Conversation 421-018

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

I already had a meeting with another driver from Detroit.

They were showing up there.

The news box that they had was on Facebook.

It was based on the NBC.

Oh, yeah.

How was your day today?

Good.

We made it through.

Ken Colby pushes some of these programs, which is good for us to show that there's a positive out of Eli and Gary and everything else, including the whole food pricing aspect, especially in certain steps that we're tailgating about it today.

So we have a positive day.

But we've got to try to move what is ours.

He couldn't sit down with me.

He was a good guy.

He was one of the good guys.

We're still talking about this.

But they, you know, are all still listening.

I support it.

It raises some people.

But it hasn't been done.

It's a great event.

Well, how do you think they can make this your opinion?

Well, first of all, I'd say if we could put out a letter, it would be very good to put out a letter.

Yeah, but I was addressing my comments in the first draft.

The question is not answered, but it's raised.

Once you raise a document like that, questions, then it focuses attention on it, and there has to be six follow-up questions immediately up on the press once.

What do you think of the thing?

Yeah, I'm sure it's a good idea.

My judgment at the moment is, if there was a way, and if a way could be found,

make our position clear.

Put it out on the record.

But every time we get into it, we still cannot get down to it.

And also, the whole point is, too, that every time you raise something like, I was thinking of that rather innocuous statement that you made, what you had to think of, the way I would handle that, I would say, I would say, for example, the way I do it,

I think you can handle it.

On the other hand, I think a lot of people, you see a lot of people that are not interested in every nitpicking fact.

But to a lot of people, they say, well, there's a nitpicking fact.

A lot of people, they just want to know why the hell doesn't the president say something?

And we have said something.

You said something.

I mean, you can find a way to say something.

Of course, but I don't know if somebody can answer it.

Another way, I said, oh, another way to do it, of course, is to ask for an adventure.

That's right.

Well, see what you can do there.

I'm sure you can see.

After they finish this, they're not like, let's just say, another adventure.

They're not like everybody in the White House staff, and, you know, we've started to come down to the bottom of the pond.

We've seen it.

That way, they are talking to the manager.

That cuts off their...

They will not come on here and give their answer.

That would be our guess.

But at least they'd have Colson.

The only other thing is if you can't make a statement, just knock her down and say,

I was going to fight it all summer, but then you were going to have to attack the committee.

That's where it was going to be.

You cannot allow a situation to be monitored in committees.

There was nothing to be heard.

You've got to attack the committee for the politics, for the show, and not say, we've offered this information.

You've got that story out.

And I have not, in my initial position, had to do that.

We got it out one day at the very least.

That's up to the committee.

And then you keep coming back to that.

What's the matter with the committee?

They want the facts.

Why don't they ask for them?

They're just being stubborn.

They want it done their way.

Well, it's got to be done the right way.

That's the way I get it.

They're insisting that only their way, their way, their way would very seriously break you down.

The constitutional principle that the president has sworn out over

be gone and he will.

That's his good intention.

But they're not trying to go back.

I think that can begin to center, center crew in everything you do.

You can tell them early on that they're in Boston.

They're having it anyway.

They're in Boston early on.

Yes, sir.

We've got the columns I've sent in that we've had on the East Coast.

That way, there's no need to run into guys.

I've had a bit more of an issue on that.

Yeah, a lot of stuff.

One thing, incidentally, I'm checking.

I have the most on the check.

You remember, you know, first of all, the famous five percent of cases.

And, uh... Secretary Rogers, please.

Oh, Bill, I wanted to ask, since you're talking to Ron, you know, when you handle the fiber center,

The point is, did you have .

Yeah.

But he was trying to get anybody else .

Yeah.

Were there any reviews or did that issue arise?

Of course, the point was, in Vaughn's case, and versus the point we made on Adams, who was charged with malfeasance, charged against him, direct charge, rather than something... That's what I mean, Vaughn's case.

Sure, sure, sure.

And the same is true of the Sherman case.

But anyway, because he was .

Sure.

And the fence also, you wear it both.

Yeah.

Well, yeah.

Well, you don't even wear it anywhere but through the fence in that department.

Oh, yeah.

I know you told me about it.

exactly as much as his.

As a matter of fact, actually, I told Defense and National Security, I said he would care about foreign aid too.

