U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–704 PDF 2005

S. HRG. 109–135, Pt. 3

TRIBAL LOBBYING MATTERS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

OVERSIGHT HEARING REGARDING TRIBAL LOBBYING MATTERS, ET AL

NOVEMBER 17, 2005

WASHINGTON, DC

PART 3

(
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Vice Chairman

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

JEANNE BUMPUS, Majority Staff Director

SARA G. GARLAND, Minority Staff Director

(II)
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Statements:

Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota, vice chairman,

Committee on Indian Affairs ....................................................................... 2

Federici, Italia, president, Council of Republican for Environmental Advocacy ................................................................................................................. 4

McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona, chairman, Committee

on Indian Affairs ........................................................................................... 1

Additional material submitted for the record:

Additional e-mails ............................................................................................ 51

(1)

TRIBAL LOBBYING MATTERS

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2005

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 216,

Senate Hart Building, Hon. John McCain (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators McCain, Dorgan, and Inouye.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MCCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

ARIZONA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning.

As part of its investigation on Indian lobbying misconduct, the

committee has tried to follow the money, in particular money that

Jack Abramoff had his tribal clients pay various entities. Among

the entities that Mr. Abramoff had his clients pay was a sizable

sum to was an organization called the Council of Republicans for

Environmental Advocacy, commonly known as the CREA.

We have with us here today Italia Federici, the president of the

CREA. Evidence in the committee’s possession shows that Mr.

Abramoff directed at least four of his tribal clients to contribute no

less than $250,000 to the CREA from 2001 through 2003. In total,

Mr. Abramoff may have had his clients contribute as much as

$400,000 to the CREA. The question is why. Documents suggest

that Mr. Abramoff was having his tribal clients pay so much because he perceived that Ms. Federici would help him get inside information about and possibly influence tribal issues pending at Interior.

In connection with the contribution of the CREA from at least

one of his tribal clients, Mr. Abramoff described the CREA as ‘‘the

Secretary’s main group outside of the department,’’ and according

to internal business communications between Mr. Abramoff and his

associates, Mr. Abramoff believed that Ms. Federici had ‘‘juice’’ at

Interior and deemed her ‘‘critical’’ to his tribal lobbying practice.

As I stated at the last hearing, there is no evidence that Secretary Norton knew, much less sanctioned, Mr. Abramoff or anyone

else using her name in seeking fees and donations from Native

Americans. What we do know is that Mr. Abramoff directed his clients to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to the CREA, clients

upon whom he relied for millions of dollars in Federal lobbying revenue to Greenberg Traurig for his secret ‘‘gimme five’’ partnership

income through Michael Scanlon for contributions to run his Jew-
2

ish boys school in Maryland, and for personal income to float his

restaurants.

Why did Mr. Abramoff direct his valued clients to contribute so

much to the CREA, unless it somehow served his purpose? What

role did the CREA or Ms. Federici have in facilitating contacts between Mr. Abramoff and Interior officials about pending tribal

issues? Did Ms. Federici in fact have ‘‘juice’’ at Interior, or did she

only say that to have Mr. Abramoff’s clients induced into donating

hundreds of thousands of dollars to her organization, CREA?

As we sit here today, we do not know the answers to these questions. I hope Ms. Federici’s testimony today, coupled with the testimony we received at the last hearing and the documents the committee has released, will begin to illuminate this important part of

the puzzle. I ask for unanimous consent that all documents and information that the vice chairman and I have agreed should be

made a part of today’s hearing be made.

Senator DORGAN. Without objection.

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

NORTH DAKOTA, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN

AFFAIRS

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

This will be the last hearing of this committee on this subject

during this calendar year at least, and I wanted to make a couple

of comments about not only this hearing, but future activities dealing with these investigations.

First of all, this inquiry would not exist without, Mr. Chairman,

your determination to find out what has happened here and whether Indian tribes have been defrauded, who has been involved. And

you have launched this investigation. We on the minority side have

worked closely with you, and I admire very much the tenacity with

which you have been willing to have this committee to investigate.

I think it is very important.

We have uncovered almost unbelievable things here, and we

have uncovered activities that are pretty disgusting, some perhaps

criminal, and many unethical. I think that from these hearings will

come a series of ideas for changes and reform and so on. But I did

want to say that this would not have happened without your

launching this investigation.

We have had a number of hearings that have investigated in a

stovepipe fashion. How, tribe by tribe, money was moved through

Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Scanlon and through other groups as well.

It was an appropriate way to proceed. There is one additional tribe

that we have not considered, Pueblo Sandia Tribe. I believe we

should consider them and I have made such a recommendation.

I believe $2.7 million was provided in two checks by the Pueblo

Sandia Tribe to Mr. Scanlon’s company, capital campaign. It is my

hope that as we proceed that we will take a look at what the purpose of that money was, where that money went, and so on. That

is very important because that is another part of this. In fact, the

Pueblo Sandia was a tribe that was originally discussed as the

committee began its investigation.

Second, Mr. Chairman, we do not at this point have a schedule

for a future hearing. It is my hope that we will have a future hear-
3

ing on this investigation. I believe there are some witnesses, which

I have visited with you about, who have not yet been interviewed

by our investigators. I should not say ‘‘witnesses.’’ There are a list

of people who have not been interviewed by our investigators who

I believe should be interviewed by our investigators. From those

interviews, I believe we should make a decision on a future hearing.

The question of a future hearing would depend on what we learn

from witnesses, but there are those, or I should say ‘‘persons’’ once

again, there are those whose names show up in many, many places

in all four of these tribes that we have so far looked at and I believe there are a group of people that really need to be interviewed

by our investigators and I have made such a recommendation.

Following that, I think we should decide from what we learn in

those future interviews by our investigators, the nature of or the

determination of whether we should have a future hearing. It is my

belief that we will need another hearing with additional witnesses.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we have received, as you know, the letter

from the Finance Committee asking for all of the information that

we have gleaned on 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) organizations through

which we have learned substantial money has moved, in most cases

it appears for the purpose of obscuring the identity of such money.

A substantial amount of money has moved through a number of organizations that are so-called non-profits, (c)(3)s and (c)(4)s. The request from the Finance Committee to further investigate requests

us to provide all relevant information that we have gleaned

through subpoenas on the potential use and misuse of these

501(c)(3) and (c)(4) organizations.

We are in the process with our staffs of putting this information

together and to transmit that at some future point to the Finance

Committee. We will need to make a decision on the disclosure of

that information. As I have indicated to you, my hope is that we

will put it on a website and disclose it to the public, as we disclose

it to the Senate Finance Committee, while we meet their request.

One significant part of this investigation, Mr. Chairman, that

has caused me some real concern is the misuse of tax-exempt organizations, non-profit organizations. We will talk a little about that

today, in fact, with the organization that is going to be discussed

through the witness, Italia Federici. I really believe that there

seems to be, at least it is apparent to me, that there seems to be

substantial misuse of these organizations.

It is appropriate that the Finance Committee has asked for all

of that information with which to continue an investigation. My

hope is that as we transmit that information, that we will be able

to make that public.

Having said all of that, Mr. Chairman, this hearing occurs because we were not able to serve a subpoena on Ms. Federici prior

to the previous hearing. We had a witness list for the previous

hearing and Ms. Federici was on the witness list. My understanding is that those who were trying to serve a subpoena on this witness were unable to do so.

So you indicated at that hearing we would have a separate hearing. She would be the sole witness, and that is the occasion that

brings us together today. I am guessing that neither of us would
4

prefer to be here. We would have preferred that she had accepted

the subpoena and come to the previous hearing, but that was not

the case so today we will ask questions and inquire about the specifics of something called CREA, the tribal money that flowed

through CREA, the issue of whether there was influence-peddling

or the circumstances of relationships with people in the Department of the Interior, and try to evaluate what this means.

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Dorgan. It has

been a great privilege for me to serve on this committee for a long

time, and with you. The reason why we have the title of chairman

and vice chairman is because of our commitment that we have always adhered to of conducting our business here in a nonpartisan

fashion. I appreciate all of the very cooperative work that we have

enjoyed together.

On the issue of the Pueblo Sandia, I agree with you. I will ask

our investigators to look into it. Our staffs will be working together

in preparation of a report. I think it is important to make clear

that if there are other allegations of mistreatment of Native Americans, it is our obligation to continue to conduct our oversight responsibilities. So I continue to appreciate the way that we have

worked together for many years and I believe that one of the reasons why these hearings have been as productive as they have is

because of the partnership that we have maintained.

Ms. Federici, I don’t very often ask for a witness to be sworn in,

but given your published statements about this committee and the

things that you have said and done, I am going to ask you to stand

and raise your right hand.

[Witness sworn.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I would like to just correct your statement. I have never made any untoward public statements about

this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Excuse me, in your deposition, statements that

you made about me personally, and I will be glad to quote from

your deposition if you would like.

