COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON, D.C. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x : In the matter of: : : WHITE HOUSE TRAVEL : DEPOSITION OF : ANTHONY MARCECA : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x Tuesday, June 18, 1996 Washington, D.C. The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 4:17 p.m. Appearances: Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee: Barbara Olson, Chief Counsel; Kristi Remington, Investigator; Laurie Taylor, Investigator; Ronald Stroman, Minority Deputy Staff Director; Donald Goldberg, Minority, Assistant to Counsel. For ANTHONY MARCECA: ROBERT F. MUSE, ESQ. ERIN L. MCGRATH, ESQ. Stein, Mitchell & Mezines 1100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 For ANTHONY MARCECA: ANDREA MARCECA, ESQ. Ms. Remington. Good afternoon. We are on the record this morning for the deposition of Anthony Marceca, which will be administered under oath. Let me identify the people present in the room. I am Kristi Remington with the Majority staff. Laurie Taylor, Majority staff, and Barbara Olson, will be joining us shortly. Don Goldberg is here for the Minority. I was informed that Dan Hernandez will be joining us later. Before you are sworn, I would like to provide you with 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 leading to the May 19, 1993, firings of the White House Travel Office employees, and includes all information provided about the White House Travel Office and any employees of the White House Travel Office at any time from January 1st, 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 taken by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice both prior to and after the firings, including 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 U.S. v. Billy Ray Dale, and all investigations and subsequent reviews of the Travel Office firings by any agency, including, but not limited to, the White House Management Review, the FBI Weldon Kennedy/I.C. Smith review, the FBI OPR review, the Justice Department OPR review, the IRS internal review, the Treasury Inspector General review, the General Accounting Office review, the proposed U.S. House of Representatives Resolution of Inquiry considered and voted on this in the House Judiciary Committee in July 1993. We are reviewing all actions relating to or describing the criminal investigations into the White House Travel Office matter, including any subsequent action 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, both Mr. Fiske and Mr. Starr, and the Department of Justice up to the date of this request, unless otherwise limited. Do you understand that your answers are to include all information which you have involving these subjects. Mr. Marceca. I do. Mr. Muse. You prefaced all of that with "as you know." It is part of your script. He doesn't know that all of that, but I want the record to make sure that he doesn't endorse that qualifier. Ms. Remington. Do you want to review -- Mr. Muse. No, I care not to review it. I care to suggest that you prefaced it all by saying that "as you know" and he would not want that be a qualifier that he endorses. Ms. Remington. The "as you know" referred to, I think, more of the investigation. There is an investigation going on. Mr. Muse. It may have; it is a syntactical ambiguity that I don't care to waste my time on. Ms. Remington. The committee has been granted specific authorization to conduct this investigation pursuant to House Resolution 369 which was passed by the House of Representatives on March 7, 1996. Pursuant to committee Rule 19, which was just provided to you, both the Majority counsel and Minority counsel will be afforded an equal opportunity to pose questions to each witness. Committee counsels will proceed with equal rounds of questioning, each lasting up to 1 hour until both counsel have completed their questioning. The only exception to this will be if a member of this committee is present and wishes to pose questions to the witness. If so, the Member will be afforded an immediate opportunity to question the witness and committee counsel will then resume questioning when the Members have completed their questions. You are here today voluntarily and not by subpoena; is that correct? Mr. Muse. That is correct. Mr. Marceca. My attorney answers for me. Ms. Remington. And you understand that this deposition is under oath. You will be allowed to confer with your attorney. If you do not understand a question, please tell me and I will try to rephrase the question, or Barbara Olson will rephrase the question. All objections raised by your attorney must be stated for the record with the reason for the objection clearly stated. At that point, committee Majority counsel will determine whether to accept the objection as a proper objection. If Majority counsel does not agree, the objection is properly before this panel, she will confer with Minority counsel and ask that they express their views on the record. If the objection remains, it ultimately may be presented to the Chairman of the committee or his designee for resolution. The Chairman will consult with Ranking Minority Member before issuing his final decision on the objection. You will be given a 5-day time frame which you and your attorney may review your deposition once it has been transcribed and to correct any technical problems that you perceive occurred in the transcription and to clarify any other matters. After that review period, you will be asked to sign the transcript. Do you understand that? Mr. Marceca. I do. Ms. Remington. Just as a matter of course, we have been getting these depositions back usually by the next day. So, by tomorrow afternoon it should probably be ready. Mr. Muse. Thank you. Ms. Remington. You are accompanied by your counsel, and I ask that you be sworn at this time. THEREUPON, ANTHONY MARCECA, a witness, was called for examination by counsel, and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: Ms. Remington. We will go off the -- Mr. Muse. I note that it is 4:25 and we have been waiting here since 4 o'clock. Counsel who has just been speaking arrived here approximately 10 minutes ago, and so it's 4:25 and we haven't had any questions to commence this deposition. And I want the record to reflect that. Ms. Remington. That's fine. We came as soon as we were notified that you were here. Mr. Goldberg. I'd like to make a statement for the record -- I'm sorry. Mr. Muse. I came as I discussed with Ms. Olson that we would be here. Ms. Remington. You will be noted for the record. Mr. Muse. We said we would be here at 4:00 and it is now 4:25 and you haven't asked a question. I wish you would start. In about 2 or 3 minutes, if you have no questions, I am going to have to get up and leave and announce that you apparently have no questions. I wish you would start. Ms. Remington. Are you through? Mr. Muse. Uh-huh. Ms. Remington. Fine. Mr. Goldberg. Can I make a statement for the record? Going back to the issue of scope, Minority doesn't necessarily concur with the definition of "scope" that the Majority counsel has presented. Even under the expansive description of "scope," which was read to you, which Minority doesn't ascribe to necessarily, it is hard to see how there are too many questions that are relevant to your role in the White House that would come out of your specific knowledge of the Travel Office employees's files. Having said that, because of the interest of this issue, the upcoming hearings, the Minority does not intend to object to any of the questions based on scope. But I would like to state for the record that it's hard to see how many questions can be asked that would fall within the scope of the resolution. Mr. Muse. We are now almost at 4:30, and I'd like you to make some inquiry. Looks like we have -- Mr. Goldberg. Just in the nick of time. Ms. Olson. Hi, Barbara Olson. I'm sorry I was late. I was in a meeting. EXAMINATION BY MS. OLSON: Q Can you give us your brief work history going back briefly from college, and then we'll get more into the details as we get up to the present date? A Yes. Q Okay. If you could just give us your brief work history. A I graduated from college in 1970 and I taught school for 1 year and I worked for Senator Muskie for about 6 months, 7 months, and then I got a job with Senator McGovern's staff. This was Senator Muskie's Presidential campaign. And then I worked for Senator McGovern's Presidential campaign. And then I went to the Department of Agriculture in Pennsylvania and I worked there for 2 years. And I left there and started an oil business of my own, and after a couple of months I got a job as a Pennsylvania State Constable in Pennsylvania. And in '83, I quit the job as Pennsylvania State Constable and took a job with the Texas Attorney General's office in July. And in November, I quit that job, and went to work for Senator Glenn's campaign. And in -- I worked with him as an advance person until February, I believe, and I worked for Senator Hart from February until July as an advance person. In July, I went to work for the Mondale/Ferraro Presidential campaign, and I worked as an advance person until November. Then I worked for a company named -- called Penn & Shoen for a couple of months doing consulting work. I worked for a company named National Strategies doing consulting work, and I then got a job in the Pennsylvania Department of the Auditor General, Bureau of Investigations. And I worked there from May of '85 until December of '87. And then January 4th, I started with the United States Army, Criminal Investigation Command, and that's where I am at present. Q And since you have joined the U.S. Army in January of 1988, have you worked on any political campaigns in any capacity? A Not to my knowledge. Q Did you have any participation in the Clinton/Gore campaign? A Not in the Clinton/Gore campaign -- well, not in the Clinton/Gore campaign. Are you -- not in the Clinton/Gore campaign. Q In the Gore campaign, did you have any participation in any of the campaign or previous political races that Mr. Gore participated in? A Gore ran for President in 1987. Q And what did you do when Mr. Gore ran for President in that campaign? A Can I consult with counsel? Q Certainly. Any time. [Discussion held off the record.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Do you need the question? A Restate the question. Q Certainly. What did you do in the Gore for President campaign? A I was an advance person. Q Did you participate in any other campaigns other than those that you have talked about? A Yes, I did an advance trip for Paul Simon. Q When was that? A I think that was '87 also. Q Did you have any other -- was that during one of his campaigns? A He ran for President in 1987 also. Q Other than that one advance trip for Senator Simon? A I might have done a couple but I know of one advance trip. Q You started saying when you were working for Senator Hart, you did advance work. Did you do advance work when you were working for Senator Glenn? A Yes. Q And when you were working for Senator Muskie's campaign, did you do advance work? A No, I was a field organizer for Muskie and McGovern. Q Since you have been working at the U.S. Army in 1988, have you had any details? A Two. Q Can you please describe those details? A I had a detail to the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Investigations for Indian Affairs. And I had a detail to the White House, the Office of Presidential Security -- or Personnel Security, sorry. Q The Special Senate Committee for Indian Affairs, when was that? A September of '88 until June of '89. Q And in your detail for the committee, what did you do? A I did investigations. Q Okay. And when did your detail at the White House begin? A I believe it was August 18th, 1993. Q In your position with the U.S. Army, CID, can you describe what background you had previous to going to the Army in investigations? A Yes, I was first credentialed as a CID agent going to school and receiving my credentials in 1983. And I have been in the CID Reserve Unit since 1980, and I'm still in the unit. Q And where were you working in '83 when you first became credentialed? A I was with the Texas Attorney General's office when I got -- when I got my credentials in October of '83. Q Okay. And did you do investigative work for the Texas Attorney General's office? A Yes, I worked in medicaid fraud. Q Okay. And you said that after that you went to some school. Was that also while you were at the Texas Attorney General's office? A To become credentialed I had to go to military schools, basic criminal investigation schools, and I did that. And that's how I -- I had to -- I had to do that to become credentialed. Q Okay. The consulting work that you did -- A Right. Q -- did that have to do with investigations in any way? A The consulting work with Penn & Shoen was not investigations but was what they called "survey work." And at that time there was a study going on, a Department of Defense study was going on at that time and the work I did for Penn & Shoen was part of that study for the Department of Defense. Q And the other company, I think it was National Strategies? A National Strategies. That was similar to advance work. Q Can you just describe how it was similar? A The National Strategies, as I recall, had a contract to stop offshore burning of dioxins and PCBs, and it was a public interest -- it was a public -- they were having these public information activities to stop the offshore burning and I acted as an advance person for that. Q Can you just briefly describe what your job with the U.S. Army, CID Unit, includes, what type of responsibilities you have and what type of activities you have pursued since 1988 in that unit? A I am in the procurement fraud office. It's actually called the Procurement Fraud Division. And I investigate fraud against the United States Government as a primary responsibility. Q Does that include all executive branch agencies or do you not go that far? What type of agencies are under investigation by your unit? A The Army Criminal Investigation Command is responsible for investigating crimes against the United States Army. Our focus is on crimes against the United States Army, particularly contracts. Our first order of business is contracts, but it can be anything that affects the troops. Q So, your investigation involves a lot of private contractors to the government? A Our investigation -- would you repeat the question? Q Well, maybe I should just ask a more open question. What type of entities are investigated in the Procurement Fraud Division that might have a fraud against the government? A There are government employees that are investigated. There are contractors that are investigated. Those are the two in the fraud arena. It would be the contracting office and the contractors. The user, which would be the Army, sometimes we investigate the user. Q Okay. Do you liaison with the FBI in your work with the CID procurement fraud unit? A I personally am not a liaison person. We have liaison persons. Q But within your activities and investigations, do you work with the FBI or have you ever had opportunities to have an investigation that works with the FBI? A Yes. Q Have you dealt with any agents in particular that you recall from the FBI in your job in the CID Procurement Fraud Division? A Yes. Q Do you recall those agents' names that you might have worked with? A Yes. Q Could you give those to us, please. Mr. Muse. I object. It strikes me that some of this might have confidential features. You can demand and overrule the objection on this basis, but some of his work, as you know, was covered by 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and he wants to, through counsel, state that he would object at making disclosures about investigations or who he consulted with because it may run afoul of his obligations under rule 6(e) as well as other law enforcement obligations he may have had. Ms. Olson. I do not want to go into any 6(e) grand jury work that he has done or reveal any work he's done concerning a grand jury investigation. I simply -- I'd like to limit my request to asking the names of agents that he's come in contact with in any manner that he knows well enough to recall their names that he would -- has worked with and that would know his work background or he would consider them to be co-workers on investigations. Mr. Muse. Do you want a couple of names? Ms. Olson. Well, I want names that he has worked with in a significant amount of time that he recalls and would be able to likely recall working with him because they had that type of contact. And I don't believe that would violate a 6(e) if we are just going through a list of FBI agents that he has come in contact on a professional basis. Mr. Muse. I could speculate how it would. Ms. Olson. If it does, I do not want to violate a 6(e), and you know the parameters of Mr. Marceca's work and just want names of FBI agents that he has professional relationships with. Mr. Muse. Why don't we come back to that and we will give you some names. Ms. Olson. Okay. BY MS. OLSON: Q Have you ever worked with any FBI agents from a unit that's known as the Spin unit? A I don't know that they were specifically with the Spin unit. Q And this would be within your work in the CID with the Army. I'm not going into the work that you did at the White House or any other detail. This would be special investigations background unit. I'll get you its official name. It's the Special Inquiry and General Background Investigations Unit is what it is now known as in 1968. I think back in 1993 it was only known as the Special Inquiry Unit. A That question goes to the previous question. I think we are going to have a hold on that one for now. Q Within your responsibilities with the U.S. Army, do you perform any background checks or review background checks? A Yes. Q Can you describe circumstances under which have you done that? A If they involve a witness in a case, I would conduct some sort of a background check on them. Q And are those background checks kept within the Army or are they in the FBI? A They're kept within the Army. Q What is the name of the unit within the Army that handled background checks and that type of information? A Each individual agent would handle that as part of the case file. Q And that would be when you would actually perform a background check; is that correct? A Part of investigation, correct. Q Do you ever have a situation where you have gone to the Army to obtain background checks that they have in the course of your work with the CID? A You're using a real very, very broad term here. And you need to define the term that you're using. Because what you're speaking of is just very broad. Q Okay. And I have limited knowledge, obviously, the way the Army works and it keeps this information. Can you describe generally what kind of information does the Army keep as far as backgrounds on individuals that work within the Army or if they keep background information on contractors. Mr. Muse. I think actually his objection is a good one for this reason. I think the phrase he was talking about is "background checks." And you may be equating background checks as he is involved in a witness investigation with a background check that may go to a personnel matter at the White House. I suggest that they're probably not synonymous and there is a lot of mischief created when you try to draw the equation. I think it is just in the fact that they are not synonymous that you are going to have trouble here. But I don't mind him answering, except he is going to get into areas that may otherwise be confidential about how he conducts investigations. I can't imagine that is germane to your inquiry. BY MS. OLSON: Q I just want a general outline of if there is a similar unit within the U.S. Army as I've described. We all know that the FBI does have a unit which handles the files and performs background checks and keeps information on individuals and keeps files where they would have information on individuals who had committed crimes or had any wrongdoing in their past. Is there similarly a unit within Army that has that sort of function for those that are in the Army? Mr. Muse. I am going to object because I can see there would be a problem. The FBI gathers a lot of information. I don't know whether what you say is true; the FBI has a unit that comprehensively keeps information which you categorize as