101
1 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, I'd like to
2 address your attention to a column on this
3 list, and it's a column that exists
4 throughout the list, but just to stay with
5 the page that you're on which addresses pass
6 type, do you see that?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Now, do you see anything in this
9 column or anywhere else on this list that
10 indicates to you that any of the listed
11 persons were inactive pass holders?
12 A No.
13 Q Based upon your experience in the
14 Office of Personnel Security, if you had
15 received a list like this --
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Let me just object
17 here that that last question lacked
18 foundation. Move to strike.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q Based upon your experience in the
21 Office of Personnel Security, if you received
22 a list like this with the pass type
102
1 identified in the manner that it's identified
2 on this list, would you have assumed that the
3 list was a list of active passholders?
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Compound. Leading.
5 Calls for speculation.
6 THE WITNESS: Based on my
7 experience, yes.
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Lacks foundation.
9 Move to strike.
10 BY MR. GARREN:
11 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, I want to draw
12 your attention to the declaration of Nancy
13 Gemmell. Have you read this declaration?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Are you aware that Ms. Gemmell in
16 her declaration identified this list as
17 probably the list that she obtained for the
18 purposes of conducting the update project?
19 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for
20 speculation. Lacks foundation. Leading.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q I'm just asking you are you aware
103
1 that she indicated that in her affidavit?
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes.
4 BY MR. GARREN:
5 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, do you believe
6 at this point that Ms. Gemmell is correct in
7 her belief that this list attached to her
8 declaration is a portion of the list that she
9 obtained from the Secret Service to conduct
10 the update project?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
12 Leading. Lacks foundation. Vague and
13 ambiguous.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 BY MR. GARREN:
16 Q Do you believe that this list
17 attached to Nancy Gemmell's declaration is
18 the same list that Mr. Marceca used initially
19 to conduct the update project?
20 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
21 Calls for speculation.
22 THE WITNESS: I believe probably it
104
1 was.
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Lacks foundation.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q Now I want to address your
5 attention --
6 MR. GILLIGAN: Should we mark that?
7 MR. GARREN: Yes. Why don't we
8 mark it as Exhibit No. 3 to the deposition
9 and put it back together so it's just one
10 exhibit.
11 (Anderson Deposition Exhibit
12 No. 3 was marked for
13 identification.)
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q I'm going to be referencing some of
16 Ms. Anderson's prior Senate testimony --
17 MR. GILLIGAN: Do you require a
18 copy, Mr. Klayman?
19 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes, thank you.
20 BY MR. GARREN:
21 Q Now, let me reference page 139 of
22 your Senate testimony. Please look at page
105
1 139 and please look at Exhibit No. 5 to your
2 deposition.
3 Have you had an opportunity to
4 review that, Ms. Anderson?
5 A Yes, as well as I can read it.
6 Q Now, in reviewing your --
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Excuse me. I don't
8 have Exhibit 5.
9 MR. GARREN: Is it missing from
10 that --
11 MR. GILLIGAN: I believe it's the
12 sheet that follows Exhibit 4, but it was not
13 marked Exhibit 5. If you flip back a page,
14 you'll have --
15 MR. KLAYMAN: Right. I have 4 but
16 I don't see 5.
17 MR. GILLIGAN: What Mr. Garren's
18 referring to here is this sheet.
19 MR. GARREN: It's referred to in
20 the deposition as Exhibit 5 but apparently
21 the copy was such that it's not clear.
22 BY MR. GARREN:
106
1 Q Now, do you recall in reviewing
2 your prior testimony having seen this page in
3 the course of your Senate deposition?
4 A I believe so, yes.
5 Q Does that page appear to be one
6 page of the list that you just reviewed?
7 A Yes.
8 Q From Nancy Gemmell's declaration?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Do you recall when being shown that
11 one page in your Senate deposition expressing
12 some doubt in the course of your deposition
13 that that page was part of the list that
14 Nancy Gemmell had obtained from the Secret
15 Service for purposes of conducting the update
16 project?
17 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
18 Leading. Calls for facts not in evidence.
19 The deposition is the best evidence of what
20 she said. Lacks foundation.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q Now, do you understand the
107
1 question?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Answer it, please.
