Word: taping
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1970-1979
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Undoubtedly at the grand jury's direction, members of Jaworski's staff also gave to Sirica a locked and bulging briefcase. It is believed to contain transcripts of White House tape recordings, documents and other evidence that was gathered painstakingly?and often despite dogged resistance from Nixon?by Jaworski and his fired predecessor, Archibald Cox. The evidence almost certainly is meant to support any charges made in the report against Nixon. The briefcase is also expected to reach the House impeachment investigators if that should be the course Sirica elects...
...original Watergate grand jury is complete. Sirica ordered the understandably weary jurors to be prepared to return within two weeks. One pending bit of unfinished business could be serious indeed for Nixon. The FBI and Jaworski's staff have been investigating the 18½-minute erasure on one presidential tape recording, as well as the claimed nonexistence of two other tapes and unexplained gaps in several more...
...produce more indictments that would give new impetus to the impeachment sentiment in Congress. Indictments may be handed up this week in the plumbers' case. Said one Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee, "Impeachment is most likely to come in the area of obstruction of justice ? the tape erasures, the possibility that the President offered money to people to keep quiet or to commit perjury, the possibility that he authorized bribes in exchange for campaign contributions...
...most intriguing detail in the indictment was one of the counts against Haldeman. In his televised testimony before the Ervin committee last July 30 and 31, Haldeman told of listening to a tape of a conversation among Nixon, John Dean and, for a time, himself that had taken place on March 21, 1973. The indictment contends that Haldeman committed perjury when he related his version of what the tape records. Since the jurors have heard the tape, the conclusion is inescapable that it does not confirm Haldeman's testimony...
...charges against Haldeman raise an obvious question: Why would he risk perjury by testifying publicly that the tape contained those five words of Nixon's if, indeed, it did not? One answer may lie in the fact that Haldeman was testifying only a couple of weeks after the existence of the secret Nixon taping system had been revealed to the Ervin committee. Nixon later fought vainly on two court levels to withhold his tapes from Archibald Cox, then the Watergate special prosecutor. He yielded seven of them, including the one of the March 21 meeting, only after the public uproar...