Advanced Search
August 1, 1994 - Part 4
(15:45:33) For the record, several days thereafter, we had a conversation and in that conversation they said they thought the statute of limitations would expire on February 28, 1994, or in early March. I was determined to see to it and I'm proud of the fact that we offered, and were able to get, legislation passed which extended the statute of limitations. It took us beyond the question of whether or not tolling agreements would be obtained, whether or not people's rights would be protected, and whether or not the matter was going to be handled in the traditional manner. I'm very proud of that, and I think we have to be very clear as to exactly what we got. We got nothing other than what we were determined to get and what was right and pro per information as it related to when this matter would go beyond the ability of the RTC to bring a suit, if one was necessary. I think that more than adequately states it, I'd like to put into the record all of the supporting documents from Peter Knight to Ben Nye, from Jean Hanson as it relates to conversations with Peter Knight, which very accurately state the facts as I have artfully-and also my communication to Roger Altman on January 10, 1994, in which we express our concern. I'll just summarize our concern that the running of the statute of limitations may prevent the final resolution of all allegations relating to Madison Guaranty. That letter was signed by eight Senators and Congressmen, and I'd like to put that in the record as well. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, we'll put all of these documents into the record at this point. Senator Sarbanes. Senator SARBANES. Could I make the observation, Ms. Kulka, that if your reputation of being a very tough lawyer wasn't generally known before this bearing today, it's certainly well-known now as a consequence of this bearing. Ms. KuLKA. Thank you, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Shelby. Senator SHELBY. I want to say, to all four of them, I believe today has shown they're very professional. If they would have had the leeway to run the RTC by themselves, we wouldn't be here today. The CHAiRmAN. I think we've concluded with this panel. I want to thank you all for your appearance today, and for the testimony you've given to us. The Committee will recess now and resume at 4:30 p.m. with Ms. Hanson. The Committee stands in recess. (15:48:20) [Recess.] (15:48:22) Commentary of NINA TOTENBERG and DON BODE from tv studio (15:50:53) WETA logo, PBS funding credits
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:30:00) PBS funding credits (Tape #10060 begins) (16:30:13) Whitewater coverage title screen (16:30:24) NINA TOTENBERG and KEN BODE in tv studio introduce and discuss day's hearing, they also interview Senator ROBERT BENNETT (16:33:25) Hearing begins: AFTERNOON SESSION The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. Let me invite everyone to find a seat here in the Committee room and we'll start in a moment. Earlier in the day, when we began, I introduced all the witnesses we would be hearing today. I wanted just to briefly repeat the introduction of the witness that we have before us now, and that is Ms. Jean Hanson who is the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. By way of background, she was previously employed at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver, and Jacobson, a noted law firm, from 1976 until March 1993. She served as a consultant to the Department of Treasury from March 1993 until June 1993 when she was confirmed into her present position, directly, by the Senate. Let me now ask you to stand and raise your right hand, if you would please. Do you swear that the testimony you, are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing had the truth, so help you God? STATEMENT OF JEAN E. HANSON, GENERAL COUNSEL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, WASHINGTON DC Ms. HANSON, I do. The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Ms. Hanson, let me inquire, do you have a statement you, want to make at the outset? Ms. HANSON. I do, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Let me also suggest that you pull the microphone a little closer to you. so that you can be heard by everyone in the room. And when you are ready, you can go ahead with your statement. Ms. HANSON. Is this fine? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Just speak loudly so you can be beard. Ms. HANSON. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. Senator KERRY. We can't hear. Senator GRAMM. We need the mike right up close. The CHAIRMAN. Let's try to tune it up a little bit, too, if you can. Ms. HANSON. Is that better? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, that's better. Just try to speak into it as much as you can, at the same time trying to get situated comfortably. I know you have a statement to read.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:35:19) Ms. HANSON. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I "am Jean Hanson, General Counsel of the Treasury Department. I have been privileged to hold that position since June 1993. 1 am testifying to ay pursuant to Senate Resolution 229 exploring communications between Treasury officials, including me, and White House personnel relating to Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan. 96 Out of respect for this Committee's work and for the investigation that preceded this Committee's work, I have refrained from speaking with reporters about this matter. There have been many recent leaks of my testimony and documents, which include numerous misstatements and mischaracterizations, I welcome this opportunity to testify publicly and to speak for myself. I hope you Will make your judgments based on my testimony today. I have tried my best to recollect everything that occurred about this matter. I have also reflected on the reasons for these conversations. I know that these conversations violated no law, no rule, and no ethical standard. I also know that they were appropriate and that they furthered legitimate governmental interests. Before I turn to Madison, I want to tell you a little about myself. For nearly two decades before coming to Washington, I practiced law in New York and worked on complex corporate transactions., I came to New York from Minnesota, where I was born, and where I was reared to do things in a straightforward, Midwestern style: Honestly and by dint of hard work. I am not a "Beltway Insider," I am not a political person. Prior to coming to Washington, I bad no contact whatsoever with the President or the First Lady. I did not campaign for them, or for any candidate, and I do not owe my Treasury appointment to political activism. I was recruited for my position. My husband is a Republican-until recently. I did not know Secretary Bentsen before I accepted his offer to become Treasury General Counsel. Indeed, I didn't know anyone at Treasury or in the White House. I accepted Secretary Bentsens offer for one reason. I wanted to contribute to the important work of the Government, and give something back to my country. I still do. At the outset, I would like to address