On December 15, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon, H. R. ("Bob") Haldeman, Stephen B. Bull, Alexander P. Butterfield, Henry A. Kissinger, White House operator, Margaret Chase Smith, John B. Connally, Ronald L. Ziegler, John A. Scali, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, and unknown person(s) met in the Oval Office of the White House from 8:45 am to 11:30 am. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 638-004 of the White House Tapes.
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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.
Cigar.
Cigar.
Boy, it really is.
I had it.
Last night, I...
They did have that game, you know.
Yeah, no.
So I just... Did you watch the whole thing?
This is real.
What do you think?
Do you want to try to get out of here today?
Yeah, it is.
Oh, boy.
Oh, boy.
Oh, boy.
Oh, boy.
It's hard for us to even know it now, and it's coming through, you know, they're right.
If I go by wrong, the first story didn't get it.
The first story didn't get it.
Now, you're one of the great climbers.
I agree with both of you.
That's coming, that's coming very clearly.
I'm not going to say that because I've actually seen it in a dream and on the basis of it, obviously, both sides, well, Connie made that one.
Both sides had to get it in order to do, at the airport.
Great.
Did he?
And his little, you know, after you put him on there.
I like to put him on there.
But why didn't you carry him live?
I mean, not live, but, you know, on film, on camera.
And I like that.
Sure.
Sure.
But that's starting to come out.
I hope our role this morning starts on the enormous significance of this.
Yeah, because he's making it.
Yeah, and they're not.
The first play was to devalue the dogma.
It was the attack reaction.
Well, it devalued the dogma, which people hear first.
It's a goddamn thing.
It doesn't change anything except the cost of imported wine or something.
It's crazy.
I think it's very beautiful.
Oh, it's up there.
That looks great.
Is that the place, Mark, do you think?
There it is.
He designed it, had it made by, you know, Australian people, student people, and had it sent.
That's, that was Duke in many ways.
And of course, that has a, as you know, it has a press agency.
It's one of its kind.
Look at it from here, the way it is.
It's a work of art.
The inside star, isn't it?
It's something that should always be in the Bible.
In 1950s, you're going to see the seal of the covenant.
It shows how to live and live still.
I was going to put it here.
Then I thought it was just too, you know, it has too much of a, it's just too hard.
You don't get the purity of it unless you look at it from a different angle.
It's not going to be over that.
You've got it on one of the shelves.
while we can move it around.
But that seems to me to have been rather well.
We shouldn't have too much around here.
You might want to think of moving, putting some things like that on the shelves instead of the birds.
It's a change after the year.
Oh, let's see.
I think that's a bird.
I think that's a bird.
I think that's a bird.
I think that's a bird.
I think that's a bird.
It was in my 11th year.
How?
I always keep my...
It's very beautiful.
Oh, on the Today Show, on the CBS morning news, it must have had two-thirds of the hour.
People explaining, what does the evaluation mean?
The first clips were, you know, people didn't know because they were... What happened is the first story was run by wired, recorded type people who don't know what they're writing.
or a local desk, obviously, right?
Then you go immediately into the other stuff, and now it's carrying.
Other than the first little clip, and that wasn't bad, it just wasn't perceptive.
Now it's...
But now it's beautiful.
Everyone is explaining it means no increase in prices.
Or it means an increase in jobs.
They're all kind of on the point of this U.S. job.
Yeah, and an increase in jobs, and then the president...
Did you say that they did have a little bit of comedy now on the air?
Yes, they did.
Oh, yeah.
That's a good idea.
And CBS this morning had an interview with him.
Did they?
Yeah.
God damn, he's good to be on.
He is so good.
He knows it.
And the thing is that he is the one to have the interview because...
Uh, it's the old story.
Anything I say about it could irritate Papadu, the British, the Japanese, or the Germans.
But if he says it, they don't blame him.
No, the British, incidentally, Mr. President, are happy as clams.
Really?
Rolly Cromer, uh...
I understand, David.
