Conversation 523-006

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

I seem to not understand quite what they want to suggest on the drug thing.

I should have said something.

That just came in.

I may go on television in the middle of the morning with a TV message and read it on drugs.

Maybe I'm...

Maybe this is something I don't quite understand.

I don't mind meeting them for radio.

If that's what they want me to do, that I will do.

But I would be damned if I'm going to request TV time.

I've talked to Robin and we both just saw that statement and we both completely agree.

That is if you're standing by for your okay to request TV time.

But he hasn't seen it.

He had not at that point seen the thing.

I remember you just got them too.

So then he read it, and he feels strong in it.

Clearly then, to be perfect, Frank, I don't know, I'm not even sure it's worth the radio time, because all it does is babble away about how we got a drug problem, and that isn't the point.

The point really is to get to what we're doing about it.

And your statement, apparently, your message is apparently damn good.

But what your statement should be, I would think, is a summation of the message, rather than a summation, a statement I have sent to the Congress today.

I have a question.

Somebody got the idea that, somebody just said that we ought to do something on drugs, and I think we should sometime.

Maybe I ought to go on sometime and talk about, do an educational speech about drugs.

That ought to be done sometime.

What do you think?

Tell him to kill us, you know, how damn dangerous it is.

I mean, it's got to be a lot more carefully thought through than this.

This is great.

They've been literally for days on this thing, and it doesn't really come out to be... Well, for after, at least I chopped, or scrubbed out.

Let me put it this way.

We'll get at it another way.

Shall we?

Now, what I...

I've really come to know about what the hell I'm going to be doing.

I've got to prepare this.

I've got to prepare a message for...

I'll get Ron in here and see what the hell he wants.

And the other thing is, if you can, as a .

.

What Pat has is a thing on the New York Times thing, but he hasn't done the other part of it.

Which John Andrews may have done, because I think he's been working with the domestic counsel people a lot.

What I'm saying is, am I or am I not supposed to make a presidential statement today?

That Henry was supposed to be driving, and there's been no glimmer of it, so I don't know what that means.

Oh, he's, he's talking to Barr now, so let's let that go.

He can also find out what happened, I guess, in your statement on, on, uh, that he and Earl and the group were supposed to be drafting on that, uh, you know, time scale.

Yeah.

Really?

I couldn't get the son of a bitch out.

He's smart, right?

What I'm gonna say, John has got too many problems for you, but I just want you, in fairness, to get across the point, and everybody here, that nobody comes in, Bob.

We don't need money.

I really think, I really believe, I feel very, very strong.

He came in in order to get more shit to go to the Dominican Republic.

I understand that.

And I probably don't think we ought to do it.

I did need to hear it.

But my point is, we, there is no one, believe me, no one, I don't care if he's going to give $50 million that I should see for the purpose of money.

Can we get the money without my seeing the individual?

Yes, sir.

Or can we?

We cannot do it.

No, sir.

And if we have to do it, we can do it.

We can sure do it on a different basis.

Can I prove all the votes?

Did you get the report on the first vote?

No.

The, uh, Charles Amendment, which is June 72, with the, with the Kent nullification and pre-POWs weren't released.

Yeah.

The McGovern-Hathfield people made a strategy decision at the last minute and moved back, moved to back it.

They were originally opposing it, and they shifted to back it.

It lost 44 to 52.

And they just voted on the first round on McGovern-Hathfield, and they lost 40 to 56.

Final votes, 55 to 42.

55.

There you go.

Tenants just called.

55 to 42.

Final votes, 55 to 42.

Okay.

I was trying to figure out, let's talk first about the media problems.

Do they have a statement that they want me to make today on this 10-year time stamp, or are we not going to make a statement?

My suggestion, there are a number of statements that I think are apparent.

I just got a man who was starting to look over them.

I don't think it's necessary for you to make a statement on the New York Times, neither today, the way things are breaking out.

I don't know.

My view is this.

My view is if he wasn't a baron, I have to let some of that be the story of the show.

We're certainly going to do, but that's pretty good, isn't it?

