you briefly tell us what her own investigation was?
A With the caveat I don't remember where Lorraine was or what she was
doing at this point in time. It could have been with regard to her own
FBI background investigation.
Q Rather than a Travel Office related matter?
A Yes.
Q I believe Lorraine Voles was in the Vice President's office doing
NPR. Would she have called you about NPR issues connected with the FBI
investigation?
A I don't think so, no. Like I say, I think it related to -- it must
have related -- I don't remember discussing it with her at all. It may
have, but I just don't recall it.
Q The day after the firing, Patsy Thomasson and then 4 minutes later
Vince Foster called you in the afternoon right before you went in with
Bruce Lindsey, the meeting with Bruce Lindsey. Do you recall any
matter that would have to do with the Travel Office that they would
have been calling you about?
A Vince could have been calling about wanting to know where the FBI
stood, what was going on. He could have been calling about that. He
could have been calling about something else. I am sorry I don't
remember. Patsy most certainly could have been calling about the
Travel Office. If it was the day after the firings, we were beginning
to interface with the FBI with regard to actually conducting the
investigation.
Q Did Neil Eggleston the day after the firing discuss possibly
representing one of the Travel Office people with you?
A Did Neil Eggleston discuss representing one of the Travel Office
people? No, not that I recall.
Q Were you aware of the issue concerning David Watkins reading
Catherine Cornelius' memo?
A What issue is that?
Q That there was a question whether or not he actually read Catherine
Cornelius' February 15th memoranda concerning the Travel Office.
A Was I aware at what point in time?
Q Well, it became an issue after the firing and so I guess -- first of
all, were you aware of the fact that he had instructed others that he
had never read that memo?
A No, the only time I became aware that there had indeed been such a
memo was from press reports, and all I know about what David Watkins
did was from press reports.
Q Did you or anyone in the counsel's office discuss the fact that
David Watkins had told Clarissa Cerda and Catherine Cornelius to say
he had never read the memo?
A I don't know whether he did or didn't make such a statement.
Q It was never discussed by you or any other attorneys in the
counsel's office?
A Not that I know of.
Q Did you provide any advice as a representative from the White House
counsel's office on the propriety of Stephanopoulos with Collingwood
about the FBI response?
A No, as I told you that meeting was going on when I showed up.
Q I know that but at any time did you ever provide any legal advice or
did anyone else in the counsel's office provide any advice concerning
the propriety of the revision of the FBI response by Mr.
Stephanopoulos?
A I did not. I can't speak if anybody else did.
Q Did you have any knowledge whether anybody else was looking at that
issue?
A No, I did not.
Q After the firing that Friday, I believe World Wide Travel had
announced that they were leaving and there was going to be a bid which
involved American Express. Were you aware that that process was going
to go on that weekend?
A At some point that was announced I think in a staff meeting they
said that, you know, World Wide is leaving and we are going to put it
out for bid. I think at the same time we were told that they were
going to give the five people -- five of the seven people other jobs.
Q Did you ever provide any advice to Patsy Thomasson about the
propriety of her meeting with American Express that Friday before the
bid?
A Did not.
Q Were you aware she had a closed-door meeting with American Express
before the weekend bid?
A Was not, am not.
Q I assume you were aware that anybody else in the counsel's office
would have been providing advice to her about the propriety of that
meeting?
A It could have happened. I don't know. I did not do it.
Q Did the FBI ever mention to you that she had asked them to guard the
door while she had the meeting?
A No, no.
Q Did she ask you to have the FBI guard her door during that meeting?
A No.
Q And that you told her it was not appropriate for the FBI to guard
her door during that meeting?
A If she had asked me, I certainly would have said that, but I don't
recall her doing that.
Q If she made that statement you would say that would be incorrect?
A If Patsy remembers asking me whether it would have been appropriate,
obviously I stand behind my testimony I don't recall that
conversation. If she had asked me I would have said it was
inappropriate.
Q Well, I guess it is not whether she asked you whether it would be,
but that she actually asked you to have the FBI guard her door.
