United States. Congress. House. Committee on the J.

Impeachment inquiry : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-third Congress, second session, pursuant to H. Res. 803 ... (Volume bk. 3) online

. (page 1 of 93)
Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JImpeachment inquiry : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-third Congress, second session, pursuant to H. Res. 803 ... (Volume bk. 3) → online text (page 1 of 93)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


School of Law
Library



Z22222^^^^^^^



IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY



HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NINETY-THIKD CONGKESS

SECOND SESSION

PURSUANT TO

H. Res. 803

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY TO INVESTIGATE

WHETHER SUFFICIENT GROUNDS EXIST FOR THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO EXERCISE ITS

CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO IMPEACH

RICHARD M. NIXON

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



Book III



JUNE 20-JULY 23, 1974



ULf,^<?7/| ■,:I,v^ -7/1O W=-'




U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
41-018 WASHINGTON : 1975



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $6.35

Stock Number 052-070-02722



PJAnn If- « 0-7 - .^ .



COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
PETER W. RODIXO, Jr., New Jersey. Chairman



HAROLD D. DONOHUE, Massachusetts
JACK BROOKS, Texas
ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, Wisconsin
IJOX EDWARDS, California
WILLIAM L. IIUXGATE. Missouri
JOHN CONYERS. Ju., Michigan
JOSHUA EII>BERG, I'ennsylvania
JEROME R. WALDIE, California
WALTER FLOWERS, Alal)ania
JAMES R. MANX, South Carolina
PAUL S. SARBANES. Maryland
JOHN F. SEIBERLING, Ohio
GEORGE E. DANIELSON, California
ROBERT F. DRINAxV, Massachusetts
CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York
BARBARA JORDAN, Texas
RAY THORNTON, Arkansas
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, New York
WAYNE OWENS. Utah
EDWARD MEZVINSKY, Iowa



EDWARD HUTCHINSON, Michigan
ROBERT McCLORY. Illinois
HENRY P. SMITH III. New York
CHARLES W. SANDMAN, Jit., New Jersey
TOM RAILSBACK, Illinois
CHARLES E. WIGGINS, California
DAVID W. DENNIS, Indiana
HAMILTON ITSH, Jr., New York
WILEY MAYNE. Iowa
LAWRENCE J. HOGAN, Maryland
M. CALDWELL BUTLER, Virginia
WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine
TRENT I-OTT. Mississippi
HAROLD V. FROEHLICH, Wisconsin
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
JOSEPH J. MARAZITI, New Jersey
DELBERT L. LATTA, Ohio



.Terome M. Zeifmam. GenerdJ Counsel

Garner J. Cline, Associate General Counsel

Alan A. Parker, Counsel

Daniel L. Cohen, Counsel

William P. Dixon, Coinist I

Ardex p.. Schell, Assistant Counstl

Franklin G. Polk, Associate Counsel

Thomas E. Mooxey, Associate Counsel

Michael W. Blommer, Associate Counsel



>







Impeachment Inqxjiry Staff

John Doar, Special Counsel

Albert E. Jexxer, Jr., Special Counsel to tlie Minority

Joseph A. Woods, Jr., Senior Associate Special Counsel

Richard Cates, Settlor Associate Special Counsel

Bernard W. Nussbaum, Senior Associate Special Counsel

Robert D. Sack, Senior Associate Special Counsel

Robert A. Shelton, Associate Special Counsel

Samuel Garrison III, Deputy Minority Counsel



Fred H. Altshuler, Counsel
Thomas Bell, Counsel
W. Paul Bishop, Counsel
Robert L. Brown, Counsel
Michael M. Conway, Counsel
RuFus Cormier, Special Assistant
E. lyEE Dale, Counsel
John B. Davidson, Counsel
Evan A. Davis, Counsel

COXSTANTINE J. GEKAS, CoUnscl

Richard H. Gill, Counsel
Dagmar Hamilton, Counsel
David Hanes, Special Assistant
John E. Kennahan, Counsel
Terry R. Kirkpatrick, Counael
John R. Labovitz, Counsel
Lawrence Lucchino, Counsel
R. L. Smith McKeithen, Counsel
Alan Marer, Counsel