my role in RTC matters. As Treasury General Counsel, I am charged with carrying out duties and assignments given to me by Secretary Bentsen and Deputy Secretary Altman. I fulfilled assignments relating to the RTC given to me by Mr. Altman and, at times, Secretary Bentsen, but at no time did I ever hold any position at the RTC nor have I ever acted as RTC General Counsel. To say the least, the RTC is an unusual entity and people often misdescribe it and its functions. For example, it is a corporation, not an agency, except for limited purposes. It is not a regulatory body because it doesn't regulate anything. It is not independent. The RTC CEO serves solely at the President's pleasure, unlike independent agencies such as the SEC and the CFTC. It has a finite life span, scheduled to end next year. Except for its CEO, it has no employees and must carry out its functions by utilizing FDIC and Executive Branch personnel, including Treasury employees. As Interim RTC CEO, Mr. Altman had statutory authority to seek the assistance of Treasury personnel on matters related to RTC functions. And, as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, he had the authority to grant the assistance of such personnel. Mr. Altman asked me to assist him with policy-related and other matters involving the RTC, and I did so. Mr. Altman undertook to serve two jobs for a limited period. He was entitled to all the assistance he 97 could muster. It was entirely appropriate for me to assist him in an legitimate way he requested.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:45:50) Although I have no recollection of having briefed Secretary Bentsen as the memorandum states, I am sure that had memorandum accurately reflects that I did. The memorandum does not specify the subject of the briefing. I may have told Secretary Bentsen about the meeting or, as is more likely, I may simply have alerted him to the fact that there would be press leaks relating to the Madison criminal referrals, and the nature of the anticipated leaks. On October 14, 1993, 1 attended a meeting at the White House arranged either by Mr. DeVore or Mr. Steiner, two senior Treasury officials, to discuss the handling of press inquiries Mr. DeVore had received with regard to the Madison criminal referrals. Mr. DeVore, at the time, was Treasury's Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. The issue I recall Mr. DeVore saying the press had raised then was whether the referrals were being held up at the RTC and not being forwarded to the Justice Department. Implicit in the question was a suggestion of misconduct on the part of the Treasuru or the White House officials. have no doubt that the meeting was appropriate. First, the press inquiries Treasury had received confirmed that information about the criminal referrals had been leaked now to at least two reporters, a significant breach of Government regulations that gave the Administration officials no choice but to be prepared to respond. Indeed, I was struck, when the articles in question appeared in the press at the end of October and early November, by just how much more about the referrals the reporters know-knew than I ever did. Second, the inquiry was based on false information that cast the Administration in an inaccurate and decidedly prejudicial light, which the Government had an obligation to correct. The CHAiRmAN, Let me gust stop you for one moment and I excuse myself for doing so, but some people are still having a hard time hearing you. If you could pull the mike a little closer stillcan you just-can you or is it stuck there? Senator GRAMM. Put your book on top of it. Ms. HANSON. I'm sorry? Senator GRAMM. Put your notebook up on top of it. That way, you can pull it closer to you. 99 Ms. HANSON. Thank you. again--better? The CHAMMAN. It's--I think so. Ms. HANSON. Again, there was no intent, and certainly I know of no effort, to interfere in any way with the referrals which, I believe I learned subsequently, had already been forwarded by the RTC to the Justice Department. By mid-January, congressional attention became focused on upcoming deadlines under the statute of limitations for the filing of any civil claims the RTC might bring in the Madison matter. At the time, civil claims involving Madison bad to be filed on or before February civil 28, 1994, unless the RTC either decided not to pursue any claims or obtained tolling agreements from parties who had might be the subject of a civil suit. various Members of Congress were pressing the RTC to obtain tolling agreements if the RTC could not complete its Madison investigation by February 28, 1994. In the face of the fast-approaching deadline, Mr. Altman considered whether he would recuse himself from substantive decisionmaking regarding Madison-related civil claims. On February 1, 1994, Mr. Altman and I briefed Secretary Bentsen on the operation of the statute of limitations in the Madison matter. In that meeting, Mr. Altman stated that be bad decided to recuse himself from any substantive decisionmaking regarding Madison civil claims, a course that I bad recommended to Mr. Altman and one in which Secretary Bentsen concurred during our meeting. Mr. Altman stated that he wanted to meet with appropriate White House officials to apprise them of his decision to recuse himself. I said that I would attend the meeting with him.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:40:15) I now turn to Madison and what I learned, how, from whom, and to whom I imparted that knowledge. Given time constraints, I will not cover every meeting or conversation that I discussed in my deposition before the Committee. Rather, I address the principal contacts regarding Madison in which I was involved. To put this into context, it is important to understand that there were two distinct phases to the RTC's consideration of Madison. First, was the preparation of multiple criminal referrals relating to Madison that I ultimately learned were forwarded to the Justice Department. Second, was the consideration by the RTC of potential civil claims that might be brought against various persons who had had some involvement with Madison From the last few days of September 1993 through the second week of October 1993, the limited discussions in which I participated related to concerns about leaks to the press of the Madison criminal referrals. In December 1993, the passage of the RTC Completion Act revived the previously lapsed statute of limitations for many potential civil cases, including Madison. From mid-January 1994 until the end of February, the limited discussions in which I participated related to the statute of limitations and other procedural matters surrounding possible civil claims relating to Madison. On September 27 1993, RTC Senior Vice President, William Roelle, called to tell me that nine criminal referrals related to Madison were on their way from the RTC in Kansas City to Washington, after which they would be forwarded to the Justice Department. I clearly understood from Mr. Roelle that the referrals and the information about them that Mr. Roelle imparted to me would be leaked to the press when the referrals arrived in Washington, which, in fact, did occur