A I certainly don't recall that.
Q Did the FBI contact you I guess toward the end of the week and over
the weekend and the following week after the firings about receiving a
copy of the KPMG report?
A Yeah, they wanted a copy of it as soon as it was available.
Q Do you recall why they didn't get a copy until after it was released
to the press?
A I am not sure that that is accurate. I thought they did get one
before that.
Q Were you the one who sent the copy to the FBI?
A It seems like I did.
Q Were you ever told by FBI Agent Carl that he felt that you and the
White House or those at the White House were sandbagging him by not
giving him the KPMG report?
A Absolutely not.
Q You don't recall that kind of language being used by the FBI when
trying to get the report out of you?
A Uh-uh.
Q On May 24th, which was the Monday following the firings, there was
an urgent report which was sent over to Attorney General Reno and Web
Hubble and Mr. Hermann. Do you recall -- did you have any
conversations with Mr. Hubble on that date about the Travel Office
matter or the urgent report that was sent over to them?
A Urgent report sent over by whom?
Q By the FBI to Attorney General Reno and Mr. Hubble concerning the
Travel Office investigation.
A On what date?
Q May 24th, that is the Monday after the firings.
A No, I don't recall any such conversations.
Q Also on that Monday after the firing, Patsy Thomasson called you
that she was in the Travel Office and asked if you were on the way.
Craig Livingstone called you that he was in the Travel Office. Can you
tell us what was going on in the Travel Office; that is that Monday
after the firings.
A Probably -- this is a guess -- I had have to see the telephone
messages, but probably they were talking -- they were concerned with
or dealing with issues of how to make information available to the
FBI.
Q And do you remember when the FBI took possession of the Travel
Office documents?
A I do not recall.
Q Would it surprise you if it was not until a month later?
A Possession of the actual documents? I don't know.
Q Were you involved in deciding about documents security after the
firings?
A Only in the most general terms. I mean we discussed it with Patsy
that we had to be sure, and when Peat Marwick went in, the documents
were not destroyed like that, but only in sort of general principle
terms.
Q I guess after the firings Peat Marwick was done. Did you discuss
document security?
A Peat Marwick was around, if I remember correctly, for several days
after the actual firings.
Q And were they handling documents after the actual firings?
A They were winding up what they were doing.
Q And I guess World Wide Travel was also in the Travel Office, isn't
that true?
A I believe so.
Q And Penny Sample from Air Advantage was in the Travel Office?
A I don't know that for a fact, but I believe so.
Q Did you direct anyone to discuss with them about security of the
records and the documents concerning the FBI investigation?
A No, I mean I talked with Craig Livingstone and I talked with Patsy
about it but again only in we need to make sure, however makes the
most sense to do so, the documents aren't destroyed or lost.
Q On Tuesday, May 25th, which is the week after the firings, there
were several chronologies that were prepared in a meeting with Mack
McLarty. Do you recall participating in the preparation of
chronologies either alone or with others in this meeting or as a
result of this meeting?
A I remember that they were -- and I attended this meeting, if it's
the same meeting that you are talking about -- I attended a meeting
with Mack McLarty, I think, on the 25th, and I remember that there was
a discussion about a need to get a chronology, but I don't recall
being asked to either prepare one or to participate in the preparation
of one. That is not to say that I didn't look at it or something, but
I don't recall it.
Q On that Wednesday, which is one week after the firing, there are
several calls that involved Jennifer O'Connor to you and Clarissa
Cerda to you and I guess ultimately Clarissa Cerda said she wouldn't
be at the 1:30 meeting on that Wednesday. Do you know?
Mr. Coffield. Is that the 26th?
Ms. Bracher. That is the 26th, Wednesday, one week after the firing.
Q Do you know if there was a 1:30 meeting and what that 1:30 meeting
involved?
A Don't have a clue. I mean, it could have involved anything.
Q There was some calls on May 27th, Thursday. Jennifer O'Connor called
you and Peat Marwick, I believe, called you with some concerns about
the reports that were coming out of the White House about their Peat
Marwick review. Do you recall that?
