thumbnail of 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 2 of 3
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
it's both many people i can only say to absolute fidelity not just any prayer and challenging and i really did not learn about as i learned about him in the press that anticipate most of the questions i get estimates of big with the exception of one thing and that is with whom did you discuss the watergate so called cover up after jim seventy and when to do it there was a cover up
subsequent events in the relationship the cover for instance i have did you just damaged at any time in june nineteen seventy two discuss with mr mitchell mr slow mr mcgregor mr lew mr
erlichman on this trip all along why i'm on the morning of june seventeenth borders and anyway the legal of those little three years of a lot of other than legally over an entire year i've been there this is not a huge fan of the finance committee wasn't all related to the dollar the owners he's a
lawyer ivins been reported in the press oh after the eventual report in the press i wanna keep knocking down the limitations that you say replacing on this book at any time after june seventeenth nineteen seventy two mr mitchell it's
attempting to tell you what happened at the watergate break in on june seventeenth novel is you know not really trying to get at culpability i'm trying to get at communicating i guess another way to put it mr stances you gave them information about the facts and circumstances that relate to watergate newspaper accounts or get one of those again mr erlichman was columnist michelle that any of them at any time until this moment tell you what happened what are you honestly i don't know like the troops then can you offer the committee
now at a later date of the most extraordinary difficult to offer negative testimony and it pretty much can walk for the committee any other suggestions on how we might inquire into the meetings in relationships to them with these distribution agreement i'm thinking for instance our meetings at which other people were present so that we get their artistic there's information and they have other actors in atlanta or data she might know of a treasure now there is another the senate we've made available to the staff of the video files they examined my personal files that air war over correspondents
memorandums of domestically made an individual you name it i think of your own of the answers so police and other witnesses that you're going to go for political activist and one or two other questions chairman senator an audio ask you about the conversation with mr hughes hello which according to mr sloan you told him when he acquired about what was going on or something to that that i don't want to know and you don't know my recollection of your answer to such renault is a question was there to indicate a similar spot something to the fact that i don't
know and you don't want to find out or something either version of that much and i create a sudden is capable of your essay on the artist member committee why now why didn't you want to know well why didn't you want him to want to know the context of the overall there was no basis for by which we could attempt to know the commitments made by the campaign people and i think this is the place for me to go back to the budget and talent will operate i think there may be some members of the committee and perhaps the only thing in the budget his organization and that organization we never discussed in the budget committee meeting
where money would go out on issues that copying the bedroom which shows how it was broken down the first item of advertising four million one hundred and thirty three thousand barrel other sentimental belongings or even the campaign there was a line about him almost seven million dollars in research and planning direct mail and cooperation
now for happening and that was for direct mail in a million on operations the discussions in the budget committee were about what states typically use more direct mail and as the campaign committee made the decision there were discussions of the budget committee which they fell into cooperation there were questions raised about is why do you need to have three pieces of direct mail delivery householder in california like that eliza smith stands what mr o'neill probably was referring to when he answered and response mr thompson question on page thirty three of your testimony with regard to misunderstand one's israel limited to raising money and less fans also protests by the decisions about money would be allocated mr o'dell i think that mr stanton the budget meetings certainly get that on where the money was going he sometimes challenge
expenditures he would say for example that we really need to spend this amount of money on television advertising this next week so sort of thing and occasionally mr mitchell and a lot of money we're against the situation fan the obama deserves in excess of that didn't know the stroke also just sort of transfer that i would say that and budget committee sessions this agreement meaning your agreement was necessary before we can allocate a great deal of money safe or television
advertising the following week yes those kinds of major decisions that essentially her that's essentially principal three and fifty thousand dollars that went to the white house didn't have to approve them news stan suggest that i believe threatened fifty thousand dollars the white house was intended for a few understand that falling costs hauling operations and other things while that wouldn't
be the most awkward way on earth to take care of something like that i why why wouldn't check check out against which the white house could draw well i mean this is a question of whether witnesses the villain that's right the campaign continues issue organizations and so understanding more intimately relate to structure campaign finance limits your final question in retrospect in hindsight is always pointing fighting
you see the reason why we should not eliminate any transaction from the political system will it go i think i think also wire into the circumstances are whether or not under certain conditions election day for example is necessary for people that cash pay certain expenses people the whole lot more things and there were legislation the suspicions
i can't help but note here while under a statement that you'll never be a finance chairman again i understand that you didn't want to be this time nothing's wrong non u you know chris one of the most successful is in the history of america on the large and hardworking young man certified public accountant at twenty three is it successful businessman secretary of commerce director the budget and find animals and affecting water is of any political campaign in the history of the country i mean it is an interesting thing and that pain
