, the one branch said was a tough guy. as it turned out, marcus branch beat up a woman. >> i'm not sure exactly what all happened. it was time for dining hall. i informed the kids it's dime for dining hall. get your coats and shoes on. walked up to shut the tv off. one of the inmates blind-sided me, hit me in the face. next thing i know, i'm picking myself up off the floor about five feet away. >> the spontaneity of incidents like that, and they tend to come from nowhere. i think it goes back to the core of the person and they have no hope. they truly believe with the soul of every fiber of their being is that their future is to end up in an adult facility. >> the average length of stay is one year for teens inside the walls of pendleton juvenile correctional facility. abel has been here for ten months. today is his shot to convince the release committee he's ready to go home. >> we review their packet, and we know that they're essentially eligible to come to the release committee for review, but we don't ever talk about i

. >> what's going on is that two branches of government are passing judgment on a third branch. the supreme court after listening to hearing oral arguments in early july. on july 24th, handed down its decision. u.s. v. nixon. to everyone's surprise, the decision was unanimous. it was unanimously against the president of the united states. that meant that president nixon's appointees on the court voted against him which astounded richard nixon. that decision said that there is a limit to president's executive privilege. it said there are moments when the president has to turn over information particularly in that information would affect a criminal trial. how can you help someone prove their innocence if president has relevant information under his control and is not willing to give it up? you got the judiciary that is in judgment of the president and now, as we listen to the debate, we know that the legislative branch is in judgment of the president. the legislative branch, however, is thinking about impeachment without receiving the information from the tape that the supreme co

. >> what's going on is that two branches of government are passing judgment on a third branch. the supreme court, after listening, to hearing all arguments in early july, on july 24th, handed down its decision in u.s. v. nixon. to everyone's surprise, the decision was unanimous, and it was unanimously against the president of the united states. that meant that president nixon's appointees on the court voted against him, which astounded richard nixon. that decision said that there is a limit to a president's executive privilege. it said there are moments when the president has to turn over information, particularly if that information would affect a criminal trial. how can you help someone prove their innocence if the president has relevant information under his control and is not willing to give it up? so you've got the judiciary that is in judgment of the president. and now, as we listen to the debate, we know that the legislative branch is in judgment, sitting in judgment of the president. the legislative branch, however, is thinking about impeachment without receiving the in

but we don't have anymore more than the executive branch and legislative branch. >> i understand he's claiming he's somewhat riglike the controller general. that he may make decisions and congress cannot recall him short of, i believe, a 15-year term for the controller general. and no president can fire him. >> i'm not too clear about the president in the myself case, i haven't thought that much of it. could be he could be fired. i think that's somewhat beside the point. this issue turns on as to the element of the executive power here involved presidential conversations. whatever else may have been delegated, those were not. this court has no jurisdiction as to resolve a dispute as to whether or not they should be given up. >> we can, sir, with respect to third parties. >> that was issued by a judge, right? >> yes, sir. >> slightly judicial. >> entirely judicial. >> and that's what's before us? >> and that we move to quash. >> it's one of the issues before us. >> the only thing before us is whether or not the subpoena should issue. >> whether or not it should be quashed and i think t

we haven't cut our branches. in fact we have more branches than we have ever hard because every neighborhood wants one. we have not cut our hours and have nor use than ever. that's the way it's experienced for most new yorkers. i grew up using my local neighborhood library in a part of new york called inwood. 20 to 30,000 kids come into our branches after school every day. it's safe. they do homeworkment they use the computer. and actually we have now launched for the first anytime our history, after-schooling programs. we aim to become the largest after-school program possibly in the nation because we have the kids coming in and because everybody needs more help on education. all that is part of the general of library. we're also -- people don't know this. we're the leading free provider in new york of english language instruction. new york is half immigrants. we teach citizenship. we are the leading free provider in new york of basic computer skills training. we'll be at 150,000 people enjoying those programs.

