Advanced Search
Wading Birds - Sandhill Crane
Sandhill Cranes on Platte River sandbars
Wading Birds - Sandhill Crane
Sandhill Cranes on Platte River take off
Franklin Jr. WEDS DUPONT HEIRESS IN COLORFUL NUPTIALS
Rolling - Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery The President's son, Franklin D., Jr. Is married to Ethel Dupont, heiress, in a simple ceremony at the Dupont Estate, 'Owl's Nest.' The ceremony unites two families that were bitter political rivals during the last campaign.
25,000 Boy Scouts Capture Capital For Big Jamboree
Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery Boy Scouts Gather In D. C. Thirty thousands scouts from all parts of the world come to the nation's capital for the national jamboree. Living in a huge tent city on the monument grounds, the boys plan elaborate pageants during the ten day convention. One boy holds an armadillo.
It May Be July To You But How's This For Summer
Rolling - Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery At Lake Helen, far up on the slope of Mount Lassen, skiers find the trout fishing excellent after racing over the snows. A perfect antidote for the summer heat wave that has swept through the far west. Shot os skiers moving down a hill at night. They carry torches to light their way.
Floating Zoo Hits Port With Oddest Cargo Since Noah
Rolling - dull in contrast and imagery 584 Assorted jungle animals are landed in New York a load that originally was an order for two leopards. The animals are a gift to the zoo, but the shipping charges from Africa come to a little matter of $25,000.
Real Copper Cloth Makes Its Bow At Novel Style Show
Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery Beach Sirens In Cooper Suits. The first copper style show is held at this center of the copper mining industry. Made of rolled copper that is so thin that it looks like cloth, the clothes appear set to be a fleeting fad-but can openers will be good to keep away from.
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(09:50:46) Finally, the hearings will address the discovery by White House officials of a torn, undated page of writing by Vincent Foster that was eventually located in his briefcase in the White House office. White House witnesses have maintained that on Monday, July 26, an Associate White House Counsel accidentally found this torn-up note in the briefcase while packing the contents of Mr. Foster's office. But, here again, there is a difference in testimony. There is evidence that at least two White House lawyers actually saw the torn paper in Vincent Foster's briefcase 4 days earlier on July 22 and that they kept this discovery to themselves, The Committee will want to ask when did White House Counsel Nussbaum and his staff first learn of the existence of the torn-up note? Why was the note not discovered during the search that Mr. Nussbaum conducted on July 22 when he opened the briefcase and removed documents from within it? After the note was removed from the briefcase on July 26, why did the White House wait another 24 hours before notifying law enforcement officials? These questions and others will arise during the testimony and documentary evidence presented to the Committee during these hearings. In the final analysis, the Members of the Committee will have to judge whether anyone improperly handled the Foster documents or interfered in the police's investigation during the days following Vincent Foster's death. These are very important questions. We owe it to the American people not to prejudge any facts. We must be fair, impartial and thorough. We must be committed to the pursuit of truth. That's the American way; that's what we intend to do. I'll now turn to Senator Mack. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CONNIE MACK Senator MACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The central question I intend to focus on for the next 3 weeks is going to be why the White House seemed so desperate to get into Foster's off-ice and re 6 retrieve the White-water files and why they can't give us the full story now. In December 1993, they told us that any records taken from Foster's office were made available to Park Police investigators for review. At the same time, they stated that no documents related-to Whitewater were contained in the inventory of items found in Foster's office. Only last week White House officials allowed reporters to review the 71-page Whitewater Development file that officials removed from Foster's office after his death. A White House official said last Tuesday that the file was the only Whitewater material in Foster's office. That's this 71 pages. That was the only Whitewater material in Foster's office. Later last week White House officials began leaking handwritten notes of Vince Foster. They claimed the reason they hadn't given them over sooner was because the notes referred to the Clintons' tax records rather than Whitewater. The White House claimed reporters misunderstood if they thought the White House was showing them every document related to Whitewater that Foster had in his office when they handed over the first 71 pages. They're still only giving us half the story. Let me show you what a partial stack of the real Whitewater file looks like. This is a partial stack. Just a few days ago we were told that this was the entire Whitewater file. These papers were provided to the Committee by David Kendall, the President's personal lawyer, and they only represented