Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
[01.14.43] Mr. SEIBERLING. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. DENNIS. I reserve my time, The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman cannot reserve his time. Mr. DENNIS. I do not yield. I The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman refuses to yield. The Chair notes that there is a rollcall vote in process on the floor and the Chair will recess the committee and continue the debate on this question and the recognition of members at 2 o'clock. AFTERNOON SESSION [01.15.29--dissolve to committee room after the recess] The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. At the time the committee recessed we were still considering the McClory article, III, as amended, and at the time there were eight members to speak in opposition of the article with 31/2 minutes for each member, and six members to speak in support. So, I will recognize now Mr. Eilberg for 31/2 minutes. Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Chairman, I think there is no justifiable defense for the President's refusal to comply with subpenas, I respectfully submit that if members now considering voting against approving this article of impeachment did not think the President should be disciplined or punished for refusing to comply with the subpenas, why did they vote for them in the first place? Is it not true that subpenas are, demands backed up by the threat of punishment for noncompliance? If not by impeachment, how can the President, as a practical matter, and I emphasize practical matter, be disciplined or punished for noncompliance? At no time has any reasonable argument been advanced for the President's refusal. His lawyer argued that the President has executive privilege in this matter. He said disclosure of these conversations could endanger the principle of confidentiality and threaten the ability of the President to conduct his business of his office. But, during, the impeachment of Andrew, Johnson there was a far-reaching inquiry into the conversations between that President and his aides. No information was withheld from the committee making that investigation and it could not' be argued that this resulted in any way in limiting any subsequent President's ability to communicate with his aides. No argument has been made which justifies any right of executive, privilege in an impeachment inquiry. No legal scholar of which I am aware, past or present, has argued that the President has the right to limit an impeachment inquiry into his conduct in any way except possibly by pleading the fifth amendment. However, the President's lawyer, James St. Clair said at his press conference. last week that the President would not claim the fifth amendment. By failure to adopt article III, we shall be unleashing a Presidency which has no limitations. The Framers of the Constitution put the power of impeachment into the Constitution to provide a check on the President. They knew that a President who could not be called to account for his actions might become a dictator-, and if we do not impeach Richard Nixon for - not cooperating with this investigation. we shall be giving up at least some of Congress' right to question the President's actions. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. [01.18.49]