: .: .. . . ..; *.> . . . . 7:

9" . : . .. . . .

. . .. . .. . . .

..

Ia The Matter Of=

Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Speciul Investigation

Deposition of John Bolton July IO, I997 CONFIDENTUL

Miller Reporting Company, Inc. 507 C Street, NE.

Washington, DC 20002 (202) 5466666 FAX= (202) 5461502

on'gimal File 07Idbouarc, 7GPgges Mht-UWPttB File ID: 0273192376

Word Index included with this Min-U-Sdm

. .. ~.

. .. . . s.:

. % . . . . .. . . .... i L

.- : , . . . .. . . .~ ... . ..

- ~. .. . __ : 5 , : . .~

. .. i -

Pppr 5

No. 1

p w 4 1'1 PROCEEDINGS m Whenupan. p] JOHN BOLTON w] was called for examination by counsel for the Committee on iq Govcrmental Affairs and, having bcen first duly mom by [q the notary ublic.was ' cd and testi6cd as foUows: m &NAT~~E'%&~EL MR WE m o m l(1 COMMITIEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS I BY MS. ROSENBERG

[tq 0 Good morning, Mr. Bolton. i t t i k Goodmorning. 114 0 Thank you for rgmino to joii us today for this I131 volunUIy deposition. I'm Lisa Roscnkrg. I'm couIJe' for [tr] the minority in this special investigation of the U ~ t d (SI States sWte.Also here in Phil Perry. c o d for the ((4 majority. Itr) And just for the record, we understand you're here [tal not pursuant to a sub- pu're ha+ voluntvily to (19 answerquertionr. lzq *Right. nil 0 You are not rcppmurtcd by counsel?

A: "at's correct. lzll 0 And again you understand you could be represented lac) by c o u ~ e l and you've just choscn not to be, comct? yxl A ' Ih r t 'SCOrrcc t .

[i] MR. PERRY: &t me ask a quick question hac. Ifas [21 the minority contacted c o u d for the NPF regarding th is m deposition? PI US. ROSENBERG No, I have not contacted counscl m for the NPF regarding this deposition. 14 MR. PERRY And you're taking, ~bviousl~ this m deposition, in part, to probe matters regvding Mr. Bolton's M employment at the NPC correct? rn LIS. ROSENBERG. "hat is correct.

[tol MR. PERRY: Plcw proceed. [tt] THE WITNESS: ~ e t me say I haven't contacted [la counsel for NPF about this deposition eithcf. [rq MS. ROSENBERG All right,wc haw that on the 1141 record. [pq And for background and pursuant to Mr. Bolton's [rq requw&wc would Like to havc =Led as Exhibit Number 1 a [tn lena to Mr. Bolton contirming ?Jut he was here 114 voluntarily, as well as an attadumnt which is the or& of [rq SenatorThompson regarding the scope of this investigation. p q [Bolton Deposition Exhibit No. p i ] 1 was marked for pa identitication.] m BY MS. ROSENBERG p] 0 Mr. Bolton, would you state your name and current pq business addnss for the record?

[ti k John R. Bolwn. I'm senior vice pmidcnt of the m American Enterprise Institute, 11 50 17th Street, Northwest, m Washington, D.C. (41 0: And would you de& briefly your educational 19 background since high school? [sl A Sure. 1 graduated fromYde CoUege in 1970 and m Yde Law school in 1974. 111 Q. 0hy.And any other educational experience since A law school? tq 111 degree. i2q 0: And would you describe yow e m p l o p a t history, ia] please. just broadly in resume fashion? 141 A Sure.When I graduated from law school I became tq an associate at Covington 81 Burling in Washington. I was tq there until ar ly in 1981. when 1 joined the R a g a n :tq Administration. where I served Lst very briefly in the $81 acting counsel for the President's officc.'lha, in rq Fcbruaryof 1981.1 kcuocgencnl counsel of the U.S. zq Agency for International Dwelopmcnt 1 w e d in that 211 position until Febnruy of 1982, when I became usisrant zq administrator ofMD for program and policy coordination. zq HI kcvne a partner at c4vington & Burling and. during that zq yme rime. I was ~ccut ive director of the 1984 Republican

(11 Platform C4mminee. m I IcA Covihgton & B- in Deccmkr of 1985 m when I was c o w as assisrant attorney genenl for 141 legislative affairs. I served in that capacity mtil March m of 1988. when I bccacne assistant attorney genml in charge

p.016

A A lot 0reduUtion;ll i ~ p u i i i c e s . ~ ~ f o r d

I stayed there until July 1983.Whcn I left, I

Pap. 7

... . ~ _ _ . IS) of the Civil Division. m I staved thae until Mav of 1989. when I was ,-- ~~ i;j co&-i as assisrant SCGcpry of.state for international ~sl organizations. I stayed t h e until J a n u q 19,1993.Whcn t q I Id?, I was briefly at the Mvlhanvl Instrtute, I rt] practiced law at the 6rm of Lancr, Reed. Bolton 61 Sanders. 14 I bccaa~ president of the National Policy FoNm in 131 January of 1995 and served until the end of December 1996. 14) I was still practicing law during that paiod.And I have 13 been senior vice president of AEI since J a n u ~ 1 of this 'a Ym. in 1 9 bacb&.You continual p ~ h w allilintcd withG tq Lerncr, Rad, Boltom & suK*ndurhg the Pime yau were at iq NPP- zrl 4 a:' Okay W n m quation. n) NI McMannis. SI 0: 7hankvou.

0: Okay. Just a couple of questions, working

A: That's correct, and SUI do todry.'

A Although it's now called Lerner, Reed. Bolton &

i . Page 8

[i) (2) THE WITNESS. Yes. PI BY MS. ROSENBERG 4

$01

m dilcercnt mrw, some litigation. 18) @I you do any lobbying with h e r . Reed?

Iiq It11 a: In any KIUC? 1121 ita] from tiw to timc on matters that arc before dents - I141 contract disputes. that sort of thing. it51 [tal at Lcrna, R e d ? i t 1 A I have done WSDC them and did some ..[*I lobbying at Covlngton & BurIing before that.

0 Did you do lobbying while you were at NPF? WI A: Not on the Hill and not othm than fordient Ipl dispute mattas with the F e d v J G~~anment. In other _ _ lpl Words. there arc not matters in adjudiation but they were 'I231 contract disputer wich for unmple.ND. [nl a: For example. what?

MR. PERRY: Is that in t o m ?

a: And what kind of law do you practice with Lcrncr.

A Priipally inrcrmtional law, a variety of

a: Is there any lobbying invoked with Lcrncr - do

A Not in the sense of lobbykg Congress.

A No. I have contact with urmrivc bnnch agencies

Reed! '

I And did you e v a do any lobbying during your time

AAID. ~. .. . . P W Q :: (11 0: And you mentioned that you practice in the area of

, . h hlC?MtiW laW.WhCn yoU b V C had lobbying dienu. have some of thore ken inturutional companies, orguliutions.

>.*I individwls? .: 151 A NO. ii .~m m A: U.S.domestic.

;-~Pl a: organizations.

I i fq state for international organiutional affairs; is that

a: m y v e been all i d . U.S. domestic -

:--io] -. . YOU uid that you were assistant xcretary of . .

' -correct? -.: A Omuliutions.vcs. - 113) 1141 A Illat's correct. 1151

a: An2 that was &h the Bush Administration?

a: And Wno appointed you to that?

[ij A Probably sometime in 1993,probably around the n summa when its formation was announced. p] Q: And who do you recall learning that from? [r] A: I don't recall any specifrc individual.

A I'd known Haley Barbour since at tust the summer m of1976. [q 0: Did Haley Barbour dixuss the formation of the @I National Policy Forum with you?

[iq A: Not aa such. Right rRer he bmme chairmy, he [ i t ] dixuucd his ida. He caUed mc and we dixurxdhir idca [iq of &ding a kcter policy mechanism for the Republican I q i i pUr).u a whok and we talked .bout several things, but at 1141 that point I don't think the idea of a National Policy Forum ($9 -up. [is] 0 Did Haley Barbour ever discuss with you the idea 1r.l) of the National Policy Forum per re prior to iW formation? 119 A Prior to its formation, no. [iq Q: Were you in any way involved in the formation of m the National Policy Forum? 811 A Not in the formation. m a: What did you know about the National Policy Forum (zq when you 5 s t learned of it? R ~ I A I think the Grst knowledge I had w a s the 1151 announcement that a numht of policy councils wae bting

[i) crated and I signed up for the Foreign Policy Council and m was a membrr of that council. m Q: And when was that that you signed up for chat [4] council? [q A Sometime in the summer or fall of 1993. [q a: And what was your role in the policy council? m A: There were a couple of mcctings.'Ihere was a kind p.1 of organizational meeting chaired by SCM~OI L u w and

[iq in the falI of 1993.There were a couple of meetings to [I 11 discuss dnFt.s of the document that later became ListCniIIg ria for America. which was oublished in the Summer Of 1994. and

[q a: ~n the NIIIIIIC~ of '93. did you know wcy arbo our?

. .

Page 12

to] senator KwcbauIll. who were the cwhairs of that council.

' ~~ ii;i that's it.- [tal [in

a: And what was the specitic council you were on? A The Foreian Policy Council.There were 14 or IS,

A me Prcri&t. Q: And what were your duties and responsibilities in

A 1 was W d in C h R C Of US. wlicv in the U.N.

111 [ t a l that position? IW

iiq I think, origind>olicy iounci~s. [iq [iq you to be on the Foreign Policy Council? rim

0: And did anyone from the National Policy Forum ask

A: No. I rhinlc chis was in response to a ncnual lhat I received and I rckrned the 6rm.

Q: Were vou asked to contribute to the National Pi system and various other & t ~ ~ t i o h o;guuutions. bcl a: And YOU also mentioned that you were executive

'PI MI

4: Was that a paid position? A I rccrived comcmwtion as a consultant inJuly -

mu 10 [TI I'm sorry - in~ugust and September of 1983.mcn I

m I m1 the forum. It ;VoulMt 'surprise me il in one of those there

(zq was a generalized request to contribute, but I nwer did.

t i ] PIpe 13

Q: Do you know how you came to be on the mailing list

&mor ofthe '84 Republican Plad6rm committee. A Illat's c 9 m t .

M commirtcc? m A: Iwun'tacNallyamembuofit.Iwasthe NI UCCUtive dircctor.Thc members arc ddcgater of the to] convention. plul U t asked me to do it.

[lo] 0 I'm sony, Pau - 1' '1 A k n l t . L+x-a.bt. 1'4 MR. PERRY: Nevada? 1131 THE WITNESS: YcS. R-NCV. 1'41 BY MS. ROSENBERG

Policy Fo&? A Never s~~ciGcaUv. 1

mcntionc4 did you have any other involvement with the m National Policy Forum? [q A I think I spoke to .Mike hoody once or twice p] about it. I spoke to Judy v m Rest on several occasions in

[im connection with an article of mine that they published in [ i t ] Common Sense in the summer of 195'4 on the United Nations. [la 119 A A number of ways that I might k hclplul to the 1141 counciI.Thae was some discussion about whether I rmghr

0: And what drd you spok to Mike BVOOdy about?

received a lot of mail

I 'r] 1981 Platform C O ~ ~ ~ N C C . preparing the drah of the phtform. I it B ,.atform Comrnittcc.

IQ Republican Pury at &ut point?

A I wu wuall in charge of the stlflof the

- i d l y ~ o r k r d withTrent LON. who was chairman of the

0: SO YOU had input into the platform of the

from

[in with the National Policy Forum.Very general conversation. [tal MR. PERRY: Could you give us a time frame for 114 that? m THE WITNESS: Summer of '93. fall of '93. bll BY YS. ROSENBERG m Q: HOW did you know .MI. Buoody?

Senate Committee on c ;over~nta l Affairs Deposition ot John Bolton

PO- 14 111 adjunct scholars at theAmerican Enterprise InstiNte. which m was hadedat that cime by -in the early'70s - by Bill PI Buoody. Senior. who was Mike Baroody's father. at a time 14 when 1 think Mikc Bvoody worked for Senator Dolc.And it 19 would have been sometime in that D a i o d .

. . !~~ . . . . . .

. .

. . ..

.~

..

. . . ~.

. .. ~~ .. . . . . . . . . . .~. . ....

1 -..-

' J

P.gs 17 conversation was?

m A Couple of minutes. pi PI you to k president? IS A Yes.

0: Were you surprised when he called you and asked

Speclal Investigation CONFIDENllAL JW 10,1997

(cq A D* thrt lSmon& peribd. two or three times. (4 0: There were conversations over the phone? 1211 A Over the phone.Thc National Policy Forum had a rn couple of functions in Washington. I think I saw hun at at PI least one of thosc. that sort of thing. M 0: Prior to being employed at the National Policy m Forum. ocher than speaking to Mikc Buoody and Judy van

ppor 1s 1'1 Rest, wa.~ there anyone else at the National Policy Forum

that you spoke to? PI A: I'm sure I spoke to people in connection with FI going to some of these meetings for the preparation of the 19 tcxt Of LislUring to America. but those were ClericaI Iq conversations. m 14 but before YOU C m X onto the Nauonal Policy Forum. did you IO] speak with Haley Barbour about the NPl?

a: Once the National Policy Forum was up and running

iiq 11 11 IW A: NM~~oIx-~MNvQ~~~.F~cITcuIc$ 1'31 aIwMr~Bprbourfir~approwhcdwaboutbccoming iidi president. 1 ~ 5 1 Iiq becoming president? IV

A I don't think so. I don't think so. 0 Did you speak with Donald Fierce?

0: And when did Mr. Barbour firs1 approach you about

A Somctimc rftu the 1994 conmssiod dation.

. . liq pq pq k, some of his idas for what NPF would k M i in 1995 14 1996. what the existing staff SVUCNI~ was. a preny broad izq array of topics. pq 0: Bd you divuu your ULry and compensation at

0 Ad what &discussed at that meeting? A What the responsibilities of being president would

M) that mCCling? -w $8

111 A yes. m m WI there was any discussion of specific G @ m . [q [q point; in other words. whether NPF was in debt at that m point? [q [ol allocation responsibilities for rNenUeS and UpCIlWS,

I!q which.vuy briefly stated. w e e that he would take the bulk It11 of the responsibility for fund-raising. 1 had told him that (13 I had essentially no hdraising experience for this sort ['a] of thing. He wid he understood that. He was interested in it41 mc because of my policy background but said that he hoped, ($9 in terms of uplaining the work that NPF was doing, that I (iq would k prepared to meet with potcntizl contributors. 1971 We discussed the rcsoonsibihties for manaainn NPF

Q: Did ys.1 discuss N P F s budget at that meeting? A We discussed it in gencnl terms. I don't thinlc

0: Did you discuss NPFs Gnancial situation at that

A: Yes, we discussed w h t he expected would be the

Iq 0 And did you remain 6iendy dr at lust in contact

181 A Yes. I met him professionally from time to rime. w 0: So you knew him when he became president of the

[toi National Policy Forum? (111 A Yes. 113 0 And when you spoke to him about the National 1131 Policy Forum, were these conversations that you initiated or [iq conversations that he initiated? [isl A I don't really recall who initiated them. [iq 0: And in the ~ m m ~ of '93 through the faU of '93, (9 I believe is when you said you'd spoken to him, or through 114 '94. roughly how oRen did you speak with him?

m withMr.&uoody-

P91 14 ~ O U about h m i n g president of NPP

'pal A Yes. PI PSI bv telephone or in Derson?

(11 A By telephone. m

0: Anathat tvaJ the Iirst rime anyone had approached

0: And how did Mr. Bahour first contact you? Was it

16

0: And M YOU deraibe to W that hrrt tekDhOile

.. m m of you as a potenrial candidate for president! [e.] PI

llol Barbour?

~ t q sometiw shortly thereafter. I don't r e d the date. 1131 Thanksgiving was in there somewhere and we had to work [irl around that. ~ t s l its] A No. ~ t ? Ita

0: Do you know how he got your name. why he thought

A I don't know. I suppose you could ask him. 0: When was the next conversation you had with Mr.

1111 A AS 1 said. WC met, I k l i N C . ill his Office

0 Was anyone eLK at the meeting?

0. And how long was the meeting? A: rtm#xiuntelya halfan hour or 50.

pi) We discussed the hct that NPF was ret up 14 scparatdy &om the RNC and had applicd for 50KcX4) 114 status. I know a bit about that *ea Of the law and I

1251 operationally and organizationally sepmtc from the RNC and discussed with him the importance of kceping it both

Page 19 [(I he M y agreed with hat. m MR. PERRY: Can YOU five me a time 6amc a little

151 president.Wc talked a linle bit over the phone &ut what

m uerrafcu. but I don't remember whether that would have 111 also ken in November or whether that was early D m m k r . w "he phone conversation I

irol 0 Do you r d , d u r a the phone convasation,what Ittl he might have said becoming president of NPF would entail? 114 A The idea of NPF that amacted me was having a 194 vehicle 10 help develop Republican poIicies.What Mr. 1141 Bvbour had said when he was seeking to become chairman of 1151 the RNC in '92 and '93 was that the '92 dat ion showed that

1171 that it had in the late 1970s and he was interested m 1181 helping to rccrcate it. Iiq I certainly shartd that analysis and thought this POI would bc an exciting way to do u r c r l y that. @ti 0: In the Grst fekphone conversation with Mr. pz~ Barbour. did he mention that fund-raising would k an PI important part of your job? 1241 A: I don't think hmd-nising came UP.

Q: Do vou have mv idea how Ions the Dhonc

14 hat might urw and I think we 7grced to mcctshor~

was fairIy brief.

It81 the party had lost the intcUccNal ferment and cre?tiviIy

and he made it dar th;t I would be responsi~1e;as cm%.ident. for all manaeemcnt. that he was obvjouslv the

.. IS] MR. PERRY: How long &at took and on what days

m THE WITNESS. It was on the day that I met with [q Mr. Barbour in his office and I couldn't give yOU an w estbatcd amount of lime. But I was vCry spcci6c about

114 that, for a lot of reasons. Having been in the F e W ( t i ] Government, I had lots of experience with loose chains of iia command and I wanted to understand precisely what it was and [i~] I think he made it very dear what it was. (141 MR. PERRY: Let's let Howard iden@' himself. liq MR. SKUMBERG I'm Howard Sldambcrg with the [lq minority. 111 1181 0 On the 5Oi(cx4) SUNS. were you surprised that [to] NPF - was it your understanding that the SOI(cX4) status pq application was s t i l l pending? pi] A Yes.We discussed the fact that the application 14 had k e n made. that the IRS had made a supplemental request mr for informtion. We discussed Mr. Barbour's opinion why the pa] appliation had not been granted. He explained that both psi the or~aniutio~~I matters relating to the foundina of NPF

thatoccurred.