a portion of what the White House gave him. He and the White House maintained that we are not entitled to all the files removed; some are privileged. Senator Hatch will get into that issue later. What I intend to explore is the fact that this is much more than just an innocuous set of documents as claimed by the White House. This pile of documents raises some serious questions about why Whitewater mattered so much back then and why it matters now. We have already established that Vince Foster was intimately involved in the Clintons' personal finances and that other White House officials were well aware of this involvement. Those same officials were very concerned that a Federal investigation into Foster's death might uncover the evidence we now possess. That evidence is Vince Foster's handwritten notes detailing his own concerns about a number of things. First, the difficulty of filing truthful tax return, for the President and the First Lady; second, Foster's fear of an audit of the First Couple's tax returns; and third, the First Lady's possible involvement in covering losses at Madison Guaranty,
Nazi Book Burning
Nazi Book Burning - Night MS flames of raging bonfire. GV men throwing books on the fire, many dressed in Nazi uniform, others dressed in civilian clothing. MS pan men throwing books onto fire. GV men throwing books in the fire. MS bonfire flames as books are tossed in.
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(09:55:53) White House officials worried that someone at the Department of Justice or the FBI might find Foster's own notes which establish that Vince Foster worried about the connection between the Clintons, Madison Guaranty and Whitewater Development Corporation, If this evidence was discovered, they worried it would trigger a Federal investigation. Sitting here today, I must say there was ample reason to worry. The Clintons have always claimed they suffered a loss on their Whitewater investment, that they were 50/50 partners with McDougal on the venture and that they bore substantial financial risk from the investment. Based on Vince Foster's own words, we 7 now have good reason to question these claims. The Clintons have maintained publicly that, although they sustained a significant loss on the venture, they reported a $1,000 gain from the investment so as to be absolutely ethical and above board in filing their 1992 tax returns. It wasn't ethics. It was their fear of an audit. Mr. Foster's own notes, which are part of the enormous stack of Whitewater documents that the White House has hidden until now, established that Mr. Foster knew the Clintons were caught in a trap. The Clintons' public statements that they had suffered a loss on Whitewater were at odds with everything he or any of the accountants knew about the venture. In 1993, in the months before he died, Mr. Foster had the impossible job of proving a tax loss for the Clintons without supporting documents while at the same time avoiding an IRS audit. No matter how good a lawyer Vincent Foster was, he couldn't prove something that wasn't true. The only thing he could rely upon was the figure of $1,000, which was the surn that McDougal paid the Clintons for their share of Whitewater in December 1992. Ultimately, Mr. Foster chose to claim a $1,000 gain so as to avoid an audit. What I'd like to do now is to take a look at a few documents. The documents I'm about to show you were taken from the Whitewater files in Vincent Foster's office. Again, these are only three pages out of at least 450 that were only recently produced for our review. I might suggest to you that the documents are going to show up on the television screen. The handwriting that you will see on these documents is that of Mr. Foster. If you would put up document number 234 and focus in on "sometimes relied on Clintons' return on evidence. Don't want to go back into that box." Here Foster is distressed over the options for reporting either a loss or a gain on the Clintons' Whitewater investment. We see his concern about the fact that the accountants sometimes relied on the Clintons' returns as evidence, and, as he put it, they "don't want to go back into that box." As a matter of public record, we also know that the Clintons have always claimed that Madison Guaranty and Whitewater Development were separate. If you could focus in on "was McDougal trying to circumvent bank losses, why HRC is getting loans from others." As we look further down on that page, which you have just focused on, this can only mean that Foster was raising the extremely serious questions we are still trying to answer. Again, his notes raise the following question: "Was McDougal trying to circumvent bank loss? Why HRC is getting loans from others." The questions that I think he was raising-were federally-insured S&L bank funds used to cover Whitewater losses and was Hillary Rodham Clinton borrowing money to help McDougal circumvent Madison losses? Now, if you would put up document number 236 and focus in on "more importantly would result in ail audit of proof of basis," and "can of worms you shouldn't open." Here Mr. Foster was trying to figure out how to avoid an IRS audit of the First Couple's tax returns. On this page of notes, he seems to finally determine that, when all is said and done, the options they have that coincide with their public statements "more importantly would result in an audit 8 of proof of basis." Which, he says, is a "can of worms you shouldn't open."
