0201
1 it's now ten minutes after one.
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Do you want to take a
3 break?
4 MR. HANSEN: I thought we had agreed to
5 break at one, but I understand your position on
6 agreements. I'm going to break for lunch now
7 whether you'd like to or not. And by my watch
8 we've gone three hours worth of testimony. We
9 have three hours this afternoon.
10 THE WITNESS: How much time --
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I disagree with your
12 calculation as to time, but I have no problem
13 with your taking lunch.
14 MR. HANSEN: Thank you.
15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off video
16 record at 1:32.
17 (Whereupon, at 1:32 p.m., a lunch recess
18 was taken.)
19
20
21
22
0202
1 AFTERNOON SESSION
2 (2:12 p.m.)
3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on video
4 record at 2:12.
5 MR. HANSEN: Not on my watch. It's 1:50
6 p.m.
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Again, he's 20 minutes
8 ahead. Let's just make a general notation that
9 the times on the videotapes are going to be 20
10 minutes ahead.
11 MR. HANSEN: I'd also note for the record
12 we've been here for 10 minutes waiting to
13 proceed.
14 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I don't agree with
15 you. The videographer was setting up, so let's
16 try not to get too petty here.
17 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
18 Q. Mr. Lenzner, you hired Larry Potts, in
19 part, based on his contacts at the Federal Bureau
20 of Investigation, did you not? That was a factor
21 in your hiring him?
22 A. Excuse me. I hired Larry Potts because
0203
1 of the incredible recommendations that I had
2 heard about him being one of the finest, if not
3 the finest, Federal law enforcement agent people
4 I respected knew, and what I was looking for in
5 Larry Potts was new leadership, new directions,
6 new ideas to share with me in a growing company,
7 really a partnership in helping grow with the
8 company and supervising what was a burgeoning
9 multi-office operation. In fact, the assignments
10 that we've given Larry Potts -- to the extent
11 that he's been free from the business that he's
12 already generated, which is substantial, I've
13 been primarily looking at our internal operations
14 based --
15 Q. My simple question is -- I'm going to try
16 to move this along as quickly as I can.
17 A. I just want to -- can I just finish my
18 sentence?
19 Q. Finish your sentence, and then I'll --
20 perhaps we can discuss how we can do this for the
21 remainder of the afternoon.
22 A. I wanted, based on his lengthy and
0204
1 honorable career at the FBI, to come in and look
2 at all our systems and operations and tell us
3 what we were doing wrong and how we could upgrade
4 our performance. And that was my primary
5 interest in Larry Potts.
6 Q. Because you wanted IGI to work with the
7 efficiency of the FBI?
8 A. No. I wanted IGI to adopt ideas that
9 Larry Potts brought with him from the FBI if they
10 made sense in the context of our company. Some
11 might make sense; some may not make sense.
12 Q. Including FBI -- including ideas with
13 regard to FBI techniques for gathering
14 information on individuals and companies under
15 investigation, correct?
16 A. That would be part of it.
17 Q. But you were also interested, in part, in
18 Larry Potts' contacts with current officials,
19 employees of the FBI, correct?
20 A. We were interested in Larry Potts
21 identifying for us people who were leaving the
22 Bureau that we could hire as people to supplement
0205
1 resources in our company that we didn't already
2 have in terms of areas of expertise and
3 experience that were missing, gaps missing in our
4 company. That was the only interest I had in
5 Larry Potts' prior relationship with individual
6 people at the FBI.
7 Q. But, in part, you were interested in his
8 contacts with the FBI, correct?
9 MR. HANSEN: Objection, asked and
10 answered.
11 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
12 Q. Yes or no?
13 A. To the extent that his familiarity
14 with people who were leaving the Bureau who
15 he thought were good and us worth pursuing
16 once they retired, yes, I would want him
17 to help us identify those people and recruit
18 them.
19 Q. But it's also important to have contacts
20 with people who are currently with the FBI, is it
21 not?
22 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
0206
1 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
2 Q. In your line of work?
3 A. Not particularly.
4 Q. Why is that?
5 A. Because the kinds of cases we're involved
6 in, if it's an active investigation, we would not
7 go and talk to the Bureau unless we had evidence
8 that we wanted to turn over to the Bureau of a
9 perceived violation of law and the client agreed
10 that we should turn it over to the FBI. In that
11 case it might very well be helpful to at least be
12 in contact with somebody inside the Bureau.
13 For example -- I'll give you a recent
14 example. We began an investigation of ATM bank
15 fraud by a ring of people who were defrauding ATM
16 banks, bank depositories, and we developed enough
17 information for our bank clients to get them to
18 concede to turn it over to the FBI, and the FBI
19 recently made some arrests.
20 Now Larry Potts had nothing to do with
21 that case and didn't communicate with the FBI
22 because we had our own relationships in that
0207
1 particular region of the country, but if we
2 hadn't, I might well have said to Larry who can
3 we bring this case to to get somebody's
4 attention.