You must be lying.
I called him, no, no, uh, they just want to get the damn thing settled.
And I called Cromer at 7.30 when he was going out for dinner.
to put some heat behind the Security Council resolution and he said he was delighted and I was so exhausted I went to bed at 9 30 and I remember he called me up and he said I just came back from dinner I want to tell you we are thrilled it's a statement I may tell him it's a statement like that of the President he said he's in New York he was in New York he couldn't tell him on the phone he said I don't care
exactly how you settled it, but it's a matrix on and on and on.
And he said, we've got to work together.
So I thought we'd pay a price with the British, but that isn't true.
If he isn't strong enough to do this, he cannot blame it on the fact that he's got to go along with the French and Americans.
He had to come out the same way.
If you had done it the other way, if you had done it with he, he couldn't have wielded it with the others.
He couldn't deliver the Germans and he couldn't deliver the Italians.
So he would have been out in left field as the American suits in Europe.
Because I talked to George Shultz this morning.
This is basically a great deal for us.
Shultz said if you didn't give convertibility...
We did it.
I went in with that column that claimed that Conway West, and that's when I told Conley to talk to Schultz, Friedrichs, and Peterson.
He's got to agree with Schultz, Peterson, and Burns on this.
He cannot tell Burns the numbers yet, because that would not be right.
But he can tell Peterson the numbers.
He can tell Schultz.
Schultz, yes.
I agreed with, Conley called me yesterday and suggested that I show Schultz the agreement.
Did you do that?
He's in the office now looking.
Yeah.
Well now, with the agreement, though, Schultz has got a note with five play of words.
It could also read the conversation.
He can see.
Well, Henry, you sat there with me, and you heard me say that, say to him, look, I don't know anything about this.
And you might tell him about where I said Hart and where you saw Kernsey.
Schultz had no political sense, Mr. President.
Schultz said to me, he hadn't read it yet.
I gave him a play where he said, marvelous agreement, very good.
The numbers, he thinks, are good.
The numbers, he thinks, are superb.
He said, on convertibility, we should have put into the agreement.
We'll never discuss it.
Well, that shows he has no political sense.
We did.
Yes, we did.
We had to have that in the agreement.
That was what we needed.
That only two couldn't have survived such an agreement in France.
We had a hard time surviving this.
That's what that son of a gun was working on for an hour.
We had the president to get a French president.
to make a monetary deal which doesn't give him controllability.
After all, he doesn't get it.
He doesn't even get the agreement to discuss it.
He said these things will be discussed in relation to everything else.
Hell, they have the right to put it on the agenda whether we agree to it or not.
So it's a totally meaningless thing.
Supposing you had said you don't want to discuss controllability, they would have put it on the agenda at every G10 meeting.
The thing that Scholz has got to realize is that I, as long as I'm in this place, will never discuss convertibility.
However, I cannot speak for whoever may be the next president.
Well, actually, Mr. President, if...
So that's it.
So Scholz has got his way.
He knows about convertibility.
Mr. President, even that I wouldn't be so sure about if the economy works the way you think.
But I'm just saying that in order to reassure Scholz just on the fact that you're president, you just...
What you did, Mr. President, is refer the issue into a future where it isn't going to arise for two years.
It was the absolute minimum from which you could get out of this.
He couldn't get any less.
And that you'll see after I explain it to him.
On the numbers, he says, superb, excellent.
He says, very, very good agreement.
Yes, but we now have the French for the first time agreeing.
Well, not only, at first they vetoed the procedure.
Now they've not only agreed to the procedure, but they've committed themselves in a gentleman's agreement to be helpful in the actual conduct of the negotiations.
And I think we're going to get something.
Oh, another thing.
in our French-American relations, would you send a message for me to come to just sort of say that the, as I'm sure you have, well, the pastor, but I'll let you say the pastor, say the pastor, and report your reaction in this country to the meetings.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So he doesn't get any impression.
