Richard Nixon — Paroles et traduction des paroles de la chanson Checkers
La page contient les paroles et la traduction française de la chanson « Checkers » de Richard Nixon.
Paroles
My Fellow Americans
I come before you tonight as a candidate for the Vice Presidency and as a man
whose honesty and -- and integrity has been questioned
Now, the usual political thing to do when charges are made against you is to
either ignore them or to deny them without giving details. I believe we’ve had
enough of that in the United States, particularly with the present
Administration in Washington, D.C. To me the office of the Vice Presidency of
the United States is a great office, and I feel that the people have got to
have confidence in the integrity of the men who run for that office and who
might obtain it
I have a theory, too, that the best and only answer to a smear or to an honest
misunderstanding of the facts is to tell the truth. And that’s why I’m here
tonight. I want to tell you my side of the case. I’m sure that you have read
the charge, and you’ve heard it, that I, Senator Nixon, took 18,
000 dollars from a group of my supporters
Now, was that wrong? And let me say that it was wrong. I’m saying, incidentally,
that it was wrong, not just illegal, because it isn’t a question of whether it
was legal or illegal, that isn’t enough. The question is, was it morally wrong?
I say that it was morally wrong -- if any of that 18,000 dollars went to
Senator Nixon, for my personal use. I say that it was morally wrong if it was
secretly given and secretly handled. And I say that it was morally wrong if any
of the contributors got special favors for the contributions that they made
And now to answer those questions let me say this: Not one cent of the 18,
000 dollars or any other money of that type ever went to me for my personal use.
Every penny of it was used to pay for political expenses that I did not think
should be charged to the taxpayers of the United States. It was not a secret
fund. As a matter of fact, when I was on «Meet the Press» -- some of you may
have seen it last Sunday -- Peter Edson came up to me after the program,
and he said, «Dick, what about this „fund“ we hear about?» And I said, «Well,
there’s no secret about it. Go out and see Dana Smith who was the
administrator of the fund.» And I gave him his address. And I said you will
find that the purpose of the fund simply was to defray political expenses that
I did not feel should be charged to the Government
And third, let me point out -- and I want to make this particularly clear --
that no contributor to this fund, no contributor to any of my campaigns,
has ever received any consideration that he would not have received as an
ordinary constituent. I just don’t believe in that, and I can say that never,
while I have been in the Senate of the United States, as far as the people
that contributed to this fund are concerned, have I made a telephone call for
them to an agency, or have I gone down to an agency in their behalf.
And the records will show that, the records which are in the hands of the
administration
Well, then, some of you will say, and rightly, «Well, what did you use the fund
for, Senator?» «Why did you have to have it?» Let me tell you in just a word
how a Senate office operates. First of all, a Senator gets 15,000 dollars a
year in salary. He gets enough money to pay for one trip a year -- a round trip,
that is -- for himself and his family between his home and Washington, D.C.
And then he gets an allowance to handle the people that work in his office to
handle his mail. And the allowance for my State of California is enough to hire
13 people. And let me say, incidentally, that that allowance is not paid to the
Senator. It’s paid directly to the individuals that the Senator puts on his pay
roll. But all of these people and all of these allowances are for strictly
official business; business, for example, when a constituent writes in and
wants you to go down to the Veteran’s Administration and get some information
about his GI policy -- items of that type, for example. But there are other
expenses which are not covered by the Government. And I think I can best
discuss those expenses by asking you some questions
Do you think that when I or any other Senator makes a political speech,
has it printed, should charge the printing of that speech and the mailing of
that speech to the taxpayers? Do you think, for example, when I or any other
Senator makes a trip to his home State to make a purely political speech that
the cost of that trip should be charged to the taxpayers? Do you think when a
Senator makes political broadcasts or political television broadcasts,
radio or television, that the expense of those broadcasts should be charged to
the taxpayers? Well I know what your answer is. It’s the same answer that
audiences give me whenever I discuss this particular problem: The answer is no.
