Advanced Search
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:45:51) Senator DODD. It's just an answer. You may not like the answer. It's his answer. Senator DAMATO. OK Fine. The CHAIRMAN. It's Senator DAMATO. I'd like to make one other point and it will take 10 seconds. This is the sworn deposition of Mr. Ickes, Deputy Chief of Staff. I want you to know that. He said it under oath. Senator SARBANES. Let him give his answer. Senator DAMATO. You disagree. 507 Mr. ALTMAN. I know it's false. I'm sure Mr. Ickes recollection is just different. I know him to be a man of honesty. I know he's honest, but his recollection is wrong. The CHAIRMAN. You're very clear on that. Senator D'Amato has read this into the record. Obviously, Mr. Ickes gave this in a deposition under oath. He'll be here so he can be quizzed on that. I think we've laid out both sides of it, and that's about all we can do at this point. Senator DODD. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think it's my time. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Dodd. Senator DODD. I'd point out it isn't just a question of these two individuals disagreeing. The fact is that Ms. Kulka disagrees with Mr. Ickes. Ms. Hanson disagrees with Mr. Ickes and they were there at the meeting. We've had testimony from Mr. Nye today as "to what Ms. Kulka said to Mr. Altman on February 1 regarding -'how these matters would be handled and whether or not the cases could be brought before the 28th. Why in the world with all of these people agreeing with what was said the day before, why would Mr. Altman sit down at a meeting with people in the White House and tell them something completely different than a bunch people heard the day before? We have heard from Mr. Ickes and he can comment on it, but as of this hour, after 40 hours of bearin this room we have beard from at least 3 or 4 different people substantiate what Mr. Altman has said. That has value I think it ought to be clearly stated. Let me tell you something regarding this. We've spent a lot of me focusing on this bearing on the 24th. I think it's important, but it also difresses, in my view, quite a bit from what the central them ought to be. Let me say I'm just speaking for myself here. I've read over the testimony, I think you have to start back in the middle of page 63 our colleague from New York starts talking about and leadup to the questions about the RTC, the counsels, and the statute of limitations and so forth. Now, I was not at the bearing, so I'm just reading this. I don't doubt in my mind that the Senator from New York, and , A] D'Amato, has a very clear understanding of what he thinks he was asking, particularly the line where it ends from our colleague, Senator DAmato says, "oh, oh. Ickes is in it" and then it goees down and he says, "or Mrs. Clinton's interest or anyone else that you were aware of as it relates to the matter that you went to brief them on." It seems to me that's an operative clause when it comes to the series of questions which is the subject of the dispute here as to whether or not the issue of the recusal meeting on February 3 should have been included in your response. In your mind, that meeting was about the statute of limitations and the procedures. Now there's a debate and discussion as to whether or not you ought to have included the issue of the recusal, but I can see where two well- intentioned people who were sitting there, responding and answering questions came to a different point of view. That's not the most bizarre thing that has ever happened at a congressional hearing. 508 I think we've heard from the witnesses but to dwell on this par. ticular point as if it was somehow central to this whole case is to digress, in my view, from what the central theme is. Let me a background here to review the bidding a little bit. We've had an investigation on the illegal questions by Mr. Fiske, 91 a Republican prosecutor, rave reviews given to him at the time was was named. We've had the Office of Government Ethics who under Mr. Stanley Potts. He, an appointee of the previous Repub- lican Administration declares that ethically, there are no problems here. We have heard Mr. Foreman, a Republican appointee who was kept on by this Administration, declare that there were no ethical problems. Mr. Stephens stays on even though the White House allegedly exercised some influence to change th at. You go to Ms. Kulka, who be gives the total authority to in these matters. She states that unequivocally here. She's not a partisan in all of this. She could have said look, he didn't say that to me. He gave her all the authority to handle these matters. She states that she had plenty to work on and bad no problem with February 28. We have Mr. Altman recusing himself, admittedly today he should have stuck with the decision when he made it in the first place but didn't, and gets involved in a discussion to bang around for a while. But as far as I'm concerned, he made that decision to recuse himself early on.
Orange Grove Irrigation
ON PREVIEW CASS. #98959 Farmer clears irrigation ditch w/ shovelSprinklers spray water in field - lush, green field.Long shot of farmer clearing ditch w/ shovel. (Lush, green fields are orchards) 1950s
Orchard Irrigation
Pan of grove along an irrigation ditch.
Irrigation - Potatoes - Grapes
Med. shot of an irrigation pumpClose-up of an irrigation pumpWide shot of an irrigation pump supplying H2O to grove.
Potato Irrigation
Farmer adjusting hoses to irrigation ditchPan of the greens in front of the farmhouse, as the sprinklers runWide shot of sprinklers.Two streams of H2O cross in front of farmhouse (sprinklers)Sprinkler washes over potato fields.