Robert P. Murphy, Counsel
James B. F. Oliphant, Counsel
Richard II. Porter, Counsel
George Rayborn, Counsel
James Reum, Counsel
Hillary D. Rodham, Counsel
Stephen A. Sharp, Counsel
Eileen Silverstein, Counsel
Jared Stamell, Counsel
RoscoB B. Starek III, Counsel
Gary W. Sdtton, Counsel
Edward S. Szukelewicz, Counsel
Robert J. Trainor, Counsel
J. Stephen Walker, Counsel
Ben a. Wallis, Jr., Counsel
William Weld, Counsel
William A. White, Counsel
John S. Whitman, Counsel ,



(TL)



CONTENTS



HEARING DAYS

Pago

Thursday, June 20, 1974 1455

Friday, June 21, 1974 1507

Monday, June 24, 1974 1531

Tuesday, June 25, 1974 (business meeting) 1571

Tuesday, June 25, 1974 (executive session) 1591

Wednesday, June 26, 1974 (business meeting) 1621

Wednesday, June 26, 1974 (executive session) 1629

Thursday,' June 27, 1974 1719

Friday, June 28, 1974 1773

Monday, July 1, 1974 __ 1867

Thursday, July 18, 1974 1883

Friday, July 19, 1974 _ _ 1023

Saturday, July 20, 1974 1957

Monday, July 22, 1974 (executive session) 2035

Monday, July 22, 1974 (business meeting) 2053

Monday, July 22, 1974 (executive session) 2081

Tuesday, July 23, 1974 (business meeting) ' 2105

Tuesday, July 23, 1974 (executive session) 2131

Appendices:

Appendix I. — Work of the Impeachment Inquiry Staff as of February 5,

1974 : :._ 2135

Appendix II. — Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,

Report by the Staff of the Impeachment Inquiry 2157

Appendix III. — ^Procedures for Handling Impeachment Inquirr

Material \ 2219

Appendix IV. — Work of the Impeachment Inquiry Staff as of March 1,

1974 2223

Appendix V.— Status Report as of April 24, 1974 2237

Appendix VI. — Impeachment Inquiry Procedures 2249

Appendix VII. — Donohue Resolution and Articles of Impeachment 2253

(III)



IMPEACH3IENT INQUIRY

Executive Session



THUBSDAY, JUNE 20, 1974

House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, D.G.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 :25 a.m., in room 2141,
Ray burn House Office Building, Hoii. Peter W. Rodino, Jr. (chair-
man) presiding.

Present: Representatives Rodino (presiding), Donohue, Brooks,
Kastenmeier, Edwards, Hungate, Conyers, Eilberg, Waldie, Flowers,
Mann, Sarbanes, Seiberling, Danielson, Drinan, Rangel, Jordan,
Thornton, Holtzman, Owens, ISIezvinsky, Hutchinson, McClory, Smith,
Sandman, Railsback, Wiggins, Dennis, Fish, ]Mayne, Hogan, Butler,
Cohen, Lott, Froehlich, Moorhead, Maraziti, and Latta.

Impeachment inquiry staff present: John Doar, special counsel;
Albert E. Jenner, Jr., special counsel to the minority ; Samuel Garrison
III, deputy minority counsel ; Bernard W. Nussbaum, senior associate
special counsel; Evan A. Davis, counsel; Richard H. Gill, counsel;
R. L. Smith McKeithen, counsel; James B. F. Oliphant, counsel;
George Rayborn, counsel; Hillary D. Rodham, counsel; Gary W.
Sutton, counsel; William A. "White, counsel; Fred G. Folsom, tax
consultant; Robert McGraw, investigator; and Jonathan Flint, re-
search assistant.

Committee staff present: Jerome M. Zeifman. general counsel;
Garner J. Cline, associate general counsel; and Franklin G. Polk,
associate counsel.