Ms. FEDERICI. You may do that.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, if you would like to make an opening statement, please go ahead.

STATEMENT OF ITALIA FEDERICI, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL OF

REPUBLICANS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. Well, I had not prepared an opening statement. I came here to answer the committee’s questions. My organization, the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, has

existed since 1997, long before we ever met Jack Abramoff.

And I have read with great interest about some of the accusations of moving money or money laundering that have been made

in the press regarding 501(c)(3)s and 501(c)(4)s. Through our multiple document productions to Mr. Carrillo and to the committee,

through my voluntary deposition, which by the way was openended. My attorney will tell you I was willing to come as many

days and be deposed by the committee as need be. The committee

determined that I had been fully forthcoming after 3 hours.
5

I also volunteered, as my letter of October 26 notes, to attend a

hearing on October 26. During all of that voluntary and cooperative

interaction with the committee, I have repeatedly attested that no

money moved through the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, nor was one penny, to the best of my recollection

and I have worked to refresh my recollection, spent from our account on an Indian tribal matter.

We were very grateful for the generous support of the Native

American community and I continue to be grateful for their generous support, but I am absolutely steadfast in my assertion that we

raised money from a legal group of individuals. We spent it on our

environmental mission, and we never said or did one untoward

thing to any Native Americans.

So it is disheartening to me to sit here and to have my good

name and the name of my organization painted with the same

broad brush that Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon and other

folks involved with this matter have been painted.

So, and I have my letter here. I did not have a subpoena on October 26, Vice Chairman Dorgan. This letter was actually sent to

Senator McCain’s staff. So I do not know if you have a copy of this

letter, but I would just like to read it into the record. I would just

like the record to reflect that I did not have a subpoena when this

letter was written and that the committee subpoenaed me after I

had left for my trip and after this letter had been received.

October 26, 2005. Dear Mr. Carrillo, As you are aware, I responded 2 weeks ago

that I would accept the committee’s invitation to participate in a hearing scheduled

for October 26, 2005. I also voluntarily made myself available to answer the committee’s questions via a deposition on October 7, 2005. Both of these events caused me

to clear my schedule and to alter previously planned trips.

The committee’s last minute rescheduling of the October 26 hearing to November

2, 2005 makes my participation impossible. November 2 is the anniversary of my

father’s death and I will be out of town.

I thank the committee for its understanding. Should you or the committee have

additional questions, please contact Mr. Scheininger and he will be happy to assist.

Respectfully, Italia Federici.

And thank you. I am happy to answer the committee’s questions

today.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

I do not want to get sidetracked on this issue of the subpoena,

Ms. Federici, but we have a very different version of events. Our

staff called your lawyer and asked him whether Ms. Federici would

be out of town because it was the anniversary of your father’s

death. He said he could not make that representation. He had no

more information than what was contained in the letter that you

just wrote.

Our staff asked your lawyer to provide any additional information that we needed to have, and that this be done in time for the

hearing. We asked your lawyer to indicate whether he was authorized to accept service of a subpoena by the close of business, and

he failed to do either. In fact, up until last week, the committee

heard nothing from you or your lawyer.

On October 28, the committee obtained the assistance of the U.S.

Marshals, which had been looking for you. I understand that your

colleague at CREA, Jared Carpenter was notably unhelpful to the

marshals.
6

On November 1, I informed your lawyer that if for whatever reasons you did not appear at the November 2 hearing, the committee

would reconvene at its nearest convenience and conduct a hearing

for you. We still did not get any response. You did not appear at

the hearing. The vice chairman and I agreed to conduct another

hearing.

It goes on. The fact is, you failed when asked to provide the committee with information necessary for the committee to determine

whether the explanation you cited for not appearing last time was

in fact reasonable. But you are here, and more importantly, you

can, I understand your statement, and unfortunately I do not think

it bears much relation with reality.

Let’s stick to the facts, the facts which explain which why we are

here today. The committee has information that over a 3-year period, Mr. Abramoff had some of his tribal clients donate hundreds

of thousands of dollars to your organization. During the same period, you repeatedly, and we have documents to authenticate this,

you repeatedly told Mr. Abramoff when asked that you would pass

along information to and get inside information from the Department of the Interior about issues important to his clients.

Mr. Abramoff, and I will cite you e-mails, believed you had

‘‘juice’’ at the Department of the Interior and he told colleagues

that you were critical to his lobbying practice. In some instances,

you did pass along information between Mr. Abramoff and thenDeputy Secretary Griles, but you told committee investigators that

more often you did not.

The question we will explore is did you exchange your access to

Interior, mainly your relationship with Mr. Griles, for contributions

to the CREA? If so, why? And did Mr. Griles know that? Did you

tell Mr. Abramoff that you ended up not doing a lot of what you

said you would? If not, why not? And if so, what did he tell his clients to induce them into donating so much to the CREA? Were

their contributions a product of deception?

And that is why we are here today. So, Ms. Federici, in front of

you is a file of documents that I would like you to look at and refer

to so you can respond to questions.

Please refer to exhibit 49. Exhibit No. 49, as you are looking it

up, is an e-mail from Mr. Abramoff to you dated September 4,

2002. It is entitled ‘‘Tigua Water Issue.’’ Here, Mr. Abramoff provides you with a summary on a policy issue related to the Tigua

Tribe, one of Mr. Abramoff’s clients who contributed at least

$50,000 to the CREA. In this e-mail, Mr. Abramoff says to you,

‘‘this sums it up. Thanks for all that you do for my clients, the

cause and me personally.’’ What did you do for Mr. Abramoff’s clients, Ms. Federici?

Exhibit follows:
7

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, I think that we have a different perception

of this e-mail. I think that quite clearly here, Mr. Abramoff separates out what I do for the cause, which is my work with the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, from what I do for

him personally.

The CHAIRMAN. I am interested not so much for the cause. I am

interested in what you do for your clients and him personally.

What did you do for Mr. Abramoff’s clients?

Ms. FEDERICI. I believe that for Mr. Abramoff’s clients, who were

donors to CREA, that we provided excellent environmental advocacy, consistent with our mission. We invited them to participate

in all of our CREA events.

The CHAIRMAN. The e-mail refers to the Tigua water issue, Ms.

Federici, not to what you do for their clients.

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I get a lot of unsolicited e-mail and I am

helpful to all of my friends. If on September 4, 2002 for some reason Jack Abramoff wanted to share with me this issue, and I told

him I would take a look at it, I don’t see how that has anything

to do with fraud or with non-profit abuse.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, then we will get a little more specific. According to e-mails obtained by the committee, I would like for you

to look at exhibit No. 52 please. It appears you served as a liaison

between Mr. Abramoff and then-Deputy Secretary Steven Griles

about matters affecting Mr. Abramoff’s clients. Let me review some

of them. Exhibit 52, on September 24, 2002, Mr. Abramoff asked
8

you to talk to Mr. Griles about a ‘‘Tigua water issue.’’ You responded, ‘‘I am calling right now.’’

[Exhibit follows:]

Ms. FEDERICI. Mr. Abramoff indicates to me in this e-mail, and

I did not have any independent corroboration, that Steve told him

that Steve would have someone look into that and the Tigua were

getting desperate. Now, I had no reason in 2002 to believe that Mr.

Abramoff was anything other than a truthful, friendly, charismatic,

well-liked, and well-respected Republican activist in Washington.

And he sent me an e-mail where he made a representation to me

that he had a conversation with Mr. Griles and that the Tigua

were getting desperate about a water issue.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you call?
9

Ms. FEDERICI. What kind of a person gets an e-mail where somebody says a Native American community is desperate about a

water issue and then shoots back, you know, go pound sand. I

mean, of course——

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, I would like for you to respond to

the question. Did you call, Ms. Federici?

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not know whether I called or not, but as you

can see——

The CHAIRMAN. Even though you say in the e-mail ‘‘I am calling

right now.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. As I told your committee repeatedly throughout

my deposition, and I have been very strident and consistent on this

point, Steve Griles was the Chief Operating Officer as the Deputy

Secretary of the Interior. He traveled. He gave speeches. He went

to meetings. He was a very busy man. I attempted to reach Steve

many more times than I actually did. I can’t have stated that

enough in my deposition.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not recall whether you called or not?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, apparently, if I said I was going to call, I

called. But if I did not get him, then I did not get him. A week

later, Mr. Abramoff says you never responded to me. So again,

these are e-mails that are 3 years old, but it is not Mr. Abramoff

asking me to do his bidding. And I don’t indicate whether or not

I reached Steve. I am happy——

The CHAIRMAN. I think that ‘‘his bidding,’’ Ms. Federici, was for

you to talk to Mr. Griles about a Tigua water issue and you responded that you were calling right now.

Ms. FEDERICI. You know what, Senator, I am proud——

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, I would very much appreciate it if

you would specifically answer the questions.

Ms. FEDERICI. ——of myself. I am proud of myself for having

been personally helpful to a friend who had desperate clients.

