[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapters 10 - 14]
[Chapter 14. Impeachment Powers]
[D. History of Proceedings]
[Â§ 15. Impeachment Proceedings Against President Nixon]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 2167-2195]
 
                               CHAPTER 14
 
                           Impeachment Powers
 
                       D. HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS
 
Sec. 15. Impeachment Proceedings Against President Nixon

                            Cross Reference
Portions of the final report of the Committee on the Judiciary, 
    pursuant to its investigation into the conduct of the President, 
    relating to grounds for Presidential impeachment and forms of 
    articles of impeachment, see Sec. Sec. 3.3, 3.7, 3.8, supra.

                         Collateral References
Debate on Articles of Impeachment, Hearings of the Committee on the 
    Judiciary pursuant to House Resolution 803, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., 
    July 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, and 30, 1974.
Impeachment of Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States, Report 
    of the Committee on the Judiciary, H. Rept. No. 93-1305, 93d Cong. 
    2d Sess., Aug. 20, 1974, printed in full in the Congressional 
    Record, 120 Cong. Rec. 29219-361, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 20, 
    1974.
Impeachment, Selected Materials, Committee on the Judiciary, H. Doc. 
    No. 93-7, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 1973.
Impeachment, Selected Materials on Procedure, Committee on the 
    Judiciary, Committee Print, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 
    1974.                          -------------------

Introduction of Impeachment Charges Against the President

Sec. 15.1 Various resolutions were introduced in the 93d Congress, 
    first session, relating to the impeachment of President Richard M. 
    Nixon, some directly calling for his censure or impeachment and 
    some calling for an investigation by the Committee on the Judiciary 
    or by a select committee; the former were referred to the Committee 
    on the Judiciary and the latter were referred to the Committee on 
    Rules.

    On Oct. 23, 1973, resolutions calling for the impeachment of 
President Nixon or for investigations towards that end were introduced 
in the House by their being placed in the hopper pursuant to Rule XXII 
clause 4. The resolutions were referred as follows:

            By Mr. Long of Maryland:

        H. Con. Res. 365. Concurrent resolution of censureship without 
    prejudice to impeachment; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

            By Ms. Abzug:

        H. Res. 625. Resolution impeaching Richard M. Nixon, President 
    of the

[[Page 2168]]

    United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors; to the Committee 
    on the Judiciary.

            By Mr. Ashley:

        H. Res. 626. Resolution directing the Committee on the 
    Judiciary to investigate whether there are grounds for the 
    impeachment of Richard M. Nixon; to the Committee on Rules.

            By Mr. Bingham:

        H. Res. 627. Resolution directing the Committee on the 
    Judiciary to inquire into and investigate whether grounds exist for 
    the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon; to the Committee on Rules.
            By Mr. Burton (for himself, Ms. Abzug, Mr. Anderson of 
                California, Mr. Aspin, Mr. Bergland, Mr. Bingham, Mr. 
                Brasco, Mr. Brown of California, Mr. Boland, Mr. 
                Brademas, Mrs. Chisholm, Mr. Culver, Mr. Conyers, Mr. 
                Dellums, Mr. Drinan, Mr. Eckhardt, Mr. Edwards of 
                California, Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. Fascell, Mr. 
                Fauntroy, Mr. Foley, Mr. William D. Ford, Mr. Fraser, 
                Mr. Giaimo, and Ms. Grasso):

        H. Res. 628. Resolution directing the Committee on the 
    Judiciary to inquire into and investigate whether grounds exist for 
    the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon; to the Committee on Rules. . . 
    .

            By Mr. Hechler of West Virginia:

        H. Res. 631. Resolution that Richard M. Nixon, President of the 
    United States, is impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors; to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary.

            By Mrs. Heckler of Massachusetts:

        H. Res. 632. Resolution to appoint a Special Prosecutor; to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary. . . .

            By Mr. McCloskey:

        H. Res. 634. Resolution of inquiry; to the Committee on the 
    Judiciary.
        H. Res. 635. Resolution for the impeachment of Richard M. 
    Nixon; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

            By Mr. Mazzoli:

        H. Res. 636. Resolution: an inquiry into the existence of 
    grounds for the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon, President of the 
    United States; to the Committee on Rules.

            By Mr. Milford:

        H. Res. 637. Resolution providing for the establishment of an 
    Investigative Committee to investigate alleged Presidential 
    misconduct; to the Committee on Rules.

            By Mr. Mitchell of Maryland (for himself, Mr. Burton, and 
                Mr. Fauntroy):

        H. Res. 638. Resolution impeaching Richard M. Nixon, President 
    of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors; to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 119 Cong. Rec. 34873, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
            The first resolution in the 93d Congress calling for 
        President Nixon's impeachment was introduced by Mr. Robert F. 
        Drinan (Mass.), on July 31, 1973, H. Res. 513, 93d Cong. 1st 
        Sess. (placed in hopper and referred to Committee on the 
        Judiciary).
            In the 92d Congress, second session, resolutions were 
        introduced impeaching the President for his conduct of the 
        Vietnam conflict. See H. Res. 976 and H. Res. 989, 92d Cong. 2d 
        Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2169]]

    Parliamentarian's Note: The resolutions were introduced following 
the President's dismissal of Special Prosecutor Cox, of the Watergate 
Special Prosecution Force investigating Presidential campaign 
activities, and the resignation of Attorney General 
Richardson.(7)

Authority for Judiciary Committee Investigation

Sec. 15.2 Although the House had adopted a resolution authorizing the 
    Committee on the Judiciary, to which had been referred resolutions 
    impeaching President Richard M. Nixon, to conduct investigations 
    (with subpena power) within its jurisdiction as such jurisdiction 
    was defined in Rule XI clause 13, and although the House had 
    adopted a resolution intended to fund expenses of the impeachment 
    inquiry by the committee, the committee reported and called up as 
    privileged a subsequent resolution specifically mandating an 
    impeachment investigation and continuing the availability of funds, 
    in order to confirm the delegation of authority from the House to 
    that committee to conduct the investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Comments were delivered in the House on Oct. 23, 1973, on actions 
        of the President. See, for example, the comments of Majority 
        Leader Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.), at 119 Cong. Rec. 34819, 
        93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Feb. 6, 1974, Peter W. Rodino, Jr., of New Jersey, Chairman of 
the Committee on the Judiciary, called up for immediate consideration 
House Resolution 803, authorizing the committee to investigate the 
sufficiency of grounds for the impeachment of President Nixon, which 
resolution had been reported by the committee on Feb. 1, 1974.
    The resolution read as follows:

                                H. Res. 803

        Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary, acting as a 
    whole or by any subcommittee thereof appointed by the chairman for 
    the purposes hereof and in accordance with the rules of the 
    committee, is authorized and directed to investigate fully and 
    completely 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. The 
    committee shall report to the House of Representatives such 
    resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as 
    it deems proper.

        Sec. 2. (a) For the purpose of making such investigation, the 
    committee is authorized to require--

[[Page 2170]]

        (1) by subpena or otherwise--
        (A) the attendance and testimony of any person (including at a 
    taking of a deposition by counsel for the committee); and
        (B) the production of such things; and
        (2) by interrogatory, the furnishing of such information; as it 
    deems necessary to such investigation.
        (b) Such authority of the committee may be exercised--
        (1) by the chairman and the ranking minority member acting 
    jointly, or, if either declines to act, by the other acting alone, 
    except that in the event either so declines, either shall have the 
    right to refer to the committee for decision the question whether 
    such authority shall be so exercised and the committee shall be 
    convened promptly to render that decision; or
        (2) by the committee acting as a whole or by subcommittee. 
    Subpenas and interrogatories so authorized may be issued over the 
    signature of the chairman, or ranking minority member, or any 
    member designated by either of them, and may be served by any 
    person designated by the chairman, or ranking minority member, or 
    any member designated by either of them. The chairman, or ranking 
    minority member, or any member designated by either of them (or, 
    with respect to any deposition, answer to interrogatory, or 
    affidavit, any person authorized by law to administer oaths) may 
    administer oaths to any witness. For the purposes of this section, 
    ``things'' includes, without limitation, books, records, 
    correspondence, logs, journals, memorandums, papers, documents, 
    writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, reproductions, 
    recordings, tapes, transcripts, printouts, data compilations from 
    which information can be obtained (translated if necessary, through 
    detection devices into reasonably usable form), tangible objects, 
    and other things of any kind.
        Sec. 3. For the purpose of making such investigation, the 
    committee, and any subcommittee thereof, are authorized to sit and 
    act, without regard to clause 31 of rule XI of the Rules of the 
    House of Representatives, during the present Congress at such times 
    and places within or without the United States, whether the House 
    is meeting, has recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such 
    hearings, as it deems necessary.
        Sec. 4. Any funds made available to the Committee on the 
    Judiciary under House Resolution 702 of the Ninety-third Congress, 
    adopted November 15, 1973, or made available for the purpose 
    hereafter, may be expended for the purpose of carrying out the 
    investigation authorized and directed by this resolution.