I said it must be swallowed up by the National Security budget.

Now that means the mass military system

I have talked to, I have talked to myself and to Jim Henson and to, uh, to Mr. Reichsman, and I'm going to see Glenn, but still, I'm going to see, because there's a reason, and I'm going to see him next week.

They're all, they're all going to be great guys tomorrow.

No, he wouldn't come out the first week.

He might be the last one.

Hey, wait.

You say it is important for the purpose of the 75% of us who support it.

So we've already talked about it.

So I said, well, now what about the spurs?

What about the Augusta?

Well, they've only got some in their hearts.

And I said, well, what about that?

Well, I think we can do pretty well on the other side.

I took 43 buildings, and I have been on both of them.

And I think we can get maybe 30 of them.

That's a good start.

The thing I'm concerned about, basically, frankly, are some of them.

And they have been weathered here about 100,000 times.

It's more partisan.

Yeah, as a matter of fact, when I made it again, you know, in January of 1971, January 25th, it was all about that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, including that one.

The other thing I was going to ask you, I just want to bring that up.

Steve was asking me about the OES thing.

And as you know, I'm getting the, you're getting the, I'm going to get the, I'm going to get the, I'm going to get the,

It comes to that.

What I mean is, well, it's the gesture to laugh.

The problem is, you're going to go down.

I'm not, of course.

I don't have any laugh.

I'm all on this one because I thought I was going to fall.

I said, well, I got here to know about the others.

You know, like the lemonade.

I can get in at some time.

We've got to get taller and all these problems are going to happen.

And we've got, and what we're really doing, we're running about

We've got Brown now, Bill, and we've got Brown, we've got the Jerry's, we've got the, we've got the, uh, and, uh, and then, uh, uh, we're going to be going over, uh, we're going to go back into the dinner and all that.

Certainly, no.

I would say this.

I think that some of them have enough space to just come for an appointment at the dinner at night is not a lot of problem.

But if you have to have the welcoming ceremony and all that crap, that shoots a day.

At the OES, the only thing that occurred to me is a gesture to the left.

I've seen Santa Maria.

It's just a handshaker, but I would probably have to say something.

No, I thought that it was.

We're going out at Monday, Tuesday night.

I'm going to stay for the house, at least.

I can't be here one Tuesday morning.

Right, right.

Well, how does that consider if it's a...

I suppose two or three options.

One is, he did have a bond.

Basically a bond.

She was going to cry.

That's a different thing.

Two ways.

One is to call her back.

The other is to let her bring it up.

The other is to cross the bridge and say that she didn't do it.

See, this is what we got into on that Dean letter yesterday.

Once even you say, not you, but we say that Dean saw Segretti in Miami, then you have a whole series of matters.

But across the bridge, it really isn't that difficult now.

But if that is done, I think we'll be able to get an option.

If that is done,

I think would require some final statement by the president, which states that whatever took place in this type of activity, although there was no legality to it and so forth, that it is not something that belongs to the other party.

That is something that I would rather do, rather than going out and grabbing her out in a tall range.

I will think that that should just be a letter that could be sent.

The truth is not that bad.

The fact of the matter is, let's say that Bob didn't know that she was spreading emotion.

Not only that.

I think it all was different to the church.

Now, but although he did not know it was secret, this thing was put in motion.

Now, when did it come to an end?

When the watering thing, which we're looking at, was convicted about it, that made everyone say, now, wait a minute.

You know, that's bad.

We should be convicted on that one.

Let's make sure nothing else is going on.

And there was an examination of the operation of it.

Because if you do send a letter saying that if there's not a stopgap put on it, that's a final statement.

Why do you think we just need a way out of this?

We need a way out of this.

I'm thinking, yeah, based upon the information I've gained, maybe they've actually covered that.

Well, I don't even know.

The advice letter that you have to cover, Steve, you would have to say it could be a final letter to the Consulate.

Not only in relation to him, but in relation to other activities.

And he could be responding or sending a letter on your instructions, the instructions of the President.

And then I've been corrected.

You've managed to draw all the information that I have.

Here it is.

I'm glad to answer further questions.

And then...

President, I'm sure it was in that.

Correct.

And this would be looked at as the initial point of the appeal.

This would all be on the Dean's stand.

That's your direction.

The following minutes, I'm going to get back to Brian.