we have to cut our branches. more branches than we have ever had because every neighborhood once one. we had to cut our hours. more use than ever. at is the experience for most new yorkers. i grew up using my local neighborhood library. part of new york. twenty to 30,000 kids come into our branches after school every day and. it is safe. they do homework. they use a computer. actually, we have now lost for the first time in our history after-school programs and to become the largest after-school program possibly in the nation because we have kids coming in and because everybody needs more of our education. all of that is part of the experience. people don't know this. we have -- we are the leading free provider in new york of the english language instruction. we teach citizenship. we are the leading free provider in new york a basic computer skills training. we will be at 150,000 people enjoying the programs. we are also now starting to teach coating so that kids in the south bronx or harlem who want to get jobs

executive branch. so that if the president exceeded his authority, the congress could either cut off the money that he was using to the agencies that exceeded his authority, or if more was needed to pun bish the president in the sense of bringing him back into line, you could slash the budget much more dramatically. but the idea would be the president had to to look to the congress, to the means to carry out his agenda, and if he overstepped his bounds, the congress would be able to crack down on that by its power of the purse. and then finally, impeachment would be the ultimate remedy, the ultimate ability to remove somebody who was ill-suited for the position. and when they were discussing this and debating it, the two things that they were concerned about were, number one, that there would be a very clear legal standard for what was required to impeach. and secondly, that it would be hard to do. because they didn't want impeachment to be done frivolously, they didn't want it to be an exercise in par

but they were with the legislative branch and not done with the executive branch. questions from the audience. >> are there historic buildings in washington that are in danger of decaying and being lost? >> there are. in fact, there's a very active website where they monitor buildings at risk, neighborhoods at risk, there's a lot of development in washington, i mean, you know, the good news is that the high pointed of population in washington was after the terms of franklin eleanor roosevelt who grew the federal government massively and washington grew along with it. and then the population of washington declined until this last census is the first time the population again grew. but with that, has come threats to buildings. now, you know, what, in this book, which is -- and i should have explained, it is 12 chapters with a brief narrative at each chapter and then you go to the sites that illustrate the narrative. we're fortunate, because there's so many buildings that were almost tore down that were at risk. whether it was the eisenhower executive old office build

they are the responsibly of the federal branch, state branch, to the local branch. public safety rightly was designed as the responsibility of the local branch. and as a career prosecutor who is personally prosecuted everything from low-level offenses to homicides, i will tell you that a system like secure communities that allow victims of crimes to live in the shadow because the predator convinces her that it is she'll be treated like a criminal if he goes to law enforcement, a police officer. that is not a smart public policy decision, and it is not true to the ideals of our country in saying that we will not have an underclass or those who live in the shadows. and, finally, when i think about this issue i think about it in the context of again who we all are in this room. you know, my mother used to have a saying, and she would say to my sister and me, you may be the first to do many things, so make sure you're not the last. and i know -- [applause] -- can we talk about the ideals of naleo, it is a much about that. i also think about this rumor look around folks

we all know that there are responsibilities of the federal branch and the state branch.re are responsibilities of the local branch. public safety was designed as a responsibility of the local branch. prosecutor who has prosecuted everything from low-level offenses to homicides, i can tell you that allowing victims of crimes to live in the because a predator has convinced her -- smart public policy decision and is not true to the ideals of our country, insane that we will not have an underclass or those who live in the shadows.

we all know that there are responsibilities of the federal branch and the state branch. there are responsibilities of the local branch. public safety was designed as a responsibility of the local branch. prosecutor who has prosecuted everything from low-level offenses to homicides, i can tell you that allowing victims of crimes to live in the because a predator has convinced her -- smart public policy decision and is not true to the ideals of our country, insane that we will not have an underclass or those who live in the shadows. when i think about these issues, i think about them in the context of who we are in this room. you know, my mother had a saying. she would say to my sister and first toe may be the do many things and to make sure that we are not the last. ideals,talk about the it is very much about that. i think about this room and the people not here. many of us share a common experience. that experience that many of you have had where a constituent shows up at the front window of your office and they say that the only person they want to speak with is you. i

the executive branch is a mav mafia organize. the all the president has to do is make speeches houston citizens united is evil and wouldn't it be great if somebody did this and senators need send a leaders to the irs saying, please target some tea party groups and magically, voila, tea party groups targeted. and then you have people running to the microphones to declare it's phony scandal. the media has such utter control over the narrative -- i have been begging folks, folks on the right will drop $400 million on crappy ads in areas of virginia for mitt romney that nobody will see. that could buy a network. you could buy nbc. if we're actually going to do this, then let's do it right. let's get into the business of taking over the things people watch. it's amazing. we on the right are acting like it's still 1790 and time distribute pamphlets. they're great, put it turns out most people my age have never read a pamphlet. we don't

from the executive branch. the framers gave us a separation of powers to check each other. unfortunately, the primary power, the legislative branch has the power first, is being denied because the senate chose to stand up for the executive branch. that is frustration number one. number 2 on the constitution also gives us the great idea about our constitution as it is it is self-government under the rule of law and that means government by consent. elections, the best way the constitution gives us to express self-government and government by consent. that is another very important tool the constitution gives us. what john is doing is expressing frustration that we are not using the power first so he is trying to stand up for congressional prerogatives and that is why the lawsuit has intellectual merits because we want to show we are not going to take this lying down. the president is issuing executive orders and regulations that exceed parameters of the statutes that gave the authority in the first place so is i