background information. FBI we know does gather information. To say that there is a unit that is fixed in terms of that mission with regard to the way you just described it I think is probably inaccurate. So, for him to draw from your premise that there is an equivalent is in itself going to create a problem. If the issue is does the Army gather information about someone's background generally, I think that is a given. For him to speak more broadly about that is I think not too productive. BY MS. OLSON: Q I have a more direct question. Are you aware of the United States Army Central Security Clearance Facility at Fort Meade? A Yes. Q Can you tell me generally what they do? A They act upon background investigations and they issue clearances. Q What do you mean by "they act on background investigations"? A They receive background investigations. They evaluate those background investigations. And then they issue clearances, security clearances. Q Who are these clearances for, what category of individuals? A People who work for the Department of Defense. I'm answering your question in a broad sense. People who work for the Department of Defense who need security clearances. Q Okay. Do you have a security clearance within the Army? A Yes, I do. Q And what is that clearance? A It is top secret. Q So is there a background investigation on you at the Central Security Clearance Facility? A I don't think that it's there. Q Where is your background? A I would think that my background would be with where they are stored, and I do not believe they are stored there. I don't know where they're stored actually is the answer to that question. Q Are they performed by this unit, those -- this Central Security Clearance Facility? A I'm really not educated in all of the duties of central clearance facilities, and I can't give statements about them. Q I guess I was just asking if you had a clearance that came from this Central Security Clearance Facility or those that work at this facility or if there is another unit that does the actual background investigations? A I would presume that I did, that I had a clearance from the central clearance facilities. But I cannot tell you that I have a clearance from them. I can only presume that. Q Do you know who your clearance is from? A No, I don't. I know -- no, I don't. Q Have you ever had an opportunity in the course of your work to retrieve or request files from the Central Security Clearance Facility? A I might have. I might have done that, yes. Q Have you ever done that at the request of anyone in the White House? A Not that I can recall. Q Have you ever delivered any such files to anyone at the White House? A Not that I can recall. Q Can you tell us do you know a person named Craig Livingston? A Yes, I do. Q Can you please just tell us how you met him? A I first met Livingstone in 1984 when I was working for the Hart campaign. Q And you were doing advance work? A Yes. Q And can you tell us the circumstances under which you met Mr. Livingstone? A He was working on an event that I was assigned to. Q And what was that? A I don't recall. Q Can you tell us what his function was in the campaign, if he was working in the campaign? A He was an advance person, the same as I was. Q Using the Hart campaign as an example, can you just describe if it's full-time if you are a member of the campaign staff or a volunteer, what your status is when you are an advance person? A I was paid a consulting fee. I was paid a consulting fee for doing advance work. Q So you're considered an independent individual rather than a part of the campaign staff? A That's right. Q Do you know if Mr. Livingstone had a similar arrangement? A I believe so. Q Is that true of all the advance work you have done? Was it set up in that manner? Rather than being a part of the campaign staff, it was an independent consulting arrangement? A I believe that it was all like that. I don't think that there was any time that I was on the staff, so to speak, of the individual. Q Did you work with Mr. Livingstone on numerous trips? A Yes. Q Can you just describe what kind of relationship you had with Mr. Livingstone during the period of the Hart campaign? A We got to be friends and we found that we worked good together, and he would handle the public relations end of the advance and I would handle the logistics end. Q Did you work until the end of the campaign? A The Hart campaign? Q Yes, sir. A Yes. Q And was Mr. Livingstone there most of the time until the end also? A Yes. Q Okay. Did you stay in contact with Mr. Livingstone after the campaign ended? A Yes. Q Okay. Can you just describe your contact with Mr. Livingstone after the campaign ended? A I called him on occasion. Q Okay. And other than just social contacts, did you have business contacts during the period after the Hart campaign? A I don't understand the question. Q Other than calling someone on a social basis to see how they are, did you have any professional contacts or business contacts with Mr. Livingstone after the campaign? A Not after the Hart campaign. Q Okay. Did there come a time when you came back into contact with Mr. Livingstone on a professional basis? A About 1 week later. Q Okay. Can you describe that? A We worked together on the Mondale campaign. Q Was there -- can you describe how you both came to work together on the Mondale campaign a week later? A The management of the campaign knew Mr. Livingstone and myself and they kept us together as a team. Not every trip was together, but most of the trips were together. Q And did you evolve into sort of a team toward the end of the Hart campaign working advance? A We worked as a team during the Hart campaign and during the Mondale campaign. Q And did you continue with the Mondale campaign until the end? A Correct. Q And did Mr. Livingstone similarly continue? A Right. Q And when that campaign ended, did you remain in contact with Mr. Livingstone? A Yes. Q What kind of contact, how often? A We remained friends. I contacted him, I don't know how often, but I stayed in contact with him, and a number of other people that I have known through the years. Q Did there come a time where you had an opportunity after the Mondale campaign to work with Mr. Livingstone again? A Yes. Q Can you please describe that? A Later on, in 19 -- I believe it was '86, I went to Colorado and worked on the Gary Hart announcement for President. And there was some other political things but I don't recall exactly what they were. Q And how did you have a contact with Mr. Livingstone when you were in Colorado on the Hart for President? A I went out there -- we met out there and we did the announcement for Senator Hart. Q Did he involve you in that matter or did you independently -- were you independently requested to join that matter without his aid? A I believe whoever was managing the Hart campaign asked us to do it. Q Okay. And was that someone who had known you from the previous campaign? A Yes. Q And in what capacity did you work together out in Colorado? A Advance. Q Okay. And was it similar to the work you had done with the earlier Hart and Mondale campaigns? A Yes. Q And did you stay with the Hart for President campaign until the end? Or until it stopped? A I was working at the State Bureau of Investigation and I would take vacations and do a trip with Mr. -- generally it was with Mr. Livingstone. RPTS BRYAN DCMN HERZFELD [5:00 p.m.] BY MS. OLSON: Q The State Bureau of Investigations, let's see, that wasn't Texas, because that was 1983. Which State was that? A Pennsylvania. Q Pennsylvania, I'm sorry. And is that -- that is State government -- A Correct. Q -- job? Okay. Were you full time with the State Bureau of Investigations? A Yes. Q And you said you would take vacation time when you would go do the advance work? A Right. Q What period of time -- how long did you work with the Hart for President group? A I would go out for one or two or three days and then come back. Q And were those always with Mr. Livingstone also? A I went out with the Hart campaign, yes. Q Okay. When that ceased, did you continue in contact with Mr. Livingstone? A Yes. Q And can you describe that contact? A It was still as a friend. Q And the same question. Did there then come a time where you had professional contacts again with Mr. Livingstone? A Yes. Q Can you please describe that? A Oh, in 1987 he asked me to work with him on the Gore announcement. Q Were you still living in Pennsylvania at that time? A Yes. Q Can you describe what you did with Mr. Livingstone working on the Gore announcement? A Advance. Q And were you working with Mr. Livingstone basically in the same capacity, the same manner, as you had on the previous campaign? A Yes. Q Okay. And how long did you work with Mr. Livingstone on this, the Gore announcement? A I did a couple of trips. Q Were you still working with the State Bureau of Investigations at that time? A Yes. Mr. Stroman. I'm Ron Stroman with the Minority staff of the Government Reform Committee. Ms. Olson. And do you know everyone at the table? Mr. Stroman. I do not. Ms. Olson. Okay. You do know Mr. Marceca. Mr. Muse. I am Bob Muse. I am counsel. Ms. Marceca. I am Andrea Marceca. BY MS. OLSON: Q We had just gone through the Gore announcement and I guess a few trips. After you finished working on that, did you have contact with Mr. Livingstone after that ceased? A Yes. Q Okay. What type of contact was that? A We remained friends in 1988. I mean, you know, in 1988 we stayed in contact, 1988 to the present. Q How long did you participate in the Gore campaign? A There was just a couple of trips a couple days; a couple of trips and a day or so each. Q Did it span over a month or a year? A As I recall, Gore dropped out of the race, so he was in it for a while, and then he dropped out. Q And after this period, did there come a time where you had an opportunity to have professional contact with Mr. Livingstone again? A I don't understand the word "professional." Is that -- what are you saying? Q After Mr. Gore dropped out and you were no longer doing any advance work, I assume you went back and you were still working at the State bureau of Investigations in Pennsylvania? A Right. Q Other than purely social calls to Mr. Livingstone, did there come a time where you spoke with Mr. Livingstone on a professional basis concerning your job or your work, either on campaigns or your work as you were presently doing with the State Bureau of Investigations? A I was a friend of Mr. Livingstone's. If I contacted him, it was on a friendship basis. Q Okay. And other than on a friendship basis, since that time have you ever had any conversations or any contact with Mr. Livingstone on other than just a purely social basis? A I did at the White House. Q Can you describe how those contacts were first initiated? A Well, you have just made a big skip here. You just -- Q Okay. What did you do after you -- you stopped working on the Gore for President, you stayed at the State Bureau of Investigations? A Right. Q When did you leave the State Bureau of Investigations? A On December 30th, I think, of 1987. Q Okay. A I started with Army CID on January 4th, 1988. Q Did you have any contact with Mr. Livingstone when you started with the Army in January of 1988? A I might have told him some time thereafter that I was going to work for the Army, but I don't -- you know. Q And other than purely social or just discussing nonbusiness, did you ever conduct any business or work on any campaigns from the time you started in 1988 with the Army? A No. The only involvement that I had with -- or the next involvement that I had with Mr. Livingstone was on election night of 1992. Q Can you please describe that? A I am speaking of other than friend -- you know, they were all friendly calls, and on November -- the election night, he called me from Little Rock and told me that Bill Clinton had won, and he had been working on the campaign. I knew he had been working on the campaign. Q I take it you did not participate in the campaign at all? A No, I didn't. Q Did you provide any advice or any other help to Mr. Livingstone while he was working on the campaign? A Mr. Livingstone was on the road, and I actually saw very little of him that year, of 1992. Q What was your understanding of what he was doing for the Clinton-Gore campaign? A Advance work. Q Okay. Did he contact you regularly during that year? A As I said, I saw or even heard from him very little during that campaign year. Q Can you just generally describe your contacts with Mr. Livingstone in 1992? A I frankly cannot recall any specific events during that year, except for that night in November. Q And you said he had called you from Little Rock. Can you just tell us what the substance of that conversation was? A He told me that he was going to try to be in charge of security at the Presidential Inaugural Committee. Q Did he tell you who he was working with? A No, he didn't. Q Did he ever mention Harry Thomason's name to you during your conversations with him, either during the 1992 campaign or during the Inaugural? A I don't ever recall him mentioning that name. I don't recall it at all. Q Did he ever tell you whether he was, in fact, in charge of security for the Presidential Inaugural Committee? A About a week later he called me and asked me to stop by the Navy Yard. Q And what was the purpose of that? A I stopped by the Navy Yard, and he asked me if I had any vacation time, if I could help in the Presidential Inaugural. Q And as a result of that conversation, what happened? A The first thing I did was check with our legal staff to find out if it was legal, and I got a copy of the law and it said it was legal for me to do it on my own time, and I went down and acted as a security coordinator for him at the Presidential Inaugural Committee. Q Can you just briefly describe what a security coordinator is? A I helped organize a system for passes into the building. I held -- we started planning -- from the very beginning we started planning the Inaugural event from the security position as far as access. That is all. It was access to events, and that is what that office mainly concerned itself with. Q And did you work directly for Mr. Livingstone? A I volunteered in that office, and Mr. Livingstone was the -- I believe he was called the supervisor or director. I don't recall what his title was. Q As a volunteer, was there anyone else who directed your activities or gave you tasks to do as a volunteer other than Mr. Livingstone? A No. He was the supervisor. Q Okay. Other than Mr. Livingstone, did you work closely with any other individuals? A Not to my knowledge. That is about the only -- it was a separate office. That is where I worked. Q And where was that office located? A In the Naval Yard on the first floor. Q When did you start helping out and volunteering as a security coordinator for the Inaugural? A As I recall, it was mid-November, or I think I was off for about 40 days, but I am not sure. I would have to check my leave slips for that. Q But you think it was approximately 40 days? A I really don't recall. I remember I had an awful lot of use or lose, and I used my use or lose for that. Q And how long did you volunteer for the Inaugural? A Until the day of the swearing in. Q Okay. During your work as a security coordinator, did you meet a lot of the individuals who later wound up working at the White House on a full-time basis? A I really didn't meet very many people there. The people that I -- that I came in contact with were mostly city officials, firemen, policemen, Park Service, that sort of thing. Q Did you meet William Kennedy during that period that you were volunteering? A No, I did not. Q Did you know Bill Kennedy prior to that period? A No. Q Did you have an opportunity to meet the First Lady during that period? A I might have, but I'm not sure that I did. Q And did you know the First Lady prior to that period? A No. Q Do you know if you met the President during that period? A I don't believe I did. Mr. Muse. It is 10 past. Why don't we take about a 5-minute break. You can tell me how long you are going to be. Ms. Olson. I am moving through as quickly as I can. I will look at it, but I am certainly not toward an area where I can say I know how much we have until the end. (Recess). Ms. Olson. We should probably go on the record. I have had discussion with Mr. Muse, who has informed me that my Republican colleagues, as he had stated, were interested in talking to Mr. Marceca on the Senate side, and I assume that is today they are interested in talking to your client. Mr. Muse. That is correct. Ms. Olson. This deposition has been set. We are very interested in receiving information, and I will not cut it short because somebody else wishes to see Mr. Marceca. I will attempt to go as quickly as I can through. This deposition appears to be moving very quickly. I am receiving answers to my questions. I see no reason it should go inordinately long, but I do not believe it will be done before -- as I said, I am on one page of seven pages. Even if we move extremely quickly, I have a minimum of two more hours of questions. If you at any time need to make a phone call to anyone over there and tell them that, we will stop and you can make a telephone call. I will get on the phone and explain to them that I have am not done and that I have requested that you not leave until I finish with the deposition. Mr. Muse. Well, we will see where we are. And you will do it with dispatch and as much speed as you can. Ms. Olson. I certainly will. BY MS. OLSON: Q Before we took a break, we were talking about the work that you did as a volunteer, security coordinator at the Inaugural until the day of swearing in. Were you actually at the Inaugural events working as a volunteer the day before the swearing in? A No. Q Okay. Did your security coordination end at that point? A I was in the Navy building coordinating movements from the Navy building from the command post. Q Okay. A As -- in a very narrow area. Q Okay. And on the day of the swearing in, were you assisting Mr. Livingstone in your work as a volunteer security coordinator? A I was in the command post on the day of the swearing in. Q Okay. And after the swearing in, did you cease to be a volunteer then for the Inaugural? A Yes. Q And I take it then you went back to work with the CID unit? A The next day, yes. Q Did you keep in contact with Mr. Livingstone after that? A Yes, I did. Q Can you describe your contact with him? A A couple of weeks later I contacted Mr. Livingstone and asked him if he knew of a way I could get a detail to the National Security Council at the White House. I believe Mr. Livingstone was working in the White House at that time. Q Did there come a time where Mr. Livingstone discussed his new position that he was going to have at the White House with you? A I -- he -- Mr. Livingstone stated that he would check on the National Security Council possibility. He did so, got back to me a couple of weeks later, and said that he did not think it was possible, but he suggested that there might be a possibility of my working in his office. Q And was that still in January of 1993 that you had this contact? A No. This is like late February. Q Prior to Mr. Livingstone starting at the White House, did there come a time where he told you he was going to receive a permanent employment with the new Clinton administration? A Not that I knew of. Up until the Inauguration, he did not know if he had a job with the new administration or not. Q When did you first find out his position with the new administration? A Somebody that -- somebody told me that, or I might have read it in the paper. I really don't know how I found out about it. Q Did Mr. Livingstone ever discuss his new position with you or obtaining his new position? A I don't understand what you mean. Q Did he ever tell you how he got his job with the Clinton administration at the White House? A Not specifically, no. Q Did he give you any general information about how he obtained the job as head of the Office of Personnel Security? A No. He didn't have that conversation, that I recall, of that manner. Q Did he ever describe what he was doing as head of the Office of Personnel Security in the White House to you? A Not until I got detailed over there did we have any conversation of any depth about his job. We had a prior conversation about what I might be doing. Q But I just wanted to ask you about his job right now. You did