Caterpillar Army Ravages Big Area Near Hudson Bay
Rolling - Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery Insect Pests Ravage Farms. Millions of tent caterpillars invade the district, making life glum for the farmer and spoiling the vacations of city folk by attacking the foliage around summer cottages. Forest-land presents a wintry aspect with all the leaves chewed away.
Russian Fliers Feted On Visit To Metropolis
Rolling - dull in contrast and imagery Fresh from a greeting in Washington by President Roosevelt, the three Russian Aviators who spanned the North Pole in a flight from Moscow to the U. S. Receive New York City's official welcome at a reception by Mayor LaGuardia at city hall.
Amelia Earhart Down In Pacific On Globe Flight
Rolling - Shaky, dull in contrast and imagery The greatest man-hunt in history spreads over the South Pacific in search of Amelia Earhart Putnam, navigator Fred Noonan and their flying laboratory, forced down in trackless waters on an attempted 'Round-The-World Flight'. Various shots of Amelia and planes flying over ocean looking for her. (disappearance, search and rescue)
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:00:42) In essence, he seems to be saying that the option that supports the public statements is something he can't pursue. The third document is number 237. 1 believe you have focused in on "$1,000 basis so no tax effect, but arbitrary and still risk audit." I believe as well "0 basis with $1,000 gain. Avoid any audit of issue." Here, again, Mr, Foster appears to be going over his options and how he can possibly keep the IRS from auditing the Clintons. He thinks about claiming "$1,000 basis so no tax effect, but arbitrary and still risks audit." He appears to then compare the scenario to the possibility of "0 basis with $1,000 gain," which would "avoid any audit of issue," Despite the fact that he recognizes it is arbitrary, this is ultimately the option Foster chooses. What all these documents tell me is the White House certainly had reason to worry about a Department of Justice search of Vince Foster's office. The documents tell me that, contrary to the assertions the White House has made for many months and as recently as this past weekend, this is not a harmless issue about tax returns. Rather, it's about the finances of Whitewater Development and the fact that Vince Foster couldn't square the First Couple's public statements with reality. Imagining the nervousness of the White House suspecting that these documents and others existed and that they were easily discoverable during the suicide investigation, a great deal of odd behavior is explained. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. We have some time remaining, but we're going to turn. As I said, each side will take approximately a half hour, then we'll go to 10-minute segments as necessary. Senator Sarbanes. Senator SARBANES. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I take it after the half hour on this side, we'll go back to that side for 10 minutes and then back to this side for 10 minutes? The CHAIRMAN. Correct. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PAUL S. SARBANES Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I subscribe to the necessity of conducting fair, impartial and thorough hearings. I think it's important that the facts be laid out in a civil manner, that this not become a partisan exercise. The Senate approved resolutions authorizing an examination of the handling of the documents in Foster's office, both last year and again this year. In June 1994, the Senate passed Resolution 229 authorizing The first phase of this investigation, and that resolution provided that the Committee should conduct hearings into whether improper con- duct occurred regarding the way in which White House officials handled documents in the office of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster at the time of his death. Now, those hearings were not held last year in response to a letter from the Independent Counsel, then Mr. Fiske, who said that there were questions unanswered at this point with respect to the handling of the documents that they were trying to resolve before they could complete the investigation. They therefore asked if the 9 Committee last summer wanted to do public hearings on this particular subject, and the Committee acceded to that request. This year, when we passed the resolution S. Res. 120, which is the resolution governing the activities of this Committee and which provides in section 4 that Consistent with the rights of persons subject to investigation and inquiry, the Special Committee shall make every effort to fulfill the right of the public and Congress to know the essential facts and implications of the activities of officials of the United States Government and other persons and entities with respect to the matters under investigation and study, as described in section 1. The matters outlined for investigation and study in that resolution included in section I are, and I quote:
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:05:48) To conduct an investigation and public hearing into and study of whether improper conduct occurred regarding the way in which White House officials handled documents in the office of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster following his death. That resolution goes on to specify some other matters which will be looked into, but the Committee is not at this point examining those other matters. Those are to be done later this year in the fall, and today's focus is on the proper handling of the documents in Foster's office. That's the charge we're dealing with here today and in the days to come, Actually, in the many days to come since we have hearings now scheduled for the next 3 and perhaps the next 4 weeks, which I take it would complete this part of our examination of the matters that we've been charged with with respect to the documents. As I understand it, it's our intention to complete this part of the inquiry during this period of time prior to the August recess. The resolution we're operating under authorizes the Committee to expend $950,000, almost $1 million, between now and the end of next February, and it calls on the Committee to "make every reasonable effort to complete, not later than February 1, 1996, the investigation, study, and hearings that are authorized" in this hearing. So that's the framework in which we are operating. In other words, we've been given by the Senate almost $1 million for this inquiry. We've been given a time frame within which we are working. The money is until the end of next February, and we've been charged: The Special Committee shall make every reasonable effort to complete, not later than February 1, 1996, the investigation, study, and hearings authorized by section 1. Section 1 includes the matters that are within the scope of our inquiry, the first of which, as I indicated, relates to the handling of the papers in Vincent Foster's office. Mr. Starr, now the Independent Counsel, has indicated to us that his inquiry would not be impeded by our proceeding to examine the way in which the documents were handled. He first sent us a letter on April 22 with respect to looking at documents and a further letter on January 6 with respect to interviewing and deposing witnesses, whereas Mr. Fiske, last summer, said I don't want you to proceed to look at that matter because we're still conducting an inquiry. Mr. Starr, in effect, indicated to us that his work was such that their inquiry would not be affected or impeded by the Committee moving forward, as we are doing today, in order to examine the Foster papers. 10 Now, having said this, by way of setting the framework in which we find ourselves, there are a number of matters listed in the resolution for examination by the Committee. Those matters were carefully worked out in extended consultations with the Chairman, Actually, these are the so-called scope questions and one can let their imagination run wild, as some have done. There are all kinds of rumors swirling around, There were candidates to be listed for inquiry that I think were clearly beyond the horizon and were not included. We tried to determine the matters that were relevant and appropriate for this inquiry and that's been spelled out in this resolution, and that, in a sense, guides us in our inquiry over the coming weeks and months.
Grey Count Wins Inaugural H'Cap At New Coast Track
Rolling - dull in contrast and imagery - D.O.S A constellation of big movie people witness the opening of the film capital's very own race course, built with money subscribed by the actors themselves. Ten thousand persons see Grey Count gallop to victory in the Inaugural Day Feature. "Cameo shot of - Bing Crosby and James Mason" - Pat O Brien
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:10:46) This is but the first step. I quoted the particular relevant section, and then there are other sections that deal with various matters which this Committee will look into on behalf of the Senate on the basis of the charge that has been given to us by the Senate. Again, we've been given significant resources and counsel has been taken on both sides. I'm encouraged by the degree of cooperation that I perceive has taken place between counsel on both sides in an effort to move forward, as the Chairman said, with a fair inquiry, an impartial inquiry and a thorough inquiry. Let me just make a couple of comments about the hearings that are now before us. We have an extended set of hearings next week, the following week, and possibly into the week after that with the objective of completing the examination of the Foster papers issue before the August break, as I understand it. I think it's important to bear a few things in mind as we hear the witnesses that are going to come before us over the next few days. First, I think it's important to withhold judgment until all information is received. We need to get the facts out to the public. We need to weigh the facts carefully. We need to hear the testimony carefully. I think people will obviously have differing recollections about events. There will be conflicting testimony. I don't find that unusual or extraordinary, given that we're talking about events that happened more than a couple of years ago. In some respects, it would be extraordinary if everyone had exactly the same story. So, in a sense, we will have to sort out these differing views of what took place and what the implications are of those differences. Second, we have to clearly recognize that many