Conversation 040-003

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Hello.

Good evening, Mr. President.

Hi, Chuck.

How are you?

Fine, thank you, sir.

Just got back from Florida.

We had a good weekend.

Oh, we did.

I've been working on economics and Paris and Brexit and everything else.

Well, that's a busy platter.

Well, that's the things that matter.

I think it is.

And you've been getting some good press, I thought, today on television and in the printed press about...

the upcoming summit, plus the economic growth.

I think that's all of the good.

That's right.

We had a very good reception in Florida when we were down there at the college, or the university, I mean.

I saw that.

That was marvelous.

And also the Laird thing, I think, played very well.

Laird and Higgs.

That's a spectacularly good move.

Right.

It's the right move, too.

We're showing that we're running the place, which is the important thing.

I'm just glad you could get Mel to come in and do it.

I was afraid that he'd had four years and was kind of tired.

Well, he wouldn't have come in unless he thought we were on the upswing.

Knowing Mel Laird, he wouldn't.

I agree.

That's right.

That's good.

When I heard that Mel came in, I figured that's... Must be a good sign, huh?

Yeah, he knows we're going to do fine.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, we struck another little blow today.

The New York Times gave it a stinking headline, but...

I didn't see it.

How did it play, though?

I didn't... Well, I just got through watching the Dan Rather Sunday evening news.

Oh, boy.

Well, I gave him an interview.

Gave him an interview?

Oh.

Well, I gave his man, Sergeant, an interview that they sent out to the house today, plus gave one to NBC.

I must say that Garrett Utley at 6.30 on the national news gave it a hell of a play, in which I...

used some of the lines that I'd used with Howard Smith, but this got it off onto two more networks today.

That you had no knowledge, and that I knew you had no knowledge because of

The conversations we had had.

Either of the break-in or the...

Alleged cover-up.

Yeah, alleged is right.

I've been saying that because, damn it.

Right.

You can't cover up something unless you know what you're covering up.

Yes, and you can't really accuse people unless you know that it was done.

I think I got that point across today, but I got angry in both interviews.

That's good.

I think it came across well.

That's the way to do it.

You've got to show a little anger down there.

What has happened?

When you get up before the committee, I think you should do the same thing.

Oh, I...

They're not going to have me up there.

I just looked at the latest witness list and... What is it now?

I haven't... Give me a little rundown.

I don't... You see, I deliberately have kept away from this thing because...

How do you analyze it at this moment?

Who are they going to have?

They're going to have Stans?

They'll have Stans this week, and then they'll have Magruder, and then they'll have Dean.

And it may be a while before they get to me.

You're supposed to be after Dean?

I am supposed to be after Dean.

That's just as well.

Get him on oath.

On the other hand, they've still got to make a basic decision on him, haven't they?

Well, I think they've made the decision on the immunity.

The question is whether the...

The transactional, that's what I mean.

Have they made it on that?

Oh, no, they'll never give him transactional.

Well, then, uh, why would he do it, then?

Well, he doesn't have much choice.

He may have to go up there and take the Fifth Amendment off him, which I'd be delighted to see, because it'll destroy his credibility.

You see, if he doesn't get, uh, if he just gets use immunity, uh, Chuck...

Doesn't help him.

Uh, he's, uh, he runs at risk of both perjury and, uh... That's right.

Other things, too, doesn't he?

No, use immunity doesn't do him any good.

I think he's in a terrible bind, Mr. President.

Don't you think that's why he's...

I noticed that somebody told me today, coming up, that he'd flung out at Ritchie, of all people.

Yep.

Goodness, why'd he do that?

Well, he's desperate.

The picture of him in the New York Times today is a very insipid expression.

Not a strong face at all.

Uh-huh.

The difficult bind that I am in right now, or not that I'm in, but the situation is in, they've got Dean and I now pitted against each other.

Oh, have they?

Oh, yeah.

You and Dean?

Yeah.

I thought it was Dean versus Ehrlichman, but... Well, it was, but by coming out the way I have this week, I've kind of deflected it.

The New York Times has the two lead stories, or Weicker reports that Haldeman liked the missing files, and...

What kind of?

Oh, some Watergate files that apparently Bob had destroyed after the buggy.

We don't know what the Watergate files, intelligence files.

Oh, he didn't destroy any files, but nevertheless, I don't know anything about that.

But then the next story is mine, which really, if you read it all, the headline is terrible.

The headline says, Colson says he warned Nixon on Mitchell's role, which is, of course, crap.