You can get back to Brian.

Which would be, that was covered in Mr. Dean's letter.

There was a bad judgment.

The bad judgment, of course, is something that is unfortunate.

And maybe the bad judgment may be on the other side of the red line.

That's right.

But we could make that point.

And maybe put something positive in that portion to make sure that it's... That scenario, of course, is neat.

We never got an option quite right.

We were...

.

I don't know.

Well, I think we're going to get away with this.

That's the way to say it.

What a beautiful answer you have for something we haven't called a grand jury.

What a beautiful answer you've got for a grand jury.

That's the liberal way of putting it.

Grand jury is the tone of the court.

Of course, that's why we do it, because it also has a tone.

The idea of taking the offensive, the idea that the president himself is not going to, rather than having the Senate say that we want the Senate to find out why the hell don't we let the grand jury find out, is much better than seeing people die.

has to be done in this predictable, totally, absolutely critical, as to what the Senate is going to do, what the Senate is going to do, and they're going to come out with a negative buy-in from the Senate.

So, is that what they want?

That's moderation.

I mean, that is a fact.

So, we've talked about that as a given.

I don't know what it is, but I think it's a little bit in relation to the water game.

The game letter addresses only the spirit of the game.

Well, I don't know if you can get that out of your head.

The other thing, however, is the grand jury game.

Of course, the other thing, and again, we're going to take some narratives from the discussions that we had, is it also a matter of time in terms of when this should be dealt with, assuming that it's going to be dealt with on some level in the next two or three years.

Isn't it far better to have it done at the early stages of the second term than it is at 1975?

to have something like that, everything that will be achieved, will be achieved tomorrow.

What is the, your judgment, I thought it was as far as the president's

Just the day after we walk out.

I think that's good.

They're going to have to concentrate more on that.

At that point, that's what I'm just doing.

Plus, the fact that you're going to be studying, right?

As far as the person is concerned, there's a lot of other people that you don't have any way to help.

That would be pretty well to do.

That's been helpful to us.

I think it would be worth considering something that we can talk about after the John Ford dinner and the two guys and so forth.

I was going to say, regarding what we've done so far on the press, and about the right number, the number when it comes to the White House correspondence, if I would like to actually tell you something that I think

They get our story out that day, at least.

I talked to Don Harvey today, who's very expressive on the map, but plus notice and listen to him, impressive commotions on anything.

Anything you want, he said.

He recommended Vancouver, barring damage to the Atlanta members.

Absolutely mind-boggling.

We knew it as a tradition to work for 977 communities, and it's our 65th anniversary.

Right.

rather than having 18 on Watergate here, and they say, well, we've got several on there.

What about that?

What about this?

What about that?

Well, I just don't think the immunity that we're watching on the grand jury is made that you come to believe because that's what it comes from.

Well, because the teacher, Johnson,

I was down at the Grand Jury Bank and she was giving immunities at home to various witnesses who would go before the Grand Jury.

I think you have to figure that that is out of the picture.

I just don't think that it's going to be carried off.

Well, either the Grand Jury or you can drive us in on a special matter.

Mr. Villanueva's panel would investigate and report back on the whole thing.

Captain, that's what you're going to do.

And I just want to say so that all the information can be obtained.

Any appointment with the presidential cabinet?

Well, that's a major special legislation because the community power is where that department does it right now.

Well, let's take the grand jury without a doubt.

Well, I think your idea is getting out of the way.

And I think there's no impossibility at least this is a very drastic result.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

And the other route that we're talking about actually

I wouldn't spend too much time on that.

The other route would be two papers, or possibly three.

President, you asked me about these things.

And I disagree as to whether that's a viable way.

I think you can get a fairly credible document that would say nothing.

And that would have the effect of critical scoping.

And would have the effect of maybe becoming the battleground on the reduced scoping.

Which I think is important for the big danger in the early hearing.

I see it as a big one.

It will run out and leave the state.

into areas that we would be better not to have to get into.

And if you could put out a basic document that would define a limited set of issues, even if you did it rather consciously as a person, it might have something that obviously you have to make way into.

Supposing, all of a sudden, there's, uh, there's anybody who would wish you to really answer the truth, what would you do?

Nothing.

That's the other one.

That's the option, period.

He's fighting it out on his ground.

It's all a sign.

