thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-30; Part 2 of 6
Transcript
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
but the president what they have set likewise there's a very timely can sell the council and laid out the facts for counsel and his opinion as to what are now we really have anything wrong and made that record to break so we were very much personally involved in trying to indicate a reservoir when you have no recollection of the facts i'm a part of this war in any of these meetings with the president and say to my attention that you were involved in a cover up in such and such a fashion i can't leave you alone because of any of the conversations now when and again as well as making an accusation against johnny these are serious allegations is that what you're telling me is true but let's face it mr peterson
it strongly urge in that i want you only been absence and i have to listen to that advice no sir i am a mom and senators among try and wipe her will have their final questions for john erlichman public television's coverage of the senate hearings will continue after we pause for a station identification on a bridge to coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service by the member stations of pbs a public broadcasting service it's b it's been
buried and pike continues its coverage of hearings by the senate select committee
on presidential campaign activities here again correspondent robert mcneil recent charges mcgregor one question the other day the president and two and at press conference of april thirty thirtieth nineteen seventy three and it you'd had throughout my country first which was indeed a significant pain his mind when you order an intensive investigation and then you're opening statement you indicated that day you had been commissioned by the president to start an investigation or an inquiry as recorded on their wives
information was given to the president as an investigation which began on monday that was presented to me but it's a situation where you say that has everything i've learned in the last nine days but at the same time in his reaction to this nerdy report which i did it was evident sunday that he had information or
anything and i know that during the time that i was working on this on a map of the thirty that the president was not limiting his sources of information to just want it so i said the other day that in this meeting of the twenty second mr rosen must've been doing one of two that either proceeding without any information gained under twenty first or else he was playing very cool game and setting that's three people in my own mind i'm convinced it was a letter that the president had picked up enough information and he was he was checking a lot of people through a lot of other big one of course of sea heavy check on bajo and answer the town hall and i was going i assume that when he made the statement at the press conference he went on what prompted first as a result of
serious charges which came to my attention and some of which were publicly reported i began intensive new engraved into this whole matter i mean that they receive he's personally and also through the ranks are you aware of any communication by anyone to the president with respect to serious charges which came to attention well i've heard that testimony here that has to be you have this conversation with him on the twenty first chemistry holman was in some of them at the same time a ride around this period of time to record of course was making charges of both in the press and through a letter to the district judge i assume that
here you're assuming that day he was referring to the report which was to be given ice and so but i don't know now why you would not open and come out with this information and also the information on april fourteen at his april seventeenth conference to say this is everything that i know what what actually went to a man who indicated that you had really given him some very substantial information well i think in the end going through the nose and their work with center weigh in and and your examination you see that a lot of what i gave it was here's a once and twice removed i would have felt it very unwise and unfair if the president had simply made a public statement of all this hearsay at that point in time it would be no
charges against people ireland that may ultimately prove to be totally false so i think what it stands for the whole thing stands for senators at first was alerted you began to move he needed a great deal more information economy then many hats in order to say definitely this is what happened this is what happened and this is what happens without being terribly unfair innocent people then again how did the name as a possible injury it under
i believe that his name was on the original is a prospect or why i don't know where no perhaps that this fire is so shortly after director who risked their i'm not i'm not sure that it had always been one of the names you too question one physicians to consider i don't believe as early as the best of my recollection other names were not really considered
until about the time that the president went west which would have been about twenty how about to talk about the thirtieth of march i could be long and as that that's the first that i recall any any serious discussion of alternatives all in their testimony was just user that you in the conversation to take telephone conversation between yourself and john dean on marxism and i'm quoting verbatim now he was an mc
confirmation hearings and the revelations of the managers to play respond because there's regional disenchantment in the manner in which she handled himself during that time when i was looking for with the various events that took place during the worst of them are in those hearings and climax in twenty thirteen march mr grayson and john being probably lied to the fbi and only later publicly recant in charge of distributing and admitting that was an overstatement and so this point in time and general disenchantment <unk> conduct in the process of confirmation there's not any question about your recording interviews chicago tribune on the twentieth march
let me go home this line he's on the twenty eighteen mars and twenty days after your comments and these comments and i think they're also be taken the light of what utah has in the us right now question would the president be unhappy if the senate refused to confirm your investigation lead in the presence of your tuition varies over more fbi files the senate judiciary committee mike answers i don't think the administration's position with the greatest necessarily related to those two incidents the president supports the raids nomination as yesterday and has from the beginning as far as i know there is no change
