Conversation 105-001

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

No, I think we're pretty much on the offense, Mr. President.

We were just discussing, and I know that you may wish to hear from some of these men.

First of all, they are, for the most part, maybe one or two exceptions, young lawyers that you ordered me to get going, hiring in connection with this program.

They're all much younger than I am, so therefore they're automatically...

I think that the encouraging thing that we've had to report, sir, is that there are increasing Arab insurers all over the United States.

The price is going up.

The number of addicts that are going into work and questions and treatment is increasing.

And there are risks.

It's a tremendous agreement.

At the end of June, beginning of July, we had 1,000 arrests.

As of today, we have about 1,650.

And in two weeks, we'll have over 2,000 arrests since May.

We're now moving into the grand jury phase, which the lawyers themselves will be much more heavily involved.

The other area that we thought we could mention to you, sir, is that I think most of us feel that one of the things that we need is an additional or heavier sentencing that the federal courts can take.

I think so, sir.

I don't think we need anything in the law.

I think the problem is that the federal judges in particular were very cautious.

An ounce seller, for example, doesn't mean anything.

A McFeller who would sell an ounce of heroin would also sell a kilogram of heroin.

I think we'd like to try and get the courts to understand what the role of removing these pushes from society is, as it be the creation of new addicts and things like that.

Is there anything?

I know most lawyers don't subscribe to this.

I've asked her about it.

I think, I think, sir, it's a real problem with a lot of judges.

On the other hand, as we've discussed with the Attorney General,

Well, that's what we're trying to do.

It's a little hard to judge.

They might go up.

Let me say this.

I want you to watch these judges.

And those that take the soft line on this, I never want to see their names on my desk over the circuit corridor in my office.

That's very clear.

In this case, this is not being hard-hearted, but they just decided to back up these guys that go out and do this very, sometimes dreary work, and sometimes risky work.

They bring these clowns in, and let them go, or suspend themselves.

That's what it is.

I was talking to some...

What's the real problem?

The real problem is, in this field, the other drugs also, particularly in this field here, is that guys get terribly discouraged because they're not in six months, or so, or...

They wear out, the witnesses get tired, and so forth.

That's all they know.

Right.

Yes, sir.

What we're thinking is we could put out as an official position, part of the justice, to the U.S. attorneys to ask for incarceration of any man that was convicted of selling narcotics.

And that will be...

I think one of the...

It would be very helpful...

I think it will get a momentum building for the federal judges, and hopefully...

How about, you know, we've talked to governors about this, and I'm not getting them all.

It isn't just state courts, but it really gets down to the counties.

I was thinking of the association of state attorneys.

It doesn't reach a lot.

In some states, they have managed to build a jurisdiction.

In other states, they can vote.

I can't believe I've got to watch this guy.

I'm just wondering if you can vote for him.

But what we're really trying to get at, really, is on the work matters.

I mean, it's the guy on that street.

But they're very sensitive to public opinion.

The DA.

I mean, because they get elected, and I suppose they're extremely sensitive.

Sure.

District attorneys are elected.

What about the, I don't know, what can be done that couldn't wipe their clients in addition?

Because he does have contact with all of the DAs, and there is an association.

But to see that they are all certain to rise to this position, not with the idea of dictating them what they should do, but to say this shall be the policy in the federal courts.

We ask you to consider, respectfully, that this bill shall be a policy in the state courts and the county courts.

Let's be more than simply pass it along to our people.

I think you have to be careful.

It's not the courts.

We're going with our U.S. attorneys and the DA.

Oh, you can't tell the judges?

But I meant the courts passing it to the people, like the district attorneys, the state's attorneys, and then, of course, our own friends down the line.

Then they ask for it.

Well, you've got a pretty strong district.

I think you have some sort of program that is key to judges.

State judges, and so far as sentencing is concerned, it's very easy.

Let's talk about that.

Can we do something?

Why do we have to just leave the judges?

Why can't we talk to judges?

I think there's a reason for the one group we haven't had in.

Yes, go ahead.

There is a bill presently before Congress to reinstate the minimum man to a five-year sentence on a private conviction.

I was wondering if that might be some sort of an aid.

What is the argument?

