thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-09-26; 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+
a piece be please this is one that i've seen now what you want to hear this is one that i'm not such a visceral alonzo was not shown the other night i thought about this more right when they asked a pointed various facets of the two minute test that that would you take it down and look at it is it's true and caulk thick so it appears to be
yes sir this is nineteen know march third nineteen seventy memorandum and it appears to be a member and yes thomas i think yeah oh whoa oh right this is it and an especially friendly fellow with a violation day
and that example we actually have this right now you may or may not call granddaughter or a constituent of mine has her finally a fine gentleman outstanding republicans than collective internal revenue service yellow april nineteen hundred and sixty nine hundred and seventy one was throwing his office under pressure oh not to my knowledge on some of the damage i just could not answer it is true that was just those in the internal revenue i believe is the state my understanding of the situation was that we had done an unsuccessful and quite candidly a very good job of taking how affective control the agency has within our lives by appointing our own schedule c's to those available positions and
secondly it was our belief justified or not that within the tax exempt division there was basically a hostility to our point of view and for us to set up say a macarthur foundation or john adams foundation as we talk about it and to have that set up and say we left office in nineteen seventy two and have a political environment or removed its tax exemption within a problem i thought that both services that not just the head of the television there's an office within it said he had a hand an entire agency that is as a senator on view was that we weren't we did not we were not stepped in depth at the internal revenue the us please follow alone shamed page there's obvious central objectives of the hands to do this is a
broad foundation the two posters that would have you and they would provide incredible all the more important that i want to recommend the same thing to be set up to complain about another sections of your man well senator there is a town there is indeed a great area indian thing in terms of the political activity one of my recommendations quite candidly was that within this foundation we would set up a group with a lawyer of about thirty five years old and with some young law clerks who would gauge the qualifications of federal judges across the country in terms of other qualifications and philosophy and these type of things quite candidly up another administration came in
they would say what's political activity will take away its tax exemption and so my recommendation was basically mean would be that this would not be a highly publicized thing within this institution that's correct let's read the next paragraph it remain you know would be settled within the foundation get out that call remember that well that would be instead of sending these up on these assignments over the brookings institute have them tune the cost was ten weeks into a new institute my view of this would be we have not been available institution conservative to not to date up to do the kind of work at the brookings institute doesn't show the brookings institute will cost plus can simply means a bunch of the brookings institute gets a year our natural slight margin what they what they do in terms of the silence and we would simply what this says is we would
shift these assignments over the newest jet finance committee the pleasure is all politics politics democratic politics republican politics like a thorough airing of you know some of the foundations of included in the political arena len they should not have we've tried to correct it in legislation i didn't try and inserted in fact provisions do get a monitoring of the registration it seems to really want to go it's a political reality
now what i'm sick and to do it would be to establish first though it's my beliefs as expressed in this memorandum that there is a bias that had already existed within the internal revenue service in my judgment there are i do not recommend incentive to take away the tax exemption of the brookings institute i do not believe in the arctic i'm a hundred percent they the brookings institute engages in politics it engages in studies which are used i think that law should be very tight but always you have an institution similar to that in my judgment and secondarily what you see here is reflection in my view that there was a political bias that existed against conservative institutions whereby the irs with the advent of video for a minute look at others i wanted to have one political and one did you get control you nina will you return
this is another tax exemption take away even though i'm critical of the brookings institute as bias in the other direction if i i agree with the use of tax exemption for institutions which daddy public issues even if they're liberal or conservative as long as our study in public issues but they're in being engaged in voter registration they're demonstrating up on the hill for a lot of legislation that their lobbying effort taken out ads to influence the vote the congressmen one way other eye would concur that ties its educational center even if it's a liberal and got no objections to its tax exemption you're kind of their accord on that the only difference i can see is it was a mistake and you're both palin family foundations and they were finally found a mistake oh i think it would be apparent but i would not recommend i do not believe
