thumbnail of 1974 Nixon Impeachment Hearings; 1974-07-27; Reel 3 of 4
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
the piece blue there's the other port o leen will not being picky that likewise obtain them of the president well all the waltons so unintelligible tell a fetishist there is a sense that all was well i won't vanish without reading of this all it didn't go down to the grand jury and carries himself with no evidence against him except records which will hold up is untrue that i go to a grand jury because obviously they're going to call me back and i go defend myself against the state with which i know it's true now i have a little tougher problem than didn't have here is they really don't make up a new avocado what would you recommend that had to stay with me or
i felt were up and go to the president or what would you have had a gentleman came by the head general recognizes gentlemen and california speak in support of the mission that we have to start from an understanding of what the line here before of the spectrum and i want to read the operative words at least these are charges against the president approving and only acquiescing in and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving false or misleading statements and lawfully authorized investigative officers and so forth including congressional seat i know that you well that the language is couched in terms of giving false testimony in the
future that's an important thing to remember because the perjury of the ruler and poor occurred prior to march seventeen well prior to march seventeen and the president didn't learn about until march seventeen and so i asked the obvious question can you counsel giving a perjured testimony after it's already well the answer to that is no the prize is just learning about on the seventeenth and a fair reading of the conversation between the president and john keane on that occasion my recollection of the thirty seven that on that occasion is that the president is learning about prior perjury as distinguished from counseling future of perjury which is the essence of the allegation that the force in addition to that my microphone as just read several
statements from the transcript of march twenty one in which a giant been speaking to the president and the president about being about certain aspects of that them unfolding watergate status question is if we have to decide and to decide on the basis of the evidence convinced that we must be unconvincing whether the president's counsel anybody advise anybody to go before a duly constituted investigative agency and not tell the truth for now i can only submitted the record settlement and ask that you really began of those specific incidences call to our attention and as the jury and resolve that question the president in the council everybody to commit perjury why i can only say that i am satisfied and i hope that you
will be satisfied upon a re reading of that that's the allegation is not true there are other aspects however that this case which have been mention from time to time in the context of the president counseling all testimony you will recall the gentleman that they're in a time in the course of this testimony when we learned that the president advised the various witnesses about what other witnesses were testifying through before a grand jury the assumption being that he was counseling them to pony up a story to counter the testimony which was then being history i'm talking specifically about where you're well aware of the situation calm i'm also talking specifically about the etiquette of backdrop for that was that john dean well even testifying before a us attorneys it's like that will remove now they've broken it was offering testimony before the us attorneys
the president said that others have to be advised as to that testimony the implication being that they would end up a story a lot like me and my remaining moment say that there are not less than to reasonable confections to be drawn from that one is with aretha live another however is that they do not live it they can form their story with that being offered before the us attorneys so as to avoid a perjury situation even unintentionally the notion that someone should be advised about the context of someone others past in someone else's testimony is wholly consistent ladies and gentlemen we're developing that and is totally unfair i believe to suggest that that was part and parcel of a plot to develop the untruths
that we'll hear of the lawyers for the house that if you have these two reasonable possibilities that i suggest that they are eminently readable if you have these two reasonable possibilities we must revolve in favor of the president of the united states to respond and not draw the adverse inference simply because some amounts that are relatively suspicious as do whatever the president does one final comment on the night that my five minutes for a problem that i didn't know was that i have that i will yield him i reckon with him at one point that if mr haldeman have the opportunity to review the prior to his testimony that time of the fall of the president the
very few others were aware of the things that mr holland reviewed the state the implication is being placed in the minds of the committee that this was again part and parcel of a rocket designed so that element the tailor his testimony falsely before a grand jury about the suspicion all planetary that there's another side that it is equally defensible and that is that mr holland reviewed that tape so as to testify truthfully in the event they're on rather than all what i think that is an eminently readable inclusion inconsistent with this suspicious circumstance and the president is entitled to the more favorable construction of that event ii merely i want to make that observation of the fact that within the mission already media empire
her question i'll say the gentleman from michigan and i think that my friend from california is very adequately covered this matter and then i don't really think i have anything particular had argued finding a material to it question is on the emotion of the gentleman from alabama words in favor of the motion please signify by saying aye all those elements the land there is anger at the bush and please signify by santa
follows opposed no no's appear to have a jump from new jersey dimaggio alone or devotion said iran also <unk> wall mr brooks no mr kastenmeier i will restore and original mr landay mr connors discover mr wooley no mr plouffe president is demanding is deciding just decide well mr daniels is to grind was to wrangle
ms jordan no result was thrown out there soon as well ryan mr wills right mr chairman i'm quite puzzled when the author of the old guys in that i normally what you know what i mean yes it is ms germain
his job was to go on there's more to it you know it's been mr chairman from memos about and i
twenty five members voted no one little the president van many pundits have flowers or lose our main substantive and that they'll be limited to twenty minutes to be divided ten minutes to the proponents of the martian implemented for those who oppose abortion that section and the policy you know running at the center for the primates will be divided among the local economies in a committee chairman i really miss your mind and as
we know three years interfering are endeavoring to interfere with the commandant of investigations by the department of justice of the united states federal bureau investigation the office of already a special prosecution for it all the importance of this more than most because of my former affiliation with the fbi but that is the fact that the president in the white house use the fbi and the cia to forty investigation troubled me very deeply because if we don't have confidence in these important sensitive investigative agencies and the very core of our country is in jeopardy if i'm going to be very specific and my colleagues if they so desire can have from you later on citations in the evidentiary record to substantiate the comments were generally may on june twenty one nineteen seventy two acting fbi director fbi director gray the dean
