thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-07; Part 4 of 4
Hide -
This transcript was received from a third party and/or generated by a computer. Its accuracy has not been verified. If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+.
it's b and honestly i really didn't see what senator ted stevens on the other hand i didn't wasn't one stand up and the animating and an unsafe thank you steve ej where does the system right now when concern was why as distinguish what is leaking is never sir or never thought about and to stand up and do everything woodstock think that's what digital that
i think partly because of the fear of a group that for that would ensue of not getting better and the fear of not being a team player was strong enough to suppress your judgment on what action you take if you considered an action are not going oh i never considered any action illegal number one i ever you think political organization should be so anonymous so military and obedient so careful for the concerns up their approval that it each and every member of that organization and leases up until a certain point and level americans asians are completely what color to
educate your own captions and disapproval it could disapprove of the frankfurter introduce operation will serve a career this is richard nixon i really suspect i first met years old in nineteen forty six the wind warnings and sixteen my mother worked on campaigns it well not personally
but in the spirit of the sensible legal and at this point when we have the warning bell of all i know your time and when we do that in years animals' owner baker's attempts to get the motivation of her reports the committee has taken another break to vote on an amendment to a pending farm bill order sings to be sign that center baker's overemphasizing the importance of his role model for which the senate but diligence complete coverage of the hearings continues at a station identification on a bridge to coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service of the member stations of pbs the public broadcasting service the fb
and that continues
its coverage of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities you again correspondent jim lehrer sen baker the ranking minority member of the committee now resumes his questioning of the report and baker says he will concentrate on motivation for the time being but what a lot of other questions asked the former campaign scheduling director in the future i might say that the chairman will be here shortly i understand from chairman's representative that it was his ways that we reopened here and t is for i reiterate what i said earlier i know i tried to be antagonistic to do i have no animosity toward i'm trying to open or state of mind of the institutional arrangements structuring the situation that produced what would appear to me to be an abdication of one's personal judgment of what it's like whoa about a particular set of activities invite was finally kicked
off in my mind that that designation now dirty tricks within the campaign organization it's about my situation that led to buy your testimony what that is the unresolved understand why are the set of circumstances that led a young man to do i think i spent most of my questions i think that i'm at best an area operational definition of anything whether you can give me that would shed light on why you agreed to swear falsely and apparently two undesirable a philosopher answer your questions on
i was not in charge of dirty tricks i don't know where all this money when i did was never aware of its money i was aware of the money but i got mr shalom and even that i was really aware of about seventy thousand dollars for that actually looked into that i have i've heard this song and make that statement and i believe i would not just whether that was because i didn't know what was being used for what i witnessed a beating of question or to assert that he has fueled the money was being used for and you refused to tell him would you dispute that i would not in retrospect it was a pretty easy target
if you ever say still not a transcription of illegal wiretaps and members never saw and the transcription of illegal wiretaps for cities don't have simpson but somebody a precedent and then you know he was my secretary for her particular type weapon of documents that you'd be stolen documents yes sir what happened then why tell me a little tinge of pensions came into play when he's director secretariat it was happening so that i'm not in the firmament and
i had been told what others in the campaign this kind of thing was a normal activity the scenes were to me and i accept them for what they were terrible indictment politics politicians really distressed to hear that are you telling me in that it was your opinion that the republicans and it was for me what would you do well if you're in the same situation at one of the things whether it's wearing a grand jury or whether hyping stolen documents what authorities are
seventeen thousand dollars loss i want what would your attitude be at this or not like what has brought change where where is this re emergence of what humans are provisions it is devastated me personally i can't answer for millions if you make a contribution to this country by serving as an example of the times and others have an attitude that might make some again we were right can you and before alaska's
last question let me point out that theres an art is not that of an amateur philosopher psychologist but rather in pursuit argues that's characteristic of this committee which is not only to find those things which may have been illegal improbable as well can you tell how we might really restructure and they now when i exposed to the fresh breeze all factions in personality the organizational presidential candidate of the young men there's a chance of doing so do you have any
money money is you know the peak so i don't like to do interviews i'm steve inskeep major