5 Q. In terms of your activities at IGI, are
6 you sometimes in a defense mode where you're
7 defending people under investigation by the
8 Federal Bureau of Investigation or conducting
9 investigations and furthering of defense of
10 targets of investigations?
11 A. On occasion.
12 Q. And your work on behalf of
13 President Clinton would be such a mode, would it
14 not?
15 MR. HANSEN: Objection. Direct you not
16 to answer with respect to public -- anything
17 other than publicly released information insofar
18 as it would cause to you violate the
19 attorney-client work product or confidential,
20 proprietary business information privileges.
21 THE WITNESS: I'll accept those
22 instructions.
0208
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
2 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
3 Q. Your interest in hiring Howard Shapiro
4 was, in part, due to his contacts at the FBI, was
5 it not?
6 A. It had nothing to do with his contacts at
7 the FBI.
8 Q. Why is that?
9 A. What I was looking for was somebody with
10 law enforcement experience who was a good lawyer
11 from a firm that was not identified with any
12 other parties in this proceeding, in a proceeding
13 involving the Office of Independent Counsel's
14 grand jury.
15 Q. Are you aware that Kenneth Starr is
16 investigating the Filegate controversy?
17 A. No, I was not aware of that.
18 Q. Are you aware that as part of that
19 investigation it's been reported that Mr. Shapiro
20 is under investigation?
21 MR. HANSEN: Objection.
22 THE WITNESS: I'm not aware --
0209
1 MR. HANSEN: Objection, misstates the
2 record. No foundation.
3 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
4 Q. Did that -- did your due diligence, so to
5 speak, turn that up?
6 MS. GILES: Objection to the question.
7 MR. HANSEN: Objection, misstates the
8 record. It's an inappropriate slur on
9 Mr. Shapiro. No foundation.
10 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
11 Q. You can respond.
12 A. I hired Mr. Shapiro to represent me in
13 response to the subpoena that was delivered to my
14 door Saturday morning two weeks ago, whatever it
15 was.
16 Q. Now the FBI files controversy, you are
17 aware that it broke some time in '96 around June,
18 correct?
19 A. I thought it was, actually, earlier than
20 that.
21 Q. Well, on a routine basis what newspapers
22 do you read, generally speaking, on a daily
0210
1 basis?
2 A. The New York Times, The Washington Post,
3 The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times,
4 often The Washington Times, and then I get
5 relevant clips from our regional offices from
6 their local publications.
7 Q. And you're telling me you didn't know
8 Howard Shapiro was involved in the FBI files
9 controversy after reading those papers on a daily
10 basis?
11 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
12 THE WITNESS: I think I testified to that
13 already.
14 MS. GILES: Objection, vague as to the
15 term "involved in the FBI files controversy."
16 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
17 Q. Are you tell me that you were aware that
18 Howard Shapiro -- excuse me. Are you telling me
19 that you were not aware that Ken Starr was
20 assigned, among his various duties and
21 responsibilities, the Filegate controversy to
22 investigate, that you weren't aware of that after
0211
1 reading those papers?
2 MR. HANSEN: Objection, asked and
3 answered.
4 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
5 Q. You can respond.
6 A. I don't remember remembering reading that
7 at any time.
8 Q. Now as part of your responsibilities at
9 IGI it's important that you keep informed of
10 what's happening in the word, is it not?
11 A. Primarily in the commercial hostile
12 takeovers, Wall Street investment banking houses
13 world.
14 Q. Is it important that you're informed
15 generally?
16 A. As I said, it is important that I stay
17 informed in the areas where the majority of our
18 clients operate in, which is, basically,
19 commercial financing, hostile mergers, civil
20 litigation support, anti-dumping, theft of
21 intellectual property, merges and acquisitions,
22 counterfeit goods and products. That's our major
0212
1 area. So when I'm reading the newspapers, the
2 most important paper to me is The Wall Street
3 Journal. The second most important paper to me
4 is The Financial Times, and the third most
5 important publication to me is either Business
6 Week or Fortune Magazine.
7 Q. And you do read the editorial page of the
8 Wall Street Journal on a regular basis, do you
9 not?
10 A. On occasion.
11 Q. Fairly regularly, correct?
12 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
13 THE WITNESS: As I said, on occasion.
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. Well, occasion is different than
16 regularly. I asked you regularly.
17 MR. HANSEN: Objection, arguing with the
18 witness.
19 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
20 Q. Correct?
21 MR. HANSEN: Same objection.
22 THE WITNESS: If I'm reading a newspaper,
0213
1 regardless of what it is, and the editorial page
2 contains an interesting article, an article
3 interesting to me, I might read it. If it's on
4 the IMF and whether or not a certain country
5 should receive some money that has nothing to do
6 with any foreseeable business that a client of
7 ours might be involved in, I won't read it.
8 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
9 Q. You are involved in some investigations
10 of a political nature, are you not?
