thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 3 of 3
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
oh i don't have any time for curiosity at their age forty million dollars and a worker at a friendly place during the entire period and the only reason i have the committee recommend it with all of you and to other representatives from the va made it all about the amount of the loan and we like that mr mitchell mr magruder and i think mr porter but i'm not quite sure will you already knew that regularly
and you had some money you just don't i wish you'd explain to me you get to say something about how they spend it was yours seven months later this morning in some detail the budget was broken down in about a dozen items and it is that which we argue about the budget committee meetings and i don't research and planning direct mail and telephone six million seven hundred and eighty five thousand dollars
about four and a half million for direct mail million nine hundred thousand for telephone and eighty thousand for computer lessons a lot that was it every time when i was nine well i mean you know no they presented figures really they presented programmed to me and i was in the position of either agree or challenging and at its allies over there when i wrote the letter made with a metal i said an anomaly the budget the very little progress in reducing the thing
is that we proposed a nice letter and said i think we ought to cut the budget a fairly significant amount of money and sethi i think is well known in the midst of metal was you now so i'm saying that the budget of the people under the financial uncharted the various functions other about a dozen different divisions of the budget and each was under an individual he regretted he came in that night before and i was in the position of being the devil's advocate in every case and saying it's too much money and the july now
beginning labor day it was given to me every week before labor day at someone to regular occasions there were fairly frequent meetings in people may have less frequent meetings i believe in june july there was an opinion that was the thrill for him among other things for the duo discuss and debate and reach a conclusion with the other members of the budgetary commission after walk out ways of money to be made you know so that was the you know apparently was an eloquent than a man like me of mental process up with you can determine how much money will be spent vote the product unless you know what it is that's exactly the kind of probably how
we we had no reservations the problem was not determining what the product was in those terms the problem was that we need four million dollars for television and radio and another report or direct mail and other rebel or isn't there were killed in the end doing all he's a gentle yardstick by which the necessities of a political campaign and i was really arguing mccain's expenditures now are the limits that i raised i figured there is definition subjective definition of the people who want
to raise money very successful they'll discuss a question about the family about the use and then a monocle and benefits for use of the money no you know good for you we'll check my record and only the media and women with and deal with you as the politics aside in the
white house mr martin i don't really know it was the dow council i don't know where he's going on the organizations particularly those where you didn't even know the role and the women in parliament i just don't know thank you as joel coen brothers not unaware that athlete you've raised some interesting questions about what the pensioners for a moment
i have not been a protector and i have not been a defender of any witnessed or have been a prosecutor how billy and i don't propose to start that now seems to me that the inquiry into two areas on campaign financing deserves further inquire jan's placed of this witness as to whether those are hired at them that requires a law the corrupt practices act of nineteen twenty ten is very interesting particularly with reference to the method and manner of accounting for cash contributions and gets his first concern require a lot of the cost them and usage by political parties and dispersing pitch the second question is about whether or not the dividing up against contributions of the smart songs are multiple possible there's an attempt to give the gift as distinguished from avoiding jenny seems to me that an absolute fantasy for going to inquire into something higher than the language of the
law the custom and practice of politics in this first but it's incumbent on this committee and i suggest that the committee subpoenaed all the records of the democratic national committee and all other candidate for nomination of either of the two major political parties we're receiving april seventh nineteen seventy two and subsequently i don't exactly what the cost of music i hope we will have witnesses here to discuss the manner of inundation manner of handling assets in order to avoid give tax consequences for these hearings there's something else too oregon probably oh i don't think understands how these committee hearings unless a hit i don't want them to get the impression that the questioning of many senators here
it's found favor well as maniacal on have not appreciated the harassment of this witness by the chairman and the questioning was just finished i think this senate committee are back in venice it worked at eighty eight years business has been good i think that it's
important that we have this in perspective i understand the chairman suggested that that democratic candidates face of the witnesses be severely just a custom musical perspective that was first i think there has been criticism over chairman ervin's question in the can of campaign finance chief maurice standards and stop why roll call vote on the floor of the senate and obviously still has a few questions asked him when he doesn't public television's complete coverage of the watergate hearings will continue after this posture station identification on a good coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service of the member stations of
pbs a public broadcasting service
and in fact continues its coverage of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities you again correspondent jim lehrer it couldn't go any storm is apparently over for now as senator of the reasons his questioning of chairman maurice and there you are there's a lot of oil company and as beautiful as i understand you to say all the money and you go home