allegations have been made, but allegations are not facts, and allegations need to be subject to a fair, tough- minded evaluation. Our job, I think, here, is to find the truth, to determine what the facts are, and, in the course of these hearings, to lay that out to the public so judgements can be made about what took place. Third, I think it's very important to bear in mind, as we look at people's conduct in the aftermath of Vince Foster's suicide, and to realize that this was an extraordinary, traumatic situation in which people found themselves. For the Foster family and friends and his colleagues and associates in the White House, this was an extraordinarily stressful time. Psychiatrists will tell you that one of the most traumatic experiences, one of the most stressful experiences, people can go through is a suicide of someone to whom they felt close, and it's very clear from some of the depositions we've already received that this had an enormous emotional impact upon people. Grown men and women broke down emotionally. Foster was extremely popular with his working colleagues, and so I simply lay that out because I think it's important, as one looks at how people behaved, to understand the emotional shock that they had experienced. I mean, that comes through at different places that we'll be looking at, just how people were reacting in a very emotional way from what had transpired.
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:15:50) Many of the questions that have been raised, I think, are obviously subject to differing interpretations, and that's one of the things this Committee will have to carefully examine in the days to come. It's also important to recognize that as Deputy White House Counsel, Vince Foster dealt with a range of matters. In effect, there are important privileges with respect to those papers: executive privilege and attorney-client privilege. For instance, we know there was a file dealing with Supreme Court nominees. That's a file over which the executive clearly can assert privilege. Also, attorney-client privilege, since Foster was using some of the personal papers of the Clintons in order to prepare some of their official statements as the Chairman indicated at the beginning, can be asserted. For example, there were mandatory financial disclosure statements that were required. So, as we look at the handling of these documents, I think we need to keep that dimension also in mind. Now, it's my expectation that the Committee will be able to work through the witnesses in the days to come in a very careful and appropriate manner, so as to place ourselves in a position to evaluate the testimony. As I said, the Independent Counsel has indicated that his inquiry has passed beyond this issue and, therefore, we were given the green light; not that we are necessarily bound by that, but it's an important consideration. We've been trying to harmonize our activities with those of the Independent Counsel. Finally, let me just say in closing that these hearings have a tremendous potential to become highly emotional. I've already outlined the fact that much of the conduct we've been examining occurred in the aftermath of the suicide, in the nature of that stressful incident. I think it's very important for the Members of this Committee to try to maintain this inquiry in a civil, rational way. We're here to try to find out what the facts are, to hear the witnesses out, to try to resolve differing recollections and differing interpretations and then to evaluate that. But I think it's extremely important, both for us and for the public, to hear the testimony in full before we undertake the evaluation. I was always taught that's how you're supposed to do it, and I'm hopeful that's what this Committee will do as we now set upon the task of carrying through the fair, impartial and thorough hearings with which we have been charged by the Senate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Dodd. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CHRISTOPHER J. DODD Senator DODD. Thank you, Senator Sarbanes. Is there about 10 minutes left? 12 The CHAIRMAN. I think it's about 10 minutes. If the Senator needs additional time Senator DODD, I thank the Chairman. Mr. Chairman, let me just begin by saluting you and Senator Sarbanes for the very fair and balanced way that I think you've gone about setting up these hearings. The matters before us, as you have pointed out and Senator Sarbanes has suggested, are far too important, I think, to be turned into a political football, and I think it is to your credit that this has not yet happened. Mr. Chairman, I hope we will conduct these hearings, as Senator Sarbanes has just said, in the same spirit of fairness that has characterized their planning.
Thousands Watch As Youth Leaps To Death From Hotel
Shaky dull in contrast and imagery While thousands of horrified spectators jam Fifth Avenue. John W. Ward, 25, defies rescue attempts and ends eleven hours of agonizing suspense by leaping to his death from a 17th floor window ledge of the Gotham Hotel. John Ward seen standing on ledge as people try to coax him back through the window. Police officer on telephone, people seated on double decker bus look up to the sky at jumper, trampoline ? Police officer covers body in the street.
