T3 B3 Interviews 1 Of 2 Fdr- All Emails And Memos In Folder And 3 Withdrawal Notices
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 T3 B3 Interviews 1 Of 2 Fdr- All Emails And Memos In Folder And 3 Withdrawal Notices as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 4,142
- Pages: 20
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 72
DOC ID: 31206579
3
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: List
FROM: TO: SUBJECT:
Team #3 Item 4: Interview Candidates
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute 9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 73
DOC ID: 31206580
81
_ACCESS RESTRICTED The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: List
FROM: TO:
SUBJECT:
Master List of Interviews Being Considered
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute 9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Mail:: INBOX: rescheduling interviews
Page 1 of 1
101.27MB / 476.84MB (21.24%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:49:59 -0400 ""^P "" <[email protected]># rescheduling interviews
pan Levin has expressed concern to us about our having rescheduled a number of interviews, occasionally at the last moment. Of course, we will sometimes have to reschedule interviews (as will witnesses). But please try to avoid doing so unless necessary, and give the witness and the POC as much notice as you can.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/22/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Resolution on oaths
Page 1 of 1
99.17MB /476.84MB (20.80%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:47:02-0400 ""^P "" <[email protected]>4P',"" <[email protected]>^ Fwd: Resolution on oaths
Part(s): g 2 Resolution re swearing in witnesses.doc application/msword 31.88 KB H
Forwarded message from "" Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:40:21 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: Resolution on oaths To: "" Last Friday Philip and I sent you a memo by e-mail seeking guidance with respect to two aspects of the question of placing witnesses under oaths: (1) interviews; and (2) public hearings, we did not get to discuss this at Tuesday's meeting, and we plan to discuss the second, more important issue at our November 7 meeting. On point (1), as we said in the memo, we plan to place witnesses under oath only infrequently at interviews -- where we have doubts as to a witness's credibility or where the witness is testifying as to important facts on which another witness is likely to have a different version, under our statute, the oath at such an interview must be administered .by. a Commissioner, who has been authorized to do so by the Commission. Attached is a resolution, approved by Tom and Lee, which would authorize any individual commissioner to administer an oath at the request of the Chair and vice chair or the Executive Director and General Counsel, we need Commission approval of this resolution, and I request that you respond to me with your yea or nay vote, by COB tonmorrow (Friday). Call me or Steve if you have any questions. 4 Finally, Scott Allan needs a Commissioner to administer an oath at an interview at the GSA Building on Monday, October 20, at 10 a.m. if you can volunteer for this important task, please call Scott at 331-4079, or the Team 3 Administrative Assistant, Marquittia Coleman at 296-5528
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.conVwebmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
DETERMINATION
Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the "Commission") has been established pursuant to Public Law 107-306; and WHEREAS Section 605(a)(l)(A) of Public Law 107-306 provides that the Commission or, "on the authority of the Commission," any member thereof, may, among other powers, administer oaths for the purpose of carrying out the Commission's statutory mandate; NOW THEREFORE IT IS RESOLVED that each individual member of the Commission shall have the authority, on behalf of the Commission, to administer an oath to any witness being interviewed by the Commission or by members of the Commission's staff, upon the request of the Commission's Chair and Vice Chair or upon the request of the Commission's Executive Director and General Counsel; AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that any oaths previously administered by individuals members of the Commission, upon the request of the Commission's Chair and Vice Chair or upon the request of the Commission's Executive Director and General Counsel, to witnesses being interviewed by the Commission or by members of the Commission's staff, were administered on the authority of the Commission. ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION on [date], in Washington, D.C. Thomas H. Kean Chair Lee H. Hamilton Vice Chair Philip D. Zelikow Executive Director
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/view.php?Horde=3fd27c2al 4a52b56b 15b08e81...
10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: further subpoenas?
Page 1 of 1
99.31 MB / 476.84MB (20.83%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct 2003 18:32:01 -0400 "" <mhurley@9-11 commission.gov>4? ""4P Fwd: further subpoenas?