11 MR. HANSEN: You can answer yes or no.
12 THE WITNESS: What do you mean "political
13 nature"?
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. For instance, you were retained by the
16 Democratic National Committee to investigate
17 allegations of fund raising abuse, were you not?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. HANSEN: Let me give you the same
20 instruction as before with respect to privilege,
21 the attorney-client, work product, trade secret,
22 except as otherwise publicly disclosed by
0214
1 clients.
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Can you just make that a
3 running objection so we can move this along?
4 MR. HANSEN: I'm trying to.
5 MR. KLAYMAN: Okay. I'll accept it as a
6 running objection.
7 THE WITNESS: Can I correct my answer to
8 that statement -- question because the lawyer is
9 sensitive to this, so let me restate the answer
10 by saying that we were, actually, retained by the
11 law firm of Debovise & Plimpton.
12 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
13 Q. Thank you for the correction. But you
14 were retained by someone to look into that
15 matter, correct?
16 A. To the foreign contributions to the
17 Democratic National Committee, yes.
18 Q. And you were retained by someone related
19 to a controversy involving the Rappahoe Indians
20 to look into matters involving gambling licenses,
21 were you not?
22 MR. HANSEN: Let me just make my
0215
1 continuing objection. If you can answer without
2 breaching privileges, please do so.
3 THE WITNESS: The answer to that is
4 that's not correct.
5 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
6 Q. What's wrong with that?
7 A. First of all, I don't remember what
8 Indian group you're talking about --
9 Q. Maybe I got the tribe wrong. You were
10 employed by some tribe to look into issues of
11 gambling licenses in Wisconsin, correct?
12 A. No, that's incorrect.
13 Q. How is it incorrect?
14 A. We've never been retained by an Indian
15 tribe.
16 Q. They approached you for possible
17 retention, correct, Indian tribes?
18 MR. HANSEN: Continuing objection. You
19 can answer to the extent --
20 MR. KLAYMAN: I'm just laying a
21 foundation. That's all I'm doing here. That's
22 not -- this isn't a tricky question or anything
0216
1 to that effect.
2 MR. HANSEN: I'm not saying it is a
3 tricky question. I'm just directing the witness
4 to make sure that he observes his privileges as
5 he's required to do.
6 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
7 Q. Well, tell me what you were consulted
8 with in anticipation of retention or retained for
9 with regard to the issue of the Indian tribes?
10 A. I met at the invitation of the tribe and
11 its lawyer to talk to them about a decision
12 involving the tribal lands that they had been
13 living on at one time years ago that they wanted
14 returned. The tribal lands, I was told,
15 contained very valuable oil and gas reserves.
16 Q. You were approached with regard to
17 possibly being retained to investigate
18 Senator Nickles, correct?
19 A. We were -- we were -- we discussed --
20 they discussed with us their concern that the oil
21 and gas industry was influencing Senator Nickles
22 and others to vote to keep their tribal lands
0217
1 from being returned to them.
2 Q. So from time to time IGI and
3 Terry Lenzner do get involved in investigations
4 that have a political element to them?
5 A. But we were never retained in that case
6 and we never conducted an investigation of
7 Senator Nickles or anybody else in that matter.
8 Q. The question was just general.
9 MR. HANSEN: It was answered generally a
10 minute ago, but you can answer it again.
11 THE WITNESS: Again, it would depend upon
12 what you mean by "political matters."
13 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
14 Q. I'm just trying to say that from time to
15 time you are approached or you are retained or
16 both with regard to doing an investigation that
17 might have a political element to it dealing with
18 affairs of the government, dealing with senators,
19 dealing with campaign finance, things like that.
20 A. Well, I would suggest to you that there
21 are aspects of our matters involved with our
22 corporate clients that delve into and interrelate
0218
1 to concerns about the government regulatory
2 bodies all the time.
3 Q. Now how long did you stay on the
4 Whitewater committee?
5 MS. GILES: Objection.
6 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
7 Q. Watergate?
8 A. I never worked on the Whitewater
9 committee. We started in April of 1973 and we
10 completed our final report in -- I think it was
11 August of '74. I'm not sure about that. I think
12 that's about right.
13 Q. And what, if anything, did you do then?
14 A. I then was made a partner in the law firm
15 of Truitt, Fabricant, Bucklin & Lenzner.
16 Q. And what types of law did you practice
17 there?
18 A. Litigation generally.
19 Q. Did you do any --
20 A. And quasi investigative litigation.
21 Q. What is quasi investigative litigation?
22 A. Well, let me give you the first big
0219
1 example. After I left the Watergate committee, I
2 was --
3 Q. Just quickly if we could. Let's move it
4 along.
