Nixon, Haldeman & Bull on Pentagon Papers and China initiative

Transcript (AI-generated)

This transcript is incomplete. The transcription skipped stretches of speech — roughly 7 minutes of this recording (about 27% of it) is represented by only a few words. Listen to the audio rather than relying on the text below; a corrected transcript is queued.

This transcript was generated automatically by AI (WhisperX) and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Names and numbers are often wrong; speakers are not identified. Do not cite it as authoritative — verify against the audio and the finding aid.

Download transcript (.txt) · JSON data

Click a timestamp to play from that point; the page address then links to that moment (e.g. #t=125).

This is terrible.

that Buckley seemed to think it was funny when he was at the press meeting with the press.

You know, he had a smile on his face.

See, they got completely caught up in it.

Oh, hell yeah.

Even the Justice Department, the Justice Department announced that they probably wouldn't have to investigate it.

Yeah.

No.

But Bucky struck and said, well, this is a perfectly valid thing to assume that they have those weird weapons and one wants to assume that they have some plan for using them.

But it wouldn't make it to begin with.

Not the intensity, no.

But Bucky said, yeah, he planned it.

It's his idea.

But Bucky said, Bucky's doing exactly the right thing with these bastards, these hoes, these scootsies.

You know, he'll laugh in there and say he's a top secret and all that bullshit.

Croc had his eye on him.

Oh yeah, because they were taken in by the police.

They believed that all these, that this was, and they were then sent to the border.

It was not any terrible thing that these people were planning to do this and all that stuff.

But now they look like they're attacking Buckface, but now they're attacking Buckface.

Well, that's the point.

That's part of what he was after.

He dropped his story like this, and I just think it's crazy.

I feel all that.

He was supposed to be right on the same page.

That's right.

Yeah.

I don't know.

We'll speed up the debate on the campaign reform.

If the lock is brought through before the recess.

And the campaign reform thing, our people behind the scenes are apparently, they feel here about a man's job to come up with what we want in both versions, so we can take whatever comes out and be happy with it.

They don't really give it in how it comes out.

Yeah, yeah.

And Henry's doing his congressional house guys today.

McGregor, it's interesting, he went to the Divine Group deal last night, their regular meeting, and he was invited, or he had somebody else from here.

And he said that they were very, it was the most positive meeting he's ever been to with that group, and that 11 of them, during the course of the meeting, spoke out strongly in favor of the President's trip to China.

The President of China did that.

He spoke out against it.

One of them, however, was Crane, who he's rated as against, but actually Crane has related favors.

And that's a proof of the law of Crane.

Crane has Crane here.

Well, it would be significant in the sense of the mistreating what Crane said.

Because the only thing Crane said was how good he was trying to get the President to take care of the Crane Act and the security measures to protect his lives in China.

And Crane said that isn't the problem.

The problem is there are other people taking care of the security measures to protect their own lives when they go to Taiwan.

And that's what we have to understand.

Is that it?

Well, he was more of a kidding.

He was partially true, and he was making the point that our people are going to be mad at us for the Taiwanese, not the Chinese.

So it's tough in regards to that.

Well, the point is that they're active with a surprise suit to be as apparently favorable as it was.

Because that's the hard core of the

Well, these guys, after their initial reaction,

Yep.

And so forth.

And the real, I would say,

And how do they handle what happens next?

And I think that's what I'm learning.

Who is also invited on that.

We don't give a goddamn about that.

You see, it doesn't make any difference about jackasses.

What happened was that that was a Japanese invitation for a meeting that they suggested they make a three-way meeting with Japan, China, and America.

That was turned down, so now they're seeking to do two bilateral meetings, one with Japan and one with China.

i would think that would be a good thing for tax to do for visibility for itself well right now

Pentagon papers, to the extent that they are divisive with the Democrats, that tends to be blunt as people begin to say, well, we're all together on a peace issue.

You remember after the October speaker, the thing that I mentioned last year, which we, everybody was saying, isn't it just great that now the country's no longer divided?

Well, that's why you read it after you're not working on that political thing.

We want the Democrats to be divided about the peace issue.

We want the Pentagon Papers to divide it and so forth.

Now, as we pull the war issue out, you know, and get people warping around and around about China,

Why do you guys still keep the pride in on that?

Do you know what I mean?

Yep.

Well, I talked to Henry about this.

It took very important to keep them fighting about these things.

Keep that going.

And also, not to allow them to get all focused on that.

This is why, as I say, you know, the deep glories I've been trying to get you in, it goes on and on and on and on.

We must not let these bastards back.

Now, we agree on this one and what they did, and it's got to be their reward and our peace.

Now, uh, it's a... You won't find that around.

I mean, it's, you know, you've got this problem.

Yeah, everybody says it.

I think they do.

And I think what we've got to do at this time is we need a big move after the China.

The big bill sort of comes down to will in the next week or so.

That means a big news

type of thing that puts the focus back on the Pentagon Papers.