Forwarded message from "" Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:35:48 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: further subpoenas? To: "" This will elaborate on what I reported at yesterday's Team Leader meeting. The Commission on Tuesday not only voted to issue a subpoena to the FAA (which was served this afternoon), but also instructed me to canvass all team leaders to determine whether there are other instances of agency non-production of important documents that merit consideration of issuance of a subpoena, what we are interested in is instances in which an agency, despite having been put on notice by us that their production is (or is suspected to be) deficient in a signifcant respect, has failed to come forward with responsive documents or has responded inadequately. The public statement the Commission issued, together with the Gonzales memo to agencies, should produce a heightened sense or urgency among the agencies in completing responses to outstanding requests over the next week or so. You should take advantage of the current atmosphere to remind agencies about the remaining holes they need to fill, and consider whether any remaining problems are serious enough to warrant consideration of a subpoena. Please send an email to Steve and me by the end of next week (Oct. 24) letting us know whether you believe a subpoena for any of the documents you seek should be issued, and if so, why. End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/17/03
Mail:: INBOX: Commission Position on Notes and Interviews
Page 1 of 1
99.17MB /476.84MB (20.80%) Date: From: To: Cc: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct2003 15:03:33 -0400 "" <[email protected]><S' ""4P "" ^,"" 4| Commission Position on Notes and Interviews
All:
AS we mentioned at yesterday's team leader meeting, we now have concrete guidance on consulting notes and other materials before and during an interview, it is provided below. Please do not alter this language in your interview requests, and in particular, do not add language encouraging witnesses to bring notes or documents to interviews. For a clarification as to why, please see Dan or Steve. For current government employees: You may wish to review notes and other documents to refresh your recollection of these matters prior to the [interview/meeting]. For former or non-government employees: You may wish to review notes and other materials you may have to refresh your recollection of these matters prior to the [interview/meeting]. Thank you, Stephanie
http://kinesis.swishniail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Gonzales memo
Date: From: To: Subject:
Page 1 of 2
99.21 MB / 476.84MB (20.81 %) Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:01:58 -0400 ""4P "" <staff@9-11 commission.gov>9 Fwd: Gonzales memo
Forwarded message from "" Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:53:39 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: Gonzales memo To: "" see below an interesting Cand helpful) memorandum Judge Gonzales sent to the departments and agencies today, which the white House plans to make public. October 15, 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR
CC: FROM: SUBJECT:
SECRETARY OF STATE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ATTORNEY GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY OF ENERGY SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE ARCHIVIST OF THE UNITED STATES HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES ALBERTO R. GONZALES COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT COOPERATION WITH NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES
As you know, the President has stated a clear policy of support for the work of the National commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the united states ("Commission")- On March 19, 2003, Chief of Staff Andrew card sent you the attached memorandum directing cooperation with the Commission and requesting that you designate an appropriate senior official within your department or agency to serve as the principal point of contact for Commission matters. The departments and agencies have made extraordinary efforts to cooperate with the Commission. By conservative estimate, more than 250 individuals in the Executive Branch - many of whom are also responsible for helping fight the war on terrorists of global reach - spend at least a significant part of their time directly supporting the commission's work, in the less than six months since the first document request was issued by the Commission in May 2003, the Executive Branch has produced or made available to the C9mmission more than 2,100,000 pages of documents, provided nearly 100 briefings, and facilitated nearly 300 interviews. it is imperative that we see these strong efforts through to completion of the commission's work. Please review the efforts your department or agency has made to date in responding to the commission's requests to ensure http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde:=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Page 2 of 2
.nat you have fully satisfied your responsibility to cooperate with the Commission and to conduct a complete and thorough search for documents that may be covered by its requests, it has recently come to my attention that the Commission has raised concerns about potential deficiencies in the document production efforts of certain departments and agencies and, in fact, has voted to issue a subpoena to one agency. Although we understand that the issues regarding that agency's document production are now largely resolved, the Chief of staff expects departments and agencies to take document requests as seriously as a subpoena and to avoid such problems in the future. Finally, please be certain that your staffs work closely with Daniel Levin, Counselor to the Attorney General, who serves as the primary liaison between the Executive Branch and the commission, to make sure the commission's requests are handled in a fulsome and expeditious manner. End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmaiyimp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: clarification of interview policy
Page 1 of 1
