thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-13; Part 4 of 6
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
it's b more relevant to get that now is their meetings of days seventy two seventy two in connection with the confirmation hearing all about it took the moment because the attorney general the findings i disagree with it if you give the gates hearings on the nomination of responsible or it did but the series of a series of these
sessions about the appalachians out of the a question about it there's a question about june thirteenth a meeting with the president now that wasn't there the day of the connected with with a lot with a great many days i had that had nothing to do with their particular meeting and then suddenly i recalled john mitchell resigned this campaign director of the first that this was an ill person meeting with the president to discuss the situation now i don't know about those four people have told me that it's nice that if someone is willing to have that he doesn't know exactly where it was a cult be a month and that was also i think
some of these things have been with putin views of the libyan situation for example but my mind and my preparation was substance or suspect that that in that time available and the day before we had the meeting mr shortz no so that if i will slow the latest show up against us you know what was the beating as the ex about without some kind of reference to that meeting was about this so that's about what your you won't
rule there's incentives to discuss betancur meetings and conversations you have with the president was being in with them and you have not to do all the other meetings that you might have had either their share of all russia iran appomattox that seemed at least the latter on perhaps had nothing to do with what you thought your mission here was precisely this question you have the president for how long i met him in nineteen fifty and then i went really that those first first name basis to go in the campaign and sixty two unknown better when he was out of office and a lawyer in los angeles and then
but his campaign eventually lithium was sixty two yes and it was like what and your mom or do you think the pros
and why do you think he found out it was twenty one in nineteen seventy three and that he did not know about it before the life and convictions in front of a small you have that thank you there's that as well well there's no question listener
mail dr mcewen wells be how well educated well yes this week re election
you're welcome and it wasn't permitted and you maybe i'm asking eighteen to
pass but because both euphemisms oh yes it was eighteen years ago tomorrow apple the
news media will sell newspapers and tv and radio did not complain they have to legislate good sermon at the newspaper's website yesterday and mo rocca it is at the moment doesn't it
clinton oh wow i like that and this and
you in the nineteen nineties somebody has a disease or do you that's right melissa block host all right and
who knows that's right right now i know who's
doing this oh yeah and so i didn't buy anything right there and that you
know and there's constantly and you this fall there is and so
it's a museum you're right you're welcome and i think that you know macy's
you're welcome you're welcome and then this is it that is a misdemeanor oh really that's close
and now annie oh right i don't know that would mean that the campaign committees this drop this is pr rep norton the slaves and the houses of the nixon campaign committees
thank you do you you interested in his campaign us system is well you keep up with what the newspapers say about a radio whoa oh it was discordant i'm steve inskeep you're welcome and
he was so right i am i guess so yeah mr bill and the white house it was
too much that's been the debate the money though january nineteen seventy three i don't recall the unemployment rate as the gemini that would be glad to say yes hello molly ivins i'll accept that i do not because i'm like
yes i just knew the inauguration it was one of those who believe that it said implicitly of that fact at the light of the us was that it has been that the white house review we'll be a team
today the piece dina thanks you've met woman known news media within two months out walking with help and you can you all all right and people rather watch the new york times and what's already on this the television am always suspect saw them miss and was a huge media well
the president for a plan he also was a different vision you're welcome and the radio and the tv and that's basically all well anyway well
thanks mm hmm in nineteen seventy three it was nineteen sixty eight and they may have already made the abilities on thursday of that operation the question was whether this way it's
consistent with the president's view that's right well that's amazing all right for many many years now the opposition political
parties don't you think that that was a servant was very well established plane inference was that was money that was used you'll be able to do anything yeah it is and in the
eighties a week after week the fbi that's right thank you that's
right that's right and then you know that's right i mean nineteen seventy three oh nice
in september nineteen seventy one that i guess that's the message in a couple of the white house i was the end of it he's got to do it all right somebody in the white house
you do maybe it will mean that if you have a suspicion that you know like that was all that are antipathetic to present mexico and it's all over well the president has and sell so that i wish i'd been more skeptical and i think he's the first one that he said it that he believes in but looking back it's always easy afterwards uncertain as to how about defending anything that there's that i have no knowledge of that is that the president was operating within hours that he was before him and he was he had no intimation of the radical right you're
welcome i think that everybody in washington dc i didn't have the people the president today and also a poem i would think that anybody in his right it was well analysts say
up through the dangers says the investigation the trial and the police there was no proven no evidence the idea that things have no evidence that the libyan now now that's the typical what has actually writes great from the war newly into the offices of the material and that the us has played live one of the things well with this directly to
