Images (40)
दस्तावेज़
| id |
id
574777798
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 40K
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
Tol
NEWS SUMMARY
July 27, 1973
(Thurs., Nets Wires)
The major stories of the day:
"Historians will talk about July 26th for a long time to come",
for "we have embarked on what is w/out doubt 1 of the most
serious and significant constitutional disputes in our history",
said Chancellor. RN's refusal to comply w/subpoenas led all
nets as film clips focused on: Ervin comm. action unanimously
voting to seek declaratory judgment in court; Cox before grand
jury and Sirica getting "show cause" order w/ 7 Aug. return
date; and Wright (msilent clips) defending RN's position while
Warren said RN would abide by "definitive" decision from
Supreme Court
Julie staunchly defended RN's refusal to release
tapes and said he'll speak out on Watergate in about 2 weeks.
Chancellor said RN "defied" subpoenas bringing US closer to
clash of Presidency w/Hill and Courts unpreced entedin US
history. Smith called it "1 of the greatest legal challenges to
the Presidency" while Mudd intoned that "what was 13 months
ago a bungled, botched attempt to break into DNC has become
1 of those rare constitutional face-offs between WH-Hill. 11 On
ABC/CBS clips Ervin read RN's letter that for reasons given
comm. in earlier letter to Ervin he couldn't comply w/subpoena,
but would give up specific papers as identified by comm. On
ABC Ervin called that condition "impossible of fulfillment"
because comm. couldn't identify documents it had never seen.
Of Baker's motion to begin litigation for document's release,
Ervin on all nets said "litigation's essential to determine if
RN's above the law and immune from all the duties and respon-
sibilities
that devolve upon ordinary citizens. 11 Noted ABC's
Donaldson, "that may be Ervin's description but it's not RN's
who sees (issue) as a battle over exec privilege and separation
of powers.
Meanwhile Cox was busy getting show cause order and saying
on all nets that while he was sure RN's argument was "presented
in good faith", it was "quite wrong" since long line of precedents
cited by RN apply to giving papers to Hill and not to refusal to
supply courts and grand jury info pertaining to possible charges
of obstruction of justice and perjury against high gov't officials.
copy to
al
BAK tohankle
2 would like wright a linef the on this on issue It sound grame]
Relations
belongs_to