thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-19; Part 4 of 5
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
it's been this request for whaling commission that included among other things mr michel piccoli that under no circumstances would bail money been forthcoming and for me to call mr lilly and tell and i do so we tell us the rest of your conversation with mr knecht i don't want to repeat anything they do a toll escalating but i would like to know what was connected to you i don't know i can't recall all
he asked me if mr liddy i might say that mr michel for the sincerely shoppers i was like at this age he asked me mr libby had disclosed any other of the activities of this group that had been arrested and mr hunt mr and himself been disclosed to others mr mitchell confirm or deny it had approved a budget on disability operation i don't think he didn't make no comment in any way as to whether or not he had approved a budget like that that
discussion took place later a discussion of what it was like when the discussions didn't start out in that vein that took place when i confronted mr mcgregor i asked liz to magruder in the presence of mr mitchell i believe the next day soon thereafter as i could how much money he had given us truly in addition i forget journal nature the entire conversation i asked him whether he directed mr levy to go in there he denied it i asked him how much money he had given mr liddy he said he had authorized <unk> slow to give mr liddy forty thousand dollars i do i asked him what he thought the
forty thousand dollars was for seemed amiss us a sizeable sum of money mr mitchell expressed the same concern and want to know you know what he could how he could have spent forty thousand dollars already because the campaign had just started mr mcgrew replied that the stomach to mr mitchell that he had authorized two hundred and fifty thousand dollars and the scene but a very small part of that that's at two hundred and fifty thousand some occasion during that week and i was not his vision other than the state testified that i confronted the two two of them and mr mitchell's peasants that may very well kurt i don't have a pleasant recollections but
after talking to mr magruder i've been interrogated <unk> slow mr sloan told me that he had been authorized by mr magruder to disperse the neighborhood of two hundred thousand dollars which shocked me even further he was sure the amount he said he had not calculated the exact amount but that it was his opinion that it was in the neighborhood of two hundred thousand dollars the poet is both that he'd already dispersed group i'm really agreement with the flow that went to mr mcgrew and i ask him if he was sure that he had only authorize the disbursement of forty thousand dollars he said well are you talking about homeless
persons or dispersants mr liddy said that i don't ask about how much money you authorize for living he said the figure was seventy five thousand dollars because he authorized thirty five thousand to mr porter subsequent to that and again i don't know the sequence of events and only guess as to the days must've been entered in the june twenty three june twenty four lester sloan came to me quite upset and said that i had he had talked to me in confidence and that i had disclosed to mr mcgrew or what he told me about the two hundred thousand dollars oh he's said in effect i thought you were the only one i could trust and i can't even trust to idlewild with a discrepancy we had i had to somehow find out where the
truth lies as i recall i believe as was the saturday before you were i may have had a discussion with him privately is he's testified in my office and another one in the presence of mr mitchell as others have testified in his commercials office where confrontation took place but i had a rather lengthy discussion with mr sloan the medication with respect to his possible liability for violation of the election campaign law and my recollection of that conversation is a little different than the small business loan bill it was being
pressured into telling a pulp story by eye i'm not sure it's yes he did but i'm not sure whether it was on that occasion or when he came back from his trip i just i'm not sure when we have that discussion but even sometimes communicate today it's fear that the reading for us and did you subsequently confirmed that the budget they've been allocated to this day that matter has never been confirmed really i've never never appraise them the facts there'd been any agreement for the amount of the whispers i think mr sloan testimony that it was one hundred ninety nine thousand you want my opinion that's figure accept but
he did not he gave me that the figure i believe after his return from his trip he tell you that he had his first honor tonight on file believe after he returned from his trapeze he told me that he had to reconcile his books and it was one hundred and ninety nine thousand dollars and admitted to that that was a correct well no and with more and while we're talking about money let me ask you if you are aware that around eighty thousand dollars in late june of nineteen seventy two from mr stanton mr sloan in the groove i'm not aware that you are not aware of that transfer closer you played no point in that and the transfer that money based upon the testimony that i really i barely get lynn neary in this tuesday's testimony today
after speaking about it fact of the transfer his chances to say at that time it was understood within the committee and robert martin had been brought to washington to work on illegal miners that were heard at the time and i went to him for advice his advice after he found the description of the money was to get the money out of the authors and out of the campaign and he suggested that i give it differently i recall adjusting do you agree or disagree with that and you suggest why was disbanded the left but yes i started to say i have this long discussion with that has flown about is possible