And if you read the story, it goes on to say Mr. Colson, one of Mr. Nixon's closest political confidants, says that as late as mid-March, the president told him that he did not believe Mr. Mitchell or any of his senior aides were guilty and would not make a scapegoat out of an innocent man.

That's good.

As interpreted by Mr. Colson in an extended interview this week, the president's remarks constitute absolute proof that Mr. Nixon knew no more than he has publicly stated about the burglary of the Democratic Party.

Democrats' headquarters or the subsequent Congress.

That's a very important point to get across because it's totally true.

You know, it's really true, isn't it?

Well, the third paragraph is great.

Mr. Colson said that on the basis of daily conversations with Mr. Nixon last year and frequent consultations this year before and after returning to private practice on March 1st, I would stake my life on the President's disclaimers because I can't think of anything that he and I didn't talk about openly.

And it then goes on to talk about

all of the points that I've made before, your attitude being one of them, discussed after the Watergate episode.

And I quote you saying that, quote, I've been saying all along that they have too much money over there.

There's no place in campaigns for mercenaries.

That staff is inflated and mediocre.

Nobody is managing it.

I can remember you saying that.

You were mad as hell that they were being paid too much.

Yeah.

But the Times story has played.

It's been on radio all day.

Has it played objectively?

Yeah.

No, they played it well.

Good.

They played a quote from me, which was that I would stake my life on that.

That's good.

And both NBC and CBS picked it up that way.

So I must say they tried to give it a little anti-Mitchell and anti-Dean twist.

I'm afraid that's unavoidable as Dean tries to hang you.

And as I come along and defend, they're going to pit Dean and myself against each other.

Well, that's too bad, because you don't want to be really pitted against anybody, in a sense.

I'd like not to be, and I was asked during these interviews today whether I would put the finger on anyone.

I said, hell no.

Everybody that day in court.

That's right, that's right, because...

to be perfectly candid, we don't know, do we?

No, we don't.

We think.

I mean, we may think this or that, you know, and... Well, the answer truthfully, Mr. President, is I don't know.

Yeah, that's right.

That's right.

Because there's so many people telling so many conflicting stories that, good heavens, we just don't know it to this time, do we?

No.

There's only one thing that I have said to these fellows that I know, and that is that I've known you for...

many, many years.

I know your character and integrity, and I know what you've said to me throughout this thing.

And on the basis of that, I'm absolutely convinced and can prove in our conversations that you knew nothing about it.

I think, too, that the point that you probably got in

that I was constantly hammering to get the darn story out.

You know, I said, what is this?

Let's get our story out.

Yeah, I know what's in there.

I've said that you, as a matter of fact, your persistence and your determination were really the reason in April that much of the truth finally came out and that you were constantly pressed.

Every time I talked to you, you made the point to me that get the facts, get the facts.

So...

I think that... That's good, that's good.

You don't think actually you may ever get up there, huh?

Well, right now they don't want me.

They may want me later, but... You mean they think you won't help their case, is that the reason?

I'm not going to help their case.

They know what I'm going to go up there and say.

And they don't want anybody that states the truth, is that it?

They don't want anybody who goes up there and says, well, the president told me that I've got to get to the bottom of this thing and...

What have they, uh, have you, uh, have you, have they, has the committee staff talked to you yet or anything?

We have, yeah.

No, I, uh... You've told them all this?

Told them what I do to set the leg in their face?

Yeah, and they never came back to me.

Hmm.

Tried to subpoena my files, my notes of conversations with you, and I told them to go to hell.

But, uh, and the... No, those are White House files.

That's right.

They, they can't get those.

The, uh...

And they're trying to get me on peripheral things, you know, going after the files of Brookings, which... Oh, well, now, that's... Those are matters that have to do with extraneous things, which... Well, I'll defend those on security grounds any day.

Sure.

But at the moment, we checked on Friday.

At the moment, they don't even have me on their list, and I think it is because of...

the public statements that I've been making this week that have gotten a lot of publicity.

I don't think they want to hear that.

They want to build a very strong case.

Who are they building it against, Chuck?

Against you.

Oh, yes, yes, I know, but Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Mitchell, right?

Yeah, I think they'll end up trying to zero in on Haldeman particularly, Mitchell, although I think we have to face the fact that they...

They really do have Mitchell.

I don't think there's a way to... You think?

Well, they...

But then he will...

I wouldn't think he could ever testify, could he?

I don't see how he can, Mr. President.

I think he has to take whatever privilege he can, Fifth Amendment or otherwise.

I just think he has to.

Although, I don't know, maybe it doesn't at this point make a difference.

They have a... Well, how do they have that, Chuck, with other witnesses?

