T3 B5 White House Restrictions Fdr- Memos and Emails Re Elements of Agreement Re Document Access-Note Taking 036

8/14/2019 T3 B5 White House Restrictions Fdr- Memos and Emails Re Elements of Agreement Re Document Access-Note Tak

1/7

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Philip ZelikowSent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 6:41 PMTo: Mike HurleySubject: FW : Draft Memo Clarifying Answers to Common Questions

Mike ~FYI. . .Philip

Original MessageFrom: Philip ZelikowSent: Su n 1/4/2004 6:37 PMTo: Front OfficeCc:Subject: Draft Memo Clarifying Answers to Common QuestionsD an etal -Th e need fo r this memo arises from my conversations with Jamie on Friday and with Bob Kerreyyesterday. Fred ha s reviewed the contents, since he is most familiar with the negotiating history.I'd like to hand this out tomorrow morning ...Also, for D an, I'd like to give Kerrey a copy of the Arnold & Po rter memo. It will help him ....I'm at the office and can be reached here or on my cellphone.Philip

1/5/2004


2/7

January 4, 2004MEMOTo: CommissionersFrom: Philip Zelikow and Dan MarcusSubj: Answers to Questions Abou t "Elements" of Agreement between the

Commission and the White House

As commissioners have examined the proposal the Chair and Vice Chair will make toyou on Monday, a few questions have come up .

Ql. If the Commission discovers a clue pointing them to the existence of some specificmemo to any President that is of particular interest to us, and we do not already haveaccess to the contents of that memo, can we still follow on that clue and make a specificrequest for it?Al. Yes we can. We are not precluded from following up on a particular lead. Theagreement instead attempts to secure some finality and avoid a precedent for demandingsuch direct, advisory documents to the President, if another way can be found to get theCommission the information it needs.A specific request prompted by a cue of some kind is still allowed. For example, supposethat Berger or Rice were to tell us that they sent relevant memos forward that did notcome from the staffer were otherwise outside our request. W e can then request thatdocument, if we do not already know wh at we need to know about it.

Q2. If the President made some annotation or comment on the memo, is the White Houserequired to brief us about that?A2. Yes.

Q3. If the DC I or Secretary of Defense sent a memo directly to the President, will we beable to see it?A3. Yes, since we believe a copy of such a mem o would invariably be given at least tothe National S ecurity Adviser (or his or her deputy, or the National Coordinator). It


3/7

would thus be covered either by DCI Document Request No. 16 or DoD DocumentRequest No. 10 (both filed on 8 Oct 03). We have not yet seen a need to file anycomparable requests to other executive departm ents. This agreement wo uld no t precludefiling such requests, as it is meant to cover future document requests to the EOF.


4/7

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Mike HurleySent: Friday, January 02, 2004 12:43 PMTo: Warren BassCc: Mike HurleySubject: Dr. Z. Request

Warren:FYI, Dr. Z. is propping for Monday's commissioners' meeting. Hesaid he hadn't heardback from us after asking us to mull over the proposed EOP deal.I told him my view was that the deal gives us substantially what we want, and that wecan live with it.Warren, I don't think it'sperfect and I dohavea reservation or wo, butoverall, I thinkit'llget us what we need.Just wanted to fill you in. Philip neededan answer.See you Monday.Thanks,Mike

1/2/2004


5/7

Page 1 of 1

Mike HurleyFrom: Warren BassSent: Friday, December 12, 2003 10:17 AMTo: Mike HurleySubject: PZ

Got a call on m y cell this morning from Philip, Mikethought you'd want a quick read-out.