BY MS. ROSENBERG

pj more pmci~ely for tiut Lt portion of the conversation! I THE WITNESS: How lone that tmk?

Senate Committee on GovernmentaJ lufalrs

P a p 20 Ill and the filing of the applicarion had PI extensively by counsel. that co~-sel was corkfidcnt that borh PI the organirational and opcntionu tests had h e n met. 141 0: This was counsel for NPF?

-

-

. ..

.:

.i : . .

.. ..

.. .

.~

Page 23 [!I were. in effect. two debts - a debt to Signet and a smaller m debt that remained to the RNC. p] 0: During that frst conversation with Haley Barbour. 141 did he tell YOU VrMhinn about the oarticulus of the Simet

July 10,1997

I141 takes an extmordinuilylong timeto make up its mind. [tsl /tsl 111 be granted as soon as possible. atnolurdy, but knowing the 1ia1 way the IRS functions and how slow it can bc and how liq inefficient it can be, it didn't surprise me. m 0: Did you have - this is jumping ahad a little Rcl bit - did you have any other dalingr with the IRS on

501<cX4) status while you were president of NPF? mi A Well 1 had one or two conversations with one of PI the staff attorneys who was handling the application pn some(iw in 199S.The conversation was. in both case, I

111 M vuy briefly, essentially along the lines of "Where M are you?"Thct answer was equally brict V e U , we're still IJI working onit." MI There was a second supplemental request for n information from the IRS in late '95 or early '96 and 1

Q: So you weren't concerned about this - A: We& I would have preferred that the application

Pwo 21

CONFIDENTIAL

. . 1141 A That he would bc-the-pcrson who did mosr of the

asking for contributions. He explained that NPF did not do pa) direct mail IUnddsing, like m ~ l y 0th- think-- do, [in and that he was not eager to get involved in thaLAnd he (14 said that he had intended that he would be the principal [iq fund.raiscr and that he would continue that.

I had told him. as I mentioned earlier, that I had si) essenliauy no h&raising experience and that I wanted him w to understand that before I undertook the job. [131 (1: During that first meeting with Haley Barbour pq somclimc in November, did he offer you the job on the spot? MI A: Yes,lhlieveso.

111 m A Ididnot,no. pi 141 I s 1 the 6rst of the YQC.

Paw 24 0 And did you accept it?

62 -did you accept Mr. Barbour's offer? A Shortly before Christmas, I bclicve. I WaJ bcfOIe

Special Investigation

Lsl 1q granted. m At some point after that, I reviewcd %e articles (81 of incorporation urd other dacumcntc to satis$ myself that PI it met the purpose test and I bclicvtd that it did.

llrp 0: Were you surprised that the application seemed to 11 11 be taking a long time, the gnnring of 501(cX4) stams! [lq k No. it's been my upaiMce,and I spoke to 1131 friends of mine who were tax lawyers. that sometimes the IRS

A: Counsel for NPEvld that the ipplicatio.~ would be Bank laan;k othir woks, that thcie was a guarantee &de isl byYoung Brothers? p~ A There was no discussion about the specifics of the [a) 1oan.There was no mention ofYoung Brothers or a rn guarantee.

[iq 9: During that &st conversation whcrc you testified (111 that Haley Bvbour said that he would take the bulk ofthe liq fund-raising responsibilities, what did you understand that iia to mun?What was he noinr: to do as far as fund-Wig?

lei didfi't deal directly with the IRS about thatutbut I PI participated in pceparinn the NPF ccsoonx

1 0: Chris& of '94? A: '94.

~sl m before accepting his offer?

(iq 1 1111 . - we had another conversation or rwo on the uhone.

0 Did you have any other meetings with Mr. Barbour

A: I don't think wc had any other mectinps. I think

I@ Q: %t rupi oiinforiition wefe ih~y requesting? PI A: Well. I don't have the document but it was

119 materials about what NPF's activities had bccn in 1991. 1111 That included the 10 or 11 mcmcduurces that NPF had . . -~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ I~ ~

11; conducted in Washington on a range of issues,policy *'Si USUCS - telccommuniationr. i n t C r N t i O d mde. h d t h

11% JM 50me of that daymenution. [lq We provided copies of Common Sense, the quyrerly 117l publiation.We provided copies of the NPF Ncarslctter and 11a1 otha documentation like that. I think we updated [lol information on who was a member of the NPF b o d of

WI 0 And did you prepare chat information or did your p2l counsel-

[N] submission andwar 0vQ.ll responsible for putting it pl togetJur.

111 Q: Who was counsel for N P F at that time? PI A: Wcll, the first COUnsd for NPF wa linda Long. a who left her law lkm, the Blank, Rome law fum, in htc '95 14 because of pasonal illness. She was replaced byTim Fry of (51 that fkm and I believe it was Mr. Fry who was rcsponsibk is) for puning togetha the response to #IC second 1RS m supplementp) request. [ai Q: Gctring back to the m i o n you were having PI with Haley Bubour, the Lst discussion about you becoming

liol president of NPF, did he tell you at char lime that NPF was 011 in debt? (111 that.

113) k d G SDme mOWy Was owed to the RNC. He MpreSKd 1141 confidence that money would k paid to pay ir off. 1151 0: Did you know how much was owed to Signet Bulk! 11s x o dourinvcstigation. Itq k. I don't r e d if he mentioned a figure or not. 117) 119 WIS owed to the RNC? ita1 BY MS. ROSENBERG: [lq A I don't reull, [tq a SO you% refusing to answer the question? m. 0 Did he tell you anything indetail at aJl about P F;D A I think what I rea l l is that he mentioned that a 1231 loan had - that N P F had a debt to the RNC. that he had [HI dcddcd at Some @IC in 1% to take out a bank loan to pay pi off part of that debt and that that explained why there

pq (1: And do you re$ &t you discusscdk the phone [iq conversations before you accepted the offer? [id] A I ihink one chins that I had mentioned in the [iq meeting that I wanted to be dm with him about was that I [lq would k able to continue to practice law during my tenure 1,- at NPF, which he agreed to. Obviously NPF would k the pa] priority an4 as for any lawyer, mere would k no conflict [tq of intcmt question that came up, I didn't chink there m would be. I don't thin& there ever was. but I wanted to 011 just be sure he undastood that for me. that was a IZZJ prerequisite to accepting the position, and he agreed with n that. PI 0: Did you, during those phone converwtions. give N him any idea of how much time you would bc spending

m m Page 25 It] practicing law versus how much rimc you would be able to I?) spend at NPF! D] A: W e didn't d y discuss it in terms of time. I [41 made the commitment to him that whatever my mponsibilitics [q w m at NPF, that thosc would be fulfilled and the Laar pj pncticr would be in addition to that. m 0: Was your salary adjusted based on the k t that

R A: The salarywu 6xe4was at his ofler,and was to [lo] do the job necessary to be done at NPF, and he agreed to

Ita Q: wae'thau any other zltuations or payment [iJ) adpstments with the law firm when you went to work for NPF! [14] MR PERRY: I'm not m e that's rally within the

Iiq GEWITNESS: I think that's my personal business, rm suite fnnkly.

-44 care, a range of things ~e that. I'm sure you have at

directors. that sort of thing.

A: I participated. Counscl for NPF made the final

you continued to pncticc law?

A: He was there a debt; some money was owed to Signet

Q: And do you red if he mentioned the 6gwc that

pq MR. PERRY: His personal law fum stuff is 50 far 011 outside OUT scope that it's insulting. p2l US. ROSENBERG: Excur me. Phil. I don't bcliOrC mi you're representing this client. 04) MR. PERRY: No, I'm not, but I'm reprcsenwlg the rm intenritv of the committee and char's an improper qwstion.

?e Signal Bank loan at that first metring!

m e r Reporting Company, Inc.

Senate Committee on mver Ueposition of John molton Special Investigation July 10,1997

paoe 2fi (i] MS. ROSENEERG Phil. I'll ask the witness the - m questions and let him decide whether he wants to answer. ni THE WITNESS: I'm not eoine to answer that _ - - idi question brcause I don't think it hu any pertinence to your m inquiry. [q m personal Gnancial information. lei BY US. ROSENBERG

MR. PERRY: Our job is not to probe people's

.. ISI

[iq employment at NPF with anyone else at .NPF before you 1111 accepted in December of 1994) 112) A No. [la[ 0: W e y Bubour was the ody NPF prrson that you p] taIkcd to about it? [is] A That's correct. [iq 0: And then you decided to accept the offer, as you [in said, somccimC in Dcrcmkr of 1994. Did you have anyorhu [iq WeUngs with Haley Barbour or did you just make a phone [iq caU and all him you accepted?

A As I lhink I ust&d a minuteago. I think we pi] had another couple of phone conversations and that was it. m There were no more meetings that I remember. In] 0: When you lirst came on, then, in January of '95, pal what did you understand the mission of NPF to be? LA: The tasks that Hatey had in mind for N P F are

111 acrually contained in some derail in an article in Common m Scnx. the first issue of Common Sen% after 1 took over, PI cilled T h e Mission of tfrc National Policy Forum" in 1995. 141 and frr! '-e '.>take a Ibok at that 1' '.vas +-.irZUy to

m Common Sense and to othhaarix cngsge in activities typical [a] of think-tanks inwashington. 10l 0: When you first came on inJanuary of '95. did you

184 malrc my ~tlrrdmnges at ANPF? I1 'I

W i g made. in effect. by people who were laving at thc Itq cime and I brought some additional people in, not [v i ncccsjlrily in Januuy. but I began at that point to (tq assemble my own management team and to makc changes, yes. vq 0: Out of who you consider the senior staff that were I!? already in p k e when you came on, did any of the senior [io[ staff love after you came on or around the time perid that [ iw you started at NPF? 1201 A Yes, KcUy Gucmicr. who had been in charge of pi1 fund-raising in '93 and 94 , had either already announced or m announced shorrly after I arrived that she was loving. and .m I replaced her with Grace Wiggins and Diane Harrison. ~ 4 1 Mary crawford. who had been in charge of public pq affairs. also leR about that time and I replaced her ~ t h

[i] Fran Westner. m Common Scnr. at that point. the editorship was PI vaunt. I ChinlrJudy van Rest had already lek and 1 GUed 141 that position with Gary Weil. . 1q And a little bit longer after that. I replaced - [SI I eliminated Denning and Denning's position and created a m new position which I think was origirully d c d vice BI wcsident for ~olicv and later iust vice mesident. with

0: Did you discuss your employment or pending

Pap. 27

~.e iy, 4: the book t h t .:. Le cr;ntinuc to pub,\:.),

A W d . lhne werc some staff changes that were

Pago 28

iiii the time period you started? 1121 pa] beginning in basically the summer of 1994.With atl of the [iq changes that were being made. I think it bas id ly 11s) stabiiliztd around March or April at a level perhaps one or [rq two people below where it MS on January 1.1995. ti? Q: About how m y p p l e were on staff at that time? liol A There were about 20.25 at that point.There were liq other people 1 let go at what I would dl below the senior

pi1 0: It's my undersfanding. and correct me if I'm 14 wrong. that around the time that you came on to NPF or mJ shortly thereafter, NPF was fransitioning &om doing a lot R ~ I of w s m u forums throuehout the counw to movine into

A I t had been dccreUing. as 1 understand it,

staff level at about that rim. as w d .

PSI the soace of what YOU describe as megaconiercnces: is-chat

Pagn 29 [i] correct? m A I don't know that I would call it uursitioning. P[ I think as Haley described it to me. that phvc was over. [a] His idea for '95." was as 1 described and w 1 laid out in [sj that Common Senre article and that's what we began to do in iq January of '95. m 0 So the megaconferences were Haley Bubour's idu, [e] is that correct? IWJ A: It wasn't a complctcly formed idea but his notion (iq was that major policy conferences in Washington on currently [ t i ] topiaI policy isma was what he wvlted NPF to do, and I [iq concurred in that. [13J 0: Had you discussed that idea or notion of major [i4] policy conferences in Washington prior to you starting at

[IS] [la office. [io]

Izo] 211 rupwisor? pl 331 0. Anyone clx? 241 A No. zq

[i] A Jackie Wolcott. m QAnyonecLrc? DJ A Mer I removed Denning. she was the vice (41 president. [q 0: On policy decisions that the NPF made. who was Iq ultimately responsible for rhore decisions? m A IUeyandme. [q 0: Haley and you together? w A Sometimcs I made them by myself. Sometimes we iq made them together. Sometimes he made them.The two of Us i 11 made them, one way or the other. $21 0: And Gnancial isrua at NPF. who was ultimately 131 responsible for those decisions? 14) A Haley and I discussed budget questions on a iq regular basis, discussed the confercnccs we wue going to iq do. discussed Agenda for America, things Ute that, 50 that in he was w d aware of what we were doing. We were very m) closely in touch on the program of work on a regular basis. iq Q: How oken did you lalk to Haley Barbour when you zq were working at .Vi? 211 A: I thinlc it's very hard to give you an avenge but 4 whenever I needed to, b a d d y . 231 0: And you would just all him? 24) A: GU him or go over and x c him, sure. zq Q. He did not have an office at NPF; is that correct?

111 A: No, that's correct. m m [4] p directly or did you have to talk to his stafR [e' VJ -rUy, or Molly 01 Kitk or other people over there. ]e] Sanford Mfhllistcr sometimes. beaus he was on the m d , (4 and I'd say, TdI Haley X," and they would pass it on and iq then they would - Bubyr. for example, would caU me or 111 caU Jackie and tdI us what the response was. 12) 0: And you mentioned a couple of 6rst maam. 131 A Holly Salatch w1s an assistant. Kirk Blalock was 14) an assistant. Barbara Ehrenrich was an assistant. Sanford 151 McAUister was his chiefof staff at the RNC. q 0: Other than the individuals you just namcd, was

e] basis? 4 A: Not on a reguIar basis. no. q 0: Was there anyone elre at the RNC chat you talked 111 to occasionally?

A During the course of two years? Sure. I'm sure I 9 ran into and raid hello to probably 100 people at different !a] rimes during the course - n 0 Let me chifv the question.Was there anvonc

NPF? A Yes. I think we discussed it at the meeting in his

0: And you agreed that thar was a good idea? A I thought it was a great idea. 0: who did you answer to at NPF? Who was your

A I answered to Haley as chairman of the board.

0:Andwhowasiammiia ' tely k l 0 W YOU?

pap. 30

P a p 3

Q: So yorrwould have to reach him at the RNC? A Or on the mad or in Mississippi or wherever. 0: Were you u 4 y able to reach Haley Barbour

A Well, sometimes I talked to Barb-. his

there anyone eke at the RNC that you talked to on a regular

Urpoiilion Of John tlolton I July 10,1997

14 a. Other than the individuals that you named that 1W were Wey Bubour's assistant3 or worked with Haley Barbour I t 11 in dealing with the individual you named in dealing with the IIZJ Listening to America television pmgnm. is there anyone 119 else at the RYC that you spoke to about NPF business? Iiy ltsl COnVUWtiOrU with wherc I would mention NPF because that's

A: There were a lor of people that I had

1 CONFIDENTIAL special Investigation

pj speakers would be. how we would svucturc the issues that

a: Would you have been the person who I think YOU

A I wish I could take aedit for it but I think that

[ tq the panels were to diuuss. and that sort of thing. 1111 [fa described would have shaped the debate as to how to [!ai deregulate versus how to slow regulation? 1141 [isl would be ruching a lime bit. No, that was -each of the

Page 35 111 1 don't recall at this tim m Grst meiaconference.

fil else at the R X you talked to about NPF business! rn A During the first six or seven months of 1995. NPF

ml BY YS. ROSENBERG p11 a: Did YOU bring on any new board members at the time

(nl cncnt. He was very involved in Wecommunications beCauX WJ it was our fist one; it was an issue he W T S p a s o d y

. ' .pi myself. I believe that Congrcssman-Bocher also joined the

1 IS] Q: And did you recommend Congrersman Bochner to the

, .m A No, I think that was a recommendation Haley had 1 .. .~ III concluded before I QW on. I believe that both my election

. .PI and Congressman Boehner's election were at the January '95 1 : I iq twudmeering. . .- a: Do you S U I have the minutes to the board I 'metrings?

631 A . No, I do not. I Ii4J a: I'm assuming there were minutes of the board

(151 meetings and you had them at one time. 1 116) A They were in the NPF files.

(in 0: Mer starting at NPF, what was your role as far 1 (to] as developing policy, NPF policy?

1181 A WeU. a iot of what NPF did was uy to encourage 1 2 ~ 1 discussion of major policy issues. It was our view - R ~ J there's an analogy in poljtid science in theh~erican m politid syStCfD, and I forget the author of it but it's a M very good yuloa, that UY, the American political system is

~. [41 board at the same time I did, and I think that's it.

1 L ~ . [ s ~ bovdordid-

WI r q y not a twoparty sptcm;it'~ a onc.an&a-hallpaity M system. It describes it as the sun and the moon.There's

Pam 34

a in putting togethe; &e megaconferences w&t d o h very PI substantially. Is] a. Do you r d who the panelists were in the Iq telecommunications conference? m A: WeU, I recall some of them.The opening speaker 181 was Jay Keyworth. who had been President Reagan's science

adviser.The dosing speaker, who was originally intended [ lq to be a luncheon spakcr. which w a s the pattern we gencdy 11 11 followed. was Senator Dole, which I was very pleased at. I 110 remember from my days at the Justice Department in the mid- [19 1980s when the United States was the only major It41 industrialized country to have its telecommunications policy [tsl run by a FcdcmI Disvict Court judge, that Senator Dole had [iq becn one of the first pcople to propose legishion to get 1111 us out of that particular conundrum. He had k e n involved 1181 in telecommunications reform from the beginning. He was [I91 obviously the majaricy leader of the Senate. We thought it (zol was great for NPF to get him involved in that first 1211 conference. IZZI PI pattern there that we hoped to follow in all the subsequent p4l mcgaconferenccs. which was that we wanted a very high-level PI public discussion among key members of Congress who would

In terms of the panels. we r d y established the

Page 37

[q what we were tryine to do was cncoupge debate among Isl Republicans on a wicty of policy issues. rn So it was not so much we were =Ring policy as I11 such as it was encouraging debate.And just as an cumple I of that, the fust mcgaconfercnce we did was on

llq tel~~ommunications reform and there were a numbcr of !ill different positions that different lawmakers had. Different Ita policy d y s W had different positions. But essentully it

151 We thought tha~ that kind of discussion would be fq most appealing to what wc considered our natural m COnStiNency, which was the members of the NPF policy la1 committees. Wious interested parties and think-Unks. PI academic and press around town. and we thought it would

Iiq provoke a vcryhigh Ievd of discussion.And I rhink. by 11 11 and luge. that w e d out to be CJiZeCt. [la At tdecommuniutions we k d Suutor Packwood.

