August 3, 1994 - Part 8
August 3, 1994 - Part 8
(19:10:37) Mr. EGGLESTON. Well, yes, although---certainly, yes, sir. Senator HATCH. Now, your memo points out that both Jack Ryan and Ellen Kulka are "career officials." Right? Mr. EGGLESTON. Yes, sir. Senator HATCH. That means, doesn't it, that they were not appointed by President Clinton? Mr. EGGLESTON. They were not appointed by President Clinton. I think that they got their jobs-I think that their hiring into their jobs as head of RTC-I think, sir, and you should ask someone else-but I think that they got their jobs in the RTC during the Clinton Administration but they Senator HATCH. But they were not appointed by the President? Mr. EGGLESTON. They were not appointed to the OTS by the President. I think the White House had some role in them being moved to their jobs at the RTC, sir, I believe. Senator HATCH. What it means by "career officials" is that they have job security, they can't be fired. Mr. EGGLESTON. What I meant by it is that they were long-term Government officials. That's what I meant. Senator HATCH. And you pointed out in your memo that Mr. Ryan and Ms. Kulka were career officials. Isn't the reason you did is because you wanted Mr. Ickes, and anyone else at the White House who read your memo, to understand that neither of these officials could actually be counted on to protect the interest of the White House? Isn't that basically true? Mr. EGGLESTON, Well, sir Senator HATCH. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but, I mean, basically that's what you're pointing out to them. Mr. EGGLESTON. On that issue, sir, I have to disagree. I think that they were going to decide whatever they had to decide. I don't think we were asking anybody to protect Senator HATCH. But that was the in-between-the-lines message that you as an attorney were sending, that, look, these are not people you can rely on, these are career employees. And you may have even known that Mr. Nussbaum thought that Ms. Kulka was a tough, aggressive lawyer from his private sector experience. Mr. EGGLESTON. I did know that, but I was not trying to send some message between the lines, I was just saying who they were. Senator HATCH. But you obtained that knowledge that they were career officials from Jean Hanson; right? Mr. EGGLESTON. Sir, I first obtained this information in a Legal Times article that was written about Ms, Kulka in January of 1094. There was a big story about how she had gotten her job and that was the first time I really learned about who Ms. Kulka was and who Mr. Ryan was, There was a Legal Times of Washington story in January. Senator 14ATCH I notice my time is up. I have two more ques- tions Mr. Chairman. I have two more questions that would tie this down, but I The CHAIRMAN. Pardon? Senator HATCH. I notice my time is up but I have two more questions that would tie this down, The CHAIRMAN. How long do you think they'll take, Senator Hatch? 142 Senator HATCH. I hope not much more than a minute, minute and a half. The CHAIRMAN. Why don't you take them, then, Senator HATCH. I think it might be good to do that. You next point out in your memo that if the person soon to be nominated were to recuse himself from the Madison Guaranty matter, then Mr. Ryan and Ms. Kulka would remain in charge; right? Mr. EGGLESTON. Yes, sir. Senator HATCH. And your purpose in making that point, again, seems to me would be to highlight that the White House might. want to address the issue of recusal with any potential nominee of the CEO of the RTC before naming that person as CEO; right? Mr. EGGLESTON. Sir Senator HATCH. Because you don't want to get into that again., Mr. EGGLESTON. Sir, I assumed that whoever came up who was a Presidential appointee was going to be asked by the Senate to recuse themselves from that matter. That's actually what I'm con. veying here. I thought whoever got nominated by the President would be forced to recuse themselves so that the decision would remain with Ms. Kulka and Mr. Ryan. That's actually what I thought was going to happen. Since we haven't nominated somebody, it hadn't happened. Senator HATCH. You pointed out that your February 28th memo is a revised version. Can you tell me how it differs-in what respect it differs from the original version and did Mr. Ickes review the original version and ask you to make changes and, if so, what changes? Mr. EGGLESTON. I was asked this earlier, and I'm pretty vague on this Senator DODD. Mr. Chairman, I interrupt. I think this is one area that, I think, does get into the scope question. I would just ask the Chair Senator HATCH. It does? Just let me limit it to the last part, then. Mr. EGGLESTON. It's not going to get into the scope because I don't remember the answer, I don't remember. I think that-my best recollection, which may not be accurate, is that Mr. Ickes looked at it, had a few more questions and asked me to add some stuff I don't remember what he asked me to add, and 1 don't have a copy of the unrevised version. I've looked in my files and I don't have them. Senator HATCH. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Senator Moseley-Braun. Senator MOSELEY-BRAUN. Thank you, Mr, Chairman. To this panel, I must say we were very fortunate to have so forthright a panel, given the fact that we were here so late last night and so I want to add my thanks and congratulations to the members of this panel for the testimony that you've given this afternoon. I'd like to pick up where Senator Roth left off. And actually put for the record, because I don't know, Mr. Chairman, if it was actually received for the record, the ethics memoranda issued by the Counsel for the President, Mr. Nussbaum-well, several of them, actually, that were issued-I'd like to have them received for the record and by that, I mean the February 22nd ethics memo, the 143 March 9 ethics, memo, the May 4th ethics memo and the follow-up of July 2.