Advanced Search
Transporting logs by truck
Milling lumber
Lumbering (b/w) on preview cassette 18490
Ext. lumbering lot
Transporting Logs
Aerial (transporting logs by river) on preview cassette 18490
Log Camp
Est. log camp
Forest
P O V Forest
Forest From Train
Forest (P O V from train)
Lumber
Lumbering
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.31.32] Mr. WIGGINS. Well, we now know as a result of the splendid contribution of friend from Ohio that, the President did not, learn of these activities with respect to Dr. Fielding for nearly 18 months after they happened. It is the first time he learned about it. And now the question IS should he be impeached. should he be impeached because be, took improper act, upon learning of that activity. The President, without question, ladies and gentlemen regarded The Pentagon Papers matter as a national security issue. It is idle to talk about whether a conviction is proper under the Espionage Acts, those acts, as my colleagues at the desk know, involving a foreign power. It was not the motive of Dr. Ellsberg, ladies and gentlemen, it was the fact of the disclosure. Whatever his motive that prejudiced the United States of America. And the President's actions were prompted by reason of the fact of the disclosure rather than any subjective motive of Dr. Ellsberg to aid a foreign power, a fact which 'Would be very important in a prosecution under the Espionage Acts. That is the issue. That Is the issue, whether or not after the 17th of March 1973, when the President learned of an act which happened about a year and one-half prior to that, whether he acted prudently given his state of knowledge and belief -.it that time. And I am telling you that the weight of the evidence, the overwhelming weight of evidence is that Richard Nixon believed the Pentagon Papers Was a national security issue, and his actions after learning of 1973 were wholly consistent with that belief on his part. Now, if a majority of the committee really believes that a President of the United States should be impeached because of his honest good faith belief that the security of this Nation is in jeopardy, that decisive and bold action is required on his part, then so be it. But, ladies and gentlemen, you live with that judgment. History is going to judge you ill if You make that judgment. This is not a proper to grounds to impeach the President of the United States. I will yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIRMAN. I recognize the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes, for 3 minutes. Mr. SARBANES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it is very important for the members of this committee and the American people to appreciate exactly what the Plumbers did in the Fielding break-in. The Plumbers broke into Dr. Fielding's office. Dr Fielding was not under suspicion. They -went into his office in order to get his files on one of his patients. And I ask every doctor and lawyer and every insurance agent and accountant in the country what kind of a land would you be living in if a group of hired hands have the, power to come into your office in the dead of night in order to get one of your files? If the purpose was legitimate, why did they not obtain those files in a lawful manner? And the answer is of course, that the purpose was not legitimate. Who were the Plumbers? They were a band of hired hands. They were not law enforcement officials. Why was not the FBI brought into this matter if it were a legitimate matter for governmental actions? Because the Plumbers were doing absolutely illegal things that the FBI refused to do and that goes back to the Huston plan of the previous Year, when this staff person, Huston put forward to the President and had approved, a plan that involved surreptitious entry. His report stated "the activity involves illegal entry [00.35.44-00.35.55--no video] and trespass" and the FBI added a footnote to that report and said "The FBI is opposed to surreptitious entry." That same Huston report provided for covert coverage, and the FBI added a footnote and said "The FBI is Opposed to implementing any covert mail coverage because it is clearly illegal." They could not use the FBI because the FBI was not prepared to do these illegal things. Let us look at one other thing. From whence did the Plumbers get their money? Where did the money come from in order to do this operation? Ladies and gentlemen, it came from a private source, Mr. Baroody, a PR man here in Washington, a close friend of Mr. Colson's who states in an affidavit that in the" latter part of August or the early part of September "Mr. Colson telephoned me and told me that the White House had in urgent need for $5,000." So, he took $5,000 over to Colson's office and was told to go down to another office and give it to the fellow that he would find There. That fellow was Egil Krogh, the head of the Plumbers unit, So, Baroody goes down there with his $5,000 in cash and gives it to Krogh. Krogh was questioned before. the grand jury as follows: Question: Did You look in there to see what it was? Answer: I looked in the envelope to see this was money inside of it--It was in the form of -cash. Question: Had you stated to Mr. Colson 'anything about the form in which you wanted the funds, whether it should be in cash or not? Answer, I believe I specified cash. Question. Why did You specify cash? Answer. I believe because it was felt that there shouldn't be any way to trace the money that was to be used. The CHAIRMAN. The 3 minutes of the gentleman has expired. [00.37.31]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.42.42] Mr. HOGAN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. COHEN. I yield to the gentleman from -Maryland. Mr. HOGAN. I thank the gentleman. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining. Mr. HOGAN. I would just like to return to the wiretap matters that I was not able to finish earlier. In addition to the Kraft wiretap having no criminal or national security basis, it was done by a consultant to the Committee to Re-Elect the President, -which makes it, totally illegal. In addition, under normal procedures, the Attorney General reviews the necessity and the propriety of wiretaps on national security matters every 90 days and this practice -was not followed in respect to any of these 17 individual taps that the President authorized and approved. Now, I would like to read from a transcript of the conversation between the President and Dean on February 28, 1973, on wiretaps when they were just talking about the Time Magazine story which revealed the Wiretaps at the White House. The President says: "Sure. And the, and the, and Henry's--he insisted on Lake, you see after working with McGov--uh, uh, for Muskie." And Dean says: "Uh-huh." And the, President, says: "Incidentally, didn't Muskie do anything bad on there? (unintelligible) Henry (unintelligible). At least, I know not because I know that, I know that he asked that it be done, and I assumed that it was. Lake and Halperin, They're both bad." That's the President talking. "But the taps were too." The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. All time has expired. And the question now occurs on the Wiggins amendment to strike subparagraph 3. All those in favor by Of the motion to strike please signify by saying aye. [Chorus of "ayes."] The CHAIRMAN. All those opposed? [CHORUS of "noes."] The CHAIRMAN. The noes appear to have it. The noes have it and the, amendment is not agreed to. I recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Brooks. Mr. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in this debate we have neglected a most vital part of this article, that being section 1. 1 think it is very pertinent to this entire activity. It is a, primary area of abuse that has subjected the American People to spying and prying and In the interest of debate, in that all of those members who have an interest in presenting the facts on this matter section 1, and those who are, opposed to it., I have an amendment at the desk to strike section 1 and would so move. The CHAIRMAN. The. clerk will read the amendment. The CLERK. [reading] Amendment by Mr. Brooks, Strike subparagraph I of the Hungate substitute. The CHAIRMAN. And the gentleman from Texas is recognized. accordance with the rule recently adopted by unanimous consent, the gentleman recognizes that there is 20 minutes in opposition to the amendment am] 20 minutes in support of the amendment The gentleman controls the 20 minutes in support of the amendment. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the time that I would use be deducted from the time of the Opponents of this so that the Proponent of this would not suffer in any way; we will have a full 20 minutes to utilize I will yield to them as they request. The CHAIRMAN'. Without objection, so ordered. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Nixon's personal involvement efforts to misuse IRS for political purposes in violation of individual civil rights is clearly documented in events that occurred on 157 1972. In the tape. of a meeting between the President, Mr. Haldeman, and Mr. Dean. there is no question that there was some discussion as to how efforts were going to get the IRS to institute audits, investigations of Mr. Nixon's political enemies. Some of the evidence involving Mr. Nixon efforts to misuse the IRS has not been made available to this committee. The transcripts submitted to us do not include last 17 minutes of this meeting with Haldeman and Dean on September 15. And yet Mr. Dean has testified that during that time there. was a specific discussion about the plan to use IRS for these purposes. Judge Sirica has listened to the entire tape and has announced in open court that those 17 minutes do indeed involve conversations relating to the abuse of the IRS. He has since made those 17 minutes available, to Mr. Jaworski but under the restraints put on him by the U.S. court of appeals has been unable to provide them to the Judiciary Committee. And needless to say, Mr. Nixon has not made this portion of the, tape available to us despite his continuing protestation that he intends to cooperate fully with our investigation. Now, we can only use the evidence that we have and that evidence, the September 15, tape, Judge Sirica's announcement, John Dean's testimony, the Johnnie Walters testimony, clearly indicate that there was a definite concerted plan to misuse the Internal Revenue Service for personal and political gain. Now, Mr. Chairman, our constitutional safeguards protecting individuals rights against arbitrary and unrestrained Government power mean very little to a President who Would use the IRS for such distorted fashion. I would 'reserve the balance of my time for those who are opposed or in favor of this proposition. [00.49.01]
Packers Win Pro Title
Packers Win Pro Title It's 17 degrees in New York as dedicated fans pack Yankee Stadium to see their Giants meet Green Bay for the professional title. It takes more than the weather to slow the Packer machine as Jerry Kramer kicks three Green Bay field goals and they wind up the champs again. 16 - 7. Shots of football fans bundled up for game, wrapped in scarf s and plastic bags. Football players on sidelines wearing packer blankets.
