Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (1/2)
[00.19.40] The, CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Iowa. Mr. MEZVINSKY. I will yield to the gentleman from Michigan if he--- Mr. HUTCHINSON. Yes; I will be happy to take time now. I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. McClory. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClory is recognized for 4 minutes, Mr. McCLORY. Thank -you. I have an idea that the gentleman from California when he was inquiring about evidence which is not in our record may have been referring to LBJ's income tax returns and the practices that he had. Now, we are not reviewing his income tax which was substantial or any of his tax practices or anything like that. -We are here considering whether or not there is clear and convincing proof of tax fraud on the part of the President of the United States and we can't base that kind of a conclusion on suspicion. Now, there hasn't been any tax fraud found by the Internal Revenue Service, or the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue both of which have investigated thoroughly the, income taxes of the President, and the President has not concealed anything. I don't know anyone who has made a cleaner breast of his income and his deductions and laid bare his Federal income tax returns for all to see. And so there isn't any mystery, there is no concealment about this at all and there hasn't been any fraud found against the preparers of the taxes even though there may be pending some investigations in that respect. I looked over the report of the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue and went through the various tax deductions that the President had claimed, including the deferral or attempted deferral of a capital gain or a loss with respect to the purchase of residential property after he sold his apartment in New York in the Hotel Pierre and bought property out in California but that right to defer the capital gain or loss was denied. I never heard of such a thing before. And, of course, with regard to the. deductions for gifts which had been taken by others, we know Hubert, Humphrey and any number of others who have made gifts, many other persons, not public officials who have made gifts of valuable papers. And it seemed to me as I reviewed this that the, Internal Revenue Service and the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue have resolved all the doubts against taxpayer Richard Nixon. Now, I don't think the President is entitled to special treatment but it seems to me he is entitled to fair treatment, and I question whether he has received it or not. Now, we did have before us someone who formerly was -with the Internal Revenue, a prosecutor. Well, certainly the prosecutor thinks that something should go before, a grand jury because it is easy for him to find things wrong and things that should be prosecuted. But. I also have a, question to ask him. I said, well I think he overpaid his taxes in some, areas. Does he still have a right to go to the Tax Court or claim a rebate or refund, and of course he does. Now, we are just talking here about the President's Federal income taxes but there is no evidence here, no clear and convincing evidence, no substantial evidence of any tax fraud and this proposed article should be summarily rejected because it doesn't belong here. Not because we feel sorry for the President or anything like that but because measuring it by the same standard that we have measured every other proposed article that has come here, there is no clear and convincing Proof of any wrongdoing on the part of the President And I yield back the balance of my time. [00.23.16]