Advanced Search
August 4, 1994 - Part 5
(13:55:30) What I can say is there is no evidence to suggest that anyone in the White House has done anything to influence the RTC's decision process and I think career RTC people have said the same thing under testimony-under oath. The CHAIRMAN, Thank you. Senator Dodd. Senator DODD . Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This will be very, very brief. I know we need to move on. Just a couple of observations. One, our colleague from Delaware, Senator Roth, in talking about "de facto recusal" and de jure, I guess, recusal I think tried to use your recusal, Mr. McLarty, as an example where your former employment with ARCO and your status there and then the company's involvement with some issues to be forwarded compared that to Mr. Altman's decision to recuse as if somehow they were on some sort of equal footing. I think the record needs to reflect that Mr. Altman, whatever other complaints people may have, had no financial interest in Madison Guaranty or any of the interests that were going to come before the RTC. His decision to recuse, ultimately I guess, was based more on what he felt may have been a personal relationship with the President and Mrs. Clinton than anything else. I just didn't want those two examples to be left out there as comparables. That's more of a statement than a question. But, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a couple of observations, if I could, because I think the record ought to reflect this. We've seen a strong indication of this Administration's willingness to be coop- erative. I know of no other example on inquiries by the U.S. Senate where the Chief of Staff of the President of the United States and the Chief of Staff of the First Lady have come before a Senate Committee-now there are historians around here who may correct me but as far as I know that is unprecedented-voluntarily to come forward and to talk about these matters. The normal course is to fight that every step of the way. We've seen that experience in the past and for many people who may be watching these procedures or listening to them who may not be familiar of the historical context, the fact that Mr, McLarty and MS. Williams are here today voluntarily to answer questions, and I think very directly and very candidly of this Committee, is some- thing I hope the Committee will take note of as an unprecedented step. And secondly The CHAIRMAN. Well, Senator Dodd, shouldn't it be noted, too, they're here because the President told them to come up here and, respond to these questions? Senator DODD. Which as well the President deserves credit for He asked them to come here rather than fighting it all the way and hiring six law firms to try to come up with Constitutional arguments why you don't have to appear here. We've seen that in past. 349 Secondly, Mr. McLarty, I want to pay a particular compliment to you as a former Chief of Staff. This group of people we had before us yesterday was about as fine a group and I'd say the same for Ms. Williams as well, but and I think you heard that from almost every Member here. They answered directly, and honestly took steps of their own volition in a number of instances in which others, I think, would be the first to tell you today they wish they had in a couple of other instances. I think that's a compliment to you in putting together a first- class team of people. These are people's faces the American public never get to see. They probably don't remember their names today, who they were, but they're down there every day working very hard. I think they reflected well on the President and on the people around him who put that staff together and I want the record to reflect that as well. Last, and it's a question for you. In his testimony before the House of Representatives, Lloyd Cutler noted that while various Treasury-White House contacts violated no ethical standards in his judgment, it would have been better if some of the contacts had never occurred. He noted- and in fact-I didn't know he used these words and I used them because my colleague from Utah has repeated them but-when I consider I used the word "sloppy"--there were too many meetings, too many people milling around, that created some of these difficulties. So instead of going back over that, I wonder if you might share with this Committee what steps have been taken at the White House within this Administration as a result of what's happened here, to minimize this from happening again? Just from an administrative standpoint, that would avoid the kind of proliferation of meetings and people being involved in something beyond their scope of responsibility, if you will.
Bears Win Pro Title - Giants vs. Chicago Bears
The New York Football Giants invade Chicago loaded for Bear as they take on the Western Champs for the title. The New Yorkers make it hot for the Bears in the first quarter despite the freezing temperatures. The Giants score first on a recovered fumble, then the tide turn dramatically as an interception by Bear Larry Morris leads to a Chicago touchdown. The Giants chalk up a field goal but then the Bears come back with another interception that leads up to the winning score. Chicago 14, New York 10. Chicago, Illinois Soldier Field in Chicago, football fans in the seats and the marching band on the field. LSOH - Football fans in the seating areas. MOHS - Bill Wade carries the ball for Chicago, is tackled and he fumbles the ball, the ball is recovered by the Giants. MLS - YA Tittle quarterback for the Giants passes the ball, Joe Morrison catches the ball and carries it for 11-yards. MSOH - YA passes the ball to Frank Gifford and it is caught and taken in for a touchdown. MSOH - Tittle passes the ball right into the hands of Larry (Johnny) Morris, a Bear. MSOH - Bill Wade goes over and ties up the football game, 7 to 7. MS - Tittle passes the ball it is intercepted by a Bear. MS - Bill Wade passes the ball to Mike Ditka and it is caught. A few plays later Bill Wade carries the ball over himself and win the world championship, 14 to 10
August 4, 1994 - Part 5
(14:00:28) Mr. McLARTY. Senator, first, thank you for your kind words and not only about me but more importantly about the dedicated men and women who serve in this White House. And while 1 appreciate your generous comments about putting the staff together, I really would be remiss if I did not underscore that they reflect the President, the Vice President's input and their values in the White House makeup. Second, to respond to your question, I made almost an identical comment that, particularly with the benefit of hindsight, some things should have been done differently and Mr. Cutler points that out in his report and outlines really three steps: First, that any contacts relating to a particular law enforcement investigation should be initiated with White House Counsel approval. And as I said in my opening statement, even better, on a Counsel-to-Counsel basis which is what he recommends. And I would note that many of the contacts that are being discussed today had White House Counsel either approval or involvement or were handled on a Counsel-to-Counsel basis, but still there were too many contacts. And third, Mr. Cutler points out that lie and his colleagues in the White House Counsel's Office are drafting rules of conduct for the future concerning contacts between the Office of the White House Counsel and the Executive Branch agencies with law enforcement functions. The first two are already implemented, the third is in process and will be implemented shortly. 350 Senator DODD. I commend you for that and that's the kind of response and action