Manhattan Mural: Kids Give Fence Fancy Brush-Off
NO AUDIO Children paint a block long mural on a plywood fence, bordering their play street in midtown Manhattan. The scenes depict "Summer in the City". The kids are neighbors of Lincoln Center and it's their second annual artistic fence-painting. MS A group of kids, hard at work, paint a fence. CU a young girl with her back to the camera painting the fence. Its hard to tell what she's painting maybe a handprint. CU Interpretations of lions and giraffes painted by the children. CU Buildings painted on the fence with "Gotham City" painted in yellow above. CU of a car at a stop sign. CUS - Profiles of children painting. MLS - Children painting on the street with some adult supervision. Slow Zoom out of the freshly painted fence. LS of the fence from a distance with Manhattan buildings in the backgrtound.
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.54.29] Mr. DANIELSON. Thank you for yielding. inasmuch as Mr.--my distinguished friend, Mr. Sandman and others request specificity on many of these items I feel it is appropriate that It be provided. Within this field of the use of the Internal Revenue Service, there are other items than those, mentioned. by Mr. Brooks. For example, along in 1971, and 1972, Mr. John Dean, who had authority to work as liaison between the White House and the Internal Revenue Service, obtained confidential Internal Revenue in information about a rather large number of people and under his direction efforts Were made to have the. Internal Revenue Service conduct audits On certain persons who were low on popularity within the White House. This is borne out on March 13 1973, for example, in a conversation within the Oval Office. The President asked Mr. Dean if he needed anything from the IRS and Dean responded that he didn't at that time. He said he now had sources in the IRS and could get whatever he needed without any further trouble. 'In the spring of 1972, the political campaign was warming up and they thought down --John Ehrlichman and others in the White House thought it would be good to get some information on Lawrence O'Brien. who was chairman of the Democratic National Committee They had found that in an investigation of Howard Hughes there was information indicating a financial connection with Mr. O'Brien. So Mr. Ehrlichman, in 1972, instructed Treasury Secretary Shultz to investigate and interview O'Brien about his tax returns because the President was interested. Thereafter, because of the inquiry. the IRS did interview Mr. O'Brien and they furnished Shultz with the results of the, interview. It didn't indicate anything particularly bad, so on August 29, Shultz, together with--Treasury Secretary Shultz together with Barth and Walters of the Internal Revenue venue Service. decided this, that we do nothing further about O'Brien. They notified Ehrlichman that they -were, dropping the matter, and of course, Mr. Erhlichman strenuously objected. But they wouldn't leave it alone at that point. A couple of days later, in early September, Mr. Ehrlichman got in touch with Herbert Kalmbach the President's loyal personal attorney and fundraiser, and told Kalmbach to go up to Las Vegas, Nev., and plant the story with Hank Greenspun of the Las Vegas Sun, I believe it is. Kalmbach fortunately refused to do so. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has used his 2 1/2 minutes. Mr. DANIELSON. But this is a part of the pattern of misuse of the Internal Revenue Service. [00.57.12]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.09.21] Mr. MEZVINSKY. When considering the Article on Abuse of Power, really what the Committee is doing is looking at the type of presidential conduct which the Founding Fathers knew the System could not tolerate. We see now, the abuse of the, IRS. There -wasn't any IRS -when the Constitution of Was written, but I'm positive that abuse of this agency, is the type of problem the drafters of the Constitution foresaw. I believe the reason that the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Railsback and the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Mayne, and so many others are So concerned about this matter is the realization that the abuse of the IRS can poison the system. When the system of government is threatened, the abuse of the IRS becomes one of the most hideous of all the charges. And why? Because we all pay taxes. We know that the IRS has personal information. We know that it is 'Is based on voluntary action, honesty and our conscientious