Conversation 423-011

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

Come in.

Oh, Bill, how are you?

How are you?

How's that?

Isn't that a day, Bill?

Beautiful.

I'm supposed to have a chair on this.

I find that I sometimes...

I don't know if it's time, but it used to be that I'd always have to do all of my writing virtually.

I'd have to sit hard at the desk.

And now I sit down and work in a chair every single night.

And I'm like, I've got this on the real tongue.

I have to do it hard to the best of my ability.

You can't do it all.

You can't take the pressure from the sponsors.

But you might have to pipe fight it when I get done.

And the hard part is because I have to get through this.

You've got to sit right at the desk.

And you've got to put your chair up hard.

But you can make a lot of what I do is do all the preliminary grafting.

What I'm trying to do is I'm not saying that I want to just do it, and I haven't.

We're ready to announce that we're going to turn it on back to the nation.

This is a device that we're going to have to do.

We're going to have to do it.

I've got a speech on national defense, and I'm going to ask you to deal with it.

I might give it to you on Thursday morning.

I've got a media conference over there.

It's a pretty good speech, actually.

Yeah, well, we'll just get up and drunkenly on this.

You know, on the whole national defense, we abolish a bill.

We're just going to fight it right down the line if these people want to.

I mean, they can't do anything.

If you say they can't do anything, all of our work is sabotaging.

What we'll have to be able to do is also sabotage what we're going to try to do in the future.

How the hell do you think we can do with the Russians again?

We can quit their abilities in that way.

Or that's my speech.

Or the meeting.

Or the... That's really my speech.

Right.

Basically.

Also, my speech, and I suppose it talks about

It's one thing to talk about reduction of forces and so forth, but you've got to look at what we've done in the last 20 years and how you list all the things we've done.

And that they did accomplish, and also, as a matter of fact,

Well, what is your judgment on that subject today?

Well, you and I are probably in the same position.

I mean, we don't really know about it.

Well, we know the facts.

What I mean is, I think I know who shot John, or at least I know the facts.

But I think I know who did what and so on and so on.

The problem is that they found out how he had believed to have voted.

And as you know, let me say, I have, you can actually have mixed emotions on this one, because it's poor Adam's, but I'm not going to hide it.

You're wrong.

You're wrong to him.

But, you know, we were under hellish pressure from the likes of Richard.

This is a different matter.

This involves the situation here as far as the...

It involves an implication for the rest of the group, and we have cooperated and so forth.

On the other hand, we can take the likes of all of them, early on, et cetera.

The man, Dean, all of them, I personally like him as well.

We can hurt him.

We can destroy him, and so forth.

On the other hand, they kind of can't, in a sense to me, destroy it in two different ways.

They have to, certainly destroy it, clearly imparting the incredible body, the wits of a sanitarium that was offered to the people of Iran, and also, in terms of the infiltration, the presence of these people, or at least, if we were to go to the border of Ukraine, we would still go to the border of Iran.

I was just talking about, there's a hell of a problem that's inherent.

One, for this reason, everyone is a supporter of you and your family.

was doing everything I could to help me.

And part of that involved getting intelligence from the other side, right?

Now, intelligence is a perfectly proper course to follow in getting intelligence from the other side.

It involves listening to speeches, running after this, where he's going, trying to generalize, to observe what one candidate says about another,

and all of that.

Newspaper men that are wrong.

All of that.

And although some people might think it's sort of very cool, the fact that it's done, everybody does it, it's just like raising money.

You try to get advance notices for what their schedules are.

You try to get what the subjects are.

You try to find out from stenographers in the papers.

You try to find out who doesn't like Google and all of that sort of thing.

Consequently, for all of the older people involved,

Somewhere along the line, that got out of hand.

Correct.

They decided to commit crimes.

Now, because of the publicity and the interest in standardized, if you were involved in an injustice gathering, the implication is that somehow you involved the water team, which is not true.

So you have that inherent problem.

The second problem is that in an effort to protect you and protect probably unnamed persons, they went, they took some of those chances, probably unknowingly.

Uh, that's where their liability comes in.

It's in the instructions in which they probably need to think of in terms of their eyes.

I think about what they were thinking about, and I was talking to them about how to help them, and how to help them.

And it may well be that it doesn't, it doesn't suffice to think of the kind of identity that carries those in their heads up to those kind of cases.

This is one of the, you know, the bureaucratic side of things.

