Advanced Search
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 (1/2)
DO NOT USE VOICEOVER Image of paper copy of Senate Resolution 60-- voiceover of Robert MACNEILL reads text of resolution, zoom in on opening paragraph on page - build out effect to full screen image of Capitol Dome.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 (1/2)
DO NOT USE Studio voiceover introduces NPACT'S "gavel to gavel" coverage, introduces NPACT correspondent MacNEILL. Pullback from Dome image into studio, MacNEILL seated with image projected over his left shoulder. MacNEIL begins to introduce the day's hearings. Notes a return to the original plan of the hearings after two days of investigating CONFLICTS in testimony between Jim McCORD and Gerald ALCH, relating to the existence of a COVERUP effort. MacNeil notes that the cross-examination of ALCH was the "most vigorous" yet, including a threat of perjury charges. Today s' hearings will return to the original business of finding out about the WATERGATE BURGLARY. MacNeil notes that due to the slow progress of the hearings, 3 additional hearings have been scheduled for the first week of June.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 (1/2)
DO NOT USE Cut to shot of Jim LEHRER and MacNEIL seated side by side - Jim LEHRER says that Senator ERVIN was more aggressive about taking charge of the hearings today, demonstrating "tenacity and charm" in process.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. DASH. Now, Mr. Alch- Mr. ALCH. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. Could you again tell us, you indicated what fee you received from Mr. McCord. What was that fee? Mr. ALCH. $25,000 plus expenses which expenses have not been received yet. Mr. DASH. Yes. Could you tell us in what form you received that money? Mr. ALCH. Periodic payments in cash with the exception of the last two installments which were in the form of cashier's checks in relatively smaller amounts of $1,700. The bulk of the money received was in cash in $100 bills. Mr. DASH. $100 bills. Did you have any knowledge or information or belief as to where the money was coming from? Mr. ALCH. No, sir, and I believe that in one of Mr. McCord's depositions he stated that at the time he paid me my fee he did not tell me where it came from except that it came from him.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. DASH. Then, therefore, since it was you, Mr. McCord's lawyer, who transmitted to Mr. McCord his first notice of a telephone call, he was to receive on the night of January 8, and that Mr. McCord knew you were conveying a message from Mr. Bittman, and it was that call which ultimately resulted in a meeting where an offer of Executive clemency was made to your client, presented as coming from the highest levels of the White House. Really, was it so unreasonable for Mr. McCord to conclude that you were involved in setting him up for such an offer of Executive clemency? Mr. ALCH. If he made that conclusion it was factually false. But let us suppose he did make that conclusion. This was in a period of time, as the trial was just about to commence, where I enjoyed with him what I considered to be a very fine relationship. Why wouldn t he not have come up to me and asked me about it or told me something to the effect that pursuant to your message to me I got a call last night? That never happened. Mr. DASH. Well, at that time perhaps he had begun to distrust you, Mr. Alch - that he needed you as counsel for his trial but after that call perhaps he had lost confidence in you. Mr. ALCH. In response to that, Mr. Dash, from what I know of Mr. McCord, it would seem to me rather or highly unlikely that he would go to trial with a lawyer whom he did not trust.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Alch, let me ask you a few questions. Going back to your original testimony concerning the sequence of events as you described them, what evidently was going on in Mr. McCord's mind as he relayed these things to you - his thoughts about his own defense and those matters? First of all, as I understand your testimony concerning matter, which Mr. McCord considered to be important to his own defense, he raised the matters of the tapping of his line and the bugging of the lines of the Chilean or the Israeli Embassies. Now, how did he explain this to you? How did you indicate that that could or would be a defense for him? Mr. ALCH. He analogized that to a situation which he said arose in the Ellsberg case. That if I made a motion for disclosure of such intercepted telephone calls which he thought were intercepted, that the Government, because of embarrassment or national security reasons would refuse to divulge it and would, therefore, in lieu of divulging it dismiss the charge against him.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. DASH. He actually mentioned to you that he received a call from a man, you will recall, named Caldwell? Mr. ALCH. Not the next day. Mr. DASH. Not the next day? Mr. ALCH. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. And then he refused to discuss that with you any further? Mr. ALCH. That is correct. Mr. DASH. Now, also Mr. Caulfield in his testimony before this committee stated that at one of his meetings -- Mr. ALCH. Mr. Dash, may I add one thing to the last question, if I may? Mr. DASH. Yes. Mr. ALCH. When Mr. McCord told me that he had received a call from a man named Caldwell, and specifically refused to tell me who he was or what the nature of the conversation was, what I did was to see whether or not there would develop any tampering or modification or interference with my advice to Mr. McCord as his counsel or whether or not I was suddenly going to be met with suggestion to change the trial strategy that Mr. McCord and I had already agreed upon. Mr. McCord was free to see whomever he pleased but at no time did indications ever come to me that either Mr. McCORD of his own doing or potentially as a result of being talked to by others was either disregarding my advice, modifying my advice, or introducing a new approach to the trial. That never happened.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. DASH. In your relationship with Mr. McCord, did you find Mr. McCord a suspicious individual? Mr. ALCH. I hesitate to use the word suspicious. There were times when I would communicate with him and ask him for positions or information on particular topics, and he would not give me immediate responses. His attitude would be or his response would be "Let me think about it" or words to that effect, and days would pass and then I would get a definitive response. Whether or not that can properly serve as a predicate for a conclusion of one being suspicious I hesitate or I can't say. Mr. DASH. I think in your testimony and in your statement you have indicated that he really did not give you all the information that has now come forward. That he did not confide in you concerning everything about the case. Mr. ALCH. That attitude commenced from my very first meeting with him but I might say in my experience as a criminal defense attorney complete disclosure by a client is not something that happens in every case.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. DASH. Mr. Caulfield, in his testimony before this committee, stated that at one of the meetings that he had with Mr. Dean during the time he was making offers of Executive clemency to Mr. McCord, that Mr. Dean told him, Mr. Caulfield, that Mr. McCord was "Not cooperating with his attorney." Could Mr. Dean have referred to or been referring to anyone other than you? Mr. ALCH. Well, the fact is that I was Mr. McCord's attorney at that time, to my knowledge, and the only reason I add that caveat is this: I was informed that, when-I was not informed, when I read a transcript of, I believe, Mr. Caulfield's testimony, I believe he said that in one of his meetings with Mr. McCord prior to the completion of trial, that the subject of bail came up, and Mr. Caulfield stated, maybe your lawyer Alch can handle it," or words to that effect, to which, according to Mr. Caulfield, Mr. McCord replied, "Well, I am negotiating with another lawyer. Maybe he can handle it." Now, this was before the trial ended. His present lawyer is Mr. Fensterwald. I had no contact or even knowledge that such a man existed until after Mr. McCord's incarceration. So I now think and ask myself, was Mr. McCord in any contact with any other attorney during the trial? If that statement about "I am not cooperating with your attorney" or "Get close to your attorney" was directed toward me, I can't explain it because, as I have explained to the committee yesterday, Mr. McCord was cooperating with me every day.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee Hearings on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 24, 1973 - Testimony of Gerald Alch
Mr. THOMPSON. According to what he told you did he consider this a complete defense for him, that this would extricate him from the situation and cause his case to be dismissed? Mr. ALCH. Yes, sir, he didn't say it was a complete defense. He described it as a means of effectuating the dismissal of the charge against him. Mr. THOMPSON. Did he indicate whether or not he placed the call to those two embassies specifically for that purpose? Mr. ALCH. He did. Mr. THOMPSON. I believe you stated he also furnished you materials concerning the Mafia and the DNC, Israel and the Mafia, Jack Anderson and Government contracts, these matters. Did he indicate in any way that these could possibly be used as a defense for him or could help his defense in any way? Mr. ALCH. When he gave me that material, he said, let us get on the offensive, let us make the Democrats - put the Democrats on the defense. He said, let us stir up something. When he told me that and when he sent me the memorandum. I simply took no action on it.