It gives us another email to reboot yourself from that.

Now we've got to get this back in there and keep the money on that.

That's right.

And, uh, we've been doing it for a while.

And I think we're going to have to deal with those stuff.

Don't worry.

I think that was the time.

I don't know.

Maybe over there.

I don't know.

We've got, we've held up on that, on the Ellsberg case now.

We've got all of their games and stuff on there.

We're going to have to get the concerned parties together next week because we're starting to drive feet against business where the FBI won't give any information to the Defense Department.

He's still staying in the news.

We've got to, I don't know how you get the Democrats back at the debate.

That's what we've got to figure out.

So, he must have had a lot of potential.

There's a lot of potential, like, you know, that there's a number of companies where we got the Democratic candidate from Brian's.

I'm sure he did.

They had a meeting.

They had a meeting and said, look, the crisis, don't argue about these papers, or anything else.

Are you sure?

and co-priming him, because he obscured him, and that makes all kinds of good things.

On the other hand, if we can just get some attacks going, they compulsively have to respond to them.

Maybe I can just start just tearing Hubert apart.

Hubert?

Not because you care about tearing Hubert apart, but because he's the one that you can get some focus on.

Yeah.

Except the whiskey washing.

The youth then turned on about it and I thought the letter you're in charge of had popped.

Yes, I didn't realize that.

I was interested in it.

I've had this young kid that he's got, he's spying on a guy with a crisis.

You can't put a kid like that in charge.

They look right along with this thing.

The letter's in charge of it.

The letter's falling out through a beautiful paper.

Now they've got a guy over there in the office.

They're like, don't.

Don't know what we have.

Well, I don't need something new.

You know what I mean?

I was thinking, I don't operate it.

There's just no ability to, I mean, this requires a command.

Plus, I part of realized that was what they were running the standards in for, right?

Who was the guy that ran the new thing at Bronx.

But Chuck says that he, you know, mentioned that last thing, and if we can solve this problem, we'll pull it out of it.

I don't know what the hell he said.

He's pushing himself.

And there becomes a real danger, when he sees he isn't getting attention, he's gonna, if he decides to do it either consciously or unconsciously, he's gonna start doing things that will get attention, and those will not be helpful.

And where he has got attention is where he gets off the line somewhere, not intentionally, but accidentally gets.

That's the best thing for me to do, is to survive in this.

Why, if you go to California or Mexico, it would be the best if you could.

I do think he ought to do what's best for him.

He ought to get out of here.

He ought to get out of the frustrating role of nothing that he's in.

He should not take the management job on him.

He should take something that gives him some stature.

Trouble.

But I mean, if he wants to be in politics, how do we do it?

How about sending him to Mexico and then pulling him out of there?

Say, come on, for two months of the campaign, the next week is.

Take Mexico for a year.

There's nothing to pray as an ambassador for many seasons.

Oh, man, I'm ready to resign.

I want to be devilish on it.

Hell, yeah.

That might help me a little bit.

Why do we have to resign?

Ain't never here.

If you did it right away, it wouldn't be bad.

I'm sure you'd not be spending much less than a year there, though.

The time.

Do you understand what I'm saying?

My concern about the decision, basically, that is the

Yeah.

Yes.

Absolutely.

We've got to really be careful where we're going to get right back to where we were and where we lost both crime and peace in 70.

Yes, sir, we do.

Because everybody just jumped us.

All of a sudden, they went away.

Well, just treating the same tactic as what we've done to them on the environment.

They lost the environment.

It's an issue.

We don't believe in it, but nobody knows we don't.

They don't believe in peace or crime either, but they killed the issue on us just by putting on their American flags for a couple months.

They really are.

And they brought them on us.

I know that the whole thing might have to wonder if somehow we've got to come out of this.

Maybe you could get on this business with us.

I mean, out of your PR people, I think they would call you here again.

Maybe for a break.

But I think you've got to say, how do you

How do we take the China thing and relate it back to other acts of leadership and forward to what we're doing?

In other words, to build it as the leadership, as our man in the leadership field.

You've got that, but you didn't even plan on it at all.

And you've got all your other, you know, all your things on the poles and so forth.

You've got to be present.

You're a lot of that away now.

But you're really coming down to it.

that you've heard in the polls, experience that and so forth and so on and so on?

Well, I was looking at the poll yesterday, in terms of China doing exactly what you're talking about, to see the direction, and it's fascinating that it, the China move, fits all of the weaknesses in a way, where it's the world statesman, or world leadership thing, the U.S. prestige abroad,

Which had been mine, people thought it had been mine.

I bet if you ask that question now, they said it soared up.

Or if you give them a couple weeks.

Uh, after the trip, it'll soar.

After the trip, it'll go up another day.

But it'll go up, I think it'll go up a chunk now because the big quarter of the morning press is so strongly out here.

And as I said, be sure, if I could say, to get out that big quarter.

What they say abroad about it.

Yeah.

What they're saying at home about it.

