August 3, 1994 - Part 5
August 3, 1994 - Part 5
(16:40:48) There were also press calls and-in that regard, and people call, ing for, as well, Mr. Altman's recusal. Mr. Nussbaum said he thought, as a matter of principle, that people shouldn't recuse unless they were required to. He also said, in particular, he said that he was concerned about Ms, Kulka. Senator DAMATO, What did he say about his concern as it related to Ms. Kulka? Mr. KLEIN. He said that Ms. Kulka was someone he had known from a case he had done, the Kaye, Scholer case in private practice, and he said in words to this effect, I don't believe I can quote it, but that she was a difficult person to deal with, she was unreasonable, she could be unfair. Senator D'AMATO. Is it clear to you, based on your conversations with Mr. Nussbaum, that he preferred to have Roger Altman as the decisionmaker? Mr. KLEIN. Yes, sir. Senator D'AMATO. Do you know why Mr. Nussbaum-well, you said that and I see our time is running out. Let me ask you this. Did he indicate anything about dealing with Ms. Kulka, that you recall? Mr. KLEIN. I believe he said he had had an experience with her in the Kaye, Scholer case, when he was in private practice. Senator D'AMATO. And what was that experience? Mr. KLEIN. He was a lawyer, as I understand, he was representing Kaye, Scholer when Ms. Kulka was involved, she represented the OTS in a proceeding against Kaye, Scholer. That was my understanding. Senator D'AMATO. Did he say something like she was tough? Mr. KLEIN. The words that come to my mind are "difficult" or "unreasonable," sir. Senator D'AMATO. What about "aggressive"? Mr. KLEIN. That is consistent with what he said, yes. Senator D'AMATO, I want to thank you for your very candid testimony, Mr. Klein. The CHAIRMAN. Let me also say before yielding to Senator Sasser that we've heard a lot of witnesses and I'm refreshed by the fact that the answers we've gotten so far are more straightforward and , I think, direct than some of the others we've gotten, and that I rind that a refreshing tone and I appreciate that, and I just want to say that now to the witnesses that are here. Mr. Eggleston, you'd asked to make a comment and I said we'd permit that. Mr. EGGLESTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In light of the comments that Senator D'Amato made, I have been counting up the number of individuals and entities that have reached the conclusion that Mr. Altman did not have a legal obligation, ethical obligation to recuse himself. I think the suggestion that Mr. D'Amato made was that I needed to go back, I think I and all of us needed to go back to Ethics 101 if we couldn't see that he absolutely had an obligation to do so. 103 My understanding, as I sit here today, is that prior-that Mr. Altman had discussed this with a variety of people at the Treasury Department prior to the time that he had the February 2nd meeting and that the advice he got was either that he did not have a legal obligation to recuse himself or that people gave him political advice. Senator Bentsen said it's up to you. I think Ms. Kulka, to the extent I remember, did not tell him that he had a legal or ethical obligation to do so. My recollection is that there had been some discussion with Mr. Foreman, the Treasury Department Ethics Officer, beforehand on the legal or ethical obligation. He was told he did not have such. He was told-Mr. Altman was told at the February 2nd meeting that if he had a legal or ethical obligation to recuse himself, he should do so. At the end of that meeting, it is my recollection that he was going to seek legal ethics opinions from the Ethics Officer at the RTC and from the Treasury Department. Based on the testimony I've heard here today, he did so and those two officials determined that he did not have a legal or ethical obligation to recuse himself. This matter has also been reviewed by Mr. Cutler who came in, was brought in in order to review this. Mr. Cutler determined that he, Mr. Altman, did not have a legal or ethical obligation to recuse himself. This matter was also reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics, an independent agency under the supervision of Mr. Potts. Mr. Potts, as we have heard, was appointed during the Bush Administration, he is at least a Republican appointee, if not a Republican. Mr. Potts, at the conclusion of extensive factual investigation by the Treasury Department, I think, concluded two things: That Mr. Altman did not have a legal or ethical obligation to recuse himself. Mr. Potts, in addition, concluded that it was perfectly appropriate-that it was not legally or ethically inappropriate-for Mr. Altman to discuss his recusal issue with anyone he wanted.