The taxpayers shouldn’t be required to finance items which are not official
business but which are primarily political business
Well, then the question arises, you say, «Well, how do you pay for these and
how can you do it legally?» And there are several ways that it can be done,
incidentally, and that it is done legally in the United States Senate and in
the Congress. The first way is to be a rich man. I don’t happen to be a rich
man, so I couldn’t use that one. Another way that is used is to put your wife
on the pay roll. Let me say, incidentally, that my opponent, my opposite number
for the Vice Presidency on the Democratic ticket, does have his wife on the pay
roll and has had it -- her on his pay roll for the ten years -- for the past
ten years. Now just let me say this: That’s his business, and I’m not critical
of him for doing that. You will have to pass judgment on that particular point
But I have never done that for this reason: I have found that there are so many
deserving stenographers and secretaries in Washington that needed the work that
I just didn’t feel it was right to put my wife on the pay roll
My wife’s sitting over here. She’s a wonderful stenographer. She used to teach
stenography and she used to teach shorthand in high school. That was when I met
her. And I can tell you folks that she’s worked many hours at night and many
hours on Saturdays and Sundays in my office, and she’s done a fine job,
and I am proud to say tonight that in the six years I’ve been in the House and
the Senate of the United States, Pat Nixon has never been on the Government pay
roll
What are other ways that these finances can be taken care of? Some who are
lawyers, and I happen to be a lawyer, continue to practice law, but I haven’t
been able to do that. I’m so far away from California that I’ve been so busy
with my senatorial work that I have not engaged in any legal practice.
And, also, as far as law practice is concerned, it seemed to me that the
relationship between an attorney and the client was so personal that you
couldn’t possibly represent a man as an attorney and then have an unbiased view
when he presented his case to you in the event that he had one before
Government
And so I felt that the best way to handle these necessary political expenses of
getting my message to the American people and the speeches I made -- the
speeches that I had printed for the most part concerned this one message of
exposing this Administration, the Communism in it, the corruption in it -- the
only way that I could do that was to accept the aid which people in my home
State of California, who contributed to my campaign and who continued to make
these contributions after I was elected, were glad to make
And let me say I’m proud of the fact that not one of them has ever asked me for
a special favor. I’m proud of the fact that not one of them has ever asked me
to vote on a bill other than of my own conscience would dictate.
And I am proud of the fact that the taxpayers, by subterfuge or otherwise,
have never paid one dime for expenses which I thought were political and
shouldn’t be charged to the taxpayers
Let me say, incidentally, that some of you may say, «Well, that’s all right,
Senator, that’s your explanation, but have you got any proof?» And I’d like to
tell you this evening that just an hour ago we received an independent audit of
this entire fund. I suggested to Governor Sherman Adams, who is the Chief of
Staff of the Dwight Eisenhower campaign, that an independent audit and legal
report be obtained, and I have that audit here in my hands. It’s an audit made
by the Price Waterhouse & Company firm, and the legal opinion by Gibson, Dunn,
& Crutcher, lawyers in Los Angeles, the biggest law firm, and incidentally,
one of the best ones in Los Angeles
I am proud to be able to report to you tonight that this audit and this legal
opinion is being forwarded to General Eisenhower. And I’d like to read to you
the opinion that was prepared by Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher, and based on all the
pertinent laws and statutes, together with the audit report prepared by the
certified public accountants. Quote:
It is our conclusion that Senator Nixon did not obtain any financial gain from
the collection and disbursement of the fund by Dana Smith; that Senator Nixon
did not violate any federal or state law by reason of the operation of the fund;
and that neither the portion of the fund paid by Dana Smith directly to third
persons, nor the portion paid to Senator Nixon, to reimburse him for designated
office expenses, constituted income to the Senator which was either reportable
or taxable as income under applicable tax laws
(signed)
Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher
by Elmo H. Conley
Now that, my friends, is not Nixon speaking, but that’s an independent audit
which was requested, because I want the American people to know all the facts,
and I am not afraid of having independent people go in and check the facts,
and that is exactly what they did. But then I realized that there are still
some who may say, and rightfully so -- and let me say that I recognize that
some will continue to smear regardless of what the truth may be -- but that
there has been, understandably, some honest misunderstanding on this matter,
and there are some that will say, «Well, maybe you were able, Senator,
to fake this thing. How can we believe what you say? After all,
is there a possibility that maybe you got some sums in cash? Is there a
possibility that you may have feathered your own nest?» And so now,
what I am going to do -- and incidentally this is unprecedented in the history
of American politics -- I am going at this time to give to this television and
radio audio -- audience, a complete financial history, everything I’ve earned,
everything I’ve spent, everything I own. And I want you to know the facts
I’ll have to start early. I was born in 1913. Our family was one of modest
circumstances, and most of my early life was spent in a store out in East
Whittier. It was a grocery store, one of those family enterprises.