93.01 MB / 476.84MB (19.50%) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 20:13:44 -0400 From: ""^P To: "" <[email protected]>4P Subject: clarification of interview policy
After Tuesday's staff meeting, Philip and I discussed further the tricky issue of whether to ask interviewees to bring personal notes used to refresh their recollection to interviews, we have decided on the fpllowing guidance: For each witness you plan to interview, you should determine whether you think it would be useful to suggest to the witness (in the letter inviting him or her to be interviewed or in discussion with the agency POC (in the case of current govt employees)) that he or she may want to refresh his or her recollection on specified issues or events by reviewing personal notes or other materials before the interview. WE should NOT, however, ask the witness to bring such notes or materials to the interview. if you have any questions about this policy, please give Steve or me a call.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde-3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08... 10/10/03
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
TAB: 74
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
DOC ID: 31206581
1
ACCESS RESTRICTED The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: E-Mail PrintoutATrofs Notes)
FROM: Dunne
TO: CIA SUBJECT:
CIA interview request no. 7
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Mail:: INBOX: FBI interview request no. 8
Page 1 of 1
89.78MB /476.84MB (18.83%) Date: From: To: Cc:
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:38:05 -0400 "" <[email protected]>^ "" <[email protected]>*P ""4P, "" 4P,"" 9,
as a word document is FBI interview request no. 8. Please call 202-331-4079 with any questions about the topics to be covered for this interview. Feel free to call Dan or me as well if any Thanks. Steve
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/3/03
Mail:: INBOX: DOS interview request no. 10
Page 1 of 1
89.79MB / 476.84MB (18.83%) Date: From: To: Cc:
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:22:40 -0400 "" <[email protected]>^ ""4f "" 4|,"" 4l,"" '#, "" ^l Subject: DOS interview request no. 10 Part(s): g2 DOS interview request no 10.doc application/msword 77.62 KB f^
Karl: Attached as a word document is DOS interyiew request no. 10. Please call Scott Allan at 202-331-4079 with any questions about the topics to be covered and to arrange for these interviews. Feel free to call Dan or me as well if any issues arise. Thanks. Steve
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl 5b08e...
10/3/03
'——Mail:: INBOX: Interview Talking Points
Page 1 of 1
46.70MB / 476.84MB (9.79%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:14:57-0400 "" <[email protected]>4P "" <[email protected]>4P Interview Talking Points
Part(s): g 2 interview talking points.doc application/msword 31.88 KB ^j|
Since formal interviews are beginning, even today, I thought I would send around the attached talking points to everyone for use in interviews. These talking points are meant as general guidelines that can be adapted as you see fit for each interview, depending on the circumstances; please let me know if you have suggestions for improvements. A much more comprehensive interview binder (with detailed procedures, forms, answers to FAQs, etc.) is in the works and should be out to the teams later this week.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56b 15b08e81... 8/7/03
INTERVIEW TALKING POINTS
•
If you are tape recording, don't forget to TURN ON THE TAPE RECORDER.
•
Identify yourself and the Commission ("I'm Pat Doe, a staff member with the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.")
•
Give the date, time and location ("It's Monday, July 21, 2003, about 10 am, and we are at the FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.")
•
Identify the event ("We're here for an interview of Chris Roe.")
•
So that everyone is clearly on notice, state that the interview is being recorded ("Pursuant to our standard policy, and our agreement with the Administration, this interview is being tape recorded.")
•
Ask everyone in the room, including other Commission staff, to identify themselves and their affiliations for the record
•
If classified material might be discussed, tell the witness that all Commission staff members present have Top Secret/SCI clearances (assuming they do). Ask the witness to inform you during the interview if he or she discusses classified information, and if so, what the proper classification level is.
•
Give the witness general background information about the Commission •
The Commission was established by statute; signed into law by the President
•
There are 10 Commissioners; all come from outside the government, but all have prior government experience
•
The Chair was appointed by the President
•
The remaining Commissioners were appointed by Congressional leaders
•
The basic statutory mandate of the Commission is three-fold: •
to investigate and make a full and complete accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the 9/11 terrorist attacks;
•
to investigate the country's preparedness for, and immediate response to, those attacks; and
•
to identify and evaluate the lessons learned from those attacks.
•
The mandate of the Commission is to determine the facts and make policy recommendations, not to establish individual culpability.
•
The Commission will report its findings to the President, Congress, and the American people, as well as make recommendations for preventing future attacks
•
If the witness has any questions, offer the witness a copy of the statute
Give the witness general instructions about the conduct of the interview •
"If you don't understand a question, or if it isn't clear, please tell me so that I can restate it or try to make it clearer."
•
"If you need a break at any time, just let me know so that we can finish up a set of questions and take a break."
•
"As to historical facts, we are just looking for your best recollection. Please be as precise as possible with details such as names, dates and locations, but also give us your best estimate if you don't remember exact details."
Start the substantive portion of the interview by asking the witness to give his or her full name, with a spelling of the last name, official title, and work location or address.