1111 considered a hmdzmentally conservative or Republican (181 debate. I

RII could do. It contributed or wc hoped it would contribute to m the recreation of that intellectual ferment in the PI Republican circler that I mentioned before. DIJ MR. PERRY: When was that parti- forum?

. And We thought that airing the wious points of J icw about that sort of thing was something very positive we

[in industry CEOs or other top corporate IDanagCfDCnt. [is] [iq dl the megaconferences were contained in onepage handauts

that were given to evqtmdy as they came in.We had a file Ril of those at NPF and I bclievc it was stored at the time we lp) basically cloxd it down.You may w d have copies Of it. PI 0: Do you recall any of the CEO5 that were panelists? pi A Gcnld LNin fromTimeWarncr. I bclieve the head

The speakers and the rough order of the panels at

- p*=

111 BCU South.We had a senior urecutive on the international m side ofAT&T.We had. 1 think. the CEO of MCLAnd there m were others, as well. 141 1 may say I haven't reviewed any documents in (51 Connection with Khis deposition and I did not participate in [q or see any of the documents that I had read in the newspaper m NPF has produced to you. I m recollection and I apprcc4au that.

rim

0: I understand this is all to the best of your

Of the guests at that teleconference that vou iust iiii named thiCEOs. the panelists.did you persbdy invite ita those CEOs? Did waxone dr innu them? ti31 A Personally in the sense that I probably sent out [MI letters to each of them. either confirming their 1151 participation or putting the formal invitarrion on a piece of [is] paper to get it into their respective corporate decision-

[ioi How they were individually approached. you know, [iq varied with each individual and each conference. 1 could rn try and answ:r chat on sort of an individual by individual [zii basis but it was whatever - the same way you my to invite N mybcdy to 1. .conference. It's to fU the best person who

1m making v-.

- Page 41

[ti spokespeople for various perspective in respective m subsuntive uar were, and they had ideas.We would speak p] with - policy cound directors would speak with Senate and 141 House staff members who were substantive experts in these 151 things. Somerimes I would talk to members of Congress or [q staff people about that. I knew a tot of people in the kind m of think-lulk community around Washington that I would tllk [a] to.And it was a very - we tried to cast the net very pj brotdly b m u x we were looking for people who were

ita articulate. who cculd Drovide the kind Of DC~SDCC~~VCS that . . - - - . [ I t ] we wanted. [ifl One thing we found was chat frequently - I don't ti$ h o w about frequently - one thing we found was that there I141 Were rimes when it was diffcult to get corporate [in spokespeeple b e a u x they feared regulatory retaliation. So (1st we also used rcprescntarnrcs of vadc associations or [in academics and think-rank persons.There was no one correct [ia formula for a c h megaconference. Each one was constructed [iq on its own. m ~ 1 1 regulatory retaliation? rm

a: You said that corporate spokespcopIe fclrzd

A Some corvonte officials - for unmple, wc did a 1231 c i permadt them that this is something they want to do. 1241 PSI with any of the panelists. either at the telecommunications

1'1 conference or any others?

0: @id you have any personal or professiod contacts

Pap. 39

c jnference on ihc Food and Dr~;Ac?ck: ;t ?tion ?:?E Sccauu 1241 many of the industry people had applications for new drug mcrmits or were seeking other kinds of renulltory approval.

iii thcv were concerned that being publicly visible criticizing Page 42

m A Personal oiprofeubnal over what period? My m entire professional area? MI 0: Recent personal or professional, around the time IS] of - say within a few years of the time you started workmg [q at NPB m 181 professional contact with any of h e noncongressional p1 people. Senator Pre~~ler I had known b e a u x he was on the

Itq kMte Foreign Relations Committee and 1 was at the State [ill Department. i!tl Senator Packwood I had dealt with when I was at

A Well. I don't think I had any pusonaI or

& the'FDA. its commiu1oners. rtspkxcdures. might ruk the m pending applicauons that cku companies had. p1 We rcceived many of the sum comments from pcople [SI concerned about EPA and some of the other regulatory [q agencies, as well. m pi

a: Was it difficult to get panelists? A It was harder than I thought it would have becn.

p1 certainly in wms of the high level that we were sccling. [iq schedules get GUed up weU in advance and scheduling was Ii 11 aiwayr a major concern for us. given the congressional work [ifl schcduk, recess schedule and so on, in an effort to be

IS panelists that I knew in subsequent megaconferences from my [iq own background. but 1 don't recall that I knew any of the [iii other CEOr. [tzl [tal break? I141 IRcCCSS.~ [in BY MS. ROSENBERC: iiq

[iq had sow involvement in inviting panclists but r h t thuc m were other ways that panelists came to be on the forums. I211 CUI you &scribe how else pancl~rts were invited. IZI who else was involved in the decision-makmg? PI A WeU. I think the staff of NPE particularly the 1241 policy council directors. who were familiar with chc

MS. ROSENEERG Why don't we rake a lOminute

a: .M.C Bolton. we were ralkrng about, before we took [in a breakabout the megaconferences and panelists and how 1'9 they were invited to be panelists.You testified that you

iirl a Iciser exteni when I was at &e State Department. [in Congressnun Brooks 1 had not mct until shortly

[in discuss the conference.That was a case where I invited him 1181 spccilkaUy right thcrc to test@. [tal Senator Dole I had known for many years. My first mi wife worked for him. 1211 Jay Keyworth I had known when he was science IZZI adviser to President Ragan.lhat's it of thox I remember. mi 0: And I believe You tarifred that at lust at that

11q before the wgaconference. I mec with him in his office to

p1 major telecommunications dorm. It nuned out it didn't [ioj happen unll1996 but M wanted to present the ~SSUCS Very

1121 cxyllple. [in 0: Was the riming of megaconferences ever determined [wi by uungs that were actually happening on Capitol W - iw hearings or legislation? [iq A No. It would have bcen too hard to calibrate.

lis 0: How was the budget of the mcgaconferences

@ti A: WeU. in the first one we had certain things that 14 were sort of Gxcd.we knew what the rent for the hall p31 would be at the RuLajssancc H0lel .W~ knew (hmgs like

I R ~ ~ t . A n d t h e n . a I t e r t h a t . w e h a d a v ~ e t ~ g ~ i d ~ w ~ ~

early in that debate. w wdl.That's a sort of typical

[ln The% were big CVCntS. Which i.5 why WC d C d them 1181 mgaconferenccs.

determined?

[ in] thing. it was a v u y complex calculus to put thex together. iiq 0: You said you made an effort to be timely in the w confaences. How would you & h e thcly? pi1 A Wd. things that were either issues that were 14 ripe for public discussion or that were about to be. For rm examole. we did one meaaconferencc in - I mess it WZT late

'PI fust megaconference - WCU. maybe you didn't tuctfy to psi chis - did tau mr&y or profcsstonaUy know any of the

i b i '9STieuly '96 on pubLC u a t y k g u l a t i & and concepts jM1 like retail wheeling and competition among distrtbution and

-40 111 CEOs? m pi not know any of them. [ai (n professiolully at any of the other megaconfcrcnccs? [q m the subsequent megaconleMces arcre CEOs. Not all of them [ai were CEOs at the first one.And there wae certainly

A I did not. I think I previously testified I did

0: Dd you know any of the CEOs personally or

A I don't chink so. Not all of the participants at

P.ga 43 111 provision of dcctr id power, which was d y Wore that

, m had come UE very much on the public ndu saecn.That was PI somcrhing chat I was p a r m k l y happy to do beausc we pi thought that was the sort of thing where, to go back to my [n sun and moon metaphor. where we could have an early Iq discussion on that. m Telecommunications, in '95. I think most pcople IOI felt that '95 would be the year in which Congress enacted

pn substultive issues. knew who some of the most articulate Inn the cost for setting up would be. what the cost of lunch

Milkr Reporting Company, Inc. Min-U-ScriptC3 (9) Page 38 - Page 43 ~-~

Ill that We usually provided would be. 121 IcNiccs. the lighting, the sound system and all thox f31 various things. PI And the budget didn't vary that much durinn the 15

. ,

. .

. .. . . .. . . -. . , .I _ . .. .

- Page 47

[il 0: And do you recall how indiv(duals managed to get m on the guest list for these receptions? m HI commnics that had &ea& contributed: some were vcoole we

k I think somc were in the fdCS,as I a y , u

n or so th2t we did rfter that. li was plcny weu Gown. [q within sow wiation. PI 0: And what was that? Do you recall? 181 A: The awagc would have bcen between 35 and PI SM.000.

I'ol n: And how did NPF pay for the megaconfuences? 111: A From thegeneral 'reawry that we had.from the It4 filnd!i that were in the general t r v . 1131 fk So, in other words. the n o r d solidtations for 114 contributions would have been used to pay for the (161 megaconfaurw? It4 A ?kat's correct.What we did, in put, MS that we [tq thought people who had an interest in the subjCct matter of 1181 the conference might be willing to makc a contribution, and rol we talked to them about the work of NPF. talked to them nol about the nature of its mission and what we were doing, and 1211 solicitd thcir support. Sometimes they made a rm conuit;ution; wmuimcs they didn't.

0: Dk! . . YOU view the megaconferences thcmsehtes as lzrl fund-rwyl g evtnts? !Y A No, no, not in the sense rhat you think of selling

Psg. 4s 111 tickets at a tabk or anything like t h a ~ not at all.Thcy m were, 1 W useful as uumplu of sow of the work NPF Dl MS doing in the policy Yena.WC also talked about the CI W d f i O n show; wc talked about Common SULK; we ulkcd Isl lbout Agenda for America that I was in the procws of (rl wiring. Lacu we talked a link bit about the work we PI w a e d o i on the presidential transition effort.

@I NPF was d o h . M h o d to show to comoanies that it was Things like &at. Ln othcr words, the work that

[;q a b u t the'& pawn when you mention her.Tha;lks. I ( i t1 Were thac any other hnd-raising events besides 1101 something tha? was w;rth supporting. [I 11 0: Did NPF evcr have fundmising evartr, u I think

.. [q had ; p p d & others pcop~e who WWC inYoived in [q industries that we had either done a megaconference on or m werecontemplating doingawgaconferencconwhowe thought [a] would be interested in NPF's work. That sort of legwork and 14 research, if you will. was done by Grace Wiggins when she

[io] was there and Diane Harrison. [i 11 A lot of people were mggcsted by others that we [la or they already knew and they uid, "well, YOU should invite (131 X and Y might be interested," and so on. [id) Q: Did Haley Bvbwr make any suggestions w to who (1% should be invited to the receptions? iiq A I'm sure he did yeah. I don't reall any 117) spccif~cally but 1s part of the conversation$ he was having, (iq he made suggestions about invitations to thox receptions, fiq pcople that I should xe to follow up on to discuss NPF's

nil &q individuals to invite? m] 1241

work in more detail and that sort of thing. 0: And did you make any suggestionS Of Ury

A: 1 may wcll have. 1 don't recall any specikically. 0: Just a point of clarification, and I don't mean to

eq be ~orrc~tinn you but your fund.nixr you keep referring to Pa@ 48

[I] 1s Gncc Wiggins; is that her last name?

14 VI ac.nuUyWcigas.

Is) m believe it's W-itgc-r-s, or c-i. 181 A €4. m

A I think she's Gnce Cummings now. 0 I thought, in things I'd bcen reading. it was

A: Gncc Wagers; I'm sorry. 0 I just wanted to dare that for the record. I

a: Okav. I ius1 wanted to make sure we're tal)cinn

:

.~ < I

~ ' 1'4 yW dexrikd it - Wng tickets or - k Not selling tkku.Wc had a coupk or three '2 rcccption~, all of which, I thb& were in 19y.5. I'm

1151 chkcldng of two spccUiaUy where we invited people who [iq were Washington r c p ~ t a t i v e s of dieercnt companies, [in different tnde associations. professional people in lrr~ Washington. 11s) The car0 that I'm thinking of, Haley and Speaker 14 Gingrich both spoke. I spoke a litcle bit. I inaoduced 811 them. mOslly.lhcY Spoke about the work of NPF and what NPF w was doing. PI Do YOU renll when those receptions took place? WI A: I Meve hey were in the spring or ~ m ~ r of PK) '95.'Ihere may have been one other. I on r e d l

(11 physically being at here may have been one or two m others. PI PI Place? PI A: Yes, I did. to Common Scnx. [SI w place at a restaurant down the street &om NPF's m h d q u a r u r s on Puulrytruua ' Avenuc. rn lpI

114 these receptions you%e described? 1131 A I don't recall any others. 1141 @ Getting back now to your role in various aspccu [in of NPF, what was your role regarding production of the (iq publications that NPF put out? 1371 A: Gary Wed was day to day in durge of prodUcing pq Common Scnse. I rhinL h u title wu managing editor or (is) something like that. I had overall responsibility for it. t4 She did a very good job. I mostly let hcr do it. 1 would pi) read the articlcs as they came in tom time to rime, decide

on some, give her prioritiw, what I thought Was h p o r m t mi to includc. But basically. she carried the wok pa] F m Wesmer did the newsletter. We'd talk about M it. its preparation, but she was responsible for writing it

P.p 46 Pspr 49 (it and putring it together. m Q: Did you havc_uly role in deciding who would p] contribute articles to any of the publiations?

m 0: h d what wu that role? How did you decide? [s] A: Sometimes we solidred articles from people that I m thought would makc for an interesting conversation. is] Sometimes y t i c k s came in and we had to make judgments m whether they fit our editorial priorities.A w i c W of

Ita) mctar t UIinJy like chat. 111) 0: W a c &mors ever given the o p p ~ y ~ i ? ' to submit 114 an article in exchange for making a contribuuon?

[irl 0: 'who decided - or what ww your role in deciding [tq who would receive the wious publiUtiOnS. eithcr the [jq newsletter or Common SaLU? [in A The newsktter went to the members of the pohcy list councils, which was around 1.933 people roughly, went to [g conuibutors, one or two people per cocponte contributor. 14 It went to a press list and may have gone to JMne other pi] pcopk.'ht list - I've just described the categories - rzg that list may have changed - those lists may have chnnged PI from timc to timc.Thc categories were basically Set.

We, fiorn time to time, xnt the nrwskttcr to 1251 veovle who were potential contributors as a further

0: Whm did they G k p k ~ - the ICCCP~~OIW U ~ C

A One took p k at the Capitol Hill Club. One took

@ And how many people attended thox receptions? 12 TWClll'y 01 25.We decided - I guess this wu

("1 because it didn't sccm to be a very effective way to do it. 113 I personally don't enjoy that sort of rhing that much so I

114 i q llsl F? representatives of one particular industry or a particular

ltol mosfly mine and Zwcy's deasion -not to pursue that

(14 was not at dl unhappy to abandon that s r y l ~ . I131 k h t while 1 Was thm. a: Were they cffo~tivc funbniscrs at a? 12 I don't think so, no. a: wuc the guests for those receptions

they were companies we'd talked to. In other cases

cnl N P F s work It MI kind of a Iairly widc wiety, PI

page 44 -'Page 49 (10) Min-u-Scrip@ Miller Reporthe COmn-n-. 'Or

Lugelv I would describe it as Washington rcvrcxntativc-me ~ o ~ l e .

I

Senate Commlnee on Governmental Attain Deposition or ~ o h n mlton

~

[ti indication of what NPF was doing. [a Common Scnx was mailed to a series af lists of PI between 15.000 and 18.OOO people per quarterly issue and (41 that list wxs compiled of all mrmkrs of Congress, (SI Republican and Democrat. Republican officeholders around the 161 country, subscribers in academic libraries. university m libraries and others around the country. media lists. things [si like that. It was basically the same list that was mailed II over and over again. It went to all the members of the

(101 policy council - Common Senx went to all the members of [I 11 the policy councils. It went to contributors.That's [tzj basically about it. it31 a: Did you ever charge anyone for copies of Common 1141 Sense? [IS] A: We would have loved to have made Common Sense a it61 profit-making operation.We did have a subscription rate. 117 It was a rdatively small number of subscribers, mostly fie] university libraries. that sort of thing. [io] We discussed, boom rime to rimc, making it a cost p~ cenfer in and of iuclfmd. for a wiety of reasons. pi] concluded that it was never quite right to do that. m 0: So the groups or individuals you just named who pi received Cornman Sense. they got it for frce?

psi a: Did any of the political parties receive Common

[I] Sense? m A I don't think we sent anything to the political p] parties.We stnt,as 1 said, wc xnt an bnrc to every 141 member of Congress, all 535. and many of the staffs, staff [q directors and chat sort of thing. received their own copies; [q members of policy councils who m y have been parry officials m or chat sort of thing. (81 0: And then you had another publication. if I [si remember correctly.That was the Listening to America , [ioi publication, correct?

4 pi1 A WeU,Listenhg toAmerica was published in 1594 i t a in two versions. a long version and a short version. and [ai that was before I got there. It was a one-time shot. It [MI was not an on-going publication. [is] 1161 there? [in [is1 publications. [to] POI talking more about the panels and how they were determined, 1211 were there steering committees at all to help recruit m panelists?

p4l mt'S COmCCt.

p.or 51

0: Were there any other publications while you were

A No, the newsletter and Common Sense were the two

0: Getting back, then. to the megaconferences and

. . [til [14 conference in your current lobbying or law practice? it31 A No. ($4)

[tq [tq 117) [is] a couple of rimes.A numbcr of'W networks came for 114 different ones, for different purposcs.Whether they were rn broadcast or not, I honestly don't know.

w PI them for the NPFW show. So in that sense I believe at w] leut smal l bits and pieces of them wouM have bKn MI broadcast.

[i] Q: Could you t d mc about the NPF'W show? A It was a hall an hour show broadcast once a month

PI or six rimes. In the first six months of '95 we concluded that it was not costeffective and we ended it after the six

1.g shows that Haley had committed to broadcast when he arranged [SI to pick it up. m 101 PI contributions. out of the general u a f q

[iq 1111 I'm wrong - that the RNC was somehow involved in the

0: Have you ever used any contacts from an NPF

0: Were the megaconferences broadcast on COP-Tv! A I don't know the answer to that. 0: Were they broadcast anywhuc? A 1 don't Itnow the answer to that. GSpan was there

1211 0 YOU had said that - c ~ l i ~ YOU t-tiGed that - A I might say we had someTV footage done of some of

Paw 54

0: And how was that paid for? A That would have been paid for out of the normal

0. And was it your testimony earlier - correct me if

111 public forUm.What they did when they walked off the stage, @I I don't know. But that wasn't part of our program. PI 141 megaconfucnces which were routinely attended by at lust [SI one or two people from the Democratic National Cofnminec, [a and I don't know what they did. either. m MR. PERRY: The conferences were certainly open to 181 Democrats?