    Mr. Rodino and Mr. Edward Hutchinson, of Michigan, the ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Jucliciary, explained the 
purpose of the resolution, which had been adopted unanimously by the 
committee, as follows:

        Mr. Rodino: Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
    consume.
        Mr. Speaker, the English statesman Edmund Burke said, in 
    addressing an important constitutional question, more than 200 
    years ago:

[[Page 2171]]

            We stand in a situation very honorable to ourselves and 
        very useful to our country, if we do not abuse or abandon the 
        trust that is placed in us.

        We stand in such a position now, and--whatever the result--we 
    are going to be just, and honorable, and worthy of the public 
    trust.
        Our responsibility in this is clear. The Constitution says, in 
    article I; section 2, clause 5:

            The House of Representatives, shall have the sole power of 
        impeachment.

        A number of impeachment resolutions were introduced by Members 
    of the House in the last session of the Congress. They were 
    referred to the Judiciary Committee by the Speaker.
        We have reached the point when it is important that the House 
    explicitly confirm our responsibility under the Constitution.
        We are asking the House of Representatives, by this resolution, 
    to authorize and direct the Committee on the Judiciary to 
    investigate the conduct of the President of the United States, to 
    determine whether or not evidence exists that the President is 
    responsible for any acts that in the contemplation of the 
    Constitution are grounds for impeachment, and if such evidence 
    exists, whether or not it is sufficient to require the House to 
    exercise its constitutional powers.
        As part of that resolution, we are asking the House to give the 
    Judiciary Committee the power of subpena in its investigations.
        Such a resolution has always been passed by the House. The 
    committee has voted unanimously to recommend that the House of 
    Representatives adopt this resolution. It is a necessary step if we 
    are to meet our obligations. . . .
        Mr. Hutchinson: Mr. Speaker, the first section of this 
    resolution authorizes and directs your Judiciary Committee to 
    investigate fully whether sufficient grounds exist to impeach the 
    President of the United States. This constitutes the first explicit 
    and formal action in the whole House to authorize such an inquiry.
        The last section of the resolution validates the use by the 
    committee of that million dollars allotted to it last November for 
    purposes of the impeachment inquiry. Members will recall that the 
    million dollar resolution made no reference to the impeachment 
    inquiry but merely allotted that sum of money to the committee to 
    be expended on matters within its jurisdiction. All Members of the 
    House understood its intended purpose.
        But the rule of the House defining the jurisdiction of 
    committees does not place jurisdiction over impeachment matters in 
    the Judiciary Committee. In fact, it does not place such 
    jurisdiction anywhere. So this resolution vests jurisdiction in the 
    committee over this particular impeachment matter, and it ratifies 
    the authority of the committee to expend for the purpose those 
    funds allocated to it last November, as well as whatever additional 
    funds may be hereafter authorized.8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 120 Cong. Rec. 2349-51, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Until the adoption of House Resolution 803, 
the Committee on the Judici

[[Page 2172]]

ary had been conducting an investigation into the charges of 
impeachment against President Nixon under its general investigatory 
authority, granted by the House on Feb. 28, 1973 (H. Res. 74). The 
committee had hired special counsel for the impeachment inquiry on Dec. 
20, 1973, and had authorized the chairman to issue subpenas in relation 
to the inquiry on Oct. 30, 1973. House Resolution 74 authorized the 
Committee on the Judiciary to conduct investigations, and to issue 
subpenas during such investigations, within its jurisdiction ``as set 
forth in clause 13 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.''
    That clause did not specifically include impeachments within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary.
    The House had provided for the payment, from the contingent fund, 
of further expenses of the Committee on the Judiciary, in conducting 
investigations, following the introduction and referral to the 
committee of various resolutions proposing the impeachment of President 
Nixon. Debate on one such resolution, House Resolution 702, indicated 
that the additional funds for the investigations of the Committee on 
the Judiciary were intended in part for use in conducting an 
impeachment inquiry in relation to the President.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. See H. Res. 702, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 15, 1973.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It was considered necessary for the House to specifically vest the 
Committee on the Judiciary with the investigatory and subpena power to 
conduct the impeachment investigation and to specifically provide for 
payment of resultant expenses from the contingent fund of the 
House.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. On Apr. 29, 1974, subsequent to the adoption of H. Res. 803, the 
        House adopted H. Res. 1027, authorizing further funds from the 
        contingent fund for the expenses of the impeachment inquiry and 
        other investigations within the jurisdiction of the Committee 
        on the Judiciary. The report on the resolution, from the 
        Committee on House Administration (H. Rept. No. 93-1009) 
        included a statement by Mr. Rodino on the status of the 
        impeachment inquiry and on the funds required for expenses and 
        salaries of the impeachment inquiry staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in section 6, supra, House Resolution 803 was 
privileged, since reported by the committee to which resolutions of 
impeachment had been referred and since incidental to consideration of 
the impeachment question, although resolutions providing for funding 
from the contingent fund of the House are normally only

[[Page 2173]]

privileged when called up by the Committee on House Administration, and 
resolutions authorizing investigations are normally only privileged 
when called up by the Committee on Rules.

Preserving Confidentiality of Inquiry Materials

Sec. 15.3 The Committee on the Judiciary adopted Procedures preserving 
    the confidentiality of impeachment inquiry materials.

    On Feb. 22, 1974, the Committee on the Judiciary unanimously 
adopted procedures governing the confidentiality of the materials 
gathered in the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President 
Richard Nixon. The first set of procedures, entitled ``Procedures for 
Handling Impeachment Inquiry Material,'' limited access to such 
materials to the chairman, ranking minority member, special counsel, 
and special counsel to the minority of the committee, until the actual 
presentation of evidence at hearings. Confidentiality was to be 
strictly preserved.
    The second set of procedures, entitled ``Rules for the Impeachment 
Inquiry Staff,'' provided for security and nondisclosure of impeachment 
inquiry materials and work product of the inquiry staff.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. For the text of the rules, see Sec. 6.9, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determining Grounds for Presidential Impeachment

Sec. 15.4 During the inquiry into charges against President Richard M. 
    Nixon by the Committee on the Judiciary, the impeachment inquiry 
    staff reported to the committee on the constitutional grounds for 
    Presidential impeachment, as drawn from the historical origins of 
    impeachment and the American impeachment cases.