I want a really spectacular piece out of that.

$50,000 a piece.

Now, you can do that.

Spend $100,000 on it if it's necessary.

Get that gold letter on it or some bright ball.

You can do that.

I'm trying to set up my own media and TV work.

I don't know why.

I'm observing for now.

Anyway, Leonard is the right guy for you.

He's the one who has the deal for the daily news headlines type stuff.

Go ahead.

You see, there's the prestigious, but also the courage, the boldness, and strength by strength.

Those are all laying out.

And interestingly, you're getting to find that even those who've been...

that go the other way this what they're saying the general play is that the only man who's strong enough to be able to stand up to the challenge in other words you're getting the strength but not because you're doing the challenge but as reassurance that you are the right one to do the challenge yeah and people want it to be right you've got there's really a thing you've got going on that you haven't had on anything you've done

except the war you had it on the war but you lost it you'd get it and you'd lose it you got it on november 3rd everybody swung with you because they wanted you to be right and you sounded like you were sure what you were doing then cambodia kind of in some ways enforced in some ways hurt that a lot of us knocked it out all the other yeah

But on other things, on domestic stuff, nobody wanted you to be right on anything.

It takes all your domestic initiatives, this is almost inevitable, I guess, that you go in with your biggest one is welfare reform.

Nobody wants you to be right on it.

The right wing is against you because they don't want you to be on the welfare rolls.

The left wing sees you, they don't want you to be right on it.

You're not doing enough.

And the middle doesn't really care.

If you ask them directly, people are in favor of revenue sharing.

If you ask them, they care about revenue sharing.

If you have to define recognition, you wouldn't find 20% at all, do you?

The old folks.

Oh, it's a special interest issue.

I don't think so.

I mean, it's pretty awful.

It's awful hard for a person by my approach on it.

Because that's the welfare issue.

That's the welfare issue.

Maybe it would be a hell of a good move.

What are we doing?

Maybe we just want to get it done so that we can get it out of the way and come back next year with a pilot.

I think that you would get something.

But you've got to...

The best way to do that would be to get a bad bill vetoed so that it is a positive outcome.

You're part of the bill.

Now, the way I think we can do it is that they will screw it up and not pass it this session.

And I'm just going to have to make it next session.

I'll send you this venture that's been around and around and around.

So I'm going to have to get a different kind of bill, which means we're going to have a test program, pilot program.

Okay?

Then I'm done.

But anyway, we'll see what happens.

I don't give much credit for nothing.

But the people who are against it.

No, Reagan was part of the program.

Yeah.

Reagan was part of it.

He said, let's try it first and see whether or not that thing will work out.

If you do that, if you align with Reagan and go hand in hand with him on a bench or something like that, is that not how I would do it?

Yeah, that's what I mean.

Oh, hell yes.

I mean, everybody around there, I'm guessing.

I don't know.

That's all there is to it.

I'm just not sure how to report it.

And I think we're going to need to make some money out of it, I think.

I wrote a big problem, and it's one where I don't know how you can do it, but maybe there's a way for you to do something dramatic.

It's a bus incident.

And it just, that's a minus.

A lot of you will be turning to a plus.

It's a minus right now.

Yeah.

Because the court is viewed as your court, even though it's not.

But your people on the court went with it.

Yeah.

And it's, there's nobody in favor of us quite your purpose, except the do-gooders.

Well, why don't you ask somebody that's, you know, a legislative proposal or, you know, or something.

Constitutional legislative or something else.

I just said you've got to be against the goddamn thing.

I'm against it.

And, uh,

Well, you said you're against it.

Well, that's where your credibility problem comes up.

You say you're against busing, and yet your court orders it.

And to hell with whatever ATW they are.

They're not enforcing it.

They can read the keys.

They can read the keys very, very carefully and see what in the hell we can do.

Maybe we can put out some sort of an order which very strictly limits what they do.

It was more obvious.

Well, the really obvious thing would be for you to come back with a constitutional, if the court had said this, for you to come back with a constitutional amendment, with legislation in it, and you'd at least look like you were trying to fight the thing.

And all the black leaders, no, the black leaders wouldn't

Yeah, they would.

Black leaders would, but the black people, if you look at any of the local polls, I don't think it'll work.

Bryce is serious on his argument that you ought to take the opposite side of that.

And before, not before, let's say, in effect, make it as bad as you can in order to screw it up,

and others say that you you're opposed to us but i just can't see how you everybody's

But it won't help this argument because you're still busting the damn sound.

I know what they're concerned about is the busting more than they are schooling the noise.

Sure are.

Nixon, Haldeman & Bull on Pentagon Papers and China initiative

AI Summary

Audio

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Transcript (AI-generated)

Also recorded on July 22, 1971

Cite this conversation

Nixon, Haldeman & Bull on Pentagon Papers and China initiative

AI Summary

Audio

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Transcript (AI-generated)

Also recorded on July 22, 1971

Related conversations

Cite this conversation