Whitewater Hearings August 1, 1994 - Part 1
Whitewater Hearings August 1, 1994 - Part 1
(11:40:47) Mr. ROELLE. The Vice President in Kansas City, who notified me that evening. I advised him, don't do any more or any less than you would normally do in any criminal referral. At that point, I called Mr. Altman. I talked to him for maybe 6 minutes. He indicated to me he really didn't understand what I was expressing to him and that he would have Jean Hanson call me, and if I would go over it with her, he would appreciate it. At which point be bung up and I believe a few hours later, although I'm not sure exactly when, Ms. Hanson called me and asked what was going on. I expressed to her that we had some more criminal referrals 8 on the Madison issue. 21 I went over those criminal referrals very briefly, based on the information that I had been given orally over the telephone about what they were about. That conversation may have lasted 10 or 15 minutes. Then we talked briefly about if it would be appropriate for those criminal referrals to be seen by anybody? I said, "In my judgment, it makes no difference if anybody sees them and, therefore, I don't think they should be seen because they were going to proceed normally I advised Ms. Hanson that I bad told the staff in Kansas City to proceed normally with these criminal referrals, Go ahead and process them. She said, "OK. I will express that to Mr. Altman." We talked briefly about-I had asked her, "Who do you, intend to tell about this besides Mr. Altman?" She said, "Well, I hadn't really thought about anybody." And I said, "Good, I do not think it would be appropriate to discuss it with anybody." I also, I believe, have testified to numerous different groups that I was never thinking of the White House when I made that statement. I was thinking about other officials at Treasury. We had a number of officials at Treasury always at meetings with the RTC, and I thought these things should be kept confidential, and the best way to do that was not to discuss them, Senator MACK. Do you think that she understood your message about confidentiality? Mr. ROELLE. I don't know. She never expressed it one way or the other. She said, "I will discuss this with Mr. Altman and we will get back to you if we need to." Senator MACK. In the conversation, did you tell her that the referrals mentioned the Clintons and Governor Jim Guy Tucker? Mr. ROELLE. I did indicate what each of the nine criminal referrals had reference to and I did mention that the President and First Lady bad been mentioned in the criminal referrals. Senator MACK. How about Governor Jim Guy Tucker? Mr. RoELLE. I did say what-I'm not sure where I stand here, Mr. Chairman. I want to be totally responsive. But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say about what's in these criminal referrals. I will say that I told Ms. Hanson what each of the nine criminal referrals' basic charges were. The CHAIRMAN. If you'll yield just a minute, just on the scope issue. Senator MACK. Let me make a point here. The CHAIRmAN. I don't want to go across this line, though. Senator MACK, I'm not going to. What I think Mr. Roelle le is saying is that he has real reservations, even today, about providing information that was included in those referrals. When we asked him for the cover page on those referrals, he refused to it to us. Yet, that's information that the White House apparently has The CHAiRmAN. I think, if I may say Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Chairman, I think that the Senator is Making a very important point, He's not going to try to cross the line. What he is saying is that Mr, Roelle considers that information SO confidential, so as not to compromise someone, that be doesn't think he can cross the line and reveal names, et cetera. 22 I think it is instructive, though, and Senator Mack has made the point, is attempting to make the point, that that same information was given-the information lie cannot give this Committee todayto the White House. That's a very valid point. Senator MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Just a moment, please. I understand the point you're making. I think, Mr. Roelle, you're correct, in your hesitation to not go into the details of the criminal referrals here today. I think that's appropriate. That would violate our scope requirements. And so, just so we all understand the fact as to where that line is, you've stopped short of it and I think it's appropriate here that you do so.