cause that to a male is seeking the facts which i think the american people and i don't know well acquainted with islam he testified before the committee last week in a set that contradiction between your testimony and that slow i thought last sloan was not taking it a go and effective whips it would protect it that's right in nineteen sixty eight
it was in this campaign before i was i don't consider these matters both our regulations that we'll agree with testified about the political reforms there were some disagreement and its isolation mr
martin right mr miller no you agree with our lists i have a few cases in which has a recollection is a slightly different from mom would substantially on recollection day online at three thousand dollar payments liddy and i thought oh no you did witness the middle on principle were there as the real thing
that is not likely those are gone i know you know this conversation those early days of the campaign people
the question that was posed as monica what was your position on what made it was maintained expenditures at an economic level it's dry for now it's five years they will unite in a small frying pan and that was the situation in the
name in the world today we were then stop this person any money that you do not disperse any money or say they go online all right as lady attended thirty three out of thirty nine finance committee august six nineteen seventy one june twenty eight nineteen seventy two he received an assignment in italy david
lennon singer and ms lily your general counsel william at daily intake of song someone will use it senator was the manager good morning or college you know i wasn't surprised that eligible people of other ninety nine thousand now about to make a point or religion as a way as i read it in depositions various levels of the program
to a thousand dollars it was great they had no money and that was it as well
it's mostly empty it is you testified yesterday to get not just slow growth due on july twelve he was voted as promised them productive minimize the amount of money that he disparaged is that right miller and that raises questions in your mind it's impossible really go on ethical uses of them on and as a person and that raises suspicions in yo
ma as possible illegal on ethical uses of the money oh really money and again testify at a jewel raising wanting to didn't think it's morning cities eyelashes that you're leading member of the committee and witnesses court reporter a copy of the documents for the purpose of identification for almost ten new
version as anomalies the number and it's a documentary road ms kamler i think they'd be inserted and record this point in the corporate law and is necessary for us to establish a system of drone partisan and distribution of our articles thirty trips and during and soulful other details though i'm liking hundred and seventy two vip is
a shadow and that indicated you had only casual interest in the operations of the campaign here's a question and then in nineteen sixty eight thousand five hundred people running location that jury as the law requires to account for every dollar races in the second with the campaign he's
bright nineteen ninety two now you can say that they on that for a million get his partners on accounting for it you got it you considered to be you on the
movie moses was argumentative i worried about numbers because the accounting for procedures they all the articles of an important responsibility under the statute the most of this so the journal of the chart as we've already learned happened before april sixth only a few items on that have a lot of variables that and there was no responsibility under the law on the treasure to account for the money that he was accountable for the prosaic of sailed into a jewelry or items of that size did you send it well all they're stating to integrate lichtenstein thank you letters to conservatives they say about them for me i see it is
considered a very important function of the fundraising effort to say that people apply for a problem show to stand up to the new company that will insert that and read the law next ten years thank you for all that in this song that it was about ten thousand dollars was able to get out and make a lot of propaganda as that sounds some reasons other than others
jamal's it does not appear there is a report we're going to report feelings we were behind and his reply was very clear i wasn't whether or not the sanctuary and that raises questions than watching you know
khan for your explicit instructions occasionally report new orleans several weeks later the department of the twenty five thousand volunteer receive most barbaric the eighty nine thousand dollars check makes the electorate the fact is that i wasn't aware of the mix oh great so is the record for a vacation it is very possible
and i think his testimony to give that money back that was it so i think that follows is a thorough as a shooter robert j course doesn't want to my hands a patent for a short time just standing but i think senator edwards are bringing out is that the difference in the functions between the chairman of a pressure i raised the money he had no part in soliciting underage valerie
miller what does that involve accountants hall of fame or the secretary of commerce who further than personally selected by the president to the director the budget and directly maybe they're a fifty million dollars for his re election campaign intended always wanted to be spent without any unusual provision in control for the record i am an indian wrestle with their version of the letter
abbreviation one of the government paid i got a report from violent crime anything to do with the day to day work now well that's why you get information from far they've gotten there's no
money i don't think you need to repeat it you got it loesser position that paul i learned the definition of a confrontation and that the practices that and i'd like to read the definition of what our competition and fictional events for that was a lot of money or anything about an inclusive whether or not legally enforceable agreement to make a contribution
will the point of doing everything he could personally relate to money available it was clearly a lawyer consulted contribution was immensely hole before it was a senator the department of justice appears to be january eleventh nineteen seventy three there's an issue that the ripple effect of the commercial airport or a little or a late night after the polls close of laughter