Also present: James D. St. Clair, special counsel to the President;
John A. McCahill, assistant special counsel.

The Chairman. Before we proceed, before we hear from Mr. Doar,
I would like to take this opportunity to extend a happy birthday wish
to our counsel, Mr. Albert Jenner. I know that even though this is
another year, he is as young and as blithe in spirit as anything. So
many happy returns of the day. [Applause.]

Mr. Jenner. Mr. Chairman, for the convenience of the members,
you have received two documents in your envelope. They go in tab 49 ^
[50] ■' in the book and tab 62 [63]. Tab 62 [63] is the letter from

1 Note. — The tab numbers cited throughout the three volumes of executive sessions refer
to paragraphs in previously printed publications of the Committee on the Judiciary entitled
"Statement of Information" consisting of 12 books containing 21 separate volumes and
"Statement of Information Submitted on Behalf of President Nixon", 4 books, all released
by the Committee on the Judiciary during July and August, 1974.

2 The paragraphs of book IV were renumbered prior to publication. The numbers In
brackets refer to the paragraph numbers in the printed volume.

(1455)



1456

Mr. Cox to Mr. SliaH'ci- and paragrapli 49 [50] is the court of aj^peals
decision.

Mr. Edwards. Mr. Chairman, I would like to direct an inquiry to
the Chair.

On national television last ni<i:ht, Mr, St. Clair advocated that all of
the presentment to date made over the past 4 or 5 weeks In- the staff
to the committee be made public, be put on the public record. i\Iy
question to the Chair is is this a request in writino- from Mr. St. Clair
on behalf of the respondent ?

The Cjiairmax. Well, the Chair will advise the gentleman that so
far as he recollects, ]Mr. St. Clair sometime back— I do not recall when,
but there was a letter that was addressed to the Chair by Mr. St. Clair,
in whicli he pointed out that there had been some material that had
been leaked out, to use the word. I do not know that he used that
word, but that was the tenor of the letter, and in the light of those
leaks, that they were prejudicial and that Mr. St. Clair made a request
of the committee that v>e would not onh^ conduct our sessions in public
view and openly, but that we would also make public whatever mate-
rial had been developed. I believe that that was the letter that was
addressed to us sometime ago.

Do you recall, Mr. Doar I

Mr. Doar. Yes; we did receive such a letter that all material received
in executive session be made public. We received that letter.

The CiiAiRMAx. But the committee, of course, decided otherwise.

jMr. Edwards. Thank vou.

The Chairman. Of course, remember, this is going to be an item
that is going to be discussed in one of the business meetings tliat will
be, I think, taking place sometime early next week, the question as to
whether or not material will be made public, what material, if any,
will be made public tliat has been developed in these executive sessions.

Before asking Mr. Doar to proceed with today's presentation, I
vrould like to call attention to the fact that this morning's report
respecting the deductions taken b}' the President for the gift of papers
contains 10 exhibits of documents which Ave have obtained from the
IRS. I would like to point out that in my indgment, it would be
improper to release these documents at this time. The committee mem-
bers, I know, must have these in connection with the report that is
in front of the book. However, there has been a recommendation on the
part of counsel — I believe that it is absolutely imperative that we take
the report respecting the deductions out of the front of the book
and then have them pick up the notebooks at the end of the preserita-
tion so that these do not get out to the newspapers. I think when the
committee votes what documents to make public, it can then revicAV
these documents and edit them and summarize them in whatever Ava}'
they feel they Avant to make them available for publication if the
committee so decides.

I Avould seriously adviee cA'cry mc]ul)er in the light of Avhathas been,
I am sure, called to tlie attention of CA-eryone here, the fact tliat the
question of leaks has become something that I think CA'ery member of
this committee ought to a'Icav very seriously, since I must say that I
believe it is not only unfortunate, but I think it is doing the committee
a great disservice.



