IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x : JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action No. : 95-0133 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, : : Defendant. : : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x Washington, D.C. Wednesday, May 5, 1999 Deposition of JEFFREY E. GARTEN a witness of lawful age, taken on behalf of the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action, before Rita M. Hemphill, Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia, in the Chambers of Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola, U.S. District Court, 3rd and Constitution, N.W., Washington, D.C. commencing at 10:11 a.m. 2 APPEARANCES: On Behalf of the Plaintiff: LARRY KLAYMAN, ESQ. Chairman and General Counsel Judicial Watch, Inc. 501 School Street, S.W., Suite 725 Washington, D.C. 20024 On Behalf of the Defendant: MARINA UTGOFF BRASWELL, ESQ. Assistant United States Attorney U.S. Attorney's Office 555 Fourth Street, N.W. 12th Floor Washington, D.C. 20001 ELISE PACKARD, ESQ. U.S. Department of Commerce 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230 On Behalf of the Deponent: ROGER M. WITTEN, ESQ. Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering 2445 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037-1420 Also present: Thomas Fitton, President, Judicial Watch Jason Aldrich, Esq., Judicial Watch 3 C O N T E N T S EXAMINATION BY: PAGE Counsel for Plaintiff 5 GARTEN DEPOSITION EXHIBITS: No. 1 Notice of Deposition 6 No. 2 United States Government Official Delegation, Under Secretarial trip to Singapore, Indonesia, China, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Seattle 125 No. 3 Memoranda re Follow-up for U/S Garten's Trip 155 4 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. This is the 3 video deposition of Jeffrey Garten taken by the counsel 4 for the Plaintiff in the matter of Judicial Watch, Inc. v. 5 U.S. Department of Commerce held in the U.S. District Court 6 for the District of Columbia, Case No. 95-0133, held in the 7 chambers of Judge John Facciola at the U.S. District Court 8 for the District of Columbia, on this date, May 5, 1999, and 9 at the time indicated on the video screen, which is 10 10:11 a.m. 11 My name is Sylvanus Holley. I am the videographer. 12 The court reporter today is Rita Hemphill from the firm of 13 Diversified Reporting. 14 Will counsel now introduce themselves? 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Larry Klayman, Chairman and General 16 Counsel of Judicial Watch, and sitting at my left although 17 not present now is Tom Fitton, President, Judicial Watch, and 18 an attorney who is helping me and Mr. Fitton bring boxes into 19 the room is Jason Aldrich. He is also present. 20 MR. WITTEN: I am Roger Witten. I am with Wilmer, 21 Cutler & Pickering and I represent the witness 22 MS. BRASWELL: Marina Braswell from the 23 U.S. Attorney's office and I represent the Department of 24 Commerce. 25 MS. PACKARD: Elise Packard, Office of General 5 1 Counsel, Department of Commerce. 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Would the court reporter please 3 swear in the witness? 4 Whereupon, 5 JEFFREY E. GARTEN 6 was called as a witness and, after having been duly sworn, 7 was examined and testified as follows: 8 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Please state your name. 11 A Jeffrey E. Garten. 12 Q When were you born? 13 A October 29, 1946. 14 MR. WITTEN: Mr. Klayman, I wanted to make a brief 15 statement before you got going with the substance. 16 I wrote a letter to one of your colleagues in 17 response to the subpoena duces tecum which stated that 18 Mr. Garten had no documents responsive to the subpoena. 19 We have discussed this morning before the 20 deposition the fact that Mr. Garten has copies of ten or so 21 public speeches that he gave while an official of the 22 Department of Commerce. These are publicly available, 23 they're on the web. You may very well have them. And it 24 just didn't occur to him as he was considering the subpoena 25 that these might be covered. 6 1 We don't have them with us, but I'd be glad to 2 supply them to you if you don't already have them. Maybe you 3 could tell us whether you do. 4 MR. KLAYMAN: We don't have them and if it's not 5 too much trouble I would ask that you provide them. 6 MR. WITTEN: We'd be glad to. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Let me ask that we mark as Exhibit 1 8 a copy of your notice of deposition duces tecum, along with 9 the subpoena and a document request which is called the duces 10 tecum Appendix A. 11 (Garten Deposition Exhibit No. 1 12 was marked for identification.) 13 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 14 Q I'm showing you this notice of deposition and 15 subpoena, Mr. Garten. Have you seen this before? 16 A Yes. 17 Q When did you see it? 18 A I don't remember the exact day. 19 Q Roughly speaking. 20 A I think it was in the last two months. 21 Q About two months ago? 22 A No. Some time in the last two months. 23 Q Have you actually seen a physical copy of this? 24 A Yes. 25 Q And did you have an opportunity to review the 7 1 documents that were requested? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And did you search for the documents that were 4 requested on Appendix A? 5 A There wasn't a requirement for a search in the 6 sense that I didn't have any documents that I considered to 7 be documents. 8 Q So you didn't do a search. 9 A I didn't have any documents. 10 Q Well, my question is you didn't do a search. 11 A There was no reason to do a search since I didn't 12 have any documents. 13 Q So the answer is no, you didn't do a search. 14 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I think it's asked and answered. 16 He's explained that he didn't do a search because he had 17 nothing to search through. 18 Is that right, Mr. Garten? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q When you left the Department of Commerce, did you 22 take any documents with you? 23 A No. 24 Q Not one document? 25 A Nothing I considered to be a document. I had 8 1 copies of some speeches that I gave which were in the public 2 domain. 3 Q Had you removed any documents before you left the 4 Department of Commerce, during the time that you worked 5 there? 6 A No. 7 Q And when I use the word documents, I'm talking not 8 just about pieces of paper but computer diskettes, any kind 9 of recordations of communications or statements of any kind. 10 A I left with absolutely nothing except a few 11 speeches and a copy of my security clearance. 12 Q Did you use a laptop computer during the time you 13 were at the Commerce Department? 14 A No. 15 Q Did you use a computer at home? 16 A I had a computer at home, but I never used it for 17 anything official. 18 Q How did you define official? 19 A I only used the computer to write personal letters, 20 that kind of thing, during the time I was at the Commerce 21 Department. 22 Q Did you ever write letters to business executives 23 that went on trade missions? 24 A Never. 25 Q Did you ever write anything to them, any kind of 9 1 communication, e-mail or otherwise? 2 A Nothing. I never used a computer in conjunction 3 with anything official while I was at the Commerce 4 Department. Even in the Commerce Department. 5 Q Did you ever send e-mail from the Commerce 6 Department? 7 A No. 8 Q Did you speak on the telephone from time to time 9 with individuals concerning the trade missions to various 10 countries? 11 A I'm sure there were times when I did, yes. 12 Q Did you ever record any of those conversations? 13 A No. 14 Q Did you ever make notes of any of those 15 conversations? 16 A To the best of my ability to recall, no. 17 Q Did you ever send facsimiles in any manner related 18 to the trade missions? 19 A I may have. I just don't recall. 20 Q You sent facsimiles from time to time to the White 21 House about those trade missions? 22 A Again, I don't recall, but it's possible. 23 Q To the Democratic National Committee? 24 A Seems entirely remote to me, since I had no 25 connection with the Democratic National Committee. 10 1 Q And do you mean you had no connection with it? 2 A I mean I had no dealings with them at all. 3 Q You never talked to them once during the period 4 that you were at the Department of Commerce? 5 A To the best of my recollection, never once. 6 Q Well, you say best of your recollection. Do you 7 mean no or you're not sure? 8 MR. WITTEN: I object to the form of the question. 9 That's an obvious answer. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: It's not obvious. Please don't 11 interrupt. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: As best you can, answer that 13 question, Mr. Garten. 14 THE WITNESS: To the best of my knowledge, I had no 15 dealings with anybody on the Democratic National Committee at 16 any time. What I can't be 100 percent certain of is that 17 there could have been a meeting and maybe somebody was there 18 and I talked to them, but I never consciously knew that they 19 were from the Democratic National Committee. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q What caused you to take copies of your speeches but 22 not copies of other documents from the Commerce Department? 23 What was the distinction? If any. 24 A The speeches I considered to be very public 25 documents and the kind of speeches that I gave were very, 11 1 very substantive about American policy and I was proud of 2 them and I wanted to keep it as my own personal record of 3 what I did and what I thought and what I thought was a 4 contribution to public policy. 5 Q During the time that you were at the Commerce 6 Department, I believe you previously testified to 7 congressional committees you had concerns about John Huang 8 being involved in matters related to China, correct? 9 A Correct. 10 Q And you wrote certain letters and memoranda to that 11 effect to people inside the Commerce Department, correct? 12 A Correct. 13 Q Did you keep copies of those letters just for your 14 own protection? 15 A No. 16 Q Do you know where those letters and memoranda are 17 today? 18 A No. 19 Q When you left the Commerce Department, did you seek 20 clearance for the documents which you did take, the speeches? 21 A No. 22 Q Did you tell anyone you were taking the speeches? 23 A No one other than the people in my office who 24 helped me to put them together. 25 Q And who are they? 12 1 A It would have been some secretaries. 2 Q And what are their names? 3 A I can't remember. 4 Q Who was your principal secretary? 5 A I can only remember her first name now, Ingrid. 6 Q Ingrid? Can you remember the first names of any 7 others? 8 A No. 9 Q Who were the people that you worked with in your 10 immediate office? 11 A There wouldn't have been any. 12 Q Okay. Well, maybe -- I'm expanding it beyond 13 secretaries. Who were people that you worked with in your 14 office suite, if you can name them, please? 15 A Well, the principal two people -- they weren't in 16 my office as such, but my principal two deputies were Tim 17 Howser, whose title was Deputy Under Secretary, and David 18 Rothkopf, who had the same title. 19 Q And what was that suite number? 20 A I don't remember. 21 Q What part of the Commerce Department, generally 22 speaking? Was it located within ITA? 23 A Yes. 24 Q What floor? 25 A I'm not sure. 13 1 Q Was it near somebody else's office, such as 2 Secretary Brown? 3 A No. His office was several floors away. 4 Q You are aware that when Mr. Rothkopf left the 5 department he took numerous documents with him, correct? 6 A I am not aware. 7 Q Have you learned of that from any source? 8 A No. 9 Q Do you know whether or not he took boxes of 10 documents with him when he went to work for Kissinger 11 Associates? 12 A No. 13 Q Let's back up. Where did you go to high school? 14 A I went to Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. 15 Q And when did you graduate? 16 A '64. 1964. 17 Q And where were you born? 18 A New York City. 19 Q And what did you do after Andover, after Phillips 20 Academy? 21 A I went to Dartmouth. 22 Q And when did you graduate? 23 A '68. 24 Q Did you major in anything in particular? 25 A It was a combination of economics and politics. 14 1 Q And what did you do at that time in 1968? 2 A I went into the military. 3 Q Which branch of the military? 4 A Army. 5 Q And what did you do there? 6 A I was in the 82nd Airborne Division and the U.S. 7 Special Forces. 8 Q You served in Vietnam? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And how long did you stay in the military? 11 A Four years. 12 Q You got an honorable discharge? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And what did you do when you got out? 15 A I went to graduate school. 16 Q And what year was that? 17 A Late '71. 18 Q And that was Johns Hopkins? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Here in Washington, D.C.? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International 23 Studies? 24 A Yes. 25 Q And you got your Master's degree in what year? 15 1 A '73. 2 Q And what did you do at that time? 3 A I went into the Nixon administration. 4 Q What did you specialize in at Johns Hopkins? 5 A Economics and American foreign policy. 6 Q And up to that point in time, you didn't have any 7 real specialty in China, did you? 8 A No. 9 Q And what position did you take in the Nixon 10 administration? 11 A I was a staff member of what was called the 12 White House Council on International Economic Policy. 13 Q And that was a political appointment? 14 A I don't know how you would define it. I was not in 15 the Civil Service. 16 Q Did someone recommend you for that job? 17 A No. 18 Q How did you get it? 19 A I volunteered my services immediately on graduation 20 to do some research on a pro bono basis and they liked it and 21 they offered me a job. 22 Q And what were your duties and responsibilities in 23 this job? 24 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. Mr. Klayman, I'm sure, 16 1 will move along. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: This is very relevant, Your Honor. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Let's go. 4 THE WITNESS: I was focusing on international 5 trade, international investment, all kinds of 6 international -- sort of problems with an economic scope. 7 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 8 Q What area in particular of the world were you 9 focused on primarily? 10 A It was every area. It was no particular one. 11 Q Did you work with a supervisor? 12 A I wouldn't use the word supervisor, but I reported 13 to the -- I think the person who would have been called the 14 deputy director of the council. 15 Q And who was that? 16 A It was a fellow named Jonathan Rose. 17 Q And how long did you stay in that job? 18 A Approximately a year and a half. 19 Q And what happened then? 20 A I moved to the State Department to join Secretary 21 Kissinger's staff. 22 Q And what position did you get there? 23 A I was a staff member of the policy planning staff. 24 Q A political appointment? 25 A Again, I don't want to use that term, only because 17 1 there was no confirmation or anything, but I was not in the 2 foreign service or the Civil Service. I think they called it 3 Schedule C. Something that was not Civil Service. I don't 4 know the technicalities. 5 Q Did you work directly with Secretary Kissinger? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What principal areas of the world were you focused 8 on? 9 A It was a job very similar to the other job I 10 described. I got involved in lots of areas. I was not 11 considered to be a regional expert, but I was developing a 12 lot of expertise in international trade and international 13 finance. 14 Q Did you have somebody you worked with most closely? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Who was that? 17 A Winston Lord, Samuel Lewis, and Reginald 18 Bartholemew. Winston Lord was the director and the other two 19 were the deputy directors. 20 Q And Mr. Lord later went on to become the ambassador 21 of China? 22 A Ambassador to China. Yes. 23 Q To China. And what period did he become ambassador 24 to China? 25 A I don't know the exact -- it was during the Bush 18 1 administration. 2 Q And how long did you stay there? 3 A I stayed there until President Carter was elected, 4 '76. 5 Q 1980 -- 1976, correct. And what happened? 6 A I went back to the White House in a very similar 7 position -- a higher position, but very similar job to what I 8 had at the beginning, so now I was in the Carter 9 administration in the White House, but focusing on exactly 10 the same issues. It was always international trade and 11 international finance. 12 Q And was there a title to your position? 13 A I believe it was called staff member of the 14 Economic Policy Committee. 15 Q And who was your supervisor? 16 A Ernest Preeg. 17 Q How is that spelled? 18 A P-r-e-e-g. 19 Q Was there someone ultimately that sat on top of 20 this Economic Policy Committee? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Who was that? 23 A Secretary of the Treasury Blumenthal. 24 Q And what were your duties and responsibilities? 25 A I was the person in the White House who was 19 1 coordinating the various views of agencies in the government 2 on these issues of trade and finance. I was a staff member. 3 Q Again, was there a particular region of the world 4 you focused on more than others? 5 A No. 6 Q And how long did you stay in that job? 7 A I stayed for about a year and a half? Well, it 8 may have been a little less. It may have been about nine 9 months. 10 Q In terms of your position at the White House at 11 that time, did you work with the Commerce Department in 12 furtherance of your duties and responsibilities? 13 A I worked with all the agencies. Any agency that 14 had a role in international economic issues. 15 Q Which would have included the Commerce Department. 16 A Yes. 17 Q Who did you work with at the Commerce Department, 18 generically speaking? What level? What part? 19 A I don't remember the names, but typically it would 20 have been at the assistant secretary level. 21 Q Of the ITA, International Trade Administration? 22 Or all different branches? 23 A Probably all different branches. I don't even know 24 if the ITA existed then. I think the position that I 25 subsequently had at the Commerce Department didn't exist 20 1 then. I was dealing at a relatively middle-high level. 2 Q Were you focused on exports? Imports? 3 A I'm sure -- I mean, I don't remember -- all of 4 those. Anything that dealt with global economic issues would 5 come to me to put in the form of a decision memorandum that 6 somebody higher than me would use. 7 Q And did you also liaise with the U.S. Trade 8 Representative in that post? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And with the Department of Treasury? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Department of Labor? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Department of State, obviously? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Did you travel to China up to that point in time? 17 A No. 18 Q Have you ever traveled to China? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Up to the point of your post under the Clinton 21 administration at the Commerce Department, had you ever 22 traveled to China? 23 A Yes. 24 Q When was that? 25 A I think it was 1985. 21 1 Q Okay. We'll pick that up as we go through the 2 chronology. Any other times? 3 A No. 4 Q In the course of your working at the White House in 5 the Carter administration with the Commerce Department, you 6 became aware that the Commerce Department generally speaking 7 is a very politicized agency, correct? 8 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. 9 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: You can respond. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. You can respond, if 12 you can. 13 THE WITNESS: I can't even relate to the question. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q Well, let me give you an example. At the Commerce 16 Department, under all administrations, or at least 17 administrations that you were experiencing up to that point, 18 Nixon and Carter -- 19 A Nixon, Ford and Carter. 20 Q Nixon, Ford and Carter. You came to understand 21 that frequently a component in decision making at the 22 Commerce Department was whether or not industries were large 23 contributors to the party in power, correct? 24 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. Form. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 22 1 THE WITNESS: I have no recollection of thinking 2 that way. Everything about my background to that point was I 3 was a very technical person. I was less than 30 years old. 4 I was not in any -- I had already been affiliated with two 5 political parties. I was not partisan. 6 I was in the area of basically asking the question 7 of asking what is in the U.S. interests as best I could and 8 that's what I was guided on. I can't relate to your 9 question. 10 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 11 Q Well, we're going to jump a little bit in time 12 here. We're going to go through your chronology, but let's 13 just, for purposes of this question, take it up to the 14 present. You are aware based on your considerable 15 experience, much of which has been published in terms of your 16 background, that a factor in decision making at the Commerce 17 Department historically, whatever administration, Democrat or 18 Republican, has been whether industries contribute to the 19 political party in power. 20 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 21 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: In the executive branch, correct? 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. I think he's answered 25 that, but if you can, Mr. Garten. 23 1 THE WITNESS: I don't know how to answer that 2 question because -- I'll ask you to make it more precise. 3 You're asking me as an American citizen do I understand that 4 there is some relationship between economic power and 5 politics? The answer is yes. I don't confine that to any 6 particular agency or any particular administration. 7 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 8 Q And a component of politics is money, correct? 9 A I think that's true in the United States and every 10 other country. I think that's true of every period of 11 American history. 12 Q And that certainly enters into the minds of 13 decision makers at the Commerce Department when deciding how 14 to make rulings on various matters. 15 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 16 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 17 MR. KLAYMAN: Based on your experience. 18 MR. WITTEN: Objection. He's asking the witness to 19 read the minds of countless unidentified Commerce Department 20 officials. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I'm going to sustain the 22 objection. I think Mr. Garten has explained to you 23 sufficiently how he views it. 24 MR. KLAYMAN: Let me see if I can make it more 25 precise. 24 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q You have sat in on discussions throughout your long 3 and distinguished career where you have heard conversations 4 at the Commerce Department and elsewhere that concern whether 5 or not a particular party that is subject to the discussion 6 has made campaign contributions to the party occupying the 7 executive branch? 8 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 9 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 10 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 11 MR. WITTEN: I don't mind if you ask questions. I 12 do a little object to each question where you load in a 13 factual premise that has not been established. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: That's the reason for the question. 15 Thank you. 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. If you can, 17 Mr. Garten. 18 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question? 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q During the course of your long and distinguished 21 career in international trade, you have been privy to 22 meetings where discussions of how much an individual or a 23 company donated to a political party came up. 24 A I don't recall ever being in a meeting where that 25 was the subject of discussion. 25 1 Q You don't remember? 2 A I'm not saying that I've never been in that 3 meeting, a meeting like that, but it has not been a part of 4 my career to find myself in those situations, and so sitting 5 here right now, I do not recall being part of any discussion 6 where someone said that so and so gave so much money period, 7 let alone that because of that something should happen. 8 Q So you're telling me that you've never, ever heard 9 anything like that in a meeting? 10 MR. WITTEN: Asked and answered. 11 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. Asked and answered. 13 MR. WITTEN: You don't have to answer. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q You are aware that historically speaking the 16 Secretary of Commerce frequently has been a fundraiser of a 17 political party. 18 A I know that some have. I don't know whether that 19 has been historically the case. 20 Q Which are the ones you know have been? 21 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 23 THE WITNESS: Secretary Mosbacher. Secretary 24 Brown. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Witten, the irony is 26 1 delicious, isn't it? 2 MR. WITTEN: I prosecuted Maurice Stans. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: And I defended him. 4 We just thought we'd tell you that. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm jealous, Your Honor. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: At the risk of sticking our noses 7 in, I thought Stans broke the record, didn't he? He raised 8 more money than any human being on the face of the earth. 9 MR. WITTEN: It was certainly the record as of that 10 time. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He was Secretary of Commerce. 12 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 13 Q How long did you stay in this job at the White 14 House? 15 A I think it was about nine months. 16 Q And what happened then? 17 A I was asked to come back to the State Department. 18 Q And what position did you take there? 19 A I was the deputy director of the policy planning 20 staff. 21 Q And what were your duties and responsibilities? 22 A They were substantially -- it was substantially the 23 same issues that I had been dealing with, only I was now 24 supervising several other people and when the director wasn't 25 there, I handled other issues, too. 27 1 Q What people were you supervising? 2 A There were staff people who were focused on 3 international economic issues. 4 Q Was there an area of the world that you specialized 5 in more than another? 6 A No. 7 Q And how long did you stay in that job? 8 A Until '79. 9 Q And what happened then? 10 A I went to Wall Street. 11 Q And where did you go on Wall Street? 12 A I went to Lehman Brothers. 13 Q And what position did you get there? 14 A I was a vice president. 15 Q Did someone recommend you for that job? 16 MR. WITTEN: Scope. 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: It may be somebody who has knowledge 19 about Mr. Garten's activities. 20 MS. BRASWELL: That's a stretch, Your Honor. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 22 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 23 Q What were your duties and responsibilities at 24 Lehman Brothers? 25 MR. WITTEN: Scope. 28 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, I'm trying to establish 3 background. It's very, very important. 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Let me see if I can figure out -- 5 Why don't you tell us what you did there, if you 6 can. 7 THE WITNESS: I was a general investment banker in 8 the corporate finance area. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: Can we take a two-minute break and 10 I'll explain why this is an important area? 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes. Do you want Mr. Garten to 12 step out? 13 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes. Thank you. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Would you step out for just a 15 second? 16 (The witness was excused.) 17 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, the reason why in this 18 instance background is much more important than usual is 19 because Mr. Garten has testified that in fact Mr. Huang was 20 not competent for his job at the Commerce Department, that he 21 and Mr. Rothkopf had much more expertise in China and 22 consequently this is why he was quote walled off. So I'm 23 trying to establish what expertise -- 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Who is the he in that sentence? 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Huang. Huang was walled off. 29 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: So you want to inquire as to what 2 Mr. Garten did at Lehman Brothers? Is that what he said? 3 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I mean, we have reason to 4 believe that Mr. Huang actually was a lot more competent for 5 China than Mr. Garten was, based on his experience. That's 6 just a premise upon which we're looking at the situation from 7 our own objective posture. 8 We don't really have a dog in that fight. That's a 9 fight between the two of them. And we need to know in terms 10 of motivation here and in terms of intent why Mr. Garten 11 would make such a claim, that Mr. Huang was incompetent when 12 it came to China, which is his specialty. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: His being Huang's specialty, 14 supposedly. 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Right. 16 MR. WITTEN: May I make a suggestion? Why don't 17 you just ask him whether he has any China or Asia experience 18 rather than open-ended questions concerning Lehman and we can 19 get right to it and past it and, though it's not relevant to 20 this particular dispute, your description of Mr. Garten's 21 testimony is not accurate. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, duties and responsibilities, 23 Your Honor, it's just a simple question just to get through 24 it. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Well, let's see if we 30 1 can move along. 2 MS. BRASWELL: Your Honor -- 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I mean, we've been bogged down on 4 his background for the better part of half an hour and I see 5 where you're going with this and you want to show that he did 6 or did not have certain expertise, but I think we can get 7 there in a more pointed and directed fashion. 8 MS. BRASWELL: And may I ask how Mr. Garten's 9 opinion of Mr. Huang's capabilities relates to documents at 10 the Department of Commerce? 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: That remains to be see. 12 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, let me -- 13 MS. BRASWELL: Maybe a proffer would be helpful 14 before we go through an hour of testimony on the issue. 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I will do that as long as you 16 don't then discuss this proffer with the witness. 17 MS. BRASWELL: I'll be happy not to. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Will you agree not to do that? 19 MS. BRASWELL: That's fine. 20 MR. WITTEN: Oh, I certainly agree with that. 21 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, we have reason to believe, 22 Your Honor, that Mr. Garten is in fact covering for himself 23 with regard to this matter; that he knew what Mr. Huang was 24 doing at the Commerce Department and allowed it to happen. 25 That's the basis for that. 31 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: And then how does that relate -- 2 MS. BRASWELL: How does that relate to documents? 3 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, that he certainly has an 4 incentive -- 5 MR. WITTEN: And what's the good faith basis for 6 that scandalous assertion? What is your good faith basis for 7 stating that, sir? 8 MR. KLAYMAN: The basis that I just stated that 9 Mr. Huang in fact is much more qualified to deal with China 10 than anyone else at that department. 11 MR. WITTEN: You said something about Mr. Garten 12 covering up something and I want to know why in good faith 13 you have a basis for stating that on this record. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm stating that because all the 15 evidence suggests that Mr. Huang was heavily involved in 16 China and that he had much more expertise than Mr. Garten to 17 deal with it; that he was the person, quite apart from other 18 factors, that should have dealt with it. 19 MR. WITTEN: Do you have any other basis for that? 20 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, there's a very long and deep 21 record. It would take us a lot of time to get through. 22 MS. BRASWELL: That doesn't seem to be much of a 23 proffer, Your Honor. 24 MR. KLAYMAN: It's more than I unusually give. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: What we'll do at this point is 32 1 we'll see if Mr. Garten -- 2 I'm going to ask you, Mr. Klayman, to please move 3 along and get general background as to where this witness can 4 claim expertise or has expertise and then move along more 5 directly to the point you want to make and then we'll get to 6 it when we get to it. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: In essence, what I'm saying here -- 8 this is why I asked counsel not to discuss it with the 9 witness -- is that Mr. Garten knew exactly what Mr. Huang was 10 doing, that Mr. Huang was the person for that position and 11 the very fact that certain things may or may not have 12 occurred with Mr. Huang, having occurred on Mr. Garten's 13 watch, he obviously has an incentive not to produce documents 14 and not to testify candidly about what happened. 15 MS. BRASWELL: What is the basis for his knowledge 16 that Mr. Garten supposedly had this knowledge? I mean, we've 17 asked for a proffer, we haven't gotten one. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, we're going to go through the 19 deposition. 20 MS. BRASWELL: No, no, no. What is the background? 21 What is the evidentiary basis for a good faith questioning 22 that Mr. Garten supposedly had this knowledge? 23 Mr. Klayman has not yet provided it, Your Honor. 24 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, I gave the proffer in 25 good faith here. What the reality is is that Mr. Huang was 33 1 someone who had the expertise to carry out the functions that 2 he carried out, whether it was done legally or not, that's an 3 issue in this lawsuit. But I'm trying to establish that 4 Mr. Garten in fact put Mr. Huang in that position because he 5 was quite suited for that position and now there is an 6 incentive to remove documents, there is an incentive not to 7 be candid, because of the things that Mr. Huang is alleged to 8 have done at the Commerce Department. 9 MR. WITTEN: Before we resume, Mr. Klayman has 10 made a serious and scandalous attack on the veracity of 11 Mr. Garten, who has done nothing but serve this country 12 during four different administrations and I will ask for 13 sanctions if you do not establish to the satisfaction of a 14 fact finder any basis for this kind of really grossly 15 disturbing name calling. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, first of all, you asked for the 17 proffer. I gave you my candid assessment. You have no basis 18 for sanctions. If you ask them, you will be served with a 19 motion for sanctions. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. That's fine. But 21 I think we all have to proceed on the basis that -- and as 22 I understand what you're trying to accomplish, is that 23 Mr. Garten is not telling the truth in what he is about to 24 tell us; that as Mr. Witten points out is dangerous ground 25 for an attorney. So you know what you're doing, there's 34 1 nothing I can do to -- 2 MR. KLAYMAN: You asked for the proffer, 3 Your Honor, I gave it to you. I'm entitled to give you my 4 reasonable opinion. You want to seal this part of the 5 record, that's fine. I have no problem with that. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I do not see any reason to seal 7 it. 8 MR. KLAYMAN: But I am giving you my opinion. I 9 have made no public allegations. I'm telling you the basis 10 for this testimony. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Fine. 12 MR. KLAYMAN: And if you want to seal it, that's 13 fine. 14 MS. BRASWELL: No. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, I don't want to seal it, but I 16 just hope that we understand that a man's reputation is at 17 stake here and -- 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I'm not the only one who has 19 made that assertion. It was others have reached that 20 conclusion. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You're the only one who's here 22 before me and that's what concerns me. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I'm entitled to prove it, 24 aren't I? 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You're entitled to prove it. 35 1 MR. KLAYMAN: And document -- 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I hope that we would be sensitive 3 to the fact that we do have a man's reputation at stake and 4 we would not unfairly or improperly impugn him. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: And that's why I'm offering, if you 6 want to put it under seal, that's fine, but I'm telling you 7 the basis for -- 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Why don't we go forward. If 9 Mr. Witten wants me to put it under seal, I'll certainly take 10 that under advisement. 11 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm telling you the basis upon which 12 I'm undertaking this line of questioning. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: That we have the benefit here of a 15 record of Mr. Garten having testified in front of Congress. 16 Number one. 17 Number two, we know Mr. Huang's expertise. He has 18 considerable expertise. In fact, he had more expertise in my 19 view, and I have an international trade background as well, 20 than anyone I know of at the Commerce Department in terms of 21 China and trade. And having looked at the testimony, I'm 22 entitled to my opinion, as others have reached the same 23 conclusion, that Mr. Garten was not being candid that 24 Mr. Huang was incompetent. 25 MR. WITTEN: Now you've stated that others have 36 1 reached that conclusion. What's your basis for that 2 statement? 3 MR. KLAYMAN: If you'd like to buy a copy of the 4 book "Year of the Rat," feel free. I'll loan you my copy. 5 They have reached that conclusion. 6 MR. WITTEN: Any other basis for that statement, 7 Mr. Klayman? 8 MR. KLAYMAN: Logic and common sense. I'm 9 certainly entitled to prove it. 10 MR. WITTEN: Well -- 11 MR. KLAYMAN: So before you make scurrilous 12 allegations on the record against me -- let me finish -- 13 MR. WITTEN: Excuse me. Excuse me. The statement 14 was -- 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Let me finish, Mr. Witten. 16 MR. WITTEN: -- that others had reached the same 17 conclusion -- 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor -- 19 MR. WITTEN: I'm only asking you your basis for 20 your statement that others had reached the conclusion and 21 other than the book, "The Year of the Rat," do you have any 22 other basis for -- 23 MR. KLAYMAN: There are two people that wrote that. 24 MR. WITTEN: Okay. And other than that, do you 25 have any other basis for your statement on this record -- 37 1 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm not being deposed -- 2 MR. WITTEN: -- that others have reached the 3 conclusion -- 4 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm not being deposed. I'm not being 5 deposed. 6 Your Honor, but I'm entitled to my position. You 7 asked for it, Mr. Witten. He got it. And for him to sit 8 here and to threaten me with sanctions is like the pot 9 calling the kettle black. 10 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Well, we don't need 11 that kind of incivility. Let's see if we can get going. 12 Let's move along with the witness' background. 13 Mr. Garten? 14 (The witness returned.) 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, may I ask that we just 16 run through quickly what his duties and responsibilities were 17 at Lehman Brothers? 18 MR. WITTEN: I thought we had agreed the question 19 would simply be Asia experience, Your Honor. 20 MR. KLAYMAN: I didn't hear that ruling from 21 Your Honor. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. 23 Mr. Garten, what we're trying to do here is go 24 through your career and your background, all right? I would 25 ask if you would help us do that by answering this question. 38 1 Looking at your career at Lehman Brothers, could 2 you just briefly describe with reference to what you've told 3 us how, if at all, your duties there had anything to do with 4 international trade or finance? 5 THE WITNESS: I spent a good deal of my time 6 working with foreign clients. I started out with a heavy 7 focus on Latin America and then in 1984 I moved to Tokyo to 8 head up and build up all the investment banking activities 9 for Lehman Brothers in Asia. That was substantially 10 Japanese-related, but it did include -- it came to include a 11 lot of work in Hong Kong. 12 Then I came back to New York in '87 and I was 13 overseeing a lot of restructuring of international companies. 14 Most of the work was out of London, I was going back and 15 forth from New York to London. 16 Then I left in '88, started my own firm called 17 Elliott Group. We worked with small American companies that 18 were seeking capital abroad. 19 And then I went to the Blackstone Group, I think it 20 as about '91, where my focus was on mergers and acquisitions 21 between Japanese and U.S. firms. 22 And then I went into the Clinton administration. 23 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 24 Q Up to that point in time, you had no particular 25 expertise in China, correct? 39 1 A Correct. 2 Q And in 1981, you say you went into the Clinton 3 administration. 4 MR. WITTEN: '91. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: 1991. 6 THE WITNESS: No, 1993. 7 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 8 Q 1993. Excuse me. And how did you get your job in 9 the Clinton administration? 10 A I don't really know. I was invited to make a 11 presentation at something that was called the Little Rock 12 Summit. It was after Clinton had been elected, but before he 13 took office. 14 Q Who invited you? 15 A I don't remember. It was a staff member, I think, 16 of the transition team. 17 Q Male, female? 18 A Male. 19 Q Was it someone high up? 20 A No. Not someone I had ever heard of and the level 21 of the person is such that I couldn't tell you the name now. 22 I was told that there was going to be this all-day conference 23 and that Clinton and Gore would be there and that they were 24 looking for people who could make some very short 25 presentations on major national issues and that it would be 40 1 televised. So I said I would be happy to go. I went. 2 And I found myself on a panel with three people and 3 the panel was the international economy and each of us made a 4 five-minute presentation. My presentation was on the dollar. 5 Clinton asked me several questions and we got into a dialogue 6 and from what I heard it was a very interesting back and 7 forth. 8 And then several weeks later I got a call from 9 somebody on the transition team asking me if I would be 10 interested in joining the administration. 11 Q Who was that? 12 A I don't know. It is somebody who isn't there any 13 more or wasn't there -- 14 Q Who sat on the panel with you? You said there were 15 three. 16 A A woman named Paula Stern and -- 17 Q Pervious commissioner of the International Trade 18 Commission? 19 A Yes. Right. 20 Q Who else? 21 A And a distinguished economist name Rudy Doenbush, 22 who is at MIT. 23 Q I take it you met people at this conference that 24 now are or were in the Clinton administration. 25 A Well, actually, I didn't because I flew in, I went 41 1 to that panel and I immediately left. I don't think I was 2 there more than an hour and a half. 3 Q You are aware that Mickey Kantor was at that 4 conference. 5 A I am not aware. 6 Q You are aware that Harold Ickes was at that 7 conference. 8 A I am not aware. 9 Q Ira Magaziner? 10 A Not aware. 11 Q Robert Ruben? 12 A Not aware. 13 Q Ron Brown? 14 A Not aware. 15 Q So you got the call and what position -- what 16 happened after you got this call saying there was an interest 17 to have you in the administration? 18 A I said I wasn't interested, although I would be 19 happy to provide some advice, if that's what they wanted. 20 Q And what happened then? 21 A They said would you be willing to come down and 22 talk to Secretary Brown. 23 Q Do you remember who that was at that point? 24 A Same person, but I don't know. 25 Q And what happened after that? 42 1 A I said of course I would. And a couple of weeks 2 later I had occasion to be in Washington, I didn't make a 3 special trip, I had a half-hour meeting with him. 4 Q Where did you meet? 5 A In his office. 6 Q Was anybody present? 7 A Not during the discussion. 8 Q Somebody was present afterwards? 9 A Somebody met me and somebody was there afterwards. 10 Q Okay. Who met you? 11 A I can see the woman, but I can't remember her name. 12 Q Was it a caucasian woman, African-American woman? 13 A Caucasian. 14 Q His assistant? Barbara Schmitz? 15 A No. 16 Q Melissa Moss? 17 A I don't think so. 18 Q You know Melissa Moss, don't you? 19 A I know who she is. Yes. 20 Q Okay. Melanie Long? Dalia Traynham? 21 MR. WITTEN: You have to answer yes or no for the 22 transcript. 23 THE WITNESS: No to all that as far as I can 24 recall. The woman left. She had a position in the 25 department for a while and then she left after maybe six 43 1 months. 2 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 3 Q Okay. So when you had the meeting with Secretary 4 Brown, it lasted about half an hour, what did he say to you? 5 I take it he started the conversation. He started the 6 conversation, correct? 7 A I assume. He was very direct. He said I've had 8 trouble filling this position. 9 Q What was "this position"? Did he tell you? 10 A He probably said -- I don't remember this verbatim, 11 but it was something to the effect I'm looking for an under 12 secretary for trade, I've had trouble filling this position. 13 Now, it was no secret he had trouble because in the 14 newspapers there was some discussion of people who had turned 15 it down. 16 Q Who had turned it down? 17 MR. WITTEN: Scope, Your Honor. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 19 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, this is quite relevant. 20 Can I explain to you why in confidence? 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Garten, step out for a second. 22 Just step out for a second. 23 (The witness was excused.) 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes? 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, can I talk candidly 44 1 without being attacked here? I'm trying to be helpful, okay? 2 It's my opinion based on everything we know, in 3 all due modesty, I think we know a little bit about this 4 subject. If people were being asked to do something which 5 was illegal and they turned it down on that basis, it's quite 6 relevant and we believe that in Mr. Garten's position that he 7 participated in the sale of seats on trade missions for 8 campaign contributions. 9 People may have turned that down because they 10 didn't want to be part of it, so we need to know who they 11 are. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Is there any evidence that they 13 did, these other people? 14 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, we just want to get the names, 15 that's all. I'm not making any accusations, but that's the 16 basis and that's what we're here about. 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: The objection will be sustained. 18 Mr. Garten? 19 (The witness returned.) 20 MR. KLAYMAN: Could I have just 30 more seconds, 21 Your Honor? For the record? 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I'm sorry, Mr. Garten. Just step 23 right outside by my clerk's desk. 24 (The witness was excused.) 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes, Mr. Klayman? 45 1 MR. KLAYMAN: This is not an issue of personality. 2 I'm not trying to -- you can see I'm being quite polite with 3 Mr. Garten and with his counsel until he attacked me, but the 4 issue here is that this was somebody who was literally in the 5 number three post at the Commerce Department. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: This gentleman. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes. He was in the International 8 Trade Administration. He took credit for the trade missions. 9 He is the implementer of the trade missions. This is perhaps 10 the equivalent, if we're going to get candid testimony here, 11 I'll let the Court be the judge of that, of a living Ron 12 Brown. And if other people were offered this post and didn't 13 take it because they didn't want to participate in a 14 political patronage scheme, it's relevant. We need to know 15 who those people are. 16 MR. WITTEN: I thought this was a FOIA case, 17 Your Honor. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: They may have documents, Your Honor. 19 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I don't think so. Sustained. 20 Come in, Mr. Garten. 21 (The witness returned.) 22 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I ask Your Honor the basis of 23 your ruling? 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Because it's irrelevant. It 25 doesn't meet even the broadest standard of Rule 26 by being 46 1 likely to lead to evidence. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Might I ask Your Honor for a ruling 3 on why it's not relevant? 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes. It is not relevant because 5 the scope of the deposition as defined by Judge Lamberth has 6 to do with whether or not there were certain documents that 7 were removed or destroyed that were subject to this FOIA 8 request and whether or not there was a corrupt motive that 9 attended that. 10 I have permitted quite broad inquiry into the 11 activities of one Mr. John Huang because of the evidence 12 that I have seen which convinces me he's an essential figure 13 in this and the connection that he has with the department 14 bears on whether or not there were people at the department 15 who by virtue of their relationship with him or otherwise had 16 some reason to be not candid when they were directed to make 17 FOIA searches or to destroy or remove documents from the 18 premises. I don't see how that question relates to it, even 19 despite your proffer. And I may be mistaken, but we have to 20 move on. 21 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, if I may just put on the 22 record, the issue here is documents and documents may have 23 been created, I'm not going to be too specific here because 24 the witness is sitting here, documents may have been created 25 in this context which reflect the matters that are subject to 47 1 the FOIAs and this lawsuit and the judge's order of December 2 22nd. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I persist in my ruling. Please go 4 on. 5 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 6 Q What position was it -- I'm not clear, forgive me 7 if I'm asking this again -- that was being discussed? 8 A It was Under Secretary of Commerce for 9 International Trade. 10 Q And that is a political appointment? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And that post is a post that would be high up at 13 the Commerce Department, correct? 