    On Feb. 22, 1974, Peter W. Rodino, Jr., of New Jersey, Chairman of 
the Committee on the Judiciary, made available a report by the inquiry 
staff on the conduct of President Nixon. The report, entitled 
``Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,'' summarized the 
historical origins and constitutional bases for impeachment and 
chronicled the American impeachment cases.
    The report, printed as a committee print, did not necessarily 
reflect the views of the committee or its members, but was entirely a 
staff report. The staff concluded, in reviewing the issue whether

[[Page 2174]]

impeachable offenses were required to be criminal or indictable 
offenses, that such was not the case under the English and American 
impeachment precedents.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. For the text of the report, see the appendix to this chapter, 
        infra.
            The conclusion of the staff report was included in the 
        final report of the Committee on the Judiciary recommending 
        impeachment of the President. (H. Rept. No. 93-1305, by the 
        Committee on the Judiciary.) See 120 Cong. Rec. 29220, 29221, 
        93d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 20, 1974.
            The minority views included in the committee report reached 
        an opposite conclusion from that of the staff report and from 
        that of the majority of the committee, which determined to 
        impeach the President for both criminal and noncriminal conduct 
        (see Sec. 3.8, supra, for the minority views and Sec. 3.7, 
        supra, for the majority views on the issue).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Status Reports

Sec. 15.5 During the impeachment inquiry involving President Richard M. 
    Nixon, the inquiry staff of the Committee on the Judiciary reported 
    to the committee on the status of its investigation.

    On Mar. 1, 1974, the staff for the impeachment inquiry reported to 
the Committee on the Judiciary on the status of its investigative work 
(summarized in the committee's final report) with respect to specified 
allegations:

        A. Allegations concerning domestic surveillance activities 
    conducted by or at the direction of the White House.
        B. Allegations concerning intelligence activities conducted by 
    or at the direction of the White House for the purpose of the 
    Presidential election of 1972.
        C. Allegations concerning the Watergate break-in and related 
    activities, including alleged efforts by persons in the White House 
    and others to ``cover up'' such activities and others.
        D. Allegations concerning improprieties in connection with the 
    personal finances of the President.
        E. Allegations concerning efforts by the White House to use 
    agencies of the executive branch for political purposes, and 
    alleged White House involvement with election campaign 
    contributions.
        F. Allegations concerning other misconduct.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H. Rept. No. 93-1305, at p. 8, Committee on the Judiciary, 93d 
        Cong. 2d Sess., reported Aug. 20, 1974.
            On May 23, 1974, the House authorized by resolution the 
        printing of 2,000 additional copies of a committee print 
        containing the staff report. H. Res. 1074, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
            The House also adopted on May 23, H. Res. 1073, authorizing 
        the printing of additional copies of a committee print on the 
        work of the impeachment inquiry staff as of Feb. 5, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presenting Evidence and Examining Witnesses

Sec. 15.6 In the Nixon impeachment inquiry, the Committee

[[Page 2175]]

    on the Judiciary adopted certain procedures to be followed in 
    presenting evidence and hearing witnesses.

    On May 2, 1974, the Committee on the Judiciary unanimously adopted 
special procedures for presenting the evidence compiled by the 
committee staff to the full committee in hearings. The procedures 
provided for a statement of information to be presented, with annotated 
evidentiary materials, to committee members and to the President's 
counsel.(1~4~)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See Sec. 6.5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The procedures allowed for the compilation and presentation of 
additional evidence by committee members or on request of the 
President's counsel.
    Procedures were also adopted for holding hearings to examine 
witnesses. Under the procedures, hearings were to be attended by the 
President's counsel, and he was permitted to examine witnesses.
    The procedures followed in the presentation of evidence are 
reflected in the summary from the committee's final report:

        From May 9, 1974 through June 21, 1974, the Committee 
    considered in executive session approximately six hundred fifty 
    ``statements of information'' and more than 7,200 pages of 
    supporting evidentiary material presented by the inquiry staff. The 
    statements of information and supporting evidentiary material, 
    furnished to each Member of the Committee in 36 notebooks, 
    presented material on several subjects of the inquiry: the 
    Watergate break-in and its aftermath, ITT, dairy price supports, 
    domestic surveillance, abuse of the IRS, and the activities of the 
    Special Prosecutor. The staff also presented to the Committee 
    written reports on President Nixon's income taxes, presidential 
    impoundment of funds appropriated by Congress and the bombing of 
    Cambodia.
        In each notebook, a statement of information relating to a 
    particular phase of the investigation was immediately followed by 
    supporting evidentiary material, which included copies of documents 
    and testimony (much of it already on public record), transcripts of 
    presidential conversations, and affidavits. A deliberate and 
    scrupulous abstention from conclusions, even by implication, was 
    observed.
        The Committee heard recordings of nineteen presidential 
    conversations and dictabelt recollections. The presidential 
    conversations were neither paraphrased nor summarized by the 
    inquiry staff. Thus, no inferences or conclusions were drawn for 
    the Committee. During the course of the hearings, Members of the 
    Committee listened to each recording and simultaneously followed 
    transcripts prepared by the inquiry staff.
        On June 27 and 28, 1974, Mr. James St. Clair, Special Counsel 
    to the President made a further presentation in a similar manner 
    and form as the inquiry staff's initial presentation. The Committee 
    voted to make public the initial presentation by the inquiry

[[Page 2176]]

    staff, including substantially all of the supporting materials 
    presented at the hearings, as well as the President's response.
        Between July 2, 1974, and July 17, 1974, after the initial 
    presentation, the Committee heard testimony from nine witnesses, 
    including all the witnesses proposed by the President's counsel. 
    The witnesses were interrogated by counsel for the Committee, by 
    Special counsel to the President pursuant to the rules of the 
    Committee, and by Members of the Committee. The Committee then 
    heard an oral summation by Mr. St. Clair and received a written 
    brief in support of the President's position.
        The Committee concluded its hearings on July 17, a week in 
    advance of its public debate on whether or not to recommend to the 
    House that it exercise its constitutional power of impeachment. In 
    preparation for that debate the majority and minority members of 
    the impeachment inquiry staff presented to the Committee 
    ``summaries of information.'' (15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. H. Rept. No. 93-1305 at p. 9, Committee on the Judiciary, 93d Cong. 
        2d Sess., reported Aug. 20, 1974, printed in the Record at 120 
        Cong. Rec. 29221, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 20, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee on the Judiciary had previously adopted a resolution 
which was called up in the House under a motion to suspend the rules, 
on July 1, 1974, to authorize the committee to proceed without regard 
to Rule XI clause 27(f)(4), House Rules and Manual Sec. 735 (1973), 
requiring the application of the five-minute rule for interrogation of 
witnesses by committees. The House had rejected the motion to suspend 
the rules and thereby denied to the committee the authorization to 
dispense with the five-minute rule in the interrogation of 
witnesses.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 120 Cong. Rec. 21849-55, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committee Consideration of Resolution and Articles Impeaching the 
    President

Sec. 15.7 Consideration by the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
    resolution and articles of impeachment against President Richard M. 
    Nixon was made in order by committee resolution.

    On July 23, 1974, the Committee on the Judiciary adopted a 
resolution making in order its consideration of a motion to report a 
resolution and articles of impeachment to the House. The resolution 
provided:

        Resolved, That at a business meeting on July 24, 1974, the 
    Committee shall commence general debate on a motion to report to 
    the House a Resolution, together with articles of impeachment, 
    impeaching Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States. Such 
    general debate shall consume no more than ten hours, during which 
    time no

[[Page 2177]]

    Member shall be recognized for a period to exceed 15 minutes. At 
    the conclusion of general debate, the proposed articles shall be 
    read for amendment and Members shall be recognized for a period of 
    five minutes to speak on each proposed article and on any and all 
    amendments thereto, unless by motion debate is terminated thereon. 
    Each proposed article, and any additional article, shall be 
    separately considered for amendment and immediately thereafter 
    voted upon as amended for recommendation to the House. At the 
    conclusion of consideration of the articles for amendment and 
    recommendation to the House, if any article has been agreed to, the 
    original motion shall be considered as adopted and the Chairman 
    shall report to the House said Resolution of impeachment, together 
    with such articles as have been agreed to, or if no article is 
    agreed to, the Committee shall consider such resolutions or other 
    recommendations as it deems proper.(~17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. H. Rept. No. 93-1305, at p. 10, Committee on the Judiciary, 93d 
        Cong. 2d Sess., reported Aug. 20, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in the committee's final report, consideration of the 
motion to report and of the articles of impeachment proceeded as 
follows on July 24 through July 30:

        On July 24, at the commencement of general debate, a resolution 
    was offered including two articles of impeachment. On July 26, an 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute was offered to Article I. 
    In the course of the debate on the substitute, it was contended 
    that the proposed article of impeachment was not sufficiently 
    specific. Proponents of the substitute argued that it met the 
    requirements of specificity under modern pleading practice in both 
    criminal and civil litigation, which provide for notice pleading. 
    They further argued that the President had notice of the charge, 
    that his counsel had participated in the Committee's deliberations, 
    and that the factual details would be provided in the Committee's 
    report.
        On July 27, the Committee agreed to the amendment in the nature 
    of a substitute for Article I by a vote of 27 to 11. The Committee 
    then adopted Article I, as amended, by a vote of 27 to 11. Article 
    I, as adopted by the Committee charged that President Nixon, using 
    the power of his high office, engaged, personally and through his 
    subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to 
    delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of the unlawful entry 
    into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in 
    Washington, D.C., for the purpose of securing political 
    intelligence; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; 
    and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert 
    activities.

