thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-29; Part 1 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 been you know mr eames says i've sought to provide this information with all the facts and information that i know are going to matter to ensure the question's been asked to me and to i'm nothing of my own involvement in this matter and provide the truth as i know this has been most difficult for me because of how to speak against the president not a staged some of my friends and some of my former colleagues i attempted in this government initially from working within the white house and
when that didn't work i took it upon myself to work and without and i honestly pay that this committee reaches the truth in this entire matter and reaches it as quickly as possible because i think that there's a terrible cloud over this government must be removed so that we remember in the seventies singing
there is none good evening tonight we haven't end of the longest we get all the watergate hearings a week that consisted entirely of testimony by a single key witness former white house counsel john dean the basic elements of his testimony was set up monday when do you read at two hundred and forty five page statement since then senators sought to have been elaborate parts of that state story or detention in a contradiction a test of that truth of the story will come later other witnesses in today's testimony these emotionally can only when he admitted that you can choose to stop you're looking at mayflower hotels in downtown washington as confusion began understandable when it was learned that there is a mayflower coffee shop in the statler hotel rather than not being stuck to his guns and his story emerged from their ordeal in fact this failure to shake dean's testimony hasn't answered many observers we can get word as busy not a single
member of the watergate committee as yet they insisted that the president come before to tell his story but there've been a lot of suggestions to that effect today sen baker the ranking republican noted pointedly that president wilson at the time a senate committee was considering a treaty of versailles and by committee members to company now senator levin noted that president lincoln appear before congressional committee looking in than those lakes and lowell weicker yeah spoken connecticut republican side in another lincoln prize with funding working on it read a portion of carl sandburg biography of the sixteenth president x or girl with a senate investigation into charges of treason against this is like an incident that astonished the members of that committee for the for the committee table stood solitary his hat in his hand as valentine abraham lincoln's to it come by some incantation vessel afloat in the pine forests of
announcement could not have been more stunned that there is almost an human sadness in the uighurs and above all in his rivals sense is complete she was the committee member phil had to do with fundamentals senses of the operation now and spoke for no one knew what to say the president had not been asked to come before the committee suspected that he had information that we were to investigate reports which are true facts and treason upon his family in the white house at last the morning chorus hooks all in control lower depths of sorrow and the tone of voice i abraham lincoln present of the united states appeared my own volition before this committee of the senate to say that i have my own knowledge know that it's untrue that any of my family or treasonable communication with me and having a test of this he went away as violent and soccer a sitcom we sat for some moments speeches
and buy gas agreement know were being spoken the committee dropped all consideration the rumors of the wife of the president of the training well i'm an interview of senator weicker by impacts peter kay at the conclusion of tonight's report right now senator rikers your calls one of those who routinely criticize the way the watergate probe was conducted before the urban committee began operations well today three men who had been criticized for the initial investigation remove themselves from the case they assistant united states attorney general silbert seymour glanzer and donna campbell also quoting today was john ingersoll who had been director of the bureau of narcotics and dangerous drugs and the sauce it was unable to make the knicks only in war on drugs succeed because of continued interference from white house aides ehrlichman and all of them but there was no mention today of why you decided not to stay on now that has two problems were gone we'll also be talking about today's testimony with former white house aide stephen hess and law professor david austin at the close of the hearings
tonight but before we go to the senate caucus room here is our hour by our rundown of today's hearings and the first are we see the confusion of the washington hotels at issue is where dean met with president nixon's post military may have a comeback and a more questioning the admits he invoked the fifth amendment before the watergate grand jury and that touched off the debate among the committee members and our number two doing testifies that after some initial opposition there was a political change of heart and chet huntley is big sky resort in montana it's an interior department approval also in that are deemed justifies that senator edward kennedy was one man on the enemies list who was admitted to extensive surveillance and the third id reveals the john caulfield found and then decided i wanted james mccord asked about what he told the president about the cover up because the committee you just don't live with the president in the fourth audiences expect others to contradict his testimony but is confident the truth is my ally asked about that
