« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
This committee, the Senate Watergate Committee, the Special Prosecutor's office and, it seems, at least 2 million newsmen have spent the better part of a year and a half trying to figure out what happened in the Watergate affair. I would ask you ladies and gentlemen of the committee to consider for a moment whether what the President had been told by Dean on either the 13th or the 21st of March, and even going on through the month of April 1973, formed a sufficient basis for belief as to create in the mind of the President the state that you and I would both agree is called knowledge.
Second, the question of whether the President manifested an intent to participate in the conspiracy, if he knew of its existence. The evidence has to be viewed, according to the case law, as if the President were a person in authority, and the test for manifesting an intent is somewhat relaxed from that applicable to a private individual, and I think a reasonable legal argument can be made for the proposition that in his capacity as Chief Executive and "boss" of the White House staff
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I note that the second bell has rung, Mr. Garrison, could you estimate how much longer you would require?
Mr. GARRISON. Oh, I think perhaps 15 minutes to cover the Watergate situation, and I would be perfectly at the will of the committee not to cover other matters, if that is
wish. Mr. McClory. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we either come back at the end of the quorum call or else reconvene at 1:30 for 15 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, unfortunately, we do have a matter that is of interest to the members of the Judiciary Committee that is on the floor immediately following the quorum call, and the committee is going to reconvene at 2 o'clock for a business meeting. So, we will determine at that time.
Mr. McCLORY. Could we come back at 1:30, I wonder, to hear Mr. Garrison?
The CHAIRMAN. We can do it afterwards. I think it would be better to wait until we have had that meeting.
Mr. McCLORY. That will be an open meeting?
The CHAIRMAN. But, we will try to get that time at sometime after 2 o'clock.
Mr. GARRISON. Yes, sir.
[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the meeting was recessed to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
MONDAY, JULY 22, 1974
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:03 p.m., in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Peter W. Rodino, Jr. (chairman) presiding.
Present: Representatives Rodino (presiding), Donohue, Brooks, Kastenmeier, Edwards, Hungate, Conyers, Eilberg, Waldie, Flowers, Mann, Sarbanes, Seiberling, Danielson, Drinan, Rangel, Jordan, Thornton, Holtzman, Owens, Mezvinsky, McClory, Smith, Sandman, Railsback, Wiggins, Dennis, Fish, Mayne, Hogan, Butler, Cohen, Lott, Froehlich, Moorhead, Maraziti, and Latta.
Impeachment inquiry staff present: John Doar, special counsel; Samuel Garrison III, special counsel to the minority; Albert E. Jenner, Jr., senior associate special counsel; Richard Cates, senior associate special counsel; Bernard W. Nussbaum, senior associate special counsel; Evan A. Davis, counsel; Richard H. Gill, counsel, Edward S. Szukelewicz, counsel; Ben A. Wallis, Jr., counsel.
Committee staff present : Jerome M. Zeifman, general counsel; Garner J. Cline, associate general counsel; William P. Dixon, counsel; Michael W. Blommer, counsel, and Franklin G. Polk, associate counsel.
The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.
The first order of business will be the consideration of the further release of executive session material, and then following that the consideration of the proposal for authorization for broadcasting committee debate. Should we not complete this business today, this meeting will be recessed until further call of the Chair. And following the recess, we will hear from Mr. Garrison in closed briefing session in order that he may complete his presentation, and following that, there is going to be some time which is to be given to Mr. Jenner who had requested that the time he is to take be deferred until after Mr. Garrison had made his presentation.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, I offer a resolution, the text of which is resolved that the committee publish, and upon publication release, the remaining unpublished executive session material presented on and after July 2, 1974, including the statement of information relating to "Political Matters Memoranda," and arguments of counsel.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman !
Mr McClory. May I inquire relative to this document? I think some of the members may have some question about it, I believe. However, it has been put into print and circulated among the members; is that correct?