We have a draft statement on that.

Do you want to put it out?

We do have a draft statement on that.

We can release it.

Has the President seen that?

The Governor had to.

I'm not sure you can put out something on that.

It's just a thing saying, you know, this, yeah, the men that stood up for this are fighting the war the right way, working with us.

Yeah, I find that we are, well, the main thing we want to get across is that we are bringing the war and the war to an end.

Maybe Alex says it.

I'm trying to see what it means, but maybe you can get that across, that I...

Well, I don't want to knock on people's ears.

Maybe they got the impression we did the speech.

We probably do.

But I feel that this is it.

I think if I talk to somebody about drugs, maybe Bob, I've got to go over to the, maybe sitting in the library, look at him in the camera and start talking to him about this problem.

You know, and so, and here it is, and the peddlers and all this and that, but it finally comes down to the home and the family and our attitude and why it's a bad thing.

But you should do that after you've done these things that you're doing.

Yes, sir.

We are talking about the New York Times statement.

I don't think that anything should be said today.

I see nothing to be gained from the same.

Maybe there's something to be lost or not, but I...

I can't help but think that...

I think that... Maybe we've got to take advantage of this damn thing.

I think the press people, the ones I have talked to today...

It's been an interesting day.

There's beginning to be a decided shift in the attitude.

Henry Frampton just called me and he said, for a privilege of, this is inconceivable.

Nor is it a bunch of editorials.

There seems to be more and more focus going on the fact that the top secret documents were handled in this way.

And they're moving away from this.

Well, he's quoting, you remember, after the Cuban Missile Crisis, he published an article in which he quoted one conversation between, in the cabinet room, and the New York Times had an editorial then attacking Stuart Alsop.

for undermining the integrity of the government, because if confidential advisors can't talk to the president without having him lead to the papers.

I want that.

Get that for me so that I can use it.

I'm going to use that in Rochester.

Yes, sir.

Use that in Rochester.

If you do that, you're going to really suit Stu also.

That will get him to go, yes.

would really have, because you got your information from Stu also, and so did Scott.

No, no, no, no, I get the column.

Yeah, the column doesn't exist yet.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

My point is, my point is, he'll build his compaction.

I will certainly hold the editorial.

But he will, my judgment is, he'll think we should.

He'll think that we should, because I don't think anyone else has that.

We may upset him.

I mean... And I think it's more effective coming from him than from you.

Well, that's the other question, whether you really, Buchanan's draft here is a...

pretty much of a cheap shot blast at the New York Times.

I'm not going to blast anyone hitting the New York Times.

No, I didn't mean it in that way.

Without even mentioning the New York Times, here's an editorial expressing a judgment about this thing.

I mean, in other words, I don't think many of these people want to have their record come out on Kennedy.

Now, that must get out if you had that summary made by Hayes or somebody.

I'm kidding.

The stuff on Kennedy, I'm going to get it leaked.

So, see, we'll just leave it out.

After all, it's fair enough.

See, nobody else, the only unit in the New York Times is the joint.

Nobody else is the joint.

So now that it's being leaked, we'll leave out the parts we want.

There we go.

their ways.

And I have the impression, I think, well, evidence is average.

He has a common tomorrow attacking the New York Times.

I think part of it was because none of them had it.

Branton is outraged.

Branton is outraged now.

These are leaders in the... Henry, how in the world could the New York Times have had an editorial conference?

Why didn't Scotty Russell have spoken up on a thing like that?

I know.

No, really.

I mean, I can't do that, eh?

Oh, I can't do that, eh?

Yeah.

Do you want to get one on Sunday, Tim?

Yeah.

Well, we've put out nothing today.

Good luck with the party.

They said, don't let him on the hook.

Oh, on that, they're mad.

You know, they let him in.

Look, look, Igor, whatever his name is.

The only thing is that some of them just thought you were the chancellor.

They thought he was very gracious.

They thought he was, that he didn't really have to lecture the president in the face of the others about ending the war in Vietnam and about Pakistan.

Just say that.

It's, you know what he sounded like?

