Advanced Search
Silly people
Silly people
Elderly couple registering at Chamber of Commerce
Elderly couple registering at Chamber of Commerce
Old people
Old people
Girl looking at flower
Girl looking at flower
Man pulling car
Man pulling car
Boy & man talking
Boy & man talking
Couple staying in woods
Couple staying in woods
People crossing bridge
People crossing bridge
Woman on phone
Woman on phone
Misc. people
Misc. people
People - woman
People - woman
People - dialogue
People - dialogue
Hula hooping (on Master #1)
Hula hooping (on Master #1)
Old people
Old people
3 teens
3 teens
Hula hooping
Hula hooping
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
[00.13.30] [***SEE RESTRICTIONS FIELD IN RIGHTS SECTION CONCERNING COMMENTARY FOOTAGE***] Senator GURNEY. Whenever they have gotten in touch with you, You have tried to cooperate fully? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, or my attorney, by transference of their requests by virtue of attorney or some other way yes, sir. Senator GURNEY. We certainly appreciate your cooperation. Senator ERVIN. If there is no objection from anybody on the committee the committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning. Mr. Sloan, you will be back in the morning? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. [00.13.58--members stand to leave] [00.14.07--Robert MacNEILL in studio] MacNEILL states that SLOAN will continue to testify about CRP financial practices, cash payments during the campaign, and his misgivings about the handling of the Watergate affair. States that SLOAN fits the pattern of allowing subordinates in the campaign machine to testify first to set the stage for their former superiors, and notes that this days hearing was the first testimony about Campaign finance practices rather than the activities which those finances supported. [LEHRER] LEHRER states that the testimony reveals the problems inherent in recording and controlling the vast amounts of money spent in a major campaign. Calls on Director of Office of Elections for the General Accounting Office, Phillip HUGHES Asks if there are loopholes even in the new law HUGHES says the law has room for improvement, as well as GAO's administration, but a great step above the former law The use of cash beyond small expenses of approx. $100 should be minimized, reporting should be simplified as much as possible, individual contributions should be limited, and improvements could be made in the details vis a vis reporting and which committees should be required to report. However, the best improvement in coming elections should be the fact that the law will have been in effect for the entire campaign period, rather than having a transition period that lends to abuses. LEHRER states that the GAO was the first agency of the government to address campaign corruption, even before Watergate. Asks HUGHES if he feels the agency has the tools to enforce the new law. HUGHES states GAO is seeking new tools, both for administration and enforcement, i.e. subpena power, to get records and compel witnesses for audits, civil litigative power to take action without using the Justice Department. MacNEILL states that SLOAN had referred repeatedly to judgement calls about when money had been committed to the campaign versus the actual date of receipt [SLOAN shown testifying], Asks about the GAO's ruling. HUGHES states that GAO disagrees, and that they consider an expenditure as giving money in exchange for a service rendered, with "committment" being an inadequate legal position. MacNEILL asks if there have been legal rulings to uphold GAO's position. HUGHES cites the pending Justice Dep't investigation of the Vesco matter, charging CRP with violating the act on the contribution side, but there are no court decisions as yet to apply to the law. MacNEILL asks then if the legality is not yet established. HUGHES confirms that it is not yet established to his satisfaction. [00.19.02]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
[00.19.02] [***SEE RESTRICTIONS FIELD IN RIGHTS SECTION CONCERNING COMMENTARY FOOTAGE***] LEHRER states that the uneven operation of the new campaign finance laws with respect to reporting and disclosure have led some critics to call for an end to private financing and the start of Government bankrolling of campaigns to end corruption and ensure fairness. Introduces an interview of Senator BAKER by reporter Peter KAYE. [cut BAKER with KAYE] KAYE asks if there is more of a case now for Federal election financing after the revelations of the days hearings BAKER says he is still opposed, very strongly, feeling that introducing the Federal bureaucracy would be exchanging one evil for another, but he would be against having the Ervin Committee