Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974
[00.24.52] The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts, Father Drinan, is recognized for 6 minutes and 15 seconds. Mr. DRINAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let's see first -what this document or article does not do. This document takes no position whatsoever on the merits of the, -war in Indochina. We are not asking hawks and doves to vote along that line today. This resolution makes provision for those who feel as others do who have spoken here. If they feel that the bombing in Cambodia save American lives, they can continue -with that conviction and still vote for this resolution today. This resolution relates in its essence to secrecy, secrecy in the executive branch of government. General Wheeler testified on July 30, 1973, that the President personally ordered him not to disclose the bombing of, Cambodia and I quote General Wheeler: "To any member of Congress." This article is very marrow. This article means that we don't want a president authorizing or ratifying- the concealment in the Congress of the. facts about it certain situation concerning which the Congress must act. The Founding, Fathers I think we should note made a provision in Article I that the Congress itself must publish a journal except in a narrow exception the journal could be secret if the Congress decided. There is no provision for secrecy in the executive branch of government whatsoever in the Constitution. The. whole, history of secrecy in government was the very thing that the Framers of our Constitution wanted to undo. Secrecy means that we in the, Congress don't get the essential information that we need in order to legislate. In the area Of war. Madison said that the war-declaring power in Congress must include everything necessary to make that power effective. The administration deceived the Congress over 4 years for this reason, that there is absolutely no request from March 1969 to August 1973 by the administration for appropriations for the war in Cambodia; $145 million was spent. Is that wrong? Can you say that this is all one, war? NO communication to the Congress Even if, and this is, in dispute, somewhere it was told on a secret basis to four or five, people in the Congress, that we have something going in Cambodia. The members of this very House were deceived because, as Senator Symington said" "We authorized $140 million not for war in Cambodia but for war in Vietnam.- At least now the Congress has a right to know. And here are some of the questions that the Pentagon refused to testify to at the hearings a year ago in the Senate. Who authorized the falsifications of documents? What reason is there now long after the war has ended for the continuation of the secrecy in this matter? Falsification of military documents appears to be it clear violation of article 107 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Melvin Laird himself in 1973--was Secretary of Defense in 1970 when these things occurred, and in 1973 he denied knowledge of it. Furthermore, why did the military feel that they could not trust their own highly classified reporting system? All B-52 strikes are carefully coordinated with special photo-intelligence and this was done outside of that ordinary system for one reason, that the Congress has not been told. To repeat, I think this is a very- narrow article. It does not really involve what Prince Sihanouk thought whether be acquiesced or did not. It does not involve our assessment of the Indochina war. All it says is that secrecy in Government without justification or excuse can in this instance be an impeachable offense. Even the acquiescence of the Congress in some Of the things that you have heard today is immaterial. The President himself told General Wheeler not once but, as General Wheeler said, Six times that no one shall ever hear of this bombing in Cambodia. Mr. Jerry Friedheim the spokesman for the Pentagon, said these sad words. He spoke of the falsification of documents. he spoke of the erroneous information that, he transmitted to the Congress And he said just a year ago, "I knew at the time it was wrong and I'm sorry." Did the, President ever reprimand any of those who deceived the Congress? No; he ratified their conduct. And those who Vote against this article will be saying, in effect, that the President, our next President can deceive the Congress, can have secrecy in the executive branch, can try to Justify it by saying that we didn't want to embarrass Some foreign prince, but that goes to the very heart of what the separation of powers is all about.