september fifteenth meeting he says i was convinced the president knew of a cover up in the faith it admits the money from harvard tumbler that went to watergate defendants was an improper use of campaign funds also in that hour he says he dropped the check your originally put in is say replace forty eight hundred dollars in campaign cash in the six flooding justifies that herbert come back learn the notes that he used to keep track of payments to watergate defendants and he spends much of that are trying to clear up inconsistency about several trips to miami security procedures thank you i would like to state that
i have never had a long public service where they've all races and i also like to make a statement the committee is discussed a questionable we were just like a pencil first testimony from witnesses and we decided we'd make more progress in ways we probably were racist well the committee
as beth say not just in the spirit of precipitation but with absolute sincerity and i've said it before i like to say it again i've never in my life worked with management more cooperative they're more sensitive and understanding of the importance of those occasions mr adler like a bipartisan effort up these hearings which i think they have been spared a great privilege for me to go for in their cell it's been white well
you were at the white house that day you had many discussions and they provide input into some legal opinions with respect to movie separation of olives and recently the possibility that the president might tear bees of the night before and a congressional committee to not get anyone else did you have any suggestions it is and there were several statements issued on monday a policy of executive privilege stem from the separation of powers and set and of loosely refer to the
murders executive privilege that is english instead referring to the separation of powers that when when we were looking at the executive force or collateral reviews but not as follows president he's at an appearance per se with the research as much of that as opposed to staff appearances i am i reading that but the president's statements let them use the separation of powers and a mr ziegler in his hair my statements usually and also the year now was there any legal opinion with respect to the ground that the two facets are two phrases covered well set i think you'll find that about in mid march the
phrase executive privilege was not been used as much and that when they began using very publicly separation of powers press conferences that occurred in mid march the president said that he did not want to use the phrase executive privilege rather he won't use that phrase separation of parliament how afraid is exactly where that anybody might have advised the president as to whether or not he was subject to a subpoena of an action committee i am referring to the year president's news conference on august eight twenty nine nineteen
seventy two and i will quote from alec conference a reporter asked this question mr president will it wouldn't be a good idea for a special prosecutor in from your standpoint to be appointed to investigate the contribution situation and also the watergate tapes answer the president with regard to who is investigating and now i think it would be it would be well to know is that the fbi is conducting a full field investigation the department of justice of course is in charge of the prosecution and presenting the matter to the grand jury the senate banking and currency the main reason he meant the house it is conducting an investigation the general accounting office an independent agency is conducting an investigation of those aspects which involve the campaign spending all now with all these investigations are being conducted i
don't believe that adding another special prosecutor would serve any useful purpose now you stated before that there was a mohel at the white house to try to stop the house banking and turns the investigation and that you pretended that testimony as to what went on in the white house in the bank right now with this going on under auspices of anyone close to the president of course on september fifteenth that had a discussion with the president about this he asked me about the banking committee investigation he cast me who was hanging from the white house side reported that mr richard clarke was a man who had formerly worked with the banking committee is a member of a minority staff or may with members of the committee and at the conclusion of ninety one and that was about the time that he was making a statement
to the press well obviously that's correct because it was september thirteenth at church that arose in his office directly and if we're talking about a press conference in august and bury me following weeks of the white house when did the president tell you about this was it before august twenty nine when he made a statement the press conference or after we're not after september mccain was approximately seventeen days later they're doing now in the same answers he went along the president says follow the other point that i should make clear that these investigations the investigation by the gao the investigation by the fbi by the department of justice have at my direction had the political operation the not only the white house but also
of our agencies of the government and i want to give a special attention to that this is quoting residents still in addition to that within our staff under my direction to the president mr dean has conducted a complete investigation of orleans which might involve any president members of the white house or anybody in the government i can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one in the white house no one in this administration president named lloyd was involved in this bizarre incident not now i ask a question with respect to any product that you handled directly for the present where a
report was required wouldn't you assume that if this is true that you would have been required to file a report it's her and also assuming that this was true wouldn't that report be available at the white house and so assuming correctness all the presidents statement than it necessarily follow that if you made a complete investigation and in the hands and for him that the president should produce that being reported it really that the white house has indicated there was no the investigation i think that is one of a number of statements but then it is to you a
