Advanced Search
Fashions Parade in Israel and Rome
The first man-made fibers from a new plant in Israel have gone into chic suits that will find world acclaim. Then, it's just a jet hop to Rome where our models make history with new styles against a backdrop of ancient history. Israel Outside view of a synthetic fiber textile plant in Israel. Model is wearing a suit of double knit synthetic fibers, the model takes off the jacket that has some piping down the front to expose an over blouse with an ascot collar, the knitted blend of synthetic fibers on the skirt hits just below the knee. Rome, Italy Models are wearing straight cut skirts with tops that slip over the head with four buttons down the back, one of the tops also has a cowl collar with an accented color white or light tan. The last model has a straight cut skirt and the top has a nautical flavor to it.
Cards Trump Yanks in World Series 1964
Backing up the superb pitching of Bob Gibson, the St. Louis Cardinals take advantage of the fumbling N.Y. Yankees to capture the seventh and deciding game of the World Series. Final score is 7 to 5 to climax a thrilling Fall Classic that is fodder for a flock of hot-stove league meetings this Winter. The final game in St. Louis and the players are on the field. Sport spectators. Tim McCarver at bat, swings and connects and the first Cardinal run is scored. Ken Boyer pitching, the Cardinal's pull off a double steel and McCarver goes streaking home. Baseball fans cheering and applauding. Mickey Mantle at bat for the Yankees, the ball is pitched and he hits it and gives the Yankees the first three homeruns. Ken Boyer at bat and scores making the score 7 to 3 in favor of the Cardinal's. Bob Gibson pitching to Bobby Richardson and he pop's out and the St. Louis Cardinals win The World Series. MOHS - All the Cardinals run out on to the field hugging the pitcher..
Ohio State 26 - Illinois 0
Ohio State takes undisputed lead in the Big Ten as they down Illinois 26 to 0. From their first interception in the first quarter, the Ohio State boys drive relentlessly and when the dust settles the bruised and battered Illinois eleven concede that Ohio State must have fielded a better team. Ohio State kicking off to Illinois. Illinois catches the ball and returns a 10 to 15 feet run. Illinois pass is deflected into the arms of Ohio State. Player rolls out and he is off and he scores a touchdown. Ohio State starts a football drive again the QB passes the ball and takes the ball to the 5 yard line. Ohio State takes the ball and carries the ball over for a touchdown. Ohio gets the ball and carries it over to the 12 yard line and for the fifth time he takes the ball over for a touchdown. College Spectator Football Fans.
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:15:57) Mr. ALTMAN. I don't remember the precise conversation, but I ,think, Senator, it's important for me to note that I immediately amended the record. It was his conversation that told me about the fall meetings. I then went through the process I described earlier today Senator HATCH. The thing that's bothering me is that either Mr. Podesta. is wrong or you're wrong and if be's right, how could you possibly forget a White House accusation to you that what you did was misleading, or wrong, or not true? Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, I don't believe that the White House called me up and said I was misleading. I don't believe that or, at least, I don't recall it. I remember the two parts of the conversation. Yes, 'Sir, he did ask me about recusal. He said, and my answer was, I -thought that my answer was responsive to the question. Now, I that's important because it shows what I was thinking. I might have-as I said in hindsight, I should have been more ex on at Treasury and that he through what was viewed 498 pansive but it wasn't intentional. I said to him a week after the testimony I thought my answer was responsive to the question. Senator HATCH. But then, if you knew there was a problem with the testimony, why did you wait 3 weeks to correct the record on recusal? Mr. ALTMAN. Well, first of all Senator HATCH. It seems to me there's something wrong here. Mr. ALTMAN. I didn't wait 3 weeks. Senator HATCH. You did. Mr. ALTMAN. No, my letter of March 11 said I was discussing recusal with the White House. Senator HATCH. But that was February 3;. right? Mr. ALTMAN. I'm just saying that I Senator HATCH. That's at the February 3 meeting. Mr. ALTMAN. No. I'm just saying I notified the Committee that I was having a discussion-that there was a discussion with the White House on recusal on March 11. Now, I just didn't think the question called for that answer, and I appreciate that I perhaps should have, but I think the most important point is intent and my response to Podesta a week later shows that I didn't have an intent to withhold that information. Senator KERRY. The letter was on March 11. The recusal discussion was on February 3. Senator HATCH. But see on March 11, they still dont Senator KERRY. I am clarifying for Senator Hatch. Senator HATCH. You're backing me up on this, on the 2nd, rather. This just doesn't compute, and again, I'm not trying to give you a rough time. I just want to get the facts out there because there's a real distinct difference between what Dee Dee Myers says, what Bruce Lindsey says, what John Podesta says, and what you're saying here today. Mr. ALTMAN. But I think Mr. Podesta will affirm that when he asked me about recusal, I said, well, I thought my answer was responsive to the question. I think he'll affirm that. Senator HATCH. But the March 11 letter did not mention the recusal discussion at the February 2 meeting. Mr. ALTMAN. No, but Senator, I said to Mr. Podesta, I believe, my answer was responsive to the question, meaning that I thought I answered the question that I was asked. Senator HATCH. Why, then, didn't the March 11 letter mention the recusal discussion of February 2? Mr. ALTMAN. Well, rightly or wrongly, I didn't reach the conclusion from Mr. Podesta's call that I had answered improperly. I said-in fact, I said in contrast to that, I said to him, I gather, I thought my answer was responsive to the question. In other words, I thought I said John, I thought I answered properly. Senator HATCH. Mr. Altman, I don't mean to beat this to death, but he told you your testimony was misleading. Mr. ALTMAN. No, I don't believe he did tell me that. Senator HATCH. You don't recall that? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't recall that. Senator HATCH. You disagree with Mr. Podesta. 