Insight Exclusive: New Details on "Missing" White House Phone Records 4/3/00 - White House Counsel Beth Nolan testified March 30 before the House Government Reform Committee that Insight's stories from December 1998 and January 1999 were wrong and inaccurate concerning a huge stash of long-distance telephone records long sought under subpoena by various congressional and federal law enforcement investigators. They just don't exist, she said. Really? Then how to explain overlooked correspondence to Judicial Watch in which the White House provides answers that confirm the existence of such telephone records -- and done so two months prior to Nolan's testimony before the committee chaired by Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana Republican. The existence of these telephone records, which Insight has reviewed in detail and obtained sample copies of, is of importance because over the many years of scandals involving the Clinton administration, the White House has long maintained that it has no such detailed telephone records and/or the only records it has involve personal celluar telephone billing statements held by individuals who submitted them for reimbursements. The records, which date back to 1992, appear as monthly billing statements from, among long-distance carriers, AT&T. They average anywhere from a hundred or so pages to many times more and provide an extraordinary glimpse into the phone call patterns of the not just the White House but also the Executive Office of the President. On thousands of domestic long-distance calls, which sources within the White House tell Insight represent only a small fraction of all such calls, the monthly billing statements show the date a call is placed, the time it is placed, the duration of the call, how much it cost, the number called and, in some cases, the number from which the call was placed. In most cases, however, the domestic long-distance calls cannot be directly traced back to a specific phone or office, only to master phone numbers and/or sub-master phone numbers listed as the number to be charged for the calls. That said, federal law enforcement officials and telephone company sources in and out of government have told Insight that the stash of records is priceless because even from the limited amount of information available, they can help investigators nail down witness statements concerning activities outside of the White House on any given date and time. For example, if Web Hubbell told investigators that he did not receive calls from the White House within a given time frame, the "missing" telephone records could provide valuable information insofar as his number may indeed show up on White House monthly telephone records. The same is true with any number in the long cast of witnesses involved in so many of the capers involving the White House. Armed with such detailed phone numbers, and with the assistance of computer programmers, law enforcement and/or congressional investigators could then access the sophisticated telephone computers and generate reports providing further details not contained in the printed versions of the monthly telephone billing statements that even include ship-to-shore calls and long-distance calls billed to specific numbers inside the White House via outside dialing patterns. In other words, investigators would have a place to start to go into the computer systems and program them to spit out data not currently known -- such as specific phones that may have placed such long-distance calls. Anybody call John Huang or Charles "Charlie" Trie? A review of the monthly long distance records could show such and a programmer might be able to get more specifics from the telephone computer systems, too. What about international calls? The monthly telephone records detail virtually every single international call made from the White House and the Executive Office of the President. The details include the date and time, the duration of the call, the cost of the call and the number called, including country code. As with the domestic long-distance calls, there also are some details on specific numbers that placed the international calls though many of them are billed to master or submaster accounts. However, as with domestic long-distance calling, investigators could bring in telephone experts to order the computer systems to spit out additional details that could lead them to specific phones/offices that placed the international long-distance calls. For example, if the Justice Department's Campaign Task Force knew the international number for any number of people and/or companies, e.g. the Lippo companies, they could use the "missing" telephone records to determine whether that particular phone number was ever called from the White House complex. They then could begin the process of trying to track down who might have placed that call and/or which phone inside was used. One of the interesting things when reviewing the international calls, besides the fact of the huge volume (it's staggering), involves fascinating patterns of calls made from the White House complex during key times that coincide with major fundraising events and activities. In fact, a review of the telephone records show dramatic spikes in international calls to mainland China, Indonesia and Switzerland during key months during 1995 and 1996 now under investigation by a variety of investigators. The patterns remind one of those associated with the infamous koffeeclatches at the White House and those Lincoln bedroom sleepovers when vast sums of money were collected for campaign coffers. Though initially these patterns of events and giving did not show up clearly, Insight was able two-plus years ago to eventually mine -- and be the first to report -- that Federal Election Commission campaign reports ultimately provided circumstantial evidence to show money patterns