testify made available that mr libby with no responsibility about to account for and that's always at the situation and whether anybody who knew what he was doing was a supper club and that you know the investigations maybe tomorrow then there's money well as chairman one thing we didn't i didn't know and i think the president of it also has now i think an adventure so a lot of that is because nobody knew that i think about do you remember absurd
you're right but when you really well opponents say that one of the palme d'or sunday morning and a dozen years that the courts have been exposed and that we have the information and in an ad campaign with the whole almost all the
army has made a flawless of the radio or watching television news it was really the point as chairman of the new legal principals and several times and it's a valid one likely to find it and see if we can agree on the area of environment spain probe at this point often i put the question as the central and key issue in this inquiry
what did the president know and what didn't when did he know it and ceremonies i understand his line of questioning has now put the question what did the president know or should have know and when did he know increases their new principal law tort law united states that a man is charged with knowing on having constructive knowledge job and that he should have known in certain circumstances under certain conditions so i interpret and i don't presume to interpret and believe the questioning of the chairman debate was not in fact a great body of publicity and the washington newspapers the washington post the star of the new york times and the other great thing is both the country that i know i absolutely white house shouldn't the president had no now i don't have to be a fair employer
like exporting much more what the state of affairs made and then at that time obviously there were newspapers in circulation white house obviously there were press summaries obviously the newspaper for carrying hard news about the arrest of the seven watergate defendants and subsequent stories about the identification of finds that were found on them justice obviously the newspapers carried reams of copy about the ongoing and continuing developments as the soap operas at the continuing story of the water right now what weighs and balances against their let's let's try to put ourselves in the situation that existed at the white house from june seventeenth nineteen seventy two so what was it mark twentieth or twenty first nineteen seventy three march twenty first century everyone would agree with me that these hearings will not be determined on the basis of newspaper accounts or rather to take into account what once
would've been on notice up i'm huge fight recaps well let's assume that those newspaper accounts her at the press office included in the press on average presidents desk either in their original form or in some summers for we also must assume mostly not from the record that has now developed in this hearing just so far been very early on in my memory serves me on june twentieth nineteen seventy to be an arab i dare to mr mitchell told the president according to his testimony it was it hadn't yet was arraigned on matters and that he would level playing like this happen and that he was it didn't know at their worst are you familiar with that testimony was all upset i would say that i did not have the opportunity to set
everything to rebuild here but prospects appear yes well you understand what it is that was what the sources of balance of information maybe is yeoman has pointed out there's a great wealth of newspaper reporting and a great wealth of television radio coverage on this but there was also input from other sources that as the mitchell statement shortly after the watergate that you know it happened that did not happen but it up now he was trying to get tighter and i met with that ten once again on the idea should the president have known as distinguished whether he didn't know what that tend to create some question in your mind goes through whether the purpose should have known that is the newspaper accounts on one side and the attorney general eliot spitzer former attorney general say and finally why wouldn't you with that
in your mind created different situations that we were a lot about mr dane you have any personal knowledge now when mr dean and fewer struggling actor i told the president that he did it not know anything that was going out of the watergate your next fall semester of it all we know from this record what some of those people say already deployed matters on tractors there was the matrix and which the president would find the information on which to know or be charged with not the watergate affair in a new comedic other information they're weighing the newspaper accounts on the one side and conversations the press and mayhem and that's you know either directly from your occupation of the white house or from testimony before this committee or otherwise you know of countervailing information that would have reached the president that would indicate
that the white house was in fact not in jail or at least was a claim not to be in my mind that this whole line a question but do you really on the bases are grossly oversimplified summary of the mitchell testimonies i understand mr mitchell and i reserve the right to change my mind and we write the report understand or perceived it differently the mix of testimony in effect as i understand it was i had everything to do with planning and i found out about it shortly after it happened but the restaurant owner and keep the president from finding out that in essence is what john mitchell say well now how was that how well as auletta conceived about concealed from the president barack when home and i being an actual by anybody else and how would that have weighed in the president's mind against these myriad newspaper television radio reports we spoke about all the question of the president and distinguished what from what you understand what
i do say have known you know referring to know that i could really have somewhat above the level of the break in i don't want to present know what should he have done and when that you know well i would say that during this period i was quite of all the preparations for the convention was in discussions of the one and seven i don't know what but the fact is we must remember this was a witch the white house boasted on its own red lines were really for you referred democratic candidates who have a political event that some have said it was the only