involvement in violation of campaign contributions mr sloan know considerably i believe a friend came to me for that advice and amongst the things we discuss with respect to his possible liability was the fact that he had failed to report cash on hand in the pie reporting period and that he had dispersed funds without reporting i might say that when he came to see me on that occasion he was almost paralyzed with fear he professed to not have intended to do anything wrong i told him that he should reconsider he had made and that if he did this and reported those dispersants and deposited the funds on hand and report before the next reporting data and
report make that report that oh he would be guilty of in my opinion was a technical violation of the law because of full disclosure would have been made simply not one reporting day later he had no knowledge of the abuses for which the money was used in i gathered that he agreed with me that money should be put in the bank and reportedly he had a sense of relief as a result of that conversation it was the same conversation where we were discussing the discrepancy in the fonz i told him that i wanted to get together with you know on the following monday i believe this was late saturday afternoon and was at that time he told me that he and his wife had planned for sometime at ten day
trip to the hill or bermuda or the bahamas someplace similar that his wife was and there's believed pretty well on her pregnancy but she was very aware of the watergate affair that he was concerned for her health and he would not have to stay at it was either called mr sloan that if he did so it would look very bad especially in view of the fact that we were having gao inquiry is that there was this large discrepancy that he was the only one that could solve it he reiterated that his wife's health was in the balance of poem i would talk to mr mitchell and let him know i talked to mr mitchell mr mitchell thought it would be very bad if he left the next day for me to try to talk him out of it but that if he felt he
had to go for his wife's help letting go i call mr slone a saturday evening and i said take your wife on a vacation but be sure that your numbers with his secretary and the chicken return twenty four hours notice and he thanked me now subsequently when he returned and i've i presume it was shortly after his return from his trip as i recall he had resigned virus time that he had in fact left the area his resignation that he was still working with us just dance fb and i don't i cannot fix a date it could have been early july he came to my
office as i recall there was somebody else in there was he came in unannounced and he said he was going it clear that it's safe or was clearing out but he had fun scarce funds for mr stands mr stanza was not there but mostly stands tall and to leave it with mr rew mr rule was not there that you call mr ruben us to rue said to leave it with mr martin i told him that i did not want to be responsible for cash i did not have a safe only thing i had was my desk drawer and that he felt that that was the safe places okay with me via the responsibility he said mr lew would be by picking up steam i love my office i had to go someplace that was not there after an ask of lester sloan had left some
money for him and i told him it was a my second birthday right hand drawer he apparently was at my guest is that i got it thanks that's all i know about the transaction and what is your testimony that if money were transferred on your legal advise know certainly be fans were not to go to mr larue but to mr stanton i think mr russo testify smart it subsequently have a conversation about this matter with mr stands and there is a definite disagreement <unk> stands asked me if i recall giving him in this advice i told him i did not recall giving him this advice is would be entirely contrary to what i did tell mr sloan for sure on what i thought i told him the money i should be deposited in the bank report on the next reporting it was three standard reply to me was somebody
told gave me that advice and i said whoa sorry it wasn't me he said well can i have discussed it he said unless you can come up with something better do when i would read it that's always going to come out and that's my only recollection in council says the data that call he called me on may want this year a couple of days before i was to testify before the us attorney's office in the morning i see the jewelry in a piece i did is that i know that you made a phone call us and i wondered if we might up to date on this is wrong says may one seventy two was may one of seventy i was worried about that more than usual the transcription of a color not a transcription of the color one
and i don't want to lose you can read this two ways you can read it well i don't agree that connotation of foreigners to stand is concerned businesses stand alone as an honorable man i just took this to deploy i took it down and came over council army from victims' advocates on a practice long long long time and i found out there the recollections of honest manager of a conversation often disagree ms bishop but german as a word on information a copy of this memorandum made at the conclusion of that conversation witness
stand on may one nineteen seventy three and i've furnished the forest that a copy of this true the staff of the committee on yesterday so we know now that the date written on it was may one nineteen seventy two like that changed on the basis of what was a testimony to seventy three you know the young couple as an aside of conversations you're in the morning i say something and it was an eighty thousand dollars last year quote i've encountered thousand dollars oh my you know it was a thousand encounter he told me that he'd he told me what the summit was when i asked him the juice loan and the road they used to say
i don't have the present recollection that somebody asked me you know originally a year staff of was forty thousand i didn't think it was a private eye eighty thousand dollars a year i certainly remember being something in excess of forty well let me turn to another seven more in the side of conversations you are you mention regarding bail money discussions with a warm caring heyman of money to the defendants in order to get as to the payment of money and so the payment of money there were three instances where i recall discussions concerning payment of on the first was the one i related with the conversation with mr libby the