August 4, 1994 - Part 6
(14:10:46) I'm trying to think about why he would perhaps have imputed more meaning to the extent that he felt, quote, "whatever the pressure was that caused him to change his thinking," if he might have imputed to your comment, which was an offhand comment as you describe. it, a meaning beyond what you intended but what he might in his mind have attached to it. Do you understand what I'm saying? MS. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir, and Senator Riegle, I really believe that you are trying to understand this, and I really want to help you understand this, but I have to tell you, I do not know what was in Mr. Altman's mind. The CHAIRMAN. No, I understand. No, I'm not asking you to try to guess at that. I'm trying to, in my own mind, think about how two people with good intentions in the same meeting could have events unfold and come away with perhaps very different feelings about it. Ms. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You see what I'm saying? Ms. WILLIAMS. I absolutely see what you're saying. The CHAIRMAN. Committee stands in recess until 3:15. (14:11:57) [Recess.] (14:12:00) Hearing hosts KEN BODE and NINA TOTENBERG talk to Representative PETER KING of the House Banking Committee and close out morning's coverage (14:24:01) WETA logo, PBS funding credits
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:55:42) He heard the testimony and he was sufficiently concerned about it. He had enough of those facts in his mind that the first moment that he had, he got up, went out into the hallway, this is his testi- mony, got on his mobile phone to call the White House, to say we have got a problem here, or whatever words he used, that the testi- mony was not complete and therefore presumably would be mis- leading because it was not full and complete. I do not know if you do that all the time or not. That sounds to me like a rather unusual procedure. Does that happen a lot? Mr. McLARTY. You mean in terms of the White House The CHAIRMAN. Having somebody from the Legal Counsel's Office coming to a hearing to listen and, in turn, have an immediate re- sponse capability if a problem of this sort arises? Mr. McLARTY. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think it would not be un- usual for someone from the White House to be in attendance at a Congressional hearing. That would not be an unusual situation. The CHAIRMAN. Well let me press you on that. I am talking about the Legal Counsel's Office. He was not up there at the table testifying. Ile was not part of Altman's team. They were up in the front row and so forth. He was somewhere back in the audience. Just as a matter of record, does the Legal Counsel's Office in the course of a week or a month of hearings, would they be up here all the time, some of the time, or on rare occasion? Mr. McLARTY. I really, Mr. Chairman, would think on some occa- sions but certainly not all of the time. The CHAIRMAN. It strikes me that it would be unusual for that to happen, It might happen on occasion, but I have to impute from 304 this that there was enough concern and sensitivity about this hearing that somebody from the Counsel's Office was detailed to be here in that hearing as a watchbird and as somebody to listen and be able to get back in a hurry. Isn't that a fair conclusion to draw from this? Mr. McLARTY. Well, Mr. Chairman, I understand your reasoning. This hearing, as I understood it or understand it, was on the RTC matters. I think it is understandable why the White House Counsel's office would be involved in that particular matter. And Mr. Eggleston has already given testimony to your Committee, as Senator Bryan and others have commented. The CHAIRMAN. I guess one of the things we will have to try to pin down is why when the alert went out Mr. Eggleston was here, did his job, and realized the testimony was not sufficient. He went:' out into the hallway. He phoned Mr. Podesta, and that set in motion a whole chain of events. The one event that did not get triggered was somebody coming to us promptly and saying: By the way, you just got something less than full and accurate testimony. So then what happens is that quite a long period of time ensues. We get four clarifying letters that come on different dates thereafter, none of which, as it turns out, are complete and full. In fact, it was not until these hearings took place that we got in a sense a full accounting insofar as one can be reconstructed, of the number of contacts and activities that would fit within the scope of the questions that were asked that day. That is troubling. I think it is troubling as a system, as a work system. I would hope that if an alert goes out like that and goes back to the White House that there would at least be two channels that it then goes down. One channel would be to say that within 24 hours we want that testimony corrected fully in every degree, and we want to make sure that that happens. I want somebody to come back-this is a hypothetical person in charge in the White House saying this, the Chief of Staff or somebody designated by you-and that I want to know that we are not going to leave a situation like that sort of hanging out there for days, or weeks, or in this case as it
August 4, 1994 - Part 6