        On July 29, an amendment in the nature of a substitute was 
    offered for Article II of the proposed resolution. After debate, 
    the substitute was agreed to by a vote of 28 to 10. The Committee 
    then adopted Article II, as amended, by a vote of 28 to 10. Article 
    II, as amended, charged that President Nixon, using the power of 
    the office of President of the United States, repeatedly engaged in 
    conduct which violated the constitutional rights of citizens;

[[Page 2178]]

    which impaired the due and proper administration of justice and the 
    conduct of lawful inquiries, or which contravened the laws 
    governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposes of 
    these agencies.
        On July 30, an additional article was offered as an amendment 
    to the resolution. After debate, this amendment was adopted by a 
    vote of 21 to 17 and became Article III. Article III charged that 
    President Nixon, by failing, without lawful cause or excuse and in 
    willful disobedience of the subpoenas of the House, to produce 
    papers and things that the Committee had subpoenaed in the course 
    of its impeachment inquiry, assumed to himself functions and 
    judgments necessary to the exercise of the constitutional power of 
    impeachment vested in the House. The subpoenaed papers and things 
    had been deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve, by 
    direct evidence, fundamental, factual questions related to 
    presidential direction, knowledge, or approval of actions 
    demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for 
    impeachment.
        On July 30, the Committee considered an amendment to add a 
    proposed Article, which charged that President Nixon authorized, 
    ordered and ratified the concealment of information from the 
    Congress and supplied to Congress false and misleading statements 
    concerning the existence, scope and nature of American bombing 
    operations in Cambodia. The proposed Article stated that these acts 
    were in derogation of the powers of Congress to declare war, make 
    appropriations, and raise and support armies. By a vote of 26 to 
    12, the amendment to add this Article was not agreed to.
        Also on July 30, the Committee considered an amendment to add a 
    proposed Article, charging that President Nixon knowingly and 
    fraudulently failed to report income and claimed deductions that 
    were not authorized by law on his Federal income tax returns for 
    the years 1969 through 1972. In addition, the proposed Article 
    charged that, in violation of Article II, Section 1 of the 
    Constitution, President Nixon had unlawfully received emoluments, 
    in excess of the compensation provided by law, in the form of 
    government expenditures at his privately owned properties at San 
    Clemente, California, and Key Biscayne, Florida. By a vote of 26 to 
    12, the amendment to add the article was not agreed to.
        The Committee on the Judiciary based its decision to recommend 
    that the House of Representatives exercise its constitutional power 
    to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States, on 
    evidence which is summarized in the following report. . . 
    .(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. H. Rept. No. 93-1305, at pp. 10, 11, Committee on the Judiciary, 
        93d Cong. 2d Sess., reported Aug. 20, 1974, printed in the 
        Record at 120 Cong. Rec. 29221, 29222, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 
        20, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The debate on the resolution and articles of impeachment were 
televised pursuant to House Resolution 1107, adopted by the House on 
July 22, 1974, amending Rule XI clause 34 of the rules of the House to 
permit committee meetings, as well as hearings, to be broadcast by live 
coverage.(19)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 120 Cong. Rec. 24436-48, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2179]]

    The transcript of the debate by the Committee on the Judiciary was 
printed in full as a public document.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. See Debate on Articles of Impeachment, Hearings of the Committee on 
        the Judiciary pursuant to H. Res. 803, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., July 
        24, 25, 26, 29, and 30, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Review of Impeachment Trial Rules

Sec. 15.8 After impeachment proceedings had been instituted in the 
    House against President Richard M. Nixon, the Senate adopted a 
    resolution for the study and review of Senate rules and precedents 
    applicable to impeachment trials.

    On July 29, l974,(1~) during the pendency of an 
investigation in the House of alleged impeachable offenses committed by 
President Nixon, the Senate adopted a resolution related to its rules 
on impeachment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 120 Cong. Rec. 25468, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Michael J.] Mansfield [of Montana]: Mr. President, I have 
    at the desk a resolution, submitted on behalf of the distinguished 
    Republican leader, the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hugh Scott), 
    the assistant majority leader, the distinguished Senator from West 
    Virginia (Mr. Robert C. Byrd), the assistant Republican leader, the 
    distinguished Senator from Michigan (Mr. Griffin), and myself, and 
    I ask that it be called up and given immediate consideration.
        The Presiding Officer: The clerk will state the resolution.
        The legislative clerk read as follows:

                                S. Res. 370

            Resolved, That the Committee on Rules and Administration is 
        directed to review any and all existing rules and precedents 
        that apply to impeachment trials with a view to recommending 
        any revisions, if necessary, which may be required if the 
        Senate is called upon to conduct such a trial.
            Resolved further, That the Committee on Rules and 
        Administration is instructed to report back no later than 1 
        September 1974, or on such earlier date as the Majority and 
        Minority Leaders may designate, and
            Resolved further, That such review by that Committee shall 
        be held entirely in executive sessions.

        The Presiding Officer: Without objection, the Senate will 
    proceed to its immediate consideration.
        The question is on agreeing to the resolution.
        The resolution (S. Res. 370) was agreed to.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. The Senate Parliamentarian prepared and published, at the request 
        of Senator Robert C. Byrd (W. Va.) a study entitled ``Procedure 
        and Guidelines for Impeachment Trials in the United States 
        Senate,'' S. Doc. No. 102, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 8, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee on Rules and Administration reported out Senate 
Resolution 390, amending the

[[Page 2180]]

Rules and Procedure and Practice in the Senate when Sitting on 
Impeachment Trials, which was not acted on by the Senate. The 
amendments reported were clarifying and modernizing 
changes.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See Sec. 11.2, supra, for the committee amendments to the rules for 
        impeachment trials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure of Evidence of Presidential Activities

Sec. 15.9 Pending the investigation by the House Committee on the 
    Judiciary into conduct of the President, the Senate adopted a 
    resolution releasing records of a Senate select committee on 
    Presidential activities to congressional committees and other 
    agencies and persons with a legitimate need therefor.

    On July 29, 1974,(4) Senator Samuel J. Ervin, Jr., of 
North Carolina, offered in the Senate Senate Resolution 369, relating 
to the records of a Senate select committee. The Senate adopted the 
resolution, following Senator Ervin's remarks thereon, in which he 
mentioned the needs and requests of the Committee on the Judiciary of 
the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 120 Cong. Rec. 25392, 25393, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Ervin: Mr. President, under its present charter, the Senate 
    Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities has 90 days 
    after the 28th day of June of this year in which to wind up its 
    affairs. This resolution is proposed with the consent of the 
    committee, and its immediate consideration has been cleared by the 
    leadership on both sides of the aisle.
        The purpose of this resolution is to facilitate the winding up 
    of the affairs of the Senate Select Committee. The resolution 
    provides that all of the records of the committee shall be 
    transferred to the Library of Congress which shall hold them 
    subject to the control of the Senate Committee on Rules and 
    Administration.