second on the second occasion i was told by mr o'brien was warmer council about higher he's come to here and i don't recall that there was much of a conversation she apparently had come thinking she was going to get money from him and as i recall it mr o'brien told me and he would be the best one to discuss that when she asked mr o'brien who he worked with her for and he said that mr martinez and she said as i recall she had to terminate conversation she said she couldn't talk to him and we asked why and she said my husband says he's a straight arrow and not to
have anything to do about the third instance was an occasion in my office and my office was used by the attorneys as it did have a small person at a room that generally where they were and i was getting increasingly involve back into the campaign mr bittman an associate from his office came there while mr parkinson mr o'brien there and after exchanging pleasantries with mr bittman i had not met him before and i had to leave public before i left mr bittman said something about his client was very upset about his attorney fees or something
later how we were having a meeting in the conference room with all of the attorneys for the two officers and i happen to arrive at the same time that the parties and i said i asked him what was all about lisa no nothing you sang it ceaselessly once twenty five thousand dollars attorney these he thinks his client thinks the committee on a play and i told him i thought it was a blackmail and those departments and i think and currently that we could not talk any further about it i thought that was the end of the discussion we went into the meeting with the firm will turn out you never have any money or money we review
dina testimony and ask you to comment on the us liaison with the aim of responding to a statement found in what has been what is now known as the buzz about memo which read like this it would be nice to get into general motors are in january sex that cia pavey watergate defendants while in jail and is the demon coming on this particular point in that i reported also at one point in time to mr mitchell and mr morgan about the great fear that period prompted but the morning and as i recall to suggest that the cia might be of some assistance in providing a support any also raised the question that the cia might have a very very proper reason to do so because of the fact that the usual or one he actually
operatives in the morning you remember a conversation of the sort i don't recall that conversation i do recall the discussions and there may have been discussions concerning cia involvement and i can tell you that whatever point in time that was it was my opinion that the cia was involved for a number of reasons and i don't recall any money managers charge the only ones our caller bail to bail the defendants now and i may have said the cia how to take care of its own people at the agency are cia problem and not a committee problem that is it would be
my best recollection why didn't you become aware of the summer of nineteen seventy clear that combat or combat was going to be asked to raise money for the watergate defendants know and did you learn sometime before the election that the money for a promise to combine insufficient and there what pressure from the defendant thought i never heard that mr camargo was involved in that type of activity anonymous to come up and i'm surprised that i'm the most surprised person the world that is to come up will be asked to do it and would get involved this morning you'll bear with me for a minute i'd like to read you to do things just about the furthest out it takes two to one morning after my meeting with gemma watters and subsequent meeting with a woman i'm always been that feel that there could be no cia assistance to the best of my recollection has occurred on the avenue
june twenty eight there was a discussion of the need for support money exchange for the silence of them in jail and at the cia could not do it they would have to find money somewhere else this will ruin decay that moses band that only a small amount that i believe he said seventy thousand eight thousand dollars but more will be needed after some discussion which i cannot recall with any specificity at this time this to michel i asked me to get the approval of all the women used the start of a comeback raise the necessary money and artillery fire having explain the status of a cat like alzheimer's american and the pressure that was being placed on the white house for the use of these weapons which i just described the payments seven individuals as pressure began long
before election day in that paul ryan was receiving messages william month lawyer at heart and others expected to have more money and attorneys the initial payment by combine have not been sufficient o'brien reported this republican michel martin room and my self quarantine you explain the discrepancy well let me say this i never recall any approach your demand for discussion with mr paul o'brian other than the one that i have related discussions with mr dean refers to either he says i believe mr martinez
and going through the testimony of some of these witnesses council and i've found instances where people say i believe he was there when i went in and tap i might point out that i don't know what the day to this conversation was a command center on or about july fifteen i started phasing out of the watergate so called other than conferences mr mitchell's request with respect to advice he wanted in connection to civil litigation i think everybody involved knew how distressed i was and how i wanted out of watergate and i believe as of july thirteenth i had an effect i i know i introduced that mr michel mr o'brien oh i mean mr
parkinson mr rhymer the vigils office and said they're taking over and i don't think anyone would have communicated that title demand to meet either out of compassion in friendship what they knew bob martins what about and i didn't want to be involved in watergate for its ramifications that is true isn't it that morning that you had a number of meetings with the department's criminal brian from a prom july up until october i would say as you say and numerous whenever the occasion demanded i would meet with them we had several lawsuits have been pending in others were about to be filed some by the democratic national committee and some by individuals
