i had interned for her, i think after my first year, maybe and again, i think that s right, i wanted to go to work with her so i moved to cambridge and began working, doing investigations and litigation around issues like the incarceration of juveniles with adults in adult prisons or the effort to give tax exempt status to private segregated academies so they didn t have to pay taxes issues like that. expanding childcare, getting better conditions for migrant workers. that s the kind of work we were doing. and that s what i started doing when i graduated and went right to cambridge to work for her. please tell us about the call from sec. clinton: this is a very funny series of actions. i was down visiting bill in arkansas, i think it was right after christmas, if i remember. either right before or after. bill s phone raining and rang and he got a call from john door. and john door said, i have been asked to put together a team of lawyers for the house judiciary commit
unless we fulfill our obligations as these fallible human beings in this genius of a governmental structure, our obligation and our duty is to impeach this president that this country might get about doing its business the way it should do and pursuant to standards that have been set for this country since its beginning. thank you. i recognize the gentleman from mississippi, mr. lott for general debate. thank you, mr. chairman. for a period not to exceed 15 minutes. thank you. this has truly been an awesome, time consuming and exhaustive task and i wonder if any of us can really appreciate what this moment in history can mean to the future of our country. while at various points along the way i ve been somewhat disgusted with this committee proceedings such as when we spend an hour earlier this week trying to decide not whether or not we should have television cramps but whether or not to have lights for the television cameras i must admit in alcan didness it has been
has in fact either authorized the bake in or personal the cover up. we were persuaded beyond a convincing case that he should stand trial in the political sense of having to have a trial in the senate but nobody felt great about it. most people get burdened. they didn t want to. we felt there was no alternative. we were the elected officials and had a duty to see whether the highest officer in the country had breached his duty. william cohen, 1974, a republican member of the house judiciary committee. thank you for being with us. thank you for being with us on cspan s 3 american history tonight. tv 8:00 eastern time sunday evening we will continue our look at house judiciary committ committee. our coverage of the 40th anniversary of water gate continues including debate over article two which charge nixon of abuse with power. you will also hear from the forrer director of the library and museum and explains how the committee s vote affecting our understanding of president
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 i m about to reconsider my assignment now that we have had amnesty, abortion, impeachment and now a bomb threat. let me say tha
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 34-year-old 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 affi