What did he sound like to the Mexican president?

That's the truth, he did.

Until he got up there, and it was supposed to be a, we didn't have it on the record, so whether we made it or not, and I got up and spoke quickly and graciously, and got sat down, and then, God damn it, he had to read something for the 10, 15 years.

And he did.

Well, he's a second man.

Well, what is your feeling, though, about, uh, you, you think we shouldn't make a statement about that?

No, I do not.

I don't think we should make a statement.

You, what makes you think that someone, well, you can't tell them about it.

I wouldn't put out a statement at 5.30 anyway.

It doesn't, it doesn't.

Now, on this drug thing, you did, it wasn't your idea, but I go out and do it, and question how many times it was made a statement on drugs.

Not to make that statement.

Well, if we're gonna do that, if I'm gonna request time, I'm gonna have to stay calm.

The plan was, on Thursday, we sent the message to Congress, Chuck.

The drug guys, the domestic counsel group and the promotion people and all that said the way to dramatize this is this is the time for the president to go on request television time at noon or at 7 o'clock and make a major statement on what this message of Congress is and all that.

Make a big deal out of the fact that we're pushing the drug thing.

And so they said, when do you want to do it, noon or seven o'clock?

That was the question that was presented to me.

My answer was, until there's a statement, I'm not going to even raise the question, because until we know what we're going to say, there's no point in deciding when we're going to say it.

So they went back and forth on that, and day after day passed.

This is finally what came forth with the idea.

My argument to them at the time was, write your eight-minute statement and look at it.

If it works as an eight-minute statement, then we'll consider it.

If it doesn't, let's boil it down to one minute, and we'll do it with the results of it.

We'll forget about that and do one today.

You can go ahead and get it done for a moment.

So this came in late in the afternoon, which when both of us saw it, I hadn't talked to anybody else about it.

They came up with the same knowledge as you sure as hell aren't going to go to television time to say this.

and did request on it.

I don't see any, I agree with you that we can do a radio, record that for radio if anybody wants to hear it or something like that.

Well, we, I think this recording for radio isn't a bad idea.

I don't know why you think we did it for radio.

Well, I don't know whether I ought to walk out of that press room and do it again.

I just don't know.

I don't want to do that too often.

I did that one last year.

Yeah, I walked out on some dance.

On the energy message.

Energy?

Well, Christ.

Oh, we had to do that.

All the drugs.

This has got to be a continuing thing.

What are your feelings about what should be done tomorrow?

We're sending a message to the Congress.

Do you want me to walk out and tell them I'm sending a message to the Congress that we've got on something on television?

You remember about ICE?

They just put it in three sentences.

It's $100 million or $1 billion.

It does this.

It's under my direction.

Wham.

If they get something like that, maybe it's worth going to Congress.

After reading this, which is, I guess, 1,098 words,

I think would be more effective instead of you sitting here reading this before cameras for you to walk out and do like a minute and a half making a point about the importance of the drug, your interest in the drug problem and kicking off a briefing and sending a message with your voice and with your... That's what I thought.

That's what I thought.

And I'm on the news.

And you will be on the news, just because it's about you.

But I've got to get it.

I want a minute and a half statement.

That's what I want.

And I want words that say it.

Now, somebody can prepare something like that for me.

By minute and a half, let me tell you what that is.

That's 150 words.

That's no more.

Not one more.

150 words.

I am sending a message or something like that.

I just want three or four ideas that can be contained in 150 words as to what we're doing is new.

I am taking personal charge of this.

It's undirected.

I have appointed Dr. Jack.

I said, I've got the best man in the country.

It's a personal charge.

It's the highest priority as a national.

You know what I mean?

God damn it, these people ought to be able to do that.

New office, more money.

Yeah.

We're going to spend so much money, and more money will be spent if necessary.

Add that in, you know.

Like on the cancer thing.

We are going to, this is, I consider this, you know what I said, the public enemy number one.

Enforcement to cut off the source and education.

I consider drugs to be public enemy number one.

The drug traffic to be the public enemy number one.