question that you were not requested by the president to make a report to him or to conduct this investigation not at that time fb i want to go into this over the matter of the sentiment to conferences well now did you discuss specific withdrawal mr erlichman and others who might have been attending their matter is directly dealing with me so paulo car i guess we get now will you is as succinctly as possible the biggest possible remake for the record now just exactly what those discussions were with respect to the car
well we have a lengthy discussion ranking over two days and i've estimated between but basically we're focusing on how to build this committee at the end of that discussion on the last day of the discussion on sunday afternoon that's true i'll be about seven individuals who have either been convicted or had pleaded guilty would they remain silent during the duration of these hearings they're still making money man nice and funny
his responsibilities as money mr richard moore who is also attending the meeting to go to mr mitchell and lay it on the line that it was mr mitchell responsibility now i assume they get that because mr morrow oh man mike mr moore and the economy are and it raises of mr mitchell mr mitchell
well mr moore and where were these particular conferences actor san clemente designed to death is just a matter of working out they were designed to discuss how to deal with this committee he would not unravel appear before this committee and on the poster it's b wisconsin's government money
david greene reporting he took it last night i believe out of los angeles we met the next morning the records review so instead of the mayflower hotel and he was staying at the mayflower hotel and i would assume that if the committee investigators which at the he was twenty nine years it was a learning and also meeting now so there was not an inverted my election as the event at a short meeting and the coffee shop as i was to meet him in a coffee shop and i recall was a very very private in the
so we decided that there's room to discuss the matter and that was there in the middle of that committee has subpoenaed records it's both the proteins but weeks but well you're seeing this being a lot of my foil to all dated
june twenty seven nineteen seventy three percent of the us senate office building washington dc to celebrate in the first of june twenty seven nineteen seventy three of the best of our knowledge our kids do not reflect a master but the comeback is being arrested yesterday after june one nineteen seventy two through july one nineteen seventy two richard leo is really so vast have a letter from a statue of health again addressed a nameless also dozens of peter of the committee was a prosthetic copies of the hotel records of auto record for most of the copy is not very good is to have to go by the letter itself at any rate here is when it's attached to a signpost that it covers of a previous emptiness of the washington
no registration card and foiled be nine cents for three comeback was registered in our hotel june twenty nine there's the nineteen seventy two a ritual for our registration card receipt in prison and so jonah well known as el telephone number three to four dirge two cents if we're unable to locate you know as i recall you have justified three times very positively did you know oh you haven't ms kalmbach often discuss matters
in a code name for example at after our discussion began referring to mr hunt as the writer he began referring to mr coleman as the bush he began referring to mr mitchell as the fight the use of these images of our discussions and this might explain that if you decided not to use his own name in english in the hotel and i think that nick answer that that doesn't have a very clear recollection of walking into god help me in the barbershop you really get a good night's sleep he became maintain further privacy i recall him also turning on the television actually adjoining door and we sat on the other side of the room and have a conversation in which i relate to him everything i knew at that point in time we have to come out of the pan to that question is poisoning the generator it
also occurred to me that that could be the case that he was using an assumed name but then one way a remnant of a suburb record of the statler hilton hotel it just doesn't make sense that he was coming out of a radio under an assumed name no no he was here and the way to record could be fun why in the world would you register under his own at a nearby hotel the washington hilton and then engaged in a room over the mayflower two to meet with us just the same i had testified the mayflower and the va i have for centuries treaties up
on the officer has to have room for you sir how long do it in washington i don't know about ten years and you don't know the difference between a washington hilton and i'm a photo i can i continue to get worse well i would say i haven't wanted a river that yemen has been arrested in unusual an actual memory you have derived from school is right on the island i refuse but you know the substances the fact that the meeting that occurred women and we went from the
discussion of the matter and that is very clear in my recollection the substance of the event and one of the reasons i'm curious about those an attempt to try to confuse you as it is to try to pin it down the busy you haven't tried to conceal the meeting and was the comeback of course who knows all about two and he's going to testify before this committee has no question about that but i can understand it the confusion in one took place because it's an extremely important meeting obviously this is will cover up as far as the financial part of the first of their usual meeting didn't occur somewhere else i mean probably show up with that it was busy we couldn't find at a booth was quietly went from the shouted his room and that's it
