July 19, 1995 - Part 3
July 19, 1995 - Part 3
(13:10:48) I think it's very important that that be understood, that a question can be thrown out that makes some farfetched assumption as part of the question. In doing so, that seems to give it the appearance that there must be something there in order for that question to be asked. The witness says, I never heard anything like that or that's news to me or where did that come from, and that's the end of it. But the question with the premise has been Put out on the table. I think it's very important that that be understood. Now, Mr. Chairman, I assume probably we're going to take up the other panel tomorrow. The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Senator Sarbanes and I have discussed whether or not we should continue. I think, in fairness to our Members and staff, that we will resume tomorrow with our next panel. Let me, before I recess, say that I appreciate, Mr. Hubbell, your responsiveness. Obviously, there are many, many questions that you are not in a position to answer, and I think you shared with us, to the best of your ability and obviously your recollection, your true feelings. I will say this: I am perplexed and troubled with respect to the redactions. I'm going to ask that we put--I have a problem when we have a matter called Whitewater and, of course, nobody knows what redactions are, but, basically, I get a page and it just says Whitewater and it's taken out. Then we're told that there is a lawyer-client privilege. At some point in time, and I would hope that we could get Mr. Kendall voluntarily to make these materials available either to the two counsels or, in some manner, to ascertain what these redactions are. I think, in fairness to everyone, if we want the story and want the information and these papers were all in Vince. Foster's office, the Committee has a right to review them. I would hope that we could do that without the necessity of some kind of formal action. I am troubled by it because you can't, on one hand, say that we've made all of the information available arid, then, on the other hand, raise the issue of attorney-client privilege. So, in fairness to this Committee, in fairness to the American people in getting this information, I hope we could resolve that. I don't know whether we can. I'm going to speak-I don't know whether it's in the ability of the Committee if we're acting together to be able to get that. It may be something Mr. Kendall wants to or feels compelled to resist. But I hope we would have ail opportunity to get that, and I Senator SARBANES. My understanding is that many of the redactions were made not on the basis of attorney-client privilege, but on the basis of relevancy. The CHAIRMAN. Maybe there is a manner in which we could solve that because if they are not relevant, why then, we don't want them. I do not want- Senator SARBANES. Why don't we explore that? The CHAIRMAN. I would hope we could explore that. Mr. Hubbell, we thank you. We stand in recess until tomorrow. (13:14:27) [Whereupon, at 1:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned, to reconvene at 9:30 a.m., on Thursday, July 20, 1995.] (13:14:30) Various shots of the Senate hearing room as Senators, witness, audience and press mingle and leave (13:17:28)(tape #10113 ends)