August 4, 1994 - Part 11
August 4, 1994 - Part 11
(22:00:17) Mr. STEPHANOPOULOS. Sir, I would point out as I said earlier today, I had that conversation with the President after any conversations with Mr. Steiner, so I don't know how he could have gotten that idea at all but it couldn't be from anything I said because I hadn't talked to the President. Senator DAMATO. I didn't say you said that. Mr. STEPHANOPOULOS. But I wanted to make sure the time was clear. It wasn't until after Senator D'AMATO. You made the observation that the President wasn't upset. I would point out that if we believe that this was not a fair and accurate representation, and I know there's a difference and particularly when it relates to how you would interpret the reactions of someone who is rather powerful, the President of the United States. Someone might say furious, someone might say upset, but Josh Steiner, if you believe that he didn't get this information, he had to be a soothsayer, a soothsayer. Because last evening, fully 5 months later, the President of the United States did indicate that he was upset. He qualified why, but he did indicate it. So this is my observation, that's a pretty doggone good, reliable document to go to before people began to get involved in tor- 463 turing what we found in that diary and attempting to place different lights upon it. Now, that's my observation, and I yield the balance of my time to Senator Mack. By the way, 1 might say that in the Office of Government and Ethics report, it's worthy of note, that it says because "your authority as Secretary of Treasury relates to employees of Democrats" --"the Department," excuse me, "the report of the Inspector General is necessarily focused upon the activities of the officials of the Treasury Department." Now, for that reason, our analysis is not intended to cover, nor should it in any way reflect upon, the actions of the individuals who are employed by the White House. We have heard repeatedly now, repeatedly every witness just about, well, we have been cleared by the Office of Government Ethics, That is not the case. There has been that little qualifier. I might say that's on page 2, and so I just think that's an important distinction, a very important distinction to make, and I yield my time to Senator Mack. Senator MACK. Mr. Lindsey, if we could pick up on the conversation we were having a little while ago. Mr. LINDSEY. Yes, sir. Senator MACK. I wanted to start with again, a point we do agree upon, and that is on October the 4th, when you're with the President, you've already had a conversation with Mr. Sloan. Mr. LINDSEY. What I believe was a fairly short conversation, yes. Senator MACK, But I think you said earlier that in that short conversation, he passed on to you the information that Ms. Hanson had given to him about the 9 referrals and that the Clintons were named as witnesses. Mr. LINDSEY. Again, I'm not sure he said 9 referrals, but he did indicate that there were referrals with respect to Madison, and that the Clintons were mentioned. I don't know at that point if he used the word "witness." Senator MACK. That's fine. Now, I want to go to this phone call that you get. We're assuming it came from Lyons and you didn't make the call. Mr. LINDSEY. Right. Senator MACK. And Lyons informs you of some rumors, that there are some referrals out there and that they may include something to do with the Clintons? Mr. LINDSEY. He indicated to me he had press inquiries, members of the press had called him, that they had also called another person who was involved in the 1992 campaign, and that in those Press inquiries or in those conversations, the press had indicated that they were aware that there were these referrals. Senator MACK. Say that to me again. Mr. LINDSEY. That the press was aware there were these referrals, Sometime after that, in a conversation with the President, I indicated to him that I talked to Jim Lyons, that the press apparently was aware that there were referrals, criminal referrals, that I understood there were referrals with respect to Madison, and that the Clintons were somehow mentioned in the referrals, but not as targets or subjects. 464 Senator MACK. So you confirmed, then, with the President that there were these referrals out there. Mr. LINDSEY. Yes. I thought, you know, with the press calling Jim Lyons and other people, that a story was imminent, It turned out that no one wrote about it for another 3 weeks. But at the time I thought it was clear there were going to be stories shortly about the referrals. Senator MACK. Again, let's go back to the conversation with Lyons. What was your reaction when he called you? I mean, how did you respond to the information he had given you? What did you say back to him?