at that spawned all of everything that we did everything went on in my vision and i'm sure that everything went on in other divisions the smallest details such as this is true he'll cast aspersions like portland basements and knowing you just indicated mr waldman was having including dismiss the audience know i advised <unk> cash disbursements sixty seven thousand dollars for the use of mail order thing sixty seven thousand dollars is a more important than just a little restless i think that one isn't falling into a big
money and it was just words mr mcmahon was a well and it would've been mr mcgregor as responsibility to relay that that situation to his his very instrumental and if you want to do you have i presume you if you would like to balance out because april seventh was approaching i do to protect myself entirely on the reader just thought what has become an act as a disinterested third party to review it in
you know if you will and just recently colin figure fifty two thousand dollars it received from him from the sort of the beginning of the time wasn't let me that and it was the finance committee information it
was i will say that i think that there will be no questions regarding my guest is the reason ackman and then another and then through the juveniles government job this development ms vivian a lot of oil i know yeah do his job
mr allman i'm almost about to ensure that you would be taken care of he had he had taught mr haldeman and mr baldwin well mr maliki and poland and in effect to back off the water coleman was aware of the situation not to that process builds on my own contact with that one of the departments secretaries minute talking through a series of interviews was offered a position in the government in the march the same time as early as a latter part of january had been
seeking to have a to do when i was in the job about it mr mitchell magruder celebrities thirty two we sat down the table next to master and this is a real mr and mrs martin mr mrs mcgregor
welcome looking backwards at the size of that at the time no the fungal that you're referring to is one that mr mcgregor have received already i think because he came back to the table and not to me but to the people he was sitting with said you know where i can find a secure fall and there was a discussion at the table that way about where one might find a secure phone and economy and he said you know i can fight its careful and i said and i said well we do have a play on individuals we want to use that he said now it's not good enough that the security in the
situation of the situation then the question will those calls as the one time i don't remember that was to them and i don't remember seeing him expressions our conversation we were very thorough and jd and conversations i think told me that mrs mcgregor had told are
often upsetting are living in a suite of rooms on the sign for that phone all morning with key biscayne bay that's congress mr mcgrew the toll you have the burden of so many of the mid afternoon the same afternoon on april fourteenth or address some out of curiosity of indicated that you were moved to take certain actions because of fear of authorization you don't want to be ostracized by the party and i think that's a phrase you'd walked he
weaves in a generic term senator not any difference what people ate all of them probably was the vision of the president i don't think that i want the russians result lead on so you write that it is now as well you can come back there's a reason for
that well if beak in that cell a third wake of the watergate hearings ended we have now heard from fourteen witnesses about the watergate break in the subsequent cover up including requested perjury and the way the campaign finance system were a big questions remain obviously about just how former white house the trail of watergate leads it often a former member of the us attorney's office here who now practices what a law in washington and teaches at georgetown university wants the hearings with is today we like deafness austrian went from a lawyer's evaluation of what the hearings produced a day or less four lt gen miller's testimony of porter was by far the most interesting here for sestak vibe that he lied he lied
twice once before a grand jury and was a trial and that is to separate crimes i would think he would be a fairly easy witness at least by some standards the cross examined by contrast interest loan lender has an amazing memory or so it would appear he remembers the exact words that took place in conversations some of which he had with people months or in one case even a year ago whereas sloan cannot remember the exact words that sloan remembers the conversations to the best of his abilities so to speak when it comes time to question mr porter i think that the defense attorneys who cross examined him will have the transcripts of today's testimony and they will be able to cross examine him word by word incidentally i dont think comes across quite as well as he testified just exuded candor and honesty because as you'll recall porter testified that he came forward and told his story because mr mcgregor was about to put
him in a position where the mr porter had to talk jeb magruder said you better tell all and that is why porter going forward where as sloan became a politeness the psalms life where he simply could not take one more act and he simply quit i think that kind of candor is going to influence the jury with far more than most reporters and finally and i are particularly sensitive to those of course i'm afraid the legal profession has again taken it on the chin there was testimony so the chorus was unsubstantiated but there was nonetheless testimony that the attorneys have not acted properly or so it would appear and indeed testimony that one attorney want to sleep while talking to a man who agrees with extensively applied at the time and lastly would appear that the legal profession is on trial in the watergate case and i'm afraid that the un we have we have heard at least in the paris is almost as important as the actuality we have heard that some attorneys are simply not conducted