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:50:59) Mr. ALTMAN. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. -and asked if I would support him, a Republican, I know him, Now, in whose interest is it to appoint a Republican to head up the RTC if you're worried about this? The people watching this and listening to this may not understand all of these debates between Committees but there's a backdrop here. When you have the overall demeanor, all of these other questions, set up something we ought to be cognizant of and aware of. We're trying to draw the conclusion of whether or not the Department of the Treasury, Mr. Altman in his capacity as the head of the RTC, the White House and others were trying to derail these criminal referrals and the civil suits. That's the issue we're driving at, did someone at the White House try and derail this whole operation? If you're looking at a state of mind, if you will, taking a look at the overall attitudes that are being reflected by decisions being made in the office, I don't see as a backdrop of this evidence, that kind of demeanor. Now, as to your state of mind in the February 2 meeting. I think that's important. I also think it's important to know what the state of mind was at the White House, Senator Domenici's questions. We're going to have Mr. Nussbaum here. We're going to have all the White House people here to ask them whether or not they were pressuring. You said you didn't take it as pressure. Clearly, they wear a different hat than you do in their particular setting. I'm satisfied with Your answer, that you didn't-you wish you made the decision to recuse yourself earlier. Tomorrow and the next day well hear from the White House people and that will be a legitimate question. While. 509 to insist that this witness understand what Mr. Nussbaum was thinking is a legitimate question, at some point you've got to let up on it. Its not his responsibility to know what the state of mind was of Mr. Nussbaum. I say that because I've listened to you for almost 40 hours, over the last 3 or 4 days, tantamount to what would be 10 days of hearings here. I think we need to remind ourselves of what we're driving at here, what the issue was as a result of the resolution being adopted, that caused this Committee to convene and discuss these issues. That is whether or not this White House, these high-ranking officials, did anything to derail, disrupt, to throw off the criminal and civil matters affecting the Madison Guaranty company. I'd like to get back on track with those questions, if we could , instead of going off ad nauseam, in areas where honest people can disagree what the intent was, what the intent behind the question was. I say that and let me ask one question that comes down to the whole issue that has to do with the statutory authority because at some point we're going to make, I hope, some legislative rec- ommendations as well. I think we can stipulate here that most of us agree that this idea of wearing two hats which by law either you I oil or Secretary Bentsen had to do, created a lot of the situation that we're in tonight. I wonder if you would comment as to whether or not you have any suggestions or ideas as to bow in the future we can avoid this in some other Administration so we're not meeting again to discuss what someone said at a hearing, what someone intended by a question, what someone intended by an answer, and avoid the kind of problems that, I think, this legislative Catch-22 has caused us to be in. Mr. ALTMAN. Well, Senator, our intentions were honorable in try ing to take up responsibility for the RTC and trying to make some improvements in it, and I believe that we did, But I agree with the rust of your question. I think it would be better in the future if a brighter line or some wall between the institution which is independent of another institution. I agree. I think these hearings alone demonstrate that all kinds of appearances issues raised and controversies arise that would not happen if there were a wall. Senator DODD. Who should have taken that job? How should we deal with that? Should it be some independent person that has not been confirmed by the Congress or the Senate. That was one of the requirements, that the person who took the job had to have been confirmed by the Senate
B-R-R-R! Blizzard Flays Atlantic Coast
Wind, snow and icy cold was the weather story through most of the nation as the Atlantic Coast experiences a true blizzard. From Florida to Maine there are record low temperatures as the storm dumps as much as 20 inches on some southern states. Washington D.C. is without train service for eleven hours and Federal employees are told to stay home. On the surface, however, the snow makes a pretty picture. United States New York A dismal shot of the skyscrapers of New York City, fog and snow. CU - Two men are cleaning off the back window of a car. MS - New York City street scene covered with 12-inches of snow. CUS - Man shoveling out his snow plowed covered car. MS - A young boy shoveling the sidewalk. CU - A hand held snow plow cleaning up the sidewalk. Washington DC LS - Snow covered 'White House'. Exterior shot - This is a scenic shot of the White House in the aftermath of a snow storm., LS - Lincoln Memorial, wind blowing the snow around. The steps to the Memorial are completely covered by snow. LS - Through the wind blown snow you see the Washington Monument. MS - Accident between a truck and a bus. MS - Capitol Building enhanced by the beauty of the snow.
British Election: Labor Party Ousts The Conservatives
It was a week of changes. Both in the political world and in the world of baseball. Crowds jam British streets awaiting the election returns as the Labour Party ousts the Conservatives of Lord Hume after 13 years. Throngs crowd London's square. A sign; Southport, Con 23,917, Lab 11,572 and Conmaj 12,345. No change. People crowded together looking up and waving at the camera. Young male adult, wearing a Derby hat, dark rimmed glasses and his mouth opened. Young men standing with their suits on, in a fountain in the middle of the square. Throngs. A door with the number 10 on it. Limousine pulls up and Lord Hume disembarks from the limo. Sign "Conservative Headquarters" A sign hanging from a building "Transport House" James Harold Wilson, new Prime Minister and his wife Mary at his side. Audience applauding and smiling. The new Prime Minister kisses his wife Mary while standing at a microphone.
