Conversation 466-004

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

He said, I don't see him in the fireplace.

He's right back.

Okay.

Fireplace with no fire.

I'm not.

This is the first time I've seen that.

I don't know.

There's no fire.

He's only got a half hour.

So.

Judge, sit here.

Yes, please.

It's time to, the judge's attorney's down, and a whole bunch of soldiers are down.

It's like a team group.

You know, it's not a big deal.

It's not a big deal.

We can start with this.

Judge, you already have one.

That was when he had his own bathroom.

I can't help you.

I can't deal with it.

I don't know why he wasn't in there because he had his own bathroom.

That's why he was in there.

I just want you to help me.

What is it?

$360,000 a year.

That wasn't the best of that.

That's better than President Manning.

But let me say, Johnny, that I didn't want to be forced on you.

I didn't want to be forced on you.

And we want to talk about it candidly.

Let me tell you that I didn't put a price on it.

The reason I put a price on it, and this is not an interrogation of our friend here who is now in charge of the professional relationship, is that I think that Bryce probably knows Wilbur.

as well as anybody except for you.

And so I said, now, we'll handle the Wilbur Reynolds who made your time for us.

It's now apparently a junior problem of mine, as well as several others.

George Mahon is a little deft at Wilbur Reynolds for reasons that are strange.

Apparently, he's sat in his committee.

Russell Wong has been dead because no one in Wilbur is getting so much publicity.

Jon Conner is going to be in here.

for 35 minutes or so, I don't ask him what he feels, you know, what his tactics should be except he thinks they should be strong.

The point that I made is this,

So it was to get it in proper and proper respect.

You know, you have suggested several times in the past few years that I should have ordered down if I had done.

So most of those times you've been listening.

And, frankly, we also know that in terms of what we're talking about now,

He's a very intelligent man, certainly.

He has fine characteristics.

On the other hand, he is a totally political man.

That's my opinion.

Totally political.

I don't see a critic, but I think that's what he is.

He's in the great school of Sam Rayburn.

He's a Rayburn boy, and he's going to act that way.

With that in mind, therefore, we have a lot of fish to fry, a lot of fish to fry, but we also have a few weapons.

We cannot be in a position, we cannot be in a position where, at which we have been so often down here, where every time any problem comes up with the hills, that people come in here and say, we've got to deliver everything he wants because if we don't, we won't get this, we won't get that, we won't get that, we'll separate social security, da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da.

If that's the case, you can't run the government.

That's my point.

I know you did.

But you see, that's what's going to be a reform of policy.

We cannot be in a position, and this, of course, becomes far more important than anything about revenue sharing or any of this other stuff we have down here.

Those things seem important.

But in terms of foreign policy, we cannot,

Even though it was the best possible deal to allow a congressman or a senator to make a deal with a foreign government, this is not going to be done.

Now, we cannot have a position where the Congress undercuts, I can't tell you, we've got to have a position where he undercuts it.

Now, having said all that, we've got to start, we have the presidency and the Congress of the foreign policy.

We have this administration and it's handing out a bar of our domestic policy which we're cutting.

We have, and then of course, tie in with what to me is a political issue.

long and far out of proportion.

I know that you don't see the textual thing from the standpoint of substance to be areas that are called problems.

The textual people, if you know what I mean, had to keep them in the back.

The problems that we have here now is to try to reverse

The second thing is that we got to have, we're going to have some other deals with the Japanese.

You know what I mean?

They're the third major power in the world.

And that's killing us all over the world.

You can't have somebody run into them.

Now, today it's Mills making tax relief.

It's not even Fulbright.

Why do you want Fulbright making tax relief?

You've got 30 other schools.

Got it.

I can't be done.

Now, the other thing is that it really comes down to this.

And I agree.

I don't know if you can hesitate to do it, but I looked at this statement and asked who calls to you, and I said, the U.S. General.

And I said, it's not your duty to act, but frankly, on a Sunday in 1970, you weren't in charge of the committee yourself, and you figured you only lost 10 minutes in the House, and you had at least picked up 20 minutes later.

But we did it.

So it hasn't happened.

But the point is, John, I agree with you that at this time, if you will, and I hate to put it so strongly, but if you would, you would take the leadership for the purpose of protecting the presidency, and I forget the name of the national people, I don't know who that would be, but protecting the presidency, the conduct of the foreign policy, and also,

for the purpose of saying that our relations with Wilbur are not military.

They cannot be.

But at least on a basis where he realizes that he doesn't have a veto on anything we do.

Now, I think, therefore, that we have to use the big gun.

The big gun is a little statement we'll put out.

I think the big gun also, if you could get your Republicans on the committee together in a caucus or something, anyway that you

to operate.