Well, the argument against it is that

The judges have charged the prosecutor right out of court in case that they've got some problem.

The idea that the charge, the idea that when it's mandatory, and I understood it because this appeals to me, this idea, but as I understand it, when you have a mandate, whenever, putting it another way, whenever a sentence is too stiff, the judge has a fine way to just not do anything that's correct.

On the other hand, this mandatory thing in terms of drugs,

It doesn't break the rule of appeal to me.

Well, we don't think it should have ever been thrown out.

No, it was thrown out, but now it's a problem we need to save.

Well, this is a real problem.

You don't think it should have been thrown out?

I don't think it should have been thrown out.

Put it in.

Now, why didn't we do it before?

Well, we had Chief Justice and others that argued very persuasively against it across... Well, it's hard to argue the other way.

They aren't always right, sir.

They aren't.

Okay.

Even the ones we have talked about...

I wonder if we couldn't approach the federal judges through Judge Burroughs' organization, the executive office, and the U.S. courts, and see if we can't set up a smoothing system for the judges.

Because they're very quiet in here, they're not wet.

This is federal terms.

Yes.

How do we reach the state?

As a matter of fact, I agree to think you could talk to Berger about this.

He does all sorts of... And he's... Let's...

Talk to Berger directly to see what he can do with regard to judicial conference or whatever it is.

But let's find a way to talk to the judges.

I have no, no, no, no, I would have no hesitancy.

The Attorney General should have it.

But you can do it very discreetly.

You can typically say, this is what we're doing, this is the importance of this thing.

We ask you to consider this as you have these cases before you, so that they require you to resolve them, because they are expected by public opinion.

They don't understand that the common knowledge in the street is that you get one chance, because if you get caught selling heroin, and it's a small quantity, you're going to be put on the street again, so there's nothing to fear, and it's an awfully profitable thing, and they know that they're not going to go to jail for one chance.

They get one chance.

That's true in L.A., for example.

No, I think that's true in Los Angeles, that everything goes back down the street if you get caught selling.

I think most people get caught selling in the state courts in California for some time.

You're right, in the state courts.

I can understand why they want to give them another chance, but everybody knows it, and it doesn't work.

But they've been very receptive to going there and telling them.

There's a great tendency to swap over and run under.

First, they're young.

Second, they're a combination of users who are selling.

That's correct.

So you feel sorry for them.

And then by the time you feel sorry for that fellow, then you finally get the simple son of a bitch that is not a user, but that just is out doing it.

That is the guy who you've got to get, you know, these people that are doing it for a business, which would mean... All users do it for a business, too, though.

Do they?

The people that start young kids aren't your major traffickers.

They're the user pushers.

They're the bums that stand around the corner.

You'd be strong.

You'd be tough on them.

Oh, yes, sir.

Very tough on them.

Yeah, well, as I say, we don't want to be fair to them, but on the other hand, if you think of the user pusher, you've got to think of that innocent kid that gets started in this.

and has his life basically marred or destroyed.

I mean, who's going to feel the more sorry for him, the criminal or the innocent person?

That's what it really gets to.

It hasn't started yet.

It's waiting to start.

If we could also, Mr. President, get to the probation law.

And there is a place for probation, but in this field, it just, you know, it's in our hands all the time.

But it's working.

The program's working.

We started with this event, I think.

What are your rush figures now that you're up to 2,000?

1,600.

2,000 next week.

You've got 2,500.

The percentage of security is going down constantly.

Even more people are going into methadone clinics.

It's harder to buy things.

And they won't sell to somebody they don't know because they're afraid he's one of our agents, which is great because that means they won't sell to new people either.

They won't start new people because they'd be afraid to sell to them.

That's hard to do.

There's a very disturbing line coming out of New York.

What was it that you found with your people?

President.

Hi.

Were you up when I asked you?

We found in New York from the junkies and the addicts that the intelligence is coming back and that he will be off after the election.

Ha!

You can quote me on that.

It's valid intelligence and we believe it.

That's one of the reasons.

Why do you think he'll be off?

I think this is purely election... We've run people through grand juries out there.

I want a tougher election, just to put it that way.

Yes, sir.