efforts to pay our taxes. It is really self-confession when we file, our taxes. We know that and we understand it. I think there is apprehension sets in because we realize that Richard Nixon's presidency has really leveled a serious blow to the IRS. We have talked about the enemies list-, but I would add that there is another use to be discussed--a list of friends. Now, what do we see about the friends, and why is the friends list as significant as the enemies Because impeding the due administration of the Internal Revenue Act by issuing a directive from the White House to turn off an IRS audit is a violation of the law. It is another kind of cover-up. It means another kind. of protection. And we have evidence to show that is exactly what happened. And let me tell you, my friends, though we are involved d in a constitutional issue, we know that some are groping for proof of criminal violations. Now if you decide to help your friends by stepping in on an IRS audit, that is an interference with the due administration of the Internal revenue Code and cite this as an example; which is not only a significant abuse of office, but it is also a criminal offense, a Violation of section 7212, Under that section, if you interfere with the -due administrative administration on of the Internal Revenue Code is a, felony and being put in prison. And I would bring that to the attention of the members of this committee. I would also like to rate that the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue, Taxation looked at this issue, and that investigation is still going 'on and the, Joint Committee in fact. has asked for re-audits of those "friends", those on whose, behalf there was direct contact we're talking about the tax affairs of some of the closest associates and friends of the White House, and we have testimony direct that, in fact, the White House was involved. Now let me point to One item that is Very interesting to me, and that the whole focus on September 15 discussed by the gentleman from California, whom I respect, Mr. Wiggins. No direct testimony, We have Mr. Dean just talking about it. He, is talking about it supposedly 'in in the abstract. Well., let me say this. It is not in the abstract, it is right on target. Let us reefer to March 13, 1973, and what do we see? We see a direct involvement, direct discussion at page 50 where they are talking About issues. What does the President say directly. "Do we need any IRS stuff." That is the answer to direct involvement, The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. [01.14.10]
Aerobatic Thriller
NO AUDIO At Tusking Airfield in Moscow, 15 nations are represented at the 11th World Championships in Aerobatics. Propeller-driven aircrafts, handled by some of the best stunt pilots in the world, perform do loops, dives, twists and turns for judges. MS Flags from 5 countries (United Kingdom, France and Germany are clearly visible) wave as crowds sit on the grass below looking up at the sky. Low Angle shot of a dirigible (Blimp) with international flags being flewn beneath it. CU of women and men, political dignitaries, watching the show. High Angle Shot - Single engine prop planes line up. CU Pilots seated in their planes prepping for takeoff. Crowds cover their faces as from the sun as they look up into the sky. Low Angle Shot - Plane doing a loop. CUS of a man charting the planes techniques on a blackboard or chalkboard. MS Various shots of plane doing aerial stunts. MS A group of men, in a judging panel, scoring the flight performance of the pilot. Air to Air - A plane doing loops and then a free fall.
AAU Swim Meet
NO AUDIO At Lincoln, Nebraska, records topple at the 16th National AAU outdoor swimming and diving championships. Both Don Schollander and Pokey Watson set world records in the 200 meter men's and women's free-style, respectively. In all, nine world marks are set and one equaled in the four day meet. Low Angle shot as a male diver on a high dive platform performs a clean dive barely making a splash. Another diver attempts a clean dive. More splash than the first. MS Female diver doing a back flip off a spring board. Male diver doing a double tuck and dive into the water. MS Female swimmers dive off swimming blocks and compete in the 200 meter freestyle. MS Lillian" Pokey" Watson is in the pool. She gives an interview poolside (no audio). MS Male divers compete at the 200 meter men's freestyle. Don Schollander takes first place in the event. MS Don Schollander walking in the shallow end of the pool.
