And my colleagues on this committee know full well that we cannot escape history. That the decision we must jointly make will itself be tested and tried by our fellow citizens, and by history itself. The magnitude of our mission is awesome. Theres no way to understate its importance. Nor to mistake its meaning. We have unsheathed the strongest weapon in the arsenal of congressional power. We personally, members of this committee, have felt its weight, and have perceived its dangers. The framers of the constitution, fearing an executive too strong to be contained, and constrained from injustice or subject to reproof arrayed the congress with the power to bring the executive into account, and into peril of removal for acts of treason, bribery, or other crimes of high and misdemeanors. Now the first responsibility facing members of this committee was to try to define what an Impeachable Offense is. The constitution doesnt define it. The precedents, which are sparse, do not give us any rea
Now, the purpose of any media to make the news, it is the purpose and the objective of the media to fairly report the news. Now to say as however, many weeks, everything that nixon knew, thats not proof. And i want to pose a point. I wonder what the prosecutor in the United States senator is going to do. I wonder what hes going to do. Is he going to plead his whole case on tapes because he cant use any of the witnesses we have. Any one of them testified no act of wrong doing on the part of the president. If you dont think so, go through the lot. Who is the man who handled the money. Louisiana rue, was there any involvement by the president . To the man who received the money, the attorney, did your client make any threat to get clemency from the president or any of his agents . The answer, no. As to the man who supposedly directed the payment of the money, the answer, no. Now with these kind of witnesses how do you prove that case before the senate . Is there a soul here who honestly b
Mr. Railsback . Chairman, thank you, and members of the committee by saying that you, mr. Chairman, i think in a rather difficult assignment with you because you know on many occasions i think you have handled yourself very well. And i think i can say for the most members of the committee that during these six months through the 38 volumes of evidence, the listening to the live witnesses morning, afternoon and night that i can be proud of my judiciary colleagues, most of them. I feel badly as Charlie Sandman did about the leaks, the selective leaks, some of which i think the newspapers made a mistake in playing. Although i know they have a job. I used to like to be on the House Judiciary Committee when we were worried about penal reform and juvenile delinquency, trying to improve some very important things in our country that needed improving, but im about to reconsider my assignment now that we have had amnesty, abortion, impeachment and now a bomb threat. Let me say that im one of th
Honestly believes that 67 out of 100 senators are willing to accept this kind of evidence. I dont think so. And i think this is why were here. This remaining someone, somehow will point out the fact that im only human and im not infallible. Maybe i overlooked something. Maybe there is a tiein with the president. All right, theres 37 of you. Give me that information. Give me the tool, because up to this moment, you havent. Thank you. I recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. Ralsback for purposes of debate only not to exceed 15 minutes. Mr. Railsback . Chairman, thank you, and members of the committee by saying that you, mr. Chairman, i think in a rather difficult assignment with you because you know on many occasions i think you have handled yourself very well. And i think i can say for the most members of the committee that during these six months through the 38 volumes of evidence, the listening to the live witnesses morning, afternoon and night that i can be proud of my judiciary
What group might be willing, or against to vote impeachment, who might come that morning. Met jim mann and talked to him for the first time. Waldon flowers and talked to him time. E first and Caldwell Butler and we met at that point and said is there we really allthat of us could agree on. Either an constitute process, abuse of say, and we went through all of the evidence that pretty convincing knew think at that point i who was voting for and who least their inclination and we went public respectivey with our speeches. You were a 34yearold from maine and a republican so a member of your by party facing impeachment a committee you served on. It was not a happy moment. Distressed through the. I knew it would be the most beortant decision i would called upon to make. I tried to be as well prepared as i could. The previous six years, three as a prosecutor, three as a defense attorney so my focus and analyzinge the evidence without regard to oritical affiliation hadisan affiliation and i s