Football - Purdue 21 to Michigan 20
Michigan's undefeated Eleven comes down to earth with a bang as they are upset by the Purdue Boilermakers. The Wolverines, trailing by a point in the fourth quarter - gambled for two points on a conversion run. They didn't make it. Purdue wins 21 to 20. Michigan plays host to Purdue and the stadium is not filled. Football players on the field. Quarterback, Bob Timberlake passes. Ball is passed and they get the ball to the 25-yard line. QB takes the football and scores. Purdue has the ball and QB passes, he catches the 66 yard pass and takes it in for a touchdown. College football fans, 1/2 Teams are tied, 14 - 14. QB passes the ball t and brings the ball into scoring position. QB passes the ball it is caught in the end zone and it is another touchdown. Final quarter, Michigan has the ball and breaks loose for a 54 yard touchdown run. Michigan tries to tie up the game by running the football and Purdue stops him. Purdue is the victor.
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:55:24) Mr. ALTMAN. Yes. Well, of course, one of the things we could have done would have been to leave it vacant until Congress con firmed a permanent nominee. We could have done that and per A haps we should have. We did go forth pretty promptly and nomi- nate our candidate and that candidate's nomination did not succeed and at the end of the year be withdrew. So one option would have been just leave it vacant until a permanent Chairperson is confirmed for that precise job. Senator DODD. Let me ask you this: I kept on asking this yester- day. Ms. Hanson said she was basically a detailee, of the RTC even 510 though she was General Counsel for the Treasury. It was clear to me when she got that job as a detailee. Did you at some point say to her when I'm talking to you the RTC, you're General Counsel for the RTC. I mean, at what point did she know she was RTC or she was Treasury? It se to me she was never clear what job she was operating in. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, I just asked her to help me out. There no formal designation. I didn't go through the process one through, the formal process, to actually detail someone fro place to another. I just asked her to help me out. Senator DODD. Is there statutory authority somehow? She was talking about statutory authority that gave her the right to do RTC functions. Mr. ALTMAN. I believe that FIRREA, the law FIRREA permits, in this case, the Treasury to-it says here, "the RTC is authorized to utilize the employees of the FDIC or, on consent, the personnel of any other Executive Department or Agency. As interim CEO of the RTC, Mr. Altman exercised all of the powers of the RTC and thus was authorized to use the time of Treasury personnel on RTC matters." Senator DODD. So that's the authority? Mr. ALTMAN. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. I might just ask you at some point here to submit to us, to this Committee a more formal set of recommendations on how we avoid this kind of mess in the future. Mr. ALTMAN, Yes, sir. Senator DODD. I yield back my time. Senator DOMENICI. Senator Dodd, do you have a couple of seconds? Could I just clarify something and ask you if you knew this: A lot of comments have been made about the Office of Government Ethics and their report. It's my understanding that they only spoke to employees of the Treasury Department. Now that's a very big difference because this whole dispute is a dispute between what Treasury Department people say and what White House people say. So with reference to that, it does seem to me that the conclusion (22:58:18)(tape #10073 ends)
August 2, 1994 - Part 10
(00:13:58)(tape # 10074 begins) Congress or the Senate. That was one of the requirements, that the person who took the job had to have been confirmed by the Senate Mr. ALTMAN. Yes. Well, of course, one of the things we could have done would have been to leave it vacant until Congress con firmed a permanent nominee. We could have done that and per A haps we should have. We did go forth pretty promptly and nomi- nate our candidate and that candidate's nomination did not succeed and at the end of the year be withdrew. So one option would have been just leave it vacant until a permanent Chairperson is confirmed for that precise job. Senator DODD. Let me ask you this: I kept on asking this yester- day. Ms. Hanson said she was basically a detailee, of the RTC even 510 though she was General Counsel for the Treasury. It was clear to me when she got that job as a detailee. Did you at some point say to her when I'm talking to you the RTC, you're General Counsel for the RTC. I mean, at what point did she know she was RTC or she was Treasury? It se to me she was never clear what job she was operating in. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, I just asked her to help me out. There no formal designation. I didn't go through the process one through, the formal process, to actually detail someone from one place to another. I just asked her to help me out. Senator DODD. Is there statutory authority somehow? She was talking about statutory authority that gave her the right to do RTC functions.
Track Stars Shine In Olympic Trials
The finals trials to pick the United States Olympic Team projects a bright future for the team in Tokyo. Bob Hayes ties the American record in the 100-meter dash. Ralph Boston sets a new mark in the broad jump - a world record 27 feet, 4 1/4 inches. Another record is set as Rex Cawley clips a tenth of a second from the world figure. Now all we need is an encore in Tokyo. Throngs fill the stands at Los Angeles Coliseum. The spectators. The track 100 meter dash, Bob Hayes sprinting and winning the race. Ralph Boston sets a new world record in the broad jump, 27 feet & 4 1/4 inches. The 400 meter event, running and jumping over hurdles, and you see Rex Cawley beat the World Record. 200 meter dash, the winner Paul Bateman of Cleveland, Ohio is the winner.