themselves as they should everything seems to be on trial in watergate to abandon our basic government says the president's campaigning now the legal profession mr austin for zimmerman has deported could still be indicted on these counts of perjury wouldn't in the eyes of the law there be a mitigating circumstance in the fact that he has now come forward cooperated and talal well just avoid it is certainly the indicted let me say first of all that whether he be indicted is strictly up to the prosecutor and along this country is fairly clear on that subject you cannot force a prosecutor to present any case to a grand jury and if the prosecutors they'll that because mr porter has in fact come forward and has at least to a certain degree voluntarily testified there is no way that the prosecutors can be forced to indict him let me say however that if he's indicted and he either plead guilty or is found guilty the appropriate sentence will be up to the judge and i would guess the question of strict mitigation would be
up to the judge who has a sense of the distrust and thank you the watergate probe includes more than what is happening in the senate caucus room today hr haldeman's the position in the democrats' ulcer was released in april and recalled that john dean the white house counsel at the time of the watergate was never asked formally to investigate the incident that raised questions about the president's statement last orders the demons had looked into the situation and reported that no one then working at the white house was involved it now appears the dean never reported anything about the situation directly to mr nixon until this year and the president today nominated kansas city police chief clients kelley the permanent director of the fbi are no choice l patrick gray is of course another casualty of the watergate william ruckelshaus will continue to have that deal until kelly is confirmed so that's the current white house reaction to the watergate in an
effort to see how satisfied be ervin committee is when it's worked so far and back os fund and peter kay talked with senator daniel inouye senator three weeks interviewing with three weeks into their hands with i don't know how many weeks ago it's been your impression of that one you're welcome i was aware that there's possibility that we made in the process of these hearings and for the reputation of the same people we also realize that
we could be using this great national forum gets an opportunity to make a statement how to distinguish yourself up to this point has been one of the toughest and most incisive questioner is a question today is another seemed to be constantly trying to tie these higher ups are you are you satisfied with the progress of cutting through the heart of this problem hey steve these are dangerous implications because the
united states presumed innocent until proven guilty you have to make sure that those who oppose a credible because states i think political parties or political process the process is on the children and all of us as well as witnesses testified that he was not the impression that service was the name of the game there were a bunch of corruption and stealing papers were so well done every day if those young and well educated so this national forum will continue next tuesday with a
reporter back to finish his testimony before the committee investigation goes on the bigger but not necessarily better things assuming the immunity question as a result tomorrow in federal court jeb magruder and possibly john dean made go before the committee on the lights next week and in the days and weeks to follow local and john mitchell laurie stands and two man named haldeman ehrlichman among others there is a momentum building and i'm sure all those who are following every word fear there may be a desire and impatience possibly if you will to get on to the big boys in their stories that is we have this latest round of hearings i like to put an opposing are tonight on behalf of the smaller shelves the little guys we've been hearing from the old rules and the reason or is called feels most loans and the orders of this world called watergate first place it's easier to identify with that with them on their problems some of them and arouse sympathy others anger and disgust depending on the specifics of their actions but they all have one thing in common neither of course is there are
little notes that with a spear carrier for the generals map that was disgraceful watergate spear carriers deserve their comeuppance as much as the generals there's no question or dispute about that but comeuppance is a matter of great as his power and authority isn't right ma you ponder that the question let me thank all of you who have expressed yourself either to or through your local station about our primetime coverage of the hearings will be back tuesday night until then i'm jim lehrer for robert macneil and peter came for our guest david austin thank you and goodnight 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 a special event 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
again lynn oh the
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 4 of 4
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-pc2t43jx4t).
Episode Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 8 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. Hugh Sloan, Jr. and Herbert Porter give testimony in this coverage.
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: 2341617-1-4 (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; 1973-06-07; Part 4 of 4,” 1973-06-07, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed June 21, 2024,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-07; Part 4 of 4.” 1973-06-07. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. June 21, 2024. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-07; Part 4 of 4. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from