The only reason we were able to make it go was because my mother and dad had
five boys, and we all worked in the store. I worked my way through college, and,
to a great extent, through law school. And then in 1940, probably the best
thing that ever happened to me happened. I married Pat who’s sitting over here.
We had a rather difficult time after we were married, like so many of the
young couples who may be listening to us. I practiced law. She continued to
teach school
Then, in 1942, I went into the service. Let me say that my service record was
not a particularly unusual one. I went to the South Pacific. I guess I’m
entitled to a couple of battle stars. I got a couple of letters of commendation.
But I was just there when the bombs were falling. And then I returned --
returned to the United States, and in 1946, I ran for the Congress.
When we came out of the war -- Pat and I -- Pat during the war had worked as a
stenographer, and in a bank, and as an economist for a Government agency -- and
when we came out, the total of our savings, from both my law practice,
her teaching and all the time that I was in the war, the total for that entire
period was just a little less than 10,000 dollars. Every cent of that,
incidentally, was in Government bonds. Well that’s where we start,
when I go into politics
Now, what have I earned since I went into politics? Well, here it is.
I’ve jotted it down. Let me read the notes. First of all, I’ve had my salary
as a Congressman and as a Senator. Second, I have received a total in this past
six years of 1600 dollars from estates which were in my law firm at the time
that I severed my connection with it. And, incidentally, as I said before,
I have not engaged in any legal practice and have not accepted any fees from
business that came into the firm after I went into politics. I have made an
average of approximately 1500 dollars a year from nonpolitical speaking
engagements and lectures
And then, fortunately, we’ve inherited a little money. Pat sold her interest in
her father’s estate for 3,000 dollars, and I inherited 1500 dollars from my
grandfather. We lived rather modestly. For four years we lived in an apartment
in Parkfairfax, in Alexandria, Virginia. The rent was 80 dollars a month.
And we saved for the time that we could buy a house. Now, that was what we
took in. What did we do with this money? What do we have today to show for it?
This will surprise you because it is so little, I suppose, as standards
generally go of people in public life
First of all, we’ve got a house in Washington, which cost 41,000 dollars and on
which we owe 20,000 dollars. We have a house in Whittier, California which cost
13,000 dollars and on which we owe 3000 dollars. My folks are living there at
the present time. I have just 4000 dollars in life insurance, plus my GI policy
which I’ve never been able to convert, and which will run out in two years.
I have no life insurance whatever on Pat. I have no life insurance on our two
youngsters, Tricia and Julie. I own a 1950 Oldsmobile car. We have our
furniture. We have no stocks and bonds of any type. We have no interest of any
kind, direct or indirect, in any business. Now, that’s what we have.
What do we owe?
Well in addition to the mortgage, the 20,000 dollar mortgage on the house in
Washington, the 10,000 dollar one on the house in Whittier, I owe 4500 dollars
to the Riggs Bank in Washington, D.C., with interest 4 and ½ percent.
I owe 3500 dollars to my parents, and the interest on that loan,
which I pay regularly, because it’s the part of the savings they made through
the years they were working so hard -- I pay regularly 4 percent interest.
And then I have a 500 dollar loan, which I have on my life insurance
Well, that’s about it. That’s what we have. And that’s what we owe.
It isn’t very much. But Pat and I have the satisfaction that every dime that
we’ve got is honestly ours. I should say this, that Pat doesn’t have a mink
coat. But she does have a respectable Republican cloth coat, and I always tell
her she’d look good in anything
One other thing I probably should tell you, because if I don’t they’ll probably
be saying this about me, too. We did get something, a gift, after the election.
A man down in Texas heard Pat on the radio mention the fact that our two
youngsters would like to have a dog. And believe it or not, the day before we
left on this campaign trip we got a message from Union Station in Baltimore,
saying they had a package for us. We went down to get it. You know what it was?