1 might say we had sign-up sheets at all thew

[41 [SI were invited to the mgacunfCrrnces. were they ever 161 reimbursed for their apcnscs? m 14 C U to be able to bring them from Capitol Hill to the

0: And when clccted officials, members of Congress.

A ?Jo.We. from rime to time. would have a van or a

PI Renaissance HotcLwhcrc most of them look place. to make

I h i im BY YS. ROSENEERG THE WITNESS. They werc open to anybod/ basically.

[a] a: So why drd you choose the RNC? 19 A: Beaux it was two block, down the street and it [a was high quality and because Haley wanted to do that. m 0 And do you know w h y Haley wanted to do that? [q A Because it was two blocks down the street and it m wuhrghquaw

[I? 0: Were the megaconfercnccs ever used as a vehicle Ity for lobbying the Republican or Democratic members of [io] Congress who might have kcn panelists?

1211

t j - 1701 A: Not byNPEno. a: Are YOU awam that anyone aught have lobbied. and

i1.i their brohast facility, their technical people and that [i.g sort of thing.We paid them a commercial fce for that and [ t q those receipts from the RNC - from NPF to the RNC were made 117) basically on a show by show basis. [in] Q: How did you establish the fee that NPF would pay 114 RNC? (29 A: F m Wesmu ralked to a number of people about pi] what it might k.We had inquiries from some other people m about doing the show. about mAucing it for us. She made

[in Denning a c W y signed them but it was a decision ChaI was [tal made before I showed up. pol 0 So you weren't involved in any of the decision- mi making process at W? 1211 A No. not to take the show over.

. . 1141 [in

A No. not for the mcgaco&renccs. a: Was there ever honoraria for anvlhule'

. ., - .~ [irl basically before I c&-e on board. In orher w&ds, the

Iris decision had been madc to underrake UUS. I think the find

Pepe 56 111 way over my head technically here and I feel very unsure M even saying that. but they had some arrangement that existed PI whereby the satellites or the cable networks or whatever "1 they were would transmit the show. and Haley had agreed to

fulw those obligations for a period of six monthly 19 broadcasts, with the option to continue it further if he m wanted to. in] m over my head in discussing this satellite issue, as well.

[tq but do you know if there was payment for the right to [it] broadcast - p a p a r to RESN for the right to broadcast the (13 shows or use their satellite? [131 A No. I believe when the m f e r of the show was I141 made therewasnopaymcntfromNPF to RESN and there wasno [iq payment by NPF that I'm aware of to satdlite owners or 1161 an- else.The only cost I was aware of to NPF was the It? cost of p r o d u w each of the six shows.

Q: Do you know if there was any payment - I'm way

:it4 0. Did you ever recuve contributions from ;[iq individuals who saw the broadcast? i@q A I don't know the answer to that. I don't recall ' 1211 ever seeing a letter thrt said "Gee, I saw the show and .: &?I here's a check." 1 don't recall that. I don't believe that I pl] happened. PI p~ IomCtiWS broadast.What else were the topics or themes of

Q: You mentioned that parts of megaconferences were

Pam 57 ~- j 111 the shows?

I?J

.. .PI two on the cnvironmcnt.We did one on foreign policy. I m don't r d the other topics but they were of that kind

: . [q the broad policy discussions that would have been cypial of -m the megaconferences. Frquenrly, when we were planning one :m] of the shows.having in mind that we had just done a IQI mcgaconfcrencc or that a megaconference was coming up, the

kq topics were frquently rdated. 0. And who were the guests on the shows? A The guests wcre some elected Republican offkids.

1131 some people on the policy councils. different kinds of [id] people like that.We had a couple of remote broadcasts. [tq We had one on the cnvironmcnr with the governor of [tq Mississippi, from Jackson, Mississippi.Wc had one from [tq Little Rock with Lieutenant Governor, as he was then. lis] Huck;lby.We had one remote from Norfok,Virginia from a [im couple of people who owned a laundry who were being (2cl harassed in their view, by the EPA. which was a really good pt] one, that sort of thing.

We tried to have a variety of different guests so mi it wasn't all just ~ 1 was the host and we wanted to avoid

A Wcll, the tapes are somewhere in !he NPF Gles. We did one on the environment.We did - we might have done

'

111 potential fund-raisers? m PI p] [q very much experience myself, I wasn't in a pos~ on to make [q that iudgmcnt but the recommendations that did come in were m sufficient to convince me at the timc that they were [a] competent to do the job.As I say, 1 talked to Haley about m them and he either was comfortable enough, knowing them

[tq pusonally. or with the people who had recommended them, [ i t ] rhat he concurred. [ia Q: Without getting into the identity of donors, how 1131 wcre the names of donors determined? [id] A Through a variety of different mechanisms - [iq people who were on the policy councils and thcir business [ tq affiliations, people who made inquiry about the National [tq Policy Forum, people who came to the megaconferenccs,peop1e 1181 who we thought might be interested in the s p d c subjects [fq that we wcre covering, and just from a gcned review of (201 what we knew of goings-on in business and industry. pt] Diane Harrison was a hithful daily rcader of the 14 Wall Street Journal. Fortune, Forks, Business Week, that PI sort of thing. and she and I talkcd about people who might PI bc potential contributors. p~ Haley was probably the major source of names of

A They were rCCOmmendcd by a number of people. ye?. Q: Do you know who recommended them? A I don't recall ofiYund. Having not had I 3'

Page M) [i] p p l e who he spoke with. M Q: And I know you testi6ed earlier you had not done PI a lot of fund-raising - previously didn't have a lot of 141 fund-raising experience. but did you eventually get involved 1% in the fund-raising process at NPF? [q A Sure.What I did was talk to prospective m contributors about the work of NPF, described what we did in [el terms of the megaconferences, Common Scnx.Agenda for PI Ameria and the other things we were doing, tried to answer

[tq their questions about the structure of NPF. who was involved [t 11 in it, that kind of thing. [la 0: You talked to prospective contributors in one-on- [ i l l one meetings or over the phone? How did that work? 1141 A WeU. both. and from time ro time. I would wy [in beginning from the spring of 1995 through the end of 1996. [la offenDiane Harrison and I would go to visit somebody in the [tq Washgron office, for example, of a corporation or uade [in] association. [iq I would basically explain the work of NPE as I've pol said several times here today. Dme would be the kind of pt] follow-up person to dul with whomever tiom the particular lpl business or trade association who would be either the PI decision.maker or the point of contact for talking about the

i a j hav@g it eniirely just people talking back and forth about Fn Po ticy issues. so we tried to do a linle bit of that.

111 .kleY was the host on the first one and I was the host on (21 thcotherGvc. PI [dl 19 host before that. [q m Forum, was there a reparate Gnance department at the [a] National Policy FoNm?

119 [t t i that would have been Grace Weigers and - Ita [UI Heather El tLj was there. KcUy Gucsnicr than left and I [id] brought Grace Weigers and Diane fiarrison. [*SI Q: Did H a t h c r El Haj stay on? [ t q A She stayed on for over a year. She Icff sometime

!in1 0. And were you enclely responsible for hiring Grace ! Veigcrs and Diane Harrison? c.6" A I talked to Haley about both of them. I rhink he pi1 either knew who they were or knew of them. mr 0: Had Wcy said not to hire either one of them, mi would vou have been able to -

Pepe5a

a: Was it your first foray into television? A I've done a lot of television but I was never a

Q: Moving on to hmd-raising at thc'National Policy

A Yes,therewas. Q: And I believe you tesrificd that when you came on,

A: She wun't there. Kelly GuesNer was there and

(in in the spring of 1996, I W.

id] potential contribution: pn Q: How much of your time was spent on these fund-

Pap 61 [t] raising meetings? 12) A It's very hard to put a percentage on it but it p] was a fraction of mprotal timc. [4] 0: On sort of a weekly basis, can you give me an [q estimate of how much time you would spend fund-nising? [q A I'd be very leery about a percentage. I meul, m them might be some week where we'd have four or Gve [n] mectings.You know, you get in a cab and arrive at K Street m and wait and meet for half an hour and get another cab and

[io] come back, ,and two or three times a day. But then there 1111 would be srrctchcs where that wouldn't happen, as well. 1121 So I did not keep hourly time recordr and I'd bc [iq very reluctant to give a guess. but it w a s certainly a 1141 distinct minority. [tq Q: And when you went on the fund-nising meetings, [iq you said that Diane Harrison went with you. Did anybody 1171 clx go with you? [in] A Very rarely. I can't even think of another time [ f q when others would have. She was responsible for fund- (2cl nising at NPF so it was very important to have her come pi] along. People would get to h o w her and then she would be rzz~ able to follow up with it. mi Q: Did Halev Barbour ever go with YOU on hnd-nising

Miller Reporthg Company, Inc.

senate Commlttcc on Governmental Aftairs Ueposltioon ot John Bolton

'3

t 9

ti1 described. no. m 0 And Grace Wcigers did not go with you? PI A: Gnce wasn't there that long. She may have gone

out on a couple. I don't mean to exdude her. I just don't [q rmll one spcciGcaUy. iq Q: And do you know who set up the fundraising p~ meetings? (81 A: Typically Diane would have asked - Diane Harrison m would have asked for the appointment.

[ia 0 Was there any reporting to Halcy Barbour about the [ t i l fund-raising at NPF? [<a A Fmm time to time we would send him descriptions [ii] or I would tallc to him on the phone of people I thought he [irl personally should follow up with. Diane Harrison regululy [is put together a list of calls that we hoped he would make. jiq On his uav& around the country, you know, from a phone in [in an airport, he'd have the NPF list and take it out and all [iq somebody. I think that dcscribcs it. [iq Q: Do you know where Diane Harrison is now?

pi1 Q: How successful were runaniring operations while IZZI you were there? Did you get responses &om the majority of m people. conaibutions from the majority of people you talked Wl to? ym A I don't Chi& we ever did a rack-up that would

W She's ill KClltUCky, 1 klicvc.

p.p.63 111 give an UUWQ to that question. In 1995, the total m receipts and total upendinver for the program and PI operating a r p u u c s of WF were roughly equal. PI We had an increvc indebt owed to the RNC that rn was almost exactly qua l to the decrease in debt paid off to [q Signet. If you eliminate the payment of the S i e t debt and m the receipt of the additional loans from the RNC. takc that (81 out. what a compzny teporting would call its actual [q operating revenues and expenditures. we broke even in 1995

[iq st a level of about $3 million.which was the highest level iicj then to date, but basically we broke even. Ita 'Ihat didn't turn out to be the case in 1996. But [is] I considered 1995. on that basis, having NPF gone into debt 1111 in 1993. gone into debt in 1994. my first y a r . in 1995. at [cq lust the net debt at the end of the year was no greater [is] than it had been at the beginning of the y a r . It wasn't 1171 less, but it -'t any grater. [iq Q: Do you have any idea why the incruse in debt to [iq the RNC wu compy?ble to the dccrasc in debt to Signet? riq A It wasn't necessarily on a d o h for d o h pi] basis. It wasn't intended to be. although loans from the pa RNC wa.uscd to pay the Signet debt. It just worked out. ml at the end of the year. It wasn't by design. It's just mj that's the way the numbers worked out. 129 Q. HOW MIC contribution solicitations documented?

Ill A Invirtuallyevuy~thatIanChi&ofthatI m nut with somebody, wc would follow it up with a letter that m said, "Dr. Mr.. it was a pleaswe to m e t with you.' dada- WI dadada and %ere's what we're doing' and d d perhaps rn contains some additional exphnatory material about NPE [q k a u ~ that's the way most corporations or trade m associations like to procecd.They like to have a document nj that they can put into their system. A There were other fund-raising letters that we sent

l r q out without thue welings. lhae were other contacts that 1111 Haley and perhaps others made that would not necessarily Iia have been docuwnted like that in the NF'F ties. liii Bnt whenever we had a meeting of the kind we've [id] been talking about, almost invariably, we would follow that [(SI up with a letter. [is] 0 Do you still have any of the letters? [cq A I don't have any of thun.They're all in the NPF [cy fdes.Thc finance l e s at NPF were kept se aratc from atl [io1 the other files and when we left in Dece&r. those were all m stored in the storehouse. 1211 Q: Was anyone at NPF - let me back up.Were there 1221 any potential donors that you would refuse to accept a mi conrribution from? [HI A Were there any who came to us and said, "We want &-I to eive YOU mone7 that we refused?

Page 65 111 a: Yes. m PI to give you money.' I don't recall any c a x s where we p] returned a check I don't r e d any where somebody [q approached us and we turned them down. [q I've read WuinnUlThompson's order and I p~ certainly will abide by it but the bulk of the contributors, [q as I've said, and I would have said rhis in h&d& [ol meetings at the time, the buIk of the contributors were :iq corporations whose names would be very hmiliv with you, ;ill Wade associations. and a few individuals. :iq Soit was not a direct mail - there was not a '13) laige. pilu and piles of checks coming in the door. It was 11) a relatively small number. iq a: Did NPF have a policy regarding contributions from 1.q foreign nationals or foreign+wned corporations? 171 A There was no policy but there were almost no such iq contributions.

zq A Fmm foreign companies? Leaving the question of z i i what you rvant to all Young Brothers Dndopmcnt out of it ZZJ for a second, 1 was not aware of any contributions dur i i my nl WDe at NPF &om foreign corporations. zq zq d e d the P a d c Cultud Foundation?

111 A Yes.Iwas. 121 Q: And would you describe that as a foreign 01 corporation or - PI A r don't know what iu legal status was. It was [q not a for-protit corporation. It was Likc a thinktank. [q Q: And do you know where the Pacific Cultural m Foundation's money came from? Was it US. money or did it rq come from outside the U.S.? [ol A I believe its principal source of receipts iq non4J.S. money. I 11 Q: Were you or was anyone at NPF aware of that at the 121 time they accepted the contribution? rg k Jack Copeluld, who was a person who actuauy 1.1 solicited that contribution. I think was aware of it.We iq were aware that it was aTaiwanesc entity but at the lime. iq we believed at the time it was a not-for-profit entity. 17) Q: And are you aware of any contributions from an 101 orgvliution called Panda Estates or Panda Industries? rq A lwas aware of that at the time it was nurdc,yes. q Q: Do you know who solicited chat contribution? 111 A: Joc Gavlord.

A There weren't enough who came and said, "We want

$9) a: were tha any?

a: Arc you aware of a contribution from an entity -

Page 66

4 lot of work f ir the Spcaker. q

111 m 0 S p a k g Gingrich? [31 A Yu. [dl iq contribution was solicited or that contribution cvae in

rn A Yes. there was. iq a: And what wu the question? q A: WCy I raised i t Gaylord was paid a consulting q fee by NPF to nise money, which he wasn't doing. Panda il Entkrprises was the 5 s t convibution that came in under q his aus ices 'Ihere wcrc three that came in together: i j panda Enterprises, Mor - W, we're not going to - one 41 investment banking firm and one law 5m. Both the 51 investment banking 5 m and the law 5 m were domestic U.S. q entities whose namcs would be well known to you. I looked ?j at F'anda Enterprises and asked what it was. 81 I might say also Gaylord getting this monthly fee. q which I eventually convinced Haley to cut off, told us that q the amount of the* contributions had to be reduced by 10 11 percent as a fee for the person who had actually raised 3 them. which I didn't like. either. 31 r ) never heard of that operation and I asked - I think 1 asked z r e s m n s e

Q: He docs a lot of work for?

A: The Spc!nkc~ of the House.

Q: And was there any question at the time that that

Psp. 67

about the source of funds?

But anyway, looking at Panda Enterprises. I'd

Miller Reporting Comoanv. Inr. ~ Min-U-Script@ ~~ ~~ ~~ (13) Page 62 - Page 67

Deposition ot John Wblton senate Committee on (iovernmental Atfairs

111 from Gaylord was that it was a HoUylvoad entertainment m company. PI :- A we accepted that.

-

Q: And you accepted that?

0: Do you recall how much that contribution was for? A I think it was for $50,000. 0: And do you rMu how much the Pacific C u l d

A I believe that MS for 525.000. Let w just

Q: Did you know or had you h d of the name Ted

A 1 had never hard that name before. IVc seu~ it

(61 m I Foundation contribution was? PI

[tal cIarii.We wae not under any impression at thc lime that

[ial [la Sicong in connection with that contribution? 1141 [is) in the papers recently but until about threc weeks ago, 1 iiq had never hard that name. 193 0: And had you ever hard the name Jessica El

A: Not until I saw it in the p a p a a few weeks ago.

(111 Panda Entapriw had any foreign connection whatever.

Nitiarta?

It did strike me when 1 saw the namc in the paper that she 'PI may have ken the tiuuhua ' for whom Gaylord wanted the .@I commission, in effect. but 1 don't w that. I don't '23l lcmcmbQ whether NF'F ynt chir perm a check or how that I%I commission was handled, but 1 didn't Iike it bcause M were . . PSI Paying Gaylord for not nising contributions and when he

pw 69 :-111 6muy found some.we had to pay somebody elx 10 percent. A It was. to =.a- 1 didn't Iike it. Ly 0: It Qrm't XUD to makc much sense, dots it?

ilc) A No; it sure didn't. '.m Q: But in connection with the Panda check it's your - (sl understanding that somcone got a commission, in addition to m Gaylord?

y j A: Ycr.WeU, Gaylord didn't get a commission. He '-pi was getting a monthly fee.

0: And then someone cl# got the commission. A On those three checks that came inat the same

July 10,1997 CONFIDENlw - s ~ i a l Investigation

P W 68

_ - p~ comntions. but there'was certainlyno plan whatever that

- -

Pap. 71 111 I know of to raise any money in foreign contributions, kt m alone any substantial part of NPF's operating expenses. PI PI were at N P E in your capacity as president of NPF? [SI A WeU I went on foreign trips where I was 16l identilied as the president of N P E which I was at the rime. m and there were some small paru of expenses on those trips [s) that I bded to NPE But I believe that aU of the foreign rn trips I took were either in my personal law practice or at

[ l q the inviration and with air hre basicdly paid by thc [I 11 inviting orgvlintion or sowbody &. [tal There were some perhaps. just thinking, for 1131 example. of the one trip I took to London ar the inviration !I$ of the Institute of United Sates Studies at the University [tq of London to participate in a conference in early 1995 on :iq the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, and I gave a 1171 papa - I gave two papm. actually. :tal And I stayed on in London for some number of days '19 before the conference or after the conference where I met m with members of p;rr l iywt , pcople who were in British 211 think-tanks, some members of the media and what-not as part m of what I thought would be an effort to get to know and

241 And so the ana nights that 1 spent in London on

Did you ever take any foreign travel while you -

establish a n k t with thhkunlu overseas.

