T3 B5 White House Restrictions Fdr- 3-3-04 and 3-4-04 Emails From Bass Re EOP Document Requests- Notes and Access 034

8/14/2019 T3 B5 White House Restrictions Fdr- 3-3-04 and 3-4-04 Emails From Bass Re EOP Document Requests- Notes and Access 034

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/t3-b5-white-house-restrictions-fdr-3-3-04-and-3-4-04-emails-from-bass-re-eop 1/5

Page 1 o f 2

MikeHurley

From: Warren Bass

Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:09 PM

To: Mike Hurley

Subject: Request permission to send to FO

Importance: High

March 3, 2004

Just wanted to pass along a quick update on a fewN E O B issues.

EOPsI've just spent much of the day reviewing the first installment of the EO F 5 Clinton material.

The good news is that it's very high-impact stuff; the bad news is that it's badly overdue. EO F 5was due more than three months ago—and westill don't have the second part of it, which issitting around somewhere in EO F rather than being processed and moved over to the SCIF.

Moreover, the EO F 5 material includes many documents that were explicitly covered by E O F 2

(such as the SOC for an Aug.7,1998 PC on the East Africa bombings) and E O F 3 (such as aslew of Clarke-Berger memos). There's also far more handwritten notes from Berger in this

installment than in any other batch ofdocuments we've gotten. Didthey only get around tosearching Berger's filesnow?

Either NARA is too casual about this task, or something's going wrong in the lash-up betweenNARA and EOF, or something's gone awry on the White House side. Wejust don't have therunning room fo r further delays.

I'd recommend the following steps; please let me knowif there's anything you'd like me to do.

1. Weneed to insist that the entire remainder of EO F 5 be produced, at the absolute latest,by OOBMonday, March 8. (I'll be lucky to get through the current stack this week.)We

should also forcefully conveyour viewthat EO F 5 production has been unacceptablyslow.

2. Contact Bruce Lindsey to find out what, if anything, NARA is still searching and to get hissense of where the bottleneck is coming from.

3. Contact NARA directly and ask them to ensure that they've done all their due diligence to

meet our document requests (have searched all the involved staffers' files, etc.) and to

confirm that they've gotenough staff on this urgent task. Danshould also convey theextent of our concern.

4. Give Al press guidance to say—either in response to questions or on his own—that we

have reluctantly concluded that production of N SC documents is unacceptably slow and

have contacted both the White House and NARA about this.

Draft NSPDon al QaedaOn another front, EOF is continuing to escrow m y one-page summaryof the first version of thedraft NSPD on al Qaeda. Karen Marmaudhas checked, an d EO F lawyersare maintaining that

3/3/2004



Page 2 o f 2

all notes on the draft NSPD are to be kept in escrow. This is ridiculous and unworkable; to

write anything responsibly about the N S P D , let alone prepare for the March hearings, we need

to have some kind of notes.

The cover sheet on the draft versions stipulates that the Commission may take notes on the

draft but may not publicly disclose that the draft was made available to us—the same rules that

apply to the PDDs and the final NSPD-g. It says nothing about escrowing notes.

By holding onto still more of our notes, the White House is moving the goal posts. We need topush sharply back and get this one lousy page of notes sent to KStreet. This is just silly. If

they'd like a showing of need, let's say we need it to write the monograph—which has theoverwhelming virtue ofbeing true.

SpecialAccess DocumentsThird, let me urge again that wemake a "particularized showing ofneed" for notes taken on the

Bush "special access documents." They're an important part of the record, and we should have

them around to prepare commissioners in the run-up to the March hearings. Moreover, I need

them to write my monograph sections.

The Coll AttackI also hope we can file a document request with the White House, CIA, and State (not with

Coll) fo r transcripts of any interviews done by federal officials with Steve Coll fo r Ghost Wars.

The Mournful FifthFinally, lest they be forgotten, about 20 percent of my notes on the pre-9/ii Bush period have

been sitting over at N E O B since October 2003because they allegedly effectively recreatedocuments—at least in the eyes of Dylan Cors or some other equally eminent historian. At

some point, we're going to have to resolve this, before we run out of time or the poor notes dieof loneliness...

Hope that's helpful.Warren

3/3/2004



Page 1 of 3

Mike Hurley

From: Mike Hurley

Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:47 PM

To: Dan Marcus; Chris Kojm; Steve Dunne

Cc: Mike Hurley

Subject: FW:NEOB issues

Importance: High

Chris:

I briefed both Steve and Dan about Warren's memo. Hemakes some good points. I

wanted to flag them to the three of you for your action/response; and I leave it to you to

decide whether the points should be brought to Philip's attention.