1457

Mv. McClory. ]\Ir. Chairman, may I just concur in what j'ou have
just said and admonish all members, Republicans and Democrats alike,
that the vei-y reputation of this committee is at stake and is threatened
by the leaks which have emanated from the committee. I am hopeful
that we can have that well in mind, because I think that even more
important, perhaps, than the decision we make is the respect of this
committee and the reputation of this committee before the American
people.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Mr. Doar.

Mr. Doar. Mr. Chairman, after I sent you that memorandum this
morninii" with respect to the documents, I called Commissioner Alex-
ander just to verify the status of documents which were received
under the executive order. He called my attention to section 301.6109
(a) and (b) of the regidations. Those sections provide that any in-
formation — and that is the information we are presenting this morn-
ing — obtained from the IIiS by such committee or subcommittee shall
be held confidential, provided, however, that any portion thereof rel-
evant or pertinent to the purpose of the investigation may be sub-
mitted by the investigating committee to the appropriate House of
the Congress.

Thei'efore. under the regulations, it would be my judgment that the
committee would not — should hold these documents — that is, tlie docu-
ments themselves — confidential until they submit their report and that
when the lecord is made public, that the documents be summarized
in some fashion if the committee feels that they are pertinent to the
presentation.

Now, we would like to distribute these documents for the members
of the committee. This report contains in the front of the book a report
respecting the deductions taken by the President in connection with
his gift of pre-Presidential papers. The deduction was taken in tlie
\ears 1969 through 197:2.

In the back of the book are the 10 exhibits to which you and I have
heretofore referred. The material is detachable and the report in the
front of the book summarizes the data that we have.

With me this morning are tAvo members of the staff, one of whom
you have met before : Bernie Nussbaiun of the bar of the State of
New York, and Smith A[cKeithen, also of the bar of the State of
New York, whom you have not met before.

Also, in connection with the tax matter, with your authority, act-
ing under ^'our authority, we hired two tax consultants to advise with
tlie staff in connection with this matter that is a special field of law.
AVe have one of those consultants with us this morning. He is sitting
at my far left. That is Fred G. Folsoin, who is a member of the bar
of the State of Colorado since 1939. He served in the Tax Division
of the Department of Justice from February 1948 through December
1972. He was a section chief of the Criminal Section of the Tax
Division for a good many years. Fie is here to participate in the
piesentat ion and answer questions that the committee members may
have Avith respect to this matter.

Now, there are a couple of matters that I would like to call to the
conunittce members' attention about this presentation before we



1458

begin. The first is that this presentation is somewhat different than
the other presentations that we have made to date. First : The presen-
tation is not based on sworn testimony. It is based, however, on care-
ful work by the Joint Committee on Taxation, which is this book that
all of 3^ou have. I believe that they were sent to your office. If they
were not, we have some moi'e books here this morning.

Mr. Seiberling. Some are different.

Mr. DoAR. It is a different color, but they are the same book.

Also, the staff has conducted interviews, not under oath, but has
conducted interviews of a number of witnesses in connection with the
gift of the pre-Presidential papers. We can advise the committee
members just which witnesses we interviewed and the nature and
substance of their statements.

The second thing is that with respect to the action by the President
in connection with his income taxes, distinctions have been made
between official and unofficial conduct of the President in connection
with whether or not conduct, particular conduct, is or is not grounds
for impeachment. In this case, of course, the filing of a tax return is
unofficial conduct. The President does this as a taxpayer. There is
no special responsibility with respect to sianiug the return or no
special authority because he is President of the United States.

The third thing is that every taxpayer who signs a tax return or
who earns a particular amount of income, a very modest amount of
income, is subject to potential criminal liability if he willfully at-
tempts to defeat or evade a tax; stating it in layman- s language, if
he cheats on his income tax return or if he signs a return knowing" that
tliere are false material statements contained on the return. There
are Federal criminal statutes applicable to all taxpayers, all citizens,
in that regard.