14 A I think it would be considered a senior 15 appointment. Yes. 16 Q Number two, number three post after the secretary? 17 A I don't know the exact hierarchy. There are 18 several under secretaries, but it was a senior post. I don't 19 know what number it would come. 20 Q What else did Mr. Brown say? 21 A He told me that he thought this was a great 22 opportunity because the Clinton administration wanted to 23 really turn a focus on global trade and that this was going 24 to be one of the key positions. 25 Q Did he tell you why it was going to be one of the 48 1 key positions? 2 A I don't recall -- I don't recall the details of the 3 discussion. I mean, I just -- it was several years ago. I 4 just remember my impression that it sounded a lot better than 5 I thought it would have sounded when I went in. 6 Q Based on what? 7 A I think just his enthusiasm and maybe the 8 recognition that I was superbly qualified for this job, given 9 everything else I had done. 10 Q What did he tell you about your background that 11 made you superbly qualified? 12 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 13 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 14 Q Or led you to believe that he thought you were 15 superbly qualified? 16 A It was what I felt talking to him. I don't know 17 what kicked off that feeling, I just -- by this stage, I had 18 had a lot of experience in the public sector and I had had a 19 lot of relevant experience on Wall Street and you could tell 20 from my background that I had had an intense interest in the 21 global economic arena and this was a senior position in an 22 administration that seemed to me to be getting off on a good 23 foot. 24 Q Did he tell you who else he was considering hiring 25 to fill various positions? 49 1 A No. 2 Q Did he discuss with you a plan to conduct trade 3 missions at the Commerce Department? 4 A No. To the best of my recollection, nothing that 5 specific. 6 Q Did he tell you he wanted to do overseas trade 7 missions generally? 8 A I don't recall. I don't think that was -- I don't 9 recall the discussion being that level of detail. 10 Q You took notes during the discussion? 11 A I did not. 12 Q Did Secretary Brown? 13 A No. 14 Q Was anything else discussed? Did he give you a 15 firm offer during the meeting? 16 A You know, I don't recall because I don't think it 17 actually came to that, given that I was somewhat reserved in 18 my willingness to say it was something that I would do. In 19 fact, I recall ending the discussion saying I don't know that 20 I would want to be in the administration, but it would be a 21 great honor to be able to provide advice from wherever I was. 22 At that moment, I was not going to come to Washington, mostly 23 for personal reasons. 24 Q Were there financial reasons as well? 25 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 50 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 2 THE WITNESS: It wasn't so much financial reasons. 3 My wife had a business in New York and it was not 4 transferrable, so I didn't want to put the burden on her. 5 That was the major reason. 6 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 7 Q What happened after the meeting? Did you meet with 8 others at the department that day? 9 A Not really. I just walked out with somebody. I 10 mean, I don't -- I think it was the same woman who brought me 11 in, just walked out and went back to New York. 12 Q What happened with regard to your offer of 13 employment after that? Lead me up to the point that you 14 accepted a position. Any other contact with Secretary Brown, 15 others in the Clinton administration? Any other discussions? 16 A I don't know exactly how I was contacted, but 17 someone said that Secretary Brown would be in New York and 18 that he would love to see me again. 19 Q Who was that someone? 20 A I don't remember. It was somebody on his staff. 21 And then I met him. He was at a -- some kind of an event in 22 New York. I think it was in a church. It was a big church. 23 Part of New York I hadn't been to before. And after -- I 24 think he was giving a talk and afterwards we met in one of 25 the -- somebody's office in the church and he said he had 51 1 been thinking about it and he really wanted me to take this 2 job. 3 Q What timeframe was this? 4 A Roughly May -- April, May '93. 5 Q Did you have any discussions of his plans to 6 conduct trade missions at that time? 7 A I don't recall. I don't recall trade missions. To 8 that point, the only issue was he just kept saying how good I 9 would be in this job and how much he needed somebody with my 10 qualifications. And how he wanted to build a Commerce 11 Department that was substantially more professional than it 12 had ever been and I was a key to that because of my 13 experience and he was probably just being flattering, he said 14 he had talked to a lot of people about me and he thought I 15 would bring a level of professionalism. 16 Q What happened after that? 17 A I think I talked to my wife and I said I had a lot 18 of conflicting views about going to Washington and disrupting 19 our family life and she said I think you should do it. So I 20 did. 21 Q Did you have any further meetings with Secretary 22 Brown or anybody else in the Clinton administration about the 23 substance of your job before you accepted? 24 A I don't recall, but I may have. There were two or 25 three people in the Clinton administration who I knew quite 52 1 well from previous experience and it's possible that I might 2 have called them and said what do you think of the 3 administration. I don't know that I did, but it's a little 4 fuzzy because I knew them quite well. 5 Q Did you have issues of ethics on your mind? Did 6 you question whether this administration was going to do 7 things honestly and ethically? 8 A That was not a major concern of mine. 9 Q It was a concern, though, wasn't it? 10 A I don't remember thinking about that. I mean, 11 having been in the Nixon administration, I understood that 12 the most important thing was one's own integrity and that you 13 just had to preserve that in everything you did, so it wasn't 14 like I at that time was preoccupied. I mean, I think I 15 understood the nature of government. 16 Q So you learned in the Nixon administration that if 17 you saw illegality occur elsewhere, just look the other way 18 and protect yourself. 19 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 20 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 22 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 23 Q You say you learned from the Nixon administration 24 that your own integrity is all that counts. 25 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 53 1 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: That's not what he said. 3 Sustained. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q What was your understanding of a proper role of 6 working in government based on your experience with the Nixon 7 administration? 8 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. Vague. Over broad. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: In terms of your ethics. Your own 10 ethics. 11 THE WITNESS: What I took from the Nixon 12 administration was that it's possible for government to be 13 challenged on things that it's doing, but that was not a 14 reason not to be in the government; that you had to be sure 15 that everything you were doing was unassailable from the 16 standpoint of ethical values. 17 I learned the same thing when I was in Vietnam. I 18 never favored the war, but it never crossed my mind that I 19 shouldn't be there if there was a war. So all of this, 20 frankly, is not -- I don't think is relevant because when I 21 entered the Clinton administration, I did not think that 22 there was anything about the administration that gave it a 23 cast of poor ethics. It was right after they were elected. 24 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 25 Q Well, you had known at the time that there were 54 1 issues of ethics that were raised in the presidential 2 campaign of 1992, correct? 3 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. Your Honor, this 4 has absolutely nothing to do the FOIA -- 5 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 6 MR. KLAYMAN: It deals with intent, Your Honor. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I don't think so. Sustained. 8 Please move on. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: Might I ask one question to follow 10 up? Your Honor can rule on it. 11 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 12 Q Is it your view based on your experience in 13 government up to that point that you can only control your 14 own actions, you can't control the actions of others and you 15 shouldn't mix into those actions of others? 16 A I didn't say that. I didn't say that. All I 17 was trying to say is I think any administration in these 18 times faces challenges by various groups that think it's 19 doing things that it shouldn't do and there will be no 20 such thing as a government that is beyond the scope of 21 this kind of criticism, thank God, and it was not an issue 22 on my mind. 23 I was very clear about my own values and it 24 never crossed my mind that anything that I came in touch 25 with knowingly would not be of the highest ethical standards. 55 1 Q You were aware, however, at the time that 2 you met with Secretary Brown and he offered you this 3 position of his previous background as a DNC fundraiser, 4 correct? 5 A I might have been. I don't recall what was -- 6 you have to remember, I was totally out of the political 7 environment. I was an investment banker, I was commuting to 8 Tokyo or to London. My only interaction was when I went to 9 that Little Rock summit, it was all of an hour and a half. I 10 had this one meeting with Secretary Brown, two meetings, and 11 I had friends in the administration for whom I had the 12 highest regard then and now. 13 Q Well, let me see if I can just focus the questions 14 here. You say that you gave this decision great thought, 15 correct? 16 A I gave it great thought from the standpoint of my 17 own personal life. 18 Q But you also gave it great thought from the 19 standpoint based on your own experience in international 20 trade and dealing with the Commerce Department, in going to 21 an agency which historically has been accused of being the 22 breeding ground of politics, correct? 23 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 24 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 56 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q You were aware up to that point in time that the 3 Department of Commerce had a reputation of doling out favors 4 to political contributions. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 6 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Under any administration. 8 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 9 MR. WITTEN: Same objection. 10 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Garten, in terms of American 11 history and your profound understanding -- 12 THE WITNESS: It isn't so profound. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, you've had a unique 14 perspective having served in so many different 15 administrations. 16 Mr. Klayman really loaded the gun up there in 17 speaking of American history focused on this particular 18 department as being a means to an end, that it is often used 19 by the party in power to reward its friends and punish its 20 enemies. Would you agree with Mr. Klayman's assessment of 21 that particular department? 22 THE WITNESS: I might have been naive, but I didn't 23 think of it in those terms. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Thank you, sir. 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Well said, Your Honor. 57 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q You were aware at the time that the Commerce 3 Department controlled grants of monies to private industry, 4 correct? 5 A I doubt that I had much knowledge of that. 6 Remember, my focus was everything that I had done in the 7 government and all of my interaction with the Commerce 8 Department was in that arena where there was no money. It 9 was all trade policy. 10 Q Well, as part of trade policy, you are aware that 11 the Commerce Department at that time administered to the 12 anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws, correct? 13 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did know that. 16 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 17 Q Okay. And based on your experience in working with 18 the Commerce Department in your various other jobs, you did 19 become aware that frequently a component in decision making 20 on whether to apply dumping duties concerned whether or not 21 the industries involved, the American industries, were heavy 22 contributions to a political party. 23 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 25 Did you ever become aware of that? 58 1 THE WITNESS: I absolutely had no knowledge of 2 that. 3 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 4 Q In fact, one of your specialties, based on your 5 experience, was Japan, correct? You had worked with Japan in 6 your various trade posts, correct? 7 A In my various investment banking jobs. 8 Q Did you have any knowledge of the prior 9 anti-dumping case involving computer chips from Japan? 10 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 11 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 12 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm trying to get a little more 13 precise, Your Honor. 14 MR. WITTEN: That's so far afield. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes. I'm going to sustain that. 16 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 17 Q During your discussions with Secretary Brown, did 18 he ever say to you I want you because of your expertise in 19 China? 20 A No. 21 Q Did you ever offer yourself because of any claimed 22 expertise in China? 23 A No. 24 Q Did Secretary Brown tell you during these 25 discussions who would handle China in particular in terms of 59 1 trade? 2 A No. 3 Q When ultimately were you offered the position? 4 A I think at that meeting at the church. 5 Q And when did you accept? 6 A I don't know precisely, but I would say some time 7 within a few weeks after that. 8 Q And what level of appointment did you receive? 9 A Under secretary. 10 Q And you had to go through a presidential 11 appointment process, correct? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Confirmation? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Did you have confirmation hearings where you 16 testified? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And at those confirmation hearings, did you stress 19 any expertise in China? 20 A I doubt that I did because I didn't have any. 21 Q Did you stress that you would be working with 22 others with expertise in China or simply point out? 23 A I don't have the testimony in front of me, but what 24 my recollection is is that I said that I was anxious to help 25 with expanding trade not only with the traditional trading 60 1 partners like Japan and Europe, but with emerging markets in 2 Asia and Latin America. And I might have said in one 3 sentence or in half a sentence like China, but I had only 4 been to China once. 5 Q And that was in 1985. 6 A That was in 1985 and that was for a weekend to look 7 at an old Jewish synagogue. I had no other -- I mean, I wish 8 I had the testimony here because I could not have said 9 anything other than like China. 10 Q In your discussions with Secretary Brown or in your 11 testimony before the Senate, did you stress an emphasis on 12 any region of the world in terms of promoting trade? 13 A I probably stressed Asia, Latin American and 14 eastern Europe as countries that were emerging. I'm sure 15 there was a tone that we cannot afford only to focus on Japan 16 and Europe, but that there were these other countries that 17 were really beginning to grow and that the world was 18 changing. The impression -- the theme just was there was a 19 lot of dynamism and let's not just fight yesterday's battles 20 but look ahead. 21 Q Now, when did you actually matriculate, so to 22 speak, at the Commerce Department? When did you start? 23 A Well, I was confirmed in November of '93 and I 24 probably got there a couple of months earlier as a 25 consultant, maybe two days a week or so. 61 1 Q Did you get your security clearance before you 2 started full time? Did you have a security clearance when 3 you were a consultant? 4 A I must have had some security clearance, but I 5 don't know if I had all of them. 6 Q Did you have other meetings with Secretary Brown up 7 to the point that you started as a consultant, other 8 discussions or meetings? 9 A I don't recall having any others. 10 Q Did you have any meetings or discussions with 11 people other than Secretary Brown up to the point that you 12 started as a consultant where you discussed your job at the 13 Commerce Department? 14 A As I said, I may have had a phone discussion or two 15 with some other people in the administration, not about my 16 job, but about the administration itself. 17 Q Did you ever ask anyone suppose I'm asked to 18 something that amounts to political patronage at the Commerce 19 Department, am I going to be asked to do that? I mean, did 20 you raise those kinds of inquiries with people? 21 A No. 22 Q Now, after you started as a consultant, did you 23 then have meetings with individuals at the Commerce 24 Department where they described in greater detail what your 25 duties and responsibilities were going to be? 62 1 A Well, I started to meet various people to find out 2 what -- I was interested in who was there, you know, what the 3 level of knowledge was, and to bring myself up to date on the 4 world as they saw it. But I will tell you, I am not the kind 5 of person that would ask anybody what is my job. I would 6 never ask that question and let somebody else define it, so 7 it couldn't have come up. 8 Q Is what you're saying that you would -- you're the 9 kind of person that would define your own job? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Did you understand the parameters to be in certain 12 areas at the time that you started? Generally speaking? 13 A I understood it to be an exceedingly broad mandate 14 to expand America's trade around the world. 15 Q Did there come a point in time after you started at 16 the Commerce Department where specifically you participated 17 in conversations or other kinds of communications about 18 overseas trade missions? 19 A Could you state that again? 20 Q Did there come a point in time after you started at 21 the Commerce Department where you participated in 22 conversations or other kinds of communications about Commerce 23 Department overseas trade missions? 24 A I'm sure. I'm sure there were. 25 Q And when was the first such time? 63 1 A I don't remember. 2 Q Roughly speaking. 3 A Certainly the issue would have arisen between the 4 time I first got there as a consultant and the time I was 5 confirmed. 6 Q And who has it arisen with, so to speak? 7 A I can't recall. There are so many people there and 8 for those two months, I maintained a very low profile. To 9 the best of my knowledge, all of the meetings were very 10 informal. I was not permitted to have meetings outside the 11 Commerce Department. 12 Q Who participated in meetings with you during that 13 time period? 14 A Probably people in the International Trade 15 Administration. 16 Q What are their names? 17 A I mean, there could have been 50. I don't know. 18 Q Well, who you can remember, the primary people. 19 A Well, I would say that Tim Howser was the person 20 that was most -- he was the deputy. He was the civil service 21 deputy. He had been there for a long time and undoubtedly he 22 was the person I would have relied on the most. 23 Q Did you discuss trade missions with Mr. Howser? 24 MR. WITTEN: During this period? 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes. 64 1 THE WITNESS: I may have. I must say you keep 2 bringing up trade missions. That was not in my view a major 3 part of my portfolio. I had no particular interest in trade 4 missions as such, so I'm sure it came up, Commerce Department 5 historically has conducted all kinds of trade missions, 6 secretarial trade missions, low level trade missions, and 7 that would not have been what I focused on. 8 I'm sure that, you know, the issue came up, but if 9 you looked at my background, it was a very un-commerce type 10 of background and I was much more, for better or worse, much 11 more interested in the broad policy and the goals and in 12 conceptualizing what it is we were trying to do. 13 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 14 Q Well, you were concerned with conceptualizing what 15 it is you were trying to do, you meaning the Commerce 16 Department, but -- 17 A No, I mean me personally. 18 Q But there's also a need for implementation of that 19 policy, correct? 20 A Right. 21 Q And trade missions were an integral part of 22 implementing that policy, correct? 23 A At least from my standpoint, very small. I don't 24 want to quibble with the word, you say integral, but on any 25 given day, if you asked how I would divide up the day in 65 1 terms of what I was concerned about that would have been, you 2 know, 3 percent. 3 Q Well -- 4 A There was a whole mechanism there for trade 5 missions. They didn't need me for that. 6 Q Let's go back. When was the first time that you 7 can recollect engaging in a conversation, a substantive 8 conversation, about trade missions at the Commerce 9 Department? 10 MR. WITTEN: Asked and answered. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 12 THE WITNESS: If you define trade mission as going 13 abroad with corporate executives, then I don't recall getting 14 involved in them at all for several months. 15 If you define that as my going abroad with a few 16 Commerce Department people or maybe people from other 17 agencies, then I was interested in that from the beginning. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q Well, let's define it both ways. Tell me when you 20 first had a substantive discussion about either. 21 A Well, right as soon as I was confirmed. See, what 22 I saw my role as is defining what could we do to expand, 23 let's say, trade in Latin America. And I would go to these 24 arenas and I would talk to American companies and ask them 25 what the impediments were. 66 1 MR. KLAYMAN: I understand, Mr. Garten. We're 2 doing our best to try to -- 3 If I may ask, Your Honor, to speed this along, I'm 4 not getting a responsive answer to these questions. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 6 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, I think you are. I mean, he's 8 just explaining to us that trade missions are 3 percent of 9 what he was doing in any given day. Then the question was, I 10 think, when was the first time -- 11 MR. KLAYMAN: That was my question. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: -- you discussed trade missions 13 with your colleagues at the Department of Commerce. 14 Now, given the background you've given us, that it 15 was 3 percent, do you remember more particularly the first 16 time that issue came up? 17 THE WITNESS: I don't. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: In the context of any place in the 19 world? 20 THE WITNESS: I don't remember when. 21 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 22 Q You were aware shortly after joining the Commerce 23 Department in your high post that Ron Brown, Secretary of 24 Commerce, was making overseas trade missions a centerpiece of 25 his secretariatship, correct? 67 1 MR. WITTEN: Object to the form of the question. 2 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 3 MR. KLAYMAN: Just a foundation. 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 5 THE WITNESS: I suspect I did. 6 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 7 Q You did, correct? 8 A I don't want to overstate it. That was one -- that 9 was one visible aspect, yes. 10 Q And you saw Secretary Brown appear in the media, on 11 television, radio and elsewhere, proclaiming that he was 12 going to conduct these overseas trade missions and help 13 American companies do more business overseas, correct? 14 A Correct. 15 Q And as part of your duties and responsibilities as 16 a high level presidential appointee, you were to play a role 17 in planning and helping to implement those trade missions, 18 correct? 19 A Well, you have to remember that I had a very 20 large -- International Trade Administration is about 3000 21 people and I did not get involved in the planning of most of 22 his trade missions other than that I was on some level, 23 because these people worked for me, responsible, but I did 24 not personally get involved in that. He went on quite a few 25 and I only traveled with him twice. In fact, it's fair to 68 1 say those are the only two trade missions I really got 2 involved in. 3 Q Which trade missions? 4 A It was to China and to India. 5 Q To China in August and September of '94. 6 A Right. And then to India, which I don't remember 7 the date. 8 Q Also in '94. 9 A I don't remember. It was, I think, six months 10 later or something. 11 Q Okay. So to back up to my question, trade missions 12 therefore were a part of your activities at the Commerce 13 Department. 14 A They were a part of my overall responsibility 15 because the International Trade Administration, which I ran, 16 was responsible for that. But personally, I did not get 17 involved except in the two. 18 Q And they were a means of implementing policies with 19 the department was trying to carry out to expand business. 20 A Yes. 21 Q In fact, that is the stated purpose of the Commerce 22 Department, to help American companies do more business. 23 MR. WITTEN: I object to the form of the question. 24 MR. KLAYMAN: Based on his experience. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You don't have to accept that 69 1 characterization, but is it a fair one of what the Department 2 of Commerce's role is? 3 THE WITNESS: State it again. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q You understood based on your experience that the 6 goal of the Department of Commerce is to help American 7 companies expand their business. 8 A That is one of the goals, yes. 9 Q And in the course of your conversations with 10 Secretary Brown, he did tell you that he wanted to use more 11 of a European model in having an effective ministry of 12 commerce help business overseas, correct? 13 A I don't know if he used those terms, but if he had, 14 I would have been receptive to it. I had just written a book 15 looking at global economy and how Europe and Japan were doing 16 it, so I was receptive to a very activist approach. 17 Q And one of the primary ways to be activist, as the 18 Europeans were activist, is to go on trade missions and to 19 help promote, correct? 20 A Correct. 21 Q So therefore it was an integral part of the Clinton 22 administration's trade policy for the Commerce Department to 23 conduct trade missions. 24 A Yes. 25 Q And as number two or number three at the 70 1 department, you would be one of the top officials assigned to 2 set the policy and help implement those trade missions. 3 A I think I've answered that question. I would like 4 to just stand on the answer as I gave you before. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Asked and answered. 6 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, it's a different question, 7 Your Honor, because I built up to it and also it puts it in 8 perspective, so I'd like a response. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Can you answer that question? 10 THE WITNESS: The International Trade 11 Administration was responsible for organizing these trade 12 missions, the ones that government officials led, and I 13 had overall responsibility for the International Trade 14 Administration. However, in terms of my own activities, I 15 delegated most of that, but I did get involved in the 16 planning of the trade mission to China and to India. 17 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 18 Q Now, tell me about up to the point that you got 19 involved in the planning of the trade mission to China and 20 India. Tell me about the discussions that you had with 21 Secretary Brown about trade missions in general, what he 22 wanted to do on them. 23 MR. WITTEN: Foundation. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 25 MR. WITTEN: You can answer, if there were any such 71 1 discussions. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Please, Your Honor, that's 3 inappropriate. 4 THE WITNESS: You know, I didn't have a lot of 5 discussions with Brown. 6 MR. KLAYMAN: All right. There's an example, 7 Your Honor. If anybody should be moving for sanctions, it's 8 us. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Oh, come on now. Let's keep 10 going. 11 Go ahead, Mr. Garten. Please, go on. 12 THE WITNESS: I didn't have a lot of discussion 13 with him, frankly, on trade missions or on anything else. We 14 seemed to be able to communicate quite easily. I always 15 figured that if I was not supporting him or doing something 16 he didn't want, he would tell me. 17 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, I'm sorry, but I take 18 extreme umbrage at the way that question was interrupted by a 19 speaking objection. I think it seriously impeded the 20 testimony here and that was obviously a crucial question. 21 And I ask for an instruction, no more speaking objections. 22 Please. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, if there is going to be an 24 objection, we'll follow the rule we have in all of these 25 depositions, if the objection is going to be anything longer 72 1 than asked and answered, we'll ask the witness to step out. 2 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, did you ask a question? 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No. There's nothing pending. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q Well, tell me the discussions you did have. 6 A You know, we had a -- I can't remember -- I mean, I 7 could tell you the discussions I remember, they were very 8 few, where he and I were alone and we were -- you know, was 9 there anything substantive -- a typical discussion would be I 10 would explain to him what I was going to do and I always 11 found him very supportive and they were very brief 12 discussions. 13 And there wasn't a lot of extensive communication 14 between us, I think, because we didn't need it. We were on 15 the same wavelength and I think we were delivering what he 16 wanted. 17 Q Was there a person that Mr. Brown did have 18 substantive discussions with where he told them what it is 19 he wanted to accomplish, if not you, then someone else? 20 A I don't know who else -- I don't know -- I 21 mean, I can't put myself in the position of who else he 22 talked to. 23 Q I'm not trying to be facetious -- 24 A No, I understand. 25 Q I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but are you 73 1 telling me that you had some kind of transcendental mode of 2 communicating with him? 3 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 4 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 5 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 6 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 7 Q Let me ask another way. You just knew what he 8 wanted to do, so you never had to talk to him? Is that what 9 you're telling me? 10 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 11 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 13 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 14 Q Well, who did Secretary Brown give directives to, 15 if not you? 16 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 17 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 18 MS. BRASWELL: Vague. Over broad. 19 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, let me see if I understand. 20 What Mr. Klayman is trying to figure out is as 21 you have explained to us, it was not your habit to have 22 deep, broad discussions with Secretary Brown. And one of the 23 reasons, as you explained, for that is that you had every 24 reason to suppose that what you were doing was meeting his 25 needs because you and he had similar thoughts. 74 1 Now Mr. Klayman is inquiring if he did not have 2 those discussions with you, who if anyone to your knowledge 3 did? If you can, tell us. 4 THE WITNESS: I have no knowledge of anyone else. 5 I had a direct line to him and it didn't require a lot of 6 discussion because we had a set of objectives we both agreed 7 on. 8 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 9 Q And what objectives were they? 10 A It's just what you said before. It's help American 11 business in their dealings in the global market. 12 Q So that's the only discussion you ever had with 13 Secretary Brown, he just simply said figure out a way to help 14 American business, and that's it? You never had any other 15 discussions? 16 A Well, there might have been -- you know, I don't 17 want to -- no, I am not saying I didn't have any other 18 discussions, but they were very routine discussions. A 19 discussion could have been, you know, I think I ought to go 20 down to Latin America and I thought I'd go for a week or so 21 and I'd like to bring the following people. And then, you 22 know, later in the administration, you might want to go down 23 there and we will prepare the ground. He'd say fine. 24 I had a very -- I think it was a unique position in 25 that I was extraordinarily free to define it the way I 75 1 wanted. I knew a lot of other people in the administration 2 from previous experience, so they had had a lot of confidence 3 in me. I kept people informed as to what we were doing and 4 it didn't require a lot of hammering out and we had a very 5 good team, so that we could deliver what we had to deliver. 6 Q And what I'm trying to get into, Mr. Garten, in 7 these questions is how you delivered it. Number one, what 8 frequency did you have communications with Secretary Brown on 9 a weekly basis? 10 A I don't recall. I would say maybe three or four 11 times a month. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Did you have regular staff 13 meetings? 14 THE WITNESS: No. As far as I know, I do not 15 recall any staff meetings. There may have been some. It was 16 not my style to spend a lot of time on that. If I needed to 17 see him, I would speak to him directly. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q And where did you speak with him, in his office? 20 A Generally, yes. 21 Q Was there anybody present during the times that you 22 spoke with him directly in his office? 23 A I'm sure there were times. 24 Q Such as Rob Stein? Such as Melissa Moss? 25 A On occasion. 76 1 Q Such as Sally Painter, Melissa Moss' assistant? 2 A I don't rule it out. 3 Q And during those occasions, you did discuss trade 4 missions, correct? From time to time. 5 A Probably. 6 Q And during those occasions, you did discuss persons 7 and companies that would go on the trade missions, correct? 8 A Less -- I had almost no involvement in the 9 selection of people. I won't say at some of those meetings 10 maybe a name or two didn't come up, but that wasn't part of 11 my role. 12 Q Well, let's talk about what you did hear. You did 13 hear names being discussed at those meetings, correct? 14 A You know, I cannot recall a meeting where that 15 was -- where that happened, but I don't want to rule it out, 16 that somebody didn't say so and so was coming or we're trying 17 to figure out what the right balance is. 18 To the extent I remember those discussions, they 19 would always center on the importance that Secretary Brown 20 accorded to having minorities and small businesses on those 21 trade missions. It was more of a broader question. He was 22 always pushing to make sure that the composition of the trade 23 mission reflected America. 24 Q Do you recall any discussions about any affirmative 25 action regulations at the Commerce Department to regulate 77 1 those criteria? 2 A No. 3 Q Do you know of any? 4 A No. 5 Q Based on your considerable experience, is it proper 6 to choose people on the basis of their race? 7 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q You stated that you recall a discussion with 11 Secretary Brown about bringing people to Latin America, 12 correct? 13 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the question. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q You testified to that, correct? 16 MR. WITTEN: He cited as a possibility -- 17 MR. KLAYMAN: Please. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. 19 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, this is outrageous. 20 MR. WITTEN: It's not outrageous, this is -- 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Garten, can you recall what 22 you told us about the discussion about Latin America? 23 THE WITNESS: I think I used it as an example. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You used it as an example. 25 Mr. Klayman's question now relates to that. 78 1 Go ahead, Mr. Klayman. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, if every time I ask a key 3 question I get somebody to make an objection, a speaking 4 objection, I would prefer to adjourn this deposition and take 5 the issue up to Judge Lamberth right now because it taints 6 the testimony. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I don't believe it does or did in 8 that instance because Mr. Witten didn't even finish the 9 sentence before I interrupted him, so I will not -- your 10 application to adjourn the deposition is denied. 11 Now, either you gave such an example or you were 12 talking in general about Latin America. Mr. Klayman's 13 question wants to focus on that aspect. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q You stated that you discussed with Secretary Brown 16 taking people to Latin America, correct? 17 A No, that was not what I meant to say if I said it. 18 I was just using it as an example, that where I saw my role 19 was in going to a place like Latin America, figuring out what 20 the issues were, what kinds of problems American firms would 21 face, and then if Secretary Brown were to take a trade 22 mission, we would have some substantive underpinning as to 23 what the problems were going to be. 24 If, for example, there were 500 American 25 construction firms that were bidding on big projects in Latin 79 1 America and they couldn't get the contracts because there 2 were discriminatory provisions in the laws, then I might come 3 back and say, you know, this is one of the issues we should 4 highlight, it's a big issue, if we could move it, a lot of 5 American firms would benefit, it's counter to our effort to 6 have a non-discriminatory trade policy. That was my 7 principal activity, that was the level at which I operated. 8 I was not a real operational person. 9 It was more conceptually what would the trade 10 mission try to do, what would be the broader issues, what 11 could the Clinton administration say after the trade mission 12 was over that we tried to accomplish. 13 Q Well, but a fundamental question in whether you're 14 going to accomplish anything on a trade mission is who you 15 take on the trade mission, correct? That's the first 16 question. 17 A I don't agree with that. 18 Q So you could take anybody? You could take me or 19 take -- 20 A I didn't say that, but at the end of the day, the 21 way I saw it, it was an administration over a period of years 22 that was going to be defined by a bunch of things and one of 23 the things would be that we tried to open the markets on 24 behalf of American firms and I was not particularly concerned 25 with -- it never fell to me to pick which firms. 80 1 I was more concerned that the generic problems were 2 big ones and which firm -- that was Brown's decision, not 3 mine, as to which one would carry the flag for that 4 particular issue. It could have been -- if you take my 5 hypothetical construction example, there could be 2000 6 American firms, there could be only one place in the mission, 7 the trade mission. I did not want to get involved in that. 8 I had no competence in that. 9 Would you mind if I just took a two-minute break? 10 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Why don't we -- 11 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I ask just one question? 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I think the reporter needs a break 13 as well. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I ask just one question on this? 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: Maybe two. 17 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 18 Q The reason you didn't want tog et involved in that 19 is because you knew that politics and money was going to 20 enter into that decision, correct? 21 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 23 THE WITNESS: No, the reason I didn't want to 24 get -- I only -- as a matter of style, I tried to do the 25 things where I felt I had a particular advantage, where I 81 1 knew something, where my experience was really relevant. 2 Traveling to Latin America and putting in digestible form 3 what the big obstacles were was something I was exquisitely 4 qualified to do. As an investment banker, I worked in Latin 5 America. As a former government official, I knew the policy 6 issues. I spoke Spanish. And so I could do that better than 7 anybody else. 8 In terms of picking the firms, I had no knowledge 9 of the particular firms or the people and so I had no 10 competence, so I just removed myself from it on the 11 assumption that other people would be better qualified to do 12 it. And deep down, I didn't care. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: We're going to have to give our 14 reporter a break. 15 Let's see if we can get back at five to 12. 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off video record at 17 11:53. 18 (A brief recess was taken.) 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video record at 20 12:01. 21 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 22 Q In addition to the meetings that you had, 23 Mr. Garten, with Secretary Brown four or five times a month, 24 did you talk to him by phone? 25 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. 82 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Without the preface, how many 2 times a month did you speak to Brown on the phone? 3 THE WITNESS: Actually, I considered the phone 4 discussions as meetings, so all together maybe four or five 5 times a month, either in person or on the phone. 6 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 7 Q And how long did these communications last, either 8 in meetings or on phones, just generally speaking? 9 A Ten minutes. 10 Q Was there anyone at the department -- well, 11 Secretary Brown was the secretary, obviously. Was there 12 anyone between you and him in terms of hierarchy? 13 A Technically, there was a deputy secretary. He 14 didn't get involved in these things. 15 Q What things? 16 A Most of what I did. 17 Q Trade? 18 A Trade broadly defined. Yes. 19 Q Who was that deputy secretary when you were there? 20 A David Barram. 21 Q And what did Mr. Barram get involved in? 22 A I don't know. 23 Q Administration? 24 A Probably. 25 Q So for all intents and purposes, when it came to 83 1 substance, you were number two. 2 A Yes. In the areas that I operated. 3 Q Which dealt with trade expansion. 4 A Yes. 5 Q Trade missions. 6 A Trade missions as I discussed them before. 7 Q Now, when you had these discussions with Secretary 8 Brown you frequently recorded little notes, correct? 9 A No. I probably didn't. 10 Q You never used a note pad to write things down? 11 A I don't recall. The discussions were short enough 12 so that if I wrote something down, I might have had a note 13 card and jotted it down so I would remember it when I got 14 back to my office. 15 Q Well, from time to time in the discussions, 16 Secretary Brown asked you to do things, correct? 17 A Yes, I suppose. 18 Q And he asked you to do things with regard to some 19 of the trade missions, correct? 20 A You know, most of the time, I would explain to him 21 what we were doing and he would say that's great. 22 Q Well, but my question was -- I mean, you jumped a 23 step there, I'll get to that question, but he did ask you to 24 do things with regard to some of the trade missions. 25 A I don't recall what he asked me to do as opposed to 84 1 respond to what I was suggesting we do do. 2 Q Well, I didn't ask you to recall at that point. 3 I'm just asking the foundational question, which is that he 4 did ask you to do things with regard to trade missions. 5 Calls for a yes or no. 6 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 8 Did he ever make his direction to you as specific 9 as Mr. Klayman's question suggests? 10 THE WITNESS: I don't recall that he did. 11 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, Your Honor, that leaps across 12 my question. That's kind of like a follow-up question. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Try again. Try again. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: Okay. Thank you. 15 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 16 Q Did he ever ask you to do anything with regard to 17 trade missions? 18 A I don't recall his ever saying, Jeff, I want you to 19 do this. Mostly the tone was my saying -- and remember we're 20 only talking about two trade missions that I was personally 21 involved in -- here's the plan that we're working on and his 22 saying sounds great. 23 Q So he never asked you to do anything. That's the 24 bottom line with regard to trade missions. 25 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. Asked and answered. 85 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 2 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 3 Q Did anyone ever ask you to do anything concerning 4 trade missions? 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Vague. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 7 THE WITNESS: No. 8 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 9 Q Do you know of persons who did participate in 10 planning and implementing trade missions? 11 A Do I know of persons who did? 12 Q Yes. 13 A Well, a number of people in the International Trade 14 Administration did. 15 Q And who were they? 16 A I couldn't begin to name them, there were so many. 17 Q Well, name the principal people. 18 A I -- 19 Q Name the supervisors. 20 A No, I think what you should do is you should go to 21 the record and look at who was -- I'll give you the two 22 positions. There were two deputy under secretaries -- 23 Q No, I can do all those things and in fact I have. 24 A Okay. 25 Q But I'm asking you who from your perspective were 86 1 the primary people who planned and implemented Secretary 2 Brown's and then Secretary Kantor's trade missions. 3 A Well, I left before Secretary Kantor was there, so 4 I cannot -- 5 Q Let's just limit it to Mr. Brown. 6 A I don't want to answer in that respect because I'm 7 afraid that I will cite some people and not some others and 8 there was a very broad cast, so I'd like to tell you the 9 positions. People were coming and going. And whoever was in 10 the position of deputy under secretary would have had a role. 11 Whoever was in the position of all the assistant secretaries 12 would have had a role, depending on the trade mission. 13 Q Well -- 14 A You see, there were quite a few trade missions and 15 some of them focused on -- let's just take a case in which I 16 didn't get involved, South Africa. It would have been a 17 different group of people. And you are asking me to throw 18 out a few names haphazardly in what is obviously a very 19 serious inquiry. And you have the names at the time, so I'm 20 not going to answer it. 21 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, may I ask for an 22 instruction that he has to answer? 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, I think he did. 24 MR. KLAYMAN: I asked for names. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Garten, it's a little 87 1 confusing to me. When you looked at the bureaucratic 2 structure, would there be one person who had had the 3 responsibility of coordinating all of the efforts of a lot of 4 people so that this trade mission had the composition, the 5 goal, the focus that it needed? Was there one such person? 6 THE WITNESS: I think it depended on where the 7 trade mission was going. 8 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 9 Q All right. Well, let's take different trade 10 missions, but the judge asked a good question, if I can 11 phrase it slightly different. Was there someone under 12 Secretary Brown who generally speaking was the overall 13 supervisor for the planning and implementation of trade 14 missions? 15 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. Asked and answered. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: Slightly different. 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 18 THE WITNESS: See, I think it depended on the 19 mission. It was a structural change. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q All right. Well, let's go through the missions. 22 The trade mission to China in August and September of 1994. 23 Who was that person? You, correct? 24 A No. No, it wasn't me. I think it was the chief of 25 staff. 88 1 Q And who was that? 2 A Rob Stein. 3 Q And what were his duties and responsibilities in 4 planning and implementing the trade mission to China? 5 A He was just -- you know, in the end, there had to 6 be one person who saw all the pieces and for that trade 7 mission, I believe he did that. I don't want to overstate 8 the role that he played or understate it because it was kind 9 of an administrative position he had. When it came to the 10 big issues of what are we going to focus on, it was my 11 responsibility. 12 So -- you know, in a lot of organizations, there's 13 a team and it doesn't always translate that there is one 14 person who has a tight fist as a chairman so long as they're 15 in contact. 16 Q Well, let's stop here. Who was the team for China? 17 A Oh, it would have been a very broad team. 18 Q Well, who were the principal players? 19 A I think the two key ones would have been Rob Stein 20 and me. In terms of the substance. 21 Q Okay. Now, did there come a point in time when you 22 learned that there was going to be a trade mission to China 23 in August and September of 1994? 24 A I'm sure there was. 25 Q And roughly when was that? 89 1 A I don't recall. 2 Q Year? 1994? 3 A Yes. 4 Q What date did you leave the Commerce Department? 5 A I think it was October '95. 6 Q So who was it that broached the idea that there was 7 going to be a trade mission to China? 8 A It might have been me. 9 Q You're not sure? 10 A Well, I'm not sure. What happened, I went to China 11 very early on. I can't even remember the date, but I took a 12 trip to China. I came back, I said to Secretary Brown there 13 are a huge number of problems for American firms, I think you 14 ought to have a trade mission. But the timing was very 15 indefinite because there were big human rights problems and I 16 think there was some legislation pending on the Hill, most 17 favored nation. So we couldn't even think about the mission 18 until that was resolved. And my recollection, you know, 19 broadly was it was resolved in late spring and then August 20 was the first sort of convenient time. 21 Q You went to China in February of '94? That was the 22 first time? 23 A That sounds right. 24 Q And who did you go with? 25 A There were some other people from the Commerce 90 1 Department. 2 Q Correct. Who were they? 3 A I don't remember. 4 Q You don't remember one person? 