•
Before turning off the tape recorder, make clear that you are ending the interview or that portion of the interview. ("That concludes [this portion of] the interview.")
•
Whenever you turn the tape recorder back on after any stop or break in the recording, re-state your name, the date, and the event. ("This is Pat Doe on Monday, July 21, 2003, and this is a continuation of the interview of Chris Roe.")
•
If anyone not identified at the beginning of the interview joins the interview, please ask them to identify themselves for the record.
•
At the end of the interview, tell the witness that he or she can contact you if they have more information to offer or want to change or add to any answers they have given.
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: NEOB procedures
Page 1 of 1
INBOX Compose Folders Options Search Problem? Help Addressbook Tasks Memos Calendar Logout
Open Folder'
82.20MB / 476.84MB (17.24%)
INBOX: Fwd:
NEOB procedures (2 of 1590)
fi
wove | copy |This message to
3
Delete | Reply | Reply to All | Forward | Redirect | Blacklist | Message Source | Resume | Save as | Print Back to INBOX Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:25:22 -0400
^^
m From: "" <[email protected]>4| To: ""4f,"" '*!1',"" ^,"" <[email protected]>4f Subject: Fwd: NEOB procedures
Below please find a message from Dan Marcus regarding visits to the New Executive Office Building to view white House documents. Forwarded message from "" Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:24:36 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: NEOB procedures To: "" , "" <[email protected]>, "" <[email protected]>, "" <[email protected]>, "" , "" Tom wonheim requests that, to assure orderliness re scheduling, all requests for appointments to review EOF documents at our NEOB SCIF be made through him. You can do that through Steve or me or directly to Tom at 456-8997. His email i s thomas_a._monhei [email protected]. End forwarded message Delete | Reply | Reply to All | Forward | Redirect | Blacklist | Message Source | Resume | Save as | Print Back to INBOX Move Copy jThis message to
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?index=l 615
j»j
9/25/03
Mail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
Page 1 of 3
69.90MB /476.84MB (14.66%) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:56:16-0400 From: "" <[email protected]>4| To: ""4| Cc: "" ^ Subject: Interviews of top policy officials
Thanks for this, Dan--and for all your slugging on our behalf. Point 3 is, I fear, problematic throughout, we are explicitly trying to reconstruct the Bush administration's CT policymaking pre-9/11, which entails reconstructing a DC and PC process that was, by its very nature, predecisional . In that context, it's important for us to hear their perceptions of otherparticipants' positions, if only to understand how they came up with their own stances. Policy isn't made in a vacuum. Moreover, in many cases—such as the four key DC meetings and the Sept. 4, 2001 PC meeting—we will be looking for significant detail, including some exact phrasings. God is in the details, after all. It matters whether, say, Armitage said, " W e ' d like to hurt al-Qaida" or said "we're going to eliminate al-Qaida." Of course, we'd be glad to corroborate such information with other sources, including documents (which I trust more than interviews anyway). I'm not sure I understand point 5, either. But again, the idea that w e ' r e limited to asking about generalities rather than specifics is problematic. I see nothing in our statute limiting us to generalities, serious history takes detail work. I also worry that the dispute-resolution mechanism may hamstring us. what if Hadley's minder objects to some point, we can't resolve it, we defer the line of questioning, and he then never comes back? Or he only comes back so late in the game as to make it impossible for us to follow up on the information he provides? Again, I don't think the statute leaves much doubt about the white House obligation to comply. Just a few quick reactions—hope they're helpful. Best, warren Quoting "" <[email protected]>:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
----- Forwarded message from "" Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 13:52:40 -0400 From: "" Reply-To: "" Subject: interviews of top policy officials TO: "" , "" <[email protected]>, ""
-----
Last night Brian Cunningham called me to propose some general guidelines, set forth below, for asking top policy officials during interviews about "deliberative" or "pre-decisional" discussions. They reflect the WHouse concern that interviews not be usded to recreate a verbatim record of what transpired at NSC principals and deputies meetings, and that hard-core exec privilege concerns be avoided as much as possible. These would apply to interviews of high-level WHouse and NSC officials, and Dan Levin would like
> to > apply them as well to interviews of agency heads about their communications > with WHouse officials or other agency heads. I think the guidelines are
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
tail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
Page 2 of 3