close in time to Mr. Roelle's call to me. Mr. Roelle summarized the referrals and said that President and Mrs. Clinton were mentioned as possible witnesses. I reported this conversation to Mr. Altman who tasked me to advise Bernard Nussbaum, then Counsel to the President of the imminent press leaks. On September 29, 1993, 1 did so after a meeting that both Mr. Nussbaum and I had attended to discuss the Treasurys report on the handling of the Waco situation. A few observations are in order. First, before Mr. Roelle's unsolicited call, I had no prior knowledge of Madison other than a news story that had appeared during the campaign. Second, my task, to alert White House Counsel Nussbaum to imminent press leaks so that he could deal with them intelligently, was entirely appropriate and necessary. The existence and the substance of the criminal referrals was leaked and the Administration did have to deal with the ensuing inquiries. Third, no preferential treatment or benefit was intended for anyone and, as far as I know, no one received preferential treatment. The President and First Lady were not the subject of any proposed governmental action. They were merely possible witnesses. It has been reported that Mr. Altman does not recall tasking me to advise Mr. Nussbaum of what the RTC professional staff believed would be imminent press leaks. In my view, the difference between Mr. Altman's and my recollections on this point is not sig- 98 nificant. If I had thought it was inappropriate to brief Mr. Nuss baum, I would not have done it. I take full responsibility for the decision to do so. What I think is significant is that Mr. Altman and I agree that it was entirely appropriate to brief Mr. NussbauTr, about the expected leaks. When the search was done to locate documents responsive to the Independent Counsel's subpoena, a September 30, 1993, memoran- dum I prepared was found in my secretary's chron files as well as in my own RTC files. That memorandum, addressed to Mr. Altman had attached. to it a document confirming that the referrals had been leaked to the press and re reported that I had spoken with had Nussbaum and Mr. Sloan, bad briefed Secretary Bentsen, and in- quired of Mr. Altman whether there was anything else he thought we should be doing regarding these press leaks. I do not have an independent recollection of writing this memorandum, but I am confident that I prepared it. It bears my initials and is the kind of memorandum I write to report back on matters that I have been tasked to do.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:50:22) To assist Mr. Altman, I prepared talking points to guide him through both the statute of limitations and the recusal issues. Prior to leaving Treasury for the White House and out of an abundance of caution, I also consulted with my Deputy General Counsel, who is the Designated Agency Ethics Officer, to see whether he had any pragmatic or other concerns regarding the topics Mr. Altman in-tended to discuss. He had none. The meeting took place in Mr. McCarty's office, although Mr. McCarty left before the meeting began. In addition to Mr. Altman and me, the meeting was attended by Mr. Nussbaum, Mr. Ickes, Mr. Eggleston, and Ms. Williams. Mr. Altman read the talking points, including the last point, that he had decided to recuse him-self from any substantive decisionmaking in the Madison civil mat-ter. There was no discussion regarding the substance of the RTC's investigation of the civil claims, and I was not capable of having such I a discussion , since I had no knowledge of the substance of the RTC s investigation. After Mr. Altman's statement on recusal, a discussion ensued. Mr. Nussbaum asked if the matter would be decided by Ellen Kulka, the RTC General Counsel, and Jack Ryan, the Interim Deputy CEO of the RTC, to whom Mr. Altman bad referred in his discussion Mr. Altman responded, "Yes." Mr. Nussbaum also asked why Mr. Altman was recusing himself, since no one appeared to believe that there was any legal or ethical requirement that he do 100 Mr. Altman indicated that I had recommended that he recuse himself. I added that Secretary Bentsen concurred in that judgment Mr. Nussbaum said that he knew Ellen Kulka, or knew of,", from her prior tenure at OTS. Mr. Nussbaum said that he saying that Ms. Kulka was not a good lawyer, but that tough. Mr. Altman responded by saying that he bad enormous confidence in Ms. Kulka, and that be would follow any recomendation he received from her anyway, so his involvement was vant. Mr. Nussbaum expressed his view that even if Mr. Altman intended to follow the staffs recommendation, Mr. Altman's pres- ence as the RTC CEO would ensure that the RTC staff would pur- sue any claims with thoroughness and professionalism. Mr. Ickes expressed the view that, if Mr. Altman were going recuse himself, it would be better if he did it sooner rather later. Ms. Williams asked whether, if the investigation could In completed by the end of February, that meant the tolling agreement would have to be signed. Mr. Altman indicated that thought so. She also asked it counsel for the private parties be contacted. Mr. Altman indicated he thought so, but he was not sure. The meeting ended with Mr. Altman stating that he would think about the recusal issue overnight, and Mr. Nussbaum told him that was all they could ask. The next morning, Mr. Altman told me that he bad decided 'not to recuse himself for the time being. The White House meeting on February 2, 1994, was proper. First, the briefing on the statute of limitations operation did not impart any nonpublic information. It merely apprised the White House of how the law operated, a briefing also given to congressional personnel. Second, the briefing served a legitimate governmental purpose. By the February 2, 1994, meeting, Senator D'Amato and others were counting down the days, wondering whether the RTC would make a decision in connection with possible Madison civil claims before the statute of limitations expired, and what the decision would be. Mr. Altman was aware of the recusal issue, and acted appropriately in considering whether to exercise his discretion to recuse himself a decision that ethics officers advised was entirely up to him and not mandated by ethics statutes or regulations. When he reached a conclusion, it was entirely appropriate for him to tell Mr. Nussbaum and other White House officials.