And then the other point is rehabilitation.

And those are the numbers that's the final key.

But that's what we ought to have, Bob.

Some of the crisp, hard-hitting, I think it's Lawrence, I don't know if it's Buchanan, Buchanan, somebody else, I don't know.

But don't, and I don't need that long thing, a folder with A, B, C, D, you know, and all those supporting things.

All we need is just something that makes the points.

And if not, just get in the long folder and I'll write it.

Because I know what it would say.

I think that's the way it ought to be done, don't you?

Yes, sir.

Just because Chris said it, now with regard to the other one, what do you want, Ron?

What do you want, Mayor?

I think we should assess the television tonight, assess the newspapers in the morning.

and see where we stand.

Don't you, Bob?

Yeah, get a reading around the country on papers, not just Washington.

We're this town.

I could call two people.

Yeah, that's what I mean.

Has that been done?

Yeah, but we can do it in the Rock or Johnson.

Oh, yeah.

Well, Colson, I see outside people.

Yeah, they can do that.

Sure, call around.

Well, maybe you call editors.

They've done that.

Well, then maybe you've already got the reading.

Don't bother calling anybody else.

What do you like?

Here is a statement from the Secretary of State.

Have you seen this?

The one prepared by the people over there.

No, no, that's just the initial draft.

So I think we can assess the thing tomorrow.

No, no, this was the result of the meeting yesterday with the early men and the attorney general.

And this was put together.

Is there any reason why I should say that?

Or is it a feeling that I should say that?

I will have to comment on Rochester.

I'm going to do it early.

But I'm not going to mention it in the New York Times.

I'm going to do it more obliquely, but I could point out why we haven't had one.

This is all right if it's punchy enough, but otherwise it's all right if it wasn't.

So that's one of the options.

It sort of states the opposite.

What if there was a firecraft on the house you stayed in?

All right.

I don't know.

Your feeling is, for me, not the same.

No, my feeling is nothing should be said.

I'm going to say, nothing tomorrow.

Maybe say something practical.

I think this doesn't make him, let me say this, maybe it just hypo's the name.

Sorry, let me just say it my normal way, Brian, rather than a presidential statement for the White House.

He's going up there to speak to me.

You have to say something, Brian, and that's a good copy of it.

I'll just cover it right there.

And that will not be on television.

On the other hand, we'll record it so they can use the voice.

We want the crowd to be acknowledged.

There is a crowd.

Very exemplary.

Brian.

Yes, sir.

Yes, I like the idea of not being prepared.

And then you know what the mood is a hell of a lot better as to what you're reacting to, what you're setting the framework for.

And that's still time to make the magazines, make the Sunday papers, make the weekend news wrap-up and so on.

And if it isn't shifting...

according to tonight's television and tomorrow morning's paper, in the direction we think it might be, well, then we have a... We can determine tomorrow... We can determine whether or not the Secretary of State should make a statement tomorrow or what move we should make tomorrow or...

Before the run.

Ron, if we could get some press people to take all the time, that's much the better thing.

What about the House and Senate?

What success do we have on that?

I don't know.

They're sort of in this crap today.

I can't believe they're doing anything on that.

All right.

Probably nobody can carry it.

Oh, they might.

What about Johnson's friends?

I told him, come on, I certainly tried.

I told him, get organized.

What the hell?

What are they doing?

He said, well, you ought to call them.

One of the interesting things is that one of the wire service guys got through to Clifford after he had met with Sullivan.

from the POW thing.

And he asked him about his copy of the report.

And Clifford gave a response like it wasn't me by saying, mine's been locked in my law office since I came in.

As a matter of fact, I hadn't even read it.

So there's a little bit of that.

type of an attitude beginning to move through the town where people i think are stopping and saying okay yeah freedom of the press people have the right to know but wait a minute these were top secret documents that were mishandled

And Times played it wrong by publishing and revading.

They didn't have to do that.

They could have done it.

This is based on a lot of things, like they've done on Dave Chavez and so many other things, like Dave Chavez with that NSC report with regard to what we're going to do with Vietnam in 1972.