not, until you really came over there, talk about his job? A Correct. Q Did he discuss his advance work that he was doing after he started in the Clinton administration with you? A I didn't know that he was doing advance work. Q Okay. In January when you had asked Mr. Livingstone for a possible NSC detail, do you know who he went to? A No, I don't. Q Did he ever discuss any of the individuals that he was reporting to or worked for in his position at the White House? A No. Q After he mentioned to you in late February that there might be a possibility of another detail, can you please describe that conversation? A He explained to me that there was a possibility that there would be a position open in his office processing paperwork, it would be a clerical-type position. I explained to Mr. Livingstone that I, number one, always wanted to work in the White House; number two, believed it to be a gold plating of my resume if given the opportunity, and I would like to do it. Q At this time, are you on a GS-level salary? A Yes. Q And what was your GS level in late February? A I was a 12. I had been promoted on paper about a year before that to a 13, but it hadn't come through. Q Okay. And do you know what the GS level of the position was that Mr. Livingstone was discussing with you? A He never discussed that it had a GS level. Q So what happened with that possibility that he mentioned to you? A He in March contacted me and told me that he had gotten permission to get someone for the position and for me to send him a resume, which I did. I faxed it to him. That was followed up by a letter from Kennedy. Q Do you believe you faxed your resume to him in March also? A Right. Q Did Mr. Livingstone discuss any facts about his office or the way in which it ran at this point in March when you were discussing this position? A He explained to me that the position would be a clerical-type position going over people's background reports and making files and collating information, and it was a very -- in his estimation, it was a job that was not investigation, did not involve investigations. Q Was Mr. Livingstone aware of your security clearance at this time? A Yes, he was. Q And how was he -- if you know, do you know how he knew of that? A I think I faxed a copy of my clearance to him. Q Okay. Did you have any discussion with Mr. Livingstone about whether your security clearance would help you with this position? A Mr. Livingstone, as I recall, thought that it would be a selling point because everyone in his office needed a clearance of some sort, and that that would have already been, you know, one of the benefits to the office to have that. Q You said that there was a letter. Did Mr. Livingstone discuss who at the White House he was talking with or had received permission to hire? A I believe he had mentioned at some time, as I recall, that he was going to go to Mr. Kennedy. Q Did Mr. Livingstone ever mention to you discussing this with the First Lady? A No. Ms. Olson. I have a document I am going to mark as Deposition Exhibit Number 1. It is a letter dated April 5th, 1993, and it is Bates-stamped number CGE 43823. BY MS. OLSON: Q I will give you a copy of this. If you would just review this letter and tell me if you have ever seen it. Mr. Muse. Actually, there are two letters, there are three letters all appended together. Ms. Olson. Can I take that? I apologize. It got stapled together in copying. The Witness. That is a demerit. Ms. Olson. It should be. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q That is a two-page document that is now marked as Deposition Exhibit Number 1. Mr. Muse. The question is have you seen it before? The Witness. Yes. BY MS. OLSON: Q Can you please tell me -- describe the circumstances that you have seen the document? A At some point this letter reached my boss's desk and -- Q And did he inform you that he had received it? A Yes. Q This letter is dated April 5th, 1993. Did you have any conversations with Mr. Kennedy, who is the author of this letter, prior to that date? A I don't recall. Q Okay. Did Mr. Livingstone ever tell you that he had discussed your qualifications with Mr. Kennedy? A I believe he did. Mr. Muse. Let me amend his answer so that there is no misunderstanding. There is a yellow marking, that is not marking that he received. He saw the letter. Ms. Olson. It is a highlight. Absent the highlighter. Mr. Muse. That is the point I want to make. BY MS. OLSON: Q The letter also has a CC. Is one of your bosses Commander Peter Berry, or David C. Allen? A Berry is the General, was the General, and Mr. Allen was the director. Q And they were director during the 1993 time frame that this letter is written? A Right. Q Did you report directly to one of these individuals? A No. I reported to an SAC, special agent in charge. Q And did that special agent in charge report to either Mr. Allen or Commander Berry? A Yes. Q Was it Mr. Allen? A Yes. Q And then did Mr. Allen report up to Mr. Berry? A Yes. Q Okay. This letter is to the Honorable Les Aspin, Secretary of Defense. Did you provide any advice or request that the letter go to the Secretary of Defense? A I provided Mr. Livingstone with a copy of a request that was used to bring me on detail in 1988 to the Senate. Q Was that detail similarly done? A The format was about the same. Q Okay. Were you on a nonreimbursable basis when you were detailed to the Senate; do you know? A As I recall, the Senate had to pay my salary, and the White House, it was -- I'm not exactly sure what the term is in there. One is nonreimbursable, one is reimbursable. Q Are details normally for six months? Is that the regular -- or is there any regular timetable? Is it just case by case, if you know? A I know of details that are five and six years long, so a detail can be for any length of time, as I understand it. Q I didn't know if the Army -- if you were aware of any requirements in the Army that they be in a six-month increment? A I don't know offhand what the procedure is for details, what the law is. Ms. Olson. Okay. The second document that I am going to mark as Deposition Exhibit Number 2, it is CGE 043821, and it is an April 6, 1993 letter to Mr. Kennedy from David C. Allen, and it says "Director," and I believe he is Director of Procurement Fraud. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.] Mr. Muse. And the question is? BY MS. OLSON: Q Have you ever seen that document? A Yes. Q Can you just describe the circumstances under which you saw that document? A I believe I saw a copy of that document at some point, and it might have been given to me by Mr. Allen, but I am not sure. But I did see the document. Q In the first paragraph it talks about a telephone conversation that occurred between, I believe, Mr. Allen and Mr. Kennedy. Were you present during that conversation? A No, I was not. Q Were you informed of the contents of that conversation? A I might have been through my boss, but I don't believe I was informed directly by Mr. Allen. Ms. Olson. There is only one other letter which I am going to mark as Deposition Exhibit Number 3, and it is Bates-stamped number CGE 43816. It is an April 13, 1993 letter, again to the Honorable Les Aspin from William Kennedy, and it has the same CC as Deposition Exhibit Number 1. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q My question is have you ever seen that document? A Yes, I have seen that. Q Do you know why a second letter went to the Secretary of Defense, being that Deposition Exhibit Number 1 was an April 5th letter, and then that is a letter that was just the following week? A I don't know why. Q Did anybody tell you what had happened to cause a second letter to be written to the same individual concerning your detail? A I don't know. Ms. Olson. Okay. The following is two letters, which are both dated June 22nd. I am going to make them Deposition Exhibit Numbers 4 and 5. [Marceca Deposition Exhibits Nos. 4 and 5 were marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q The first is a June 22nd letter. The first page is Bates-stamped CGE 43814. It is a letter from William Kennedy, Associate Counsel to the President, to Colonel Michael Sherfield, and I ask you if you have ever seen the Deposition Exhibit Number 4 before? A I believe I have seen it. I think I have seen that letter. Q Do you recall when you saw that letter or under what circumstances? A No, I don't. Q Do you know if you were already at the White House when you saw it or during this time period before you came to the White House? A Are you cognizant of the date of the letter? Q The June 22nd, 1993? A Correct. Q Do you know -- A I went to the White House in August. Q Yes, sir. A And your question was? Q Do you know if you saw the letter at the time when it was drafted in the June time period or at some point after when you went -- started at the White House? A I believe it was after I started at the White House. Ms. Olson. I am going to put in the record a second document which is the same date. It is Bates-stamped number CGE 43819, and it is what I believe to be exactly the same copy of Deposition Exhibit 4, and I have titled this one 4-A, since I believe it to be the exact same copy, and it is being put in the record just for completeness. I don't really have any questions about the letter, absent any comments that you wish to make about the letter. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 4-A was marked for identification.] Mr. Muse. No, since there is no question. BY MS. OLSON: Q The next document is Deposition Exhibit Number 5, and it is Bates-stamped number 43812, and it is from the Office of the Secretary of Defense in Washington, D.C. It has a date stamp on it -- A Could we stop for a minute? I do not know that these are the same letters. They may have the same format and the same date, but I don't know that they are the same letters. So I don't know what kind of an answer you got for that. Mr. Muse. She didn't get any answer. There is no question. Ms. Olson. Then I will wait for your assistant Mr. Muse to give me back Deposition Exhibit Number 4. Mr. Muse. Are you using the exhibit? Ms. Olson. I would like to look at Deposition Exhibit Number 4 when your assistant is finished with it. [Document tendered.] Ms. Olson. Thank you. BY MS. OLSON: Q I am going to show you this document that I described as Deposition Exhibit Number 5. It is a memorandum for Associate Counsel to the President, the White House, and it is signed by Robert M. Alexander, Lieutenant General of the Air Force, and the subject is the detail of Special Agent Anthony B. Marceca. Have you ever seen Deposition Exhibit Number 5 before? A Yes. Q Do you know if you saw that document on the date that it appears to have been created and/or transmitted, or if you saw it at some time after you started at the White House? A Probably thereafter. I believe we are inadvertently leading you astray here. There is no indication to me that these letters were sent. I don't know where you got these letters, but there is no indication to me that these letters were received. Q Do you have -- A I don't want to mislead you. Q Thank you. Do you have any information or belief that they were not sent? A They are rather close together on the same subject, and I have a feeling that you might have a duplicate there. Q Have you had any conversations with anyone or received any information that, in fact, one of -- any of these deposition exhibits were not sent? Mr. Muse. I think what he was saying is if you got to 4 and 4-A, which are the same ones, and 4-A has no question intended to it, that that probably looks like a duplicate. I am not sure that it takes us anywhere. Ms. Olson. I can give you a reason why I put it in, and it will probably explain. This is a document production that we received on Saturday night at 7:00 p.m., unannounced and put under our door, and I am going to put all of these documents in the record for your deposition just because they were sent over together in our request for documents concerning your detail. So it probably is a duplicate. We received no explanation of it, and so I do not have any information. I agree with you from looking at it it appears to be a duplicate, but they are just in the record because they were all sent to me, and the duplicate was included for some reason. Mr. Muse. Who sent them to you? Ms. Olson. It was the White House. Mr. Muse. Thank you. Ms. Olson. I have -- similarly, I have a document which I am going to mark as Deposition Exhibit Number 5-A. I have no questions for 5-A. I believe that it is, in fact, very similar to Deposition Exhibit 5, except for it has an additional date stamp of August 12th, 1993. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 5-A was marked for identification.] [Document tendered.] Ms. Olson. Exhibit Number 6 is a Department of Army letterhead, CGE 43813, and it is a memorandum to Major General Peter Berry from a Charles Dominy, Lieutenant General, and the subject is White House detail, which requests that the Major General coordinate with the White House staff to ensure your immediate detail. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 6 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q I would ask if you have seen that document before? A I don't know that I have ever seen this document. I might have, but I don't recall that specific document. Q Okay. Was there any conversations that you had during that time period with your supervisors or within the Army concerning the timing of your detail or the -- a sense of urgency for your detail? A No. No. Q In your experience with the previous detail, was there anything unique or different about this detail that stands out in your mind, or that you noticed during the process of receiving your detail? A No. It went off the same as the Senate one did. Ms. Olson. Okay. The next document I am going to mark as Deposition Exhibit 7. It is Bates-stamped number CGE 43811, and it appears to be a fax header sheet, and it is from TFC Ryan to Mr. Allen, and it says, a copy has been faxed to Mr. Berry, and I believe attached to it is a second page. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 7 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q I would ask you if you have seen those, and if, in fact, they go, the two pages that is Deposition Exhibit Number 7, go together or if you have any knowledge of whether they go together? A I have no knowledge. Q Have you ever seen the second page before? A I know what the document is. Have I seen this document? I don't know. I might have. Q Can you describe what that document is? A It is called a 50 action. Q And what is that used for? A That is like an order that transfers me to the White House detail. Q And is a 50 action always filled out when there is a detail? A There is. Q Okay. The final -- A I doubt that these two are together. Q Okay. Can you just state, if you have a basis, why you doubt that they would be together? A Well, the fax page is five copies. This is one sheet, and I doubt that the 50 action would come along on the same -- on or about the same date. 50 actions generally come along quite a while later. Q Have you ever seen fax header sheets similar to what has been put into evidence as Deposition Exhibit Number 7? A Have I seen them used? Q Yes, sir. A Yes. Q From the content of that sheet, and based upon your experience, do you know what copy they are stating with five pages that was faxed to Major General Berry? A I haven't a clue. Q The part that says "office symbol" with the "12 August," is that where a date is normally put in, a current date? A I don't know. Q The next box, which has a fax with a colon, it says "DSN" and then has a telephone number. Do you know what "DSN" stands for? A That is code for telephone. That is Army telephone. I think it is defense something number. Defense system number is what it means. Q Do you recognize -- does it give a specific location because of that? A DSN means that it is a defense system number. It is a line. It is like a watts line. Q Can you tell me who Mr. Ryan is? A I don't have a clue. No idea. Q Do you know if he works for the Chief of Staff of the Army? A No idea. Q Is the Chief of Staff the individual responsible for the detailees in any way that you are aware of? A I would think he was part of the chain of command. Ms. Olson. Okay. The final document I have is another facsimile transmittal header sheet. I have marked it as Deposition Exhibit Number 8. It is Bates-stamped number CGE 43817, and it has as its releaser Betty Bray, and at the bottom it has "Remarks," and says, "As requested, official authorization SF-50 to follow. Good luck. BB." It is to attention, Tony Marceca. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 8 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Have you ever seen that document before? A Yes. Q Can you please describe the circumstances under which you have seen that document? A I believe Betty Bray faxed this to my office. Q And that would be your office at the CID? A Fort Belvoir. I mean, correction, it was at Fort Meade at the time. Q Did you fax a copy to the White House? A I don't know. That fax, I don't know. Q At the very top there are some fax notations. Do you recognize those? A Yes. That was our fax machine at Fort Meade. Well, that is her fax to us at Fort Meade. Q Okay. And is she at Fort Meade also? A No. She is at -- she was at headquarters. Q Which is where? A At the time it was at Falls Church. Right here is the address. Q And is she responsible for the final authorization for detailees? A She is just a clerk in the Personnel Office. Q So you started, I believe, on August 14th? A August 18th. Q August 18th. Ms. Olson. We have to wait until she leaves the room. She has to be cleared. Mr. Goldberg. I think if you read the committee rules, she's authorized. Mr. Stroman. Is this a good time for me to question? Ms. Olson. Why don't you go ahead. I am up to the start, if you have questions. EXAMINATION BY MR. STROMAN: Q Mr. Marceca, I understand that in around mid-August you were detailed to the White House Office of Personnel Security; is that correct? A Yes. Q And what did you understand your assignment to be in that detail position? A That I would work in the Office of Personnel Security doing updates of White House staff and visitors, people that had access. Q And your supervisor at that point was? A Craig Livingstone. Q And I understand that one of your assignments in the office was to pick up and continue the project of recreating personal security files -- A That's correct. Q -- in the office. And that assignment was given to you by Mr. Livingstone? A Yes, sir. Q Did he give you any instructions with regard to that assignment as to how that would be accomplished? A Yes. He told me that I would be briefed on what my duties were by the lady that was doing the project, Nancy Gemmell, and she did that. Q And who was that? A Nancy Gemmell. Q Did there come a time when you were briefed by Ms. Gemmell? A Yes. Q Can you explain to us when that happened and what the circumstances were regarding the briefing? A I believe it was about August 9th. I took an afternoon off from CID and went to the White House, and Nancy Gemmell walked me through the process that I would be performing, the duties I would be performing. Q Was this a meeting in which you and Nancy Gemmell were alone, or were there other people in the meeting? A There were other people in the office, but she went into great detail about my duties. Q Who else was in the office at the time? A Who was in at the time? Q Do you remember? A I believe Lisa Wetzl was there, and I know that Mr. Livingstone was there when we started. Q Is that it as far as you can recall? A Yes, sir. Q And can you explain to us what Ms. Gemmell described to you as how you would perform this responsibility? A She took me to the safe and showed me the procedure that I would follow in the update project and my duties, my other duties that I would be expected to perform. Q And how -- did she -- how did she describe your duties in the update process? What were you to do? A I was to take a list and open files on individuals who had access to the White House. Q And when you say "take a list," what list? A There was a list provided to me. There was a list in the safe that would be there when I started that she was currently working on. Q Did she give you -- were there any written procedures that she gave you that morning? A There were written procedures when