A The short answer is, no, I don't. I talked to Larry Hermann a couple
of times sort of after the dust had settled. And I just don't -- you
may have mentioned that there was some unrest or something inside the
Peat Marwick, but I don't remember any specifics.
Q Do you remember any comments to the effect that they had never said
gross mismanagement that was reported by the White House and the press
conferences?
A No, I don't remember any conversations like that.
Q Do you remember any conversations either using the words, "gross
mismanagement," or "concerns" by Peat Marwick that the White House had
stated conclusions that they had not, in fact, reached in their
review?
A I don't recall such concerns or such conversations.
Q On the day Mr. Foster was interviewed by the White House management
review, which was June 3rd, did you meet with Mr. Foster or discuss
the contents of the White House management review interview with him?
A I did not.
Q Did he ever express any concerns about the role of the First Lady
coming out in the White House management review with you?
A He did not.
Q Do you know if he ever expressed these concerns with anyone else
other than you?
A I do not.
Q So that would include Todd Stern or Neil Eggleston or Bernie
Nussbaum?
A You will have to ask them about conversations they had with Vince
Foster.
Q I am just asking you if you are aware of any of those conversations?
A I previously said, no. I know the contents of the White House
internal management report as it came out, but what was said I don't
know.
Q June 11th, 1993, the IRS was contacting Catherine Cornelius about
the Federal excise tax issue. Were you aware at that time -- did
Catherine call you or were you aware that the IRS was calling
Catherine about this audit?
A No, ma'am I was not.
Q Who is John Emerson?
A He was -- he worked for either the White House or the Executive
Office of the President.
Q Did he handle any Travel Office related matters?
A No, ma'am, not that I know of.
Q Do you recall what he did?
A I don't know what his job description was at that point in time. I
just don't recall. I don't know precisely what he was doing. It had to
do with sort of local politics issues, but I don't know that for a
fact.
Q On June 15th of 1993 Mr. Foster left you a message that he needed
you at a meeting at 2 o'clock the following day in his office with
John Emerson and others. Do you recall meeting with John Emerson?
A I probably did. I can't recall the substance of it.
Q On June 21st there is a series of calls from Patsy to you as well as
Todd Stern to you and Mr. Foster. Do you recall any activity on June
21st, 1993, that would have prompted Travel Office related calls to
you?
A Sorry, I do not. June 21st -- June 21st -- I am sorry, I don't
recall. I don't know of anything that would have been going on at this
point other than press reports and investigations.
Q Did you ever have any meetings in the White House residence
concerning business matters?
A Yes.
Q Were any of these at all related to Travel Office matters as I
stated in the opening scope?
A No.
Q On July 2nd do you recall having a dinner at the White House that
was attended by you and Mr. Watkins?
A July 2nd?
Q July 2nd which was a Friday night.
A If you tell me there was one I attended several and so, yes.
Q Do you recall discussing Travel Office matters or the reviews or
investigations with anyone at that dinner?
A No, I do not, uh-uh.
Q Do you recall attending a dinner at the White House residence with
Vince Foster right after the firings and I think a movie was shown,
"The Firm," if that helps refresh your recollection?
A We attended -- I think we attended the movie, but there wasn't any
dinner involved.
Q Do you recall anything coming up concerning the Travel Office while
you were up there with Mr. Foster?
A No, I do not. I mean, I am sure -- what's the date again?
Q I don't have the date of the movie.
A Whether it was post --
Q It was post firing?
A If it was post firings and post press fire storm, I am sure there
were comments about things on a general basis, but there would be no
specifics.
Q Actually, I correct it. I think it was July 16th, two days before
the firing when you were up there with Mr. Foster?
A July 16th it can't be two days before the firings.
Mr. Coffield. July 16th?
Ms. Bracher. May 16th.
The Witness. No, that can't be right. May 16th, let me get my days
right. Friday would have been -- no, Saturday would have been the
15th?
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q The 16th was Sunday night.
A I don't remember going to a movie that night, but I may have.