would be handling an inquiry into war to give the white house the following day the twenty second of jim gray informed mean that the one hundred dollar bills found on the watergate burglars had been traced to the miami bank account of bernard barker who he recalls one of workers and that dollar word and a very old had been identified as the makers of the checks and that the fbi was trying to locate these men for interview the following day being reported this information to haldeman and haldeman reported it to the president we subpoenaed tape of the conversation between the president mr haldeman and it was not given tours but we do know from other testimony that the same day the president personally directed haldeman ehrlichman to meet with the either at the cia director helms and deputy cia director waters to express white house concerns and asked waters to meet
with fbi director gray and communicate these white house concerns to gray they didn't meet with how it's an host oh and an alderman that there was no cia involvement in the watergate break in and he told him that he had previously given similar assurances for mr gray hollande told house with the fbi investigation was leading to important people and it was the president's wish because an fbi investigation in mexico might uncover cia activities or assets that walters suggested writing that it was not advantageous to pursue the inquiry especially into mexico eloquence testimony subsequently and was that the mexican checks traced to this part of bank accounts were discussed as a specific example of the president's concerns now why were they concerned about the subject they were concerned because these checks were a
direct line from the burglars to the committee to re elect the president and if that link have not been forged we would not be sitting here today so that's why they didn't want the investigation to go forward into mexico during our shortly after the meeting between eloquent haldeman thousand watertown the olive gray and told him that he could expect this fall from deputy cia director won't hurt neeley after the meeting with solomon american waters met with gray and express these so called concerns so great great to hold up the fbi interview of a burial and he indicated that the fbi however was still going to try to locate oliver parents that actually had this very kind of work was meeting with maryse than to the committee to re elect the president while yeah yeah fine walters thinking that there might possibly be some cia involvement which he
wasn't personally aware checked his operatives in the field and to see if there was any heard any jeopardy to a cia activities he found out from them that there was no such jeopardy involve on june twenty six nineteen seventy two or three so advise white house liaison land john dean on the twenty seventh of june helms officially notified gray that the cia had no interest in a burial and helms and gray are in their telephone conversations set up a meeting for the following day so the two of them i could discuss the question of possible cia interest and worry mr gray reportedly five minutes the gentleman is recognized however the job would like to say to a state that since the gentleman is speaking in opposition to the
amendment and there were others who were others who sought to be recognized that the gentleman you ready to yield two minutes to two other gentleman otherwise it's not clear the chairs that it will recognize and within that time i've been very pleased to do so with the chairman of the chair would advise me at that point in the expiration of my time all including the new packaging there's the great reported this back to muscatine that he was going to have a meeting with house and so on the morning of the twenty eight erlichman telephone gray and told him to cancel a meeting with no because he didn't want the meeting to take place in which cia involved very carefully the same day great instructed his fbi agents to go out and interview a very old and continue to try to locate oliver are also on the twenty eight in the water there even happened
knowing that there was no cia involvement being asked walter that the cia could stop the fbi investigations of the dollar working very objects what has refused to do so since he could be the cia to block the investigation being then acted correctly called gray and insist that that for national security reasons or because the cia interest a great instructions to interview those two men were actually be withdrawn braided cancel interviews but a few days later i recall walters and said that he would have you know unless cia put into writing its objection cia refused to do so and walter's son graham now saying the cia had absolutely no interest they both express their dissatisfaction with the way the white house was interfering with their agencies and they're concerned the president's interests are not being served by his aides he's above activities were set in motion by the president
limit i am limited be investigatory efforts of the fbi out there other problems are going to detail but i will be able to but i do want to call out to the attention and recollection of my colleagues a conversation where by grade called san clemente and dark locker greater on the phone and he said i want to talk to the president about his aides trying to misuse these the grays were towers the issues the cia and the fbi a few minutes later the president called mister gray and in any way alluded to any conversation that he had with mr mcgregor or miss the great concern and he congratulated mr draper doing an outstanding job in a hijacking this a great one can contain himself any more people are about mr president your aides are trying to destroy you are misusing the fbi and the cia and then as the great testifies there was a perceptible pause and the president said go on with your aggressive
investigations that didn't even inquire about this involvement of his a kind of issues the fbi and the cia i only wish i had another hour to detail more specifics in this area and unfortunately not how you know the chairman at the point i withdrew to think i'm going to support my amendment to include congressional committee forward to refer to and by that reference great comments this morning at the time of the amendment and also my comments made on day before yesterday july twenty five with respect to the house committee on banking firm says there are further evidence in support of such activities respect and senate select committee and this committee and i also incorporate them by reference shortage of time it along to my brother oliver i think very much they given much i want to point out the necessity of retaining this action because of the over something very fundamental
that by federal law and a person who influences or seeks to influence or intimidate or impede any weakness in any proceeding and it's a crime let's take the summer on john being during that particular a year on june twenty one he's assigned to this case and he says it's first of all with mr gray in the fbi people and every single interview when people from the white house go before the fbi it has to do you seeking to influence ought intimidate aren't the eleven city the president comes out and all the people who saw being there who knew recognize that this is most unusual especially after the president on the very day after mr bean was assigned some of the white house has had no involvement whatsoever in watergate and the president's counsel is there on the phone that echoed through long week with mr patrick gray will be an
element of really could write a book on how to be a double agent in the fbi did he say to you succeed in influencing that's not the question the whole fence is done even if he endeavours to influence yesterday was before this committee i can imagine an intimidating anyone it can influence and the kennedy and he was very successful because of the gentleman from massachusetts has expired all kinds of biden the question is on the martian not intentionally lie i'm sure it will be got it