4 A Based on what I was shown at the
5 deposition, yes.
6 Q When you reviewed your testimony,
7 did you see that when you expressed doubt
8 that this page, this one page, was part of
9 the list initially obtained by Nancy Gemmell
10 for purposes of conducting the update
11 project, that you mentioned that you thought
12 that the list that she had obtained included
13 a separate column listing the agency in which
14 each of the listed passholders was employed?
15 A Yes.
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
17 Lacks foundation. Vague and ambiguous.
18 THE WITNESS: Yes.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q The one page that you were shown,
21 was the heading obscured on that page the way
22 that it is obscured on this page?
108
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
2 foundation. Vague and ambiguous. Leading.
3 THE WITNESS: Specifically, I
4 cannot remember, but I'm not sure I could
5 read it. I definitely can't read it now.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Did you have a clear and distinct
8 memory at the time that you testified that
9 you thought that the list that Nancy Gemmell
10 had obtained from the Secret Service to
11 conduct the update project had a separate
12 column listing the agency in which the person
13 was employed? Did you have a clear and
14 distinct memory at that time that there was a
15 separate column?
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
17 Compound. Vague and ambiguous. Lacks
18 foundation.
19 THE WITNESS: I had a distinct
20 memory at that time that there was the
21 possibility that there could have been a
22 column, and I did remember that Nancy had it
109
1 delineated by office.
2 BY MR. GARREN:
3 Q Would it surprise you to realize
4 that the office designation was in the title
5 on each page of the list as opposed to being
6 in a separate column?
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
8 Leading. Lacks foundation.
9 THE WITNESS: No.
10 BY MR. GARREN:
11 Q Do you recall in your Senate
12 deposition testifying that you thought that
13 this might not be the same list that Nancy
14 Gemmell had obtained for the update project
15 for the additional reason that it included
16 temporary passholders on the list?
17 A Yes.
18 Q What can you recall about that?
19 A I had thought that the original
20 list had only active permanent passes.
21 Q In reviewing Ms. Gemmell's
22 declaration, did you notice that she stated
110
1 that the list that she obtained contained
2 both permanent and temporary passholders?
3 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
4 THE WITNESS: Yes.
5 BY MR. GARREN:
6 Q In light of your prior Senate
7 testimony, do you doubt that Ms. Gemmell was
8 correct on that when she said that the list
9 that she obtained from the Secret Service
10 included both temporary and permanent
11 passholders?
12 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
13 Leading. Lacks foundation. Calls for
14 speculation.
15 THE WITNESS: Is the question do I
16 doubt Nancy identified the correct list?
17 BY MR. GARREN:
18 Q Right.
19 A No, I believe she did.
20 Q And do you doubt that she was wrong
21 when she said the list that she obtained, for
22 purposes of the update project, included both
111
1 temporary and permanent passholders?
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading
3 and compound.
4 BY MR. GARREN:
5 Q You can answer.
6 A If Nancy had requested that, then I
7 would defer to her comment.
8 Q In your Senate deposition, do you
9 recall being shown any more than one page of
10 this list?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
12 foundation.
13 THE WITNESS: I recall being shown
14 other pages. If they were this list
15 specifically, I'm not -- I don't remember.
16 BY MR. GARREN:
17 Q Do you recall whether you were
18 shown any portion of the list that included
19 any of the following agencies in the heading?
20 Did you recall being shown any portion of the
21 list that identified the employees as White
22 House operations employees?
112
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
2 Compound.
3 THE WITNESS: I don't believe I saw
4 one that said White House operations.
5 BY MR. GARREN:
6 Q Did you see one that said FBI
7 employees?
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
9 THE WITNESS: I don't remember
10 that.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q Did they show you one that said CIA
13 employees?
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
15 THE WITNESS: I don't remember
16 that.
17 BY MR. GARREN:
18 Q Did they show you one that said the
19 National Park Service employees?
20 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading
21 and for all these similar-type questions also
22 lacks foundation.
113
1 MR. GILLIGAN: Object to your
2 objection as itself being vague and
3 ambiguous.
