Advanced Search
House Subcommittee Shreddergate Investigation
Committee Chairman U.S. Representative James J. Howard (D-NJ) swears in G. Lucero of the EPA to give testimony at Public Works and Transportation Committee hearing on the shredding of public documents carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency. Lucero states his title as Director of Waste Programs Enforcement. Rep. Howard asks Lucero who knows what documents were or were not destroyed; Lucero says these documents are logged by the Secretary to the Deputy Director, who works for Lucero. Lucero discusses placement of the shredder next to the only copy machine in the office, says the shredder was primarily used to dispose of bad copies. Lucero interviewed staff with access to enforcement-sensitive documents and those who maintained documents subject to the subpoena. Lucero says his employees have stated that to their knowledge, neither they nor anyone else they knew had been shredding any documents subject to subpoena. Lucero says he reminded his staff on multiple occasions that subpoenaed documents were to be preserved and made available, that he has asked members of the Committee’s staff and other members of the EPA’s Solid Waste Department to review available documents. Lucero says President Ronald Reagan has decided upon enforcement-sensitive documents, which have been secured until the situation is sorted between Congress and the President.
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Cambodia Bombing Article of Impeachment. Henry Smith III
Peter Rodino (D New Jersey). The gentleman from New York, Mr. Smith, is recognized for 3 minutes and 45 seconds. Henry Smith III (R New York). Mr. Chairman, the other night when we started this debate I said that as far as I was concerned I did not think that clear and convincing proof of the President's direct involvement in all of the that had been made against him had been brought forth this committee in the months of our efforts and the mountains of evidence that we have looked at. But I was bothered in one area and that was this area of the bombing in Cambodia in which the proof seemed to be clear and convincing to me that the President directly ordered bombing in Cambodia and that it be concealed generally from the American people and generally from the Congress. And it does bother me. And I congratulate the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, for bringing this article forward. Now, I am going to vote against the article because there are too many aspects of the situation which are still not clear, and perhaps will not be clear for years. I think perhaps this committee should have gone into this matter more deeply than we did. I think we should have pursued perhaps more vigorously the quest for information. But we have heard about the President's duty to inform the Congress about military moves. This was a move. One question is was this militarily justified, and the consensus seems to be, that it was. It did save American lives.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
[00.12.46--ERVIN gavels meeting open] Senator ERVIN. The committee will come to order. We are somewhat shorthanded this morning. Senator Weicker is compelled to attend a graduation of his son. Senator Talmadge is the floor manager of an agricultural bill which IS now the pending business of the Senate & Senator Inouye is compelled to chair hearings on a Subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee. So, notwithstanding our investigation, the business of the Senate is compelled to go on and we hope that these Senators, will be able to come sometime today. Counsel will call the first witness. Senator GURNEY. Mr. Chairman. Before we call the first, witness, I think we ought to straighten out this news report that: appeared last evening and also this morning about the fact that the committee was going to issue a subpena to obtain the logs of' the President to verify the number of times that -Mr., Dean either did Or did not see him. I have talked to the Chief counsel about, this. He tells me that there was no such statement issued by him and I think that ought to be made clear at this time because it certainly is a misapprehension and it indicates the committee and the White House are not operating in conjunction with this or the White House is, not cooperating with this committee and I wonder if we can have an explanation at this time. Mr. DASH. Yes, Mr. Chairman a request was made of me as I left the hearing or some time during the recess as to whether or not the committee would be seeking the information concerning contacts between the President and Mr. Dean. My statement was that if it is relevant evidence we certainly will be, seeking it and I made no statement that the committee will be, issuing a subpena. A correcting statement to the news releases has been made by me, Senator Gurney, which indicates all Of Our requests to the White House for the appearance of a White House witness or for the production of records from the White House has been made through a discussion between me and Mr. Leonard Garment, Counsel for the President. Up to that date we have received complete cooperation concerning such requests, We, will continue that policy which is carried in our guidelines which were approved by this committee, and that is the explanation of this situation. Senator GURNEY I thank the chief counsel and I do think it does clarify the situation. Mr. DASH. Now the next witness is Mr. Hugh Sloan. Senator ERVIN. Will you raise your right hand. Do you swear that the evidence which you ---hall give to the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Mr. SLOAN. I do. Mr. DASH. For the record, would you please give your full name and address. TESTIMONY OF HUGH W. SLOAN, JR., ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES R. STONER AND JAMES R. TREESE, COUNSELS Mr. SLOAN. Hugh W. Sloan, Jr., 709.2 Alicent Court, McLean, Va. Mr. DASH. Are you accompanied by counsel? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, Sir; I am. Mr. DASH. Would counsel please identify himself for the record. Mr. STONER. Yes, my name is James R. Stoner. I am an attorney here in Washington & I am appearing here along w/ my partner, James R. Treese, who is seated behind me. The two of us are counsel to Mr. Sloan. Mr. DASH. Mr. Sloan, did you have a position with the Committee for the Re-Election of the President? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir, I did. Mr. DASH, Could you tell us when you first joined the Committee for the Re-Election of the President? Mr. SLOAN. There were a series of committees here, As far as my participation in the campaign goes, it would go back to March 6, 1971, and run through until my resignation on July 14, 1972. Mr. DASH. Now, prior to March 6, 1971, when you joined the campaign, how were you employed? Mr. SLOAN. I was employed at the White House on the President's staff. Mr. DASH. What position did you hold there? Mr. SLOAN. I was a staff assistant to the President in the scheduling and appointments area. Mr. DASH. Now, how did it come about that, you joined the campaign which, as I understand it, did that mean CREEP? Mr. SLOAN. At that, point in time it was the, Citizens Committee for the Re-Election of the President.. Mr. DASH. How did it come about that you took that, position? Mr. SLOAN. 'Mr. Herbert Kalmbach, President Nixon's personal lawyer, at this point in time called me at the White House one day & indicated to me that He wished to talk to, me, would I come to California, which I did, and spent an evening with he and his wife and we discussed the proposition of the organization of the reelection effort for President -Nixon. His specific concern was in the finance area. He 'was looking for someone who had experience from the 1968 campaign to be the first one essentially to set in motion the personnel, the organization, and SO forth, the early stages, planning stages of a full-fledged Presidential campaign. Mr. DASH. With any other person at the White House involved in your selection or approval? Mr. SLOAN. Yes, sir, that is correct. In my conversations with Mr. Kalmbach he indicated to me that before I made a final decision., since I was working at the White House, that he wished me to discuss this matter with Bob Haldeman, which I did upon my return from California. [00.18.45]
Church Committee Hearings - James Angleton
CURTIS R. SMOTHERS, Minority Council. Then let me ask a final question. Was there any doubt in your mind during the period of these meetings, that your task was to respond to the White House s bidding and that the message regarding the desires of the White House was being brought by Tom Charles Huston? James Angleton, CIA Counterintelligence. I m sorry the last part I missed. CURTIS R. SMOTHERS, Minority Council. During the course of the meetings of this interagency intelligence group, was there any doubt in your mind that your purpose was to respond to the White House's bidding and that the message regarding the desires of the White House was being brought by Tom Charles Huston ? James Angleton, CIA Counterintelligence. There was no question in my mind, nor in the minds of others, that he represented the Commander in Chief in terms of bringing together this plan. He certainly never qualified what his authority was. He made it very clear, and he submitted in writing that he was to have this role for domestic intelligence comparable to Dr. Kissinger's role in foreign affairs. CURTIS R. SMOTHERS, Minority Council. Thank you, Mr. Angleton. Mr. Chairman, I have nothing further.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 17, 1973
Senator Sam ERVIN (D-NC). Do you swear the evidence you shall give to the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. Bruce KEHRLI. I do. Mr. Sam DASH. Mr. Kehrli, do you have any statement first to make to this committee? Mr. KEHRLI. I have no opening statement, but I do have a statement I may want to give later on in the testimony. Mr. DASH. Yes, alright will you first then for the record give your name and your address. Mr. KEHRLI. My name is Bruce Arnold Kehrli. And my address is 736 South Lee Street in Alexandria. Mr. DASH. And what is your present employment, Mr. Kehrli? Mr. KEHRLI. I am employed at the White House. Mr. DASH. What is your position? Mr. KEHRLI. My title is Special Assistant to the President. Mr. DASH. Now, how long have you had such a position? Mr. KEHRLI. I have had the title since January of this year. My Position is actually that of staff secretary, which I have had since January 1 of 1972. Mr. DASH. And to whom do you report, Mr. Kehrli? Mr. KEHRLI. Right now to General Alexander Haig. Mr. DASH. And prior to that time, to whom did you report? Mr. KEHRLI. H. R. Haldeman. Mr. DASH. Now, a chart has been placed on the easel to my left. Have you seen that chart before or something like it? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes I have. Mr. DASH. And did you assist our staff in the preparation of that chart? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes I did. Mr. DASH. Did you want to make some comment concerning the chart? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes, I would like to make a statement now about the chart itself. [2 second cut to angled view of committee table with chart on easel at top right] Mr. KEHRLI. The organization chart was prepared by the committee and checked with me for accuracy. It is accurate as far as it goes, but it could be misleading in two ways. First, it shows only those people about whom information was requested. It does not give an idea of the many hundreds of people who worked on or around various White House staffs, some of which, like the Domestic Council and the National Security Council are themselves administratively separate and independent entities. There are also the working relationships with members of the Cabinet and with other people in the various departments and agencies of the executive branch. In other words, the chain of command is not nearly so small or so closely integrated as the few dozen boxes and names on this chart might indicate. Second, there are often re-arrangements within the white house staff which is in fact a fairly dynamic organization. This is partly a function of the nature of the work which involves not only long range responsabilities, but also literally scores of short term projects and informal ad-hoc relationships. Since many individual staff members have a wide range of responsabilities, and each area of responsibility could conceivably have a different reporting relationship, some common denominator had to be chosen as the basis for the chart. The criterion chosen was the formal administrative chain of command. This chart describes then the fundamental relationships which existed in the white house during the months it covers and the dates in parenthesis on which the individuals left the White House payroll. I shall be glad to the extent of my knowledge to answer any questions the Committee may have about it. Mr. DASH. Alright now, would you please go to the chart and take a corner. Mr. KEHRLI. Sure.