You know, there were stories indicating a great French victory and so forth and so on, but we must, I don't think, that's just a... Joe Kraft called, just as you were coming in, he said,
He said, well, he was very interesting.
He called, he said, all the newspapers say that it was a great French victory, but to me it looks as if the President got almost everything he wanted.
Where am I wrong?
I said, you are not wrong, but what I prefer you to say is it was to everybody's benefit.
And
That's the way we have to play it.
The other interesting thing as we think about this when I catch the mythology is this is being built as being the Azores doctrine and the Guam doctrine.
Guam did it on political policy and Azores did it on economic policy.
And they're looking at it the same way.
Did you see Dan Rather this morning?
No.
I didn't see him.
Because he made exactly this point.
He said the president does all his great, his revolutionary things on islands.
So then somebody asked him, what's the relationship of Nixon-Darkshan to the ASO's effect?
He said, that's too deep for me, but it's very significant.
Well, but some of the columnists are writing, the editorials, making the point that this, the Azores Agreement has the same significance, same low significance in economic policy that the Guam document has.
Oh yeah, that's what he said.
He said he didn't know why.
Yeah, they don't understand it yet.
That's the interesting thing.
These guys are reporting.
They don't know what the hell it's all about.
That's a...
But the people that do, you see all of our relatives, right?
You know, the staff.
But that's important.
Well, he understands it.
I mean, he may not be friendly, but he is.
The market didn't respond to it at all.
But as I had said last night, I think the market's already discounted.
Well, it didn't affect the market a hell of a lot on timing anyway.
You know, you had a couple on block.
Yeah.
Let's wait till today when people have a trend.
When it boosts.
The term effect on the market will be more stabilizing in the long term.
In other words, it removes the negative energy.
That's really what it does.
And not a positive.
That's for sure.
It could go today, but that communicator, Mr. President, is almost incomprehensible.
Well, I don't know.
It was delivered.
And I suppose, probably when I did say much, remember, we agreed that all I went out and said, we've made very productive talks.
We've made very productive talks on the internationals.
And then our partners in the United States will...
Carter, he said the same thing.
That's what he wanted.
You notice he was very sensitive.
He didn't want it to be just that.
Well, that, and he was afraid it would blow his exchange market sky high.
Today, which is, of course, Conway's happy as a pig about it.
The dollar has dropped again in England and Italy, and it's gone way down in Japan, and so he's getting
It's beautiful that way.
When Pompidou had wanted to put it to us, and if he had made it as a straight commercial transaction, he would have said, we'll settle it at the G10 meeting.
That way he would have had the maximum pressure on us.
By settling now, the float is already taking care of most of the devaluation.
And... And...
In addition, he's committed, of course, to helping us at the T-10 meeting.
But...
Excuse me, what's the time today?
I talked to him last... Last night.
When he knew about the marks.
One of the... Well, then you feel, both of you, that I've been calling in here, and then he thinks I'll come to get him in with a cigarette and random kind of skeleton.
Remember, I told you last night, so we get them in position as to how to answer the questions in this field.
We're going to have common answers most, but I don't want everybody to battle on this, and I don't want the wrong people to battle.
Did you want me to end on that?
You mentioned that.
Yeah, we'll have everybody sit down.
I want you to comment on it first, see what he thinks is a good idea, and if he does, we'll bring you in then, because you'll know what the sensitivity is of Pompidou.
That's why I think it might be helpful if I know what Pompidou's sensitivity is.
But I think it worked.
Also, I have to say, it was such a pleasure to work with Connolly on this.
You know, he might have been sensitive.
Who am I to talk to Pope?
But we were up together until three.
He said that's it.
He understands the game.
He said it's the right thing to do.
He's got to win.
I told him the night before I didn't think of that.
I said, I want you to know.
I've been around the President now for two years.
I've never seen anyone in whom he has as much confidence as you.
And the reason he's asking me to do this is because he knows I don't know anything about the financial side and that I should put it on the political framework to get it off a straight commercial transaction.
But you give me my brief, and so we work together till three.