removing the tax exemption from a foundation which was directly engaged in studying issues even if it were at a a liberal foundation who wants to offer you a memorandum paid for and read three women age forty or memorandum three percent an ad ministration foundation should be cut off without the senator's of differentiation between getting any administration foundations are money and leaving them with their tax exemption i believe that we ought not to fund liberal tax exempt foundations there's no inconsistency in that position with a statement that they also want to be allowed to keep their tax exemption simple i don't think will find them on to talk about that one long ago well here's the thing you talked about two ways when you talk about you were given in the white
house's tax exempt from a i'm sorry a tax funds to a foundation they get it that way and it's subsidized through their tax exemption as well my recommendation would be only a couple years let me make a suggestion to me so if you have some recommendations for improvement of foundations to get a lot of the political arena is the president send up an appropriate message and that moscow thank you very much no further questions jam it does matter of foundations has been trading congress for a long time and i like food too testimony this morning the big foundations
ford foundation number two i believe is rockefeller foundation when you count it down below that two lonely and duke and some of the others in the top ten they are some of them known for example is conservative things but conservative foundations be quite candid or are far less aggressive than in the ford foundation or could you give us examples of the ford foundation rockefeller foundation to support well the rockefeller foundation which you have been studying the ford foundation for example provides funds for the institute for policy studies institute for policy studies gold has held my recollection that's ruskin barnett said that they had held seminars for congressman for staffers on the line in a great deal in trying to influence influence on congressman like one direction to get very close to the line but they in turn if i'm not mistaken the
list of policy studies has interned funded are the quicksilver times which was a young radical on so it's wild radical radical underground newspapers which is which has a political point of view which is all secondly what this is in the nineteen seventies drafted that set of libraries there is of course a highly celebrated also be on the funds that the ford foundation provided to fix kennedy staffers nine speech and this edition features all in nineteen sixty eight the ford foundation is running providing sort of the southern states
democratic staffers of senator edward kennedy and the mayor's race in cleveland in nineteen sixty eight i believe they found a voter ford foundation on a project for a voter registration drive and a blackberry which was partially responsible for that even though seth taft republican that area and the victory of mr stokes i think the legislation now is that you can find voter registration drives ah what you have to do in areas of my five states the southern christian leadership conference and mr abernathy is the one that caught my attention what was done there was there course are funded by the ford foundation have they sent to me which was a strictly political literature document today which was calling effect we did x y unseat mr nickson has dragged him at the bottom of that time said to send in your taxes and contributions now this is what we raised cain about mr baldwin in the checkout and seventies groups like that group in the nsa and we have set up
in other words if you send an executive declared the tax exempt they say goes in the educational farm i don't know what it's made six years combing when the funds are what in those things our bodies would be if you were the things that i can recollect them from those those particular own speeches these are examples of these these were examples of direct political activity or a question that would make an earlier was it just my judgment it if you have a number of public policy institute's center on a liberal persuasion i agree with ian with the tax exemption for these kind of institutions even if you disagree with a gift you get out on a giant like the ford foundation which is pouring tens of millions of dollars into the creation of studies which in effect on you for a on a particular point of view persuasively like you get a brookings study assumes a brookings study is done you see it on the front page of the new york times and washington
post are precisely what they recommended in these things are moved into the political bloodstream and one of my basic conventions is that there's an imbalance and resources are with regard to these foundations counties a couple of excellent times that was david cameron when he identify this is when he's talking this is at an immigrant march twenty six nineteen seventy right the information i have came out of an article about even
the washingtonian magazine or i would have to check that sort of indicated that it has indicated at the institute for policy studies which was a beneficiary this is just delicious patients i speak with the authority of human history little interest me but i've always felt that that legislation perhaps which would have the ford foundation is divided into four separate divisions were on everyone's national affairs much of the increase and it was