Now, so I would think that there would be, to really, and it depends a lot on how the thing is done, which says that if somebody can explain the point I'm encouraging about intelligence and distinguishing the good things from the criminal, I don't think you can get intelligence.

Then you can exclude a lot of the things that happen later in it.

Not necessarily because I don't think everybody does it.

Now the criminal act itself is a minor example of what I was talking about.

You know, very unsuccessful work.

Yeah.

Well, I mean, hell, in every divorce case, right, you just have a puppy that breaks into a hotel room.

Do they?

So that, I mean, that part of it is, but it's the attempt to cover up later on.

Now, what do you ask me, Mr. President, what to do?

One thing I would not do, but I'm not sure exactly what I recommend, but I will have, I'll recommend something and I'll say it.

I don't like the idea of a special panel at all, for a lot of reasons.

In principle, there's no reason to suspect the court system can't handle it.

Let me say that without going into the special panel, I came down and guessed it.

It's going to take a hell of a hell of a long time to hold back.

This is going to hang over for all of them to do.

If you go that way, it also really magnifies it even bigger.

That's my second point.

That would be the only time in history that's happened this way.

Yeah, the one question was to investigate anybody in the situation.

No, no, that's what I meant.

But it was a special panel.

If you remember, we would always have the idea of special panels.

I think it was even suggested at the time.

I don't think it was suggested.

Oh, you know, the administration.

How about it was suggested at the time they added special panels?

No, I also, I just don't think, I don't think that

I just don't think, I just don't think they have to be doing it.

The only way they could do it, in fact, is the only way they could do it would be to shoot them down the road, or out across the road, or whatever.

How do you think they could do it?

You know, I mean, any of that's a good transition.

I mean, even though I think they... Well, I think he would probably be less suspect than those.

But who else do I get on?

Earl McCann, because he's suspect, being not suspect, but being charged, being tantalized, being called in.

I don't think that maybe the best thing to do, I think that the time has probably come where there's some action.

Well, I don't know if I should say anything, but I think there's some action to be taken.

Maybe.

John and Bob talked to me about that, and we talked to Susan, and I talked to my brother, and my director.

But what you might do is have the client discuss with you.

You can discuss with him.

You can tell him to make more if you want the whole thing to fully develop.

And two, that if you do not have confidence in him, trust him to work for him.

You should make, you should make a call.

You will give him your full support.

Three, that you will make everything available to him.

Including?

Including waving executive orders.

On all matters?

On all matters.

And you can have a special grand jury.

This grand jury is not that special.

That covers the ground.

You don't have to talk to the jury.

It's a full talk jury.

He doesn't deal with us.

He's an advocate.

What do you do on Dane's?

Dane?

There's no problem with protecting the president as far as the military is concerned.

It's not quite a problem.

I like that you guys talk.

But I think we'll just let that happen.

I think it has to happen in schools.

In the first place, I don't think it's probably, in most cases, it's probably not a proper claim for privilege because you probably had it with other people around and you can't claim a privilege.

Nobody should know.

Just from what I've heard, it's worth it.

I was corrected.

I didn't talk specifically, but I said that I've got to be able to make a statement in the fact that I've been talking about it.

I don't know why I was involved in making a statement like that.

So I was basing it on my deans.

The investigation was brought out, and these deans didn't question individual areas, never in the White House yet.

But that would really be a lot of advice.

Okay.

Oh, it's a lawyer's high truth.

It's only, I don't know if it's a lawyer's high truth.

He said some of those, say, well, I'm talking confidence here.

Well, I think in those cases, if he said to him, look, I'm your lawyer.

Yeah.

You can tell me anything in confidence.

Yeah, that's a different matter.

That's a different matter.

If he says I've been asked to, I can look into it and tell me what the story is.

But I think he'll need to put it up by the year.

I doubt very much that he would be impressed on that.

I don't think he'll try to make it up.

We'll try to develop these things.

Basically, anything that he has is almost, basically, in Dean's case, it's what somebody else told him.

He said, well, I've talked to people, and it's all I know.

Actually, since you're not in question with us, as an individual, I think you can get away with it.

I know nothing about it, but we hear something about it.

Now, if this were done, it would make some time, obviously.

And I would think it would slow down the committee.

I don't think many people do this stuff.

Let me put it this way.

Here's what I have in mind.

I would like to, I would, I know the grand jury is tough.