> generally OK, but welcome your reactions and comments. I would like to > discuss > them at our staff meeting Tuesday. > > 1. witnesses may be asked about positions they or their agencies took at NSC > > principals or deputies meetings. > > 2. They may be asked about the general reaction to their position, about > options that were discussed, and about decisions or consensus reached at the > > meeting. > > 3. They should not, however, be asked to characterize positions taken by > other > participants, and they should not be asked to give a blow-by-blow account of > > the meeting or to provide exact quotations. (I reserved on the first > point.) > > 4. Cunningham requests that we give prior notice if we intend to ask a > witness > about his or her conversations with the President, VP, or Nat! security > Advisor. > > 5. Cunningham proposed a "rule of reason" on questions about discussions the > > witness had with other WHOuse officials -- substance of conversation OK, but > > not details. (I told him this distinction would be hard to follow.) > > 6.Cunningham requested that all interviews of top policy officials be > conducted > by staff members who are cleared to review the NSC documents -- PZ, Kojm, > me, > Hurley & Bass. I told him that limitation was not practical, and that we had > > to have the flexibility to use other members of Team 3, scheid and others who > > are cleared to share what Hurley & Bass have learned. > > Cunningham believes, and I agree, that if we can agree on these general > > principles, it will minimize the need to interrupt interviews to discuss > concerns that the minder has about questions, if such questions do arise, we > > will seek to resolve them on the spot -- by discussion between the > interviewers > and the minder (who in the case of top NSC and other WHouse people will > usually > be Bellinger, Cunningham or Monheim). Steve or I will often be available by > > phone to help resolve the matter. Brian agrees that interviews should not be > > suspended in the event there is an impasse about questioning on deliberative > or > other sensitive matters; rather, the questioning on that subject will be > held, > the interview will continue, and they will agree to make the witness avaiable > > again if it is later determined that the questioning is OK. > > Reactions/comments?
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmaiyimp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
Mail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
>
Page 3 of 3
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde:=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 72
DOC ID: 31206579
3
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: List
FROM: TO: SUBJECT:
Team #3 Item 4: Interview Candidates
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute 9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 73
DOC ID: 31206580
81
_ACCESS RESTRICTED The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: List
FROM: TO:
SUBJECT:
Master List of Interviews Being Considered
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute 9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Mail:: INBOX: rescheduling interviews
Page 1 of 1
101.27MB / 476.84MB (21.24%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:49:59 -0400 ""
pan Levin has expressed concern to us about our having rescheduled a number of interviews, occasionally at the last moment. Of course, we will sometimes have to reschedule interviews (as will witnesses). But please try to avoid doing so unless necessary, and give the witness and the POC as much notice as you can.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/22/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Resolution on oaths
Page 1 of 1
99.17MB /476.84MB (20.80%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:47:02-0400 ""
Part(s): g 2 Resolution re swearing in witnesses.doc application/msword 31.88 KB H
Forwarded message from ""
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.conVwebmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
DETERMINATION
Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the "Commission") has been established pursuant to Public Law 107-306; and WHEREAS Section 605(a)(l)(A) of Public Law 107-306 provides that the Commission or, "on the authority of the Commission," any member thereof, may, among other powers, administer oaths for the purpose of carrying out the Commission's statutory mandate; NOW THEREFORE IT IS RESOLVED that each individual member of the Commission shall have the authority, on behalf of the Commission, to administer an oath to any witness being interviewed by the Commission or by members of the Commission's staff, upon the request of the Commission's Chair and Vice Chair or upon the request of the Commission's Executive Director and General Counsel; AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that any oaths previously administered by individuals members of the Commission, upon the request of the Commission's Chair and Vice Chair or upon the request of the Commission's Executive Director and General Counsel, to witnesses being interviewed by the Commission or by members of the Commission's staff, were administered on the authority of the Commission. ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION on [date], in Washington, D.C. Thomas H. Kean Chair Lee H. Hamilton Vice Chair Philip D. Zelikow Executive Director
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/view.php?Horde=3fd27c2al 4a52b56b 15b08e81...
10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: further subpoenas?