, we need one branch to check the other. no one need be afraid. the north carolina ratification convention. no one need be afraid that officers who commit oppression will pass with immunity. prosecutions of impeachments will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community said hamilton in the federalist papers number 65. we divided the parties, more or less friendly to the accused. i do not mean political parties in that sense. the drawing of political lines goes to the motivation behind impeachment. but impeachment must proceed within the confines of the constitutional term high crime and misdemeanors. of the impeachment process, it was woodrow wilson who said that nothing short of the grossest offenses against the plain law of the land will suffice to give them speed and effectiveness. indignation so great as to overgrow party interest may secure a conviction. but nothing else can. common sense would be revolted if we engaged upon this process for petty reasons. congress has a lot to do. appropriations, tax refo

were with the legislative branch and not down with the executive branch. >> questions from the audience? surely. sorry, wait for the microphone, please. >> are there historic buildings in washington that are in danger of decaying or being lost? >> there are. in fact, there is a very active website where they monitor buildings at risk, neighborhoods at risk. a lot of development in washington. the good news is that the high point of population in washington was after the term of franklin delano roosevelt, who grew the federal government massively, and washington grew along with it. then the population of thisngton declined until last census. it's the first time the population again grew. threats that has come to buildings. explained it is 12 chapters. there is a brief narrative in each chapter, and then you go to the site that illustrates the narrative. we are also fortunate because there were so many buildings that were almost torn down that were at risk, whether it was the eisenhower executive office building, the patent office was , andt torn down fortunately, many of them were saved,

, their relationship with the legislative branch. this is a huge issue. it could be an issue of constitutional proportions. there have to be implications. >> you want to know more of the facts. does this potentially call into question john brennan's service? >> it could. we have to understand all the facts. it if we understand that the cia -- he has apologized for the cia tapping into the legislative computers. where does it end? >> you have been a sometime critic of the administration's foreign policy. there have been two secretaries of state. hillary clinton and john kerry. do you see a difference between the two? >> both of them. the administration as a whole -- to use russia as an example -- secretary clinton was secretary of state reset policy was put in place. secretary kerry has had to follow through on the policies. it is hard to compare the two of them and i will not do that. i have had disagreements with how the administration has handled it and the secretaries of state have carried out the policies. a prime example is rese

every branch of government claims the same privilege. calling it an executive privilege sounds as if the president is elevating himself above the rest of the government. he's not. you try subpoenaing the conference records of a court or try subpoenaing the records of a closed session of a congressional committee. you're going to get a claim of privilege. it's not executive. it's a governmental privilege. >> tell us about any interactions you had with archibald cox when you were both professors. >> none. i didn't know the man. i knew who he was, but i didn't know him. i read one article by him. >> that summer as you were watching -- you did interact a little bit with his team. you mentioned about talking to him. how well did you think he was doing his job? >> cox, he was doing okay. he was very slow. he didn't do anything wrong, but he was not a prosecutor. he agonized over decisions, which was just as well because if you don't know quite what you're doing it's just as well. jawarski was a prosecutor and he moved much more rapidly because

with all three branches of government there are documents that are available with all three branches of the government there is a decision making system in place to be made available to all parties involved to all three branches of the government if we don't teach the young people what the government's original intent would be. >> what about your views of the government and what it does for this congress or white house with the higher minimum wage? >> ; a lot of americans believe our federal government functions in a super effective way today. there is a bunch of reasons for that let me be somewhat optimistic one of the reasons it doesn't function very well by the ideologies on the left and the rights that are bankrupt and fairly useless. so we have the same dumb arguments again and again to move the country for word. of and that old and boring argument is a consequence to look at the world in a similar way and there is an opportunity to present itself that allows us to look at the world in a different way in the more sophisticated way to imagine the economy rather than and up mechan