The New York Times had a secret...

The material on the front page of the paper today, which would have been hard to deal with on the El Paso gas thing.

They did.

But they killed that, sir.

Those bastards.

I told that to ten State Department people.

I told Peterson to tell them they were never going to let Algeria have any long narrative when they did provide any compensation to the French.

No, sir.

But you're right, they could have.

He could have sat down and rewritten that whole stuff.

He could have gone on for months with the series.

You know, they get around three full pages every day for months of rewriting.

Even the Sun-Times saying that, I'm trying to get more detail on it.

They didn't use documents.

No.

What they did, they printed, apparently, that we had broken the code.

But they didn't.

Back in World War II, the Sun Times.

At one point we had broken the Japanese code.

I don't remember.

But the Sun Times apparently printed that the United States had broken the code, therefore the enemy knew that we had broken the code.

So that was a big deal then.

But they did not print it, although they obtained the information.

from classified documents or from an individual who had access to the classified documents.

They did not print the documents.

So this is where the Times has made basic sense.

There's been no, and Marty is referring to checking this, there's been no pending on this.

The verbatim reprint of a classified document you've ever gotten after might have had all the documents.

of Pearl Harbor been made public or not?

God damn it, we ought to find out.

I'm going to get a call to the Defense Department.

I want to know.

Tell them I want to know.

I've got to know by 6 o'clock.

Now, they can find out.

God damn it, I asked for that yesterday, Ron.

I want to know, and I want you to get it out.

That's a very sharp deal, particularly put into some of the Jewish reporters around here.

Now let those bastards stand up and be counted for a change.

They all want to understand World War II.

And it was frankly the right thing to do, as it turned out.

But, they, Dan and Will, are not going to protect Roosevelt and then take us up.

That's the way it is.

I want to know, have they or have they not?

And why aren't they?

Why doesn't the Times call for a report or a publishing?

Should we publish it?

How do we get into World War II?

We want the true story out.

I want to know whether the classified documents regarding World War II, the decisions prior to World War II, have all been made public or not.

If they have, it's a beautiful story.

If they have not, then let's get at it.

I'm going to play this game.

It's got to be played right down the line.

I can't believe it.

You see, I think we've got to, I mean, we'll punish the times enough, in our own personal way, by the threes.

Thank God when I read this, you don't want to speak with them.

What's the other game?

The thing is that this kind of thing must not be allowed to go.

It's got to be nailed.

It's got to be fought.

We're not just trying to say, well, we just hope it'll go away.

That's what we're saying.

We have got to make this a capital case.

That's Judge Stanton.

Martin and I talked to him today, and he feels that they're developing quite a good case.

He does?

Come on.

I said I'd go and see if he's got any guns.

Okay, fine.

Are you getting a lot of immunity?

Coming down?

The group coming?

We've got a story like this, Bob.

We've got to make it.

Not just so that we try to make the worst of it, but try to make the best of it, you know what I mean?

And by that I mean find it.

Find it.

Tear it to pieces.

But we can't let the impression be that what we're doing is trying to

I saw a story a couple weeks, a week ago of a West Point critic with his wife who had to sleep.

I want a little background on the case.

I want to say to you, just for my critical purpose, I'm curious to know, he's served in Europe, gosh, he's lit it up over there.

We did something wrong.

I don't mean we, it's our name.

No, it's... Are you the host?

Yeah, I was looking at it.

We had a problem, and I've got to tell you something about it.

No, I don't remember.

Sounds good.

Let me get it for you.

I thought maybe the guy used his hand, and he ought to be all right in here.

I recall it was just a guy who, all of a sudden, changed his mind.

He wasn't on dope.

This doesn't say that he was.

Or he wasn't, he hadn't been in discipline or something, and he had a good record, or what the hell was his career?

That's what I said.

I recall he had a good, I'd better not tell you, because that just wasn't, if it's just a normal case.

If something came in, I'd want to send it off, because I didn't, I don't think he'd be able to pull it together.

I don't think so.

Well, I'll tell you, that kid, those two guys, he's got this feeling sometimes.