education and the other is something else if legislation were passed say to restrict a foundation two particular percentage of the gross national product its assets that legislation could result in the dismantling of the ford foundation's essential power structure while reaping all the benefits they're in other words you pick the national affairs would be one foundation educationally another separate foundation this would be another separate foundation and it's one of those foundations determined to move into the political arena then not a practice that tax exemption on that particular foundation it up if they want to tax exemption to be withdrawn which you mean this is a problem concentration of political power in all those resources and anne frank levy something analogous to have any trust situation regarding the ford foundation i think would be advantageous to the political process longer for
however if mark fourth bottom of the page you mentioned did you say this will be striking at the heart of the establishment what do you mean by louis public radio has been in my own view there is there is visiting the country intellectual and political establishment to which the major networks the ford foundation of some of your major public policy institutes the dominant media liberal wing of the democratic party in the senate and others can be said to belong i think this is a this is my view i think they there's a prevailing mind set among these groups and they are in control of a significant political assets and there's nothing conspiratorial
or anything that nature about it that i think it's essentially the political establishment country downing political status for the country against with tonight's episode to be simplistic of his connection to america's veterans mm hmm royal scottish director so if you take a look at those two crises institute in princeton the brookings bern brookings institute the ford foundation the harvard center for the study of the kennedy center for the study of politics and given the same individuals we'll move on these various board of directors and i think it's not unfair to characterize that as and the terms on the sale of a jar as a nationalist element
there's also mention for information thanks so much and there's an allegation in the ford foundation is the hamas says its faithful and since and certainly some troubles and questions could lose seats in the center of a behind his candidacy investigation should be done on the score well the evidence would be clear circumstantial i think sepp senator must be on several objects that have been or trips abroad that had been sponsored and funded by the ford foundation i think senator muskie had been a prominent on each of these and they're always and i think this is this was a bill like lincoln and congressman patterns
hearings the witch of in the congressional record i think that's where this game where that came from you know these are just ideas you gave us some examples of thought crimes and trucks hauling the only other did you do anything in the nineteen seventy two campaign no i think it was it is in a convention that we were putting out a newspaper yet these pranks and seventy two i think were directed at senator our mosque really did something of a city in new hampshire i believe but it would add i can recall exactly the watergate and frankly and really anybody who was involved in the senate grinds some things that i was probably
drawn in each of his tank is odd enough senator it's a good question those innate confidence in the public i'm not mistaken that's in the public record in an article that was written on the institute for policy studies now believe it was one of the smaller magazines and all is research going on since i was never consume content with commercial venture it would seem to me that this would be an illicit use of tax exempt any ideas
well as i say this is my understanding of an article which i'd read it's a question of fact and i'd be happy to go back in and find the researcher a difference thank you he is big
conversion that's right that's great yes we know much of the city showing of political connection between the allegation and source an overseer for instance that works over time suggests that demonstrations are crucial for a range
of activities little girls in confronting the gop aren't there should be one massive legal demonstration as a sports arena so what's the i don't know who that is but it is in fact in the mainstream of political activity and i suggest here that argues that we put in the record for orders were thanks gene it's an essential he says you know
it's been then there's beth they're disseminated price was certainly the most knowledgeable witness before the committee alone on issues in the campaign what the candidates stood for the various candidates attack plans and what sort of flying and you also quite suddenly with some of the other political campaigns in recent years either actively participating on
behalf of nixon i guess doing research cause you give us any idea about this campaign of nineteen seventy two as stacked up on it again as we're talking about supposedly believed that it could not testify with actress you go to what dirty tricks were played and what allegations are true but i do that and go with your whites a statement that the bees were these really have the weight of a feather on the campaign of nineteen seventy two i think what was unprecedented for us senator was the fact that we were in the