question there's an advisory question president made a point that that runs the arab princes white house press secretary to expresses confidence in john dean the other day was being absence of such an expression for mr graham significant in any way and said oh no ron i'm sure has expressed confidence in mr gray or he would ask i certainly do and i know the president would want to do question you still a man for the job as far as you're concern and said oh sure now sterling specifically i want to know what the version is that the white house has supported his nomination when the nominations bill
we support that nomination what i may say john being violently lady in house disenchantment with that nomination certainly would never be reflected in statements to the press until president decides that he's going to have to withdraw the nomination and by georgia or tweet us it's both and i think it raises some interesting questions whitehouse question is dated october second
nineteen seventy two for the time being and it is from john e your name fb to pass by the memorandum that october second nineteen seventy two from the white house were thinking ahead to the possibility of a matter of privilege being raised sometime or another suggested that there should be a written arrangement in existence in a debate yasmin long and that i'm sure you'll find the basic question of whether or not such letters advisable to be the first
if you think it would be inadvisable mr camargo now reviews follow them for you while those letters to confirm that you have been and are now acting as legal counsel to the white house on various assignments in such capacity as a legal counsel we expect to treat these matters as being entirely confidential we consider all aspects of these assignments to be within the attorney client privilege and you want to be should you be requesting comment and here we are
october second nineteen seventy two chinese immigration would you like to explain to this committee as to whether or not someone is to a rousing suspicions and your heart and why it is that we have to set a client relationships the attorney client privilege in advance well as you see from the cover of memos are simply translating from of comeuppance would be a suggestion in that house i don't relate to any specific incident or project of all i can't come once every couple months and then on may and we would go down a list of items and this
was one that i recall who liked to meet at such a meeting said that he was concerned about the serbian formality of his arrangement and he was about him for being a terribly good idea as you say by covering memo i wasn't at all sir when there was a possible and i refer to the ninety nine months or whatever became and whether there was any action taken under now i don't know relationships i think so and then i was in opposition to judge as to whether that was there was a certain well i'm remembering his this relationship
well as i say i think that one of the basic questions what i was concerned there was not whether there was a relationship or not whether this was a river this was an advisable thing for the white house to be dealing with an attorney announcer thank you and obviously i'm i'm not in a position at this time but the time is to know what is thought was as i say that that's something that i asked the issue with hamas directly it to myself out in conjunction with other veterans issues
people like allam and then in connection with something that we discussed but i would know some people with german council my intention at the mission simon mcgregor and his his response to my question out there is in the committee staff physician at a conversation because there isn't this point i would ask transcriptions simply be that part of the record these things now that wasn't me and raise money
and all that money transfer through lessons from a council in the elections and that the head of the sports money who wrote it is permissible like who are you as a suspicious so they can sell less to counsel salim michael kimball the operative well exactly he did a great many things i don't see this as a test for the
white house particularly reliant so i would think just the opposite to be true and that this was related to some of those things which he had done in connection with the essential many property owners signed or something that was turning into a legitimate white house now what is it mark that's right the pain
the only question of the siege of the armoire privileges of justice a couple questions you get back they cannot getting into that they can sell and i will not be in the legal questions the legality of bacon but the sincerity a statement that he thought it was legal now the first question there is another factor that this is the first time you before that was lethal
and after what they have on like the other investigative audiences this one goes far beyond mere fact yes and the associated questions the other investigative bodies as huge as you grow and then basically grand juries were not gotten into questions of law nor for that matter the surrounding and sort of a lot of questions so that i've never been called upon i don't like to have it anyway treat events of the previous fifty years or so you do it was legal
and i had a year of the section of the now would you be saying there was no way until well i think you remember my testifying here but at the time it was recorded it i didn't know it wasn't it was simply beyond my yard my compilation that there would be a resort to that particular method to make in order to do this job that they were assigned to do this investigation you'd have to find the time on an answer questions that the regime was actually acting it is a math eighteen years they do that do in the event that was perfectly legal under the law the president
yes you do and if they did that in law a year where it is may twenty sixteen while in the senate race and his legs one second statement make responsibility as well as president that's why we really necessary and take responsibilities you're asking me to explain the statement in a voice like i was
three weeks my statement here with regard to my understanding of the law is not meant to speak for the president or anyone except ice up and this is my view based on the advice of eminent council and i think it's a sound when you first get that is not true you wrote recently that this is illegal and therefore i had no occasion to brief it until i left the white house alone and you never really believe that the way you wanted it was certainly headed viewpoint and i certainly had a really strong feeling of the idea of the
president's actions in attempting to put these leagues and that that's right let me get my answer in the house i understand i understand your questions debate whether or not i have a belief or impression that the thing that the president had assigned here in creating this special unit and my answer to you is going to continue in that clique but in all respects i had them at a positive impression at that time this was well within the president's national security plans and that has continued to be my reason for now says