It was a little cocker spaniel dog in a crate that he’d sent all the way from
Texas, black and white, spotted. And our little girl Tricia, the six year old,
named it «Checkers.» And you know, the kids, like all kids, love the dog,
and I just want to say this, right now, that regardless of what they say about
it, we’re gonna keep it
It isn’t easy to come before a nationwide audience and bare your life,
as I’ve done. But I want to say some things before I conclude that I think
most of you will agree on. Mr. Mitchell, the Chairman of the Democratic
National Committee, made this statement -- that if a man couldn’t afford to be
in the United States Senate, he shouldn’t run for the Senate. And I just want
to make my position clear. I don’t agree with Mr. Mitchell when he says that
only a rich man should serve his Government in the United States Senate or in
the Congress. I don’t believe that represents the thinking of the Democratic
Party, and I know that it doesn’t represent the thinking of the Republican
Party
I believe that it’s fine that a man like Governor Stevenson, who inherited a
fortune from his father, can run for President. But I also feel that it’s
essential in this country of ours that a man of modest means can also run for
President, because, you know, remember Abraham Lincoln, you remember what he
said: «God must have loved the common people -- he made so many of them.»
And now I’m going to suggest some courses of conduct. First of all,
you have read in the papers about other funds, now. Mr. Stevenson apparently
had a couple -- one of them in which a group of business people paid and helped
to supplement the salaries of State employees. Here is where the money went
directly into their pockets, and I think that what Mr. Stevenson should do
should be to come before the American people, as I have, give the names of the
people that contributed to that fund, give the names of the people who put this
money into their pockets at the same time that they were receiving money from
their State government and see what favors, if any, they gave out for that
I don’t condemn Mr. Stevenson for what he did, but until the facts are in there
is a doubt that will be raised. And as far as Mr. Sparkman is concerned,
I would suggest the same thing. He’s had his wife on the payroll.
I don’t condemn him for that, but I think that he should come before the
American people and indicate what outside sources of income he has had.
I would suggest that under the circumstances both Mr. Sparkman and Mr.
Stevenson should come before the American people, as I have, and make a
complete financial statement as to their financial history, and if they don’t
it will be an admission that they have something to hide. And I think you will
agree with me -- because, folks, remember, a man that’s to be President of the
United States, a man that’s to be Vice President of the United States,
must have the confidence of all the people. And that’s why I’m doing what I’m
doing. And that’s why I suggest that Mr. Stevenson and Mr. Sparkman,
since they are under attack, should do what they’re doing
Now let me say this: I know that this is not the last of the smears.
In spite of my explanation tonight, other smears will be made. Others have
been made in the past. And the purpose of the smears, I know, is this:
to silence me; to make me let up. Well, they just don’t know who they’re
dealing with. I’m going to tell you this: I remember in the dark days of the
Hiss Cass some of the same columnists, some of the same radio commentators who
are attacking me now and misrepresenting my position, were violently opposing
me at the time I was after Alger Hiss. But I continued to fight because I knew
I was right, and I can say to this great television and radio audience that I
have no apologies to the American people for my part in putting Alger Hiss
where he is today. And as far as this is concerned, I intend to continue to
fight
Why do I feel so deeply? Why do I feel that in spite of the smears,
the misunderstanding, the necessity for a man to come up here and bare his
soul as I have -- why is it necessary for me to continue this fight?
And I want to tell you why. Because, you see, I love my country.
And I think my country is in danger. And I think the only man that can save
America at this time is the man that’s running for President, on my ticket --
Dwight Eisenhower. You say, «Why do I think it is in danger?» And I say,
look at the record. Seven years of the Truman-Acheson Administration,
and what’s happened? Six hundred million people lost to the Communists.
And a war in Korea in which we have lost 117,000 American casualties,
and I say to all of you that a policy that results in the loss of 600 million
people to the Communists, and a war which cost us 117,000 American casualties
isn’t good enough for America. And I say that those in the State Department
that made the mistakes which caused that war and which resulted in those losses
should be kicked out of the State Department just as fast as we get them out of
there
And let me say that I know Mr. Stevenson won’t do that because he defends the
Truman policy, and I know that Dwight Eisenhower will do that, and that he will
give America the leadership that it needs. Take the problem of corruption.
You’ve read about the mess in Washington. Mr. Stevenson can’t clean it up
because he was picked by the man, Truman, under whose Administration the mess
was made. You wouldn’t trust the man who made the mess to clean it up.