now you said that you made of that well there was not money that are the property of the committee approached forty five thousand dollars of that was nine eleven given the medical expenses which i decided not to you with money which have been a contributor and i didn't know i could accept that and accepted that i was falling and many of the nomination there are the two real huge generational campaign visit as government spending is now yvette thomas to come back to do that he was i was a white house product and
the idea that the question may don't buy him on our part yes when he refused to tell you what that money was all those are now he later you might've found out that money was given to a man named tony to find out what happened to all be used to bathe suddenly become like him or just the reagan years i learned that in london late april or late now this year you can vote you know the bottom line up four hundred and fifty thousand dollars of funds raised only the campaign raised the people active in the campaign alright well given the openness to all because of these paul mccartney's action in to pay their salaries and they figure that families
you know i think so so we have a situation in the wealthy and to some extent is that senator mccain will be in play by money which was one of the people who were active in the campaign is not so well it depends on the way there and what the source of the money wisely and i really don't know only rent and that was not maintained that probably the important chemical material will now allow
me you have to make your own i do on june twenty four but because the committee vote was such an emphasis on my counsel on his initiative called mr mitchell's council and columnist from the history of the election mr mitchell there were the meetings and i'm hearing today that way in marion magruder and slow
pushing to find out i was not at the meeting and i did not know that there was a second meeting the same date between money and metal mitchell because why not how much money you're given that it again i was not at that meeting and i did not know the meaning of the bill then according to mr mitchell record thirty three forty there was a telephone conversation between the july and they originally or whether it that we don't know at four pm i met with mr mitchell in his office oh no one else was a little lonely that sloan would not tell him how
much money you let it and asked me if i know an isolated not there is always that i am not in your report rich's third and mr mitchell who his counsel to my counsel to me and i said earlier election a meeting at the meeting but mr mitchell report in this episode yeah we do
and then you found out for that one nation at the money which had come from all the proceeds objection of the committee and then i knew that you absolutely knew that all the group had patrons of had record low tech world of smaller format movers direction at a substantial sums of money to live eighty years that we also knew that made it was that the right well before that and
answer questions for the fbi the us and libya thing about you so no i did not because mr martin was standing only legal matters involving hillary will know that it's been serving as scout council of your committee is running ads in question because the rest of it mr liddy had failed to cooperate with the fbi as maya kill a firearm and said don't discuss the matter women or discuss anything to escalate and that was the end of a chopin mostly to my office over the line and that was it and you knew that they know that the actor a message to be had so much so much of misgivings about all
the money that had been given to lead a biomed room his request that he was thinking about as i yes that happened the red river below and i'll add given that message about telephone get divorced finally you need to the audience no i didn't tell him that work at body in that manner i was certain that the iphone was resigning it was no question that that was his intention he hadn't submitted in writing but when i met with the fbi said that the official own and offered to resign two weeks ago and that was a reasonably resigning under that was
the record mm hmm all flock to persuade him to commit perjury and respected amount of money that has been given to mr liggett yes he did he told me that after he had had several conversations and they were going to vote no mr stanton all the use of this knowledge you acquire one will know about these mothers about the new record in yemen in your mind a feeling that if you alter can communicate on top of the bottle and all of that so that question for the german this no it was
that was implicated in this matter there was no indication that anyone else has it mr martin had been appointed as the harmful to investigate the situation presented with a report to mr mitchell and the president at that it was fine i haven't major mcculloh you know
for you oh yeah allegations mccarthy you that as a friend to the president as long now wishing well on one reason they're going to re secure his re election that you hear the top president biden suggested to him that he come out and make it clear that he was going to enforce a law regardless of what happened ms janet president had far more resources are that i did it was known that the white house was conscious of the problem i had no knowledge that thea was common knowledge at the time i had nothing to tell the president that one of an unusual
i'm david greene mr chairman i have no reason this is like at that time and until march twenty thirteen that there was anybody involved in this matter beyond i'm libby lewis and his connection with the fire the united food and i didn't know i didn't know anything about the cover and presently was indicted and the fact that you've been told that mr mcgrew had no longer commit partner didn't know like if it was implicated in some women well it's entirely possible mr miller was really wasn't indicted by the grand jury today apparently had the entire
story statement in addition to the grand jury indictment remember him that you know you can have interactive listening more information which of mystical sort of my head to do something now oh my you all my b raman committed reelect president feel like the perfect you know ms givens people in the white house all i can say is that i said no reason really going any farther with the president where you do all the revenue and that thought it was anything that