(14:00:01)(tape #10091 begins) what steps have been taken at the White House within this Administration as a result of what's happened here, to minimize this from happening again? Just from an administrative standpoint, that would avoid the kind of proliferation of meetings and people being involved in something beyond their scope of responsibility, if you will. (14:00:28) Mr. McLARTY. Senator, first, thank you for your kind words and not only about me but more importantly about the dedicated men and women who serve in this White House. And while 1 appreciate your generous comments about putting the staff together, I really would be remiss if I did not underscore that they reflect the President, the Vice President's input and their values in the White House makeup. Second, to respond to your question, I made almost an identical comment that, particularly with the benefit of hindsight, some things should have been done differently and Mr. Cutler points that out in his report and outlines really three steps: First, that any contacts relating to a particular law enforcement investigation should be initiated with White House Counsel approval. And as I said in my opening statement, even better, on a Counsel-to-Counsel basis which is what he recommends. And I would note that many of the contacts that are being discussed today had White House Counsel either approval or involvement or were handled on a Counsel-to-Counsel basis, but still there were too many contacts. And third, Mr. Cutler points out that lie and his colleagues in the White House Counsel's Office are drafting rules of conduct for the future concerning contacts between the Office of the White House Counsel and the Executive Branch agencies with law enforcement functions. The first two are already implemented, the third is in process and will be implemented shortly. 350 Senator DODD. I commend you for that and that's the kind of response and action (14:02:01)(tape #10090 ends) that I'm pleased to see and undertaken of Your own initiative. It should be noted of course that you said 80 in your opening statement. As I mentioned last week, we've used a lot of language and acronyms and dates and names that could probably cause most people's eyes to glaze over. Except for the subject matter we're talking about, and the notion that this was an all-consuming set of events because that's what we're paying attention to here, as you point out in your testimony, goes far beyond that. From the end of September, September 29 to roughly March 3 or 4, 1994, is the window we're talking about. We passed the North American Free Trade Agreement, obtained a GATT agreement, and the President traveled a number of places worldwide. There's a whole list of things that you included in your testimony that involved-I know because I was involved in a number of these things--countless hours, countless meetings and this did not cause a paralyzation of activity at all. Quite to the contrary. A lot of other things were going on and I think that should be noted as well.. With that I thank both of you for being here today and I commend you on your testimony. Mr. McLARTY. Senator, thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Let me just indicate, I've talked to the Senators on this side and I have not received any indication from anybody that has any further questions right now. Is that correct, Senator Sasser? Senator SASSER. Well, Mr. Chairman, to paraphrase our own colleague, Stu Udall, every question has been asked of this panel that needs to be asked. I'm just not sure that everybody's asked it yet. [Laughter.] Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Chairman Senator SASSER. But frankly, I don't have any further questions. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Let me also say it will be my intention, once we finish with this panel which I hope we can do shortly, we'll take roughly a half an hour break because we know we've got two other panels today and we want to get through both of those, so that we can let people get a bite of lunch. We'll start roughly a half an hour after we recess. So let's finish up with this panel now. Senator Bond. Senator BOND. Just a couple of quick questions and I'll try to be brief. Mr. McLarty, when you are going to do an interview, show or major appearance, do you normally have somebody prepare a briefing memo for you on positions that the White House has taken or that you are taking? Do you have a memo prepared for you? Mr. McLARTY. Senator, usually it is not in written form. It really depends on the type of interview. Usually the preparation is rather brief and, frankly, reflects a discussion with two or three people that are involved in topical areas that the interview will probably focus on. Usually there's-usually there's nothing written, prepared. Senator BOND. Is there anybody generally responsible for that, preparing you on those interviews? Mr. McLARTY. It really depends on the type of interview and the topics and what is topical at the time. If it's going to be on foreign 351 policy, the briefing would normally come from the NSC. If it's on economic matters, it would come from the National Economic Counsel personnel.
Cabin cruiser
Misc. Antelope - (African)
Misc. Antelope - (African)
Orange Bowl: Nebraska 13, Auburn 7
Nebraska goes into the Orange Bowl as the under-dog but with the help of a 85 yard touchdown run by Dennis Claridge in the first minute and 13 seconds of play, the Cornhuskers take charge. Auburn scores once in the 3rd quarter but it's too little - too late. Miami, Florida Miami's Orange Bowl, crowded stadium, marching band on the field with a huge American Flag. OHS - Sports fans packed the stadium. MSOH - Dennis Claridge runs 68 yards with the ball and he scores a touchdown. MLS - Nebraska punts the ball and it received by George Rose and he fumbles and it is recovered by Nebraska. In the third quarter Auburn gets rolling and passes to Bucky Wade for 28 yards.
Cotton Bowl: Texas 28, Navy 6
University of Texas manager to contain Navy ace Roger Staubach at critical points as Duke Carlisle quarterbacks the Longhorns to glory. He throws two touchdown passes to Phil Harris. One of the Carlisle pass plays is 58 yards and the other 63 yards. Navy Ace, Staubach, completes 21 of 31 passes to no avail, though he does score the only Navy touchdown. Dallas, Texas At Dallas, Texas out side shot of the Cotton Bowl Stadium. The word A R M Y is spelled out on the football field by the army marching band. MS - News Reel cameras and sports crowd the top tier of the stadium. MS - Navy has the ball and Duke Carlisle carries the ball and lays the ground work for his first touchdown. MS - Carlisle unleashes a bomb and shakes the Navy, he throws the ball it is caught by Phil Harris and he runs 58 yards a scores a touchdown. MS - Carlisle and Harris to team up again, Carlisle passes, Harris catches the ball and takes it home for another touchdown. Tommy Ford has the ball and once again takes it up close to the goal line, Texas is on a roll. MS - Finally Navy has the ball, Roger passes it and its caught. On the next play Roger sees no one open so he takes the ball over the goal scoring 6 points. Texas wins 28 to Navy 6.
Sugar Bowl: Alabama 12, Mississippi 7
There's a sweet football on tap at the Sugar Bowl in a game that becomes "The Case of the Educated Toe". Alabama's Tim Davis kicks four field goals to score all of Alabama's 12 points. Again this is a game where the losing team, Mississippi, manages to squeeze out a score in the final quarter to avoid a whitewash. New Orleans, Louisiana Sugar Bowl has 80-thousand football fans cheering on their teams. MLS - Alabama's Tim Davis kicks a field goal. MOHS - Mississippi fumbles and Butch Henry recovers for Alabama. MOHS - Tim Davis kicks the ball 48-yards for a field goal the longest in any Bowl Game history.