Q I guess to put it in context it would have been right before the
firing?
A No, the firing was on a Wednesday.
Q Right, well it would have been a few days before the firing that you
were up in the residence watching a movie that was attended by you and
Mr. Foster?
A I am sorry, I mean, if you are going to be talking in that time
frame, I don't remember -- I don't remember that a movie intervened
here, but that is not to say it didn't. Now, if it was -- it was the
Sunday following the Saturday meeting, as I testified, I don't
remember attending any meetings that Sunday night and I stand by that.
If there was a movie there and I went, and I saw Vince, I would have
given him a status report because I hadn't seen him since then.
Q It was attended by the First Lady and the President. Would you have
given him the status report in front of them?
A Absolutely not.
Q Why do you say absolutely not?
A Because we wouldn't have discussed business in front of them.
Q On July 6th, 1993, there was a message from Catherine Cornelius that
said she was going to leave town for a while and would like to talk to
someone before she leaves regarding a reassignment. Do you recall?
A This is a July 16th message to me?
Q It is to you and Mack McLarty and I am not sure who responded to it,
I am just asking if you responded or you recall her calling you or did
you have any subsequent discussions with her regarding her
reassignment in July of '93.
Mr. Coffield. Did you say the 6th or the 16th?
Ms. Bracher. July 6th 1993.
The Witness. Joint phone message to me and Mack McLarty?
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q She may have called both you or either called both you jointly or
individually. And I apologize. Some of our information is cryptic,
too.
A The short answer is I recall receiving no such message from
Catherine. This is pure speculation, which I know I am not supposed to
do. The only reason Catherine would have been talking to me would have
been to be sure that it was okay from the perspective of the
investigation for her to be gone for a while. That is the only reason.
I have nothing to do with assigning her or not assigning her.
Q I think it is likely Bill Burton -- Bill with no last name and it
was likely that it was Bill Burton.
A That is correct.
Q I just wanted to see if you remembered any call.
On July 20th, I guess Marsha Scott stopped by to visit you that day.
Do you recall if she mentioned any conversations that she had had with
Mr. Foster about the Travel Office or relayed any information
concerning the Travel Office to you?
A On July 20th?
Q Uh-huh. She stopped by to see you at 11:55?
A No, Marsha and I are friends and have been friends for a long time.
As I testified previously, I do not recall her telling me about any
conversations she had with Vince.
Q And Vince, I guess, paged -- Mr. Foster paged you that day a couple
of times in the morning. Do you know if that was connected with Marsha
Scott's visit to you or in any way jogs your memory about what she
might have stopped by to see you about that morning?
A No, Vince and I traded phone calls that day. Never talked to him.
Q That same day September 27th, 1993, when we were talking about your
GAO interview, you had lunch with Mr. Hubble. Do you recall if any
Travel Office issues were discussed or the context of the GAO
interview, if the substance was discussed with Mr. Hubble.
Mr. Coffield. September 27th?
Ms. Bracher. 1993.
The Witness. No, I don't. You know.
I did not discuss the specifics. I may have told him that I was going
to be interviewed but that would have been it, and I don't remember
doing that.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q Okay. In October 7th '94, Mr. Serf, Chris Serf, received some
communication from you where you told him that the GOP 10794 only had
passing generalized reference to the First Lady's conversations with
no specific quotes.
A Say what?
Q There is a conversation either that you had personally with Chris
Serf or some notation that you gave him where you discussed the GOP
10794 report, which was a report that was issued by the Chairman
concerning the Travel Office matter. And in that communication you had
with Mr. Serf you noted that there was only passing generalized
reference to the First Lady's conversations without specific quotes.
Do you recall having any discussions with Mr. Serf regarding how much
information we had on the First Lady?
A Do I recall it specifically, no. But it is not to say it sure didn't
happen. There wasn't any official capacity. I don't recall that
conversation, but it certainly could have occurred.
Q Were you --
A Did I review that report? You bet I did.
Q And did you review it to see how much information we had concerning
the First Lady?
A I did not.