within the committee to re elect the president i was of course an attorney of record in the case and i think got a courtesy they would call me i sat in on our meetings concerning civil litigation but i never sat in on any meeting with mr reiner mr parkinson were there was any discussion about payments so mr danish just dead wrong that well i don't think you can characterize it as dead wrong when you said he says i believe he also said in this program reported this frequently than the michel martin will ruin myself that is the need for money either mr ryan would be the best one to testify what he reportedly or not mr dean willette and this morning john mccain that you wished
to read the fbi or your sorrow for those accounts you have a stake in that thing that you wish to read fbi rio to report regarding the watergate investigation last one really if you're eager to know if you have a suggestion that they no the fbi were being too aggressive know and that is degrade shallow hal its investigation absolutely violin to review from the danes testimony that it was true one nine nine to zero zero it was that i showed a copy of the july twenty first reported that the metal that mr morgan insisted that he be permitted to say the fbi report that you agreed and thought that paul ryan and karen parkinson could also say that i recall that when morty an o'brien parkinson
finally came to my office to look at the reports they realized that they were not very meaningful it was mr martin became very excited because of the scope of the investigation that gray was conducted and the tone of the cables you were sending out of headquarters body and clearly thought that gray was being too vigorous in his investigation of the case and was quite critical of gray's handling of the entire month humana that it over greater slowdown but i never did so no activity i can't explain yesterday's testimony in this particular and some others my attitude at that time tried to demonstrate an opening statement to the date especially ease talking about
i was surly wanted nothing more to do with the war i didn't want us to last say i would want to do to see an fbi report he indicates that for some reason and i was an active participant a lot of part of life and i wasn't mr de niro and in his statement on that story's dead wrong the real value is mr mcgregor never really revealed to me even the amount of money involved much was his role in the affair i would say this is a farce mr mcgrew is concerned i think mr magruder recognized how i felt about the matter and there was no discussion open discussion at any
time in my presence and the presence of mr mitchell or anyone else about his back and roll i think that after my talking to mr liddy there was no need for him to tell me i think i know what i believe in i just don't think joe wanted to get re involved anymore that i was a jew that he was going to mcmurtry before the grandparent no you did not at a huge divergence of a trial no you did not really tell you what the facts are going to testify before the grand terre i never knew what he was going to testify to even at the time he testified that you know is going to testify at the trial and no i didn't because you know where do i know what he testified to you know contemporary say that we were testifying in the trial no i didn't
a lot of our readers are more testimony mitchell is no room for islamist in the middle at ages three five seven eight three five seven senator evans us envoy bomberger that he would ruin the fed to commit perjury when it went before the grand jury in opposition rather than to reveal what he knew about the tomato that will rock your world thank you they were present on occasional mortar in which mr mcgrew no stated what he was going to testify here now from a
reading from page to a victory in dualistic fall again then that fall it was the trial might be issued by the prosecuting attorney and the major re elect the president they devised a cover up story to the effect all of this money had been given the lady for him to engage in legitimate intelligence operations yes sir that is correct that matter was discussed by mitchell being ruth braun morning and although it was not mr mcgrew yes sir and they are and encouraged it has been a brutal yes sir and finally on the testimony yesterday of this novel room a page i take these one time i don't want you reading sounds
like an indictment and white answer that i can't answer all three of the same time and this reading all these things people are making the hybrid i am reading statements that have been made to get your comment on the go as they sang and again you can do that what you have in common that at one time all three states joseph o'neill you know the danger involved
that was it that's right continued for years oh hello hello how the committee for maura where a stampede federal investigation for investigation of that of that week informal that a similar request was made just for our request for the president and by the attorney general investigations now ongoing and will be pursued to whatever lexicon the law
well thank you the next five years there's the middle of the bus on our occasional more in which has been imposed at what i'm going to testify the visuals have to say when he stated what he was going to
i was present at numerous meetings where mr mcgregor was discussing the money will come out how to suggest that i knew he would be perjuring himself if he testified to announce that he was telling us about the answer would be yes because i felt that what mr sloan was telling me was that true but i don't think that what mr mitchell is saying there is that he told me he was going to produce i believe it's you justify that you didn't know what was going to say to the danger and if i read his book he says that you were present occasional more and which has been
overstated what he was going to testify as mr mitchell well mr mitchell may be referring to the numerous discussions with respect to how much money goes to magruder sadly gay or authorize mr sloan give mr levy and others and i heard the number of those stories the figure of fun to get up to ninety five thousand dollars well let me have my question is where were you present on occasion when that day i am going to go down to the grand jury and testify at the apollo let me rethink also reminds me that that you were asking that question for allen kwai was that with respect to his testimony at the