they refine it amuses me the most of their what it what a difference forty four hour mix tested their dad so much testimony they were afraid to put nine simple signs it's not that that embryo were vague breathe is a word specific isn't that unusual so unusual everything is so specific but they haven't shame one word in the articles have as that be a reason for a little less than says that the dairies or you know what the reason is when it came about what time of place and i believe they don't have it only have a conjecture dj all about would be told somebody were looking for somebody with somebody else told somebody this is gonna be the most unusual and there had to be a man they don't approve the whole case against the president of the united states over the senate which
takes a no witnesses won't that be unusual and this is when it all about now if i went through this a paragraph by paragraph i could cite with great detail their presidential and while they know what you know and i know now let's get down oil companies a real specifics well we ever forget peterson's answer to my question and was bearing question aspinall investigation for the cheap that she followed criminal division of the department of justice what i have was the peterson you received any information whatever from the beginning the president didn't know the bench or wrongdoing that was a danger of white and mr pearson dancer was none that's a pretty solid witness i would
say for the president if you go right down on the stall nine witnesses became beef for this committee and plotting the great john bain they get the same can advise them on the witnesses are a lot stronger than those puppets here tonight you didn't think about a contract he could buy apple particular article given those newsweek good usually have a sense that we want the five most important words it's terrible surest bet you i know lawyers is not the kind of evidence that were convicted ended by now that was such a coverup years so much of an inner france between the president and his people is an unusual but not a single case that the president as for immunity for any out and fight this move was little time for it won am an immunity you want him to tell the truth and he told everyone out tell the truth of her weakness
testimony that he said that we can say all we want about the various a gun being a man who had a mechanical memory he could remember split seconds of what he was going to have years ago almost certainly but he can't remember what was in the papers and he really he could remember and then when i was involved in this safe was was broken sounds like somebody does something they shouldn't doesn't happen john dean was told to take all of that staff down to the fbi he was told about that and he took everything down to the fbi accepted to know tortured lala them and add information than that he said he could remember what they set up happened to make this is the job of the facts you know you're a big man everybody gets in the air you can see what's happened here
and so it was with mr pat emi dozen volumes sovereign most cases anyone in the audience there and fighting tried a one man investigation you're a little bit about that analysts or bad that even the democrats on that committee which is the standing committee of the house voted against it right this a painting a single witness that's the kind of jurisdiction was the atlanta so as an iranian affairs for the minivan and we get all right on down the list but let us get by the end of the most important thing of them all why are these people resisting so our fig it was nine simple sentences why they have to give a great big my hands i don't have to give us a hundred and fifty pages it with the door referred to just give his nine simple sentences simple reason
why they won't they don't have the proof they got forty bucks but no witnesses an unusual case the senegalese yeah we could talk about this as long as we want but i think we thought long enough i wheeled the balance of my time californians by mississippians life but the sentiment at a couple of points first of all with reference to this telephone conversation between the president that great the fact is that gray did not initially called the president called a great at approximately twenty five million july sixth this all came about gregor emigrated meet with the president until ten at you know a lot has been said about what was said in a conversation after gray raise the question that the presence that would try and a mortally wound the present what did the president do utah's perceptibly and i think this is a natural it shows logically that there was a matter of first impression and
concern and he didn't make any kind of comment about cover up the tone and you just keep going and there's no hard evidence that the president ever attempted to interfere with the course of the fbi's investigation and no plan to the state of the investigation should be afforded an hour are you the book to page three a tree they merely expressed a concern and a legitimate one i think at that time that the trail not lead to exposure of cia or plumbers activities which would harm national interest and this isn't port before and after that concern was expressed there was no knowledge or no involvement by the president and the future attempts to limit the investigation there's no evidence that the theory of watergate break in was a cia operation was discussed before great told mean the fbi was considering this possibility on june twenty second although gregg had checked with helpful for talking to clean and receive a tentative
about it does not appear that he presses information only refer you to build two basic reporting that therefore there is no evidence that the president was aware of any cia deny our journey with informal possible cia involved knives very difficult target to the specifics that we're being given we yearn for the first time here and there are obliged to believe that we have tried to go and find a reply all this furlough it's important to differentiate i think between the president expressed concern and the subsequent actions taken by his assistants without his knowledge once again you must look at whether this is the assistance that he's doing these things do you think that lincoln chairman i think it's instructive to remember that in the
form of that article were talking about presidential misconduct presidential misconduct and not lead from the other politically logically an appropriately tied to the president i was just the rather rapidly to the matter of cia there are two presidential acts within the timeframe of june twenty three until i say that is the timeframe in which it is the lead there is an interference with the cia the first act begins when the president issued these instructions as reported in our tap the president instructed hr haldeman and john ehrlichman to ensure that the fbi investigation of watergate didn't expose unrelated cia covert activities or white house special investigative unit activities and that the cia and the fbi should coordinate this man at the president elect been submitted the only other president elect heard on july six several weeks later and this is what the president said after being informed by factory
that that his aides are attempting to mortally wounded the president said that you just continue to conduct your aggressive of investigation or some sinister purpose is included because he fought bravely before he said that but that's what he said valerie flesh the recollection member of as to whether or not the president's concern about cia was justified under all those circumstances we remember that record was in fact arrested and a former cia agent we remember that barker was in fact arrested and a former cia agent perhaps an active cia agent martinez was a record arrested and he was an active cia agent hans name was in the washington post was a spy for the united states a former cia agent and a former member of the plumbers you know there are other factors which were called the president's attention on june twenty three all of which indicate possible cia involvement a theory which was supported by the fbi itself