He said, the President is absolutely right.
I would, in fact, he recalled to me, he had recommended to you that somebody...
lay the groundwork for... Yeah, that's right, he did.
He wanted you to go to David Morgan.
That's right.
That's right.
I don't know if you're raising this, but probably another thought is the question of whether he has a session with some congressional people, which...
could be desirable.
We've got a pretty congressional reaction.
We ought to keep it that way.
Well, I'd like to... Well, that brings me to the point that I have, uh, as to, uh, do you think I'd better pass the trip?
No, I would...
I don't think you should pass your Florida trip, but I think if you do the congressional thing, Mr. President,
While Conley should do 90% of it, it would be sort of nice if you introduced it so that your leadership role is clear.
Yeah.
Introduce it.
Well, I wonder.
Conley can build a president as he does, build a president's leadership role, and, you know.
Yeah, but still it's better than his dad.
Well, the point is that the party could be done better than that if you don't do the congressional thing.
But I'm not so sure of this.
If you don't do the Congressional one, there's no reason to be here from the foreign policy point of view.
There certainly isn't.
This story is adequately played.
And it'll go on...
The story is adequately played.
You should do it.
You can't do anything.
How about India at the present time?
Look, what we got yesterday...
It didn't play the same as last night.
Yeah, except that I think we're moving towards an acceptance of the British resolution.
But actually now...
I haven't talked about it yet.
The Russians came in yesterday, giving us their own guarantee that there would be no attack on West Pakistan.
A letter to Brezhnev.
In addition, an explanation of the letter to Brezhnev saying, David, Soviet Union guarantees there will be no military action against West Pakistan.
So we are home.
Now it's done.
Just a question, what legal way did we choose?
Well, what the UN does is really irrelevant.
Well, the bastards, of course, have broken promises before.
It would be better to have it on public record.
But we might be able to do it in an exchange of letters between Brezhnev and you, that is, make public.
Which you say you express your concern, and he says he wants to assure you.
Well, what does that do now with the Chinese?
Oh, the Chinese would be sold if West Pakistan were guaranteed.
You get the, you feel you've got that, the concern about something cool off.
I think, Mr. President, that it was unintentional that it blew into such a fantastic thing.
And if you read the full report, you'll see that they... Well, it isn't that big, actually.
It's still a secondary story.
I think it has its advantages, Mr. President.
First of all, since we now know there'll be a settlement, you will get a major credit for it.
Second, it shows that you're not a politician, that you were willing to put the summit on the line when the peace was at stake.
Third, it is a caution to the Russians.
Fourth, it helps with the
with the injunctions, with the Chinese.
Hell, that fellow Barroso came babbling in here.
He said, can't you give me some reassurance?
I know President is terribly concerned when he reads this.
We need some words of reassurance.
And I'm a great believer in selling something you've already done.
So I turned to Haig.
I said, tell Ziegler to calm it down a little bit.
But you people should understand.
By that time, Ziegler had already agreed to calm it down.
And I told him, but the president has to understand you cannot play such a game with the president.
So I, and that's when he said, well, I've just had a cable to tell the president, we give him, this letter means that the Soviet government gives him the guarantee that there will be no attack on West Pakistan, no annexation of West Pakistan.
He said, no annexation of West Pakistan territory.
I said, no, don't play any legalistic games with me.
We consider...
the dividing line, the existing dividing line, and not disputed territory also can't be taken.
He said, yes, that's the guarantee.
So now it's just a question of how to formulate it.
It's a miracle.
It's an absolute miracle, Mr. President.
It's a miracle.
I think it's a good idea, but we have
Well, how are you?
I just wanted you to know that I was flying back from the Azar just today and I came in this morning and you had a birthday.
Happy birthday, but more happy returns on election day for you.
Are you Walter Reed?
Oh, I heard that when I called.
I hope everything's going all right.
Sounds good.
Very good.
Well, you certainly, let me say, you've been like a rock in America these last months.
It's been hard.