They look so dark now.

Neil just looks like he's 18.

He's actually 25.

He has to be finished.

He's not 21. Who said that?

He would be 26, yeah.

He's a great explorer.

He sees the property like that.

Instead of just letting him coast, he just drives and drives.

We don't have money to do that.

That's right.

I mean, I keep bugging people and it isn't...

and go with them.

I said, what's happening?

It's like my view of agriculture.

I know it's been bad for a year.

We're not making enough points on it.

We screwed up the drought.

We screwed up the program and everything else.

And frankly, that's the whole problem with the domestic council.

Now, this is a drug thing.

I must say, they're going to work on that.

Well, I'll put further consideration on the airtime thing.

What about our earlier deploy?

Should we or should we not?

I think so.

We've got to have a focal point.

There's got to be a guy who understands it.

all the ramifications that can deal with the top level of the people concerned.

He's got the staff.

He's got the staff to back him up.

Well, to back him up.

He's got an institution so he can move into Venezuela.

He...

I think would like to do it.

I think it's good for John to pull him out of some of this other crap and into the Subject A once in a while.

He was just into the Subject A basically.

John and George did the same thing.

They would be the last to recognize it because both of them were Solveig Smith.

But they are like all the other members of the domestic canon.

They have to be that way.

They know that their subjects are important.

They are deeply involved in them.

They spend hours and hours and hours on them.

They talk to their staffs.

They try to live them up.

And then they bring them to me.

And they know that they just aren't that important.

And it's hard for them to, you know, to, you know, it's not hard for guys to work in that sort of thing.

And we can talk all we want all week, but we know about it.

I don't care whether it's even the floor of the barge canal.

It's not worth that much.

I mean, it's going to, you're going to drain the lake.

They're not going to drain the lake now.

Somebody will just come and say, I think you ought to drain the lake.

And I say, well, it's the best.

Let's drain the lake.

I don't think you should drain the lake.

Let's not drain the lake.

See what I mean?

Yep.

Three.

Probably it's because they're having fun, but John can do it.

I mean, he's got a lot of other things to do, but this is more important than them, and other people will do it, but he doesn't do the other things.

Sure.

I don't know what I'd call it.

I'd call it an assault.

I don't know what you're talking about.

After the leadership is clear,

We are at the leaders meeting, aren't we?

Yeah, what time?

8.

8 o'clock.

8 o'clock tomorrow, there is the leaders meeting.

They know what it's about.

I'm not seeing any mark, though, compared to my remarks, sir.

I wonder if, uh, uh, maybe I could use a microphone.

It's pretty much down to motherhood.

You're not going for a partisan political shot at all.

There's a chance for everybody to be together for something.

You know what it is?

Like you're trying to cut those, you know, under 10 years, must be a really long time because we're not in this.

I'm trying to be a non-environment.

Listen, I'm feeding myself to it.

I have a feeling the environment is a made issue.

Help, basically, Bob, is, well, everybody's, you know, Grouse is about back to those and the rest, but it's pretty much of a May issue in many cases.

I mean, there's some, you know, or there's Dan Gallagher.

Anyway, as I'm telling the writers, they did a good job, and I'll use it for all kinds of lights.

Health doesn't even show on this damn planet.

Vietnam, 33, up from 28 in March.

Economic, 22, down from 24.

Drug addiction, 12, up from 6.

Race relations, 7, same as it was.

Crime and lawlessness, 7, same as it was.

Other international problems, 7, down from 12.

Youth protests and unrest, 6, up from 3.

Poverty and welfare, 5, same as it was.

Other international problems, 7, down from 12.

The devil was up, at least.

No, okay.

Now it was up from where?

It's 33 up from 28.

It's hard to realize how that went up.

If the other one was in March, that was in August.

And this is when they give a no list.

They just say, what do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?

Poverty and Welfare is five.

Education in America is five.

Pollution and Ecology is four, down to seven.

Doctor of Religion and Moral Decay is two.

Education is one.

Other Response is nine, and No Opinion one.

That's it.