And if I had this statement, which I'm supposed to do, and if you all agree that I love your show, could you back it up?

That's just the first step.

Well, that's why it's in the mind of the state, and I think it should be backed up.

There's one aspect I think you should know, and maybe you have it for yourself, is that I think you have to be

I hope Wilbur enough to know that he's going to back out and say, I did not have any issues.

I did, there was no such thing as a mills, or mills plant.

That's it, from your perspective, that's the other statement of the, of the journalist that I did discuss as I've been making, here's what I'm going to say, if I can guess.

I'm going to say, from the beginning, I had told the President of the United States

I agreed with him that we had what we stressed and that if worse came to worse, we would do it by the Japanese, but preferably it would be in agreement and a voluntary agreement with the Japanese.

I did talk with representatives of the Japanese industry and it was quicker than that.

my determination that this was what we had, that there had to be restraint.

And if they didn't provide restraint, we would have to go to legislative court, but I would prefer not to have voters.

And after that, all that done, I just kept making clear to them, and I made clear in all my statements, that I would prefer not to have voters, but it was essential that at least there be a voluntary agreement that we were to avoid,

Period.

That's what he's going to say.

It's his part in this whole thing.

And God knew it.

From there on, you get into a...

I wouldn't argue with you on that.

Boston, why are you interested in it?

I wouldn't argue with you.

I don't think that all of you should get off the hook.

What do you think, Bryce?

Well, sir, I don't know what to do.

Thank you.

We were talking upstairs.

You're welcome.

Hey, careful, the couch has been blackened.

We need to get rid of this procedure.

Right.

Because what happened here, and what he's going to say, I can't control the Japanese minds if they think that they were going to satisfy me by just, by doing something that I said was a conditioned procedure to avoid being at war with me.

Let me turn this on.

I know they're going to send great privacy here.

This must not go over.

the lower is, he's putting it right into their hands.

And these people come in here and sell it to the people.

You understand?

Well, we're not, you know, and I said, well, right, we're a voluntary agreement.

We're workers, we're a voluntary agreement.

But we always find out that it was all hard to get.

So you want a little slap in the... Well, I think there should be an orthodoxy of this whole operation.

You should take...

Well, we can understand the well-intentioned.

well-intentioned efforts of various people to attempt to solve this problem.

But the orderly processes require that where foreign policy is involved, it must be handled at this level.

Let's get it right on the nose.

Well, I think this can be hit intuitively.

is the newspaper reporting of this thing.

And that is true.

There was a negotiation between the terrorists and the industry.

That would disturb me knowing.

Also because I think that would be law.

Yes, without saying that there was negotiation, but the way this is reported is that even the press reports to the effect that there was a misadventure of the negotiations, of course, it would be necessary for me personally to have a second date.

The worst kind of trend is starting at this rate.

No, if you go that far, right?

Yes or no?

Yes, sir.

I think it's probably to be dismissed.

So you guys are out of here.

All right.

If something's missing.

Well, we don't want to get into it.

John says that Arlington's back, of course, he did.

He didn't press the reports or accurate by his own admission.

He didn't.

So he can put it that way.

Thank you.

There is another comment that could truthfully be made.

We could have gotten a better deal in the last year.

I'm satisfied with this.

Yeah.

I just don't know how far you can go or how far you want to go.

and laying out on the table what the various propositions were in the negotiating area, and then get into, well, yeah, that deserves another factor, or something like that.

You're right.

You don't want to get confused.

There are people who don't understand one story at a time.

Right.

What is the fact that cracking fills that directly on our future relationship?

No reason.

Well, I don't know that we're cracking them.

We're cracking them in terms of certain things that happen, but we're not accusing them of doing it.

What we have to make of that is what we need to make of that.

That's a little interpretative.

It's an accusation.

Well, uh, no, I'm talking about what I...

There's nothing in here that they didn't... We only mentioned it once.

You just say that it is followed upon...

This is not orthodox action.

Followed upon discussions between the industry representatives and him.

I'm sorry?

So you don't require any repression towards...

All right.

He was here.

The witness.

Yeah.

He was here.

And, uh, well, he liked to have him, I guess, but he, I don't think he knows the, the subject story, or the, the tapest story, because he thought that Jerry Ford reported to you the details, he just gave you the general, very Christian, you know, he had a discussion.

And Mills called Jerry Ford into his office yesterday afternoon.

Mills called Ford into his office.

Yeah, that's right.

So he had a, you know, a good call in that little office, he got off the horse, he just stopped by, you know, and was supposed to give him a minute to speak.

