Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (1/2)
[00.51.27] The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California, Mr. Waldie Mr. WALDIE. I thank the gentleman, but a 5 minute segment of the Watergate saga is a pretty hard one. But, we left the principals after the President and Mr. Colson on Sunday, following the burglary, 'were. having an hour's chat, in which they discussed the Watergate, hilt Only in general terms and never discussed any particulars at all, according to Mr. Colson. And we don't know, according to the President. But, we do know something that happened on June 20. All the President's men gathered from all over this country back into Washington They came from California, they came in from Florida. and they came to Washington where they could meet and confer and de- what to do about this threatening calamity, the threatening calamity of the re-election of the President, the most important thing all of them had facing their entire lives. the re-election of this President, and their blind-dedication to that 'objective is just not even arguable. And after they met and discussed their policy, the President met with Haldeman, his closest adviser, and they discussed the Watergate. That is in Haldeman's notes. Everybody agrees there was a, discussion of Watergate on that tape, That 18 1/2 minutes is all that is missing. There is nothing else missing on that tape except the discussion Of Watergate, right after that big strategy session. Now, it is now determined that human hands erased that 181/2 minutes while it was in the exclusive and sole possession of the President. And it is attributable to sinister forces. My own inclination is to believe that it is ,in inescapable inference that the President had that 18 1/2 minutes erased because. it would have been so devastating in its incrimination of the President immediately in the coverup plan. But, there is something that was not erased. There was a dictabelt of a phone conversation or the recollection that the President had of the events that day. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. Is the gentleman from Ohio seeking recognition? Mr. LATTA. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I thought maybe they would never get down this far. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. LATTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is interesting to sit this far away from the center of power. You get all of these statements before you get an opportunity to speak. And let me just say, Mr. Chairman, that I was surprised as a member of the Rules Committee to hear that you propose sending these articles of impeachment in a general form. and attached thereto as a supplement I might say, in the report to the Rules Committee for consideration. Well, now Mr, Chairman, Members of the Rules Committee are, supposed to read those reports before. we make a finding and report a rule to the House of Representatives. And certainly you would not want us to void our own rules. I think that we ought to ponder about that, the same way that Members of the House of Representatives ought to ponder about what you are proposing. You are saying that we are going to send these general articles of Impeachment to the floor of the House, without being specific, without, saying the time, the place, and say to the Members of the House of Representatives who are not on this committee, go through those 38 or 40 volumes, try to sort out what we think as members of this committee are impeachable offenses, and make a judgment thereon. Is that what we are saying? If you are, other Members of the House, good luck. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to rethink what we are pro posing. A common Jaywalker charged: with jaywalking any place in the United States is entitled to know when an where the alleged offense is supposed to have occurred. Is the President of the United States entitled to less? Yes, he is entitled to know, even though the Constitution from which impeachment proceedings comes does not specifically spell out, but you have to do so. The sixth amendment is still in the Constitution, and are we going to waive it in this case? They did not waive it in. any other impeachment case. Are we going to set a new precedent here and waive that? Where are these civil libertarians? I think it is high time that we stopped to rethink what we are doing. Nobody is trying to delay the action here, because I well know that anytime that the chairman puts down that gavel and says call the roll, the votes are here to do exactly as you like. Whether or not Mr. Jenner Mr. Doar prepared these articles, which they probably did, they certainly ought, to agree with what they prepared, and I thought that was a question that really did not have to be asked by the Chair as to whether or not these gentlemen agreed with what they had prepared. I think that was useless. But, I think that it is important that we do something fair for the Other Members Of the House. Let us forget about the President of the United States. We are not the only Members of the House of Representatives who are going to be called upon to make a judgement And to throw 38 or 39 books at them and say here, here's what we meant, let Us just take a look at them. On the first page at the bottom, No. 1, he is charged with making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigating 'officers. [00.58.27]