[00.44.00] Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it is important to continue to present proof of the charges in the bill of impeachment. I am sure that there are going to be many byroads, and many other issues that will be brought -up, but I think it is vital that in these proceedings that the evidence be spelled out so that -we all can understand it better. In support of the first portion of the bill of impeachment, Mr. Sarbanes presented some very clear evidence of the President's knowledge almost immediately after the June 17, 1972, burglary at the Watergate. I think that anybody here can understand the reluctance of the White House and the President to have the public find out about this, and find out. of the connection with his Committee To Re-Elect of Mr. Hunt and the other people who -were arrested for the burglary. Well. one of the choices would have been just to let them go to jail, and call it a bizarre incident. I think it is fairly clear that this was the, choice, and every effort was made to have it appear to be just a bizarre incident. Yes, perhaps there could have been some connection with the White House with Mr. Hunt and so forth. Or another choice would have been just to admit Mr. Hunt 'worked at the, White I-louse, yes, had an office there, was in the White house phone book, and then down the road let Liddy. chief counsel, I believe for- the Committee To Re-Elect, surface. He was bound to surface, Well, why not take that choice? That could be ridden out perhaps by the White House, even as Watergate itself was ridden out. But, why do you imagine the President had to or felt he. had to encourage such a massive coverup after June 17, shortly after the burglary? Why not let it hang out', This was discussed quite a lot. We all remember that in the transcripts. Why not direct the FBI to go ahead and do a darn good job, and really complete the investigation as they started out trying to do? Why involve the CIA in this Unfortunate behavior? Why encourage almost demand, that the CIA to the FBI and say, stop, don't continue your investigation stop where you are. By all means, don't act into that money &at was found on one of the burglars. Well, incidentally, the efforts by Mr. Dean and the efforts to direct the CIA to influence the FBI not to continue the investigation -were successful. They were successful until Julie 5 when Pat Gray finally said no, I am not going to do it any more and went to the CIA. The CIA said of course we don't have anything to do with anything in Mexico where your investigation might disclose some unfortunate things that are going on down there or something clandestine by the CIA. Well, here is the key to it. Immediately the next day actually the White House, knew that Hunt was involved. His name was in the book. He had an office in the Executive Office Building, And Liddy had to be exposed somewhere down the line. The, money on the burglars could immediately be traced to Liddy, the Mexican banks, and then back to the Committee To Re-Elect the President. Sloan had given the money to Liddy to launder. That was all sure to come out. But, what would the exposure of Hunt and Liddy reveal In addition to their participation in the Watergate burglary and their connection with the Committee To Re-Elect the President and the White House? Hunt, just about the original plumber, came aboard the White House in July 1971. Suppose--and this probably would have happened if it. had all come out right there with a hard-hitting FBI investigation that after Mr. Hunt went to work as a plumber at the White House in late 1971 he composed the fake Diem cables, attempting to link former President Kennedy with the Diem assassination. He tried very hard to. sell those cables, not to sell them but to get Life magazine to write them up as real. It is very much to the credit of the magazine that they did not do it. On July 22, just a few weeks after Mr. Hunt became a plumber at the White House he went to the CIA, and obtained a red wig, a voice changer, and fake identification papers and so forth. He Put on this disguise shortly after that and went to Massachusetts to interview a Clifton DeMott in hopes of digging up some dirt on Senator Edward Kennedy. What else was Mr. Hunt doing during this period shortly before Watergate that would have been exposed? He had taken the famous trip to Denver, Colo., in the same red wig, with the voice changer to interview Dita Beard, who was in a hospital bed there, in connection with the ITT case. We all remember the famous Dita Beard-ITT memorandum. And then for all we. know, another project of the plumbers that John Dean testified to but did not come Off, might have been exposed-- The planned bombing, allegedly ordered by Charles Colson, of the Brookings- Institution so that in the confusion people could rush in and take out, a report that -was being written. But, more importantly, what would have been exposed. the burglary, the burglary in Los Angeles in September 2, 1972, of Dr. Fielding office in Los Angeles. Who was involved in that burglary that was also involved, participated, and was arrested at the Democratic National Committee? Mr. Barker, Mr. Martinez, Mr. DeDiego The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman I has as expired Mr. BUTLER. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Butler. [00.50.45]