the fbi itself believe there might be cia involvement given those factories and gentlemen we're asked to conclude that the president corruptly iraq will inspect instructed his aides to request that there be coordination between the cia and the fbi so as not to reveal unrelated cia covert activity always a gentleman that's all the evidence there is in between the twenty third of june and the sixth of july there's no question that gun being acted improperly i'm willing to stipulate that but that doesnt execute the president's instructions that were given on a twenty thirteen a view on that issue ladies and gentlemen the question really isn't all up close i would think that the weight if not the preponderance of the evidence in favor of the president is that he acted in the public interest as distinguished from corrupt like germany however there is not a clear and convincing showing that the president
acted properly given the facts and the knowledge that he had that the timing issue murdoch has expired question now chairs an emotional gentleman of alabama while those of their emotion plea say it was impossible in those have a gentleman from new jersey to allow the motion well mr brooks so mr kastenmeier will mr edwards well <unk> at all mr connors oh mr oliver no those billion dollars
business ms desanto involved well i'll tell you well yeah it's busy life because it mr wells right now i know they're going to want
it ms rowley you know and all the power as chairman levin members voted aye twenty six members voted no one member voted present rate i recognize the journal in a moment the final moments will be subtle and you will see the first
crucial vote on the first article of impeachment and backs videotape coverage of the house in the debate will continue to ensure that this is pbs public broadcasting service thank you like be on the stage again i suppose i should congratulate you on the ingenuity and coming at all costs even if they sometimes show up and the professionals rather not susan orlean's native justice and that's what i think we
usually once you know big at the summer tennis tour will attract world famous players competing for top prize money stands on the lid on rod laver and bjorn borg us professional championship from boston all very tough on the station also it nice nice nice nice any
the pope the pope and blacks coverage of the house judiciary committee's impeachment debate continues as we go back to the debate democratic congressman walter flowers of alabama is again moving to strike out
more charges against president nixon but only as a maneuver to spell out for the record what the charges until we recognize the channel and then in the midst of flowers strike some paragraph seven of the sarbanes oxley to all five or six it's my judgment that both of these up or aggressive than adequately covered him and other presented to the committee here and in connection with some paragraphs on our yield to the gentleman new york and a line to make it the gentleman the gentleman from alabama say that i regret that i
left over the most importantly i ask unanimous consent that the debate on this whole notion of monday limited to twenty minutes with him in his goal of the components implemented to the front of the movie without your support this program number seven which deals with the charts and the president were disseminating information received from offices of the department of justice of the united states the subject of the investigation and duckett my lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the united states for the participating and assisting sex objects and their attempts to avoid liability this is malik isn't just that one of the most sacred institutions that we have in this country as the
proceedings which i lie in the grand jury shots my sensitivity to hear certain members of this committee committee indicates that an entrance is drawing because the president she has information that he receives from the acting attorney general were people that he knows are being investigated for possible indictment where the acting attorney general has indicated that these people would be indicted would be indicted but we can say that the president cheered grand jury information with these people that we should draw two entrances one in france is that the president would want them to lyon and four mystery to one that would avoid liability and one of the members suggested that we should consider the fact that perhaps in this particular instance the president juan it one of his men to
tell the truth i submit that we got a list of which one obvious to the president was suggesting it was violating the sacred information which should have remained in the grand jury and should never have been sheared in the first instance with the president and the president should never use this information regardless of the watch parties to share with other people is especially so when he went out of his way to tell and repeats and that he was going to keep that information confidential but there's also a lot of the plan was that the recall on march three twenty four years john dean came to the president to talk about the cancer that was growing and the white house and the president again recall exactly what he was being told on is that the fall and the president know that people in the white house had started this conspiracy rolling of course at that time was really to gather political intelligence
the president had read some of the political intelligence because crp would give it to regrow that roeder would give it a strong strong would give up all the time and all the men as disgusted with the president and we have got onsite know just weird do you get political intelligence from europe on the record is very clear because the president responds audie what that must be on the bottom of the album and the entrance with idol is that just the dnc i don't know how the president would suspect they get this information because you're only a burglar if you get caught and so when the president as the information that the attorney general and he won and directed her album and it felt like these that no white house personnel and prior knowledge of the break and it was strange that when
members said yesterday well they didn't have prior knowledge in other words i will accept what the members said i don't really believe that libby and not pull the president of the united states and say without a hit on june the seventeenth i do believe however that no no no that they had gotten enough money to get the libyan hot lady was transferred off the white house it will they're the worker great huntsville has focused in the white house and this decline least it was supposed to be receiving this report for the first time so they had a very grey on the golf course and he never told the fbi so that scenario which one members that it's shrewdly never had prior knowledge the only prior knowledge that people in the white house no was when they were going to get what they certainly know when they got information whether they would say implementing what would washington dc or whether or not
it when he was dying that lady and hot or the people as a matter of fact the president says on one of the tapes that we received that he immediately suspected gold let's find out what the plan is that it was suggested to me mr mitchell he was the new planets mars but clearly pointed out that they felt that they could delay them as the mitchell and perhaps it would keep away from the white house and keep it away from the president think i don't know why people and says that's a read the whole paragraph that you talk about the stonewall inn plead the fifth amendment because the president saying he rather do it another way if it's going to come out of all what the president can close to read the bottom line that led to his own will cover up and save the plan the last thing that he said them as the michel is that you know up to this white the whole theory has been contained and you know that job but they schlepping now and the important thing is to protect the people
