Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 27, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 27, 1974 (1/2)
[00.25.17] Mr. HOGAN., Mr. Chairman? The. CHAIRMAN. I recognize the gentleman from Maryland . Mr. HOGAN.. Mr. Chairman, it seems that my good friend from New Jersey, Mr. Sandman, is carrying water on both shoulders, and I say this kindly. He subjected all of us yesterday to belabored arguments about the necessity for specificity. Now, he convinced a number of us that he is right. We should have specificity. So, what we are involved in now, is not an effort to embellish, to exaggerate the narrative material which almost all of us are familiar with in a general way. We are trying to be responsible and specifically support every item in the articles of impeachment, with not supposition, not rumor, but specific facts acts to support those charges. Now, I would have thought that the gentleman from New Jersey would be applauding this effort. Because of his eloquence yesterday he convinced us of the rightness of his arguments, so I am very surprised now that he is saying that we are just wasting our time. Mr. SANDMAN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. MARAZITI. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. HOGAN. I will. yield to both gentlemen from New Jersey, but Mr. Sandman, whose name I used first. Mr. SANDMAN. Well, I am certainly not carrying water on both shoulders. What you are doing today is not any more definitive today than it was yesterday because, you are not adding One blessed word of clarification' to the articles of impeachment. All you are doing is rehashing the same narrative that, the public was exposed to yesterday, for a dozen hours and this is what, I think we should say. Mr. HOGAN. Well, I would say to the gentleman that I think presentation today is strikingly dissimilar to the statements made yesterday to which I personally took exception. I think that we should stick specifically to the facts and the evidence and I think that is what has been evolving here, today and I will---- Mr. MARAZITI. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOGAN. I will yield to my other friend from New Jersey, Mr. Maraziti. Mr. MARAZITI. Thank you, Mr. Hogan, for yielding. Let me. say that Mr. Sandman has stated the position that I had intended to state, that the specific point is this, that what we have asked for and what he has asked for is including the allegations in the, articles of impeachment. Now, we have a recitation of facts. All well and good. I have no objection to it. But, I am saying--I am not talking, about facts or evidence. I am talking about allegations that ought to be included in the articles of impeachment, not a recitation here. If you want a recitation here, fine, but if these are the allegations, put the allegations in the articles of impeachment so we know what we are voting on, so that the respondent knows how to defend. Mr. HOGAN. I would say to my friend from New Jersey that he is--- Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Chairman----- Mr. HOGAN [continuing]. That he is free to offer amendments to the Sarbanes, substitute or to the Donohue resolution, inserting in the, kind of specificity, to use a much worn word, that he desires. We have advice from our expert counsel that it is not necessary. It is my own feeling that it is not necessary to have it in the impeachment resolution itself, although I do agree that we have a responsibility to shore UP the allegations in the impeachment resolution with factual evidentiary material and that is the effort, in which we are now engaged. Mr. SARBANES. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOGAN. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Railsback. Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Doar, I am -wondering if the, staff, pursuant to our discussions yesterday is preparing in effect what a amounts to a bill of particulars? Mr. DOAR. We are. We are; yes, we are, Mr. Congressman. Mr. RAILSBACK. You are. and are there going to be specific references to the item within each article? Mr. DOAR. Yes. Mr. RAILSBACK. Then, I am inclined frankly, Mr. Chairman, to agree, with Mr. Sandman that perhaps this is all a waste of time. In other words, I think we do know how we are going to vote. Is the bill of Particulars going to be submitted to us anyway for our approval or disapproval? Mr. DOAR. Well, I do not know what plans the chairman has. As I indicated yesterday, Mr. Congressman, this would be included as part of the proposed report. Mr. RAILSBACK. I thought Mr. Cohen did a fine job in laying out a lot of facts and I thought it was an excellent presentation. I just, wonder if perhaps this should not be done in another way so that we can move along? Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman Mr. HOGAN. I think I have the time I yield to the gentleman from Indiana and then to the gentleman from Mississippi. Mr. DENNIS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am really seeking recognition to speak on my own time on the amendment. Mr. HOGAN. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi. Mr. LOTT. I have one quick question, then. Mr. Doar, when will we get this bill of particulars? Mr. DOAR. Well, Mr. Congressman, as I say, it was our idea that we prepare this material as part of the proposed committee report and it would be up to the committee as to how that would be handled. Mr. DENNIS. Will the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. The time, of the gentleman from Maryland has expired. The gentleman from Indiana. [00.30.54]