Nixon White House Tapes — Conversation 182-002
Date: Sunday, October 29, 1972 at 5:22 PM
Participants: Nixon, Richard M. (President); Haldeman, H. R. ("Bob"); Camp David Operator; Ehrlichman, John D.
Recording device: Camp David Study Desk
Source: https://www.easynixon.org/tapes/182-002

This transcript was generated automatically by AI (WhisperX) and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite it as authoritative.

[0:06] Go ahead.
[0:09] Hello.
[0:10] Hello.
[0:11] Sorry to bother you.
[0:36] Sitting here with Maury Stans and Dick Moore and John Dean, and we're talking about a possible settlement of the Common Cause case.
[0:43] It would involve the disclosure of about $5 million worth of gifts pre-March, or early March and before.
[0:51] And contains mostly gifts that are already been printed, like the Hunstone gift, the Dick Scaife gift from the producers, Arthur Watson, people of that kind.
[1:06] What do you do with the other $5 million?
[1:09] Pardon?
[1:09] What do you do with the other $5 or $15 million?
[1:12] It's litigated later, after the election.
[1:15] But how do you deal with the propaganda thing of how come you're letting out this $5?
[1:20] What about the other $5?
[1:20] You do it under court order.
[1:22] I see.
[1:23] And the whole question is one of what the PR impact is versus the PR impact of Hugh Sloan being on the stand starting tomorrow and for the next week telling everything he knows.
[1:44] sort of an open-ended hemorrhage.
[1:48] Do you need to decide this right now?
[1:49] Yep.
[1:50] They're down in chambers with the judge right now.
[1:54] And our inclination, I think the consensus in this room is that we're better off to cut our losses.
[2:00] Morey thinks so?
[2:01] Yep.
[2:02] He's actually negotiated a pretty damn good settlement.
[2:05] Morey has?
[2:06] Yep.
[2:07] Who do you negotiate with?
[2:08] A fellow named Rogovan, who's the attorney on the other side.
[2:14] And this drops the whole case then?
[2:16] No, no.
[2:19] No, no.
[2:20] What it does, it eliminates a requirement to disclose any expenditures.
[2:24] It postpones until after the election the litigation of the question of whether the contributions between early March and the April cutoff date.
[2:34] Should I check this with the president?
[2:36] Huh?
[2:36] Should I check this with the president?
[2:38] Oh, I don't know if I'm in here with him.
[2:39] I just like your reaction to it.
[2:41] Okay.
[2:43] My reaction, if you think we can ride with the...
[2:47] If you can figure out how we explain why we didn't release the others is fine.
[2:51] I wish that we'd done it three months ago.
[2:53] Well, the way we do it is...
[2:56] We have no concern about releasing it.
[3:03] There are intervening parties.
[3:05] Their rights have to be protected.
[3:08] This is an order that would seem to protect everybody's rights and preserve the litigation to a time of less emotion after the election.
[3:15] Do you think this comes off all right publicly?
[3:17] It has problems, certainly.
[3:20] It's not risk-free.
[3:24] And we're not sure we can get the settlement.
[3:27] But it seems to be... My view would be if you guys think you should, that you should.
[3:34] Okay.
[3:34] See, the judge has to buy it among others.
[3:36] Yeah.
[3:36] And he's a wildfire.
[3:38] Yeah.
[3:39] But I want you to know what we're talking about here.
[3:43] Okay.
[3:43] And you, Mike, doesn't really know about it if he has any serious objections.
[3:46] Okay.
[3:46] All right.
[3:47] Oh, hello.
[3:48] Yeah.
[3:49] Oh, I guess we covered the other thing.
[3:51] Just a minute.
[3:51] Hold on for a second.
[3:52] Okay.
[3:57] Colson is on this business of dispersing this white paper again to the editors and publishers and says that this is your idea or you're approved it or something.
[4:06] No, it goes beyond that.
[4:08] All right, I strongly recommend it.
[4:10] I want to distribute only the vice president's answers.
[4:13] Let me call you back on that.
[4:15] All right, thank you.