House Subcommittee Shreddergate Investigation
Committee Chairman U.S. Representative James J. Howard (D-NJ) recognizes U.S. Representative Elliot H. Levitas (D-GA) at Public Works and Transportation Committee hearing on shredding of public documents carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency. Representative Levitas, holding a cigarette, asks for clarification on where exactly the shredders were located. EPA Chief of Staff John Daniel clarifies the shredders were in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, and that to his knowledge there was never a shredder in the office or staff offices of EPA Assistant Administrator Rita Lavelle. Rep. Howard calls for a 5-minute limit on questions, recognizes U.S. Rep. Gene Snyder (R-KY). Rep Snyder asks if Lavelle had access to a shredder during her time with the EPA; EPA Director of Waste Programs Enforcement G. Lucero says yes.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.15.14-committee table, Sen. ERVIN, Sam DASH, committee staff] Senator ERVIN. Senator Talmadge. Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Mitchell, in your testimony you have repeatedly referred to "White House horrors." What do you mean by that phrase? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, as we have discussed them here, Senator, they certainly involved the break-in of Dr. Ellsberg's doctor, I think we had better put it instead of the other phrase that is used, the Dita Beard matter, both with respect, to, apparently the removal of her from the scene is 'Well as visits or attempted visits. We are talking about the Diem cables: we are talking about the alleged extracurricular activities in the bugging area, the bombing, purported bombing of the Brookings Institute, and a lot of miscellaneous matters with respect to Chappaquiddick and this, that, and the next thing. Those are the areas of which I am talking. [00.16.27] Senator TALMADGE. Who was the author of the White House horrors? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, I do not know as I can answer for all Of those, Senator. I think that the affidavits that have been filed in some Of the courts and the stories that have come out in the press probably give You a better picture of that than I can individually. [MITCHELL commences hairsplitting] Senator TALMADGE. Did you play an active supervisory role in the campaign before you resigned as Attorney General? Mr. MITCHELL. An active Supervisory role? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. sir. Mr. MITCHELL. What I did was Succumb to the President's request to keep an eye on what was going on over there and I had frequent meetings with Individuals dealing with matters of policy also with individuals who would bring other individuals Over to introduce them to me and discuss their talents and their qualities with respect to filling- certain jobs in that particular area. Yes. sir, I did. Senator TALMADGE. You would consider, then, that you did play an active Supervisory role before you resigned as Attorney General? Mr. MITCHELL. Well. the word "supervisory" gets me, Senator. I am not quite sure of that. Senator TALMADGE. An active role before you resigned. Mr. MITCHELL. If You would change "supervisory" to "consulting", I think I would be much happier. Senator TALMADGE. Did it get beyond the consulting capacity? [00.17.54] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, it might have been in areas where I let them know lily opinion quite forcefully and strongly, but I think that would still I fit under the role of consultant. Senator TALMADGE. Didn't you testify to the contrary before the Judiciary Committee on March 114. 1972? Mr. MITCHELL. Senator. I am glad you asked me that. I was waiting for Somebody to. May I read the' dialog? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL. I was, hoping that would come up. Senator TALMADGE. I am glad to accommodate you, sir. [00.18.25] Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you. Because this subject matter has been bandied about, and I think quite unfairly. This is a question by Senator Kennedy: [Reading] Senator KENNEDY. Do you remember what party responsibilities you had prior to March 1? Mr. MITCHELL. Party responsibilities ? Senator KENNEDY. Yes. Republican Party. Mr. MITCHELL. I do not have and did not have any responsibilities, I have no party responsibilities now, Senator. Mr. MITCHELL. Now, it seems to -me that this committee has spent, about 6 weeks trying to make a distinction between the different parties and the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, and I look upon it the same way. Senator TALMADGE. Let's read a little further, Mr. Mitchell. Mr. MITCHELL. This is the only quote I have. Do you have something more, on that? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Let me read it for you. [Laughter.] Next question: [READING] Senator KENNEDY. No re-election campaign responsibilities? Mr. MITCHELL. Not as Yet. I hope to. I am going to make the application to the chairman of the committee if I ever get through with these hearings. [Laughter.] Mr. MITCHELL. I can't believe that the Washington Post could be so mistaken. Senator TALMADGE. May I send it to you for the refreshment of your memory, sir? Mr. MITCHELL. I would like, to see it, Senator TALMADGE. I will ask a member of the staff to show Mr., Mitchell page 633 of the hearings of Mr. Richard G. Kleindienst, resumed, an March 14, 1972. [document passed to MITCHELL, reading with counsel] [00.20.45]
House Subcommittee Shreddergate Investigation
U.S. Representative Gene Snyder (R-KY) at Public Works and Transportation Committee hearing on shredding of public documents by the Environmental Protection Agency, continuing line of questioning on memorandum by EPA General Counsel Robert M. Perry. Representative Snyder quotes a section of establishing a procedure for identifying, storing, and logging enforcement sensitive documents.
House Hearing: Johnston Praises Motion Picture Code
Title card: House Hearing - Johnston Praises Motion Picture Code. Adult Caucasian males seated in gallery; middle-aged and elderly adult Caucasian males and Kathryn Elizabeth Granahan (D-PA) seated on the dais in a U.S. House of Representatives Postal Operations Subcommittee. Committee members seated on the dais, a couple of men in FG looking at camera. Middle-aged and elderly adult Caucasian men seated in gallery. Hands of adult Caucasian male typing on stenotype. President of the Motion Picture Association of America, Eric Johnston, speaking to the camera, explaining self-regulation by the motion picture association's is not a matter of "don't film that", but encourages filming by the basic standards of decency and morality. The MPAA code preserves diversity, variety, and keeps the screen open to the treatment of many subjects. Johnston decries the notion of government censorship of film, and appeals to Americans' ability to make their own choices and make up their own minds.