the important thing is to go to the grand jury get the information and report back to those people lobby the suspect to consume five minutes i recognize the gentleman from ohio thank you much has been made a terribly hard conversations between the president and mr andrew petersen who was the assistant attorney general of the united states yeah i'm not in the evening of april sixteenth i'll i think that that the conversation has to be taken in its proper context and it is important to know and considering this to recall a extensive examination mr peterson money appearing in person before the hour he is
one of the relatively few live witnesses to which unfortunately that was at a closed hearing the press and the american people were not there friendly to that at the time i was very much that day is testimony that had been seen as well as waiter rant of what he testified that it was his understanding that under the circumstances today it was entirely proper for him to get this information to are the president it testified that in his opinion it was not grand jury information that is not information that it already testifying before the grand jury voted in
by the government and he said that certainly such information could properly the years by the president in his capacity as the chief of state and that he'd fully expected the president to do so i'll be justified further that even if it were grand jury testimony on that it was his opinion has the assistant attorney general in charge of the criminal division i that there would be no impropriety in the president evolving back to subordinates in the course of his official duties and specifically said that it would be better able to determine whether or not alderman and ehrlichman to be specific should be permitted to continue and there are important
duties he couldn't discuss the the president couldn't discuss this information with them and the german what it should take them on one out now seems to me that henry peterson is certainly one person was and skating through that so or deo as a very dedicated public servant professional of the very highest standards and that his testimony should be given a great deal away you further testify that is generally the practice within the government up for persons accused of wrongdoing to be confronted not only with the charges against them but also the information on which those charges are based in for that reason he felt that it was entirely appropriate for the president to transmit that information do
i think his testimony is so important to refer to it in detail and this is so during an examination by mr dennis in indiana at one point into a book mr peterson i think you testified earlier that information which are transmitted to the present of the united states was not in fact grand jury testimony rather material and evidence which you and the department of justice had accumulated an acquired by your own investigations and that is really what is a treacherous area at the time i was receiving information it was not grand jury information but that same information may be within a matter of a day would become grand jury information what i understand that however at the time you had it and at the time you transmitted if it had not yet become so is that true answer well certainly at the
time i transmitted weather at the time certainly at the time my god whether or not it was at the time of france know it was grand jury information i was not even a close track of mr that's ok and you testified our concern of the journey of the need to have a few minutes so i will come out a candidate as chair and you testified however that had in fact been technically grand jury testimony that in your legal opinion you had a pretty likely transmitted right answer yes sir and i think a justified also that had in fact been technically grand jury testimony that in your legal opinion it would be entirely proper correct and legal or the president
in the discharging his administrative function in determining whether or not to fire a homeowner and ehrlichman what he should do about them and so on to inform them of the charges against them is that correct answer by mr pearson yes sir i'll be similar answers were given the buyer to serve distinguished public servant to a number of congressmen who questioned am on the savvy and it seems a clarinet that much appeal is being made about nothing in this particular paragraph talk of the president then transmit information received from mr peters thank you mr manos
then my speech from a ma very well i'm very happy that he read that a pop way that i haven't mr pearson unfolded to our attention because it's me answer mr pierson said the first place it was the grand jury testimony altogether the mother was elmo was an air in the second place evaded all been grand jury testimony and that apart right help for united states about as i did and the third place the plaza in eyes they said a perfect right to head to a couple of these people the general subject matter which they were charged for his administrative purposes an unarmed german weather app they'll be fired reclaimed and i expected him to do that when i talked to him and the there wasn't anything out now that's the peterson testimony are you're gonna hang any body because of that transaction when that's what the man involved as to say about it it's very very difficult history mr
pearson i have no complaint and i wouldn't think that they would have a complaint here now that's adequately covered i hope everyone here understands exactly the procedure we're going through yesterday we gave these people a hard time because they wouldn't fine or very charge which is mr lehr said would be granted any va walker in the land so today they concocted a scenario and we have a series of motions which nobody invincible or even including the charming gentleman make them just so they can talk about specifics that they were willing to plea ads all right it's good clean fun i guess at how little bit farcical i think for such a serious procedure i am afraid some of the bias not he's against the president is showing here and there in this kind of an operation i'm afraid so but they're very much more to say about this particular charge because the man
who was involved and who's information was supposed to be transferred as no complaints as it was perfectly all right for new jersey and the san juan meal and i'll be happy to do so thank you my only purpose and seeking those one minute i have a question for my friend from alabama on my motion to strike you would now in the second one of course we had no vote won three and for you it would present five and six we had no vote was seven i'm curious he's spending money on the side the continuum
gentlemen by mr chairman members of the committee i've spoken to this issue before an idea i regret the need to have to go back into orbit i guess this is what we decided to do today a major say that i think the american people if they want to suitably a prize themselves the facts surrounding events of april fifteenth either get a hold of the transcripts and look at them the two preceding speakers for better relate a couple of important months the president of the united states who was interested in finding out about the involvement of halderman ehrlichman his two top aides and specifically oh sure it henry peterson the new top law enforcement officer investigating the watergate situation that he would not divulge any information given to him and he saw
