Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.25.23] The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired. The gentleman of from California is seeking recognition Mr. WIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, the article having been read, is it open for amendment at any place? the CHAIRMAN-. The article open for amendment at any point. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, Mr. WIGGINS. I am prepared to offer an amendment, but if we are going to have general debate on the article I will withhold. The CHAIRMAN. If the gentleman will defer? Mr. WIGGINS. Surely. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. CHAIRMAN. The CHAIRMAN, Mr. McClory. Mr. McCLORY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized at this point to discuss generally this proposed article of impeachment. It seems to me that this really gets at the crux of our responsibilities here. It directs our attention directly to the President's constitutional oath and his constitutional obligation. There is nothing mysterious about this, and there, is nothing, evil and Malicious about it. It directs the attention directly to this responsibility that is and has been reposed in the President. This certainly is no bill of attainder. We care not thinking this up to as an offense and then charging the President with a violation of it. We are calling the President's attention to the facts that he took an oath of office, and that he had in his oath of office a solemn obligation to see to the of faithfully of execution of the laws. This is quite different and distinct from the elements of criminality that are involved in article I charging the President with a conspiracy, and with all kinds of criminal acts of misconduct and obstruction of justice and so on--an article which I did not support because I do not believe the facts support that kind of charge. Now. some of those who have been expressing themselves in support of article I clearly have included feelings of deep hostility, and bitterness and political bias. On my part, article II, based on 'the take care clause of the Constitution which specifies a solemn obligation of the President to take care to see to the faithful execution of the laws, I want to make perfectly clear that I harbor no malice, I attribute no evil thoughts or conduct to the President of the United States. I express no bitterness, no hostility. What I do want to make clear that the President is bound by his solemn oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and to take care to see that the laws are faithfully executed. While many of the paragraphs contained in article II may appear similar to those that are found in article II, which I opposed, it important to note carefully that the pattern of conduct which is delineated in article II is quite distinguishable from that in a article I. For one thing, I would point out there is no clear proof In The fact that, others surrounding the President have been guilty of acts of gross misconduct. However, there is a clear violation of the President's responsibility when he permits multiple acts of wrongdoing by large numbers of those who surround him in possession of greatest, responsibility and influence in the White House. The establishment of the Plumbers, and many of the attributed to them are wholly unrelated to the Watergate, and that is the same case -with respect, to his misuse of the FBI and the CIA and the IRS. Nothing to do with Watergate for the most part. But these clear acts of misconduct which, it seems to me, are important for us to take note of. In other words, the acts and conduct upon which I feel an article of impeachment should be presented to our colleagues is strictly constitutional, which relates narrowly and directly to The President himself and his personal oath of office. While this article may seem less dramatic and less sensational the Watergate break-in and coverup, it is nevertheless a positive and specific responsibility, and a positive and responsible approach to our power On our part as investigators of misconduct. One purpose of the impeachment process, it seems to me, is to Set a constitutional standard for persons occupying The office of the President. Thus. if we approach our task in constitutional terms, we will be setting such a standard. I view the duty of the House of Representatives as something other than serving as a district courthouse to hold the President accountable for statutory violations of the criminal law. I think we can agree that the President should not commit crimes, If we are to set a constitutional standard, we must take a different view of the facts. We must phrase our charges in constitutional terms so that the Presidents to come may know what is meant by our actions. If we are to establish our proceedings as a guide for future Presidents, we should speak- in terms of the Constitution and specifically in terms of the President's oath and his obligation under the Constitution. It Will be of limited value to admonish a future President not to obstruct to justice or engage In a coverup. However it will aid future Presidents to know this Congress and this House Judiciary Committee will hold them to an oath of office and an obligation to take care to see that the laws are faithfully executed. I realize that there is no nice way to impeach a President of the United States. I realize also that the distinction between the criminal conspiracy theory of article I and the purely constitutional aspects of article II may be misunderstood. But, its a member of this committee, the most I can do is to exercise my independent, judgment and to search deeply my own conscience. Both reason and wisdom dictate the judgement I am going to make in support of this article II is right. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The time of gentleman has expired. Under the rules of Jefferson's Manual and the rules of the House. The chair IS constrained to state that perfecting amendments take precedence, and the Chair did state this. The members, however, who want to speak to the substitute will have their time reserved for them. I am going to recognize at this time those members who wish to Offer perfecting amendments. [00.31.45]