August 1, 1994 - Part 7
August 1, 1994 - Part 7
(20:05:53) Senator MURRAY. Mr. Chairman, we have not had an opportunity. The CHAIRMAN. I beg your pardon. Let me stand corrected. Let me give the whole answer here. On the Republican side, some of the time has been yielded to one Member, several times over in the rotation, as opposed to going down and getting every Senator. Not 145 every Senator on this side has been called upon, although I've tried to call on each one that I've understood to be wanting to be called upon. In fact, it would help me, now, to know what Senators, on both sides, would like to be called upon and, then, I will do so in the order in which we're proceeding. Senator Bryan, Senator Murray, and Senator Moseley-Braun wish to be called upon. At this point, Senator Boxer Senator BOXER. I already had my round, but I'll wait The CHAIRMAN. Senator Boxer has had one round-the voting period Senator BoxER. But I'll wait for the end, because I have More questions. The CHAIRMAN. On this side, Senator Gramm, Senator Bennett, Senator Roth, Senator Domenici, Senator Hatch, and Senator D'Amato wish to be called upon. That's why we have ordered in the pizzas tonight, Senator D'Amato's birthday day is today. Senator SHELBY Mr. Chairman when are they coming? The CHAIRMAN. Not soon enough. In any event, who's next in the order now rotating across to this Senator D'AMATO. I believe Senator Domenici is next. I yield to Senator Domenici. The CHAMMAN. Senator Domenici will go next on this side. Senator DOMENICI. How many times have you had an opportunity to correct the record when a witness that you represent, as le I counsel, has, in your opinion, failed to tell the whole truth? Ms. HANsON. To my recollection, this is the first time that I have been in a position, like this one, where there was a transcript that was going to be provided for me to review. I have reviewed other testimony, but I bad not been in this particular position before. Senator DOMENICI. Are you of the impression, the way we do business in the U.S. Senate is that, a witness can come before the Committee, tell half truths or one-quarter of the truth and, then, that gives him the right to take as long as he'd like to look through the transcript and correct it? Even if it's something as specific as, "Did you have only one meeting?" and the answer is, "Yes," but it turns out that there are at least three and maybe more? Is it your understanding that's the way the Senate does business.? at you have that right and Mr. Altman has that right? Ms. HANsON. It's my understanding--certainly, it's my understanding that the requirement is to testify truthfully. It's also my understanding that it is necessary, and what a careful lawyer does, to review the transcript and to correct it, if necessary, and supplement it. Sir, that was what I intended to do here. That was all I intended to do. Senator DOMENICI. I understand. Mr. Chairman, I might just state my own observation. The CHAIRMAN. Please. Senator DOMENICI. I really don't understand that to be the premise upon which we operate in terms of our records that witnesses can come and tell us a quarter of what's truthful or a half of what's truthful and then go see their legal counsel and say, "Let me correct it," and then correct it once, correct it twice, correct it ,three times. I think it's very unordinary that this matter was ban 146 dled like this and, frankly, I just call upon Senators who have here to recollect whether they think this is the way we do business. I mean, the fact of the matter-is, Mr. Altman did not tell this mittee the truth. Or, let's put it another way, the whole truth. Then you sought as you claim, in due course, to fix that record as I understand it. Ms. HANSON. Sir, that's not what I-what I've said. I think Altman and-and Mr. Altman will appear before this Coln, and you can ask Mr. Altman questions about his testimony, I have testified-is that, I intended to review all the questions answers to make sure that they were fully and completely swered, and I did not have an opportunity to do that. You're this was an unusual process, because a Grand Jury subpoena delivered to me on March 4, 1994, which terminated my ability participate in this process.