Pope In India: Pontiff Hailed on Historic Visit
The teeming millions of India flock to Bombay to greet the "burra guru" - the great, Holy Man - as Pope Paul VI arrives for the international Eucharistic Congress. No other Pope has ever visited this area of the world, and no other Pope has ever made a trip of such length. He is greeted by Prime Minister Shastri and other high dignitaries and he donates $50,000 to India's poor before presiding at the elevation of six Bishops. His return to Rome is equally a triumph. Bombay India Riding in an open car is the "Burra Guru" (Holy Man), Pope Paul VI waving and blessing throngs that line the street. The mass of Indian people who gathered together to see the Pope Paul VI. Camera panning the crowd with smiles on their faces the people wave back to the camera man. Prime Minister Shastri and Pope Paul VI shaking hands. Pope Paul shaking the hand of an older lady. Indira Gandhi the only daughter of Nehru Jawaharlal, Prime Minister meets with Pope Paul VI. 1,000 faithful sit in attendance to see Pope Paul VI consecrated six Bishops. Vatican City, Italy Pope Paul VI arrives back in Rome standing on a raised platform. St. Peter's in Vatican City, evening shots, the Pope is arriving home, blessing the throngs who came out to welcome him back.
Baseball Underway: Houston Stadium Is This Year's Star
The shape of things to come in our national sport as the baseball season gets underway. The spanking new Astrodome is the $31.6 million home of the Houston Astros. It's a domed stadium that holds 50,000 fans - in air-conditioned comfort. Fielders have trouble with high-fly balls during the day contests, but research teams promise to solve that problem. In Washington the baseball season becomes official as President Lyndon Johnson throws out the first ball. Houston, Texas Exterior shot of the Astro Dome (Astrodome) Stadium in Houston, Texas. High-Angle Shot baseball fans packed to the top of the stadium. High-Angle Shot - Baseball game going on. High-Angle Shot home team scores a home run and the mechanical score board lights up. Washington DC President Johnson arrives to throw out the first ball. MS A baseball player on top of someone's shoulders taking pictures. MS Vice President Hubert Humphrey standing next to President Lyndon B. Johnson who is getting ready to throw out the first ball of the season. He throws out the ball.
Model Plane Race
The Germans hold a competition for remote-controlled seaplane models & the entrants come up with planes that even outdo their big brothers. TLS men standing on shore with remote control boxes, pan left to seaplane models taking off from water. Tracking shot model seaplane attempting takeoff, crashing into water. Panning TLS seaplane successfully taking off. Tilting MS man with remote control peering into sky. TLS seaplane model executing barrel roll. MCU two towheaded white boys peering awestruck into the sky. Panning MS seaplane model taking off with great ease. MS young white man peering into sky. TLS/MS - model seaplane landing in water.
Marine Offensive: Vietnam Landing Traps Guerrillas
"Operation Piranha" throws an assault force of U.S. Marines against a pocket of Vietcong on the Batagan Peninsula, 20 miles south of Chu Lai. With helicopters and the Marines push Red forces inland where South Vietnamese troops await them. In one of the fiercest hand-to-hand engagements of the War, more than 100 Vietcong are vanquished. South Vietnam An amphibious assault on the beach of Vietnam. CU - Helicopter taking off from the deck of the Princeton air craft carrier. MS - Marines disembarking from the ship on to a duct that will take part in the amphibious assault on the Vietcong. LS Looking at the ships in the ocean from the beach. Aerial shot - The Marines in the ducts heading for the beach front. Marines disembarking on to the beach from the Amphibious Assault Landing Craft. LS A platoon of Marines on the beach.
Miss America Crowned: Kansas Gal Is Pick Of Peach Crop
The new "Miss America" is chosen at Atlantic City, New Jersey, and the fairest of them all is Miss Kansas - 19-year-old Deborah Bryant. Selected over 49 other candidates for the title. Miss Bryant aims to become a Doctor of Medicine. If she reached this M.D goal - her patients ought to find being ill little less painful. Long Live the Queen. Atlantic City, New Jersey Interior of the building curtain going up and all the beauty contestants are on the stage in evening gowns. MS The parade of girls from each state. LS The stage all lit up and audience. CUS - Audience applauding, MS Curtin opens on the Miss America Pageant bathing suit parade. CU Audience applauding all the men have these big smiles on their faces. MS The five finalist. CU Audience MS Miss Mississippi and Miss Kansas, Miss Kansas wins. the girls hug. MS Crowning of Miss Kansas, she walks down the stage with her crown, cape and flowers. CU Miss Kansas and her mom, pouring tea. CU - Deborah Bryant, Miss America, holding up a newspaper.
