Conversation 524-008

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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'm going to move ahead.

It didn't work out as a good bipartisan thing to do.

or not i think so yeah you know i uh you were kind of concerned about whether they'd show up sure they're not interested in the subject anyways

After the vote, it's Thursday morning.

So Wednesday.

Last week?

Yeah.

When do I have my press conference?

No, you don't.

That's not next week, that's the following.

Yeah.

Wednesday morning is fine.

They may be shooting for a Canada meeting Wednesday morning.

Well, Thursday morning.

And I launched John as the guy in charge of this thing.

He says, oh, dear, or something.

But he's interested in doing it.

And I think he is the right guy.

We do need to pull the people concerned together.

I think it gets challenging and motor and coast.

And they're all bouncing out.

It's a lot different.

Yeah, they're all coordinating with each other, but nobody's really pulling together a master strategy yet.

So we're going to pull back.

John Henry and I are going to get together for a few minutes and then pull this over together and try to get the whole thing.

Okay.

Who else is referring to me?

We've got several other complaints.

That's what I want to pull together, because there's a lot of stuff out, and we need to get it in, and see if I can write down the next statement.

If not the Rodgers statement, I'll go ahead and put it out.

I'm just starting to continue to fight the deep pounding at the public points here, so that we can talk and so forth.

Now, they've really got to get it to work.

I mean, our old client now can't really get off his tail, and those who caught him are editorial people.

Well, he'll be off his tail, of course, but there's only so much he can do, I know.

We can beat him on this, Bob, if we work it right.

Yeah.

Right, you think so?

Yep.

I do.

I think it's one that is an opportunity.

If we, if that's what I mean, an opportunity.

But we have to look at it that way and not say, gee, this is too bad we're involved in this.

Why do we get the New York Times and all that?

We've got to recognize this is an assault right on the highest level on the government.

It's hard still, for me, is to measure what the thing is on it.

They're putting, like, the Edwards each gave over five minutes to it last night.

It was not believed on any of them, of course, because the governor had to be on that.

But it all took five minutes.

But they all took 108 minutes more.

Six or seven minutes.

One of them, one of them, Taylor, I understand.

Maxwell Taylor was on two networks.

He was a PR, and he was dang good.

And somebody calculated it and said, well, that is this hideous deception and distortion or something, you know, aren't you?

Doesn't that disturb you?

And he said, do you mean of the government or of the New York Times?

That involved, that is...

I can't get this out, but can I get my, please, my little comments, my little research on Korea and World War II?

Don't ask him about World War II, because he's got the Jew complex, too.

But Korea, God damn it, I can get that, can't I, from somebody?

And World War II is biblical, too.

God damn it, this thing, Roosevelt's involved in this.

And Truman has evolved in it, and Kennedy, and Johnson, and Eisenhower, if you've been in the war.

You know, let's face it, you know, there are all sorts of documents you don't put out publicly.

You can.

Well, there are other things.

There's kind of like the Canadian government now is racing down.

That's good.

Well, there's something in one of the papers that says that they're

some lesser Canadian diplomat was used as a letter carrier, as an emissary in one of these exchanges or something.

And they're raising hell because they said it was clearly understood when he performed this service that it would not be publicized.

Can anybody really push that now?

Push it, push it, push it.

And that's what I want to get back to these people together and get a basic approach established.

I agree.

some sort of dirty about it, except that I do know that it's an act.

I just don't want people to fly around me on what the hell they're doing, because they're not getting, they're not focusing on anyone.

If you just focus on, they are focusing on censorship, right?

Censorship and the evil war and deception.

Now, what the hell are we focusing on?

Are we anything?

What are we focusing on?

I don't know.

We're focusing on violation of security.

You know, I mean, this is not right.

We have something to do with this.

Also, we focus on this is their problem.

I mean, this is a first aid.

We are not covering up.

This administration is covering up now.

That's the point we've got to get across to them.

This involves two previous administrations, not this administration.

That's one simple line.

For God's sake, sit here.

I want to get that across.

I've told you that I know what he does.

He gets sucked into the other questions.

I can't help it.

Out there, maybe somebody else could get that.

Maybe the old arrangement.

I know it's always current.

I'll tell you when it is.

Okay.

The other administrations.

I don't like the idea of jumping them.

I don't think it makes sense to jump on them for, well, they got us into this war.

It's a horrible thing.

I'm pretty dumb about it.

And that also would lead to the conclusion that certain units, one, we put it out, and two, well, what the hell, we're glad that they get out to get us a chance to make a point.

We've got to say that Biden's got integrity in the presidency, right?

The presidency had information and so forth.

It cannot be...

I haven't got a way to put it, but Christ, what the hell do we hire more of these other people for?

Can they think of a word?

Yeah.

If you've got the channel, if you've got the seat, if you've got anything.

Ken is like, maybe he's bought something.

It's just a pure open attack on the times, which we can move from.

I don't think I did it after all.

After being told not to.

He did pretty well.