introduction presence and on this was the right place and the innovations in terms of the offensive strategy and media hands the attack group which has gotten on the night of the group has gotten a bad name the use of us surrogates and the orchestration of our political offensive the senator they fix it was one of the most effective operations in one of control operations i've been involved in it sixty six in order to compare campaigns i think you would really really have to do is i'll in terms of strategies you have to go back to president johnson who had come and see in nineteen sixty four and compare his strategy in stratagems and institutions were part because the other
democrats this time around the time around nineteen sixty four it was a civil war in iraq republicans were severely a better comparison there than you would get between us and the democrats you're welcome they're effective and political factors and some of the tactics that he'll recommend i know that this isn't the american politics whether they should be continue to libya has been our goal we're going to do
and for the opposition party oh i think any direct transfer of campaign funds from one party to the candidate of another is currently of a visitor amenities sure that that's the funding legislation i do not think it is legitimate for example if we went to say oh one of our competitors given the fact that we you know we had done considerable financial resources that we went to one of the large contributors and said laughter the best thing you could do for the president would be contributor texas campaign in the democratic primary because that's a close race he doesn't have any money that would seem to me is it's it's i don't know that has been done in the past the idea of assisting candidates in the other party's primary is not unprecedented all the
pipe we'll be back to the center and always questions about campaign ethics in one moment public television coverage of the senate watergate hearings will continue after paul's perspective identification on average coverage of the hearings is being broadcast as a public service where local public television station this is pbs public broadcasting service it's been the pittsburgh
has been
the panel
the polls again and that continues its coverage of hearings the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities here again and by correspondent jim lehrer as we go back to the hangzhou to senator edwards turned a question presidential aide patrick buchanan in his final hour at the witness table it's begun to approve the ethical proper place the campaigns the camp of the opposition as well as this is a common thing done in american politics now is it is it ethical i would not sit in judgement of the ethics individual who took that assignment i did not think my cell phones and my personal it myself and to the confidence of an individual and then i'll look for cash it would not be something i would do but i don't i would
not want to sit in judgment of the ethics of others who volunteered did distance and i think you've made yourself a senator welcome to distribute campaign literature which does not part of solace which was designed by opposition i think the data to identify that they can have a i'm a resource named on the literature or sponsor is is a violation of the law believe thats a misdemeanor plea this is what we refer to in the documents released by the spinning <unk> refer to this morning asked is it legitimate say to them to get an example i would say yes on the fans it's a second government run against president and states is running from position on the left of the spectrum all president nixon campaign in nineteen
seventy two we had weaknesses on the right side of the spectrum now if senator mcgovern got to say some conservative democrats on the hill in some conservative money raisers and they formed a committee which saves committee for a balanced budget or something like that and then they criticized the president's face for having spends say among dozens of excess of xyz that would be political criticism of the president and states from a separate vantage point senator mcgovern was done by democrats and that they would be purely legitimate even a senator mcgovern i had not been seeing images in a requirement that you have to be inconsistency in every single argument to make against the candidate you think it would be ethical and papa or topical champion at one candidate who also subtle kinds of campaign appearances of the opposition candidate bob seeley washington
uses the terminology you said what we do and thanks to what they do now they depend on precisely what's done samples it and these are the dangers i think in terms of numbers it's okay you know the cumulative impact of the kind of disruptions and so now these operations i think that cost lives and excess numbers i think that probably was one of
the other direction in terms of the character is of the kind of stops this was not a crime senator clinton as they can interstate commerce california campaign it was not oh i don't think i don't think he should be prosecuted it should be prosecuted and say this is against decent train pulled out of the station has responsibility i think they're somebody have stopped him
we are victims of like that happened and it was prosecuted because of the demand i don't think it's unethical and consider the ethics of a priest you took a gun and that's his own judgment i do not believe it's unethical it doesn't strike me as unethical you'd think it would be ethical to encourage proposal one party who just blatantly political caucus of the opposition party the political caucus that's next to him impossible i think you have to be registered that i just cause i believe you have to be a registered democrat caucus and primary right now because there is a place where on the
