← 522-006522-008 →

Conversation 522-007

TapeTape 522StartWednesday, June 16, 1971 at 12:59 PMEndWednesday, June 16, 1971 at 1:04 PMTape start time03:37:02Tape end time03:42:45ParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Ziegler, Ronald L.Recording deviceOval Office
AI Summary

President Nixon and Press Secretary Ronald Ziegler strategized on how to frame the White House's public response to the New York Times' publication of the Pentagon Papers. They agreed to shift the narrative from the suppression of information to the criminal nature of the leak and its potential threat to national security, particularly regarding sensitive diplomatic negotiations like SALT and MBFR. Nixon emphasized the necessity of prosecuting Daniel Ellsberg to establish a deterrent against future security breaches and directed Ziegler to portray the press as reckless and implicate the previous Democratic administrations in the origins of the Vietnam War.

Pentagon PapersDaniel EllsbergNational SecurityWhite House Press StrategyVietnam WarLeaked Documents
AudioNARA Description

On June 16, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon and Ronald L. Ziegler met in the Oval Office of the White House from 12:59 pm to 1:04 pm. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 522-007 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 522-7

Date: June 16, 1971
Time: 12:59 pm - 1:04 pm
Location: Oval Office

The President met with Ronald L. Ziegler.

     Morning press briefing
         -Pentagon Papers
               -Administration concern with classified material
                     -Publication of John F. Kennedy administration material
                     -Dealing with other nations
                           -Need for confidential contacts
                                 -Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction [MBFR]
                                 -Strategic Arms Limitation Talks [SALT]
                                 -Berlin negotiations
                                 -Willy Brandt precedent
               -Clarification of the issue
                     -Violation of security
                           -Impact
                     -Suppression of news
                     -Involvement in war
               -Administration Vietnam policy
                     -Questions to former administration
                     -Reformulation of policy upon taking office
               -Comparison with theft of Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] files
                                               35

                               NIXON PRESIDENTIAL MATERIALS STAFF

                                        Tape Subject Log
                                          (rev. 10/08)



                 -President's familiarity with material
                       -Extent of material
                       -Familiarity with content
                 -Need to fight New York Times
                       -Possible extent of leak
                 -Daniel Ellsberg prosecution
                       -Deterrent effect
                 -Public relations                                     Conv. No. 522-6 (cont.)
                       -Attack on press
                             -Ziegler’s role
                       -Attack on previous administrations

Ziegler left at 1:04 pm.
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.

Well, they said, well, the first question, one of the questions is how long are we going to continue with the suppression of this?
And then I said, our interest is not suppressing the information.
Our interest goes to the national security aspects, and I hit that.
Then I said, our interest is not the details of the matter, of holding back the information.
Our interest goes to the handling of classified information.
I said, for example, as I understand it from what the New York Times said, this pre-advanced publicity tomorrow or today was going to be on the Kennedy administration.
So I got that point in.
Then I got the point in about...
about our dealings with other governments now i said for example you take the mutual balance force reduction strategic arms limitation talks the berlin talks a number of matters that have vital interests to this country the national interest in this country the security of this country a government must be able to to engage in confidential conversations with other governments if not the government is not viable it cannot operate i said that's where our interest goes
Not for this depression.
Does American people have a right to know a good deal consistent with national interest?
So I tried to...
Were you able to use the brand finder for that work?
I used it in relation to...
I did pull the document up because I didn't want to...
They wouldn't take pictures and all this type of thing, and I didn't.
Well, just keep hitting the same point.
They won't keep writing the other point.
They're interested in it.
They're interested primarily in it.
They want to make the issue of suppressing the news.
We want to make the issue of breaking the law, violating security, and endangering the United States.
We've got to get to the theme of basically disloyalty, doing something that breaks the law and jeopardizes the interest of the United States.
Let's think through it in that term.
They want to make the issue two-fold.
One, that we're suppressing the military right now.
And secondly, that who got into war?
Who was at fault for getting us into war?
And we're suppressing it.
Our view is we have
We're not getting into that debate.
That's the debate in the previous administration.
You made that point.
Yes, sir.
I did again today.
I said, I think, in relation to your questions, I said, I think it may be more meaningful to you, more productive for you to address your questions regarding this assessment of previous administration policy to the members of the former administration.
And then I made the point, when we came into office, we completely assessed and formed a new policy.
They attempted also, there was an attempt
to draw a parallel between the stealing of the FBI files and the printing of those by the Post.
I said, my judgment is that you can't draw a parallel between the FBI files and this particular material.
I said, there's no really precedent for this type of publication.
Then they asked if the president had the chance to read this.
I said, do you know how big this is?
I said, there are two large cases, five feet long, with documents, you know, throughout the whole thing.
I said, of course not.
But he's aware of the information that the assessment was based on.
Well, we have to fight the crime.
You know, we're in this position.
We either fight it, or this place is going to be like a city anyway.
We do realize it.
Every son of a bitch will walk out, give it to the papers, and they'll pray.
And there's nothing we'll do about it.
We've got to, also, we've got to really get those hurt if he is the man.
And he's got to be prosecuted and condemned.
Right?
I think so, yes.
That's the only thing we can do.
Otherwise, he has no deterrent to serve in the future.
We were talking yesterday, when you look at the options available, there was no other option but to move.
And if we play it right, we can get people concerned about, I mean, the main thing around you, you've got to make the press look bad for doing this.
That's your job.
They're trying to make us look bad.
You've got to make them look bad.
And incidentally, to make the previous administration look bad.
In other words, say, look, this is not our problem.
Thank you.
← 522-006522-008 →