I started my -- started at the White House. She left me some notes. And the day that she briefed me, I took notes. Q She -- all right. Let me go back. At the August 9th meeting in which she is describing those responsibilities, were there written procedures that she gave to you with regard to how that -- your responsibilities would be executed? A Yes. She left me a sheet. Q And do you know where that sheet came from, or is this something that she put together? A I believe it was a sheet that she had left there for me. Q Continue. You mentioned that there was a -- there were lists in the safe? A Yes. Q Is that correct? A Right. Q The lists in the safe, who generated the list in the safe? A I was under the understanding in my conversations with Nancy that that list came from the Secret Service. Q All right. Did she tell you that the list came from the Secret Service? A I don't specifically recall that. Q And what were you to do with those lists? A I was to open up a file on each individual on that list. If there was not a file already on file, I was to open a file folder. I was then to request a previous background from the FBI, and I did that. Q Was there anything else she said to you in the meeting, any other -- A Well, she went in detail to the other duties that I had in the office. Q And just give us roughly what those other duties were. A Well, I was to review SF-86s and put all of that stuff together and get those things sent off to the FBI when they were processed. Essentially, I was to review and process SF-86s for permanent staff positions, volunteers and everybody else that had access to the White House. Q After the -- was that pretty much the extent of it, of your conversations at the August 9th meeting? A Yes. Q After the August 9th meeting, did you have any other occasion to meet with Ms. Gemmell? A No. She was gone when I started. Q Did you have any other occasion to talk with her on the phone? A I only spoke with her once, and it was around Christmas of 1993. Q And can you give us roughly the thrust of that conversation? A It was only hello, you know, merry Christmas, happy holidays. Q All right. After that -- do you remember approximately what date you started working there? A I believe it was August 18th. Q August 18th. On August 18th you began your normal duties at the White House. Can you -- you started at some point to work on something called the update project? A That is right. Q All right. Can you explain that project for us? A As I just stated, I would go to the safe on the update project itself, I would get out the list, and I would check off the name I was working on. I would look in that file that was with the update list to see if there was a name in that file. That file that the update list sat in was where files were stored that were what I recall dead files, files of people who no longer worked at the White House. They went in that file. They went in that bin. If there was -- if the name was not -- if the person's name was not on file in that bin, that meant that I had to open a file. But before I opened a file, I checked into file drawers to find out if a file had already been opened. And if there was no file in the file drawer, I got a new file folder, and I opened a new file, I typed up a label, put the person's name on it, got a Bernard Nussbaum request, typed in the person's name, made a copy of the request, stamped it and put the copy in the file. Q The files that were in the safe, is that -- A Yes. Q Is that correct? You worked off of the files that were in the safe when you first came there? A I worked off the file -- I worked off the list. Q Off the list? A Correct. Q And again, I know I am -- I just want to be absolutely clear about this. A Sure. Q The list that you are working off of came, you believe, from where? A From the Secret Service. Q And why do you believe the list came from the Secret Service? How do you know it came from the Secret Service? A I was under the understanding from a conversation when Nancy briefed me that those were where the office got their list. Q Did you have a discussion with the Secret Service about the list? A No, I didn't. Q Did you ever call the Secret Service about that list or any other list? A Not that I recall. I might have called them, but I don't recall ever talking to them about the list. Q All right. Did -- were there dates on the list? Was the list dated at all? A Not to my recollection. Q How did you know the address -- how did you know the accuracy of the list? How did you know whether or not the list was accurate? Mr. Muse. Accurate as to what? Mr. Stroman. As to the current status of the people on the list. The Witness. I had no way of knowing whether they were, whatever their status was. BY MR. STROMAN: Q So did Ms. Gemmell ever instruct you that you had to determine accuracy of the status of the names on that list? A My project was to establish -- was establish a file that would perform a check to find out if these folks were still on staff or not on staff. It was the update project. The list that I was provided was a list to my understanding that everybody on that list had access. Q Right. It was your understanding, based on discussions with Ms. Gemmell? A Right. Q All right. Do you recall whether or not the list included the letters A or I? A I do not recall that. Ms. Olson. I'm sorry, is that -- Mr. Stroman. A as in apple and I as in independence. Ms. Olson. Thank you. BY MR. STROMAN: Q Have you ever heard of a designation on any of these lists for which "A" and "I" would mean anything? A To my knowledge, "A" meant access, "I" meant intern. RPTS STRICKLAND DCMN GALLACHER [6:00 p.m.] Q Let me -- after the lists -- the lists were then -- I'm sorry to repeat this, but I want to be absolutely clear about this. A Please. Q Under certain circumstances you had to create new files; is that correct? A Yes, sir. Q All right. Explain to me the creation of those new files. What are the circumstances around which you had to create new files? A Okay. The update list, if there was nobody in file, I had to create a file. And I explained to you that I would look in there, find out if it was there, if it wasn't there, I would get a file folder and I would open the file folder. I would make the Nussbaum cover sheet and I would put it in the file and I would put them in the file cabinet until there was additional documents to go into the file. Q Right. Let me go back to the -- when you are sending requests over to the FBI -- A Correct. Q -- you talked about a form that you used. Can you describe the form that you used to make the request? A Yes, that was the Nussbaum form. Q All right. You call it the Nussbaum form. And it had Mr. Nussbaum's name on the form? A Yes, sir. Q Were you -- did Ms. Gemmell discuss with you the use of the form? A Yes. Q What did she say about the form? A She showed me where they were stored. They were stored in the safe in a file -- in a file like on top of a desk, that sort of a thing. Q Yes. A And she explained to me that if I needed additional ones, I would go to the copier and make additional ones. As I explained, I'd make the form, make a copy, stamp "copy" on the form, put the copy in the file, put the date on it, take the original over, and it would go in a packet to go to the FBI. Q Did Ms. Gemmell instruct -- indicate that you should show this form to anyone in the office before it was sent to the FBI? A No. Q What did she say? A She said, this form goes to the FBI; you will get a SBI back, if there is one, or you will get a sheet of paper that says "nothing on file." Q So that no one looked at the form -- A No, it was a process. Q -- before it went -- A It was sent. Q -- to the FBI? A No. Q And you worked -- you did this over what period of time? A From the day I started, I sent out forms, until the day I ended my detail. Q And once the files came back from the FBI, what did you do with those? A Okay. When the FBI -- if there was a background investigation from the FBI, I looked at the background investigation to find out what the date, the last date of investigation was. Q Right. A Once I determined the last date of the investigation, I put that on the file folder -- Q Right. A -- in pencil. The purpose of that is that was a tickler for the person's need for the next update. They were required every 5 years. Q Right. Right. A In that background SBI from the FBI was generally the office that the individual worked in at the White House. We had nothing to tell us what office they worked in. Q Right. A I reviewed the background investigation to find out where the last office that they worked in. Some of the SBIs came back and I couldn't even tell, they were so generic, that I couldn't even tell where they worked. They just said "White House staff." Q Right. Were there occasions in which you had to refer files to Mr. Livingstone? A There were what I recall was approximately three times that I did. Q And please describe the circumstances in which you did that. A Okay. I had gotten the SBIs back from the FBI and I had in my hand a SF-86, which is a job application. This was -- everybody that needed a new SBI had to fill out a SF-86. If they started to work at the White House, they needed one. If -- if it was just their first day at the White House and no background, they needed one. Okay? If they were a holdover, they needed one if it was time for a reinvestigation. Continuing with that, there were the three instances that I recall that before I sent out the SF-86 to the FBI to do a new reinvestigation or to do an investigation, I spotted some problems and I tried to correct those problems, as I was supposed to do, with the person. When those problems couldn't be corrected, I turned those files over to Mr. Livingstone. Q What were those problems? Generically? A Well, one of them -- they were -- let's term them personnel -- one had a personnel problem. One had I believe an arrest in their record that was in the SBI, and not on their SF-86. And I do not recall exactly what the other one was. But it was a matter that I gave to Mr. Livingstone. Q And do you know how those issues were resolved by Mr. Livingstone? A I don't know how he resolved that issue, but I know that Mr. George Saunders gave me the files back with the problem corrected. Q Okay. Were you aware of a stack of request forms that were left at Ms. Gemmell's work area? A Not specifically, no. Q Okay. Generally, were there -- let me put it this way, were there -- were there forms that Ms. Gemmell either indicated needed to be processed or were there forms that you saw that appeared to be from Ms. Gemmell that you believed needed to be processed when you first came into the office? A I do not have any specific recollection about forms having been prepared. They may have been there, they may still be there, but I don't have any specific recommendation -- recollections of that. Q Did there come a time when you were made aware that some of the requested -- that there were problems with some of the information that was being requested of the FBI? A I don't know what you mean, sir. Q It's your understanding, it was your understanding at the time that you were working on the update project that every person on the list was, every person on the list from which you were working was properly included on those lists; is that correct? A That's correct. Q All right. Did there come a time when you found out that there were people who were not properly on those lists? A Not to my knowledge, from the time I left, no. Q From the time you left? A To the time I left, no. Q That's the question. To the time you left. Did the FBI ever contact the office in December of '93 or thereabouts and ask you about the high volume of requests that were coming out of the office? A As I recall, there was a meeting with Mr. Livingstone, but not with me. Q All right. You were not present. Did Mr. Livingstone tell you about that meeting? A Yes. Q What did he tell you about the meeting? A That there was a limit on the SF-86s and the requests for previous investigations that I was to send to the FBI. Q And what was that limit? A It seems to me that was something like 50 previous investigations or 30 previous investigations and 50 SF-86s, because I was swamping the FBI with work. Q And what did Mr. Livingstone tell you you should do about the problem? A I would only send out whatever the specific number were per week from then on. And I'm not sure that your date is correct about December, but I know that that took place when I was working there. Q I think that is from the FBI. Let me go back for a moment to the -- A Sure. Q -- ref sheet that Ms. Gemmell, I think you indicated Ms. Gemmell left for you? A Yes, sir. Q Do you have a copy of that? A I believe I left it in the White House on a drawer, on a pull-out of a drawer. I believe that's where I taped it to there, and if it's still there, I don't know. But I believe that's where I left it. Q But you do not have a copy of that? A No, no, but I referenced that sheet. I would pull it out and look at it when I had a question. Q And when you say "on a drawer" -- A It was on the desk drawer, that I had had a -- Q The desk that you sat at? A Yes, sir, it had whatever these were -- secretarial wings. Mr. Muse. Excellent. Very fine description. BY MR. STROMAN: Q Did anyone ever instruct you to obtain FBI files on Bush White House officials? A Not specifically. They told me to do the update list. Q Right. My question is, specifically, did anyone ever instruct you to obtain FBI files on Bush White House officials? A I have to answer that yes, and I did many. They were holdovers, and I did many of them. Q Right. Did Ms. Gemmell ever instruct you to obtain from the Secret Service an undated list of names for the update file? A Not that I recall. Mr. Stroman. That's all the questions I've got right now. Thank you. Ms. Olson. Okay. I would like to put in the record a document which has been marked as deposition number 9. It's Bates stamped CGE 43641. It is a form to FBI, Liaison from Bernard Nussbaum. Subject: FBI investigations. It is a 2-page document of which page 1 has a date stamped December 20, 1993. Page 2, the basic difference is it has an additional date stamp as well as a response stamp in the lower right-hand corner. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 9 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Looking at just page 1, the forms that you were discussing in the previous questions, absent the particular typing of the names, is that similar to the forms that you were describing that you were sending over that you called the "Nussbaum forms"? A Yes. Q Can you describe where you sat in the Personnel Security Office when you arrived there in August? A Yes, beside the copy machine, on the left. Q And did you have a desk? A Yes. Q The intern, where did she sit in relationship to where you were? A Across from me. That's a general question. Q Yes. She sat directly across from you in the same room? A There were a number of interns. Q I'm asking about Lisa Wetzl? A I do not believe she was an intern. Q Okay. What was your understanding of her position when you first started? A She was a staff -- I don't know that for a fact. I just presumed she was staff. Q Okay. Did you report to her at any time? A I reported to Mr. Livingstone and Mari Anderson. Q And what was Ms. Anderson's position? A She was the office manager. Q Okay. On August 9th, you were describing a review and walk-through that you got from Nancy Gemmell? A Right. Q At that time did you notice any other individuals in the office? I think you said Lisa Wetzl was present and Mr. Livingstone, and I assume Ms. Anderson was there. Were there any other individuals there in the office during that time? A Not that I can recall. Q Okay. And when you went into the room that's been described as a vault, were there individuals working in that room? A Not that I can recall. It was just Ms. Gemmell and myself. Q Can you describe where the vault room is in relationship to the office where everyone worked? A It is a room of about equal size to the Security Office and it adjoined it. Q Is there any other way to get in and out of that room without going through the Security Office? A No. Q Okay. That's the only entrance, is walking all the way through the Security Office and into this vault? A Correct. Q Is there any furniture in this vault? A There's a table and a chair. Q At any time when you were working in the office, did you ever see anyone working in that vault? A Sometimes Lisa worked in there and sometimes Mari. Q Did you ever work in there? A I usually typed up the Nussbaum requests and I typed up the file labels in there. Q So there was a typewriter or was it a computer? A It was a typewriter. Q Were there interns working with you in that office? A There might have been some interns on occasion that worked in there, but they didn't work with me. Q Okay. A There was -- there was only one occasion that an intern worked with me and that was during the month of December. Q And who was that intern? A I don't recall her name. Q Okay. Was there a certain set number of interns that were consistently there during the time period when you were in the office? A I think there was usually one, at least one. Q Was there at any time a large number of interns working there with you? A Well, there might have been a period that there was more than one, but -- there might have been a couple, but I generally stayed at my desk, did my job, and except for that one intern that helped me in December, I didn't have -- I didn't pay much attention to all that. Q You said that Nancy Gemmell gave you background and told you how to do the work that you were going to be doing. What was your impression of her knowledge of the operation of the office? A She seemed very capable and articulate. Q You said you took notes during the briefing with Ms. Gemmell? A Uh-huh. Q Where are those notes? A My attorney has them. Q Have you shown these notes to anyone else other than your attorney? A No. Mr. Muse. He has not. BY MS. OLSON: Q To your knowledge, have these notes been produced to anyone else? Mr. Muse. I'm not sure he'd know. BY MS. OLSON: Q Do you have any knowledge whether or not these notes have been given to anybody else? A Not since I turned them over to my attorney. Q After you turned them over to your attorney? A I would have no knowledge -- Mr. Muse. Answer. The Witness. No. Ms. Olson. I don't want the attorney -- I object to that. If there are notes and this witness has knowledge of what you have done with his notes and sharing them, I don't think that is privileged. You are answering the question. Mr. Muse. You have to rule on your objection. Under the rules, all objections have to be ruled upon by you. Ms. Olson. They are not ruled upon by me. Mr. Muse. Your counsel told me they were. Ms. Olson. You listened to the opening statement, of which I will provide you a copy -- Mr. Muse. It is too tedious. Ms. Olson. May I finish, Mr. Muse? The statement because -- I think I need to make this clear. You have been very, very careful to put in the record that I rule on my own objections. I do not rule on my own objections. If I do believe that the objection is not valid, then I have the ability to go to the Chairman to make a final determination. If the Chairman makes a final determination that objection made by counsel is not proper before this deposition, he will make a ruling. And if the ruling is that it's proper, then no answer is required. If the ruling is that it is not proper, then the question will be represented to the witness. Mr. Muse. Thanks for the clarification. You made an objection and I don't know what to do with it. Ms. Olson. I object -- and I would like it for the record -- to your answering for your witness and I have asked the witness, your witness -- and I don't mind going off the record. You may have whatever conversations are necessary with your witness. But I would like it if you would not answer my questions. If you need time to confer with your witness, please, I will always give it and I don't mean to indicate that I will not. Mr. Muse. Okay. BY MS. OLSON: Q Are you aware of any requests that have been made for these notes? A No. Q And other than sharing them with your attorney at any time, this is before you gave them to your attorney, and after you gave them to your attorney, have you shown these notes to any other person? A No. Ms. Olson. At this time for the record, I would