the executive branch is too big and burdensome. by only way to stop this is electing a congress that slices the size and scope of executive authority. a tweet -- what is your opinion on gay marriage and abortion? opinion on gaymy marriage, with regard to gay marriage, i am a traditional marriage guy. however, it is time for the state to get out of the business of marriage entirely. i think it is a mistake for the state to be involved in marriage. marriage is a relationship between two people. i have my agreement with the state, which i do not care about. then i have my religious agreement with my wife, and that is the when i actually care about. that is the way i believe it should be for most americans. the idea that the government would give tax benefits to married couples, it obviously did not work, and now you can get a tax credit for being married. i highly doubt people are getting married for that reason. the answer for religious people, and i am a religious person that believes in traditional marriage, here is the danger, if

the branches of government, you have the legislative, you have judiciary and you have the executive branch. the executive branch, the laws,ent executes the puts them into force and makes sure that people follow them and eisenhower was forced to act. he did not want to. he did not want to act. the brown happy about decision at all. and in fact the white house refused totary comment on the brown v. board of education decision. the only other major official refused to comment was the governor of mississippi. those were the two people who on brown v.omment board. the president was not happy about it but as the years went he realized there was a great deal of resistance, rebellion in some places and he had to execute the laws so he did send in the military. it was very sad. one was happy that that had to happen. but, yes, he had to use the military on united states soil law.force the when what does that mean people organize, they think they're doing something right the courtsnk that are supposed to be the final say-so or the government or the governmenten itself is like, you know, where the par

under the constitution, i now belong to the executive branch. the supreme court has even ruled that i am the executive branch -- head, heart, and hand. with due respect to the learned justices -- and i greatly respect the judiciary-part of my heart will always be here on capitol hill. [applause] i know well the coequal role of the congress in our constitutional process. i love the house of representatives. i revere the traditions of the senate despite my too-short internship in that great body. as president, within the limits of basic principles, my motto toward the congress is communication, conciliation, compromise, and cooperation. [applause] this congress, unless it has changed, i am confident, will be my working partner as well as my most constructive critic. i am not asking for conformity. i am dedicated to the two-party system, and you know which party i belong to. i do not want a honeymoon with you. i want a good marriage. [laughter] [applause] i want progress, and i want problem solving which requires my best efforts and also your best

every branch of government claims the same privilege. calling it an executive privilege sounds as if the president is elevating himself above the rest of the government. he's not. you try subpoenaing the conference records of a court or try subpoenaing the records of a closed session of a congressional committee. you're going to get a claim of privilege. it's not executive. it's a governmental privilege. >> tell us about any interactions you had with archibald cox when you were both professors. >> none. i didn't know the man. i knew who he was, but i didn't know him. i read one article by him. >> that summer as you were watching -- you did interact a little bit with his team. you mentioned about talking to him. how well did you think he was doing his job? >> cox, he was doing okay. he was very slow. he didn't do anything wrong, but he was not a prosecutor. he agonized over decisions, which was just as well because if you don't know quite what you're doing it's just as well. jawarski was a prosecutor and he moved much more rapidly because

power between the legislative branch and the executive branch. in particular the senate of the united states challenge whether the white house has been probably appointed during a senate recess three members of the national labor relations board, a company to court had ruled against said that wasn't in the decision because these members were never legally part of the board in the first place. >> it's a bit of a roundabout case. have to unpack the details a little bit. there's disagreement, bargaining, collective bargaining agreement and the parallel issue of these nlrb appointees. >> the underlying facts are actually a mother to the constitutional question. the merits or the demerits of the labor argument we can set aside. visited all about two things. the courts facing the question of what is a senate recess and what is the vacancy to be filled. they have to decide whether this vacancy in filled that the constitutional requirements of the recessed upon the laws. >> this would be the case where the court has immediate political impact in terms of

police s the driver hit someone piney branch road. the car was seen headed toward takoma par we'olth person who was hit will recover. >>> it is expected to be a short day in the corruption trial of bob mcdonnell. final witnesse will be called today. closing arme e not expected uilro tug at the ear crestearliest. their oldest daughter said her mother ha mild obsession th john an jonllef gave a $10,000 wedding gift which she says they returned when they realized williams was a, quote, criminal. prosecuto objected that statement but the jury already heard the regarding. williams no be charged with any crime. >>> today you'll have a chance to voice your opinion about a potential gun range. a firing range is planned on turner road near sugarloaf mountain. not from several animal training a boarding facilitie so mef t neighbors there think the range is a bad idea for the community and those animals. a bl hearing on the issue begins today at 1:00 at winchest h in frederick. the zoning board will make a decision somime after today's hearing.