it the investigation which was going on by the fbi by the grand jury by the white house and other sources i have now investigating or you add three legally npr's one occasion when i came back your questions that you know you didn't know the information you didn't give the state may do you it's been and how long
conversation with that person now sixteen and made an investigation and that he could assure the american people that they'll i don't know or after that date that i had a meeting with the person in september you said yes at discussing these matters when you know i did not discuss the watergate matter as such the president visited with me he said i know you're taking a lot of punishment in the accusations and working with others some day and i'm confident that you're not going to do it was a copywriter
and i did take advantage of the occasion to say to the president i think are spending on money or working awful hard to raise it and raise money for a candidate who's thirty points ahead of the ball but there was an intruder in the stands you testified that a lot of what mr coll that has paid out of civility no national money and you said that that had to be paid back no
now isn't it true in the stands that show at the break in lester sloan went to the white house because he was very upset about certain things that had allegedly happened it did indeed go there is the list of like i have no like it he returned to the community and it should not speak to him about his conversations with white house i have no recollection and do you recall writing about about that maybe you write about having that
meeting i now do i understand that your concept of mr mitchell's role in the whole campaign is that he was he chaired those meetings you spoke about it the budget committee that's right with yes we were we were really co chairman of the budget committee the minister michel girls in his officer in his office and in fact i considered him the chairman of the meeting's but you give you have this man in charge of the whole campaign as i quote you you said that you had really nothing to do with the campaign that you consider him in charge of the whole campaign process it as it was given the record that was his title i don't know when when you were approached about giving some money to mr
liddy you called up mr mitchell and i want to say right and i think yesterday in response to a question i suppose you use a that do you mean john and retail slowly these amounts are any amount that you should do so and he said that is right now before that estimate said you he will have to ask the river because the river is in charge of the campaign and he directs the space i was reading that were you know not in the context in which i understood it why is that but now there is the man who is handling the details of the rulers the man who is working on the program there is a man who has a responsibility for wrecking to spend when don mitchell is before this committee in better than it
was but i can see this to be that the political professional man to talk to the political leaders of the state of oregon to the campaign in the state the man who thought about it and i'm steve inskeep that's been the center for public relations he was in on the discussions on that that he was the political professionals recruiter was that the owner and managers of the activity i know that you have head about so called cia involvement in the mexican transactions but did you have some inkling of that at the time that the dollar mexican checks came up with somebody notified you about there was possibly cia involvement and
these stories i mean in a paper recently admitted to privately about the discussions between the heads of the cia fbi because i was not aware that that was going on but there was an occasion where no bob allen had complained that the attorney in mexico was being a rat that the fbi had demanded to know the name of his client that this would've reached his lawyer client really and really fun and so does the fbi have that much authority in a foreign country i talk to either to martin gardner john d and i can't recall her which warner well as the question
and some time later there it appears as alicia lawyer maybe an epic that maybe a cia source and if that is the case the investigation will stop at that point now that is all i heard or know about that situation i can't place that conversation on in terms of the day but the idea that that one report the investigation the nazis and the investigation at all that statement the position and the white house position that there was cia and well you know again the fbi investigation reported burning through the night
of the year thank you to get to the end of that testimony and age seventeen thirty three do you have that this is a chemist stands the fbi on page seventeen this morning senator low yesterday and this morning to testify that you had no reason to question
the integrity or the reliability research associates has missed two room you just grabbing is a good person has to make a much calmer when did you suspect something role must the state i didn't have any suspicions about any of these people until after the disclosures in the press following i believe it was march twenty third mr mccourt wrote a letter and then on page seventeen seven there's one point in the standings did that raise suspicions in your mind as a possible illegal unethical uses of the money must magruder with this person must stand is no question about that but those patients began to generate earlier than they
typically on jun twenty eight ms ledoux of this jar of failing to cooperate with the fbi huge they didn't leave boston always question mark good question earlier than that taken on june twenty eight so when did you first gets a spaceship something rotten in denmark well i think i've been clear that up with a quotation he recited with us to abandon the movement called no i was not suspicious of them and delivered sometime after march twenty are the watergate affair and that is the answer
these issues suspicion or anywhere they can withstand sanctions ms jan says you indicated in your testimony throughout the mit sloan was in charge of the air
money money and then now a way you weren't in california and iowa on a similar mission approximately june good morning fortunately july fifth miami
what were you in touch on or about the sixth of july with anyone connected with the white house or with the committee and what was that a region of space the result that you're never really going to work or not and that was the only telephone call with washington or anyone connected with the cfp or with the white house on that day