U.S. House of Representatives - Floor Schedule Question
Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Tip O’Neill (D-MA) recognizes Rep. Robert Michel (R-IL); adult Caucasian and African American, predominantly males, seated at House Rostrum. Rep. Michel asks for the next day’s schedule and Speaker O’Neill states there is no intention to hold a session on Friday, but tomorrow will focus on the Defense Authorization Bill. Speaker O’Neill also notes the Chairman of the Finance Committee hoped to bring up matters regarding the International Monetary Fund if there can be bipartisan agreement. Rep. William Louis Dickinson (R-AL) asks if the IMF agreement can be made, would it be brought up before the Defense Bill. Speaker O’Neill states if there was agreement, then it would come first. Speaker O’Neill and Rep. Michel engage in discussion on issues regarding bringing the IMF bill to the floor tomorrow, with Speaker O’Neill wary of the issues surrounding the bill and not wanting to waste time on a bill that won’t pass without negotiations.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 26, 1973
[00.07.37-LEHRER in studio] LEHRER states that the two counsels and Senator TALMADGE have questioned DEAN in a way to check the facts of his testimony and test his credibility. [PBS network ID-title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"] [00.10.11-LEHRER] LEHRER states that Sen. WEICKER will ask the next round of questions [00.10.19-to committee room, shot of Sen. ERVIN.] AFTERNOON SESSION, TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 1973 Senator ERVIN., The committee 'will come to order. Senator Weicker. Senator WEICKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dean, I would like to completely chancre gears from the testimony which you gave this morning and go back to the beginning of the statement you made yesterday in order to put this in its proper context because it is so completely different from what was discussed this morning and yesterday. I am going to read the early portions of your statement in Order to set. the framework for the questions I am going to ask. This is quoting from your statement of yesterday. [READING] It was when I joined the White House staff in July of 1970, that I -became fully aware of the extent of concern at the White House regarding demonstrations and intelligence information relating to demonstrators. It was approximately one month after I arrived at the White House that I was informed about the project that had been going on before I arrived to restructure the Government's Intelligence-gathering capacities vis-a-vis demonstrators and domestic radicals. The revised domestic intelligence plan was submitted in a document for the President. The committee has in its possession a copy of that document and certain related memoranda pursuant to the order of Judge Sirica. [END QUOTED SECTION] I want to inform the chairman and members of the committee so there is, no apprehension here, I do not intend to go into the memorandum of 1970, I understand that there are matters contained therein which the chairman is handling at the present time so it, is not my intent to go into that document. [READING] After I was told of the Presidentially approved plan, that called for bugging, burglarizing, mail covers, and the like, I was instructed 'by Haldeman to see what I could do to get, the plan implemented. I thought the plan was totally uncalled for and unjustified. I talked with Mitchell about the plan, and he said he knew there was a great desire at the White House to see the plan implemented, but, he agreed fully with FBI Director Hoover, who opposed the plan, with one exception. He thought that an interagency evaluation committee might be useful because it was not good to have the FBI standing alone without the information of other intelligence agencies and the sharing of information is always good and avoids duplication. After my conversation with Mitchell, I wrote a memorandum requesting that the evaluation committee be established, [00.12.55-long shot of the committee room, starting at rear with public audience, panning to front over reporters and photographers, committee table] and the restraints could be removed later. I told Haldeman that the only way to proceed was one step at a time, and this could be an important first step. He agreed, The Interagency Evaluation valuation Committee (IEC) was created, as I recall, in early 1971, I requested Jack Caulfield, who had been assigned to my office. to serve as the, White House liaison to the IEC, and when "Mr., Caulfield left the White House Mr. David Wilson of my staff served as liaison. I am unaware of the IEC ever having engaged in any illegal activities or assignments, and certainly no such assignment was ever requested by my office The reports from the IEC, or summaries of the reports were forwarded to Haldeman and sometimes Ehrlichman. In addition to the intelligence reports from the IEC, my office also received regular intelligence reports regarding demonstrators and radical groups from the FBI and on some occasions from the CIA, A member of my staff would review the material to determine if it should be forwarded to 'Mr. Haldeman--that is, for bringing to the President's attention--or sent to another member of the staff Who might have an interest in the contents of the report. [END QUOTED SECTION] [00.14.00]
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities - Testimony of Robert Odle.
Senator Sam ERVIN (D-North Carolina). Senator Inouye. Senator INOUYE (D-Hawaii). Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Odle I recall your testimony this morning to the effect that prior to the Watergate break-in you had never heard of E. Howard Hunt? Mr. ODLE. Yes sir. Senator INOUYE. Am I to presume from that that he was not on the payroll of your committee? Mr. ODLE. Yes sir, we were asked about that and we checked and found that he was not. Senator INOUYE. And you had no official relationship with him? Mr. ODLE. I've never seen him, met him, talked to him or had any other kind of conversation with him. Senator INOUYE. Since that date. Mr. ODLE. Never. Senator INOUYE. You've never met him? Mr. ODLE. Never met him. Senator INOUYE. It's been reported that a former secretary of the white house domestic council has indicated that you are an occasional visitor to Mr. Hunt after the break-in. Mr. ODLE. What? I'm not aware of that. That it's even been reported, but it's not true. Senator INOUYE. You have never seen ... Mr. ODLE. Are you referring, there was a story in the Post a long time ago about a secretary who worked for Mr. Liddy and Mr. Hunt at the White House and that she was trying to describe telephone conversations between the white house and between that office. And I think she may have mentioned my name, that was a story. Um, she was also the secretary just before that to one of my best friends who worked at the White House and perhaps that's what she's thinking of. I am saying sir, categorically, I have never talked to Howard Hunt, met him, seen him, written a memo to him, received a memorandum from him. Senator INOUYE. So to this date, you've never seen Mr. Hunt? Mr. ODLE. To this date I have never seen Mr. Hunt. And in terms of Mr. Liddy, I met him for the first time in December at the campaign committee. Senator INOUYE. Thank you sir.