        It provides that after these records are transferred to the 
    Library of Congress the Senate Committee on Rules and 
    Administration shall control the access to the records and either 
    by special orders or by general regulations shall make the records 
    available to courts, congressional committees, congressional 
    subcommittees, Federal departments and agencies, and any other 
    persons who may satisfy the Senate Committee on Rules and 
    Administration that they have a legitimate need for the records.
        It provides that the records shall be maintained intact and 
    that none of the original records shall be released to any agency 
    or any person.
        It provides further that pending the transfer of the records to 
    the Library of Congress and the assumption of such control by the 
    Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, that the Select 
    Committee, acting through its chairman or through its vice 
    chairman, can make these records available to courts or to 
    congressional committees

[[Page 2181]]

    or subcommittees or to other persons showing a legitimate need for 
    them.
        I might state this is placed in here because of the fact that 
    we have had many requests from congressional committees for the 
    records. We have had requests from the Special Prosecutor and from 
    the courts. . . .
        I might state in the past the committee has made available some 
    of the records to the House Judiciary Committee, at its request, 
    and to the Special Prosecutor at his request. The resolution also 
    provides that the action of the committee in doing so is ratified 
    by the Senate.

Broadcasting Impeachment Proceedings

Sec. 15.10 The House adopted a resolution providing for the broadcast 
    of the proceedings in the House in which it was to consider the 
    resolution and articles of impeachment against President Richard M. 
    Nixon.

    On Aug. 7, 1974, the Committee on the Judiciary, having previously 
determined to report affirmatively to the House on the impeachment of 
the President, the House adopted House Resolution 802, called up by 
direction of the Committee on Rules, authorizing the broadcast of the 
anticipated impeachment proceedings in the House. Ray J. Madden, of 
Indiana, Chairman of the Committee on Rules, who called up the 
resolution (with committee amendments), cited the prior action of the 
House in changing the rules of the House to permit the deliberations of 
the Committee on the Judiciary to be televised.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 120 Cong. Rec. 27266-69, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 15.11 After impeachment proceedings had been instituted in the 
    House against President Richard M. Nixon, the Senate Committee on 
    Rules and Administration reported a resolution for televising any 
    resultant trial.

    On Aug. 8, 1974,(6) Senator Howard W. Cannon, of Nevada, 
reported in the Senate, from the Committee on Rules and Administration, 
Senate Resolution 371, to permit television and radio coverage of any 
impeachment trial that might occur with respect to President Nixon. The 
resolution was subsequently laid on the table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 120 Cong. Rec. 27325, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Procedures for Consideration by the House

Sec. 15.12 The House leadership considered a number of special 
    procedures to be followed in the consideration of a resolution and 
    articles im

[[Page 2182]]

    peaching President Richard M. Nixon.

    On Aug. 2, 1974, Ray J. Madden, of Indiana, Chairman of the 
Committee on Rules, addressed the House on a recent meeting of the 
leadership as to the proposed hearings of the committee relative to the 
consideration by the House of the impeachment of President Nixon:

         Conference of House Rules Committee on Impeachment Debate

        (Mr. Madden asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks, and include 
    extraneous matter.)
        Mr. Madden: Mr. Speaker, the coming Presidential impeachment 
    debate calls for the House to adopt certain special procedures 
    which are not otherwise necessary when considering regular 
    congressional business.
        The members of the Rules Committee, Speaker Carl Albert, House 
    Majority Leader Tip O'Neill, House Majority Whip John McFall, House 
    Minority Leader John Rhodes, House Minority Whip Les Arends, 
    Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, and Representative 
    Edward Hutchinson, the ranking minority member of the Judiciary 
    Committee, met in an unofficial capacity Thursday afternoon, August 
    1. In the 2\1/2\ hour meeting thoughts were exchanged and 
    recommendations made regarding the rules and procedures which would 
    be most practical in allowing the entire House membership 
    participation in this historical legislative event.
        Although the bipartisan gathering reached no official decision, 
    there was agreement that after the Judiciary Committee files its 
    report on the impeachment proceedings next week, August 8, the 
    Committee on Rules will then convene--on August 13 for the purpose 
    of defining the rules and procedures for House debate. It was also 
    agreed by the members of the Democratic and Republican leadership 
    present that the impeachment debate will begin on the floor of the 
    House on Monday, August 19.
        Among the impeachment procedures to be given consideration by 
    the Committee on Rules will be: The overall time of debate; 
    division of debate time during the floor discussion; the control of 
    the time; the question of whether the three articles of impeachment 
    recommended by the Judiciary Committee should be amended; and 
    whether or not the electronic media should be allowed to broadcast 
    the proceedings of the House floor.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 120 Cong. Rec. 26489, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Later on that day, Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts, the 
Majority Leader, and Peter W. Rodino, Jr., of New Jersey, the Chairman 
of the Committee on the Judiciary, discussed tentative scheduling of 
the resolution of impeachment and arrangements for Members of the House 
to listen to tape recordings containing evidence relating to the 
impeachment inquiry:

        (Mr. [Leslie C.] Arends [of Illinois] asked and was given 
    permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

[[Page 2183]]

        Mr. Arends: Mr. Speaker, I take this time to ask the majority 
    leader if he will kindly advise us of the program for next week.
        Mr. O'Neill: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield to the 
    gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rodino), chairman of the Committee 
    on the Judiciary, so we may have some indication of his plans?
        Mr. Arends: I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
        Mr. Rodino: I thank the gentleman for yielding.
        I would really like to announce that today I have circulated a 
    letter that should be in the offices of each of the Members which 
    sets up a schedule so that Members who are interested may listen to 
    the tapes that are going to be available in the Congressional 
    Building where the impeachment inquiry staff is located. There will 
    be assistance provided to all of the Members, and this is spelled 
    out in this letter--the schedule as to the time when the tapes will 
    be available, together with the transcripts, and assistance will be 
    provided by members of the impeachment inquiry staff.
        In addition to that, there is also in the letter pertinent 
    information which relates to the particular pieces of information 
    or documents that are available. All of the documents that have 
    been printed and the President's counsel's brief will be included. 
    Members will have available to them all that the Committee on the 
    Judiciary has presented and printed and published up to this 
    particular time, which I am sure all Members will be interested in.
        I thought that I would make this announcement so that this 
    letter will come to the Members' attention and will not be somehow 
    or other just laid aside. I think the Members are going to be 
    interested in seeing it and knowing that there is a schedule for 
    them, and we will allow them sufficient time within which to be 
    briefed regarding these various materials that are available and 
    the facilities that are available to them.
        Mr. O'Neill: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. Arends: I yield to the distinguished majority leader.

        Mr. O'Neill: I thank the gentleman for yielding.
        I should like to address some remarks to the gentleman from New 
    Jersey (Mr. Rodino), the chairman of the Committee on the 
    Judiciary, in view of the fact that the leadership on both sides of 
    the aisle met yesterday with members of the Committee on Rules 
    trying to put together a schedule, which, of course, we understand 
    is tentative.
        It was my understanding from that meeting that the Judiciary 
    Committee would be planning to report next Wednesday, and would be 
    going to the Rules Committee on Tuesday, August 13, with the 
    anticipation that the matter of impeachment would be on the floor 
    on Monday, the 19th.
        Would the gentleman want to comment on that?
        Mr. Rodino: If the gentleman will yield, that is correct. That 
    is the schedule that we hope to follow. I have discussed this with 
    the gentleman from Michigan, the ranking minority member, and we 
    have agreed that the scheduling is the kind of scheduling dates 
    that we can meet. On Tuesday, the 13th, we would go before the 
    Rules Committee. I thank the gentleman.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Id. at p. 26512.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2184]]

Committee Report as to Impeachment; Resignation of the President

Sec. 15.13 After the Committee on the Judiciary had determined to 
    report to the House a resolution and articles impeaching President 
    Richard M. Nixon, the President resigned; the committee submitted 
    its report recommending impeachment to the House, without an 
    accompanying resolution of impeachment. The House then adopted a 
    resolution under suspension of the rules accepting the committee's 
    report, noting the committee's action and commending the chairman 
    and members of the committee for their efforts.