television on because there was a durant joining your next to the room and then we proceeded to have our conversation could that particular meeting you speak of at the mayflower overturn some of the time for the ventilator maybe a million maybe no sir that that's my recollection this is the first time we've ever talk about this matter and these were the circumstances under which we talked about it was when he flew in from california it was fire and we met up with the newsroom that repeated urgent and then have a discussion and let me just read a reflection of refresh our recollection could this meeting have taken place out in front of the hay adams hotel in front of them so you walked over from your office and he walked over from his hotel and matt outsider hadn't
discussed it with subsequent occasion when we met after he had money in his possession as he told me and i believe that we're going to meet with mystery alaska with that time and that was it the market that we put up on the bench and we're looking back over towards the white house and talking he had a fetish a case where they might walk out of my office in the service sometime after this initial meeting couldn't have been the initial meeting at least according to your collection a story let's go back a little bit at the crowded and you know we have a discussion on the use of a forty eight in fifty eight
dollars and it actually were or you couldn't use your credit card not allow the committee staff has brought to my attention chefs are you it's been the push back i think that's important so yours is not yours yes it
is but we're taking a very four thousand eight hundred and fifty dollars is a check and then the american express company for yes it is yes it is and we go down a little further on the rim of the other checker on to buy the market for two hundred and fifty dollars and fifty one cents is this also you're checked as saul silver credit card bill is down with another check the date november twenty seven nineteen seventy two hundred and six thousand fifty cents is the show chat go for credit and then and then dropping further down another in march an american express
company for five hundred and seventy one dollars and forty five cents is the future that as another in april the american express company four hundred and fifty nine dollars and seventeen cents that is correct do you have any recollection the committee i believe in my own records will be found the stubs indicating what each expenditures for a credit card payment i know that because of the result of some foreign travel when i did use my credit cards when traveling abroad some of the for six
months make the payment due that is financial reform oh my well the
like you know well what does that mean i wanted to weaken i am human if it's important senator that particular location of that meeting out to me that was the substance emitting it was important that relate to the committee and for substance of the meeting and what occurred in the result of the meeting now what is your testimony is one hotel and it was made ms smith yes
i have my weapon september twenty seven that i'm expecting certain amount and i live basically on my salary in and do not like to reach into brokerage accounts and capital to make expenditures so as i say i think this will be fully revealed of the committee when when my financial materials are gone through in great detail on the committee have that as their development of those records it isn't your testimony that you use credit cards only for expenses in connection with your job you do use credit cards also
says the current welcome for example senator when i was at the republican convention and often traveling on behalf of the government i knew i would be reimbursed for some of those expenses rather than to go to some elaborate procedure when you're checking out of a photo so it was the easiest way to critically when you know you're going to be reimbursed because a government expenditure or a government expenditure know i think that that we have that reflected when the people you know go through my financial records that was often the case in some of these expenditures well ari i have no doubt it is i'm sure that will be true of my question was don't use credit cards for personal expenses to i guess that sort of has another point that i'm interested in india
is this meeting of march twenty first with the president which of course was an extremely important meeting i was very i'm also a totally confused managers didn't understand summarizing briefly you mentioned of course that you talk with the president about that remain committed you talked about the cover up if it was going to continue it would require more perjury and more money because of the demands that were being made on convicting people surgery on the cancer itself everything two thirds
of islands but then you also made mistakes after i finished i realized that i have not really made the person on the staff because he asked me a few questions after he asked a few questions he suggested it would be an excellent idea if i get some sort of re think of the cap and he was very impressed of my knowledge of the circumstances but he did not seem particularly concerned whether implications the testimony was doesn't seem any sense to me you know if the president was no they're fully knowledgeable about this whole cover of business and a part of it as i think you have indicated before the committee why in the world would you want the cabinetry well as i went into an american not the conversation the taper down until we were into a light question and answer session