the vestibule recollection was that meaningful and to the best of recollection of the rest of your recollection what the conversation confined just to the very subject and i didn't you going to california violence you can join us did you ask
i do i don't know and during those meetings me stay with you you you i think it is in as a hotel room somewhere in he gets passed a hat fact that voters have been trying to end detergent hell with you we really don't know
well you want to discuss anything it is fascinating about working with david i think there were some discussions in the ongoing at a glow that morning seattle and there is a meeting beginning with private meetings about an inning as a lot of meetings with the treasurer of the washington finance committee forty nine
good morning all right social conversation together in june is concerned fortunately you mean to tell me that was just long to rescue his concern about western reporters' attempts to get him to perjure himself
said that way would you say that to you and it didn't get either on or before why do you say that you have knowing that you had no knowledge of anything disparaging about mr miller until march twenty third of the senate you're seventy three but in the grand jury and as time went on it was
evident that the grand jury did not think that it was anything wrong and says well i was concerned that they didn't really interesting concern mr ashbaugh owner vote he knew that he had had a meeting with the attorneys mr parkinson mr ryan and informed them of the attempts me go well before the grand jury handed plane the fifth amendment i don't recall it was all you weren't aware that he had met with less true on the day he returned from the california trip we know well in the
election his testimony later on a lot of that day he did call you on the telephone call made in the morning i'll give you that i will be in the audience he was joking about his resignation participate in the meetings
well actually you're aware that there were more than two months between you and the grand jury acted we're not i think do you do i understand that was just on one under you know i'm responsible for you for his actor's career as a responsible end of the low rise access to either directly in an important but i was the chairman of the committee i coordinated its activities slogans only i could solve the relationship was exactly right but in theory in practice he did work on that you only organization
the suspects in past scandals political scandals that just people don't handle the crime involves use of money or portugal produces many have suggested that they need now under consideration by the select committee none of them were ever useful for sporting purposes are you aware of any of the funds on the open forward you do and it was eliminated financially as a result of any of these things a normal reimbursement expenses he can't quite be different venue you told the committee that you're not aware of all of the cash
dispersed those were useful well obviously some of the rather want to foreign reporters testified that he got compensation continuing for a period of time after he was discharged now if the events of a long fall the newest chairman of the finance committee to reelect president made an attempt to investigate what uses these monies were approved russia's regions independent investigation of the riot there's been
an investigation how would you respond to improve the internal revenue service to get them interested in the use of an integrated welcome sharon or whether they will be taxable there is a great wall unintended problems such as the cost we knew as chairman of the finance committee and make an effort to get the funds return was probably is
settlers of responsibility and responsibility and whether there is going to recover there is an obligation it is last week
and twenty four oil reserves of that is intention may have the opportunity and the committee's rules of applause and take them and the german up on the banking committee for your consideration and for the opportunity to me to present my story for the first time i hope the greater picture of a very difficult undertaking a frenzied activity and my part and on the part of the finance committee and trying to meet the obligations of a campaign i still recall from all records i have
everything to answer the committee's questions about human and i can only deal or no now anyone to say something about the three elements first i'd like to talk about the people in the finance committee under the conditions of the separatists and i won't use the term are watertight until this morning that under the conditions of separateness between the two committees i'm confident that no one in the finance committee except of course ordinarily at any knowledge or participation in the watergate affair or any other as the dodgers when all the testimony is in their hearings i'm confident that you will find that everyone connected with the finance committee has cooperated falling so particularly with respect to oregon treasures a
useful and all that not much has been made of a few differences in recollection of really an official that ignores all the common ground there between artist and there's a great deal of animal a difference is that it happened now and then the recollections of national money really relate to financial reporting rather than responsibility for espionage or suburb that regard to the watergate affair second they know about the controversy among all of our committees in this campaign there are about a million contributions received for the president and the republican party summoned him from wealthy people feminine came from people in the most radical some reporting we received a man from a one dollar or less up to a very large amount in
an inalienable i have all these people in the course of my travels and solicitation to contribute according to their meetings guarding their ability to get the justice that some large contributions a very large economy the id is made of a circle's that no one has a substantial amount of money into a campaign without buying something in return without the expectation of it was never the committee would agree with me that that's a vicious that's eli attie living through our self respect as a people i haven't stolen chicago pretty well known now to two million dollars to like a lot of nineteen sixty eight is a very wealthy man and he can afford