they'll refine any bases for criticism transaction acted on the basis of legal advice then it turns out that my legal advice was good political campaigns illegally and fortune leno says in the dozen or so i thought that sanders seat had been reporting even though they're not happy about it for the certified public accountant sec only real accountability mean you and other analysts think that as we get millions of dollars from people injured many of these agencies that really is nineteen seventy one i could have
every one of those things that was a little before they very much stricter standard for the purposes of accounting and that was the only in the case of the government or the individual contributor have done everything possible to us you wanted to be funny hi liane to spend a lot of the
family goes involved because the songs and jazz it's been dispersed by people finally got to play on spending reporting and this person is but under the register it's really not what i said i worried about all the things that a lot of my time for them in consideration to handling the accounting for the various items stolen ids over and over again and that we exercise their best judgment on the basis of advice and fell thank you it's b so what senator kennedy expressing disbelief over mr stands like
a financial records committee is taking a lunch break will be for the pursuit of this whole matter when we resume a reminder that a reminder of our thanks to all of you who have expressed your cells about public television's experiment of broadcasting these watergate hearings in primetime those of you who still like to say something pro or con we would suggest that you drop a line or color or whatever you'd like but another words express yourself your local public television station and they're the folks who make the decisions of our system as to what programs are specifically say no were each local station meaning the station which are watching right now their coverage in our coverage public television's coverage of the series will continue after this offer station identification on a great coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service by the member stations of pbs and public broadcasting service the point is
both it's been the pittsburgh area and that continues its coverage
of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaign activities it again correspondent jim lehrer our eyes we enter the third hour of testimony as the chairman's term and it is undoubtedly the tapas questioning of the day and perhaps of the entire year is the us for now the man with the gavel the piano or no questions that's the problem witnesses
this represents is that understand what that most of them are committed really to testify was the nation state of the finance committee found for april seventeen nineteen seventy two season been commended for various purposes now is correct all right but severe understatement it's a
lot of information that i don't require have a chairmanship of the committee it is a problem sen lieberman yeah liz we don't know and this committee has been part of the senate resolution number
sixty to investigate every campaign contribution may go in connection with the presidential campaign of mike incentive to a campaign preceding it there yeah really do you hear me in nineteen sixty three i really
like that people have been reconstructed well our land investments to help reconstruct their main contributor there are at considerable a lot of records not in existence it would show that it is from chile on the record we want respect the anonymity that they had sought than they were then and i don't do under the law we're talking now but contributions before april
seven nineteen seventy two they were destroyed after you ah point here was false accounting for this relief fund has given the may and june twenty thirteen the only reason it was on june twenty thirteen was that he was waiting for mr coll my comeback from europe rejected figure the statement was ready by mr shalom several weeks before the watergate affair and he can effectively and i said i didn't want to lead at checkout the figures with mr already another well as the violence there recently
yes that's right there are records that show the amounts of the contributions and that i have been able to verify and reconstruct those that right there you know and
they'd only with respect to myself i will say to you that there was no connection between my destruction of a summery he's given an intimate ritual and the warrior for instance was about a suspicious a coincidence that all the records which show that all these mountains or this broader six days apple to break into the watergate so you know that you're using you live as well that's right on april sixth earth mr sloan the build up the records of
all the contributors are needed so i ask him up on april tenth before i left on my vacation the valentines day how little thing for some of the lion pit requests now the fact that they came to me after the watergate was pure coincidence all right what you destroyed i don't know that would mean the destruction of prior records although it's brought to reconcile all those practices as treasurer
hundreds of political decisions that are being created right right with the respective eu so cash accounts the record at this point was a violent only only original interview had of these different sections of her death that's a weird been able to mit sloan has been able to reconstruct the expenditures by a fight is about to have before you and i have been able to reconstruct well apparently you
have reconstructed the total it's ridiculous you have reconstructed records which show what we seize it made at you know sloan has reconstructed this a list of expenditures and i know the items for which these expenditures remain about that you're thinking don't you think it was there were reasons at the time in retrospect we would've saved an awful lot of questions that we have kept them what we had reasons which we believe are of
alan woodward based on legal advice anybody reminded urban development and it really gave us the legal advice you haven't good standing as our counselor little reason to suspect him in any way and he was doing a good job as counsel law but i did get a good opinions from others including john lehman including our own renee montagne please mr ok will i testified before that i had it on my