Page 1 of 1
99.31 MB / 476.84MB (20.83%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct 2003 18:32:01 -0400 "" <mhurley@9-11 commission.gov>4? ""
Forwarded message from ""
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/17/03
Mail:: INBOX: Commission Position on Notes and Interviews
Page 1 of 1
99.17MB /476.84MB (20.80%) Date: From: To: Cc: Subject:
Thu, 16 Oct2003 15:03:33 -0400 "" <[email protected]><S' ""
All:
AS we mentioned at yesterday's team leader meeting, we now have concrete guidance on consulting notes and other materials before and during an interview, it is provided below. Please do not alter this language in your interview requests, and in particular, do not add language encouraging witnesses to bring notes or documents to interviews. For a clarification as to why, please see Dan or Steve. For current government employees: You may wish to review notes and other documents to refresh your recollection of these matters prior to the [interview/meeting]. For former or non-government employees: You may wish to review notes and other materials you may have to refresh your recollection of these matters prior to the [interview/meeting]. Thank you, Stephanie
http://kinesis.swishniail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: Gonzales memo
Date: From: To: Subject:
Page 1 of 2
99.21 MB / 476.84MB (20.81 %) Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:01:58 -0400 ""
Forwarded message from ""
CC: FROM: SUBJECT:
SECRETARY OF STATE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ATTORNEY GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY OF ENERGY SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE ARCHIVIST OF THE UNITED STATES HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES ALBERTO R. GONZALES COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT COOPERATION WITH NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES
As you know, the President has stated a clear policy of support for the work of the National commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the united states ("Commission")- On March 19, 2003, Chief of Staff Andrew card sent you the attached memorandum directing cooperation with the Commission and requesting that you designate an appropriate senior official within your department or agency to serve as the principal point of contact for Commission matters. The departments and agencies have made extraordinary efforts to cooperate with the Commission. By conservative estimate, more than 250 individuals in the Executive Branch - many of whom are also responsible for helping fight the war on terrorists of global reach - spend at least a significant part of their time directly supporting the commission's work, in the less than six months since the first document request was issued by the Commission in May 2003, the Executive Branch has produced or made available to the C9mmission more than 2,100,000 pages of documents, provided nearly 100 briefings, and facilitated nearly 300 interviews. it is imperative that we see these strong efforts through to completion of the commission's work. Please review the efforts your department or agency has made to date in responding to the commission's requests to ensure http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde:=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Page 2 of 2
.nat you have fully satisfied your responsibility to cooperate with the Commission and to conduct a complete and thorough search for documents that may be covered by its requests, it has recently come to my attention that the Commission has raised concerns about potential deficiencies in the document production efforts of certain departments and agencies and, in fact, has voted to issue a subpoena to one agency. Although we understand that the issues regarding that agency's document production are now largely resolved, the Chief of staff expects departments and agencies to take document requests as seriously as a subpoena and to avoid such problems in the future. Finally, please be certain that your staffs work closely with Daniel Levin, Counselor to the Attorney General, who serves as the primary liaison between the Executive Branch and the commission, to make sure the commission's requests are handled in a fulsome and expeditious manner. End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmaiyimp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/16/03
Mail:: INBOX: clarification of interview policy
Page 1 of 1
93.01 MB / 476.84MB (19.50%) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 20:13:44 -0400 From: ""
After Tuesday's staff meeting, Philip and I discussed further the tricky issue of whether to ask interviewees to bring personal notes used to refresh their recollection to interviews, we have decided on the fpllowing guidance: For each witness you plan to interview, you should determine whether you think it would be useful to suggest to the witness (in the letter inviting him or her to be interviewed or in discussion with the agency POC (in the case of current govt employees)) that he or she may want to refresh his or her recollection on specified issues or events by reviewing personal notes or other materials before the interview. WE should NOT, however, ask the witness to bring such notes or materials to the interview. if you have any questions about this policy, please give Steve or me a call.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde-3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08... 10/10/03
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 11/20/2008
BOX: 00001
TAB: 74
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
DOC ID: 31206581
1
ACCESS RESTRICTED The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Interviews DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2003
DOCUMENT TYPE: E-Mail PrintoutATrofs Notes)
FROM: Dunne
TO: CIA SUBJECT:
CIA interview request no. 7
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Closed by Statute
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Mail:: INBOX: FBI interview request no. 8
Page 1 of 1
89.78MB /476.84MB (18.83%) Date: From: To: Cc:
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:38:05 -0400 "" <[email protected]>^ "" <[email protected]>*P ""
as a word document is FBI interview request no. 8. Please call 202-331-4079 with any questions about the topics to be covered for this interview. Feel free to call Dan or me as well if any Thanks. Steve
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e... 10/3/03
Mail:: INBOX: DOS interview request no. 10
Page 1 of 1
89.79MB / 476.84MB (18.83%) Date: From: To: Cc:
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:22:40 -0400 "" <[email protected]>^ ""
Karl: Attached as a word document is DOS interyiew request no. 10. Please call Scott Allan at 202-331-4079 with any questions about the topics to be covered and to arrange for these interviews. Feel free to call Dan or me as well if any issues arise. Thanks. Steve
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl 5b08e...