recommend such a move. [MacNEILL in studio] MacNEILL states that before the committee can grapple with making a recommendation on Campaign reform, it must cover the factual ground of the coverup, leading to the point when the Committee will have to decide if the evidence implicates President Nixon in illegal activities. There is a growing argument about the Ervin Committee hearings, with one side claiming that airing so much hearsay evidence will prejudice the trials of other indicted conspirators in the Watergate affair, and Senator ERVIN on the other claiming that it is more important to get the facts to the public even at risk of jeopardizing the criminal courts' ability to indict and convict conspirators. Notes that Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox renewed his failed effort of the day before to get the Ervin hearings postponed, with a request to have the testimony of men like DEAN and MAGRUDER heard in executive session by the committee. MacNEILL states that there is another debate, about the effect of NIXON to govern, and that the committee should proceed to the witnesses closes to the President so that a fast conclusion about NIXON'S involvement in illegal activities can be reached. States that the committee rejects this argument, saying that it is necessary to have a careful and deliberate examination of lower-level witnesses to allow for proper examination of the larger figures in the Watergate affair. States that a number of politicians are getting impatient, among them Congressman McCLOSKEY, stating that an impeachment should be initiated, Senator FULBRIGHT, calling for both NIXON and VP AGNEW to resign (Agnew would be forced to split soon enough, as it turned out), Senator GRIFFIN of Michigan, a Republican, demanding disclosure of the facts by NIXON. MacNEILL states that NIXON seems determined to organize his new staff at the White House to "ride out the storm". States that it is reminiscent of the final act of a Shakespearean tragedy in which "forces are rising against the king on all sides" etc., etc.. However, reminds that the final scene is some time away, and it's not clear that it will become a tragedy. [00.22.36--MacNEILL signs off--title screen 'SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"--PBS ID] [00.23.14--TAPE OUT]
Along The Birthday Circuit - Hamburg, Germany
It's the 775th year for the famed seaport...which today is a bustling terminus. Since its founding in the 12th Century, Hamburg as been an important cog in the German machine. Hamburg, Germany The great port of Hamburg, Germany is celebrating its 775 year old birthday, crowds of people board the boats. CUS - A deck hand taking a boat rope and tying it around a medal post on the deck. MS - A painting of a wooden sail ship, MS - Fishing boat, the Fairplay VI. MS - A tanker ship. CUS - Chancellor Ludwig Erhard. MS - A small passenger entertainment boat with lights. MS - Chancellor Ludwig Erhard disembarking the entertainment vessel. MLS - A fireworks display in celebration of the ports birthday.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 7, 1973
[00.02.00--NPACT letters on black screen--image of page with SENATE RESOLUTION 60--Robert MacNEILL v.o. reading text of resolution--title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"--MacNEILL in studio] ***SEE RESTRICTIONS FIELD OF RIGHTS SECTION*** MacNEILL states that the day's hearings ended with new insight into the motivations of men who were willing to disregard the law to carry out the campaign out of loyalty to NIXON. States that viewers will see the unusual spectacle of a man admitting that he voluntarily committed perjury, for which he could still be indicted, as part of the Watergate Coverup. This man was Herbert PORTER, of the Committee to Re-Elect, who paid out some of the funds to Gordon LIDDY. MacNEILL states that his testimony raised a major theme of the hearings, how to ensure the morality of campaigns. [00.03.32--Jim LEHRER] LEHRER states that the fallout from Watergate continues to reach outside the hearings. Clarence KELLY, Kansas City police chief, was nominated to head the FBI, after the previous nominee, Patrick GRAY, was forced to quit because of his handling of the Watergate INVESTIGATION. States that the FBI will continue to be led by acting Attorney General William RUCKELSHAUS until KELLY can be confirmed by the senate, with the BUREAU being without permanent leadership since the death of J. EDGAR HOOVER over a year before. [MacNEILL] MacNEILL states that in the courts, the deposition of former WHITE HOUSE Chief of Staff H.R. HALDEMAN was made public, containing some surprises. HALEDMAN'S deposition stated that White House Counsel John DEAN was never asked formally to investigate