5 A. I was retained by the -- well, you asked
6 the question. Let me answer it.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. I was retained by the state of Alaska to
9 conduct an investigation into the construction of
10 the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System to determine if
11 any of the costs incurred during the construction
12 and planning phases were improperly incurred,
13 and, therefore, should be struck from the right
14 base, which then the state of Alaska would
15 receive substantial additional revenues. And
16 that was a lengthy investigation which I later
17 litigated at the Federal Energy Regulatory
18 Commission for several years. So I considered
19 that litigation, but the investigative part of it
20 was interviewing people from The Execution
21 Contractors, the Becktell Company, the Alliance
22 Pipeline Service Company.
0220
1 Q. Okay. And how long did you stay with
2 that firm?
3 A. That firm merged in Wall, Huckrader &
4 Ross in a year or two, so we then became partners
5 in Wall, Huckrader & Ross.
6 Q. And when did you leave that firm Wall,
7 Huckrader & Ross?
8 A. I believe in 1981 I joined the firm,
9 which it's renamed Rogovin, R O G O V I N, Huge,
10 H U G E, Stern & Lenzner.
11 Q. And what type of work did that firm
12 perform?
13 A. We performed litigation, counseling,
14 corporations, environmental work, a diversity of
15 corporate and --
16 Q. Did you do investigations as well?
17 A. Well, the Alaska case continued into that
18 phase, and we were retained to conduct an
19 investigation of the municipal bond markets in
20 New York. Yeah, we had continuing investigative
21 work. We started a due diligence practice at
22 that firm for our corporate clients that grew
0221
1 rapidly on the issue of background investigations
2 of corporations and individuals for investment
3 banking houses. And, in addition to that,
4 shortly after I joined that firm, hostile mergers
5 became hot and very popular, and we were in many,
6 many hostile mergers.
7 Q. And that's what gave rise to the
8 formation of IGI?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. The work that you started to do there?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. And you left Rogovin & Huge law firm in
13 1987?
14 A. I thought it was '88. Maybe it was '87.
15 I won't quote.
16 Q. And it was at that time that you
17 dedicated your attention solely to a company
18 which you formed, IGI?
19 A. No, I retained law clients and I retained
20 a law firm.
21 Q. What law firm did you retain?
22 A. A firm that continues to this day, Terry
0222
1 F. Lenzner, P.C.
2 Q. How many people are employed by that
3 firm?
4 A. We have -- well, a number of the office
5 heads are members of that firm and then I think
6 we have two investigators employed by that law
7 firm.
8 Q. Do you have partners, shareholders?
9 A. We -- I don't think we have a formal
10 partnership relationship.
11 Q. You're the sole shareholder of that P.C.?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What are the names of the other lawyers
14 in that firm?
15 A. Henry Kupperman.
16 Q. How is that spelled?
17 A. K U P P E R M A N. And I believe Craig
18 Kravit, K R A V I T. Peggy Daley will join it
19 soon. She just joined us in our Chicago office.
20 Q. How many offices do you have?
21 A. It's eight.
22 Q. And what are the total number of
0223
1 employees in the firm?
2 A. Roughly 90 something.
3 Q. Is it the same as IGI or --
4 A. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I
5 slipped off. We're talking about the law firm?
6 Q. We're talking about Terry Lenzner, P.C.
7 A. It must -- there's probably half-a-dozen.
8 Q. Any lawyers?
9 A. Yeah, Peggy Daley, Henry Kupperman,
10 Craig Kravit, and Terry Lenzner and two
11 investigators.
12 Q. Peggy Daley is out of Chicago?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Who are the two investigators?
15 A. Kathy Lavender and -- I'd have to find
16 out who the second one was.
17 Q. And what type of law does the firm
18 practice generally? Brief response.
19 A. Generally the kind of law I've been
20 practicing all my life.
21 Q. Which is?
22 A. Litigation with a special subcontractor
0224
1 investigative phase to it.
2 Q. Are you currently involved as a lawyer in
3 any cases in your capacity as a lawyer?
4 A. I consider my involvement in every case
5 as a capacity as a lawyer.
6 Q. But under the auspices of Terry Lenzner,
7 P.C. are you currently counsel in any cases?
8 MR. HANSEN: Do you mean counsel of
9 record?
10 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
11 Q. Counsel of record?
12 A. I'm co-counsel in a number of matters
13 with a number of law firms, but I don't have a
14 list off the top of my head.
15 Q. What are some of those cases?
16 A. I said I don't have a list off the top of
17 my head.
18 Q. Can you remember any of them?
19 A. Yes. There's a case I just got retained
20 involving a suit against a law firm in New York,
21 and TFL, P.C. was retained, and I consider myself
22 to be co-counsel with the other counsel.
0225
1 Q. Who is TFL, P.C.?
2 A. That's my law firm.
3 Q. Oh, okay. Do you have any ongoing
4 litigation that you're counsel of record on here
5 in the District of Columbia?
6 A. Counsel of record?
7 Q. Yeah.
8 A. I don't think so, but I'd have to check.
9 Q. Virginia?
10 A. Again, I'd have to check.
11 Q. Maryland?
12 A. I'd have to check.
13 Q. You can't remember one?
14 A. What I'm telling you is that when I
15 practice law, I am hired to bring to the table
16 the oversight of legal and factual research that
17 is going to assist a client who's decided that he
18 needs that combination of talents, that is to
19 say, a legal factual team that will obtain
20 information legally and ethically that fits the
21 legal strategy of the ultimate client and gets to
22 his or her goal as cost effectively as possible.
