NAME: HIR197002

946

947

948

949

950

951

952

953

954

955

PAGE 39

Tungsten and maybe Mark Richard sitting right in front of me
when I was talking with him, and I said, ''Look, you might
be a fact witness in this whole shouting match about your
weekend investigation, so it may not be advisable for you to
go meeting with counsels, and--'' this incidentally had been
discussed at the 2:30 meeting with the FBI, the advisability
of having Tom Green bring in Secord for a proffer.
Bill Hendricks had argued against it.

Reynolds had

argued--Brad Reynolds had argued in favor of it, but anyway,

now this meeting was going ahead on the first, and I urged 956 Brad not to--not to have the meeting with Green.

957

He didn't buy me scenario about fact witness. Не 958 said, ''Well, isn't every FBI agent who conducts an interview a fact witness, and why isn't he debarred from conducting any further fact interviews?''

959

960

961

962

963

964

965

966

I said, ''Well, you know, we don't agree, but I think if you are going to have the meeting in a minute, you should have Bill Hendricks there. Hendricks is a career guy

from the Public Integrity Section, now Chief of the Fraud Section,'' and Brad said, ''I have no problem with that.''

2 Un-hun. What was your understanding of the purpose 967 of the meeting was to be?

A A mini-proffer by Green as to what his client might

NAME: HIR 197002

PAGE 40

971 represented just Secord alone, oz were you under the

impression he represented more than one of the participants?

972

973

.

974

A I am not sure when it changed from all three to just Secord in my understanding.

976

977

978

Well, by the time you spoke to Mr. Reynolds on the

1st of December, did you have an understanding who Green represented?

979

A Quite sure on the 26th Brad said he represented more 980 than one, but it looked as though he was going to have to

981

982

983

984

get out for one or the other. Now, the 1st of December would have been my next business day in the office, so I don't know if I learned that in the interim.

Just in the interests of completeness, after I hung 985 up from talking with Mr. Reynolds, I called Mr. Trott, who 986 was somewhere out of the office. He said, ''Look, I have

987

988

989

990

991

992

993

had this conversation with Brad. Do you think I should go over the cliff on it, you know, raise it up to the AG, pull it all over the floor, because the way I left it, it is. going to go ahead, but with Hendricks present.''

And Steve said, ''Yeah, that is probably

survivable.''

. 2 Did Mr. Reynolds give any affirmative reasons for wanting to be part of this meeting?

Well, he had argued in the November 25 afternoon

NAME: HIR 197002

996

997

998

999

1000

1001

1002

meeting that sometimes you can get more at the beginning
then you can after a position freeze, which is true, and Mr.
Hendricks had argued that you don't want to have somebody.
come in before you can intelligently cross-examine then and
tell you their stories, because then later, you get so you
know your case, and you want to ask them questions, and they
tell you, ''Look, I already told you my whole story'', and

1003 that is also true.

1004

2 But what reasons did Mr. Reynolds give for himself

1005 wanting to participate in the meeting?

1006

A

The impression I got was that he thought he could 1007 advance the ball. I pressed him pretty hard, and his

1008

1009

response was the one I just related about the FBI agents and

the fact-

1010

2 Did he mention at any time that he had a long

1014

1015

For the record, you are the person that drafted the application for Independent Counsel; is that correct?

You were lucky, but made much ado about the fact

NAME HIR 197002

PAGE

42

10211 that he was the only person mentioned in the application for

1022

1023

1024

1025

1026

1027

1028

1029

1030

Independent Counsel, a fact which apparently rankled him a bit. Do you recall any conscious decision to only put his name in the application?

A Well, I guess the reason I started with him was a feeling that if there was anybody who knew what was going on here, it was he.

Poindexter and a bunch of other people? The answer to that

is,

we were a little short on facts at the time this was 1031 being drafted, which was on the night of December 1.

2 So, you didn't know exactly what Admiral Poindexter

Okay. Did you have anybody else in the government

A Well, no. I mean, my thought was, let's draft it broadly and let the facts take us where they will.

2 I guess, then, my question is, then why did you add Colonel North at all?

1037

1038

1039

1040

1041

1042

1043

1044

2 Was there any discussion in any of the drafts that

.

A I guess to give context. I have been involved in a couple of these things before and none of them with no

names.

1045 were circulated to add more names or to delete his name?

NAME HIR 197002

PAGE

43

A I don't recall either of those changes being raised. a lot of--there was a lot of discussion about

1046

1047

There were

1048 adding more violations or subtracting violations.

2 Would it be normal procedure in drafting such an application to add people who aren't in the government as possible co-conspirators?

1049

1050

1051

1054

Did you give any thought then to adding Mr. Secord

1055 or Mr. Hakim or-

Oh, no. This is December 1. I don't think I was

1057 that for along in terms of knowledge.

2 By the way, did you ever receive Mr. Cooper's notes that he had taken at the interviews over the weekend

1058

1059

2 Did you ever see Mr. Richardson's notes of the North

interview?

A I have never seen them.