WHITE HOUSE involvement in Watergate, and never submitted a report on it [contradiction of the White House's public statements on the matter] MacNEILL states that HALDEMAN'S deposition claims that DEAN did not talk to NIXON about the Watergate matter directly until 1973, confirming DEAN'S statement of surprise in 1972 upon hearing that NIXON had publicly claimed that DEAN was investigating the matter. The deposition also stated that HALDEMAN had control of a $350,000 fund for polling during the campaign. The deposition was part of the Civil litigation by the DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE against the COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT, and was over 200 pages long. [LEHRER] LERHER states that, as viewers will see, Jeb Stuart MAGRUDER is now at the center of the scandal, as the days testimony places MAGRUDER in a central postion in the COVERUP, with Hugh SLOAN giving more damaging testimony, and another former CRP staffer Herb PORTER adding more incrimination of MAGRUDER. SLOAN'S testimony concerning MAGRUDER'S efforts to get SLOAN to lie about the amount of money given to Gordon LIDDY, and PORTER'S story concering MAGRUDER asking PORTER to lie to the FBI, a GRAND JURY, and a trial court, with PORTER going along with the plan because he trusted MAGRUDER personally and in his position of second in command to John MITCHELL in the COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT. [00.05.53--shot of PORTER testifying] PORTER recounts MAGRUDER asking PORTER to corroborate to the FBI a false statement previously made by MAGRUDER about expenditures to LIDDY and others, and continuing to corroborate the PERJURY for the GRAND JURY and the TRIAL of the Watergate defendants. [00.06.52--MacNEILL in studio] MacNEILL states that PORTER would later describe his motivations in going along with the COVERUP, and that his admission of PERJURY before a national audience was a dramatic moment of the hearings thus far. [00.07.04] .
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 7, 1973
[00.07.04] . *SEE RESTRICTIONS FIELD OF RIGHTS SECTION*** MacNEILL introduces guest commentator, David AUSTEN, Georgetown University LAW PROFESSOR. MacNEILL asks AUSTEN about the important points of the day's hearings. AUSTEN comments that SLOAN is just a great witness, honest, confident, candid, that he is a model witness, particularly in being pinned down about exact words, is candid to admit he is not sure. This is in contrast to PORTER, who is much more insistent on exact words etc, States that PORTER'S testimony will probably cast some disrepute on the legal profession as PORTER recounts a story of the CRP's lawyer falling asleep during a conslutation with PORTER. [00.08.40] LEHRER states that AUSTEN will comment further at the end of the day, along with an interview by reporter Peter KAYE with Senator Daniel INOUYE. MacNEILL advises that the most dramatic questioning, by Sen. BAKER of PORTER, comes at the end. Offers an hourly summary of the hearings. [00.09.09--cut to SLOAN at table with counsel, MacNEILL continues v.o. to give summary--titles show the thrust of testimony] [00.10.26--Sen. ERVIN/gavel] Senator ERVIN. The committee will come to order. The New York Times and the, Washington Post, carried news dispatches indicating that papers identified' as the so-called "Dean papers" have been released in some manner to the New York Times, and published in part in the New York Times. When Judge Sirica ordered a copy of these--I do not know whether they are the same papers but indications are that, they are--ordered copies of the papers which Mr. Dean allegedly carried from the White House and placed in the safety deposit, box and later surrendered to Judge Sirica and furnished to this committee, I have a very wise man for a vice chairman of this committee. In spite of his youthful appearance he has wisdom of the ages and he suggested to me when the papers were received that we deposit them in a secure place under the most watchful security officer, and I am happy to report that an investigation made this morning indicates that any release that May have been made to the press of any papers of this nature did not Come from this committee. These papers were deposited under the understanding they would be kept, secure, that. no one would have access to them except the Senator., who constitute members of this committee and that no member of this committee would make any notes in respect to those papers. So I am glad to be able to report that however the New York Time, may have, gotten copies of any Papers of that nature, that they did not come from committee or from copies of the copy deposited with this committee under order Of Judge Sirica. I would be glad to have my wise colleague make a statement, on this point. [00.12.58]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 7, 1973