well, this allowed the executive branch, basically, to not bother consulting the legislative branch atll and simply make decrees, and this was one of 'em. in fact, this decree covered a lot of subjects, and the consulate at that time -- and now we'll test my electronic abilities -- heinrich bruning, basically the head of the german government, and there was something called the enabling act which allowed the executive branch, as i said, to issue these decrees. and that's what he did. and that was one thing that the republic adopted that was a horrible precedent, because when the nazis came to power, they could rule by decree just as well. and so this one particular decree, if i can move to that, this is like the decree about internal security, and it's about misuse of weapons. but when you look at the first provision, this section one provided for registration of all firearms by all people. and then it had a provision too here which stated that anytime the officials, the authorities decided it was needed for public security, they could require everybody who registered their firearms to

the -- that our responsibility are able to be carried out without any parents from the executive branch of government? and away, frankly, the presidential spokesman yesterday just kind of, just dismissed it out of hand. that is even more appalling to me. and i did not mean to sound sexist in my remark about bad

by another agency, another branch of government who vociferously denied that that was taking place on a number of occasions. this is to me the utmost seriousness. what did the director of the cia

the supreme court isn't a check and balance on the executive branch. anyone reading the hobby lobby report is missing the point: we were one way away from this. and hobby lobby could have established a mandate but it neglected to do so. the same thing with the national labor board decision that happened a week before. it was a slap against the obama administration but it absolutely wasn't. it setup a process where by any time congress takes a vacation for more than ten days the president can appoint anybody he wants. the states would have been the normal check on the government and this is what the founders thought and in the federalist papers it says the federal government will not get too big because the states will not stand for it. that is overthrown because of had legacy of state rights and what they meant. state rights need to come back to preserve freedom and we need to disconnect the history. the final check, unfortunately, is us. and we are seeing that. and in california the buses are turning around. the american people don't understand a fund

three, one branch doesn't know what the other branch is doing, the political wing in qatar doesn't know what is happening on the ground or four, they are not really in control of the factions there. i know some other faction. are those all viable options? >> what you're basically saying they are totally dysfunctional, but either way we know they are a brutal enemy. they are extremists. they are ruthless, that they have -- they don't play by the rules. we woke up this morning believing we would start a seize fire. the united nations received assurances that hamas was going to abide by this seize fire and then just an hour and a half after the seize fire started, you get this unprovoked attack on our forces. two soldiers being killed. one soldier kidnapped and you get mortar fire on the frontier and missile fire. hamas clearly torpedoed the chance for a seize fire. i think it's pafair to say thiss part of the course. this must be the fifth or sixth seize fire hamas torpedoed before it began. >> there was a meeting in israel tonight to discuss the seize fire as well as the capture of the s

judicial branch. so all other matters are referred to the states. if you just knew that come bigotry a great deal about what we should and should not be doing. >> host: quick lightning round. gay marriage you can be pro-civil union. at that point what is the difference? >> guest: what i am pro- and what i defined very clear, i said any two adults, regardless of their sexual orientation, should have the right to bind themselves in some type of a legal manner so that property rights, visitation rights, whatever. >> host: too many people that's a distinction without a difference. why not come out for marriage? >> guest: because i think marriage is a sacred instituti institution. and it's between a man and a woman and has been for thousands of years. my problem is if we start changing it for one group, why would you not change it for the next group? where would you draw the line? would you say would is going to change it this one time per day people ever not going to change it in the house that going to g

the legislative, executive, and judicial branch of government. and they drew as fine lines as they could between the three. but they always knew there would be a gray area. they anticipated that each branch of government would jealousy protect the constitutional authority that's vested within it in the constitution, the supreme law of the land. when the president said i'm going it usurp your legislative authority. i' going to take article 1, and legislative state if you don't do what i tell you. what happened? the people applauding now applauded then. they said, mr. president, take the power to send the constitution, take it from me. take article 1, too. take your pen, cell phone, you run this country as if you were a king rather than only the president of the united states. mr. speaker, that's what this debate is about here. this is about the daca language that the president has introduced two plus years ago. i said then when we had hill hearings before the judiciary committee and janet napolitano, said we'll take you to court on this. this will

