August 1, 1994 - Part 9
August 1, 1994 - Part 9
(23:05:34) I recall discussing it with him, and I recall the substance of the conversation to be that I should tell Mr. Nussbaum about the press leaks, the imminent press leaks. I also recall, and I have always recalled, and my testimony on this has always been the same, that either in that meeting, or in another meeting around-close in time, Mr. Altman called in his secretary and asked her to bring him a file, which-in which he had The New York Times article that he gave me. He had a copy made and he gave it to me. It was around that time. I have not recalled whether it was in that exact meeting, or in a subsequent meeting shortly after that. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Gramm. Senator GRAMM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So it's even possible, Ms. Hanson, that you talked to Mr. Altman twice about it. You might have gotten the directive to call the of 193 fice, and you might have gotten the article at another meeting on the same subject? Ms. HANSON. That's correct, sir. Senator GRAMM. You made the point, the strongest point you've made here tonight, that it would be, for all practical purposes, impossible that you would have contacted Mr. Nussbaum, on this subject, without a clear and direct directive or order. I've sat here ever since you've been here, and that's been the strongest point you've made. The point is that it would have been inconceivable for you to have contacted Mr. Nussbaum without a straight directive or order from Mr, Altman. That's correct, isn't it? Ms. HANSON. That is correct. I would not have contacted Mr. Nussbaum. Senator GRAMM. Would you say it is also correct that Mr. Altman would have known that you would not? Ms. HANSON. I'm sorry? Senator GRAmm. Would you say it is also true that Mr. Altman would have known, or would have known then, that you would not have made that contact without his approval? Ms. HANsON. I don't know the answer to that question, sir. If you could rephrase the question. Senator GRAMM. You worked with Mr. Altman. You worked for him. Right? ht9 Ms. HANSON. Yes. Senator GRAMM. Would you believe that he would think that you would contact Mr. Nussbaum, about a criminal investigation &at involved the President of the United States, without him telling you to do it? Ms. HANSON. You'll have to ask him that question, sir. Senator GRAMM. You don't have an opinion, one way or another? Ms. HANSON. No, sir, I don't. Senator GRAMM. I want to go back to the letter of March 2, 1994. 1 have a total of five questions and I'll try to get through them as quickly as I can. You have said, several times ere, that this letter of March 2, 1994, a letter that, as Counsel, you were involved in, was sent for one, and only one, purpose. That purpose was, in essence, to give the Committee a heads-up that there was about to be a media story about these two meetings. Is that right? Ms. HANSON. That was my understanding of what the purpose of that letter was. Senator GRAMM. So Mr. Altman wrote us the letter simply to tell us something he knew we were going to hear about the next day in the paper. Ms. HANSON. As I stated, it was not intended to correct the record or to be a full answer to your question. Senator GRAMM. Was he telling us, as a courtesy, so we would know when we read it in the paper the next day? Ms. HANSON. It was my understanding the timing of the sending of that letter was a result of the article that was going to appear in the paper. However, as I stated, the expectation was that there would be a full review Senator GRAMM. Let me go back to this point. Was be telling us, as a courtesy, so that we would know what the facts were when the article came out, or was he writing this letter, solely, to protect himself so that 194 he would have told us prior to the article coming out the next day? Ms. HANSON. I think you'll have to ask him that question, sir. Senator GRAMM. You here say, that in this letter, there was no reason for him, in essence, to tell any more, that this was a special purpose letter, and that, because he was going to write us another letter, he was under no obligation in this letter to give us the truth, the whole truth-you know the line better than I do.