499 Mr. ALTMAN. I don't recall it. I recall him telling me two things and I recall them quite vividly. One was the fall meetings and the other was the recusal and my response to him. Senator HATCH. Regarding your February 1 meeting with Ms. Kulka, didn't Ms. Kulka brief you on the RTC status of its civil investigation of Whitewater? Mr. ALTMAN. No, sir. Senator HATCH. Mr. Nye testified under oath at his deposition as follows: Question: What was and what do you mean when you say the situation that Ellen Kulka was facing? Answer: That she was going to be forced to make a decision how to proceed without perfect information on a politically charged case or potentially charged case. Question: What did Ms. Kulka say about the imperfections of the information at that point? Answer: Just that she wouldn't have enough time between-her feeling was she wouldn't have enough time between then, the date of the meeting and the 28th, the statute of limitations expiration, to make as informed a decision that she would need to make. In her opinon that wouldn't be enough to go through all these mountains of documents and so forth, or for her staff to do so, and that ultimately she would have to be making a decision with the best information possible at that time. So the shortness of questions--so the shortness of time and the inability to develop fully the facts of the case was identified as a problem-as problems in and the answer is, yes. Now, Mr. Nye testified earlier today
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:20:49) The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hatch, I don't want to break up your question, but we're over the time. Senator HATCH. I'll finish in just two sentences. Mr. Nye testified earlier, again today, that this is what occurred. Was be telling the truth? Mr. ALTMAN. I'm not disputing that account, Senator. I agree with that. I'm just saying I don't think that's a briefing on the status of the investigation. Ms. Kulka testified that she would make her decision by February 28 as best she could. Senator HATCH, But earlier today Mr. Nye testified that Ms. Kulka discussed a tolling agreement. Now, was he telling the truth? Mr. ALTMAN. She did discuss a tolling agreement, Senator, but she didn't provide, as far as I'm concerned, a status report on the investigation, Senator HATCH. But he also said The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hatch Senator HATCH, I have one sentence and I'll quit for the night. The CHAIRMAN. I understand but you just said a minute ago two sentences. I don't want to be arbitrary but it keeps going back and forth and we're over the time. Senator HATCH. Could I make one last comment an then en quit for the night. Mr. Nye also testified that Ms. Kulka told you that it would be difficult to conclude the investigation by February 28, and that it Mr. be necessary to present a tolling agreement to the Clintons. Did he testify truthfully? ALTMAN I believe be did, Senator, but I just don't think that's telling me what the status of the investigation is. Ms. Kulka's testimony , I think, is the decisive one and she said-she doesn't dispute Mr. Nye's account I don't think-she says I was 500 going to make my decision, and knowing Ellen Kulka as I do, she sure would have. Senator HATCH. My time is Up. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Sarbanes. Senator SARBANES. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Altman, today in your statement, your opening statement, you were discussing the different story put forward by Ms. Hanson and by you, and you said recollections can differ, of course. There's nothing unusual in that. Now, the thing I'm trying to Puzzle through, and I want to put to you and then get your explanation is, I accept that, but there's a difficulty when your recollection seems to be differing with a whole list of people. Let me just run through that. In fact, in your statement on page 4, you acknowledge a difference with Mr. Roelle concerning a hearing about a possible criminal referral as early as March 1993. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, if I can just say Senator SARBANES. No, let me run through them all and then I'd be happy to have you address them. You say I respect him, but I do not recall it. Then we have the Hanson testimony. Of course, Ms. Hanson was in here for a very long time yesterday and stuck very much to her story about having-you keep wanting to use the word "task" and I'm not quite sure whether you attach a particular significance-I'd like to get off of that word to find out whether you might have, in some other way, suggested to her or indicated to her something that she ought to go over and talk to Nussbaum. In any event, you said you didn't do that. Now, Ms. Hanson on September 30, sent you a memorandum in which she says, "I have spoken with the Secretary and also with Bernie Nussbaum and Cliff Sloan" which are the two people she talked to at that White House meeting after the Waco session. "I have asked Bill Roelle to keep me informed, Is there an thing else you think we should be doing?" That's a memo to you of September 30. Ms. Hanson also called Sloan the next day after the meeting where she saw Nussbaum and Sloan, and tells him to remind Nussbaum about The New York Times fax that you had sent on March 23. She had mentioned to Nussbaum about this material that had come from you, and Nussbaum bad said to her, I didn't get any such material. I don't know what you're
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:25:27) The following day she called Sloan to tell him that there had been a New York Times fax. The question then was how would Hanson know of the fax if you hadn't spoken to her about it, since it was a fax that came from you at an earlier time. Now, Roelle says that at the October 6 meeting with you about the Madison criminal referrals and I'm now quoting from his deposition: Question: Who else was present for this? Answer: Nobody. There was just me and Mr. Altman and he called Ms. Hanson on the phone. Question: To the best of your memory, who said what to whom during this conversation? Answer. I just told him about this and he said OK and he called Ms. Hanson and told her about it and that was pretty much it," And there's some more questions and answers- Question: Do you recall "who he," Mr. Altman, "told her," Ms. Hanson, "to call"? 501 Answer: Yeah, he said, "call Jack, Bernie, and the Secretary. He named about 10 names." Now, Ickes tells us the purpose of this meeting, and the focus of Altman's discussion, was the relationship at the time that he felt this investigation might be wrapped up. And be said, at least in so many words, that it was his understanding the investigation probably would not be concluded and that a determination could not be made by the RTC's General Counsel as to whether there was a basis for a civil claim until after the expiration of the statute of limitations. That's Ickes. Williams, Maggie Williams, tells us that you called her about coming over for a meeting. Now, you say that it wasn't Maggie Wil- liams, it was Ickes. You said that Ickes was wrong in this comment that he made. You've fairly well repudiated a good part of Steiner's diary. Is there some conspiracy at work here, on the part of a lot of peo- ple, to contradict your versions? I mean, we've got Roelle, Hanson, Ickes, Williams, and Steiner. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, there's no conspiracy. Why don't we go through these one by one. You asked me about March and Bill Roelle. I don't recall him telling me about the criminal referral but he may have. I just don't recollect it. He may have told me. You asked me about this memorandum. I may well have received this. I probably did, but this memorandum does not confirm an discussions at the White House regarding the criminal referral. This memorandum, which I must say, I think, is awfully clear, is attached to a compendium of press stories-excuse me, a compen- dium of stories the press may be working on and the operative one is relating to the Rose Law Firm that The Washington Post and the Associated Press are working on. I just don't be eve that con- firms Ms. Hanson's September meeting. You asked me about Senator SARBANES. When did Ms. Hanson's September meeting with Nussbaum and Sloan take place? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't know which day it was in September. The 29th? I'm not sure. Senator SARBANES. It was September 29. What is the date of this memo saving I have spoken with the Secretary and also with Ber- nie Nussbaum and Cliff Sloan. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, the date is the 30th. Senator SARBANES. The' 30th, the next day. Mr. ALTMAN. Do you know what this is? This is a comprehensive Senator SARBANES. I have it right here. Mr. ALTMAN. But it's a compendium of developing press stories or at least stories that the RTC thinks is developing. Senator SARBANES. That's right, which refers to the first paragraph of the memo. Mr. ALTMAN. I just don't think this confirms that- Senator SARBANES. The first paragraph of the memo is relevant !0 the Early Bird. The second and the third paragraph need not be, I'll my judgment, are not relevant to the Early Bird memo. The first aragraph of this memo says, "Steve Katsanos has talked with Sue Schmidt (see attached RTC Early Bird)." That's this. 502
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:30:30) The next paragraph says, "I have spoken with the Secretary an seems to me with Bernie Nussbaum and Cliff Sloan." Now, it see a the reasonable view of that is that was with respect to the meeting that bad taken place just the day before. Then the next paragraph "I have asked Bill Roelle to keep me informed." Of course, I had just, in effect, informed you all about the referrals 2 , 3 before, as I recall. "Is there anything else you think we should doing." I know how you're trying to parse this memo, but I agree with it. Anyhow, what's next? Mr. ALTMAN. You asked me about Mr. Ickes's comment in his' de deposition. Senator SARBANES. What about the Sloan-tbe Hanson conversation with Sloan about The New York Times fax and bow would Hanson have known that but for talking with you? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't know, Senator, but I don't know what's wrong with sending a fax of a press clipping. Senator SARBANES. No, I didn't say anything was wrong with sending the fax. I didn't see anything wrong--how did-I'm trying to get at Hanson 's credibility given the direct contradiction between her testimony and yours. How would Hanson have known to call Sloan the next day about the fax if she didn't learn about the fax from you because the fax was something you sent to Nussbaum back in March 1993; is that correct? Mr. ALTMAN. That's what the fax-yes, that's what the fax suggests, yes. Senator SARBANES. Before Hanson took over as General Counsel at the Treasury? Mr. ALTMAN. I can't remember exactly when Jean arrived, Senator SARBANES. She came in June. Mr. ALTMAN. All right. It could have been. Senator SARBANES. How would she have known to call Sloan about this fax if she hadn't been talking with you? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't know the answer to that, Senator. Senator SARBANES. What about Roelle and the telephone conversation at the October 6 meeting? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't remember that. Senator SARBANES. Ickes's report on the February 2 meeting? Mr. ALTMAN. That one I have a very strong view on, Senator, and that is incorrect. That is not what happened, and I believe Mr. Ickes, when he comes before you, whenever that is tomorrow, Will not say what I gather you have. Senator SARBANES. What makes you believe that? Mr. ALTMAN. Just because it's incorrect. Senator SARBANES. What about Williams? Mr. ALTMAN. Well, I don't think that's very meaningful. I agree that the conversation took place. I just think I called Ickes to set it up and I had it primarily with him. And she thinks I set it up with her, but the conversation took place, I don't dispute that. I think that's a minor issue as to whether I bad it the way I say or she says. It took place. Senator SARBANES. She says that you said-did you say your recollection, specifically, was I want to come over in person and 503 have a meeting to announce this? I don't remember if he said I want to come over in person. I think he said A want to talk to a few people, can you get some people together and I maybe said west wing office or he could have named-why would Maggie Williams say this if it hadn't happened? Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, again, the conversation or the essence of it, did happen. I'm not disputing that. I think I happened to call Mr, Ickes and primarily had the conversation with him, but I did have the conversation, so I'm not disputing that. Senator SARBANES. My time has expired. The CHAIRMAN. Senator D'Amato is prepared to yield you 2 additional minutes. Senator SARBANES, No, I'm finished. The CHAIRMAN. Senator D'Amato. Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Chairman, if I might, this will take us back to the question of that meeting on the 3rd and whether the meeting came up as a result of talking to Maggie Williams and/or Ickes. There was a meeting. Is that not correct, Mr. Altman? Mr. ALTMAN. I'm sorry, Senator. Senator D'AMATO. Whether or not the meeting came about as a result of our conversation, your contact first with Mr. Ickes or with Ms. Williams, there did come a time, right, on or about February 3, the day after your decision where you went home and you meditated about recusal, then you went over to the White House. You had called earlier. You missed Jean Hanson for lunch. She kind of was one step behind. But we know there came a meeting and af that. meeting there were at least Williams, Ickes, and Eggleston. Hanson got there later. Is that not a fact?
