sk b2 commission meeting 10-14-03 fdr- 2 draft minutes

8/14/2019 SK B2 Commission Meeting 10-14-03 Fdr- 2 Draft Minutes

1/6

. . . 0003/012

N A T I O N A L C O M M I S S I O N O NT E R R O R I S T A T T A C K S U P O N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S

Minutes of th e October 14, 2003 MeetingThe C ommission met informally at 12:15 for discussions prior to the resum ption of aC ommission hearing. The C hair, Vice C hair and C ommissioners Ben-Veniste, Fielding,Gorelick, Gorton, Lehm an, Roemer, and Thompson were in attendance.The C hair began by noting that a topic of media interest w as an allegation of theExecutive Director's conflict of interest. C ommissioner Ben-Veniste asked about therole of the Ex ecutive Director on the P FIAB ; his resignation from the PFIAB at the outsetof the C ommission (February 2003) was noted. C omm issioner Gorelick observed thatthe General C ounsel nogtefto'tako |he loadjfu-ecordiBgythe recusals of C ommissionersand staff. Gfo\. ^PDBs. Discussion ensued on the upco ming New E xecutive Office Building briefing onthe question of Presidential Daily Briefs. The C hair explained w hat had been proposedoriginally by the W hite House, and why this fell far short of what the C ommissionbelieved it required in terms of access. He explained that he and the Vice-C hair wouldpresent a proposal on access to Judge Gonzales as soon as the C ommission hadformulated one, and the Judge had agreed to a prom pt response. Q /*'Because of the press of time/ C ommissioner Ben-Veniste askedtSnce again that theC ommission meet more frequently. Comrnissionei/Gorton^oncurred.^fld stated hisbelief that theC ommission will soon need to be meeting each week. \A problems. Team leader John Ffailure to produce docum ents. He and Team 8 members discovered during the course offield investigations several types of docu ments present at regional offices that were notproduced in response to d ocum ent requests. This discovery became a source of acuteembarrassment to the FA A . Under the threat of subpoena, and pressure from Dan Levin,the FA A produ ced approximately 20 boxes of documents late on October 10th. Farmerdid not know whether the documents fulfilled the document request; it would takeconsiderable time to review the documents, and in anyevent thedelay in production ,*would result in a significant delay of Team 8's work^ As*=*^" * & < * \, v/cU < * ^' KV * tJ"~~ ^Subpoenas. Team Leader Farmer's presentation led directly to a discussion about / >subpoenas. C ommissioner Gorelick said that she intended no disrespect to any Agency many if not most of which had taken document requests seriously and made substantialefforts to comply with them. Nonetheless, she believed strongly that subpoenas shouldbejssued-across the board to all Executivebranch agencies^/ She stated her belief that tiw

Commissionshould certainly know nowfthat confirming subpoenas are necessary". CommissionerBen-Veniste and Gorton agreed. Gorton called the FA A's behavior an absolutely

l Z-Q-'1^(-wp~ -


2/6

. . .

shocking instance of failure to respond. Commissioners Gorton and Gorelick both statedthat they are increasingly concerned that the Commission cannot meet a May 27thdeadline.Discussion ensued. Commissioners Gorelick andBen-Veniste stated their belief that theissuance of subpoenas was not, and would not be viewed as, a hostile act and that theCommission would get more compliance with a subpoena than without it. CommissionerThompson stated his belief that a subpoena would be seen as a political act.Next Steps. The Commission decided that the Chair and Vice Chair should meet withJudge Gonzales as soon as possible. The Chair and Vice Chair decided to cut short theirpress availability at the close of the day's hearing, and postpone any statement until thefollowing day. Staff were instructed to draw up alternative press statements and optionsfor the issuance of subpoenas for discussion later in the evening after the conclusion of aCommission briefing at the New Executive Office Building. The Commissionresumed its hearing at 1:45 PM.