August 2, 1994 - Part 11
(23:44:38)(tape #10075 begins) You said OK, I'll think about it, and you called him back the next day and said I won't recuse myself Mr. ALTMAN. I made clear that in the real world I was recused. Senator KERRY. The problem is--I hope you understand it. To me this is just the whole problem here and I'm not-you can't pros- ecute an intention and we're not prosecutors. We're trying to make a judgment about what may have motivated this, what was at play, what happened here. Now, I find it hard to understand how you could be persuaded by Nussbaum that your staying would satisfy his desire for steer- ing the case clear of politics if, number one, you yourself were a political appointee, an number two, you genuinely were not going to be involved in the case. Mr. ALTMAN. There is no evidence whatsoever, Senator, that that was how I was acting. Senator KERRY. Well, can I ask you a really hard question? Mr. ALTMAN. Sure. I guess that wouldn't be the first time today. Senator KERRY. Were you trying to have the best of two worlds by keeping the White House happy in a sense that they were going to feel that I someone was there that they could trust and there wouldn't be a runaway investigation but at the same time, keep all the people on the other side of the fence happy by saying I'm not going to have anything to do with it, Ms. Kulka, you go ahead? You kind of, in a sense, curried favor with both parties. Mr. ALTMAN. I don't think I left any doubt, Senator, and I don't think any of the attendees at the meeting have testified that I left any doubt, that this was Ms. Kulka's decision and whether I stayed there Senator KERRY. But you're not answering my question. Mr. ALTMAN. I think I did answer your question. Senator KERRY. I don't doubt you, Mr. Secretary. 525 Mr. ALTMAN. But you asked me, Senator, I think you asked, was I trying to keep them happy in the sense that my presence would somehow assure a more favorable decision? That was your question. Senator KERRY. That's what Bernie said. Bernie Nussbaum said Mr. ALTMAN. That may be what he said. Senator KERRY. --you remain as the head of the RTC this provides additional safeguards for professionalism and fairness because if people know they're reporting to somebody else and their judgments and fact- finding are going to be reviewed by that individual, I think they take greater care to be professional and fair rather than have the ultimate decision. Now, you say, Bernie, I'm not going to have anything to do with this. I accept that. I don't think you did have anything to do with it, but all this fuss is about why, notwithstanding that you decided not to recuse yourself immediately and stayed on. So it leads everybody, , all my colleagues across the aisle and everybody else, is sitting there saying why did he stay on. I'm sure that Ellen Kulka is saying-she did, she said why do you want to take the political hit. Jean Hanson said that. Secretary Bentsen said if it was me, I'd recuse myself. So I'm left saying why does a smart guy like Roger Altman who understands the game decide not to do this when be himself had decided to do it, now suddenly he's not. And the only thing I can conclude is that you were somehow trying to please a number of different folks. You were trying to please the White House by making them feel comfortable and simultaneously totally be at arm's distance from this event so that--I mean, I don't know any other reason why and I'm just asking you so I can make a judgment. Mr. ALTMAN. I said in my opening statement, Senator, I wavered. I found it a hard decision. Given the opportunity to do it again, I would have recused myself elf right at the outset, I should have. I should have, but I didn't engage in any improper conduct in that respect. I was undecided, or wavering. I don't want to leave any doubt about that. Senator KERRY. I haven't labeled it improper. I haven't suggested that but it clearly has created a political firestorm. It may not be improper, but maybe this is the bad judgment that Mr. Cutler was referring to. I don't know. I mean, it's why we're here, I guess. Mr. ALTMAN. What would go through your mind if you picked up the report of the Independent Office of Government Ethics and in fact, criticized you for having recused yourself and essen- tially supported Mr. Nussbaum's position, which is what they did? Senator KERRY. I'd rather be on the safe side of- Mr. ALTMAN. But I do. I think it illustrates this was-it wasn't an easy decision. Senator KERRY. Well, fair enough. You've given me your sense of it and I've had a chance to probe you and I appreciate your answer. My time is up and I thank you. Mr. ALTMAN. Mr. Chairman, could I ask for a break? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Let's take a brief break. Let me tell you where we are here, since we were through a situation somewhat like this last night. It's late in the evening, there are Members still 526 here that have questions that they want to ask and, you are get ting questions from both sides of the aisle. I think, if your strength is Sufficient, that it would be well to take the break and then stay on with this and try to finish up tonight, at whatever hour. I can predict that as I sit here and-this was the same thing that we faced last evening and we do have other witnesses coming tomorrow morning who are scheduled, who are important , who have things to say, and questions to answer. So my thought would be that we take another 10-minute break here and continue on. Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, could we get a sense of how much questioning Members have? "I The CHAIRMAN. I think that's a very good suggestion. Senator DODD. I think we ought to point out tomorrow-we've been, here going on 7 hours. Mr. Altman will be a witness tomorrow In front of the House, I presume almost all day as well. And I don't know how much ground we want to plow over here, but some sense of decency about a human being going through all of this ought to be, at least, factored into the decision of how much more question. in we have to go through,
August 2, 1994 - Part 11
