Advanced Search
Washington: Lake Mead
Washington: Lake Mead
Vermont Lakes
Lakes: Vermont
Lake with Alpine View
Lakes: Lake with Alpine view
Lake Tahoe
Nevada: Lake Tahoe
Lake Mead
Nevada: Lake Mead
Mountain Lake
Mountain: Lakes
Lake Mojave
Lakes: Lake Mojave, Arizona
Mississippi River Meets the Gulf
On Preview Cassette #221751 Mississippi river: Meets Gulf Of Mexico, Mississippi River, Louisiana, Mississippi Delta
Columbia River
Oregon: Columbia River
Muddy Flood Water
Disasters: Flood water, muddy
River Aerial
Aerial: river
Waterfall
Waterfall
Streams in Desert
Desert: Streams near desert area
Swamps
ON PREVIEW CASSETTE #201071 Swamps
Louisiana Bayou
On Preview Cassette # 218036 Louisiana: Bayou
Island Aerial
Swamps: Island aerial
Moss Pond
Spain: Moss Pond
Marshlands
Marshes, marshland
Cypress Gardens
Florida: Cypress Gardens
August 4, 1994 - Part 12
(23:50:08) Mr. NUSSBAUM. Well, thank you, Senator. Senator BENNETT. You've come in here and told us exactly where you stand and we haven't had the lapses of memory nearly as much as the kind we've had from some others. Maybe it has to do with the fact that you don't work for the Government anymore and your job is not in jeopardy. I would just like to make a few observations, I associate myself completely with the Chairman's opening statement. This Committee feels very strongly about the issue of RTC independence, In my opening statement to the hearings that was my central focus because at that time I didn't understand any of the rest of this stuff -that we've now come to understand. I was offended by the testimony of one of the RTC employees, that the RTC has been more politicized in this Administration than in previous ones. There were several who testified to that. Mr. Altman, of course, denied it, but the career RTC employee had that feeling. That may ,be part of the reason behind the Chairman's passion because this Administration allowed Mr. Altman to remain in a position where structurally the independence of the RTC was compromised. What should have been a 2-week, 3-week arrangement until somebody was found and confirmed turned into a year and a half ,Of built-in conflict of interest, in terms of this Committee's interest; that is, that the two should be independent. You're not responsible for that. It's too late to do anything about it now, but understand that's a large reason why the Chairman was as passionate as he was in MY view and one of the reasons why I identify with him. Now the other half of his statement about the recusal issue, I'm .not a lawyer. I think I can understand the English language withOut having been to law school. Turn to page 13 of your statement. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Yes. Senator BENNETT. You're quoting the OGE guidelines and you very passionately say this means the official has a duty to do his or her duty and you've been very passionate about that. The last 492 phrase of that guideline referring to employees are expected to perform their duties unless there is a reason their participation, "ill the last phrase, will result"- this is the English language I think 1 understand----"will result in an appearance of conflict significantly detrimental to the public's legitimate perception of the fairness of the governmental processes involved." Now Secretary Altman made the decision that his involvement in this would result in an appearance of conflict that would be significantly detrimental to the public's perception of the fairness of this thing and he came to the White House to announce that decision, He had already checked with Secretary Bentsen, and Secretary Bentsen has testified that if he had been in Mr. Altman's position, he would have recused himself. So what you're really saying here, Mr. Nussbaum, in your passionate statement that every official should do his duty and we need to enforce that throughout the whole Administration' and this is something you would absolutely establish is that if Secretary Bentsen had asked you for advice, you would have told him do your duty and stay there. My only comment is I think Secretary Bentsen's advice was the correct one. I think subsequent events have demonstrated that Secretary Bentsen's instincts were the correct ones and Mr. Altman's instincts were the correct ones before something happened at the White House to turn him, and that's why I find myself in agreement with the Chairman's position. Thank you. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Can I respond? Senator BENNETT. Absolutely. Mr. NUSSBAUM. I don't believe Mr. Altman made a decision nor did he say he made a decision when he came to see us, that his continuing to act would result in an appearance of conflict significantly detrimental to the public's legitimate perception of the fairness of the governmental processes involved. He didn't make such a decision. He said just the opposite in effect. What he said to me is that he had consulted ethics people and they told him that he was not legally or ethically required to recuse himself.