state level there could conceivably be reform and that is a crossover voting i think the republicans and sixty in wisconsin we were there because going on a doctor because deliverance center mccarthy effort of course was to inflict to defeat or not president johnson of course just withdrew two days before they were going to do that now that's one reform that could conceivably be recommended that jordan or what you'd done before you do that in the crossover voters in my judgment because know they can be more conservative centrist democrats moving into republican primaries centrist republicans moving in the democratic primaries these things tend to have a leavening of that to increase more changes i think of a centrist and a centrist candidates move cross over voting and you will have more mature candidates were going to be more ideological in the sense that there will be more oil they will go to the true believers of their own party who were on the left in the
democratic party and the conservatives in the republican party and you are allowed to have more shopper differentiation to your candidate and you're candidates so i think you are the four states do that i have my own personal feeling is that that would be a good thing to cross over voting because i think each one should have the right note to nominate its own candidates and republicans have no business should have no business voting in democratic primaries and vice versa the waivers are hopeful candidate provide information to from the press which would prove opposition countries with all sorts of the nation being identified publicly well most of the individuals in the national press that i know would not be in a story which was not did not have it in some substantive documentation you mean to go to get some false or make a false allegation against an individual oh that's not that's
not ethical lapse that's a attraction to me as an individual but they're not not international press people are going to run with the story is just based on the word i think of another individual that a serious person charge against someone else we're going in a reliable source of ad didn't make using fifty reporters and then you don't get to the ethics of journalism now i think when the reporters as he has a reliable sources got a reliable source louisa lim reporting i think it's both i've read
in many years the agreement to rethink some of the matter isn't true specifically yours allegations the campus in to join regular flow through states these conventions gen true calling and i must confess to you that i think any political scientist looking at the election at least give equal attention to the matter listener
i can't richardson's speeches by republicans researchers around the country clear that respects because reuse legitimate
a lawyer but the problem is of course that what matters to you and a job or other matters that you and other members of the administration isn't going to ya katie jm but like him let this stand in so far as you're testimony is concerned i'd like to i'd like to get into certain of these activities in and see just how we categorize and how you explain like if i might go to work in a memorandum to rose september the thirtieth nineteen seventy two three letters
but more specifically the painting came to play
now thanks bob this administration that was not like walking to the fact that one of the positive or pose a new campaign was for an excess of the other side but i'm not we were not thirty four points ahead of sen mcgovern simply on the basis of iraq i think we could have won on the basis of our records i stated earlier once we move up about sixty percent in the polls to or
seventy percent of all people who are voting there are voting for us almost entirely democrats and if you told them in the most women say they were dissatisfied with certain aspects of the president's economic program certain aspects of the other programs personality in a normal election we would go for a senator i would vote for senator kennedy they were standing with us senator for the reason that they were strongly opposed mcgovern this go to appoint a curator we're talking into another testimony you wanted to know that we have and then other republicans that question is no we did not and sixty six roberta networks republicans and seventeen workers who are totally unsuccessful we got the bass so the way we could bring in a republican congress that the best way that we can bring in republican senators and senate the house president ronald
reagan landslide and hopefully they've been coming in on the presidential coattails they didn't thirty six and as he did sixty four an unsuccessful for the for the reason that this new well the ticket splitter phenomenon has taken over and now and the candidates at the top of the ticket less and less can deliver the candidates accountable what is the campaign and that makes an incumbent president thought of hate his opponent as the inside and i don't quite understand the years he's thinking there were polls taken
post election mike was on election night said that the ripples taken that indicated that the reason the american people went to the polls and voted for the president was opposed mcgovern is a vote on two issues he said patriotism and now now whether contact and recently named george mcgovern's not anti patriotic he's not anti mall in my closet women what we're talking about is public perceptions the positions that senator government job for example that you would go to hell no i am not and then for the release of american prisoners it necessary in the minds of millions of americans will proceed or anti american and i do not suggest that senator mcgovern is anti american but this was the perception the perception in his mind was that the senator mcgovern was not a figure who work they want to put the presence the united states because he did not she interviews with regard to patriotism things in that character now i don't say that senator mcgovern does that but he would be false for me to stand up
