August 4, 1994 - Part 11
August 4, 1994 - Part 11
(22:30:23) The October 14 meeting was attended by Mr. DeVore, Ms. Hanson and Josh Steiner from Treasury, and Mr. Lindsey, Mr. Gearan, myself, Mr. Sloan and Neil Eggleston of my staff. I remember Mr. DeVore explaining at that meeting that Jeff Gerth, a New York Times reporter, was aware of the referrals to the Department of Justice in the Madison Guaranty matter. He was asking why the referrals had been forwarded to Washington, DO from Kansas City instead of directly to the U.S. Attorney's office in Little Rock. Mr. Gerth apparently believed that the forwarding of the referrals to Washington was unusual. It might suggest special treatment. Mr. DeVore said he was going to advise Mr. Gerth, of The New York Times, that the referrals had been sent to the U.S. Attorney's office in Little Rock before Mr. Gerth had called. A question was raised by someone I don't remember who,-whether it was usual for the RTC to confirm criminal referrals. As I recall, Mr. DeVore said that it was not unusual, but it was done in certain circumstances. We were also told at that meeting- The CHAIRMAN. Excuse me. In your printed text, I just want to make sure that you said what you meant, or maybe this is a mistype. It says here, as I recall Mr. DeVore said that it was not usual Mr. NUSSBAUM. I'm sorry, as I recall, Mr. DeVore said that it was not usual, not usual, that's correct. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. I just wanted to make sure that's the way you wanted to say it. Mr. NUSSBAUM. That is the way I wanted to say it. It was not usual, but it was done in certain circumstances. Senator KERRY. Would it be easier if you followed your text if you picked it up and put it over the top of the mike? I was just curious, Mr. NUSSBAUM. Thank you, Senator. We were also told that Mr. Gerth was inquiring and would likely ask the White House about the endorsements on four cashier's checks from Madison to the Clinton gubernatorial campaign. In essence, all we were told at this meeting is what The New York Times was saying to Treasury and what Treasury was planning to say to The New York Times. With respect to the referrals mentioned in the September 29 conversation and the October 14 meeting, I never saw a copy Of them. Nor did I ever ask to do so. In early January 1994-I'm now going to the next contact that I recall-in early January 1994, Joel Klein, the new White House 470 Deputy Counsel, told me that at the Renaissance Weekend in South Carolina, which Mr. Klein attended, the President had sought to have a brief conversation with Eugene Ludwig, Comptroller of the Currency. The President asked for advice apparently as to how to deal with the recent flurry of Whitewater stories. Mr. Mein said he told the President and Mr. Ludwig that it would be best if they did not speak about the matter. I told Mr., Mein I agreed and that he had done the right thing. At some later time, in a brief telephone call from Mr. Ludwig, I told him that I; agreed with Mr. Mein. I saw the President shortly thereafter. I told him that I had heard about his brief conversation with Mr. Ludwig. I also said it was my view that he should not speak to Treasury officials about this matter. The President and I agreed that if there were any appropriate discussions to be had, they should be had by Counsel, either White House Counsel if they involved official matters or Private Counsel, if they concerned purely private matters. The next contact I recall occurred on February 2, 1994, that now famous February 2nd meeting. On that day-I believe it was late in the day actually-I received a call from Mr. McLarty's office asking me to attend a meeting that evening in his office. When I arrived, I found Roger Altman, Ms. Hanson, Harold Ickes [the White House Deputy Chief of Staff], and Margaret Williams [the First Lady's Chief of Staff] in the room. When I asked what the meeting would concern, because I had no prior indication what this meeting would concern, I was told that Mr. Altman was going to brief us about the statute of limitations process being followed in the RTC's Madison Guaranty investigation. I then asked one of my staff, Mr. Eggleston, to join us. At the outset of the meeting, Mr. Altman told us that he would be informing us about a process that had been recently discussed with Members of Congress. He then described the RTC Completion Act, explaining that the statute of limitations with respect to civil fraud and intentional misconduct was due to