August 4, 1994 - Part 12
(23:55:17) That means, Senator, with all respect, that Mr. Altman and his ethics advisor believed that acting in this manner would not raise an appearance of partiality within the meanings of the relevant ethical standards because if, in fact, he made such a judgment, and his ethics advisor made such a judgment then he couldn't come and tell me that he and his ethics advisor believe that there is no ethical or legal reason for him to recuse himself What he said to me, Senator Bennett, is that he talked to Secretary Bentsen and he talked to Ms. Hanson and he thought it was best, what he was conveying to me is not this appearance issue that you refer to. What he was conveying to me that he thought it was politically best, public relations best, that he didn't really want to take the heat. He didn't want us to take the heat. That's what he was saying to me, And that is what I think is wrong. If he made a determination that there was an appearance issue here, then he would have been legally or ethically required to recuse himself, but he did not make such a determination. And this notion about Mr. Altman being a long-time friend of the President, a close personal friend, which is sort of gaining currency 493 here, is also, I believe, incorrect, sir. Mr. Altman went to college with the President 25 years ago. I don't think they were in the same class in college. I don't believe Mr. Altman saw the President between 1968 and 1991, until the President started running for ofIt is true that Mr. Altman was a high Government official in the Administration. That's true, but that doesn't mean he's pre cluded from doing his duty and indeed even if he was a close per- sonal friend of the President's, which I don't believe he is, a close personal friendship is not, under the ethics rules, a covered relationship that requires you to recuse yourself. There were no facts that I knew, and no law that I knew that would in any way indicate that Mr. Altman was wrong when he told me that he was not legally or ethically required to recuse himself. What Mr. Altman was taking was in my view an unprincipled position here, A position contrary to what I believe should be the proper policy for the Executive Branch, Now I know that a lot of people don't agree with me on this thing. Lloyd Cutler doesn't agree with me. Lloyd Bentsen doesn't agree with me. Ms. Hanson doesn't agree with me. You don't agree with me. Chairman Riegle doesn't agree with me, A lot of people don't agree. I lose a vote in :this Committee at this time. But I believe I'm right in this thing. Senator BENNETT, Obviously you do and I won't beat the dead horse any more. I'll simply say for all of my earlier statements of admiration for you which I do not back away from, I will not consult you if I ever get in a circumstance where I need advice on this issue. Thank you. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Maybe I'm not the most politically astute person in the world, Senator Bennett, except I happen to believe the best politics is to do your duty, to stand. up for what's right and when people come at you and attack as they will, political opponents or newspapers, you explain yourself, you defend your position. To me that is the best politics also, but a lot of people don't agree with me about that either, The CHAIRMAN. Senator Shelby, Senator SHELBY. Thank you. Mr. Nussbaum, you obviously-I never met you until tonight that I recall. I knew what you were doing at the White House as the Counsel, as White House Counsel, is that the proper term? Mr. NUSSBAUM. Yes, sir. Senator SHELBY. White House Counsel. You are obviously a man of strong opinions and there is nothing wrong with that. Strong personality. I would contrast you in my own mind with Mr. Altman sitting there and so forth. But I've got some problems and I want to follow up with something and I disagree with you on this, too, and I was going to ask a similar question that Senator Bennett got into, On page 13 and I had circled this earlier and I'm going to go back into it. "Or will result"-talking about conduct-- "or will result in an appearance of conflict significantly detrimental to the public's"-"to the public's legitimate perception of the fairness of governmental process." Well, that's what a lot of that was about, what is the perception of this. Mr. Altman, I believe, was on the right track, but he's not as strong as you are as far as personality. Why does he come to 494 the White House? Obviously a lot of trails led right to you you know, you were the Counsel to-White House Counsel. He Was down there and he was asking you about this. The diary here of Mr. Steiner and I think it's instructive now in a lot-to a large de- gree, and I can imagine just in my own mind and I think other peo- ple could seeing you tonight, seeing your demeanor as-you're' a trial lawyer and we do this, we carry our own common sense into
August 5, 1994 - Part 2
Coverage of the House Banking Committee Hearings where JACK RYAN the acting head of the Resolution Trust Company, ELLEN KULKA - General Counsel of the RTC, APRIL BRESTLOV - Staff Attorney of the RTC, Mr. HEINZ (?), JAMES DUDINE Chief of Investigations at the RTC, WILLIAM ROELLE - Former Senior Vice President of the RTC, and others testify
August 5, 1994 - Part 3
Coverage of the House Banking Committee Hearings before which testify several officials from the Resolution Trust Corporation
August 5, 1994 - Part 3
(14:01:37) How does this confidential information help the White House deal with press leaks? Were they going to deliver it to reporters? How did this information help shield the President from embarrassment? Did it keep the President away from Governor Tucker? Second, it will not do to say that the recusal decision was a tempest in a teapot. The top officials of the White House and the Treasury spent too much time agonizing over how to keep Roger Altman involved. But for the unexpected congressional extension of the statute of limitations, Mr. Altman would have been the final decisionmaker in Madison. At bottom, the question is why were they so afraid to leave the White House "defenseless" without Altman? Third, we must also decide if, as Mr. Ickes testified, nonpublic information was revealed by Altman to the White House on February 2. Why would he say so if it were not true? Can we accept his efforts to dilute his testimony? Robert Fiske's report said there was insufficient evidence to prove criminal wrongdoing. That conclusion, of course, reflects the extraordinary burden of proof (14:02:55)(tape #10101 ends)