NPF busintss I would have billed to NPF. but they were not PIPS 72

111 Iundniring dfom.Thcy were nelworking. (2) m foreign policy and I discussed this with Haley at the

1% other people about wious f0rcip.n policy maners on the one iq trip I had with sevcrrl of my fotwcr coUcagues and m counterpuu in the Foreign ~ m m o n w d t h Office in the IS) British govcmwnt and things Iikc that. lpl iq did things that wcrc related to NPF. and NPF paid what I t i [ hoped was a fair and rasonable aUocation of the cost of

And aLro,bcau~ my background has been in

(41 bC@Ulh& 1 thOU&t thir OppOrtUIlity to Cdk with

So there wac. as part of these- various trips, I

1 s tha-t pIR of the travel. 131 a: When was the London uiD? Do YOU recall? (4; A It WL( in the kbnury-Maich-Apjil. somewhere in tq thae,in 1995. 161 0: What other trips did you take that had an NPF 171 component to them? 19 A I went t o M i in the hll of 1995. principaUy to im attend a c o n f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c e in Shanghai sponsored by the Shanghai m] Institute of International Srudiu.'ht trip was paid for 211 by the U.N.Association of the United States through a gnnt rn that was rmde, I klieve. by the Ash Foundation. r ~ 1 And the way that worked out with the cost of the 241 air ticket over and back, wim the cost of what it would

[I] to add stops in Hong Kong andTaipei as weU. without any m additional cost 10 the U.N.&sociation. 1 did that and I PI spent a couple of days in Hong Kong. a couple of days in WI Taipa. (51 In Hong Kong 1 met with oBdZls of the British I government that my coUagues here in Washington and in m London in the UKFCO had set up. I met with people h m the m Far Eastern Economic Rcview and the Asia WaU Street pj Journal, Mends of mine who I had known before. q As the +edule would have it, I was in Hong Kong 11 ova the wtckcnd urd 1 did some sigJtUeeing. 1 met with 14 some pcopk in connection with my law practice. a Then I went on toTiipci where I had meetings 141 with represcntarives of the Republic of China government - 151 Mou Shih-Dq. whom I'd known, who was ,?mbas*r hex in 14 Washington, who is now the natiorul security adnsa to 71 Resident Lcc Tcng-Hui. I met with a number of p p k in q the ROC fofeign ministry. I mct with J.C. men, who, at 01 that time. was the Kuomintang's head of international ai relations. 1 met with ShawYu-Ming at the Institute of 111 International Relations inTaipei.And these were people ZI that I had ather known ordal t with or," some pxs,was SI meching: for thc Grst ciw on b v i y fomsg'i POW

zq have cost w to fly from Washington to Shulghu, I wal able Pap. 73

- '41 iSSUCS. SJ In neither Hong Kong norTaipei nor Shanghai. for

Page 68 - Page 73 (14) Min-U-Script@ Miller Reporthg Company, Inc.

Senate Committee on Gover tal Attairs Deposition or John noiton Special Investigation CONFIDENTIAL July 10,1997

Paps : [!I that matter. did I do any funchising for NPF at 111. I m guess that's it. PI 0 Prior to your going on thcx trips. was there any 1'1 discussion that you might do fund-raisiig for NPF with Is1 anyone at NPF? 161 A: On the trips? m QMmhmm. [el m Studies trip was at the invitation of the director. Guy

[tq McDoweU. whom I'd known at the Department ofJustice, and [ i t1 he invited mc because of my tenure in the Bush

A: I don't rhink so, no.The Institute of U.S.

(ra Administration as assistant &cretary for international [mi organizations. it41 Likcwisc. the t rh to Shanehai. I had been iii interested ih Hong.Kong sin& I was acMD in 1981-1982 when It61 the k S t discussions between the UK and the PRC for the [in eventual handovu took phcc and because acUQ one of cht (tai things we were rrying to do was replace the C u t u [!el Administration's licy of basic human needs international W dcveh ment rVi F a more mvketoriented approach and Hong mil Kon& P thouaht back in 1981-32. was a rime -DIG of

pal pn in the Bush Administration. I had testifid and written on

[ \ I the subject of why the ROC is enticled to representation in m the Lnited Narions separate from the PRC. and that was the pi main subwt of conversation with people there. 141 61 ' M E WITNESS: Ihe fail of 1995. I want to YV

AndTaipu. I had, again coming from my experience

- 7

MR. PERRY: 'That was back in the hll of 1995?

October- N O V C ~ ~ U . somc(hing-iikc that. m BY MS. ROSENBERG is] 0 Were them any othu foreign trips chat had any 101 sort of NPF component. besides the Landon trip and the Asia

poi uip? [!!I A Sometime in probably the early fail of 1995 I was I t t i invited by the Cairo Egypciul.Amerian Chamber of Commcrcc

1941 clients with interests in Cairo that I dcalt with on that [!SI trip but that was not redly an NPF trip. I was invited 1'61 because I was and introduced as the president of NPE ftn [!a1 from the minority staff has just step

w 0: Any other trips? vi1 14 p31 r i s i n g at dl for NPF? (261 pn anv of my trips.

4 [!9 to give a speech out there. which I did. I also had private

Us. ROSENBERG: Just for the record, David McKtln

IW By w. R O S E i k G :

A I took some other trips for my law pncticc. 0: And on any of thcx trips did you do any fun&

A I didn'f do any fund-raising for NPF overseas on

Paw 71 1'1 m Whereupon. at 11:30 a.m.. Ihc deposition was PI adiourned.1

US. ROSENBERG: Off the record.

CONFIDENTIAL Senate Committee on Govcr Special Investigation

$25,000 68:9 $3 63:lO $50,000 44:9; 68:6

1 1 5:16.21;715;2816 1,500 49:18 10 21: 11; 6720; 69: 1 10-minute 40:12 100 31:23 11 21:11 115062 14 12:lS 15 1215;44:4 15,000 SO:3 17th 6 2 18,000 50:3 18-month 14:19 19 7:9 1970 6 6 1970s 13:23; 16:17 1974 6:7 1976 11:7 1980.3613 1981 6:16.19 1981-'82 74:21 1981-1982 74:lS 1982 6:21 19836:23; 1O:l 1984 6:25 1985 7 2 1988 7 s 1989 7:7

63:14 1994 12:12; 13:ll; 15:17; 2224;2611,17;28:13; 51:11;63:14 1995 713; 17:21;20:25; 21:10;273;28:16;322; 45 14; 60:lS; 6 3 : ~ 9.13. 14; 71~15; 72:15.18; 75:4, 5.11 199CI996 343 18% 713; 17:22;43:10; 58:17;60.15;63:12

' 199379;11:1;125.10;

2 20 2818 25 2818;469

3 35 44:8

5 SOl(c)(4 1822; 19:18.19; 20:11.22 50th 71:16 535 51:4

7 ~~

70s 14:2

8 84 922

9 92 16:lS. 15 93 11:S;13:20.20;14:16, 16; 1615; m 2 1 94 14:18; 1519;246,7; 27:21 95 21:s; 223; 2623; 27:9; 29:6 33:9; 34:25;4224; 43:7,8;45:25; S4:3 9S96 29:4 96 21:5:42:24

A abandon 4613 abide 6S:7 able 2416;25:1;31:4; 52:8; 5823; 61:22; 7225 absolutely20:17 acadamk 379; 506 acadamks 41:17 .cCept24:1.3;2616; 64:22 accepted 24:13; 2611, 19;66:12;6&3.4 accepting 24:9.22 access s5:25 acting618 acthfiiies 21:10;27:7 actual 638 mctually 107; 271; 371; 43:14; 48:4; S5:17; 66:13; 6721;71:17 Id 5123 ~ d d 73: 1 ndditkn 25:6; 69:6 nddKinal2713; 63:7; 64:5;73:2 llddnss 325 ndjudication 822 ndjunct 14:l BdjUsted 25:7 ndjustmnts 25:13 Administration 617:

Viller Remrtincr Cnmonnv. Inc.

9: 13; 4 1:23; 74:12.25 Administration's 74: 19 administrator 6:22 advance 42:lO adviser 369; 39:22; 73:16 advising 54:25 AEI7:15 Aftairs 45.8;74;9:10 27:25 affiliiated 7:18; 69:lS affiliations 59:16 again 4:23; 1015; 509; 74:24 agancias 8:12;426 Agency 620 Agenda m6; 3016; 45:5:60:8 ago 2620;66:15.19 agreed 166; 19:l; 24:17, 22; 2S:lo; 29:18; %4 agreeing 4:12 ahead m 2 0 AID 622;8:23.25;74:15. 17 air 71:10;7224 airing 3419 airport 6217 allocation 189; 72:ll aImost63:5;61:14;65:1: alone71:2 along 21:1;61:21 already 27A7.21; 283; 4620; 474.12 alterations 25:12 Although 7:23; 63:21 always 42:ll; 74:22 ambassador 73:lS A m r k a 1212; 155; n:6;30:16;323.12;45:5 S1:9,11; 60:9 American 6:2; 14:l; 33:21.23;7012 among 345; 3625; 4221 amount 19:9; 67:20 analogy 33:21.23 analysis 1619 analysts 34:lt anniversary 71:16 nnnounced 11:2;2721. 22 announcement 11:25 mnsmred 29:22 inybody 3219; 3822; 53:9;61:16;70:20.22 nnyone 12:17; 15:1,21; 17:lS; 2610; 29:23; 302; 31:17.20,2s;32:12; 5013; 52:21;64:21; 56:11;74:5 nnyway 6723 anywhere 53:lG mppcaling 37:6

Min-U-Scriot@

Deposition of John Bolton 0 July 10,1997

application 1920,21, 24;20:1.5.10,16,24 applications 41:24; 42:3 applied 1822 appointed 9:lS appointment 62:9 appreciate 389 approach 15:15;74:20 approach& M13.21; 3818;475;655 approval 41:25 Approximately 1718 April 28:15 area 91; 1823 araru41:2 arena 45:3 argument 3433 around 11:l; 17:lk 2718 28:lO. IS , 22;379; 39:4; 4 1:7; 49:18; 50:5,7; 6216 arranged 54:s arrangemt %:2 a m y 17:23 arrive 61:8 arrived 2722 article 13:lO; n:l; 29:s; 4912 articles 20:7; 4821; 493, 6, 8 articulate 4025; 41:lO Ada 7218.22;738;75:9 aside 70:2 aspects 4814 assamble 2 7 M assistant 621;7:3.5,8; 9:9;31:13,14,14;74:12 assistants 3210 assocl.ie 615 association 60:18.22; 7221;73:2 associations 41:16; 45:17;61:7; 6S:ll assuming 33:14 AT&T 382 attachment 518 attend 7219 attended 4 6 8 53:4; S9:19 mttorney 7:3, 5 bttorneys 2024 mmctad 1612 hugust 1O:l auspices 6712 author 3322 hvenue 467 werage 30:21; 4 4 3 mvoid 5723 i w r e 3017; 52:21; 56:15.16;65:22.24; %11,14.15.17.19; 59:25

B back 228; 43:4; 48:14; 51:19; 52:lO; 5724; 61:10;64:21;7224; 74:21;75:4 background 5:15;65; 18:14;4010;722 backwards 7:18 Bank2213,15,21.24; 23:s banking 6714.15 Barbara 31:6,10.14 Barbour 11:s. 6,8,16; 159.13. I S , 24; 163,14, 22; 17:lO; 198; 22:9; 23:3. 11,23;24:8;2613,18; 3019; 31:4;3210;47:14; 61:23;62:10 Barbour's 1923; 243; 29:7;3210 Baroody 13:s. 12.22; 14:3.4,7.25 Baroody's 14:3 basad 25:7 basic 74:19 baskally 1019;274; 28:13.14; 30:22; 326; 3722; 4823; 4923; 50:8, 12; 53:9; 54:17; 55:14; 60:19;63:11; 71:lO; 73:23 basis 30lS,18; 31:18, 1 9 3821; S1:23; %.17, 25;61:4;63:13,21 becam 6:14.19.21.24; 7:5.lZ;ll:lO;12:11;14:9; 276 becomo 1614 becoming 194; 1513, 16.22; 164.11; 22:9 began 27:14; 29:s begin 275 beginning 2813;3618; m.15; 63:16; 724 believe 14:17; 17:ll; 225; 23:25; 24:4; 2522 33:3.8;3721.24; 39:23; 45:24;48:7; 52:11,16; 53:23; 54:23; 55:3,12; 5613,22;5810;6220; %:9; 68:9;71:8; 7222 ~ lkved 20:9;66:16 Bell 381 OW 28:16.19; 29:25 iesider 48:ll; 759 last 32:21;388.22; ~S:I M e r 11:12 pig 4317 3ill 14:2 iilkd71:8.25 lit 16:s; 18:23; 20:21; !8:5;35:15;45:6.20; i7:25 iits 53:24

(I) $25,000 - bits

0 Deposition of John Bolton July 10,1997

Blalock 31:13 Blank 223

:ks W 5 . 8 b a r d 18:20; 21:19; 29:22; 3224; 33:2.4.6. 10,11,14; 55:14,16 Bob 13:25 Boehner 333, s Boehner's 339 BOLTON 43.10; 5:17. 20,24;6:1;7:11,19,23; 40:16 Bolton's 5:7.15

-

i book 275 . . . Eork 1325 .~ both 1824; 1924 m 2 . ' -25; 333; 45:20; 5020;

': &.14;67:14 branch 812 break4013.17

.:: b r i d 16:9; 21:2 : briefly 6:4.17;7:10;

-. bring 32:24; 331; 52% ; .British 71:20;72:8;73:5 : broad 1722; 576 . ~ . broadcast 53:14,16.20. :. '25; S4:2,5. 12,14; 55:25; . ~ . ~ ~ 1 1 , 1 1 . 1 9 , 2 5

1810;21:1

;adcasts %6;57:14 broadly 613;41:9 bmke 639.11 Brooks 37:14;39:15 Brothers 23:6,8;65:21; 701 brought 2713;5814 budget 182; 3014; 43:19; 44:4 bulk 1810; 23:ll; 6S:7.9 Buriing 615.24;72;

Bush 9: 13; 74: 1 1,2S business 5:25; 25:16; 32:1.13;59:15.20,22; 60:22;71:25

'8:18 .

C DSpan 53:17 cab 52:12;61:8.9 cable 56.3 Caim 75:12.14 cakulus 4218 calibrate 43~16 call 2619; 28:19; 29:2; 30:23.24;31:10,11;

'17;63:8;6521 c8h?d4:4;7:23; 11:ll; 173; 27:3; 207; 32:3; 43:17;65:25;66:18 calls 54:23;61:24,25;

.62:1S .. came 11:15; 13:l; 15:8;

1624; 24:19 26:23; 27:9. 17,18 2822; 33:s; 37:20; 402O;4821; 498; 52:ll; 53:1855:14.16; 58:lO; 59:17;64:24;65:2;66:7; 675,11,12;69:11 can 16:2; 19:2; 20:18.19; 3823; 4021; 45:25; 55:10.23;61:4;64:1.8 candidate 17:7 Capacity 74;71:4 capitol43:14;465; 528 car 528 Cam 21:14 career 39:3 carrkd 4823 Carter 7418 Cory 284;4017 CaEe 39:17; 63:12; 64:l C m e 8 2025;4619.21. 21; 693; 73:22 cast 41:s categorkr 49:21.23 center 5020 CEO 382 CEOs 37:17.23;3811. 12; 401.4,7.8,11 certain 35:22;43:21 certainly 1619;40:8; 429; 53:7;61:13;65:7; 70:23.25 chains 19:ll chaired 128 chairman 1019; 11:'iO; 1614; 1820; 29:22; 3713, 14;65:6 Chamber 7512 chanaed 49:22.22 changes n : l O . l l , l S ; 2814 channels sS:25 charge7:s; 9:19; 10:17; 2720.24 32:1; 35:6; 4817:)0:13 check 5622; 6 5 4 &23; 69:s che&s6S:13;6911 Chan 73:18 ch id 3i:i5 China73:14 choose 55:4 chosen 4:24 Christmas 24:4.6 circles 34:23 civil 7:6 chritiiation 4724 chrity 31:25;486; &io clear 1818; 19:13;24:15; 32:17 clerical 155 Cl in t 820; 2523 clients 8:13;92; 75:14 Closed 37:22

e on Governmental Affairs C0NFIDE"IlA.L

closely 3018 closing 369 Club465 cothairs 129 Coast 69:14,20 colleagues 726;73:6 College 6 6 comfortable 599 coming 57:9; 6593; 74:24 command 19:12 comments 42:4 Co1nmerce75:12 commercial 324; 54:15. 25 commisslon 68:22,2(; b9:6.8.10.16 commissioners 422 commitment 254 committed 54:s Committee 4:4,8;71; 922; 104.6.16.18.20; 25:25; 39:lO; 53:s committees 378: 51:21 Common 13:ii; 21:16; 271. 2.7; 282; 29:5;45:4; 48:18; 49:4.16 502,lO. 13,15,23.25;51:17;60:8 Commonwealth 72:7 community 417 companies 9:3; 4 2 3 45:9,16; 4620,21;474; 65:20 Company 37:25; 633; a . 2 comparable b3:19 compensation 9:25; 102.3; 1724 competent 598 competition 4225 compiled M:4 c0mp)SrC~ 29:9; 70:19 cornlex 42:18 component 7217; 759 concepts 42:24 concern 421 1 concerned 2015;42:1.5 concerning 37:l concertcd70:19 concluded 338; 5021; 54:3 concurred 2912:5911 conduct 275 conducted 21:12 conference 35:7; 36:6, 21;3019.22;39:1.17; 41:23;44:18 53:12; 71:15.19.19;72:19 conferences 29:iO. 14; 30:15;4220;53:7 confidence 2214 confident 20:2 confirmed 73.8