5 A Well, I might remember one, but I don't want to get 6 into the position of remembering one and not the others. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor -- 8 Well, let me ask this question. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Mr. Garten, you are very concerned -- let me ask 11 this question. Let me run you through this, if I may, 12 Your Honor. 13 You are aware that this lawsuit was filed to 14 determine whether or not seats on Commerce Department trade 15 missions were sold for campaign contributions. You're aware 16 of that, correct? 17 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Let's try to move on. 19 Go ahead. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q Correct? 22 A Well, when I look at this -- 23 Q It calls for yes or no. 24 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, it doesn't. 91 1 Give the best answer you can, sir. 2 THE WITNESS: I was not aware of that precisely. 3 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 4 Q Have you ever read about this lawsuit in the 5 newspaper? 6 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. Your Honor, this 7 is a quiz on Mr. Klayman's practice? 8 MR. KLAYMAN: Please -- 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. Overruled. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: It's not a quiz. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Have you heard about the lawsuit? 12 THE WITNESS: I may have. I certainly haven't in 13 the last couple of years where I've been preoccupied with 14 other stuff. 15 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 16 Q And you're aware that these allegations were raised 17 in the context of this lawsuit. 18 A I don't know anything about the lawsuit. What I 19 know about the lawsuit is that there is some inference that 20 there were documents missing. 21 Q How did you find that out? 22 A I think I read it in here. 23 Q What are you pointing at? 24 A The subpoena. 25 Q Are you aware that it was this lawsuit that 92 1 resulted in the testimony of John Huang in the fall of '96? 2 A No. 3 Q Had you ever heard of Judicial Watch before you got 4 your subpoena? 5 A I'd heard of it. Yes. 6 Q How did you hear of it? 7 A I don't remember. I mean, I was in Washington for 8 two and a half years. I heard of a lot of groups. I don't 9 remember precisely when it entered my consciousness. 10 Q Do you remember seeing anything in the media about 11 Judicial Watch or Larry Klayman or this lawsuit in late 12 October of '96? 13 MR. WITTEN: Your Honor, objection. Scope. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: We'll see if this is going 15 somewhere. 16 THE WITNESS: In late October of '96, I was deep 17 into my current job. I don't get The Washington Post, I 18 don't get any material from Washington. 19 If it appeared in The New York Times, I'm not 20 sure that I would have focused on who was filing the suit 21 so much as the broader issue, which obviously -- which drew 22 me in because I had to testify in the Senate. I had to 23 testify in the Senate about -- entirely about John Huang. 24 So that's my reading of it. Other than that, I don't know 25 much about it. 93 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q Were you aware throughout 1997 that there were 3 allegations that John Huang may be connected to Chinese 4 intelligence? 5 A Only from what I would have read in The New York 6 Times. 7 Q Well, did you read that in The New York Times? 8 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. Sustained. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I have a few minutes with 11 Your Honor without the witness here? 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, let's go forward. Let's go 13 forward. Let's see if we can -- I think I see where you're 14 going. It's okay. Go ahead. 15 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 16 Q Mr. Garten, your hesitancy to name people today is 17 because you're aware that Judicial Watch and others have 18 maintained that there were illegal activities occurring at 19 the Commerce Department in the context of these trade 20 missions, correct? 21 A No. I have a general hesitancy to name names 22 because of the process which I don't have total recall. 23 In the time that I was in the Commerce Department, a lot of 24 people came and went. And I feel that in naming some people 25 I am giving you the impression that they may have had a role 94 1 that was either more or less important than other people that 2 I'm not naming. 3 And since there is a public record of who was in 4 every position that you care about, you either give me the 5 time to look at that public record, in which case I could 6 confirm that these were the positions, but I find it very 7 unfair that you are asking me to recall things I'm not sure 8 of and to do it in a very selective and episodic way. I'm 9 only trying to be fair here. 10 Q You are aware that there are allegations 11 outstanding, not just from Judicial Watch, but from many 12 sources, that the Commerce Department was used by John Huang 13 and others as a staging ground to obtain national security 14 classified information and to pass that information on to the 15 Chinese. 16 A Yes, of course, I'm aware of that. 17 Q And you understand those to be extremely serious 18 allegations, correct? 19 A Absolutely. 20 Q And these things if they occurred, occurred on your 21 watch, correct? 22 A I don't know whether I would make that equation 23 because the only person that I know who is allegedly involved 24 in this, John Huang, was there at the Commerce Department 25 longer than I was. So if any of those allegations are true, 95 1 I can't say for sure that it happened when I was there. I 2 can't say it didn't, I just -- you know, as far as I know, 3 unless it's been proved otherwise, they're allegations and 4 his time in the department was much longer than mine. Or was 5 longer than mine. 6 Q You were John Huang's supervisor, correct? 7 A There was somebody in between us. 8 Q But you were his supervisor. 9 A There was somebody in between us. 10 Q But you were his supervisor. 11 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. 13 MR. KLAYMAN: That's not an answer, Your Honor. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: It is. Please move on. It is an 15 answer. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, my problem here is, with 17 all due respect to everyone, is that this is going to be 18 very, very long with Your Honor's indulgence deposition 19 because it's very hard to get a direct response to these 20 questions. 21 MR. WITTEN: Move to strike. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: And the witness is very defensive. 23 He doesn't even want to name names. He has to name names 24 because this is discovery based upon what is in his mind at 25 the time. We're not in a trial here, we're just trying to 96 1 get discovery and that's the problem and this is becoming a 2 long process. I'm patient. I'll stay here as long as 3 necessary. 4 MR. WITTEN: Move to strike. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: But I think we could speed it along. 6 MR. WITTEN: Move to strike. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Let's see if we can move along in 8 that spirit. Go ahead. Pose a question. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Who were the main people -- 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, just before we leave that, 12 between you and Huang there was another person. Who was that 13 other person? 14 THE WITNESS: It was Assistant Secretary Meissner. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Meissner. Thank you, sir. Is 16 that Chuck Meissner? 17 THE WITNESS: Yes. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Thank you. 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q And you were responsible for Meissner, correct? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Now, who were the principal -- who did you go to 23 China with in February of '94? Who in your mind right now do 24 you think you went to China with? 25 A Can I just -- can I just confer with my counsel, 97 1 please? 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Of course. You can use the other 3 room. 4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off video record at 5 12:21. 6 (A brief recess was taken.) 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video record at 8 12:22. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Would you please respond? 11 A Could you repeat the question, please? 12 Q Who did you go to China with in February of '94? 13 A I just want to preface this answer by saying any 14 names that I give you are just the best of my recollection 15 and they do not constitute necessarily the whole group of 16 people or even the most important. I can only give you what 17 I remember several years later. 18 On that trip, I believe that -- I'm not even sure, 19 but I believe that David Rothkopf was with me. I believe 20 that there was a fellow named Don Forest, who runs the China 21 office in the Commerce Department. Those are the only two 22 names I remember right now. 23 Q What was the function of David Rothkopf going with 24 you? 25 A He was my deputy. I had two deputies, one was Tim 98 1 Howser, who was more or less the person who ran ITA day to 2 day, and I looked to David Rothkopf as a person who would 3 generate new ideas and who could coordinate on my behalf a 4 lot of activities that I would -- 5 Q Who was responsible for hiring Rothkopf? 6 A I was. 7 Q How did you find him? 8 A I knew him a little bit from -- he was a publisher 9 of a magazine in New York when I was an investment banker and 10 I interacted with him a little bit. He published some 11 articles I had written and then I would see him at some other 12 kinds of conference type events. 13 Q He wasn't an expert on China, was he? 14 A No. 15 Q Howser wasn't an expert on China, was he? 16 A No. 17 Q And Meissner wasn't an expert on China, was he? 18 A No. 19 Q This trip to China in 1994, was to do advance work, 20 to try to find out if a trade mission would be appropriate, 21 correct? 22 A It wasn't -- no, I wouldn't put it that way. I 23 would say that it was a trip -- it was the first trip of the 24 Clinton administration to scope out what problems were 25 American firms having in entering the China market and that 99 1 became very useful in terms of a trade mission, but if there 2 hadn't been a trade mission, it still was a really important 3 trip. I in my mind did not go there with the notion that we 4 were going to have a trade mission. 5 Q But in the back of your mind, you knew that one of 6 the ways to implement that goal was to have a trade mission 7 ultimately. 8 A Probably. 9 Q Using the European model to go on a trade mission 10 and to help companies do business through the government. 11 A I would have to put it differently, since you keep 12 bringing up the European model. The European model, in my 13 mind, was not a question of trade missions. The European 14 model was government being willing to help firms very 15 actively when they came across barriers to the firms' entry. 16 They were using the muscle of the government on behalf of 17 firms, as contrasted to a very free market approach. 18 Q But you have heard Secretary Brown compare himself 19 to a minister of trade in Europe during the time you worked 20 with him, correct? 21 A I don't recall his using those terms. 22 Q Do you recall terms like that? 23 A I think he was -- my recollection is he would have 24 been very careful because even the word trade would have set 25 off alarm bells at the U.S. Trade Representative's office, so 100 1 he may have said I'm a champion of American firms, but I 2 don't think he would have used the term minister of trade or 3 minister of trade ministry. 4 Q Have you ever met a Nolanda Hill? 5 A No. 6 Q Do you know who she is? 7 A I don't know who she is. I know I've read about 8 her in the paper. 9 Q Right. And you know she was Ron Brown's business 10 partner and very close personal confidant? 11 A I didn't know that. 12 Q You didn't know either of those things? 13 A I know a little bit from what I've read in the 14 paper, but I don't -- what can I say? You know, I can read a 15 lot of stuff in the paper and not necessarily say that I know 16 it or that I agree with it. 17 Q You ever talk to her? 18 A No. 19 Q On this trip to China, who did you meet with in 20 China? You meaning the delegation. 21 A Well, we certainly spent a good deal of time with 22 the American ambassador. We met several ministers, Chinese 23 ministers. 24 Q Which ones? 25 A I don't recall, but I would -- 101 1 Q Generically, what area were they? 2 A Trade and industry. I think I met with the 3 minister of communications, which is separate there. And I 4 met with American firms who were in China and I met with the 5 U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Beijing and in Shanghai. 6 Q Did you meet with a company called China Resources? 7 A I don't recall. 8 Q China Aerospace? 9 A I'm not sure I met with any Chinese companies per 10 se. 11 Q Did you meet with anyone connected with the 12 People's Liberation Army? 13 A Not knowingly. 14 Q Were any precautions taken before you went on that 15 trip to counter possible efforts to conduct intelligence 16 operations on you and others on the delegation? 17 A Well, we received security briefings, both in 18 Washington and in Beijing, so we were quite aware -- I 19 certainly was quite aware that any document -- I remember our 20 being told that we could not enter China with any classified 21 documents and I remember being told that the hotels might 22 have TV cameras, hidden TV cameras, or listening devices. So 23 I think we were pretty sensitized to the potential problem 24 there. 25 Q Did any counter intelligence agents of the United 102 1 States accompany you and others on that trip in February of 2 '94? 3 A I don't believe so. 4 Q Now, on that trip, there was a designated note 5 taker, was there not? 6 A I don't recall. 7 Q It was the policy and practice of the Commerce 8 Department when you went on an overseas mission, for whatever 9 purpose, to have a note taker or note takers, correct? 10 A Actually, I think you're right. It would have been 11 somebody in the embassy who would come to all the meetings 12 with us because every night -- well, maybe not every night, 13 but regularly, they would report back on what was said so 14 that every meeting that I was in, I don't want to call it a 15 transcript, but there was a summary and that would have gone 16 to a range of people in the American government who had an 17 interest in China or trade. 18 Q And that was the general practice that was followed 19 either on advance trips or on trade missions. 20 A Well, let's take the trips -- I can only talk about 21 the trips that I was on. Virtually all the meetings that I 22 would have, I'm sure there were some exceptions, but 23 virtually of them, the American ambassador would be with me. 24 It was him in the end who made the suggestions as to who I 25 should see. 103 1 I mean, we may have had some idea, but the way we 2 worked it was it was the embassy that controlled the trip on 3 the ground. And so there was always a junior foreign service 4 officer who was there to take notes on what was said and to 5 create reporting cables. 6 Q And that was the practice ultimately when you went 7 on the trade mission in the fall of '94, there were people 8 taking notes in meetings. 9 A I'm sure. But the only one that I -- the record 10 that I know about or I assumed existed, because I didn't 11 necessarily see the cables, was -- it was when we were in 12 those countries, we were on State Department -- this isn't 13 the right way to put it, but we were on State Department 14 territory. They kept the record. 15 Q But there were also people at the Commerce 16 Department that were designated as note takers on overseas 17 trips, correct? 18 A That I don't recall. I'm sure some people would 19 have taken notes, but if you're asking designated official 20 note taker, I don't recall that. I'm not saying it didn't 21 happen, I don't want to make myself sound so removed, but I 22 wasn't focused on that. That was the kind of implementation 23 thing that somebody else would take care of. But I'm sure, 24 for example, a desk officer who had responsibility for a 25 particular issue, let's say it was communications or a 104 1 country, would make some notes because there may be some 2 follow up. 3 Q In fact, taking notes was an integral part of 4 meeting with individuals overseas so you could have a 5 recordation of what went on and then analyze that. 6 A You know, I would broaden the point, in any kind of 7 meeting, where there was a lot of complicated stuff, I assume 8 somebody was taking notes so there could be follow up, but in 9 terms of -- I'm just being precise because you are, if you're 10 talking about stuff that would be analyzed, I would always go 11 to the State Department record. 12 Q Backing up a little bit, when you went on these 13 meetings, on the February trip, were there American 14 intelligence personnel that accompanied you on these meetings 15 to make sure that Chinese authorities weren't trying to 16 compromise you and others? 17 A Not to my knowledge, but I don't see how they could 18 have compromised us. I mean, these are quite formalized 19 settings. It could be a room like this and sitting over 20 there would be the minister of trade or the minister of 21 communications and the American ambassador and two or three 22 other people. I don't know where -- maybe I'm naive, I don't 23 know what compromise would have entered into it. You know, 24 these were not -- 25 Q Well, make sure somebody didn't say something they 105 1 shouldn't say. 2 A In terms of my portfolio, there was very little 3 that was almost not in the public domain. We weren't dealing 4 with highly sensitive issues. I mean, a typical discussion 5 would be American firms are saying to us that they cannot get 6 into this construction industry and they're saying it's 7 discriminatory; could you, Mr. Minister, please explain your 8 policy. And then they would explain the policy and we'd say, 9 you know, if you could reduce these barriers, we'll benefit, 10 you'll benefit, and it was that kind of discussion. You 11 know, these were not sensitive discussions of military or 12 anything like that. 13 Q Before you went to China in February of '94 and 14 when you later went in the fall of '94, you did have access 15 to security briefings. 16 A Yes. 17 Q And those security briefings did contain 18 generically speaking information about certain sectors of the 19 economy in China, correct? 20 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. To the extent 21 he's asking for what would be contained in classified 22 information -- 23 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm not. 24 MS. BRASWELL: -- the witness cannot answer, 25 Your Honor. 106 1 MR. KLAYMAN: I just said sectors. I said sectors. 2 I'm not saying which. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Would you please read back the 4 question and see if we can get his characterization? 5 (The record was read back by the court reporter.) 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Ms. Braswell, is there any way you 7 can sharpen the question so that he could answer it without 8 breaching any confidence that may be legally lodged? 9 MS. BRASWELL: I don't think so, Your Honor. 10 It's one thing to ask whether or not he saw any classified 11 information on China, but as soon as he starts getting into 12 something more particular, he's basically asking for what 13 kind of classified information we have, which could reveal -- 14 depending upon the answer, it could reveal sources, it could 15 reveal the very fact that the United States is gaining 16 information on these particular areas. I don't think that he 17 can discuss that at all. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor -- 19 MS. BRASWELL: Nor do I see, frankly, Your Honor, 20 how there is possibly a need for this kind of information in 21 this case. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, this is a matter of 23 public record. If you go through the proceedings in front of 24 the Senate where Mr. Garten and others testified, you'll see 25 that there is testimony being provided, not just by people 107 1 like Mr. Garten, but by U.S. intelligence agencies in this 2 area. Mr. Huang himself has testified in this area. 3 I didn't ask for a specific sector, although I 4 think I could have probably done that, too. I'm not asking 5 about how the information is gathered, how it's analyzed, 6 just whether he was briefed on it. 7 MS. BRASWELL: Your Honor, he's asked him about 8 whether he was briefed on certain specific types of 9 classified information. If Mr. Klayman would like to provide 10 me with evidence of what has already been disclosed on the 11 public record, then I'd be glad to take a look at it, but 12 barring looking at what the evidence is as opposed to the 13 representation made, I don't think he should be allowed to 14 explore in this area. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: And as a representative of the 16 United States, you are asserting that there is a risk that if 17 Mr. Garten answers that question he would be yielding 18 information that is protected by statute. 19 MS. BRASWELL: Absolutely. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: By national security. 21 MS. BRASWELL: Yes, Your Honor. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: The objection is sustained. 23 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 24 Q Well, let me ask it more broadly. You did get 25 briefings before you went to China, correct? 108 1 A Yes. 2 Q And there was a risk that somebody, if not you, 3 could spew forth information at those meetings that was 4 classified, correct? 5 A Correct. 6 Q And I'm asking you what precautions, if any, were 7 taken to prevent people from doing that? 8 A It is always a risk if you're exposed to classified 9 information that you would use it inadvisedly. The reason I 10 was so -- I think other records show the reason I was so 11 obsessed with only certain kinds of people being in the 12 middle of important events is that I understood that you 13 needed a certain level of experience and maturity to exercise 14 the requisite caution. 15 So having said that, if there had been a security 16 agent right next to someone and they had divulged something 17 inadvertently, it would have been -- that person could not 18 have taken the words back, so all I can say is we were very 19 careful. We carried no classified information and we did our 20 very best to be very careful. 21 Q So what you're saying is there was no point in 22 having security officers there, intelligence officers, 23 because if you inadvertently breached classified information, 24 it was too late to take it back anyway. 25 MS. BRASWELL: Objection, Your Honor. 109 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: What's the matter with that one, 3 Your Honor? 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You're characterizing his 5 testimony. He's given you his answer. He's explained to you 6 how he -- 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Well -- 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: How in his own mind that 9 prevention could occur by everyone keeping their wits about 10 them. 11 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I'm just -- 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: The analogy he was saying was that 13 even if you were so fortunate as to have an agent three feet 14 away if you blurted out something the agent couldn't 15 unscramble the egg. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: I understand that, Your Honor. 17 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 18 Q The bottom line is that you didn't have agents 19 there. 20 A To the best of my knowledge. 21 Q Who was the ambassador to China at the time? The 22 American ambassador? 23 A Stapleton Roy. 24 Q Was there any effort on these overseas trips to 25 keep track of the American delegation, the people on the 110 1 delegation, to make sure they weren't interacting outside of 2 these meetings with Chinese intelligence agents? 3 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Scope. 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 5 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 6 Q Was there any effort made on these overseas trips 7 to make sure that notes that were taken were reviewed to see 8 whether there was classified information in them? 9 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 10 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 11 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, this bears on whether or 12 not there's an effort to suppress evidence. That's the 13 point. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, you'll have to help me here. 15 As I understood it, the question that the lawsuit involved 16 was whether or not documents at the Department of Commerce, 17 classified or otherwise, which were not produced in 18 accordance with the FOIA request because they were documents 19 that were destroyed. 20 During the course of the missions to China, 21 Mr. Forest, for example, has told us about the note taking, 22 the use of computers and all of that -- 23 MR. KLAYMAN: Can we not get into that in front of 24 the witness? 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, all right. We've heard 111 1 testimony from some other people about how that was done in 2 terms of the trade mission. But as I understand it, these 3 inquiries are not about a trade mission, but about this 4 gentleman's trip to China on another instance. 5 Now, some of the inquiry along those lines deals 6 basically with the security briefing before he left and we 7 went into that, but now we are getting into the general area 8 of what, if any, precautions were taken to keep the Chinese 9 from having exposure to information they should not have. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: What I'm trying to -- 11 MR. KLAYMAN: I think that's, to put it mildly, 12 peripheral to our inquiry here. 13 MR. KLAYMAN: What I'm trying to establish here -- 14 if I can say this without the witness here? 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Go ahead and step outside, 16 Mr. Garten. 17 (The witness was excused.) 18 MR. KLAYMAN: First of all, Your Honor, this was -- 19 it's our position, and I ask Mr. Witten not to discuss this 20 with his client, this proffer. 21 MR. WITTEN: I agree. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: Okay. That this is in furtherance 23 of the China trade mission, part of the China trade 24 mission, which took effect in August and September. That's 25 point one. 112 1 Point two, I'm trying to establish a pattern and 2 practice, a course of conduct, at the Commerce Department, a 3 routine procedure that would be directly relevant to whether 4 documents were kept in conjunction with the trade mission in 5 August and September of '94. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: And the pattern and practice has 7 to do with what? The absence of precautions taken to keep 8 the Chinese from knowing what they were not supposed to know? 9 MR. KLAYMAN: The way that relates is that if there 10 are things that were discussed or taken down and if those 11 things are not the kind of things that anybody would want to 12 come out in a FOIA case then perhaps that helps explain why 13 we don't have any of these documents. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: These documents being the 15 documents that may have been generated during this trip, 16 which anticipates the -- 17 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes. And he just testified -- 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Are they part of the FOIA request? 19 MS. BRASWELL: Pardon, Your Honor? 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Would documents that were 21 generated during this trip fall within the FOIA request? 22 MS. BRASWELL: Well, it's unclear to me, I thought 23 he was talking about the actual Chinese trade mission, rather 24 than a pre-trip. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I thought he was talking about the 113 1 one he went on before -- 2 MS. BRASWELL: If he's talking about the pre-trip, 3 then I don't think they would fall into the FOIA request, 4 Your Honor, because the FOIA request deals with the actual 5 trade mission. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: But Mr. Klayman's point is that if 7 the anticipatory trip, questions about the recordkeeping and 8 maintenance in the anticipatory trip might then under a broad 9 discovery standard cast some light on maintenance of the 10 records during the trip, which of course fall directly within 11 the FOIA request. 12 MS. BRASWELL: Right. But -- 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: So in that sense, why isn't this 14 at least a legitimate inquiry for a few more questions? 15 MS. BRASWELL: Well, because first of all, my 16 understanding was the inquiry wasn't on documents. The 17 inquiry was whether or not classified information was being 18 made not in a documentary form -- 19 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No. 20 MS. BRASWELL: -- made available to the Chinese. 21 He also asked whether or not documents that existed had been 22 reviewed to see if there was classified information in there. 23 How that relates to the removal or retention of documents is 24 beyond me. So it's one thing to ask about what kind of 25 documents could have been created that would be relevant, but 114 1 he's going well beyond that in his questioning. 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. I think I agree with you, 3 Ms. Braswell, if that's an objection you're making. 4 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, let me finish, Your Honor, if I 5 may. Can I respond to that? 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sure. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: What I'm talking about here is trying 8 to establish a pattern of the way procedures work at the 9 Commerce Department and Your Honor hit the nail on the head, 10 that that is relevant to discovery in this case. And whether 11 or not it falls within the original FOIA request or not, it's 12 relevant to the discovery to know how they do things. 13 MS. BRASWELL: With respect to documents, 14 Your Honor, it is. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, let me draw another what I 16 think is vital distinction. 17 Mr. Witten, you weren't here the other day, but a 18 record has been created here when Mr. Huang was asked these 19 questions, if he was taking things from the documents, making 20 them available to the Chinese. There is evidence in the 21 documents we have seen that is, to put it mildly, troubling. 22 The problem I have, it seems to me that it fits 23 well within what we're doing because if Huang was doing that 24 kind of stuff, then there would be a powerful motivation for 25 governmental officials to destroy documents with reference to 115 1 him if they existed in Department of Commerce files. 2 So on that point, the inquiry of Huang's access to 3 secured information and his use of it seems to me to be very 4 probative and highly related to the issue. But here we've 5 gone -- it seems to me we've gone in quite a different 6 direction. 7 Here we have a trip that anticipates a trade 8 mission and now the inquiry is the precautions taken during 9 that trip to keep the Chinese from seeing classified 10 information. 11 I for one don't see that connection. I don't see 12 the same connection that I see when inquiry is made about 13 Huang's access, use and so forth of that information. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, if I may ask, Your Honor, are 15 we going to break for lunch soon? 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I think we should break for lunch. 17 Yes. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Okay. Okay. I didn't mean to dwell 19 a long time on this. I was just trying to lead up to the 20 trade mission, but I think when we come back after lunch I 21 can show Your Honor why it's relevant. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Let's get to the trade 23 missions as quickly as we can. 24 Mr. Witten, I didn't mean to cut you off. Did you 25 want to be heard? 116 1 MR. WITTEN: No, thank you, Your Honor. 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Why don't we just -- 3 I'll just tell your client we're going to get some lunch now. 4 Can we get back at 1:45? We've got a lot to do. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: That's good, Your Honor. Thank you. 6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off video record at 7 12:48. 8 (Whereupon, at 12:48 p.m., a luncheon recess was 9 taken.) 10 * * * * * 117 1 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N 2 (1:52 p.m.) 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video record at 4 1:52. 5 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Witten? 6 MR. WITTEN: Thank you, Your Honor. 7 Mr. Klayman, I just wanted to inquire about 8 scheduling. I mean, we'd very much -- we were expecting and 9 would very much like to complete this deposition today. If 10 we can't complete it today, we might ask to suspend it at 11 three and finish it another time, but our preference would 12 be -- and sitting from where we're sitting, we don't see any 13 reason why we couldn't complete it today, I'd like to know 14 what your expectation is. 15 MR. KLAYMAN: How late can the Court work and how 16 late can you work, is my question? 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: What is the problem? Does 18 Mr. Garten have to get out of town? 19 MR. WITTEN: Yes. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You've got to get back to 21 New York? So you want to catch the 4:00 shuttle? 22 If that's the way we have to do it, that's the 23 way we have to do it. We'll just have to find another 24 date that's convenient. That only gives us about another 25 hour. 118 1 MS. BRASWELL: Well, Your Honor, I think the 2 question was how late would it go if in fact we were willing 3 to continue. 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, I think we'd go to six. 5 MS. BRASWELL: But would Mr. Klayman be finished by 6 six? I don't think that Mr. Garten wants to go to six and 7 then be told he has to come back again. I think that's the 8 issue. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: That's certainly true. 10 Can you finish by six? 11 MR. KLAYMAN: I don't think so, Your Honor. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Then we'll go to three and pick it 13 up there. All right. Let's go, then. Let's get as much 14 done as we can. 15 MR. WITTEN: If that's the case, if you're sure 16 we're going to go, if we're going to have another second -- 17 let me just think for a second -- 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Take your time. 19 MR. WITTEN: We'll go to three, if that's okay. 20 MR. KLAYMAN: That's fine. When are you next 21 available, Mr. Garten? 22 MR. WITTEN: We'll have to get back to you. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: It will be within the next two or 24 three weeks? 25 MR. WITTEN: Well, I hope so. I don't have my 119 1 schedule with me. 2 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You can get back to us. We'll 3 work on that. 4 Whereupon, 5 JEFFREY E. GARTEN 6 was recalled as a witness and, after having been previously 7 duly sworn, was examined and testified further as follows: 8 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF (RESUMED) 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Over lunch, Mr. Garten -- we're back on the 11 record -- I was trying to digest your testimony this 12 morning. Correct me if I'm wrong, it seems to me that your 13 relationship with Ron Brown was such that he delegated to you 14 near total responsibility in the areas of international 15 trade, correct? 16 A I would say he gave me tremendous latitude. 17 Q The reason that you didn't communicate much was 18 because you were in effect the Secretary of Commerce when it 19 came to international trade matters. 20 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 21 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: You can respond. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I don't know if there's an answer 24 to that, but answer if you can. 25 THE WITNESS: I was certainly not the Secretary of 120 1 Commerce. I had a good understanding with Brown. I knew 2 exactly when to talk to him to get guidance and he was the 3 only secretary and it was his show. I was just, I think, a 4 very competent lieutenant. 5 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 6 Q I didn't mean that your title was Secretary of 7 Commerce. What I meant was in function you had near total 8 authority in the area of international trade. 9 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 10 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 11 Q You were functionally like a Secretary of Commerce. 12 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 14 THE WITNESS: I did not see myself that way and I 15 don't think anyone else did. He had -- I'll stick with that. 16 MR. KLAYMAN: Go on. You can answer. 17 MR. WITTEN: If you've completed your answer, you 18 don't have to say anything. 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q This morning, did I understand you correctly to say 21 that it was Ron Brown himself who chose the participants on 22 the trade missions? 23 A To the best of my knowledge it was Ron Brown who 24 made the final decisions. 25 Q And did anyone know how he made those decisions? 121 1 A I can't answer because I wasn't there when he made 2 them. 3 Q But you had no knowledge as to how he made them. 4 A No, I was not there when the decisions were made so 5 I was not knowledgeable about them, other than to know what 6 the results were. 7 Q So you did not know what criteria he used 8 specifically to choose specific participants on trade 9 missions. 10 A I knew that there was a relationship between the 11 problems that I identified and the kinds of companies that 12 would come on the trade mission. To go back to that 13 construction example, if I said the biggest issue was 14 construction, it was pretty clear that there would be some 15 companies from that sector and I also knew that one of his 16 criteria was diversity, that every trade mission as best I 17 can recall would include representatives from big companies 18 and small companies and some kind of ethnic diversity. 19 Q And that representatives on the trade mission would 20 include political diversity as well? 21 A Never arose. Never arose in any discussion with 22 me. 23 Q Do you know what I mean by political diversity? 24 Some companies that contributed to the Democratic Party and 25 some who didn't? 122 1 A Same answer. 2 Q Now, given your considerable background and 3 training in economics, are you a believer in competition? 4 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Just a foundation question. 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Go on. It's been sustained. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Was there ever any discussion at the Commerce 11 Department that if you chose company A from a particular 12 industry to go on a trade mission that you would be using 13 government resources that could distort competition vis-a-vis 14 company B in the same industry? 15 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 17 THE WITNESS: I don't remember that discussion. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q Was there any discussion that dealt with 20 competition or anti-trust issues in terms of how participants 21 should be selected for trade missions? 22 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 24 THE WITNESS: Let me just say that in virtually all 25 the issues that I was involved in we always had counsel. It 123 1 was my assumption that any issues that -- I'm not a lawyer, 2 any issues that raised -- that had legal ramifications would 3 have been handled by counsel. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q Given your considerable expertise in economics, are 6 you saying that the thought never crossed your mind that if 7 we choose one company that we may be hurting another 8 competitor? 9 A I considered these trade missions to be highly 10 symbolic and when we made a case for opening a sector, it 11 was a case on behalf of all American companies that were 12 involved. We never took sides, one American company against 13 the other. Very explicit guideline. And if a representative 14 from one company was there, we did everything we can 15 vis-a-vis the foreign government to indicate that this was a 16 representative from a sector and so we did the best we could, 17 short of taking all of corporate America on every trip. 18 Q So is what you're saying that -- say the trip to 19 China which ultimately occurred in the fall of '94, that if 20 you took Loral Corporation, which you did, in the 21 telecommunications sector, that Loral was representing its 22 competitors on that trip? 23 A I don't remember the specific circumstances 24 surrounding Loral, but I remember telecommunications in India 25 where there were lots of issues, we had only one or two 124 1 telecommunications companies and when Brown and they were 2 there next to a foreign government, we were making the case 3 on behalf of the whole sector. 4 Q You are aware on the trade mission to China that 5 there were certain specific negotiations underway for the 6 companies that went, correct? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And some of those companies actually put together 9 deals on the trip to China, correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Some of those deals ultimately went through and 12 others didn't, correct? 13 A Right. 14 Q You are aware, for instance, that Entergy 15 Corporation went on that trip to China, correct? 16 A I can't recall. I'm not denying it, I just don't 17 remember who was on that trip. 18 Q You know who Entergy Corporation is, correct? 19 A No. 20 Q Never heard of it? 21 A I've heard the name, but if you're asking me do I 22 know who AT&T is I would answer no. I mean, you know, I've 23 been in the business sector, so I know the name of the 24 company. 25 Q Well, you know that Entergy Corporation is a New 125 1 Orleans based energy company, correct? 2 A I don't know that. 3 Q Did you know that Entergy Corporation was a donor 4 to the President of the United States before he became 5 President and to the Democratic Party? 6 A No. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Getting back to the trip that you 8 took in February of '94, I'm going to show you a document 9 which I'll ask the court reporter to mark as Exhibit 2. 10 This is a document which is captioned "United 11 States Government Official Delegation Under Secretarial Trip 12 to Singapore, Indonesia, China, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Seattle, 13 February 9 - March 4, 1994." 14 (Garten Deposition Exhibit No. 2 15 was marked for identification.) 16 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 17 Q This is the trip that we're referring to in 18 February of '94, correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And these are among the people that went on that 21 mission, correct? 22 A Yes. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, just for the record, our 24 FOIA request refers to a secretarial trade mission to China 25 and we would submit that included within that definition is 126 1 under secretarial trip, that this would be part of our FOIA 2 request. 3 MS. BRASWELL: Your Honor, we disagree. The FOIA 4 request is very specific for a specific trade mission. It 5 does not include this one. 6 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, actually, that particular -- 7 MS. BRASWELL: I believe FOIA requests -- 8 MR. WITTEN: Can we have this argument at a time 9 when you're not spending Mr. Garten's and my time? 10 MR. KLAYMAN: That's fine. I just wanted to put on 11 the record what our position is. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I have your position. Thank you. 13 Please proceed. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: And I'll be happy to give Your Honor 15 a copy of the FOIA request. 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Thank you. I would appreciate 17 that. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q Now, were there other people that went -- I take it 20 these people went on that trip, correct? 21 A I'm not sure all these people were on the whole 22 trip. There were a couple of stops here, so I cannot -- my 23 assumption is everybody was on part of it, but not everybody 24 was on the whole trip. I was. 25 Q Now, the two main people on the trip were you and 127 1 Mr. Rothkopf, correct? 2 A Right. 3 Q And you were the one that conceived of this trip in 4 February. 5 A You know, I don't want to quibble with words. I 6 don't know whether conceived is right. I was the person who 7 helped conceive of it. Yes. 8 Q Was there anyone else who helped conceive of it? 9 A Well, I might have sat around with a bunch of 10 people saying, you know, now that I'm confirmed, we really 11 ought to get moving on examining where some of these 12 obstacles are. 13 Q Now, going on this trip with you was Melinda Yee, 14 correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Did you know Melinda Yee before the trip? 17 A No. 18 Q Did you meet her on the trip? 19 A I either met her on the trip or I met her right 20 before. 21 Q And in meeting her, did you meet her in a group of 22 people or did you meet her one on one? How did that work? 23 A I don't recall. Unlikely I would have met her one 24 on one. 25 Q And either through those meetings or through some 128 1 other means, did you learn Ms. Yee's background? 2 A I didn't know her background, to the best of my 3 recollection. 4 Q I take it that at some point you learned that she 5 had experience in Chinese matters. 6 A I don't think I knew that. 7 Q Have you ever known that? 8 A If you ask me that now, it would be a surprise to 9 me. 10 Q You are aware she's Chinese-American. 11 A Yes. 12 Q Does she speak Chinese? 13 A I'm not aware if she's -- I guess she is. I mean, 14 she's Asian-American. 15 Q Are you aware she's Chinese-American? 16 A I just don't recall. 17 Q Did there come a point in time when you learned 18 that Ms. Yee knew an individual by the name of John Huang? 19 A Well, by the time I met her, I knew John Huang, so 20 it would never have arisen. I don't know what the 21 implication of your question is, but I never had a discussion 22 with her about John Huang, if that's what you're asking. 23 Q Well, no, there's no implication in my question. 24 It's straightforward. 25 A Well, if -- 129 1 MR. WITTEN: Why don't you restate it. 2 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 3 Q When did you first learn that Melinda Yee knew John 4 Huang? 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Foundation. 6 THE WITNESS: I never learned it. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: If at all. 8 THE WITNESS: I never learned it. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q And you say by the time you met Ms. Yee, you 11 already knew John Huang. When did you first get to know 12 Mr. Huang? 13 A I met him shortly before that memo, before he was 14 hired at the Commerce Department. 15 Q John Huang's first day of work, it's a matter of 16 record in this case, was July 18, 1994. 17 A Okay. The first day of -- he was actually 18 appointed then? 19 Q No, that was back in January of '94. Did you meet 20 John Huang some time between January and July of '94? 21 A Give me the dates again. 22 Q Well, don't even worry about when John Huang had 23 whatever position. Did you meet him between January and July 24 of 1994? 25 A I can only answer that in relationship to when he 130 1 came into the Commerce Department. I don't remember the 2 dates. I met him shortly before he got the appointment. 3 Q Okay. So he got the appointment in January of '94, 4 so you met him before January of '94? 5 A I met him before he got the appointment. Yes. 6 Q And how much sooner did you meet him? 7 A I don't know. I would say maybe just within a 8 couple of months. 9 Q What were the circumstances of your meeting him? 10 A You know, I don't recall precisely, but I'll give 11 you the best recollection I have is that the Commerce 12 Department had some openings, these were positions that 13 needed to be filled in ITA and I was given a list of names of 14 people who had expressed interest in the job and who at least 15 as a courtesy I should interview and he was on that list. 16 Q Who gave you that list? 17 A Somebody in Secretary Brown's office. I don't know 18 who. 19 Q Rob Stein? 20 A I just don't remember. 21 Q Did you know how Huang's name wound up at the 22 Commerce Department? 23 A No, I don't. 24 Q You understood that his name was submitted by the 25 White House at some point. 131 1 A I did not understand it and I don't understand it. 2 Q Did you ever ask anybody how Huang's name was 3 submitted for consideration at Commerce? 4 A No. 5 Q Did you ever discuss that with anyone? 6 A No. 7 Q You're sure of that? 8 A I don't recall -- I just recall that I had a list 9 and that -- I don't recall having a discussion about it. I 10 can't swear to the fact I never did, but from what I recall 11 now, I had a list and there were several people on the list 12 that I was supposed to interview. 13 Q And except for his name, do you remember anybody 14 else's name? 15 A No. 16 Q Tell me how Huang got off that list and got to be 17 appointed at the Commerce Department. What was the process 18 that caused you ultimately to select him? 19 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. Foundation. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, yes. To lay the foundation, 21 did you select him, as opposed to someone else? 22 THE WITNESS: I'm hesitating. I'm just trying to 23 recall what happened. It was Meissner who selected him, but 24 we had -- 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes, go on. 132 1 THE WITNESS: We had these openings and there were 2 quite a few people and I did have a discussion with Secretary 3 Brown and he said the one thing I want to be sure of is that 4 this place looks like America and don't fill it with white 5 males, don't fill it only with white males from Wall Street. 6 And I then said to Meissner, I relayed Brown's advice and it 7 really was Meissner's decision because Huang would work for 8 Meissner. 9 I think I did say to Meissner that there's a 10 difference between filling the position and exactly what the 11 position would be and at the end of the day we would have to 12 decide who was capable in what functions and that I was not 13 so wedded to the titles as I was to identifying who the 14 people were that I wanted on the team. But it was Meissner's 15 decision. 16 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 17 Q At that point that you had this discussion with 18 Meissner, you had already seen Huang's resume, correct? 19 A I don't know if I'd seen his resume, but I probably 20 knew a little bit about him. 21 Q You knew his qualifications. 22 A I knew what his background was. 23 Q And how did you learn of his background? 24 A I can't remember. 25 Q You knew that in fact he had been an international 133 1 banking executive, correct? 2 A I think I did, yes. 3 Q With particular expertise in China. 4 A It never -- it never entered my mind that he had 5 expertise in China. I never saw him that way. 6 Q But you knew that. 7 A I didn't know it. 8 Q So you were not aware that he was the -- he had 9 been an officer of a bank in Hong Kong? 10 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. Why don't you lay a 12 foundation? 