that something like this you're talking to me and there's not going to be anybody else in the white house staff in other words i'm acting counsel and everything else that people present and suggested the only exception might be bit more when peterson express some reservation about information being disclosed more the president said let's just keep it with me right at that meeting and supplied the president what the memorandum which he had requested on april fifteenth summarizing the existing evidence that implicated halderman ehrlichman and strong later that same day april sixteenth there was a telephone conversation even more specific the president told mr peterson this is that the us believes have already developments you should know about and he reassured peterson of course as you know anything you tell me as i think i told you earlier will not be passed on because i know a lot of the grand jury now it is true that some of the information that was given to the president by
henry peterson was not strictly grand jury information although as the gentleman my friend the spoke before you said that it was treacherous area let me just say but what the president did is extremely significant because in examining henry peterson myself and this is not come up henry peterson said in his opinion there wouldn't be anything wrong with relating that chartreuse to the two top aides of that they would be a prized and he could get somebody else to take their place i specifically has to be differentiated between the charges and telling them to take some positive course of action henry peterson set humane tactics and years it was the conversation now and a lot of this is i am examine hillary peterson you testified earlier this morning i think i'm frankly i agree with you that what you said that it has not improper for you i don't think it's improper for you to the voters to the president what concerns me so much about
this is that the president didn't seem to be revealing charges he is stating specific information and possibly even making suggestions to them what they could do by referring specifically to what the president told to to potential criminal defendants on the morning of a southern dean the president told haldeman that the money issue is critical point another thing if you could get shot in yourself to sit down and do some hard thinking about what can a strategy or that i have with the money you know what i mean my recollection is home and said yeah and then it goes on and he takes up by actors some material deleted he goes into the callback what is called back no one has come back on and say in addition the president instructed haldeman well be sure the callback is at least aware of this little rule has talked very freely is a broken man when henry pierson said that he didn't think there was anything wrong with the rising of the charges he wasn't talking about the president trying to get them to engage in some
kind of tactics not only was that truly differentiate between advising even of charges to the top aides an advisory called backward already been implicated it was suggested to the president earlier the comeback was going to have to be called as a witness i suggest that when henry peterson said in response to a question by mr oliver we were not talking about federal rule sex either relates to the grand jury we're talking about section fifteen all three have title of eighteen which has to do with the impeachment the obstruction that do it of the do administration of justice and i suggested it's up to each one of us members to look at the facts that have been related by these own private by the president's own transcripts and make up their mind whether they think that the president was simply letting the home and ehrlichman the charges that have been leveled against them or whether he was telling them what they should do when the challenger bravely value greatly i think evaluating their testimonies usually delineated all
conversational april sixteenth nineteen seventy three in the president's transcript ethiopia's nine forty one nixon well let me say how i got going on historically ehrlichman ok it is tremendous and posing and fairness to my friend mr wiggins was just slip n o henry peterson further suggested activists had an examination that dealt with big difference between charges and tactics and and somebody like on becker was not a copy of that he also told haldeman notified you suggested that it's a question for this committee to determine whether there was corruption in the mind of the president and other words what were the president's motives that issue time of the gentleman has expired on time has expired and the question is now on emotion of the gentleman from alabama all those in favor of the motion please signify by saying aye it's been
the eighth no no no now it was designed ms jordan no ms hall
this going to settle this and there's no mr hutchins as for cory is just meant i was resentment it is the rails or more has to weigh in by mr dennis <unk> fresh well ms germain there's a coin was there was it was a really it was mortifying it was it
no no as britain german's blanton and there's a vote i'm a twenty six members voted no one members voted present an election is not agree jack on a memorable motion to open or the early nineteen nineties to strike
at the sarbanes gemini astronaut of consent that the debate on this amendment they wanted twenty minutes to be divided to the proponents of the motion and going into the fall well that faction has foreign and i have discussed the matter with german newcomers poems and i would like to ask if we have an economist michael most of that time gentlemen is that it doesn't fire very common separate airplanes and express my appreciation to him freely sell any deals with the question of whether the president made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the united states into believing that if there are incomplete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel the executive branch the united states and personnel of the committee for the reelection of the president and has been a great deal said during the
course of this debate on this subject i'll try to find some new materials and make reference to them during the course of preparation for this final debate i think the most significant the most interesting documents that i went over was a compilation by the committee a presidential statement on the watergate break in in its investigation i went through with a red pen when i spent three or four hours on it and underlined all the statements of the president during this period of time which i found to be as i say it's the evidence either false or misleading and they go through this or less than it's less than a straightforward kent state and then i find that there are red marks on almost every day and it was a very telling point for me i like to read them are canadian
gentlemen ladies in the audience and loiter and gentlemen will mostly on october fifth nineteen seventy three the president held a press conference this was i think two weeks almost to the day of the thai ministry cox was fired on saturday night the so called saturday night massacre in the following tuesday as members will remember their work a total of ninety four members of the house to join in impeachment resolutions and following that with the president gave up the plate but at the time of october fifth president at least they were not tapes were available that the president has asked this question mr president the follow up on the tapes question earlier you told us that your reasons are based on principles separation of powers executive privilege things of this sort can you assure us that the
tapes do not reflect unfavorably on your watergate position but there's nothing in the tapes that would reflect unfavorably and the president in front of the american people says this there is nothing whatsoever as a matter of fact the only time i listened to the tapes to certain states and i didn't listened listened to all of them of course was on june fourth there's nothing whatever in the tapes that is inconsistent with the statement that i made on may twenty second or of the statement i made you ladies and gentleman several questions rather searching questions i may say and very polite questions two weeks ago for the most part and finally nothing that differs whatever from the statement i made on the fifteenth of august i won't try to go into what those tapes of reveal except to say that i think the committee was committee members of common a one time or another today does the tapes which represented the case the real case hard case of evidence against the president now i'd like to refer back which but which tapes released within about a month of that time