Yeah, he just did it in answer to a question in the press conference, which he couldn't avoid.

Yeah.

What'd he say?

He didn't attack the Times.

He attacked, he hit the point of there's got to be privileged documents, you know.

Yeah.

I have the government on my nose, but that's not fair.

I took out this stuff.

Maybe it's important.

Some of it is put in a, you know, a not important file.

People can look at it every day if they want to, or it just costs.

Low-priority costs.

You know, it's something, you know, no urgency required, you know.

I'll figure out something for those reeds.

They're getting closer to it.

Closer to it.

I'll give you this back in the interest of the, you know, I said the DNA.

Right.

You can give me the reed dog if you don't mind.

The difficulty with old cook and crisis is they talk around some of you too much.

Andrew's is better.

He talks to it better.

You can't.

Too much, right?

That's why I take a look at McGinney.

We still haven't got the guy that focuses down on him.

Now, I thought that this man was right there.

He's there.

This program will be worldwide.

We're trying to stop the source of the supply as we accept that we can to our international agencies.

It's worldwide in terms of our service, and it will be government-wide.

There are nine different agencies presently handling the problem.

We're pulling it all together under the White House.

It will be named by the nationwide program of education.

Dr. Jack is the outstanding expert.

I don't quite understand this.

The head of the new office in the White House, he reports personally.

I emphasize this problem will not go away under Vietnam, because it must be attacked at all levels.

One half of the crime in this country is committed by a car committed by the people who are on drugs, as you said.

It attacks 300 people, and it destroys the character of the nation.

Each of the country, each of us, where I spent $158 million more this year,

and can be needed, it will be spent to win this war.

Don't you think that's the way to see it, Sid?

I sure do.

That's just melodramatic.

It's not right now, but it's not over yet.

I don't get stuff like that.

Now and then you can.

I've got a few things like that.

The only thing I wonder about is saying you're going to waste your own water or whatever it is.

Yes, because it's a standard line job for every program.

And I know the more that I set up the leaders, I tend to use the whole reason for the more, but...

They launched a new offense against the offensive, I guess, authority.

Do people understand that?

Maybe it's just steady water.

What the hell?

Maybe they know what we always say about it.

War against pot.

Let's have a total war against drugs.

That's our war.

I don't know.

I'm trying to think sometimes that we are too sensitive about him using it because Johnson used it.

Well, he's, uh...

It isn't just...

I'll be damned, Bob.

I wouldn't be sensitive because Johnson used it.

It was that he overused it.

I'm going to hate it if they are.

Well, I think everything he did was a new war against something.

Well, we haven't used it.

Well, I don't know.

It expands.

And against drugs.

I'll say, I want a nightmare.

But it's, I haven't found anybody else to get that off or something.

It's offensive.

Worldwide, it's nationwide, it's government-wide.

And so that's war, isn't it?

Well, this is a war in a much more literal sense than the war against poverty, for instance, which was a euclidism.

Maybe we don't want to use the word for it.

But we'll call it offensive.

I thought we'd use the public entity number one.

I sure would.

No, that's what some of our boys recalled with that.

I'm sorry?

No, that's the line that came through before.

You ought to use it again.

The word came through in the first meeting.

You used it in something.

Yeah, that's the first line you said in the previous meeting.

That's the thing.

Public entity number one.

Could you chime in?

Waging a total offensive.

You want to call it a total offensive just to go ahead and wait for it to change?

No, not offensive.

I don't think so.

No, I think war is better now.

Director, wage total war.

Wage total war.

God damn it, people know what war is.

Yeah, the intellectuals, people don't like war.

People don't like war.

I wonder if, you know, I've gotten to sort of thinking about the research and about the teaching and I've, you know, even gone back and forth on this.

Has there really come down to the fact that I probably ought to

I really think this is the best thing I could do.

Who the hell else is going to do it?

Who the hell is going to do it?

Mrs. Woodchester, a moment now, please.

That's the real problem I've got.

I just haven't got anybody that comes in and says, ha!

Crap.

Gosh.

Let's face it, you know, Henry can't do that.

He doesn't think right this way in these things.

His stuff is turgid.

As a matter of fact, John doesn't either.

John Erickman doesn't.

He's legalistic as hell.

John's legalistic.

Henry's is turgid.

Turgid.

Raises intellectual, high-flown, and responsible.

And now they've just got to put in a gut-biting thing.

I don't think you're gonna really die if you push to put somebody in who will take these things and get it down and to...

I mean, it's ridiculous to prepare statements for me that I'm gonna make orally that have as little sex in it as that one.

I know, I'm not criticizing, but if that's what you'd write in a college paper now, would you?

Huh?

No, I'd do better than that in college paper.

Okay, let me tell you a question about the words for this tangent.

It's a deadly social problem.

Now, who the hell talks about social problems except in college?

They can have some deal with it.

My partner and I have a deal.

A deal requires, total level requires you to take it to rehabilitate the drug user.