You mean like... Magruder.

Magruder, when he comes on, yeah.

there's just no way that there's no way that john and i'm sorry about that but it just doesn't mean i think he's well on that point though wouldn't that uh sort of encourage cox to give dean uh transactional immunity huh well transactional immunity is in a uh in the federal system is is very rarely given and is that right oh yes and there have been cases as you i know nothing about it no that have gone to the supreme court that have

that have held that transactional immunity wasn't transactional.

In other words, you could still come back on other accounts, even when they intended to give it, because it's use immunity, that's something else.

We don't, we'll give immunity against a person testifying and that being used against them.

But hell, in a case like this, where there are three and four testifying,

Use of immunity is not worth a damn.

Because if you get use of immunity, they can prove their case with other people, can't they?

Sure.

And that's why Dean's people are flailing out now, isn't it?

Mm-hmm.

He's in a terrible bind.

He's got, in my view, an impossible problem.

And he's approached it wrong.

How has he approached it wrong?

What do you mean?

Well, the best thing you can do in a situation like this is to, first of all, tell the truth.

Yes, that helps.

Be cooperative.

He won't do that.

No.

Never.

he can't he's expanded his story the the more he has gone on the more he's expanded his story the more he has brought out extraneous things uh hoping that he will i mean he can what he has tried to do and it's obvious the way the press has developed it he has tried to bring out stuff about itt he's tried to bring out stuff about the brookings he's tried to bring out stuff about the ellsbury case all of this has come from dean

I see.

When do they make that deal, Chuck?

They have to make it next week, do they?

No, they don't.

I thought you told me they had to do it on Tuesday.

Well, the Tuesday is the question of whether the hearings will be televised.

That's Cox's latest.

Well, they'll have to rule Cox on that one, Chuck.

I don't think there's any question about it.

Yeah.

Nobody's going to end up getting a fair trial anyway.

That's right.

You know, that's a great possibility in this whole matter, isn't it?

Well, I think it's... How in the devil could Mitchell get a fair trial or Haldeman or Ehrlichman?

I would say at this point, Mr. President, there's a probability that no one can get a fair trial.

Now, that doesn't mean they won't try him and convict him, but there'll be a hell of a lot of... Appeals?

Law made on the appeals, that's right.

Hmm.

But I think the important thing now, the thing that I've got to keep doing it, and then I'm going to like it, is just talk about you and just say, as I said today on NBC, and they picked it up, let's let the congressional process and the judicial process...

judge the conduct of those who served around the president but let's get to the american people very quickly the truth of what is the only central question and that is was the president involved and the fact is he was not and those of us who dealt with him day in and day out those of us who know him can testify to that you know i think uh i think one thing that's quite interesting is that dean uh well not him but his attorneys keep uh talking

you know, about, you know, that they have memoranda from high White House people, and that they, but they hint that they have tapes.

They have neither, as a matter of fact, you know.

They what?

They have neither.

I don't know about memoranda, but they, you know, they have no tapes or anything of that sort, you know.

Well, I think that John and Bob kept some tapes.

No, no, no, no, I mean Dean.

Oh, Dean, I see.

Yeah, Dean is inferring that he has them, you see.

Right.

for the purpose of, you know, sinking people.

Oh, I think John Dean at this point, Mr. President, would hold anything out.

And he's sort of holding out that he's got a piece of paper here and just like, you know, the various other things.

But if he had them, he'd be showing them to him, I would think, wouldn't you?

That's right.

Or would have shown them to him.

Well, he would have shown them to him.

The question is, or he would have described them at least, and by now they would have leaked out.

Boy, isn't that the truth.

Yeah, well, you can't tell anything to anyone that isn't two days later in prison.

If it is harmful to you, if it's helpful to you, hell, you know, the interesting thing is that I went up to the urban committee.

You were asking me had I been before this staff.

Yeah, yeah.

I was before this staff five or six weeks ago.

They didn't put any of it out.

Not one single thing I told them did they leak out.

Nothing.

Because mine really doesn't.

do anything as far as anyone in the White House is concerned.

It doesn't help me.

It certainly doesn't help the President.

I mean, it doesn't hurt the President.

It helps you.

It helps the President.

And I was told of conversations I had with you and what you said to me and how that... What do they do when you tell them that, Dash, and the rest?

Just sit there and don't make any notes or what?

No notes, yeah.

That was the fascinating part of it.

Huh.

They really don't want to hear it.

Is that right?

Well, you know, it's the point I made.

Well, they aren't going to succeed, I'll tell you.