I know it involves, I don't know, I know it's a bill, so does the committee of Congress.

God damn it, you know, we both have to prove that.

I know the committee of Congress, first of all, the committee of Congress is a double weapon.

It destroys a man's character in the public.

And second, if the file is turned over, you know, the Department of Justice and Prosecution will prosecute him for that.

So he gets a double.

And the other way to do it, we did it to two people.

We did it to his, I did it to his, we did it to the Vice President's, I don't know who it is, but then it all went down.

Now, the question is, the point is, I would like to be in a position to say that the proper place would be versus the argument.

Let me, let me distinguish the histics where I meant this one.

And I think it was distinguished the way that's what I would do it, because in your case it's a little different.

But you did get to the plot version.

Then the histics, uh, we went forward with the investigation under Narnia's public assault.

And editorials and versions all over the major papers and so forth said,

The proper place for this to be had was in a court of law.

And the reason that we went forward with it was that the statute of limitations had left the court without it.

That's why, when I pointed that out, I said, you can't send this to a court of law.

There's a statute of limitations.

Once, however, the perjury was committed, then it was up to the Justice Department.

See, we nailed this with the perjury.

That is, at least in our sessions.

It was up to the Justice Department to prosecute it.

would not prosecute, then they continued.

And that's what broke the Constitution.

And then they didn't prosecute.

Once they started their prosecution, there was never another hearing in history.

My point is that the proper place for a hearing, the proper place for a criminal complaint to be incurred and so forth is in the judicial system.

It's only when the judicial system is not being followed that you can justify a congressional .

Which is, of course, the absolute general function of the congressional committee, to get the judiciary to dig out things the judicial system is not digging out.

In this instance, why couldn't you make the case or say, I will go to everybody.

I'm going to ask the judge to call everybody in the White House on the same day.

The executive will testify for me.

As far as the Congress is concerned, until this is received, I will be on the basis for it.

Well, if you can do that, I think that you'll... You see, the point is, on the executive, what I do not want, I want to avoid, basically, the mechanic, not the other staff member.

They're all for a great

I don't know.

Give me your, if that won't rush, it won't launch.

I think it'll launch.

I don't think, well, I'm sure it does.

Otherwise, let me say this.

You're going to have to do the grand jury anyway.

I mean, if you're going to have to do the committee, you feel you're going to have to deal with the executive purpose and all of that.

Hell, you're going to have to do the grand jury.

I've heard both times.

You've got to let them try to screw it up.

I've tried to think of a way to

You know, it's the double jeopardy business to a certain extent.

It really is.

You go before the grand jury, you go before the police, they're lips off.

On a VR standpoint, for instance, we have two roadshows, except the first one, of course, in Chicago.

What I mean is that if we say that this criminal charge is found, it should be heard.

It should be done by the grand jury.

Of course, the grand jury can't publish the information.

They have to say that.

I think it's better to make them almost get adjusted, maybe even join with you.

But I agree with you that it's worth a try.

It would depend a little bit on how they're going to be developed now.

Here's the population curve that gets into it at the present time.

But, in your point, which you make all very very precise, now you've got the judge, the white charger guy.

Well fine, he's the white charger guy, let's let him lose.

He's the man to look into it, because his urban question isn't him.

He wants to get to the bottom of it.

We're cooperating toward him.

That's what I feel is the way for this to do this for today.

I don't have any idea what they'll pull it off.

Well, they can call it off.

But if they don't call it off.

If they don't call it off.

What's that?

They can delay it for quite a while.

I think you could ask what you could say.

If they don't, if they don't call it off, then, you know, what do you do about it?

What do you do about it?

I'm not going to make them available.

I've made them available.

That's the proper form.

You see, that's the reason that I... That's what I had thought.

Just playing hardball.

I think what the public wants, they want to be damn sure that the president is not covering up anything.

If you have the FBI on him, it's a suspicion.

Or if you have the FBI on him, it's a suspicion.

You can have that to them.

They're both suspect.

But the judge is not suspect.

You say to the judge, all right, we'll turn it all over to you, and that's the proper place for it to be done.

I don't think any service will ever show up there.

It will be there, but we're not going to wait as far as it's finished.

I think that was the line I would take.

That's a great hard line, and stick to it.

The fact that you say you can't do it, why don't you just stick to it?

Then if they want to, then after that, if they want to have a legal testimony, have a legal testimony.