like to make a request for copies of these notes to be produced to the Minority as well as the Majority counsel of this committee. We can follow that up with a letter by the Chairman, and I will make the request to the Chairman and ask him if he will write a letter to request those notes. BY MS. OLSON: Q You said that you were working to review the SF-86s; is that correct? A Yes. Q Had you ever seen an SF-86 before you started in the White House? A No, I didn't. Q And did Ms. Gemmell go through the SF-86s? A Yes. Q Did you notice what Lisa Wetzl was working on when you first started at the White House? A No, I did not. Q You said you started the Project Update at some point. What did you do when you first started on August 18th and in the first weeks that you worked at the White House? A The very first day and the first weeks I started working on the backlog of SF-86s, which were piled up on my desk. They were approximately 2-1/2 feet high and I went to work on them. Q Okay. And what did you do by going to work on them? What did that entail? A The very first thing I had to do was go into the vault, pull out this list that was in the vault, and check to see if the name was on the list. Which means, that if it was on the list, then they were former White House staffers. If their name was on the list, I would put a check beside their name. Okay? If they were not on the list, I would just continue on. Now, if they were not on the list, assuming -- well, let's assume -- which one do you want to go with? Do you want to go with the one on the list or off the list? Ms. Olson. Can we stop for a minute. Mr. Muse. You go ahead. Ms. Olson. Counsel does not object to us continuing while you have a conversation with Minority counsel? Mr. Muse. Counsel is listening very carefully. Thank you for your concern, by the way, for the witness. BY MS. OLSON: Q Can you describe this list that you are discussing that you go check? A This is the update list in the safe. The -- Nancy Gemmell demonstrated the process. I do not know if it was the same list that she demonstrated to me on August 9th but it was a list. And it was explained to me that this was a list of former White House staff who needed access -- former White House staff, contractors, groundskeepers, et cetera, that needed access on a daily basis or weekly basis or regular basis to the White House. So, I got the SF-86 and walked in the safe. I would get the list out and review it real quickly to see if their name was on there. If their name was on there, I would check the list, and then I would open up a file, just like I explained previously. And I would then take the file folder and type up the Nussbaum letter and the 86 -- SF-86, and go back to my desk. I would do a stack of these at a time, what I could manage. Q So rather than working first from the list, you were working from the 86s and then going to the list? Mr. Muse. May I hear the question again? BY MS. OLSON: Q Is it true that rather than working first from a list, you were actually working from the names that were already on the 86s and then referring to the list? A No, I picked up the SF-86, went to the list in the safe, got the list out, and reviewed the list to see if those folks were on that list. Now -- Q By "those folks," you mean the name that is on the SF-86? A That's correct. Q So you would first look at an SF-86 name? A Right. Q And then check to see if that name was on the list? A Right. If it was on the list, I would look in the file to try to find a file folder. If there was no file folder, I would create a file folder. I would type up a Nussbaum letter, and I would then go back to my desk with all of that -- with those items. If there was a file folder in there, I would open the file folder, and there should be a Nussbaum request in there or a previous investigation in the folder. Q Yes. A I would take that folder back to my desk and I would sit down and I would start to review the SF-86 and the other documents that had to go with the SF-86 to make sure they were ready. Okay? Q Uh-huh. A If there was no previous background, no background at all or no not on file letter in there, I would request that by sending the Nussbaum letter out. I would process the SF-86 and then when it was processed, I would send the SF-86 out. Q Okay. And if there was, the folder was, then you would do as you previously testified, make sure that there were no problems with it; is that correct? A That's correct. Q What color was the list? Do you recall the paper? A I recall that it was green and white striped paper, computer paper. Q Can you estimate was it the size of a normal piece of paper? A It was -- it was -- as I recall it, it was computer paper, and it was quite a number of paper -- quite a number of sheets attached, and they were folded over and that's the way they were kept. Q Is it the old-fashioned computer printout green and white paper that used to have holes on the edge and you could tear it off? A It did have holes on the edge but I'm not sure how wide it was. Q Longer than legal size? A I'm not sure about the width of it. Q Legal size is -- I'm holding up a Redwell. A I really don't recall the width. It was folded over. It may not have been that wide. It might have been 8-1/2 by 11. I don't really recall. Q Were the sheets perforated so you could tear them off at each page? A At the bottoms. Q Ms. Gemmell went through a list that she had been working on. Did she tell you at what point she was at on the list at that time when you met with her on August 9th? A I don't recall that. I don't recall her describing where she was. Q Did she indicate she had gone through agencies in the list or that she had gone through a part of the alphabet to you in any way? A I don't recall that. Q Okay. When you started in August and started going through the SF-86s and doing the activities that you described, did there come a time where you finished that backlog? A No. Q Okay. What happened to cause you to start on the update project then rather than finishing all the backlog? A I tried on a weekly basis to devote some time to the backlog. And so generally on Friday afternoons I tried to give some attention to the backlog. Now, if in the week -- [Witness confers with counsel.] Ms. Olson. Could we just take a 2-minute break? Mr. Muse. Why don't we take a 5-minute break? Stay on the record for just a moment. I have got to find out when you are going to be terminating this, because I have requests from a distinguished Republican counsel on the Senate side who seemed to have some of the same interests. Ms. Olson. I will get on the phone and speak with him but I am not going to be done or end this deposition so that you can go and talk to any Republican counsel. I will explain to them that I am still holding you in a deposition. I assume I have -- I don't want to give it a time. I am moving -- Mr. Muse. You have to. Ms. Olson. No, Mr. Muse -- Mr. Muse. At some time you are going to get to a fatigue factor as well. I'd suggest we would come back in about 5 minutes, whatever time you want since you are requesting this break. Before that, I will call counsel as a courtesy and tell them that we are going to be staying here and then we will move with as much dispatch as you can and I'd say about 7:30 we should be trying to reach the terminal pace. Ms. Olson. I will not stop this deposition at 7:30 if I have not finished my questions. Mr. Muse. You do your best. I will say that we are at the end of a long day. My client is tired and he has a right to sort of try to do this in an orderly way. You have found yourself with other circumstances that kept you late today. So be it. But you are going to do your best to move this along and then we're going to break at a reasonable hour. Ms. Olson. Mr. Muse, I asked to begin earlier. I asked for a 2 o'clock time and you were busy so I accommodated you with a 4 o'clock time. Mr. Muse. You didn't accommodate me. I told your office yesterday -- you said you wanted to do it this afternoon. We previously last week talked about 4 o'clock. I told a woman from your office 4 o'clock. You called and said that you didn't know that until this morning. Perhaps -- though, fine, that is sort of your problem, not mine, because we had agreed on 4 o'clock yesterday. And at that point, when you said 2 o'clock, I don't know where you get off telling people they should drop everything and show up, and on that basis I said we could not be here until 4:00. We arrived at 4:00 and then you didn't show up until 4:30, which I think was a rank discourtesy. Ms. Olson. Mr. Muse, let's make the record clear. I did not show up late. I believe an opening statement had been made by another attorney. I did get a report from Laurie Taylor, who is on my staff, there was not an agreement of a time. She was informed by you that it would be 4 o'clock, so the idea that you set that on the record I think is a bit of a misrepresentation. Mr. Muse. Not at all. Ms. Olson. If at 7:30 I still have questions, I would like to continue. If your witness is tired, I do not want to continue beyond a time that he can answer to the best of his abilities. But in order for you to stop to go to the Senate and have another deposition I don't believe rings true that your witness is tired if he has the energy to answer questions at the Senate. I request that you remain here and answer our questions. Mr. Muse. We are going to stay here, but my client per their request -- and it was quite courteous -- the Senate said that they would like 45 minutes. If we left here at 6:30, we would be finished there by 7:30 -- Ms. Olson. I am not going to stop this deposition so the Senate can have 45 minutes to question your client and you can call them and I will talk to them on the phone. Mr. Muse. You are raising your voice. Are we on break? Ms. Olson. If you would like to. I asked for a break for 2 minutes. If you would like 5 minutes -- Mr. Muse. We're happy to accommodate you. [Recess taken 6:32 p.m. to 6:39 p.m.] Mr. Muse. The record should reflect that counsel, moi, made an effort to contact Senate Majority counsel, Mr. Yoo, Y-O-O. I had a number; he's not there. Because I'm held incommunicado here, he is going to have to live with the consequences of my not showing up. But since we have a transcript, perhaps he will see this in a favorable light in terms of my plight. Ms. Olson. I have to say, in order for you to be fully informed, our transcripts, we can't share them with the Senate. However, I will represent to Mr. Yoo that we made the phone call. Mr. Muse. Read that part of the transcript, I'm sure there would be no problem. Ms. Olson. I can't read out of the transcript, but I will, wholly out of this transcript, tell him you did make a phone call and Mr. Comstock tried to call him. Mr. Muse. Thank you. Ms. Olson. Just wanted full disclosure so you knew he wouldn't be reading this. BY MS. OLSON: Q We were talking about the point at which you began the update project. And I had asked you when you began working on the update project after doing these SF-86s for a while. A I tried to work each week on the update project in some method. Now, if I found a couple of new SF -- if a couple of new SF-86s came in and the names were on the big list, and I checked off a couple of names on the list, wherever they might be on that list, I considered my effort to have been expended in that week on that project. Okay? Q Yes, sir. A So I worked on it. The answer is I worked on it on a weekly -- I made sure I worked on it on a weekly basis because it had to be done. Q I believe you'd said, though, for the first few weeks you were just doing the 86s or were you also doing the update project the first 2 weeks that you started? A I'm sorry; you might have misunderstood me. Every SF-86 that I processed, I checked the update list. Q Okay. A And some of them, some of the holdovers were on -- well, all the holdovers should have been on the update list. So I was essentially working on that update project list. I didn't process an SF-86 without checking the list. Q So, in effect, you were working on the update process from the beginning while you were going through the 86s? A That's correct. That's correct. Q Do you know who filled out these SF-86s or how they came to be in this giant stack that you found when you arrived? A Yes. The individuals that they belonged to, they all had to have an original signature on them. Q And did Ms. Gemmell have these 86s and describe them to you before you started? A I can only respond in this manner: I walked into the office. There was a pile of them about approximately 2 feet high when I got there. How long they had been collected, I don't know. But there was an approximately 2 feet high stack of SF-86s. However many that amounts to. Q I'm just trying to determine if Ms. Gemmell had that stack while you were going through the August 9th review with her or if it was a stack that came in sometime between the 9th and the 18th? A I don't know that answer. I don't have knowledge of that. Q Do you recall seeing that stack on her desk or anywhere else in the office when you were there on the 9th? A No, no. Q Okay. During the period that you were in the White House office, did you ever see any Secret Service list updates coming into the office? A Yes. Q Can you describe what your knowledge is of those updates? A I recall that single page list came in usually on a Monday from the Secret Service. Q And what were these single page lists? A It contained a list of names of individuals who needed to be processed. Q So they would have been the new individuals? A No. They were lists of people who were apparently on the access -- had access and they needed to be contacted and an SF-86 filled out. Q Did you ever hear those lists referred to as an access list? A I believe they were all access lists, but I don't -- you know, I believe they were all access lists is the answer. Q Did you ever see any Secret Service pass lists? A I don't -- I don't recall that term used. Q Okay. Do you recall a term "Secret Service WAVES list"? A I have heard the name of WAVES, but I don't know WAVES list. I don't know what that means, either. Q Do you know if you ever were given a WAVES list or a list that was identified as a WAVES list to work off of? A I may have been given a WAVES list to work off of, but that doesn't strike me or I don't recall that specific -- I don't know what WAVES list means. Q Okay. Well, rather than identifying them as WAVES lists, let's just call them Secret Service lists. What Secret Service lists were you given to work off of? A On a weekly basis, as I recall, I received generally on my desk on Monday mornings, a list. It may be 3 names; it may be 12 names. But that was my second priority to work on. The first priority was the SF-86s, the second priority was the new list, and the third priority was the update project. So, I worked in that manner. Q Were you aware during the period while you were working in the Personnel Security Office of what specific projects Lisa Wetzl was working on? A No, I was not totally aware of what she was doing. I know that she was issuing passes -- she was issuing lists of completed White House personnel that got passes. And plus she was processing other paperwork. But I don't know specifically what she was doing. Q Were you ever told whether or not she was working from the temporary pass holder list or a permanent pass holder list? A Those are terms that are new to me. Q Do you know if her project involved looking at people who had temporary passes but not permanent passes? A I'm not sure you understand the pass process. Q Okay. Can you explain it? A A temporary pass was issued when you first came and you were a permanent staff. A permanent pass was issued after you'd had your background cleared. Q Okay. And did you have an understanding of a time frame where a temporary pass would expire, a set period of time? A Yes. Q And what was that? A The passes, the temporary passes -- this is a Secret Service function which I only know peripherally about because I had a pass myself. So your questions should be directed to the Secret Service. Q Well, I just want to know your knowledge. Was there a limited amount of time that a temporary pass was good for that you know of or that you had an understanding of? A Yes. Q What was that? A Every temporary pass had an expiration date on it. Q And was it a 2-month, 3-month, 6-month expiration date? A I don't know what the -- in other words, there were many passes, many types of passes. I don't know the particulars about the Secret Service passes. Q Was there anybody in that office who was assigned to make sure the people with temporary passes got their new temporary pass renewed until they were able to get a permanent pass? A I don't know what office you are referring to. Q The Office of Personnel Security. A I don't know the answer. I don't know if there was anybody assigned to that project, specifically. Q Okay. Did you ever work on that -- a project like that? A No, no. Q Did you ever receive a Secret Service list that had all of the current pass holders on it on a weekly or monthly basis? A My answer is the same. I received weekly pass lists. I worked on weekly pass lists along with current SF-86s and I did the update project. Q But the list, as you have described it, has just a couple of names on it every week? A Correct. Q I just asked you if you had ever received weekly or monthly Secret Service lists that had everyone in the White House that had a pass. A No, not to my knowledge. Q Did you ever see any Secret Service list which would be broken down by agency within the White House? A That -- we might have gotten some lists like that, like you're mentioning, in January. Q Of 1994? A Maybe that we got some then. There may have been some before, but I don't believe that I got any lists like that until January. That were broken down. Q And the list that you were referring to that you had described previously had been in the file, did you work from the same single list the entire time you were doing the Project Update? A Yes, I did. Q Okay. A To the best of my knowledge, that is the list I worked on. Whether it had been replaced -- I do not think it was replaced. Q Did you replace it with any new release? A I do not recall ever replacing it because my checks, I just continued to check off. Q Did you perform any cross checks of any list? And by cross checks, did you take the list that you found in the file that you used the entire time in the Project Update, and cross check the names with any other lists other than Secret Service lists that might be in the White House? A No, I stuck to my system that was shown to me, and that's what I did. Q Did you perform any activity in order to assure that the names on those lists were current? A Yes, I did. Q Okay. What did you do? A I would type up a list of names of -- by like mid-December, I was not progressing very quickly down the alphabet and there was a number of names that were still there, and, as I recall, I was early into the alphabet, and so other than the SF-86, the occasional SF-86 that would check it off. When I say "occasional," that may be the wrong term but the SF-86s I went through. But the overall project looked like it was not being accomplished very well. So I began to make lists of names, maybe a dozen names on a sheet of paper. Generally, I typed those up on the typewriter and I started to systematically circulate those to various offices in the White House, okay? Such as GSA, the grounds, telephone company, and I asked those folks to tell me if those people are here, or if they have gone. Okay? And I would get those -- I would get -- I would then go back the next week and some of those lists would say, oh, one name is on here and the rest of them we don't know anything about. So that one name that was on there, I would then immediately take that file, that name, and I would order up -- I'd look in the file to find out if there was a file. If there was no file, I would immediately order up their SBI. Okay? Now what that told me, I found a person who is definitely a holdover. In some cases those folks, the GSA would tell me this person is still here, but these people with GSA, two or three people with GSA left in '87 and they are no longer here. So I would go back to the file then and I would check off on the list and I would not call for an SBI because I knew they were not there. Okay? But there was not that many of those that -- there's a number that I canceled but I don't know how many I canceled by not calling for an SBI, but if all else failed I then sent for an SBI. Q Okay. Do you know about where you were in the list when you started doing this by mid-December? A Until all of this started, I didn't know. After this business has become public, I have read the paper. Q Okay. And so at the time you are doing it mid-December, you don't have any recollection, just solely from thinking back, of what you were doing in mid-December, what letter you were at or anything; is that true? A That's correct. Q And the recollection you have is just from what you read in the paper where they say the list stopped? A I have heard a lot of stuff now that leads me to believe that I stopped at "G." Q And that's mainly from the public accounts? A Mainly, that's right. Q Are there any other individuals that you have spoken to, other than your attorney solely, that have allowed you to put that together? A I believe most of it has come from analysis with my attorney. Q Has any of it come from anyone else? A Not that I can recall. Q Have you had any conversations with Craig Livingstone about this matter? A About the matter? Q About anything concerning the FBI files and lists or you working there? A Yes, on Sunday. Q Sunday? A Last week. Q Okay. Can you tell us what you talked with Mr. Livingstone about? A I met him and asked him about what was going on. And he told me that Billy Dale thing was under investigation and he told me that if I got called before the grand jury to tell the truth and then he asked me to speak to his attorney, which I did. Q And where did you meet with him on Sunday? A I first met my wife and I first met Craig at the flea market. Then we went to his house, or his apartment and then we went to his attorney's office in Georgetown. Q And which one of his attorneys did you speak to? A Mr. Cohen. Q And what did you discuss with Mr. Cohen? A Mr. Cohen asked me if I would give a statement about my details -- about what I did when I was on detail. And I did so. Q And were you with your counsel there? A No, I was not. Q Okay. And how did this statement come to be drafted? Can you just describe if you wrote it out or what happened? A I dictated it to Mr. Cohen. All the flaws are my fault. Q And can you describe, was he typing as you were dictating? A Yes, sir -- yes, ma'am, he was on the computer. Q Okay. So he was actually typing the words as you were dictating? A Correct. Q He wasn't taking shorthand as far as you know? A No. Q Was this a process where it was being edited as you were dictating it to Mr. Cohen? A No, it was about a 30-minute process. I went through it and he word spelled it and gave it to me. I looked it over. Q As you were dictating it. Did he ask you any questions about what you were saying? Did he stop at any point? A He listened to what I had to say, made some clarifications. Q Can you describe what kind of clarifications he made? A You well know I can't answer that without access to the statement. If you have the statement, I'll look at it. Ms. Olson. I'll mark this as a Deposition Exhibit Number 10. And this is Declaration of Anthony Marceca, which is a typewritten statement, and it is 4-pages long, signed by Mr. Marceca, dated June 9th, 1996. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 10 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q I ask if you recognize the Deposition Exhibit Number 10? A As I recall, there was some revision in the -- in my description which has been blacked out on this sheet, concerning the name of the individual who was blacked out. RPTS BRYAN DCMN HERZFELD [7:00 p.m.] Q That is, for the record, the place that we are talking about is on page 2 under paragraph number 5 that we have been just discussing; is that correct? A That's correct. Q Okay. Can you describe what discussions you had with Mr. Cohen concerning this paragraph? A Yes. He asked me -- the best I can recall, he asked me, how did I know that those former White House people should have been on the access list and should have been -- backgrounds should have been requested, and didn't that cause me to question why I was doing that in one case specifically, and I said -- I answered him that I had seen them, as it stated there -- I had seen this individual walking the halls, and therefore I did not find it unusual at all. I had seen him walking unattended. Q Who was the individual? A Marlin Fitzwater. Q And is that in the line -- it says, "I recall seeing several former Bush administration officials, such as" -- and that crossed out is "Marlin Fitzwater"? A Correct. Q And then the sentence goes on to say, in the White House complex during my detail at the Office of Personnel Security. If I saw blank name on the access list, therefore, it would not have struck me odd. What name? A Same name. Q Okay. Do you have any knowledge why these names have been blacked out? A Yes. Q Can you please tell me? A I did it. Q Can you state your basis for why you did that? A I just felt after I had given him the statement that those names should have been blacked out. Q Other than that paragraph that you just discussed with Mr. Cohen, did he ask you any questions about any of the other information that you were giving during that statement? A Not that I can recall. I just kind of gave it to him and signed it and left, took a copy with me. Q Did he question you about any other individuals who were reported to be on the list? A I don't recall that he was specific about any other names. Q Did he ask you if you had ever seen James Baker on the list that you were going through? A I don't recall that. Q On page 4 of your statement, you are talking about three files that you reviewed in the course of the update project that you delivered for Mr. Livingstone's review. The next sentence says, "To the best of my recollection, none of these files were of former high-ranking Bush or Reagan organization officials such as," and then there is a blank. Is that a name of a Bush or Reagan official that you believed was on the list? A I believe it was. Q And can you tell us what name you had in that section? A I believe it was Marlin Fitzwater, and I don't know what the other name was. It might have been James -- I don't know. Q Do you have a copy without the name blacked out? A I don't believe so. I don't -- I don't know if I do. Q Do you believe that Mr. Cohen has a copy without the name blanked out? A I really -- might, I don't know. Q When he was originally typing it, did he type it up with the name and print it out? A Yes. Q And then after you saw the copy -- A I think I blacked it out before I -- Q Before additional copies were made? A Before I signed it. Q Okay. A I don't know for sure that I blacked his copy out. I think I blacked his copy out. Q Do you know if he took it off his computer, the name, or if he left it on his computer that he was typing it on? A I don't know. Q Did you see him ever delete the name after you blacked it out? A No, I didn't -- I did not think that I was involved in this thing. I was just doing that. Q You said that by mid-December when you were typing up this list of names and then calling up the agencies such as GSA, how did you know what agency the people were at? A I was attempting to identify -- you mean department? Q Uh-huh. A I was attempting to identify the department that they worked in. Q How were you doing that? A I was doing that through sending memos to various office heads. That was my normal process. I was diligently trying to identify who was there, who was currently active, and who was not. Q To the best of your knowledge, the list you were working from, was it divided up by agencies such as GSA, so that you knew every one? A I believe it was just a bunch of names, and I don't recall anything else, you know, at this time. Q So was there any indication next to the name whether they were GSA or OMB or White House office? A I cannot recall that there was anything on that. It does not seem likely. Q And just for the record, can you state why you don't think it is likely? A Because I would have immediately contacted that agency. Q And instead, you were doing memos to find out what agency the names were at? A That's right. Q Did you keep any of those memos? A I gave those memos to Mr. Livingstone. Q Okay. Do you know if he put them in a file or what happened with them? A I think he threw his copies afterwards in the burn -- you mean the memos that I gave to the agencies? I think he gave those -- threw them in the burn barrel. I don't know. I know that the copies that I got back from the agencies that I threw when I was through marking them up or whatever, I threw those in the burn barrel. Q Okay. Do you recall coming to the name "James Baker" while you were going through the list originally in this August through February period? A No, I don't. Q At that time, were you aware of who James Baker was? A I have seen Mr. -- I know who James Baker was, but I thought that his name was James Baker, III, and I don't recall typing up specifically a request for James Baker, III. If you can show me that, I -- a Nussbaum sheet that I did, then I can verify if I did. Ms. Olson. For the record, if I had those sheets, I would love to show them to you. We have repeatedly requested them from the White House and from the FBI and from the Department of Justice, and no one will release those to us. So unfortunately I don't have them. I did want to put that on the record so that you and your attorney didn't think I was asking you questions when I might have documents that would assist you. Mr. Muse. We can assume that you are showing us all the documents that might be of assistance otherwise? Ms. Olson. I did not make that representation; however, the Billy Dale is the only document that we have, and you can assume I am showing you any documents that I feel are relevant to the scope of the questions I am asking that I feel will be fruitful in this deposition. I am not certainly going to pull out every document I own in this matter, but anything that is relevant to this deposition. We do have Mr. Dale's form, and I think it is now marked as Deposition Exhibit Number 9. BY MS. OLSON: Q Do you recall or have any recollection at that time of seeing Mr. Dale's form? A If he came up and -- no. If he came up on the update project, he came up. Other than that, no. Q So you don't specifically remember seeing his name? A No. Q Were you aware that Mr. Dale was being investigated and that there was pending prosecution against Mr. Dale at any time when you were at the White House? A No. Q Did you have any facts about the White House Travel Office while you were there? A Any facts. Q Facts. Any conversation, any information, any internal memoranda concerning the Travel Office firings? A The Travel Office never came up on the screen. It was another department, and I processed SF-86s for the people in that department just like any other department. Q Did anybody ever tell you that they were all new people there, and that all of the people had been fired, and there was a particularly unique situation in that office? A No. Are you accurate about that? Mr. Muse. Just answer the question. The Witness. I'm sorry. BY MS. OLSON: Q Did Mr. Livingstone ever discuss the White House Travel Office matter with you? A No. Q Did you have any conversations with Mr. Livingstone about Harry Thomason? A I'm sorry, the name again? Q Harry Thomason. A No. Q So I am going to assume the next question, did you ever see Harry Thomason in the office while you were in the White House? A I don't know who that is. Q So if he were there, you wouldn't recognize him? A I don't know who it is. Q Okay. He is a very close friend of the President and a Hollywood producer that did have access to the White House and a pass. There was a lot of press about the fact that he had access and a pass after the firings. Does that give you any basis to recognize the name? A I don't know Mr. Whatever, Thomason, or Thomalson or whatever his name was. Q Okay. Also, before the name "Marlin Fitzwater" is the name "Tony Blankley." Do you recall seeing the name "Tony Blankley" on the list that you were working from? Anthony Blankley, I believe it is. A No, I didn't. Q Kenneth Duberstein? A I don't recall the name. Q Did you know who Tony Blankley, Anthony Blankley, was at that time? A I apologize to Anthony. I didn't know who he was. Q Did you know who Kenneth Duberstein was at that time? A I did not. Q And can you describe if you saw Marlin Fitzwater and what brought your attention to his name on the list, if anything? Did you see Marlin Fitzwater's name on the list while you were doing the update? A If I had seen Mr. Marlin Fitzwater's -- Mr. Muse. Her question was did you see it -- BY MS. OLSON: Q Did you see it or recognize it on the list while you were doing this? A It did not jump out to me at the time. Q When you wrote your statement, what was the purpose then of mentioning Mr. Fitzwater in particular? A Because when I wrote the statement, I was aware that allegations were out there that I had requested illegally or some sort files, and the reason I put that in there was I didn't know how I could request files illegally when I believed that these folks still had access. Q Is it true -- A And he was my example. Q Is it true that that didn't mean that at the time you believed Marlin Fitzwater one way or the other had access; is that true? A I believed that everybody on that list had legitimate access unless I could establish that they were no longer on the access list. Q Do you recall ever having those thoughts at the time, though, that you were looking at that list while you were working in the White House Travel Office in connection with any name on that list? A I had no reason to suspect anything other than they were legitimate pass holders or had access to the White House. Q And I will leave from the subject, but one final question about that. Was there any name on that list that gave you any pause or made you hesitate or stop and think about the name and whether they had access? A Not that I can recall. Q Did you ever see anyone else working from that list while you were there? A The only time anybody else worked on that list that I can recall was when I had an intern assigned to me. Q Was this a permanent intern or a daily volunteer? A I believe it was an -- well, she came in for about a month, and she sat at the table across from me, and I brought the typewriter out because she wasn't supposed to be in the vault, and she worked across from me typing up the Nussbaum sheets. Q Okay. So do you recall interns being in the vault? A They may have been at the table, but I don't recall them -- I understood the rule -- I don't know. Q Do you have any recollection of seeing them ever going in the vault for any purpose? A You know, I can't specifically recall that, and I am not evading your question. Q Okay. A But I worked at my table, and I didn't -- I worked at my table, and my back was to the office, and it required strict concentration on what I was doing. Q You worked at your desk, right? A Correct. Q It wasn't a table? A Well, I say table. I have since -- it was about that size and then across from me, back -- it was backed up to a desk. But my table had a drawer and had one of those pull-out things. So it was that type of a desk. Q Oh. So it wasn't your standard desk that you would think of as a normal desk with drawers? A No drawers, no. Q It only had a pull-out? A A pull-out, and, as I recall, a drawer. I know it had a drawer because I kept pencils and stuff in there. Q So it had a center drawer and a side drawer? A It had a side pull-out. It had like a secretary, as I recall, on the side. Because that is where I kept the Gemmell notes. Q Okay. And that is what I was coming to, which was why I was asking you to describe your desk or table. What notes exactly did you keep on this pull-out? A Nancy Gemmell gave me a typed-out sheet of paper, and on that typed-out sheet of paper were the instructions that I was to follow concerning the process that I was to accomplish. And I, if I were questioning, I would refer to that. A certain file or a certain file color or a certain dot or dash or whatever, I would refer to that. Q Was that in your handwriting or hers? A It was left for me. Q So you didn't write it out? A No, no. I believe she typed it up and left it for me. Q It was typed? A Yes, it was. Q And when you left, you left it right there? A I didn't take it with me, I left it there. Q Has a copy of that been given to you? A My attorney asked me to look for that, and I have been unable to find it. I don't think I took it out. It is wherever they find the desk is probably where it is at. Q Have you had any conversations with Craig Livingstone regarding that note? A No, no. Q Have you had any conversations with Craig Livingstone regarding your handwritten notes? A I don't -- no, I don't think so. I don't think he knows anything about that. I don't know. That is an assumption. Strike it. Q Do you recall if you have had any conversations with Craig Livingstone about your notes? A I have not. Q We have been talking about SBIs, and I don't know if for the record we explained what they are. What you just describe what you are calling an SBI, what it stands for? A Yes. My instructions from Nancy Gemmell, an SBI is a secret background investigation which is sent to the White House, which is, number one, I understand, prepared for the White House for people who want to work in the White House. So the FBI go out and do an SBI for people who want employment in the White House. To my knowledge, that is the only people that do that, but I don't know that as a matter of fact. That is information that was provided to me by Nancy Gemmell. Q On Deposition Exhibit Number 9, when you requested a copy of a previous report -- A Correct. Q -- is an SBI what would come back -- what comes back as the previous report? A Yes. Q Did you ever request anything else other than a copy of previous report? A Sometimes I did some name checks, but that was -- well, this list, take this sheet, okay? On a couple of occasions I requested name checks. I don't recall the circumstances where I requested name checks. A name check may have been just for volunteers, but I don't know if that is completely accurate. I would check full field investigation. If I had an SF-86, a full field investigation was requested, and the level of full field investigation was requested, it was level 1, 2 and 3. I don't recall at the time, at this time, what the levels meant, but I do recall that each time I had to type "level 3," I had to come in and type "level 3" and put the Xs beside it. So I put X at full field, X at level 3. Q Did you ever have any cause to request a full field investigation from the names on the list that was left for you that you were going through as a part of Project Update? A I would never -- correction. I would not routinely -- I would not request a full field investigation if there was not an SF-86. Q Okay. So unless you saw an SF-86 in that stack, no full field investigation would be ordered by you? A That's correct. Correct. Q Okay. When the SBIs came back from the Nussbaum forms where you check "copy of previous report," did you read those previous report -- A The SBIs? Q The SBIs. A When previous reports came back on my name checks, I would get those SBIs and look for the office, and I would look for the last date of investigation. Q What do you mean by "office"? A I would look -- I would look at the SBI, and it would generally describe, hey, you know, this person worked at the Office of the Vice President, okay? Well, that triggers immediately to me the Office of Vice President, and that was done in 1989, that unless this person has been placed in another position, which a lot of them were, that it is likely that this person was not here. So I would -- I would make every attempt to find out if this was a person that was here. Now, if I found that the person was still here, and their investigation was within the last five years, this thing went in the folder and nothing more was done about it. Q Okay. A If I found that they were gone, okay, I now had an SBI on somebody that was gone, and in the dead file it went. Q Where was the dead file? A In the file rack there was a folder, there was a file there for dead files. Q And that was where you put all SBIs that you would review and find that they were not currently at the White