Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.28.14] Mr. WIGGINS. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman an ? Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding- I rise also in support of this amendment and honestly, I would hope that the proponents of the amendment would accept this or the proponents of the article would accept this amendment. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak in opposition to the amendment for this reason: It strikes me that the break-in of the Democratic Headquarters is only part and in my opinion only a small part of the misdeeds, the misconduct which is attributable to these aides and assistants of the President, and where the President through these individuals attempted to impede the investigation of the Department of Justice and to otherwise interfere or frustrate the lawful inquiries. For one thing, certainly the break-in of Dr. Fielding's office and the events surrounding that are far more reprehensible in my opinion. The Watergate--the break-in at the DNC is a political matter but the other is unrelated to any political campaign and there are a number of other activities that I suppose they Could be all delineated but I think they are all well known. Now, it is possible that some other appropriate language which Would cover this would be adequate instead of just the blanket phrase "other matters." A great deal of this does arise from the break-in of the Democratic Headquarters, In other words, while that seemed to generate this sort of clandestine operation which took place in the White House, nevertheless, it was only a small part of the overall activities in which all of these different characters were involved and I would hope, either that we would retain this language or that, some appropriate more explicit, language would be offered in order to cure what the gentleman feels is too much of a generalization. Mr. HOGAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. McCLORY. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hogan. Mr. HOGAN. I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. McClory. While I think it would be preferable in the drafting of this clause if we did include more specific terms, there are many more items than the break-in of the Democratic National Committee. But, I think this argument of specificity that my friends and colleagues have so effectively and articulately made is, in effect, a red herring because we should not delude ourselves into thinking the deliberations we are now engaged in is a presentation of the evidence. We do not intend to duplicate the 10 weeks of evidentiary hearings which brought us to this point. We are only trying in the most general way to give a summary of the kinds of arguments which support the various paragraphs in the article. We are not presenting the evidence. I will vote against the amendment of the gentleman from California, but I do hope that some of our draftsmen who are supporting article II will jot some additional specifics and offer some additional amendments so we can clarify the objection raised by the gentleman from California. Mr. McCLORY. I yield to the gentleman from Maine. Mr. COHEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to follow up on the line of reasoning of Mr. Hogan and inquire of the gentleman who drafted this article as to whether or not he was prepared, as we have been prepared in the past, to list a number, of specific instances to -which you are referring, in addition to the break-in into Dr. Fielding's office. I think that of particular concern, might be the matter that Mr. Hogan mentioned just prior to the break and that was the activities involving the transfer of FBI -records to' the Oval Office at the direction of the President. Could the gentleman from Missouri help us out in that regard as to whether or not be would be in a position to delineate some of the specific items upon which he intends to rely upon for the proof of this case? [01.33.01]