Reel

August 3, 1994 - Part 7

August 3, 1994 - Part 7
Clip: 460458_1_1
Year Shot: 1994 (Actual Year)
Audio: Yes
Video: Color
Tape Master: 10082
Original Film: 104248
HD: N/A
Location: Dirksen Senate Office Building
Timecode: -

(18:55:23) Senator DOMENICI. I understand. So what he's telling us is: "it's enough for you to know that they were about press inquiries. You don't have to know what the subject was." That's the way I read it. Now, you don't have to answer that. Mr. Klein, do you know something about these letters and the handling of the responses by Roger Altman? Mr. KLEIN. Only that I've read them, sir. That's all I know. Senator DOMENICI. You've seen both of those letters? Mr. KLEIN. I have. Senator DOMENICI. Would you agree generally, so I won't waste a lot of time, with what I've said here and with what your fellow Counsel said about these letters? Mr. KLEIN. Yes, I would. Senator DOMENICI. If you were preparing a letter, either or both Of You, for somebody in the White House that you were responsible for, and you were attempting to answer Mr. Podesta's concerns 136 about Roger Altman not telling us something, is this the kind of letter you'd write? Mr. KLEIN. Sir, again, I don't want to put myself in Mr. Altman's mind. I didn't speak to him. The information that I had, we tried to make sure that it went to Mr. Altman through Mr. Podesta. Mr. EGGLESTON, Senator Domenici, could I say one thing, sir, in the interest of completeness and 1 just offer this. That is that the letter does reference the question from Senator Bond. My recollection is that the question from Senator Bond was about criminal referrals. I just offer that for the what-it's-worth category. He references in the March 2nd letter the question from Senator Bond. He does not point out in the letter that the question related to criminal referrals, but he does reference a question that did relate to criminal referrals. Senator DOMENICI. That's more reason for him to refer to it, it seems to me, since his answer was "no" when it was asked. Is my time up? The CHAIRMAN. It is, and if you had just one follow-up, I'd certainly entertain that because we did that on this side but otherwise we'll go on to another round. Senator DOMENICI. I would also ask both of you, as competent lawyers who work in this field a lot, do you notice anything, inferential or otherwise, in either of these letters that would indicate to this Committee that more corrections are to come? Do you see anything in there that would indicate to us that you've got to fix the record some more? Mr. KLEIN. I don't see it. Obviously, the letters speak for themselves. You can assess them as well as I can. Senator DOMENICI. Let me ask again, if this Committee, under the Chairmanship of Senator Riegle, were wrapping up that February 24th hearing and got these two letters; is there anything to indicate that maybe he's got some more things to correct? To me, I would think it was over with, that there aren't any more. Mr. KLEIN. Again, I don't know. He said he had conversations with people on the Committee. I can tell you what the letter says but you can read it for yourself. Senator DOMENICI. Thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Campbell. Thank you for your patience Senator CAMPBELL. Also as my friend Senator Boxer has said, I would like to commend this Committee. I think they've tried to answer in a very forthright manner and to the best of their recollections and very openly. I know it's difficult to answer some of the variety of questions that have been asked. Some of them are reflective of the members' former professions of being criminal prosecutors. Some of them are kind of fishing expeditions, I guess, hoping you're going to run into a hook. And I personally liked Senator Dodd's questions; did you do it or didn't you do it, yes or no, And those are the kind of answers I understand very well when they're asked, but I know you have to answer a big variety of them. (18:59:12)(tape #10082 ends)