That's that.

It's not rehabilitate the drug user.

To treat them.

to treat the drug users, to treat the drug addicts, the victims, the drug victims.

Now you're talking, see, it's expanding the other way.

Coordinating the national action.

Well, that's what I'm saying.

Coordinating the national action.

It's being all out, World War I now, is coordinating the national action.

Now, if you're not just the boss, you're just the backer.

You know, it's a curious little thing, a small pattern, a wedding thing, a little wine that came through, like this little tent, which I had thought a little about before when I said that a gentle rain caresses a wedding.

Did you notice that was picked up all over?

Did you notice that all over again, enormous, everybody would remember that, a gentle rain caresses a wedding.

And apparently you said it also in the receiving line to somebody.

Yeah.

Is that right?

Someone said, isn't it too bad that it rained?

And you said, oh no, the general rain caressed it.

That's where it probably hit you, that the general rain caresses the weather.

But it isn't that I, it isn't that, I suppose it's because I'm more exposed to this than I think politically.

Come up with it.

I just don't think we're coming up with stuff with it.

I don't think so.

that is bites, bites, bites.

You're dealing with an area where you have basically the real problem is focus, focus, focus.

It is focus on two or three things.

I get back to what John's concerned about the fact that he talks to the press guys and he's absolutely right that the president is preoccupied with border policy.

And you know that's three times as much time spent on these other things.

I spend all the time, I talk to these people, I work my butt off on these meetings.

It is, I thought, people don't give a shit.

They don't care.

And another thing is,

Did it occur to you that in that list of galloping, the revenue sharing didn't show up?

That reorganization didn't show up?

Of course, that's what's the most important problem chasing a nation.

I want a new goal.

I want to listen to things and say, what do you consider the most important?

Vietnam War, Mideast, disarmament.

Don't say the troll armaments of nuclear.

Just say disarmament.

Welfare reforms.

Health costs.

Better education.

High taxes.

And put it around the sharing just so that we'll have it there.

Air and water pollution put in.

Crime.

Drugs.

Now, just list those.

Will you do that?

And if that's going to...

Uh-huh.

Which do you think is being the most important issue?

I'll put that on the chart at 10.

Uh, I thought the pollster could do that, but the people that go down there and they can say what I consider number one, I don't see a lot of people come up with how many pick up this, that, or the other one, not this.

But listen, listen.

Pick the first three.

Let each of them pick three.

See?

But you have to go down through 10.

It'll take too long.

But when you name the three, when you name the most important issues, what are the three most important issues on each 10?

How would that be?

or do you want to take it forward yeah then you've got to get to there's another thing we've been talking about that's looking at that's that's that's one play but when you say it's most important then you've also got to get to what do you want what do you think what do you think

But it's also, you need to get to some measure of intensity.

In other words, so they say pollution is the third most important thing.

But do they feel, it's like, you get to that, some of you know, measure it against the cost, or against that versus other things.

Like, when people say you've got to clean up the Potomac, and you say you want to spend $6 billion to clean up the Potomac.

I take a poll, not before car signs, but whenever I speak to a large group.

I take a poll by the reaction to what the hell I say.

And I can tell what they're listening to.

And I can tell what they're living in the relationship.

Now, what John is concerned about, and we keep doing the same thing,

that we all, and everybody in this shop, except perhaps for a few of the politicians who would say that all are concerned about the fact, well, the people ought to be concerned about this issue.

We've got to make it.

That doesn't mean we can't make an issue about that.

We've been able to make an issue.

But my point is,

Generally speaking, you cannot talk to them to turn out wrong.

Is making an issue principally a function of the out rather than the in?

You're damn right.

Except for this, that we ought to make the issue of dignity.

We ought to make the issue of we're a leader.

We ought to make the issue of boldness and courage, leadership.

Those things we can manage.

I mean, there is...

Would you mind having the police go to the pollsters and say, why don't you try to carousel this one for a change?

Why don't you try again?

The board?

I mean, we've got to get him on our company and say, we'd just like to know what the hell people are thinking of, what do they consider to be.

It has to be something.

Put race on there.

Put race.

Race relations.

See, if you say race relations, they rate it high.

If you say integration of the suburbs,

and desegregation of the schools.

You get a different thought.

I'll put it on that one.

Integration of the suburbs.

No, integration of housing.

Why don't you put it that way?

Okay.

Housing integration and desegregation of schools.

Desegregation of schools.

Those are fair.

Did you wonder how to curl handles in this room?

Yeah.

How to curl handles in this room.

Okay.

Well, if I do, uh, I won't say it, I'll tell you.

We got, that's not going here.

Uh, we're gonna get it.

He wanted John, so I don't want him to get into it again.

I don't give a shit about the law.

I stand here.

I forget the law.

And that picture was the law.

I lose the law.

I can barely even lose the case.

I pound home the best times.

It's on terror.

Terror for the country.

Case law, you know.

That's a big thing.

And it's true.

It's just damn true.