(23:50:50) The CHAIRMAN. If I may say and I want to make sure everybody has a chance to be beard so they may cover the ground they have need to cover Senator GRAMM. Mr. Chairman, may I address that issue? The CHAIRMAN. All right, then I'll make my statement after you. Senator GRAMM. I have, of course like everybody else, sat here all day. I have about 6 more major questions that I think are relevant on ground that has not yet been plowed, in my opinion, or certainly has not been seeded. My suggestion is this: Why don't we let Mr. Altman go home in the name of human decency and also allow ourselves to go home, and why don't we go ahead with our hearing tomorrow. Let him go ahead with his hearing and then when our bearings are finished, let's have him come back. The CHAIRMAN. Well Mr. ALTMAN. I'd prefer not to do that, Senator Gramm. If you want to stay here until 7 a.m., I'll be sitting right in this chair. Senator MOSELEY-BRAuN. And so will 1, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. And so will I, Mr. Altman. I think we've got to go ahead and conclude this. I will say in my own view, and I don't dispute at all the fact that Senator Gramm has 6 more areas that he wants to go over, but I do think we're reaching the point where a lot of what we're discussing is repetitive. In other words, I think a person coming along and reading the record will find that a lot of what has been said has been said more than 1 2 3, or 4 times. who That's all right up to a point, but I think because those of us are still here have been here the whole time, we should use the remaining time to break new ground and not just rehash where we've been. I think there is a point where it sort of borders on a trespass on what really is appropriate to the situation. I want to stay here to get the information that we need and I will do so. I'll protect every Senator's right to get the information that we need. Mr. Altman-if you'll permit me to finish-Mr. Altman has said he'll stay here as ]on as it takes, I'm prepared to do that but I would just ask each Senator to take a look at that 527 question. We're all able to make that judgment and I'm sure well make good judgments in that regard. Senator Sarbanes. Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, perhaps we can do it during the break through discussion amongst ourselves and get some sense of how much time Members think they'll need. Well have some sense then, when Mr. Altman returns, of what we're facing. We did this last night with Ms. Hanson. I think the end result of it was we were able then to move along with the bearing and finally bring it to a conclusion with everyone satisfied that they'd had a chance to make their inquiries. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Bennett. Senator BENNETT. As I said last night, I have 5 minutes roughly and they are all items that have not been discusseduntil now. I'll comments on stuff that's already been said The CHAIRMAN. Senator Domenici. Senator DOMENICI. Five. The CHAIRMAN. Five minutes for you or 5 questions? Senator DOMENICI. Five minutes. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Faircloth. Senator FAIRCLOTH. I think 5 minutes. The CHAIRMAN. Five minutes will do it for you? Senator Mack. Senator MACK. I suspect that would be enough. The CHAIRMAN. Probably 5 minutes for Senator Mack. How much for you, Senator Gramm? Senator GRAMM. It bard for me to say.. If we could get nice concise answers, I think it would be pretty quick. Senator BOXER. I need 5 minutes. Senator MOSELEY-BRAUN. Five minutes, also. The CHAIRMAN. Five minutes here. Senator DODD. That's about 7 a.m., I think. The CHAIRMAN. No, I don't think it has to be. If Members say the can do it in 5 minutes, I think they'll make a good faith effort to do so. Senator DODD. Senators can't clear their throats in 5 minutes. The CHAIRMAN. Well, that's true, but last night we ran into this same situation and we got to this point, people were able to start to wind it up. And I trust to people to do that now. I think if Senator Domenici says 5 minutes, it will be pretty darn close to 5 minutes and Senator Bennett and the rest. So let's just proceed on that basis and we'll take a 10-minute break now. We'll resume in 10 minutes and then we'll see if we can't finish. (23:55:00) [The Committee stands in recess.]
August 2, 1994 - Part 11
(00:11:28) Hearing resumes: The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will resume. Senator Mack of Florida. Senator MACK. Thank you Mr Chairman. Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if it would be possible to do--since most Members said 5 minutes, whether we could go to 5 minute rounds recognizing that Senator Gramm, of course, as more--maybe, he could do 10 minutes when be gets his round. Senator MACK. I indicated I didn't think I would go over 5 but I do want to have the opportunity to go through with my questions. Senator SARBANES. I'll withdraw then. 528 The CHAIRMAN. We'll stick with the 10-minute rounds and if you don't need that long, you can just yield the time back. Very good Senator Mack. Senator MACK. Just before the break, Senator Kerry said kind of toward the end of his questions, Mr. Altman, you are not answering my question. And frankly, that's been a constant refrain from both sides during this hearing. My impression is that you have no interest in finding the truth or providing it to the Committee. I say that for many reasons, the latest of which is the conversation you had with Mr. Podesta on March 1, 1994. Mr. Podesta called you about a week after your testimony on February 24 and raised Significant concerns about the accuracy of your testimony. There were several areas he thou ght you should correct. I'm going to focus on the omission of the fall meetings between White House Counsel staff and Treasury officials. When Mr. Podesta brought up those meetings to you, you told him you didn't even want to hear about it. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, that's not what I said. Senator MACK. I'll give you an opportunity to respond. I'm going to read out of the transcript here. Now a whole group of attorneys down at the White House Counsel's Office thought you should correct the record and you didn't even want to hear about it. That's certainly the impression that we drew. Mr. ALTMAN. That's not what I said, Senator. Senator MACK. Members of the White House Counsel's Office undertook a very serious analysis of the accuracy of your testimony. Question: What was the conclusion of that serious analysis? Answer: The conclusion of the analysis was that in whatever capacity Ms. Hanson, or Mr. DeVore, or Mr. Steiner were over there, the Committee needed to be aware of these contacts. Question: The testimony? Answer., We thought this was very serious. Question: The testimony needed to be supplemented in some way? Answer: Yes. Question: What did Mr. Altman say on March I when you either read or paraphrased that second question? Answer: From February 24? (And he's referring there to Senator Bond's questions about contacts.) He said that-he again said it was an accurate statement. I said to him that there may be information that he would have to acquire to supplement this answer. He said I don't know whether we should be even having this conversation or something to that effect. Then I said well, you may have a duty to supplement your testimony from the perspective of an agency witness. He, I think at that point, did not want me to give him specific information about contacts that I was aware of because I think he was at the point just not sure about whether he should be learning additional facts subsequent to the hearings. The next day you sent this Committee your first of what turned out to be 4 letters to correct the record. in that letter, you continued to be, again in, my opinion, evasive as you were in the February 24 hearing, and I'm going to read from that letter. It is basically a three-paragraph letter, third paragraph: But I have learned today of two conversations which did take place between Treasury staff and White House personnel on this matter. My information is that both related to handling of press inquiries.