Vietnam's Future: Hawaiian Parley Affirms US Aims
A three-day Summit Meeting between United States and South Vietnam leaders was aimed at bringing a new social and economic perspective to the war in Vietnam. President Johnson flew to Hawaii for the meeting with the leaders from Saigon and at its conclusion came the declaration of Honolulu - an outline of both war and peace aims in Southeast Asia. Later, the President returns to Los Angeles to confer with Vice-President Humphrey before the VP leaves for Saigon to implement the conclusions reached at the conference. Hawaii President Lyndon Baines Johnson meeting with Vietnam emissaries shaking hands on the steps of the building. MS - President Johnson shaking hands with Minister Nauyen Van Thieu and Prime Minister Cao Ky, Secretary of State - Dean Rusk standing in the background, middle. MS - President Johnson, Prime Minister Ky on the left, Minister Nauyen Van Thieu on the right, Dean Rusk off to the left and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara off to the right. walking in back of President Johnson. MS - As they sit at the conference table, to the right of President Johnson is Secretary of State, Dean Rusk and to the left of President Johnson sits Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara MS - President Johnson and his globetrotting emissaries leaving the building and walking down the steps. MS - Prime Minister Ky and Minister Nauyen Van Thieu engaged in conversation on the steps of the building. Los Angeles, California Mean while at the Los Angeles air port Vice President Hubert Humphrey waits for the arrival of President Johnson's plane. ECU - Vice President Hubert Humphrey. CU - The Presidential plane is rolling down the landing strip, President Johnson on board. CU - President Johnson holds an impromptu press conference, President Johnson steps up to the podium. President Johnson sums up the aims outlined in the Declaration of Honolulu, "... and we shall fight the battle against aggression in Vietnam to a successful conclusion. e shall fight the battle for social construction and throughout the world we shall fight the battle for peace. And to the American people who have given us their strength in every hour of trial, I say to you that we shall fight all of these battles successfully, and we shall prevail."
Rooftop Heliport: Copters Fly From Midtown New York
Like every large city, New York faces the frustrating problem of getting airplane passengers through heavy traffic to outlying airports. Now the problem is being partially solved w/ the opening of a helicopter landing pad atop a mid-town skyscraper. POV Views of New York skyline from cockpit & window seat of passenger jet plane (console & window in respective shots). Nice aerial of skyscrapers, buildings, downtown Manhattan, New York City, Empire State Building rising tallest. Over this shoulder shot of chopper pilot flying over NYC. Aerial shot - Pan Am Building (Pan American Bldg, now occupied by MetLife). Low angle / LS - Dual-rotor helicopter coming in for landing on rooftop helipad of Pan Am building. Over the shoulder MS - Heliport control operator as New York Airways chopper lands. TLSs -people boarding helicopter. TLS - Helicopter lifting off from helipad. Rear view MS passenger looking out window. High angle LSs - Manhattan all aglow at night. MS former Governor of New York NELSON ROCKEFELLER & Mayor of New York ROBERT F. WAGNER JR. chatting with FRANCIS CARDINAL SPELLMAN; Mayor Wagner kisses the Cardinal's hand before departure. MSs - Cardinal Spellman boarding helicopter. TLSs - Pan Am double rotor helicopter taking off from rooftop helipad, night. H/a LS - Nighttime traffic, buildings in downtown NYC (Manhattan).
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:35:40) Mr. ALTMAN. I had the discussion, as I said, Senator, that I recall having with Mr. Ickes, a couple minutes before another meeting we were both scheduled to attend. Senator DAMATO. Wasn't Mr. Eggleston there? Mr. ALTMAN. I don't recall whether he was there. Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Eggleston says be was there in his deposition. Maggie Williams says she was there. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator I'll give you my best recollection. Senator D'AMATO. Well, your best recollection is that-and I can read you Maggie statement where she talks about you calling and getting together in the West Wing. Senator Sarbanes just went over that with you and you said could you get some peo- ple together. But there did come a time when you went over to the White House and you talked and you informed Mr. Ickes and you don't recall if Ms. Williams was there and Eggleston, that you were not going to withdraw, that you were going to continue on the case, and that you would not recuse yourself. Isn't that right? Mr. ALTMAN. I said I was not going to recuse myself for the time being. Senator D'AMATO. Good. OK. So that took place on February 3; Is that not correct? ALTMAN. Around February 3, yes. Senator D'AMATO. Let's go back to the conversation we had when asked you about meetings. Now, remember the night before I told you, we were going to ask you about this, about contacts that you had or that the White House had, et cetera, and I refer you, and 504 I think you have a copy of the transcript of the bearing on February 24 to page 63. Do you have it in front of you? Mr. ALTMAN, Yes, sir. Senator D'AMATO. If you count up 10 lines from the bottom, it says, "Senator D'Amato." That refers to a question I asked. Will you read with me? I said "did anyone"--and I'm asking You now about the meeting of February 2. I'm asking you bow this came about. I said "did anyone request this meeting?" You responded -I requested the meeting." I then went on, Un,, there any other meeting that may have been requested?" You then responded, "No." Now, Mr. Altman, is that statement incorrect? Mr. ALTMAN. Senator- Senator D'AMATO, Do you read that-you see it in front of you? Mr. ALTMAN. I do, Senator. Senator D'AMATO. Now, is that statement-you said no. Is that incorrect or not? Mr. ALTMAN. I interpreted your question to mean were there any other meetings that the White House requested and I said no to that question Senator D'AMATO. Excuse me. The question of the White Houseexcuse me. The question of the White House did not come up until were there any other to which you said no. after you answered that question. I said meet ings that may have been requested, After that I then propounded a series