August 1, 1994 - Part 3
August 1, 1994 - Part 3
(13:55:19) Senator DODD. Mostly in the press? Ms. KuLKA. Certainly, at some point, in the press, sir. Senator DODD. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. No, I'm not aware of any either, Senator DODD. Mr. Katsanos? Mr. KATSANOS. No, sir. Senator DODD. To your knowledge-and again anyone here-to your knowledge, did anyone who learned about the referrals-and we may find more who learned about the referrals--did an one use this case? that information in any way whatsoever to interfere with Mr. RoELL.E. No, sir, not that I'm aware of Senator DODD. Ms. Kulka? Ms. KuLKA. No, sir. Mr. RYAN. Not that I'm aware of. Mr. KATSANOS. No, sir. Senator DODD. I think that's an important point, Mr. Chairman, to make. Again, who had the information is important, but what they did with that information and to what extent they used that information to, in any way, try to pressure the RTC from doing its business is also important. These are the witnesses uniquely qualified to answer that question and the answer has been no. Mr. Chairman, I think at this point it might also be worthwhile to include in the record this morning pages 7, 8, and 9 of the Office of Government Ethic,' analysis of the meetings between Ms. Hanson, Mr. Nussbaum, and Mr. Sloan. I found that tremendously worthwhile. It's technical in nature, but our colleagues ought to focus on those pages, particularly when it comes to both the legality and the propriety of that information being shared. I would ask unanimous consent that be included in the record. The CHAIRMAN. We had included that in the record, but I think drawing your attention to those pages is also appropriate. Senator Bond, a vote has started. You're next. Id like to start with you and see how far we can get and, in light of the fact we're going to have to adjourn for this vote, we should go on. I'd like to resume. I've talked to all the Members present. Some wish to have a few additional questions. Some think they'll need the whole time period, some not, I think we can finish here. I'd like to do that right after this vote so we can save the remainder of the day for Ms. Hanson, who I think we need to hear from. She will address many of these same issues, and I'd like to bring her on as early this afternoon as we can. But I want to make sure-everybody has a chance to finish up with these witnesses. Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman 65 Senator SARBANES. Can we get some sense of bow much time this panel will involve, because some of us may not have any further questions for this panel. The CHAIRMAN. I think, from my estimation here, 30, 35 minutes from what Members have said to me. Now, that can change based on what develops, but that's my best estimate based on asking each Senator Domenici. I'm going to go vote and come back. inn Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman an, I'm going to do the same. I'm going to vote, come back, and have my questions. The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Senator Bond. Senator BOND. Hopefully, we can go quickly and finish up in 7 minutes. I'm going to follow up on the line of questions asked by my good friend from Connecticut. I want him to know that. Senator DODD. I'm going to stick around. Senator BOND. We have bad in the record significant discussions. The written answer provided to me by the RTC said the reason that you don't disclose an ongoing investigation is because it may serve to alert a suspect that an investigation may be pending and enable the suspect to conceal or destroy evidence, conceal or dissipate the proceeds of the crime, fabricate evidence, or otherwise impede the investigation. That's correct, Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. That's correct. Senator BOND. If a subject or a suspect who had been tipped off had concealed, destroyed, dissipated proceeds, or fabricated evidence, you may not know that. Is that correct? Mr.RYAN. That's correct. Senator BOND. Thus, when you say that there has been nothing as a result of this tipoff that would impede the investigation, you can speak with knowledge about the work going on internally at the RTC, but do you have any means of knowing whether any action was taken by any of the people mentioned in the referral, whether it was Governor Tucker or other subjects? Do you have any positive knowledge that no steps were taken by the people named in the referral? Mr. Roelle? Mr. ROELLE. Sir, I think I answered that. I'm not aware of anything. Senator BOND. Ms. Kulka? Ms. KULKA. I would have no knowledge, sir. Senator BOND. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. I would have no knowledge. Senator BOND. Mr. Katsanos? Mr. KATSANOS. There's no way to make that determination. Senator BOND. That's precisely the reason you don't disclose it, because you as regulators would have great difficulty finding out if there was a premature disclosure and you bad not been able to proceed with your investigation. Ms. KULKA. Sir, that is why I continue, in every forum I have, to try to protect the information that we are gathering with respect to our investigation. I am concerned, sir, that it could be released to anyone who does not have an absolute need to know because of its utility for other people, and it goes way beyond the specific issues you've raised. 66 Senator BOND. I would agree with you. I think it is quite accurate. I would ask, Mr. Ryan, the Office of Government Ethics report that we've discussed, laid out specifically why possibilities of a leak or press inquiries were not an adequate basis for destroying the confidentiality. Do you agree, and is it the policy of the RTC that the possibility of a press inquiry or a prospective leak is a sufficient reason to divulge confidential information?