Turkish Disaster: Thousands Killed In Vast Earthqauake
Over three thousand people are killed in Eastern Turkey in the worst earthquake in 23 years. Some 139 villages are totally destroyed. United States Air Force planes bring in doctors and supplies. MS Aftermath of the earthquake and most of the homes are leveled. CU Structural damage to homes including clacked foundations and collapsed roofs. Mountains of debris. MCU Rescue workers digging in the ruins. A turkish person with a headwrap with a small child hiding behind him or her. A street of homes now rock and rubble. ECU an older Turkish man. Rescue workers, hard at work, shoveling and clearing bricks from their path. MS at a Turkish Army field hospital, people queue in line for medical assistance. ECU of man and child waiting in line. MS - People sitting up on medical cots and doctor standing with his patients. CU Nurse and doctor giving first aide to a man's injured face. Little girl with her face cut up from falling debris. Man being attended to by a female doctor. CU of people lining up for food. Bags of rice in a pile. CU Woman holding her crying child. MS People being handed rations from rescue workers. MS Tents set up to shelter the homeless and injured survivors. CU Smiling mother holding her little boy. High Angle Shot - Camera panning a demolished village.
Ranger Comes Home: Carrier Brings Viet Vets
The attack Carrier U.S.S. Ranger arrives in San Francisco after nine months of fighting in Vietnam waters. Over five thousand relatives and friends greet her crew. The first air strikes over Haiphong were flown from the Ranger. The CV-61 Ranger was a aircraft carrier that received the Navy Unit Commendation for exceptionally meritorious service during combat operations in Southeast Asia from January 10 to August 6, 1966. LS The Golden Gate Bridge 1966. MS Tug boat with the fire hoses turned on honor the Ranger Aircraft Carrier. Throngs of family and friends anxiously await the arrival of the Ranger with a banner saying "Welcome Home." The Ranger pulling up to her berth with all the sailors in their Naval best standing at the railings waving to family and friends. MS Family waving to the ships crew. MS The Ranger in the background as family face it waving to loved ones. A little boy on little boy on his daddy's shoulders. MS Sailors disembarking from the Ranger. CU Sailor and woman hugging/embracing each other. She is crying. CU Young sailor and girlfriend / wife embracing beside gangway. CU of various families of mothers, fathers/dads, etc greeting one another with hugs and kisses after the time away.
Humphrey Wedding: VP's Son Marries Minnesota Beauty
Former "Miss Minnesota" competitor, Donna Erickson, becomes the bride of Robert Humphrey, son of the Vice-President, in a wedding in St. Olaf's Roman Catholic Church, in Minneapolis. Surprise guest at the reception is Luci Johnson Nugent. High Angle Shot - St. Olaf's Roman Catholic Church. MS Roped of Onlookers watch the Bride and Groom leave the church. . High Angle Shot of Bride, Donna Erickson and the Groom, Robert Humphrey climb into their wedding car High Angle Shot of wedding guests gathered outside the church. The wedding car pulling away from the church and the hand of the bride is waving goodbye to the people. LS of Vice President Hubert Humphrey's lakefront Waverly home. MS Vice President Humphey and and Luci Johnson Nugent exiting the the house from a side door along with Donna Erickson and other dignitaries. High Angle Shot as Newlyweds - Donna Humphrey, Robert Humphrey, Luci Johnson Nugent, Vice President and Mrs. Humphrey and Mr. and Mrs. Erickson gather for a picture. High Angle as guests enter their wedding reception. CU as Donna and Robert talk with guests beside their wedding cake. She feeds him cake with her fingers.