Waco Hearings - Day 4
Waco Hearings - Day 4 (7/24/1995) Master 12009 (Tape One) Tape begins at end of Bryant testimony. 13.03.53 Shot of Committee members, press photographers, Mr. Blute asks questions to Mr. Rodriguez. 13.16.14 Chairman Mr. McCollum says "..there are quite a substantial number of very significant specific questions that only the ATF and some of you that are here today can answer that really should be brought out, I think public needs to have us ask these questions so that you can respond to them...." Break in time code - 14.28.10 Chairman Mr. McCollum pounds gavel, various members questioned. 15.11.09 Mr. Schumer says "... I think a number of things have come out pretty clearly first is of course that (David) Koresh fired first, that's undisputed. Second, that the element of surprise was broken, that's undisputed. Third, that the decision to go ahead once the element of surprise was broken was almost certainly the wrong decision, that's the overwhelming consensus here and then we get into the debate of who made the decision to go ahead ..."
Flash Points USA - America At War - Jean Folkerts
Flash Points USA America At War - Jean Folkerts Interview (raw footage from interview with Jean Folkerts, a Professor of Media History at GWU, George Washington University) 01.01.53 Jean Folkerts is asked question about Abraham Lincoln, what lead him into war? Jean Folkerts says that it was the firing of Fort Sumter, that Lincoln was not the type of President eager to go into war, that he was "dragged" into the Civil War. That the public was divided in many ways, some people in the South wanted to have a division, to be separate from the North and there were many people Northerners and Southerners who were highly supportive of the Union. There was a great deal of "fear" associated with the stability of the country at that time. There were Northerners also who thought we need to put these Southerners down and finish this "once and for all"....The whole issue of slavery was there, there were abolitionists, people who wanted to deport all the africans to Liberia, there was not a unified opinion on slavery. 01.03.58 Break in tape, cameraman asks Folkerts not to lean to side 01.04.34 Jean Folkerts continues "It was keeping the Union together which was the final motivator I think for Lincoln. He was a country lawyer from Illinois, he was very committed to the Union and the sense of the country as a whole. His background didn't really lead him into being a "commander in chief", if anything he was un-prepared". Says Lincoln is remembered today "as the hero, the emancipator, as the person who ended slavery, Lincoln enjoys a great historical reputation." Folkerts continues by saying that he wasn't a very good commander in chief, that he had a lot of trouble with his generals, they were always fighting amongst each other. 01.05.58 Jean Folkerts says that the war helped Lincolns presidency, but since he was assassinated that that always helps your "hero" status, once he was assassinated he didn't have to finish his Presidency and didn't have to go through the re-construction of the country, he like Kennedy went out on the "high point". Says "If you die as a young President especially as Kennedy did, Kennedy never got tied up with the legacy of Vietnam even though he started it, because he was assassinated and was the young President hero and will always be that." Continues to say that "Kennedy has always escaped the legacy of Vietnam, because it really was Lyndon Johnson who did the build up of the troops and who is mostly identified with Vietnam." Kennedy had this aura of "great grace" and the ability to move internationally with a degree of class. 01.08.33 Jean Folkerts talks about Woodrow Wilson and says that World War One was a very controversial war, people thought it was a european war, that we were only going to war because the munitions manufacturers were going to make money off of it, Wilson had a vision of world peace. "Wilson's unfortunate legacy is that the League of Nations did not transcend the circumstances ending the war. Had that been a stronger legacy then Wilson might be looked in a more popular vein." Wilson was perceived as an intellectual, bookish, and not a popular President." 01.10.15 Jean Folkerts says "I think very few of these Presidents have experiences that really lead them to be good commanders in chief. They have to do more with their leadership qualities and the ability to talk to different kinds of people, take in different kinds of information, listen to different kinds of opinions, so that I think the personality rather than the experience is more important." Folkerts says Kennedy was known for bringing in a lot of intellectuals into government. She says "The good leaders can hear different opinions, can think about them and can understand sometimes that their initial impulse is not the correct impulse necessarily. That's the criteria for a "good leader" not necessarily a commander in chief, but I think that's what makes a good commander in chief rather than someone who's necessarily been a private or a sergeant or fought in a war. Although, once fighting in a war certainly gives you an understanding you don't have otherwise." 