That’s Truman. And by the same token you can’t trust the man who was picked by
the man that made the mess to clean it up -- and that’s Stevenson
And so I say, Eisenhower, who owed nothing to Truman, nothing to the big city
bosses -- he is the man that can clean up the mess in Washington.
Take Communism. I say that as far as that subject is concerned the danger is
great to America. In the Hiss case they got the secrets which enabled them to
break the American secret State Department code. They got secrets in the atomic
bomb case which enabled them to get the secret of the atomic bomb five years
before they would have gotten it by their own devices. And I say that any man
who called the Alger Hiss case a red herring isn’t fit to be President of the
United States. I say that a man who, like Mr. Stevenson, has pooh-poohed and
ridiculed the Communist threat in the United States -- he said that they are
phantoms among ourselves. He has accused us that have attempted to expose the
Communists, of looking for Communists in the Bureau of Fisheries and Wildlife.
I say that a man who says that isn’t qualified to be President of the United
States. And I say that the only man who can lead us in this fight to rid the
Government of both those who are Communists and those who have corrupted this
Government is Eisenhower, because Eisenhower, you can be sure, recognizes the
problem, and he knows how to deal with it
Now let me that finally, this evening, I want to read to you, just briefly,
excerpts from a letter which I received, a letter which after all this is over
no one can take away from us. It reads as follows:
Dear Senator Nixon
Since I am only 19 years of age, I can’t vote in this presidential election,
but believe me if I could you and General Eisenhower would certainly get my
vote. My husband is in the Fleet Marines in Korea. He' a corpsman on the front
lines and we have a two month old son he’s never seen. And I feel confident
that with great Americans like you and General Eisenhower in the White House,
lonely Americans like myself will be united with their loved ones now in Korea.
I only pray to God that you won’t be too late. Enclosed is a small check to
help you in your campaign. Living on $ 85 a month, it is all I can afford at
present, but let me know what else I can do
Folks, it’s a check for 10 dollars, and it’s one that I will never cash.
And just let me say this: We hear a lot about prosperity these days,
but I say why can’t we have prosperity built on peace, rather than prosperity
built on war? Why can’t we have prosperity and an honest Government in
Washington, D.C., at the same time? Believe me, we can. And Eisenhower is the
man that can lead this crusade to bring us that kind of prosperity
And now, finally, I know that you wonder whether or not I am going to stay on
the Republican ticket or resign. Let me say this: I don’t believe that I ought
to quit, because I am not a quitter. And, incidentally, Pat’s not a quitter.
After all, her name was Patricia Ryan and she was born on St. Patrick’s day,
and you know the Irish never quit
But the decision, my friends, is not mine. I would do nothing that would harm
the possibilities of Dwight Eisenhower to become President of the United States.
And for that reason I am submitting to the Republican National Committee
tonight through this television broadcast the decision which it is theirs to
make. Let them decide whether my position on the ticket will help or hurt.
And I am going to ask you to help them decide. Wire and write the Republican
National Committee whether you think I should stay on or whether I should get
off. And whatever their decision is, I will abide by it
But just let me say this last word: Regardless of what happens, I’m going to
continue this fight. I’m going to campaign up and down in America until we
drive the crooks and the Communists and those that defend them out of
Washington. And remember folks, Eisenhower is a great man, believe me.
He’s a great man. And a vote for Eisenhower is a vote for what’s good for
America. And what’s good for America…
Traduction des paroles
Mes Compatriotes Américains
Je viens devant vous ce soir en tant que candidat à la Vice Présidence et en tant qu'homme
dont l'honnêteté et-et l'intégrité ont été remises en question
Maintenant, la chose politique habituelle à faire quand des accusations sont portées contre vous est de
soit les ignorer ou les nier sans donner de détails. Je crois que nous avons eu
assez de cela aux États-Unis, en particulier avec le présent
Pour moi, le bureau de la Vice-présidence de
les États-Unis sont un grand bureau, et je pense que les gens ont à
ayez confiance en l'intégrité des hommes qui se présentent à ce poste et qui
pourrait l'obtenir
J'ai une théorie, aussi, que la meilleure et la seule réponse à un frottis ou à un honnête
erronée des faits, est de dire la vérité. Et c'est pourquoi je suis ici
soir. Je veux vous dire ma version de l'affaire. Je suis sûr que vous avez lu
L'accusation, et vous l'avez entendu, que J'ai, sénateur Nixon, pris 18,
000 dollars d'un groupe de mes partisans
Maintenant, est-ce mal? Et permettez-moi de dire que c'était mal. Je dis, incidemment,
que c'était faux, pas seulement illégal, parce que ce n'est pas une question de savoir si cela
était légal ou illégal, ce n'est pas assez. La question Est, était-ce moralement faux?