You heard me just three minutes before I came in here and said that you were very concerned that the presidential statement that will destroy the progress that's been made in Georgia's region might be some sort of a drink.

And I said, well, Jerry, we haven't made progress in Georgia.

You might want to go over and ask me.

You asked me.

You asked me to call you on this one policy statement.

I was just finished.

And what did you want to do?

If you had brought to your attention the letter that this group of textbook congressmen wrote to Mills, they suddenly decided to copy them here.

They did it, they had a letter copied to me, and you told me about it, and I said, I've got a copy of Peter's one.

You know, John, I remind you, as I've said to you and whoever you may be, today we have so many problems that in the days of this Republic,

from basically the Civil War until the World War I, that ain't the subject of debate.

What brought parties up and down except for depressions was demand care.

So this is a hell of an issue.

It was then.

But that's really what we're talking about.

We're talking about strangely enough, it has all the overtones of terror.

We talk about revenue sharing and government tax reduction

I think this will happen.

I will get down to the answer to your question.

I think it will be static check.

Hold on.

How would you know?

Should he be told before he should be put on?

The statement now.

You just put it on.

Good.

I'm glad you said that.

That's your statement.

You don't know.

He didn't tell us.

No, sir.

Oh, hell no.

Did he think about the agreement?

Did he tell you what he was going to say?

Did he make a statement about what you think about what to have?

I couldn't check on that.

If Charlie conveys the minority, I'm committing.

And remember what happened when this happened to Carl Winston once.

And it's because you chose not to participate.

And suddenly the minority had come.

You're kidding, you're not kidding.

You're never going to tell what you're kidding when you're not kidding.

And so, their comrades got together on the committee and I was instantly recalling the development and change that had come from one end to the other.

Enjoying it, because the minority had come.

I don't think he's going to be excited about the talk.

How many members do you have on that side?

I'm not sure.

Let's clarify.

What?

It was a support position.

the contemplated that we would issue a formal statement as a result of that, or just, you know, I didn't know what it was going to be, and I want to be able to understand what's going on, and we'll have a brief here and there, but I've had in mind, and I hope you've done, and then let's throw it over for discussion.

What feels to me best is not to formalize it to that point.

I think you should call them together and say, look, President, we're informing you of the statement, and here's the statement we're going to go with.

And then afterwards, the statement is issued, and you, as the Republican leader, says, this is the view of all Republican membership, period.

That's how that sounds.

Does anybody have another?

Would you prefer it as a formal statement?

What do you think?

Let me say this, let me say this.

You can't fight one man with death.

You fight one with one.

And frankly what I think has to do is that I'd rather have John be here.

He's down here and he is the president's spokesman on this thing and not everyone else.

I think that's a good deal for me.

I'll just sound to you, Bryce.

Well, that would be where I would do it.

When I say make a statement, after the President maybe just go to the floor and say, right after he gets the White House statement, says the President has made the statement, Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that I agree with it, that in an informal meeting with members of my committee, we all agree with it or something like that.

Could you do that?

I do have a question about having this, that we had to go through this kind of formality and get all our guys in line or something like that.

I think that they should be alert to what's going on.

And we are going to be.

And you are.

And I am going to be taking it.

I'm going to slap Wilbur.

And this thing, as far as we're concerned, as far as you're concerned, this text will say this.

And so they know where you stand and that this does entail a very serious problem that we're going to address ourselves to.

But I think you've got to be, I'm not too sure that you want to get into a hard sell on this.

It's a soft sell in terms that this is just completely unacceptable to us.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm very disturbed.

If the history of this thing is reporting that the baby was right and we have these kinds of things going on, I can't believe that we did.

But no matter what,

It seems to me that as far as one member is concerned, the Japanese agreement is very unacceptable.

He and I agree wholeheartedly with the President of the United States.

It is safe.

That's enough.

I assume that you said, without having a caucus, I could see my view of Johnny getting together with ten guys and lining them up against the chair.

That is a little bit of a formal deal, but it's not really necessary.

I think it's the one-on-one that appeals to me.

In other words, like in another deal, in a Russell fight, where it's a Russell's man, right, so his control is on him.

Mr. President, Bill Timmons and I can get to each of the members of Congress with your statements so that they're alerted ahead of time when the press asks them as the President welcomes them.

Now you've got a situation where you've got a tiny situation that we probably will not meet.

Tomorrow.

We're going to do this at 4 o'clock.

The house will not be accessed in that long.

In fact, I'd like to meet the chair.

As far as that's concerned, I think you don't have to do it on the floor of the house.

That isn't all that necessary.

I think if we do this at 4 o'clock, I think you should be in the same story.

I think he should, and I will wait for tomorrow to go back to grace.