01.11.39 Interviewer asks Folkerts, who was the best war-time President? Jean Folkerts says "In many ways I think FDR was. Roosevelt had a lot of charisma, he got credited with ending the Depression, probably the war had more to do with ending the Depression than Franklin Delano Roosevelt did. But, there are many, many people in the generation just older than us that believe that Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved the country from poverty." Folkerts continues saying the WWII was the least controversial war, because after Pearl Harbor it was seen as a war to protect our country. 01.13.40 Speaking about President Harry Truman, saying that the White House reporters liked Truman, they saw him as a really honest, decent, straight forward person. However, Truman did not like publishers, they didn't like each other. People didn't trust Truman's relationship with the Russians. Speaks about Truman's decision to drop the Atomic bomb, that it was about "ending the war". Truman's legacy ended up being the Korean war and the cold war. Folkerts says that Truman doesn't stand out as a very charismatic President. 01.19.21 Jean Folkerts talks about air raids, fear in the country at that time of communists, red china, the russians. She says that President Truman's legacy suffers for the Atomic bomb, that he actually mentioned to reporters at the time that the atomic bomb was being considered for use in the Korean War. 01.23.03 Folkerts speaks about President Richard Nixon, that the Vietnam War pales by comparison of what ultimately brought Nixon down, that "Nixon's legacy is always going to be Watergate, so the fact that he ended the Vietnam war will be seen more I think as an evitable end to something that wasn't working, rather than some brilliant move of Nixon. Nixon does get credit for going into China and foreign policy." Continues to say that by the end of LBJ's Presidency, it was clear who ever was the next President was going to get out of Vietnam, it was so mired at that point, the public had turned sour, the public and the media turned sour, but they turned sour after the public officials turned sour. She says that the "public officials started coming back, Senators, Congressman, started coming back from Vietnam saying I don't think this is going to work, this isn't going to continue..... once that comes back than it starts to swell and you get a bigger public domain of opinion about it. So the public reaction against Vietnam by the time Nixon comes in that I think it's really considered inevitable that it will be ended." 01.25.00 Jean Folkerts states that the Vietnam War damages LBJ's legacy enormously, all of the retrospective looks at the Gulf of Tonkin and feeling that that was unnecessary, all the protests, "how many kids have you killed today" ..... The positive side to LBJ's legacy is Civil Rights."
Flash Points USA - America At War - Jean Folkerts
Flash Points USA America At War - Jean Folkerts Interview (raw footage from interview with Jean Folkerts, a Professor of Media History at GWU, George Washington University) 01.26.00 Jean Folkerts says "It's very difficult to mount a war, it is very difficult to sustain a war and that is the fact that it is so public. If you go back to WWII, we were bombing Tokyo and children and women and men and everyone was dying, it was just not that reported. There's more strength in some ways when the public doesn't know what's happening in terms of sustainability, that doesn't mean that it should be that way or it's right or wrong, it's just that it's more sustainable, and we could argue that it is also harder to maintain private negotiation among countries because everything is so public today." Folkerts mentions that the whole attitude of the media towards war had changed after the Bay of Pigs Invasion, that the press felt that it had been betrayed. 01.28.44 Folkerts says that "If the atrocities in the prison in Baghdad were not public, if we did not know about them, they would not be having a negative impact on our understanding of the war, it's having a negative impact. Now, that's not to say that those should not be made public, but it makes it more difficult for a commander in chief to sustain public support of a war." 01.29.44 Jean Folkerts says "I think you can't be a great President without something to remember you by. So you have a president who operates in a time in which there is no war, then something else significant has to happen through which you are remembered. So if you don't have a great war, you need a great cause or a great historical event or a great personality, something that carries you into the minds of the generations that follow you." Continues "In very few circumstances does war really carry you in the positive hearts and minds of the people who follow you. It does in FDR's case, because of the known atrocities of Hitler and the feeling of had we not gone to war the landscape of the world might be very different today."
