← 043-003043-005 →

Conversation 043-004

TapeTape 43StartWednesday, January 31, 1973 at 10:04 AMEndWednesday, January 31, 1973 at 10:06 AMParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Brennan, Peter J.Recording deviceWhite House Telephone
AudioNARA Description

On January 31, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon and Peter J. Brennan talked on the telephone from 10:04 am to 10:06 am. The White House Telephone taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 043-004 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 43-4

Date: January 31, 1973
Time: 10:04 am - 10:06 am
Location: White House Telephone

The President talked with Patrick J. Buchanan

[See Conversation No. 403-15]

       Preparation for the President’s forthcoming press conference on Watergate
            -John D. Ehrlichman
                   -Location
            -John W. Dean, III, H. R. (“Bob”) Haldeman
            -Ehrlichman’s comments
            -No comment on case during period of litigation and appeal
            -Possible questions and answers
                   -Maurice H. Stans, John N. Mitchell
                   -Samuel J. Ervin, Jr.
                         -Haldeman
                   -Executive privilege
                   -Dwight L. Chapin, Donald H. Segretti
                   -Dean investigation
                   -Stans, Mitchell
                   -Advice from Dean
                                                -3-

                   NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUM

                                        (rev. Aug.-08)
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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
I was trying to reach Ehrlichman and find these at U.S. News and World Report.
So you will probably have to sort of dig out something and get it over to me.
All right.
I read it reasonably soon, and I suppose Dean and Haldeman would be the best ones to talk to, maybe more.
I don't know.
Not too many.
On the Watergate thing, I read Ehrlichman's comments and so forth, and I...
Not sure that he may have.
I mean, I think he may have dug us into a little hole that I may not be able to use the answer.
Let me say that first, with regard to the Watergate generally, since the defendants have indicated they're going to appeal, my position can very justifiably be that I'm not going to comment on the case while it is still in the courts and on appeal.
You get my point?
Right.
Rather than just start going over the whole thing.
Don't you think that's a solid position?
Right.
I think you've already stated your position with regard to the act itself.
Oh, I've already stated that I don't approve of espionage and burglary and all that sort of stuff.
This stuff has no place in the political process, right?
That's right.
That's right.
That's right.
But my point is that what they will try to say, well, now, what about higher-ups?
Do you think the court proceedings were adequate and so forth and so on?
Well, any comment upon that certainly affects the rights of the defendants on appeal.
It didn't involve the appeal.
Well, anyway...
The other point is to check that out to see what kind of an answer should be given.
Well, for example, they'll say, Staines and Mitchell, do you think that the courts have adequately handled this problem?
Do you favor the urban investigation, for example?
And then do you favor...
what if they call White House people, including Mr. Haldeman, to testify before Irvin, would you have executive privilege?
And my answer there, of course, I think would be that, well, that depends on the circumstances.
And we exercise executive privilege if it's a confidential matter of the press, otherwise not.
But anyway, and the other one with regard to Chapin,
Segretti is all wound up in this, or was in there, and the rest.
Did you, in talking to them, get any idea?
Say, for example, do they say, well, was Mr. Chapin involved with Segretti?
Or what do you think of his involvement?
What do you say?
Okay.
Or do you have a thought on that?
I, of course, naturally am going to... Just say, no, here's the thing.
I think I'd say, look, we had an investigation of this thing in the White House.
The investigation involved not only the matter relevant to the Watergate, but the other allegations which were in the press last fall.
And nothing was uncovered in those investigations which caused me to have... Can we say that?
That's right.
I cleared that, the answer I gave you.
In other words, did Dean investigate Segretti as well as Watergate?
See, that's my point.
That's the critical question.
Okay, you find that out, will you?
Okay, that's what I would like to say, just say that we had an investigation and nothing is, as far as I'm concerned, nobody in the White House staff and I have...
I guess total confidence in Stans and Mitchell.
Can I say that?
Yeah, well, yeah, I didn't see any damn problem, frankly, from the testimony in the trial.
All right.
Well, okay.
You can see what I want.
Not too much.
Not too much.
I want a long answer, but quick, terse answers is what I'd prefer.
But talk to Dean.
I guess he's the best one.
I'll get him right away.
Yes, sir.
Okay.
← 043-003043-005 →