N.Y. Blaze Blacks Out Waterfront
A roaring fire casts a dark blanket over mid-town Manhattan as a blaze engulfs a waterfront pier. Six fireboats and scores of fire engines fight the blaze for an hour before bringing it under control. The pier was due for demolition anyway, so the fire just rang down the curtain early on one of New York's landmarks. Manhattan, New York, NY Fire men, hoses and a building burning. CUS - Top of the building burning. MS - Fire Tug Boat with all its hoses turned on and aimed at the pie, it's an old railroad terminal that has turned out to be a 5 alarm fire. CUS - Through the smoke you can see a fire man holding a hose, other firemen around him. MS - Three firemen standing on a smoke filled roof of a building, you can see the fire ladder leading to the roof.
Winter Olympics Preview
Scores of nations are in the frenzy of last-minute preparations for the opening of the Winter Olympics games in Austria. Germany is picking her ski-jumping team in final tests at Oberstdorf and they jump as far as 252 feet. There will be thrills at the Olympics and that's not jumping at conclusions. Oberstdorf, Germany Skiers getting in condition at Oberstdorf for the up-coming Olympics. MS - One of the skiers take on the course of long jumping and ends up sliding on his belly. MS - Another skier come along and jumps and has a successful jump.
August 4, 1994 - Part 6
(14:05:23) Senator BOND. Do you have any recollection who would have prepared you for that CNN interview show which I have referred to in the last line of questioning, where you talked about Mr. Altman's position? Do you know who would have done it or who did it? Mr. MCLARTY. Senator, as I recall it, that was a relatively farranging interview, as many are, and I think I received briefings from several people. Perhaps someone from the White House Counsel's Office would have briefed me on the matter that you are speaking of I honestly don't recall the briefing. As I remember, it was a busy time and I didn't spend a lot of time getting briefed before that interview. Senator BOND. And I can understand that. I'm trying to find out who did it because the concern I have is, there was much discussion in the White House about the inaccuracy of Mr. Altman's testimony, but that seems to be as far as it got. There was talk about it. I personally received a telephone call on March 2nd from Mr. Altman, not because he had discovered that the testimony was in error, his first words to me were The Washington Post is going to publish this story the next day, and I have the sinking feeling that I found out only because it was going to be in the newspaper the next day. That's why I'm trying to find out who should have or would have been in a position to brief you, to tell you why the testimony by Altman was not correct or why you were not given the information that the recusal should have been discussed. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time. The CHAIRMAN. I right. Let me just indicate I've been informed that the Senate is about to start four back-to-back votes starting at 2:10. The first one will run for 20 minutes; the next three, 5 minutes each. That will take us into the range, by the time they announce those votes and so forth, to a little bit after 3:00. So I'm going to, in a moment, discharge these witnesses and indicate that we'll start with our next panel. We'll recess the Committee as well. We'll start our next panel at 3:15, so those witnesses can be on notice. I want to say to these two witnesses, we appreciate, very much, your testimony. I have one other question that I want to put to Ms. Williams before this vote starts. I was listening very carefully to everything that's been said, not just by the two of you but by all of our witnesses, and I'm trying to make sense out of this obvious contradiction between Mr. Altman, his diary, what he bases that on and the testimony that we've gotten here from you today, and also very much on the recusal issue. What I'm wondering is this: I'm looking for how, how could that plausibly be, how could that ever be reconciled? I'm wondering, Ms. Williams, you came to the meeting late, the meeting that we're talking about on February 2nd? Ms. WILLIAMS. That's correct sir. The CHAIRMAN. You arrived late at the meeting. So anything that went on in the meeting before you got there, you are obviously not going to know about because you weren't there; isn't that fair to say? Ms. WILLIAMS. That would be fair to say, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. So whatever lie might have taken away from that meeting that occurred before you arrived would be between the other participants in the meeting and him and that would be outside the scope of your knowledge; wouldn't that be fair to say? Ms. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. That would be fair to say. The CHAIRMAN. OK. Also, when you came in, you weren't prepared or briefed or ready to discuss recusal, as I understand your testimony today, in any formal fashion. The issue came up and you gave a point of view, essentially off the top of your head; would that--I don't say that disrespectfully, but would that be a fair way to characterize it? Ms, WILLIAMS. Very much off the top of my head. The CHAIRMAN. In fact, Mr. Nussbaum, you felt, in the meeting was sort of dismissive of your point of view. You also said that today, did you not? Ms. WILLIAMS. I believe I mentioned that. The CHAIRMAN. I thought I heard that. In any case, I'm wondering, just to try to reconcile these two accounts if, in Mr. Altman's mind, if he's in there and he's already gotten a dose of negative feedback on his decision to recuse himself-I'm just theorizing now-if, when you offered your opinion, which was a spontaneous opinion that you offered at that particular time, if he might have construed your opinion to be one either coming-you have two roles in the White House, you work for the President, you work for the First Lady-whether Altman, in his frame of mind, might have thought that whatever opinion you were giving was not just your opinion, but maybe you were giving an opinion that might have been a reflection of either the President's or the First Lady's.