list for two days and i was interested in the names of contributors economy sure the record of that that that i was interested in the bow we had on hand that was in early december because it's here and now that was great number one it was possible to be german and the time from remaining leverage on the recollections of people who have given that money number two on the
little as we understood it on a bicycle so there was no requirement that the record and as i testified yesterday that in a council it was to the effect that we didn't have to keep any records before it was a we didn't want you know we've got ninety nine percent of our at all saints and the film's director with that some records and we have enabled from those records to reconstruct what is that and this is the set visitors every day
as bill to pay but just as that was authentic you know automated your attitude that the american people are not always making political contributions to the united states which was awesome the law's in effect prior to april seventh relating to candidate for nomination did not require any recording of a kind and it will require an evil thing we get a lot of beginning with april seventh they did require little
contribution to be reported and we made an honest and global effort to say that that was done it's like people contributed before it also there were two parties and then there was our committee and i was a contributor are committee didn't care but we felt that we didn't have that right to waive the contributors but if he wanted intelligent gave that was his right there was no iraqi state we were confronted with the political situation at the time in which some of the candidates for president have released the names of their competitor and we have to consider whether we wanted to do the same thing we met we consider that and we decided that we did not we were not going to give away the right to privacy of the individual contributors who have helped in the campaign
that was a decision in other words that you decided that they all right all the contributors hello what they can do we'd been evacuated in those terms really evaluate it in the terms that it was the congress of the united states in nineteen twenty five it gave the option to a contributor to remain anonymous and that we have no right the giveaway is an intimate don't misunderstand do not buying that man who have them on about the american people as you know oh yeah
i don't quarrel about whether there's an ethical question and whether or not i can take your money with a contributor with an understanding on your part that you're so of privacy in that congregation and then go around and release the role was educational and two thousand and one wasn't even have to make a public reporting of the contributions contributions that the german a lot of you know that for a lot of even require us to keep any records during a period of time and now a man who exercise great political
power and you exercise and as a walmart particularly mind space to exercise and he's made it work now senator i haven't said that i wouldn't say i'm saying that i think we have to balance one ethical principle against another right of privacy of an individual against the right of the public to know the congress has to recognize that there's a problem that's why advanced a new low and that was the reason that i know why we should have anticipated that day that law was effectively congress has determined it was sixteen days after the law was effective to operate under the old law you for contributions but it only in the case of a general election
and he was listening to like the mirrors about him campaign contributions is that some of the people utilize the review find one years ago or don't you feel some obligation to them to make them if it's about what happened to the money they confront will you know did you just want that you tell us is
that the sense of confusion about them all i can tell you about the only other item which i did knowledge of the time and that is the fifty thousand dollars that went to the request of the planets still almost all are a large been driven into the largest contributor of the campaign and he said that for someone in the organization i don't know who i give it all to give this year ago and fifty thousand dollars of the people and i think you have those i was aware the committee and illinois the
name of which i don't recall that was dealing with this bipartisan program to prevent voter fraud fifty thousand dollars now you know we are there for years or like now what it was that they got information as well the worst of it we wanted to make and
more but in fact it was now it wasn't an obvious you know well obviously the public about the successful like the success of all the month before that's right that is the senate and so then you blame the miami
of that was to practice a deception so far as i know is exactly and what wasn't an interviewer and it for them for well i hope all of what that now you're committed not only didn't keep records of what it actually undertook with respectful campaign contributions aren't of the mexican senate absolutely not well you said you know all they can in texas on april third as teenagers all right for him to accept the conservation
of an american citizen that money in mexico and wanted to give it a mexican farms the name of the party liberal it was an apt that the third of april to save know that so far eighty nine thousand dollars in four mexican initiatives why didn't receive the homeowners object it was routine loan on april fifth and yeah look at the position mr dionne right
one of those double or check your body what amounts to a mexican molly watson i sounded annoyed name i didn't hear his name until months later and i have no idea that time as i saw them in a while now i don't recall in the stands and one way to conceal transactions to get cases sexual assault that the name of the rocket arm level as anyone yes yes well i think it's both
you're absolutely not you get like an investigation later than i did not make an investigation into the results of other investigations you asked that question of waiting for instance yesterday our committee did not longer any checks with anybody our committee did not send any money to any foreign country of the longer have brought back to the united states a positively verdant lawns we devoted all checked in the bank accounts of one or other of our committees in washington or in the states welcome aj messed up all my savings for mexican fiction in autumn when the question was originated in the ordinary