of questions to ascertain the people from the White House may have put forth these. You cannot now tell me that you're answering a question that you didn't know I was going to even ask at that time. I ask you again; is that not correct? Were there any other meet- "that may have been requested. You said no. Mr. Altman, is that correct.? Is that correct? Mr, ALTMAN. That's bow I interpreted your question. Senator DAMATO. But is that correct? Mr. ALTMAN. I think the context of your question before Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Altman, the context of my question before was as it related to who set up the meeting of February 2--of February 2, quite clear. There's no reference to any-wbo set it up. You went on to say, and I'm paraphrasing, that you did, you requested the meeting. I said, "Was there any other meeting that may have been requested?" You said, "No." Now, Mr. Altman, you were not aware of that meeting in which you rushed over to the White House to inform them of your decision to not recuse yourself at that time? Mr. ALTMAN. First of all, Senator Senator D'AMATO. I mean, you forgot that? Senator SASSER. Mr. Chairman, for goodness sake, can't this witness answer a question? I mean, I've never seen such badgering of a witness in my life here. Senator D'AMATO. Was it correct, Mr. Altman? Mr. ALTMAN. I answered the question that I thought you asked and I answered the question that you asked to the best of my ability. I think there's a reasonable basis to have interpreted it the way I did because you immediately said, you mean there were no other meetings requested by the White House? Senator GRAMM. He didn't know 505 Senator BOXER. Mr. Chairman, now we've got two-- Senator DODD. He can answer. You made your point and I'd like to hear an answer. We've been over this matter but I'd like to hear an answer. Senator KERRY. I have no objection, I'm sure nobody has any objection to tough questions being asked but when two people start jumping in asking questions and the witness doesn't have an opportunity to answer, none of us are well served. I'll go for as long as we want but this witness has had a long, grueling night,
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:40:31) Senator DAMATO. Let me say this to you Senator KERRY. I think we should get the answer. I'm not saying we shouldn't but lees do it in an orderly fashion. senator D'AMATO. Mr. Altman, when I asked you, were there any other meetings that may have been requested, you answered no. In light of what you know now, in light of what you have beard testified to, that you called at least two people to set up a meeting on the 3rd that 's what Maggie Williams says, that's what Ms. Hanson. says, Mr. Ickes verifies the meeting, and Mr. Eggleston verifies the meeting. Is it not true that that answer was not responsive and not accurate? Mr. ALTMAN. No, Senator, it isn't. That question was responsive to the question as I understood it. Senator D'AMATO. Let me tell you, the question as you understood it, that you make reference to, didn't take place until after you answered. I then pursued that when you said no, I then asked you about other contacts. Mr. ALTMAN. But I think it's a reasonable thing to see how I might have come to that conclusion because you say you mean there were no other meetings requested by the White House? You were explaining your own question. Senator D'AMATO. I only raised the question after you said precisely no to the question as to were there any other meetings? You said no. I have to tell you, it is hard for this Senator to see how "You could have forgotten the meeting of February 3. 1 then went -further to say: Dig other people possibly set them up? Did the White House set it up, et cetera. I nave to tell you, are you saying :,now that because maybe Ms. Williams set it up or because Ms. Hanson set it up that there was no meeting? Mr. ALTMAN. No, Senator, I believe I called Mr. Ickes. Senator D'AMATO. So the difference is because you called Mr. Ickes that it means you didn't have to tell us about the meeting February 3? ALTMAN. No, Senator. I'd like to try to make one thing as clear as I can. I Senator D'AMATO. Yes, please. Mr. ALTMAN. I've testified the same way I've always tried to tes- when I come before the Congress, and I've had the privilege of doing that many times, and there are some Members on this Committee known me for some time, and they think of me do, but I just want to assure this Committee that I up here on February 24 as a different person, as a dif- ferent person than I've been every other time. Senator Riegle-Sen- ator Riegle knows me very well. I thought he always had a high regard for me. I hope that's true. 506 Senator DAMATO. Mr. Chairman, I don't mean to. Mr. Altman, YOU re now not being responsive to the question and I understand your answer. I don't accept it, but reasonable people may disagree. Let me move on to something else, Mr. Ickes testifies about the meeting in his deposition on July 24. Among other things he was asked, are a number of questions about the details of the statute of limitations and the progress of the inquiry being conducted. He goes on and he says: What he discussed was whether there was an inquiry underway and that, in his View based an information from his sources--I don 't think he delineated them, but I assumed one of them was the General Counsel of the RTC-that investigation was going to take a longer period of time to conclude and that it might not conclude until after the expiration of the statute of limitations Now, that's Mr. Ickes, a trained lawyer, Deputy Chief of the White House. That's his recollection. Let me go on to page 122. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, that is false. Senator DAMATO. He says the purpose of the meeting Mr. ALTMAN. That is false, Senator DAMATO. OK You disagree with him. Mr. ALTMAN. Not only do I disagree with him, but the facts disagree with him. The facts disagree with him, and I can tell you in the strongest terms that that is false. Senator D'AMATO. Let me continue. Mr. Ickes says the purpose of this meeting and the focus of his discussion, and I think this goes to the essence of being responsive to the Committee, was the relationship of the time that he felt this investigation might be wrapped up, and be said, at least in so many words, that it was his understanding that the investigation probably would not be concluded and that Et a determination could not be made by the RTC's General Counsel as to whether there was a basis for a civil claim until after the expiration of the statute of limitations had ap- lied to this particular investigation. And I'll note that, thereafter, he says that be informed both Mrs. Clinton and the President of the gist of this conversation. Now, would Mr. Ickes go to the President and to the First Lady and inform them of this, if it didn't happen? Mr. ALTMAN. Senator it is false. The Office of Government Ethics, the independent Office of Government Ethics evaluated that. That's not a Clinton body. That's an independent Office of Government Ethics, and it concluded that no nonpublic information was provided. Senator DAMATO. Let me say Mr. ALTMAN. Just a moment, Senator. Senator D'AMATO. I don't want to hear about the Office of Government Ethics-that's not a responsive question, to have him come