obviously there had been some intensively for them aside you're saying the fruits of that in the colloquy between a chairman mr wells that's a much more refined and precise and substantiate a position on the law that i have any occasion to make fire a lot is it also true that you were totally ignorant of the fact that actually the president and just the head and had been informal that's clearly illegal and right now if you're speaking of the houston the congressman mammals of course this i think there is an entirely different
subject and that was a domestic intelligence the message you're here you're doing in the area of foreign intelligence and national security the reason i'm doing well i'm lynn neary
thank you i can see i know that is the question and this week as beakman the
point the power to propose changes he says the images you have to pay it is right now
today oh no that's right it's been years you know and then oh no reading the statement that
was given to the president announced that it will use notice that day and international security is billy elliot and that's the decorating was not but i don't think the terrain ok yeah the information mr wessel no i don't know i
just realized that our security agencies security and i say or what would be you know i understand what led to the victory was the developers resource your questions are answered we are leaving those sections designated
security and supply chains so that you can be very good for what concerns name as the vice chairman is that that quantum is the last chance thanks wednesday i am a new a shirtless a poster that is doing here is charging the way if somebody is opinion in the stockpile without having first lay the foundation of every single document before or participated in the opinion and analysis you just need to
this is thank you the documents patients
olive oils drew on the years of the state politically risky we do are you
a little bit i was a millionaire that when such plans are made in nineteen eighty when energy agency cia but also the action the president of united states reserves and i worked with a wayward adventurers time i think what we're going through right now that evidence of this committee has in fact i think that's the question i cannot imagine what this
witness facts about whether it is or is not scientifically nose or don't know i respect him and that we move on parliament well the way the witnesses stated that the new law and now the senate committee will leave the witness all the law of this year is president and his record and he said that he knew that it was legal and security matters you that is even on how that question makes an assumption not in evidence that the president said he knew it was legal i don't believe i've ever testify that maybe some other witness as the more you got that idea
i couldn't answer the question that assumption i mean i certainly would not want to give the impression that the president had given me a legal opinion on this at that time the president said was that he felt that it was important and necessary in the context of the massive fast turnover to the russian embassy all of all context of that operates these are the men who have undertaken is in believing that they were responding to the urgency of this circumstance you know well i certainly
would want to leave that it personally that variation and i would simply stand on my actual answers now this was the nineteen nineties thank you yes i believe that it was basically to determine between us the inquiries which i felt the automated in order to try and determine whether what had taken place not always any
indication or have i have the impression yesterday had been at what we're all at that time and that he was just getting started what was the meeting with the city the principal witness as i recall was too be in a position to answer inquiries which i guess mr clawson was getting are the press people were getting about plants white house that and whether he was still unemployed and white house if not when he had terminated and under what circumstances and so does that mean mr carroll assistant secretary and would have to be involved in any discussions there is another senate is best at the time as i recall i was a precipitating what
is the white house yes it was actually i don't know i think it must have been either that evening her the next morning now lemons i don't recall somebody of a summit meeting i think the way it came out was not so much of a personal concern as it was an inquiry by the investigation either the math problems or the fbi as development enabling
you may nice to be with what was going on i think this was a process of trying to get everybody together who might know anything to try and get a picture of what the investigation was going to be whether there might be other people involved as what the what as the campaign director mit and the head of the department of justice and everybody together in one place that was living oh yeah
well yeah i mean all of that information well by the time he came in at nine point five that morning mara what are doing that day i i don't believe that mr dean contributed very much a family of information and that means i think that meeting was more for the purpose i love hearing from mr mitchell mr klein what the progressively investigation was what was known at the time and my impression is that must've been told me about his conversations with mr libby at some other time
now i don't have my best recollection i have is that it was in some times more remote today's conversation would lead even then this if in fact that occurred when you say that the billions and thirty or present what you have learned it i go senator baker i believe the other day that watergate was not discussed at that meeting and since then i have to reject what it you know it's i have been i find i was in arizona i'm sure there must have been some discussion of the watergate with the president on that occasion on the point there were three principal subjects covered about meeting one of them was a government wiretap and it's obvious to me that that there must have been some more discussion that led into this discussion which i took an assignment from him yet some statistics for him about the incidents
of federal wiretapping an end foreign situations that in situations involving us citizens and foreign governments which is a statistic he did not have in which he won now i'm summarizing and reconstructing but because i have no no direct notes on that but i'm just under certain that he did discuss watergate at the outset and we are now there is no indication that yes i met with a present in the company of others on the twenty twelve thirty eight am at five twenty on the points out i mean recess that is that we're going there on that at a meeting with the hole in