U.S. House Subcommittee : Shreddergate Part 1
U.S. House Subcommittee Hearing in progress; aerial portrait of the Washington, D.C. area by the Potomac River. Adult male, off camera, states that when questions arise about "who knew about it, when did they know about it, and what did they do about it," nothing happened until investigators from the committee went to bring it to the attention of EPA officials; wide view of the adult Caucasian males and females in the committee room including witnesses, EPA Director of Waste Programs Enforcement Eugene Lucero and EPA staff chief John Daniel. Aerial portrait of the Washington, D.C. area by the Potomac River. Adult male, off camera, asks how many shredders, altogether, the EPA has at the waterside mall complex of the EPA. No one at the witness table can answer the question; Lucero states the shredder in his office and his colleagues office are gone. Adult Caucasian male videographers standing by cameras, filming. Adult, predominantly Caucasian, men and women seated or standing in the gallery; adult male, off camera, wants to know when a shredder would be used instead of a trash can. Daniel states that there is no clear policy on that other, than specific instructions that are given to preserve records.
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative Edward Hutchinson
Peter Rodino (D - New Jersey). I recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Hutchinson, for 4 minutes. Representative J Edward Hutchinson (R Michigan). Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I suppose it will come, as no surprise to anyone that I would oppose the inclusion of this Article of Impeachment because I voted against subpoenaing the President of the United States on every occasion. I voted against those subpoenas because first I did not think there was any practical way to enforce them, But, equally and perhaps even more importantly, I voted against subpoenaing the President of the United States because we have a government of three co-equal branches, and that means to me that while the President is not above the House of Representatives and the Senate, neither is be below the Congress. He is equal with the Court and the Court is not above him, nor is he above the Court. These are three coordinate branches. It seems to me to make that system work there has to be an accommodation between those branches, but confrontation never settles anything.
House Subcommittee Shreddergate Investigation
U.S. Representative Gene Snyder (R-KY) at Public Works and Transportation Committee hearing on shredding of public documents carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency, brings into question a memorandum signed by EPA General Counsel Robert M. Perry, regarding a document titled “Response to Congressional Subpoena.” Rep. Snyder quotes a section establishing a log created to keep track of EPA staff members who accessed subpoenaed material; Snyder asks if this log has been kept. EPA Chief of Staff John Daniel points out that Perry’s copy of the memo had been entered into record; Perry finds copy, restates the section regarding the log and describes his office’s logging system. Snyder asks Perry to confirm whether the log in question exists; Perry says the log exists and agrees to submit a copy of the log to the Committee.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 27, 1973 (2/2)
[01.13.17] Mr. DEAN. Excuse me, May, before we leave Senator Inouye, may I just add one point? One thing missing in that description of the sequence of events is the fact that I, on the 15th, was asked by Mr. Ehrlichman to come in--- Mr. DASH. What month? Mr. DEAN. April of this year, the 15th of April of this year, I was asked to come in and see him'. I did not want to visit with him. That is when I sent a message to the President requesting I meet with him. I did meet -with him that night, on April 15, and that meeting is described, of course, fully in my testimony. Senator MONTOYA. Mr. Chairman, in view of the observations made in the memorandum submitted by the White House with the list of questions, and in view of the fact that the authorship of the memorandum is attributed to a Mr. Fred Buzhardt, I would like to request that the chairman in behalf of the committee, request the committee issue a subpena to Mr. Buzhardt so that he can inform the committee as to the source of the observations which led him to some of the conclusions in the memorandum. Senator ERVIN. My understanding is that Mr. Buzhardt is the counsel and I don't believe be claims to have any personal knowledge of any of these matters. In a great many instances, be cited depositions or statements of others. The Chair will take that under advisement and rule on it later. Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, before we conclude would it be in order for me to ask, in view of the rather extended testimony that Mr. Dean has now given us and now the certainty that his testimony will continue until tomorrow, -what plans the chairman might have for the remaining schedule for the committee this week and thereafter? Senator ERVIN. Well, it is apparent that -we will not finish with the witness until Sometime tomorrow at the most optimistic period. The next -witness -who has been tentatively scheduled for bearing was former Attorney General John Mitchell, and I do not believe that we could finish with Mr. Mitchell within the time allotted for meetings this week. I think it would be unjust, to the committee and the public and to Mr. Mitchell to have,, his testimony split between this week and, the next session by the 10-day period. I have talked to most of the members of the committee and they feel that under these circumstances we ought to complete the testimony of Mr. Dean and then recess until after the -week of July 4. Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I entirely agree -with that. Senator ERVIN. In deference to the request made by Senator Montoya, I would like to ask the staff to address a request to Mr. Buzhardt as to whether he, is able to testify from his personal knowledge to any of the matters set forth in the statement. If he says he can, that he has personal knowledge of the matters, then we can subpena him. If he says he, has not, then we can refrain from so doing. Senator BAKER. In order to -make sure I understand the schedule outlined-by the way, I do entirely concur with it and I cannot speak for the members of the committee, but I understand they are in agreement with that, but it is my understanding that we will finish with the testimony of Mr. Dean on tomorrow or Friday, as the case, may be. But if we do conclude with Mr. Dean's testimony tomorrow, the committee -will stand in recess at the close -of business tomorrow instead of Friday, until -we reconvene again on Tuesday, July 10. Senator ERVIN. Yes. Senator BARER. Thank you, sir. Senator ERVIN. The, committee -will stand in recess until 10 o'clock in the morning. [01.17.34-MacNEILL in studio]