Mike

Original MessageFrom: Warren Bass

Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:06 PMTo: Mike HurleyCc : Team 3Subject: NEOB issuesImportance: High

Just wanted to pass along a quick update on a few N E O B issues. Mike, please let me knowhowyou'd like to follow up.

EOF 5I've spent much of past two days reviewing the first installment of the EO F 5Clinton material.The good news is that it's some of the best stuff I've seen during the whole life of theCommission; the bad news is that it's badly overdue and, I very much fear, incomplete.

O n timing: EO F 5 was due more than three months ago—and westill don't have the secondpart of it, which is sitting around somewhere in EO F rather than being processed and movedover to the SCIF.

Moreover, the EO F 5material includes many documents that were explicitly covered by EO F 2

(such as the SOC for an Aug. 7,1998 PC on the East Africa bombings and numerous TNT-prepared briefing papers for Small Group meetings) and EO F 3 (such as a slew of Clarke-

Berger memos). There's also far more handwritten notes from Berger in this installment thanin any other batch of documents we've gotten. Did they only get around to searching Berger'sfilesnow? Wasn't that a pretty obvious step even before we listed the names of people to searchin EO F 5?

Indeed, except for some McCarthy memos on intel issues, pretty much everything else I've readthis week should have been produced by either June 25,2003 (for EO F 2) or Aug. 13,2003 (forEO F 3).

3/4/2004



Page 2 o f 3

Moreover, the very fact that the EOF 5 documents are so rich leaves me deeply concerned thatwe may still be missing other essential documents.

Either N A R A is being too casual about this task, or something's going wrong in the lash-upbetween N A R A and EOF, or something's gone awry on the White House side. W e just don'thave the running room for further delays.

I'd recommend the following steps; please let me know ifthere's anything you'd like me to do.

1. We need to insist that the entire remainder of EOF 5 be produced, at the absolute latest,by OOB Monday, March 8. (I'll be luckyto get through the current stack this week.)Weshould also forcefully convey our view that EOF 5 production has been unacceptably slowand our deep concern at finding so much EOF 2 and 3 material in it.

2. Contact EOF to underscore our view that every effort ought to be made to ensure thatproduction fo r EOF 1-5 be complete.

3. Contact Bruce Lindsey to find out what, if anything, N A R A is still searching, to find out ifhe has any sense we're missing anything, and to get his sense of where bottlenecks may

be coming from.4. Contact N A R A directly and ask them to ensure that they've done all their due diligence to

meet our document requests (have searched all the involved staffers' files, etc.) and toconfirm that they've got enough staff on this urgent task. Dan should also convey theextent of our concern.

5. Give A l press guidance to say—either in response to questions or on his own—that w ehave reluctantly concluded that production of N SC documents is unacceptably slow andhave contacted both the White House and N A R A about this.

Draft NSPD on al QaedaOn another front, EOF is continuing to escrow m y one-page summary of the first version of the

draf t NSP D on al Qaeda. Karen Marmaudha s checked, and EOF lawyers are maintaining thatall notes on the draft N S P D are to be kept in escrow. This is just unworkable; to write anythingresponsibly about the N SPD , le t alone prepare for the March hearings, w e need to have somekind of notes.

The cover sheet on the draft versions stipulates that the Commission may take notes on thedraft but may not publicly disclose that the draft wasmade available to us—the same rules thatapply to the P D D s and the final N SPD -g . It says nothing about escrowing notes. Moreover,

both Rice and Hadley have already discussed the draft with us.

It's tough to see this as anything other than silly. We need to get this one lonesome page of

notes sent to K Street. If they'd like a showing of need, let's say we need it to write themonograph—which has the overwhelming virtue of being true. Dan placed a call on this, butI'm no t sure what, if anything, resulted.

Special Access DocumentsThird, let m e urge again that w e make a "particularized showing of need" fo r notes taken on theBush "special access documents." They're an important part of the record, and we should havethem around to prepare commissioners in the run-up to the March hearings. Moreover, I needthem to write my monograph sections. If the White House is going to give us a hard time aboutthese notes, I'd rather start the hassle sooner rather than later.

3/4/2004



Page 3 of 3

TheCollAttack

I also hope w e can file a document request with the White House, CIA, and State (not withColl) for transcripts of any interviews done by federal officials with Steve Coll for Ghost Wars.

TheMournful Fifth

Finally, lest they be forgotten, about 20 percent of my notes on the pre-9/11 Bush period have

been sitting over at N E O B since October 2003 because they allegedly effectively recreatedocuments—at least in the eyes of Dylan Cors or some o ther equally em inent historian. Atsome point, w e're going to have to resolve this, either befo re we run out of time or the poornotes die of loneliness...

Hope that's helpful.Warren

3/4/2004