I don't think they're going to allow that.

I think that's the best way to do it.

And then let the committee do it.

They're going to have that role.

That's a pretty good way to do it.

What would you like to do with it?

Red market problems.

That's what I didn't have to do.

But, still, I talked to all of them at early, at, uh, early, post-virtual every day, uh, by the 1st of January, and they mentioned about, you know, about the therapy, and what I mean about this week, about her death, and everything.

I never once

But he mentioned nothing.

I think they were told.

Sure.

You know what I mean?

I don't...

I mean, after all, they would have said, well, look, we've got an operation.

We're not going to tell you about it.

There was never...

He mentioned the God man.

There I was in Florida.

I said, what in the hell is this?

And Irving, I know of all of them, Mr. Brown.

I know Colson and others from Irving.

John Irving, of course, is the back of all of them.

All right, now let's assume they're all telling the truth about what did happen.

I don't think he did it, perhaps.

in a very conscious way.

But what happened here, apparently, was that they had this group over there, you know, these people who were so far.

And they were supposed to get intelligence.

And then they had this wild-eyed scheme.

Apparently, they discussed such a scheme.

It was turned down.

And then they discussed it a second time.

And Dean was threatened on both occasions.

But Dean said, look, this won't go.

This can't

can't go off this course.

Then, at a later time, they went on and went ahead with it anyway, because they said they had to get information to .

Now the question is, who will trigger and go forward with this contact team?

My view is that the murder was the acting character, all tied up in this .

would probably say here that he had pressure from Holt, which I will claim, which is not true of Holt.

As I know, they would never, would never, the main reason that Holt, let's forget any question whether he would be right or wrong, he's too smart to know that.

On the other hand, that's what raises my question on which one.

Mitchell's going to be smart enough to know what the price is going to be at this time of year.

It's the Democratic National Committee.

What in the name of God are they going to find there?

I don't know.

But I think what happened to John.

You know John is sitting around fighting all the rest, physically everything else.

He says, well, I don't have to.

But you can't, boys.

There, there, there.

Don't tell me about it, but I'll let you talk.

But somebody had to.

Somebody had to prove it.

I didn't.

I've never asked him.

That's been my guess.

I've never asked Mitchell.

And I probably will have to ask him.

Oh, because I wouldn't ask him.

Why should I ask him?

Why should I know?

I can't put him in a position to lie to me.

He's already lying.

You don't know.

You see, Mitchell has said that.

My only statement I've heard is that totally, I mean only, totally honest and candid.

I did nothing about it.

I disapproved of it.

And no one in my house was involved.

Period.

I've said that.

That is the honest-to-God truth.

Now in terms of what happened afterwards, there is this, there are the questions.

I mean, somebody promised a climate city and the rest.

Not me.

Not your damn life.

I know what the hell I'm promising.

I know Greg Coulson was a couple of these.

Chuck is a very careless guy.

He is very likely to have said, well, I'll do my best to get it.

But he sure, in front of me, he never was aggressive.

He never discussed it.

He never said the president would grant it.

That's the kind of thing that he doesn't do.

No, he won't say that.

They might get that impression.

The other person, I don't know if he took care of it or not.

On that, he's gotten right out of the very sponge of a race and so on and so forth.

Everybody can hear that.

The way I think that they would have to do that sometimes is they would reject to help these people who they were entitled to counseling and they were entitled to this during this time.

That's very good.

Of course, they say they were better because they were trying to be shut up.

They don't know what they're going to say.

Well, anyway, no use to borrow trouble in that direction.

The whole point is, my own view would be still, that you've got to figure it until it's all going to come out.

And I don't mean by that that you put it out.

In other words, you've got to figure that is your, that is the risk.

Therefore, you must have no statements made, which would, no positions taken, which would be covering up what may eventually come out.

That's what I want to do.

I want to do it.

The third point is, however, that the system with trying to see the good guys not get burned here, I don't want to denude, you know, the names of the fighters.

That's why I think that I was in the background for the first time.

I thought I'd keep on the hell out of it, but I have got to feed it up to the very end.

And I think the place to feed it up to is to surrender.

No, I'm just arguing.

I'm arguing the case.

I'm presenting a proposition because I don't believe you can do anything else now.

I don't believe, especially with Washington and all, I don't believe you can come up to the committee and say, in session, Washington's done with the justice system.