The other matter is that, and this is for each member to decide, in
evaluating the question of grounds for impeachment, one matter that
the committee members will have to consider is whether or not a fail-
ure by the President to meet his constitutional duty to take care that
the laws be faithfully executed is grounds for impeachment. In looking
at the conduct of the President with respect to a number of matters,
it is for your consideration to make up your mind one way or tho
other, it seems to me, whether or not the conduct of the President witli
respect to his filing of his income tax returns might or might not
constitute part of a total course of conduct that Avould or would not
warrant a conclusion by individual members of this committee that
the President of the United States failed to take care to see to it that
the laws of the United States were faithfully executed, contrary to his
constitutional duty and to his oath that the President takes when he
assumes office.

Xow, I mention that because I think in fairness, when you get into
income tax matters, we have to discuss some matters tliat are of con-
siderable public interest, and I urge on all of you the importance of
reserving judgm.ent about this particular matter until you have heard
all of the presentation and considered whatever materials or matters
that the President may wish to present in connection therewith, be-
cause we are going to have to, in making this presentatiori, call your
attention to criminal statutes, call your'attention to procedures* and



1459

standards that are followed, generally followed by the Department of
Justice in reviewing conduct by the ordinary taxpayer in connection
with the filing of income tax returns.

]Mr. McClory. ISIr. Chairman, may I just ask this? I do not want to
open up a can of worms here.

The Chairiman. Mr. McClory.

Mr. McClory. What you are telling us is something that might have
application with respect to other parts of this case? You are just sug-
gesting for our consideration that this subject of the President's re-
sponsibility to see that the laws are faithfully executed is something
for us to consider in this connection ; what you are also telling us, are
you not, is that that might be something for consideration with re-
spect to other aspects of this total inquiry ?

Mr. DoAR. Yes, I am.

Mr. Latta. Mr. Chairman?

The Chairman. Mr. Latta.

Mr. Latta. To my knowledge, this is the first time Mr. Nussbaumhas
appeared before this committee?

JNIr. DoAR. Xo, Mr. Nussbaum has been here with me in connection
with the preparation of subpenas, in connection with other matters.
This is not the first time he has been here.

Mr. Latta. Do we have a biographical sketch or could we have a bio-
graphical sketch of Mr. Nussbaum ?

Mr. DoAR. Certainly, but I would be happy to just outline that for
you now.

Mr. Nussbaum is a resident of the State of New York. He lives in one
of the suburbs of New York. He graduated from Harvard Law School
with honors in 19G1. He was on the Harvard Law Review there.

Pie then joined the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District
of Now York, and he worked in the Southern District of New York
for 5 or 6 years, both as a trial lawyer and as an, either a deputy or
section chief in the Criminal Appeals Section of the Department of
Justice, U.S. attorney's office, in the Southern District of New York.

Since then, he has been a partner in a leading firm of 30 or 40 lawyers
in the city of New York and has had a distingiiished record in connec-
tion with the preparation and trial of all sorts of civil cases. His prac-
tice has been largely civil since he left the U.S. attorney's office.

He is also a teacher, an instructor at the Columbia Law School.

IVIr. ]SIcClory. Will the gentleman yield ?

]Mr. Latta. I will be happy to yield.

]Mr. IMcClory. Was Mr. Nussbaum formerly attorney for one of the
members of this committee in connection with some litigation?

Mr. DoAR. Yes, at one time. He represented Ms. Holtzm.an in con-
nection witli an election contest in the Borough of Brooklyn.

Mr. McClory. He is not currently representing any member of this
committee ?

Mr. DoAR. No ; he is not currently representing Ms. Holtzman. Ms.
Holtzman for a short time, as I understand it. was an associate of
the firm that ]Mr. Nussbaum w^as a partner in. He represented her in
connection with just the ordinary professional assignments he had. He
is a friend of Ms. Holtzman's, but the relationship vras professional
in this case, and it was finished at the time that T interviewed ]Mr.
Nussbaum for this.



1460

!^^l^ McClory. He vron the case?

]\Is. PToLTZMAX. Oh, he did.

^Ir. Latta. One further question. Wh.en was ho appointed to t]ie
Southern District of Xew York ?

