Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
[00.02.00] [in to NPACT logo-- to debate in progress in HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE on the adoption of ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT against President NIXON] A heated debate between two Representatives about the nature of admissible evidence results in fist-shaking and table pounding. {weird graphic of 3-D rotating Capitol Dome--title screen "Impeachment Debate"--Jim LEHRER seated in studio] LEHRER describes the morning's debate over a defeated motion to delay the proceedings until the remaining Watergate tapes could be obtained, and the committee turning its attentions to article I, the charge of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE against PRESIDENT NIXON. [cut Paul DUKE and LEHRER seated] DUKE says that it's clear that the REPUBLICAN defenders of NIXON will fight every point in order to delay the proceedings in hopes that the vote does not reach the HOUSE floor. It's also clear, however, that there is still a heavy majority for impeachment. DUKE says that the wrangling, acrimony, and pissfighting of a Congressional committee have emerged today after the civil speeches of the previous two days. LEHRER speaks to the morning's debate, saying the REPUBLICAN position was that the wording of the ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT as proposed was too general, with the pro-impeachment rejoinder being that the article was supposed to be general, with the specific counts enumerated below. LEHRER says that that general argument followed all day long. DUKE introduces Caroline LEWIS at the Rayburn Office Building on Capitol Hill LEWIS says she'd describe the day's proceedings as an introduction to the "niceties" of Congressional Committees and the way they work, the task of the Chairman to control, yet being out of control. [back to studio] LEHRER introduces the videotaped testimony of the daytime session of the hearings [cut to committee bench] [00.08.25--Chairman RODINO gavels meeting to order] DEBATE ON ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT Business Session, Impeachment Inquiry FRIDAY, JULY 26, 1974 HOUSE or, REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be, in order. And pursuant to the rule, we will proceed with consideration of the proposed Articles of Impeachment. Mr. McCLORY Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClory. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I have--- The CHAIRMAN. For what purpose'? Mr. McCLORY. I have a motion at the clerk's desk which I have distributed among the members, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The clerk will read the motion. The CLERK [reading] Mr. 'McClory moves to postpone for 10 days further consideration of whether Sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power of impeachment unless by 12 noon, eastern daylight time, on Saturday, July 27, 1974, the President fails to give his unequivocal assurance to, produce forthwith all taped conversations subpenaed by the committee which are to be made available to the district court pursuant to court order in United States V. Mitchell. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McClory. Mr. McCLORY. I -am offering this motion, Mr. Chairman, to defer the conclusion of our proceedings for a period of 10 days, providing that we get assurance from the President by tomorrow noon that 63 of the. 64 tapes which the Supreme Court has ordered to be made available to the district court, to Judge Sirica, are also made available to this committee. Sixty-three of the. 64 tapes- which were involved in the Supreme Court proceeding were also requested by us. We subpenaed those, and the President has failed to make them available to us. It is my understanding that these contain highly relevant materials highly relevant information which will be valuable to us in coming to a, fair and a complete decision with respect to this impeachment inquiry. And it seems to me for us to conclude, our proceedings without having available to us, at least without having tried to make a available to us this additional information, would not be consistent with our important role here. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that I would press more. vigorously for this if I had some assurance that these tapes would be made available. I might say that Wednesday, following the Supreme Court decision, I communicated directly and personally with Mr. McCahill, who is the associate attorney to Mr. St. Clair, and urged him to make this material available to us and give us some immediate response. Also I watched the TV press conference of Mr. St. Clair, and waited anxiously for Mr. St Clair to make some offer to make the materials available, to our committee, which the President is now compelled to do by the Supreme Court order to make available to the district court . I did not hear any such commitment on his part. And I have the strong feeling that there is no intention to provide the materials to this committee. I think, nevertheless, that this motion should be made, this opportunity should be offered. because later I expect to offer an article which would suggest that the President should be impeached on the basis of his contempt of the Congress in failing to respond to the subpenas that we have directed to him for relevant and necessary materials which we require for a complete and a Conclusion of our inquiry. And, therefore, Mr. Chairman, I move the adoption Of the motion. [00.12.20]