Go ahead.

You've run people through... A lot of people through the grand jury.

Sure.

What is it?

Some of the agents... Oh, I understand.

Now, all of you, I hope you can...

I think that's a very good point.

You know, it's when you're talking, you have to make speeches, and it's interesting.

Yeah.

Judges at the federal level are right up and down.

I understand the necessity to protect the innocent as well as to have concern for the rights of the guilty.

And we're going to continue to back this all the way.

I mean, if it needs more money, you need more people.

You need stronger laws.

I don't know what the law requires, but we're going to find out.

If we can't pull around on this, also we have to have in mind, too, that there will be a change in the Congress.

The Congress will reflect.

The fact that the country is very much behind strong action here, really, as we've pulled this, you know.

I mean, we have, Harris has pulled it, Gallup has pulled it, and all the rest.

This is 75-80%, you know, they don't know how, but they say, you led to rest.

Mr. President, if I might comment, I think we all support the concept of educating judges.

But I'm busting to say pragmatically, before you can educate the judges, at least at the state level, and I'm from Detroit, I can't speak for other cities, you've got to devise a means of getting the education before the judges, because they don't want to be educated.

Again, I'm speaking... What do you mean, they don't want to be?

They won't accept educational programs.

Because of the idea that they're supposed to be independent laws?

That may be part of it.

I've talked to many of the judges at local level, and they're very adamant in their positions that they are judges, and you can't tell them anything, and you can't re-educate them.

I've got an idea, but let's see if the Chief Justice can come over.

How many of you know him?

He's a good man to talk to.

We've never discussed a case with him.

But in things like this, he has an enormous interest in speeding up the judicial process.

Part of your problem, of course, is speaking.

He's working at all levels.

He's speaking all over the country.

Let's come in and see what he can suggest on this.

Because you remember before, he was here to the circuit court, and he's worked for the American Bar and Arrest.

There's got to be a way to get to the judges.

There's got to be a way.

And incidentally, while we're talking about it, why not the probation officers?

They have meetings with the bar organizations.

have somebody, now the next time they have one of those meetings, I want some of our people to represent, go in and talk reasonably, you know, to rest concern about the people and all that.

They have got to be a little bit, because here's the other thing, I come back to Tim and his group, and that couple of, you know, the general education levels, these are guys, you know, they've come out of the service, they haven't had the benefit of the, or should we say, the disaster of a college education, some of us have had,

These fellows can get terribly discouraged, terribly discouraged.

Remember that, I don't see you in many movies, but the speaking of San Francisco, the Clint Eastwood movie, drew us badly away.

Of course he was overplayed, but there's a lot of appeal in that question.

Well, let's get the... We talked to the Chief Justice about it, and get his idea as to how he thinks you could add the judge in a way that does not in any way interfere with their traditional independence.

After all, they're...

People that are interested.

Setting up the DALE program, you talk to judges all over the country.

How many did you talk to?

New York, Miami?

At least ten chief judges in major areas.

I still do when I go around to try to get across.

I sat down, for example, the other day in Miami with the judges.

We do that every time.

It's terrific.

I hope that all of you will talk to judges to the extent that you can without being held.

Well, I want to say that this idea is one of all that they approve.

It's one that appeals to me.

We were discussing this.

I mentioned it in a movie like Dirty Harry.

I am the first to know law enforcement, and like being in service during a war, there's not much glamorous about it.

Most of it's rude.

I think most of it's bill of hard work.

People with bodies scrounging around.

Very few become heroes.

Very few get the recognition.

We all know that, but look around.

What most of you do is not very spectacular, but almost, but indispensable.

And I'm aware of that.

I mean, I look back and remember, most of you will remember, how Dewey, of course, parlayed as a very young man.

I believe he was only 38 when he ran for president, the first time in 40, that denomination.

But he took that young group of Tigers in his office,

And they went out and, of course, built themselves national reputations.

This has happened to many, and most of them can't expect that.

On the other hand, it's that kind of drive, that kind of zeal, that kind of dedication and dogged determination that's what we need to really need.

And when you get past a certain age,

Very few people have it.

You know what I mean?

