Advanced Search
Man ordered by police to clean trash on road
Trash dump
Littering the city street
Littering lake
Littering the zoo
Littering sea shore
Drivers littering
Littering picnic places
Littering the bridge
People talking about littering
People in parks
Littering farm fields
Throwing trash from car
On preview cassette 220038 Throwing trash from car, litter
Men dropping paper on crowd
Littering country road
Town and highway littering
Lake Louise resort - flowers
Frasier River (Lake Louise)
Lake Louise area / mountains
Lake Louise
August 1, 1994 - Part 7
(20:05:53) Senator MURRAY. Mr. Chairman, we have not had an opportunity. The CHAIRMAN. I beg your pardon. Let me stand corrected. Let me give the whole answer here. On the Republican side, some of the time has been yielded to one Member, several times over in the rotation, as opposed to going down and getting every Senator. Not 145 every Senator on this side has been called upon, although I've tried to call on each one that I've understood to be wanting to be called upon. In fact, it would help me, now, to know what Senators, on both sides, would like to be called upon and, then, I will do so in the order in which we're proceeding. Senator Bryan, Senator Murray, and Senator Moseley-Braun wish to be called upon. At this point, Senator Boxer Senator BOXER. I already had my round, but I'll wait The CHAIRMAN. Senator Boxer has had one round-the voting period Senator BoxER. But I'll wait for the end, because I have More questions. The CHAIRMAN. On this side, Senator Gramm, Senator Bennett, Senator Roth, Senator Domenici, Senator Hatch, and Senator D'Amato wish to be called upon. That's why we have ordered in the pizzas tonight, Senator D'Amato's birthday day is today. Senator SHELBY Mr. Chairman when are they coming? The CHAIRMAN. Not soon enough. In any event, who's next in the order now rotating across to this Senator D'AMATO. I believe Senator Domenici is next. I yield to Senator Domenici. The CHAMMAN. Senator Domenici will go next on this side. Senator DOMENICI. How many times have you had an opportunity to correct the record when a witness that you represent, as le I counsel, has, in your opinion, failed to tell the whole truth? Ms. HANsON. To my recollection, this is the first time that I have been in a position, like this one, where there was a transcript that was going to be provided for me to review. I have reviewed other testimony, but I bad not been in this particular position before. Senator DOMENICI. Are you of the impression, the way we do business in the U.S. Senate is that, a witness can come before the Committee, tell half truths or one-quarter of the truth and, then, that gives him the right to take as long as he'd like to look through the transcript and correct it? Even if it's something as specific as, "Did you have only one meeting?" and the answer is, "Yes," but it turns out that there are at least three and maybe more? Is it your understanding that's the way the Senate does business.? at you have that right and Mr. Altman has that right? Ms. HANsON. It's my understanding--certainly, it's my understanding that the requirement is to testify truthfully. It's also my understanding that it is necessary, and what a careful lawyer does, to review the transcript and to correct it, if necessary, and supplement it. Sir, that was what I intended to do here. That was all I intended to do. Senator DOMENICI. I understand. Mr. Chairman, I might just state my own observation. The CHAIRMAN. Please. Senator DOMENICI. I really don't understand that to be the premise upon which we operate in terms of our records that witnesses can come and tell us a quarter of what's truthful or a half of what's truthful and then go see their legal counsel and say, "Let me correct it," and then correct it once, correct it twice, correct it ,three times. I think it's very unordinary that this matter was ban 146 dled like this and, frankly, I just call upon Senators who have here to recollect whether they think this is the way we do business. I mean, the fact of the matter-is, Mr. Altman did not tell this mittee the truth. Or, let's put it another way, the whole truth. Then you sought as you claim, in due course, to fix that record as I understand it. Ms. HANSON. Sir, that's not what I-what I've said. I think Altman and-and Mr. Altman will appear before this Coln, and you can ask Mr. Altman questions about his testimony, I have testified-is that, I intended to review all the questions answers to make sure that they were fully and completely swered, and I did not have an opportunity to do that. You're this was an unusual process, because a Grand Jury subpoena delivered to me on March 4, 1994, which terminated my ability participate in this process.