Q Is there any reason you would have relayed that to Christopher Serf
in particular that the First Lady's --
A There had been speculation in the press about Mrs. Clinton's
involvement or noninvolvement because of it at that point in time, so
the short answer is I will be interested in what your side of the
aisle's position on that would have been, other than that, no.
Q Other than this no one in the White House suggested or there was no
one who wanted you to look and see --
A Nobody asked me to do that.
Q It was just your idle curiosity?
A My curiosity is never idle.
Q It was just your own curiosity that would cause you to report that
to Christopher Serf?
A I didn't report that to Christopher Serf. First of all, I don't know
what your source is. I am assuming that, I mean it must be some
recollection that he has. I don't remember this conversation. Okay he
may have said what's in the report, I don't know. I just can't recall.
Q You don't remember specifically highlighting the First Lady's
involvement?
A I don't know if that remark was taken out of context. I don't know
if it was included in a larger discussion about what you all said
about me. I don't recall the conversation at all. If you tell me it is
written down somewhere I am not saying it didn't happen, but I am
saying there is no particular focus on the First Lady.
Q That was my question, if there was a particular focus?
A Absolutely not.
Q There are calls that you made after leaving the White House in
November of '94 that you made to Bruce Lindsey from Arkansas. Would
those have anything to do with anything in the White House Travel
Office matters?
A No.
Q So any calls you made to Bruce Lindsey in 1995 were totally
unrelated to the Travel Office matters?
A Yep.
Ms. Bracher. That is the -- if there is anything else you would like
to put on the record, I am done. Mr. Goldberg has a couple of
questions.
Mr. Goldberg. I have just two questions for you Mr. Kennedy.
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q When you contacted the FBI with Jim Bourke of the FBI that time
prior to the audit review taking place, did you have any discussion,
was anybody else at the White House about contacting the FBI prior to
the making of the phone call?
A Prior to making the phone call?
Q Right.
A The very first phone call I made? No.
Q Can you explain again why you decided you needed to talk to Jim
Bourke?
A Well, again, I had a good working relationship with him. He was
somebody that I trusted, and I felt he reciprocated that trust. He was
knowledgeable.
Q What specifically, though, were you requesting?
A Help. The specific question was I have got a problem over here. I
don't know how to deal with it. I think that I probably need auditing
or financial auditing help. I don't know where to get it. I don't know
what's going on here. Can you help me? Can I talk to someone about a
way to deal with this problem.
Mr. Goldberg. Thank you very much, that is all?
Ms. Bracher. Just one moment.
I guess the record is complete. I state there will be five days where
obviously you have access to the report to make any corrections and we
do ask you take that time to review the report. If you do review it,
Mr. Kennedy, we have asked all witnesses to sign it at the end of that
five days and we will make the same request to you. Obviously, you
must proceed as you feel it proper. We do ask that you sign the
report.
The Witness. Let me put it on the record, my position on this. I do
not intend to come back up here at my expense to examine a copy of
this deposition. You can send me a copy so I may read it. If you
choose not to or if you feel you are bound by your procedures or the
resolution, or for any other reason from doing that, I will not -- and
I want this on the record -- I will not sign that deposition. Period.
I will also not agree that it is accurate and I will not be bound by,
to the extent I have the power, by what it says so I am inviting you
to talk to the Chairman or whoever and figure out whether you can send
this to me in Arkansas.
BY MS. BRACHER:
Q I guess the final question is you sat here all day and you realize
all of your answers have been under oath today?
A Yes.
Q And have you answered all of the questions truthfully to the best of
your ability sitting here today?
A I have a question for you, Barbara. Is this good woman and her
cohorts and comrades, are they machines?
Q I take that as a "yes" or a "no", Mr. Kennedy?
A No. The short answer is this, Barbara. Yes, I have answered
truthfully. I am not sure they were able to take down my answers
verbatim, my questions, or your questions verbatim. That is why I
believe we have the review process set up I would like to have.
Q We have cassette tapes of this interview if you need to review them
at any time.
[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the deposition was adjourned.]