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:45:51) Senator DODD. It's just an answer. You may not like the answer. It's his answer. Senator DAMATO. OK Fine. The CHAIRMAN. It's Senator DAMATO. I'd like to make one other point and it will take 10 seconds. This is the sworn deposition of Mr. Ickes, Deputy Chief of Staff. I want you to know that. He said it under oath. Senator SARBANES. Let him give his answer. Senator DAMATO. You disagree. 507 Mr. ALTMAN. I know it's false. I'm sure Mr. Ickes recollection is just different. I know him to be a man of honesty. I know he's honest, but his recollection is wrong. The CHAIRMAN. You're very clear on that. Senator D'Amato has read this into the record. Obviously, Mr. Ickes gave this in a deposition under oath. He'll be here so he can be quizzed on that. I think we've laid out both sides of it, and that's about all we can do at this point. Senator DODD. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think it's my time. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Dodd. Senator DODD. I'd point out it isn't just a question of these two individuals disagreeing. The fact is that Ms. Kulka disagrees with Mr. Ickes. Ms. Hanson disagrees with Mr. Ickes and they were there at the meeting. We've had testimony from Mr. Nye today as "to what Ms. Kulka said to Mr. Altman on February 1 regarding -'how these matters would be handled and whether or not the cases could be brought before the 28th. Why in the world with all of these people agreeing with what was said the day before, why would Mr. Altman sit down at a meeting with people in the White House and tell them something completely different than a bunch people heard the day before? We have heard from Mr. Ickes and he can comment on it, but as of this hour, after 40 hours of bearin this room we have beard from at least 3 or 4 different people substantiate what Mr. Altman has said. That has value I think it ought to be clearly stated. Let me tell you something regarding this. We've spent a lot of me focusing on this bearing on the 24th. I think it's important, but it also difresses, in my view, quite a bit from what the central them ought to be. Let me say I'm just speaking for myself here. I've read over the testimony, I think you have to start back in the middle of page 63 our colleague from New York starts talking about and leadup to the questions about the RTC, the counsels, and the statute of limitations and so forth. Now, I was not at the bearing, so I'm just reading this. I don't doubt in my mind that the Senator from New York, and , A] D'Amato, has a very clear understanding of what he thinks he was asking, particularly the line where it ends from our colleague, Senator DAmato says, "oh, oh. Ickes is in it" and then it goees down and he says, "or Mrs. Clinton's interest or anyone else that you were aware of as it relates to the matter that you went to brief them on." It seems to me that's an operative clause when it comes to the series of questions which is the subject of the dispute here as to whether or not the issue of the recusal meeting on February 3 should have been included in your response. In your mind, that meeting was about the statute of limitations and the procedures. Now there's a debate and discussion as to whether or not you ought to have included the issue of the recusal, but I can see where two well- intentioned people who were sitting there, responding and answering questions came to a different point of view. That's not the most bizarre thing that has ever happened at a congressional hearing. 508 I think we've heard from the witnesses but to dwell on this par. ticular point as if it was somehow central to this whole case is to digress, in my view, from what the central theme is. Let me a background here to review the bidding a little bit. We've had an investigation on the illegal questions by Mr. Fiske, 91 a Republican prosecutor, rave reviews given to him at the time was was named. We've had the Office of Government Ethics who under Mr. Stanley Potts. He, an appointee of the previous Repub- lican Administration declares that ethically, there are no problems here. We have heard Mr. Foreman, a Republican appointee who was kept on by this Administration, declare that there were no ethical problems. Mr. Stephens stays on even though the White House allegedly exercised some influence to change th at. You go to Ms. Kulka, who be gives the total authority to in these matters. She states that unequivocally here. She's not a partisan in all of this. She could have said look, he didn't say that to me. He gave her all the authority to handle these matters. She states that she had plenty to work on and bad no problem with February 28. We have Mr. Altman recusing himself, admittedly today he should have stuck with the decision when he made it in the first place but didn't, and gets involved in a discussion to bang around for a while. But as far as I'm concerned, he made that decision to recuse himself early on.
Orange Grove Irrigation
ON PREVIEW CASS. #98959 Farmer clears irrigation ditch w/ shovelSprinklers spray water in field - lush, green field.Long shot of farmer clearing ditch w/ shovel. (Lush, green fields are orchards) 1950s
Orchard Irrigation
Pan of grove along an irrigation ditch.
Irrigation - Potatoes - Grapes
Med. shot of an irrigation pumpClose-up of an irrigation pumpWide shot of an irrigation pump supplying H2O to grove.
Potato Irrigation
Farmer adjusting hoses to irrigation ditchPan of the greens in front of the farmhouse, as the sprinklers runWide shot of sprinklers.Two streams of H2O cross in front of farmhouse (sprinklers)Sprinkler washes over potato fields.