U:-.V.Cm.r&

confirming 5:17;38:14 conflict 24:18 Congress 810; 36:25; 37:1641:5;43:8 50:4; 51:4; 52:4.19.22 congressional 15:17; 42:ll; 51:25 Congressman 33:3,5,9; 39:15 connection 13:lO 153; 385; 42:13; 68:11,13; 695; 73: 12 conservative 34:17 consider 2716 considered 34:17; 37:6; 51:24;63:13 constituency 37:7 constructed 41:18 consultant 9:25; a 2 3 consulting 679 contact 8:12; 14:s; 15:24; 39:8;60:23; 71:23 contacted 5:2.4,11 contacts 3024; 53:11; 64:lO contained 27:l; 37:19 contains 64:s contemplating 47:7 contexts 39:13 continue 2319; 24:16; 27:6: 56:6 continued 7:18; 25:s contract 8:14.23 contribute 1221.25; 34:21;49:3 contributed 34:21; 474 contribution 44:18.22; 46:20; 49:12; 60:24; 63:25;64:23; 65:24; 66.12,14,20;67:5,5,11; 68:s. 8,13; 707 contributions 23:15; 4414; 54:9; 56:18;6223; 65:15.18.22;66.17; 67:20; &25; 69:23,25; 70:5.6.24;71:1 contributor 49:19 contributors 18:16 49:19,25; 50:ll; 59:24; 60:7.12;65:7,9 conundrum 3617 convention 109 conversation 13:17; 163.9.10.21;17:1.9 1%; 20:25; 23:3.10; 2411;49:7;753 conversations 14:13. 14. M, 15~6; 2023; 24:13, 24; 2621; 32:15;47:17 convince 59:7 convinced 67:19;70:4 coordination 622 Copeiand 66.13 copies 21:16,17; 37:22;

corporate 37:2.17; 3 8 16; 4 1: 14,20.22; 49:19;709.23 corporation 60.17; 66:3. 5 corporations 64:6; 65:lO. 16.23;7025 correcting 47:25 correctly 51:9 cost 43:25.25;44:1; 50:19; 5616,17;7211, 23,24,25; 73:2 costcffective 54:4 couldn't 19:s; 7 0 11 Council 121.2.4.6.9, 14.15. IS; 13:5,14;4024; 41:3;SO:lO councils 11:25; 1216; 49:18; M:l1; 51 :6; 522; 57:13; 59:15 counsel 4:4.7.13,15, 21.24;5:2.4.12;6:18.19; 202.2.4.5;21:22.23; 22:l. 2; 54:24 count 33:2 counterparts 727 country 28:24;36:14; 506,7;6216 couple 7:17; 12:7,10; 14:22; 172; 2621;31:12; 45:13; 53:18; 57:14.19; 62:4; 7019;73:3,3 course 31:22.24 Court 3 6 1 5 covering 59:19 Covington 615.24;72; 8:18 craft 3517 Crawford 27:24 created 121;28:6 creativity 1616 credit 35:14 cr i tkking 42:l Cultural 65:25; 66:6 &7; 69:24 Cummings 48:2 current S24;53:12 currently 29:lO cut 6719

D.C 6 3 dada 64:3 dadada 64:4 daily 59:21 date 17:12;63:11 David 75:17 day 197;4817.17; 61 : 10; 703 days 195; 36: 12; 71: 18; 73:3.3 deal 21:6:60.21

-

. . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . .

. .

. .~.

. ..

. - .

3

dealing 32:ll. 11 22; 59: 14 dealings 20:21 dRicuit 41:14; 427 dealt 3912; 73:22; 7514 direct 23:16; 65:12 debate 34:5,8.14.16.18; direction 32:18 35:5.12;43:11 directly 21:6;31:5

25;23:1,2;63:4.5.6.13, l5;74:9 14.15,18.19.22 directors 21:20; 40:24; debts 23:l 41:3;51:5 December72.13; 168; discusr 1:8, 1211;

desk 2 6 2 48:21; 49:s

debt 18:6;2211,12,23, director6:25;9:22; 10:8,

26:11,17;64:19 1724; 182,5;25:3;269;

k i d d 2224;2616; discuss^ 11:1],]1; 35: 10; 3 ~ ~ 1 7 ; 47~19

46:9;49:14 1719; 183.8.17.21.24; deciding 49:2.14 1921.23; 24:12; 29:13. deckmn38:16;4610; 16;30:14.15.16;50:19; 55:15, 17,19 declsbn-mkar 6023 discussing %9; 6924 dsbbn-mking 4022 discussion 13:14; 184; decisions 30:5.6.13; 228.9;23:7;33:20;35:21; 358; 374 3625; 375.10; 42:22; decisions-makers 37:3 436; 74:4 decrease 2810;635.19 discussions 576;7021; decreased 3415 74:16 decreasing 28:12 dispute821 define 42M. 5523 disputes 814.23

70:24;72:3

degree 6:l l distinct 61: 14

E el 487.8 each 3S:lS. 16;3814.19,

eager 23:17 earlier 23:20; 53:21; S4:lO; 60:2 early 616; 1323; 142;

71:15;75:11

I9;41:18.18;4618~5617

16:8;21:5;42:24;43:5.11;

W i l y 7 0 : l l Eutern73:8 Economic 73:s d h r 4 8 : 1 6 editorial 49:9 editorship educatbnal 64,8,10 M23:1;2,.12;32:4; a22 at(cctive4611.14 atfort42:12.19;45:7; 7014.20;71:22 cftortt721 EgyptianAmerican 7 C . . 9

delegates 10:s Democrat 50:s Democretic 5218; 53:s Democrats 53:s document 1211; 21:9; 5316; 5821.22; 599; Denning 286; 303; I 64:7 I 60:22;67:22;70:11;71:9;

I,.*'.

Ehrenrkh 31:14 either 5:12; 27:21; 3814.

distribution 4225 District 3615 Division 7 6 254221:47:6:49:15;

~.

I 2&3.15;68:17 55:17 - documentation 21:15. Dennlna's 286 1 1P

done 8:17;25:10; 47:6.9; 5225; 5322; 573.8; 584; a 2 donors 49:ll; 59:12.13; 64:22 door 6513 down 363; 37:22;4216 466; 55:s. 8; 655 Or 64:3 draft 1018 drafts 1211

~ ~.

elected 33:t; 524; 57:12 I election 15:17; 1615; Depp.rt&nt 36:12; I i k m e n t e d 63:25; 39:ll. 13.1C587;7410 a.12

71:ll employed 14:24 employment 5:8;612; 10:24; s 9 . 1 0 enacted 43:s encouraga 33:19; 34:s encouraging 34:s .. end 713; 60: 15; 63:15.23 ended 54:4 engaga 277 eniov46:12

deposition 4:13; 5:3.5, 7,12.20;38:5 c!emgubta 3416; 35:13 deregulation 3414; 37:2;4224

. describe 6:4.12; 16:2; 2825; 40:21; 46:24; 66:2 deicrlbsd 29:3.4; 35:s. 12; 4S:12; 48:12; 4921; M):7;62:I describes 33:25; 6218 descriptions 6212 design 63:23 detail 2220 271;4720 determined 43:13.20; 51:20; 59:13 develop 1613 developing 3318 Development 620; 6 ~ ; 7420~22 Diane 2723; 47:lO; 58:14.19; 59:21;60.16, 20;61:16;628,8.14,19; 6725; 70:21 dhmnt 87; 31:23;

16,17;4213;45:16,17; 49:10;53:19. l9;57:13.

34:11,11, 11, ]2;35:]6,

documents 20:s; 38:4.6; 55:16 Dole 14:4;3611.15; 39:19 dollar 63:20.20 domestic 9:6.7;6715 dominant 341.1 Donald i5 : i i

- ~.

Drug 41:23.24 enbush 59:9;65:2 duly 4:5 entail 166.11 during624;714,19; Enterprise62; 141 815; 14:19; 1610;23:3, Enterprises67:11,13,

24;32:2;44:4;65:22;70:4 entertainment 68.1 dutks917;1016 entire39:3 *

10.23; 24:16.24;31:22, 17.23;68:11;70:3

33:s. 9 electrical 431 eliminate 636 eliminated 28:6 elan 15:l; 1715;2610;

321.13.22;35:2038:12; 4021.22; %16.25;

29:23;30:2;31:17.20;

61:17;69:1.10;70:22;

Deposition OF John Bolton Jdy 10,1997 -

entirely 5724; 58:18 entities 6716 entitled 75:1 entity65:24;66:15,16 environment 57:3.4. 15 €PA 42:s; 57:20 q u a l 63:3,5

essentially 1812; 21:l; 23:21;34:12 establish 54:18;71:23 established 3622 Estates 6638 estimate 61:s estimated 199 even 4215; 56:2;61:18; 63:9.11 cvent69:14. 19 events 43:17;44:24; 45:11;4811 eventual 74:17 eventually 276 60:4; 67:19 eventuate 13:15 every 51:3;64:1 everybody 32:16;37:20 exactiy 1620;63:5 examination 44.7 examined 4:6 example 823,24; 31:10; 34:8;41:22; 4223; 43:G 60:17;71:13; 7421 examples 45:2 exchange 4912; 5511 1; 70: 12 exciting 1620 exclude 62:4 excluding 70:l Excuse 25:22 executive 625;8:12; 921; 10:s. 15;3725; 381 Exhibii 516.20 existed 562 existence 10:25 Fxisting 1722 expected 188 expenditures 63:2.9 expenses 189; 526;

experknce 68; 18:12; 19:11;2012;23:21; 59:s; &4; 74:24 experiences 6:lO experts 41:4 explain 6039 explained 1924; 22:25; 23:lS explaining 18:15 explanatory 64:s expressed 22:13 extensively 202 extent 34:13; 35:23;

equally 21:2

63:3;71:2,7

39:14 extra 71:24 extraordinarily 2014

F t a c i l i 5414 fact 1821; 19:21; 25:7 fair 35:25;72:11 fairly 169; 362;4623 faithful 59:21 fall 12:s. 10; 13:20; 14:16; 7218;75:4,5. 11 famlllar 4024; 6510 family+wned 7013 h r 23:13;25:2033:17; 73:s h m 5212;71:10 fascinated 74:23 fashion 613 father 14:3 FDA 42:2 feared 41 :I 5,20 February 619,21;34:25 February-March-April 7214 Federal 8:21; 19:lO; 36:15 tee54:15.18.25;55:1; 6 n O . 18, 21;69:9 feel 274; S6:l feh 43:s ferment 1616;34:22 few 395; 6S:ll; a 1 9 Fkrce 15:ll. 12 figure 22:16.17 figures 18:4 file 37:20 tiler 33:16;47:3;57:2; 64:12.18.18,19 filing 201 filled 2&3;42:10 final 21:23; 35:7; 55:lS finally 691 finance 58:7;64:18 financial 185; 26:7; 3012 tind 38:22; 67:25 tlnding l l : i 2 firad 3222 firm711; 223.3,s; 25:13,20;6714,14.15, 1s first 4:5;617; 1025; 1k23.24; 13:23; 15:13. 15.21.24; 162.21; 222, 9,21; 233.1423; 24:s; 2623; 27:2.9 31:12; 322; 34:9; 35:l. 2.24; 361.16. 20;3919.24;40:8;43:21; 54:3; 58:l. 3;63:14;6711; 73:23;74:16 ti 49:9

(3) dealing-fit

Senate Committee on mvernmentai Affairs

18:ll. 12;2312.13,16. 21;27:21i44:24;45:11;

five -Justice (4)

Deposition of John Bolton July 10,1997

33:7;35:22;45:19;47:14; 545; 55:6.7;56:4;58:1. . .

Min-u-script@

five 58261:7 fiUed 259; 43:22 f!V 72:25

b1:22;6214;64:2.14

followed 36: 1 1 follows 4:6 Food 41:23 footage 53:22 tor-profit 665 foray 9 .3 Forbes 59:22 Foreign 121.15.18;

:;~39:10;574;65:16.20,23; .. .. f i 2 ; 68.11; 69:25;704,5, .. .IS. 20;71:1.3.5.8;723.

i 'tomign-own.d65:16

;;harm 1220 <~~tormal610;3815

OW 3623; 47:19;

followup a 2 1

. .

i . 5,7;73:18.23;75:8

forget 3322

; formation 11:2.8,17.18, .19,21

::. ,formad 299 fl former 72:6

;formul.41:18 r . . forth 5724 : ;'Fortune 5922 ''~-.ctrum7:12; 11:9.14.17.

#2221217.22.2(;13:2. ~~7,15.17;14:10,13,21, 25; 15:1;7.8; n3;34:24; 53:1;587.8;59:17 forums 2824; 4020 tound41:12,13;69:1 Foundation 65:25; 68:s; 6924: 7222 Foundation's 6 . 7 founding 1925 four 61:7 traction 613 frama 131% 19:2 Fran 281; 326;4824; 54:20 tmnkly 25:17 tree 274; W23

. .

. . :. :

trquently41:12.13; 57:7.10 friendly 14:6 triends 2013;73:9 Fry 224.5 fulfill 56.5 fulfilled 255 fully 19: 1 functions 14:22; 2018 tund 60.25;61:1975:22

.d-raiser 23:19; 4735;

tund-misers 4614; 59:l d 2 1

fund-raising 1622.24;

481 1; 58:660.3.4.5; 61:5.15,23;626,11.21; 64:9;65:8; 72:1;74:1.4; 75:24 fundamentally 34:17 funds 44:12;67:6 further 49:25; 566

G Gary 749 g.Ve71:16.17 Gaylord 66:21,22; 67:9. 18;6&1.21.25;69:7.8. 15, 18 Gee %21 general 6 19; 73,5; 1219;13:17;18:3;44:11, 12; 54:9; 59:19 gonerallzed 12:25 generally 3610 Gerald 3724 Gingrich 45:20;672; 69:19 given 37M;42:11; 49:ll goings-on 59:20 Good4:10,11;29:18; 33:23; 43:24; 48:20; 5720 GOP-TV 5314 ~.

Government 8:21; 19: 1 I ; 72:8; 736.14 Governmental 4:5.8 governor 5715.17 Grace 2723;479;481. 2.5;58:11.14.18;622.3; 7022 graduated 66.14 grant 7221 granted 19:24; m6.17 granting 2011 grassroots 2824 great 29:19;36:20 greater 63:15,17 groups 5022 guarantee 235.9 Guesnier 27:20; 58:12. 13 guess 33:24223;469; 61:13;74:2 guest 472 guests 38:10;46:16; 5223;5711.12,22 guidance3218

H Haj m13.15 Heley 11:5,6.8.16; 15:9 22:9; 23:3.11,23; 2613. is. 25; 29:3. 7.22 307. a. ~. . .~ . . 14,19;31:4.9;32:10. 10;

CONFIDENTIAL. specbl Investigation

20,22; 59:8,25;61:23; 62: 10; 64: 1 1; 6 7 19; 723 Haiey's 4610 half 1718;54:2;61:9 hall 43:22 handouts 3719 handover 74:17 handled a 2 4 handling 2024 happen 43:lO 61:l l happened 5623 happening 4314 happy 43:3 hemsred 575% hard 30:21;43:16;61:2 harder 42:s Harrison 2723; 4710 5814.19;59:21;60.16; 61:16;628.14.196725; 70:22 haven't 5:11; 384 head3724;561.9; 73:19 headed 14:2 headquarters 467 health 21:13 heard67:24;68:12.14, 16.17;707 hearings 43:15 Heather 58:13.15 hello 31:23 help 1613; 51:21 helpful 13:13 helping 1618 here's 5622; 64:4 high 65; 3710;42:9; 55:6,9 high-level 36:24 highesl63:lO highlight 35:17 Hill 8:20; 43:14; 465; 52:8 himself 19:14 him 5822 hired 58:24 hiring 58:18 history612 hoc 51:23 Holly 31:13 Hollywood 68: 1 honestly 53:20 Hong 73:1,3.5. IO, 25; 74:15,20 honoraria 5213.15 hoped 1814;34:21; 3623; 45:9;62:15;7211 host 57:23; 58:l. 1.5 hotel42:16;43:23; 52:9 hour 1718; 54:2;61:9 hourly 61:12 House 37:13.14;41:4;

Howard 1914.15 '-

6 7 1

human 74:19

I ideall:ll.11.14.16; 16:12.25;24:25;29:4.7, 9,13.18.1943:24;63:18 ideas 17:21;41:2 identification 522 identified70:11;71:6 identify 19:14 identity 59:12 illness 224 i m d i a t e l y 29:25 importance 18:24 importclnt 1623;48:22; 61:20 Impression &:IO improper 25:25 include 4823 included 21:11 incorporation 208 increase 28:10;63:4.18 increased 34:15 indication 50:l individual 11:4; 3 2 11; 38:19.20.20 individually 3818 individuals 9:4;31:16; 329;47:1.22; S0:22; %19; 65: 11 industrialized 3614 industries 47:6;66:18 industry 37:17;41:24; 46:17.18; 59:20 inefficient 20:19 information 19:23; 215, 8.19.21; 267 inhted 14:13,14.15 input 1021 inquiries 54:21 inquiry 26:s; 59:16 Institute 62;7:10; 14:l; 71:14; 723% 73:2@ 74:s insulting 25:21 integrity 25:25 intellcctual16:16; 34:4. 22 intellcctualiy 34:1 intended 23:18; 369; 63:21 interesl24:19;44:17 interested 16:4,17; 1813;35:25; 37:3.8; 4622;478,13; 59:18; 74:15 interesting 497 interests 75:14 internal 52:l International 620; 7:s; 8:6: 92.3.10.20 21:13; ~ , . ... 38: I; 72:20; ?3:19,21;

74:12.19.22 into 1021; 28:24;31:23; 38:16; 58:3; 59:12;63:13. 14; 64:s introduced 45:20; 75:16 invariably 64:14 investigation 4:14; 5:19 25:15 investment 67:14.15 invitation 38:15; 71:10, 13; 74:9 invitations 4718 invite3811.12.21; 47:12.22 invited 39:17;40:18.21: 45: IS; 47:15; 523; 74:ll; 75:12. I S inviting 40:19; 71:l l involved 8%; 11:19; 23:17;35:19.20.23; 3617.20;371;4022; 475;521; 54:ll; 5919; 60:4,10 involvement 13:64019; S5:lO; 69:15 1RS 1922; 2013,18.21; 21:5.6;22:6 issue 27:2; 35:24; 50:3; 51:3; 569 issues 21:12.13; 2912; 3012; 33:20; 34:6 35:9. 18;4025;42:21;43:10; 52:25; 57:25; 73:24 itself 50:20