it leaves and the president you know the only friend lyman stone has never asked for anything from the government or the administration and return because he believes that the public service land it will likely be another james ray kroc is a man in chicago who is responsible for the development of the mcdonald's hamburger chain i visited with him in chicago in september about forty five minutes i never met him before i talk about the campaign on them we discussed his successful without their bit on there with their and i have my seventieth birthday and an appreciation for what i have been able to achieve i'm going to get millions of dollars of my money charity that significant drop you or a beneficiary of the great american system injury believe in it i
mean the way that you think the president will help preserve that says i like to make a suggestion when you get to make those distributions to charity i don't have the same two hundred and fifty thousand dollars you get there was no discussion and in that meeting of anything else now what happened after his contribution even though prosecute him of making the competition's really good influence the price commission on matters affecting his company secondly it was a coda making accommodations really to get a lower minimum wage for the young people of workers' comp he was installing berries insinuations and fossils they were vicious and unfair completely conjecture without any fact whatever my point is that there are many people like that you've got
a wave and the country will of the party will even principles and really believe that any given time on a candidate there are very few people like to collect in return for their contribution and they don't get very far under either party thats and file democrats or republican i think the time has come to express their confidence in the honor and integrity of our fellow man with a rich or poor and stop manufacturing reasons to attack people really exercised their own citizens about making a political operative in the course of all things that have happened since the june seventeenth a lot of innocent people of an unrelenting publicity insinuation accusations chart name a
few of your great endings robert l and there a reasonable number of others who played a horrible cries merely because they participated in the campaign as a contributor or as a worker in time and expenses and even their reputation ivan very damaging effects on their business isn't on everest a lot for somebody just a couple of people on the committee included work and writes this report will make it clear that such people and by name are innocent victims of this tragedy i hope that people like usual and others in the limelight of adverse publicity will be directly played i put myself in that category i volunteer was that whatever the case may be because i believe in my presence
you know why now from whatever but i know you can't think the abuse to which i've been subjected because of the associations i fell into when you make a record my goodness you will play similar situation and been called to testify and that was the reason that i stayed commanded yearlong know although press statement that he made news for the opposition i'll leave i haven't and i don't think tom service can be rather than a person to see piracy
that is not a strike out that notwithstanding the fact that point i'm just a situation it was somewhat though oh i am rep substantially to an election law allows us about that agreement as chairman or the witnesses each to excuse to like associate myself with remarkable chairman also express our appreciation to mr stan are curious of what i hope now that with this phase of his testimony concluded that some concerns about job involving testimony and other matters in other forums as vendors that we have not trespass for are encroached on other employers really not intend to put your embarrassing position we do not intend
to create or you know what we did not intend to do less and the very best we can to get all the lines it would very helpful in that respect all right he's no so as you saw the end of the murray stands testimony with that the most acrimonious exchange within the committee as senator bernie criticized the chairman on what he called housing the witness
still <unk> and managed to maintain the calm demeanor which is characterized his appearance he may return later for more questioning on how he ran the finance operations generally next understand will be jeb stuart magruder the deputy campaign manager reportedly authorized the payment of large sums of cash to g gordon liddy was one of those convicted in the watergate break in the key question from a reader is what he knew of what lady was going and who instructed him to include it in his operation was granted immunity earlier this week and there are several theories about what he'll say on the stand meanwhile an end to the hearings seem further away general announced today that the committee will work a four day week for the next two weeks in an attempt to accelerate the pace but as of now no one's betting on when these hearings will come to an end our clothes they will come to the start of the nineteen seventy four congressional races we have got oscar the georgetown university law school and robert alexander director of the citizens
research foundation an actual expert on campaign financing with us now john mcpherson was like to ask you mr alexander is there something inherently evil about the use of cash in a political campaign you believe secretary stands suggested that there was a necessity for the use of cash in campaigns it is true that in a campaign organization there must be petty cash it is also true that sometimes money is raised in cash in small sums and perhaps a collection basket will be sent around at a rally and that individuals should be permitted to contribute cash in small sons i think that their own in terms of legislation i would not be in favor of prohibiting the use of cash or rather with circumscribe its use by saying that an individual could not contribute in cash in excess of say fifty dollars or one hundred
dollars whatever the amount of congress might want a salad and i would also try to set some limits on the use of cash within the campaign organization itself when an advance man was going out on a trip to set up a rally in maine a hundred or two hundred dollars in tears i to pay into their lives bounces along the way and i would not try to inhibit that kind of activity but rather to limit and what we have with this almost just as being questioned about the advantages to a contributor of anonymity network what advantages this hell holes for contributor he was not asked however within that framework what advantages giving cashiers for contributor why are they from yours from your own extensive research in this area oh of course cast as the