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I'm going back
5 because he's not laying a foundation for
6 these questions. Move to strike.
7 THE WITNESS: What was the question
8 again, please?
9 BY MR. GARREN:
10 Q Do you recall when you were shown a
11 portion of this list in the course of your
12 Senate deposition that you were shown a
13 portion that identified the employees as
14 employees of the National Park Service?
15 A Could have been but I do not
16 remember.
17 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Do you recall being shown a portion
20 of the list that identified the employees as
21 employees of the General Services
22 Administration?
114
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
2 THE WITNESS: Vaguely, but I'm not
3 sure.
4 BY MR. GARREN:
5 Q Do you recall being shown a portion
6 that identified the employees as employees of
7 the National Security Council?
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
9 THE WITNESS: Vaguely, but I
10 remember discussing the National Security
11 Council.
12 BY MR. GARREN:
13 Q The issue that I'm getting at here
14 is when you reviewed this list attached to
15 Nancy Gemmell's declaration, were you shown
16 this list in its entirety, as it is here,
17 when you were deposed by the Senate?
18 A No.
19 Q Do you believe that, if you had
20 been shown this list in its entirety with
21 these various agencies designated in the
22 heading, that would have been of any benefit
115
1 to you in refreshing your memory as to
2 whether this was the list that Ms. Gemmell
3 used for the update project?
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
5 Leading. Vague and ambiguous. Lacks
6 foundation.
7 THE WITNESS: Yes.
8 BY MR. GARREN:
9 Q And why is that?
10 A Because I would have seen at the
11 top where it was delineated by office.
12 Q In the course of the Senate
13 deposition, were you shown the page on this
14 list that included the handwritten notation,
15 "Labels Completed 7/2/93"?
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
17 THE WITNESS: No. No.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Do you believe, as you sit here
20 today, that, if you'd been shown the portion
21 of the list indicating with the notation
22 "Labels Completed 7/2/93," that would have
116
1 been of any benefit to you in identifying
2 whether this list was the list that Nancy
3 Gemmell had obtained for the purposes of the
4 update project?
5 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection. Add
6 requests speculation, calls for speculation.
7 THE WITNESS: I believe it would
8 have, yes.
9 BY MR. GARREN:
10 Q Why is that?
11 A I believe it would have triggered
12 the memory, my memory.
13 Q Well, in light of this discussion,
14 I want to ask you some general questions
15 about the state of your memory at the time
16 that you were deposed by the Senate. Do you
17 note on this deposition that you were deposed
18 in October 1, 1996?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And how long was that after you
21 left your job with The White House Office of
22 Personnel Security?
117
1 A Two years after I left it and
2 probably about the same amount of -- the
3 summer before is when this was -- when I saw
4 the list, so three years total.
5 Q During your tenure with The White
6 House Office of Personnel Security, was the
7 update project considered by you to be a
8 major priority in the office?
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Vague and
10 ambiguous. Leading. Compound.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q You can answer.
13 A No.
14 Q Did you personally do much work on
15 the update project while you were with the
16 Office of Personnel Security?
17 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
18 foundation. Leading.
19 THE WITNESS: No.
20 BY MR. GARREN:
21 Q How much time would you estimate
22 that you personally devoted to the project
118
1 during your tenure with the Office of
2 Personnel Security?
3 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
4 THE WITNESS: In totality?
5 BY MR. GARREN:
6 Q In totality?
7 A Maybe five hours.
8 Q Is that five hours in the course of
9 the entire 19 months you were in the office?
10 A I would guesstimate that, yes.
11 Q During your tenure with the Office
12 of Personnel Security, did you see many
13 secret service lists in the office?
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
15 foundation.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 BY MR. GARREN:
18 Q And were there many different kinds
19 of Secret Service lists?
20 A Yes.
21 Q And were there many different types
22 of formats of information on these lists?
119
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection to the last
2 two questions. Vague and ambiguous and
3 leading. Move to strike.
4 THE WITNESS: You could request any
5 configuration that you needed.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Explain just generally how often
8 you'd see lists, how much the lists varied
9 from one another.