NPACT coverage of Church Committee Hearings - The mystery of the shell fish toxi
NPACT coverage of Church Committee Hearings - The mystery of the shell fish toxin
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities - Testimony of Bruce Kehrli
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities May 17, 1973 - Testimony of Bruce A Kehrli, Special Assistant to the President United States Senate Caucus Room, Washington DC [Odle standing to leave, cut to Sen. Ervin at committee table] Senator ERVIN. I would like to say to the committee that we have one witness this afternoon who has an engagement to be in a golf tournament tomorrow, Sergeant Leeper. And since he is to testify only upon the apprehension of people caught in Watergate, I am going to suggest that we be as restrained as possible in our questioning, so that since that proposition has been well established. First, we have another witness before Leeper, but, I just want to say I want us to do all I can to facilitate his getting to the golf tournament tomorrow. And that would necessitate us to finish with him today. Call the next witness. Mr. Sam DASH. The next, witness is Mr. Bruce Kehrli, if you'd please come to the table. [cut shot of full caucus room/audience, Bruce Kehrli standing at witness table, brown suit, conservative haircut, stodgy glasses, smiling in] Senator ERVIN. Mr. Kehrli, hold up your right hand, please. [cut Ervin standing to swear in witness] Do you swear the evidence you are to give to the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. KEHRLI. I do. Mr. DASH. Mr. Kehrli, do you have any statement first to make to this committee? Mr. KEHRLI. I have no opening statement, but I do have a statement I may want to give later on in the testimony. Mr. DASH. Yes, alright will you first then for the record give your name and your address. Mr. KEHRLI. My name is Bruce Arnold Kehrli. And my address is 736 South Lee Street in Alexandria. Mr. DASH. And what is your present employment, Mr. Kehrli? Mr. KEHRLI. I am employed at the White House. Mr. DASH. What is your position? Mr. KEHRLI. My title is Special Assistant to the President. Mr. DASH. Now, how long have you had such a position? Mr. KEHRLI. I have had the title since January of this year. My Position is actually that of staff secretary, which I have had since January 1 of 1972. Mr. DASH. And to whom do you report, Mr. Kehrli? Mr. KEHRLI. Right now to General Alexander Haig. Mr. DASH. And prior to that time, to whom did you report? Mr. KEHRLI. H. R. Haldeman. Mr. DASH. Now, a chart has been placed on the easel to my left. Have you seen that chart before or something like it? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes I have. Mr. DASH. And did you assist our staff in the preparation of that chart? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes I did. Mr. DASH. Did you want to make some comment concerning the chart? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes, I would like to make a [2 second cut to angled view of committee table with chart on easel at top right] statement now about the chart itself. Mr. KEHRLI. The organization chart was prepared by the committee and checked with me for accuracy. It is accurate as far as it goes, but it could be misleading in two ways. First, it shows only those people about whom information was requested. It does not give an idea of the many hundreds of people who worked on or around various White House staffs, some of which, like the Domestic Council and the National Security Council are themselves administratively separate and independent entities. There are also the working relationships with members of the Cabinet and with other people in the various departments and agencies of the executive branch. In other words, the chain of command is not nearly so small or....
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities May 17,1973 - Testimony of Robert Odle.
Samuel Dash asks Mr. Odle to state his name and address. Robert Odle. Robert C. Odle, Jr., (address) Samuel Dash. And what is your present occupation? Robert Odle. I am presently a consultant to the committee for the re-election of the President. Samuel Dash. Prior to that time, what position did you hold at the committee for the re-election of the President? Robert Odle. I was director of Administration of the committee from May 1, 1971 until approximately May 1, 1973. Samuel Dash. Could you tell us, when the committee for the re-election for the president was set up? Robert Odle. Yes sir, it was set up and announced I believe on May 1, 1971. Samuel Dash. And can you state briefly, to your knowledge, what purpose the committee for the re-election of the president was set up? Robert Odle. Yes sir. In early 1971, a number of people began to look at the 1972 campaign. There was the thought that people would have to begin to work full time on the President s campaign. They did not want those people to remain on a government payroll or on a White House payroll. They did not want that activity at the Republican National Committee because at that point, it appeared the President might have competition in the primaries from two Congressmen, and it would be technically inappropriate for the RNC to house presidential campaign activities. So therefore, the committee for the re-election of the president was set up in May of 1971.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities May 17,1973 - Testimony of Robert Odle.