universal means of exchange and it doesn't bring along with that the individual who may have given casper come from any source from any individual and then you can establish a linkage between the giver and the receipt so it's double anonymity and worked with austin know in the testimony mr stands where he said that he gave seventy five thousand dollars for her recalled back on the water sell from high up or to request a pilot i openly and the white house are legal question hypothetical in question if it later did is determined that that seventy five thousand dollars was used for any legal purposes has been a less it was used to work their health to a system that in the watergate cover up is mr stands legally culpable even though he said he did not know about aston reese and mr combat refused to tell him for what purpose that money was to be spent for gemma as far as a the criminal law is concerned he is not culpability did not know there are exceptions to that in the criminal law many
states many jurisdictions have a negligent homicide statute so that if you kill someone with your automobile obviously didn't do it on purpose that is nonetheless a crime but when it comes to the illegal purpose of money that might have gone through mr stance hands if he really did not know what the purpose of the money was for then he's not criminally liable however let me add this there are a number of civil suits which have grown out of the watergate matter one of them is a suit by the democratic central committee against the committee for the reelection of the president and a businessman's and mr mitchell and some other individual defendants now the issue is somewhat different ethically of negligence was crying and when it comes to negligence the issue is not what this does stands knew the issue was whether mr stands knew or should have known what the money was going to be used for and the proof is very different and if it can be shown that goes to stan's was negligent and in fact should have known what the
money was going to be used for then he has an individual defendant could be liable well are reasonably peripheral question about him beyond the argument that we saw between nelson a gurney a certain the whole thing from a partisan standpoint how would you raise an urbanized country lawyer well i'd like to be a country lawyer the way he's a country where he has obviously a person for a legal mind he plows right ahead when he asked the questions and frankly with a witness likeness the stands that is what you have to do is the stance does not answer questions yes or no he simply gives fairly long answers answer and just asks the question whatever response he gets he goes right ahead masts the next question that is frankly what you have to do right away from the hearing today vice president agnew is named receives an indirect watergate spillover in a manner that has previously been linked with the watergate probe a
county grand jury in maryland came up look for camp sealed indictment against someone involved in last year's baltimore dinner honoring the vice president that was the dinner were more expansive as fifty thousand dollars well the kid and action and may be advancing more successful i really was to recall mr stands test what about that money wasn't eventually return to the national campaign the identity of the person in that it won't be made known until the arrest has made an apology jamal there are really two themes running through this investigation these hearings and the second one not quite an airing today the main theme of course is to find out who did all bad things associated with the nixon campaign illegal improper or unethical things it's a search for the guilty and how high up the guilt reaches the committee is grinding on with that process the other process is to accumulate materials to help the senate draft better campaign legislation and that involves the morality of
campaigning reality is a notoriously difficult thing to define in politics probably impossible but the committee's attempting anywhere in the questions particularly senators baker and urban there is a pattern of concern a number of witnesses have been forced to probe the moral conscience isn't public it may prove impossible to legislate these matters but the hearings themselves goodbye and repetition of their concern how promulgated finer set of political ethics too broad generalizations which might form the basis for such a possible code ever emerge from hearing so far one is that loyalty to any politician even if he's the president or to his political team does not override a man's moral to do is amal conscience the other thing was welcomed by senator evan today the conduct of people in high political positions should be guided by ethical principles which are higher than a minimal requirements of the law ford
jr from washington you've been watching gavel to gavel videotape coverage of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities as coverage is made possible by grants for special events coverage from the corporation for public broadcasting and the ford foundation and has been a production of unpacked and a vision of a greater washington educational telecommunications association dune in news
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 3 of 3
Producing Organization
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/512-7940r9mw4p).
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 10 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, Maurice Stans testifies.
Asset type
Event Coverage
Politics and Government
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Media type
Moving Image
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Anchor: MacNeil, Robert
Anchor: Lehrer, James
Producing Organization: WETA-TV
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2341642-1-2 (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: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 3 of 3,” 1973-06-13, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed June 17, 2021,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 3 of 3.” 1973-06-13. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. June 17, 2021. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 3 of 3. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from