about some of the areas that i've gone into and i must say that i had a similar reaction and i don't think we would i could give a briefing on the taliban taking on that he thought that that might be an important that i explain some of the parameters of the problem and the like it wasn't a lengthy america i felt sometimes carry my presentation that he was very sort of impressed with the way i was giving a presentation i tried to i was trying to really eat it one of the most dramatic speech is that ever given in my life well it still is my dad i never did give a briefing in a cabin that withdraw immediately in a conversation i added that stuck in my mind that if one of the points that i really didn't feel i had made the full implications of this
than clear that the sort of thing that as a you know that the testimony didn't know that very clearly in my mind when the suggestion came up well because to me to maybe the president didn't understand for some reason i can't imagine a president out its days as to see for yourself the ruling body in the polluted mitchell all these people being involved in this criminal activity and hear or possibly involved in this from a lot of water which is a little bit of that they use a camera tetanus to come back and all of these things when on anything new right as i understand your thesis is how in the world would have instructed anybody
who had total knowledge of this like you to go before the captain tell on several occasions no i wish to report as compelled by this committee the facts as i know them and secondly this was a part of a dialogue follow i don't think the president have any intention of sending me and to report in full as i had just recorded him i mean i made it to become a much less money because it stuck in my mind as evidence of the fact that the president not really still realize the implications of what i was talking about and i recalled me and explaining that his involvement and he didn't seem to be won one ever get into it or anything of that nature so that's what's in the testimony because it's a soda thank senator if you win the re read the testimony
in my mind the same way and that same thing occurred to me that maybe even on march twenty first eu wasn't totally aware of all the sciences division testified to italy's last friday so that was it i can understand why you would have suggested over the cabinet let's go you did do so i did that you had had enough of this business you wanted out of it and families in early april late in march early you decided that you get enough of this cover up them and you wanted to get out of the oven and doing encores as i would put it maybe come clean as another village that's senator what i wanted to do i would i was trying
to work internally within the white house i was very anxious to get the president out in front on this issue i have had conversations from camp david whitcomb or exploring further ideas we explore this on countless occasions on how to end it thank you decisive action and by the time i went to camp david i realized that i have not accomplished what i was trying to do internally began to think about it i might be the one to stand up and that my own steps and taking your own steps of course will be revealing and telling all stories in the court you mean that's correct when it went before the grand jury
last week as you know that is correct you tell em all star i decided to exercise my constitutional right at that point in time what you mean by i invoke the fifth amendment you didn't own anything did you mr kohut not the victim because i do think that we ought to have the rules and has to the women's council may be found these constitutional rights that the attorney can testify here make statements i will say he's right and by so doing out like all the attention the chair the fact that nineteen fifty nine us supreme court decided the case of united states versus brutal and in that case the supreme court said that it's
not proper cross examination and it's not inconsistent for what this obligation to take his fifth amendment right and on another occasion testify and as a result of that decision the case that we reach out to southern district of the oil and then when it made it was they went to the federal bench and men every track is about that and i'd say to the counselor just about all the testimony has been present it before this committee what about this witness or any other one that would never be admissible in court of law who knew all right
and and not others along some questions as to the supreme court while i think the great bulk of test does it would be admissible i disagree with that thank you most of parliament without social bit of advice such witness one is testifying in his legal writings are a must listen randal o'toole a witness at this moment that i simply estimate the number for the grand jury citing ethnicity
and also i was there i tried to convey to the grand jury that i wish i could tell him the story because everything but i've told this committee would be admissible before the grand jury and the grand jury was very anxious to hear it extensive discussions with it prosecutors about the timing of my appearance before the grand jury the prosecutors themselves were in the middle of the situation or whether there's going to be a special prosecutor no special prosecutor the resolution of that was with mention i think that you'll find in an affidavit attached to a motion filed in court regarding my appearance before the grand jury some of the facts that relate to that but when the grand jury decision that's an unusual cases in this
jurisdiction on the leading case been referred senator to read as to what happened when one way this one's rights in its jurisdiction been any jurisdiction and then they're looking at the entire picture the reason i felt it was necessary to give a lot of them go out like a politician committed to being with the innovation who doesn't the committee that's right
the state is that it's improper examination by crime rates the fact that on a previous occasions now that ball is very important to go back that will be ugly it is well i think the obvious it was the only answer questions senators why my council and the state we go on to what's happening here now that's really