0226
1 That's what we do.
2 Q. Have you ever --
3 A. And whether I'm counsel of record or not
4 counsel of record to me is academic because if
5 I'm hired as a lawyer --
6 Q. I understand that. But I just asked
7 whether you were counsel of record. That's all I
8 want to know.
9 A. And I'm responding.
10 Q. You can't remember one case that you're
11 in where you're counsel of record?
12 MR. HANSEN: I think it's a misstatement
13 of testimony. Objection.
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. Well, give me one.
16 MR. HANSEN: The one in New York, I
17 believe he gave you.
18 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, he didn't say he was
19 actually counsel of record. He said he was just
20 retained.
21 THE WITNESS: Well, define "counsel of
22 record."
0227
1 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
2 Q. Where your name appears on pleadings.
3 A. There have been matters where I have been
4 counsel of record, and I would be happy to supply
5 those for the record.
6 Q. Okay. We'll take you up on that offer.
7 Thank you.
8 Where is your office located for Terry
9 Lenzner, P.C.?
10 A. It's located in 1140 Connecticut Avenue.
11 Q. Is there a suite?
12 A. No.
13 Q. It's the whole building?
14 A. Fourth floor.
15 Q. Fourth floor. Is it in the same suite as
16 IGI?
17 A. It is.
18 Q. What is Mr. Kupperman's area of specialty
19 in the law?
20 A. He came from the Brobeck, Phleger firm,
21 and he did a lot of work in the entertainment
22 community, contract disputes.
0228
1 Q. Craig Kravit?
2 A. He came from the law firm of Beverage &
3 Diamond, and his specialty is environmental
4 litigation.
5 Q. Peggy Daley?
6 A. She came from the Sonnenschein Law Firm
7 in Chicago and her specialty is corporate
8 finance.
9 Q. Are the two investigators, were they ever
10 employed by the FBI?
11 A. No.
12 Q. During the course of the existence of
13 your law firm Terry F. Lenzner, P.C. and your
14 company, IGI, have any employees ever left your
15 employment and gone into the current Clinton
16 Administration?
17 A. Any employees at any time?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Well, this just goes back to 1992 because
21 the Clinton Administration wasn't in existence
22 before then.
0229
1 A. Yes, they have.
2 Q. Who are they?
3 A. Anne LaSoto, Ricky Simon, and Brooke
4 Sheare -- and, excuse me, Ray Kelly.
5 Q. When was Anne LaSoto employed by -- was
6 it IGI?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. When was she employed by IGI?
9 A. I think mid-90s, mid-1990s.
10 Q. And what was her job title?
11 A. She was in charge of marketing.
12 Q. When she left IGI, did she take the job
13 as the press secretary to Mickey Cantor, at the
14 U.S. Trade Representative?
15 A. I'm trying to remember. She's at the
16 National Security Counsel now, but she was at
17 treasury -- not treasury. She was at USTR for a
18 while.
19 Q. She was Mickey Cantor's press secretary
20 when he was U.S. trade representative, correct?
21 A. No, but she had left the government --
22 she had left our office well before he became --
0230
1 you say secretary of commerce or treasury rep?
2 Q. U.S. trade representative.
3 A. Oh, no. Okay. That's right, yes.
4 Q. Later she became the press secretary to
5 Mickey Cantor when he moved over to the Commerce
6 Department, correct?
7 A. That's correct.
8 Q. Correct. Did you maintain contact with
9 her during the period that she was working for
10 Mickey Cantor?
11 A. As a social friend, sure.
12 Q. You are a close friend of Mickey Cantor,
13 are you not?
14 A. I'm a friend of Mickey Cantor's. I
15 wouldn't say I was a close friend of
16 Mickey Cantor's. I've known Mickey Cantor since
17 Legal Services. I brought him up -- was working
18 for the Florida Rural Legal Services program in
19 rural -- I mean, the Immigrant Legal Services
20 Program in South Florida, and I met him down
21 there in one of the disputes with Governor Kirk
22 in the 60s and he then came up and worked in the
0231
1 Washington headquarters.
2 Q. Are you working with Mr. Mickey Cantor
3 now on any matter?
4 MR. HANSEN: Let me give you the
5 previously stated continuing objection and direct
6 you to answer only to the extent you can do so
7 without violating privileges.
8 THE WITNESS: I'll not answer that
9 question on those grounds.
10 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
11 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
12 Q. Are you working with Mickey Cantor now to
13 investigate perceived adversaries of the Clinton
14 Administration?
15 MR. HANSEN: Continuing objection. Same
16 instructions.
17 THE WITNESS: I'll adhere to those
18 instructions.