13 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 14 Q You did know that he was an officer of a bank in 15 Hong Kong, correct? 16 A I probably did. 17 Q And you knew that that bank was owned by a family 18 called the Riadys? 19 A I don't know if I knew that. I don't know if I 20 even had heard of the name Riady at that point. 21 Q You knew that Mr. Huang had had a number of 22 different positions in the banking sector, correct? 23 A I don't -- I just don't recall everything I knew. 24 What comes to my mind now is that I thought he had been based 25 on Los Angeles or in California. 134 1 Q You knew that he had worked with a bank in Los 2 Angeles called the LippoBank? 3 A That's probably -- I don't remember the details, 4 but that sounds reasonable. 5 Q You had seen that bank on the 110 Expressway in Los 6 Angeles? 7 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 8 THE WITNESS: No. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: What's objectionable about that? 10 MS. BRASWELL: Who cares where the bank is? 11 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You've seen physically the bank? 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. I've seen the bank. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. Let's move on. 14 MS. BRASWELL: I said who cares where the bank is? 15 You asked me why I objected. 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He's seen it. Okay. Let's go. 17 He's seen the bank. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q And you knew that Mr. Huang had been employed by a 20 family and a banking conglomerate that was one of the most 21 powerful in Asia. 22 MR. WITTEN: Object to the form. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 24 THE WITNESS: I didn't -- when you mention the word 25 family, I did not -- I don't recall knowing anything about 135 1 that. I did know that Lippo was a big bank and that its 2 roots were in Asia. 3 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 4 Q Now, at the time you had this discussion with 5 Meissner, you knew, did you not, that President and 6 Mrs. Clinton wanted Mr. Huang to get a job at the Commerce 7 Department? 8 A I had no idea. 9 Q You subsequently came to learn that, correct? 10 A Incorrect. Let me just make sure that came across. 11 Incorrect. It's not true. 12 Q You have information that it's not true, that the 13 President and First Lady did not want -- 14 A Come on. 15 MR. WITTEN: Objection. He's talking about his own 16 knowledge, Mr. Klayman. 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: It also has a double negative. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: I'll revise the double negative. 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q But you have information that that premise is 21 incorrect, that Huang -- 22 A I have no knowledge of that. 23 Q Let me finish. You have information that the 24 President and Mrs. Clinton played no role in having Huang 25 placed at the Commerce Department? 136 1 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 2 THE WITNESS: I'm not even going to answer the 3 question. 4 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, he can't refuse to answer 5 the question. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He's given you your answer. 7 Please move on. He says he has no information, no knowledge 8 of it. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: I didn't hear that response. 10 MR. WITTEN: I heard it. 11 MS. BRASWELL: He gave it. 12 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 13 Q When you went on this mission in February, you 14 traveled to Indonesia, correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And during your trip to Indonesia, you visited with 17 the Riadys at their house, correct? 18 A I definitely visited with them. I'm not sure it's 19 on this trip. I'm not saying it isn't, I don't remember the 20 exact date, but I did visit with them. But I think that's 21 the wrong terminology. 22 I met with them at their house which is a common 23 thing in Asia. In my presence was the American ambassador to 24 Indonesia and a big delegation of Americans and Indonesians. 25 That same meeting could have been in the embassy. It was an 137 1 official meeting that just happened to take place in their 2 house. That was Asian culture. 3 Q Are you saying it's particularly Asian culture to 4 meet with people at their houses? 5 A In Indonesia, it's not unusual if you're having a 6 business meeting for someone to invite you to their house to 7 have it. In this case, location is irrelevant since I was 8 with an official delegation, which included the American 9 ambassador. 10 Q Melinda Yee was there at that meeting at the 11 Riadys' house, correct? 12 A I don't recall. 13 Q This meeting at the Riadys' house took place before 14 John Huang actually commenced work at the Commerce 15 Department, correct? 16 A I'd have to look at the dates. I don't recall the 17 date of the Riady meeting and I don't know offhand the date 18 that Huang became official. 19 Q We have his calendar, I can show it to you. 20 A Okay. 21 Q But the date is July 18, 1994. If you want me to 22 show it to you, I'll show it to you. 23 A No. 24 Q Did you meet with the Riadys in Indonesia before 25 that date? 138 1 A As I said, I made more than one trip to Indonesia. 2 If I met with them, and you have this on an official record, 3 if I met with them on this trip, then by definition I met 4 with them before Huang assumed his position. 5 Q And did you discuss with the Riadys what John 6 Huang's duties and responsibilities were to be at the 7 Commerce Department? 8 A Assuredly not. 9 Q Did you ever discuss that with them? 10 A Definitely not. 11 Q Did anyone recommend to you or anyone else that you 12 know of that John Huang be hired at the Commerce Department? 13 A No. 14 Q So he was hired on merit, as far as you know. 15 A It was Meissner's decision. There was an element 16 of consideration of diversity. That's what I know. 17 Q You're saying John Huang was hired because he was 18 Asian-American? 19 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 20 THE WITNESS: I'm not saying that. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 22 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 23 Q You're saying he was hired in part because he was 24 Asian-American? 25 A I told you what I know. 139 1 Q Was John Huang part of an affirmative action hiring 2 program at the Commerce Department? 3 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Asked and answered. This 4 is harassment. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: It's a different way. It's not 6 harassment. It's also irrelevant. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: You know, Your Honor, I take issue -- 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. Sustained. Sustained. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: I take issue to the cheap shots that 10 I've had to endure from counsel, from people in the Clinton 11 administration throughout this entire process. I have not 12 leveled one cheap shot at any of these people and this 13 conduct is inappropriate. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He has explained to you how the 15 concern for diversity was factored into the decision to hire 16 Mr. Huang. That probably is all he's going to say or has to 17 say, it seems to me. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, Your Honor, you're the judge. 19 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes, I am. 20 MR. KLAYMAN: And I'm asking you to have him go a 21 little further because was he part of some kind of 22 affirmative action hiring program. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Some agencies -- 24 MR. KLAYMAN: That's legitimate. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Garten, as you're well aware, 140 1 some agencies by specific regulation are directed to have 2 affirmative action programs which have a lot of different 3 parameters to them. Was this gentleman hired because 4 someone's attention was brought to such regulations or 5 directives and said that this would be a way to comply with 6 them? 7 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, not to my recollection 8 was it so formal. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Thank you, sir. But by the same 10 token, you have a specific recollection that the secretary 11 felt that his department should be representative of America 12 and therefore a steady parade of investment bankers from Wall 13 Street was not what he had in mind. 14 THE WITNESS: You said it perfectly. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: That was a parade he didn't want 16 to lead. 17 THE WITNESS: That's right. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. I think we've exhausted 19 that. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q Did you discuss with Meissner what Huang's 22 qualifications were? Before Meissner recommended his hiring? 23 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 25 THE WITNESS: Let me just preface this by saying 141 1 this was several years ago and what I am about to say -- this 2 is the best of my recollection. That's all I can say. 3 I don't know what came first or what came later, 4 but I think I did say to Meissner -- there was more than one 5 candidate on that list that I did not feel was high quality 6 from a substantive standpoint or from an experience 7 standpoint and I say that -- I believe I did say -- I believe 8 he went through some of the candidates that he was partial to 9 and when it came to Huang I did say I don't care what kind of 10 banking experience he's had, he cannot have a substantive 11 position. 12 And I could say to this Meissner because both he 13 and I were in several administrations. I said something like 14 you and I both know that there is no relationship between 15 what a person looks like on paper and what a person can 16 really do and he doesn't have the requisite experience to 17 carry any real responsibility. I don't think he will 18 understand the difference between private and public 19 responsibility. All of his experience was in the private 20 sector. 21 I could say that because I did understand the 22 difference and Meissner did. And I said if Huang comes in 23 here, you want him, that's fine, but we have to make sure he 24 does not -- that he had an administrative role. And it 25 wasn't word for word that way, that was the understanding. 142 1 Q You had the ultimate say over whether Huang was 2 hired, correct? 3 A Well, in the sense that I delegated it to Meissner. 4 I said you pick, the guy's going to have to work -- there 5 were some women on there, too, the person is going to have to 6 work for you. I said, you know, it's your call, but if it's 7 somebody without -- I was kind of preoccupied with people who 8 had had some public sector experience before. 9 Q Who else on the list had expertise in China? 10 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Foundation. 11 MR. KLAYMAN: If anyone. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 13 Did anyone have any expertise? 14 THE WITNESS: I just don't recall the list. 15 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 16 Q But that wasn't the question. I'm not asking you 17 for the name right now. Were there other candidates on that 18 list that had expertise in trade matters in China? 19 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Foundation. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 21 Sir, on that list, when you looked at it, do you 22 remember -- in other words, using various categories, think 23 of the category of people who could claim experience in China 24 itself, was there anyone else on that list who could claim 25 that kind of experience? 143 1 MR. WITTEN: Object even to the judge's formulation 2 of the question for lack of foundation. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: How would you phrase it? 4 MR. WITTEN: Did anyone on that list have expertise 5 in China? 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I stand corrected. 7 THE WITNESS: Can I tell you, from where I sat -- 8 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, let's get the answer -- 9 THE WITNESS: Yes, I'm going to tell you. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: I will agree in this limited -- to 11 just this -- 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Mr. Witten has phrased it with 13 perfect accuracy. 14 THE WITNESS: But I have to preface it by saying -- 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. But then go back to 16 it, okay? 17 THE WITNESS: I will. No. I'm going to answer the 18 question. 19 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Thank you. 20 THE WITNESS: My notion -- I, myself, knew that I 21 was not an expert on China, but I had more experience and 22 more knowledge in my little finger than 99 percent of the 23 people who claimed it because of my general experience in 24 trade and in Asia. So there was nobody on that list, 25 including Huang, who met my threshold of having the ability 144 1 or being able to carry the responsibility for dealing with 2 China. 3 I was not confusing their ethnic origin, the fact 4 that they may have worked in and around China for any amount 5 of expertise. I knew too much. I had too much background to 6 make that mistake. 7 So, Your Honor, in answer to your question, nobody 8 on that list. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Nobody on the list. 10 THE WITNESS: Nobody on that list qualified as 11 having any competence to deal with such a big issue, such an 12 important issue. And that's why this guy Don Forest was the 13 person all along who was the closest we had to a China guy. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q Well, let's back up a little bit. You were the one 16 that had the ultimate decision making authority as to whether 17 to hire John Huang or not. 18 MR. WITTEN: Asked and answered. 19 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes or no. I didn't get an answer. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 21 THE WITNESS: I delegated that to Chuck Meissner. 22 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 23 Q But it was your authority that you delegated. 24 A Yes. 25 Q Did you ever ask Meissner, let's get more people 145 1 because I have more ability here in my little pinkie than any 2 of these people on the list? Did you ever say anything to 3 that effect? 4 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the form. 5 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I think he said experience in his 6 answer. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Experience. 8 JUDGE FACCIOLA: As opposed to ability. Maybe it 9 was a different pinkie. But go ahead. 10 THE WITNESS: You know, it wasn't a very -- it 11 wasn't a very high level position and I think what was in my 12 mind was for a country like China, given its enormous 13 importance, nobody below -- when it came to the Commerce 14 Department, I was going to be the person who had the most to 15 say about what we were going to do and nobody else was going 16 to bear a lot of responsibility other than just the 17 administrative part, so I think what went through my mind, 18 having been in the government before, it would be fruitless 19 to say we want a great China expert, let's go look for one. 20 I didn't think it would happen. Not at that level in the 21 Commerce Department. And this was not my only concern at the 22 moment. 23 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 24 Q Based on your considerable experience and obvious 25 intelligence, you're not telling me, are you, that never 146 1 having been an expert in China that just based on your raw 2 intelligence and your background generally that you consider 3 yourself to be an expert on how this country operates? 4 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Mischaracterizes his 6 testimony. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. I mean, let's see if 8 we can -- 9 THE WITNESS: I can tell you the answer. I assumed 10 that it wasn't my job to be the China expert. We had a whole 11 State Department for that. I had worked for Winston Lord, he 12 was the Assistant Secretary for Asia. All the help I needed 13 to get expertise from throughout the administration was right 14 at my fingertips. 15 So I didn't -- I wasn't so arrogant to say I know 16 how China works. Always when we -- I never went to China, I 17 never did anything without going over to the State 18 Department, talking to Winston, meeting with the China 19 experts, so it was unrealistic. 20 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 21 Q Is it your view, Mr. Garten, that someone such as 22 John Huang who was president of major international banks in 23 Asia, who had worked for a family that controls much of the 24 financial wealth of Asia, who was highly educated through the 25 university system of Taiwan and who had lived in this country 147 1 and knew how we operated here was not qualified for a post at 2 the Commerce Department to promote trade with China? 3 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 4 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 5 MR. KLAYMAN: Is that your position? 6 MS. BRASWELL: Objection as to scope, Your Honor, 7 too, how this whole argument over Mr. Huang's qualifications 8 as an employee is way beyond the scope -- 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Yes, I think we can move on. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I get an answer to that just, 11 Your Honor? 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. 13 In terms of that question, can you answer it, in 14 hopes that we can move on? Can you try? 15 MR. KLAYMAN: It's a crucial question, which is why 16 we got so many objections. 17 MR. WITTEN: Move to strike. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Don't characterize it. 19 THE WITNESS: I may have not been an expert on 20 China, but I had a lot of experience in Asia. I wasn't going 21 to confuse -- there were millions of people who had a lot of 22 experience in Asia, worked there, lived there. That to me 23 was a totally different thing than having the qualifications 24 to represent the American government in official dealings in 25 Asia. And there was nothing about Huang's background in my 148 1 view that qualified him to do that. 2 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 3 Q So you gave the go ahead to Meissner to hire him as 4 long as he was limited to being effectively a budget clerk. 5 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Mischaracterization. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: I don't think you have to do 7 that -- that you can do that to the witness, to characterize 8 it. You can ask him a legitimate question, Mr. Klayman. But 9 he's explained to us that he delegated his authority to 10 Meissner to hire him, but he explained to Meissner that this 11 person would be working for Meissner, it was Meissner's call. 12 And I guess the question I have on that, Mr. Garten, is after 13 that discussion with Meissner, what did you see Huang's role 14 in the department to be? 15 THE WITNESS: Well, once Meissner -- 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: If Meissner would have taken him. 17 THE WITNESS: The actual position, as I recall, was 18 the deputy assistant secretary in this one bureau for Asia 19 and we changed it. We changed it to be the deputy assistant 20 secretary with responsibility for admin, for administration. 21 So from the very first day, the Asian responsibility was 22 stripped from him. 23 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 24 Q In fact, Mr. Garten, the reason that you gave these 25 instructions to Mr. Meissner, that he could hire him -- 149 1 MR. WITTEN: Objection. We've been through this 2 four or five times and each time Mr. Klayman mischaracterizes 3 it. 4 MR. KLAYMAN: I'll tell you something. Your Honor, 5 I'd prefer to adjourn the deposition right now. 6 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, no. Let's keep going. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: I really would. I really -- I'm 8 being second guessed here on all sides. I'm entitled to ask 9 my questions. If they're not framed properly, make an 10 objection to form. It will never come into evidence at the 11 trial. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Okay. Well, let's -- 13 MR. KLAYMAN: But let me ask my questions the way I 14 want to. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: You try and ask your question and 16 then Mr. Witten will make his objection. Rephrase your 17 question and let's try again. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q The reason that you gave the instruction to 20 Meissner that it was his call to hire Huang was because you 21 really didn't want to know why Huang was going to be at the 22 Commerce Department, correct? 23 MR. WITTEN: Object. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 25 THE WITNESS: That's a mischaracterization of 150 1 everything that happened, but the final part of your question 2 is totally false. I delegated it to Meissner. 3 And, incidentally, I'm not sure technically whether 4 it was my authority or it was Brown's. It may have been that 5 for deputy assistant secretaries the secretary has the last 6 ruling. He had delegated it to me and I delegated it to 7 Meissner, so it might have been the secretary's authority 8 that had been delegated down. I delegated it to Meissner for 9 one and only one reason, that it was his operation. 10 I had several bureaus and it wasn't -- I did not 11 have the time and I didn't feel it was job to get involved in 12 appointments that in my view were that far down on the totem 13 pole. That's the only reason. 14 Q But at the time you made these statements to 15 Meissner that it's effectively your call, if you hire this 16 guy I don't want him involved in anything of substance -- 17 A I didn't say that. 18 Q I don't want him involved in China, correct? 19 A I said I looked at the list and I said for a lot 20 for a lot of these people, if you want to hire them, we 21 should have a prior understanding that they may not be 22 qualified in the way you, Meissner, and I know they should be 23 and in that case, we're not going to make the mistake that 24 maybe other Commerce Departments have had in filling the 25 important positions with people who were not up to it, so we 151 1 will in a sense cordon off their responsibilities so that 2 they have no substantive involvement. 3 A Well, the reason I'm asking these questions is here 4 you are making these statements to Meissner before you ever 5 have an opportunity to work with Mr. Huang, telling Meissner 6 this is what he's not going to be doing, dismissing Mr. 7 Huang's Chinese experience, in the context of your having no 8 China experience and the people around you having no China 9 experience, and my question is this: you knew, did you not, 10 that Huang was being inserted into the Commerce Department 11 for an improper purpose. 12 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 13 THE WITNESS: I did not. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 15 THE WITNESS: I did not. 16 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 17 Q And that's why you prejudged him and insulated him. 18 A That's not true. 19 Q And you knew he had a conflict of interest, 20 correct? 21 A Incorrect. 22 Q And you knew about his involvement with the Riadys. 23 A Incorrect. 24 Q And you knew about the Riadys' involvement with the 25 Clintons. 152 1 A Incorrect. 2 Q And you knew that the Riadys had been alleged to 3 have funnelled money to Webster Hubbell in '94, correct? 4 MS. BRASWELL: Objection, Your Honor. This is far 5 afield from anything involved with documents -- 6 MR. KLAYMAN: It's certainly not. It's not. 7 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Did you have any such information? 8 THE WITNESS: I had no information whatsoever on 9 any of those issues. 10 And every single question you asked me I consider 11 totally loaded and the answer, if it wasn't clear, is no to 12 every single one of those. 13 MR. WITTEN: Your Honor, it's 2:35. We began at 14 10:00. I have yet to hear a question about the destruction 15 or removal of any document from the Commerce Department. I 16 don't have a long track record in this case, I don't know 17 what the common law of it is, but just sitting here as a 18 stranger, I don't think we're doing what was set forth in 19 Judge Lamberth's order. 20 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, your orders are 21 previously clear on what the scope of discovery is. We're 22 staying within that. This is crucial testimony and it bears 23 on Your Honor's ruling with regard to the John Huang 24 deposition and the Johnny Chung. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Why don't you proceed? 153 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q At what point did you learn that Melinda Yee knew 3 John Huang, if at all? 4 A I never learned it. I never learned it. I mean, 5 at some point, maybe it became obvious, but it was never 6 presented to me. I mean, at some point, I knew them both. It 7 would not have been an event to know that they knew each 8 other. 9 Q Well, at what point did it become obvious? 10 A I didn't say it did become obvious. I said it 11 might have been. 12 Q Well, when do you believe it might have been? 13 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 14 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 15 Did you ever become aware of the relationship 16 between those two people? 17 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Thank you. 