What'd you do?

That's the other one.

That's a very good one.

Maybe you can make it, but... That was not that bad.

We talked about the possible opportunities in the Senate.

It may turn out that we don't foresee now.

We go into a place beyond.

We're trying to put out fires here and there.

The problem is a month thing and to possibly report to so many other people.

There's no sign-off on that ever.

That's right.

That's the case now.

Well, my view is that Hunt's entrance line and getting a parking ticket, that ought to be, somehow or another, one of the options that he is most particularly concerned about.

In direct context with John, I don't contemplate that at all.

Obviously, he's got a figure.

He has crosswise.

But that blows.

And that's, it seems to me, the only way that he is understood.

It says,

Your Honor, I'm willing to tell all, I don't want to go to jail.

I'll take that as a plea.

I don't want to go to jail.

I'll cooperate with you as possible.

I'll try to do everything I know.

I think that's probably what you did.

Okay.

On a very basic basis, I'm willing to tell you.

Okay.

Yeah.

That's not one.

So it would be quite the act to reach across there as a plea.

It's a long road.

The way you look at that.

for all of us, for all of us.

That's why you're, that's why you're investing in the idea of another journey.

Right.

Because knowing that we're in this circle of people who have gifts of knowledge, there are a lot of individuals, and you want to know, because of the secretaries that were late, uh,

Secretary to, uh, the general group.

I'm sorry, I'm not.

I'm supposed to be secretary.

Well, that would be called, uh, what does that mean?

It's not, it's not a one-form, it's civil, it's a, uh, it's not a one-form issue.

Uh, for some reason, we can't get settled.

We're holding on to it.

We're going to have, uh, a chance.

There's an attitude involved in this thing.

Maybe we face a situation where we can't do anything about it.

Well, that's what you're sort of trying to do.

My thought is it's not common.

It's a common way.

It's not common.

We don't want to harm the people either.

That's my point.

Well, we can't harm the people.

That's the point.

That's why I say we have to realize that nutrition is going to be one of the most important things.

That's your point.

I think it's very important.

That's why I raised the point of this immunity concept again.

That would take a lot of heat, obviously, to do something like that.

But it also is one that cannot be structured.

You're concerned about there's something working here that brought your attention, at least.

Now is the time to get the facts.

People have been protecting themselves.

They couldn't get all the information.

There are other cases now.

There are other things.

And you'd like to get all this information and lay it before the public.

But it's not going to come out of the committee.

It's going to come out of the committee.

It will never be approved.

And it isn't going to come out of the committee.

It's not going to come out of the committee either.

For those reasons, it's not in a fair way at this point.

That's right.

Or if they never come out, that means they can probably never get out either, regardless of how clever they are.

Now is the time to pull out all of us.

They're not going to have the key list.

So therefore, you select the panel of the State of Deputy Attorney General, the head of the criminal division, the head of the civil division, something like that.

They're called over.

Everybody in the White House.

And tell them that we want the instruction of the president.

We're going to put together exactly what happened.

And you prosecute the court because...

And then you will make a decision based on what you learn, whether people can remain in government or not.

And if it's bad, I'll be removed from what you design, because it's something that's as palatable as ever one of the gods.

If you would cry, it would be the distance.

All right, is that better or is it better to have, you know, keep going and go up and all of a sudden go down?

After we've come up, after we've come up, after the president's been accused, we've come up that way.

That's the point.

Or is there a hell of a matter?

Yeah.

Like, like, like the, the Dean's statements, where the president then makes a full disclosure of everything, which he then has.

And as a physician, it does collapse a little every time.

Because I had the FBI and the grand jury.

I had my own counsel.

I turned over every rock I could find.

And I rested my confidence in those people in good faith.

And it's obvious now.

The middle ground thing would be.

I mean, that's what you do.

I mean, it doesn't concern me, and I think as far as the public is concerned, you as the White House counsel for that.

Which is very general understanding.

I can't comment on that specifically.

I'm thinking on far more general terms.

Having in mind the fact that the problem with this specific report is that you can disprove this one, and that one, and that one, and you can disprove something, you can disprove it all.

If you make it quite general in terms of your investigation in the case that this man is not this, this man is not this, this man did do that.

You're going to have to say that, though.

You know, like the, uh, the cigarette achievement news.