Been around a lot, and then thinking, well, I'm tired about here and there, and making mistakes, and all that sort of thing.

Most of you are young enough to still be pushing my trust.

Not pushing, but pushing.

Now, what I want to say is that having this young group is, of course, a promise of heart to us.

Your work is very important.

We want to give you all the back that we can in a legislative way.

We want to give you the back.

And we can also, I'm talking to the lawyers, talking to the probation officers, talking to the U.S. attorneys and the local law enforcement officials.

And, or whatever it's worth, in thinking of what you contribute.

You're talking about the first drafts of the drafts.

It's an offer.

Dirty business.

Dirty business for a bunch of people.

You think of here's a young guy who's one of the big New York law firms.

Probably wonders, what am I doing out here?

I should be thinking about that.

I'm going to be a partner.

And he's going to be worried about how I'm going to pay my taxes and all that sort of thing.

So it's all changed over time.

But my thinking point is this.

If you think of a contribution that you make,

If you could all think of it, I would trust in terms of one individual boy or girl.

If you could see some of the letters that are written in here from kids that have gone on this stuff, and their lives are ruined.

Or their parents.

If you think of one individual boy or girl, something that one of you would have done to save that life.

It's worthwhile.

So you work in this.

You work in your offices.

You prepare these cases.

Probation officer lets the guy off.

The judge doesn't.

The prosecutor doesn't.

But as a result of what you've done, more arrests.

And of course we're supplementing them, but we're trying to cut off the sources of supply.

We have an educational program.

We have a program, of course, to handle addicts, which we think is much better.

And the work that you're doing does really involve an individual single person.

If you think on the other hand, solely in terms of our arrests of 1600 to 2000, that's very impersonal, but very important.

That's really a progress.

The way I like to think of it is that, and you can think of that, I often think of a kid,

A teenager, and a lot of them are teenagers, or very young kids, and a boy or a girl.

And, you know, they, and not simply for the poor, but sometimes, sometimes, sometimes they get hooked.

And by making it less likely that that one does get hooked, you're saving a life, and that's really a worthwhile business.

You know?

I can tell you one little story, which I remember one of the first meetings we had that showed how deep this cuts across in this general.

It was with the Black Caucus for Congress.

That piece about drugs.

Drugs were one of the subjects that they brought up.

Congressman Rangel is the Congressman of Harlem.

A very intelligent papal man.

And the Democrat, of course, was from that district.

And he said, you've got to cut off the flow of drugs from Turkey.

Most matter of fact, we were very fortunate.

The State Department cut to work.

We got to work.

I got a hold of the Prime Minister, and we sent messages.

Well, long and short of this, no more poppies are going to grow in Turkey after this year.

We have to pay it off.

We've got to buy the crop.

So what happened, I called Congressman Randall on the phone.

The congressman got the story that the Turkish government just agreed to a two-year deal whereby they would cut all oil and so on.

Because that's great, he said, because he was talking about it.

He was saying, before it was done, he was saying it was the most important thing we could do up here in Toronto.

It was, again, a tough, tough, rough country.

He said, the most important thing you can do for our people, Puerto Ricans and Blacks, he said, well-nourished, important, of course, where they need it, better housing, all the rest of it.

We've got to stop this drug.

He said, let's kill it.

So, when he got through, he said...

I finished the conversation, I said, well, Congressman, we talked for five minutes, and he was done.

I thought, Congressman, and I finished talking, and he said, you know, Mr. President, I told my old man when I was growing up in Harlem that someday I'd be talking to the President, and he told me I was crazy.

And I said, well, Congressman.

I said, if I had told my old man when I was growing up on the terrible end of the Sunday, I'd be talking about Congressman.

He thought I was crazy.

Anyway, the point is that it showed you what we cut across the border.

And I could tell the same story about, in our state, Beverly Hills, high income, the city of Palisades, bailing, you know, cuts all across.

So, we appreciate your work.

Trouble is, you see, our guys are a little soft on this issue.

Mr. Williams.

You are, I mean.

Thank you.

We're going to leave each of you if we have enough.

We always get visitors from the presidential conference.

So, we'll have to see you all in a little while.

They look very expensive, but they...

They are actually important.

Thank you very much.