Sd B5 White House 2 Of 2 Fdr- Email Re Interview Guidelines 454
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Sd B5 White House 2 Of 2 Fdr- Email Re Interview Guidelines 454 as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 849
- Pages: 3
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Page 1 of 3
59.59MB / 476.84MB (12.50%) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:27:30 -0400 From: ""4| To: "" <[email protected]>^P Subject: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Forwarded message from "" Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:02:07 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am) To: "" Dan-Per our discussion this morning (as always, we appreciate your tough-but-fair negoatiating), these are the final guidelines on interviews. We will provide these to Dan Levin this afternoon for use with his agency focal points and understand you will similarly share them on your side. Thanks again.
H. Bryan Cunningham 09/17/2003 05:06:40 PM Record Type:
To:
Record
[email protected]
cc: Subject:
Final Interview Guidelines
(Document link: H. Bryan Cunningham)
Interview Guidelines It's in our mutual interest to written) general principles so those the Commission gives its conflicts at the interviews to
have agreed-upon (though not formal and that the guidance agencies give witnesses and interviewers will be consistent, avoiding the extent possible;
Both sides will apply a "rule of reason" in interpreting the guidelines, bearing in mind the overall guiding principle that, consistent with the specific gudance below, we are trying to create rough equivalence between the way WH/NSC documents are treated and how the interviews will be handled; If disputes arise during interviews: (1) both sides can try to contact Marcus/Dunne on their side or Dan Levin, Bryan, Tom, or Dylan and resolve issues on the spot; (2) if no such resolution is possible, the question simply will not be answered, the interview can continue and, if we ultimately agree that the question may be answered, the Commission may have additional interview time with the witness for only the deferred question(s) (possibly
http://kmesis.swisrimail.com./webmail/imp/niessage.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Page 2 of 3
by phone if feasible) Witnesses can discuss positions their agencies took in WH/NSC meetings, but, except upon a particular showing of need, interviewers will not elicit verbatim quotes from witnesses about what they, their bosses, or other officials said in NSC/CSG, Deputies, or Principals, or other WH meetings, or otherwise to WH/NSC officials. To the extent the need for verbatim quotes to be elicited may be anticipated by the interviewer, this need should be discussed in advance of the interview; With regard to questions of Assistant Secretary-level witnesses or above concerning positions taken, by their own or other Deparments or Agencies, in NSC or other WH meetings: Commission interviewers will meet w/Exec. Branch reps reasonably in advance of any interview in which they may want to ask about positions taken in specific meetings and identify: (1) what meetings specifically they may wish to cover; and (2) to the extent possible, the specific Departments/agencies' positions about which they may wish to ask. As general principles, interviewers will: Focus only on what they need to know, that is, information of particularized importance to the Commission's statutory mandate; Seek information not otherwise available, first looking at prior testimony and documents to determine whether the information is available from SOCs, notes, etc., or from previous witness statements; Look to the substance of the discussion and the arguments presented, rather than verbatim exchanges; Inquire into personal or agency positions when it's important to understand the significance not only of a position taken but which Department took it, e.g., DOD's position on the use of military force; Not inquire about particular statements, or particular disagreements, for their own sake or because it might be interesting The scope of appropriate questioning in this area, therefore, must be determined on a particularized, case-by-case basis, depending on the Commission's specific need for particular information. Before asking any questions of any witnesses (not just Asst. Sec. and above) concerning individual conversations with, or concerning statements by, the President, Vice President, National Security Advisor, White House Counsel, or Deputy National Security Advisor, the Commission will consult reasonably in advance with the EOP about the planned areas of inquiry for any such questioning. The Commission does not anticipate this issue coming up except with a small number of very senior witnesses, and both sides expect that we would revisit ground rules before any such interviews (assuming we agree on any interviews of officials senior enough to have this type of information); In all interviews (not just Asst. Sec. and above) interviewers: with regard to post 9/20/01 matters, will not go into operational details, or great detail about the implementation of policies, though interviewers may question witnesses about post-9/11 policies and programs developed to deal with terrorist threats in response to the events of 9/11; and will not question any witness about that person's time at another agency
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Page 3 of 3
(including the WH/NSC), without giving notice reasonably in advance to the agency representative, so that we may mutually discuss how to cover issues related to the time at the other agency.