The CHAIRMAN. As a witness before this committee, Ms. Federici,

I expect you to answer the questions. There is such a thing as contempt of Congress if you do not answer the questions. If you chose

to take the fifth amendment, that is your right. Otherwise, answer

the questions. Okay? That is the last time I am going to warn you

about it.

Now, did you call him or not? Do you recall whether you called

or not?

Ms. FEDERICI. I absolutely have no recollection.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the answer to the question. Thank you.

Ms. FEDERICI. If I told Jack that I was going to call, I would

have.

The CHAIRMAN. On exhibit 56, now, I want to caution you again,

Ms. Federici, I want answers to the questions. I do not want a filibuster. Exhibit 56, an e-mail dated December 4, 2002 entitled ‘‘Gun

Lake Indian Tribe Casino.’’ Mr. Abramoff complains to you about

developments relating to this tribe and conveys to you a strategy

regarding the tribe’s environmental impact report to shut down the

tribe’s land and trust application. You respond, ‘‘I will call ASAP

to Steve Griles.’’ Also in exhibit 57, dated December 6, 2002, entitled ‘‘Gun Lake, New Hope for Gun Lake Casino,’’ Mr. Abramoff
10

urges you, ‘‘this is what we have to stop.’’ You respond, ‘‘Seeing him

at 4 p.m. today.’’

[Exhibits follow:]
11
12

Now, do you recollect whether you called Steve Griles ASAP as

indicated by your response in exhibit 56?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, where I do not have any independent

recollection.

The CHAIRMAN. What about in exhibit 57, where you respond,

‘‘seeing him at 4 p.m. today.’’ Did you see him at 4 p.m. that day?

Ms. FEDERICI. I would have no way of knowing whether or not

I actually saw Steve or the meeting was canceled.

The CHAIRMAN. You have no recollection of a meeting you might

have had with a top official at the Department of the Interior?

Ms. FEDERICI. He was an 11 year friend of mine, or 10 year

friend of mine.

The CHAIRMAN. But you would not remember if you had a meeting with him or not?

Ms. FEDERICI. No; Steve Griles and I have been friends since

1997.

The CHAIRMAN. The length of your friendship is not to important

to this conversation. What is important is whether you would re-
13

member or not whether you had a meeting at 4 p.m. on December

6, 2002 with Mr. Steve Griles.

Ms. FEDERICI. How would I remember that?

The CHAIRMAN. Most people do remember when they have a

meeting with high-ranking officials of the Administration. That is

how you would remember it.

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, Senator, I do not recall if I saw Steve or did

not see Steve at 4 p.m. on December 6, 2002.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you keep records of appointments that you

make?

Ms. FEDERICI. Not consistently. I do not keep a day-timer or anything like that.

The CHAIRMAN. Please turn to exhibit 72, dated March 6, 2003,

entitled ‘‘Saginaw Chippewa Tribe School Cost Share.’’ Here, Mr.

Abramoff asked you ‘‘if you can call Steve on this.’’ You respond,

‘‘Got it.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, Where? I am sorry.

The CHAIRMAN. Exhibit 72.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Exhibit 72, March 6, 2003, entitled ‘‘Saginaw

Chippewa Tribe, School Cost Share.’’ Here, Mr. Abramoff asked

you, ‘‘if you can call Steve on this.’’ You respond, ‘‘Got it.’’ Do you

recall communicating with Mr. Griles in response to the March 6,

2003 e-mail?

[Exhibit follows:]
14

Ms. FEDERICI. No; and I think that if I recall correctly my response ‘‘got it’’ was a dismissive, I do not necessarily plan to take

any action on that; just e-mail received. If you did not respond to

Jack’s e-mails, he would call and call and call and e-mail and email and e-mail until he knew that you had received what he wanted you to receive.

The CHAIRMAN. That fact that you have been friends with Mr.

Griles, it seems to me, we are not talking about friendship; we are

talking about official communications concerning substantive issues

here. So I am puzzled why you would not remember, for example,

a 4-p.m. meeting on a certain date, not on a social visit, but on a

specific issue affecting Native Americans.
15

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I would not have scheduled, I think there

is a misunderstanding I would like to clarify.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay.

Ms. FEDERICI. I believe my response to seeing him at 4 p.m.

today was that I was telling Mr. Abramoff that I had already had

a previously scheduled appointment or meeting, and considering

the timeframe in December, maybe that was around the Department of the Interior’s Christmas party. I am not really sure. But

I did not set up a special meeting to go to the Department of the

Interior to raise that issue with Mr. Griles, and I can see why you

would think that if I had done that, I would recall it, but I had

some other reason for going to the Department of the Interior at

4 p.m. on December 6.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I can also see why if Mr. Abramoff received

that response when he asked you to address an issue with Mr.

Griles and you say ‘‘I am seeing him at 4 p.m. today,’’ I would naturally assume that that response would be indicating that you

would be discussing that issue with him.

Ms. FEDERICI. I never really went into the substance of these

issues with Mr. Griles.

The CHAIRMAN. You didn’t?

Ms. FEDERICI. As I said in my deposition, to the best of my recollection.

The CHAIRMAN. Then look at exhibit 55. Now, exhibit 55 is an

e-mail from Mr. Abramoff to you dated December 2, 2002, entitled

‘‘Jena Band, Logansport Asked to Speak on Proposed Casino.’’ Mr.

Abramoff writes, ‘‘It seems that the Jena are on the march again.

If you can, can you make sure Steve squelches this again.’’ You respond, ‘‘Thanks for the update. I will bring it up ASAP.’’

[Exhibit follows:]
16
17

Ms. FEDERICI. Right. And I told the committee staff during my

deposition that I did have specific recollections of mentioning Jena

and Saginaw Chippewa with Deputy Secretary Griles, but not the

substance of what those issues were.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a remarkable statement.

Exhibit 39, please look at it, an e-mail from Mr. Abramoff to Michael Scanlon entitled, Mr. Abramoff says he ‘‘just got a call’’ from

you. You apparently provided Mr. Abramoff with then-non-public

information from Mr. Griles that, ‘‘as of now, Norton is going to

sign the Jena deal.’’ Do you know anything about that? In other
18

words, the implication in this e-mail is that you received information from Mr. Griles that was not public, that says ‘‘as of now, Norton is going to sign the Jena deal.’’

[Exhibit follows:]

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not recall having had that conversation with

Mr. Abramoff, Senator, but I do recall that, this goes to sort of

what I said about not discussing the substance of the specific

issues, but having mentioned the issue in general. The Jena issue,

as I remember it, for me was that it was much more of a political

problem that Jack was raising with me; that Christian conservatives and other very important grassroots constituencies and large
19

blocs of Republican Congressmen and Senators were very angry because they felt that they were not being heard.

I believe what I told your staff during the deposition was that

my memo that I wrote to the Department of the Interior, that I addressed actually to Eric Ruff, and any of the mentions with regard

to Jena would have been much more focused on, I am hearing that

Christian conservative groups are really angry and that they are

going to start running negative ads about Secretary Norton; it is

something to do with the Jena; or I am hearing or I was shown a

stack of letters signed by very large blocs of Republicans and that

are saying that the doors of BIA have been closed to them, and

they are not having access and getting the respect that they think

that they are merited; Is anybody aware of what is happening with

this Jena issue?; Is anybody talking to these people?

That is what I meant by not discussing the substance. You know,

Senator, sitting here today I now know that the Jena issue was

about a designation for land and it had to do with casinos. That

was not my understanding of the issue 3 years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. Who are these large blocs of Congressmen and

Senators, Ms. Federici? Can you give us the names?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, groups.

The CHAIRMAN. You just said that large blocs of Congressmen

and Senators.

Ms. FEDERICI. Right.

The CHAIRMAN. Who were they?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, if you really want me to just start naming

names of people I saw letters signed by?

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. Senator Grassley, Senator Stabenow. I do

not know which particular Indian issues they were, but I was

told——

The CHAIRMAN. We were specifically referring to the Jena issue.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. Well, with the Jena issue, I believe it was

the Republican Policy Committee, which is sort of like your Gang

of 14. It is a bloc of people. I understood that there were Senators

and Congressmen who were unhappy that this was going to be taking place in their districts.

The CHAIRMAN. I am interested in knowing who those individuals were, or some of them, if there large blocs.

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, I cannot name all of the Senators or all of

the Congressmen who are part of the Republican Policy Committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you name one of the large blocs of Senators

and Congressmen?

Ms. FEDERICI. I did, the Republican Policy Committee. So if you

know who is involved in that.

The CHAIRMAN. I am asking if you can name one Senator or Congressman. The Republican Policy Committee has nothing to do

with the Gang of 14. Please go ahead.

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, Senator, you have all the letters.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any names? You just said there are

large blocs of Congressman and Senators.

Ms. FEDERICI. There were.

