August 2, 1994 - Part 2
August 2, 1994 - Part 2
(11:15:35) Senator FAIRCLOTH. If ducking's not misleading-ducking is misleading, now what does lying do. Mr. STEINER. Senator, as I said, I have no reason to believe, nor do I believe, that Mr. Altman lied to this Committee. Senator FAIRCLOTH. But he ducked? Mr. STEINER. Senator, I think he was asked a question which be didn't anticipate. Senator FAIRCLOTH. In fact, you kind of admired his ducking because you said he ducked gracefully rather than clumsily. I mean, that's nicer ducking than kind of stumbling through a duck, to gracefully duck. Mr. Foreman. Mr. FOREMAN. Yes, Sir? Senator FAIRCLOTH. In your deposition, you testified about a conversation you bad with Beth Nolan who worked for Bill Clinton in the White House. In that conversation, you said that you told her that there was concern about the possibility of new leadership at the RTC, in other words, somebody besides Altman. You said the concern was that the new leadership might, and I quote, "come up with some off-the-wall decisions relative to the Madison civil case." Mr. Foreman, as Ethics Director, why should you care whether someone other than Roger Altman made the decision about the Madison Guaranty civil case? You're the Ethics Director. You're supposed to be grading them, not directing them. Mr. FOREMAN. Senator, excuse me. That was not my comment from my head. I was passing on something that I bad heard. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Wait a minute, what now? Who were you passing it on from? Mr. FOREMAN. To the best of my recollection, Ms. Hanson said to me, something like there was concern because the other leadership in the RTC was brand new in their positions and someone bad expressed a concern that there was no experience with the thoroughness and fairness with which they made decisions, That was the basis of the comment that I passed on to Ms. Nolan. Senator FAIRCLOTH. I would think the Ethics Director, you're somewhat of a judge. You're supposed to be setting, the example, isn't that right? 351 Mr. FOREMAN. I would like to think so. Senator FAIRCLOTH. So you're worried about passing,,, on information as to who might come up with something different would produce a different outcome from what you all were hoping for. Mr. FOREMAN. Senator, that's not what that comment goes toward. One of the factors, when one looks to decide to make a discretionary decision of whether to recuse is looking at the other people who would be making the decision if that person doesn't. It's one of the factors listed in section 5.02. 1 was merely passing on a comment that someone bad made to me. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Let me ask you another question, then, and if you'll be shorter in your answer, Mr. Foreman. In depositions, we have learned that you had a conversation with Jean Hanson who testified here yesterday for 8 hours. In that conversation, you and Jean Hanson talked of concerns that Ellen Kulka would be the one making the decisions about Madison Guarantee Yesterday, we learned that Ellen Kulka is regarded as being a tough lawyer. If you weren't trying to influence the outcome of the decision on whether to file civil cases in the Madison matter, why were you concerned about a tough lawyer being the one to make the decision? Mr. FOREMAN. I wasn't concerned at all about a tough lawyer making the decision. That was fine with me, I had no view on the question of who would be making the decision. My only interest was that somebody bad mentioned this, which is a fact related to people who would be making the decision if Roger didn't. I personally had no concern about that, and as I said before, I believed that Mr. Altman should recuse himself from this matter. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Bernard Nussbaum complained to Jean Hanson about the choice of Ellen Kulka, the person who will make the decision in the Madison matter. Nussbaum, twice, wanted to know how Kulka got hired without being cleared by him, even though the RTC is supposed to be an independent agency. The White House wanted to take the Madison Guaranty civil cases away from Ellen Kulka, and ]instead, put the decision in the hands of Robert Fiske. Why would the White House want to replace a lawyer that the think is too tough with Robert Fiske? Were they thinking he'd be softer? Mr. FOREMAN. I don't have any idea about that, Senator. I had no knowledge about that at the time, and I don't know what anyone may have been thinking who said that.