Je dis que c'était moralement faux-si l'un de ces 18 000 dollars allait à
Sénateur Nixon, pour mon usage personnel. Je dis que c'était moralement faux si c'était le cas
secrètement donné et secrètement manipulé. Et je dis que c'était moralement faux le cas échéant
des contributeurs obtenu des faveurs spéciales pour les contributions qu'ils ont fait
Et maintenant, pour répondre à ces questions, permettez-moi de dire ceci: pas un cent des 18,
000 dollars ou tout autre argent de ce type jamais allé à moi pour mon usage personnel.
Chaque centime était utilisé pour payer des dépenses politiques que je ne pensais pas
devrait être facturé aux contribuables des États-Unis. Il n'était pas un secret
fonds. En fait, quand j'étais sur "Meet The Press" ... certains d'entre vous peuvent
il veut que vous alliez à l'Administration du Vétéran et que vous obteniez des informations
à propos de sa politique GI-des éléments de ce type, par exemple. Mais il y a d'autres
dépenses qui ne sont pas couvertes par le gouvernement. Et je pense que je peux mieux
discutez de ces dépenses en vous posant quelques questions
Pensez vous que lorsque moi ou un autre sénateur faisons un discours politique,
a imprimer, devrait charger de l'impression de ce discours et l'envoi de la
ce discours aux contribuables? Pensez-vous, par exemple, quand je ou tout autre
Le sénateur fait un voyage dans son État d'origine pour faire un discours purement politique
le coût de ce voyage devrait être facturé aux contribuables? Pensez-vous quand un
Le sénateur fait des émissions politiques ou des émissions de télévision politiques,
la radio ou la télévision, que les frais de ces émissions devraient être imputés à
les contribuables? Eh bien, je sais quelle est votre réponse. C'est la même réponse que
le public me donne chaque fois que je discute de ce problème particulier: la réponse est non.
Les contribuables ne devraient pas être tenus de financer des postes qui ne sont pas officiels
affaires mais qui sont principalement des affaires politiques
Eh bien, alors la question se pose, vous dites: "Eh bien, comment payez-vous pour ceux-ci et
comment pouvez-vous le faire légalement?» Et il y a plusieurs façons que cela peut être fait,
et que cela se fait légalement au Sénat des États-Unis et en
congrès. La première façon est d'être un homme riche. Je n'arrive pas à être riche
mec, donc je ne pouvais pas utiliser celui-là. Une autre façon qui est utilisée est de mettre votre femme
sur la bobine. Permettez-moi de dire, incidemment, que mon adversaire, mon numéro opposé
pour la Vice-présidence sur le billet démocratique, a-t-il sa femme à la solde
et l'a eu - elle sur son rôle de paie pour les dix ans - pour le passé
décennal. Maintenant, permettez-moi de dire ceci: c'est son affaire, et je ne suis pas critique
de lui pour avoir fait ça. Vous devrez porter un jugement sur ce point particulier
Et permettez moi de dire que je suis fier du fait qu'aucun d'entre eux ne m'a jamais demandé
une faveur spéciale. Je suis fier du fait qu'aucun d'entre eux ne m'a jamais demandé
pour voter sur un projet de loi autre que de ma propre conscience dicterait.
