August 4, 1994 - Part 9
August 4, 1994 - Part 9
(18:15:04) Senator FAIRCLOTH. As you may be aware, Roger Altman testified before us Tuesday and one of the items discussed was his diary, as he has called it, or a scrapbook of historical significance. After a meeting with Maggie Williams, Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff, on January 11th, Mr. Altman wrote that he had gotten the impression the White House was actively trying to negotiate officials at the Justice Department the scope and jurisdiction of what a Special Counsel could look into. This, of course, was prior to the appointment of the Special Counsel. The point being that after months of opposing the appointment of a Special Counsel, the Clintons were finally about to succumb to the growing political pressure and to ask the Attorney General to appoint a Special Counsel, but not until they first tried to limit what he could look into. Mr. Fiske, did you-Mr. Lindsey rather., did you talk with Robert Fiske prior to his appointment as Special Counsel? Mr. LINDSEY. No, sir. Senator FAIRCLOTH, Did you talk with Bernard Nussbaum about Mr. Fiske before his appointment as Special Counsel? Mr. LINDSEY. I don't believe so. I think I had heard that Mr. Fiske's name had been mentioned as a possible candidate, but I don't believe Senator FAIRCLOTH. This is an important question: Did you talk with Bernard Nussbaum about Robert Fiske prior to his appointment as Special Counsel? Mr. LINDSEY. Again, I think I had heard that Mr. Fiske's name was one of the names being mentioned, Bernie and I may have talked about that, but we didn't talk in any detail about it, it was simply a discussion about the newspaper accounts. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Did you talk with anyone at the Justice Department concerning jurisdiction or scope of the Special Counsel? Mr. LINDSEY. No, sir, I did not and I do not know of anyone in the White House who did. Senator FAIRCLOTH. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Sarbanes, do I understand (18:17:02)(tape #10093 ends) Senator SARBANES. I think Senator Murray has been here throughout and The CHAIRMAN. She's prepared to have you go next. Senator MURRAY. I'm really used to going last. Senator SARBANES. Fin happy to defer to you. Senator MURRAY. OK, that's fine. I'm ready. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murray. Senator MURRAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you, Senator Sarbanes. 398 Welcome, gentlemen. I sit way over here, I generally go last, usually every question has been asked, but in my State we believe In conserving resources, so I don't like to rehash what we've already gone through. If for a minute you will indulge me, I want to review what I think I know after 5 days here. It seems to me that the RTC handed down nine criminal referrals on Madison Guaranty, Apparently the President and the First Lady were named as possible witnesses so this information which was perceived by some as newsworthy was leaked from the RTC to the press. That apparently is no Surprise to anybody either. Reporters started asking questions. They wanted responses and more information, and they started calling the RTC, the Department of Treasury and the White House. So because of those press inquiries, officials from those agencies and the White House met to discuss how to deal with those press inquiries. I think I'm right so far. Now because of all of those meetings that occurred as a result of press inquiries, charges are now being made that those meetings were illegal or unethical or im proper. And, as a result of that, we have piled through tons of depositions and paperwork, 5 days of hearings and a lot of questions. Am I right in all of that? Mr. STEPHANOPOULOS. Basically. Senator MURRAY. Well, I do believe that it would have been better if a lot of those meetings hadn't taken place, but I also think that it's unfair that when the press knows something and, hence, the American people and Senate staff know it, there should be a process in place so that those who are affected by that information should also have it. My question is: How do we set up a system so that contacts can be made between Government agencies so that people in Government know what everybody else knows? Maybe Mr. Stephanopoulos can address this. Mr. STEPHANOPOULOS. Sure, I'd be happy. I think that Mr. Cutler did testify or is planning on testifying before this Committee and I think he's laid out appropriate guidelines for making sure you contact Counsel's Office on that. But I think that the basic dynamic point that is also right. There was an awful lot of information flying out of the RTC and other places that we weren't aware of but there were a number of reporters and other organizations were and that put us at something of a disadvantage but I think it should be done properly and Mr. Cutler has laid out proper guidelines. Senator MURRAY. He does testify tomorrow, and I will be listening to his testimony, because I hope we learn some lessons from this in order to handle it right in the future. There will be times in the future for some President down the road who may have to deal with the same kind of thing and I don't think it's fair for them to be at a disadvantage. The other question we have spent a great deal of time on here is the question of recusals and I want to get to what I think is the problem there. Mr. Stephanopoulos, do you know Ellen Kulka? Mr. STEPHANOPOULOS. No, I do not.