trial before the grand jury the one before the last question this is years and years back gregory to the next to last question the question relating to mr mitchell's testimony the question that i get asked was relating to testimony before the grand jury with respect what mr mitchell's testimony ones that relate to that and i might say i don't think i talked to a single witness who was about to test pilot came to me that i didn't advise that they would have to tell the truth so yeah people made statements in front of a contrarian truths i think they would be honest enough of that state that that's the only advise any of them ever got from a
he reviewed the question was then throw it through the prosecuting attorney in the committee to reelect president they devised a cover up for a previous all this money had been given the lady for him to engage any legitimate intelligence operations within the answer that is correct that matter we discuss why you have metal beam will ruth braun morning and all of the guests and they all acquiesce in it and encourage it ms mcgroarty yes sir i recall aren't testimony and i recall those answers to the questions asked by chairman but i think if you go back and take the testimony of mr mcgrew his direct testimony where he was asked as to who was
involved he enumerated a number of people and then added and mr marty and to some extent subsequently when that question is asked mr martin was no longer some extent involve all and i think i would have like to have asked mr mcgrew what he meant by to some extent i think he probably was aware of the fact that i after talking to mr liddy move his involvement i would be less than honest if i didn't say that i went up there and testified that he was not involved that he would be perjury if you want my personal opinion i thought he was going to go up and take a fisherman that you know he testified in illinois when i knew he wasn't indicted so you must not have taken the
fifth inning was not a justified use of troops so that you have a grand jury yes i think an awful lot but i suspected an awful lot i to this day don't know what the answer is but as a lawyer i felt that she only solace i have that all persons are entitled to presumption of innocence there were it not for a lawyer not to make that judgment but record to make a judgment i may have had very strong feelings about the guilt or innocence of a lot of people and i have now but as a lawyer i cannot substitute my judgment for theirs and i did what i felt i had to do on the premises lauren
i'll get bored and move on to another satisfied my next question is did you have a guess at your race shouldn't intriguing environment into we don't know in every job that we read you a section from the cruz executive session was right that doing the question was what was in that time of the mental illness in the morning suggested you could erase the robber baron has been a brew that has right now is that it was the middle of the route and i said to jane to raise environment which you know somebody said the fbi retired
now but i have no problem prisons ms martin i think it is it there's a conversation with this plea you had a good indication that at least mr mcgrew had been involved in some regard in the watergate break in let us know you are aware we're not in the summer of nineteen seventy two the metal an estimate there are making statements about finding the complete not involve out of anyone still be a part of that yes i was aware of the way you make any attempt to all
older i was in california is presented to me i felt it should go out that fashion mr mitchell could not make those flat statements i change it by an image they took was brought to be like with miller he said mr mitchell wanted me to prove that before going out i made those changes took administer majority agreed with all of them i then saw this taken as it came out and the changes have not been made with respect to mr mcgregor i tried to see mr mcgregor on numerous occasions concerning statements were going out by the committee i recall one instance and i wasn't successful in that regard until the convention
he had made some very flat statements that convention i insisted on saying i'm on medication historians this week and i walked in he appeared as if you varied a walkout in some of an awful very violent i don't have much time you're making statements concerning a possible involvement of people in the campaign that i believe i believe to be untrue there are people in multiple the campaign and have a tremendous exposure clark and you better watch out what they watched woods' statement you're making a better review and he got very upset when i took that job i was assured that nobody involved nobody involved in watergate still in the campaign and rely on that night i wonder about it advise mr mitchell
that he should terminate mr mcgregor you wanna know the advice i gave advisory should terminate has to porter i thought he really he then told me that he couldn't do it subsequently i advise mr mitchell it probably a memorandum rid of all the facts as we knew them at least put in the file to protect him he instructed me to do so mr o'brien left to prepare the memorandum subsequently i was told to forget the memorandum they didn't want one how i can't recall all the kids spoke with tory things i try to do to protect myself and some of the people involved that there were numerous you make a report anyone else scientist mitchell and his previous report about talking to know a community conversation your
body and if you haven't talked privately no ser o no sir no sir old mr hamilton i was precluded i felt my legal fight took was a lawyer never to disclose communication maybe he disclosed to me i was trying to investigate one crime the commission of other felonies and i think i would've been remiss in my profession after giving him i promise to disclose to others the commission of other products with more knowledge you explain that little brother who you testified that you did not take an attorney client relationship with mr libby walton robinson of the committee to reelect on the white shirt and the attorney client relationship would pertain after that conversation