I think Economy is one.

Twenty-four and Twenty-two is just about right.

Economics is twenty-two, down to twenty-four.

Are you all set for this thing, or are you going over there?

Should I come at 6.30 when you're finished?

No, no, no.

I would come at about 6.15, and I'll join you at 6.20.

Go out over there at 6.15.

Did you talk to him about eating out on the porch?

No.

He'll eat at 6.30 when I come back.

Six thirty-five.

That can still be handled, no?

Could I get about, could I get one thing?

Take over anything that's interesting to show over here.

You got anything?

All right.

Could you really?

Any thoughts about that one minute statement?

I, I might well, or I'm just working off of this stuff that we have here.

Well, you don't have to mess all the material in there, no it doesn't.

How do we get over to U-27 anything that they can?

Well, let's put it this way.

They've been working on other things.

They may have a one-and-a-half-mile statement.

Is that right?

Seven.

But I would like to have, I'd like to have their suggestion as to what I should say.

You know, one-and-a-half, you know, and a statement of toleration.

And when I introduced the briefing to you, don't you think that's by far the best thing to do?

If there were a resounding thing that announced big new stuff in the right way, I think it might be worth going on.

But what is it that's so resounding?

If we had a $1 billion referral, maybe it would be.

And even then, I'm not sure.

It has to have a lot of faults in it.

I hope everybody in jail is doing this.

Or, like I said, I'd call it a death penalty.

Death penalty for peddlers and suspending aid to all producing nations.

And a few things like that.

But there you're back in enforcement again, which is where the real...

See, this doesn't really deal with enforcement.

This deals with, I wish I had the Office of Treatment and Rehabilitation.

That's a good facet to it, but it isn't.

Then, having done this, having done your enforcement things, having had your name, your national name, and all that, you're in a position where

Sometimes down the road a little ways, you can then do a direct address on the whole drug problem, talking about what's wrong about it and what you're doing about it.

I think, as I said, I think it's a third, or at least a fourth, 25% of the package of the NLM and the MSP should be on the drug problem.

Not the AMA.

The AMA.

Yeah.

But I've got to hand that out.

I've got to get it.

When is that?

Next Tuesday?

Yes.

Well, Bob, I'll have to have the darn thing when I get at it.

I don't know how they're supposed to do it.

Well, that's all right.

I don't expect it to.

2,000 words, both times.

I said 2,000 words there and 2,000 words in the world books.

The suggestion is that some of that material that Cook has for this would be put in the AMA speech.

I mean, that's good stuff, but getting into the asking the doctors to participate in the educational side, that's what I want.

I see that they could work up a thing where you

give a direct challenge to the AMA.

Ask them to set up a blue ribbon commission of MDs to work with Dr. Jackie and the whole, on the education program.

Thank you so much.

But it needs a specific thing.

The president calls on him and he needs to set up a leader.

Yeah.

Especially if he doesn't just get up and say it.

He doesn't just say it.

That's a problem.

But he should say it.

To set up a... You've got a good point there.

Then you'll have a lead-out.

It's better if you've been talking about him.

You ought to talk about him.

cover the health stuff that you don't necessarily want to leave with you.

Absolutely right.

The whole thing is simply to say that we want your cooperation and so forth.

It's programmed in America.

I'd like to hear your thing to the Nebraska kids on the NJAC youth volunteer corps and to the JC's on

So in communications with you, you call on the doctors to set up an all-out program on double education.

Doctors, the most respected men, most people come in contact with in this kind of a field, a field relating to the physical thing of the body.

It's not good, when he's gone along.

Probably shouldn't have said it to her about the other day.

I think we ought to see where it is.

The longer, the surer we are where it is, the more

We want to make an asset out of the battle rather than simply hoping it goes away.

We've got an interesting possibility.

I've heard he's been pushing for you spending part of the day in a small farm town.

No, in a farm town sometimes.

Just to talk with people and get a feel for them.

They're trying to figure out how to do it.

They can't figure it out.

But somebody wrote it.

You've got a letter from the Children's Historical Society.