[00.12.58] Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Whatever wisdom I have in that respect I learned from you. But anyway, I think it might be of some interest to know how we provided for the security of these documents. Judge Sirica ordered a certified copy delivered to us provided that the documents would be delivered to the chairman and vice chairman for disposition as they directed. Senator Ervin and I, in accommodation of that suggestion by Judge Sirica, conferred on how best to provide for the security of documents that are considered classified at a Very high level. I am also a member of the Joint, Committee on Atomic Energy. The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy has the highest security custodial facilities. The committee permitted us then to provide for separate storage of those documents in a separate safe under the direction of the security officer of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, in a secure area protected 24 hours a day by guards, protected by automatic detection systems, protected by other devices that, I believe, virtually guarantee that there would not be intrusion into that area. No one has seen those documents except the members of this committee Plus the chief counsel and the, minority counsel. No one has taken those documents out of the secure area. Those documents are still in a secure area. It is a matter of some pride the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy since its instigation, since its beginning, has never had a security leak and I am sure this does not constitute an exception to the rule. Senator ERVIN. Any other member of the, committee desire to make any statement before we resume the questioning of the witness? Senator Inouye will resume the questioning of the witness. [00.15.12] Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Sloan, I gathered from the testimony yesterday you have been involved in raising funds, political funds since 1965; is that correct? TESTIMONY ;OF HUGH W. SLOAN, SR.-Resumed Mr. SLOAN. Yes sir, that is correct. Senator INOUYE. I would gather that this would qualify you as an expert in political fundraising. Mr. SLOAN. I am not sure anybody really becomes an expert in this area, Senator. senator INOUYE. I gather also from the testimony yesterday that you were a member of the budget committee. Mr. SLOAN, Yes, sir, that is correct, senator INOUYE. Who were the other members of this committee? Mr. SLOAN. To my best, recollection it was Mr. John Mitchell, Mr. Maurice Stans, myself, Mr. Lee Nunn, vice chairman of the financial committee, Mr. Jeb Magruder and Mr. Fred Malek. Mr. Robert Odle participated in those meetings in the form of keeping the notes of changes and so forth as we proceeded through budget, reviews. He would take that information, recollate it and revise it and provide the working papers for any subsequent, meeting. Senator INOUYE. Would you call this a high echelon Policy committee? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. Senator INOUYE. Now, did this committee decide upon how funds were to be spent? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir, it really had a dual function, which is the reason for the joint representation essentially, of the political members and the finance members. The finance input essentially into budget committee meetings would be, to indicate at any, particular point in time what, our best estimates might be of what we realistically felt we could raise in terms of funds for the total effort. We also had responsibility in providing a detailed budget for our own operating overhead for the, finance committee as one of the items considered in these meetings.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 7, 1973
[00.17.22] Mr. SLOAN. The political committee essentially working with the, guidelines we gave them, for instance, if you are talking about a, $40 million campaign, each of the various differentials would begin the process by indicating the tasks they wanted to accomplish and how much their thought it would cost. The process within these meetings would be to review- these in total and totals might come in at $60 million and subsequent discussions would generally be along the line: where did you cut, where do we establish our priorities, how do we get all of the individual departments and divisions so they fall within the ceiling set by the finance committee in terms of total dollars expected to be raised. We subsequently were in the process which we had not completed at the time I left of setting up a monitoring function where we would report back to