10 A We received --
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Vague and
12 ambiguous. Leading. Compound. Lacks
13 foundation.
14 THE WITNESS: We received a list
15 monthly from Secret Service. Randomly
16 throughout, we would request lists.
17 Specifically what we requested, I don't
18 remember because it was in the day-to-day
19 course of business, but lists were always
20 coming in to the office.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q Did you consider there to be a lot
120
1 of different types of secret service lists in
2 the office?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Did you consider that these lists
5 had --
6 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Move to
7 strike. Vague and leading.
8 BY MR. GARREN:
9 Q Did you consider that these lists
10 had many different types of formats of
11 information in them?
12 MR. KLAYMAN: Leading. Compound.
13 Vague and ambiguous. Lacks foundation.
14 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the
15 question?
16 BY MR. GARREN:
17 Q Did you consider that these various
18 Secret Service lists that you saw in the
19 office had many different types of formats of
20 information contained within the lists?
21 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
121
1 BY MR. GARREN:
2 Q Now, in the intervening years after
3 you left The White House Office of Personnel
4 Security and the time that you were deposed
5 by the Senate, did you devote much thought to
6 the update project?
7 A No.
8 Q Is it something that you put
9 largely out of your mind after you left the
10 Office of Personnel Security?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Vague and
12 ambiguous. Leading.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q During those intervening years
16 between the time you left the Office of
17 Personnel Security and the time that you were
18 deposed by the Senate, did you devote much
19 thought to the format of the various Secret
20 Service lists you recalled being in the
21 office during your tenure?
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Add compound. Same
122
1 objection.
2 THE WITNESS: No.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q So let me ask you to basically
5 assess for us the state of your memory at the
6 time that you were deposed by the Senate
7 concerning the details of the update project.
8 A Vague and fuzzy.
9 Q Describe it to a greater detail.
10 Would you say that you had memory of the
11 general outlines of the project?
12 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
13 foundation on the last two questions.
14 Leading. Move to strike.
15 THE WITNESS: I would say my memory
16 was I knew what we needed in order to conduct
17 the project, but I'm not exactly sure as to
18 how the list was configured.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, I'm going to ask
21 you to take a look at your testimony on pages
22 99 and 100 of your deposition.
123
1 Please just review that quickly.
2 And I'm going to draw your
3 attention to some of the specifics of your
4 testimony before the Senate. Do you recall
5 testifying in the Senate that you believed
6 that some point after Mr. Marceca began
7 working on the update project using the list
8 left by Mr. Gemmell that he mentioned the
9 need to obtain a fresher list from the Secret
10 Service?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Testimony
12 speaks for itself. Leading.
13 BY MR. GARREN:
14 Q Do you recall that?
15 A Yes, Mrs. Gemmell.
16 Q I'm sorry?
17 A You said "Mister."
18 Q Oh, did I? And do you recall
19 testifying that Mr. Livingstone subsequently
20 requested a new list from the Secret Service?
21 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
124
1 BY MR. GARREN:
2 Q Do you recall testifying that you
3 picked up the list?
4 A Yes.
5 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Do you recall testifying that you
8 went through the list and you noted that
9 there was a large number of prior
10 administration employees on the list?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
12 Leading. Compound.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q Do you recall testifying that you
16 sat down in the office with other employees
17 of the office and went through the list?
18 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 BY MR. GARREN:
21 Q Do you recall testifying that when
22 you and the other employees in the office
125
1 went through the list that you struck through
2 names of people that you identified as prior
3 administration employees?
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Continuing objection.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Now, do you recall testifying that
8 when you mentioned this incident where you
9 had obtained a list and sat down and gone
10 through the list and struck through the
11 names, that you used the statement you
12 believed that incident had occurred?
13 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 BY MR. GARREN:
16 Q Do you recall using the statement
17 in regard to this incident that the incident
18 occurred, if you "remembered correctly"?
19 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
20 THE WITNESS: Yes.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q Now, why, when you testified in
126
1 your Senate deposition about this incident of
2 sitting down and going through this list and
3 striking out names, did you use the phrases,
4 "I believe it occurred," and it occurred "if
5 I remember correctly"?
6 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection and
7 add lacks foundation and leading.