    On Aug. 9, 1974, President Nixon's written resignation was received 
in the office of the Secretary of State, pursuant to the provisions of 
the United States Code.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 3 USC Sec. 20 provides that the resignation of the office of the 
        President shall be an instrument in writing, subscribed by the 
        person resigning, and delivered to the office of the Secretary 
        of State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Aug. 20, 1974, Mr. Peter W. Rodino, Jr., of New Jersey, 
submitted as privileged the report of the Committee on the Judiciary 
(H. Rept. No. 93-1305) to the House. The report summarized the 
committee's investigation and included supplemental, additional, 
separate, dissenting, minority, individual, and concurring views. The 
committee's recommendation and adopted articles of impeachment read as 
follows:

        The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
    consideration of recommendations concerning the exercise of the 
    constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the 
    United States, having considered the same, reports thereon pursuant 
    to H. Res. 803 as follows and recommends that the House exercise 
    its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of 
    the United States, and that articles of impeachment be exhibited to 
    the Senate as follows:

                                 Resolution

        Impeaching Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States, of 
    high crimes and misdemeanors.
        Resolved, That Richard M. Nixon, President of the United 
    States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the 
    following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate:
        Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of 
    Representatives of the United States of America in the name of 
    itself and of all of the people of the United States of America, 
    against Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of 
    America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment

[[Page 2185]]

    against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

                                 Article I

        In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, 
    Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath 
    faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States 
    and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the 
    Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his 
    constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully 
    executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration 
    of justice, in that:
        On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee 
    for the Reelection of the President committed unlawful entry of the 
    headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, 
    District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political 
    intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the 
    powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his 
    subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to 
    delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such unlawful 
    entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to 
    conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert 
    activities.
        The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan 
    included one or more of the following:
        (1) making or causing to be made false or misleading statements 
    to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the 
    United States;
        (2) withholding relevant and material evidence or information 
    from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of 
    the United States;
        (3) approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling 
    witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading 
    statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and 
    employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in 
    duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
        (4) interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of 
    investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, 
    the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Watergate 
    Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;
        (5) approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious 
    payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining 
    the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential 
    witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry 
    and other illegal activities;
        (6) endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an 
    agency of the United States;
        (7) disseminating information received from officers of the 
    Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of 
    investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative 
    officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of 
    aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid 
    criminal liability;
        (8) making false or misleading public statements for the 
    purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing 
    that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with 
    respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of 
    the executive branch of the United States and per

[[Page 2186]]

    sonnel of the Committee for the Reelection of the President, and 
    that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct; 
    or
        (9) endeavoring to cause prospective defendants, and 
    individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favored treatment 
    and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, 
    or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.

        In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary 
    to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional 
    government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice 
    and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
        Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants 
    impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

                                 Article II

        Using the powers of the office of President of the United 
    States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath 
    faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States 
    and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the 
    Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his 
    constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully 
    executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the 
    constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper 
    administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or 
    contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch 
    and the purposes of these agencies.
        This conduct has included one or more of the following:
        (1) He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and 
    agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in 
    violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential 
    information contained in income tax returns for purposes not 
    authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional 
    rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax 
    investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory 
    manner.
        (2) He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret 
    Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard 
    of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or 
    authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue 
    electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes 
    unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any 
    other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or 
    permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes 
    unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any 
    other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the 
    concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of 
    Investigation of electronic surveillance.
        (3) He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and 
    agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of 
    citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret 
    investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in 
    part with money derived from campaign contributions, which 
    unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence 
    Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to 
    prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
        (4) He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully 
    executed by

[[Page 2187]]

    failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close 
    subordinates endeavored to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by 
    duly constituted executive, judicial, and legislative entities 
    concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the 
    Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and 
    concerning other unlawful activities, including those relating to 
    the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General of the 
    United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the 
    break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign 
    financing practices of the Committee to Reelect the President.
        (5) In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the 
    executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive 
    branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal 
    Division, and the Offlce of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of 
    the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in 
    violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully 
    executed.
        In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary 
    to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional 
    government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice 
    and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
        Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants 
    impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

                                Article III

        In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, 
    Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the 
    office of President of the United States and, to the best of his 
    ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the 
    United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take 
    care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without 
    lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by 
    duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary 
    of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, 
    May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such 
    subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary 
    by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence 
    fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, 
    knowledge, or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to 
    be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In 
    refusing to produce these papers and things, Richard M. Nixon, 
    substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for 
    the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the 
    lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming 
    to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the 
    sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House 
    of Representatives.
        In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary 
    to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional 
    government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, 
    and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
        Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants 
    impeachment and trial, and removal from office.\(10)\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. H. Rept. No. 93-1305, pp. 1-4, Committee on the Judiciary, printed 
        in the Record at 120 Cong. Rec. 29219, 29220, 93d Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Aug. 20, 1974. For complete text of H. Rept. No. 93-
        1305, see id. at pp. 29219-361.
            Pursuant to H. Con. Res. 566, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., 10,000 
        additional copies of the report were printed for the use of the 
        Committee on the Judiciary.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2188]]

    The report was referred by the Speaker to the House Calendar and 
ordered printed.
    The Committee did not report a separate resolution and articles of 
impeachment for action by the House, the President having resigned.
    Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts, the Majority Leader, 
moved to suspend the rules and adopt House Resolution 1333, accepting 
the report of the Committee on the Judiciary and providing for its 
printing, and the House adopted the resolution without debate--yeas 
412, nays 3, not voting 19:

                                H. Res. 1333

        Resolved, That the House of Representatives:
        (1) takes notice that
        (a) the House of Representatives, by House Resolution 803, 
    approved February 6, 1974, authorized and directed the Committee on 
    the Judiciary to investigate fully and completely whether 
    sufficient grounds existed for the House of Representatives to 
    exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, 
    President of the United States of America; and

        (b) the Committee on the Judiciary, after conducting a full and 
    complete investigation pursuant to House Resolution 803, voted on 
    July 27, 29, and 30, 1974 to recommend Articles of impeachment 
    against Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of 
    America; and
        (c) Richard M. Nixon on August 9, 1974 resigned the Office of 
    President of the United States of America;
        (2) accepts the report submitted by the Committee on the 
    Judiciary pursuant to House Resolution 803 (H. Rept. 93-1305) and 
    authorizes and directs that the said report, together with 
    supplemental, additional, separate, dissenting, minority, 
    individual and concurring views, be printed in full in the 
    Congressional Record and as a House Document; and
        (3) commends the chairman and other members of the Committee on 
    the Judiciary for their conscientious and capable efforts in 
    carrying out the Committee's responsibilities under House 
    Resolution 803.

    Following the adoption of House Resolution 1333, Mr. O'Neill asked 
unanimous consent that all Members have five legislative days in which 
to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1333, but Mr. 
Robert E. Bauman, of Maryland, objected to the request on the ground 
that no debate had been had on the report.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 120 Cong. Rec. 29361, 29362, 93d Cong. 2d Sess. The Majority Leader 
        had announced on the previous day, Aug. 19, his intention to 
        offer the resolution, and had read the text of the resolution 
        on the floor of the House. 120 Cong. Rec. 29005, 29006, 93d 
        Cong. 2d Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2189]]

    Neither the House nor the Committee on the Judiciary took any 
further action on the matter of the impeachment of former President 
Nixon in the 93d Congress.

Impeachment Inquiry Evidence Subpoenaed by Courts

Sec. 15.14 The Speaker laid before the House subpoenas duces tecum from 
    a federal district court in a criminal case, addressed to the 
    Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary and to the chief counsel 
    of its subcommittee on impeachment. The subpoenas sought evidence 
    gathered by the committee in its impeachment inquiry into the 
    conduct of President Richard M. Nixon. The House adopted a 
    resolution granting such limited access as would not violate the 
    privileges of the House or its sole power of impeachment under the 
    U.S. Constitution.