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Page 1 of 3
59.59MB / 476.84MB (12.50%) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:27:30 -0400 From: ""
Forwarded message from ""
H. Bryan Cunningham 09/17/2003 05:06:40 PM Record Type:
To:
Record
[email protected]
cc: Subject:
Final Interview Guidelines
(Document link: H. Bryan Cunningham)
Interview Guidelines It's in our mutual interest to written) general principles so those the Commission gives its conflicts at the interviews to
have agreed-upon (though not formal and that the guidance agencies give witnesses and interviewers will be consistent, avoiding the extent possible;
Both sides will apply a "rule of reason" in interpreting the guidelines, bearing in mind the overall guiding principle that, consistent with the specific gudance below, we are trying to create rough equivalence between the way WH/NSC documents are treated and how the interviews will be handled; If disputes arise during interviews: (1) both sides can try to contact Marcus/Dunne on their side or Dan Levin, Bryan, Tom, or Dylan and resolve issues on the spot; (2) if no such resolution is possible, the question simply will not be answered, the interview can continue and, if we ultimately agree that the question may be answered, the Commission may have additional interview time with the witness for only the deferred question(s) (possibly
http://kmesis.swisrimail.com./webmail/imp/niessage.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Page 2 of 3
by phone if feasible) Witnesses can discuss positions their agencies took in WH/NSC meetings, but, except upon a particular showing of need, interviewers will not elicit verbatim quotes from witnesses about what they, their bosses, or other officials said in NSC/CSG, Deputies, or Principals, or other WH meetings, or otherwise to WH/NSC officials. To the extent the need for verbatim quotes to be elicited may be anticipated by the interviewer, this need should be discussed in advance of the interview; With regard to questions of Assistant Secretary-level witnesses or above concerning positions taken, by their own or other Deparments or Agencies, in NSC or other WH meetings: Commission interviewers will meet w/Exec. Branch reps reasonably in advance of any interview in which they may want to ask about positions taken in specific meetings and identify: (1) what meetings specifically they may wish to cover; and (2) to the extent possible, the specific Departments/agencies' positions about which they may wish to ask. As general principles, interviewers will: Focus only on what they need to know, that is, information of particularized importance to the Commission's statutory mandate; Seek information not otherwise available, first looking at prior testimony and documents to determine whether the information is available from SOCs, notes, etc., or from previous witness statements; Look to the substance of the discussion and the arguments presented, rather than verbatim exchanges; Inquire into personal or agency positions when it's important to understand the significance not only of a position taken but which Department took it, e.g., DOD's position on the use of military force; Not inquire about particular statements, or particular disagreements, for their own sake or because it might be interesting The scope of appropriate questioning in this area, therefore, must be determined on a particularized, case-by-case basis, depending on the Commission's specific need for particular information. Before asking any questions of any witnesses (not just Asst. Sec. and above) concerning individual conversations with, or concerning statements by, the President, Vice President, National Security Advisor, White House Counsel, or Deputy National Security Advisor, the Commission will consult reasonably in advance with the EOP about the planned areas of inquiry for any such questioning. The Commission does not anticipate this issue coming up except with a small number of very senior witnesses, and both sides expect that we would revisit ground rules before any such interviews (assuming we agree on any interviews of officials senior enough to have this type of information); In all interviews (not just Asst. Sec. and above) interviewers: with regard to post 9/20/01 matters, will not go into operational details, or great detail about the implementation of policies, though interviewers may question witnesses about post-9/11 policies and programs developed to deal with terrorist threats in response to the events of 9/11; and will not question any witness about that person's time at another agency
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Final Interview Guidelines (per our discussion this am)
Page 3 of 3
(including the WH/NSC), without giving notice reasonably in advance to the agency representative, so that we may mutually discuss how to cover issues related to the time at the other agency.
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?actionID=148&mailbox=INBOX&... 9/26/03
Related Documents
More Documents from "9/11 Document Archive"
Letter To 9/11 Commission About John Kerry
April 2020 0