8 THE WITNESS: Because it had
9 occurred such a long time ago. I was not a
10 hundred percent sure of my memory.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q Did you use the terms to reflect
13 any doubt in your mind as to whether the
14 events occurred in the way that you had
15 remembered them?
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
17 Leading. Assumes facts not in evidence.
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, because I had
19 thought I wasn't a hundred percent sure and I
20 thought I might have been melding memories or
21 merging memories.
22 BY MR. GARREN:
127
1 Q Now I'm going to ask you to look at
2 a document entitled "Employer Listing White
3 House" --
4 MR. GILLIGAN: Do you want to mark
5 this?
6 MR. GARREN: No. I'm just going to
7 use this.
8 BY MR. GARREN:
9 Q The document is entitled "Employer
10 Listing White House NEOB and OEOB." Please
11 look at that.
12 Please review it through.
13 Does this list appear to be a
14 complete list from A to Z, did you notice?
15 A It appears to be.
16 Q Do you notice that some of the
17 names have been marked and crossed through on
18 the list?
19 A Yes.
20 Q When you testified in the Senate
21 about the incident in which you sat down with
22 other members of the Office of Personnel
128
1 Security and went through a list and crossed
2 through names, do you recall specifying the
3 type of marker that you used to accomplish
4 that?
5 A Yes.
6 Q What did you say about that?
7 A Black Magic Marker or Sharpie.
8 Q Now, is that the same type that
9 appears to have been used in crossing through
10 names on this August 1, 1993, list?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
12 foundation. Leading.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q Now please look at the manner in
16 which the names are crossed through and
17 marked on that list.
18 Are the markings consistent with
19 the markings that you recalled making on the
20 occasion when members of the office sat down
21 and went through a list and marked out prior
22 administration employees?
129
1 A Yes.
2 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, when you
3 testified in regard to your testimony about
4 members of the office sitting down and going
5 through and crossing out names on a list, is
6 it possible that that event occurred in
7 relationship to this list?
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
9 Calls for speculation. Lacks foundation.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q Is it possible that this is the
13 list that you had in your possession that you
14 used to cross through at the time you went
15 through and crossed out names?
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Does this list contain the type of
20 specialized information needed to conduct the
21 update project?
22 A No.
130
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
2 foundation. Leading. Move to strike.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q What type of information is lacking
5 from this list that is needed for the
6 purposes of conducting the update project?
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
8 THE WITNESS: Social Security
9 number, date of birth, and place of birth.
10 BY MR. GARREN:
11 Q Now, let me ask you to note the
12 date on this list. What's the date on the
13 list?
14 A August 1, 1993, I believe.
15 Q Is that date before Mr. Marceca
16 began his detail at the Office of Personnel
17 Security?
18 A I believe so, but I'm not exactly
19 sure of his exact start date.
20 Q If that date was before he began
21 his detail at the Office of Personnel
22 Security, is it possible that the marking
131
1 through of this list occurred before
2 Mr. Marceca began?
3 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for
4 speculation. Lacks foundation. Leading.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Is it possible that the marking
8 through of the list was done outside of
9 Mr. Marceca's presence?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Is it possible --
12 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
13 BY MR. GARREN:
14 Q Objection noted. Is it possible
15 that Mr. Marceca was unaware of the event in
16 which the office went through and marked off
17 people who were prior administration
18 employees from a list, as you have described?
19 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
20 THE WITNESS: Yes.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q In your tenure with the Office of
132
1 Personnel Security, do you recall
2 occasionally receiving from the Secret
3 Service lists of active passholders sent over
4 for the purposes of Office of Personnel
5 Security to identify people who had left The
6 White House?
7 A I'm sorry?
8 Q Do you recall during your tenure
9 with the Office of Personnel Security the
10 Secret Service sending over active passholder
11 lists for the purposes of having the Office
12 of Personnel Security identify people who may
13 have already left White House employment?