that i prefer back to a presidential news conference of august twenty second in nineteen seventy three into several months before the tapes were released to the time the president indicated he would not release any case in his press conference the president made several assertions which i think are worth less than candid in his statements to the press and through them to the american people he said that in the summer of nineteen seventy two mr mcgregor would replace mr mitchell as director of his campaign mr mcgregor conducted a thorough investigation in nineteen seventy two about the involvement of white house personnel mr mcgregor has testified before the grand jury sworn testimony before this committee in evidence that he received no distraction from the president and that he did not conduct a thorough investigation about the involvement of white house personnel in response to another question in that same press conference the president said that on march twenty second he had told erlichman alderman and mitchell and dean
that quote we must get this story out we must get the truth out whatever and whoever it is going to hurt when the take on it was released and it became public that conversation march twenty first to which the president refers is that was made public and we have a recording and the committee members have heard that recording and they heard the president instructs mr dean and mr mitchell and mr haldeman and mr erlichman this i don't give an expletive deleted what happens i want you all the stonewall inn a complete the fifth amendment cover operating out of it save it save the planet is the whole point and later on he says i don't know but that said you know up to this point the whole theory has been contained and as you know john not only is there no search quotas the president put himself is giving is giving but when one reads the transcript there's an exact direction those for gentlemen to do the exact opposite thing
gentlemen gentlemen california's more of refinement in support of it people with me to realize that what is going on here this afternoon and that is that although the staff and the members of the majority have refused to give us a detail complaint filed against the president of the united states so that he could tell exactly what he's charged with the other side has got into it with him to present a lot of evidence a lot of facts that they claim this is evidence that this committee that really is not supportive i mean the material that we had taken i don't have the flowers
is doing the thing that he does is important for him to do in bringing up each one of these motions to strike but he obviously is against them or he would vote for that and then each one of the members of the majority those wanting to an impeachment of reading a copy of the paper the fairness bull by million dollars that the words sound so very close they like the same kind of the version that obviously didn't nearby someone with a tremendous imagination and i think that course they have a right to express their opinions i do think that when you're considering such an important thing as the impeachment of a president we ought to stick to the evidence that we have and the very best interpretation of the evidence that we have some of the things that means they don't just not borne out by the facts i didn't receive a copy of a recent
version that was just given statements first that on june twenty seven nineteen seventy two the president publicly about that with his position and as a factually accurate the previous nathan mitchell instagram that the white house had no involvement whatsoever in the watergate break in and a crp had no legal moral ethical accountability for the break here there's absolutely no evidence the president had any knowledge of the involvement of white house people i mean he made the state in fact the evidence is to the conference he'd been told that there was no involved was also stated to the grounds for this section that on august twenty nineteen seventy two the president publicly stated that the president says that at the president's direction being conducted a complete investigation which indicated that no one in the white house that four in the administration is involved in the watergate in the crp who is also conducting an investigation of the watergate ehrlichman directed being to conduct an
investigation to see if anyone in the white house was involved no one present we employed in the white house was involved as the state to live in one and the white house that there had been a previously that have let me there's that was given that on october third nineteen seventy two the president publicly stated that he wanted every league carried out by the fbi to the end because i want to be sure that no member of the white house that the nomad a woman in a position of major responsibility in the committee for re election and anything to do with this kind of a reprehensible activity well with a great pursuit of the investigation let's go down the line and i don't have to go through all of these various sections but i want one thing very clear and that is from the present patients of a live witnesses before this committee it's apparent that despite being with the man in the white house that had the responsibility to look into the watergate investigation
mr golson told us here with the lack of mine that everything was forget that being that pertained to watergate dean with the man with a look to for any investigation that was done and when we listened to create a conversation between the president as being part of his to being going up to camp david president comic i don't remember the exact words all this will give you an opportunity to think about the things that have happened and to prepare a report yesterday where they were not prepared for although he was against the civic going to do so why was there i guess his involvement was too deep for them to really be able to prepare something and
as a result was thinking back about the report of the president but it is perfectly clear that the president looked at being for the investigation for information on this matter janet yellen from california has inspired gentleman from indiana chairman at the aisle don't just happen to have a lot of repairing material by mail like as my friend from utah doesn't use one of the president's favorite words the scenario hasn't been so well written over here as it has been over their orders them very carefully taken care of by their sisters of staff counsel and everyone has these fees but i think i can still raining a few minutes cessna
and i don't rely reference i don't believe do help convince any reasonably open minded person if there is such a person on the committee that this particular paragraph belongs out of here emotions bright eyes the guy just on ordinary garden variety principles not that much reference to the weighty matters we're dealing with because it just doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about we should go back to the beginning of article one and see what were what were discussing your article starts out themselves and auntie and seventy to seventy two the agency with a major re elected him in an illegal entry into the democratic national committee headquarters and subsequently there to mr nixon that persona to plan and so forth the acting through various
subordinates they're various things through the lady impede and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry that's what this is all about and a cover up and protect those responsible now that's the granite monolith charge he tried to obstruct the investigation of an illegal entry and protect those responsible and they began to spell out how about was done now something else was done you come down to this number me and it says making false or misleading public statements i don't care where they're false or misleading or not for president purposes that question is due date palms brought the investigation of this break in and protect the people and get it and it says