The CHAIRMAN. Then tell me the names of them?
20

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, Senator, sitting here today without having

notes in front of me, I cannot recall and I do not want to just sort

of start throwing names out. I did give you some names of Senators

and Congressmen who I said signed letters that I saw about tribal

matters and who seemed to be upset. You did not like that response.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever provide documents to Mr. Griles

that you had received from Mr. Abramoff or his associates, that is,

the Jena notebook?

Ms. FEDERICI. Pardon me?

The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever provide documents to Mr. Griles

that you had received from Mr. Abramoff or his associates?

Ms. FEDERICI. I cannot recall having given Mr. Griles documents.

I mean, I might have shown him a newspaper article or something

like that, but I did several days after the last hearing watch the

hearing. The notebook I believe you are referring to appeared in

November 2003. By November 2003, I do not think I communicated

with Jack Abramoff for 4 months.

The CHAIRMAN. But you do not recall if you ever provided any

documents that were given to you by Mr. Abramoff or his associates to Mr. Griles?

Ms. FEDERICI. I recall newspaper articles, Senator. I believe that

that was somewhat covered during my deposition. They were all

newspaper articles that I was shown.

The CHAIRMAN. All you did was provide newspaper articles, nothing more?

Ms. FEDERICI. Not that I can recall, and I haven’t had anybody

show me anything to refresh my memory otherwise.

The CHAIRMAN. Exhibit 64, Ms. Federici, an e-mail dated January 21, 2003 entitled, ‘‘Intel from Department of the Interior BIA.’’

Mr. Abramoff asked you if there is ‘‘any way to find out when and

how the BIA will respond to a letter from Governor Foster about

a new Jena casino.’’ You respond, ‘‘Thanks, Jack. I will ask about

the timing and content and call you.’’ Mr. Abramoff also reached

out to you about the Jena Band’s casino proposal, that is in exhibit

73. That is an e-mail dated March 9, 2003 entitled ‘‘Jena Choctaw

Update.’’ You responded, ‘‘I will call you on Monday with whatever

I can find out.’’

[Exhibits follow:]
21
22

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay.

The CHAIRMAN. These e-mails are typical of many others we

have, where Mr. Abramoff asks you to contact Mr. Griles on issues

important to his clients, his clients have contribute to the CREA.

And you say, ‘‘I am on it; I will get back ASAP; I will bring it up

ASAP.’’ Did you actually do the things you said you would or not?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, if I told Jack Abramoff that I would make

a phone call, I did. But as I said before, I tried to reach Steve many

more times than I actually successfully reached him.

The CHAIRMAN. Why wouldn’t Mr. Abramoff just contact Mr.

Griles himself?

Ms. FEDERICI. That is an excellent question.

The CHAIRMAN. Why didn’t you ask him that during all these emails that you were receiving from him over a period of years, and
23

saying, ‘‘I am on it; I will get to it ASAP; Seeing him at 4 p.m.

today,’’ et cetera. Why didn’t you ask him that question?

Ms. FEDERICI. Because he was a friend and a donor, and when

my friends reach out to me and ask me to help them with things,

I never turn around and say, why don’t you just do it yourself. A

lot of people ask us for assistance or for help all the time, and I

would never turn to a friend and say, do it yourself, especially

when you are talking about a local telephone call.

The CHAIRMAN. You didn’t reach Mr. Griles or did not get done

what he had asked for. Did you ever tell him that you didn’t?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, it was apparent from the numerous e-mails

throughout the lifetime that I knew Jack that many things did not

get answered.

The CHAIRMAN. But Ms. Federici, there is no e-mail from you

that says ‘‘I didn’t contact him; I didn’t meet with him; I didn’t get

this information.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, Senator——

The CHAIRMAN. Let me finish my question, Ms. Federici.

What is in all of these e-mails is, ‘‘You’ve got it; Thanks for the

update; I will bring it up ASAP; I am calling right now.’’ There is

never an e-mail that says, ‘‘I did not get a hold of him; I was unable to communicate.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. But there are e-mails from Jack to me saying,

‘‘Why didn’t you respond to my e-mail?; What is going on with

this?; How come you never got back to me?; Where are we on this?;

What is going on?’’

There are e-mails coming from him that clearly indicate that between my e-mail back, just sitting at my computer, okay, sure, I

will ask about that; thanks, Jack; send. And then a week would

pass, 2 weeks would pass, however much time, repeatedly throughout these e-mails he writes back to me and says, ‘‘I didn’t hear anything; what is going on?; Can you give me an update?’’

The CHAIRMAN. Why didn’t you just tell him? Why is there no email that says, ‘‘I did not contact him; I did not get an answer; I

cannot help you out.?’’

Ms. FEDERICI. I was probably busy doing some of the Republican

Environmental Advocacy work that I was working on.

The CHAIRMAN. I see, but you would respond by saying ‘‘I am on

it’’ and ‘‘I will do it,’’ but you could not respond that you were too

busy to respond by saying, ‘‘I did not get a hold of him.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. I might have called Jack to say, you know, there

are a lot of e-mails, and then I am going to call Jack to say, ‘‘Jack,

I didn’t reach him; I will try later.’’ But there are plenty of e-mails

to me, Senator, where Jack Abramoff, one, apologizes consistently

from day one to the last day of the communication for bothering me

with tribal matters, and there are also e-mails——

The CHAIRMAN. It’s funny. We did not get those e-mails, and we

got all of their e-mails, Ms. Federici.

Ms. FEDERICI. There are many of those e-mails.

The CHAIRMAN. Look at exhibit 81 please. Look at exhibit 81.

This is April 3, 2003 between you and Mr. Abramoff entitled ‘‘Urgent Alert, DOI Proposes Policy Changes in Compact Review Process.’’ Here, Abramoff attaches a memo on this issue, to the e-mail,

and writes, ‘‘If this attached memo is correct, someone over at BIA
24

is doing some really odd things. Any way to see if this is something

coming from the top? All of our tribes are very agitated about this

one.’’ In response, you write, ‘‘I will definitely see what I can find

out. I hate to bug you, but is there any news about a possible contribution?’’

Ms. FEDERICI. From a tribe for the Labor Environment——

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, I have not completed my question

to you.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, any objective observer would see

that there is a clear connection between contributions to your organization and work that you would be doing on behalf of Mr.

Abramoff with the Department of the Interior. I will repeat again.

In response, you write, ‘‘I will definitely see what I can find out,’’

and then you immediately go on to say, ‘‘I hate to bug you, but is

there any news about a possible contribution from Redacted?’’

[Exhibit follows:]
25

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay, ‘‘Because the Labor Environment Alliance

launch is rapidly approaching and we are very, very committed. I

am worried about getting everything in place. The Labor Environment Alliance is great and will be extremely helpful to our guys.

Thanks for all of your help.’’

Every one of my funding requests to Jack was attached to not

only an environmental project, Senator, but a completed environmental project. The Labor Environment Alliance was time-consuming to organize. It was extremely successful. We traveled out of

State, and we did a very successful grassroots campaign.

The CHAIRMAN. This is totally non-responsive, Ms. Federici. Is

there a connection between what you say, ‘‘I will definitely see
26

what I can find out; I hate to bug you, but is there any news about

a possible contribution.’’ Does that appear to be that there is a quid

pro quo here?

Ms. FEDERICI. No; The quid pro quo is I need the money for LEA.

All I did was attach, a, ‘‘yes, Jack, I will look into that. By the way,

while I am sending you an e-mail,’’ I did not write that, I would

like to attach the second thought. I mean, it just is not a natural

way for someone to write. So he sent me an e-mail. I told him I

would look into it, and then I attached a second unrelated thought

about a contribution attached to an environmental project. An environmental project, Senator, was expensive and it was completed.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we have many e-mails, Ms. Federici. For

example, exhibit 66, an e-mail between you and Mr. Abramoff entitled, ‘‘Help.’’ Here you ask Mr. Abramoff, ‘‘I hate to bother you with

this right now; hoping to ask you about a possible contribution to

CREA.’’ It started out, Mr. Abramoff graciously responds, ‘‘We will

get that moving ASAP; I will hit them immediately.’’ But he continues, ‘‘By the way, Governor Foster just sent Gale another letter

pushing a new compact he signed for Jena. Can you make sure

Steve knows about this and puts the kaibosh on it? Thanks.’’ Ms.

Federici promises, ‘‘I will tell him where they are now and with

whom. Thanks, Jack.’’

There are numerous e-mails.

[Exhibit follows:]
27

Ms. FEDERICI. I never asked Steve to put the kaibosh on anything. And Senator, I cannot tell you what was in Jack’s mind. I

only know what was in my mind. Jack gave me a reason for why

the Native American tribes were donating to us. We were very

pleased for their generous contributions. I repeatedly offered to

meet with them in my capacity as CREA’s president. We invited

them to our events and I used their resources to complete substantive and important environmental work.