14 A Not specifically. I know that we
15 received a multitude of lists, and I do know
16 that we did go through it, and when we found
17 names we did not believe were still at The
18 White House, we requested that they be
19 deleted. What I'm saying, I don't remember
20 the specific purpose was for us to delete
21 them.
22 Q Do you remember receiving active
133
1 passholder lists and going through the lists
2 on occasion and identifying people who had
3 left?
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
5 Compound.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes.
7 BY MR. GARREN:
8 Q Now, Ms. Anderson, is it possible
9 that when you testified about the incident in
10 which the office sat down with the list and
11 went through the list and struck through
12 names related to the update project that you
13 may have confused that with a process of
14 going through and striking out names and the
15 routine process of identifying people who had
16 left?
17 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
18 Compound. Calls for speculation. Lacks
19 foundation. Leading.
20 THE WITNESS: Extremely possible.
21 BY MR. GARREN:
22 Q So is it possible in your mind that
134
1 Mr. Marceca may never have seen this list?
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes.
4 BY MR. GARREN:
5 Q Do you have any personal knowledge
6 that he ever saw this list?
7 A No.
8 Q Do you recall testifying in your
9 Senate deposition that at some point during
10 Mr. Marceca's work on the update project that
11 you realized that he had obtained files on
12 some people who had already left White House
13 employment?
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
15 foundation. Leading. Compound. Assumes
16 facts not in evidence.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Now, when you testified that you
20 initially came to this realization that
21 Mr. Marceca had obtained files on some people
22 who had already left White House employment,
135
1 did you ever have any information to indicate
2 that Mr. Marceca had intentionally obtained
3 files on people he knew had left White House?
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Lacks foundation.
5 Compound. Vague and ambiguous. Leading.
6 THE WITNESS: Are you asking that
7 at the time he ordered the files he knew they
8 were no longer at The White House?
9 BY MR. GARREN:
10 Q You mentioned in your Senate
11 deposition that when Mr. Marceca was working
12 at the Office of Personnel Security at some
13 point you realized he had obtained files on
14 some people that had left White House
15 employment?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Did you mean to suggest that he had
18 intentionally obtained files on people he
19 knew had left White House employment?
20 A No.
21 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for
22 legal conclusion. Speculative. Leading.
136
1 Lacks foundation.
2 BY MR. GARREN:
3 Q When you came to this realization
4 that Mr. Marceca had obtained some files on
5 some people who had left White House
6 employment, was it your understanding that he
7 had obtained these files intentionally or
8 inadvertently?
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
10 foundation. Leading. Compound.
11 THE WITNESS: Inadvertently.
12 MR. GARREN: So why don't we take a
13 break and let you change the tape?
14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off
15 video record at 11:43.
16 (Recess)
17 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on
18 video record at 11:54.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q Now, I want to go back to this
21 question we were addressing prior to the
22 break because I want this to be absolutely
137
1 clear.
2 You did indicate in your Senate
3 deposition that you came to realize at some
4 time that Mr. Marceca had obtained files on
5 people who had left White House employment,
6 correct?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Did you intend to --
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection as
10 before. Lacks foundation. Leading.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q Did you ever have any information
13 that Mr. Marceca had obtained files on people
14 that he knew had left White House employment?
15 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for
16 speculation. Leading. Compound.
17 THE WITNESS: No.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Now, do you recall whether, when it
20 became known to you that Mr. Marceca had
21 obtained files on some people who had left
22 White House employment, Mr. Marceca was
138
1 encouraged to take any action to avoid that
2 problem?
3 A I'm not sure of your question.
4 Q Do you know whether Mr. Marceca was
5 encouraged or instructed to do anything to
6 try to avoid obtaining files on people who
7 had left White House employment?
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
9 foundation. Leading. Compound.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q What was he encouraged or
13 instructed to do?
14 A When we had --
15 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Add vague
16 and ambiguous.
17 THE WITNESS: When we had a contact
18 in the office, if it was Office of Vice
19 President or an office where we knew that
20 there was someone who could say who these
21 people were, we would say -- we would send a
22 memo and say can you tell us if these people
139
1 are still there.