political issue that the democrats thought that going to involve various political seasons and political campaign probably tend to want one otherwise healthy skepticism about the fear is that not all present this all i'm trying to do is to establish that there was in fact a great deal of reporting johnson there was in fact a great deal of countervailing information apparently being given to the president in conflict with the reported and printed using cash and that is a valid area of inquiry want to present know or what city of nome and when did you know but do you take all that into account when you make a statement that you did make in your opening statement that you're convinced the president did not know of the cover up until march twenty first nineteen seventy for
all if you don't want to send one more question i wanted to put that relates to page fifteen the first paragraph of your statement it begins on page fourteen less for convenience elie mystal on mars writing those calming president listed in the presidency or the office the president reiterated his desire to get out a general stay there and cs just be thinking about ways that was the dining room others will include visual impulse they try to victory was also asked about thoughts about ways to present our story to the senate in terms of depositions affidavits or possible and princes or meetings which would give the senate all the information that we should but which would not the separation of powers doctrine you may
be aware of my concern that we find a way to avoid the rocks and shoal south a constitutional confrontation between the congress in the white house on separation of powers and still have access to the unique information allegedly held the present on certain conversations now a comparison to analyze this conversation about the positions conferences often the line now my question to you is it was bad in terms of the deposition of the president or inactivated the president or a conference between the present in this committee what was open and i don't believe your statement exactly that with presidential positions i support senator baker has completed his
efforts to diffuse some observers questions and we'll take a short break public television coverage of the senate watergate hearings will continue after a pause for a station identification on average coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service of the member stations of pbs of public broadcasting service if by the
pay the play and that continues its
coverage of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities you again correspondent jim lehrer as we resume a playback of the testimony centered challenges asking about richard morris activities is a great case in all of last year are now special counsel in the united states some of the beauties is i'm standing at this lonnie related to public relations or even conference's press statements taken advantage of trying to get a proper statements in the news media yet president often before the public in the correct manner set fires now is the lead male in the white house paul ryan they shape in cigarette a story respond to that story is that was when
they need to look at who is in attendance and meeting mr erlichman was the whole this is or current thank you believe it i'm going to go with the story so that was
or a position really is seven of activities i think we're going to get an analysis of that chicken at all souls that message at that that it's also going to also bear witness to how it was that said it that he approached a couple of security major parts of a very serious story will be published but it was the biggest of the tune out what's it was not true and that's a common theme mr
jp morgan is your fight from spain about matter at that time i was just a teenager then statement was given the polls it was included in the story which we were told to run the next day actually was as silly my statement here was the washington post reporter has just god story is based entirely on hearsay and it fundamentally in that statement on a new van on the statement that it was yesterday and fundamentally inaccurate well think of the stage full of
the first to the state that it was an act and you do as president about to get a map i didn't know that for example for these people as i understand it that the votes already interactive of these hearings is exhibit forty four on a retired us tab that's driven it is your fault you may correct if i'm an air
report with you and this is a job interview comebacks date simply made several payments to see that a lot of them in care and that these payments from a guaranteed period from september nineteen seventy wong was nineteen seventy two nicole represented total salary expenses and forty thousand dollars would you say now if that state essay and fundamentally inaccurate like to play
tennis we do people are and this was a story in the possession of the last of what they chose to do in syria and they start with a big picture of other was presiding as units operate one of the things that were reported in there or statements they are
having to petition the state who is that and a lot of times all right the report oh
yeah and i don't know anything here is the question oh really that's right
fifty nine you think that time you didn't have all the facts as a reason to say it was fundamentally well actually what i said was that when the law was this was serious allegations of beating with how it hadn't heard about them an injury viewers often goes on to say if you stated you didn't have the full facts that
time and since that time you've been trying to defend actresses data i was a newspaper spoke with reporters at the park was fundamentally an important respects was we had testimony now is the age fifteen was actually said it was inaccurate in baseball history so that is a political statement
fb fb
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 4 of 6
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-rj48p5w82z).
Episode Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 20 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, Richard Moore testifies.
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: 2341688-1-4 (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; 1973-07-13; Part 4 of 6,” 1973-07-13, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed April 21, 2024,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-13; Part 4 of 6.” 1973-07-13. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. April 21, 2024. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-13; Part 4 of 6. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from