August 2, 1994 - Part 11
(00:30:33) Senator BOXER. As a point of information for the Senator, I read that question and if you care, I can read it back to you. 'You took no action to stop the hiring of Republican Jay Stephens as Outside Counsel of the RTC; is that correct?" Senator GRAMM. And Mr. Altman, as I recall, said yes or that's correct. The point is he couldn't take action because he didn't know about the hiring, and I didn't want him to be incorrect. Senator BOXER. He was told by Mr. Stephanopoulos. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, the question was, did I take any action to stop it, and the answer is no. Senator GRAMM. But the implication, Mr. Altman, was that you could have. Senator Boxer was giving you a litany of the things you had done and Senator KERRY. You know, I don't think we're going to edify anybody with this exchange. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Faircloth. Senator FAIRCLOTH. I had some questions to you concerning Mr. Fiske, but they'll bold. I am going to yield my time to Senator Do menici. Senator DOMENICI. Thank you very much. That's probably because I'm the oldest one here. Senator DODD. Pull the microphone closer to you. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Not chronologically. Senator DOMENICI. Mr. Altman, lees see, you have been telling us that you didn't recuse yourself on February 2, but you dig recuse yourself on February 25. Mr. ALTMAN. Yes, sir. Senator DOMENICI. I get the impression that you're trying to lead us to believe that there is no real difference between your recusing yourself on February 2 and your recusing yourself on February 25, and I think there is a big difference. In fact, I think the difference between those two dates, of your recusal on February 2 or recusal on February 25, is all the difference in this whole situation, so let me tell you why I think that. On February 25, there was no imminent decision to be made in the Madison/Whitewater case, no imminent decision to be made. On February 2, when the White House exerted and I quote from one of the witnesses, "intense pressure," the situation was dramatically different, Mr. Altman because on February 2, the White House and you both understood that within 3 weeks, either the statute would expire and Whitewater would soon be a distant memory or someone would have to make a decision to bring the case or seek a tollinge agreement. February was the critical time. The White House unde rstood. Bernard Nussbaum understood that, and the White House was fearful that if you recused yourself, the President and the First Lady would be left defenseless against Ellen Kulka or other RTC professionals who might file suit in the Madison/Whitewater case. The White House wanted you, not Ellen Kulka, to be the decisionmaker. And the documents and the testimony make this very clear. Now, let me read something to you. Let me direct your attention to a very new document that was just given to us. It had been previously edited out, and the White House later agreed we could have it. It's a memorandum dated February 28 from Neil Eggleston to 535 Harold Ickes where we get a unique insight into how they perceived your role, and, Mr. Altman, maybe you did not perceive your role this way. I am confident the White House did. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, what's the date of it? Senator DOMENICI. I'm telling you it's after all this, but just wait until we have to hear what it says. Mr. ALTMAN. It's after I recused myself; right? Senator DOMENICI. Yes, it's February 28, but let me read it for you, because - Senator KERRY. What page? Senator DOMENICI. Let's see--of the memo that we have?