Footprints In The Cement Of Time
For the first time in 30 years a child movie star is immortalized at Grauman's Chinese Theatre, a Hollywood landmark. The teen-ager honored is Hayley Mills, (daughter of British actor, John Mills), who has scored her latest hit in the film version of "The Chalk Garden". Now her hand and footprints are in the sidewalk in front of the famous theatre. Hollywood, California Out side Graumann's Chinese Theatre it is jammed packed with fans of Haley Mills. MS - A young Haley Mills is introduced to the outside audience. MCUS - Haley Mills is on her knees and she's placing her hands in wet cement in front of Graumann's Theatre. CUS - Fans standing behind the ropes. MCUS - Haley is held by her hands as she steps into the wet cement leaving her footprints.
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:00:01)(tape #10098 begins) Ms. WILLIAMS. You would have to ask Mr. Altman why he called me. Senator GRAMM. Why do you think he called you? Ms. WILLIAMS. One, Mr. Altman and I talked frequently about Health Care, all the time, in fact. In fact, one of the things that I did both as an Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the First Lady is I did a lot of meeting facilitation. I would try and get Senator GRAMM. Well, but he says in his diary that he had talked to you about Whitewater. He has in quotes that you had told him, "that the First Lady was paralyzed by it." (10:00:44) Ms. WILLIAMS. Senator Gramm, you must let me take one ques- tion at a time. If you want me to go back and talk about the diary, then I am happy to do so. If you want me to finish this one question Senator GRAMM. My one problem is that my light is about to turn red and I am not going to get back to ask a question for 2 hours. You understand that. Ms. WILLIAMS. I understand that, but my problem is I have to tell you what I know. The CHAIRMAN. We will give you a chance, when he finishes, to answer both questions. Senator GRAMM. If, on my time, you will go back and try to tell me why you think he, of all the people he could have called, why he would call the Chief of Staff of the First Lady to set up this meeting for him to come over and say, I am not taking myself out of the investigation of Madison? Ms. WILLIAMS. First of all, let me say that I am very uncomfortable speculating about why Mr, Altman called me, because it will only be speculation. But I will say that I talk to Mr. Altman regularly in the course, of Health Care. I will say that I am known to be a person who puts people together to facilitate meetings. I would also say that I have instant access to Mr. Ickes, Mr. Stephanopoulos, and also people in the Counsel's Office. 285 So I think it might have been as a matter of convenience kind of one- stop shopping, since this is what I had done (10:02:10)(tape #10087 ends) during my work on Health Care. In the second question what about the diaries? Senator GRAMM. Well, I was simply, in the second question, pointing out that you had had previous contact with Mr. Altman. He had referred in his diaries to Whitewater and had put in parentheses, as if it were a quote from you, about the First Lady being paralyzed by the Whitewater matter. Did that have anything to do with Mr. Altman wanting to deliver what at least he perceived that the White House would view as great and glorious news, I that he was not taking himself out of this investigation? Ms. WILLIAMS. Well, first of all, you start, in my view, from the wrong premise, You start from the premise that I had conversations with Mr. Altman about Whitewater. Now, his diary may say that, but my testimony to you today is that I do not have recollections of those conversations, so I cannot even start from that premise. The CHAIRMAN. Your time is up here, and we can come back to this in another round. I do not know if you had a chance to see those diary entries, but have you? Because I want you to have them if you are going to be asked questions about them. Ms. WILLIAMS. They have been read to me, and I understand essentially what they say. The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Thank you. Senator Dodd. OPENING COMMENTS OF SENATOR DODD Senator DODD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, Ms. Williams, I think your testimony has been excellent to this point and I would like to bring up one point immediately, because we had some testimony yesterday from one of the members of the Counsel's Office about the length of the February 3 meeting, and someone can check the record for me, but my recollection of less than 24 hours ago is that one of the attorneys said the meeting lasted something like 10 seconds. I do not know whether they were engaging in a little hyperbole to create the impression it was brief. You said no one sat down. That certainly gives me the impression that this was not a meeting of any length at all. Normally, people sit a little bit, So that meeting lasted how long, roughly in your mind, 10-we heard 10 seconds, you said 10 minutes. Obviously, someone is going to make a lot of this, I promise you. We might as well get to it right away, and it sounds to me like you are both probably within the ball park, It was a brief meeting? Ms. WILLIAMS. Brief would be a correct characterization of it. Senator DODD. No one sat down? MS. WILLIAMS. No one sat down. Senator DODD. You do not recall any conversation per se about it? Ms. WILLIAMS. No, I do not. 286 Senator DODD. OK, You clearly recall Mr. Altman calling you to set up that meeting? MS. WILLIAMS. I do recall that, Senator DODD. Mr. Altman says that he believed he called Mr. Ickes. However, I think he also said he could easily be wrong about that, in fairness to him here today. Although he believes he called Mr. Ickes, we can ask Mr. Ickes and I think probably close the loop on that this afternoon.
Berlin Wall Is Sealed Once More
The Berlin Wall is sealed once more as the 17 day pass agreement ends. Westerners say their last goodbyes to East German relatives before returning to free Berlin. During the period nearly a million and a quarter passes were issued to West Berlin residents. Not surprisingly, there wasn't one who decided to defect to Communism. East and West Berlin, Germany Camera pans the Berlin Wall made of bricks and cement and in back of that bar wire. MCUS - A family reunited hugging on the other side of the Berlin Wall. MS - You see the top of the barb wire wall with throngs to get on the other side to see family members in East Berlin. MS - People walking through the opening of the wall from West to East Berlin. MCUS - Someone on the East side of the wall is replacing the barrier to keep the West Berliners out. MS - West Berliners walking next to the Berlin Wall, the father is holding the child in his arms as he walks with his wife.