Have you sometimes wondered about how, on those, what our friends have made a side or two on these things?
You know, that contingency resolution and some of that stuff, we've really had to draw on it.
It's been very difficult, I know, for you and others who are trying to be responsible down there.
It's hard to know how that contingency resolution and everything.
It's really strange that they're playing that game, isn't it?
Yeah.
Yeah, that's right.
Everybody's hired.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, I appreciate what you've done.
You just take good care out there, and we'll look forward to seeing you after the first year.
Okay?
Okay.
Thank you.
I see.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mark.
Thank you.
He says you're doing a wonderful job.
If you had predicted, Mr. President, one of the aspects of your policy is that it always happens a matter of factly.
I mean, no one really saw all the maneuvering in the ASOS.
They all think that...
Yes, you know the funny thing.
I came back and saw the papers.
I saw the New York Times.
Lee started the day before.
Ted Schultz, of course, had something to say.
I know he has a picture of Pompidou and so forth, but Holbrook even fades.
They are based on nothing.
If you, in the middle of November, had said that by the middle of December you'd have the monetary crisis solved, essentially on our terms, which is really what it's come down to,
that the French gave up on convertibility, that they would hold still for, in effect, a 9% American devaluation.
And so on and so forth.
What we're getting is 14% of the Germans and 19% of the Japanese.
These are the things, Bob, that the average person comes down with.
God damn, that's tremendous.
What Congress is getting is his average around 12.
Almost.
He's almost there.
Mr. President, our own conventional wisdom when you stepped into this early in November was
I had bitter battles.
Everyone said, jump the French, work with the Germans.
Well, but once I have to say to Connolly's enormous credit, when you told me to start talking about this, I thought Connolly would be the trouble.
When I talked to him alone, explained the German domestic situation to him, and I said, I doubted that he could get an agreement, but if he did, it wouldn't stick.
From then on, he changed course completely and played your game.
And he's been terrific.
He's a political animal.
George Shultz's proposal, and I don't criticize him because as an economist, he was right.
But George, just to give you the figures, George said, let's get the Germans to stick at 10%.
That's what George was willing to settle for.
If we could get the Germans to settle at 10%, then we don't have to change the price of gold.
The French can stay.
We can say, the hell with the French.
This way, we got the French to where George wanted the Germans to be.
We got the Germans 5% higher and the Japs nearly at 20%.
And last year, as late as September,
when the Japanese finance minister came over here, Peterson's operation did a paper saying if we can get an 8% revaluation out of the Japanese that's doing well, 8%.
No, I'm just saying that on the figures you, what you got is, you got great figures.
But the thing that had always concerned me was
to do it in such a way that the political structure of the West would be strengthened rather than weakened.
And what we've brought up is the amazing thing that we've strengthened the political thing and gotten nearly our maximum figure.
I think one thing we could have done, which I, you know, I'm a consistent elector, I could have sold the party to the West.
written statement, to have written it in a way to say that the President of France, the President of the United States, have reached agreement on the international monetary silver.
You could.
I didn't want to say that horribly.
Now, that would have gotten some more positive leadership.
No, but, Mr. President, that would have cooked you and him with the others because we have...
I tried it out a little bit, but I think he was worried about... You see, what we talked about, remember when I said we couldn't have a frankly American condominium either more than we can have a Russian American condominium.
You see, Mr. President, there are some byproducts of this that won't be...
won't show up immediately.
For example, he has learned a lesson.
I'll guarantee you that he won't.
Oh, yes.
Because he is, after all, he is sucking around foam beetles.
But when the chips were down,
Pombidou had no business making any deal with you on any figure.
If Pombidou had played the European game properly, he would have said, thank you very much, Mr. President, I'm now going back to Europe.
I'll discuss it with my allies, and at the G10 meeting we'll present you a United States deal.
Because abroad, no matter what they do to you here abroad, you are the leading statesman in the world, Andy.
