Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.25.55] I recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Froehlich. Mr. FROEHLICH. . Mr. Chairman, my concern over the extended use of the wiretaps and the abusive use of the IRS have been fully developed here, this evening and today, and I, therefore, yield to the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Latta. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized. Mr. LATTA. Can I take my time now, Mr. Chairman.-' The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered, and the gentleman is so recognized. Mr. LATTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Froehlich for yielding to me. Mr. Chairman, if -we had not had all these -weeks of in-depth study on the evidentiary material I frankly would have a hard time making a judgment on this article after hearing all of these remarks that have been made by our colleagues, I think this probably is attributable to the fact that I believe in the history of the Congress that there has not been a committee that has studied so intently for or' such a long period of time and given such attention, and I do not believe we have ever had a committee in the Congress that has had better attendance, even be hind closed doors at committee sessions. And I want to commend you, Mr. Chairman, for the attention that, you have given and the direction that you have given in this committee. Certainly there are disagreements, and I think by now there is one thing on which we can all agree, however, and that is that, there are many areas of disagreement. And our vote depends on which into interpretation we place upon them. If we choose to view the President in a bad light, we can do that, and if we *choose to view him in a good light, there is ample evidence to permit us to do that. We have also learned this afternoon that a majority on this committee wishes to hold a President impeachable for actions of subordinates under subparagraphs 1 and 2, even though he had no knowledge of the action of said subordinates. Now, Mr. Chairman and members of this committee and fellow Americans, this bothers me tremendously. Mr. RAILSBACK. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. LATTA. I will be happy to yield. Mr. RAILSBACK. Thank you for yielding. You are not suggesting, I take it, that in respect to the subparagraph 1 relating to IRS that on September 15, there was no conversation between John Dean and the President at which time John Dean has testified that there was an extensive discussion about the IRS audits? Mr. LATTA. I have direct reference to the refusal of this committee to adopt the Wiggins amendment. Mr. Chairman, as I say, this bothers me tremendously, not only for now, but for the future. What we do here, will be written down as a precedent to be used in the future, and I'm not particularly concerned about the present occupant of the White House. I am most deeply concerned about the Office of the President of the United States, and -where that Office will be not 10 years from now or 20 years from now, but in generations to come, because I highly revere that office. It is the most respected office in all the world, and it is the most powerful. Nobody can deny the fact. that every nation on the face of this globe looks to the Oval Office of the, President of the United States, and what we are saying here is that we can impeach a, President for actions of his subordinates without his knowledge. And what can that do to the Office, of the President in the future, when you -can impeach for actions of a subordinate without his knowledge? As members of this committee know there, are approximately 3,900 employees at the Executive Office of the President. There are, 2,600,000 employees of the Federal Government. not counting the military. Could somebody down the line. years hence interpret our actions here that he would have to be held accountable, for any and all of these actions, even though he had no knowledge of them, because they are under his jurisdiction, under his administration, and technically they are? So, I think that -we must proceed with utmost caution, that 'We, weaken, that we weaken that office that we hold so dear. [01.31.22]