The CHAIRMAN. Did it matter to you that Mr. Abramoff was asking you to contact Mr. Griles on issues important to donors to the

CREA?
28

Ms. FEDERICI. No; not particularly. I was responding to Jack at

the time, he was a friend, in the way I would respond to any friend

who had a need or a question.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, in the record, there is a continuous stream

of e-mails that connect contributions to you and CREA with actions

that are requested or anticipated concerning Native Americans.

There is a long stream of them, and they will be in the record.

Since your answers are so bizarre, I will not continue. I will let others make that judgment.

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, am I allowed to add something quickly?

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. I did notice on the committee’s website

there is an e-mail, and part of this is——

The CHAIRMAN. There is a stream of e-mails, Ms. Federici.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay, there is a stream of e-mails. I only got like

one or two in before I stopped looking. There is an e-mail. I do not

know the context of these e-mails. You are saying that you do not

have any of the e-mails from Jack where he apologizes to me

for——

The CHAIRMAN. We have all the e-mails. We just do not have the

e-mails that contain the information that you claim there is. We

have all the e-mails.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. Well, here is an example, Senator. On

Thursday, March 1, 2001, there was an e-mail stream that was put

up on the internet that appears to show, as it is posted, that I invited Jack to meet Secretary Norton at Julie Finley’s home, and

then Jack said, ‘‘wow, that would be great; thank you so much for

everything; let me know if I can help you cover the costs.’’ And it

stops there. And it would create the impression in mind of anyone

who did not know the circumstances that I was charging people to

meet Secretary Norton. The missing part of that e-mail is the part

where I say, ‘‘Thank you so much for the offer, but Julie is the

hostess with the mostess, and she will not let anyone help with

anything. She is great.’’ And I turned down the contribution.

So these e-mails, if we are going to parse them individually, tend

to take——

The CHAIRMAN. We are not parsing them, Ms. Federici. We have

a long stream of e-mails. I did not bring up that e-mail that you

are talking about because there may be some ambiguity associated

with it. The fact is, there is a long stream of e-mails that show a

direct connection between contributions, your relationship with Mr.

Griles, and action taken by the, well, action that was taken or was

attempted to be made.

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not understand why the committee

doesn’t——

The CHAIRMAN. I did not even mention that e-mail that you

wanted mentioned. It is clear, it is clear when you mention contributions to your organization in the same e-mail on many occasions, with action that you can have taken by the Department of

the Interior, there is a connection, Ms. Federici. We are releasing

all of these e-mails and we will let others judge, but it is clear to

me what was going on.

Senator Dorgan.

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
29

Ms. Federici, when you came to the committee interview, you indicated on a number of occasions you felt this proceeding was a

witch hunt. Can you tell us why you think this proceeding is a

witch hunt?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I have read in the newspaper and I have

actually been told by the press that committee staff in particular

are engaged in a smear campaign against me.

The CHAIRMAN. Who in the press told you that?

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not believe that he would appreciate me telling his name. It would probably preclude his ability to work with

other sources. But I have read that——

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, you are under oath and the chairman has asked you a question. You are suggesting that somehow

someone was trying to smear you, and you have indicated——

Ms. FEDERICI. I was told that there was a narrative of a very

personal nature that was being put forward from committee staff.

You know, it sort of fits with——

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, look, that is not what you told the

committee in your deposition. You suggested this was a witch hunt

for other reasons, but now that you have apparently created a reason separate from that, you want to air that out. We would be

happy to find all those sources if you want to do that.

Let me just tell you my impression. I listened to your answers

to Senator McCain. Here is what it looks like. Now, I come from

a really small town, but I think I can spot a pretty big lie from

time to time. Somebody has been lying to us. Somebody sitting at

this table has been lying to us. You probably have not had a chance

to hear the previous testimony, but we have witnesses that have

come to this Committee that clearly have been lying. The question

is who.

Now, I have listened to the line of questioning proposed by Senator McCain today. I want to tell you my impression. You should

disabuse that, if you think the evidence exists to do it. You received

some hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions to an environmental organization that you headed, and those hundreds of

thousands of dollars came from Indian tribes. I assume that might

have been a surprise to you. I mean, to head a Republican environmental organization, then all of a sudden one day to find, remarkably, you are getting a lot of money from Indian tribes.

Ms. FEDERICI. It did not surprise me, Senator.

Senator DORGAN. Then why don’t you tell me why you were not

surprised.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay.

Senator DORGAN. And tell me also how much money you received

from the various Indian tribes.

Ms. FEDERICI. I would be happy to do that.

Senator DORGAN. All right.

Ms. FEDERICI. It did not surprise me because I have had a very

close working relationship with Chairman Ben Nighthorse Campbell. When we founded our organization in 1997, he actually flew

out to do Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher in an effort to help

us get some publicity. He hosted a fundraiser with us where we did

outreach to many of the same groups that are being discussed here
30

today. And I follow the environmental movement very closely, obviously. It is what I do.

In the year 2000, Ralph Reed ran for President of the Green

Party and he selected as his running mate a Native American

woman. I believe her name was Winona LaDuke. One of the things

that they talked about repeatedly was that her Native American

heritage gave her a wonderful respect for conservation and the environment, and the Green Party really liked that.

I thought it was a wonderful——

Senator DORGAN. Let me just correct that, because while Ralph

Reed’s name shows up in very many places, he would not want to

be associated with your remarks.

Ms. FEDERICI. Right. I am sorry. Ralph Nader.

Senator DORGAN. We have other reasons to pose future tough

questions to Mr. Reed, but he would not want to be identified with

someone who ran for President on the Green Party.

Ms. FEDERICI. Right. The Green Party, yes.

But Native Americans are, I think, at least in my mind, a very

generous group of individuals. In fact, I was kind of joking, we are

a week from Thanksgiving, which is the quintessential holiday

celebrating Native American generosity. And I believe that they

are also very closely tied to the environment. So I was happy to receive money from them.

Senator DORGAN. So, I have news for you. Ben Nighthorse Campbell is not an Indian tribe. He is a Native American. He is former

chairman of this committee, but he is not a tribe.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay.

Senator DORGAN. And if you are suggesting somehow that your

organization, a Republican environmental organization headed by

you, is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars by some

act of generosity, that really strains credibility.

Let me tell you what it looks like from my standpoint. I am going

to go through a series of e-mails with you. It looks to me like——

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, can I please just to the fullest of my ability?

Senator DORGAN. Of course.

Ms. FEDERICI. I did print off some materials from the Saginaw

Chippewa, from the Coushatta, and from the Choctaw website, and

one piece in particular from the Saginaw Chippewa, a member of

the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe, a member, I do not want to misspeak

again, named David Pago wrote a piece called ‘‘Gas Prices Hurt Indians More Than Others.’’ I have worked for this entire relevant

time period that we are discussing very hard on energy issues and

issues that I feel would raise energy prices. The Choctaw Vision

website, parts of it dovetail with the mission statement of the

Labor Environment Alliance, including the Clean Air Act portions.

Senator DORGAN. You are welcome to submit all that for the

record, Ms. Federici. I am not——

Ms. FEDERICI. But Senator, I feel like what people are saying,

and I might be misunderstanding you and the chairman, and

please forgive me if I am, is that it should have been blatantly obvious to me that Native Americans would not be generous or philanthropic and would not care about the environment; and it should
31

have been obvious to me at the time that they were making these

generous contributions to my group for some third purpose.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, look, let me finish what I was

going to tell you. I am going to ask you a bunch of questions about

the evidence itself.

First of all, you have this organization that you head, a Republican environmental group, CREA, and you come into hundreds of

thousands of dollars. And then we take a look at what your organization has been doing, a massive e-mail trail of contacts you have

with Interior, with Mr. Griles, with Mr. Abramoff and so on. And

it looks to me like you got paid for doing things that had nothing

at all to do with your organization. That is probably for other people to investigate with some seriousness, but I want to ask you

some questions about some of the evidence.

You are an environmental organization. You come into a lot of

money from Indian tribes. My guess is that that money had nothing to do with generosity, or had very little to do with energy or

the environment, but had a lot to do with Mr. Abramoff saying to

his contacts in these tribes, ‘‘I want you to stick money into Ms.

Federici’s organization,’’ and they did.

We have had testimony about that. Let me just read you some

information from document 88. I’ll just go through a series of them.

From Abramoff to Italia, ‘‘Want to see if we can get a sense as to

where we are on the following: Sac and Fox, Saginaw Chippewa

school cost program; moving the Inspector General from Choctaw,

Mississippi to Coushatta election; Mashpee, Jena. Thanks.’’

[Exhibit follows:]
32

Ms. FEDERICI. And there is no response to that e-mail, Mr. Vice

Chairman.

Senator DORGAN. Pardon me.

Ms. FEDERICI. There was no response to that e-mail.