Flash Points USA - America At War - Jean Folkerts
Flash Points USA America At War - Jean Folkerts Interview (raw footage from interview with Jean Folkerts, a Professor of Media History at GWU, George Washington University) 02.00.40 Jean Folkerts talking about the Iraq War, "If people perceived the Iraqi War either the first one or the second one, the second one obviously since we're actually in Iraq and staying there for the time being, if people perceived that as a war that would make a difference in how the landscape of the world looked, it would be a very different kind of public opinion and I think that's why despite all the things that have gone wrong, that the support for Bush hasn't eroded more. It has eroded a lot, but I think that the reason it hasn't eroded more is that there is a kind of tension about what happens if you don't confront sort of terrorism .....there's enough tension in the country, enough fear that if you don't confront terrorism in some major way that the landscape of the world might well be very different down the road." 02.02.02 End of Tape
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Genevieve Wood
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Genevieve Wood Interview (raw footage from interview with Genevieve Wood spokesman for the Family Research Council - FRC)
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Rev. Barry Lynn
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Rev. Barry Lynn (raw footage from Interview of Rev. Barry Lynn - the Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State)
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Ken Starr
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Ken Starr (raw footage form interview of lawyer Kenneth Starr)
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Ken Starr
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Ken Starr (raw footage form interview of lawyer Kenneth Starr)
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Gary Bauer
Gary Bauer (President of American Values) responds to question about gay marriage, partial birth abortion, prayer in schools, the pledge of allegiance, ten commandments monument, he says "There's been a cultural war in the United States, even though I know it's politically incorrect even to mention the phrase, but there's no doubt there has been a cultural war for several decades quite frankly. One could go all the way back to the school prayer decision by the Supreme Court in 1963 and I think these are issues that deeply divide the American people and that say a lot about the philosophical divide in our country and unfortunately they're issues that are being settled more or less in the courts which I think is a very unhealthy development."
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Gary Bauer
Flash Points USA III - God & Country - Gary Bauer (raw material of interview with Gary Bauer - President of American Values) 03.07.33 Gary Bauer speaks about moral legislation "One of the un-challenged so-called truths these days is that you can't legislate morality. I think that's one of the most foolish things I've ever heard of. All the great debates in American history, the more important debates in Congress, are in fact an attempt to enshrine somebody's morality. Lyndon Johnson, when he came up with the "great society" in our obligation to help the poor, which many Conservatives disagreed with as programs, nonetheless Johnson had the high moral ground. He argued, as well as other Liberals argued that we had a moral obligation to help those who were less fortunate than us. So, I can't imagine having debates on these public policy issues, without attempting to legislate somebody's idea of what's morally correct." 03.09.26 Mr. Gary Bauer is asked for his opinion of the courts ruling of Lawrence v. Texas, Bauer responds "The Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas was embraced by some conservatives quite frankly, because they felt that these laws on sodomy were virtually never enforced anyway, and that it's a bad idea to have laws on the books that are not being seriously pursued. But, I think what was really troubling about the Lawrence case is the sweeping terms the Supreme Court used to write their decision. The Supreme Court traditionally uses very narrow language to avoid exactly the problem that they ran into in Lawrence, the language is so broad that it looks like it's virtually impossible in the Supreme Court mind, for any state to in any way regulate what goes on in somebody's home. My goodness, the ramifications of that are severe, there's everything from child abuse, to drug use to child pornography, I certainly don't think the country's at the place where if three people want to get married and have relations in the privacy of their own home that we're ready to embrace that. So, the court was very broad in their statement and I think have raised some really troubling implications." 