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(17:00:20) At page 55 of the printed record of the Committee's hearings, the following question was asked by Senator Gramm: 102 Have you, or any member of your staff, had any communication with the Presi- dent, the First Lady, or any of their or any member of their White House Savings & Loan? representatives, including their legal counsel staff, concerning Whitewater or the Madison Although Mr. Altman responded affirmatively to this question and described his discussion at the February 2, 1994, White House meeting about the statute of limitations, his answer did not include a description of the recusal discussion. I believed it was appropriate to wait until we could discuss his answer and the reasons that he had not mentioned the subject of recusal, to decide how best to supplement the record. As I have indicated, that opportunity never arrived. As I left the hearing on February 24, 1994, 1 spoke with Steven Harris, the Committee Staff Director and Chief Counsel Mr. Harris told me that there were going to be follow-up questions for Mr Altman from the Committee. The next day, Mr. Harris emphasized that we should expect many follow-up questions. On the following Tuesday, I was given a copy of a Reuter's transcript of a colloquy between Senators Riegle and DAmato in which Senator DAmato set forth over a dozen questions that he wanted answered about the White House meetings described in Mr. Altman' s testimony. Senator Riegle responded to Senator DAmato that, ' "The Committee record is still open," and that Senator D'Amato's questions should be submitted to Mr. Altman so that they could be answered and included in the record. Based on this and on what Mr. Harris had told me the previous week, I fully expected that we would receive written follow questions which would be answered in conjunction with a thorough review of the transcript of the testimony. There was no doubt in my mind that all of these conversations and meetings would be disclosed and described fully to the Committee, and that every question would be answered. However, as I stated, with the service of the Grand Jury subpoenas by the Independent Counsel the normal process of reviewing and, if necessary, correcting the record was overtaken by the many investigations that followed. As my description of the events of last fall and this past winter makes clear each of the conversations between White House and Treasury officials at which I was present served a legitimate governmental purpose, and was not intended to, and, in fact, did not, further any private interests or bestow benefits on any individual. The same cannot be said, however, for the RTC employee, or employees, who leaked information about the criminal referrals to news reporters, breaching the Office of Government Ethic's ethical standards and RTC regulations. No action was ever taken against them. I think it is important for all of us to maintain our focus. Much has been made in the press about purported inconsistencies between some of my recollections and those of Secretary Bentsen and Deputy Secretary Altman. I have the highest respect for both Sectary Bentsen and Deputy Secretary Altman. It is my honor and privilege to serve with them and report to them. The fact that we have differences in recollections should come as no surprise. Wit- nesses to events often have differing recollections and, frankly, the differences here are not important. They are not important because no one, not me, not anyone at Treasury,and no one at the White 103 House, attempted to interfere in the substance or processes of any criminal referrals, or the substance or processes of any potential civil claims, involving Madison. The criminal referrals were made, the civil claims continue to be explored, and Mr. Altman recused himself from any involvement in the Madison matter almost half a ear ago, never having made, or having been asked to make, a substantive decision.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(16:55:14) Third, no discussion took place regarding the substance of any civil claims. I was not in a position to have such a discussion. Fourth, and most importantly, Mr. Altman viewed the issue of recusal as one of process, and not substance, because, as he repeatedly said to me, to Ellen Kulka, and to others, Mr. Altman intended to follow whatever recommendation be might receive from Ms. Kulka. I believed him then, and I believe him now. In recounting the events of February 1 and 2, 1994, 1 am aware that others' recollections differ from my own. I do not question the good faith of anyone who has a differing recollection. Most importantly, I think these differences in recollection are irrelevant. What matters is that each of these events in which I participated pursued legitimate objectives and were appropriate. Despite differ 101 ences in recollections, no one, to my knowledge, intended to do, or did, anything wrong or unethical. On February 24, 1994, this Committee held RTC oversight hearings. It was the first time, in about a year, that those hearings had been held, and the scope of the topics to be covered was enormous. For over a week, often working around the clock, a team of RTC, oversight board, and Treasury officials prepared testimony, questions and answers, and otherwise researched issues that were thought likely to arise at the hearings. Ultimately, a substantial briefing book was put together for Secretary Bentsen and Mr. Altman. When the day of the hearings came, Secretary Bentsen and Mr. Altman testified on a panel of witnesses, and I was seated in the row behind them, along with other Treasury and RTC officials. The hearings went on for 41/2 hours, without a break. During the hearings, I was aware of a number of responses that Mr. Altman gave that I believed would require further elaboration. I expected and understood that, in the ordinary course, the record would be supplemented and, if necessary, corrected, and that we would have the opportunity to do so in a careful, professional, and thoughtful way, following a review of the transcript. But the events of the next week overtook us. A March 3, 1994, Washington Post article discussed the September and October White House meetings that I described to you this afternoon. Rather than awaiting a complete review of the transcript, piecemeal corrective efforts began. The next day, March 4, 1994, Grand Jury subpoenas were issued by Independent Counsel Fiske. This effectively ended the normal processes that would have occurred to review and supplement the testimony. ~ Two questions that Mr. Altman was asked during his testimony have been the focus of some attention. I have been asked why I did not speak up at the hearings or have Mr. Altman supplement his testimony. I want to address those issues directly. At page 69 of the printed record of the Committee's hearings, the following question was asked and answered: Senator BOND: How was the White House notified of the referral? Mr. ALTmAN: They were not notified by the RTC, to the beat of my knowledge. When this question was posed, I realized that there bad been no consideration of this question in preparing Mr. Altman's briefing materials, and that I had not thought about the fall events relating to the criminal referrals for many months. Although I remembered that I had spoken with Mr, Nussbaum about the referrals, I did not have a clear recollection of the meeting or of the events surround-ing it. Listening to the question in the context of the questions that I came before and after, it appeared that it related to RTC contacts with the White House about the criminal referrals. Moreover, Mr. Altman was asked, and answered, about the extent of his own knowledge. I did not know, sitting there, what he knew or recalled knowing. Without having the ability and opportunity to discuss this matter with Mr. Altman and others at Treasury, I did not be-lieve that I could suggest to Mr. Altman, there, on the spot, that he change his response.