10/3/03
'——Mail:: INBOX: Interview Talking Points
Page 1 of 1
46.70MB / 476.84MB (9.79%) Date: From: To: Subject:
Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:14:57-0400 "" <[email protected]>4P "" <[email protected]>4P Interview Talking Points
Part(s): g 2 interview talking points.doc application/msword 31.88 KB ^j|
Since formal interviews are beginning, even today, I thought I would send around the attached talking points to everyone for use in interviews. These talking points are meant as general guidelines that can be adapted as you see fit for each interview, depending on the circumstances; please let me know if you have suggestions for improvements. A much more comprehensive interview binder (with detailed procedures, forms, answers to FAQs, etc.) is in the works and should be out to the teams later this week.
http://kinesis.swishmail.com/webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56b 15b08e81... 8/7/03
INTERVIEW TALKING POINTS
•
If you are tape recording, don't forget to TURN ON THE TAPE RECORDER.
•
Identify yourself and the Commission ("I'm Pat Doe, a staff member with the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.")
•
Give the date, time and location ("It's Monday, July 21, 2003, about 10 am, and we are at the FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.")
•
Identify the event ("We're here for an interview of Chris Roe.")
•
So that everyone is clearly on notice, state that the interview is being recorded ("Pursuant to our standard policy, and our agreement with the Administration, this interview is being tape recorded.")
•
Ask everyone in the room, including other Commission staff, to identify themselves and their affiliations for the record
•
If classified material might be discussed, tell the witness that all Commission staff members present have Top Secret/SCI clearances (assuming they do). Ask the witness to inform you during the interview if he or she discusses classified information, and if so, what the proper classification level is.
•
Give the witness general background information about the Commission •
The Commission was established by statute; signed into law by the President
•
There are 10 Commissioners; all come from outside the government, but all have prior government experience
•
The Chair was appointed by the President
•
The remaining Commissioners were appointed by Congressional leaders
•
The basic statutory mandate of the Commission is three-fold: •
to investigate and make a full and complete accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the 9/11 terrorist attacks;
•
to investigate the country's preparedness for, and immediate response to, those attacks; and
•
to identify and evaluate the lessons learned from those attacks.
•
The mandate of the Commission is to determine the facts and make policy recommendations, not to establish individual culpability.
•
The Commission will report its findings to the President, Congress, and the American people, as well as make recommendations for preventing future attacks
•
If the witness has any questions, offer the witness a copy of the statute
Give the witness general instructions about the conduct of the interview •
"If you don't understand a question, or if it isn't clear, please tell me so that I can restate it or try to make it clearer."
•
"If you need a break at any time, just let me know so that we can finish up a set of questions and take a break."
•
"As to historical facts, we are just looking for your best recollection. Please be as precise as possible with details such as names, dates and locations, but also give us your best estimate if you don't remember exact details."
Start the substantive portion of the interview by asking the witness to give his or her full name, with a spelling of the last name, official title, and work location or address.
•
Before turning off the tape recorder, make clear that you are ending the interview or that portion of the interview. ("That concludes [this portion of] the interview.")
•
Whenever you turn the tape recorder back on after any stop or break in the recording, re-state your name, the date, and the event. ("This is Pat Doe on Monday, July 21, 2003, and this is a continuation of the interview of Chris Roe.")
•
If anyone not identified at the beginning of the interview joins the interview, please ask them to identify themselves for the record.
•
At the end of the interview, tell the witness that he or she can contact you if they have more information to offer or want to change or add to any answers they have given.