since he was an employee of the committee and i was the attorney for the committee it could only exist in its employees people i told i could not act as his personal attorney this is different i really the argument before a judge so that was not that the attorney client relationship did not prevail by reason of any lack of bona fides on my part the argument was made before judge director that i had been acting in good faith they argued that mr libby had not been acting in good faith oh when he approached me that he was really trying to use of client privilege and use me and i think the knee transcript of that proceeding will show that there was never
any suggestion that i was acting in bad faith and i think that more than one occasion they pointed out that my activities were in good faith as the activities of agility that were in question and i still have doubts i've taken the advice of my counsel mr libby was not a party to that proceeding and yet manner regardless of what you think of him has been held in contempt for refusing to testify and yet here i am honored court order required to testify as to what he told me when he was willing to go to jail not to talk to the somali and it's not one that i feel comfortable mcnaughton your world war ii or that the attorney general the attorney client privilege not cover communications relating to the continuing commission of a crime such as a conspiracy charge for justice i don't think that i i presume a vacuum that's a great
question that i don't think that my discussion with mr libby yes he has two more questions first of all where you are an adherent of what we might call the little particle that the reelection of the president was more important than almost anything else and certainly outweighed the revealing of the true facts of the war the white house cards which you hear that title the microscope i don't know whether it's in hindsight i as i say i did not feel that i could continue because of my own feelings i've never practiced for a lot i don't know what a criminal lawyers go to go through in carrying the burdens of their clients but i i couldn't practice criminal law
i think maybe a good poem lawyer could have represented the committee with the plot i couldn't i wanted out and i expressed to him on at least three point three occasions i quit to stay on the committee july eleventh the new rule would be found from a renewal was found for me and i was divorced from watergate activity from after that date except one people are never consulted about specific aspects of the civil litigation and i wouldn't point out that i saw mr mitchell on numerous occasions to chart women's clothes meetings the ones that show up there as of five thirty six o'clock
that was my arrival was not a meeting mr mitchell the co driver my car and he went right past my apartment and his secretary would call good timing's about leaving senator mitchell's rarely more often than not he wasn't really when i would wake up from the charts to those are meetings i was present either in his office or immediately outside assaulted in heaven and the prisoners are from the middle of july on i had taken my mother yes i mean the question was well you consider that reelection of the president of oil the considerations which it did not win all other considerations
good morning a number of people have testified you know in ways that appeared to implicate shoot certain aspects of the cover up of red in the middle and end believable in this morning we must at least partially i believe it's believed even in the middle of the month than workforce and close friend and my question is why we believe you answer it is a fried testifies to the best of my recollection inability to believe the
question mr rumer really recall a conversation about construction of knocking you in the middle of being recalled in your car or not your average know we keep referring to meetings i don't mean to say that mr mitchell as an unstructured person my recollection is that i couldn't really see
was this is about warriors all his years of our lives to do on november a trip from the airport when you were president i can't recall anybody coming after me and that i was sure that this will rule was the winner that was my best recollection that you're listening to the testimony in a listener's <unk> he was there to testify what was i didn't know my best recollection is that's why i thought there was a recent survey also public information present that there was something that occurred that day that require reply from mr mitchell the other thing that occurred was an announcement of the democratic national committee files filing suit the next morning million dollars slightly
i received the next morning service of that play martha own on june twenty four years i understand that you received it everything from weight in the presence of you talk about this or that situation that you have mostly did you also envision yourself in that same town relationship with with the committee as a whole or other members of the committee as i was representing what over was i say i'm probably still attorney of record that proceeding i tempted ended that's an extent possible shift all of the other two july fifteenth of archived interview i was like you not be interviewed the very reason that that's not true i hope the
fbi interviewed me and i offered to answer any questions they would put to me questions oh actually related to communications made to me and they ask me numerous questions about my it's both the
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 4 of 5
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-c53dz03t15).
Episode Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 24 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, Fred LaRue and Robert Mardian testify.
Broadcast Date
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: 2341696-1-4 (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; 1973-07-19; Part 4 of 5,” 1973-07-19, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed March 2, 2024,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-19; Part 4 of 5.” 1973-07-19. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. March 2, 2024. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-19; Part 4 of 5. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from