interesting here of course we've had testimony for fiber is this is the fifth as a statement of two hundred and forty five pages and indeed it you have endeavored to their talcum at everything of course that you knew about ethics commission is regretful you're testifying the committee has made a decision i understand by a unanimous vote the immunity i don't come before this committee without substantial consequences on my future legal rights even though i am under immunity here that's correct that is correct well just a
nice area the five days again as i understand it at our knowledge do you have no knowledge that president nixon was ever involved in the planning of the breakdown of what you get is that correct and then in the year nineteen seventy two economy of ahead of the president on what it was on september the fifty years that's correct yes i don't think in nineteen seventy three two occasions that richard to discuss what a gig with him prior to march twenty first was that me on february twenty seven is that correct and i'm answering santa's baker's questions yesterday i don't know but you a pleasant summer i we were going through all of it
circumstantial situations leading up to the meetings that occurred in february and march and the fact that real estate at developing strategy occurred in california after meetings and on the tail end of those and consistent with those i had a number of meetings with the president where subjects related to that particular california policy setting meeting was been continually that i mainly direct involvement of a possible criminal activities of watergate february twenty seven was the first meeting was not one as you testified in the question of obstruction of justice came up is not correct that is correct and you stated that you might be implicated in some way and that and the president said no he didn't think so is about the substance of that is correct that ahmad akkad
you also are a lot of money and then another meeting on money that you have another conversation with him that involved this executive clemency this is not iraq on march thirteenth we discuss book clemency and the fact that there was no no money no way to get clemency discussion came up as you recall is at the end of another conversation that i raised with them the fact that there were demands been made from money for continued money there was no money around the pet yes we know you know how much of a macaw so i gave him my best estimate show which i suppose a million dollars or more you said to me and then he came back mm hmm
you know it's a message through the game that the bears and seventies that war who's making the principal demand for this money that one time i said they're constantly coming from mr kun through his attorney and he then turned to the discussion of the fact that the head talk with mr mcmahon and mr carlson about clemency for mature and any western lowland set the fact that mr olson had come to him contrary to an instruction that i was aware of the races with him this money was delivered an iphone and that date was laundered been learning about things that chad never known about before and i thought this was quite funny instead of laughing so there were really
two main discussions on watergate the money to cover up money that you've just discussed and also they exacted upon and say under stalin was present during these discussions well senator not the two were taking away from your interpretation that a lot of the discussion occurred regarding the press conference is the position for one take on executive privilege and the like indeed i do but i'm talking about the criminal activity suddenly press conferences executive clemency do not involve any any criminal activity i'm just trying to pinpoint the criminal courts and then of course there was a meeting on march twenty four hours i might add that in them and go to one point in time i went to discuss this with counsel he's interviewing
show intention and that's why that's why i've tried to report everything i know to the committees fully is right now i understand a committee member i'm an extremely glad you did because i do think it shows a lot of light and it will help the deliberations of the committee when other witnesses come before and i'm not through it in anyway deprecating the importance of the events that surrounded these transactions in watergate that i am try to pinpoint the problem there are and that really is the salmon substance of your direct knowledge of direct conversations with the president on the criminal activity on the march thirteenth may well i also serve the march twenty first out this is in the series of meetings and the april
no i realize that but it i really i'm not interested now not try to cut you off here but across the president himself later said the march twenty first was the time of the first to really realize the full implications of the rationale that came out march fifteenth april fifteenth when he was in his mind or has been led through a series of rather leading questions whether president and one point in the conversation he said to me if you recall when it was that you gave the report on some of the implications for decades remember the exact date in march he said i
believe it was twenty first and i said i will not shed it was the next day when i was in his office again that the new talking about a statement that he was going to put out he said i got my confirmation now and then i believe it was the year the twenty first time he kept he referred to it at that time because my cancer on the presidency statement lead author not so odd referred to it he referred to it or senator bernie has completed his questions about mr deans finances in that meeting with herbert comeback the debate over what is proper questioning is not finished and we resume with more of that public television's coverage of the senate 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 the public broadcasting service the power is by it's been
and pike continues its coverage of hearing about the senate select committee on