And his being able to come back, standing on a platform with you saying, in effect, we've reached agreement, his being able to come back, he could make the deal with the Americans and nobody else could.
I think it's a complicated deal.
I think we have the beauty of a good personal relation because of my going to New York.
Second, I'm going to Paris for the All-Star.
Second, in other words, we have better French-American relations than we've had since Eisenhower.
And they know you held that view before you became president.
The second thing is that I think Pompidou, frankly, wanted to be a big shot.
And now he's a big man and so forth.
Our setting, his meeting first, was very important.
I think, too, that the French, both Schumann and
But Papadu, too, you know, we're talking about the next American elections.
And whatever they may think here, you know, they say that they are very confident that we're going to win.
Very confident.
I said, well, I said, but Mr. Papadu is here.
He said, you don't have any political problems.
I've seen your Gallup poll.
It's a lot higher than mine.
And he laughed.
No, he said, there's no way.
But they both had drugs.
But what he said is not true.
And in this drum fire of criticism you're getting from the press, where even your best stories are given, imagine if Kennedy had done half of what you did, what orgasms the...
I mean, they report such things as Azores quite accurately.
It's pretty close to orgasms on this.
Give it a couple days and they figure out what they got there.
Yeah, but they don't keep it up.
The trend on the whole is it goes that way.
Well, it's a spectacular thing.
And the beauty of this...
I think you should.
Mr. President, there's nothing in my field that I... Well, you've got another two hot days next week.
Good morning.
Good morning.
I was in New York, but I asked you to come in and call me for permission.
getting your evaluations to how you would be our angle of balance with Lee.
And after you decide what we want, I then thought that we would call Sigler and Scali so that you would tell them exactly what line you want to put out.
Now understand, my instructions to them up to this point have been
except what you told them to do on the airline.
I said, now look here, all questions with regard to the monetary thing are referred to the secretary, so that you take it.
I said, no, same.
Now on the other hand,
to the extent that you want to use them for purposes of feeding any line out, or not having any line, you can do it.
That's what I wanted to say.
So what I'd like to say to get a feel now as to how the story has run, Bob, things have run very well after the first of those few things.
There was a first blip that was confused because it was written by water service people didn't understand what they were talking about.
But as it starts to pick up now, it's being played, first of all, as a, as a monumental accomplishment and it's being put in the context of the Guam Doctrine was the political world's position and the Azores... Did you see that?
Yes, yes, the, uh, water service...
This morning he said, he said this and then somebody said, alright, what does it mean?
And so it's, he said, that's the deed for me, but I have to tell you, it's a monumental achievement.
But that, you're on, it's turning, probably, and all the economists, as they start writing, the whole Barbro, it's the people who understand what's been done, are writing it as being, you know, enormously significant, and to our benefit.
The play now is clarifying completely.
There was a little blip of devaluing the dollar, you know, what's, my money's not worth the
That's shifted now.
That has no real domestic... Did you say that he covered that at the airport and it was covered?
That wasn't at the airport.
He covered it.
Covered it there and also... No, he gave it in the...
They carried you live.
I'm not live, but on film, on the airport.
In fact, on the network.
He had a very...
The illuminating thing with Levine.
Well, I had an interview with Levine.
See, they set this up while I left.
I regretted it when I got back.
But it turned out beautifully.
Where did you do it?
In my office when I got in.
I said, where the hell did you do the interview?
That was it.
That's great.
They are, for example, that's the price for Toyota is going up.
They were trying to get the impression that this means a rise in prices.
We hope that what it means is to find more American products which aren't going to be affected by it.
In fact, the idea of more jobs for American Russians, that's coming through.
What is that?
I think we ought to change the two baselines I think we ought to pursue, Mr. President.
First, we ought to encourage them to go back to their European position.
All they were willing to do was let us be very even 5%, 5, 5, 5.
We haven't given yet, but even the stories now are talking about 5 to 7.
Let them play that.
Let them play that without revealing what we actually got.