The Commission resumed its meeting at 6:30 PM, with all Commissioners present,Whom toSubpoena. Commissioner Gorton beganby stating that he believed it to bevery important that the Commission proceed with unanimity. He spoke in favor ofalternative #1, issuing a subpoena to the FAA, combined with a warning to other agenciesand a requirement that they provide certification promptly as to the completeness of theirown document compliance efforts.Commissioner Ben-Veniste disagreed. He spoke in favor of alternative #2, an issuance ofsubpoenas to all agencies. He stated he saw no reason why the Commission shouldn't useevery tool in its toolbox, and use the tools the Congress saw fit to provide it.Commissioenr Gorelick strongly concurred.The Vice Chair stated that hejeanedtoward the first option. Additional subpoenas arebased on a prediction, andtne Commission does not now know whether other agencies'behavior merits a subpoena. The course of cooperation has gotten the Commission amountain ofmsferial, and has worked reasonablywell. Commissioner Gorelickdisagreed,(that the provision of mountains of material was not dispositive as to whetherthe Commission had received the material it needs. She added further that if theCommission had to wait for evidence of failure, it wouldbe too late for a subpoena towork, and too late for the Commission to do its job.Commissioner Ben-Veniste expressed his view that the issuance of a sole subpoenawould only defer an inevitable decision on broader issuance. Hereiterated his strongsense that, given the provocation, the Commission needed to use all the tools it has.Commissioner Roemer spoke in favor of the broader issuance of subpoenas as well. The


3/6

: . . .

Chair spoke in favor of a subpoena of FAA alone. Commissioner Lehman stated hisinterest in a subpoena of NORAD in addition to FAA.Decisions. After additional discussion, the Commission decided, without dissent, to issuea subpoena to the FAA, with a warning that additional subpoenas would be issued ifnecessary. Further, it called upon staff teams to use the next two weeks to test the levelof compliance by Executive branch agencies and report back to the General Counsel withrecommendations, where appropriate, for the additional issuance of subpoenas.The Chair and Vice Chair discussed with the Commission informing Judge Gonzales ofthe Commission's decision on an FAA subpoena the next morning before releasing apublic statement. The Commission further decided that the Chair and Vice Chair shouldask the White House for Commission access to all PDBs responsive to its request.


4/6

N A T I O N A L C O M M I S S I O N O NTERRORIST A T T A C K S U P O N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E SMinutes of th e October 14, 2003 Meeting

T he Commission met informally at 12:15 for discussions prior to the resumption of aComm ission hearing. T he Chair, Vice Chair and Comm issioners Ben-Veniste, Fielding,Gorelick, Gorton, Lehman, R oemer, and T hompson were in attendance.T he C hair began by noting that a topic of me dia interest was an allegation of theE xecutive Director's conflict of interest. Commissioner Ben-Veniste asked about therole of the E xecutive Director on the PFIAB; his resignation from the PFIAB at the outsetof the Com mission (February 2003) was noted. Commissioner Gorelick observed thatthe General Counsel needs to take the lead in recording the recusals of Commissionersand staff. -"'PDBs. Discussion ensued on the upcoming N ew E xecutive O ffice Building brieiifig onthe question of Presidential Daily B riefs. T he Chair explained what ha d beerf proposedoriginally by the White House, and why this fell fa r short of what the Qofnmissionbelieved it required in term s of access. He explained that he and the'Vice-Chair wouldpresent a proposal on access to Judge Gonzales as soon as the Com mission hadformulated one, and the Judge ha d agreed to a prompt response/@a 'Because of the press of time, Commissioner Ben-Veniste asked once again that theCommission meet more frequently. Comm issioner Gorton concurred, and stated hisbelief that the Com mission w ill soon need to be m eeting each w eek.FAA problems. T eam Leader John Farmer briefed the Comm ission about the FAA'sfailure to produce documents. He and T eam 8 members discovered during the course offield investigations several types of documents present at regional offices that were no tproduced in response to document requests. T his discovery becam e a source of acuteembarrassment to the FAA. Under the threat of subpoena, and pressure from D an Levin,the FAA produced approximately 20 boxes of documents late on O ctober 10th. Fdid not know whether the documents fulfilled the document request; it would takeconsiderable time to review the documents, and in any event the delay in productio:would result in a significant delay of T eam 8's work.Subpoenas. T eam Leader Farmer's presentation led directly to a discussion aboutsubpoenas. Com missioner Gorelick said that she intended nodisrespect to anyAgency -man y if not most of which had taken document requests seriously a nd made substantialefforts to comply with them. Nonetheless, she believed strongly that subpoenas shouldbe issued across the board to all Executive branch agencies. S he stated her belief that theCom mission should have know n before this would be the case, and the Commissionshould certainly know now, that confirming subpoenas are necessary. Com missionerBen-Veniste and Gorton agreed. Gorton called the FAA's behavior an absolutely