J J.C 73:18 Jack 3714;663 Jackie 289; 301; 31:ll Jackson 5736 January 7:9.13,15; 26:23; 27:9,14; 28:16; 296; 33:9 Jay 368; 39:21 Jessica a 1 7 /ob 1623; 23:22,24; 25:10;266;4820; 59:s Joe a21.22 JOHN 4:3;61 ioin 4:1% 1315 joined 616; 33:3 Journal 59:22; 73:9 judge 36 15 iudgment 59:6 Iudgments 49:s Judy 13:9; 14:25; 28:3 Ju& 623;9:25 lumping 20:20 iurisdiction 37:15 Justice 3612;39:13; 74:lO

CONFIDENTIAL Senate Committee on Gover Special Investigation

-~ ~

K-

Lugar 128

K6l:S Kassebaum 12:9 keep 4725;61:12 keeping 18:24 Kelly 2720; 5812.13 Kentucky 62:20 kept 64:iS key g.25 Keyworth 36:& 39:21 kind84; 127;375;41:6, lo; 4623; 52:2; 575; 60:11.20;64:13 kinds 41:25; 5713 Kirk 31:7,13 knew 14:9;409,10.25; 41:&43:22,23;4712; W.21.21; 5920; 69:22 knowing 2037; 59:9 knowledge 11:24; 3221; 55:l knowledgeable 51:24 known 1 1 6 3222; 39:9. 19.21; 44:s; 6 7 16; 7 0 12; 73:9.15,22;74:10 Kong 73:l. 3.5.10.25; 74:15.21 Kuomintang'r 73:19

L Lax-a-l-t 1011 laid 29:4 large 37:11;65:13 Largely 4624 last 19:3;481 late 1617;21:5; 22:3; 4223

.Mer 12:11;288;45:6 laundry 5719 ~w6:7,9.14;711,14, 18;84.6;9:2; 1324.25; 1823; 223.3; 2416; 2% 5.8,13.20;53:12;6714. 15; 71:9; 73:12; 75:21 lawmakers 34:ll iawyer 24:18 lawyers 20:13 Laxiit 10:9.11 krder 36:19 kadcrs 373 barn 1025 learned 11:23;7018 barning 11:3 k.tt 11:6; 14:6,23; 21:15; 39:23; 53:4.24; 63:15 kave 27 18 leaving 27A2.22; 65:20; ID:2 Lea 73:17

leery 61:6 left 6%; 7:2. io; 223; 27:25; 283; 5813.16; 64:19 legal 66:4 legislation 3616;43:15 legisiatiie 7 4 legwork 47:s Lerner7:11.19.23;8:4. 8.9.16 kss 63:17 lesser 39:14 letter 5:17; %21;64:2. 15 kners 38:14;64:9.16 kvel 2ik15.20; 362; 3 7 lo; 429; 63: 10.10 Levin 3724 libnrks 50:6.7,18 Lbutonant 5717 lighting 44:2 Ukewise74:14 Linda 222 lines 21:1 Lisa 4:13 list 13:1;472;49:20.21. 22;504,8;6215.17 listed 70:12 Listening 12:ll; 155; 323.12;51:9.11 lists 4922; 50:2.7 litigation 8 7 liib 165; 192; 2020; 28:5;35:15;45:6,20; 5717.25 loan 2221.23.24;23:5,8 loans 63:7.21 lobbied 5221 lobbying 88.9.10.15. 17.18.19;92; 52:18; 53:12 local 9 6 London 71:13.15.18. 24;7213;73:7;75:9 long 1625; 17:17; 19:4. 5;20:11,14;222;51:12; 6 2 3 longer 285; 3415 loOk27:4;4215 looked 6716 looking 41:9; 6723; 7023 loose 19:ll loosely 5222 lost 1616 lot610; 1223; 1910; 2823;3214;33:19; 34:4; 41:6;4711;5&4;60:3.3; 66:24.25;7024 lob 19:11

loved 50: 15 Lon io19

lunch 43:25 luncheon 3610

M mail 1223; 23: 16; 65: 12 mailed 50:2,8 mailing 1220; 13:l main 75:3 mior 29:lO. 13;33:20; 3613;372;4211;43:9; 59:25 majority 4:1636:19; 6222.23 making 35:7;38:17; 49:12; 50:19; 55:20 managed 471 nmnagemnt 1819; n.15; 3 7 17 managing 1817; 48:18 Manhattan710 many 23:16;28:17; 3919; 41:24; 42:4; 468; 51:4; 52:ll March 74; 2815; 34:25 marked 516.21 markctorknted 74:20. 22 Mary 2724 material 64:s materials 21:io matter44:17;74:1 matters 5:7;813.21,22; 1925;725 May 77; 37:22; 38:4; 45:25;461;4723;49:20, 22.22; 51:6;623;68:21 maybe 39:24 McAllister 31:8. 15 McDowell7410 MCi 38:2 MsUean 75:17 McMannis724 mean 23:13;42:15; 47:24; 61:6; 624 means 55:22 mechanism 11:12 nmchanisms 5914 d m 50:7;71:21 mct 16:6; 18:16;61:9; 64:3 meeting 128; 1715.17, 19,25; 18t; 2221; 23:23; 24:15; 29:16; 33:lO W.13; 7323 m t i n g r 12:7.10; 15:4; 24:8,10;26:18,22; 33:12, 15;~.13;61:1,8,15; 627; 64:lO; 65:9 7313 megaconference 34:9; 352; 39:16.24; 41:18; 42:23; 476.7; 5P24; 579, a

Deposition of John Bolton J d y 10,1997

megaconferences

405.7.9,17;43:13.18.

5624; 577; 59:17; 60:s member 10:7; 12% 21:19;51:4 member0 10:8;32:24; 36:25;37:7.16;41:4,5; 49:17;M:4.9,10;51:6. 25; 52418.22; 71:20,21 mantion 1622; 23:s; 3215;4810 mentioned 9:l. 21; 13:6; 2216.17,22; 23:20; 24: 14; 31: 12; 3423; 5624;69:20 met 13:23; 148; 15:12; 171 1; 197; 203.9; 39:15, 16; 645% 71:19; 735.7, 11.17,18,20 metaphor 34:4;43:5 mid 36:12 might 1313.14.16; 166. 11; 422; 44:18; 4622; 4713; 52:19,21; 53:3.22; 54:21; 573; 59:18,23; 61:7;6718;744 Mike 13:s. 12; 14:3.4,25 million 63:lO mind 20:14; 26:25; 57:s mine 13:10;2013;46:10; 73:9 ministry 7318 MINORITY 4:7.14; 5:2; 19:16; 61:14;7518 minute 2620 minutes 172;33:11.14 miasion 2624; 27:3; 44:20 Mississippi 31:3; 57:16, 16 Mmhmm 74:7 Molly 31:7 money 22:12,13,14; 64:25; 65:% 66:7.7.10; 67:lo 7015.20; 71: 1 month 54:2 monthly 565;67:18; 69:9 months 322; 54:3 moon 33:25;43:5 Mor 6713 mom 1923; 2622;47:20; 51:20;74:20 morning 410.11 most 2314; 376;40:25; 437; 52:9; 64:6 mostly 4521; 4610; 4820; 50:17; 51:25 Mou73:lS move 11324 moving 28:24; 58:6

21 : 11; 275; 2825; 29:T 35:16; 36:3.24; 3719;

19;44:10,15,23; 51:19; 52:5.14.17,23; 53:4.14;

nuch 2215; 24:25; 251; 54:7: 35:19;43:2;44:4; 4612; 59:5;60:25;61:5; 58:5.7;69:3;7018 myself 20:s 30:9; 33:3; 593

N name 5:24; 176481; j5:24;68.12,14.16,17. 20;69:17 named 31:16;329.11; )8:11;50:22 names 31:12; 59:13.25; 55:lO; 67:16; 709 National712; 11:9.14. 17,20.22; 1217,21; 13:Z 6.7.15.17;14:10.12.21. 24; 151,7,8;273;53:5; 586,8; 591&73:16 nationals 65:16 Nations 13:i 1; 71:16; 752 natural 376 nature 3413;44:20 necessarily 2714;

necessary 25:lO needed 3022 needs 7419 negotiated 5513 neither 7325 net 41:8;63:15 Network55:ll networking 72:l network. 53:18; 563 Nevada 10:12 new 28:7;3224;41:24 Newsletter 21:17;4824; 49:16,17,24;51:17 newspaper 386 newspapers 7018 next 722; 179 nights 71:24 Nitlart. 6838 nkty-grkty 4216 non-U.S e 1 0 noncongressionai 39% nor 73:25,25 Norfolk 5718 normal 4413; 54:s Northwest 6 2 not-for-profit 16.16 notary 4:6 notion 29:9,13 November 15:19; 168; 23:24;75:6 NPF5:2.5,8.12;720; 819; 1024; 15:9,22; 1611.12; 17:21; 18:6.15. 17.21; 19:19,25; 2045. 22;21:7.11,17,19,23;

63:20; 64:ll

(5) K - N P F

Deposition of John Bolton Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs J e 10,1997 CONFIDENTIAL special Investigation

person 15:25; 23:14; 26 13; 35: 1 1; 3822; 4810; 6021; (i6:13; 67:21;68:23 personal 22:4; 25:16,20 26:7; 3824; 39:2.4.7; 71:9 personally 35:24;3811. 13;39:25;40:4; 46:12; 59:lO 62:14 personnel 32:6 persons41:17 perspective 413 perspectives41:10 persuade 3823 penlnence 264 pertinent 35318 phase 293 Phil 415; 25:22; 26:i phone 14:20,21; 16:5,9. 10.25; 24:11,12 24; 2618.21;60:13; 62:13,16 physically 461 pick 546 piece3815 pieces 5324 pika 65:13,13 place 2717;45:23;463. 6,s. 6; 52:9; 7417 plan 7020,25 planning 57:7 Platform 71;9:22; 103, 5.15.18.18.20.21 Vease 5:10;613 I I tSSed 361 1 #leasure 64:3 ioint 1022; 11:14; 186. 7; 20:7; 2224; 27:14; 28:2. 18; 47:24; 6023 mints 34:19 iolicies 1613 mlicy 6 2 2 ; 712; 9:19; 1:9,12.14.17.20,22. !5; 12:1.6,15,16,17.18, !2;13:2.4.5,7.15.17; 4:10,1~21.24; 15:1,7, I; 1814; 21:12; n 3 ; 2&8; 9:lO. 11.14;30:5;33:18, 8.20;34:6,7.12;3614;

53;4917; 5010.11; 1:6522;574.6,13.25; 8:6,8;59:15.17;65:15, 7;72:3,5;73:23;74:19 olillcal33:21.22.23; 025;51:2;66:23 ortion 193 osition 621;9:18.24; 422; 28:4.6.7;595 ositiins34:11, 12

positive 3420 possible 20:17; 54:23 potential 17:7; 1816;

'7 1,4.7; 40%; 4 1 :3;

4925;591.24;6024;

22:l.Z. 10,10,23;23:15; 24:17.17; 25:2,5,10.13; 2610.10.13,24,25; '710.19; 28:22,23;

25;321.2.13,15.20.25; 33:16.17,18,19;35:22; 3620; 377.21; 38:7; 39t 4023; 44:lO. 19; 4%. 9. 11.21.21;4815.16 501 5 2 1.20; 53: 1 1,23; 54: 1, 16,18;55:13;56:14,15, 16;572;60:5,7.10,19; 61:20;6211.17;63:3.13; 64S 12.17.16.21;65:15 23; G11; 67:10;68:23;

.. . 6925; 7014.21; 7~4.4, 1 ~6.8.25,25;72:19 1916; - . : ~74:1,4.5;75:9,15,16.23, ;. i24 :? NPF's 102s; le:& 5;

i-:i52:3;51:10;71:2 ...

MI, is,20;30:5.i2.20

. ..

=21:10;466.23;478,19; - y : Number 5:16; 11:25; :. 13:13;34:10;37:16.16;

'65:14; 71:18; 73:17 -5017;53:18;54:20;592;

:;- numbers 63:24 .~ . .

5:14.20.24; 266; 32201 k24; 53:7;75:4

- .. 0

64:22;7024

- .. .. ~. C..iobligatiins 56:s

4,tbUSly 5:6; 18:19; %5:17; 36:19 occasionally 3121 occasions 139 occurred 19:6 October 75:6 M2214.25;53:1;63:5; 67:19 Otter 23:24; 24:3.9.13; 25:9;26:16 offhand 5 9 4

' office6:i8;i7ii;i98; 29:17;30:25; 39:16; 60:17;727 offmeholders M:s Ofticial841:22;51:6; 524; 5712;73:5 often 14:18;3019;60:16 on-going 51:l.L once 13:s; is:? 542 one 1224; 14:23; 20:23. 23; 2 4 14; 28: 1 5; 3 0 1 1; 33:15; 34:1;35:1.24: 36:l. 16;40:8;41:12.13,17.18; 4223; 43:21; 45:2); 461, 5.5.17;49:19; 53:5;573. 4,7.15,16.18.21;58:1, 22; &13; 623; 67:13.14; -- 13:725;74:17

onwn60:12 tne-paga 3719 onetime 5 i : i j

NPF's - provision (6)

ones 53: 19 only 26: 13; 36:i - 3; 56: 16 onto 158 open 53:7,9 opening 36:7 operating 63:3,9; 71:2 operation SO:16; 67:24 operational 20:3 operationally 182s operation* 62:21 opinion 1923 opportunity 49: 11; 724 option % 6 order 5:18; 3718;65:6 ordan 3218 organization 55:12; 66:18; 70:7; 71:l l organiutional9:lO; 128; 19:25; 20:3 organizationally 18:25 organizations 79; 93. 8,12,20;74:13 original 1216 originaily 287; 369 Others 35:22; 38:3; 391, 462; 475.11; 4813: 507 61:19;64:11 otherwise n:7 OUm %24 OUi 2224; 27:16; 29:4; 36: 17; 3 7 1 1; 38 13; 43:9; 4826; 54:8.9;61:25;62:4 17;63:8,12.22,24;64:10 65:21;6725; 72:23; 75:13 D u b i d 8 25:21;66:8 wer 14:20.21; 165; 272; 29:3; 3024; 31:7; 328; 39:2; H):9,9; 55:21. 23; 56:l. 9; 5816; 6033; 72:24; 73:ll wemll9:19; io:i7; 11:24; 28:lO; 35:6;48:19 werseas 71:23;75:24 J W d 2212.13.15.18; 53:4 Jwn 2715; 4010;41:19; il:S;52:ll iwned 57:19 iwners 56:15

P 'ICific 65:25; 66:6; 68:7; &24 l a c h o d 3712;39:12 inid 924; 2214; 324; ;4:7.8.15;63:5;679; '1 : 10: 72: 10.20 K h 34:2 Ianda66:18. 18;67:io, 3.17.23;68:11;695,24; '02.6 ;anelisto 365; 3723;

3811.25;409.17.18,19 20,21;42:7; 51:22; 5219, 23 panels 35%. io; 3622; 3718;Sl:ZO paper 3816;68:19,2o; 71:17 papers 68:15;71:17 Parliament 7120 part 57; 1623; 22:25; 14:16; 47:17; S3:2;71:2. 21; 729.12 mrticipants 406 participate 35:s; 38:s; 71:lS JOr tk ipNed 21:7.23 #artkipation 36:2;38:15 wrticular 34:24; 35:18; 1617;4617,17;51:24; w:21 iarticulerly 40:23; 433 iarticulars 23:4 iarties 378; 5025; 51:3 iartner 624 ,arts 5624;71:7 'arty 10:22; i i : i3; 161634:1,2,4;51:6 iass31:9 last 70:18 imam 36:10,23 iau110:9.10 lay 22:14.24;44:10,14; 14:18; 55:2;63:22;69:1 laying e.25 iaymnt 2912; 568. lo. 1.14.15;63:6 ending 19:20; 26:9 2:3 iennryhranla 467 iwple 15:3;27:12,13; 8:i6,17.19; 31:7.23; 28.14; 3616; 373; 399; 1:6.6.9.24:424:43:7: . . - . . 4:17;45:15,17;468,22, 5;47:4.5. 11,19;496. 8.19,21.25; 9 3 ; 51:23; 22; 535; 54:14.20,21. 4; 5713.14.19.24; 59:2. D. IS . 16,17.17,23; 01;61:21;6213.23.23; 120; 72:5;73:7.12,17, 1; 75:3 eople's 26:6 er 11:17;49:19; 50:3 orcent6721;69:1 orrentage61:2,6 erhaps 28:15;64:4.11; 1:12 ~riod7:M; 14:s. 19; 718; 28:ll; 39:t; 56:s armits 41:25 erry4:i~;5:1.6.i0;8:i; k12; 13:18; 192. 5. 14;

p O ~ ~ 4 3 : l practke8:4;9:1;24:16; 25:6.8; 53: 12; 71:9; 73: 1 & 7521 practiced 711 practicing7:14,18; 2s:i PRC 74:16;75:2 precisely 19:3,12 preferred 2016 preparation 154; 4825 prepare 21:21 prSpOrad 1816 preparing i0:18; 21:7 prerequisite 2422 present 4310 president 61;7iz. 15; 916; 13:4; 149; 15:14,16. 22; 165.11; 174.7,20; 1619; -22; 2210; 268, 8; 30:4; 36:& 39:22; 7 1 4 6; 73:17; 7516 Prcsldent'r 618 presidential 45:7 press 37:9; 4920 Pressler 3713;39:9 pretty 1722; 4324; 445 previousiy 402; 60:3 prime 7421 principal 23:18; 669 Wncipally 86;72:18 wior 11:17.18; 13:4; 1494; 29:14;74:3 iriorities 48:22; 49:9 iriority 24:18 irivate 75:13 irobably 1i:i. 1;31:23; i813; 5925;709;75:11 irobe 5:7; 26:6 i l o C e d U n S 42:2 iroceed 5:10;64:7 WOCEEDINGS 4:l irocess 455; 55:ZO; ;O:S iroduce 326 iroduced 38:7 troducer 5 5 : ~ troduters 54:23 iroducing 48:17; 5422;

iroduction 4815 irofessional38:24; 92.3,4,8; 4917 ~rofessionaliy 14:s; 925; 4 0 5 lrotesrors 1325 rotit-making 50:16 rogram 6:22; 30:18; 23,lt; 53:263:2 ropose 3616 rosptctive CAk6.12 rovide 4 I : 10 rovided21:16.17;44:1 rovision 47:l

,617

Wa-U-Script@ Miller Reporting Company, Inc.