August 1, 1994 - Part 7
(20:15:19) Senator DODD. I don't think Mr. McLarty was there. It was in his office, you testified, but he was not present. Is that correct? Ms. HANSON. That's correct. Senator DOMENICI. Nobody else from' the White House has called ou about the subject matter of that meeting? Has anybody else been in contact with you? Ms. HANSON. As I testified, Neal Eggleston called me just before the hearing on the proposed answer to a question regarding the meeting, but other than that, no, sir. Senator DOMENICI. Just one last time, as you sat behind the table there, while Mr. Altman was testifying-and Secretary Bentsen was there, I recall it rather vividly-are you actually telling us today, that you did not clearly understand, right then and there, that he was not telling us all of the facts? Ms. HANSON. As I stated, sir, I realized that be bad not mentioned recusal. I did not know why he had done that. Senator DOMENICI. And you didn't choose to do anything about that until later on? Ms. HANsON. That's correct. I didn't think there was anything I could do about it, at that point, given the way he bad testified. Senator DOMENICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAiRmAN, I think, in fairness to the witness, on this---and she can speak for herself, I'm not trying to speak for her-but she did say earlier, and it was confirmed in your deposition, that you felt, beyond a certain point, he had made such a declarative and definitive answer, if you will, that the moment bad passed where You thought you could intervene and, in a sense, broaden out the answer. Is that correct? 148 Ms. HANsON. That's coThe CHAIRMAN. I'm going to yield to Senator Bryan. Before I yield I just want to ask you if you think nk you've got the staying power tonight, to finish up this evening. I know this is a difficult exercise for you, and there are a lot of us and only one of you. I think it would be well if we could finish tonight, as opposed to carry 0 until tomorrow- MS. HANSON. That's fine. The CHAIRMAN. -but I don't want to do that if that--if you don't feel you want to stick it out here tonight. I don't know what your own energy level is in terms of responding. I'd like a little guidance from you. I'd like to finish, but I don't want to do that if it's beyond what you think your strength is here tonight Ms. HANsON. I'm prepared to continue, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Thank you. Senator Bryan. Senator BRYAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of things I find to be quite troubling here. I'm very disturbed at the way in which Mr. Altman was handled, both your conduct, with respect to it, and his. Tomorrow, well have a chance to ask him some questions. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Bryan, I'm having a hard time hearing you. I'm wondering if you could get closer to that mike? Maybe we could turn it up a bit. Senator BRYAN. Mr. Chairman, is this a little better? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, it is. Thank you. Senator BRYAN. What I just said is that, I find a number of things troublesome and particularly disturbing to me in the way in which the Altman testimony was handled, both Mr. Altman's conduct and your conduct. I don't find your explanation persuasive, but I don't want to dwell on that. I think a number of others have made that point as well. I'm also bothered with the contacts with the Administration. It may very well be, as you suggest, that an ethical standard was not breached, but there is an appearance of impropriety and I don't believe there was the sensitivity that there ought to , have been with respect to that issue. What I want to talk to you a little bit about, now, and get the benefit of your thinking, is an area that I've explored with several other witnesses and that is the relationship of the RTC to the Treasury. Those of us who were here in 1989, when we worked on the FIRREA legislation, certainly had the impression, I think it's fair to say, that we were creating an independent relationship between the RTC and the Treasury. Perhaps, as you've. indicated on page 2 of your testimony today, it was not as independent as, say, the SEC, because there was no fixed term. I think that is correct, but yet, clearly, there was an independent relationship contemplated. You, obviously, take a different point of view. Let me just say that, in this morning's testimony, a number of the witnesses who were questioned were concerned about the absence of that independent relationship they thought was important. Mr. Roelle commented, during the course of his testimony, that the RTC did not operate independently of the Treasury, "Everything we do is cleared by the Treasury." " Mr. Katsanos was very concerned about the relationship. He felt that, and inherently, and I'm 149 paraphrasing, the two hats that Mr. Altman wore made it a very difficult relationship, and even Mr. Ryan commented that he felt the lines of authority were blurred. The line of questioning that I'd like to pursue with you is what the nature of the RTC is. Is it simply a bureau, as one witness commented in disagreeing with that perception, is it just a bureau within the Department of Treasury, or is it just an entity within the Department? Give me the benefit of your thinking, of how you understand and how you perceive this relationship.
Shades Of Aviation Past
Look what the Germans have got airborne once again - there hasn't been a rigid airship aloft since the tragedy of the Hindenburg until now. It's a 20-foot model built by a Bavarian watchmaker and it would do Count Zeppelin proud as it flies over the roofs of the fascinated townsfolk. You see the second stories of houses and floating above them is a zeppelin, looking very slick. CU - A little blond haired boy looking up at the airship. The zeppelin is making a nice and easy landing. Teenagers on their bikes watching the landing of the airship. Model of a zeppelin and the builder pulling it along holding it on a string. The two builders of the model airship. MS - Once again they are letting the 20 foot model up in the air again. "Altvater". MS - The builder of the Altvater is putting it through different maneuvers.
Princeton 51 to Penn State 0
The Princeton Tiger goes for 14 straight victories and has no trouble with Pennsylvania as they run roughshod. It seems that touchdowns get so monotonous that they let Charlie Goggled kick a field goal or two (or three, as it turns out). Throngs of fans fill up the stadium. High Angle Shot - Princeton has the football and takes it just outside the goal line. High Angle Shot - Princeton is handed off the ball and takes it over the goal line and Princeton is on the scoreboard. MS - Princeton fires a shot deep into the end zone, it is caught and Princeton scores again. High Angle Shot - Googled kicks the football and it is good for a point. High Angle Shot - Scoreboard Princeton 17 - Penn State 0. High Angle Shot - Princeton throws short and runs it in for another touchdown. High Angle Shot - Princeton throws another pass, it is caught and is ran in for a touchdown. MS - Princeton runs the ball for 16 yards. MS - Princeton gets the ball again and pulls off a razzle dazzle right down the middle for a touchdown. High Angle Back Shot - Fans sitting and cheering in the bleachers. High Angle Shot - Googled kick the ball for a 43 yard field goal. MS Princeton takes the ball through the middle for 11 yards. MS The final touchdown. Final score 51 to zip, Princeton gets its 14th straight win.