presidential campaign activities here again correspondent robert mcneil we go back to the senator's image on to councils and asia are offering opinions on what type of testimony is admissible in court and i think the question does come up from time to time and as we mentioned here by witnesses or by members of the committee as soon as a building of certain hearsay evidence right now and a lot has been submitted to all members of the committee the leading case that the supreme court is polish versus united states and it has been the position of the committee on the counter working on the committee that even his status as the money in the details within this rule
is an exception for the disabled supreme court has ruled that is where there is a conspiracy and the overpasses and i think at this stage there's insufficient testimony of which would go to relocate them indicating a conspiracy under the collar and that there had been other attacks that therefore the statements of a co conspirator and they further it's an in the course of the conspiracy or hearsay is an exception to that is a rule on this and that in every court in this country and therefore following up on the evidence of other witnesses which is that there's a conspiracy and over at the supreme court that it will influence in other cases that that testimony is admissible and goes to the jury and is used against the defendants that might be charged as conspirators as any other testimony
as an exception to that should be made very clear to an anomalous been given to the committee that the hearsay evidence that has been admitted before this committee will be admissible and any work on this country under the religious decision accepting conspiracy co conspirators what the chief counsel a sign that some people may be indicted on conspiracies just a similar thing evidence before this committee and i understand it prosecutors includes the conspiracy led to morsi's engage in the commission of a crime gets a conspiracy and i understand that even as little row who just recently pleaded guilty guilty to conspiracy count
and the conspiracy is a major crime in this country and it's an incremental but of laughter german cars are worth i don't mean to be decisions and i certainly don't intend this to be critical of mr desouza fine lawyer jennifer jurney find water and senator this committee's too far gone we'll start worrying about yourself and we are too deep into the business of finding the dreaded second guess whether portland mayor has been a professional lifetime a continually surprised at what the courts have made it or didn't admit depending on my point of view i think it was john oliver wendell holmes who said that hire lawyers spend their professional careers troubling slow and i
have no desire to shovel smoke so i really recommend the german and once again this is not a criticism of the committee but i recommend or counsel i recommend that you recommend that we not think of ourselves or mercury or jew and that we try to qualify for a really leaves you with a pole or knowledge that what we do will have little if any effect on how the rules of evidence are applied if there isn't that litigation years of war criminal based on the same facts so far i think that rules committee are important to rule against her assailants exceptions and though there's a rule is richly emasculated hundreds of exceptions too i make the rules themselves are far less important than getting along with the business and so we don't fall under the business of extensive of objections during the
objections of the arguments about rules of lullaby the quality of the evidence we can take that million dollars be and he laid like that you think you're
welcome that relationship and this is thank you all that the new legislation on internet chairman good morning edition inadequate conversation moment ago and i'm sure he will not think that a breach of confidence repeatedly sent our says don't try to explain your friends don't require it and your enemies won't believe
i think the point of it and individuals i know that's right
and you mentioned and he's the reason that was a dozen years ago and that will accept him and the alamo this is a disease business or for having me in the course of all our testimony to the extent that we have conflicts and i'm reminded of a lawyer in scott county tennessee there
are so many killings just remembering the part i did it was the peak
i wish that was for the question isn't about us custody were not prepared by the office of the council president testimony resumes today the following statement as a statement you have depicted all others in the white house has excessively preoccupied with political intelligence use of vulgar mother's insecurity and yourself as a restraining influence on these preoccupations amnesty this was your response i do believe i was a restraining influence of the white house have been a wild and crazy schemes i've testified to some of them some of them i've not justify many of the memorandums that came into my office
became a joke in fact some of the things that were being suggested i think if you talk to some of the other members of my staff or if your investigators like to talk to them they would tell you some of the things that we would automatically just fall just like a political animation than to lose jobs i would do anything so i do view i had some restraint and once i did not have a disposition or like for this type of activity they don't like about where to a memo dated august sixteenth nineteen seventy one and it justify the us was prepared for mr haldeman ehrlichman and others of the white house is dated august sixteenth nineteen seventy ones plus about a controversial subject
