Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
[01.25.54] Mr. HUTCHINSON. I will claim the time on this side. The CHAIRMAN. -Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. HUTCHINSON. I will claim the time on this side, and I -will yield 5 minutes to Mr. Wiggins. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wiggins is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. WIGGINS. I thank the Chairman for yielding. Ladies and gentlemen, we reached all agreement a few moments ago that what this case was all about, was the willful evasion of taxes. We know, although the gentleman from Iowa causes me to doubt that he knows that this case has nothing to do with an innocent state. If the President, in fact, erred on his income, tax but did so innocently or relied in good faith upon his counsel, then -we are not talking tax fraud in this case. It is a sweeping inaccurate statement, to say any citizen who claimed an improper deduction in this amount would be criminally prosecuted. That is not so. Such a prosecution can only proceed if there is fraud. And I want to discuss the evidence, not a theory, not a, theory at all, but the evidence with respect to whether or not fraud exists in this case. This story began in the fall of 1968, ladies and gentlemen, after the, election, when President-elect -Nixon met with President Johnson. President Johnson recommended to President, Nixon that he might consider giving certain pre- presidential papers as a gift and taking a tax deduction. President, Johnson recommended to President-elect -Nixon the name of an appraiser, one that -Mr. Johnson had used when he claimed his deduction. The appraiser's name was Newman and he was from Chicago. President Nixon apparently felt that was worthy of pursuing and contacted his law partners up in New York, the firm of Nixon, Mudge, Rose, and an attorney proceeded thereafter to perfect a gift of certain pre-Presidential papers for the taxable year 1968. Now, that was the only Presidential Involvement in the year 1968, President-elect Nixon, talking to President Johnson and dealing through his attorneys concerning a gift. We move now into the year 1969, which is the critical year insofar as Presidential actions are concerned. In February of that, year, John Ehrlichman sent a memorandum to the, President in which he discussed tax planning for the President and suggested that the President might well consider making a gift of his pre-Presidential papers. There was no question at that time as to the. propriety and lawfulness of making such a gift if it were properly perfected. The. only Presidential act so far as our records disclose is the President writing on the bottom of that memorandum the word "good," and a few odd sentences with respect to a, foundation. But the word "good" is the operative word, suggesting that the President was instructing Ehrlichman to go forward and perfect the gift of his pre-Presidential papers. The President now is removed from the picture for a period of many months. Thereafter, John Ehrlichman and Ed Morgan of the White House, in cooperation with Mr. DeMarco, a tax attorney out in the Los Angeles area, performed certain acts for the purpose of claiming a gift. I make no claim, ladies and gentlemen, that they acted properly. That will be determined at a later time. But we, are talking about the President's actions and his alleged fraud. The President played no role. ladies and gentlemen, in that at all. The next act of the President is in a, social occasion at. the White House, when he meets -Mr. Newman and as Mr. Newman goes down the social greeting line, and we have all had some experience in that, there was a brief exchange about the appraisal, appraisal of the pre-Presidential papers. Thereafter, the next act occurs in January, rather, in December. The President signs a bill, a tax reform bill. And the final act upon which this whole case is premised is that in April, April 10, 1970, Mr. DeMarco and Mr. Kalmbach, his two attorneys, come to the Oval Office .With a completed tax return. They spend approximately 35 minutes in the Oval Office, a portion of which was devoted to pleasantries, approximately 10 minutes of which Was devoted to the tax return Itself. It is stated by the, witnesses that they went over it page by page and now critically, ladies and gentlemen, critically the, evidence' is that the President's attorneys then and there stated to him that these deductions were properly taken and the President signed the return, A few moments thereafter 'Mr. DeMarco took the return upstairs for Mrs. Nixon to sign and that is it. That is all the evidence we are talking about. Now, on that--on that this web of fraud is spun and I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, it is wholly, wholly unsupported by the evidence. The CHAIRMAN. The 5 minutes of the gentleman has expired. Mr. Hutchinson. [01.31.20]