Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
[00.30.44] Mr. SARBANES. No. I am recounting back. over the transcripts of the tapes. pertinent portions of that conversation. Mr.. SANDMAN. Well, if it is not a new document then we are, back to where we started. Why are you resisting the fact that this should be in the articles of impeachment? Is not the Congress entitled to know what they are going to vote on when I it gets to them?? Should they not know when it happened and how it happened? Should this not be In the. articles? Mr. SEIBERLING. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. SANDMAN. A brief answer from the gentleman from Maryland, if he has one. Mr. SARBANES. I responded to that question this morning when the gentleman asked it and---- Mr. SANDMAN. You have not given any answer at all. Mr. SARBANES. And I said at that time If we were to bring into articles all the factual material which underpins them we would have to have articles that run into volumes and volumes. Mr. SANDMAN. Now. that is not so. Mr. SARBANES. It is SO. Mr. RAILSBACK. Will you yield? Mr. SANDMAN. In a moment I will yield, you know that is not SO more than it is an indictment. You do not need the whole brief in indictment and I do not want to be confused again by saying this is an indictment. It is not. But the common criminal in a criminal case has no more rights than the President of the United States in an impeachment case. This is what I have said. RAILSBACK. Would you yield? Mr. SANDMAN. -No, I won't yield. I am not finished Now. the important things here is why isn't the President entitled to this kind of simple explanation? It can be in a single, sentence. We don't have to go through the speech that you made. All you have to say on any one of your articles, a very simple sentence, on such and such a date the President did contrary to the law a simple act. That is all you have to say. Why won't you say it? Mr. DANIELSON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SANDMAN. I want him to answer. Mr. SARBANES, Will the, gentleman yield'? Mr. SANDMAN. Sure, a simple answer. Mr. SARBANES. Behind each of those allegations lies an extensive pattern of conduct. That will be spelled out factually and will be-- Mr. SANDMAN. That is- Mr. SARBANES./ If the gentleman -will let me finish, I am endeavoring as best, I can to respond to his question. Mr. SANDMAN. All right. Go ahead. Mr. SARBANES. And that pattern of conduct will be spelled out in the report that accompanies the articles. But there is not one isolated incident that rests behind each of these allegations. There is a course of conduct extending over a period of time involving a great number of incidents. Mr. SANDMAN. I am not going to yield any further. It is my time you are using up. I am not going to yield any further for that kind of an answer. You are entitled to your proof. No one said that you aren't. You are entitled to as many articles as you can get the Democrats and some Republicans to agree upon. And no one says that you are not entitled to that. But to each of these, my friend, the law from the beginning of this country up to the last impeachment in 1936 says, whether you like it or not, it has to be specific and this is not specific. [00.33.54--cut to LEHRER in studio] LEHRER says that Chairman RODINO will try to break this impasse by referring the issue to counsels. [00.34.06--PBS NETWORK ID] [promos for other PBS programming] [00.37.18--title screen "Impeachment Debate July 26, 1974"]