course of his believe it in the literature you have a phone call and wood says they wanted to know if you could receive a competition on american that money in mexico so there was no discussion about the form of dollars remain in the way the church roxanne literally two weeks after three weeks and you found out that there was a bicameral there was a bank in navajo and with your nose or ominous reich section be not be a bank account of all mr bernardo marker as chairman i've had not checked with additional onerous a demonstrator they discuss them with council because he wasn't sure how they should be handled also
recommended that they be returned back there and i'm a writer in agreement i have no idea how they were in the middle of your investigation also local investigative obama they get the when all you know that he deposited about all of this so on in portland ore right at the same time he was the architect of the value for a very brief time
on his own discuss the council and accepted council's recommendation that they determined to play and now and now the same data through the work that he rejects no i don't i
don't know what his judgment was i think the only man who had the patella is mr gordon liddy and i wish he would talk you know with older than before this committee and has testified have the device available and that stalin given a reason four k plans to twenty five thousand dollars or any other mom of that size and you were single committee without creating problems for the interrogators well into the divisions are divided over who commit is not to eighty three thousand dollars a in this case apparently i wasn't there for an initially recommended that the czechs be converted into cash now that the amount could be distributed over a number of committees on
disability mr solomon you're welcome i really do i'm telling the story thank you well yeah and so the way through the application i think that's a proper raising that we were not only are we did not normally divide up checks that is the problem i do
developers different committees rejected well you know what right now senate still a presumption and because of that they ended up going to his bank account but they could conceivably of others though and you
know you like it yes today we have another do you this money and you thank you i don't know
bill they were kids in california you're right now you and your new medical watergate era that that we wanted to come out of this with a pro walk around in the pockets of the fall i mean something what is
it i was definitely different businesses morning when any money came in first copper mines safely and have an event that will protect the money and as i said there was only one occasion on which there was more than one contribution it's a different situation in my state i
went on vacation he did not want to keep the money in his day the euro incredible combination to the safe in my secretary's office labeled the money and that's that i do you related to religion i don't know well occasionally
some of these items oh yeah and oh yeah but i don't think
so and when very simple way to do it perry in a play this is the responsibilities of that
money this recent report is that it has not but the responsibilities of the chair now the phone and has responsibilities inaudible and we worked together very well but we didn't you know i wasn't born later that committee and in that sense i was a very original responsibility and eventually when they went out of the problem but he didn't work with everyone else in and you of course i do
we're trying to do thank you the questions you say the deal that we liked it committed to do we like them this is sabrina and now it wasn't
that the omnibus bill that the human toll estimated as we all testimony you want me now the whole understanding of the arrangement was that it wasn't necessary for them in the campaign committee and tell us what they were going to spend the money for big step in the major categories as discussed in the meetings of the budget committee at all five hundred and forty million dollars well you did only aggregate by categories and i have
very little authority to make fart that's right now you want me to make a record that slowness and i think that they didn't relate mr mitchell if the magruder and i think this report shows that regularly an hour and you had some i don't know i want to explain to me you get
to say something about the expenditure with us and i said in my statement this morning in some detail the budget was not unknown in a lot of the survivors and it is that which we really means and i don't know research and planning direct mail and telephone six million seventy five thousand dollars for half million for direct mail million nine hundred thousand for telephone hundred eighty thousand for computer lessons along it was in oh no well i don't
know no they presented they carefully they presented programmed to me and i was in the position of either agree for challenging and it made them feel set in the nineteen twenties so i think we'll have a significant amount of money and in sixty eight a well known among the rest of metal was not so i'm saying that the budgets were prepared by the people under mr mitchell who had charge of the various functions there are about a dozen different divisions of the budget each was under an individual he prepared but
he came in the night before and i was in the position of being the devil's advocate and every case and saying it's too much money and the rule is too high now beginning labor day it was given to me every week before labor day at some point a regular occasions there were very frequent meetings and people may have less frequent meetings that i believe in june july there was an opinion that was so fortunate among other things the duo discuss and debate and reach a conclusion with the other members of the budgetary commission after walk out ways of money to be made
1973 Watergate Hearings
Part 2 of 3
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-cf9j38m832).
Episode Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 10 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, Maurice Stans 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: 2341642-1-1 (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; 1973-06-13; Part 2 of 3,” 1973-06-13, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed December 4, 2023,
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 2 of 3.” 1973-06-13. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. December 4, 2023. <>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-06-13; Part 2 of 3. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from