Although now, we look back and say it is so obvious, at the time there was nothing obvious about it. It could have ended up being nothing, but as it worked out and turned out to be a very significant event. Im very happy i did have the opportunity. Host whod you know among the earliest recruits . Were some of your friends recruited . Ms. Winebanks yes. Wasirst boss, charles ross, one of my colleagues. He was on the Campaign Contribution team. In terms of the coverup up, i did not know anyone when i first started. After the number of years of 24 hour days, seven days a week, i know them all very, very well. Host tell us about the state of the case. It was a long time ago. The you started your job, assistant attorney, assistant u. S. Attorneys were working what was the state of the case . Do you remember . Ms. Winebanks there really was not much when we took over, but the hearings had started and john dean was soon to testify, shortly after we were formed, he testified. And his testimony
Covered the coverup trial. I understand people were convicted. But you need to understand that lawyers, lawyers donts play fair. They argue two things. They can argue, look, the person didnt do the crime. The person wasnt guilty. But usually in a political scandal the argument is there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Very high standard. Its not theyre blameless, its not theyre innocent. But we say wed rather let 100 guilty go free than convict one innocent man. So were were loading it to a very high standard. The other thing that lawyers argue, which the public sometimes has trouble with, is procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly, then it cant come in. If you didnt share exculpatory information properly with defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both. So, thats thats kind of what were going to go through. One word from last week. Last week was the allure of
Lawyers, lawyers donts play fair. They argue two things. They can argue, look, the person didnt do the crime. The person wasnt guilty. But usually in a political scandal the argument is there wasnt enough proof to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Very high standard. Its not theyre blameless, its not theyre innocent. But we say wed rather let 100 guilty go free than convict one innocent man. So were were loading it to a very high standard. The other thing that lawyers argue, which the public sometimes has trouble with, is procedure. If you didnt get that evidence into the courtroom properly, then it cant come in. If you didnt share exculpatory information properly with defense, those are procedural violations which can equally invalidate a verdict. And im happy to argue both. So, thats thats kind of what were going to go through. One word from last week. Last week was the allure of the white house tapes. And i went through a bunch of them with you, perhaps too fast. What i fi
give me a name like that but backwards is spelled suffer. and and i was the deputy chief counsel of the senate watergate committee under center sam irvin the man i m worship most in public life. and we were also proud to work for him. on may 17th 1973 out of this very room. chairman, sam irvin began hearing from the watergate scandal these hearings touched the heartstrings of america and ended up helping mold. what we thought would be the future of constitutional government. as then minority leader mike mansfield said no one in the entire senate was better equipped. to handle this thing called watergate than senator sam j irvin. i worked for center sam jay irvin for 10 years. and i can personally attest. that things were different then than they are now. civility reigned remember that word civility and all of and all the people who were here some 60 years ago know that that is the case. too much civility is absent today. consider the level of viteral and the political discour
anniversary of the watergate break-in. my my name is rufus edmiston. can t imagine my parents. give me a name like that but backwards is spelled suffer. and and i was the deputy chief counsel of the senate watergate committee under center sam irvin the man i m worship most in public life. and we were also proud to work for him. on may 17th 1973 out of this very room. chairman, sam irvin began hearing from the watergate scandal these hearings touched the heartstrings of america and ended up helping mold. what we thought would be the future of constitutional government. as then minority leader mike mansfield said no one in the entire senate was better equipped. to handle this thing called watergate than senator sam j irvin. i worked for center sam jay irvin for 10 years. and i can personally attest. that things were different then than they are now. civility reigned remember that word civility and all of and all the people who were here some 60 years ago know that that is the c