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.20.46] Mr. FLOWERS. Let me turn to some specifics which may be just the tip of the iceberg. There was a two-pronged attack on a well-known political Figure who is now the Governor of my State, and a great and courageous American, a belief which is shared equally by those who agree or disagree with him. In the spring of 1970 George Wallace was not Governor of Alabama, but engaged in a heated contest with the then Governor Brewer who had succeeded Governor Lurleen Wallace on her death in 1968. The decision was made, by whom I don't know, but I think you be certain it was in the highest councils of the White House, that the success of Governor Wallace in the Democratic Primary in the State of Alabama was somehow incompatible with the interests of the Nixon administration. So, what did they do? Well, at the specific instance of Mr. Higby, primary assistant to Mr. Haldeman, Chief of Staff to the President, $400,000 in funds left over from the 1968 Presidential campaign was funneled to Alabama in a devious and undercover manner in on unsuccessful effort to defeat Governor Wallace. There is direct evidence to this from Mr. Kalmbach before this committee in this room. Then in early 1970, H.R. Haldeman, directed a special counsel to the President to obtain a report from the IRS about. the. investigation of George Wallace and his brother. Haldeman gave assurances that the report was for the President. A report from IRS Commissioner Thrower was requested on this basis, received and given to Haldeman. Material contained in the material -was there, thereafter transmitted to Jack Anderson, a syndicated columnist, by Murray Chotiner, a White House employee and personal confidant of the President. Portions of the material potentially dangerous politically to Governor Wallace were published nationally on April 13, 1970, several weeks before the primary election. Now: both of these foregoing, actions were gross abuse of the IRS as an agency of Government And incidentally, a violation of Federal law. Now, I ask you, my friends, who -was it that maintained a political enemies list in an effort to get back at them? It was the administration of Richard -Nixon. Who was it that released potentially damaging tax information about. The Governor of Alabama? The aides of- Richard -Nixon. And on another subject of gross abuse, who was it that frustrated the ultimate date with justice that awaited Daniel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo. and which I trust would have come to them at the hands, of a jury? Was it some left-wing radical liberal group ? No, my friends, it -was the administration of Richard M. Nixon. However you describe yourself and wherever you may be., you ought to be vitally, concerned here. because if this President, with whom -you perhaps agree politically, can get by with the abuses described in this article, then so can succeeding Chief Executives, including those with whom you may not agree, thus imprinting in our highest office a standard of conduct that is certainly unacceptable to me. The, CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired, The gentleman from New Jersey has 3 minutes remaining. Mr. SANDMAN. Well, I think now we have the whole case and if we could rest all Of it on this one, this lawyer would have asked for a directed verdict because these are the facts and now you know why they will not be specific. All they have are generalities, groups Of dates and each one, include about 3 months. All they have is in 1970 Haldeman told Mollenhoff. All they have is over sometime in 1971 and 1972 Caulfield did something' that Dean told him to do. All they have is in the spring of 1972 Ehrlichman told someone else something. The, only thing left is that magic date, September 15, 1972. Why don't you say that is all you have? "Why don't you let this count, rest on that date, because you know you cannot hold up. That is why you don't do it and here is why it would not hold up. All you have is a conversation which anybody that listens to that tape can tell why and how it was arrived at. Mr. Railsback now has brought Something and this is a majestic case to say the least. Modern times has done away with the fifth amendment. We heard that a day or so ago. And what did Mr. Railsback just say? Do you know what he said ? Nothing happened. not one of the five were audited. -Not one of them. But you have got to look past that. Impeach the President of the United States for a thought, not a deed? That is what he is saying. When did that happen before? And what kind of law is this going to make for every Man that sits in the White House from now on?, This is what I am concerned about. This can be a, stage show from now On for any majority party to manipulate against any man that becomes President of the United States that is not a member of his party, and such actions as that cannot be in the best interest of the Government and the country we all love so well. This is the thought we, have to prove to 220 million people. This shows beyond all reasonable doubt you cannot prove this count. You know it and the people know it, and why don't you pass this motion to Strike? The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. [01.26.24]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.31.41] Mr. DENNIS. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. HUNGATE. I will yield to my distinguished and learned colleague from Indiana. Mr. DENNIS. I would just like to say to my good friend from Missouri that I really intended no criticism of President Truman who happens to be a gentleman that I admire myself, and if he did check into Drew Pearson, I would come close to thinking that that might almost have been justified. Mr. HUNGATE. I thank the gentleman for his comment and I know that as a distinguished trial attorney he would do nothing except what is proper. We have talked about people, and agents. and servants and employees and I would like to in just, my brief time talk some about Mr. Butterfield's testimony. I thought he was good. He was one of our better witnesses. He has not been indicted. Now, he said in some of his testimony,. after qualifying how much time he spent In the White House from his first day and that is as early as you can get sworn in and he is right up there next to the Oval Office and goes through some of this, then he. talks about Mr. Haldeman: "Now, -Mr. Haldeman, in addition to being the Chief of the White House Staff was in charge of everything other than the domestic international trade, congressional and national security. He was in charge of everything that had a personal connotation, the speech writing the appointments, the President's travel schedule, the liaison with outside groups, political matters by and large, Personal matters, communications with the media, et cetera." And then he says "I could go on now and elaborate a bit on the Haldeman staff. That is the staff I know best. That is the staff which was the biggest and had most of the people on it. But if a crunch matter came up, of course, they checked with Haldeman. Larry Higby was Bob Haldeman's alter ego. Larry Higby was to Haldeman what Haldeman was to the President." Then he goes on about Higby and Gordon Strachan and his responsibilities, He says that "he was responsible for keeping attuned to the political happenings around the country, and had a very close liaison to the Committee to Re-Elect." Then continuing in our testimony on page 29, he testifies: [quoting transcript] The President, first of all, is well organized always and highly disciplined as an individual. The whole staff reflected that. The staff was a very, very well organized, firmly run staff. Mr. DOAR. Could you give to the committee an indication of the President's work habits with respect to attention to detail? As you knew it? Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Yes; from my observations, from my having seen thousands and thousands of memoranda over this period of time--I May be using these figures loosely-- hundreds and hundreds of memoranda over this period of time, from working directly with the President and Haldeman, I know him to be a detail man. Then he goes on The President often, of course, was concerned whether or not the Curtains Were closed or open, the arrangement of state gifts, whether they should be on that side of the room or this side of the room, displayed on a weekly basis or a monthly or daily basis. Social functions were always reviewed by him, the scenario, after they came to me from Mrs. Nixon. Each was always interested in the table, arrangements. He debated whether we should have a U-shaped table or round table. He was deeply involved in the entertainment business, whom we should get for what kind of a group, small band, big band, black band, white band, jazz band, Whatever. He was very interested in meals and bow they were served and the time of the waiters and was usually put out if a State dinner was not taken care Of in less than an hour or an hour's time. He debated receiving lines and whether or not he should have a line prior to the entertainment for those relatively junior people in the administration who were invited to the entertainment portion of the dinners only and not to the main dinner. [end quoted section] The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SEIBERLING. Mr. Chairman ? Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Did Mr. Dennis seek recognition? Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman, I will Seek recognition, sure. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dennis Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman, and my colleagues on the committee, think this article, if proof were here, would be more important in many respects than article I that, we dealt with earlier. But, the difficulty as I see, it is that whereas on article I you had a, difficult matter of balancing Proof mid deciding where the weight lay and whether a case had been made beyond a, reasonable type of a doubt. and I decided it had not been, but while you have that kind of a problem there, here we might have a serious case, if you had the evidence, you don't really have the evidence. And I cannot believe that we are going to impeach the President of the United States, without------ [01.36.03--TAPE OUT]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.07.37] Mr. DANIELSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak in opposition to the point of order. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized in opposition to the point of order. Mr. DANIELSON. Mr. Chairman, I apologize to Mr. Hungate. I feel deeply about this point order. I feel that I must speak in Opposition. In MY opinion, Mr. Chairman, this is possibly, probably--I can make that stronger--it is certainly the most important article that this committee may pass out. The offense in this article is truly a high crime and a misdemeanor within the purest meaning, of those words as established in Anglo-American jurisprudence over a period of now some 600 years. The. offenses charged against the President in this article are Presidential offenses. No one else can commit them. You or I, the most lowly citizen can obstruct Justice. You or I, the most lowly citizen, can violate any of the statutes in our criminal code. But only the President can violate the oath of office of the President. Only the President can abuse the powers of the office of the President. When our Founding Fathers put our Constitution together, it was no accident that they separated the powers. Against the backdrop of 400 years of history of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence they realized the need to have a device. a constitutional means of removing from. office a chief magistrate who had violated his solemn oath of office. And I respectfully submit that impeachment clause of our Constitution which. fortunately, we have to use now for only the second time, is that means. These are high crimes and misdemeanors, meaning that they are crimes or offenses against the very structure of the state, against the System of government, the system that has brought to the American People and has preserved for the American people the freedoms and liberties which we so cherish. This is uniquely a Presidential offense, a Chairman, and the most important subject of this hearing. There are some--and I -would like to respond right now--there are some among us, there are conscientious, dedicated Americans who harbor a feeling of fear and apprehension at this. They seem--I submit that it is a sensitivity to the travail through which our Republic is now passing, but they feel they recognize, they sense that this is a most grave responsibility and proceeding, and some of them say that this should not be done because it might harm the Presidency. Mr. Chairman, I submit. that only the President can harm the Presidency. No one but the President can destroy the Presidency. And it is our responsibility acting under the impeachment clause, to preserve and protect the Presidency as -we preserve, and protect every other part Of our marvelous structure of Government, and we do it through this-- it through this process. Someone' in his opening statement, referred to this as being a situation Of "We, the people" acting "We, the people," are acting through this procedure, through the provisions put into our Constitution. The American people, Mr. Chairman, are entitled to and -want a Government which they can honor and respect, and they should have it. The American people, Mr. Chairman, are eager to revere their President. They are entitled to a President whom they can revere. Mr, Chairman, I ask, "Is not the violation of the solemn oath of office an impeachable offense?" It is not found in our criminal code. It, is implicit in our Constitution but it is necessarily implicit in the Constitution for otherwise why would there be an oath of office? The offenses charged in this proposed article I respectfully submit, Mr. Chairman, are offenses which go directly to the breach of a solemn oath of office. Can anyone argue that if the President breaches his oath of office, he should not be removed? I say not. And I respectfully submit that this point, of order should be denied. [00.12.50]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.43.01] Mr. BROOKS. Now later Dean joined the President and Haldeman and continued their meetings. We have not received a tape recording of this portion of the conversation but Dean testified that at that meeting there was a discussion of the unwillingness of the IRS to follow up on the White House directive. In his testimony the following exchange took place between Mr. Doar and Mr. Dean: [quoting] Mr. DOAR. Did you discuss your assignment with respect to the IRS with the President during your meeting on September 15? Mr. DEAN. I am not sure how directly or specifically it came up. But there was Indeed a rather extended discussion with the President on the use not IRS. He made some rather specific comments to me which in turn resulted in me going back to Mr. Walters again. Mr. DOAR. When you say the use of IRS, what are you talking about? Mr. DEAN. Well, as I recall the conversation, we were talking about the problems of having IRS conduct audits and I told him that we hadn't been very successful at this because Mr. Walters had told me that be just didn't want to do it. I did not, I did not push him. As far as I was concerned, I was off the' hook. I had done what I had been asked. I related this to the President and he said- The CHAIRMAN. The time--- Mr. BROOKS. May I complete this paragraph, and he said something to the effect, "well, if Shultz thinks he has been Put Over there to be some sort of candy ass, he is mistaken and if you have got any problems you just come tell me and I will get it straightened out." The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired, [00.44.43--cut LEHRER in studio, says that Rep. DENNIS will speak next--PBS network ID--promos for PBS Programming--these are kind of crazy, very dated, i.e. a "civics lesson" cartoon show] [00.48.02--title screen "Impeachment Debate July 29, 1974--pullback to LEHRER in studio, introduction of the debate to pass Rep. WIGGINS' amendment] [00.48.18--cut audience shot of committee room--committee bench] [00.48.18]