49 3 Doesn't Your Relationship with the President and Mrs. Clinton Require a Recusal. First, as I said. I not be playing any role in this matter. There won't be, therefore, any appearances of a conflict. Secona. I'm playing no role whatsoever right now in the RTC's investigation of this case. Third, I might point out that the RTC referred this matter to the Justice Department for possible criminal eview last October. I was also interim CEO at that time. I was advised at that ume that such a review was being conducted and that a decision on referral to Justice would be made. As certain Treasury and RTC officers will attest. I took the position that no mal procedures should be followed. If such a decision on referral was typically made at the regional office level, my view was that it should be made that way in this matter. 16306 + what Conversations Have You ad With the White House on this Matter? I've had on substantive conversation. Approximately three weeks ago, Jean Hanson (Treasury General Counsel) and I requested a meeting with Mr. Nussbaum, White House Counsel. The purpose of the meeting was to describe the procedural reasons for the then impending February 28 deadline: the Completion Act, the statute of limitations was retroactively reinstated for certain types of civil claims (those relating to fraud and certain claims relating to intentional misconduct); as it related to Madison Guaranty, it would expire the end of February. Finally, if the RTC were to determine that any such claims existed, the RTC would have to determine whether seek a tolling agreement or Commence litigation. We made clear that we had no idea at all what decision would be reached. I did say, however, that if I received a clear recommendation from the RTC's chief legal officer, I would follow it. I also said that I was reserving judgment on a recusal. We were only asked one question. Did the RTC intend to provide the same briefing on the RTC's processes to attorneys for the parties in interest. I said that I assumed so but would check with the RTC General Counsel. Jean Hanson did check and was told "in due course." "I said fine". کے Why did you brief the White House on those processes? Solely to ensure that they understood the legal, procedural subject of major It is not uncommon The meeting could was simply a legal Who else attended that meeting? Mr. Ickes, Ms. Williams and one of Mr. Nussbaum's assistants. Were there any other conversations at all? The only other discussion occurred later when [ indicated that I was not inclined towards a recusal. Has the White House attempted to influence your decision on these matters? No. It is understood that the RTC must complete the task that it has been given and, of course, the White House respects the independence of the RTC. Have you attempted to influence the RTC's review of the Madison No. Why did the Treasury General Counsel accompany you and not the RTC General Counsel? We discussed only the broad procedural framework fl the statute of limitations issue and the presence of the RTC General Counsel was No specifics were, or were intended to be, not necessary. discussed. 52 Are you a close friend of the Clintons? I know them well, yes. Am I one of their very closest circle? Yes, Do you consider yourself a FOB? as I understand that term to be used. Do you think your relationship with the President should disqualify you from playing any role in Madison? No. As I said, I won't be playing any role and the question is moot, if I were to be playing a role my answer would be no. When the issue of referring this to Justice arose, my position was that all the normal procedures should be followed. In that case, such decisions are often made by regional offices and my view was that nothing should be different. That would be my stance on Madison. If I received a truly clear recommendation on it from the chief legal officer, I'd almost certainly follow it. I've never played favorites on sensitive matters, let alone one of this sensitivity, and I wouldn't do so here. |