here not for that purpose because i suppose any one could say that that wouldn't do very much for obstructing the investigation the break in but for the purpose of the seeming the people of the united states into believing that a girl and complete investigation of them combat rifle infected and then now if there is any kind of a charge at all i certainly some areas and the charge of article law you get justice false a statement i like to make clear that i'm not seeing the rebels take over the say the argument you can handle it and one made for the purpose of making people think that theyre of an investigation is breaking and use that would not have any single play which implemented the charge here which is obstructing the investigation
of the boy he and what leverage does it make what the almighty into brain thinks about whether the investigation or not the question is was there and was something done with interfering with the investigation the prayer the united states i don't think he was in the country when they're for that investigation which is what were talking about here this number he whatever it just doesn't belong here as they specifications activity as of this particular charge and i think my good friend from alabama whom i greatly love respect and admire will vote with mia strike was one because i just simply suggesting submitted during the ideological ground on which you can leave this monstrosity here in this particular way we should keep in mind
secondly some of the arguments and it didn't have a section or actually true and to want and thirdly are we now in the business of impeaching president are making misleading state from indiana has expired and i recognize the gentleman from california mr walid for five minutes and opposition i think the charges cover was really continuing to the very highest level is embodied in this declaration that the president was making the false or misleading public statements for the purpose of cementing the cover up all the activities of those below the president became manifested in terms of there's certainly when the president himself says that this matter is now being investigated thoroughly and that the results we will give to you are the only
results that need to get now there are maybe some question is to whether the president had within his knowledge that's up through and until april thirtieth nineteen seventy three because all of those statements were made at a time when we did not have in our possession of the edited transcripts the president then on april thirtieth may twenty second august fifth teeth in august twenty second continue to make statements that were less than complete now the question is was the cover up continue in on april thirtieth and at subsequent there too it's my own contention that the cover up was continuing in those public statements because there's no question the erroneous statements actually from april thirty may twenty second august fifteen and august twenty second were clearly known to the contrary to the
president because he had added and transcripts of all those conversations he had full transcripts of all these conversations the last public statement the president made on this issue to the nation was april thirtieth of this year april thirtieth of this year nineteen seventy four and he said as he has said in every one of these statements to the people of this nation tonight i am giving you that the front of the story the real story of watergate everything you need to know about watergate is contained and he pointed as mr well it did last night to his forty seven volumes of the edited transcripts and he set up at this point you haven't had the full story though it made about ten public statements saying we have at the four story but this is the definitive full story
the edited transcripts which is releasing to the nation they set after you've read these you need no more information it is all there now we ought to examine was he telling the truth to the public on april thirtieth of this year when he said all the truth of watergate is contained in these edited transcripts the nation relied on that as the president thought they would and believe this is the final statement about watergate everything up to this point has been less than full because the president says now it's a full story well it goes back to april thirtieth nineteen seventy three the president says in april nineteen seventy four what i've told you before april thirtieth nineteen seventy three was not the definitive story but this is everything now is in these transcripts well everybody he resign a relief and several thank god president find as told us the full story of watergate and that is about and we're pleased and were relieved
that the president has now called everything there is to know about watergate the committee began examining the edited transcripts and the committee got a hold of traits from which those transcripts have been transcribed and that takes on our equipment compared to the president out of the transcripts were incredibly more incriminating and in fact produce a great deal more of the story of watergate so that the last public statement on the president april thirty nineteen seventy four that this is the full story of watergate again has been false and misleading and the extreme because it was misleading in every aspect in those mistake and transcripts those altered transcripts misleading in a manner beneficial to the president
intentionally omitted and believe intentionally the subject of endless leaving the allegation making false or misleading public statements for the purpose of this even the people of the united states there's an allegation that has been sustained actually as recently as april thirtieth of this very year i do have a gentleman from california has expired all time has expired and the question now carries on the motion of the gentleman from alabama follows in favor of the motion police say ah follows a pause no no's appear to have it down in the new jersey a lot of the road has demanded and the clerical collar on all those in favor of the motion may signify vice and i all
those opposed no you know because of mines but europe has a kind of those big fb fb
1974 Nixon Impeachment Hearings
Reel 3 of 4
Producing Organization
National Public Affairs Center for Television
Contributing Organization
Library of Congress (Washington, District of Columbia)
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/512-2r3nv99w9t).
Episode Description
Videotaped coverage of the debate of the House Committee on the Judiciary, chaired by Peter Rodino, Jr., on the articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon. Includes approval of the first article of impeachment charging obstruction of justice. This is day 5 of the Nixon impeachement hearings
Broadcast Date
Asset type
Event Coverage
Politics and Government
Nixon, Richard M.; Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Media type
Moving Image
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Producing Organization: National Public Affairs Center for Television
Producing Organization: WETA-TV
Reporter: Lehrer, James
Reporter: Duke, Paul
Speaker: Rodino, Peter W.
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2403151-1-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Preservation
Color: Color
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Chicago: “1974 Nixon Impeachment Hearings; 1974-07-27; Reel 3 of 4,” 1974-07-27, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed June 19, 2024,
MLA: “1974 Nixon Impeachment Hearings; 1974-07-27; Reel 3 of 4.” 1974-07-27. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. June 19, 2024. <>.
APA: 1974 Nixon Impeachment Hearings; 1974-07-27; Reel 3 of 4. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from