Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.16.58-BAKER continues the committee discussion of what evidence may properly be considered by the committee] Senator BAKER. I might say. Mr. Chairman, that by explaining my point of view. I have fallen into the trap that the chairman just, warned me against. He and I had a brief conversation a moment ago, and I am sure he will not think it, a breach of confidence to repeat it. He said, Howard, he said, do not try to explain--your friends do not require it and your enemies will not believe it. Senator ERVIN. I agree with you. I was not trying to explain, I was just trying to enlighten some of our commentators. I would like to put in the record a legal memorandum which sustains the points made by Mr. Dash. [01.17.36-THOMPSON checks into the debate, suggesting perhaps the committee ought to be more selective in accepting evidence] Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman, on that point. I do not want to belabor the matter If I am in error. I want to be corrected for my misinformation, but I think what Mr. Dash has said is completely correct. I think there might be one additional consideration. It goes to the point of admissibility under any circumstance about what this witness thought another man was thinking at any particular time, his mind as to what some, other individual was thinking or his impressions of his thoughts. and I think. that is a completely different matter. With that statement, I would like to subscribe to everything you and the, co-chairman and Mr. Dash have said. Senator ERVIN. I agree with you on that. Mr. DEAN. I just want to---- [01.18.19-ERVIN tells a HUMOROUS country ANECDOTE] Senator ERVIN. I am from near Watauga County in North Carolina, the county where Rufus Edmisten comes from. 'This man had been in court over in Boone, the county seat. He came back that night, and was in the country store and he mentioned the fact that he had been over to the court in Boone, and somebody asked him -what, was going on there. Well, he said, there was the judge sitting up there; there -was the jury sitting over in the jury box. And there were the lawyers. He said, some of the lawyers were objecting and others were excepting and the costs were piling up. [01.18.58] Senator BAKER. You know, Mr. Chairman. if this is storytelling time [LAUGHTER], my distinguished chairman is going to have to suffer for having Set the example for me. But in the course of all of our testimony, to the extent that we have conflicts in it, I am reminded of an old lawyer in Scott County, Tenn. named Haywood Pemberton who was employed to defend a man. He said, I have just shot a man, Haywood, will you defend me? He said, of course I will defend you. Did you kill him? He said, no, I have just wounded him. He said, that is all right, but just remember, he will be an awful hard witness against you. [LAUGHTER] [01.19.42] Senator ERVIN. I believe the, witness wants to make some observations. Then we will go to Senator Inouye. Mr. DEAN. I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, that as you know, I am here under compulsion of the committee and I have tried to withhold nothing from the committee at any time and I did not want these conversations to reflect, that there has been any hesitancy on this witness to answer any question put to him and to answer it fully and honestly. [01.20.15] Senator ERVIN. Senator Inouye? Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, I regret I have no Hawaiian stories to tell. [Applause.] Senator INOUYE,. Mr. Chairman, in order to avoid confusion, I wish to advise the Chair that the questions I am about to ask Mr. Dean were not prepared by the Office of the Counsel of the President. [01.20.46--Sen. INOUYE addresses previous testimony given by DEAN, regarding the climate of spying in the White House] Mr. Dean, I will refer to testimony received yesterday. To the following statement, you made your response. This is the statement: [QUOTING] Mr. Dean, you have. depicted all others in the White House as excessively Preoccupied with political intelligence, use of overt methods of security, and your-self as a restraining influence on these pre-occupations. And, Mr. Dean, this was your response: I do believe I was a restraining influence at the White House to many wild and crazy schemes. I have testified to some of them. Some of them I have not testified to. Many of the memorandums that came into my office became a joke; in fact, some of the things that were being suggested, I think if you talked to some of the other members of my staff or if your investigators would like to talk to them, they would tell -you some of two things that we would automatically file, just like the political enemies project. Many of these just went right into the file and never anything further until extreme, pressure was put on we to do something did I ever do anything. So I do feel I had some restraining influence. I did not have a disposition or like for this type of activity. [01.22.13]