here and deny that that was a perception of millions of americans wanting to do it more than anybody else in the country what campaigns maybe you do you're welcome
well i would say that of course individuals to mention allegations have been made and not yet been tried there have been mistakes in his judgment and wrongdoing on the part of individuals with whom i'd been associated i believe then perhaps some of them are within the white house i am that's true but i don't think that the to take and i don't think that certainly what we did if these things were done you were not justified and they certainly do not justify it the things were done in nineteen seventy by the demonstrators and both were wrong but i don't i don't see the connection between this new president and states and i don't see the connection between that may or has gone on make the statement that republicans were not responsible all
anemic state of the republicans were not responsible for the nomination allison says no i think i'm going to have to be held accountable for what they get individuals conceived and carried out the watergate break in which in and of itself i consider wrong and not just grievously harm those individuals are accountable know the political party is not responsible on public employee surveys not responsible he would you know do you want me to pass judgment on your also
welcoming mr mcgregor as i believe testify before this committee that he was cognizant of that there are seven individuals i think of and convicted of a either other individuals who i do not believe that he had been indicted in the no position to sit up here and say that time that these individuals are guilty i just don't know i'm not in control of yemen sanaa to judgment that's responsible for what they do the station
banks he was in the justice department demonstrations well you hear that references those categories are in references to the so called dirty tricks are not in reference to crimes his vision that will center on his customary in national politics that the second event civilian sector state general stay out of politics although that was not the case in sixty four and circulate course they put the speeches i don't see anything is that your investigation political campaign it would be unjustified use
of that agency which it not be done the department of justice and has been president of the year senator kennedy at present in nineteen sixty eight no one has suggested that the fact that things were done wrong for just well be the one setting examples of justice and the fans and stadium responding to each in the nineteen seventies who
disagree with you know as i say it as if a sectarian tensions secretary of state i would think statistics instead of the topics presented in terms of defense budget is a national issue as it was in sixty four are certain actors as was descending too secular they're perfectly within their rights to speak and then the policies of the administration by surprise in connotation i know when they should be you know i see nothing wrong for the notion of the doors of the justice department you suggested that the agency's on behalf of a political campaigns at all they should not be using the sea central intelligence agency quite i think my last treatment courses have a lot of the investigation should have no political campaign
we cover all the us to talk about what individuals conceivably could be indicted in the next week i don't know i'm not a lawyer i don't know the responsibilities upon layers two and some individuals who are said to have known about this on the lawyers aw to report is to be a trial judge it whip which point these are matters which would which i'm not i was just this was the most serious matter of all that a cover up was absolutely essential political campaign of nineteen seventy two thousand that they can't replace july nineteen nineteen seventy one well i would just disagree with the attorney general fined billions to this extent
effective that have occurred we come forward in an insane so explain i don't think it would've been a fatal blow well i think if you look back in retrospect i think certainly a big thing to have done would've been not even to wait for the seventy two campaign i think that's right i think with the wits with anatomist that discussion just as his as things done during the campaign by political organizations it was not a political campaigns on that all right
certainly individual things in testimony this morning correctly stated christie no i don't think i don't say that that summer i think i said a state correctly his position regarding gun control at six two this is these are you were rather it is not left wing rhetoric but this statement on senator must've position on gun control that is active on the state with regard to black americans there is not an inaccuracy in terms
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-mc8rb6ww0n).
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 40 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings.
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: 2342071-1-4 (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; 1973-09-26; Part 4 of 5,” 1973-09-26, 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; 1973-09-26; Part 4 of 5.” 1973-09-26. 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; 1973-09-26; 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