And I don't believe just holding on and letting it come out, that's your question.

Another thing about the Syrikan review,

I don't want to get the goddamn thing done.

I don't want other things.

Another thing, Mr. President, is that people are going to wonder, well, why did you do it now?

You've got a good reason to do it now.

That is a clear statement.

Yeah.

Up to this point, you talked to your assistants.

They told you the story.

That's right.

Now he's made charges.

Very serious charges.

Reflecting on the charges.

Well, I've asked for these charges.

I agree.

So that's why, well, there's another reason not for doing it now.

There's another reason too.

The trial was going on there.

The trial, until it was finished, I mean, there was no, I couldn't interfere with that.

I mean, the judge was, the judge, the prosecutor, anybody was, I wasn't trying to stop anybody from justifying.

There had never been any instance of that charge.

of the White House trying to keep anybody from the White House from getting statements.

In fact, they got statements from everybody but all of them.

Why didn't they get them?

Because they were held out of charge.

Well, what I was thinking also about the executive privilege, people say, well, why didn't you play the executive privilege before?

There really were no charges made against anybody from the executive privilege office.

Correct.

I have never claimed that executive privilege ran

to a case, a charge, and a crime.

Oh, absolutely.

Now, of course, there's these efforts, there's these possibilities at this time of the week in China, but your assistance, it sounds like, that they have the right to advise on that at a certain time.

And also, I can say that there's no exact information about what you can simply say to them.

You just have to get off and talk to them.

That's what you can do.

That's all.

We don't want to explain things to them.

That's what we're explaining to them on the side show.

I think you can justify that.

I don't think it's going to make a hell of a lot of difference as to why you do it then and why you do it now.

If you do it.

Then it's their story.

How do you get along with Plain Decent?

Would you be alright to do this to him?

Is he not decent?

Well, he'd be alright to talk to him.

Plain Decent, at least if you accept him.

He doesn't know a goddamn thing about it, that's for sure.

Miles away.

Mindy's is a very good friend of Zuri, as you say.

Very good friend of his.

So I would think that he could go and profit and see what the other judge would want to do.

I've actually been close to him.

One of the closest friends that I've had, I went around to Serena, you know, I put him on there, and I put him there.

He was a good judge, apparently.

He's doing what he should, except I think he's gone overboard on the sentences.

I think if you don't, you've got a good five years for breaking and iterating.

But my point is, he's pretty dumb on a little bit.

He's got 20 years.

He's got a physical, but he's not really blind.

And he hopes that he'll practice.

But nevertheless,

I'm not going to criticize him for being tough, to hell with it.

It's a kind of judgement law.

And he's the kind of fellow that the public would respect, you know.

Well, are you suggesting you talk to Siri?

No, I don't think so.

No, I think it's better if you talk to Siri.

The only problem is whether or not my niece is, as you say, so attentive to Siri that I don't want to talk to her.

I'm proud of you for taking that on.

No.

I can't do it without telling them.

That's what's going to come up.

Now, John Earl was in that car.

He said, all these silver buckets are going to fall off.

And, he's right.

So, we're going to go on the actual toll road tonight.

I think as we learn, you know, it's the beauty of our hands, it's the fun piece, it's the time, it's what you do.

And we hit it.

Everybody forgot to say it.

But in this instance, it's time.

I'll do something.

It was a deferred charge, that's all.

Well, the deferred charge has changed a little bit.

So I think that, I think the way to do this is to have time to sort it out.

All right.

After all, you see a lawyer in the United States.

He says what goes right down the line.

But most of that is just a following that matters to his case.

that you have available to you everything you need to get to the bottom of this whole thing.

He's written, of course, they have said he wants to give you this training.

He's registered it.

So that's point number one.

Two, he suggested if you have any questions about the

the justice of the U.S. Attorney's Office and with prosecutors in the family space, they can feel more comfortable with a special prosecutor to handle it from now on.

The President's prepared to work that out to his satisfaction.

So, we'll work with you to get a special grand jury, this grand jury, on that satisfaction level.

You can just say to the president and the director that I do everything that is necessary to cooperate with you against the special prostitution that's necessary.

You're getting a special grand jury if you want it.

And finally, you're getting total cooperation from White House staff.

If I should call, do you want to?

Now, how do you answer early on this point, though?

Maybe you could ask the half the time he says that talk to the judge, you could ask him.

