Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (1/2)
[00.26.30] MURPHY states that the Committee's vote to impeach on the CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS charge is arbitrary, and that the Committee's solution to the conflict with the Executive Branch over Constitutional protections and powers has not been consistent with the Constitution. LEHRER asks WILL if the introduction of the final three ARTICLES will detract from the strength of the first two, specifically citing the TAX FRAUD and CAMBODIA BOMBING charges. WILL says that the final three articles may be an aesthetic failure, but that practically, the other articles will not be affected. Says that NIXON is not in trouble because of Parliamentary irregularities, and that a final judgement will not be made on a Parliamentary basis. States that if the third Article was ill-advised, there remains two more sets of hearings through which the ARTICLE may be weeded out. Furthermore, in rejecting the CAMBODIA ARTICLE, the committee demonstrated moderation and discretion that give its decisions more credence. DUKE brings up the CAMBODIA Article. Asks the guests if they agree with the opponent's argument that Congress was in complicity with NIXON and previous presidents around the issue of undeclared war. WILL hesitates to say complicity, but says that Congress was definitely involved in the BOMBING of CAMBODIA. DUKE points out that it was only certain, handpicked, friendly members of Congress who were notified of the decision, with tacit or explicit direction not to share the information with the Congress at large. WILL says that he thinks NIXON can convincingly argue that there was a practical necessity which compelled the incomplete informing of Congress about the bombing, on condition that publicizing the bombing would have violated Cambodian neutrality, and that as a practical matter, says WILL, Congress cannot be trusted to keep secrets from the Press. LEHRER reminds viewers that they are awaiting the convening of the evening session of the committee [empty committee bench shown] to debate a charge of TAX FRAUD and PROFITEERING against NIXON. LEHRER asks MURPHY in legal terms which of the three approved ARTICLES will be easiest to prove to the full HOUSE and then to the SENATE. MURPHY says that the theory in operation in the HOUSE would make ARTICLE II the easiest to prove, as the standard of proof that seemed to be required would allow the President's failure to superintend his subordinates to stand as an impeachable offense. DUKE notes that WILL appears to disagree. WILL discusses the "MADISON RULE" of SUPERINTENDENCY, which would hold NIXON responsible for his subordinate's misdeeds. WILL refers to the speech of BARBARA JORDAN, who argued that in fact there were plenty of "smoking guns" to implicate the PRESIDENT directly in wrongdoing. MURPHY agrees that there are a number of "smoking guns", but that analysis of the Article, including the attempted WIGGINS Amendment, indicates that the Committee majority shied away from the burden of proving direct involvement by NIXON. WILL says that MURPHY isn't "keeping his eye on the ball", that listening to 38 LAWYERS appears to be confusing and to be obscuring the truth. Says that the charges are going to be investigated by exceedingly practical men of politics, and that they will be unlikely to accept that a degree of insubordination could possibly exist in the NIXON White House such that the subordinates could have acted without direction or approval. MURPHY disagrees, saying that the ARTICLE does amount to a ratification of SUPERINTENDENCY because evidence cannot be shown to demonstrate NIXON'S active participation or orchestration of crimes. WILL again tells MURPHY to keep his eye on the ball, that both REPUBLICANS and DEMOCRATS conceded that the White House was on a crime spree, even Rep. SANDMAN acknowledges this, and argues that no one can practically argue that NIXON had nothing to do with it. LEHRER reminds WILL, however, that the key issue is to prove NIXON was responsible for misconduct in some way. Asks if WILL is suggesting that the HOUSE members ultimately will vote not according to a Constitutional theory, but according to whether they think NIXON should take blame for the corruption of the White House. WILL says that practical resolutions to doubts will be found, either in the WHITE HOUSE TAPES or in the idea that it's impossible that NIXON did not know of the misdeeds going on in his own White House. [00.38.07]