Samuel Dash asks Mr. Odle to state his name and address. Robert Odle. Robert C. Odle, Jr., (address) Samuel Dash. And what is your present occupation? Robert Odle. I am presently a consultant to the committee for the re-election of the President. Samuel Dash. Prior to that time, what position did you hold at the committee for the re-election of the President? Robert Odle. I was director of Administration of the committee from May 1, 1971 until approximately May 1, 1973. Samuel Dash. Could you tell us, when the committee for the re-election for the president was set up? Robert Odle. Yes sir, it was set up and announced I believe on May 1, 1971. Samuel Dash. And can you state briefly, to your knowledge, what purpose the committee for the re-election of the president was set up? Robert Odle. Yes sir. In early 1971, a number of people began to look at the 1972 campaign. There was the thought that people would have to begin to work full time on the President s campaign. They did not want those people to remain on a government payroll or on a White House payroll. They did not want that activity at the Republican National Committee because at that point, it appeared the President might have competition in the primaries from two Congressmen, and it would be technically inappropriate for the RNC to house presidential campaign activities. So therefore, the committee for the re-election of the president was set up in May of 1971.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 17, 19
Senator GURNEY. I see. Tell me, was one of your responsabilities the White House payroll? Mr. KEHRLI. Yes, I was responsible for monitoring the White House payroll. Senator GURNEY. What do you mean by monitoring? Mr. KEHRLI. Well, whenever for instance any raises of professional employees were sent to Mr. Haldeman for approval. I approved all raises for people below that level, in other words clerical types, secretaries. Senator GURNEY. Did you ever handle any monies that were paid to White House personnel that were not federal payroll monies? Mr. KEHRLI. No. Senator GURNEY. Did you ever handle any cash at any time? Mr. KEHRLI. I did, as I talking before about one of my responsabilities being that making sure that anything the President did, or that his staff did in supporting him while he was participating in a political event, was covered by funds by the Committee to Re-Elect the President, as opposed to appropriated funds. We did have a problem at one point, for instance when the President would fly somewhere and they needed to stock the plane, provision it with food, the way we had it set up was to have the military people go out and purchase the food, put it aboard the plane. Rather than having them, and most of them were low level military people put out money and have to be re-paid, we brought over some cash and paid them in advance to buy this food. Senator GURNEY. These were all monies paid in direct support of the president .... Mr. KEHRLI. Absolutely. Senator GURNEY. ... at any particular time. Senator Ed GURNEY (R-FL). And you testified that you made no cash payments to anybody other than in this area that you're now describing. Mr. KEHRLI. To the best of my knowledge, yes. Senator GURNEY. Well now, what does that mean? Mr. KEHRLI. Well, I can't remember any. Senator GURNEY. Do you think that you did? Mr. KEHRLI. No. Senator GURNEY. Do you know of any people on the White House staff who were paid monies by anybody else? That were not federal payroll monies? Mr. KEHRLI. No I don't, no.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 17, 19
Senator GURNEY. How about Republican National Committee Chairman was he ever on the visitors list very often? Mr. KEHRLI. He was on the visitor list. Senator GURNEY. Very often? Mr. KEHRLI. It's difficult to say what, how often he was in there, more than once. Senator GURNEY. Would you say frequently? Mr. KEHRLI. How would you term frequently? Senator GURNEY. Well, you term it, I mean you saw the schedule, I didn't. Mr. KEHRLI. I would say ..... Senator GURNEY. Once a month? Mr. KEHRLI. Once a month is probably a good ... Senator GURNEY. That would be about right. Mr. KEHRLI. That's right. Senator GURNEY. What about other Republican Party People, State Chairman or other people who worked within the party, did you ever see them on the schedule? Mr. KEHRLI. I may have, but they weren't listed as State Chairman and I probably wouldn't recognize the names. Senator GURNEY. But at any rate, the people who saw the President were carefully screened by Mr. Haldeman and those people that we have talked about here who were brought to the White House by Mr. Haldeman, is that right? Mr. KEHRLI. Mr. Haldeman was responsible for putting together the Presidents schedule and based on I'm sure conversations with the President on what time was available and how it was to be used. Senator GURNEY. Would you have any idea how many people on the White House staff, how many were there now total staff? Mr. KEHRLI. A total on the White House staff, approximately 500. Now there s a confusing point there, and that I'm speaking only to the White House office, and the Domestic Council for instance, the National Security Council, the Council of Economic Advisors all of which are housed in the Executive office building White House office complex are not included in that 500. Senator GURNEY. I'm talking about the 500, the staffed. Mr. KEHRLI. Yes. Senator GURNEY. Who recruited most of those people, would you say? Mr. KEHRLI. It was done, I can speak only from the time in November of 1970 when I came on the White House roles, and they were recruited by the personnel office primarily. Senator GURNEY. And who was in charge of that? Mr. KEHRLI. Fred Malek. Senator GURNEY. Who brought Fred Malek to the White House? Mr. KEHRLI. I assume Bob Haldeman did, although I can't answer that for a fact because I arrived almost on the same day that Fred Malek arrived. Senator GURNEY. Well is it fair to say that all people who came on board, regardless of who they were recruited were okayed or turned down by Mr. Haldeman, is that fair to say? Mr. KEHRLI. Mr. Haldeman did want to be made aware, as he was responsible for them, of all members of the White House staff, all new members. And he was made aware of anyone of by one of the staff members if they wanted to bring an individual on. Senator GURNEY. Did you ever hire anybody for your staff? Mr. KEHRLI. No I didn't. Senator GURNEY. Did you have a staff? Mr. KEHRLI. I do now, yes. My staff is primarily career employees. One of my basic responsabilities is the 280 or so career government employees who serve the President, the office of the President year in and year out.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 17, 1973 - Testimony of Robert Odle.