Mail:: INBOX: Fwd: NEOB procedures
Page 1 of 1
INBOX Compose Folders Options Search Problem? Help Addressbook Tasks Memos Calendar Logout
Open Folder'
82.20MB / 476.84MB (17.24%)
INBOX: Fwd:
NEOB procedures (2 of 1590)
fi
wove | copy |This message to
3
Delete | Reply | Reply to All | Forward | Redirect | Blacklist | Message Source | Resume | Save as | Print Back to INBOX Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:25:22 -0400
^^
m From: "" <[email protected]>4| To: ""
Below please find a message from Dan Marcus regarding visits to the New Executive Office Building to view white House documents. Forwarded message from ""
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?index=l 615
j»j
9/25/03
Mail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
Page 1 of 3
69.90MB /476.84MB (14.66%) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:56:16-0400 From: "" <[email protected]>4| To: ""
Thanks for this, Dan--and for all your slugging on our behalf. Point 3 is, I fear, problematic throughout, we are explicitly trying to reconstruct the Bush administration's CT policymaking pre-9/11, which entails reconstructing a DC and PC process that was, by its very nature, predecisional . In that context, it's important for us to hear their perceptions of otherparticipants' positions, if only to understand how they came up with their own stances. Policy isn't made in a vacuum. Moreover, in many cases—such as the four key DC meetings and the Sept. 4, 2001 PC meeting—we will be looking for significant detail, including some exact phrasings. God is in the details, after all. It matters whether, say, Armitage said, " W e ' d like to hurt al-Qaida" or said "we're going to eliminate al-Qaida." Of course, we'd be glad to corroborate such information with other sources, including documents (which I trust more than interviews anyway). I'm not sure I understand point 5, either. But again, the idea that w e ' r e limited to asking about generalities rather than specifics is problematic. I see nothing in our statute limiting us to generalities, serious history takes detail work. I also worry that the dispute-resolution mechanism may hamstring us. what if Hadley's minder objects to some point, we can't resolve it, we defer the line of questioning, and he then never comes back? Or he only comes back so late in the game as to make it impossible for us to follow up on the information he provides? Again, I don't think the statute leaves much doubt about the white House obligation to comply. Just a few quick reactions—hope they're helpful. Best, warren Quoting "" <[email protected]>:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
----- Forwarded message from ""
-----
Last night Brian Cunningham called me to propose some general guidelines, set forth below, for asking top policy officials during interviews about "deliberative" or "pre-decisional" discussions. They reflect the WHouse concern that interviews not be usded to recreate a verbatim record of what transpired at NSC principals and deputies meetings, and that hard-core exec privilege concerns be avoided as much as possible. These would apply to interviews of high-level WHouse and NSC officials, and Dan Levin would like
> to > apply them as well to interviews of agency heads about their communications > with WHouse officials or other agency heads. I think the guidelines are
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
tail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
Page 2 of 3
> generally OK, but welcome your reactions and comments. I would like to > discuss > them at our staff meeting Tuesday. > > 1. witnesses may be asked about positions they or their agencies took at NSC > > principals or deputies meetings. > > 2. They may be asked about the general reaction to their position, about > options that were discussed, and about decisions or consensus reached at the > > meeting. > > 3. They should not, however, be asked to characterize positions taken by > other > participants, and they should not be asked to give a blow-by-blow account of > > the meeting or to provide exact quotations. (I reserved on the first > point.) > > 4. Cunningham requests that we give prior notice if we intend to ask a > witness > about his or her conversations with the President, VP, or Nat! security > Advisor. > > 5. Cunningham proposed a "rule of reason" on questions about discussions the > > witness had with other WHOuse officials -- substance of conversation OK, but > > not details. (I told him this distinction would be hard to follow.) > > 6.Cunningham requested that all interviews of top policy officials be > conducted > by staff members who are cleared to review the NSC documents -- PZ, Kojm, > me, > Hurley & Bass. I told him that limitation was not practical, and that we had > > to have the flexibility to use other members of Team 3, scheid and others who > > are cleared to share what Hurley & Bass have learned. > > Cunningham believes, and I agree, that if we can agree on these general > > principles, it will minimize the need to interrupt interviews to discuss > concerns that the minder has about questions, if such questions do arise, we > > will seek to resolve them on the spot -- by discussion between the > interviewers > and the minder (who in the case of top NSC and other WHouse people will > usually > be Bellinger, Cunningham or Monheim). Steve or I will often be available by > > phone to help resolve the matter. Brian agrees that interviews should not be > > suspended in the event there is an impasse about questioning on deliberative > or > other sensitive matters; rather, the questioning on that subject will be > held, > the interview will continue, and they will agree to make the witness avaiable > > again if it is later determined that the questioning is OK. > > Reactions/comments?
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmaiyimp/message.php?Horde=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
Mail:: INBOX: Interviews of top policy officials
>
Page 3 of 3
End forwarded message
http://kinesis.swishmail.com./webmail/imp/message.php?Horde:=3fd27c2al4a52b56bl5b08e8... 9/3/03
Related Documents
More Documents from "9/11 Document Archive"
Letter To 9/11 Commission About John Kerry
April 2020 0