19 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
20 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
21 Q. Do you know Harold Ickes?
22 A. Yes.0232
1 Q. When did you get to know Harold Ickes?
2 MR. HANSEN: Objection to "get to know."
3 THE WITNESS: I first met Harold Ickes in
4 1971, something around that time. Don't hold me
5 to the year, but in that time frame.
6 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
7 Q. And have you ever worked with
8 Harold Ickes in any capacity?
9 MR. HANSEN: Let me make the same
10 continuing privilege objection.
11 THE WITNESS: I don't believe so. I
12 don't know what you mean by "work" but I think
13 the answer is no.
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. Have you ever worked on any matter where
16 Harold Ickes was involved in any way?
17 MR. HANSEN: Let me get the same
18 continuing privileged objection.
19 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
20 Q. You can respond.
21 A. I think I -- I think that that would
22 relate to a privileged communication.0233
1 Q. You're not going to respond?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Are you currently working with
4 Harold Ickes on behalf of the Clinton
5 Administration to investigate perceived
6 adversaries of that administration?
7 MR. HANSEN: Same continuing privileged
8 objection and instruction.
9 MS. GILES: And objection to the term
10 perceived enemies. It's vague and ambiguous.
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Adversaries.
12 MR. HANSEN: I'll also join in the vague
13 and unintelligible --
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. I might add it's been the White House
16 that's used that term.
17 You can respond.
18 A. I'll accept the instruction.
19 Q. Were you retained by Williams & Connolly
20 to investigate perceived adversaries of the
21 Clinton Administration?
22 MR. HANSEN: Continuing privilege0234
1 objection. Same instruction with respect to not
2 breaching any privilege.
3 THE WITNESS: I'll accept the
4 instruction.
5 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
6 MR. HANSEN: And also let me make the
7 objection as to unintelligible as your question
8 stands.
9 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
10 Q. Do you know Erskine Bowles?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Have you been retained by the law firm of
13 Skadden, Arps to investigate perceived
14 adversaries of the Clinton Administration?
15 A. I'll accept his instruction.
16 MR. HANSEN: Let me give the same
17 continuing privilege objection and state that you
18 may answer the question only insofar as there is
19 public disclosure of any matter that you're free
20 to disclose.
21 THE WITNESS: No, I accept the
22 instruction.
0235
1 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
2 Q. Have you been retained within the last
3 five years by the law firm of Skadden, Arps?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What were you retained to do?
6 MR. HANSEN: I give you the continuing
7 privilege instruction and instruct you to answer
8 only insofar as you have been -- there is public
9 information that you're permitted to reveal.
10 THE WITNESS: We've been retained on
11 numerous matters by Skadden, Arps.
12 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
13 Q. Were you ever retained to investigate
14 individuals who were perceived as adversaries of
15 the Clinton Administration, either legally or
16 otherwise?
17 MR. HANSEN: Same continuing privilege
18 objection and instruction. Also unintelligible
19 instruction with respect to "perceived
20 adversaries."
21 THE WITNESS: I accept that instruction.
22 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
0236
1 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
2 Q. Do you know Bob Bennett of the law firm
3 of Skadden, Arps?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. When did you get to know him?
6 A. I got to know him when we worked on a
7 matter seven or eight years ago where he was
8 representing an indicted defendant and who was
9 later acquitted based, in part, on our work.
10 Q. Have you worked with him on any matters
11 concerning the Clinton Administration?
12 MR. HANSEN: Continuing privilege
13 objection and instruction not to answer unless to
14 do so would not violate -- unless you can answer
15 without breaching the privilege.
16 THE WITNESS: I think it's a matter of
17 public record that Mr. Bennett and Mr. Kendall
18 announced that IGI had been retained since April
19 of 1994 by both firms to assist in the defense of
20 matters related to the President.
21 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
22 Q. I'll show you what I'll ask the court
0237
1 reporter to mark as Exhibit 5.
2 (Deposition Exhibit Number 5 was marked
3 for identification.)
4 MR. HANSEN: Do we have copies of that?
5 We still don't have Exhibit 3, by the way.
6 Would you like us to read this,
7 Mr. Klayman?
8 MR. KLAYMAN: You can do what you want.
9 MR. HANSEN: You say do what we want. If
10 you're going to ask questions on it, would you
11 like us to read it? Because I will --
12 MR. KLAYMAN: I'd like the witness to
13 read it.
14 MR. HANSEN: Okay.
15 MR. KLAYMAN: I don't care if you read
16 it.
17 MR. HANSEN: Then we'll have Mr. Lenzner
18 read it. That's all I was asking.
19 MS. PAXTON: Is this Exhibit 5?
20 MR. KLAYMAN: Yes.
21 THE WITNESS: Okay.
22 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
0238
1 Q. Have you seen this document before,
2 Mr. Lenzner?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did you see it in draft form before it
5 was issued?
6 A. I did not.
7 Q. Did you assist in any way in preparing
8 this document?