i like harry potter because this memorandum addresses them out of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with prisons known to be active in their opposition to administration's stated a bit more bluntly how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies there's not a lot of expertise i know rather we needed the project coordinator and full support for the project and brief the system would work as follows the members of the staff francis calls and dan flanagan cosponsors should be requested one was asked to hold a few we should be getting a hot time the private corporations and determine what's also the deal is these individuals have the federal government and how we can best who then france's availability federal
complex litigation prosecution of several holes right says project to have the full support of the top officials of the agency or department and proceeded to do with the individual this is a very important memorandum is this show it all are straining everyone's as i said senator in a memorandum original question yesterday picked up a good bit of both before i would like that i have a request that request after request to repair this i think so we're not going to get him
things as i say one when the ear thing they kept sending their political enemies to get back to me that was i never did a thing together project coordinator i there was some now and while it was the conception on the map in some camps and in these things and for my political enemies project there was no political enemies product operating out of my office so i thought well i'm only going out and you know satisfy my superior that something is being done in fact it was not being done so i thought there was a risk free is your testimony then that this man will describe an activity which in the minds of those areas was considered important it was
not a while or craziest thing it worked and it was a wild and crazy surreal because i i know i didn't operate that way and considered a while creative speed all of those are and your testimony have submitted several exhibits with lists of names politico's members of congress members of the media members of the entertainment field cetera et cetera i'm taking this demo together with the lives of my emotional center before we go forward i don't believe that list is completely allowed itself it just happens to be a part of that i received in have the access to files were shut down and we may well be additional names an additional information available on them it would have been enough
and on one of the exhibits you have a copy of a memo which suggests that that certain things can be done such as calling the internal revenue service now in addition to that you've testified that and one of your meetings with president nixon you are saying we'll take care of him after the election when the president for anime news as a character and as i said and then you give us examples of concrete examples lead the memo itself was never implemented i never did have a political enemies project that losing anyway operational we do have evidence year low for example a tv commentator with cbs was an invited orator but internal revenue service just for
the purpose of iris mann is not correct fbi investigation many times so we're going to receive i know i can imagine a lot of my own you only in connection with clearing individuals who voluntarily submitted them in relationship to a
nomination for oh yes we go availability of i refer to him for a long time jon winokur is all of the department of agriculture to quit right in its heels on the big sky was this a political favor and what's the moment in the army was thirty four so i think you're referring to a recent thirty four a minute sequence here i believe that might be in four five six or seven of
bell you say this is risky on me at one point and actually the government that you're referring to the
city that may well answer your question with his line of question was very important because so your acceptance of list the house a couple hundred names of their distinguished americans most of them and so suggests about actually looked over these have been caught up in connection with these names other members of the seven members of the house whose names of the area but today you've been able to tell us of the possibility of a man from cbs examples i'm asking this week mr colson has gone and suggesting that the list you submitted were a socialist this was so inviting
the names listed where he was to colorado but want the worst enemies and submit them this was again because i was receiving through mr heggie industry strong the minimum wage through his lips what the candidates it was gone and i knew that these people were my enemies and then be in again you
know it was sent back to leave and went back in the file again ever happened least one a on the top i cannot i cannot answer that because i think that it would realize that my mile there's less enthusiasm for dealing with things like this just to be used music was just an exercise and that your work in a personal and an agency where no official using these lives israel uses the fact that some of the president's friends
and neither and exhibits and i just think of inappropriate right now to mention that in the individual's names having a relationship with jesus and in many ways and now finally things
exhibit in the nineteen nineties now using names in this instance that they were a question of an audit was going on that you know somebody who was president and there are several people and i went to the justice department fb fb
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 1 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/512-3775t3gp0n).
Episode Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 16 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, John Dean 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: 2341667-1-1 (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; 1973-06-29; Part 1 of 4,” 1973-06-29, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed July 20, 2024,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-29; Part 1 of 4.” 1973-06-29. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. July 20, 2024. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-29; Part 1 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