WASHINGTON — The White House has allayed Congress’ concerns about
missing e-mail by turning over the e-mail search project to a third
party — an “independent” and “private” contractor. What the White House
hasn’t said is it’s still calling the shots.

In an exclusive interview with WorldNetDaily, the president and chief
executive of the general contractor for the e-mail restoration job says
the White House matched him with a subcontractor that employs former
White House officials.

Also, the general contractor himself worked in the White House —
under an official that a House committee has recommended the Justice
Department investigate for perjury in the mushrooming e-mail scandal. In
fact, he lists him as his top reference.

Tung Q. “Eric” Duong, head of lead contractor ECS Technology Inc.,
says he found out about subcontractor SRA International for the first
time in a White House meeting “a couple of weeks ago.”

“I just only know SRA about couple weeks ago,” Duong, who speaks
slightly broken English, told WorldNetDaily yesterday. Duong (pronounced
Young) is a U.S. citizen.

What led you to pick SRA as your subcontractor?

“The government,” Duong replied.

The White House?


As reported yesterday in WorldNetDaily,
SRA employs at least two former senior White House officials who
allegedly “dragged their feet” in restoring missing White House e-mail
under subpoena by several investigative bodies, White House insiders

Dorothy “Dotty” Cleal was associate director of the Office of
Administration’s Information Systems and Technology unit, which manages
the White House computer systems, including e-mail archiving. Cleal left
her post in January and hired on with SRA.

The other ex-official working for SRA is John Dankowski, who was
President Clinton’s special assistant and director of White House
operations. He left the White House in September.

Sources say both officials “worked closely” with Mark Lindsay,
Clinton’s assistant and director of management and administration, as
well as Lindsay’s predecessor, Virginia “Ginny” Apuzzo.

Six Northrop Grumman computer contractors have testified that Lindsay
ordered them to keep quiet about the e-mail records gap, known inside
the White House as “Project X.” Four of the six said they felt

A House committee investigating Project X says it will ask the White
House for more details about the new contract by Friday. And a
public-interest law firm suing the White House says it plans to file a
complaint about the new contract in federal court.

As a so-called 8(a) minority-owned small business, ECS did not have
to bid for the White House contract — which is how the White House was
able to hire a new contractor so soon after the e-mail scandal broke in
the press.

The Small Business Administration lists ECS’ minority status as

SRA didn’t have to bid on the job, either, because the general
contractor hires subs. As it turns out, ECS hired SRA at the White
House’s urging.

The SBA profile on ECS shows it had sales of just $150,000 last year.
The company, which recently moved its office from Fairfax, Va., to
Springfield, Va., employs just three, including Duong. It’s a subchapter
S corporation and has been in business since 1996.

Normally, the general contractor has more overall experience than the
subcontractor. Not in this case.

In fact, Duong sounds as if he’ll be taking direction from Fairfax,
Va.-based SRA, even though ECS has majority control of the $3 million

“I’d like to have SRA as my mentor,” he told WorldNetDaily.

The White House told Congress it will take six months, or maybe
longer, to track down all the omitted e-mail, even though
computer-forensic experts tell WorldNetDaily it’s really a weeks-long

Asked if he has any experience restoring and reconstructing computer
back-up tapes, Duong said only that he worked in the White House as a
subcontractor for computer contractors Northrop Grumman and its
predecessor Planning Research Corp.

The subcontractor was his own firm, then called Enterprise Computing

On his SBA form, Duong lists as his top reference White House
computer specialist Daniel A. Barry — the same White House official who
House Government Reform Committee Chairman Dan Burton, R-Ind., last
month recommended the Justice Department investigate for perjury.

Burton claims Barry lied in a sworn affidavit submitted on behalf of
the White House in Judicial Watch, Inc.’s Filegate suit. The 1999
affidavit signed by Barry declared that White House e-mail “has been
archived.” Northrop Grumman technicians found a two-year e-mail gap in
June 1998.

A Burton spokesman says that, by Friday, the panel will send
questions to the White House Counsel’s Office to explain their selection
of the new contractors.

Panel member Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., says he’s disturbed by the news.

“I’m very concerned by (WorldNetDaily) reports that former White
House employees are still in a position to cover up e-mail in
private-sector roles,” Barr said in an interview.

“These latest reports cast further doubt on the administration’s
terrible record of providing subpoenaed materials,” added Barr, a member
of Burton’s House panel. “Sadly, this White House has refined
obstruction of justice to an art form.”

Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman was livid over the news and
says it’s more reason for U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth to
take action to secure the White House evidence.

“It’s quite clear that unless we can get Judge Lamberth to seize this
evidence, it will be destroyed,” said Klayman, who plans to submit the
WorldNetDaily articles to the court as exhibits.

WorldNetDaily has also learned that SRA does a lot of contract work
involving national security-related data. Former White House computer
chief Dotty Cleal is now SRA’s director of Navy programs.

Previous stories:

‘The fix is in’ on e-mail fix?

Firm won’t take hit for Project X fiasco

Memo: More e-mail missing

Gore’s e-mail MIA for next 6 months

More signs of obstruction as judge nears decision

Perjury charges at White House?

E-mail whistle-blower’s office was burglarized

White House killed ‘Project X’ story?

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.