Senator DORGAN. That is true. I am just telling you that our

records are full of these things. It is full of references to the duties

that you were performing for Mr. Abramoff. Those duties had to do

with the term ‘‘juice’’ that also exists in our set of records. You had

‘‘juice.’’ You got paid for that ‘‘juice’’ by having Mr. Abramoff direct

funds to your organization, and you spent a lot of time in your correspondence back and forth with Mr. Abramoff about what you are

doing; not about the environment; not about energy; about Jena,

Mashpee, all of these issues that have to do with Mr. Abramoff.

It looks to me like you were working for Mr. Abramoff and you

were getting money from Indian tribes to do it. That is what it

looks to me like.
33

Ms. FEDERICI. But Senator, I do not know what was in Jack’s

mind. I only know what I was told. And I never told or was told

by or had a conversation with any Native American or Native

American tribe where my duties to my donors were outlined as,

you know, we think you have ‘‘juice’’ with this, that or the other

thing, or where I requested funding for something other than environmental activism.

Now, I believed at the time that the reason that Jack was giving

us money is because he was a very generous Republican fundraiser.

I mean, the amounts of money that, as I understand it——

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, that is unbelievable.

Ms. FEDERICI. What we received from Jack were modest in comparison to some of the fundraising that he did.

Senator DORGAN. The way you describe it in this testimony is the

Indian tribes are generous; Jack is generous; everybody is generous. That is unbelievable to me.

Ms. FEDERICI. That is unbelievable to me.

Senator DORGAN. You think that there are resources in this town

that provide generosity to the tune of several hundred thousands

of dollars, and then we take a look at what was done? Let me just

ask you to look at, if you would, exhibit 56, to you from Mr.

Abramoff, ‘‘The important thing is that Steve,’’ I assume that is Mr.

Griles, a friend of long- standing, ‘‘Steve clearly understands what

a great friend he has in you. He is a great guy and we need to

make sure he is always protected.’’

What do you think he needed protection from, Ms. Federici?

[Exhibit follows:]
34

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, I think I already answered that for your

committee staff during the deposition. But I cannot believe that in

all of the e-mails that you have that there are none of the e-mails

where Jack is talking to me about how angry certain members of

Congress are and that they are calling the White House, frankly;

that people are upset with the Interior Department because they

feel that there are problems with BIA.

I believed that Jack’s conversations with me were always geared

toward, hey, you know, I did not know that he was behind the effort to do the grassroots work with Ralph Reed. All Jack did was

pick up the phone and call me and say, ‘‘Oh, my God, this is a disaster in the making. Ralph Reed and James Dobson are going to
35

run ads against Secretary Norton. You need to give those people

a heads up.’’ I never knew that.

I do not know what Jack was thinking in his mind or what he

was doing. My conversations, to the extent that I would be able to

reach anyone at Interior about this, was about, you know, it was

political in nature, not related to the substance of the lobbying.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, who is Eric Ruff?

Ms. FEDERICI. He is the communications director at the Department of the Interior, or he was.

Senator DORGAN. This is a memo from you to Eric Ruff, exhibit

No. 41, ‘‘Hi, Eric. Here are two articles that were forwarded to me

today. You can see from one that Ralph Reed and his firm are involved somehow. From what I have been told, Ralph is working

with Doolittle, don’t know whether for free or as a paid consultant,

and has been bending the ear of Karl Rove and possibly even the

president about land and trust gaming issues,’’ and you go on and

on and on.

[Exhibit follows:]
36

Ms. FEDERICI. Right. But I did not know that Jack was behind

that effort. And when I found that out, I felt tremendously manipulated. Jack presented that to me that this was something that he

was hearing second-hand, or that he was a third party to it. He did

not tell me that he was paying Ralph Reed to do that.

Senator DORGAN. Reading from exhibit 4, ‘‘Hi Italia,’’ began Mr.

Abramoff, ‘‘I hate to bother you with something on tribal affairs,

but one of our hard core tribes is being screwed by the BIA and

we really need somehow to get the Secretary to undo this fast.

Their insurance business is just about to go under, days away, and

BIA is just not responding, since there is no new head there. I have

sent this to Steve as well, but I thought perhaps you might be able

to get this to the Secretary directly to get action. Here is the onepager on it.’’

The point of this is that at the drop of a hat Mr. Abramoff would

to send you a note and say, ‘‘get this done; do this; contact this person.’’ This is the person who incidentally gave you hundreds of

thousands of dollars.

[Exhibit follows:]
37
38

Senator DORGAN. Would you agree that the tribes donated this

money at Mr. Abramoff’s request? I am talking about donated

money.

Ms. FEDERICI. Oh, absolutely, absolutely.

Senator DORGAN. So Mr. Abramoff got the tribes to donate some

hundreds of thousands of dollars to you. Do you agree that Mr.

Abramoff is constantly asking you to do business for him with respect to tribal interests? Do you agree with that?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, it appears constant because we are going

through it in a rapid-fire fashion, but to me, if it was once every

other week, that did not seem rapid-fire at the time.
39

Senator DORGAN. Whatever ‘‘rapid-fire’’ is, do you agree that Mr.

Abramoff, after getting you the funding for your organization, was

asking you, as we have cited in the evidence, asking you to do some

Indian business with him at the Department of the Interior because you had ‘‘juice?’’ Do you agree with that?

Ms. FEDERICI. No, Senator; I do not agree with the characterization that Jack made; that I was not a party to; that I had ‘‘juice’’

at Interior. I had friends.

Senator DORGAN. I would like to stop with the ‘‘juice’’ thing. Do

you agree with this. Do you agree that Jack Abramoff got you some

hundreds of thousands of dollars and then asked you over a period

of time, many times, to get involved in Indian issues that he was

involved with with the Department of the Interior? Is that the

case?

Ms. FEDERICI. He did make requests of me, and he did also, Senator, continually apologize to me throughout this time period for,

bugging me with tribal issues.

Senator DORGAN. And so he got you the money. He asked you to

do some work with him with the Department of the Interior. Did

you do some work with the Department of the Interior? Did you

contact Mr. Griles? Did you do the kinds of things he was asking?

Ms. FEDERICI. I sent the memo to Eric Ruff, giving him a heads

up. And I told the committee staff in my deposition that I did raise

the concern that members of Congress had about both Jena and

Saginaw Chippewa with Steve, but I did not get into the substance

of those issues with the Department of the Interior officials.

Senator DORGAN. The exhibits that I have read to you just go on

and on and on from Mr. Abramoff to you. As I have indicated previously, you are then sending materials as well, in this case to Mr.

Ruff at the Department of the Interior.

Ms. FEDERICI. But I think that memo was appropriate. I mean,

I think that memo was appropriate.

Senator DORGAN. My point is this. My point is you received information to an environmental group, non-profit that you——

Ms. FEDERICI. No; to me as a person, Senator. I did tell your

Committee staff also, I paid for this e-mail account out of my own

pocket because I use it for both personal and business. I paid for

my cell phone out of my own pocket.

The CHAIRMAN. You pay for your cell phone out of your own

pocket?

Ms. FEDERICI. During this time period.

The CHAIRMAN. How much money did you get from Abramoff and

his clients?

Ms. FEDERICI. We got hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. How much, roughly?

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay, without disclosing donors, I believe it is

about $500,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Over what period of time?

Ms. FEDERICI. Three years.

The CHAIRMAN. Over $500,000?

Ms. FEDERICI. Not over, not over. You guessed $400,000.

The CHAIRMAN. And that is modest, and so you were able to pay

for your own cell phone.
40

Ms. FEDERICI. But Senator, I was not abusing non-profit resources, okay? And Jack at the time, I believed, was a friend. I did

not know that he was doing the things that he was doing. I really

wish, sitting here today, I really wish that any of the Native Americans who donated to us had just once in this time period picked

up the phone and called me and said, you know, what are you

doing with our contribution; or how is this money being spent; so

that I could have had a direct line of access to them.

I repeatedly offered to meet with our Native American donors. I

invited them to all of our events. I was told by Jack Abramoff that

these were people who wanted him to, as their Washington representative, help them to formulate where he was going to give

money, and that they did not want to be bothered with me.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, you must be the luckiest woman

alive.

Ms. FEDERICI. I thought I was.

Senator DORGAN. To be heading an organization and all of a sudden a friend says, you know something, let me get you about

$500,000. But now we know what that was for, in my judgment.

Let me ask you a question about exhibit 56, It is from Mr.

Abramoff to you, subject Jena Band panel, ‘‘It seems the Jena are

on the march again. If you can, can you make sure Steve squelches

this again? Thanks.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. I never asked Steve to squelch anything the first

time. So I do not know, I have listened to your staff; Jack was close

to 50, a man, and a high-dollar donor. I did not feel comfortable

correcting his vernacular. We work with people every day who have

varying levels of decorum. There are lots of things, phrases that

Jack would use that I would not be comfortable using, but I did not

feel comfortable e-mailing him back and saying, don’t use the word

‘‘kaibosh’’ with me.