in four-to-six week intervals that closely tracked events at the White House either just before or just after the campaign contributions were recorded by the FEC. Could the same be true with the international long distance calls? Could batches of calls during heavy fundraising time periods be tied together? The only way to determine that would be to secure the telephone records and then cross-match the numbers with, for example, banks or people or companies overseas suspected to have been involved with raising or processing campaign dollars for the Clinton/Gore reelection committee or the Democratic National Committee. To date, however, this has not been done and even some cynical insiders at the White House have wondered why? Indeed, so too are a growing number of federal law enforcement and congressional investigators. Consider the following: Some of these odd patterns involve hundreds of international calls to overseas numbers that follow a strange descending or ascending numerical sequence involving calls lasting between 30 seconds and 2 minutes. These overseas numbers called do not overlap in sequence or in time but follow one another in rapid fire over short bursts a few days each month. Some of the numbers called, based on tests conducted by Insight and a federal law enforcement source assisting the magazine, involve hotel rooms overseas and/or fax machines. Some of the calls are to individuals, too, and companies that only federal law enforcement could identify clearly. Is it just coincidence that these recurring spikes occur generally during the heavy months of campaign fundraising now under scrutiny? It could be and it could also be something totally unrelated to fundraising, say those who have cooperated with Insight during the past two years since the magazine first broke this story and has continued to investigate. No matter, says a senior federal law enforcement official who has reviewed some of the records at the request of Insight. The never overlapping sequences of ascending and decending numbers that never overlap in time to the same countries month in, month out during the height of the fundraising efforts is intriguing. Given that the CIA and National Security Council (NSC) operate from within the complex, anythings possible, admit those cooperating with Insight's investigation. "I'm only guessing here," the federal lawman tells Insight, "but it looks like somebody is trasmitting a large volume of 'burst' instructions computer systems or faxes. It's anybody's guess what they were up to but I certainly would want to know if I were in charge of the [campaign finance] probe." Indeed, so would the FBI agents and prosecutors involved if they could get their hands on the records they've been told don't exist. And this is consistent with what White House Counsel Beth Nolan told Burton's panel -- no such telephone records exist as first reported by Insight. Then how to explain in a written response to Judicial Watch in mid-January when Nolan's colleagues at the White House counsel's office confirmed otherwise. For example, the White House said that it's own counsel's office has at least "36 boxes of paper telephone logs regarding the White House Counsel's office alone in ORM [Office of Records Management] that would have to be reviewed to ascertain which ones pertained to" various officials in that West Wing office. The White House counsel's office also said the following: "Except for cellular telephones, billing records do not provide any useful information. The vast majority of domestic long distance calls are placed via an FTC number, for which there is no call detail. The small number of domestic alls not placed on FTS lines reflect only one of several trunk lines of origin. The bills do not reflect either the originating number or the full destination number. Internal calls similarly do not reflect the originating number, but do reflect the destination number. Accordingly, there would be no way of ascertaining the billing records for the telephones 'used by or assigned to' the individuals" who placed the calls. While technically the White House response is accurate, it fails to fully explain in context what is or may be available, according to telephone company experts contacted by Insight, including some involved in designing and installing the White House telephone systems. For example, while the White House may not be able to tell which specific phone may have made a specific long distance call, there are system codes embedded into the computer system that designate which master or submaster account will be billed for calls by a specific number or general grouping of office phones. Moreover, while the telephone systems may not internally or externally provide detailed monthly call reports, specific phone activity reports can be produced which may provide some details not now available on the monthly billing records, according to the experts. Also, the computer systems can be reprogrammed to spit out specific reports not now available or programmed into the systems, the experts say. The issue of the telephone records raises as many troubling questions as they provide answers for both the White House and the various investigators who have been told repeatedly that such records either don't exist or, just recently, that they do but are not in usable formats. Insight's review of the monthly records going back to 1992 show they are easy to browse and certainly easy to do so on a monthly basis if one were interested in looking up a specific phone number within a known time frame. While imperfect, conducting such a simple search does provide results when checking on a few phone numbers known to have been used by a variety of witnesses -- it took Insight less than 30 minutes to locate one specific phone number said to belong to a high- profile witness who has been called before several grand juries