j**~

.

.-,

- *^

. *f(,

4**%*4%,


5/6

shocking instance of failure to respond. Comm issioners Gorton and Gorelick both statedthat they are increasingly concerned that the Com mission cannot meet a M ay 27 *deadline.Discussion ensued. Com missioners Gorelick and Ben-V eniste stated their belief that theissuance of subpoenas w as not, and wou ld not be viewed as, a hostile act and that theComm ission w ould get more compliance w ith a subpoena than without it. Comm issionerThompson stated his belief that a subpoena wou ld be seen as a political act.Next Steps. The Commission decided that the Chair and Vice Chair should meet withJudge G onzales as soon as possible. The Chair and Vice Chair decided to cut short theirpress availability at the close of the day's hearing, and postpone any statement until thefollowing day. Staff were instructed to draw up alternative press statements and optionsfor the issuance of subpoenas for discussion later in the evening after the conclusion of aCommission briefing at the New Executive Office Building. The Commissionresumed its hearing at 1:45 PM.

The Comm ission resumed its meeting at 6:30 PM, with all Commissioners present.Whom to Subpoena. Com missioner Gorton began by stating that he believed it to bevery important that the Commission proceed with unanimity. He spoke in favor ofalternative #1, issuing a subpoena to the FAA, combined with a warning to other agenciesand a requirement that they provide certification promptly as to the comp leteness of theirow n document compliance efforts.Com missioner Ben-Veniste disagreed. He spoke in favor of alternative #2, an issuance ofsubpoenas to all agencies. He stated he saw no reason why the Comm ission shouldn't useevery tool in its toolbox, and use the tools the Congress saw fit to provide it.Commissioenr Gorelick strongly concurred.The Vice Chair stated that he leaned toward the first option. Ad ditional subpoenas arebased on a prediction, and the Comm ission does no t now know w hether other agencies'behavior merits a subpoena. The course of cooperation has gotten the Com mission amo untain of material, and has worked reasonably well. Com missioner Gorelickdisagreed, that the provision of moun tains of material was not dispositive as to w hetherthe Commission had received the material it needs. She added further that if theCommission had to wait for evidence of failure, it wou ld be too late for a subpoena towork, and too late for the Commission to do its job.Commissioner Ben-Veniste expressed his view that the issuance of a sole subpoenawould only defer an inevitable decision on broader issuance. He reiterated his strongsense that, given the provocation, the Com mission needed to use all the tools it has.Comm issioner Roemer spoke in favor of the fefflader issuance of subpoenas


6/6

"CMif spoke in favor of a subpoeji j: ^ Lehman stated hisf interest in a subpoena ofTTORAD in addition to FAA.

Decisions. After additional discussion, the Commission decided, without dissent, to issuea subpoena to the FAA, with a warning that additional subpoenas would be issued ifnecessary. Further, it called upon staff teams to use the next tw o weeks to test the levelof compliance by Executive branch agencies and report back to the General Counsel withrecomm endations, where appropriate, for the additional issuance of subpoenas.ft w v

sk b2 commission meeting 10-14-03 fdr- 2 draft minutes

Documents