Mr. BROOKS. And copies are before the members. And I would say to my distinguished friend that after July 2, that means everything after the initial presentation, which has already been released, and the testimony of witnesses already released, and does include the new material, as new material to be released the political matters memoranda we discussed last week, Mr. St. Clair's response and the briefing that he submitted to the committee, both of which the members have already, and fourth, the arguments, the summary of information of our counsel, and the Ehrichman notes which have been delivered to this committee. That essentially is the material.
Mr. WIGGINS. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. WIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, referring to the political matters memoranda, as I recall that is a thick booklet of several hundred pages, and out of those several hundred pages I am aware of only a half a dozen or so which have been referred to by counsel in the course of their presentation. If I am incorrect in that, Nr. Jenner, you may be able to correct my recollection, but it seems to me that my recollection is that only a small portion of the political memoranda were called to the attention of the committee in the presentation of their case as evidentiary material bearing upon this case. Is my memory correct, Mr. Jenner?
Mr. JENNER. Congressman Wiggins, your memory happens to be correct. I don't know as I would view it as a small portion, but certainly not all of it by any means. But, the staff had in mind that the political matters memoranda have been referred to by the witnesses, Mr. Colson, and others during the course of the proceedings, and that the members of the committee, therefore, would wish to have the political matters memoranda generally in mind to absorb their general character and their flow.
Mr. Wiggins. Yes. I appreciate, Mr. Chairman, if I am still recog. nized, the need for the members of the committee to review the full body of the political matters memoranda to determine what portions of them are relevant to our inquiry. But, having made a judgment, the judgment affirmed by the staff in their presentation, that the great body of it, without attempting to quantify it more precisely than that, the great body of it is not relevant to our inquiry.
My concern, Mr. Chairman, is that that irrelevant material labeled political memoranda be released publicly. The concern I have, and I will try to be succinct, is that the power of this House to obtain materials under the impeachment clause is admitted to be sweeping in character, but it would be inappropriate, I think, to compel the production of documents under the power of impeachment, and then to release publicly that material which has been produced, if it is, in fact, irrelevant to an impeachment inquiry. It permits the kind of public disclosure of information which is private and would not be published but for the impeachment power.
I would suggest to the chairman that the appropriate response to my concern is that only those portions of the political memoranda of Mr. Strachan to which this motion refers, which are included in our evidentiary materials, or to which counsel has referred to in the course of his argument, be released, and that the balance thereof not be released.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. EDWARDS. I would agree with Mr. Wiggins. I don't think that we should be publishing a lot of information that doesn't have anything to do with the actual evidence having to do with the various charges that have been made in this impeachment inquiry. I think it is certainly not very fair to provide to the public and to political writers and to members of the other party confidential political matters that really have nothing to do with the subject of our inquiry, and which could be highly prejudicial to third parties.
Mr. WIGGINS. I appreciate the gentleman's comment.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Mr. Chairman, in addition, of course, to the point that Mr. Wiggins raised, I, during my examination of Mr. Bean, referred to some portions of the political matters memoranda that had not previously been referred to by counsel, and I think that obviously ought to be released. But, I would like to make a broader statement, that I have reviewed, I won't say all of that book, but a substantial portion of it, and I think it is highly relevant to determine the extent to which Mr. Haldeman did have knowledge, and was aware of the matters going on in the campaign to reelect the President. And I would suggest that document is extremely relevant to our decision, and I would support Mr. Brooks' motion in full.
Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Dennis. Would the gentleman from Texas yield for an inquiry on another matter? I am assuming that arguments of counsel include the oral argument that the President's counsel made here the other day, Mr. St. Clair's oral argument is included in this? Mr.
BROOKS. That is my understanding: Mr. DENNIS. That was my understanding, but I wanted to ask you as the author.
Mr. Brooks. Yes, sir. I certainly included that and expected to.
Mr. SANDMAN. I would like to ask the sponsor if it also includes the President's counsel's brief, since it is a part of the record, I assume, and it was filed with the committee. Mr. Brooks?
Mr. BROOKS. Yes it does. I said so originally. I'm sorry.
Mr. SANDMAN. Now, you said that it included the President's coun. sel's argument.
Mr. BROOKS. Response and brief.