Roll Out The Barrels
They are jumping for joy at a resort in the Catskills as 20 high-flying speedsters compete in the 14th annual barrel jump. The test draws the crowds to Grossinger's and they see Kenneth LeBel defend his title successfully. Grossinger, New York, Catskill Mts. In the Catskill Mountains a ice skaters are competing in Ice Skating World Jumping Barrel Championships. MS - The first jumper makes a jump over all the barrels. CUS - Spectators are applauding his efforts. MCUS - One of the officials just laid down a 16th barrel. MCUS - Two of the jumpers fall short of the 16th barrel. MCUS - Man from Lake Placid, New York skates and clears all 16 barrels. He is the only one who cleared the barrels and he takes home the trophy as Champion for another year. Winner holding up his arms and the trophy is being awarded by pretty Mary Ann Mobley.
Storm Report: Blizzard Hits Wide Area
The worst blizzard of the season spreads from the Midwest to the Atlantic seaboard. Again, nature puts the brakes on the wheels of progress as automobile traffic slows and stops, airlines are grounded and trains run hours behind time. Oh well, Spring is only about two months away. Only?? Aerial view of city street with cars in blizzard. A crowded expressway on a snowy afternoon. MCUS - City traffic, snowing, traffic moving slow. POV - Inside a car, snowing, two cars in shot and windshield wipers are turned on. MS - Snow building on the street, a couple of cars pulled over to the side of the road. MS - A tow truck hooking up a stalled car. MCUS - Man with a shovel digging his car out of the snow on a city's side street. MCUS - Empty bridges, empty gas stations, and empty streets and the snow is really coming down and accumulating. View from top of a building of heavy traffic on this street and a lot of snow coming down. MS - People helping one another cross a street.
First Lady's Tour: Inspects Coal Areas Hit By Unemployment
Mrs. Lyndon Johnson assumes her duties as First Lady with a visit to one of the nation's distressed areas -- the coal mining region of Scranton and Wilkes Barre, Pa. She attends the dedication of a science center designed to train unemployed men in new skills that will attract modern industries to the area. Pennsylvania The First Lady, Lady Bird Johnson is greeting and shaking hands with the people who live in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. MS - Throngs stand behind the ropes. MCUOH - Lady Bird smiling and shaking hands with children and adults. CUS - Lady Bird Johnson attending a dedication.
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:05:25) Let me also ask you this. Senator Gramm just made reference the words in the diaries. We have heard some rather florid language in diaries over these last several days. I almost think someone were an understudy for Louis Lamour to hear some of the language. Are you in the habit of talking about Mrs. Clinton's moods with people in the White House, friends of yours, and how she is doing, from day to day, or feeling? 1. Is that something you are likely to share with even close friends? MS. WILLIAMS. It is not something that I would share with close, friends. It is not something that I would share with anyone, maybe my immediate staff. Otherwise, I think it just amounts to gossip. Senator DODD. Well, I happen to agree with you, and I presume you would not be in your job long if that were the case. I certainly would not tolerate it in my office, and I presume the First Family". would not be particularly anxious to have someone discussing their' moods with people. So I accept your answer in that matter as being fairly good. Mr. McLarty, welcome to the Committee. Mr. McLARTY. Thank you, Senator. Senator DODD. Let me run through a series of questions for you. When did you first learn about the RTC's criminal referral regarding Madison? Mr. McLARTY. Some time in November. Senator DODD. Of? Mr. McLARTY. 1993. Senator DODD. And when did you first learn that Jean Hanson had spoken with Mr. Nussbaum on September 29, 1993? Mr. McLARTY. After Mr. Altman's testimony to this Committee, after February 24th. Senator DODD, After February 24th? Mr. MCLARTY. Yes, sir, that is correct. Senator DODD, Let me ask you this. Do you believe it was appropriate for Ms, Hanson to have had that discussion with Mr. Nussbaum and others at the White House? Mr. Chairman, I am having a hard time Mr. Chairman, I am just having a hard time hearing. [Pause.] Do you believe that it was appropriate for Ms. Hanson to have had the discussion with Mr. Nussbaum? Mr. McLARTY. I asked Mr. Cutler, the White House Counsel, to look into all of the matters in this time period, and I believe that he concluded that he felt this meeting was appropriate, and I, would rely on his judgment. 287 Senator DODD. Do you have any knowledge, Mr. McLarty, as to whether or not Ms. Hanson received instructions? We have heard a lot of different words used to describe how she was, how that meeting occurred. I gather it was around the Waco discussion, and at the end of that, sort of an aside. We have had enough testimony, I think, to probably establish that was the case. Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not Ms. Hanson was sent to that meeting by Mr. Altman? Mr. McLARTY. No, I do not, Senator. Senator DODD. Now, you did not attend the February 2, 1994, meeting? Mr. MCLARTY. That is correct, Senator Dodd. Senator DODD. But you received a call after that meeting from Mr. Altman? Mr. MCLARTY. Yes. Mr. Altman called me a couple of days after that meeting, and I returned his call. Senator DODD. Well, as it pertains to the subject matter before this hearing, did any part of that conversation touch on Mr. Altman's discussions during the February 2nd meeting? Mr. MCLARTY. I do not know that he characterized them that way. He called me, I returned his call a couple of days later. When we made connections, he noted he was weighing the matter of recusal. I listened. Senator DODD. Let me stop you there. This was a couple of days after, this is like maybe February 4th, then? Mr. MCLARTY. Somewhere in that time frame. Senator DODD. So it is after February 3rd, it is after the February 3rd meeting, as well? Mr. MCLARTY. Senator, as I recall it, it was a couple, three days after the February 2nd date that we made connections. Senator DODD. He is weighing recusal at this point? Mr. MCLARTY. He told me he was weighing recusal. I listened to him, told him I was sympathetic with the situation, and encouraged him to make the judgment he felt was the right one. It was a brief conversation. Senator DODD. Did you get the sense from him in that conversation that he was sort of agonizing over this decision somehow? Mr. McLARTY. I do not know that I would use the word agonizing. He said he was weighing the matter, as I recall the telephone conversation, Senator. Senator DODD. Did he mention to you at all what had happened at the February 2nd