unintelligible and says the president on this but in the city specifically says it's all over you and this girl that he was concerned about the cia agent to see judith investigation did not cover up on the options are already know those instructions came through mr hall and were given to me i think the morning of the day of the meeting which would've been twenty four well actually the president's statement well because he instructed me to attend the meeting that he instructed me through mr coleman and a great many of my requests from the president would come here from the staff secretary or from mr coleman or possibly someone else was not always face to face now
mr dean that you want to monitor this is that the five that you examine compensate listed below and at this time well your question a partial solution mr dean knew the contents of the safe i've heard in the past by both ways and maybe iraq and i thought his testimony was that he did not know the contents of the state but the us to feel they had inspected the contents of the senate i recall only one conversation with must've been about the contents of the safe in any sort of scripted turns and i'm sorry i can't tell you what it was on that occasion or
the following week but what he described for me was simply that they're given papers i've done what i could put limits on time which were described variously as a tape recorder and other kinds of electronic equipment and that yuki reported inmate that feeling felt that some of the papers were very politically sensitive now that was the that was the full report him when he gave that to me whether it was the end of the week of the nineteenth or sometime the beginning of the week of the twenty six of the report also a formal table involving the president kennedy invisible un sensational now the news that by the weather was on this day twenty ones who
are a little bit that when he was an it that you said or told in the sense because you now a description of what that response to senator jerry senate race question and that's an artifact that what has been testifying to hear you're confusing what it is one of his best leagues with his testimony i think he has five year that i totally get rid of the briefcase not convicts you probably read one of the news magazines but the fact is that i never gave him any suggestion or or direction to do either one it needs to be
and he used that time to do it is a bit of that sense it was suggested that i don't think that's a that's a familiar anthony and he was you know i i recall some testimony old and you are called testament yes i i recall hearing you say that you know i didn't tell him that i do recall a conversation that must be about that river because just at this time i understood these house was in the process of being one of them at the time and we had quite a bit of discussion about the fact that he was away from where several days sandbagging his house and moving the furniture and so on and that
we were discussing that in the context of having held this material from the fbi he was concerned might be considered he knows exactly what he's going to do and the international community on may fifteen nineteen seventies that yesterday's testimony before this may election but it was just the dean's testimony amari mr starr over ethnicity and there you had instructed and these things are
dropping briefcase or that he went see was building and reported that feeling that that was the concern about america because many people actually do as givens that position and in nineteen seventy three it and we review what was appealing space and that their position a question concerning the conversation inevitably event it was i would say it was one of the ones that i'm afraid i can't really important much more than that and that was a conversation that we have john indicated that there's a lot of concern about this material i would've said this is not a quote that it would be unfortunate itself of some of the stuff now or is revealed the earth by the same token it is all
that is even though obviously summers totally unrelated to the right in the context of that conversation yesterday indicates maybe this was in the camp of the conversation i was in this building what are people there now i was raised that you won races that is the feeling that you tell them that mr that says it's perfectly selling to suggest that i would go to the elaborate lengths that i did in making sure that the secret service and try and the tsa and somebody from bing's office was present at the opening of the state and that i would give instructions for taking custody of the contest and then make a suggestion why
i think you have to give me credit for understanding the importance of evidence in a case of this time and i didn't understand that and on the nineteen radar for that that evidence was preserved in a way that if there were subsequent problems can be identified and then placed another the nominee that it would be inadvisable a lot of us want to ask mr golson mr kurland mr clawson who were also at that meeting who it was that established the process but with the integrity of that evidence would be preserved and then perhaps you get some of that ms dickinson you had made some statements has to be a transcript of that you had witnessed the boston which you your attorney have
This record is featured in ““Gavel-to-Gavel”: The Watergate Scandal and Public Television.”
Series
1973 Watergate Hearings
Episode
1973-07-30
Segment
Part 2 of 6
Producing Organization
WETA-TV
Contributing Organization
Library of Congress (Washington, District of Columbia)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/512-p26pz52g21
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/512-p26pz52g21).
Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 31 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, John Ehrlichman and H.R. Haldeman testify. Note: Only reels 1-5 of 6 exist.
Broadcast
1973-07-30
Asset type
Segment
Genres
Event Coverage
Topics
Politics and Government
Subjects
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Media type
Moving Image
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Credits
Anchor: MacNeil, Robert
Anchor: Lehrer, James
Producing Organization: WETA-TV
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2341980-1-2 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Preservation
Color: Color

Identifier: cpb-aacip-512-p26pz52g21__2341980-4-2.mp4.mp4 (mediainfo)
Format: video/mp4
Generation: Proxy
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-30; Part 2 of 6,” 1973-07-30, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed May 26, 2019, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-p26pz52g21.
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-30; Part 2 of 6.” 1973-07-30. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. May 26, 2019. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-p26pz52g21>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-30; Part 2 of 6. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-p26pz52g21