That has to be said.

And, uh, so forth.

And there are certain chances that you're going to get that right.

All right.

So you do this to give some weight to that.

If you attach as an appendix a list of the FBI reports to which you have access,

So the president that's on later time is in a position to say, I rely on you.

That's right.

It also helps the

It's a great situation because it shows the use of the name of the FBI report by you in reporting the president.

You can say in there, I'm not disposing of content to use in any way.

Yes, I was at access to reports for the purpose of carrying out your instructions in my office.

Is that the issue?

You're the man I've asked for help.

I think maybe the president's in a stronger position later.

The presidency is in a stronger position later.

If he can be shown to have justifiably relied on at this point in time.

Well, there's the argument now that he needs credibility to be questioned.

As a matter of fact, they want you up there to testify.

I don't think it's the credibility.

They want you to testify.

I would not be too sensitive about that.

I think that you would make a hell of a good impression.

Beyond that, you can help your participation in the interviews by saying, in addition to having seen the FBI synopsis, you were present at the time of the interview, and you yourself conducted interviews of others.

I conducted interviews with the following people.

I'm just trying to let you know.

Turn all that into a podcast.

When the dissonance and frivolity are all

And also that you would invent such a, a lot of crap about it, about what you had done.

And without referring to the fact that I didn't think the best thing about it, I don't know if it was the right choice, or if it was the right choice, which would not be a letter to the east or the right at this point.

It would be a letter to the north of me, to me.

And you'd say that now, indeed, and you would base it on the fact now, that the jury is now in the right place.

Well, that's what you should say.

In other words, he gives the report because you asked him for it, regardless of the time on this.

I think you could say that you could say, I have a report.

I don't like showing it to her.

I will publish it.

Because some of those crime cases go around.

Well, let me say the problem with that is I don't think that helps on our part.

In fact, I'm not sure it can get wrong.

The fact that the president says, I've shown her, we've got to remember, we have nobody there.

I think something has to play with it.

We can put out something.

If you're worried about the timing of trying to hang on the sentencing, you don't really have to do that.

We're just going to say, just ignore the trial, and say you have been, as we did, the lines established today by Dean has given you a report.

We basically said it's an oral report.

You can put the thing that Dean has kept you.

You have asked him now to summarize those into an overall summary.

And I make the report available to the Irving Committee very publicly.

And I again offer to the Irving Committee, I offer the Irving Committee, I say, there, Senator Irving, there, Senator, here is the report.

And as I have said previously,

They will be directed to answer.

Yeah.

And if you make some passing orders to money, correct?

And then you send her up there?

Um... That also folks my followers at some time.

Our position on that is that, uh, I was an investigator.

He was sent out to do an investigation on that old bird.

When we discovered what he was up to, we stopped him.

Now, I suppose I have to tell this bird how that's related to a certain shooter that may be sufficient, at least for a mistrial, if not for a dead man's freedom.

That case is about finished.

That'll go on a while, yeah.

Well, let's suppose that occurred.

That was a national security situation.

I think it's arguable that he should never have been permitted to go to the committee after that episode, having reflected on his judgment that way.

And that's that part of it.

Getting back to the, getting back to this, John, you still sort of tilt your hat on it when you're suffering.

I still, I see it in this conversation, and I've thought about it before, we've talked about it before, but they do not always solve when I see us in the grave of a cancer growing in front of us.

Well, it doesn't, it doesn't permit the president to clean it out in such time as it does come up.

Quite a shame.

He died relying on it.

And now, this, this later thing turns up.

And I don't want that.

And if I had done that before, obviously I would

You've got to take the cancer out now.

Yes, sir.

And how do you do that?

I'm thinking whatever.

You see no other way to do it.

Without the Senate, without breaking down the executive privilege, of course.

I see.

There's a couple ways to do it.

You certainly don't want to have the Senate do it, do you?

All right.

I think that would be it.

That's the worst thing.

Uh, we've got to do it.

We've got to do it.

You have to do it to get the credit for it.

Uh, that's the application we're developing.

Uh, and lastly, it has to be located in person.

And I, unfortunately, can't find the answer to that problem.

I suppose you did this.

Supposing you were under the report for the first time and everything was all about this.

Step 2, send the report over to the Justice Department.

And says, I've got an intelligent way to work on this.