2 BY MR. GARREN:
3 Q When you say that Mr. Marceca was
4 instructed to circulate lists of names with
5 the various agencies before requesting files,
6 was that something that was possible to do
7 throughout those employees employed by White
8 House operations?
9 A No.
10 Q Why was that?
11 A Because, if you'll notice on the
12 list, it says White House operations
13 personnel and it does not delineate under
14 which office they worked.
15 Q When you mentioned that at some
16 point you came to the realize that
17 Mr. Marceca had obtained files on people who
18 had left White House employment, when you
19 came to that realization, did you understand
20 that these were people who had never worked
21 in the Clinton Administration?
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
140
1 Compound. Assumes facts not in evidence.
2 Lacks foundation.
3 THE WITNESS: No.
4 BY MR. GARREN:
5 Q What did you understand? When you
6 said you initially came to this realization
7 that he had obtained files on some people who
8 had left, what did you understand about those
9 people's employment status?
10 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
11 THE WITNESS: That they had been
12 caught between the transition between
13 administrations and that they had either
14 worked, like, a day or two or maybe even two
15 or three weeks or for longer periods after
16 the Clintons had taken possession of the
17 administration or had actually begun their
18 administration.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q Do you recall testifying in your
21 Senate deposition that at some point you came
22 to the realization that Mr. Marceca had
141
1 ordered files on some people who had never
2 been members of the Clinton Administration?
3 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
4 THE WITNESS: We did eventually
5 come to that realization.
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Do you recall specifically how you
8 came to that realization?
9 A Not specifically.
10 Q Is it possible that this was
11 brought to your attention after Mr. Marceca
12 had finished his detail at the Office of
13 Personnel Security?
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
15 Leading. Calls for speculation. Assumes
16 facts not in evidence.
17 BY MR. GARREN:
18 Q Do you understand the question?
19 A Did I find out before or after?
20 Q Right.
21 A It's possible it was after. I'm
22 not specific as to when.
142
1 Q Did Ms. Wetzl have any involvement
2 with the update project?
3 A Yes.
4 Q What involvement did she have with
5 the update project?
6 A When Tony's detail ended, she took
7 over the project.
8 Q Is it possible that the realization
9 that you came to, that Mr. Marceca had
10 ordered files on some people who had never
11 been employed by the Clinton Administration,
12 was when Ms. Wetzl was working on the update
13 project?
14 A Yes.
15 MR. KLAYMAN: Calls for
16 speculation. Leading. Lacks foundation.
17 Move to strike.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Now, when it was discovered that
20 Mr. Marceca had obtained files on some people
21 who had never been employed by the Clinton
22 Administration, did the office take any
143
1 action?
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection, indefinite
3 as to time. Leading.
4 THE WITNESS: When you say take any
5 action, what do you mean?
6 BY MR. GARREN:
7 Q Well, did the office do anything as
8 a result of that?
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Vague and ambiguous.
10 THE WITNESS: When we realized the
11 files were of people who were no longer at
12 The White House or had not been in The White
13 House, we archived those files.
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q Why did you archive those files as
16 opposed to send them back to the FBI?
17 A I didn't realize we could send them
18 back to the FBI. I thought that, because we
19 had created the request and we'd received the
20 request, they had become presidential
21 records, so, therefore, they had to be
22 archived.
144
1 Q Now, during your tenure with the
2 Office of Personnel Security, were you aware
3 of anyone outside the Office of Personnel
4 Security, outside the immediate staff, being
5 aware that Mr. Marceca had obtained files on
6 some people who had left The White House?
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
8 Leading.
9 THE WITNESS: No.
10 BY MR. GARREN:
11 Q Was Mr. Nussbuam, to your
12 knowledge, ever informed, during your tenure
13 in the Office of Personnel Security, that
14 Mr. Marceca had obtained files on some people
15 who had left White House employment?
16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
17 foundation. Leading.
18 THE WITNESS: Not to my knowledge.
19 BY MR. GARREN:
20 Q Was Mr. Kennedy, to your knowledge,
21 ever informed that --
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
145
1 MR. GARREN: Let me finish the
2 question.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q To your knowledge, was Mr. Kennedy
5 ever informed during your tenure at the
6 Office of Personnel Security that Mr. Marceca
7 had obtained files on some people who had
8 left White House employment?
