August 3, 1994 - Part 7
August 3, 1994 - Part 7
(17:59:49)(tape #10082 begins) Ms. NOLAN. I just don't know what was 127 senator BRYAN. What did you advise them-I know my time iswhat did you advise Mr. Klein? Ms. NOLAN. We started a preliminary discussion about whether there was any obligation to correct. I should explain, Senator, just so this is in context, that about a week earlier, I had broken my right shoulder in three places. So I was not a fully functioning member of the team right then. So I came over to Mr. Klein's office. We talked about the issue, and he indicated at the end of our discussion that he was going to pursue the matter. He thoughtwhether there was an obligation to correct or not, that there would be some kind of amplification that would probably be appropriate. That was--- Senator BRYAN. My time is up. It's tempting to ask a follow-up, but I'll yield. Senator D'AMATO. Why doesn't the gentleman proceed. senator BRYAN. Ms. Nolan, as a follow-up to that, so the conversation just kind of ended at that point. You exchanged some thoughts with him. Did you indicate to him in any way---"him" being Mr. Klein-that you felt that there was an obligation to correct the record, either based upon some legal standard or ethical standard? Share with us a little bit more completely what you communicated to Mr. Klein. Ms. NOLAN. Well, Senator, let me make clear that I spoke with Mr. Klein, and then we went into Mr. Nussbaum's office and spoke briefly about it, and then I spoke with Mr. Klein again immediately after the meeting. At that point, I saw only one page, I think, or a portion of the transcript. I had not seen the whole record, and so we were talking really quite generally at this point about what the issues might be. Senator BRYAN. But did you give him any counsel in terms of what he should do? I understand -it was a general conversation. What conclusion, if any, did you reach? What did you tell him, if anything, or maybe you just simply said, look, I'll have to think about this. Ms. NOLAN. I don't remember coming to a conclusion at that point, because I remember that Mr. Klein indicated that whatever obligation there might be, it seemed to him that it would be a good judgment to clarify-if you didn't have to correct, to at least clarify-the record. That was the direction it was going to go in so you didn't have to reach a legal judgment about what might have to be done under those circumstances. So it wasn't concluded at that point. That's where we were. Senator BRYAN. I thank the Chair and apologize to my colleagues for violating the time constraints. I The CHAIRMAN. Well, no, Senator DAmato ceded to that graciously. Senator Roth. Senator ROTH. Ms. Nolan, I 'd like to draw on your expertise on ethics in a series of questions. Are you familiar with the February 22, 1993 memorandum from White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum on prohibition of White House staff contacts with independent regulatory agencies? MS. NOLAN. I am familiar with it. I'm not-I don't know it word for word 128 Senator ROTH. Did you have any role in drafting this legislation or this memorandum? Ms. NOLAN. I don't believe so, Senator Roth. I came to the White House about 3 weeks before it was issued. My guess is that it was discussed in the staff meeting. It might have been reviewed, but I didn't have any role, other than that. Senator ROTH. But it is the statement of policy as to prohibited contacts with agencies? Is that the purpose of it? Ms, NOLAN. Yes, that is correct. Senator ROTH. Now, I'd like to take you through this memorandum and have you, if you could, explain the significance of several key passages. Section A-1 concerns contacts with regulatory, investigative and procurement agencies and it states, and I quote There is generally no justification for any White House involvement in particular adjudicative or rulemaking proceedings at any agency. Therefore, as a general rule, no member of the staff should contact any agency in regard to any adjudicative matter pending before that agency. Do the Madison Guaranty criminal referrals constitute an adjudicative matter pending before an agency, either RTC or Justice Department, in your judgment? Ms. NOLAN. Senator, I should explain that I have not reviewed these particular matters, and so I don't feel I'm in a position to give an off-the-top-of-my-head judgment. I believe that Mr. Cutler testified in the House that it was his view that these contacts should have gone through the Counsel's Office consistent with the memo.