Baseball
Boston's Red Sox take two in a row from the Minnesota Twins in a cliff-hanging two-day finale to the tightest American League race in history. It's the first pennant for Boston in 21 years and now they face the Cardinals in the World Series. Shot of crowd in bleachers and stands. Vice President Humphrey and Edward Kennedy. Home run play. Players run the bases. Reggie Smith makes a hit. Players and fans converge on the pitcher's mound after the win.
The World Series
"The St. Louis Cardinals win the opener 2-1 against the Boston Red Sox, on the strength of Bob Gibson's pitching while Lou Brock ties a Series record by getting four hits. Santiago homers for Boston's only run." Panning TLS crowd in bleachers. High angle LS Cardinal Lou Brock getting hit, running bases. H/a LS Jose Santiago pitches to Kurt Flood who hits a double. H/a LS Cardinal Roger Maris hitting, running, letting Lou Brock run home. TLS scoreboard showing 1-0 Cards, top of thrid. H/a LS Jose Santiago hitting home run, running bases. H/a LS Brock hitting ground single, Yaz throw to home, catcher tagging Javier out at home plate. H/a LS Brock stealing second base. LS scoreboard showing final 2-1 score.
Refloating Ship
A sunken Danish freighter is re-floated by air-filled plastic balls that look like Ping-Pong balls. The spheres are pumped into the ship's hold until their lifting force is enough to raise her. Footage shows a salvage operation in a small, unindustrialized harbor. Distant bluffs are treeless and covered in patchy snow. A worker wades through a large pile of small Styrofoam balls with a bucket. He fills it under a jet tube that is feeding the growing pile. A close-up shows the Styrofoam being pumped through a tube. The emerging wreckage slowly breaks the water's surface. Mongolian-looking man takes still pictures from over friend's shoulder. Small skiffs surround the newly emerged ship.
Mexican Refugees of Hurricane Beulah
Mexican refugees return home aboard U.S. Army helicopters, after having fled from Hurricane Beulah. Hurricane Fern brings heavy rains but no extensive flooding. MS/CUs storm refugees mingling around a grove of trees. CU grandmother smiling, holding a smiling child. Young children look and smile at the camera. A mother laughs and holds her infant child. Refugees hurry aboard U.S. Army CH-47 Chinook helicopter with their belongings, American soldiers supervising. MS soldiers & refugees aboard helicopter. Aerial of flight from camp. Excellent MCU tired Mexican woman in strong half-light, her hair whipping around her face & eyes. Panning MS refugees aboard helicopter.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(17:05:07) At the outset, I indicated that I only know one way to do things: With honesty, and consistent with, legal and ethical requirements. I testified extensively before the staff of this Committee, and this is the seventh day that I have given sworn testimony before a governmental investigative body. I have tried to give this Committee, albeit in abbreviated form today, my best recollection of what occurred and why. I am satisfied that I have given you my best recollection, as I have done on each prior occasion that I have testified and the numerous additional times that I have been interviewed. I have no doubt about the propriety of my actions, and I have no reason to doubt the propriety of anyone else's. I thank the Committee for the opportunity to make this statement and I welcome any questions that the Committee may have. The CHAIRMAN. Lees start if we may Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, can I ask-are there copies available of Ms. Hanson's opening statement? The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Sarbanes. No, we were not given copies. If I may--do you have copies or could we-if you'll let us have what you just read, we'll Xerox it, so we can circulate it to Members of the Committee. Ms. HANSON. We sent 120 copies at 9 a.m. The CHAIRMAN. Apparently, they haven't arrived. Until they're located, it would be helpful if we could just take your statement and make some copies. They're probably somewhere making their way here. In any event, we do want to have copies in front of us. I want to go to the testimony before this Committee on February 24, 1994, that you've made some reference to and which other witnesses today have talked about. As I understand it, there was very careful preparation done ahead of time for that meeting. Several hours were devoted on at least 3 or 4 different days leading up to that hearing. Material was put together, a group met, you were part of the group, Mr. Altman was part of the group, the questions were discussed, and all of this was gone through in some detail. Is that correct? Ms. HANsoN. That's correct. It was a massive amount of material. The CHAIRMAN. In any event, is it fair to say that Mr. Altman was well-briefed by the time that hearing started? It sounds to me as if everybody really focused on getting ready for that bearing. Is that a fair conclusion? Ms. HANsON. There was a focus on----clearly, there was a focus 01, preparing for the hearing. As I said, there was a massive 'mount of work to do, a tremendous scope of issues to be covered. Although we did our best, on many, many issues there was not as in-depth a review as we would have liked. The CHAIRMAN. But you testified today, and also in your deposi- on that, as you were listening to Mr. Altman answer questions 104 that day, questions you yourself have cited from Senator Bond Senator Gramm, that-and ve been careful as to how you put it, but that you were -- the answers in and of themselves were not complete, and in your mind, in effect, you thought, well, those can be amplified later. Is that a fair conclusion for me to draw from what you've just said? Ms. HANSON. Yes, I thought the entire testimony needed to be re- . viewed. The CHAIRMAN. On the recusal issue, it seemed to me, you also seemed to be saying you were somewhat surprised that, when Mr. Altman was asked to summarize anything that was of an consequence, he omitted any discussion of the recusal even though that was in the preparation document that you'd helped put together Were you surprised that he left that out? Ms. HANSON, Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Did you say something to him about it after you left the Committee room? Ms. HANSON. No. I didn't The CHAIRMAN. Why? Ms. HANSON. He left before I did and I didn't go back with him. The CHAIRMAN. How about in the days that followed, did you have any occasion to mention that to him. MS. HANSON. Not that specific issue. As I stated, I knew during the course of the testimony-the course of the hearing that there were a number of issues that needed to be followed up. I did not have a copy of the transcript until substantially later, and it was my intention to go through the transcript carefully and raise all of the issues with Mr. Altman at once. The CHAIRMAN. Didn't I hear you say in your prepared statement, though, that when you went over to the meeting at the White House, Mr. Altman went over with the idea in mind of saying be was going to recuse himself and then encountered some pressure, some resistance to that, and decided not to recuse himself? Didn't I hear you say this a minute ago? Ms. HANSON. I wouldn't characterize it as pressure. There was a discussion of the issue, and I understood Mr. Altman to have listened to the discussion and considered it, but I wouldn't have
