Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 26, 1974 (2/2)
[01.16.08] Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Rangel, for 5 minutes. Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, and my colleagues, it seems to me that our constitutional responsibility is really to respond to the House of Representatives. It seems to me that we would be taking on more than mandate allows if we were to draw some very narrow allegations and not have the evidence that not have heard over all of these months presented to the Members of the House. I think their judgment as to final allegation, if any, is going to be presented to the Senate, we cannot be presumptive enough that it just meets our needs, and to cut ,off to them the benefit of all of this, all of these months of research. If members are having some type of a problem in terms of what they are prepared to vote for in connection with an article of impeachment, it seems to me that this does not necessarily have to be done in a parliamentary way to just delay these proceedings. I think that each member would. have the opportunity as to what in his own mind be believes is an impeachable offense. And I personally believe there is enough in the edited transcripts for that purpose. But, he should not preclude the information which we have compiled from reaching the floor of the House of Representatives We merely have the responsibility to report our findings to the House, and if we vote articles of impeachment they may, in fact be rejected by the House. If we suggest to them that three or four articles have been voted on by the majority of the members of this committee, and they see fit to expand, then it seems to me at this late time that if the -Members want facts, my God, we have had more than enough facts to reach questions of whether or not we should vote on a particular article. But, if there are Members that are. prepared to vote on a particular article, it seems to me we should be, prepared to vote on that, and then to Move so that we can work our will and report back to the House Of Representatives. I think that is our restrictive constitutional responsibility, and we should not allow our vote to be interpreted as being the vote of the House. Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio. *NOTE*-- The following segment was stricken from the official record of the hearing* MR. SEIBERLING. I would like to suggest that the other gentleman from Ohio owes this committee and Mr. Jenner an apology for what I consider to be an uprofessional and certainly an unjudicial comment on a completely extraneous matter with respect to Mr. Jenner. And I hope the gentleman would reflect that it is completely unbecoming t0 the dignity of these proceedings and in all my time on this committee its the first time I've ever heard this kind of thing in [unclear]. Mr. LATTA. Will the Gentleman Yield? Mr. SEIBERLING. I don't have the time. Mr. LATTA. Who has the time? The gentleman is entitled to his opinion and that's all it is. I might say that the gentleman, Mr. Mann, was referring to some of the items that, the articles that he agreed with, and then went into the matter of some of the activities of Mr. Jenner that he agreed with, and I'm not gonna give a blanket endorsement to what came out in the paper today---- Mr. SEIBERLING. Well, all I---- Mr. LATTA. Will the Gentleman please withhold just a minute--- Mr. SEIBERLING. I would hope the gentleman would reflect on what he said. Mr. LATTA. I think the American people are interested in what was in the article, and here it is--- [the time is withdrawn from Mr. LATTA.] *End of STRICKEN SECTION* The CHAIRMAN. There is still discussion, but the Chair is going to recess at this time until 8 o'clock. [01.20.28--DUKE v.o. begins] DUKE announces end of first five hours of debate. [cut DUKE in studio] DUKE calls it a turning point as members begin to debate specific articles. Became evident that the PRO-NIXON REPUBLICAN members intend to use a variety of tactic to slow down the process Indicatiop that the DEMOCRATIC majority may have difficulty in getting REPUBLICANS to sign on to ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT,but nonetheless, a majority does exist for IMPEACHMENT, and some form of ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT will almost certainly be submitted to the HOUSE Floor. LEHRER signs off (the morning sessions were videotaped and broadcast after the evening sessions, making the time well after midnight. [PBS ID] [01.22.34--OUT]