meeting regarding conversations with Mr. Nussbaum and others about reasons why he should not recuse himself? Mr. McLARTY. No , it was not a lengthy conversation and I do not recall that kind of detail in this telephone visit. Senator DODD. I presume you have explored the issue, since it has now been a matter of public discussion for some time about what happened at that February 2nd meeting regarding the recusal discussion. Can you share with the Committee what you know about what was said at that meeting and whether or not, in your opinion, what was said by Mr. Nussbaum and others constituted pressure, for 288 lack of a better word, since that one's been used the most around here in the last several days? Mr. McLARTY. Well, Senator, it is my understanding that Mr. Altman, I believe, has testified he did not feel any pressure and it is my understanding that the other people that attended that meeting felt they were not applying pressure, In terms of my own opinion, I think there has been a number of views expressed about the matter, and Mr. Cutler and others can speak to that. I am of the view, really, very much like Secretary Bentsen, that it really is up to the individual to make his own judgment and that is what I encouraged Deputy Secretary Altman to do.
The World Mourns John Fitzgerald Kennedy
The final act in the tragedy of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 35th President of The United States is one of the most memorable in history. Kings, Queens, Presidents, Premiers, Princes and Princesses, Emperors and Dictators - they come from the far corners of the earth to pay tribute to the man who had served the world while he served the nation. From the moment his casket is borne from the White House to lie in state at the Capitol it is a drama filled with high emotion. All through the night people file past the bier. Some standing in a 10-mile long line for as long as 12 hours. To pray. To mourn. To weep. Then the cortege winds from the Capitol to Saint Matthew's Cathedral for a Pontifical Funeral Mass while Mrs. Kennedy walks for six long blocks behind the caisson drawn by six white horses. After the religious rites the cortege proceeds to the cemetery of Heroes --- Arlington --- where the martyred President will rest. At the end of the solemn, heart-rending graveside honors, Mrs. Kennedy lights a flame that will burn forever in his memory. Rest In Peace. Washington DC
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:10:46) Senator DODD. Ms. Williams, let me jump very quickly to two final questions. In that February 2nd meeting, we have heard testimony that Mr. Altman made the point specifically at that meeting that Ms. Kulka was going to handle the RTC civil matters, make all the decisions on it, and that the February 28th deadline was not going to pose a problem because a complaint could be filed. What is your recollection regarding that testimony? Do you agree with that, or disagree with that? Ms. WILLIAMS. On the whole, I believe I agree with that. I do not remember the names. Ms. Kulka's name does not strike a bell with me, but I would not challenge that if names were discussed. Senator DODD. Did he make it clear that someone else was going to be responsible for this other than himself? Ms. WILLIAMS. Yes, he did. Senator DODD. All right. Mr. Chairman, can I ask one last question here? The CHAIRMAN. All right. Senator DODD. This is the question I have asked all of the witnesses, because it goes to the central question I think, and I apologize. I read it because I want every word to be correct in it, and I ask this of both of you. Did either of you take or instruct anyone to take any action to obstruct or impede the Resolution Trust Corporation's handling of either the criminal or civil case against Madison Guaranty? Mr. McLarty. Mr. MCLARTY. No, sir, I did not. Senator DODD. Ms. Williams. Ms. WILLIAMS. No, sir, I did not. Senator DODD. Are either of you aware of anyone in either the RTC or the Treasury Department or the White House taking any action to obstruct or impede the Resolution Trust Corporation's handling of either the criminal or civil case against Madison Guaranty? Mr. McLarty. Mr. McLARTY. No, sir, I am not, as I commented in my opening statement. Senator DODD. Ms. Williams. Ms. WILLIAMS. No, sir, I am not aware. Senator DODD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Dodd. Senator Mack. 289 OPENING COMMENTS OF SENATOR MACK Senator MACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And allow me just a moment of lightness here, if I could. It has all been pretty tense over the last 3 or 4 days. One of the observations I have picked up about what is going on down at the White House, and I think you might want to take back down there, is the theme I see kind of running throughout here, that no one has time to sit down, all conversations are brief conversations, and nobody remembers anything. And so maybe the suggestion would be to maybe slow things down a little bit, have longer conversations, sit down and discuss things through, and maybe someone will remember something. Anyway, it is just a side comment. [Laughter.] Mr. McLARTY. Senator, as always, we will take your comments under advisement. Senator MACK. Ms. Williams, are you aware of a memo written by Bruce Lindsey on October 20th, which he copied to you, concerning press inquiries about the criminal referrals on Madison? MS. WILLIAMS. No. Senator MACK. Do you have any idea why you would have been copied on such a memo? MS. WILLIAMS. No. I am not clear why I would have been, I have since seen that memo, and it is about a press inquiry, and the Director of Communications was copied on that memo, so I could have been copied because it was a press inquiry. However, Mr. Lindsey, I believe, has testified that in fact the memo may never have gotten to me at all because the cc's on it were for an earlier memo. I do not know exactly the ins and outs of that, but I am sure Mr. Lindsey can speak to it. Senator MACK. Would it be normal for you, though, basically to be copied on concerns, (a) about press, and (b) about what was going on with Whitewater? Ms. WILLIAMS. I would generally be copied about press inquiries, Yes. Senator MACK. You stated that the Whitewater response team was formed in October or November. Since two of the members of the team were copied on this memo, was it the subject of any of those meetings? Ms. WILLIAMS. Well, first of all, to the best of my recollection, there was no Whitewater response team in October or November, as such. The Whitewater response team, as I recall, and Mr. McLarty may be helpful since he organized it, was in January, was when we first had any meetings, organized meetings in any kind of routine way. I recall January specifically because Mr. Ickes did not come to the White House until January, and he was the person who was asked to focus, in an organized fashion, on Whitewater press inquiries.
