On November 17, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon, Stephen B. Bull, and John D. Ehrlichman met in the President's office in the Old Executive Office Building at an unknown time between 1:27 pm and 2:48 pm. The Old Executive Office Building taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 293-006 of the White House Tapes.
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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.
I'm working on the speech.
I've got some things ready.
Yeah.
Go.
You're not going to be able to find it.
You've got to give it that much.
Is that the one that provides for a takeover of everything above or under 25%?
Yeah.
That's good for a reference sheet.
This is the house .
I don't know about males in history.
I'm not going to be able to do that, so I'm going to have to go around.
That's the problem.
You can't go over that task first.
I'm not being concerned about that.
On the ground, frankly, I don't think HR1 is going to make one.
No.
Why don't we play that game?
I mean, I think looking at it very realistically, I don't think you're going to be able to...
If this amendment passes, I mean, I cannot be in a position, John, of vetoing the tax bill because of everything else in it.
Is that what the recommendation would be, to veto the amendment?
I guess I have to say, in fact, what you and I know is that
It may be one of those things where we have to grin and bear it, you know, with the idea that maybe it's just one space.
It may be the way we get rid of the stimulus that we're going to go through reverent sharing, right?
So you come down to this.
But what does it gain as we commit this person?
Does he give up on his amendment?
Then what happens if he gives up on his amendment?
All that we do by getting up, by going to Percy, is to move up to the effective day-to-day trial.
We don't change any principles.
I agree.
Okay, then let's try it.
Don't you think so?
See, I think that's where we are.
Let's be quite realistic.
We cannot be COVID taxpayers.
I mean, I just can't do that, because other than that, the auto-excise is going to be
I think we ought to get out of this terrible situation.
I mean, this has been terrible.
I wasn't here to wait for Reagan.
I'm pretty sure he didn't.
I don't know.
I don't understand much of what he's doing.
I see.
But he's not four persons in that.
Well, of course not.
So why this doesn't happen is the wrong way to do it.
On the other hand, so therefore we ought to try to meet the amendment and pay what price we have to pay, don't you think?
The evil in Percy changed.
I mean, in Percy, that's what I mean by meeting and pay what price we need to not to have an amendment because the alternative is to have the amendment.
Let's see what happens to HR1.
Something may happen to it.
Or do we feel something may, right?
Is this network just gonna make something that's already bad a little worse?
But isn't it worse, I mean, in front of this thing?
of having what you call this one-time re-administration business, which is bad business.
It isn't helpful, but they didn't do it.
It's intolerable in terms of the revolutionary thing.
They just want to bail out the governor and so forth.
Don't you think so?
That's my opinion.
All right.
Reagan's against it, too.
Yeah, he said he was against it.
Mainly because it's open-ended, as he puts it.
That's his argument.
He's against it on principle.
Okay.