August 4, 1994 - Part 13
August 4, 1994 - Part 13
(00:25:34) Mr. NUSSBAUM. 1. don't object to that, Senator, but the report also indicates that Mr. Altman had no legal or ethical obligation to recuse himself. That's what Senator KERRY. I agree, it does reflect that. Mr. NUSSBAUM. And that's what Mr. Altman told me. Senator KERRY. But I also read that they took out each of the sort of legal, codified concepts of recusal and frankly, they had to do with a public employee affecting the private sector or a public employee affecting private gain, private decision, but it didn't reflect any applicable notion of ethics with respect to a public employee's impact on another public institution, particularly one that was involved with an investigation. And you yourself were sensitive enough about the investigation to state in your own policy that you shouldn't meet except rarely. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Senator, he came into our off-ices on Yebruary 2nd and he said I'm inclined to recuse myself, but I am not legally or ethically required to do so. I've been told that and I don't believe it. And I respectfully, Senator, disagree with you. Senator KERRY. You're entitled to and I'm not going to lambast you. Mr. NUSSBAUM. When somebody says that to me, I think then you have to do your duty. And if there's political heat, if Howell Rains is going to write editorials against you, if Republicans are going to criticize you, so be it. Senator KERRY. So do you still believe he should not have recused himself? Mr. NUSSBAUM. Yes, sir. Senator KERRY. Well, then, I'm very happy you're not serving as President's Counsel today. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Domenici. Senator DOMENICI. First, let me state for the record, Mr. Chairman, that I agree with you and I might also state that, all things considered, your statement tonight is very courageous and these whole hearings have been a testimony of your fairness. Now we have a testimonial beyond your fairness in conducting matters here, your straightforwardness and integrity, and I thank you very much for it. Mr. Nussbaum, I trust your integrity as much as anyone else's, and I had a lot of difficulty, as I heard you talk about the duty to sit rule. Frankly, you almost remind me of the law professors we have who taught a different kind of law than today, and you might be that kind of lawyer. I'm not at all sure you'd be out there seeking cases like some of them are, which you and I learned was champerty when we went to law school. But, frankly, it bothered me that you carried an analogy of a duty to sit rule to this situation. Now, frankly, there is no longer a duty to sit rule; that rule has been changed by statute. Title 48, section 455 no longer includes the duty to sit rule, but rather says, it obliges judges to recuse where their impartiality, and now I will, quote, "might be reasonably questioned." Now, frankly, I believe" that is exactly-that is exactly carried over to the last sentence of the so-called ethics rule that you read to us in our statement. Mr. NUSSBAUM. I agree with that. I agree it's carried over there--I and I also believe Senator DOMENICI. I'm going to let you answer but I want to fin- ish my thoughts. I'm not at all sure even now, having heard you, my self. But about the total reason for Roger Altman not recusing him I am convinced more than ever, that he shouldn't have asked you,'; if he did, and you should not have told him, if you did. My own conviction is he went there convinced that he was going to recuse himself.