The Ctiairmax. I am sorry; I think that this line of questioning
is certainly not in ordei-. Mr. Nussbauin's biographical sketch, along
with the biogi'npliical sketches of all other members of tlie statl' are
iiicluded in a document that has been before this committee and I
would advise the gentleman if he is interested to inquire into that
document.

Mr. Latta. I might advise the chairman that I am interested and
I will advise it thoroughly.

Mr. Sarbaxes. ]Mr. Cliaii'man, I think the point ought to be made
on this point that Mr. Xussbaum was presented, as I recall, to the
committee at an earlier time, at the very outset. With due respect to
the gentleman from Oliio. this has happened before. Xow, maybe the
gentleman is not aware of it, but I do thijik that the thrust of his
question misses an important simple factual matter. Mr. Nussbaum
was presented to the committee, as I recall, at the very outset, when
we met a number of the principal attorneys in this matter and Ins
lnogra]5hy was included, it is my recollection, in the initial biograplii-
cal material furnished to the members of the committee.

Is that not correct ?

]Mr. r)oAR. That is cori'ect.

The Ctiairmax. ]\Is. Holtzman.

!Ms. HoLTZMAX. Thank you. Mr. Cliairman. I would just like to
cori'ect the record in one respect. That is that the firm that IMr. Nuss-
baum is a member of represented me and not — that was the capacity
in Avhich Mr. Xussbaum Avas associated with my case.

Tlie riiAiR:\rAX. ]\Ir. Doar.

]\Ir. DoAR. ]\Ir. Xussbaum will make the initial presentatioii with
i'es]:)ect to tliis matter and go througli this, review this notebook with
you. Also. Mr. McTveithen will participate in tl);!t presentation.

The CiiAiRMAX. Mr. Xussbaum.

]\Ir. XussBAi'M. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.

The report that the committee has in front of it is basically divided
into two sections. The first section is a sequence of events respecting
the deduction for the years 1069 through 1072 for a gift of pre-
Presidential papers. The gift claim having been made on March 27.
1060. That is the first section.

Tlie second section of the re]:)ort is a sequeiice of events respectino-
the reo))enin2: of the President's tax returns in 1073. Xow. as ]Mr.
Doar indicated, we are not going to do this in a normal fashion. This
has not been structured in a para.Q-ra]5h form but in a report form.
"What T intend to do basicallv is just simplv go down some of the
In.o-ldights of tlie report and bring them to the attention of tlie com-
mittee. The committee will be able to take the rejiort itself after this
meeting- and rend it in more detail. T do not purport to cover every
1'>articidav fact in this report. T am ju.st sort of ffoiug to tell the story
the wav the report tells tlie story — or tvx to tell tlie story. T will be
refen-in.of from time to time tr> certain documents, both of which are
attached as exhibits to the leport itself — the repoj-t we are giving to



1461

the conimitteo— as "wcjI as exhibits whicli are attached to the joint
committee report.

Now, I sliould sa_y at the outset tliat tliis report Avas based on the
followino; things:

It was based on the joint committee report, whicli is very extensive
as the members know, whicli is based on materials obtained by the
joint committee, w^hicli they consented to let us view, members of our
staff. It is based on the IRS audit report and materials which the
IKS has supplied to us from I'ecent days.

It is also based on interviews that the staff has conducted of the
major or the principal fig-ures in this story, namely. Frank De^farco,
Avho was the President's tax attorney and a partner of Herbert Kalm-
T)acli; Edward ^Morgan, who was a deputy counsel to the President;
Ivalph Newman who is an appraiser and appraised the pre-Presiden-
tial papers; Mr. Blech, who is an accountant for the Presi-
dent; Richard Ritzel, who is an attorney, a partner in the President's
former law firm in New York, and. ^Ir. Alexander, who is present



Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JImpeachment inquiry : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-third Congress, second session, pursuant to H. Res. 803 ... (Volume bk. 3) → online text (page 1 of 93)