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:50:59) Mr. ALTMAN. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. -and asked if I would support him, a Republican, I know him, Now, in whose interest is it to appoint a Republican to head up the RTC if you're worried about this? The people watching this and listening to this may not understand all of these debates between Committees but there's a backdrop here. When you have the overall demeanor, all of these other questions, set up something we ought to be cognizant of and aware of. We're trying to draw the conclusion of whether or not the Department of the Treasury, Mr. Altman in his capacity as the head of the RTC, the White House and others were trying to derail these criminal referrals and the civil suits. That's the issue we're driving at, did someone at the White House try and derail this whole operation? If you're looking at a state of mind, if you will, taking a look at the overall attitudes that are being reflected by decisions being made in the office, I don't see as a backdrop of this evidence, that kind of demeanor. Now, as to your state of mind in the February 2 meeting. I think that's important. I also think it's important to know what the state of mind was at the White House, Senator Domenici's questions. We're going to have Mr. Nussbaum here. We're going to have all the White House people here to ask them whether or not they were pressuring. You said you didn't take it as pressure. Clearly, they wear a different hat than you do in their particular setting. I'm satisfied with Your answer, that you didn't-you wish you made the decision to recuse yourself earlier. Tomorrow and the next day well hear from the White House people and that will be a legitimate question. While. 509 to insist that this witness understand what Mr. Nussbaum was thinking is a legitimate question, at some point you've got to let up on it. Its not his responsibility to know what the state of mind was of Mr. Nussbaum. I say that because I've listened to you for almost 40 hours, over the last 3 or 4 days, tantamount to what would be 10 days of hearings here. I think we need to remind ourselves of what we're driving at here, what the issue was as a result of the resolution being adopted, that caused this Committee to convene and discuss these issues. That is whether or not this White House, these high-ranking officials, did anything to derail, disrupt, to throw off the criminal and civil matters affecting the Madison Guaranty company. I'd like to get back on track with those questions, if we could , instead of going off ad nauseam, in areas where honest people can disagree what the intent was, what the intent behind the question was. I say that and let me ask one question that comes down to the whole issue that has to do with the statutory authority because at some point we're going to make, I hope, some legislative rec- ommendations as well. I think we can stipulate here that most of us agree that this idea of wearing two hats which by law either you I oil or Secretary Bentsen had to do, created a lot of the situation that we're in tonight. I wonder if you would comment as to whether or not you have any suggestions or ideas as to bow in the future we can avoid this in some other Administration so we're not meeting again to discuss what someone said at a hearing, what someone intended by a question, what someone intended by an answer, and avoid the kind of problems that, I think, this legislative Catch-22 has caused us to be in. Mr. ALTMAN. Well, Senator, our intentions were honorable in try ing to take up responsibility for the RTC and trying to make some improvements in it, and I believe that we did, But I agree with the rust of your question. I think it would be better in the future if a brighter line or some wall between the institution which is independent of another institution. I agree. I think these hearings alone demonstrate that all kinds of appearances issues raised and controversies arise that would not happen if there were a wall. Senator DODD. Who should have taken that job? How should we deal with that? Should it be some independent person that has not been confirmed by the Congress or the Senate. That was one of the requirements, that the person who took the job had to have been confirmed by the Senate
B-R-R-R! Blizzard Flays Atlantic Coast
Wind, snow and icy cold was the weather story through most of the nation as the Atlantic Coast experiences a true blizzard. From Florida to Maine there are record low temperatures as the storm dumps as much as 20 inches on some southern states. Washington D.C. is without train service for eleven hours and Federal employees are told to stay home. On the surface, however, the snow makes a pretty picture. United States New York A dismal shot of the skyscrapers of New York City, fog and snow. CU - Two men are cleaning off the back window of a car. MS - New York City street scene covered with 12-inches of snow. CUS - Man shoveling out his snow plowed covered car. MS - A young boy shoveling the sidewalk. CU - A hand held snow plow cleaning up the sidewalk. Washington DC LS - Snow covered 'White House'. Exterior shot - This is a scenic shot of the White House in the aftermath of a snow storm., LS - Lincoln Memorial, wind blowing the snow around. The steps to the Memorial are completely covered by snow. LS - Through the wind blown snow you see the Washington Monument. MS - Accident between a truck and a bus. MS - Capitol Building enhanced by the beauty of the snow.
British Election: Labor Party Ousts The Conservatives
It was a week of changes. Both in the political world and in the world of baseball. Crowds jam British streets awaiting the election returns as the Labour Party ousts the Conservatives of Lord Hume after 13 years. Throngs crowd London's square. A sign; Southport, Con 23,917, Lab 11,572 and Conmaj 12,345. No change. People crowded together looking up and waving at the camera. Young male adult, wearing a Derby hat, dark rimmed glasses and his mouth opened. Young men standing with their suits on, in a fountain in the middle of the square. Throngs. A door with the number 10 on it. Limousine pulls up and Lord Hume disembarks from the limo. Sign "Conservative Headquarters" A sign hanging from a building "Transport House" James Harold Wilson, new Prime Minister and his wife Mary at his side. Audience applauding and smiling. The new Prime Minister kisses his wife Mary while standing at a microphone.
Football - Purdue 21 to Michigan 20
Michigan's undefeated Eleven comes down to earth with a bang as they are upset by the Purdue Boilermakers. The Wolverines, trailing by a point in the fourth quarter - gambled for two points on a conversion run. They didn't make it. Purdue wins 21 to 20. Michigan plays host to Purdue and the stadium is not filled. Football players on the field. Quarterback, Bob Timberlake passes. Ball is passed and they get the ball to the 25-yard line. QB takes the football and scores. Purdue has the ball and QB passes, he catches the 66 yard pass and takes it in for a touchdown. College football fans, 1/2 Teams are tied, 14 - 14. QB passes the ball t and brings the ball into scoring position. QB passes the ball it is caught in the end zone and it is another touchdown. Final quarter, Michigan has the ball and breaks loose for a 54 yard touchdown run. Michigan tries to tie up the game by running the football and Purdue stops him. Purdue is the victor.