the various divisions on essentially a monthly basis as to how they were doing versus the funds they Were allowed within their budgets. Senator INOUYE. SO in your budget committee discussions you discussed the purposes for which these funds were to be used? Mr. SLOAN. In broad categories. There would be, for instance, in considering the advertising budget, the members of that department, would come in, essentially make a presentation and say our judgment is we should allocate 60 percent of this money for television, 10 percent for radio and so forth. But generally, to these kinds of dimensions there would often be discussion of whether that is the proper allocations in terms of percentages and so forth. Senator INOUYE. Would the disbursement of 81 million qualify for discussion in these meetings? Mr. SLOAN. I believe it should have, I never heard any of these funds listed here ever discussed in, any budget. Senator INOUYE, Did you ever discuss clandestine activities? Mr. SLOAN. No, sir, I never heard any such discussion. Senator INOUYE. Was it the practice of your budget committee to dispense $300,000 or a $1.7 million without your knowing what the purpose was to be? Mr. SLOAN. As I indicated, Senator these funds and the, authority that was set up to disburse them was never a subject of any budget committee meeting in which I sat. I did not sit in all of them'. Senator INOUYE. You just took it on face value That it was to be spent for legal purposes. Mr. SLOAN. Absolutely. Senator INOUYE. Never got suspicious? Mr. SLOAN. Not at the time I was doing it, Certainly, following June 17, yes, sir. Senator INOUYE Did your office, the White House and Internal Revenue Service ever get together to discuss how the laws of the United States, the tax laws of the United States would be skirted to raise funds such as, for example, avoiding payment of capital gains taxes? Mr. SLOAN. There were discussions, I am not sure quite the context you presented, Senator. Opinions on the subject of capital gains liability were sought from various legal sources independent as well as, I believe there were opinions probably from counsel in the White House at early stages since we did not have a full-time counsel ourselves. With regard to the other matters, for instance, the gift tax liability to donors, I believe both our Party as well as the Democratic Party were urging, I believe, cooperatively an attempt to reverse the decision to get some kind of a decision that would do away from the necessity of these multiple committees which are real headaches and nightmares for people involved in the mechanical end of fundraising. Senator INOUYE. I have here a draft letter prepared by Mr. Thomas Pike, cochairman of the California Committee To Re-Elect the President dent. It is a draft letter which is addressed to you, sir. It is a form letter that one would fill out when he wishes to contribute stocks and securities. Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir. Senator INOUYE. Did you receive any stocks and securities? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir; we received a very large proportion, particularly, in the pre-April 7 period, of our receipts in the form of securities. Senator INOUYE. What was the scheme, sir? Mr. SLOAN, Excuse me, sir? Senator INOUYE. What was the scheme involved? Mr. SLOAN. The. scheme, sir? Senator INOUYE. Yes. Mr. SLOAN. I do not believe there was any scheme. I think in terms of fundraising, anything that is of value essentially can be accepted into a campaign. Securities, as far as I know, certainly not in the magnitude or quantity that existed normally in a Presidential campaign, have been handled by finance committees regularly. For instance, when I was with the Republican National Committee, there would be contributions in the form of securities. [00.22.47]
Hong Kong Hails Rain
Nearly two years of drought ends as the rains come to this crown colony bordering Red China. Enough rain, it is hoped, to save some of their crops. Hong Kong A dried out rice field, the ground is cracked up. A man working in the field trying to water the plants the hard way. A Shrine is set up to a Chinese god s, an abundance of people are at the shrine to honor goddess. The Chinese goddess, a young woman is on her knees honoring the goddess. CUS - Man beating a drum, people hold a parade to give thanks for the rain, holding umbrellas. MS - A little girl doing a trick on a unicycle while held up in the air riding the unicycle on some bike tires. MS - A little girl doing a balancing act while she is carried standing on toys, that are being supported by a drum. A long line of people under the canopy of a dragon MS - The rain hitting the earth, camera pans up to some corn in a filed.