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(17:10:07) The CHAIRMAN. Let's leave the pressure part out. The point is, he heard a contrary point of view and it caused him, in a sense, to revisit his decision. Is that a fair summary? Ms. HANSON. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. The fact that occurred, and it was significant enough that you just described it here to us in your prepared statement, it seems to me, when that was omitted when he was asked a question that clearly was designed to encompass such things as that, at some point, either right then or shortly thereafter, you know you had some obligation to remind him of the fact that, for whatever reason, that had been left out. You say you didn't do that. Ms. HANsON. Sir, as I stated, this issue, the recusal issue has assumed a tremendous-much more importance than it had at that particular time. At that particular time, there were a lot--tbere were a number of issues that I knew needed to be followed up. I fully expected that this would all be handled in the ordinary course. What happened was that, with the appearance of The 105 Washington Post article and the service of the Grand Jury subpoenas, the orderly process of responding to questions and supplementing and reviewing the transcript terminated, at least my participation in it terminated. The CHAIRMAN. But other things did happen, and you also made reference to this in your statement. We began to get clarifying letters from Mr. Altman, as you know, shortly after the hearing. We got a series of letters. The first one came on March 2, 1994. The next letter came on March 3, 1994. The next letter came on March 11, 1994 and the next on March 21, 1994. What I'm struck by, among other things, is that, for example, in the first letter that came, you might have thought, if the recusal issue had been forgotten or overlooked even though it was in the briefing, it's in your briefing sheet, and was discussed, that in the case of his reflecting after the Committee hearing to the point he was going to prepare a memo and send it to us, which he did, that the recusal issue would occur to him and would go in that memo. But it didn't, did it? Ms. HANSON. If I might, sir. I was unaware of the last two of those letters until Grand Jury testimony. The letter of March until my 2, 1994, was prepared hastily for a specific purpose, which was to put you and the Committee on notice of the two fall meetings prior to learning about it in the press. The CHAIRMAN. Right. Ms. HANSON. It was not intended, by any stretch of the imagination, to completely supplement or correct the record. The CHAIRMAN. How about the second letter, then, on March 3, 1994? Ms. HANSON. The second letter on March 3, 19941 1 understood, was prepared by Mr. Altman, and I understood that he prepared it in response following a conversation that he had with you. I didn't know exactly what it was that Mr. Altman was intending to respond to at that time. and my-as I stated, I did not expect it, by any stretch of the imagination, to be a full correction and review of the transcript, which, to my recollection, I did not even have. I reviewed that letter solely to make sure that there was nothing in it that was affirmatively wrong. The CHAIRMAN. I think it's the issue of what's missing, as opposed to what's affirmatively wrong, that's the problem with the testimony before the Committee. My time is up, so I'll just make my point and then yield. My point is that, I think as a professional-and you clearly are that and I respect your professionalism and we've cited that here today-when the hearing was underway and pointed questions were being asked and were being followed up by follow-up questions, there was a requirement there on his part, and yours, to make sure that the answer was complete and responsive to what the question was. I think you, in effect, have said today that you had some concern about that-you phrased it carefully, but you said you were listening and you knew some things were not being said that, presumably, needed to be part of an answer. But then, you say he used words at the end that-what were the words that he used at the end of his statement Senator MACK. "That's the whole conversation." 106 The CHAMMAN. "That's the whole conversation," in other words,, I he used a very declarative summary comment. In your deposition, you say that, in your mind, when be said that was the whole con-' versation, in effect, he closed the door on you being able to lean forward to him and say, "By the way, you've left out recusal." Ms. HANSON. Sir, he bad an answer in front of him that had been gone over and he had reviewed that had the recusal issue ' in"' it. I did not know, as I sat there, why it was that he didn't include that in the discussion, but, as I sat there, I thought that I could give him a note and remind him about the recusal issue. I recall realizing that 1 had lost that opportunity
Royal Welcome: New Zealand Greets Queen
Royal Welcome: New Zealand Greets Queen. The Maoris who came from Polynesia 600 years ago welcome Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip to New Zealand. Now loyal subjects, they perform their traditional war dances for the ruler before she goes to Auckland for the Royal Regatta. Off in the not too far distance sits the Queen's personal yacht, the Britannia. MCUS - A woman taking a picture of the Britannia. MS - Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip being greeted by the Governor General of New Zealand. MCUS - Queen Elizabeth getting into a convertible. MS - Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip standing up in the back of the convertible as they drive along in a motorcade,. MCUS - The tribal natives of perform their native war dance the 'haka'. MS - Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip are at the beach looking at the boats that will be in a regatta. MS - A sail by of the mask boats salute Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip. MS - The Queen and the Prince are off to Auckland as they return to the Britannia.