I do think that he was not nearly as harsh with me as he was,

say, about me. For example, in the e-mail that your committee staff

showed me from this same time period where he told people he was

going to ‘‘f—ing bury me.’’ I mean, it is obvious from the e-mails

that you have that there was a lot that Jack was doing that I had

no idea about.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, you had an event at Signatures

restaurant. We have an e-mail trail about the question of whether

your organization was going to actually pay for the food and so on

at Signatures restaurant. Let me go through a couple of these.

Ms. FEDERICI. Which exhibit is that?

Senator DORGAN. Let me go through a couple of them. Exhibit

47. This is from Rodney Lane to Mr. Abramoff, ‘‘Spoke with Jared.

I got the sense they were hoping we would‘ take care’ of things; it

sounds to me like they are planning on doing these luncheons twice

a month; 10 or less coming for lunch tomorrow; to avoid embarrassment, maybe we should pick up at least one-half this tab, then our

work with Jared going forward would give him a discount on future

events.’’ It goes on, ‘‘It looks like this bill was slightly over $300

plus tip; what do you want me to do in the future?’’

A series of things in which——

[Exhibit follows:]
41
42

Ms. FEDERICI. Jack was a donor. Again, I mean this goes to my

naivete, but I thought he was very generous.

Senator DORGAN. Well, that would be pretty generous; if you are

going to do a couple of meetings a month and go to a restaurant

and not be charged for it, that would be mighty generous.

Ms. FEDERICI. We did pay. We did pay, and we provided documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI and other people

that showed that we wrote checks and did make payments to Signatures for the events that we did there. And I did leave open in

my deposition with Mr. Carrillo the possibility that there was a

lunch at some point that was picked up by Jack. We also did

lunches at the Caucus Room and other places, and we would pay

for our own lunches.
43

The CHAIRMAN. Did Mr. Abramoff ever comp a CREA function?

Ms. FEDERICI. I cannot recall if he did or did not right now——

The CHAIRMAN. But you just provided documents. Were you reimbursed? You must have examined whether there were cases

where you were comped by Abramoff.

Ms. FEDERICI. If I didn’t, the absence of a check would not be a

document. How would I know?

The CHAIRMAN. I think you would know whether you paid or not.

Any record keeping would indicate whether you paid or not. The

question is, did Abramoff ever comp an event by CREA?

Ms. FEDERICI. I can’t say, but if he comped us a lunch at some

point in time, we would have just written it down as an in-kind

contribution. That is what an in-kind contribution is.

The CHAIRMAN. Exactly. And that is the question: Did he ever

comp anything for your organization?

Ms. FEDERICI. I was not asked to look into in-kind contributions,

that I recall.

The CHAIRMAN. You are totally non-responsive. You should know

whether you were comped or not, because it is just a simple thing

of recordkeeping. Go back into your records.

Ms. FEDERICI. For a $300-lunch 3 years ago?

The CHAIRMAN. Please do not interrupt anymore, Ms. Federici.

It is a simple question as to whether Mr. Abramoff ever comped

anything for your or your organization.

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not recall.

The CHAIRMAN. Then I would like to have you go back through

your documents and provide for this committee whether he did or

not.

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman.

Ms. FEDERICI. I would be happy to do that.

Senator DORGAN. Let me just say that there is an exhibit on this.

No. 71, from Laura Lippy to Rodney Lane and then to Abramoff

from Rodney Lane. The end of it is, ‘‘Jared called; they want to do

this reception on Thursday, March 20, for 50 to 75 people; Jared

said that Italia and Jack spoke regarding this and Jack may want

to comp it; Eric can you call Jared to get the details; Rodney will

talk to Jack about the comp issue.’’ And then he says, ‘‘See what

Eric comes back with, but it sounds expensive. Do we owe them

something?’’ Mr. Abramoff says, ‘‘Unfortunately, she is critical to

me. What will it cost us?’’

[Exhibit follows:]
44

Ms. FEDERICI. This event, to the best of my recollection, as I answered in my deposition on October 7, did not take place. These are

conversations between people, not me, and I do not know what

Jack was thinking or what was in his mind. I can’t address this

e-mail.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, there is so much to ask you

about.

Ms. FEDERICI. I am happy to answer all of your questions.

Senator DORGAN. I understand, although I guess I am not understanding your answers. I think that this set of e-mails and the evidence that we have collected through subpoena paints a very clear

picture of what was going on. You are denying virtually all of it.

I understand that. You come to the committee with some jeopardy.

Ms. FEDERICI. I am not lying. Senator, I am not lying to this

committee, okay? I am not lying to this committee. Jack Abramoff

gave us, you have to put it into the context of 4 years ago, 41⁄2

years ago. Jack Abramoff was a very well known and very highly

respected lobbyist and Republican activist.

Let me put it to you this way. When I walk into the Republican

National Committee building, and Chairman McCain, you will

know this more than Vice Chairman Dorgan, there is a center
45

there called the DeVos Media Center. I believe that the DeVos’, a

couple, gave $1 million out of their own pocket to help construct

that media center. I do not believe that they received anything personally in exchange for that. It is philanthropy.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, please. Let’s get back on the subject. The time of this committee is more valuable than to talk about

a contribution from someone from the State of Michigan.

Here is the question, Ms. Federici. In one exhibit, Todd Boulanger, a senior member of Mr. Abramoff’s team, is asked, ‘‘Can Italia

get shit in the President’s budget to Congress?’’ Mr. Abramoff responds, ‘‘I do not think she has juice beyond Interior.’’

Another exhibit, here the two discuss CREA and a political contribution, Mr. Abramoff writes to Mr. Boulanger, ‘‘Todd, did we not

request money for CREA from them? That is our access to Norton.

We need money for them more than many of the others.’’

Another exhibit, here the two discuss a CREA freshman reception, Mr. Abramoff replies, ‘‘Unfortunately, she is critical to me.’’

Why is it, Ms. Federici, that in your view, that Mr. Abramoff

time after time after time, not only believes you are critical, but ensures that donations are made to you and your organization? How

do you think he became so confused?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, how did he get confused enough to call

Native Americans ‘‘troglodytes?’’ Nobody can know what Jack

Abramoff was thinking.

The CHAIRMAN. That is not responsive, Ms. Federici.

Ms. FEDERICI. I can’t know what was in Jack Abramoff’s mind.

The CHAIRMAN. So the answer is you do not know?

Ms. FEDERICI. I have no idea. Those e-mails were not to me or

from me.

The CHAIRMAN. Although there are e-mails that say, ‘‘I have got

it; I will get on it; I have a meeting a 4 p.m. this afternoon.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. I help my friends.

The CHAIRMAN. We have a trail.

Ms. FEDERICI. I am sorry.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, for the last time, I am asking you

not to interrupt me.

Even though there is e-mail after e-mail where you state, ‘‘I’ve

got it; I am on it; I have an appointment at 4 p.m.’’ What is Mr.

Abramoff supposed to think when every e-mail that he sends to

you, you are saying ‘‘I am on it ASAP; I have got it; I have a meeting at four,’’ on and on and on. What is he supposed to think?

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, it is not every e-mail. My e-mails to Jack,

many, many, many, many of them, and I am extremely concerned

that this committee does not have them, are all, ‘‘Jack, here is

what we are doing with the money; we have this project; we are

focus-testing this video that I brought with me; we are taking out

a very expensive $40,000 ad in the Washington Post; we are

launching a major alliance with the Teamsters that is going to cost

50 grand.’’

And that is what was in my mind. I cannot say what was in

Jack’s mind. From time to time, and it does, as we go through

these rapid-fire, just sitting here today, he did ask me for assistance, but it was not the body of the work that I did. I did a lot

of work, real environmental work with his funding.
46

The CHAIRMAN. The focus of this committee’s hearing is why you

continued to respond to him, ‘‘I’ve got it; I’m on it.’’ And you have

given no satisfactory explanation. And the fact that you were doing

other work at the time, Ms. Federici, is not convincing.

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, Senator, may I respond?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; as long as it is a direct response to the question.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay. But Senator, I did environmental work with

the money that Jack gave us, and if he called me or e-mailed me

and asked me to pick up the phone and raise and issue and I said

I was going to call, I called. I can’t tell you what was in his mind.

I don’t know what he was telling his donors. I wish he had given

me access to them. He did not, because I think that we would not

be sitting here today if I had access to them. And we did not do

anything untoward with those contributions.

Thank you.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, is your organization a 501(c)(3) or

(4)?

Ms. FEDERICI. No, sir; We are a 501(c)(4).

Senator DORGAN. Formerly a 527?

Ms. FEDERICI. We were a 527 until 2000.

Senator DORGAN. As a 501(c)(4), your organization would not be

collecting money for the purposes of using it politically. Would that

be accurate?

Ms. FEDERICI. I do not understand all the ins and outs.

Senator DORGAN. Were there restrictions on the use of the

money?

Ms. FEDERICI. We are not allowed to write checks to campaigns.