03.10.45 Gary Bauer states "It's a nice bumper sticker, Keep the Law Off of My Bedroom, but sure there's all sorts of things that go on in every room in the house that the state has an interest in. If someone is abusing somebody in the bedroom, that is in most states a crime. Incest in the bedroom, that is relations between close blood relatives is crime. There are a number of people in certain areas of Utah that want to have the right to be with their six wives in the bedroom, we made a decision way back in the 1800's that America would not tolerate that. So, yes there are things that go in our bedroom that the state does have an interest in." 03.11.36 Speaking about gay rights Bauer says "We live in a democratic republic and there are times when on specific legislative issues you have to make compromises, but I'm not willing to compromise on basic issues on the public policy agenda for that movement. Marriage is between a man and a woman, it has been for over three thousand years of western civilization. There is no country in the world nor any state in the United States who has ever voted to make marriage anything other than the union of one man and one woman. I don't see where there's a compromise on an issue like that. Marriage is either the uniting of the two sexes or it isn't, so there are some things where folks like me will resist with every ounce of political strength that we can muster." 03.12.41 Mr. Gary Bauer is asked his personal view of homosexuality, Bauer replies "Well, my faith teaches that homosexual conduct is a sin. It's no worse or any better than any other sin, and my faith also teaches we're all sinners, so it's not that I look down upon those that are engaged in homosexual activity, they are in need and as an evangelical christian I believe their in a savior just as I am. But, I do believe that conduct is a sin, just as stealing or other sins that the major faiths teach about. I'm not a theologan however, and my role in this debate is not a role about the moral issues of homosexuality. My life has been devoted to public policy and I believe the "gay rights" political agenda is from top to bottom terrible, and I think most Americans disagree with that agenda." 03.13.47 Interviewer asks Gary Bauer if homosexuality should be made a crime, Bauer responds "The country is no longer debating by and large the question of whether the question homosexuality should be a crime and in fact the Texas v. Lawrence case struck down sodomy statutes, ati-sodomy statutes which I think pretty well ends that arguement." 03.14.09 Helicopter noise heard in background, interviewer compliments Gary Bauer and says his response was perfect but they want to do another take, then Gary Bauer says "My wife accuses me of speaking in sound-bites." Gary Bauer restates remarks on homosexuality, then says that gay and lesbians can "change" lifestyle, he says he knows people who have left the gay lifestyle and now have a normal family life. 03.16.33 Gary Bauer says "I reject completely any comparison of the battle over the radical "gay rights" agenda with the "civil rights" battle and some of the other issues that we've dealt with in this country over the years. This is a fundamental question about something that every culture agrees about. Every culture over thousands of years of history has attempted to discourage homosexual activity and certainly no culture has tried to elevate it. On the basic question of whether homosexual relationships between two men can be morally or legally the equivalent of the love between a husband and wife, I'm confident that we're on the right side of history and that this radical movement will in fact fail."
Flash Points USA - America at War - James Thorber
Flash Points USA - America at War - James Thorber (raw material of interview with James Thorber, answers questions related to various Presidents) 03.02.15 James Thorber responds to Teddy Roosevelt quote "You can't be a great President without a war", Thorber says "I think many Presidents think that if they solve a crisis in foreign policy or they go to war they certainly are going to go down in history as a great President, but that is not always the case. Americans like President's to solve crisis, but when they don't, when they screw up in war they are at the bottom of the list in terms of prestige." 03.02.44 Thorber says FDR (Franklin D. Roosevelt) obviously succeeded in WWII, Abraham Lincoln took great risks in the Civil War, says "He kept the nation together". Says Wilson wasn't so successful after WWI, Johnson didn't run for re-election because of Vietnam, says "the American public didn't agree on what the threat was, let alone what the mission was in Vietnam, and that hurts a President." Teddy Roosevelt is known as the great "charging" leader in war, John F. Kennedy helped to create the "Bay of Pigs" failure, but came back and solved the Cuban Missile crisis, says Kennedy is a very prominent President known for "keeping us out of war." 03.04.20 Thorber says that Kennedy got us into Vietnam, and Johnson felt that we couldn't withdraw from Vietnam that it would be a question of our prestige, he continues "it was a failure and it was a mark for an entire generation that effects us today with respect to the use of power through warfare and I think that people are a little more cautious these days as a result of that." 03.05.07 James Thorber speaking about Abraham Lincoln "As we look back at Lincoln, he's this very prominent President that kept the nation together, kept the Republic together but he was not well liked, he was criticized in the press. If we had poles which we did not then, he would be in the 20 % percentile probably in terms of job performance and agreement with his policy of going to war against the South, the Confederacy." 