Easter Around The World
Easter Around The World. The most joyous day in Christendom sees churches from Maine to Hawaii thronged with the devout as they celebrate the Resurrection of Christ, each in his own way, each in his own faith. , The glory that is Easter is reflected in the facades of churches majestic and humble; it is found in the hearts that worship the miracle that was Christ's passion and the empty tomb on Easter Day. New Yorkers throng to parade along Fifth Avenue, services are held at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington and at the National Cathedral. As the nation rejoices they pause in sorrow - flags fly at half-mast in memory of those heroes who died aboard the submarine Thresher. In Vatican City Pope John gives his traditional blessing, "Urbi Et Orbi" -to Rome and the world. Christ is honored in every corner of the earth on this Easter Day of rejoicing. A sun rise over trees. MS - Outside shot of a lovely church where people are walking in to attend Easter Service. MS - another one of America's churches on Easter Sunday. More churches and more locations. Outside shot - People filing in to attend Easter Sunday Service. CUS - Stained glass window depicting the Birth of Christ. MS - Little Children holding song books queuing in to sing. OHS - People standing up in their church pews. First Baptist Church. MS - Pastor of the church shaking hands with the people coming out of church. OHS - People standing out side of New York's largest Cathedrals wearing their finest Easter wear. MS - The White House Walter Reed Army Medical Center. On the ground of the medical center a full dress army band marching through the throngs of people who have gathered here to celebrate Easter. MLS - Throngs of Christians attend for an out-door Easter Service. MS - The Vatican throngs of Christians standing wanting to be part of the religious experience. MLS - The pope blessing all the people. CUS - Some of the young Christians praying. CUS - Nuns. MLS - The Pope blessing the people
Kennedy In Crash: Senator Recovering from Plane Accident
"Misfortune strikes the Kennedy family once again. Senator Edward M. Kennedy is seriously injured when his private plane crashes in the woods near Southampton, Mass. Despite a broken back doctors expect his complete recovery within 8 to 10 months." MSs youthful Senator EDWARD KENNEDY (Ted Kennedy, D-MA) sitting at desk in office, reviewing paperwork, smiling into camera. TLS/MSs wreckage of downed single engine private prop plane in woods shrouded in fog (plane crash, accident scene). Rear view TLS/MSs police officers, detectives. MS sign "The Cooley Dickinson Hospital Entrance" pan left to hospital. TLS hospital building. MSs U.S. Attorney General ROBERT F. KENNEDY (RFK, Bobby Kennedy) talking with men outside hospital, then entering building. Rear view TLS press conference in hospital; MS doctors standing behind desk; MS Robert Kennedy speaking to reporters from podium.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(17:15:36) The CHAIRMAN. Because of that statement Ms. HANSON. Looking back at the transcript, I understand why I thought I had lost that opportunity, because he had stated that's all there was to the conversation. I believed, until I had the opportunity to sit down and talk with him in an orderly way, review the transcript with him, and answer not only that, but a number of other questions on the transcript, there was not a way to-certainly it was not appropriate to supplement the record in a piecemeal fashion. That was my view. The CHAIRMAN. We may come back to that. Ms. HANSON. No, on that day we were working on his actual recusal. If you recall. Senator D'AMATO. Wouldn't that be a time to say to him, by the way-- I mean, you work together, you're colleagues together? You did not mention the fact of this you, knew about it, and you said be was so declarative that you didn't want to get up and say, "By the way, you left out the recusal." Ms. HANSON. Let me state again, the responses in the testimony, there were a number of items in the testimony that I knew had to be reviewed and Senator D'AMATO. We'll come back to those. Let me yield to Senator Mack. Senator Mack. Senator D'Amato, my time is up. Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to yield to Senator Mack, but I'd like to say that was February 24, 1994. Did you speak to him about the recusal issue, that he did not put it forth before this Committee the day after the testimony on February 25 1994? Senator MACK. Thank you, Senator D'Amato. Welcome, Ms. Hanson. We appreciate your testimony and the time that you've given to it. I'd like to review this with you chronologically, and touch on some of the things that you mentioned both in your statement today and also in the deposition earlier. Did you ever become aware that in the spring of 1993, Mr. Altman had faxed copies of press articles regarding Madison and Whitewater to Bernie Nussbaum that actually bad appeared 1 year earlier, in March 1992? Ms. HANSON, Is your question whether I knew it in the spring Of 1993? Senator MACK. Did you ever become aware that in the spring of 1993, Mr. Altman had faxed copies? 107 Ms. HANSON. I was recently shown a copy of a fax and I also heard from Mr. Nussbaum's testimony before the House last week that, in initial discussion with him on September 29, 1993, 1 mention= I understood Mr. Altman had given him some information on Madison. I had not independently recollected I had said that to him, but Mr. Altman did give me, at that same time in September, a copy of the same article that, it appears, he had faxed to Mr. Nussbaum in the spring don't I didn't know about it when it was done in the spring, and I recall the conversation with Mr. Nussbaum in the fall. Senator MACK. What you're testifying is that the first time you had knowledge of this was during your September 29, 1993, meeting with Mr. Nussbaum? Ms. HANSON. I'm saying I don't recall at that time-I don't recall, as I sit here now, that at that time I realized that it was the article, The New York Times article, that bad been faxed. I have been shown a faxed copy of that, along with a fax cover sheet recently. Senator MACK. You would have no knowledge that Mr. Altman has a file in which he had kept that? You didn see him take it out of that file? Ms. HANSON. He did take it out-when Mr. Altman gave me a copy of The New York Times article, it was taken out of a file that he ad. Senator MACK. How old an article was that? Ms. HANSON. It was an article that had appeared during the campaign. Senator MACK. Would that be in March 1992? Ms. HANSON. I believe so. Senator MACK. It sounds as if Mr. Altman had a file containing fairly extensive information relative to Madison. Ms. HANSON. I don't know what else was in the file, sir, he gave me a copy of the article. Senator MACK. Drawing your attention back to the fall of 1993. On September 27, 1993, did you have a discussion with Bill Roelle about nine new criminal referrals regarding Madison Guaranty? Ms. HANSON. Yes. Senator MACK. Please tell me about that discussion,
Candy Spots Takes Santa Anita
Two thrill-packed horse races are unveiled for racing fans. In the Santa Anita Derby four horses take a bad spill at the first turn as Candy Spots goes on to win handily. In the Flamingo at Hialeah, Never Bend hops into an early lead and is never headed. These are two horses to watch in this year's Kentucky Derby. California, Santa Anita track, throngs of fans. MS - Horses take off from the gate, thirteen three-year olds thunder by the stands. MS - Candy Spots breaks away ridden by Billy Shoemaker. MSOH - As the horses take the bend, Sky Jim runs out and four horses go down. Two jockeys stay down and one horse. All the jockeys are OK and one horse has to be destroyed. MSOH - Candy Spots and Sky Jim battle it out and the winner is Candy Spots #5. Florida's Hialeah race track, flamingos flying over head. MSOH - The horses break out of the gate for the 54th running of the Flamingo. MSOH - Down the stretch, Never Bend is running easily. MS - Never Bend is in the lead by a 8-length margin. MSOH - Never Bend and his jockey. Beautiful horse.