9 A. I did not.
10 Q. This document is a press release which
11 was issued by David Kendall and Robert S. Bennett
12 concerning you and your firm Investigative Group,
13 International; is that not correct?
14 MR. HANSEN: Objection to the form of the
15 question.
16 THE WITNESS: I believe it was released,
17 but I don't know in what the matter -- the manner
18 it was released by.
19 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
20 Q. Is this press release the public
21 information that you've just described?
22 A. Yes.
0239
1 Q. Which announced that, in fact, you were
2 employed by these two firms?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And you were employed since April of
5 1994?
6 A. I haven't gone back, actually, to check
7 the date, but that sounds about right.
8 Q. Were you employed by these two firms in
9 April 1994 at the same time?
10 MR. HANSEN: Let me just instruct
11 Mr. Lenzner that other than matters publicly
12 released by the firms, I instruct you not to
13 answer. If you do so would breach any privilege
14 that I previously listed in the continuing
15 objection.
16 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I believe that would
17 breach the privilege.
18 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
19 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
20 Q. Were you employed to do the same things
21 for both firms?
22 MR. HANSEN: Same objection.
0240
1 THE WITNESS: Same answer.
2 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
3 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
4 Q. You were employed to investigate
5 perceived adversaries of the Clinton
6 Administration in April of '94 by Williams &
7 Connolly and Skadden, Arps, were you not?
8 MR. HANSEN: Objection one, vague and
9 unintelligible. Objection two, asked and
10 answered. Objection three, calls for the
11 disclosure of privileged and confidential
12 information that's subject to the continuing
13 objection and instruct the witness not to answer
14 unless you can do so without breaching the
15 privilege.
16 THE WITNESS: I'll accept the
17 instruction.
18 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
19 Q. You were employed to dig up dirt on
20 perceived adversaries of the Clinton
21 Administration so you could destroy them, were
22 you not?
0241
1 MR. HANSEN: Objection, harassment of the
2 witness. We're now almost four hours into this
3 deposition of a nonparty where you haven't gotten
4 one piece of information relevant to your
5 lawsuit, Mr. Klayman. Objection two,
6 mischaracterization of testimony, inflammatory,
7 argumentative question. Objection three, I
8 continue to instruct Mr. Lenzner regarding that
9 privilege.
10 MR. KLAYMAN: You can respond.
11 MS. GILES: Also object that it's vague
12 and ambiguous.
13 MR. HANSEN: Oh, yeah, I forgot that one.
14 Let me join in that objection.
15 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
16 Q. You can respond.
17 A. I accept the instructions with the
18 exception that we would never accept an
19 assignment of the nature you described.
20 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
21 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
22 Q. Were you employed --
0242
1 MR. HANSEN: I think that's probably
2 right for the Geraldo show. Mr. Klayman, I
3 really suggest that at this point you move to
4 questions pertinent to this matter because this
5 is just pure harassment of this witness, pure and
6 simple harassment. You started it this morning
7 with the Safire column and you're continuing with
8 it this afternoon. And you've done it with other
9 witnesses and other courts have commented on your
10 conduct and I'm not going to tolerate it here.
11 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I certainly hear you
12 commenting on it.
13 MR. HANSEN: I think the Second Circuit
14 commented on it as well, hasn't it?
15 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, you want to keep
16 making wise cracks, you can do whatever you want
17 Mr. --
18 MR. HANSEN: Hansen's the name.
19 MR. KLAYMAN: -- Hansen, at your own
20 risk.
21 MR. HANSEN: Threaten all you want,
22 Mr. Klayman. No one's threatening you.
0243
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Oh, I think you were
2 Mr. Hansen.
3 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
4 Q. Mr. Lenzner, were you hired to look into
5 the personal lives of Victoria Toensing and
6 Joseph diGenova?
7 MR. HANSEN: I would instruct you,
8 Mr. Lenzner, that you may answer the question
9 only insofar as there's public information, if
10 clients have instructed to be released. And if
11 to answer the question would breach any
12 privilege, you can not answer.
13 THE WITNESS: The answer is no.
14 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
15 Q. Why can you answer that -- why can you
16 answer that question but you can't answer the
17 other ones?
18 A. Because it's referred to in the statement
19 that was released by Mr. Bennett and Mr. Kendall?
20 Q. Were you hired to look into any aspect of
21 the professional lives of Ms. Toensing and
22 Mr. diGenova?
0244
1 MR. HANSEN: I'm going to give the
2 continuation privilege objection and instruct
3 Mr. Lenzner not to answer if to do so would
4 represent a breach of a privilege and ask him to
5 confine his answer to unprivileged material.
6 THE WITNESS: I accept.
7 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
8 Q. Are you refusing to answer?
9 A. I accept the instruction.
10 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
11 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
12 Q. Did you discuss the issuance of this
13 press release before it was issued with
14 Mr. Bennett or Mr. Kendall of Skadden, Arps and
15 Williams & Connolly respectively?
16 MR. HANSEN: Continuing privilege
17 objection noted for the record. Instruction,
18 Mr. Lenzner.
19 THE WITNESS: No.
20 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
21 Q. At the time that this press release was
22 issued on or about February 24th, were you aware
0245
1 that the White House had denied that the Clinton
2 Administration had hired any private
3 investigators?
