Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.10.45] Mr. BUTLER. I thank- the gentleman from Maine. I just would take A moment, but I feel like we ought to complete what was said by the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Brooks, with reference to the O'Brien investigation, and point out that there is among the evidence -which Was brought to our attention the affidavit of Mr. Thompson with reference to the conversation -with Mr. Fred Buzhardt on behalf of the White House in which he advised on September 15, 1972, Dean reported on the IRS investigation of Larry O'Brien. There Would be some questions in my mind under this amendment as to whether that would, in fact be relevant and admissible, but under the proposed amendment, substitute by Mr. Hungate, I am quite satisfied that it -would. In my judgment, the proposal by Mr. Wiggins expressly excludes the opportunity for ratification and evidence of ratification. Mr. WIGGINS. Would the gentleman yield on that? Mr. BUTLER. And I think that is very significant. "The time is not mine,. Mr. WIGGINS. Would someone yield? Mr. COHEN. I would yield to the gentleman. Mr. WIGGINS. It is not my intention as the maker of the' motion to exclude the concept of ratification. That is not my intention. My words were, only intended to convey to the gentleman that I did not accept the view that the facts constituted a ratification, but that, the issue of ratification is still before us in terms of my language. Mr. COHEN. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. HOGAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I agree with my colleagues who say that we cannot, impeach the President for the wrongdoing of his aides. I have said so myself. I think there is a very, strong case of personal culpability on his part, as Mr. Cohen has indicated, and there are a number of them and in the short time, remaining I will try to hit some of them myself. We have his words on record, but one of the strongest things of personal involvement to me is when the Department of Justice files briefs in the Ellsberg case and says that there is no record of any wiretaps or any overheard conversations of Ellsberg. The reason they filed those briefs is because it -was not in the files of the FBI. And why 'was it not in the files of the FBI? Because the Assistant Attorney General, Mardian, flew to San Clemente and personally discussed the matter with the President, not his aides, personally with the President and he said what shall I do with these records, and the President said deliver them all to the White House, And Mr. Mardian testified that he delivered them to the Oval Office. When he was asked, well, to whom did you deliver them, he said, I would rather not say. Well, who sits in the Oval Office except the President? They were then given to Ehrlichman and Ehrlichman kept them in his files outside of the records of the Department of Justice. This is one of the reasons the Ellsberg case was dismissed, which I think was a calamity. In February 1973, when Time magazine came out with a story about a White House wiretap program, the President personally approved the cover story, as he did in the Daniel Schorr case, and there was no such wiretap program. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. HOGAN. May I have another 30 seconds with unanimous consent? the CHAIRMAN. Well, there, are 3 minutes remaining in support, or in opposition to the amendment. Mr. HOGAN. Could I be recognized for one of those, 3 minutes, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will be recognized. Mr. HOGAN. He denied the existence of the wiretap program when with Time Magazine came out with the story. That is in February 1973. In May 1973, he publicly states that he, the President, personally had authorized and directed the electronic surveillance of 17 persons. A number of these wiretaps were blatantly illegal. There, was no justification for them whatsoever under criminal or domestic security bases. And is it reasonable for reasonable and prudent men to conclude that White House aides would tap the phone of the President's own brother without his approval in advance? I think there is ample material linking impeachable offenses directly to the President, not to his aides. Directly to him. I agree we should do that, and I think we have done so. The CHAIRMAN. The 1 minute of the gentleman has expired. There are 5 minutes remaining to those in support of the amendment and 2 minutes remaining to those in opposition to the amendment. And I think the Chair will, unless there are those who wish to be, recognized at, this time for the short 2 minutes, otherwise, there, is a rollcall vote, and the vote Is on the conference report, Of Military procurement authorization, and the Chair will defer calling on any member On either side, until we have returned from the rollcall vote at 2:30 p.m. We will recess until 2:30 p.m.. [01.15.35]