Et je suis fier du fait que les contribuables, par subterfuge ou autre,
n'ont jamais payé un centime pour des dépenses que je pensais être Politiques et
ne devrait pas être facturé aux contribuables
Permettez-moi de dire, incidemment, que certains d'entre vous peuvent dire, " Eh bien, ce n'est pas grave,
Sénateur, c'est votre explication, mais avez-vous des preuves?» Et j'aimerais
vous dire ce soir qu'il y a à peine une heure nous avons reçu un audit indépendant de
l'ensemble de ce fonds. J'ai suggéré au gouverneur Sherman Adams, qui est le chef de
Personnel de la campagne Dwight Eisenhower, qu'un audit indépendant et juridique
le rapport doit être obtenu, et j'ai cet audit entre les mains. C'est un audit
par le cabinet Price Waterhouse & Company, et l'avis juridique de Gibson, Dunn,
& Crutcher, avocats à Los Angeles, le plus grand cabinet d'avocats, et accessoirement,
l'un des meilleurs de Los Angeles
Je suis fier de pouvoir vous signaler ce soir que cet audit et ce
l'avis est transmis au Général Eisenhower. Et j'aimerais vous lire
l'avis qui a été préparé par Gibson, Dunn et Crutcher, et basé sur tous les
lois et statuts pertinents, ainsi que le rapport d'audit préparé par le
certified public accountants. Citation:
Nous concluons que le sénateur Nixon n'a obtenu aucun gain financier de
la collecte et le décaissement du fonds par Dana Smith; que le sénateur Nixon
n'a violé aucune loi fédérale ou d'état, en raison de l'exploitation du fonds;
et que ni la partie du fonds versée par Dana Smith directement à la troisième
personnes, ni la partie versée au sénateur Nixon, pour lui rembourser
les dépenses de bureau constituaient un revenu pour le sénateur qui devait être déclaré
La Politique de Truman, et je sais que Dwight Eisenhower le fera, et qu'il le fera
donnez à L'Amérique le leadership dont elle a besoin. Prenez le problème de la corruption.
Vous avez lu le désordre à Washington. M. Stevenson ne peut pas le nettoyer
parce qu'il a été choisi par L'homme, Truman, sous L'Administration duquel le mess
a été faite. Vous ne feriez pas confiance à l'homme qui a fait le gâchis pour le nettoyer.
C'est Truman. Et de même vous ne pouvez pas faire confiance à l'homme qui a été choisi par
L'homme qui a fait le désordre pour le nettoyer -- et C'est Stevenson
C'est ce que je dis, Eisenhower, qui ne devait rien à Truman, rien à la grande ville
les patrons ... c'est l'homme qui peut nettoyer le désordre à Washington.
Prenez Le Communisme. Je dis qu'en ce qui concerne ce sujet le danger est
génial pour L'Amérique. Dans le cas de sifflement ils ont obtenu les secrets qui leur ont permis de
briser le code secret du Département d'État américain. Ils ont des secrets dans l'atomique
bombe de cas qui leur a permis d'obtenir le secret de la bombe atomique cinq ans
avant qu'ils ne l'aient obtenu par leurs propres moyens. Et je dis que tout homme
qui a qualifié L'affaire Hiss D'Alger de hareng rouge n'est pas apte à être président de la
USA. Je dis qu'un homme qui, comme M. Stevenson, a pooh-poohed et
ridiculisé la menace Communiste aux États-unis, il a dit qu'ils sont
des fantômes entre nous. Il nous a accusés qui ont tenté d'exposer le
Communistes, de chercher des communistes au Bureau de la pêche et de la faune.
Je dis qu'un homme qui dit cela n'est pas qualifié pour être président des États Unis
Unis. Et je dis que le seul homme qui peut nous conduire dans ce combat pour débarrasser le
Gouvernement de ceux qui sont communistes et de ceux qui ont corrompu cela
Le gouvernement est Eisenhower, parce que Eisenhower, vous pouvez être sûr, reconnaît le
problème, et il sait comment y faire face
Maintenant, permettez-moi que finalement, ce soir, je veux vous lire rapidement,
ce soir à travers cette émission de télévision la décision dont il est le leur
faire. Laissez-les décider si ma position sur le billet aidera ou blessera.
Et je vais vous demander de les aider à décider. Fil et écrire Le Républicain
Comité National si vous pensez que je devrais rester ou si je devrais obtenir
hors. Et quelle que soit leur décision, je m'y conformerai
Mais laissez-moi dire ce dernier mot: peu importe ce qui se passe, je vais
continuer ce combat. Je vais faire campagne en Amérique jusqu'à ce que nous
lecteur les escrocs et les Communistes et ceux qui les défendent de
Washington. Et rappelez-vous les gens, Eisenhower est un grand homme, croyez-moi.
Il est un grand homme. Et un vote pour Eisenhower est un vote pour ce qui est bon pour
Amérique. Et ce qui est bon pour L'Amérique…