4 MR. HANSEN: Objection,
5 mischaracterization. Objection, unintelligible
6 question.
7 THE WITNESS: I don't know when I learned
8 that. I saw it in some newspaper.
9 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
10 Q. You are aware that the White House made
11 such a statement?
12 A. I read it in some newspaper.
13 Q. If the White House made that statement,
14 it would be false, would it not?
15 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
16 Objection, lack of foundation.
17 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
18 Q. You can respond.
19 A. I wouldn't characterize what the
20 White House does or doesn't do.
21 Q. It wouldn't be correct, would it?
22 MR. HANSEN: Same objections.
0246
1 THE WITNESS: That's not my job.
2 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
3 Q. You have no thought processes on this
4 issue?
5 MR. HANSEN: Objection, unintelligible.
6 THE WITNESS: I have no comment on this
7 issue.
8 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
9 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
10 Q. You are aware that you have to answer my
11 question?
12 MR. HANSEN: Mr. Lenzner has asked --
13 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
14 Q. You're not allowed to take a "no comment"
15 in a deposition?
16 MR. HANSEN: Mr. Lenzner has asked your
17 abusive, hostile, and harassing questions now for
18 almost four hours, Mr. Klayman, as have other
19 witnesses. Your pattern of conduct in these
20 depositions is truly remarkable. I would request
21 you not scold the witness but rather ask your
22 questions.
0247
1 MR. KLAYMAN: We'll be very happy to let
2 the record speak for itself, Mr. Hansen. Your
3 characterizations are inaccurate, and, frankly, I
4 don't care.
5 MR. HANSEN: It's abundantly clear you
6 don't care, Mr. Klayman. That's the entire
7 problem here.
8 MR. KLAYMAN: I don't care because my
9 conduct is clear and you'll be able to review the
10 entire videotaped deposition if that's what you
11 desire to do.
12 MR. HANSEN: May will review it,
13 Mr. Klayman. But please ask your questions of
14 Mr. Lenzner because we're imposing on his time.
15 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
16 Q. Are you aware that you can't take a "no
17 comment" in a deposition? You are a lawyer of
18 many years, Mr. Lenzner?
19 A. I have no opinion on the question you
20 asked.
21 Q. It never dawned on you whether the
22 White House's statement was true or false?
0248
1 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
2 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
3 Q. Is that what you're saying?
4 MR. HANSEN: Objection, argumentative.
5 THE WITNESS: I have no opinion on the
6 question.
7 MR. KLAYMAN: Certify it.
8 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
9 Q. Has your daughter ever worked for George
10 Stephanopoulos?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What's the name of your daughter?
13 A. Emily. Emily Armastead Lenzner.
14 Q. How was it that Emily Armastead Lenzner
15 got a job working for George Stephanopoulos at
16 the White House?
17 A. As I understand it, Emily was looking for
18 a position -- thank you. Because her assignment
19 at the Washington Post had terminated, and --
20 MR. KLAYMAN: Can we start that over,
21 again, because you made a lot of noise,
22 Mr. Hansen, with that ice?
0249
1 MR. HANSEN: I'm just trying to get some
2 water. The witness would like a little water. I
3 don't think that's an unreasonable request.
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Not at all. But I just
5 don't want there to be a lot of noise. I'll
6 certainly get you water. I'll be happy to. Do
7 you want some water, Mr. Lenzner?
8 THE WITNESS: Please.
9 BY MR. KLAYMAN:
10 Q. Let's start over again.
11 A. My recollection is that her tenure at
12 the -- her tenure at The Washington Post was
13 about to end and she was looking around to do
14 something else and she received a call from one
15 of her friends and, I think, classmates who was
16 then working at the White House saying there was
17 an opening there. She went for an interview.
18 She was told that there were other applicants and
19 then eventually she was told that she was
20 accepted.
21 Then sometime thereafter she told me that
22 she told Mr. Stephanopoulos that she couldn't
0250
1 continue to work there as an intern and she
2 needed a paying job and he then secured her a
3 position, a staffed position of some kind.
4 Q. Do you know what the job description of
5 that position was?
6 A. I have no idea.
7 Q. Let's back up. Emily was working at The
8 Washington Post?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Who was she working for and what was her
11 job?
12 A. She was working in the photography lab as
13 a photography assistant. I don't know individual
14 who she was working with.
15 Q. Was she writing -- was she working with
16 any reporters?
17 A. Thank you. I think she was working
18 solely with the photographers. At that time she
19 was very interested in being a photographer,
20 which was why she went there in the first place.
21 Q. Did she have any contacts to get the job
22 at The Washington Post? Did somebody give her a