August 2, 1994 - Part 9
(22:55:24) Mr. ALTMAN. Yes. Well, of course, one of the things we could have done would have been to leave it vacant until Congress con firmed a permanent nominee. We could have done that and per A haps we should have. We did go forth pretty promptly and nomi- nate our candidate and that candidate's nomination did not succeed and at the end of the year be withdrew. So one option would have been just leave it vacant until a permanent Chairperson is confirmed for that precise job. Senator DODD. Let me ask you this: I kept on asking this yester- day. Ms. Hanson said she was basically a detailee, of the RTC even 510 though she was General Counsel for the Treasury. It was clear to me when she got that job as a detailee. Did you at some point say to her when I'm talking to you the RTC, you're General Counsel for the RTC. I mean, at what point did she know she was RTC or she was Treasury? It se to me she was never clear what job she was operating in. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, I just asked her to help me out. There no formal designation. I didn't go through the process one through, the formal process, to actually detail someone fro place to another. I just asked her to help me out. Senator DODD. Is there statutory authority somehow? She was talking about statutory authority that gave her the right to do RTC functions. Mr. ALTMAN. I believe that FIRREA, the law FIRREA permits, in this case, the Treasury to-it says here, "the RTC is authorized to utilize the employees of the FDIC or, on consent, the personnel of any other Executive Department or Agency. As interim CEO of the RTC, Mr. Altman exercised all of the powers of the RTC and thus was authorized to use the time of Treasury personnel on RTC matters." Senator DODD. So that's the authority? Mr. ALTMAN. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. I might just ask you at some point here to submit to us, to this Committee a more formal set of recommendations on how we avoid this kind of mess in the future. Mr. ALTMAN, Yes, sir. Senator DODD. I yield back my time. Senator DOMENICI. Senator Dodd, do you have a couple of seconds? Could I just clarify something and ask you if you knew this: A lot of comments have been made about the Office of Government Ethics and their report. It's my understanding that they only spoke to employees of the Treasury Department. Now that's a very big difference because this whole dispute is a dispute between what Treasury Department people say and what White House people say. So with reference to that, it does seem to me that the conclusion (22:58:18)(tape #10073 ends)
August 2, 1994 - Part 10
(00:13:58)(tape # 10074 begins) Congress or the Senate. That was one of the requirements, that the person who took the job had to have been confirmed by the Senate Mr. ALTMAN. Yes. Well, of course, one of the things we could have done would have been to leave it vacant until Congress con firmed a permanent nominee. We could have done that and per A haps we should have. We did go forth pretty promptly and nomi- nate our candidate and that candidate's nomination did not succeed and at the end of the year be withdrew. So one option would have been just leave it vacant until a permanent Chairperson is confirmed for that precise job. Senator DODD. Let me ask you this: I kept on asking this yester- day. Ms. Hanson said she was basically a detailee, of the RTC even 510 though she was General Counsel for the Treasury. It was clear to me when she got that job as a detailee. Did you at some point say to her when I'm talking to you the RTC, you're General Counsel for the RTC. I mean, at what point did she know she was RTC or she was Treasury? It se to me she was never clear what job she was operating in. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, I just asked her to help me out. There no formal designation. I didn't go through the process one through, the formal process, to actually detail someone from one place to another. I just asked her to help me out. Senator DODD. Is there statutory authority somehow? She was talking about statutory authority that gave her the right to do RTC functions.
Track Stars Shine In Olympic Trials
The finals trials to pick the United States Olympic Team projects a bright future for the team in Tokyo. Bob Hayes ties the American record in the 100-meter dash. Ralph Boston sets a new mark in the broad jump - a world record 27 feet, 4 1/4 inches. Another record is set as Rex Cawley clips a tenth of a second from the world figure. Now all we need is an encore in Tokyo. Throngs fill the stands at Los Angeles Coliseum. The spectators. The track 100 meter dash, Bob Hayes sprinting and winning the race. Ralph Boston sets a new world record in the broad jump, 27 feet & 4 1/4 inches. The 400 meter event, running and jumping over hurdles, and you see Rex Cawley beat the World Record. 200 meter dash, the winner Paul Bateman of Cleveland, Ohio is the winner.
Pope In India: Pontiff Hailed on Historic Visit
The teeming millions of India flock to Bombay to greet the "burra guru" - the great, Holy Man - as Pope Paul VI arrives for the international Eucharistic Congress. No other Pope has ever visited this area of the world, and no other Pope has ever made a trip of such length. He is greeted by Prime Minister Shastri and other high dignitaries and he donates $50,000 to India's poor before presiding at the elevation of six Bishops. His return to Rome is equally a triumph. Bombay India Riding in an open car is the "Burra Guru" (Holy Man), Pope Paul VI waving and blessing throngs that line the street. The mass of Indian people who gathered together to see the Pope Paul VI. Camera panning the crowd with smiles on their faces the people wave back to the camera man. Prime Minister Shastri and Pope Paul VI shaking hands. Pope Paul shaking the hand of an older lady. Indira Gandhi the only daughter of Nehru Jawaharlal, Prime Minister meets with Pope Paul VI. 1,000 faithful sit in attendance to see Pope Paul VI consecrated six Bishops. Vatican City, Italy Pope Paul VI arrives back in Rome standing on a raised platform. St. Peter's in Vatican City, evening shots, the Pope is arriving home, blessing the throngs who came out to welcome him back.