Senate Committee on Gover Deposition of John Bolton Special Investigation CONFIDENTIAL July 10.1997

regularly 6214 regulation 34:15,16; 351'3 regulatory 41:lS. 21.25; 425 reimbursed 52:6.12 dated 57:10;72:10 relating 19:25 Relations 3910;73:20, 21 relationship 327 rebtiiely M:17; 6914 'eluctant 61:13 I

provoke 3730 public 4:6; 27:24; 3625; 42:22.24; 43:2; 53:l publication 21:17; 5i:a. 10.14 publications 48:16; 493,15;51:15.18 publicly 421 publish n .6 published 1212; 1310; 51:11 purchased 54:13 purpose 20:9; 5224 purposes 53:19 pursuant4:18;515 pursue 4610 put 42:18; 48:16; 61:2; 6215; e . 8 putting 21:24; 226; 35:6; 36:3; 3&15;49:1

ienior61;715; 14:3;

!1:1627:2.2.7;282; 9:5; 3813; 44:25; 494; l3i7sZ6 i8:18;49:4,16; 50:2. 10,

433; 4 5: 10; 48: 19; 70: 1 1,

SOn#tiIna 11:l; 125;

Q quality 556.9 quarterly 21:16; 503 questioned 708 qukk 5:l quickly 362 quite 25:17; 5021

R R 6 1 R-Nev 10:13

radar 43:2 raise67:10;7015.20; 71:1 I8iSed 67:9.21 raising61:1.20;68:25;

Ralph 1325 ran 31:23 range 21:12,14 rarely 61:18 rate 32:s; 50:16 reach 31:2.4 reaching 3515

reader 5921 reading 483 Reagan 6:16; 39:22 Reagan's 36s

mk-up 62:25

. 7523

mad 306; 48:21; 65:6 7017

mlly 14:15; 253.14; 33:24; 3622; 431; 5720; 59:4;7515 matonable 721 1 reasons 1910; 50:20 recall 11:3.4;14:15; i6:io 17:12;22:16.17. I9,22; 24:12; 35:l; 365,

7; 37323; 40:lO; 44:7; 4523.25; 47:l. 16.23; 4813; 5620.22; 515; 594; 625; 653.4; 685.7. 22; 69: 16.17; 7021; 7 2 13 receipt 63:7 mt iptr 54:16;63:2; 6 .9 receive 103;4915; 50:25; 56:18 rcceivd925; 10% 1220,23; 424; 5023; 51:5;6916 Recent 39:4 recentlyY15 reception 4618 reception8 4514.23; 46:3,8.16;472.15.16; 48: 12 RW-8 4 0 14; 4212 recollection 38:9 recommend 33:s recommendation 33:7 recommendations 59:6 recommended 5825;

record 417; 5:14.25;

recorda 61:12 recreate 1618 recreation 34:22 recruit 51:21 reduced 67:M Raed 7:11. 19.23; 859. 16 reterring 4725 reflection 34:2 reform34:lO; 36:18;43:9 retuse 64:22

refusing 2519 regarding 5:2,5.7.19; 481 5; 691 5 regular 30:15, 18;31:17. 19

592.3.10

48:6;75:17

nrused 64:25

' e m i n 14:6 'errmined 23:2 rmember 16:7; 2622; )6:12;39:22; 51:9;68:23

removed 303 Renaissance 43:23; 529 rent 4322 replace 74:18 rcphced 22:4; Zt23.25; 285 reporting 6210; 63:8 representation 751 reprasentativcMype 46:25 representatives 41:16; 45:16;4617.19;73:14 represented 4:21.23 representing 25:23.24 Republk 73:14 Republican 625;922; 10:22; 11:12; 16:13;343. 17,23; 5 0 5 , s ; 52:18; 55:11;57:12 Republicans 34:6 request 916; 1225; 19:22; 21:4; 22:7 requesting 21:8 rarc.rc)r 13324; 4 7 9 reserve 4236 RESN 55:24;56:ll, 14 respective 38: 16; 41:l response 1219; 21:7; 22:6; 3 ~ 1 ~ 6 7 2 5 responses 62:22 responsibilii'as 9:17; 1016; 1720; 189.17; 23:12; 294 responsibility i8: i 1; 4899; 52:3 responsible 1818; 21:24;22:5;30:6.13; 4025; 58:18;61:19 R u t 13:9; 15:1;283 restaurant 466 result 374 m8um6:13 retail 42:25 retaliation 41:15.21 return& 122Q654 revenues I09;63:9 review 59:19; 738 reviewed 20:1.7; 38:4 Right4:20;5:13; 1 i : iO; 39:18;50:21; 56:lO. 11 ripe 4222 risk 422 RNC 1615; 1822,25; 2213. 18. 23; 232; 3l:2. 15,17.20;332:1,4.13.19; 5411,16,16,19.24; 594; i3:4,7,19,22

RNC's 54:13 road31:3,8 ROC 73:18;75:1 R0ck57:17

48:14.15;49:2.5,14 Rome 22:3 ROSENBERG 4:9.13; 5:4.9.13.23;8:3; 10:14; 1321; 19:17; 25:18,22; 261.8; 3223; 353; 4012, 15; 5330; 75:7,17. I9 rough 37:18 roughly 14:18;4918; 552; 633 routinefy 53:4 run 3615 running 15:7

S salary 1724; 25:7,9.12 Salatch 31:13 same 625; 33:4;3021; 42:4;48:10; M:8;69:ll Sanders 7:1 I, 19 Sanford 31:8,14 Satelliie 55:11.25; 569. 12,lS saiellii 563 satisfy 20:8 saw 14:22; 5619.21; m19.20 swine 562 schedule42:12.12; 73:lO - schedules 4210 scheduling 42:lO scholars 14:l school 6:5.7.9,14 science 33:21; 36:s 3921 scope5:19;25:15.21 screen 432 se11:17 second 21:4; 22665:22 secretary 78; 99; 31:7; 74:12 security 73:16 w i n g 5621 seeking 1614;41:25; 42:9 seem 461 I; 69:3 seemed 20: 10 selling 44:25;45:12,13 Senate 4 15; 36: 19; 3910; 41 :3 Senator 5:19; 12:s. 9; 14:4;3611,15;37:12.13; 39:9.12.19 send6212

a . 8 ; 693 sent 3813;49:24;51:2.3. 3;64:9;68:23 separate 1 8 : ~ ; 5a7; 64:18;75:2 separately 1822 !Sepiember 101 series 502 S e N d 6:17,20;7:4.13 88WkOS 4 4 2 54:13 set 18:21; 4923; 62:6; 73:7 retting 347; 43:25 seven 32:2 several l M 3 ; 13:9; 60.20;726 Shanghai7219.19.25; 7325; 7414 shaped 3512 shaping 35:4; 37:l shared 16:19 Show 73:20 sheets 533 Shih-Ding 73:15 shott5I:IZ shortly 166; 1712; 24:4; 2722; 28:23; 39:15 shot 51:13 Show 32:6;45:4.9; 53:23; 54:1,2,17,17.22; 55:13. 21.22.24; 564.13.21 showed 16:1S;5518 DhoWS%:5; 56:12,17; 57:l.a. 11 skle 38:2 Skong68:13 sightseeing 73:ll sign-up 533 Signal 2221 cignd121.3;55:16.17 Slgnet2212,iS;231,4; 53:6,6.19,22 situation 18:s six 322; 54:3.3.4; 5 6 5 . I7 SKLAMBERG 19:15, 15 slow 20:18;35:13 small 50:17; 53:24; 55:14;71:7 Bmcllbr 23:l rolicit.lionr 4413; 53:25 ,olkited 44:21;49:6; W.14,20;67:5 lOIll&Ody 60:16;62:18; %:2; 65:4;69:1;71:11 tomehow 54:11

Miller Reporting Company, Inc. DLin-U-Srript@ (7) provoke - sometime

Deposition of John Bolton

2025; 23:24; 2617; 5816751 1 somtimes 20:13; 30:9.

7; 31:6.8;41:5;44:21. . r96.8;51:23,25; 52:2; 56:25 somewhere 17:13; 57:2; 7214 soon 2017 sorry 101,10;48:5 SOrt8:14;14:23;18:12; 21:20;34:20; 3510; 38:20;42:14.17;43:4,11, 2246:12:47:8.20: 50:18: .. ~ . 5115.7; SZ:lO;W:15;

~ 57:21; 5923; 61:4,25; -739 ~ ~~ . . jS6rtD . 8:7 c k u n d 44:2 'source 59:25; 66:9; 676 sources 7015

'South 38:l isouthorn 37:25 t space 2&25

:.11;41:2,3 '

i - .. speaker 367.9.10; 45:19;66:24;671,2; 69:19

I $peaken 35:9;37:18 * .aking 14:25 .,_ .kit114:14 specific 11:4; 1214; 184; 19:9; 59:18 specifically 1223; 39:lE; 45:15; 4717.23; 62:5 specifics 23:7 speech 75:13 s p e d 34:13 spend 25:2;61:5 .

spent'60:25;71:24; 73:3 spoke 13:8.9; 14:12; 15:2, 3; 20:12;32:7,13; 45:20,20.21;60:1 spoken 14:17 spokespeople 41:1,15. 20 sponsored 7219 spot 23:24 spring 4524; 58:17; 6015 stabilized 28:15 staff 1017; 17:22; 2024; 27:10.11.16.18;~10. 17.20 31:s. 15; 32:20; 35:22;40:23;41:4,6; 51:4, - - 52:1;75:18

stage 53:l

3225; 39:s startingZ9:14; 33:17

. ~.

..

;. >,

speak 13:12; 14:lE; 15:9.

. .

I spending 24:25

A S 51:4

started 2719;28:11;

39:lO. 14 stated 18:lO

7221 Status 1823; 19:18.19; 20: 1 1.22; &4 stay 58:15 SbYd 6:23; 7:7.9; 58:16;71:18 steering 51:21 Iteppcd 75:lE still 714.21; 1920 2 1 : ~ 33:ll; 6k16 MOCk 7 0 12 Stops 73:l storad 37:21;64:20 storehouse 64:20 stna 62; 466; 55:5,8; 59:22;61:8;73:8 stmtches61:il strike 68:20

4:15; 3613;71:14

structure 1722; 35:7.9; 60:10 student 1324 Studies 71:14;7220; 74:9 studio 32:5 Stuff 25:20 Styk 4613 subcommittee 3715 -~ subject 35:16;44:17; 75:1.3 subjects 4213; 5918 submission 21:24 submit 4 9 1 1 subpoena 418 subscribers 506.17 subscription 50:16 subsequent 36:23; 40:7. 9 substantial 71:2 substantially 364 substantive 4025;41:2. 4 success 36:i successful 62:21 sufficient 597 suggested47:11 suggestions 3218; 4714.18.21 summer 11:2.5,6;12:5. 12;1311.20; 1416;

sun 33:25; 34:4; 43:s supomitor 2921

28:13; 45:24

supplemental 19:22; 21:4; 22:7 Support 44:21;7024 supporting 45:lO suppose 178 S u i 6 4 14; 102; 15:3; 21:14; 24:21; 25:14;

sometifnes - variety (8)

senate Committee on avermental Affairs CONFIDENllAL special Investigation

3024;31:22.22;361; 47:16489; 52:10;60:6; 69:4 surprise 1224;20:19 surprised 17:3; 19:18; 20: 10 sworn 4:5 system 9:20; 33:22.23, 24.25; 44:2; 64:8 systems 38:17

T bb le 451 Taipei73:1.4.13.21.25; 74:24 Taiwanese 66.15 talk 3O:19;31:%41:5.7; 4824; 52:25; 60:6; 62:13; 724 talked 11313; 13:16; 165; 2614;31:6.17,20; 321. 16; 4419.19;45:3,4,4.6; 4621; 54:tO; 5820; 59:8. 23;60:12;62:23 talking 4016; 48:9; 51:20; 5724; 60:23; 64:14 bpes 57:2 tasks 2625 Lax 20:13 team 27:15 technical 5414 technically 561 red68:12

21:13;34:10.14;35:4.23; 366.14,18 37:2.12.14; W25; 43:7,9 teleconference 38:lO telephone 15:25; 16:1,2. 21 ielevision 323.12; 45:4; 583.4 m d s 342 h n g H u i 73:17 :enure 24:16;70:4;74:11 'erm 52:22 erms 18:3.15; 25:3; 5622; 429; 60:8 ,est 209 ,estified 4 6 23:lO; !620; 39:23; 402.18; i3:21; 5810;60:2;74:25 estify39:18.24 estimony 54:lO estr 20:3 Ihanks 4810 rhanbgiving 15:lE; .7:13 hemes %:25 hemselves 44:23 hereafter 167; 17:12; !8:23

They've 9:6 think-tank 417.17; 66.5 think-tanks m i 6 27:8; 37:8;71:21,23 thinking 45:15.19;71:12 Thompson 5:19 Thompson's 656 thought 1619; 17:6; 29:19; 34:19; 35:lS; 3619;315.9;428;43:4; 44:17; 4622; 477; 48:3, 22;497; 59:18;62:13; 71:22;724;74:21 thrw 14:19;45:13;61:10; 6712; a.15; 69:ll throughout 2824 ticket 7224

Tim 224 T ieWarner 37:24 t h d y 42:13.19.20 times 14:19;31:24; 41:14; 53:18; 54:3;60:20; 61:lO timing 43:13 title 4818 today 4:12;721;&20 together 21:25; 2 2 6 308.10;35:6;363;4218; 4 9 1; 62:15; 67: 12

tkkcts 45:1,12,13

told 18:11; 2320; 54:24; 6119 took 19:4.5; 212; 40:16; 45:23;465.5; 52:9;71:9. 13; 74: 17; 75:21 top 37:17 topic 51:24 topical 29: 11 topics 1723; 5625; 57:5. 10 total 61:3;63:1.2 touch 3018 toWna:1;379 trade 21 :13; 4 1 : 16; 45:17; 6O:17.2& 64:6;65:11 transcription 44:1 transfer 5613 transferred 55:13 transition 45:7 transitioning 2823; 29:2 !rnnsmit 56:4 t m V d 71:3; 72:12 travels 62:16 IrMSUrY 44:ll. 12; 5 4 9 Trent io:i9 lrkd 35:17;41:8; 57:22. 25; 60:9 kip 71:13;72:6,13,20 74:9.14; 75:9.10,15. IS trips 71:5.7.9;72:9.16; 74:3.6;75:8,20,21,22, I S

true 3220 try 33:19;38:20.21 trying 3 4 3 74:18 turn63:12 turned 37:11;43:9;65:5 N 32:5; 53:18.22,23; 54:l; 5S13 Twenty 469 twice 13:8 two 1324; 14:19; 2023; 23: 1; 24: 11; 28 16; 3 0 10; 31:22;45:15,19;46:1.1; 49:19;51:12,17;53:5; 5558; 574;61:10;69:23; 71:17

31:22;45:15,19;46:1.1; 49:19;51:12,17;53:5; 5558; 574;61:10;69:23; 71:17 two-patty 33:24 type 2 1 : ~ typical 277; 43:li; 57:6 Typically 62:8

U L U.N 9:19;72:21;73:2 U.S619;9:6.7.19;66:7, 8; 6715; 74:s UK7416 UKFCO 73:7 ultimately 30:6.12 unaware 70:19 under67:11;68:10 understood 18:13; 24:21 undertake 55:15 undertook 23:22 unhappy 4613 United4:14; 13:ll; 3613; 71:14.16; 7221; 75:2 university 506,18; 71:14 unsure 561 up 11:15;12:1,3;~5:7; 1624; 18:21;20:14; 24:19;42:10;43:2.25; 47:19; 54:6 55:18; 579; 61:22;626.14;64:2.15, 21; 73:7 updated 21:18 use 325; 52:22;,56:12 used 32:4;41:16;44:14; 5217; 53:11;63:22 useful 452 usually 31:4;44:1 u t i l i 4224

V vacant 283 ran 13:9; 14:25; 28:3; 52:7 variation 44:6 varied 3819 lrarietq 8:6; 34:6; 39:13; 1623;b9:9; 50:20; 57:22; -_

Deposition of John Bolton CONFIDENTIAL 0 July 10,1997

Senate Committee on Gover Special Investigation

59:14 various 9:20; 34:19; 376; 4I:l; 44:3; 48:14; 49:15; 7 2 5 9 vary 44:4 vehicb 1613; 5217 vendor 324; W:13 version 51:12.12 versions 51:12 versus 251; 343% 35:13 vke61;715;28:7.8; 30.3 v b w 3320; 34:3,M; 4423; 5720 Virginia 57:18

visible 421 visit &16 voluntarily 418;5:18 voluntary 433 votes 5210

virtually 64:l

W W - w a r - s 407 wail 61 :9 walked 53:l Wall 59:22;73:8 wants 26:2 Washington 63.15; '14:22;21:12;276;29.10, 14; 41:7;45:16.16; 4624; W.17; 66323; 7225; 73:6, 16 way 11:19;1620;20:18; 30:11;35:17; 3021; 4611; 56.1.8;63:24;64:6 7223 Ways 13:13;4020 Week 59:22 weekend 73:ll weekly 61:4 weekt 61:7;68.15,19; 7019 Weigers484,5;581i, 14.19;622;7022 Weil284: 4817 weren't 20:15; 5519; 65:2 west69:14,20 Westner 28:i; 32:6; 4824; %:20 what-not 71:21 whwiing 42:25 whenever 30:22; 64: I 3 whereby 56.3 Whereupon 4:2 wherever 31:3 Who's 66322 whole 11:13 whomever a . 2 1 whose 6510; 67:16

wide 46:23 wife 39:20 Wiggins 27:23; 479; 48:l willing 4418 Winter 13:25 wish 35:14 within 25:14; 395; 44:6; 7224

Wilhout 59:12;64:10 73:l WlTNESS 511; 82; 1013; 13:20; 19:4.7; 25:16 261,3;32:21; 3425; 53:9;75:5 Wokon 26:9; 3O:l

w o e 6:22; 106; 235; 34:14; 44:13; 45:s; 5514 work 13:s; 17:13; 16:15; 25: 13; 2%; 30: 18; 4 2 1 1; 4419;45:2.6.8.21; 4623; 478.20; 4023; 60:7,13,19;66324,25 workaday 523 worked 1019; 14:4; 32:lO. 16; 39:20;63:22. 24; 72:23 working7:17; 21:3; 30:20,395 worth45:lO writing 13:24;45:6;48:25 written 74:25 wrong 28:22; 54: l l

X I

X 31:9;47:13

Y Y47:13

Yak 66,7 yeah 4716 year716;24:5;43:8; 56:16;63:14.15.16,23 years 31:22; 3% 19 Young 23:6,8;65:21;

Yu-Ming 73:20 70 1