House? A That they were gone. Q Did they -- did the SBI go into a folder? A Oh, yes, because I ordered it with a -- I ordered it with this -- this was in the folder, the copy was in the folder. When the SBI came back, I reviewed it. I would place on the folder the date of the last SBI. So immediately, if you looked at the folder, I knew when the next SBI was due, okay? Now, once I identified clearly that the person was gone, then it would go in the dead file, okay? It was done. Q Did these folders that you were putting in the dead file all have a single color? A I don't recall if they did. I don't recall that. Q How big was this dead -- can you describe the dead file? Is it a -- Mr. Muse. Bigger than a bread box. BY MS. OLSON: Q I have a Redwell here. Is each -- A It was a metal folder,. It was a metal file bin, and I stuck them in there. Q Was each file that was dead the size of a Redwell, or was the entire dead file the size of a Redwell? A No, no. May I take one of your files? Q Yes, sure. A A folder that went in a dead file could be -- only have a Nussbaum sheet in it or -- and no record found, or it could have an SBI that could be an inch thick stuck in there. Those folders went in the dead file, and they got -- Q And was that in the vault room? A Yes, it was in the -- yes, they were kept in the vault. Q Was it in one of those big file cabinets that had 15 rows? A It was in a metal bin, a rolling file cabinet, and it was a metal bin. It was at the end of the alphabet, and there was the dead file. That is, incidentally, where I kept the update list, in that same bin. Q Do you recall if every single one of those files was orange? A I really can't recall the color. Q Did you notice files coming back of any particular color depending upon where they were -- what agent they were from, or did you notice filing anything by color? A Well, you know, I know that there was different colors, but I also recall that GSA notified me that this person is gone. Q Uh-huh. A So that one, once that file went in there -- so I don't know what color GSA was. I know of another time that the last SBI was like 1985 for a person that worked in the grounds from the Department of Interior who was a detail, and I was ready to strike him from the list, and I made one last check, put him on a list that went over to the grounds, the head of the groundskeepers, and lo and behold I find this guy is back at the White House. So that is why I checked diligently to find out if they were still there, because even though he was long overdue for an SBI, he had been detailed back. So if I had knocked him off that list and put him in the dead file, he would have not got in the White House to work. So that is why that was, in essence, the flavor of the update project, to keep these people from, you know, not being able to get to their job. Maybe they worked nights, maybe they are janitors at night in the White House. I might never see them, or I might not even be able to contact them, see? I didn't know. Q Were people that you were putting in the dead file from all different agencies or from just a singular agency, one or two agencies? Mr. Muse. You mean departments? Ms. Olson. I am talking about agencies, I will call them departments, within the EOP, the Executive Office of the President. BY MS. OLSON: Q Were they from all different departments or just a single department? A To the best of my knowledge, they could be from anywhere. They could be from the telephone company. Ms. Olson. Okay. I have a document, and I have marked it now as Deposition Exhibit Number 11, and this is a list which at the top it says, "White House Personnel Security Files Staff Prior to 01-20-93." On the last page, the last typed item says, "Update Project as of 1-94-Marceca." [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 11 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q I ask you if you have ever seen that document before, either with or without the handwriting? [Brief pause for document examination.] Mr. Muse. The question? BY MS. OLSON: Q Have you ever seen that document before? A The list is similar, but the last page, I believe, is different. Q Okay. It is similar to what? A To another one that I have been shown. Q Okay. And can you set that in time? Were you shown that list prior to June of 1996? A No. Q Prior to June 1 of 1996? A No, I was not. Q Okay. This is a list -- what is your understanding that that is -- of this list, if you have one, at this point, today? A I recognize a series of names which appeared in the newspaper. Q Were you aware that a typed list had been created? A Not before the FBI showed me that list. Let's get to it. Q And how was this list represented to you by the FBI? Mr. Muse. I don't know if he should be answering how the FBI profiles a matter or how grand juries profile matters. Ms. Olson. If it is a grand jury matter, I don't want to go into it. BY MS. OLSON: Q You said that there were some names that you took off that you recognized that were going in the dead file. Are you able to look at this list and recognize if any of those names are actually on this list, if any would -- A I was asked -- I cannot recall that. I really can't. Ms. Olson. Okay. There is a second list, which I am going to put in as Deposition Exhibit Number 12. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 12 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q I ask if you have ever, prior to June 1st, 1996, seen that list? [Brief pause for document examination.] A I don't recognize the list nor the names. Q Okay. Have you ever seen this list at all before today? A No. Q Okay. These lists -- I mean, the representations that we have is that these were lists that were made after you left, and particularly Deposition Exhibit Number 11 is a list that was created of documents that were in the file drawer that you have described. Do you know -- do you recognize the names on Deposition Exhibit Number 11 as being any category of files you put together or that you left in any way, whether in the dead file or in another file? A I don't really recall -- I would only be guessing. Q I am asking about Deposition Exhibit Number 11. A Deposition Exhibit Number 11? Q Yes, sir. A I do not recall any of those names. I recognize one name. Q And what is that? A Fitzwater's name, Marlin Fitzwater's name. Q Okay. Does it refresh any recollection that it appears to be the same as the -- the same names as the list that you were working off of on Project Update? A It could be. I don't know. Without the list, I mean, I can't -- I don't know. Q But independent of looking at some Secret Service list that you had, this list doesn't jog any memory that it is the same order that names were in on the Secret Service list? A Correct. Q When you left, you said you put files in a dead file. Had you created -- how much of that drawer had you filled, if you know? A Probably about half of it. Q Okay. And had you looked at all of those background -- those BSIs before putting them in the dead -- A I looked at them for previous investigations, the date of previous investigation, and I looked at them for the office that they would work in so that I could identify who should get a new SF-86. Q Okay. And while you were looking at them for that information, did any name such as the name on the list for Deposition Exhibit Number 11 stand out at that time, such as a Tony Blankley, a James Baker, a Marlin Fitzwater, a Kenneth Duberstein? A At that time, no, and I didn't even see -- I was looking for that Blankley or Blakely or whatever his name is, and I can't even find it now. Oh, here it is. Q Anthony David Blankley? A Oh, okay. It is not ringing a bell. Q Okay. A This list here? Q Yes, sir. Deposition Exhibit Number 12. A Yeah. Are these -- are you representing that these folks were Bush administration people? Q No. These are other files and other lists which were -- A That were in the dead file? Q I don't know if they were in the dead file. If I knew specifically where they were and what had happened to them, I would tell you. These are additional documents that were in possession of the White House that were returned to the FBI, and I think the FBI reported publicly that they believed that they were improperly in the possession of the White House. A Can I consult with my attorney for a minute? Q Absolutely. [Witness conferring with attorney. Brief recess.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Did you ever see Craig Livingstone reading the contents of the reports that you got back from the FBI? A Not that I can recall. Q Okay. Were you ever told that it was your job to read the contents of all of the previous reports that were ordered during the time when you were there? A As I recall, I was -- I had to look up the dates of the last investigation, and I had to find the office, if I could. So as far as that goes, I looked at the reports. Q Okay. I think on questioning earlier you said that you looked at the reports, and I think you had said that you spotted some problems? A Correct. Q Can you tell me what you were reading when you were spotting problems? A Okay. If I would look at a report in depth, it would have an SF-86 attached to it, okay? And I would be looking for any FBI report, instances of travel as one of the things, and I would be looking to see if they put that travel on the SF-86. I would be looking for work, jobs that they had, and I would see if they would correspond with the SBIs. So for that, to accomplish that, I had to read both of these documents and assimilate those two, and that is what I did. Q And did you do that to all of the documents as you got them back from the FBI that you ordered previous reports on? A If -- the only -- as I said before, the only way I would do that is if I had an SF-86. Now, if somebody came back and I could not find where they worked in the White House, okay, if they were previous employees, previous White House employees and not with this new administration, as I said, they would go in the dead file. Did I look at those things? I didn't waste my time looking at those, other than trying to find the last date of investigation. But did I review those? No, I didn't. I would have fallen asleep. Q Why do you say you would have fallen asleep? A Well, because most of them are the same, the same words just repeated over and over again. Q The SBIs are the same words? A The SBIs are mostly what great things people say about one another. Q But they would have any arrests that the individuals had; isn't that true? A If I had an SF-86, I would be looking -- if I had an SF-86, and I saw that in the SBI, I would be looking to see if that was reported on the SF-86. Q Am I correct, though, for the previous reports that you ordered, you didn't have SF-86s; is that true? A That's correct. Q So when you were reading the previous reports, were you comparing it to some other SF-86? A No. When I was looking at -- we are back to the update project. I have a list of names. I have ordered the SBI from the Secret Service, okay? Nothing on -- Q From the FBI? A From the FBI, I'm sorry. Nothing on file, it goes -- nothing on file, I can't find him in the White House currently working, it goes in the dead letter file. Q If you find him working? A If I find him working, and he needs a new SBI because it is beyond the last 5 years, he gets an SF-86. Once he gives me that SF-86, before I send it in, I check it to make sure that what he has got on the SF-86 is consistent with his background investigation as much as it is. If there is a problem that he didn't report something, then that is what I would first contact him and say, hey, you missed something here, okay? And then he would be given an opportunity to correct it. If he denied that there was a correction, then that -- that was not my problem to straighten out. That was a problem that went to Mr. Livingstone, and I am assuming that he gave them to George Saunders because George Saunders gave me those files back, and I filed them. Q And that was a category of individuals of the three that you would call; is that correct? A That's correct. Q What about the category of individuals that you have sent off for a previous report, you have gotten back for a previous report, and they are not due their 5-year update; they are fine? A In other words, they have a 5-year update? Very good question. Q Thank you. Mr. Muse. I knew we would get to one. The Witness. That SBI, we would be looking at that, and hopefully it would be on the front page that the SBI was on such a such a date within the last 5 years, went in the file and went in the master file. BY MS. OLSON: Q Did you ever review those to see if there were any problems with them? A I didn't have the time. No, I did not. Q Do you know if Mr. Livingstone reviewed those in the course of his duties just to see if there was any problems with these holdover people? A I do not believe Mr. Livingstone -- I don't know that he did, but I can't imagine him going in a safe to get something out to walk out and to do it when he was busy all the time. Q What was he busy doing all the time? A He was busy doing this and that, answering questions. Q Was he working on any particular project that you know of? A He was in and out of the office. Q Was he doing advance? A No, not to my knowledge. Q Do you know where he was when he was in and out of the office? A No, I do not. He got calls. Whether it was a volunteer problem or it was this or that, I don't know. Q By in and out, was that on an hourly, or was he out for days at a time? A No, no, no. He would be called out, he would come back in, maybe Mari would take a memo, he would do something. He was busy. Q Was he ever out of the office for several days in succession while were you there? A Not that I recall. Q Do you recall him ever doing any advance work while were you there? A Let's see. That is the third time you asked that. Q Okay. I just keep asking it because you are someone who actually understands advance work. So you did not read that category of files that didn't need an update, that didn't have an 86, that were ordered on the Nussbaum previous report; is that a correct statement to say? And you didn't read them for content, you only read them to see if they needed an update? A That's correct. Q Did you see anyone else in the office whose -- or know of anyone else in the office whose job it was to look at the reports and see if these people were appropriate to remain in the Clinton administration? Mr. Muse. Appropriate? Ms. Olson. Appropriate for them to remain as holdovers in the Clinton administration or make a call on whether they were the kind of people that should remain. The Witness. Okay. You are making a leap of assumption, and I have explained the process, and I will explain it to you, if you would like, again. BY MS. OLSON: Q Well, I know the process that you did. A I don't mean that sarcastically. [Witness and counsel confer.] Mr. Muse. Would you repeat the question again? Ms. Olson. Yes, I will. BY MS. OLSON: Q Was it anybody's job in that office, that you are aware of, to review these files to make a determination on the basis of the content of those files whether or not they should remain as holdover employees of the new administration? A No. Q Are you aware of files that did not come straight to the office where you were in Personnel Security, but went straight to Mr. Kennedy from the FBI? A No. Q Are you aware of files coming back to Mr. Livingstone to review from Mr. Kennedy? A Yes. Q Can you describe what kinds of files went to Mr. Livingstone for review? A Well, they didn't go to Mr. Livingstone. They came from Kennedy's office down to my office to process the SF-86s. Q The file or the SF-86 came back? A The SF-86, the file and the previous background investigation came down with brand new -- with brand new SF-86s, and I worked on those. Q And those are the ones that you compared to make sure the information was the same? A Yes. Q Did Mr. Livingstone also do that? A Not to my knowledge. Q Was anyone else doing that same -- had that same responsibility as you while you were there? A During the period of August to February, I believe every SF-86 -- I may be wrong -- I did it. Every Nussbaum letter, I did it. Q Do you know who -- do you know if Ms. Gemmell was the sole person who did it before you? A I don't. I'm sorry, I don't. Q Did Lisa Wetzl do any of the same -- did she do any SF-86 work while you were there? A I think Lisa helped me on a couple of SF-86s that I got back from the FBI, and the reason that she helped me with those couple is because the SF-86 came back, and there was -- and the FBI described the problem. But I could not figure out what the problem was that they were describing. Q Okay. A And so the answer is, Lisa did look at a couple, but she was helping me with it. Q The Deposition Exhibit Number 9 next to the word "access" has an "S" in parens. Do you know what that means? A I would assume it means staff. "S" means staff. So access staff. I don't know what the date of this person's last SBI was, but that would be the requesting purpose. Q The FBI report talks about these forms having the word "access" and then an "I" in there. Do you know -- A The FBI report? Q These Bernie Nussbaum forms, Deposition Exhibit Number 9, that it would have "access" typed with an "I." Do you know what that -- A It sounds like an intern to me. Q Okay. And then the other letter that they saw was "access" with a "C." Do you know what that would be? A I think that is volunteer. I am not sure. Q Do you know who established this system? Did you establish it? A No. I believe that was -- I don't know who established it, but I believe that was a preexisting system. Q Were you taught that system by someone? A I believe that was the system that was there. I don't know of anybody specifically told me that, but I know that that was what I went by, and I might have just picked that up on my own from other files. Q During your time at the Office of Security Personnel, did you ever talk politics or political matters with Craig Livingstone that you recall? A Not that I recall. Q Do you remember ever talking about prior Republican opponents on the campaigns that you both had worked on during the period when you were in the White House? A No. Q Okay. A There is a reason for that. Q Okay. Do you want to give me the reason? A The interns and some of the staff in the office were Republicans, so there was not political conversation in the office. Q Okay. Do you recall any staff that was Republican when you were there? A I believe a lot of them. Q Who? A In our office? Q Yes, sir. A I believe Lisa Wetzl, in our office, but there was others throughout the building. Q Any others in your office, though, in particular besides Lisa Wetzl? A I don't know. I really don't -- I know about her, because I think she told me that. Q Was James Baker an individual who was an opponent, a Republican opponent, on any campaign that you worked on with Craig Livingstone? Mr. Muse. Was James Baker ever a candidate? BY MS. OLSON: Q Was he ever someone managing a campaign for a Republican candidate? Was he ever someone in particular who was on the opposite ticket of a campaign that you were working for? Mr. Muse. Is that a history question, or is that -- Ms. Olson. Well, I am just wondering if James Baker was a name that would have come up that would have been someone on prior campaigns that Mr. Marceca knew about, such as if you ask someone who worked for George Bush's campaign, they would probably say Jim Carville was a name we knew, because everybody knew Jim Carville if he worked on the Bush campaign, and I am wondering if James Baker was a name that everyone who worked on some campaign would have known he was working on the opposite side. The Witness. It doesn't come up on my screen. BY MS. OLSON: Q Do any of the names on the list for Deposition Exhibit Number 11 come up on your screen in particular as being names that you were well aware when you were working on campaigns were people that were opponents? Mr. Muse. Say that again. The question is, every name -- Ms. Olson. Let's have it read back. [The reporter read back as requested.] Ms. Olson. I can rephrase it if you think it is too long. The Witness. I don't recognize any names, and you have an overexpectation of my abilities on campaigns. Mr. Muse. Try to respond. Do you recognize this? The Witness. No. BY MS. OLSON: Q Just for the record, to be clear, can you just define what you mean "I