Oh, hell no.

And I...

The thing you will kill him with, Mr. President, is if you move him off this issue.

I mean, Scoop Jackson coming on today saying that the summit should be canceled because while Brezhnev is here, it's likely that Mitchell and Haldeman and Ehrlichman and others will be testifying.

For Scoop to say that is totally irresponsible.

The summit isn't going to be canceled.

Of course not.

But which comes first?

I mean, he should really be saying, why don't we call off the Urban Committee hearings while President is here.

It's really rather surprising he would say that because he's really a very responsible guy.

But I guess he's running for president again.

Is that it?

Yeah, plus he still does not, as a matter of ideology, agree with our doing anything with the Soviet Union.

Oh, yes, that's right.

That's just his...

But for him to say the summit should be canceled, of course, that's a line of the New York Times and others, but Chuck, it isn't going to happen.

No, hell no.

Hell no.

They don't want the summit, do they?

No, but you see, I was just down in Middleburg this afternoon after I did the TV tapings, just visiting with some friends and kind of ordinary folk, and we were listening to the radio, and that came on, and they just got furious.

They said, well, jeez, if he's really worried about the impact of Watergate on Brezhnev, why don't they call up the damn witch hunt in the Senate?

What's the point of that?

He said we should cancel the summit because we're going to be for the urban committee then, and that would be bad.

While Bresnes was here, therefore we should cancel Bresnes, not cancel the urban committee.

I mean, it's preposterous.

Good heavens.

It's utterly ridiculous.

Do you think we should try to knock a little of that down?

No, no, I guess not.

Just go forward with it.

Yeah, the best posture that you can possibly be in, Mr. President, is the one that you're in right now.

Just ignore the whole thing.

Right.

Totally.

And do the job.

Do the job.

And deal with the economy, which you are, and deal with Bresnev, and deal with the energy crisis.

Right.

People, by the way, are getting very concerned now that they won't have gasoline for their cars.

Sure.

Anything you do on the energy crisis, anything you do on the economy, anything you do in foreign affairs.

And the more of it you do, you see the more, by contrast, these people look like they're petty, that they're trying to get at you.

and that they're really playing with the national interest is against the political interest, isn't that it?

That's right.

You see, it's very important that you not be sucked into the thing.

I mean, let me do what I can do.

Let Bob and John do it if they can do it.

Let any of us do this who can.

I talked to several senators last week.

Bob Dole, by the way, told me that...

I call him up, and I said, I've had a hell of a flood of mail from the Howard case, which I have, and ABC too also.

And Bob said, well, you know, it's funny.

He said, my mail's turned around.

He said, I just looked at this morning's mail.

He said, there were 11 letters on Watergate, 10 of them for the president, one against.

And I said, well, Bob, why don't you get going?

Let's get out in front and say something.

Yeah, they tell me he was, somebody said he was on Meet the Press or something today.

Oh, was he?

He did very well.

I didn't see it or hear it.

Well, that's good.

But Bob said it was turning around.

Bob said the attitude on the Hill was changing, that he was now getting people who were taking the position that the networks and the New York Times and the Post are out to get you.

I think that's a good line, too.

They're out to get the president.

People don't like that.

What do you think?

Oh, I think you, Scott, struck a real...

a real spark with that one because people, number one, people believe that.

And number two, it's true.

And number two, it is sure as hell true.

My God.

Of course, I guess you're right about Jackson.

He's against dealing with the Soviet in any event because of the Jews and all that other thing.

But he sounds silly when he says it.

His reasoning is very clear that he

He'd like that drip cold off on any basis.

One week before?

So you call up Brezhnev and say, look, let's not come now because we're having Watergate problems?

Yeah.

Good heavens, and let the peace of the world suffer?

That's right.

I think he puts himself in a terrible position.

And any Democrat who takes that line, he's the only one who has.

Others have taken it on the grounds that this isn't a good time.

You're not in a strong position to bargain.

That's Fulbright and all those people, yeah.

But that's a lousy line also.

But I think we can knock them down.

Well, that's right.

And as a matter of fact, the public attitude is probably shifting some.

I'm not Pollyannish, but I think it has in the last two or three weeks.

What do you think?

Oh, absolutely.

Absolutely.

And I am convinced of it.

I have... Well, you take a guy like Doe, and he has said nothing good...

I told him about the mail that I'd gotten, and he checked his mail, and he began to think about it, and I think he'll come around.

Hugh Scott certainly came out well.

We'll get some of the guys coming around, and that'll help.

That's all it needs.

It really just needs a little momentum, I think, that everything that Dean...