August 2, 1994 - Part 11
(00:15:39) Let's take the position that you had no knowledge about these last two conversations. Why in the world wouldn't you have taken the opportunity to inform the Committee as fully as possible? And frankly, I have watched the testimony now for hours and you have repeatedly given nonresponsive answers, which you justify with se- 529 mantic gymnastics. I believe you have continued tonight the evasive course which you adopted on February 24 and continue through a series of incomplete and misleading letters written to the Committee. I can't help but conclude that your every statement to this Committee is to evade, not to inform. So I say why in the world wouldn't you take this opportunity to inform the Committee as fully as possible in those four letters'! Mr. ALTMAN. I did so, Senator Mack. As you know, I received that call from Mr. Podesta and what happened? That same day, I sent this Committee a letter indicating that I just learned about those meetings. I thought they had to do with press inquiries. The same day. I didn't hesitate at all to put this information in the hands of the Committee as soon as I had it, the very same day. Senator MACK. Mr. Altman, again, I think you could have gone into a little bit more detail about what those meetings were about. Mr. ALTMAN. When Mr. Podesta told me about the meetings, I think he'll confirm that I said to him I never beard of the meetings which is simply the truth. Now, I wasn't then sure whether it was proper for me to get briefed on the meetings, whether I should get some legal advice as to whether I should then get briefed or not get briefed. I did call in Ms. Hanson and Mr. Steiner immediately or at least speak with them. They confirmed the meetings Senator MACK. But you felt no need to provide information to the Committee about what those meetings were about? I mean., I understand that Mr. Podesta may have tried to get you to provide information not only about the meetings, but about the recusals as well. Again, the feeling we had was when he started to talk to you, you just didn't want to have anything to do with this. Mr. ALTMAN. That's just not true, Senator You quoted Mr. Podesta when he asked me, I guess it was about recusal, I said I believed that my answer was responsive to the question or it was accurate. That's what I believed. You may not like that, but that's just what I believed. Now, I just don't accept the notion that at was evasive. I immediately prepared this letter. I called Senator Riegle on the phone, told him about it. I called Senator Bond, reached him at home, 8 p.m. or 9 p.m., told him about it. That's not the pattern of someone who's trying to withhold information. Senator MACK. Let me go back to a concern that was mentioned in the transcript about you having the conversation. What was that about? Why were you all of a sudden having concern about talking with folks at the White House? Mr. ALTMAN. No, no' I just didn't know at that moment whether it was appropriate to get fully briefed on those meetings, whether I should have that information at that point. Senator MACK. Again, what was wrong with being fully briefed and then passing that information on to the Committee? If the purpose was to fully inform the Committee, why wouldn't you do that? That sounds like a fairly reasonable question. Mr. ALTMAN. I just wasn't sure whether it was appropriate, including legally appropriate, for me to immediately It all this information and my first instinct was to be cautious, but Senator Senator MACK. Cautious about what? Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, the salient point is I immediately communicated to the Committee. 530 Senator MACK. What you communicated to the Committee was that there were two meetings, nothing about the meetings, nothing about recusal. Again, it seems like you were just going to provide us just enough information and that's the point that I'm making. All through this process, the February 24, the follow-up and frankly your testimony here tonight, you just give us enough but not any more and that's the way it comes across. I'm sorry, but that's the conclusion that I've come to. Mr. ALTMAN. I respectfully disagree. I'm prepared to sit here until hell freezes over to answer every question you want to ask. Senator MACK. Why were you so concerned, in this testimony here in this transcript indicated that you weren't even sure whether you should be having conversations with folks at the White House? Mr. ALTMAN. They told me-Mr. Podesta said the meetings had-he asked me what about the meetings. I said I didn't know anything about them. And I think that confirms that my response I to Senator Bond on February 24 was an honest response. Senator MACK. But you subsequently found out about those meetings. You could have taken the opportunity in these letters to, in fact, fully inform. Taking it from the perspective that you didn't know about the meetings, why couldn't you have just said, again not knowing about the meetings, but here's what we've been able to reconstruct as to what happened at those meetings? Mr. ALTMAN. I tried to use my best judgment, Senator.
Cotton Bowl: LSU 14 - Arkansas 7
Arkansas comes into the Cotton Bowl game with a winning streak of 22 games and are heavy favorites to take the measure of Louisiana State. They go home after a skinning in the hands of The Tigers who upset them - 14 to 7. High Angle Shot - LSU football stadium with throngs jammed packed into the stands. There are floats that were used in the parade. CUS - College kids and a teacher or dad in the stands cheering on their team. High Angle Shot - Arkansas has the ball and they pass completing a 16 yard pass. (Arkansas) High Angle Shot - Arkansas takes it in for a touchdown. High Angle Shot - LSU - Shining in the second quarter, catches an 18 yard pass. High Angle Shot - LSU hands off the ball and jumps over the guards at the goal line. Game is tied up. High Angle Shot - LSU recovers a fumble. High Angle Shot - LSU has the ball again and once again he makes it over into the end zone, LSU winning 14 to 7.
Rose Bowl: UCLA 14 - Michigan St. 12
Michigan State was undefeated during the season and two-touchdown favorites to take the measure of UCLA. Well, you know the story when you have Old Man Upset playing "drawback" for the opposition. UCLA pulls for the biggest upset in Rose Bowl history as they down Michigan State - 14 to 12. Exterior shot - Rose Bowl and people walking around outside the stadium. High Angle Shot - UCLA marching band. High Angle Shot - People shaking their pomp pomes. High Angle Shot - The kicker kicks the football to Michigan State, the receiver fumbles, UCLA recovers the football. High Angle Shot - UCLA goes around the left end and he makes it to the 1 yard line as the first quarter ends. High Angle Shot - UCLA makes it over the block and he scores a touchdown. High Angle Shot - California kicks an off side kick and UCLA recovers the ball and takes it away from Michigan. High Angle Shot - UCLA passes the ball down the field and it is caught at the 1 yard line, and a touchdown is scored. At the half, California 14 - Michigan 0. Michigan lets loose in the fourth quarter, High Angle Shot - Michigan for 42 yards. High Angle Shot - Michigan takes a pitch out and 38 yards later its a Michigan touchdown. High Angle Shot - Michigan trys to run a 2-point conversion but is stopped by UCLA. The final score is UCLA 14 - Michigan St. - 12 - Upset