    On Aug. 22, 1974,(12) Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
laid before the House a communication and subpoena from the Chairman of 
the Committee on the Judiciary as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 120 Cong. Rec. 30025, 30026, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Communication From the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary

        The Speaker laid before the House the following communication 
    and subpoena from the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, 
    which was read and ordered to be printed:
                                               Washington, D.C.,
                                                  August 21, 1974.
Hon. Carl Albert,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

            Dear Mr. Speaker: On July 29, 1974 two subpoenas duces 
        tecum issued by the United States District Court for the 
        District of Columbia, one naming myself and one naming Mr. John 
        Doar, an employee of the Committee, were served commanding 
        appearance in the United States District Court on September 9, 
        1974 and the production of all tapes and other electronic and/
        or mechanical recordings or reproductions, and any memoranda, 
        papers, transcripts, and other writings, relating to all 
        nonpublic statements, testimony and interviews of witnesses 
        relating to the matters being investigated pursuant to House 
        Resolution No. 803.
            The subpoenas were issued upon application of defendant H. 
        R. Haldeman in the case of U. S. v John Mitchell, et al.
            The subpoenas in question are forwarded herewith and the 
        matter presented for such action as the House deems 
        appropriate.
              Sincerely,
                                           Peter W. Rodino, Jr.,
                                                         Chairman.

[[Page 2190]]

                                      ----

                                   [Subpoena]

         [U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 74-110]

             United States of America v. John N. Mitchell, et al., 
                                   Defendants

            To: Congressman Peter W. Rodino, United States House of 
                       Representatives, Washington, D.C.

            You are hereby commanded to appear in the United States 
        District Court for the District of Columbia at Constitution 
        Avenue and John Marshall Place, N.W. in the city of Washington 
        on the 9th day of September 1974 at 10 o'clock A.M. to testify 
        in the case of United States v. John N. Mitchell, et al., and 
        bring with you all tapes and other electronic and/or mechanical 
        recordings or reproductions, and any memoranda, papers, 
        transcripts, and other writings, relating to:
            All non-public statements and testimony of witnesses 
        relating to the matters being investigated pursuant to House 
        Resolution No. 803.
            This subpoena is issued upon application of the Defendant, 
        H. R. Haldeman, 1974.
                                                Frank H. Struth,
                                           Attorney for Defendant,
                                                   H. R. Haldeman.
                                                 James F. Davey,
                                                            Clerk.
                                              By Robert L. Line,
                                                     Deputy Clerk.

    The following resolution, in response to such subpoenas, was 
offered by Mr. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts:

        Concerning Subpoenas Issued in United States Versus John N. 
                              Mitchell, et al.

        Mr. O'Neill: Mr. Speaker, I call up House Resolution 1341 and 
    ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 1341

            Whereas in the case of United States of America against 
        John N. Mitchell et al. (Criminal Case No. 74-110), pending in 
        the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 
        subpoenas duces tecum were issued by the said court and 
        addressed to Representative Peter W. Rodino, United States 
        House of Representatives, and to John Doar, Chief Counsel, 
        House Judicial Subcommittee on Impeachment, House of 
        Representatives, directing them to appear as witnesses before 
        said court at 10:00 antemeridian on the 9th day of September, 
        1974, and to bring with them certain and sundry papers in the 
        possession and under the control of the House of 
        Representatives: Therefore be it
            Resolved, That by the privileges of this House no evidence 
        of a documentary character under the control and in the 
        possession of the House of Representatives can, by the mandate 
        of process of the ordinary courts of justice, be taken from 
        such control or possession but by its permission; be it further
            Resolved, That the House of Representatives under Article 
        I, Section 2 of the Constitution has the sole power of 
        impeachment and has the sole power to investigate and gather 
        evidence to determine whether the House of Representatives 
        shall exercise its constitutional power of impeachment; be it 
        further
            Resolved, That when it appears by the order of the court or 
        of the judge thereof, or of any legal officer charged with the 
        administration of the orders of such court or judge, that 
        documentary evidence in the possession and under the control of 
        the House is needful for use in any court of justice, or before 
        any judge or such legal officer, for the pro

[[Page 2191]]

        motion of justice, this House will take such action thereon as 
        will promote the ends of justice consistently with the 
        privileges and rights of this House; he it further
            Resolved, That when said court determines upon the 
        materiality and the relevancy of the papers and documents 
        called for in the subpoenas duces tecum, then the said court, 
        through any of its officers or agents, have full permission to 
        attend with all proper parties to the proceeding and then 
        always at any place under the orders and control of this House 
        and take copies of all memoranda and notes, in the files of the 
        Committee on the Judiciary, of interviews with those persons 
        who subsequently appeared as witnesses in the proceedings 
        before the full Committee pursuant to House Resolution 803, 
        such limited access in this instance not being an interference 
        with the Constitutional impeachment power of the House, and the 
        Clerk of the House is authorized to supply certified copies of 
        such documents and papers in possession or control of the House 
        of Representatives that the court has found to be material and 
        relevant (except that under no circumstances shall any minutes 
        or transcripts of executive sessions, or any evidence of 
        witnesses in respect thereto, be disclosed or copied) and which 
        the court or other proper officer thereof shall desire, so as, 
        however, the possession of said papers, documents, and records 
        by the House of Representatives shall not be disturbed, or the 
        same shall not be removed from their place of file or custody 
        under any Members, officer, or employee of the House of 
        Representatives, and be it further
            Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be transmitted 
        to the said court as a respectful answer to the subpoenas 
        aforementioned.

    The House adopted the resolution.

Pardon of the Former President

Sec. 15.15 The House having discontinued impeachment proceedings 
    against former President Richard M. Nixon following his 
    resignation, President Gerald R. Ford granted a full pardon to the 
    former President for all offenses against the United States 
    committed by him during his terms in office.

    On Sept. 8, 1974, President Ford issued Proclamation 4311, granting 
a pardon to Richard Nixon:

      Granting Pardon to Richard Nixon by the President of the United 
                             States of America

                               a proclamation

        Richard Nixon became the thirty-seventh President of the United 
    States on January 20, 1969 and was reelected in 1972 for a second 
    term by the electors of forty-nine of the fifty states. His term in 
    office continued until his resignation on August 9, 1974.
        Pursuant to resolutions of the House of Representatives, its 
    Committee on the Judiciary conducted an inquiry and investigation 
    on the impeachment of the President extending over more than eight 
    months. The hearings of the Committee and its deliberations, which 
    received wide national publicity over television, radio, and in 
    printed media, resulted in votes adverse to Richard

[[Page 2192]]

    Nixon on recommended Articles of Impeachment.
        As a result of certain acts or omissions occurring before his 
    resignation from the Office of President, Richard Nixon has become 
    liable to possible indictment and trial for offenses against the 
    United States. Whether or not he shall be so prosecuted depends on 
    findings of the appropriate grand jury and on the discretion of the 
    authorized prosecutor. Should an indictment ensue, the accused 
    shall then be entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury, as 
    guaranteed to every individual by the Constitution.
        It is believed that a trial of Richard Nixon, if it became 
    necessary, could not fairly begin until a year or more has elapsed. 
    In the meantime, the tranquility to which this nation has been 
    restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost by 
    the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United 
    States. The prospects of such trial will cause prolonged and 
    divisive debate over the propriety of exposing to further 
    punishment and degradation a man who has already paid the 
    unprecedented penalty of relinquishing the highest elective office 
    of the United States.
        Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United 
    States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article 
    II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these 
    presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard 
    Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard 
    Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during 
    the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.
        In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this eighth day 
    of September, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventy-
    four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the 
    one hundred and ninety-ninth.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 39 Fed. Reg. 32601, 32602 (Sept. 10, 1974).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some Members of the House suggested in debate that impeachment 
proceedings be resumed, notwithstanding the resignation of the 
President; for example on Sept. 11, 1974, Mr. Ralph H. Metcalfe, of 
Illinois, declared:

        On August 20, 1974, Mr. Speaker, the House adopted House 
    Resolution 1033. This resolution took notice of the fact that on 
    February 6, 1974, the House, by adoption of House Resolution 803, 
    authorized and directed the Judiciary Committee ``to investigate 
    fully and completely whether sufficient grounds existed for the 
    House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to 
    impeach Richard M. Nixon''; further, House Resolution 1033 noted 
    that the Committee on the Judiciary recommended articles of 
    impeachment; that Richard M. Nixon resigned the office of President 
    of the United States; and further, this resolution accepted the 
    report submitted by the Committee on the Judiciary pursuant to 
    House Resolution 803.
        The articles of impeachment voted out by the full committee, 
    Mr. Speaker, were never debated and voted upon by the full House. 
    At that time there was the strong possibility that the former 
    President would be indicted, and that

[[Page 2193]]

    the President would be held accountable for his actions in a court 
    of law. President Ford's action on September 8, 1974, has 
    effectively nullified that course of action. . . .
        Is there a precedent for the impeachment of a civil officer 
    after his resignation? I think there is.
        In Federalist Paper 65, Hamilton states:

            The Model from which the idea of this institution 
        (Impeachment) has been borrowed pointed out that course to the 
        convention.

        The model that Hamilton refers to is clearly that of Great 
    Britain. The course of action that Hamilton refers to is 
    impeachment by the House of Commons and trial before the Lords. 
    And, consequently, it is to the English precedent that we must 
    first turn. Contemporaneous with the drafting and adopting of our 
    own Constitution was the impeachment trial of Warren Hastings in 
    Great Britain. Hastings resigned the governor-generalship of India 
    before he left India in February 1785, 2 years before articles of 
    impeachment were voted by the House of Commons for his conduct in 
    India. The impeachment of Hastings was certainly a fact known to 
    the drafters of the Constitution.
        George Mason, in discussing the impeachment provision on 
    September 8, 1787, in the Constitutional Convention, makes a clear 
    reference to the trial of Hastings. Further, Prof. Arthur Bestor 
    states that--

            American constitutional documents adopted prior to the 
        Federal Convention of 1787 . . . refute the notion that 
        officials no longer in office were supposed by the framers to 
        be beyond the reach of impeachment.

        Bestor specifically cites the constitutions of two States-
    Virginia and Delaware-which were adopted in 1776.
        Bestor also cites a statement of John Quincy Adams, made in 
    1846 after he left the White House, made on the Floor of the House:

            I hold myself, so long as I have the breath of life in my 
        body, amenable to impeachment by this House for everything I 
        did during the time I held any public office.

        Another historical precedent is that of William W. Belknap, 
    Secretary of War in President Grant's cabinet. As Bestor summarizes 
    it:

            Belknap resigned at 10:20 a.m. on the 2nd of March (1876), 
        a few hours before the House of Representatives voted to 
        impeach him, the latter decision being officially notified to 
        the Senate at 12:55 p.m. on the 3rd . . . on May 27, 1876, in a 
        roll-call vote of 37 to 29 (with seven not voting) the Senate 
        ruled that Belknap was amenable to trial by impeachment for 
        acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his resignation 
        of said office before he was impeached.

        Mr. Speaker, there is precedent for the impeachment of a civil 
    officer after he has resigned.
        Another point to make, Mr. Speaker, is that article I of 
    section 3 of the Constitution states, inter alia:

            Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further 
        than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and 
        enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United 
        States.

        There is a twofold penalty provided for in this article and 
    removal from office is but one part of the penalty.
        Mr. Speaker, the former President has not been held accountable 
    for his

[[Page 2194]]

    actions. He has avoided accountability through the impeachment 
    process by resigning, and he has avoided trial on charges of 
    alleged criminal misconduct as contained in the first article of 
    impeachment through the Presidential pardon of his successor.
        Mr. Speaker, history can conclude that the Congress of the 
    United States was confronted with a series of actions by the Chief 
    Executive, actions which constituted a serious danger to our 
    political processes and that we did nothing. The proper forum, and 
    now the only forum, for a debate and a vote on these most serious 
    charges is here in the House. We have no other recourse but to 
    proceed if we are to assure that all future Presidents will be held 
    accountable for their actions whether such future Chief Executives 
    resign or not.
        Mr. Speaker, I urge that the impeachment report of the House 
    Judiciary Committee be debated and that we proceed to vote on the 
    articles of impeachment.(14~)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 120 Cong. Rec. 30695, 30696, 93d Cong. 2d Sess. (footnotes 
        omitted). For a memo inserted in the Record by Senate Majority 
        Leader Michael J. Mansfield (Mont.) on the power of Congress to 
        impeach and try a President after he has resigned, see 120 
        Cong. Rec. 31346-48, 93d Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 17, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Sept. 12, 1974, Ms. Bella S. Abzug, of New York, introduced a 
resolution of inquiry related to the pardon: (15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 120 Cong. Rec. 30964, 30965, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                H. Res. 1363

        Resolved, That the President of the United States is hereby 
    requested to furnish the House, within ten days, with the following 
    information:
        1. What are the specific offenses against the United States for 
    which a pardon was granted to Richard M. Nixon on September 8, 
    1974?
        2. What are the certain acts or omissions occurring before his 
    resignation from the office of President for which Richard Nixon 
    had become liable to possible indictment and trial for offenses 
    against the United States, as stated in your Proclamation of 
    Pardon?
        3. Did you or your representatives have specific knowledge of 
    any formal criminal charges pending against Richard M. Nixon prior 
    to issuance of the pardon? If so, what were these charges?
        4. Did Alexander Haig refer to or discuss a pardon with Richard 
    M. Nixon or representatives of Mr. Nixon at any time during the 
    week of August 4, 1974 or at any subsequent time? If so, what 
    promises were made or conditions set for a pardon, if any? If so, 
    were tapes or transcriptions of any kind made of these 
    conversations or were any notes taken? If so, please provide such 
    tapes, transcriptions or notes.
        5. When was a pardon for Richard M. Nixon first referred to or 
    discussed with Mr. Nixon, or representatives of Mr. Nixon, by you 
    or your representatives or aides, including the period when you 
    were a member of Congress or Vice President?
        6. Who participated in these and subsequent discussions or 
    negotiations with Richard M. Nixon or his representatives regarding 
    a pardon, and at what specific times and locations?
        7. Did you consult with Attorney General William Saxbe or 
    Special

[[Page 2195]]

    Prosecutor Leon Jaworski before making the decision to pardon 
    Richard M. Nixon and, if so, what facts and legal authorities did 
    they give to you?
        8. Did you consult with the Vice Presidential nominee, Nelson 
    Rockefeller, before making the decision to pardon Richard M. Nixon 
    and, if so, what facts and legal authorities did he give to you?
        9. Did you consult with any other attorneys or professors of 
    law before making the decision to pardon Richard M. Nixon, and, if 
    so, what facts or legal authorities did they give to you?
        10. Did you or your representatives ask Richard M. Nixon to 
    make a confession or statement of criminal guilt, and, if so, what 
    language was suggested or requested by you, your representatives, 
    Mr. Nixon, or his representatives? Was any statement of any kind 
    requested from Mr. Nixon in exchange for the pardon, and, if so, 
    please provide the suggested or requested language.
        11. Was the statement issued by Richard M. Nixon immediately 
    subsequent to announcement of the pardon made known to you or your 
    representatives prior to its announcement, and was it approved by 
    you or your representatives?
        12. Did you receive any report from a psychiatrist or other 
    physician stating that Richard M. Nixon was in other than good 
    health? If so, please provide such reports

    The resolution of inquiry was referred to the Committee on the 
Judiciary. A subcommittee thereof held hearings on the matter of the 
pardon of former President Nixon, and President Ford appeared in person 
and testified before such subcommittee on Oct. 17, 1974.