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.
10 THE WITNESS: Not to my knowledge.
11 BY MR. GARREN:
12 Q Could you identify who Mr. Kennedy
13 is?
14 A Mr. Kennedy is William Kennedy. He
15 was the associate counsel to the president.
16 I believe he was underneath initially Vince
17 Foster, and I can't remember after he passed
18 who took his place. I and he reported
19 directly to, if I understand correctly,
20 Mr. Nussbuam.
21 Q Who was Mr. Livingstone's immediate
22 supervisor?
146
1 A Bill Kennedy.
2 Q Do you recall that files identified
3 as files obtained by Mr. Marceca on people
4 who no longer required White House access
5 being sent to the Office of Records
6 Management?
7 A I have no specific memory of them
8 going to records management.
9 Q Do you remember any effort to
10 segregate them and forward them?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for
12 facts not testified to. Leading.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 BY MR. GARREN:
15 Q Tell us what you recall about that.
16 A I recall that we had -- when we had
17 realized that there were individuals who were
18 no longer there, we set up a file drawer, a
19 file drawer to be dead files that were to be
20 archived because my understanding of the
21 procedure was you couldn't just send a few
22 files into records management to be archived.
147
1 You needed a whole box so that, if we did for
2 some unknown reason need to go back, like a
3 Senate investigation, we could immediately
4 find them.
5 Q And were you aware at some point
6 that the files were forwarded to the Office
7 of Records Management?
8 A I believe they were.
9 Q Prior to the time that the files
10 were forwarded to Office of Records
11 Management, are you aware of any of those
12 files having been removed from the Office of
13 Personnel Security?
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
15 foundation.
16 THE WITNESS: No.
17 MR. KLAYMAN: Vague and ambiguous.
18 BY MR. GARREN:
19 Q Let me turn your attention to the
20 log used at the Office of Personnel Security
21 during your tenure. Do you recall a log
22 being kept in the office?
148
1 A Yes.
2 Q What was the purpose of the log?
3 A The purpose of the log was so that,
4 when we had background investigations of
5 employees that needed -- that were going to
6 be checked out of the office, to keep track
7 of who had them and where they had gone.
8 Q When the Clinton Administration
9 came in in 1993, do you know what system was
10 in place at that time to keep track of files
11 were removed from the Office of Personnel
12 Security?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Explain what that system was.
15 A Pink cards would be placed in the
16 files in the vault.
17 Q Before the log system was adopted,
18 do you recall if Mr. Livingstone ever
19 mentioned that the office needed a better
20 system to keep track of the files that were
21 removed from the office?
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
149
1 Assumes facts not in evidence. Compound.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q Did Mr. Livingstone's express
5 desire for a better system have anything to
6 do with the adoption of the log system?
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Compound.
8 Leading. Assumes facts not in evidence.
9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
10 BY MR. GARREN:
11 Q Why was the log system developed?
12 A The log system was developed in
13 case Craig wanted to review a file or
14 somebody called and had some counsel --
15 member of counsel's office called and said
16 there's an issue or if there was an issue of
17 specific individuals, we needed to know where
18 that investigation was, who had custody of
19 it, and if we needed to know how many were
20 out of the office at the time, so in order to
21 be more efficient we created the log.
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Move to strike based
150
1 on the previous testimony which essentially
2 provided the answers to her.
3 BY MR. GARREN:
4 Q Did Mr. Livingstone approve the
5 adoption of the log system?
6 A Yes.
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
8 BY MR. GARREN:
9 Q Did Mr. Livingstone instruct that
10 the log system be kept?
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Leading.
12 THE WITNESS: Yes.
13 BY MR. GARREN:
14 Q Are you aware of Mr. Livingstone
15 ever instructing or encouraging anyone not to
16 make entries in the log system when files
17 were removed?
18 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Lacks
19 foundation. Compound.
20 THE WITNESS: I did not know of
21 anything saying not to keep the log.
22 BY MR. GARREN:
Goto
Previous Section / Next Section
of this deposition