I thought he was going to say, well, the president would be happy to announce it himself or have it announced in the White House.

How about having it announced in the White House?

I don't know.

I wonder if that, I want to get your PR judgment on that, as I said earlier.

So, but he's, Josh goes overboard on that sort of thing.

Christ, he wants me to do that.

And then, it won't be me after.

Why is that?

Why can't it be me?

Well, I don't know how she was hurt.

I just think that it was both of God and that group.

She was thinking, I should go on TV and not go on TV.

Also, it was distracting.

It was a little weird.

Nothing distracts her that she was on TV.

You know, that's, that's, you know, I've never followed that line.

During the tough days in Vietnam, all the rest of the people would say, Christ takes care of you.

I'd say, no, no, no.

You've got your problem.

You're going to have to do a little more shopping.

People have, people have very stupid ideas.

On the question of how you're going to do this, I think the main thing, the main thing, too, is not to be so concerned about the fact that all I was saying, you know, they, you know, they, you know, you take it exactly right.

We've talked about all the problems we've had so far.

It's all of its own.

Look back over the hundreds of years on these eggs.

Every, about every eight dead ones, there's an exodus hatch, which is incredible.

I've never had a fish in my life.

Uh, 1970, uh, Cambodia.

1971, uh, I didn't get back to staff and so forth, uh, in Brazil.

1972, uh, the whole, uh, business about, so on and so forth.

And so, imagine that goes back to 1971.

What happens?

We all underestimated this.

First, our intelligence.

And second, the enormous power of intelligence.

Now what the hell?

As far as troubles in science, as far as intelligence is concerned, I can believe a lot of these things.

I'm not sure if we're going to have one or all of them at a given time.

And also trying to work out these odds.

It's a tough time.

But you realize that when you look at this, George Shultz was back in the city of Miami.

All of R&D had built up R&D in Miami.

But the city of Miami, the British, the French, the Japanese, the Japanese, they all said, God, we should do this for our children.

Our rate of inflation today is half.

That's one of those things.

The British are 7%.

Seven?

But I hope you're going to mention this next week.

I may, yeah.

That's right.

But then it goes on.

It goes on and on.

But then, I want you to do that.

Second, to take, for example, on Vietnam.

Now, Vietnam is a problem.

I talked to your friend, who wrote a book about it.

What I'm getting at is, when you start to think that at this time, we did not have the last resource and stuff, and this is what fits across the people, and maybe it's a two-run status on the middle box, where you know, they said, well, it's in trouble, and we just took a very strong stance and said, by God, maybe we're going to get it back, or we'll start to relay on pies, and that's what they hope.

to the back of all of that.

And then this last week, I said, the president's being very unreasonable, because here's 140, they will that out.

And he's insistent with all of them.

And I said, the last line was the first line.

But that's the kind of thing people think about, in addition to the federal system.

But I don't mean to have problems.

but the point is

I wonder, I'm asking you a question, I may be wrong, but John Steele said, I've got to go on with it.

It's embarrassing, it's there in my soul.

I know you all know that at 9 o'clock at night, he said to me, 9 o'clock at night, he said, this has been done, the White House has cast a cloud on it.

First of all, I had a very interesting recollection.

First of all, television makes big mistakes, but

There were other ways to reach them, actually, in 1952.

They had some tall, they had massive, they had huge, those people killed.

They can't remember.

In fact, we looked at it in retrospect.

There were a hell of a lot of people that didn't.

No!

By going off, it was a human mistake, because we said, well, that poor guy had the food.

But my point is, oh, I don't care.

Everybody's got water to eat.

I don't think that as of this point, the whole of the country is, I mean, Washington is, I don't know, it's the congressmen, the senators, it's supposed to be the president of the country, and the president of the city is trying to protect the nation.

I may be wrong.

No, I agree with you.

I don't agree with John as well, but I do think that the, how do we get it across?

What do we answer?

You see, whether we agree with that or not, if people like it,

I saw that earlier in the Congress meeting that we should get something across.

How do I, he wants to dramatize this.

They told us you can't answer it.

That's right.

You went on the television, you went on the open, you had to struggle.

That's right.

Now you were accused.

I can only say that I have been assured that these people are that.

I've told them.

That's right.

You've always said that.

You don't want to go on and say this.

And I've said it in three of those conferences this year and the last six weeks.

Uh, but it seems to me that if you could go through this exercise with just, and then, announce that, you know, announce that you've done these things.