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q Did you ever become aware that Melinda Yee worked 21 with Democratic fundraisers that John Huang also worked for? 22 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: With. 24 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 25 THE WITNESS: I never was aware of that. 154 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q Do you know of individuals by the name of Nora and 3 Gene Lum? 4 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 5 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 6 THE WITNESS: I only know those names from 7 newspapers which reported on them after I left Washington. 8 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 9 Q Did you know Trisha Lum when you were at the 10 department? 11 A No. 12 Q Did you know -- if I was to tell you that she was 13 an assistant to Ron Brown, would that refresh your 14 recollection? 15 A No. 16 Q Were you aware of allegations at the time you 17 worked at the department that Ron Brown's son, Michael Brown, 18 had been a conduit of money from the Lums to Ron Brown? 19 A No. 20 Q Were you aware of Ron Brown being investigated 21 about that by an independent counsel? 22 A I was certainly aware that there was -- that an 23 independent counsel was being appointed and I think was 24 appointed while I was there. I don't recall the 25 circumstances. I think maybe I knew at the time from reading 155 1 The Washington Post, but I don't remember what they were now. 2 Q Did you ever discuss the independent counsel's 3 investigation with Ron Brown? 4 A No. 5 Q Melinda Yee was the note taker on that February 6 trip to China, correct? 7 A This one? 8 Q Yes. 9 A I can't recall. 10 MR. KLAYMAN: I'll show you what I'll ask the court 11 reporter to mark as Exhibit 3. 12 (Garten Deposition Exhibit No. 3 13 was marked for identification.) 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q Take a look at this document. It consists of one, 16 two, three, four, five, six, seven pages. And turn to page 17 2, Tuesday, February 22, 1994 -- Singapore. Do you see where 18 it says in the second paragraph "Notetaker: Melinda Yee"? 19 A Okay. 20 Q Did you attend a luncheon with the Aerospace 21 Industries Association on that date? 22 A I don't remember. 23 Q Does this refresh your recollection at Melinda 24 Yee's note taking? 25 A No. Melinda Yee was definitely on the trip. I 156 1 don't know if she was on the whole trip, but shew as 2 definitely on part of it. And if she were there taking 3 notes, that would not necessarily have surprised me. 4 Q This document which lists the time, the event, the 5 note taker, this is characteristic of how records were kept 6 of activities on trade trips, correct? Procedurally. 7 A I am not in a position to comment. It wasn't my 8 job to keep the records. 9 Q But you've seen documents like this before. 10 A You know, I probably never saw a document like 11 this. 12 Q But it does refresh your recollection generally, 13 and I believe you testified to it this morning, that there 14 were note takers at each of these meetings on trade trips. 15 A I'm sure there was somebody taking notes in these 16 meetings. 17 Q And it also would refresh your recollection that 18 the note takers frequently came from the Commerce Department 19 in Washington. 20 A If I had to guess, this is not the complete list of 21 who was there. This is the Commerce list. 22 Q That's a different question. 23 A No, it's the same question because there could 24 be -- there could well have been State Department note takers 25 in each one. 157 1 Q I'm not -- I'm not denying that, but I'm asking 2 you, this confirms that in fact at these meetings on overseas 3 trade trips the practice was to have a note taker from the 4 Commerce Department in Washington. 5 A That I -- 6 Q In addition. 7 A Yes. I don't know. I was just not conscious of 8 it. 9 Q You're not denying that Melinda Yee came from the 10 Commerce Department in Washington, correct? 11 A No. 12 Q Or Bob LaRussa. 13 A No. 14 Q Or someone by the name of -- on the top, what does 15 that say, Crayen? 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Craven. Steve Craven. He's on 17 the first page as well. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q Do you know Steve Craven? 20 A He may have been the commercial -- you know, the 21 Commerce Department had some people in different embassies. 22 He may have been there. 23 Q Well, look at the second page. This is the 24 follow-up required -- the third page, follow-up required for 25 Jakarta -- February 24-26, 1994, Thursday, February 24, 1994, 158 1 note taker: Rob Klein. He came from Washington, didn't he? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And Karen Goddin, G-o-d-d-i-n, she came from 4 Washington, right? 5 A Right. 6 Q And then, of course, you have Melinda Yee below. 7 A Right. 8 Q The next page, listing note takers again. And look 9 at the third from the bottom, where it says lunch with James 10 Riady, that refreshes your recollection, does it not, that 11 you had lunch with James Riady on that trip to Jakarta in 12 February of '94? 13 A I don't need my memory refreshed. If this is an 14 official document and that's what it says, then fine. The 15 date's not relevant. 16 Q And during that lunch you discussed John Huang with 17 James Riady? 18 A Certainly not to my recollection. 19 Q But you may have. 20 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 21 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 22 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I can probe a little bit. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Do you have a specific -- 24 MR. KLAYMAN: It would be conceivable that he did, 25 given the fact that they had hired Huang already and he came 159 1 from the Riady empire. 2 MR. WITTEN: Move to strike. 3 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I ask a few questions? 4 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Just ask him if he had lunch with 5 this gentleman and what they discussed. Let's see if we can 6 move on. 7 MR. KLAYMAN: Can I ask it a little more pointed? 8 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 9 Q You did mention John Huang during this lunch, 10 didn't you? 11 MR. WITTEN: Asked and answered. 12 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 13 THE WITNESS: I have no recollection of discussing 14 John Huang. 15 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 16 Q So you can't remember one way or the other. 17 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. Asked and answered. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Asked and answered. Sustained. 19 MR. KLAYMAN: No, Your Honor, it is not. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He just answer it. He just -- 21 MR. KLAYMAN: I never got it. 22 JUDGE FACCIOLA: He has no recollection. 23 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, can I ask what is the problem? 24 Why they have to interrupt this? An innocuous question like 25 that? You know, it's uncanny, every time I have a question 160 1 that has some importance -- 2 MR. WITTEN: Can we get another question? It's 3 quarter to three -- 4 MR. KLAYMAN: I object to this, Your Honor. 5 MS. BRASWELL: Your Honor, we're clearly entitled 6 to make our objections. The fact that Mr. Klayman doesn't 7 like the answers he's getting is his problem. That has 8 nothing to do with the objection. 9 MR. KLAYMAN: You're darn right I don't like them 10 and, Your Honor, I will be moving for sanctions. I don't 11 like them. 12 (Interruption to the proceedings by phone ringing.) 13 MR. KLAYMAN: Your Honor, the problem I have here 14 is that even if you -- on something as innocuous as that, 15 where clearly I'm just trying to close the loop in the 16 conversation, that any kind of an objection, and there was no 17 basis for that objection, tips the witness off and this 18 happens consistently. It's happened throughout this case. 19 Judge Lamberth has noted it with a number of 20 different counsel and I don't see the necessity. Why can't 21 people come forward and just testify? This was not a complex 22 or trick question. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Well, okay, but they're permitted 24 to object. 25 Do you recall the question, Mr. Garten? 161 1 THE WITNESS: Could you please repeat it? 2 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 3 Q When you said that you don't remember, you can't 4 remember one way or the other. You might have discussed 5 Huang with them, correct? 6 A Well, I prefer to say that I doubt very seriously 7 that Huang's name would have come up and I don't recall it's 8 coming up. 9 Q What leads you to believe that you doubt it would 10 come up? 11 A Well, the purpose of this -- I remember the purpose 12 of this lunch, I don't remember all the discussion, but the 13 purpose of the lunch was to get the assessment of the 14 Indonesians who were there why are American firms losing 15 market share. We had done an analysis in Washington which 16 showed that American firms were losing market share to 17 Japanese and the Europeans. And I was taking this lunch to 18 have a very serious discussion of why was that, is it 19 something the American firms are doing, is it a policy of the 20 Indonesian government. 21 I was focused on something of that order of 22 magnitude and from the beginning to the end of my time in the 23 Commerce Department, John Huang was not an important person. 24 It was not a subject of discussion, it did not hit the radar 25 screen. With the benefit of several years and all of this 162 1 investigation, it might seem like it would have been 2 different then, but at that time, it was -- so I don't 3 remember any discussion of that. There was a much bigger, 4 much bigger issue and the Indonesians were quite animated 5 about this big topic I raised. It was not some small topic 6 to them ether, given the importance of American investment. 7 Q Who did you understand Mr. Riady to be at that 8 time? 9 A I understood him to be one of the major Indonesian 10 business leaders. 11 Q Who arranged for that lunch? 12 A The American ambassador. 13 Q Did John Huang play a role in arranging for that 14 lunch? 15 A I have no knowledge that that happened. I don't 16 see how. The trip was arranged with the American embassy, 17 which had one of the most impressive ambassadors. 18 Q Who was present at that lunch besides you and 19 Ms. Yee and James Riady? 20 A I think several people from the American embassy 21 and others from the Commerce Department. 22 Q And who from the Commerce Department? 23 A I don't remember. 24 Q Ms. Yee took notes at that lunch, correct? 25 A I don't remember that. 163 1 Q She may have, but you don't remember? 2 A I have no recollection of her even being there. If 3 she took notes, I don't recall. 4 Q Well, you have no recollection of anybody being 5 there except you and James Riady, correct? 6 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 7 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 8 MR. KLAYMAN: Just trying to narrow it. 9 JUDGE FACCIOLA: No, he mentioned that he was 10 certain that there were some other people -- 11 THE WITNESS: I said that the American ambassador 12 was there. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: -- from the Commerce Department. 14 MR. KLAYMAN: And the American ambassador. 15 THE WITNESS: And people from -- 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: And people from Commerce. 17 THE WITNESS: And people from Commerce. 18 MR. KLAYMAN: Okay. And Melinda Yee was from 19 Commerce, correct? 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: But he doesn't recollect whether 21 she was there. 22 You don't remember if she was present? 23 THE WITNESS: I don't remember if she specifically 24 was there. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: All right. Fine. 164 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q Now, have you had any contact with Melinda Yee in 3 the last three years? 4 A No. 5 Q Are you aware that she's testified in this case 6 that she destroyed her notes with regard to trips to China 7 and India? 8 A No. 9 Q Those just happen to be the trips that you went on 10 as well, correct? 11 MR. WITTEN: Objection to the insinuation in the 12 question. 13 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 14 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 15 Q Do you know where any notes taken by Ms. Yee may 16 be? 17 A No. 18 Q Was there a procedure for storing notes when people 19 were traveling overseas? In other words, if people took 20 notes on trade missions, how were they then filed? 21 A I don't know. 22 Q You obviously must have taken notes from time to 23 time overseas. 24 A You know, I don't think I did. What I did was -- I 25 didn't take notes. I think I incorporated a lot of my 165 1 thoughts in the speeches I gave. 2 Q Well, so you didn't take a lot, but the notes you 3 did take, where did you store them? 4 A I don't remember taking notes. 5 Q You never wrote anything down when you were 6 overseas? 7 A I can't say that I never wrote anything down, but 8 if I did, it would have been on the back of an envelope and I 9 just don't -- I mean, you have everything -- you have access 10 to all the papers I had. If there were notes, they would 11 have been in there. 12 Q Well, the problem is we don't and that's why I'm 13 probing. Did you take your notes back when you came back 14 from overseas trips? 15 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 16 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 17 THE WITNESS: I don't remember taking any notes, so 18 I can't tell you what I did what I can't remember. 19 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 20 Q Any writings. Let's take the word notes out. Any 21 scribblings, writings? 22 A I don't -- I don't recall anything. 23 Q Did you use a dictaphone? 24 A No. 25 Q A little tape recorder? 166 1 A No. 2 Q On these trade trips, people did take laptop 3 computers from time to time, correct? 4 A I don't recall. 5 Q Did you ever learn that Ms. Yee actually 6 participated in raising money for the Clintons with the 7 Riadys? Have you ever learned that? 8 A No. 9 Q Who is Patrick Nolan, N-o-l-a-n? 10 A I think he might have been a short-lived special 11 assistant to me. 12 Q Is he still alive? 13 A He didn't last long with me. 14 Q I was referring to people who died when the 15 airplane -- 16 A I think he -- I think he was assigned to me as a 17 special assistant and, you know, he wasn't very good, so he 18 was gone. 19 Q Do you know where he is today? 20 A No. 21 Q Rob Stein. You said that he was another person who 22 played a major role in planning the trip to China and India, 23 correct? 24 A I think China. 25 Q What role did he play in planning and implementing 167 1 the trip to China? 2 A Rob was the chief of staff and he was someone I had 3 tremendous respect for and who I could call instead of 4 calling Brown. Instead of bothering Brown, I could call Rob 5 and say here's what we're thinking, what do you think, or how 6 do you suggest we get something done. In the end, he had to 7 be the coordinator because there were lots of other parts -- 8 there were some other parts of the Commerce Department that 9 were actually involved in the trip. 10 I might have had overall substantive 11 responsibility, but there were issues that related to other 12 bureaus. And, as you know, in a bureaucracy, when that 13 happens you need somebody who is outside all of the bureaus 14 and Rob was highly respected, highly knowledgeable, and he 15 performed that role. 16 Q What did he do specifically in terms of planning 17 and implementing the China trip? 18 A I think he was sort of -- he was like the -- he was 19 acting as the chief of staff of the Commerce Department and 20 in the end, he had the responsibility for making sure all the 21 trains were running on time. 22 Q What do you mean by all the trains? 23 A Well, you know, he handled everything from the 24 logistics, who was going to go on the trip, especially the 25 government delegation. I think there were some people from 168 1 other agencies, people from throughout the Commerce 2 Department. How are we going to get there, who's doing the 3 advance work for Secretary Brown, where are the hotels. Who 4 is the schedule -- you know, he was focused -- on a 5 secretarial trip, somebody's job is to make sure that every 6 minute that the secretary spends is organized. 7 Q And by the nature of Mr. Stein's position, he would 8 have known the basis upon which Secretary Brown selected 9 trade mission participants, correct? 10 A I don't know that because I was never in those 11 meetings. 12 Q But if there was one person that would have been 13 privy to that, it would have been Rob Stein. 14 MR. WITTEN: Objection. Calls for speculation. 15 MR. KLAYMAN: Based on his experience in working 16 with him. 17 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Based on your experience, would 18 that be a fair statement? 19 THE WITNESS: I don't know because, you know -- I 20 don't know the answer because Brown -- the way Brown 21 organized things, there were different people for different 22 functions. 23 And in the same way he always relied on me, I think 24 he did, anyway, what should the policy be, what should be the 25 focus on this trip, what kinds of problems should we be 169 1 talking about, he would come to me for that. If he -- 2 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm not asking about you, I'm asking 3 about Stein. 4 THE WITNESS: No, I'm saying -- I'm just giving you 5 the pattern. I'm sure that he relied on Rob Stein to make 6 sure everything worked, that the trip was going to go off 7 smoothly and that he, the secretary, was being -- that 8 somebody was looking out for him. I did not see that as my 9 job. 10 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 11 Q You understood that Rob Stein's prior experience 12 was working with the Democratic National Committee. You knew 13 that. 14 A I may have been dimly aware of it. You know, I 15 came into that Commerce Department, I didn't know anybody 16 there. I wasn't -- maybe this was -- I just didn't look into 17 their backgrounds. 18 Q But you knew he had worked at the DNC. 19 A I may have. 20 Q And you knew he was Brown's chief of staff there. 21 A Where? 22 Q At the DNC. 23 A I did not know that. 24 Q You knew Melissa Moss who worked in the Office of 25 Business Liaison was one of Brown's fundraisers at the DNC, 170 1 correct? 2 A I probably knew that over time. 3 Q And you knew that she participated in playing a 4 role in selecting trade mission participants. 5 A Probably did. 6 Q And Stein was also responsible for making sure that 7 meetings overseas, such as meetings in China, were attended 8 by certain companies and business interests, correct? 9 A I don't know. 10 Q Now, do you know whether or not Rob Stein has held 11 certain meetings at his house to discuss this lawsuit with 12 either employees or former employees of the Commerce 13 Department? 14 A I have no knowledge of that. 15 Q Have you ever heard of that? 16 A No. 17 Q Have you ever attended such a meeting? 18 A No. 19 Q Do you know a James Hackney? 20 A Yes. 21 Q James Hackney was counsellor to Ron Brown? 22 A For part of the time I was there. 23 Q And very close to him, correct? 24 A Yes. Certainly that was my understanding. 25 Q And did you know Lauri Fitz-Pegado? 171 1 A Yes. 2 Q And what was her role? 3 A She was one of the assistant secretaries that 4 worked for me. 5 Q And what did she do for you? 6 A She was in charge of what was called the Foreign 7 Commercial Service. These were the Commerce Department 8 employees in various embassies. And actually throughout the 9 U.S., too. 10 Q Have you reviewed her testimony in this lawsuit? 11 A No. 12 Q Have you talked to her about this lawsuit? 13 A No. 14 Q Did she ever tell you she was going to testify 15 here? 16 A No. 17 Q If you had to based on your experience on the 18 various interactions professionally and personally at the 19 Commerce Department, if one wanted to get information given 20 the fact that Secretary Brown died on how he selected trade 21 mission participants, who would be the logical person to talk 22 to? 23 A I think you'd just have to get all the people 24 who worked directly for him on his staff together. I 25 don't know what else to say. I don't know who -- since 172 1 I don't know what the mechanism is, I think you have to 2 talk to them all. 3 Q Well, you're not the person to talk to, correct? 4 A Absolutely. 5 Q Because you didn't have a clue, correct? 6 A I wouldn't use those terms. I was not involved in 7 it. 8 Q Did Meissner know? Based on your experience. 9 A I would be very surprised if he knew. 10 Q Did Rothkopf know? 11 A I would very surprised. Rothkopf may have been in 12 some meetings, but you're talking about how were they 13 selected, that would be a surprise to me. 14 Q Did Lauri Fitz-Pegado know? 15 A Same answer. 16 Q Rob Stein? 17 A I don't know. 18 Q Melissa Moss? 19 A I don't know. 20 Q Given the fact that no one that you know of knows 21 how Brown selected trade mission participants -- 22 A I didn't say that. 23 Q Based on your knowledge, you don't know of anyone 24 who definitively knows how Brown selected trade mission 25 participants. That's correct, right? You can't tell me 173 1 today anybody who you know knows how Brown selected trade 2 mission participants. 3 A I cannot identify one person who can tell you the 4 whole story. 5 Q Right. And given the fact that you were number two 6 at the Commerce Department -- 7 A Technically, not. Technically, that's wrong. 8 Technically -- 9 Q I know, there was Barram. 10 A There was Barram -- 11 Q But Barram was an administrative job. 12 A But in the horrible event that Brown had been 13 incapacitated and Barram, my understanding was the next 14 person in line was the general counsel and then I'm not even 15 sure I was the number four. So I would just -- 16 Q Well, we spent some time on that. We know what 17 your position is in terms of your role there, the importance 18 of it, but given the fact that someone of your level and 19 expertise and involvement in international trade didn't know 20 how these trade mission participants were being selected, 21 didn't that raise concerns with you as to what was going on 22 at the Commerce Department? 23 A You know, when you -- the answer is no. 24 Q Was this a throwback to the Nixon days where what 25 other people did was their business and not yours? 174 1 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 2 MR. WITTEN: Objection. 3 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Sustained. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q Did you have an attitude at the Commerce Department 6 that there were certain things I don't want to know? 7 A No, I think I explained to you that there were 8 certain things I felt I could make a real contribution to and 9 there were others that I had no value added and so I assumed 10 that Secretary Brown would find the people who did. 11 Q You were aware at the time you took the job at the 12 Commerce Department that Secretary Brown was alleged to have 13 taken a bribe from the government of Vietnam. 14 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. Outside the scope. 15 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 16 Do you have any knowledge of that? 17 THE WITNESS: Not when I took the job. 18 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 19 Q You learned that after? 20 A I think I learned that afterwards. 21 Q And on top of that, you then became aware that he 22 was being investigated by an independent counsel for alleged 23 financial disclosure improprieties, correct? 24 MS. BRASWELL: Objection. 25 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Overruled. 175 1 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 2 Q Correct? 3 A Correct. 4 Q And you also became aware that members of 5 his family were also involved in that investigation, 6 correct? 7 MS. BRASWELL: Same objection. 8 THE WITNESS: No, that part I don't know. 9 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 10 Q Did you ever go to Secretary Brown and express any 11 concern as to whether or not he was engaged in improper 12 activities? 13 A No. 14 Q Did that cause you any concern, that he was alleged 15 to have been involved in these things? 16 A You know, I hold the belief that somebody is 17 innocent until proved guilty and there were quite a few 18 investigations going on in Washington, so I decided that I 19 would let the law take its course. 20 Q Well, we all harbor that notion, that everybody is 21 innocent until proven guilty, but my question was did that 22 raise any concern with you. 23 JUDGE FACCIOLA: In fact, it's harbored in our 24 Constitution. 25 MR. KLAYMAN: Which is mere paper -- 176 1 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Madison was fond of it, too. 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I mean, that's nice, Your 3 Honor; unfortunately, nobody seems to follow it these days. 4 BY MR. KLAYMAN: 5 Q But in all seriousness, you had a concern, didn't 6 you? 7 A You know, of course I had a personal concern that 8 if in fact these allegations proved true, I cared about him, 9 I would have been sad for him and we also had a real policy 10 going and I would have been concerned that it would have been 11 disrupted. But that was on an intensely personal level. It 12 did not affect anything that I did and I gave him the benefit 13 of the doubt all along the way. 14 MR. WITTEN: The videotape operator is signally 15 wildly -- 16 MR. KLAYMAN: This is probably a good point to 17 break, Your Honor. 18 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Is this an appropriate place to 19 stop and you can get your plane? Okay. 20 JUDGE FACCIOLA: Thank you, everyone. 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off video record at 22 3:07. 23 (Whereupon, at 3:07 p.m., the deposition of 24 JEFFREY E. GARTEN was adjourned.) 25 * * * * * 177 1 I have read the foregoing pages, which are a 2 correct transcript of the answers given by me to the 3 questions therein recorded. 4 Deponent ____________________________________ 5 Date ____________________________________