We are not allowed to endorse political candidates. We are allowed

to engage in advocacy, environmental advocacy and point out examples of hypocrisy and things like that.

Senator DORGAN. In your deposition, you said ‘‘we focus-tested

the video of John Kerry leaving a fuel efficiency rally and hopping

into an SUV.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. Right.

Senator DORGAN. And then you talk about, ‘‘I wanted to let you

know we just posted the anti-Kerry video-clip on our website; released it to the news media in Beta format; The O’Reilly Factor

and Hannity and Colmes are interested; I will keep my fingers

crossed; the Post ad comes out on Wednesday.’’

Ms. FEDERICI. It was very important to policy, because at the

time Senator Kerry was threatening to filibuster ANWR on the

floor of the U.S. Senate. And the rally that he was speaking at was

a fuel efficiency and ANWR rally that he then, after telling people

to tighten their belts, conserve and accept higher gas prices,

walked past five limousines and got into a chauffeur-driven SUV.

It was timed with an important public policy matter.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, in these old western movies on

television, they have this phrase, ‘‘what are you going to believe:

Me or your own eyes? I do not understand this testimony. This

body of evidence we have is complete and persuasive that you came

into hundreds of thousands of dollars, at some moribund little environmental organization, and all of a sudden you seem to be on the

payroll of or working for Mr. Abramoff in all kinds of ways. I mean,
47

obviously it looks to me pretty political, but let me ask you, how

does this role of yours that we see in evidence here, how does that

relate to Indian tribes as regards the environment?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, okay, my op/ed piece that was entitled American Ingenuity in Energy Stability mirrors quite closely actually

the piece written by David Pago from the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe,

Gas Prices Hurt Indians More Than Others. We have worked extensively on issues relating to high gas prices. We are dancing

around an issue here that I think it is time to mention because you

asked me why I thought this was a little bit of a witch hunt.

A lot of the money that was used, that was raised during this

time period was spent constructing and putting together the Labor

Environment Alliance, and the major project of the Labor Environment Alliance were pink slips that we made to defeat the

Lieberman and McCain Climate Stewardship Act. And so, a lot of

the money that was raised during this time period was spent putting together a coalition which then funded an effort to defeat Senator McCain’s legislation on the basis that it would raise gasoline

prices.

Now, reasonable people can disagree. I am sure Senator McCain

believes that his legislation wouldn’t raise gas prices. We had a different viewpoint, but we worked on that from almost all of 2002,

putting the Alliance together, and most of 2003.

Senator DORGAN. And that was funded by the Indian tribes?

Ms. FEDERICI. It was out of our general support funding.

Senator DORGAN. Let me ask you, is there any trail of evidence

that would suggest that the Indian tribes decided that was going

to be a big issue for them, and they wanted to deliver hundreds of

thousands of dollars to you for that purpose? Any evidence that you

have about that?

Ms. FEDERICI. No, Senator; other than the fact that we have a

website, www.crea-online.org, with our mission statement, our

projects, publicly available information, telephone number, e-mail,

et cetera, and nobody ever reached out, none of our donors ever

reached out to me to either contact me to set up a meeting or to

say, hey wait 1 minute; you are doing things with our funding that

is counter to how we would like to see our funds used.

Senator DORGAN. It almost sounds like a fairy tale, doesn’t it? You get hundreds of thousands, up to $500,000 and the people that

gave it to you really never reached out to you to talk to you about

the issues that represented the main elements of your organizations.

That is why I think this is unbelievable, Ms. Federici. We have

a body of evidence here that suggests you got a substantial amount

of money from Indian tribes, and then you were very busy working

with Mr. Abramoff and a close friend at Interior, close friend for

10 years. You were very busy moving back and forth on a wide

range of very controversial Indian issues, and now you come here

and say, well, I really did not do that; that really did not happen.

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I did not say that I really did not do that.

Senator DORGAN. Well, did you do it then?

Ms. FEDERICI. I told you that I contacted folks at Interior, but

that the issues were, in my mind, it was Ralph Reed is angry, and

James Dobson is angry; is anybody paying attention to this? Jack
48

represented to me, and I know that there are e-mails, because I

was actually shown them by your staff, where he repeatedly represents to me in writing that he does not have any way of talking

to people at the Bureau of Indian Affairs; that nobody will speak

with him. In his framing of that issue to me, he said that other

people were becoming angry and frustrated with his inability to

have meetings.

Now, at the time, hindsight is 20-20, he was the paid representative of the Choctaw and the Coushatta and the Saginaw Chippewa

and lots of very nice Indian tribes. If he presented that information

to me in writing as he did, and also verbally on the phone, why

wouldn’t I pick up the phone and call the Chief Operating Officer

and just say, ‘‘hey.’’ People who are concerned about these issues

are frustrated that they can’t, you know.

Senator DORGAN. You know what bothers me? We have been

through hours and hours and hours and hours of hearings. And the

staff has been through days and days of interviews at this point.

It is pretty clear that this is one of the most disgusting tales of

greed and avarice, or perhaps fraud, stealing. It is unbelievable

what we have uncovered here. It is almost sickening to see what

we have uncovered, the people being bilked and defrauded and so

on.

And you come to our table and say, you know, gosh, this was just

about friendships, hundreds of thousands of dollars that came my

way and I didn’t really do much. I mean, somehow none of this

adds up, Ms. Federici. As I said before, this committee, in my judgment, has had people testify, and in my judgment some of the testimony has been fraudulent. And we need to find out who because

there are consequences for that.

And I do not know where this hearing goes from here, what we

do. I have indicated that I think we have some additional witnesses

or some additional people to interview; perhaps another hearing.

But I think at some point, Mr. Chairman, we have to reconcile as

well some of the inherent conflicts that this committee has been

told in open hearing because there are consequences to providing

testimony that is false testimony.

Ms. FEDERICI. And there very well should be, and I did not provide any false testimony to this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Federici, do you have anything from the IRS

that establishes you as a 501(c)(4)?

Ms. FEDERICI. Can you be more specific, Senator?

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, when you were established as a

certain category, you receive documentation from the IRS to authenticate that. Your file is one.

Ms. FEDERICI. Our General Counsel on that issue, well, actually

CREA’s General Counsel is Ben Ginsburg. He did our incorporation. Those records would be with him at Patton Boggs. He has assured me that our filing was done properly.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you provide it for the record, please?

Ms. FEDERICI. Sure. I will ask Mr. Ginsburg for that information.

The CHAIRMAN. No; you can get it. You are the head of the organization, Ms. Federici.

Ms. FEDERICI. Okay.
49

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I have to be on the floor of the

Senate in just a few minutes. I wonder if I might just ask one additional question.

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.

Senator DORGAN. Ms. Federici, because of the pattern I see here

with this 501(c)(4), and you heard that we will be submitting at the

request of the Finance Committee information about activities of

(c)(3)s and (c)(4)s that we have uncovered, let me ask you, has any

of the funding that has come to the (c)(4) that you are involved in

been used by you personally or for political purposes?

Ms. FEDERICI. Not to my knowledge.

Senator DORGAN. So you have not used any of that funding from

your (c)(4)?

Ms. FEDERICI. I pay myself a salary. We have salaries.

Senator DORGAN. Beyond a salary, you have not converted that

to personal use in any way, and you have not used it for political

purposes?

Ms. FEDERICI. Well, converted to personal use would be salary or

reimbursements and things like that. No. I mean, if money from

CREA goes to me, it is salary or reimbursement.

Senator DORGAN. The reason I am asking the question is this

money came to you from Indian tribes.

Ms. FEDERICI. Right, Senator.

Senator DORGAN. And we are trying to track the money from Indian tribes, who it went to and how it was used.

Ms. FEDERICI. And I want to actually be as forthcoming as possible on that point. We were not a group that received money and

then hired any of Jack’s friends or wrote checks to any of Jack’s

organizations or anything like that.

The CHAIRMAN. We would like to have a yes or no answer.

Have you ever made any use of the money for purely personal

expenses for campaign work-related contributions?

Ms. FEDERICI. Do you mean did I ever write a CREA check for

a campaign?

The CHAIRMAN. That was the question, or any for purely personal expenses?

Ms. FEDERICI. No; not to the best of my recollection. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Was CREA ever used as a conduit for any reasons? In other words, was the CREA ever used to funnel money

from one source to another?

Ms. FEDERICI. No, Senator; I mean, not to the best of my recollection. I would actually prefer to be answering that question ‘‘no.’’

You know, and if you have specifics, I could probably, if you wanted

to know did I ever write checks back to the organizations Jack ran,

no.

The CHAIRMAN. Any other organization?

Ms. FEDERICI. No; Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Federici. I am sure

that there will be more concerning this particular relationship, this

three-cornered relationship between you and the Department of the

Interior and Mr. Abramoff.

Ms. FEDERICI. Senator, I am happy to help in any way I can.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I thank you.

This hearing is adjourned.
50

[Whereupon at 11:25 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
(51)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173

Æ