Record Floods: Thaw And Rains Hit 7 - State Area
Rampaging waters roar through the Ohio Valley as rain and melting snow trigger the worst flood conditions to hit many areas in 30 years. High drama at the height of the flood as two boys are rescued by helicopter after clinging to trees above a raging river for nine black hours. Eighteen deaths have been contributed to the rush of the flood waters. Raging and turbulent water rushing over some rocks in the Ohio Valley, houses in the Valley that are completely flooded up to their window sills. MS - The current of the water seems to be very strong as the water rushes through the valley. MS - Looks like white water as the melted snow combined with rain rush over farm land. MS - A 17-year old boy who climbed to the top of a tree is rescued by a helicopter, his boat overturned while he and his friend were searching for calves. MS - His friend being rescued by the helicopter, slowly the helicopter lifts the boy to safety. MCUS - Chopper has landed on the ground and two firemen rush up to help the boys, they carry one away from the chopper covered with a woolen blanket.
Defy DeGaulle: French Miners Continue Strike
The coal mines of France are idle as 200,000 workers defy orders from President Charles DeGaulle to return to their jobs. After a hard winter coal is in short supply and the strike is aggravating this. DeGaulle threatened the minors with server penalties - heavy fines and imprisonment and the strikers expressed outrage demanding a shorter workweek and a pay boost. Throngs gather and unite against the coal mines. The closed down coal mines, camera pans showing the result of the abandonment by the coal miners. MCUS - Strikers posting strike-signes. MSOH - Striking minors march united. MS - Street level, the striking minors walking in unity. CUS - Striking coal minor holding a sign; (De Galle - Des Sous!). Shot looking down from a balcony - A back of a head, throngs gathered in the towns square.
Skyline Giant: New Office Building Is World's Largest
A $100,000,000 beauty makes her debut on the New York scene as the Pan American Building is dedicated. It is the world's largest office building and it looks south to the Verrazano Bridge from the mainland to Staten Island where they have begun to spin the cables. Governor Rockefeller, Mayor Wagner, Mrs. Wilson, widow of builder are at dedication. Atop the 808 foot building is a helicopter landing deck. Looking up at the new giant building, MS - Outside of Pan American Airways Building and people going in through the revolving door. MCUS - Governor Rockefeller, Mayor Wagner and Mrs. Erwin Wilson dedicating the building and cutting a ribbon. MS - On top of the building two men walking about on the helicopter landing pad. MS - From atop of the roof you see the Empire State Building. MS - From the roof looking down at the United Nations Building and traffic on the street below. MS - The new Verrazano Bridge in the process of being built. MS - On top of the bridge looking straight ahead. MS - Looking up from the water at the unfinished bridge. CUS - Bridge cable that will support the roadway above the entrance to New York Harbor. CUS - Robert Moses, head of the Bridge Authority and President of New York's fourth coming World's Fair. MS - Crowd of people gathered at the bottom of the bridge to cheer on Robert Moses.
"Golden Globes" Top Acting Awards Go to Universal Stars
Golden Globes. The most coveted movie awards next to the Oscars are given by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. Rock Hudson, Gregory Peck and Doris Day are among the top winners as they are honored with "Golden Globes." Also seen are Tony Randall, Edie Adams. Peck wins for "To Kill a Mockingbird", Hudson wins Male World Film Favorite, winning award 3x. Day gets award for Female World Film Favorite. Ambassador Cocoanut Grove and the marquee below in lights CUS - People queue up to see their favorite stars. CUS - Tony Randal. CUS - Gregory Peck. CUS - Doris Day. CUS - Doris Day and Rock Hudson in the back ground. MLS - Camera pans over the audience mostly made up of movie stars. CUS - Paparazzi taking pictures of Gregory Peck who just received his award. presented by Art Linkletter. MCUS - Jane Wyman presents Rock Hudson with his award. MS - Gregory Peck and his wife applauding for Rock Hudson. MCUS - Doris Day receives her award from Charlton Heston, Art Linkletter off to her right.
A Big Story: Baby Hippo Stages Own Water Show
Baby Hippo Stages Own Water Show. At California's Jungleland they've come up with a way to pool their resources - and have fun. Sam, a 9-month-old, 150 pound Hippo frolics in the old swimming hole with his instructor. When he grows up he'll be an actor - all two tons of him. Mila and baby hippo, Sam going into the poll with the assistance of zoo hippo keeper. MCUS - Zoo keeper rubbing Sam's nose the baby hippo is standing by the zoo keeper's other hand. MS - Zoo keeper chasing Sam around the pool, Sam jumps into the pool and the zoo keeper follows. CUS - Zoo keeper holding on to Sam as he swims and then he try s to hold him, no luck. MCUS - Baby Sam climbs out of the pool and the zoo keeper shares an apple with him. CUS - Looks like the baby hippopotamus is kissing the zoo keeper, very touching.