the historical research branch -- you are the chief of that. not a lot of agencies have a historian. what purpose to user -- what purpose do you serve? guest: there are not a lot of the federal historians, but several of them are with small programs like mine. our program recently -- last year we celebrated 25 years of a program. the historical research branch is comprised of three parts could we have the office of the historian, we have the historical reference library, which is a small library that serves about half of our customers within the agency. we help other staff who work with the agency to find information, finances -- find answers. the other half of our customers are public researchers who make an appointment to research policy.of the agency or the third is a fee-for-service genealogy program, which began in 2008, and is a way to try to help family. street -- family history researchers and access to our oldest records. they, too, want access for research purposes. host: how does this program work, the genealogy program work? what is

and when mocha wrote his history in 1922, he wrote that it was watson who ran a hard branch. she had taken the name of kate maxwell and was known as cattle kate. later writers picked up on that version than university of wyoming professor published his history in 1965 he was careful to separate fact from allegation. ella watson was variously described as a prostitute and james averell's para more. she accepted stolen cattle from cowboys in return for her favors. post 1966, a pharaoh, lively history of the so-called johnson county war, when 50 wyoming ranchers and hired texas gunman invaded johnson county in 1892 in northern wyoming to kill wrestlers. the ella watson james averell lynching delayed the invasion argues huntington smith and she severely criticized the cheyenne papers but even smith writes she was a prostitute who accepted recompense for her favors in the form of stolen yearlings and may have gotten in deeper. that is the accusation against her. what some may have been a prostitute. there is no way to know for sure but by the time she was hanged all recorded actio

and a law making a curse of the legislative branch of the executive branch. >> in 2012 producing and democratic presidents and the republican house and a democratic sen. [inaudible question] >> i gave you a couple. a two-year budget agreement rust together, preventing future government shutdowns. a first-time and number of years. unfortunately the senate has chosen not to bring a single appropriation bill to the floor even though we passed a number cells. so we have not seen corresponding one is to regulate another one is transportation. we have an issue in the senate. the house in a bipartisan white came up with the reform to prevent the trust fund from going dry. if you actually look at the votes in congress, a lot of bills that pastor cars come with a bipartisan support. job training reform for a number of years because we believe the federal government has been duplicative and redundant. about 49 different programs. so we work with our colleagues in the senate and democrats announced to come up with common-sense solutions focus on getting people the skills they need to get the jo

it was branches of individuals. it was regions of individuals. >> what you seem to be saying was, it was just a way of doing business. >> yes. >> in 2007, foster sent a team to the boston area to search several branch offices of countrywide's subprime division, the division that lent to borrowers with poor credit. the investigators rummaged through the office's recycling bins and found evidence that countrywide loan officers were forging and manipulating borrowers' income and asset statements to help them get loans they weren't qualified for and couldn't afford. >> all of the--the recycle bins, whenever we looked through those, they were full of, you know, signatures that had been cut off of one document and put onto another and then photocopied, you know, or faxed and then the-- you know, the creation thrown-- thrown in the recycle bin. >> and the incentive for the people at countrywide to do that was what? >> the loan officers received bonuses, commissions. they were compensated regardless of the quality of the lo

immunity can only be granted by the executive branch, where the prosecution would be continued. but senator javits views that it would be kind to take this burden away from incoming president gerald ford, so that he would not be forced to make the decision to whether he would allow prosecution of the man who made him vice president, and subsequently is making him president, so that congress could take this painful decision away from the new president, gerald ford, and make it for him, not in a fully legal sense, but in a political sense, set the stage, set the emotions of the nation so that it would not be wise or fruitful for any prosecutor to try him. none of this, of course, applies to the question discussed by dan and fred of being witness at the trial. it applies only to immunity. but we have seen two days, perhaps two and a half days of body english by the congress, trying to extract from the president, without doing it in so many words, the kind of resignation they would like to see. the dilemma of the republican members -- they wanted to get the word to the president tha

of the government because immunity can be granted only by the executive branch where the prosecution would be continued. as i mentioned earlier, the senator feels it would be kind to take this burden away from the incoming president, gerald ford so he would not be forced to make the decision whether he would allow prosecution of the man who made him vice president and consequently making him president so that congress could take this painful decision away from the new president, gerald ford and make it for him. make it once again not in a fully legal sense but political sense, selt the scene and set the stage and emotions of the nation so it would not be wise for any prosecutor to try them. none of this applies to the question which was discussed by fred of being a witness at the trial. applies only to immunity. what you've seen here now two days, two and a half days of body english by the congress trying to extract from the president the kind of resignation they would like to see from him. >> one other problem, the dilemma of the republican members, they wanted to get the word to th