August 4, 1994 - Part 2
(10:15:37) Senator MACK. OK, let me just ask one more follow up to that. Ms. WILLIAMS, Yes, sir. Senator MACK. Are you saying to us that you were not at meetings during October and November of 1993, where the criminal referrals were discussed? 290 MS. WILLIAMS. That is what 1 am saying, sir, other than the Feb- ruary 2nd meeting, I had not been at any other meetings. Senator MACK. All right. At this time) Mr. Chairman, I would just yield the balance of time to Senator Gramm. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Gramm. Senator GRAMM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me go back to this question about the entry by Mr. Altman into his private diary, a diary that he never had any reason to believe was ever going to be made public, ever scrutinized, in which he says that you told him the First Lady was paralyzed. And let me say that how the First Lady felt on any day is none of our business in many ways, but it is only relevant to this issue, it seem's to me, because of this meeting in your office on February 3rd, Mr. Altman is asked, in sworn testimony, what did You understand Ms. Williams to be conveying when she talked about solving this problem, the problem about the First Lady. And Mr. Altman says, "Mrs. Clinton is upset. My understanding was that, or the context was that, Mrs. Clinton was so distracted or upset by Whitewater, she could not," and then he loses the focus. Mr. Altman had called on February 3rd and asked you to set up a meeting so that he could come over to the White House to tell people, after this meeting the day before, that he had decided not to recuse himself. He had come over to the White House on February 2nd to announce his recusal but now he changed his mind. Now he is coming back to say, I am not going to take myself out of the Madison investigation. He makes that announcement in your office. We have had this dispute about time, and your Counsel has told you that, well, isn't 10 seconds 10 minutes. I'll leave that alone for the time being, but let me ask you a question. Did you report this meeting, or did you ever have any discussion about the recusal issue, or about Altman's recusal decisions, with the First Lady? Ms. WILLIAMS No, sir, I did not. To the best of my recollection, I did not. Senator GRAMM. Never, ever, on any occasion, did you talk to the First Lady about Roger Altman's decision as to whether to stay in his position overseeing the Madison investigation or whether to take himself out of it? Ms. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir, I understand the question. To the best of my recollection, I did not. Let me refer you to my statement. In my statement, I said that I had made a conscious decision for myself and for other members of my staff that we would not spend our time discussing issues re lated to Whitewater with Mrs. Clinton unless we were fact-finding to respond to press inquiries. Let me tell you a little bit why I did this, so you will have some context and you can understand it. Whitewater certainly was a concern in the White House. it was a distraction, but it was not Senator GRAMM. Let me be sure I have asked the question both ways. Did the First Lady ever raise these issues with you? 291 MS. WILLIAMS. No, she did not. Sir, I would like to, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to continue because I think it is really important for me to put this in some kind of context so you can understand the mindset that I was operating from. I knew that in the newspapers everyday, Mrs. Clinton and the President were being beaten up on about Whitewater. I also knew that even though Mrs. Clinton does not normally read the newspapers, it would be very hard to avoid them. I also knew that she was engaged in fact-finding with her personal lawyer, which was taking up a lot of time on Whitewater. I made what I believe was a sound and good management decision Senator GRAMM. Ms. Williams MS. WILLIAMS. Excuse me, sir, may I just finish this please? The CHAIRMAN. Senator Gramm, I want to let her finish. I'll restore your time, because she has asked to do this, and I think it is important that she have the chance to do so. Senator GRAMM. And let me say I understand you want to give us the context that is very important. You understand our frustration that we are on a clock? MS. WILLIAMS. I do. I understand that. I really do. But I think that this might save us time in the long run. Senator GRAMM. I do not want my mom to watch this and say I was not letting you talk. Ms. WILLIAMS. Right. My mom's right here and she does not want to let me talk. [Laughter.] Senator GRAMM. Now that we understand each other. The CHAIRMAN. Listen, why don't you have your mother call his mother. [Laughter.] MS. WILLIAMS. But I had made a very conscious, and I think a sound management decision about what it was I would discuss with Mrs. Clinton. I thought to myself, she has the newspapers, she has her personal lawyers, she has whoever else that she wants to talk to in the White House about it, be it the