My counsel has been willing to do the work.

Here is his finding.

I don't know where it stops.

I don't see it.

That's what he's talking about.

That's a good creation.

What you do is you draw the numbers and draw them up and see who gets there.

Strong.

I think we have a problem.

A problem with dollars.

Yes, a problem with dollars.

But we have a problem with action.

Action and purging.

Well, sir, I'm lying.

That's the problem.

I'm really lying.

The thing is, it's like, you know, it's a good pocket business.

It is.

I'm going to be honest and tell you, the black man was blacked directly to the white.

Would he have said it to you?

What do you mean?

That's the interesting kind of thing.

There's something there that makes people look all up that way in there and all of a sudden everything starts going in a whole new direction.

I've heard of it.

He's pretty fast.

Right at it.

So you can go year-round with the cat.

Because it did knock the hell out of him.

That's right.

Well, if you think you're rude, and those who slide into a hood, you have a certainty.

Almost.

Because we're going to jail.

And you're going to jail.

You're going to jail.

Now, probably he's going to jail.

I don't know.

The question will ask.

Certainly in shape.

Certainly strong.

No, not really.

I think Straub spoke on this claim.

What claim?

He's an accessory in an undeclared campaign.

That's normal.

That's the only time he's responsible for this.

That's the truth.

Well, that was an undeclared claim.

Yeah, but then I got back into the coffers and, uh, accused of this kind of thing.

Let's say, let's say the president sent me to the grand jury to make the report.

Who would be, who would, who could I actually do anything to solve this problem for?

As a practical matter, first-hand knowledge.

Uh, almost no.

All I can do is give them my post and I'll leave.

Right.

Okay.

Then they turn all of the leaves.

That's right.

And then they all just come down and start.

But at their end, you don't have the ability to talk to somebody who understands the process technically.

That's on the outside, about a hundred years.

Yeah.

What do you think of his knowledge?

You've got to be the brother who has this problem at school.

Or this wild scenario.

Yeah.

That's why I said, you know, somebody who has tested for criminal liability, maybe they're misintested.

I think I would.

What the hell is it?

You can start that and then vote.

You can say, I want to talk to you about a question that arose in the course of my investigation, but I swear to the secrets.

take it on that basis.

I don't know if you can talk to me.

Off the record.

I don't think you don't know.

What are your options?

Well, I think the option presently was a position that I thought of.

So you, you see that you don't see the, you don't see the statement thing helping us so far as to, anyway, helping us far.

You must, do you think that over Samoa, sir?

Yes, it has been temporary.

I agree with that.

But the point is, you see here, the way I see the statement,

and I've said it, and we just can't get it across the list, but they're going to cross and cross and cross.

And second, again, they offered for quite a lot of people to walk right through it, and I've never done that before.

And it still leaves an outrage in the hands of the United States.

It's a statement, at least.

It's purely temporary, but it's good information.

The President has looked into the matter.

He's had his counsel report him, and this is what he's telling them.

He said, you know, you do your best.

The committee will say no.

So we will stand right here.

That was great.

And I think we're going to have a new public police director giving us the bench on Friday at least now.

Yeah.

Can you do that?

Right.

You can find a special prosecutor.

Or what?

Or if it was real when he investigated, he was presiding over it.

That's right.

He could get me a grand jury.

That's right.

The government's going to do that, right?

The government's going to do that.

What do you want?

Right after you get the sentencing, they're going to take all the people that sent back before the grand jury.

The same ones?

The same ones.

And if they don't have one, no.

Wow.

The only thing that we can say is we've investigated backwards and forwards in the White House.

to satisfy the places that they reportedly have.

Nobody in the White House has been involved in a burglary.

Nobody had notice of it, knowledge of it, participation in the planning, or aid to do a visit in any way.

Well, that's what he said.

And it happens to be true.

Thanks for that, Crankside.

Sure.

Thanks for that, Crankside.

John, you might be about to say something.

But let's try another comment on that.

Supposing Mitchell were to step out on that same day and were to say, I believe it's an investigation.

That's 1701.

I don't know what he was saying, but maybe he was going to make some kind of a disclosure.

At that point, what the hell is he going to disclose?

Is he going to do something?

Yeah.

Well, I don't know what happened.

I don't know what happened to his arm.

Sure going around that's what you have.