don't recognize any names"? Because I know we have talked about Mr. Fitzwater. A You are talking about Mr. Baker. I do not recognize Baker, and I do not recall that he was involved in any Republican campaigns. He may have been, but I don't recognize that, and I don't recognize Mr. Baker on that list as being the Mr. Baker. Q That is fine. I want you to look at that document, because since then there have been a lot of names who have been put -- who have been identified as political operatives who have worked on numerous campaigns, and who have done various levels of jobs on campaigns, and I just want you to look at the list and see if any names, as you had put it, come on your screen or you recognize from your work on prior campaigns. A Okay. [Brief pause for document examination.] Mr. Muse. Let me see if we have it accurate. Your inquiry is whether, when he saw any of these names back at that time he worked at the White House, if they somehow registered with him as the names of people involved in political matters? Ms. Olson. No. I am asking him, as he sits here looking at the list that has been identified as Deposition Exhibit Number 11, if any of the names on that list were individuals who were involved in any campaigns that he worked in on the opposite side. Mr. Muse. Well, your problem is they are individuals, you say were individuals, and I think that creates some problem. If you are asking him now, for example, about his present state of knowledge which would necessarily incorporate what has been in the newspapers about, for example, James Baker, he is drawing down on that, I thought, and I believe focusing on the fact that you were wondering about his state of knowledge as he would have seen any of these names back then. If you are now asking him -- for example, Tony Blankley listed as Anthony David Blankley, one has to sort of take into consideration the fact that there are news media accounts of the fact that Tony Blankley has been identified as a person who is on some list. Now, I am -- Ms. Olson. Let me be clear. Mr. Muse. The problem is there is no clarity, and I want you to be clear, but I am just trying to tell you that for the life of me, I can't follow the use of this list in terms of drawing down a present state of knowledge or a past state of recollection or a present state of recollection that may have existed at a different time. As you know, because I understand from many people that you are a very talented lawyer, there is a whole series of evidentiary considerations that go into past recollection recorded, present recollection refreshed, and any number of factors. As your questions are asked, there is all kinds of ambiguity, just between the two of you, and I don't think that there is going to be much room for clarity. Ms. Olson. Let me lay a foundation. It has not been determined that this is, in fact, the list that Mr. Marceca worked from. As a matter of fact, it has been determined that this is not the actual list. It has not been determined that Mr. Marceca worked from a list that had these names on it, so therefore, I don't have that list. What I have here is a list that was created at some point after Mr. Marceca left by an individual who claims that they were files that Mr. Marceca had put on a shelf. Mr. Muse. All right. Ms. Olson. So with that as a foundation, Mr. Marceca, I believe, has already stated that when he was actually in the White House looking at the green and white list, he didn't recognize any names. Mr. Muse. All right. Go ahead. Ms. Olson. And if that is incorrect, I would like that to be corrected by the witness. Mr. Muse. You're summarizing testimony, which I think has a lot of mischief associated with it. The testimony is as it is, but go ahead. Ms. Olson. It is as it is. So I am asking him to look at this list, understanding that it is not necessarily the list that he looked at while he was at the House. So I am not asking him if he remembers seeing these people while he was at the White House, because I don't know if this is the list. I am asking him if these names are people that he ever worked in opposition of in a campaign. Mr. Muse. Okay. Ms. Olson. And if he recognizes any of these names as being individuals of people he worked in opposition with on a campaign. Mr. Muse. Can you answer that question? The Witness. Not to my knowledge. RPTS STRICKLAND DCMN GALLACHER [8:00 p.m.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Did the interns that were in your office have security clearances, to your knowledge? A I do not know. Q Did you ever have them fill out any paperwork while you were there or get any checks on any of the individuals that were working in the office you were? A I don't know that any of them filled out SF-86s, which is what your question is. Q Yes? A I don't recall. They may have gotten jobs, but I don't recall. Q While you were working in the office under Mr. Livingston, did you ever see the First Lady in the office? A In the Security Office? Q Yes, sir. A No. Q Did you ever have any contact, any professional contact with the First Lady while you were in the White House? A I might have shaken her hand once or twice. I don't recall specifically if I even did that. I would see her passing in the halls, but I never had any conversation with her. Q Did Mr. Livingstone ever describe any meetings or discuss any contact he had with the First Lady? A Not that I can recall specifically that he had -- I don't recall that. Q Did he ever tell you that his job was due to a recommendation or input from the First Lady? A No. He never told me that. Q Did you receive your job because of input from the First Lady, your detail because of input from the First Lady? A No. Q Are you aware of any input or any comments from the First Lady concerning you coming over on detail? A That's a flattering question. Thank you. No. Q Okay. When you finished with the list, did you put it back in the file cabinet as you left? Mr. Muse. Which list? BY MS. OLSON: Q The Secret Service list that you were working on, the green and white list that you were working off of with the names? A It stayed in the vault. Except for the occasion that the intern worked on it across the desk from me, that's the only time that I can recall that it was actually out of the vault. Q Okay. But when you left and went back to the Army and left the White House, what did you do with the list? A Left it in the vault. Q Okay. And is it correct that you do not recall seeing the letter "I" or "A" next to the names that were on this list? A That's correct. Q Do you know approximately how many names were on that list total? A I really don't know. I don't have a clue. Q Do you know if it went from "A" to "Z" or if it stopped somewhere in the alphabet? A I've been asked that question. I don't know. Q How was the list specifically explained to you, if it was at all, what it contained? A To the best of my knowledge, it was imparted to me that the list was current people that needed access to the White House. Q And was it your understanding that what you were doing was updating files of current people at the White House who were holdovers? A Creating files. Q Creating files. Did anyone sign for files when the FBI agent would bring them back? The SBIs or whatever they would bring back? A I don't recall that. Q Did they come every day? A I don't know that, either. I don't think they came every day, but I remember they came in packages but I don't know that anybody signed for them. If that happened, it missed my attention. Q During the time period where you did say that the telephone call went back and forth from Mr. Livingstone to the FBI -- A Uh-huh. Q -- did you have any discussion with Mr. Livingstone at that time about the number of files you were ordering and why you were ordering so many files? A No, that was a policy decision that was made. Q And I think you said you went down to a number, a set number per week that was a max you could order? A Correct. Q Were you hitting that max pretty much the whole time you were there? A Yes. Q Are you aware of Mr. Livingstone obtaining or doing anything with files from Bush and Reagan administration people? A I never saw him do anything with them. Q And by Bush and Reagan, I mean people who were not holdovers, I mean political appointees of a high level? A No. Q Did you ever do any activity on a campaign where you would actually obtain or try to obtain information and private information on individuals in the Republican Party? A No. Q Do you know if Mr. Livingstone ever did that kind of investigation? A Never came in my purview. Q Did anyone ever ask you to do that? A No. Q Did you hear any conversations at the White House that anyone was trying to conduct a project to get files on prior Bush and Reagan high level administration officials? A No. Q You had said that you reported to Craig Livingstone. Can you state what you understood the chain of command to be within that office concerning your detail? A Craig Livingstone, and Mary were my -- Craig was my supervisor, Mari was the office manager. Mari could tell me what to do. Craig supervised me. My directions came mainly from Craig. Q Okay. And did you have an understanding of who Mr. Livingstone's supervisor was? A I understood that it was Mr. Kennedy. Q Okay. Did you give Mr. Livingstone any kind of status reports or memos on a regular or periodic basis? A I gave him some reports when he requested them. Q And can you describe what kind of reports you would give him? A As I recall, these reports listed the number of, I think, SF-86s and might have discussed where I was at. I don't have that in front of me. I just can't recall that very vividly. Q But was that on a weekly basis? A As I recall, there were a couple of times he asked me, but that may not be correct. He may never have asked me for that. He may never have asked me for any kind of a status report. Q Do you believe that you did at some point, though, create a status report? A I do. Q Do you know if it was more than one? A I think it was more than one. Whether he threw it in the burn barrel, I don't know. Q My question was, do you recall if you gave it actually to Craig Livingstone after you created it? A I don't recall if I gave it to him or to Mari. Q Do you recall if it was to one or the other at least? A Well, it was most likely to Craig, but it was probably to Craig, but I don't recall that I put it on his desk or I put it on Mari's desk. Q Did you ever attend any meetings with Bill Kennedy? A No, not to my knowledge. Q Or sit in on any meetings with Bill Kennedy? A Oh, no. Q Same question. Did you ever attend any meetings or sit in on any meetings with Vince Foster or Bernie Nussbaum? A Well, no. Q Did you ever attend any political meetings or gatherings while you were working at the White House? A No. Q Did you ever have any contact or conversation with the FBI about the number of reports that you were ordering or any conversations about the frequency of the reports that you were ordering? A No. Q When you left, there came a time you said in mid-December where you did start doing the list because you needed to find where the people were? A Right. Q Was the project still ongoing when you left in February? A Yes. Q Were you still sending in requests for previous reports? In January and February? A I don't have any recollection that I stopped sending in at any point. Q Okay. Why did you leave when you left the White House? A My detail ended. Q Did you try to get your detail extended? A As I understand my agency, the only conversation I recall -- no. Q Do you know if anyone tried? A Not that I recall. Q Do you know if anyone else tried to get your detail extended? A I don't think they did. Ms. Olson. I have a document that I'm going to mark as deposition number 13. It's Bates stamped CGE 43810, White House office personnel from other offices. [Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 13 was marked for identification.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Have you ever seen that document before without the highlighting marks and the Bates stamp number? A I've never seen this document before. Q This is a document that purports to request to extend your detail for another term. Were you ever told any reason why your detail couldn't be extended by the White House? A The fact that my detail was ended was -- I was advised by my personnel office, Betty Bray, that my detail was ending on the date that it was ending. I thought that it was ending on March 1, but I was told by Betty Bray that the detail was ending on the pay period that it ended. That's all the conversation that I had. If that document is accurate, I was unaware of that document. Q Were you ever informed or were you aware of any problems in your security clearance? A I was made aware of it at some point later. Q Do you know if that had any effect on your having to leave the White House? A Not conclusively. Q And what were those problems? A Apparently there was a problem in my background. Q And what was that? A What was my problem? Q What was the problem that was in your background? A Apparently there was some negative information in my background. Q Concerning what? A Concerning my work in Texas. Q Was that information having to do with your work for the company, the Attorney General's office in Texas? A That's correct. Q And what was that? A I had been -- a woman had filed a private claim against me in Texas. Q Did you ever have any discussions about that complaint with Mr. Livingstone? A Yes, I did. Q And was he aware of that prior to you starting at the White House? A I believe so. I'm not sure about that. Q Do you recall having any additional discussions with him about that while you were at the White House? A No, not specifically. Q Did anyone else question you about that incident while you were at the White House? A No. Q Did Mr. Livingstone ever discuss any problems in his background that he had getting clearance at the White House? A No. Q Were you aware of any conversations with anyone else concerning Mr. Livingstone's problems getting a security clearance at the White House? A No. Q When you left, did you pass on Project Update to anyone or explain to anyone what you had been doing on Project Update? A When I left -- before I left, we had a meeting. Q And who was that? A Everybody in the meeting, as I recall, Mari, Lisa, Craig, and myself. It was agreed at that time that I would come in on a Saturday at some -- within the next month and that all four of us would work on the update project and get it completed. And we would do that on successive Saturdays until the project was done, which we thought it would take a couple of Saturdays. Q And it was Lisa working primarily? A No, it was myself -- the agreement was that the four of us would work on that together. Q Okay. Did you do that? A No, I did not. Q Was there a reason why you didn't? A Well, as soon as I went back to my agency I got sent on a detail to Canada. When I got back from Canada, very shortly thereafter, I was made Special Agent in Charge and I did not have the time to -- I didn't have the time to do anything like that. And I didn't. Q And when you were made Special Agent in Charge was that a promotion? A It was a temporary position. Q Is that one that you hold at this time? A No, I don't. Q Have you received any promotions since leaving the White House? A As I mentioned earlier in my statement, I was promoted to a GS-13 about a year before I went to the White House. The paperwork, the actual promotion, the SF-50 I received, that -- I believe it is an SF-50 -- I received the 50 action after I got back from the White House. No, as a matter of fact, I think I received it before I left the White House. Q Other than -- A I think I got promoted while I was at the White House. Q But that was a promotion that you had knowledge of before you came; right? A It was a promotion -- was an advertised position that I had to submit, you know, paperwork for, and it was a competitive promotion and I received that in a competitive thing approximately 2 years prior. Q And did that give you a different or a changed title? A It just made me a senior agent. Q Okay. When you left on the last day, you left out of the White House, did you -- do you recall if you left a copy of the green and white file you were working from on the table or in the file? A I left it, to my knowledge, in the file. Mr. Muse. Speaking of leaving -- Ms. Olson. Yes, I have crossed out -- that was my last page, but let me double check and make sure I have everything done. Let's just go off the record for 2 minutes and let me double check everything so I don't kick myself and make sure I have everything. No reason you sitting here while I go through this. Mr. Muse. All right. [Recess taken 8:18 p.m. to 8:21 p.m.] BY MS. OLSON: Q Did you run for delegate to the Democratic National Convention at one point in your career? A I did in 1975. Q Did you win? A No. Q In the 1970s, did you apply for a Federal position with the Law Enforcement Agency? A I think I did. I think I made a lot of applications. Q To the FBI? A I don't know that I applied to the FBI. I might have, I don't know. I don't remember that. Q Do you know what agencies or what types of agencies you were applying to at that time? A I don't -- I know that I applied to a lot of agencies. Took tests and stuff like that. Q Law enforcement agencies or -- A Yes, mostly law enforcement agencies. Q Okay. Did you ever obtain Army dossiers on individuals and pass them on to the White House to aid them in their appointment of individuals to positions? And by "Army dossier," I mean similar to a background file? A You asked me that earlier and I answered it, but it's possible that I contacted an agency. But I'm not sure that I got any files back. I mean, I'm not sure what I got for them, but I do recall trying to do an update and requesting some files. Now, when I gave that answer earlier, I didn't want to mislead as you read to me, so I don't know that that -- I cannot answer with certainty your question. I don't know. Q And when you were obtaining this update, were you seeking files that you had authority to seek? A I believe I was trying to identify if the individual was still working at the White House or on detail to the White House. That's the only thing that I can imagine that you're referring to. That you mentioned the central clearance facility. Q Yes, sir? A That's got me completely baffled. Q So, other than that, did you ever do any favors for anyone to try to get some confidential dossiers to help defeat a promotion or appointment for a person during the Clinton administration? A No, I don't -- I don't know what you're talking about. Q Okay. Ms. Olson. I don't believe I have any questions, if Minority has no questions. Mr. Stroman. Minority has no questions. Ms. Olson. We are down from the record. [Whereupon, at 8:24 p.m., the deposition concluded.] CONTENTS EXHIBIT NO. PAGE Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.............................. 45 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification...............................47 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.............................. 48 Marceca Deposition Exhibits Nos. 4 and 5 were marked for identification............................. 49 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 4-A was marked for identification.............................. 50 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 5-A was marked for identification...............................53 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 6 was marked for identification.............................. 54 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 7 was marked for identification.............................. 55 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 8 was marked for identification.............................. 57 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 9 was marked for identification.............................. 76 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 10 was marked for identification............................. 103 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 11 was marked for identification............................. 123 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 12 was marked for identification............................. 124 Marceca Deposition Exhibit No. 13 was marked for identification............................. 150