World Wide News Events - Air Raid Toll High
Shaky dull in contrast and imagery - DOS Horror and destruction is wide-spread as Japanese bombers rain death on the city and its civilian population, with pitiful scenes as rescue workers search for victims. Meanwhile girl battalions train for duty with machine guns, marching past camera.
Thousands Homeless In Flood
Shaky dull in contrast and imagery - DOS 13 inches of rain fell in 3 days and turns the Colorado river valley into a watery sea of submerged towns and villages. Several lives are lost and damages run into the hundreds of thousands. Sign for Riverside Camp, flood waters are up to the roofs of the cabins (cottages).
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:20:26) We on this Committee should remember what we're not. We're not the FBI. We're not the Grand Jury or a Grand Jury. We're not prosecutors, nor are we defense attorneys. We're United States Senators carrying out the mandate of this institution and the mandate of a very, very specific resolution. Our charge in this set of hearings is to answer a narrowly tailored question: Did anyone at the White House impede the police investigation of Vince Foster's tragic suicide? That is our mission. Our charge during this phase is not to delve into the details of President Clinton's and Mrs. Clinton's land transactions or to audit their tax returns or to spin wild conspiracy theories. We're going to hear about what people did or did not do in the midst of their grief at a very, very emotional time. We may hear about sloppiness We're probably going to hear about mistakes. We're going to hear a lot about gossip and speculation. But let me emphasize there has never, never been any suggestion that the police wanted to review Whitewater or any substantive file in Vince Foster's office. They were investigating a tragic, tragic suicide. We're going to hear about discrepancies in testimony from witnesses doing their best, in my view, to recollect specific details in the midst of a highly charged emotional event from 2 years ago. I hope, Mr. Chairman that we'll do our best to keep everything we hear and learn during these hearings in that context. We cannot look at people's actions, in my view, in July 1993 in a vacuum, plot them out like steps in a chemical reaction or subject them to the cold microscope of rational analysis. I think we must examine these events for what they were, deeply human reactions to a deeply human tragedy. Mr. Chairman, there are few human experiences more traumatic than experiencing the suicide of a family member, a close friend or colleague, and I hope that each and every one of us will try to put ourselves in the shoes of those who lived through that tragedy. In examining this aspect of our hearings, I think we should ask ourselves how would we have reacted if this would have happened to someone on one of our staffs or to one of our childhood friends ' In the minutes and, literally, minutes and hours and days after this terrible suicide of a very decent man, friends and colleagues understandably acted on instinct, in my view, more than careful thought or plotting. One of the most traumatic and perplexing of human tragedies, a suicide. You've just been informed that some 13 one you're very close to, known all your life, has taken his life. How do you react? What are you thinking about? The people involved here were emotionally, mentally and physically exhausted, in my view, and we cannot expect people in such situations to exercise the clearest possible judgment in every case. The context, Mr. Chairman, is also important because of the nature of the office in question. We're not talking about a crime scene here; the tragic suicide occurred in Fort Marcy overlooking the Potomac River. The suicide of a lawyer does not mean that it is open season on that attorney's files. There are legitimate privacy and executive privilege issues involved, as Senator Sarbanes has pointed out. Think about it, if you would, in terms of a doctor/patient relationship. If your family doctor took his own life, would you want the police rummaging through your personal medical records in your doctor's office? Obviously we have different standards when we're talking about the President of the United States, but I think we should all at least acknowledge the understandable instinct to protect the privacy of the material in Vince Foster's office. To date, Mr. Chairman, as you and Senator Sarbanes in part have pointed out, we have spent at the Federal level more than $10 million in reviewing what is known as Whitewater. Independent Counsels, two offices, IS prosecutors, dozens of FBI agents and IRS agents, this Committee's work, independent investigators, press inquiries. It has been voluminous.
1957 Rose
1962 Rose Parade