Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 Washington DC
Robert MacNEIL in NPACT studio. MacNEIL says that 5 days are done, 3 more have been added, starting on June 5.
DO NOT USE Jim LEHRER says there are several obvious things to talk about, what was accomplished today and in the first five days in sum, calls on guest commentators (Alan BARTH and Adrian FISHER) to comment.
Alan BARTH. I've been turning that over in my overcrowded mind, that has received so many impressions that I'm not entirely sure what I think. I'm pretty sure that I think that this has been useful and worthwhile. I think that it has been the indespensible means of giving to the American people a genuine basis for jugding where the responsibility lies for Watergate, with all that terms implies of moral decay, of scullduggary, and meaness. I think that the congressional investigation, with all its faults and this one has been singulary free frm them so far, is a great engine for the discovery of truth and the presentation of it to the public which will come to its own conclusions when it's heard the facts.
Adrian FISHER. I agree with all that Alan has said. Being much more short range, I think the last two days, particularly this morning, represented a failure in an attempt to impeach McCord. He may have been impeached 5% or 10 %, but they were trying to shoot him down. I think the evidence showed he perhaps had a little bit more about Mr Alch's relationships through the CIA then in fact existed, but the evidence did show that most of the things he talked about were sustained. Particularly when McCord said that he felt he was under pressure with an offer of clemancy. When you add everything together, I think it was not unreasonable for him to reach that conclusion. I think a reasonable man couldn't reach anything else. So the attempt to go after McCord, apart from the fact that he is a little more detailed on some things. And I think that the facts are he knows more about things than are so. The attempt to impeach him I think failed.
MacNEIL says that this is significant because McCORD is most important witness thus far in terms of connecting HIGH-UPS to the conspiracy.
Alan BARTH. McCord is the man who has laid out the structure and substance of the 'plot'.
DO NOT USE LEHRER asks whether the significance of McCORD'S testimony prompted the Senators to really grill ALCH in the cross-examination.
Alan BARTH. says that the ALCH controversy started to unravel the BIPARTISANSHIP of the hearings as Senator BAKER and Senator ERVIN disagreed about the propriety of administering POLYGRAPH tests. Says that BAKER should have kept in mind Senator ERVIN's longstanding objection to polygraph tests, an objection with which Barth professes agreement.
DO NOT USE LEHRER wonders whether the careers of the Senators have been enhanced or damaged by their roles in the hearings' first five days.
FISHER says he doubts that it's made much difference to anyone's standing thus far, But that Senator BAKER had better be careful about how he plays the Polygraph issue, he could be seen as statesmanlike, or unreasonable.
(Do not use brief shots of Lehrer) BARTH says that BAKER's status has been enhanced, comments that the group of Senators on the committee has a "central casting quality" to it, with a diverse range of "types". Says that many have been "playing the role of the country lawyer", speaking bluntly and plainly, with Senator TALMADGE taking the prize for that area.
head/shoulders MacNEIL. MacNEIL thanks the guest commentators, wishes for them to return for the next round of hearings.