August 4, 1994 - Part 2
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:45:13) Ms. WILLIAMS. Well, Senator, first of all, let me say that I do not actually recall saying that, but it would not be inconsistent for me to say to anyone that there are matters that belong appropriately so I believe to the personal Counsel of the Clinton's. 300 I was trying to make sure, in my own mind, making a distinction between what rightfully belonged with the personal lawyer and what was an institutional matter. So I believed if we were talking about waiving of the statute that was not my business, that was the business of Mr. Kendall' Senator FAIRCLOTH. In your everyday course of duties as Chief of Staff to the First Lady, did you have contacts with Mr. Kendall, the Clinton's personal lawyer? Ms. WILLIAMS. Not in my everyday work. There would be sometimes, however, when Mrs. Clinton could not remember a fact about Whitewater that she would say, either call Mr. Kendall or I will call Mr. Kendall and try and get an an- swer. Senator FAIRCLOTH. What was the reaction of the other White House officials at the meeting, to your suggestion that President Clinton's personal lawyer be briefed on the operation of the statute of limitations in the Madison case? What did they think when you said that? Ms. WILLIAMS. Once again, sir, it is difficult for me to talk about their reactions since I do not even remember saying that. What I have tried to do is to volunteer to you that it would not be inconsistent of me to have said that. I was not paying any attention to any reaction because I do not recall myself saying that specifically. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. Kendall, the Private Counsel to the President, concerning the possibility of obtaining a briefing by the RTC on the operation of the statute of limitations in the pending Madison case? Ms. WILLIAMS. No, sir, to the best of my recollection, I did not. Senator FAIRCLOTH. That is all, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Senator Bryan. OPENING COMMENTS OF SENATOR BRYAN Senator BRYAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McLarty, Ms. Williams, it is nice to have you with us this morning. Mr. McLarty, I want to focus attention in my line of questions dealing with the testimony of Mr. Altman on the 24th, before this Committee. I continue to be very, very troubled by that testimony and yesterday we had testimony before this Committee by two gentlemen that I think are extremely able, whose instincts and judgments think were sound, and who I think were highly credible. Mr. Eggleston told us that on the day before the hearing, he was sufficiently concerned about how Mr. Altman's testimony was to be presented that he actually called Ms. Hanson to discuss, you know) the recusal issue there which had been the subject of the meeting on the 2nd of February. Mr. Eggleston further told us that he was assigned to be in attendance at the time of the hearing, and that after Mr. Altman testified in response to a line of questions from Senator Gramm, Senator Bond and Senator Domenici, that he was sufficiently concerned that he left the hearing, as I understood it, placed a cellular 301 call to the White House to in effect say I am concerned about that testimony, I am led to believe that thereafter, either he or others made contact with Mr. Podesta who was then in chain of command. For whatever reason, and this is the question that I want to ask you in a moment, that was not addressed properly, in my judgment, there were a series of letters, as you know, that flowed from, I think, March 2nd to March 3rd to March 11th and there was one other letter. Share with me what the organizational structure was in the White House because you had two fine gentlemen who I think immediately saw the problem, attempted, to the best of their ability, to alert the White House that this needed to be addressed, and I guess, to use a football metaphor, somebody fumbled the ball. Mr. MCLARTY. Senator Bryan, I think your assessment of Mr. Eggleston and Mr. Podesta and others is a correct one. The matter was brought to the White House's attention to Mr. Podesta and I believe Mr. Ickes, who made me aware of it sometime shortly after Mr. Altman's testimony. And my direction was that we should work with Treasury to make certain that Deputy Secretary Altman's testimony was complete, I would say, Senator, that Treasury testimony, Mr. Altman's testimony per se, he and his staff should take the lead in terms of that testimony. Mr. Podesta had worked with the Treasury Department regarding this particular hearing, at the request of Mr. Griffin, who is responsible for our legislative affairs, and me. This hearing was a regularly scheduled hearing, as I understood it, and covered a very wide scope in its meeting. Senator BRYAN. Mr. McLarty, when did you first become aware that there was, quote, "a potential problem," those are my words, I do not think that is the testimony precisely, but that clearly is the import of the testimony by Mr. Eggleston and Mr. Klein, when did you first become aware that there may be a problem with that testimony?