On November 21, 1989, Ma. Rosemary Stavart testified before the Committee Before the Committee, Xs. Stewart testified that: [v]ith the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I now believe that certain (Committes Hearing Transcript (Testimony), Part 5, p.274) At her deposition, Ms. Stewart testified that it was her "suspicion" that A. Was that suspicion grounded on anything that, in part at least, on anything that Mr. Black over said to you? Q. Was that suspicion grounded at least in part on anything that you over heard Mr. Black was supposed to have said to someone 180? THE WITNRIB: No. Q. A. Q. Same question with regard to Mr. Gray: Was it based at leas: in part on anything that Kr. Gray ever said to you? Was it grounded at least in part on anything that you had heard THE WITNESS: You. A. It was based upon the information contained in Lineola's motion to racuse Rd Gray, many of which attachments were purported yuubro of Ms. Bany. It's based upon information contained in the lavoufe filed by Lincoln for the leaks, which, again, contained information about things that Rd Gray had said er dona. And it was based upon information described to me by Charlie Keating, who had heard secondhand about comments that Ed Gray Bade. And I lied believed Ms. Heating when he sold [the] there things. (TA 336 and 337) Did you ever make any attempts to independently verify any of whatever it was Mr. Keating told you? Q. Did you ever make any attempta to independently verify any of the information that you had some across in (Lincoln's) recusel sation (against Kr. Gray]? In his deposition, Mr. Keating described the purported comment by Kr. Oray that Ms. Stewart indicated was a basis for her suspicions regarding Chairman Gray. (TZ 338-39) He stated that someone told him that Chairman ōray, in front of a group of people in Hawaii, called Mr. Keating a vulgar name and said he would "put him out of business." (Keating TR 49-51) Jue Mr. Keating does not remeber who told him this story, nor does he remember where or when he was told this story, nor has he ever found anyone who vas in this large group with Chairman Gray who heard any such comment or anything remotely like ie. (Keating TR 51, 303-307) Indeed, Mr. Keating testified that he most likely did not include the alleged Hawaii incident in Lincoln's motion to recuse Chairman Gray because he lacked any support for the story. (Keating TR 307) More broadly, Ms. Stewart's claim before the Banking Committes that the 407 investigation was improperly used for criminal investigative purposes li inconsistent with her own testimony. The 407 investigation cannot have been improperly motivated gåvan Xo. Seamaru's testimony to the Committee that Enforcement, the department she supervised, sought the 407 authority on its own initiative. (Testimony Part 5, p. 265) She also supervised the investigation. In an appendix to her Comittee testimony, Ka. Stewart sayı: Based on ay objection, Ms. Bobol was not placed in charge of the (Appendix 10) Koreover, Ms. Stewart testified that her concern was that the criminal referrals that resulted from the 407 investigation should have been filed Barliar. (1 314) The 407 investigation was conducted for appropriate supervisory purposes. It found critical evidence of violations of the direct Investment rula, awful underwriting and the creation of forged signatures of senior management. Then findings vere important components of San Francisco's May 1, 1987, recommendation to the Bank Board. Ma. Stewart's testimony in har deposition also shows that she supports the propriety of the criminal referrals: And we dii conclude that a criminal referral should be filed because of the possibility that (the file stuffing] had been done with the intent of deceiving the examiners in violation of Titla 18. The backditing report is much more lengthy. That investigation involved a great deal more werk. And we concluded that there was an intent to backdate documents, so that they would appear to have been grandfathered, and that that was done so, inappropriately, with willful intent, and that a criminal referral should definitely be (TR 211 and 212) Xa. Stewart's testimony before the Committee contained charges of "leaks" by Bank Board sources concerning Lincoln. In her deposition, Xa. Stewart acknowledged that: "I am not sure that every time I say 'lock' (in Congressional testimony) I meant unauthorized." (TR 326) the in fact was told by Bank Board General Counsel Harry Quillian that the release of information she wrote about in her memorandum regarding leaks," wae authorized by the Chairman and therefore authorized under the Bank Board's regulation. (TR 168, 169-170 and Testimony, Part 3, p. 19) Q. A. I understand your testimony then that you simply assumed that Yes. (TR 316-17) She also said 'I have no personal knowledge as to the source of any illegal leaks." (TR 621) Ma. Stewart vent on to tortify that she did not know whether any contacts I had with Congress or the media concerning Lincoln vere authorized. (319) Ka. Scovart testified before the Comittee that Chairman Gray and I appeared to have a "hidden agenda" against Lincoln and she implied that there WAS personal animosity on our part against Lincoln. (Testimony. Part 3, p. 256) ACC's counsel put this slain to rest in Ko. Stovaxt's deposition: Q. I want to know about comments you have ever heard ... from THE WITNESS: The only comments I recall with respect to personal ACC. (TR 328-330) Ma. Stewart's Congressional testimony also stated that I criticized her inaction in a series of non-Lincoln matters and that she believed I found her "too ochival,' (Testimony, Part 9, p. 174) Her deposition testimony is revealing in this areat A. It van elear to me that Mr. Black did believe I was too Q. A. Can you be specific about some areas or some instances? There were a couple of securities casos ..in which ay office had reached certain conclusions about the way s8108 should be handled. And I attended a meeting in which Mr. Black was very vocal about: We should have done mors; va should have sued the people. And there was a disagreement, a clear poliay disagryonent. And Kr. Gray van persuaded that Mr. Black was (TR 347-348) right. Thus, a "policy disagreemeng" in which the Chairman of the agendy was persuaded that my view (and the view of the Bank Board's chief securities lawyer, Ms. Williams) in favor of vigorouq enforcement of the securities lav vas right was sharacterized in Ka. Stavert's Congressional testimony as evidence of lax othies. (Testimony, Part 3, p. 274) Ms. Stewart also testified in her deposition as to my sthies conoorning Do you have any information about Mr. Black over asking anybody in Washington or San Francisco to do anything which you fels was 'methical which dealt with Lincola? No. (TR 348) She was asked "the same question as to Chairman Gray and gave the same answer. (TR 349) Ka. Stewart alno testified before Congress that she failed to reach a mutual Q. When you say you failed to reach a mutual understanding, did |