I think Johnny should just go out and the press is going to ask him if we can arrange that.

Do you like that?

You've got to have a great point of arms.

and say, President, you're going to make a statement today.

I know what it is.

And here's what I get to say about it.

We should look forward.

Or another thing you could do.

We're trying to make it back.

Here's what we thought.

Why didn't John come here?

I mean, I'll be here in the White House.

And he comes down at 4 o'clock and walks out and makes a statement.

Here's the press I met with the President when I seen the statement and I backed up the statement.

What'd you do with it?

I was thinking about that very simple.

All right, there it is.

You see, you'll have all the press support here.

And you'll just walk out and you say, I met with the President and here it is.

And Zegar will give you the statement.

You can stay here when I support the statement.

If you would do that, in that case, you'd have a good forum.

It doesn't mean you didn't call the press conference, but you kind of looked around.

I don't like the idea of the attempt to form a dialogue.

I think everybody is going to expand on that and talk to me about it.

And so let's set up a meeting, if that's all right with you, four o'clock this afternoon.

Well, I don't know how these things are going to work, but we're supposed to be back in three days.

Uh, I think it says your schedule is less than 345.

I see it to the janitor.

And I oppose it at least.

But, uh, that was very simple.

We definitely need it back at 345.

That's what it says.

All right, let's just say this.

Take it as it's going to be some funding.

You do appear at 4 o'clock, say, 4 o'clock, and then we'll have you in the lab station doing what you need.

That picture that I just

I'll be here around 345 at 4 o'clock.

Between 4 and 415.

that the statement will be issued and then you will go out and see the press report and tell them what you think about it.

And that does, that does the presidential, you know, you come down and consult with the president in this matter and then to, you know, make the statement.

That's, I think, the narrative.

Now, can we, um, can I have some of your eye count?

like the Vice President, to develop a little formalized statement that might

What I would like to have prepared, what should be prepared, as a matter of fact, you come down early during travel.

We have 3.30 in the morning.

You have a responsibility.

You have prepared for John the little Q&A.

But in other words, a talking point.

Here's what we would like for him to say.

And here are possible questions that we also would like to have prepared.

How does that sound?

Senator?

Sure.

And Senator?

Senator won't have no money.

I can't stand it.

They're finally getting me on the side of the president.

I'm sorry, Senator.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, Senator.

33 fourths of your juice.

Your program.

They told me, who's the man that's more likely to accept a burn?

I said, 100%.

They're completely different.

Because 100% of parents worry about their kids, and the parents are very interesting.

Absolutely.

Who do you have in mind?

Before that, there was a group in the National Tax Department.

Oh, yes.

I read it.

It's very good.

It's very readable.

And we discussed this at the previous time.

I think it's here at the time of the absence of the sexuality that we're getting behind these special books.

Yeah.

So, yeah, we have these shots of art that those tax people wear from such purists.

All right.

At the, I think it would be good if you said that you should, back to the grantee, chair congressman Burns, I'll always be the president this morning, and say that some of your suggestions,

Now, at 4 o'clock this afternoon, and I'll be back at approximately 3.45 to 4, but at 4 o'clock this afternoon, we'll be ready with the statement.

And then he will go out and make a statement, orally, backing it up, and take questions.

So that they know that we're consulting.

You're not at the expected state of the day.

Well, I'd like to loosen up.

What's it going to be?

One at four o'clock?

Why did you start referring to that?

Should I say one at the state of the day?

That's what I did with the Beard's arrow.

All right.

Is that so?

Yeah.

What's going to happen to one of them?

I'd like to just, if you could give me more, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little, let's make it a little,

But for your information, we're aiming at 4 o'clock with the statement, the presidential statement, in comparison to the Washington statement.

All right.

I'm certainly going to stay for some reason.

All right, don't spend all that money.

You're going to have to keep it at this for a time.

You're not going to have all the taxes.

I'm going to have to make a problem with you.

It's a tough evening.

Now on the statements, you know, Heather is not coming and making this.

If you all agree, whatever you do, we'll get together in a hotline and we'll get the talking lines.

We'll get about 330 paragraphs or two to leave the thing off you.

What we want is just a two-paragraph statement that Congressman Burns will make.

when he walks out, and then any other points that might come up.

Okay?

Yes, sir.

Just briefly, we'll have that prepared, and I'll be ready at 3.30.

When you come at 3.30, Greg, you're talking to us.

No, my dad was with me.

God, he's got to get it.

He said, fair enough.

He's got to get our boys together.

He said, just hold on.

I just want you to know we're going to make the statement that you're going to back the whole thing with two.

Just start with that.

Thank you.

All set.

All right.

Good.

Thank you.