1. He asked for a recommendation on holding the Simon and Cressey interviews at NEOB. I said that thereweren't many specific documents I wanted to walk either of them th roug h (especially Simon), so I wasn'tsure it was necessary. Also, I told him we have quite limited time with them both. I'm not sure we'd want tolose time in an interview with them reading over docum ents and saying, "Hmm..." (This was the argumentfor having them review documents before the interview.) I also said I was a little concerned about, say, atape recorder conking out far from home. The argum ent about limited time seemed the one that mostpersuaded him.2. I said I wasn't su re the sam e logic held for Clarke, with whom we have far more tim e.3. He said we were close to a resolution on the withheld EOP 3 Clinton documentson the brink of anagreement, he said, that would give us "access" to all of them. He provided no m ore details bu t asked menot to tell anyo ne abou t this (except you) for fear that word of the deal would somehow get public. He saidKean and Hamilton knew what was going on, and Gorelick, too. He wasn't sure if she'd told othercommissioners, but he didn't want us to tell anyone else that anything wasupand seemed especiallyconcerned that we'd tell Tim Roemer. In other words, Philip wasafraid we'd tell Tim, who'd tell the press orthe families. I told him that Tim's meeting with us was for next Friday. (For what it's worth, I continue tohold by the policy that if commissioners ask us questions, we should answer 'em, and then report theconversation to the FOwhich is also their policy.)4. Philip suggested we talk later today about getting him som e of our prepara tory work for Simon andCressey. I'm doing up questions this morning.5. He also suggested that w e focus ou r efforts on gaps in our knowledgein the policy stories we don't yetunderstandto avoid wasting each others' time. I think this is fair, although I think it's worth spending

time on things we think we know , too, lest we find out we've only got a piece of the story.Good luck, and let's chat when you're back.Warren

12/12/2003


6/7

Mike HurleyFrom: Dan MarcusSent: Sunday, December07, 2003 4:43 PMTo: Mike HurleyCc: Alexis Albion; Gordon LedermanSubject: Re: McCarthy nterview

By the way, as I mentioned to Mike and Warren late Friday, we have worked out a deal withWHCounsel on notes of interviews of WHouse people which -- while we're not crazy about it-- is the best we could do. Your notes will remain for 24 hours to be reviewed, forclassification purposes only, by Bill Leary the longtime career NSC recordfs manager, whowill not discuss their substance with anyone else at WHouse. In addition, if WHouse repduring interview identifies matters that he believes are subject to "no notes" or"escrowed notes" rules, we will take notes (unless we agree no notes are appropriate) onseparate sheet of paper and resolve any disagreement later.Quoting [email protected]:

> Thanks Dan. Will do.>> Mike>> Quoting [email protected]:>> >> > I told Bellinger late Friday that Gordon would substitute for Kevin> > at> both> > the> > McCarthy and Sturtevant interviews. In both cases, Gordon, you> > should go first (try to stick to no more than half an hour) and then> > leave because they> may> > insist on their crazy two-interviewers-at-a-time limit. Hopefully,> > Mike, they'll be relaxed about the limit during that first Lederman> > half hour, when the questioning won't touch on sensitive documents> > and meetings.> > One of you need sto call in clearance info to Bellinger's> > office> first> > thing Monday. 456-9111.


7/7

Date: November 25, 2003From: Mike Hurley9-11 CommissionTo: White House/NSC reviewersMonday, November 24,1gave Dylan Kors 3 sets of my notes for review:

CMH Camp David Briefing Book Notes CMH Post-9/11Notes Michael Hurley NSPD Notes

This morning, November 25,while reading documents in the NEOB, I added acouple of pages of notes to the Post-9/11 Notes set; and a page or two to the MichaelHurley NSPD Notes set.I have given those 2 (now complete) sets to Colin and asked that they be taken to thereviewer and that those two replace for review the two (CMH Post-9/11 Notes andMichael Hurley NSPD Notes) given to Dylan yesterday. [Note: I made nochanges/additions today to the CMH Camp David Briefing Book Notes, so theversion you have from Monday, November 24 is the correct one to be reviewing.]I would deeply appreciate if you could review the notes I have taken today. Iadvised Tom Monheim on Friday, November 21 and Dylan on November 24 that itwould be most helpful to have th e notes in my K Street Commission office by nolater than Wednesday, November 26, as I am under a tight deadline. They boththought the request reasonable and doable.Thus, you should be reviewing and getting back to me tomorrow (Wedenesday,November 26):

CMH Camp David Briefing Notes given to Dylan on Monday CMH Post-9/11 Notes given to Colin on Tuesday Michael Hurley NSPD Notes given to Colin on Tuesday

Please let me know if I can do anything to assist. Many thanks for your help.

Mike Hurley202 331 4077

Documents

T3 B5 White House Restrictions Fdr- Memos and Emails Re Elements of Agreement Re Document Access-Note Taking 036