03.05.44 James Thorber states "I think most President's feel that they have truth when they go to war, they feel they're doing the right thing, after they've discussed it with their advisors and sometimes with Congress, many times not with Congress which is a problem, and many times it's not popular. The ones that win those wars or confrontations or keep us out of crisis or solve crisis are the ones who go down in history as great Presidents, the ones who lose are the ones that go down in history as not being great Presidents. All wars are controversial, all wars are tragedies for families that lose their daughters and sons and no one wants to see slaughter and so Presidents usually take this to their heart and it's a very hard decision." 03.06.47 Continues to say "The point is many times when people get into war at the very beginning there is a rally effect around the President and there's great support. In fact if you look at George W. Bush, there was great support for the war in Iraq 75% of the American people felt he was doing the right thing, he has dropped in the poles to most recently in the 40% percentile. There was great support at the beginning of Vietnam, although there wasn't great understanding of the war by Americans and then of course it became quite unpopular. That happens in war, many people didn't want Lincoln to go to war in the beginning and then when he won in history he became very prominent. And of course America generally for years didn't want to enter WWII after the terrible experience of WWI and FDR had to bring people along slowly, had to do things secretly to support the Brits (British) in terms of construction of ships and other weapons and it wasn't very popular until Pearl Harbor occurred, when that occurred we had rally effect and there was great support." 03.08.13 Mr. James Thorber says "This is the most important power of a President and they have to take it very seriously, and the ones who take it seriously and think about the alternatives to war, to prevent war, to think about the variety of things with war and what happens after war are the ones that are the best Presidents. The ones who have rushed into combat, the ones who have not taken a long time to weight the alternatives to combat are the ones who run into trouble."
Flash Points USA - America at War - Robert Dallek
Flash Points USA - America at War - Robert Dallek (raw interview with Robert Dallek speaking about various Presidents) 06.02.03 Mr. Dallek speaking about Abraham Lincoln says "There was a terrible crisis in the United States when Lincoln was elected President in 1860, the South was threatening to secede because the Republican party was dead set against the expansion of slavery into the territories and the South felt that is was going to be overwhelmed by the North and they seceded and Lincoln felt that this was understandably the destruction of the Union." 06.03.47 He continues to say "when war erupts it's usually the consequence of unpredictable circumstances". He explains that Lincoln was lead by circumstances in the Civil War, it was the "bloodiest struggle in American history, 620,000 Americans on both sides of the line perish. He continues to say that "a series of victories in the fall of 1864 secure Lincolns re-election and put the Union on the final road to victory". Speaks more about the post-war, reconstruction, Lincolns assassination, successor Andrew Johnson impeachment. Speaks about Lincolns presidency, he wasn't seen as a great leader, called the "original baboon", retrospectively he is seen as one of the three great presidents in history along with George Washington and Franklin Roosevelt. Dallek says "He won the Civil War and he preserved the Union, and this makes him of the greatest Presidents in history", talks about his personality, his speeches are what recommends him, but contemporaries didn't see him that way. 06.08.43 Dallek talks about President Harry Truman, says he's seen now as a great President, but when he left office he was seen as a failure. Mentions FDR, Thomas Dewey, election was "the greatest upset in American Presidential history", Truman enters into a new term of popularity, fair deal, Korean War, 38th parallel, Douglas Macarthur. "It was Truman who put into the Containment Doctrine that is so instrumental in helping us win the Cold War, so Truman's reputation changes over time." 06.12.05 Robert Dallek states "The fact that Truman used the atomic bomb to end WWII to this day still sparks fierce debate." States that the United States is the only country to ever have used a nuclear weapon in anger, that tens of thousands of american lives were saved, because it helped us avoid an invasion of the Japanese home islands. Dallek continues "To get into a nuclear war would be a holocaust for the human race."