Now let me ask you, did you actually announce it?

Or was it just, I just said it.

I wouldn't get myself to do it.

You don't want to defend yourself.

I mean, this is, this is something that happened, and that's the point.

That's what I'll do.

So I'll make it right.

That's the deal.

I think that's where I'm going to go.

I really feel so.

I think what we do there is we just simply make public

.

I think you'll go ahead with that.

Now, you may say, you may say, I don't want a special question.

I'm satisfied with this.

I'm satisfied with this measure.

Then we can say we made the offer.

The only problem I have with this is a rather strange thing.

I said I'd give you, give me, give you a sentence or something.

Why would it occur to me?

I thought it would.

I thought it was a statement.

We don't have to make a decision.

They're not going to sit until May anyway.

So if it gets too heavy, one fella said to me, that's the problem, if you ever have a decision, you've got to carry it along.

I said, well, if there's demand, we'll do what we want.

And that's what he said to me.

Not everybody.

I think he had a good growth in the whole of his life.

You might, in other ways, you might give him a pain.

I don't know.

Yeah, because he's trying to move on.

It's not much better, though, before that grand jury.

Much better.

And if the grand jury goes early, so that's what I would have done better for him.

Does that make sense to you?

We've got a very strong position now.

We're cooperating with the Grand Jury.

That's the proper place for this to be here, not up on the side.

Whoever, of course, would say, but I want to go into things other than what the Grand Jury does, well, what does that mean?

Not that it has to do with your assistance.

But what I meant is to say, I'm not just here to watergate you.

I'm actually here to take that position.

I just have to say that I'm not just here

That is a follow-up crime.

If you've got any crimes, we'll jump to the branch or anything.

That's what we'll do.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I have a little... You ought to remember that, uh, I don't know, I keep playing foil, uh, in the past.

Yes.

He had his club over the foot with Vince over there.

Boy, I said, hey, if you had a fist with anybody, they'd be a real crook.

And all I kept doing in London was all the things that I was doing.

And I got down to tell everybody what happened.

Baker didn't make a deal that I was going to London.

No, but I know, I know.

But I'll tell you that one of us, the hardest one was, was like, I think it led to our story.

But it is, I think it led to the stroke, I really do.

But you know, the horrible experience that, you know, I never forget that day, you know, I said, oh yeah, I told you about it, right?

We got to testify for that.

I had to go out and say it.

I asked Dean, he said, he was right.

I kind of had to admire him.

I asked him, hey, you know, that's true.

You find 18 ways to whine out of it, but nevertheless,

He had a huge bottle of milk on him.

Equinox.

And he was digging his hands for sheep.

And I talked to him.

He'd take as many as four or five.

Four or five.

These are techies.

And I had this guy, Icy, call him.

And I said, yes.

He was the president of the office.

And I said, I'm not going to tell him.

And I told him.

And I discussed it.

And I said,

There was a real theater that was working in the best possible way.

It was that lot.

And he walked in, and I was in the heart of the place right after that.

I saw him walking in.

And I had a legendary person in front of me.

So I walked in and I laughed.

I feel like I broke out.

So I outlawed the law.

It was the law of law.

Probably the hardest experience I've ever had in my life, firing a cat.

I'm retired.

The rest of it.

You know, Adams was frankly much closer to Eisenhower and more indispensable than anybody I know.

I mean, it's, you know, I, I, I spread it around on several people, and there were a dozen of them sitting in the hall, and a dozen others, and I did it for this particular, well, you know what I mean?

The, I started, he just about dropped that, and, and, and I was, we did it, and he was, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I, and I,

Okay, well thank you.

I think that's what we should do.

I do.

I'm glad you agree with my view of the concept that we should not, that we should, you know, we should say, we should not go on the, on the, uh, the right path.

That's, that's good.

I don't know, I don't know what I'm doing either.

If anyone has questions, do, I, I'll do it, but if there's, if there's anyone asking, I'll put it in the comments.

We don't want it, but what we want to do is to say, it's stealing, so we've got to, or, obviously, do it.

Clear my name.

Okay.

The presidency looks to change politics, but it's, it's, but they don't have, you know, it's, it's, I, this, this is a, from the standpoint of the public, it's terrible, it's very awkward, awkward, you know, and I'm embarrassed to say it.

And your opponents are good.

But not because of you.

Yeah.

But not because of you.