and Congress. Sources within the White House complex also have been able to produce other data related to telephone records based on searches of the various computer programs available to technicians that officials, for example the White House counsel's office, may not know exist. "The point is that nobody has reviewed these records and there could be valuable information in them that could prove priceless for any investigator," confirmed one current White House source familar with the telephone mangement systems at the Executive Office of the President. This official, who asked not to be named, tells Insight that on several occassions with FBI agents and/or investigators from Ken Starr's office, only top-level officials or White House lawyers were allowed to speak while technicians or other employees were barred from talking if even allowed to attend such meetings. "I just find it very frustrating," the White House official tells Insight. "I don't want to help you guys but at some point this has got to stop and let's get over it." Chairman Burton, who has been told such telephone billing records don't exist, told Insight recently that he plans on issuing subpoenas for the records and do a cross-check himself to see whether any of the phone numbers his staff knows were used by a variety of witnesses show up in the monthly long distance domestic and international bill records. What's interesting, is that FBI agents for the Campaign Task Force have known about the telephone records -- along with the so-called lost White House emails -- for nearly two years since Insight first broke both of these stories but never secured the records. Ditto the various independent counsels investigating the White House and the courts where several civil suits are pending, including those filed by Judicial Watch. Part of the reason, according to a variety of offices contacted by Insight, is that the White House has provided huge volumes of documents, including thousands of answers to questions that are yet to be fully sifted for data. Another reason is that the White House generally has told investigators that, in the case of the long-distance telephone records and emails, that they either don't exist or that what does exist isn't very helpful and it'd be costly and/or time consuming to review. (Insight found these last two reasons not valid given that the telephone records are in binders easy to thumb through and the emails are easily pulled from the various servers simply by typing in a name, as was done at Insight's behest at a secret location.) Besides the long distance records from, for example, AT&T, there are other detailed monthly records maintained by the White House Communications Agency, the General Services Administration, and the U.S. Secret Service whose phones often are used by White House personnel. In the case of WHCA, these records are stored by the DOD. GSA's records, including a number of celluar telephones assigned to the White House and residence staff, are stored by that agency at several locations, while those of the Secret Service are separately stored by that agency. As a footnote, the White House has informed Judicial Watch and others that neither the president nor the first lady have celluar phones that they use. However, according to White House sources, Hillary Clinton did in fact have a celluar phone ordered for her personal use several years ago -- and there's a purchase order along with a tracking code for charge purposes. What happened to that phone? And where are the monthly billing statements? Finally, given that every single phone located within the White House complex and the larger Executive Office of the President is trackable via internal phone orders and installation records, including the specific phone numbers -- for example, the president's sofa phone, his bathroom phone, the phones on his desk, in the residence, the pool house, his study, the ultra-secret "situation room", the NSC, the chief of staff, the first lady and courtesy phones installed at key locations for select staff -- determining where phones are physically located might help investigators learn which phones specific individuals used and, in turn, which internal billing schemes were put into place to have calls made from those phones charged to master and/or submaster accounts via the computer systems of the White House and externally with the telephone companies. Investigators could then compare the actual long distance numbers called to the matrix of master/submaster accounts linked to specific internal billing numbers tied to known telephone nodes that feed (or lead back to) specific phones and numbers assigned to individuals within the complex. While not all numbers might be trackable by this back-and-forth method described to Insight, technically it can be done if the various computers have not been purposefully tampered with to prevent such checks. And based on what telephone experts have told Insight, even if software installations may have been designed to turn off such intricate tracing methods and/or report churning, the hardware and original programming that comes with it has not. "Yes, you could do it but it'd be complicated unless you knew what you were doing," said a telephone company programmer who has installed systems similar to those housed at the White House. Like emails, Insight is told, telephone computer systems retain virtually all information. It's just a matter of getting the right technicians to extract what could be a treasure trove of data previously unknown and/or, as Nolan has testified, just doesn't exist. By: Paul M. Rodriguez, Managing Editor (rodriguez@insightmag.com) (http://www.insightmag.com) Copies of Insight's original stories on the telephone records and emails from December 1998 and January 1999 are located at the Insight webpage. http://www.insightmag.com/cgi-bin/item52.shtml 04/04/2000