Flash Points USA - America at War - Colleen Shogun
Flash Points USA - America at War - Colleen Shogun (speaking about various Presidents) 04.01.35 Colleen Shogun speaks about President Abraham Lincoln, "Lincoln doesn't really rally the public to war, what he does is call the Congress back into session after the Civil War has already started and issues an address to Congress on July 4th, 1861 and talks about what he has done up until this point in prosecuting the war .....he uses the address to justify that the states do not have the power to secede the Union legally, he believes that the Union actually existed before the states, the Union actually created the States, therefore the States can not leave the Union legally without an unjustified revolt." 04.02.37 She continues to say that Lincoln actually waits for the "war" to come to him, "He could have had the choice to prosecute the war, the Confederates surround Fort Sumter in Charleston, and Lincoln could have easily ordered the troops that were hold up in Fort Sumter to fire upon the Confederates, but Lincoln is always three steps ahead of everyone else, that's sort of Lincoln's gift, and tells the Union to freeze and as a result the confederates get antsy and get impatient and he waits until the Confederates fire upon Fort Sumter. Lincoln does this because then a state if insurrection already exists, he did not start the war, the insurrection already exists and as a result he can prosecute the war as commander in chief, unilaterally without Congress' intervention." 04.03.53 Colleen Shogun speaks about Lincolns background, that he was not the first choice for the Republican nomination. She says that Lincoln was underestimated, he was a "dark horse" within the party. "Even during Lincolns Presidency, he's not perceived to be a "war hero", he's not considered a popular president, he doesn't think he's going to win the 1964 election. ......Lincolns is really catapulted into his very preferred status, his revered status after his assassination, but during his Presidency he's not considered someone who has saved the Union, someone who is trying to stick up for the principals contained in the Declaration of Independence. The Legacy that is conferred onto Lincoln comes afterwards, but not when he is President." 04.07.13 Shogun continues to say "The war definitely makes his legacy, the second Inaugural Address also makes his legacy. Probably his most famous piece of Presidential rhetoric, it's very complicated at the time because Lincoln is saying that the blame of the Civil War does not fall squarely on the shoulders of the South, that the South and the North have to share the blame of the war and that he is not in the position to judge who is good and who is evil, that actually god will judge who is good and who is evil." She states that this is very different from the rhetoric of Presidents of today, etc, judging who is good and who is bad, who has done things correctly or incorrectly, Lincoln on the other hand takes a step back and refuses to judge the North or the South. 04.09.01 Speaking about Woodrow Wilson and the Treaty of Versailles, she says "For the most part, throughout the war Wilson is able to garner public support for the war in the United States, he's certainly a hero in Europe and this is in part why he wants to go to Paris by himself, because there's parades, commemorations and dinners all thanking Woodrow Wilson and the American leadership in the war, so this is Wilson s time to shine in Europe. ........Originally Wilson backs away from war and says the alternative to war is armed neutrality, we can be prepared in the United States, we can be armed, but we can also remain neutral and then he changes his tone and says "armed neutrality" is no longer an option, because he views WWI as being a threat to democracy..." 04.12.14 Shogun states "Wilson is without doubt a principled visionary and is motivated by his own philosophical beliefs. Wilson is a political scientist, he's a scholar before he becomes a politician and is motivated by ideas of democracy, motivated by what he believes as being the institutions of democratic government. He's definitely ideologically and philosophically and intellectually motivated by his actions." 04.14.43 Shogun continues "What Truman says is that wars are no longer "declared" anymore, we have to react to situations as they evolve. So, Truman's understanding of it is that World affairs have changed and as a result the Presidency has to change along with the fact that world affairs have been altered." She continues to speak about President Truman and says that the Truman Administration classified the Korean War as a "police action". 04.17.41 "President's look at war and war making as an activity that can enhance their constitutional authority. They look at the commander and chief clause as being a vehicle for power, a vehicle for enhancing their own political capitol. It's an attractive prospect, because it allows the President to act independently. The problem is that wars don't often go the way that President's want them to go and there's an unpredictable nature to wars, all wars have an unpredictable nature, but particularly in modern warfare Presidents can't control everything that goes on in modern warfare and as a result they end up being more controlled by the war than controlling the actually event itself." She continues to say that modern President's should take a page from Lincoln who said "I understand that events control me, more than I control events." 04.19.13 She talks about George Bush, Sr. and that the strongest part of his legacy was his foreign policy involvements and the Iraq War, however his domestic record is weak.
U.S. Constitution B-Roll
Camera pans across preamble of the U.S. Constitution: “We The People…” and “Article I” (heading) of the Constitution. Camera adjusts and focuses on preamble: “We the People…” and “Article I.” Camera pans over Preamble.