Copyright by Benjamin Jonah Koch 2011 The Dissertation Committee for Benjamin Jonah Koch Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Watchmen in the Night: The House Judiciary Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry of Richard Nixon Committee: David Oshinsky, Supervisor H.W. Brands Dagmar Hamilton Mark Lawrence Michael Stoff Watchmen in the Night: The House Judiciary Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry of Richard Nixon by Benjamin Jonah Koch, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2011 Dedication To my grandparents For their love and support Acknowledgements I owe an immense debt of gratitude to my dissertation supervisor, David Oshinsky. When I arrived in graduate school, I did not know what it meant to be a historian and a writer. Working with him, especially in the development of this manuscript, I have come to understand my strengths and weaknesses, and he has made me a better historian. Thank you. The members of my dissertation committee have each aided me in different ways. Michael Stoff’s introductory historiography seminar helped me realize exactly what I had gotten myself into my first year of graduate school—and made it painless. I always enjoyed Mark Lawrence’s classes and his teaching style, and he was extraordinarily supportive during the writing of my master’s thesis, as well as my qualifying exams. I workshopped the first two chapters of my dissertation in Bill Brands’s writing seminar, where I learned precisely what to do and not to do. His little pointers are always in the back of my mind. I did not know Dagmar Hamilton before pursuing my dissertation, but I am very happy to have met her. She is not only a scholar but also a member of John Doar’s special inquiry staff, and her recollections of her days on Nixon’s impeachment are fascinating. It would have been impossible to complete this project without generous travel grants from the George Bush Presidential Library, the Carl Albert Center at the University of Oklahoma, and the Schlesinger Library at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies. Special thanks to the Dirksen Congressional Center; its Congressional v Research Award permitted me to visit fifteen libraries during one long six week, 6,700- mile research road trip. A dissertation investigating the work product of thirty-eight individuals is impossible without the help of many archivists and librarians. The chapter on Baruch Korff owes a debt of gratitude to Tim Engels at Brown University’s John Hay Library for pointing me to the Vivian Vanbrundt Papers. Thank you to John Jacob at Washington and Lee University’s Powell Archive for granting me access to the Fragile Coalition interviews and the recordings of Caldwell Butler. I marvel at the patience of Marla Vizdal and the staff at the Western Illinois University Library, who stood by as I devoted an afternoon speaking a diary into a microphone. Even though the CIA decided that I could not look at most of the Liz Holtzman papers at Radcliffe’s Schlesinger Library, I am grateful to Diana Carey for scavenging up everything she could on short notice. Bonnie Sauer took time from her processing of the Peter Rodino papers at the Seton Hall Law Library to answer all of my questions about her work in progress. To all of the hardworking staffs of the many archives and libraries I visited, a hearty thank you for your time and your help. Even though the CIA made me change my plans, I would not have been able to look at Liz Holtzman’s papers without her permission. Thank you. The same to the late Jerry Zeifman, who told me what to look for in his papers at George Washington University. The late Jerry Waldie trusted me with the only copy of his impeachment diary, for which I am deeply thankful. Hopefully, it will soon be stored with the rest of his papers at UC-Berkeley’s Bancroft Library. I met several kind individuals during my travels. These include Helen Starr, Ben Wallis, and Gary Sutton, who I can’t thank enough for bestowing me his entire set of vi impeachment inquiry transcripts. Stanley Kutler, the dean of Watergate historians, set me on my way and offered me sound advice and good beer during my trip to Madison. I might never have written about the Judiciary Committee and impeachment if I had not been seated next to John Dean at a dinner party. This was his suggestion, and a wonderful one. My friends have always buoyed my spirits when I needed it. Sometimes they provided a bed to sleep in during my travels. Howard Hunter has been an inspiration to his many students over the years, and I count myself a lucky beneficiary of his largesse. Special thanks to Marilyn Lehman for her uncanny ability to cut through all of the graduate school red tape. No one has been more supportive of my education, from kindergarten to Ph.D., than my grandparents, Ira and Betty Kohn. Their goodwill and generosity set an example that I will forever strive to emulate. My parents, Julian and Fran Koch, have been there for me through the ups and the downs, always encouraging and ready to help me in all endeavors. They are simply the best. And finally, Courtney Resnick, who has never known me when I wasn’t burdened with this dissertation, puts up with that distraction and still gives me more love and affection anyone could ever ask for. Every day that I’m with her, she makes me a better man. vii Watchmen in the Night: The House Judiciary Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry of Richard Nixon Publication No._____________ Benjamin Jonah Koch, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2011 Supervisor: David Oshinsky When the Judiciary Committee initiated its impeachment inquiry of Richard Nixon for his complicity in Watergate, it was the first time that the House of Representatives had commenced such a proceeding against a president since Andrew Johnson in 1868. Johnson’s impeachment and subsequent Senate acquittal was widely regarded as an example of Congress run amok, its partisanship so blatant and its failure so grand that many Americans assumed that presidential impeachment had become obsolete. But impeachment, by its nature, is political, and each Congress defines the bounds of high crimes and misdemeanors in light of the current political climate. For the House in October 1973, Nixon’s Watergate scandal threatened to breach those limits. From the outset, Judiciary Chairman Peter Rodino recognized that if his Committee were to recommend impeaching President Nixon without bipartisan support, viii the American public would interpret it as another Johnson-like fiasco, and a threat to the constitutional system of government. To thwart suspicion that the Democratic majority would impeach Nixon exclusively for its own political gain, Rodino preached fairness to the President, even as Nixon refused to comply with the Committee’s investigation. Despite Rodino’s assurances, however, his procedural proposals—designed in consultation with the Committee’s Special Counsel, John Doar—did not always seem fair enough to many Republicans. At the same time, many Democrats believed that Rodino and Doar had already accorded Nixon too many rights, which encroached upon the House’s constitutionally guaranteed “sole power of impeachment.” Ultimately, Rodino conceded that he could not marshal a bipartisan majority without making compromises with members who expected more fairness than he and Doar had initially offered. Despite pressure from their congressional leadership, constituents, and the White House, seven southern Democrats and moderate Republicans formed a “Fragile Coalition” to vote their conscience in favor of three articles of impeachment. In doing so, they convinced a fearful and cynical American public that impeachment could be just, and in the case of Richard Nixon, necessary. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: The Constitutional Basis of Impeachment............... 1 PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT ......................................................................9 NIXON ...........................................................................................................17 IMPEACHMENT WHISPERS ...........................................................................30 Chapter 1: The Saturday Night Massacre: Catalyst of Impeachment............................................................................. 39 “I LIE AWAKE AT NIGHT”: PETER RODINO’S BURDEN..............................46 THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CONVENES....................................................52 SEEDS OF DISCONTENT.................................................................................60 Chapter 2: A Staff at Work............................................................. 69 CATES AND JENNER......................................................................................69 DOAR VS. ZEIFMAN ......................................................................................75 BEHIND-THE-SCENES AT THE CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL .............................83 Chapter 3: Laying the Groundwork: Preparing for an Impeachment Summer...................................................................................... 92 THE RIGHT TO SUBPOENA ...........................................................................92 ST. CLAIR....................................................................................................104 HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS .........................................................106