Mr. DASH. Now, by the way in going over the chart, what was the role of Mr. Bart Porter? Mr. ODLE. Mr. Porter was director of scheduling. Mr. DASH. And Mr. Powell Moore? Mr. ODLE. Mr. Powell Moore was assistant director of Public Affairs. Mr. DASH. Now, at the time, have you met or did you know or did you ever work with Mr. Krogh in the White House? Mr. ODLE. I knew Mr. Krogh at the White House, yes. Mr. DASH. And while you were at the White House did you ever attend a Justice Department Taskforce meeting with Mr. Krogh, Mr. Mardian and the FBI? Mr. ODLE. No sir. (Mr. Dash goes over paperwork) Mr. DASH. Mr. Chairman, for the time being, that is all the questions I have. Mr. FRED THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman I have no further questions. Mr. SAM DASH. Lets make copies of that memorandum. Um could Mr. Odle, could you briefly come back prior after the lunch just so we can, the members of the committee can see this memorandum and we can perhaps inquire into it? Mr. ROBERT ODLE. (shakes head yes) What time would that be Mr. Dash? (Senator Baker, Senator Ervin and Mr. Dash agree to 2 o'clock) Mr. ODLE. Two o'clock? Senator SAM ERVIN. (hits gavel) I might state that this gavel was given to me by the chief of the eastern band of the Cherokees to preside over this meeting. The committee will take a recess till two o'clock. (members leave, get up from chairs)
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities May 17, 1973 - Testimony of Robert Odle.
Senator Ed GURNEY (R-Florida). Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Odle pursuing the line of questioning that Senator Talmadge was engaged in, Do you know whether at any time the committee to re-elect ever received any instructions from Robert Dole the chairman of the Republican National committee? Mr. ODLE. Well um, Senator Dole was actively involved of course in the campaign and I know he worked very closely with Mr. Mitchell and with Mr. MacGregor. I don't know that Mr. Dole, Senator Dole would instruct Mr. Mitchell or Mr. Mitchell would instruct Senator Dole sir, but they worked together. Senator GURNEY. But he was not actively involved in the committee to re-elect the president? Mr. ODLE. No sir, he was the chairman of the Republican National Committee. Senator GURNEY. Do you know whether any Republican National Committee people were brought over to the committee to re-elect the president? Mr. ODLE. Yes sir, there were people from the national committee working at the committee in later stages. Senator GURNEY. Do you recall how many? Mr. ODLE. Uh, I don't think a great number, I'd say less than 10. Senator GURNEY. Do you recall what positions they had? Mr. ODLE. Um, to the best of my knowledge they were working in the political division. Senator GURNEY. Do you recall whether any people who were key people in the committee to re-election the president ever been in republican office holders before? Mr. ODLE. Mr. MacGregor of course was. He was a congressman from Minnesota. Senator GURNEY. Beside from him. Mr. ODLE. Mr. Flemming was I think the first Republican ever elected to the Alexandria Council. Mr. Mardian has been active in Arizona and California politics, I don't know that he's been elected. Let me look at a copy of the chart here.... I don't see any other names I recognize, no sir. Senator GURNEY. Was the committee to re-elect the president involved in any other political campaigns in 1972, the re-election of the Republicans other than the campaign to re-elect the president? Mr. ODLE. Uh, It certainly did what it could, I believe to be of assistance. Senator GURNEY. Well, could you amplify on that, actually (Mr. ODLE speaks over question) to involve itself in any other republican campaigns? Mr. ODLE. Well I know that when Mr. Flemming became special assistant to the campaign director after July, that he, he actively worked with the Senate and the House campaign committees, I believe and in support of other congressman, republican candidates for, for high office. Senator GURNEY. What did he do? Mr. ODLE. I'm not familiar sir with the specifications. Senator Gurney. Were any uh, can you describe the policy meetings at the committee to re-elect the president where decisions were made about what to do in the campaign and discussions were had about the progress of the campaign? Mr. ODLE. Sir, there was a strategy board, I did not attend those meetings. Senator GURNEY. Who served on the strategy board? Mr. ODLE. Um, well there was Mr. Magruder, there was I believe Mr. Clifford Miller from California. Um, Mr. Dailey our advertising director. I didn't go to the meetings and I can't remember all the people who did. Senator GURNEY. What uh, wasn't Mr. Mitchell involved in a policy meeting? Mr. ODLE. I don't believe he went to those sessions. I believe that those were brought to him in the forms of memoranda. Senator GURNEY. These are the only people that you know who engaged in any policy meetings? Mr. ODLE. Well, those are the ones I can remember right now off the tip of my tongue who went to those, I think they were Monday evening strategy meetings. Senator GURNEY. How was strategy disseminated from this policy committee, meeting? Mr. ODLE. Sir, that was just not my area. I'm sorry, I really can not answer that. Senator GURNEY. Did you ever receive any instructions from anybody in the White House during your service on the Committee to Re-Elect? Mr. ODLE. Um, I talked from time to time with Mr. (Straun) who was a White House Liaison, he made suggestions and ideas. I remember one time he said that the switchboard at our committee headquarters was overloaded and over burdened and he had a hard time getting in, and would I please hire another telephone operator. That's the only instruction I remember. Senator GURNEY. What other? Mr. ODLE. There may have been others. Senator GURNEY. What were the nature of your discussions with him other than the switchboard? Mr. ODLE. Well, just general things relating to my own activities. I was in charge of personnel, and I was in charge of volunteers, things like that.