So when the facts do come out, that is a major achievement for you.
and there's a phrase that's up all over the place, the hard line that the European community took on trade, we're going to get nothing, we're going to get nothing.
And yet, as a result of your meeting yesterday, you're not going to the last meeting of option.
Well, I take it, if I could add, one, we already have made progress on burger and cherry at the last meeting.
Second...
Secondly, we have now opened the way for major progress on trade with the European community.
And third, we have enormously improved the competitive position of American goods in the world markets, and that means more jobs in America.
And finally, it does not mean that your dollar at the end of Christmas season is going to buy a bit less now than it did before.
Now, those things can be... Are those true?
Absolutely.
It's not true to want to say absolutely.
It's a lot harder to do it cheaply.
It's a lot harder because we want to buy this up.
Did you point to 90% of what Americans buy?
Somebody did.
If it came in to think that 90% of what Americans buy are made and produced in America, well, you know, Paul, I don't know.
The only thing that we should be a little careful about, both for tactical, short-term reasons,
is to probe too much about a victory.
I think because they have the best line to take is that a good system is one in which everybody gains.
I think that as far as it's concerned, this is a deal that is very much in U.S. interest.
And in that sense, certainly...
How hard was it in the interests of our trading partners abroad?
Because that's hard, because it would not be in our hands.
in an unstable situation that would lead to recession abroad.
This has been a very great member of the recession talk.
We have stopped that, and it will create stability abroad, and by reason of that, it will mean better and more trade in the future, you know, some of that sort of thing.
Incidentally, John, I don't know, you probably haven't had a chance to talk to him yet.
I was talking to Cromer last night,
about the Security Council thing, which I told you they're pushing a resolution that we want.
And he said, I said, I hope the reason we had to do this, and you understood why we had to do this, he said, understand how we are happy.
We wanted this thing settled.
And he said, we wanted it settled.
They're not mad.
They couldn't do it.
If they had done it with us, the French would have screamed bloody murder.
It seems to me, John, that...
I usually assume the French are going to tell him, but I'm not sure of John.
I thought he would tell him from an honorable man.
And I think you should tell him, though, that he's the only one that knows.
But would you mind doing that?
You can call him.
He won't be in until noon.
Whatever it is.
But if you could call him, and then you could say that you were talking to me this morning, and then people get it.
Say, now look here, you know we're going to have this meeting.
The President feels it.
that we do have a special relation, and here it is, and we've got to fight for this and that.
All right.
One thing that disturbed me a little bit, and I don't think it's all that important, but Schiller was quoted in a paper this morning.
They say that he did not think that we could probably work it out during the G-10 meeting this weekend, that it would probably take one more meeting, but that I had anticipated that in the wrong meeting by saying that it might be necessary.
This indicates that Brock is...
It only means that Brock will want to get...
The credit will be... See, Brundage... Brundage...
Sorry, I got a Nobel Prize.
But Brundage and Schiller have the same relationship, yes.
Yeah, all right.
I'll be doing it.
I'll be doing it.
I'll be doing it.
The problem may be, Schiller is a doctrinaire professor, and he may have some chart that proves that he can only do three and a half percent of something.
When you meet Brandt, I'll guarantee you that Brandt is a jellyfish, and you'll get from Brandt whatever John tells you you've got to get.
Because Brown told me that he would take 6%, didn't he?
Yeah.
Well, I don't think we can, I don't think the Germans would be involved.
There is a disposition on Royce's part and perhaps some others in the Congress can give you the authority to change the price.
in this section.
In other words, to move down into it.
Well, you've got to signal that on or off or stay out of it.
And that relates to one other thing, John, while you're commentating about that.
McGregor raised the point this morning
He said some of the boys down there called us to the Congress.
He still snagged us out of here.
That, uh, you're giving them a little briefing.
Uh, we don't do that.
Uh, you, you, you should have a positive attitude there.
You've got to hold it to the likes of them.
We ought to give them a briefing today.
But before you do that, you, you better decide whether you want to get this legislation announced.
You've got the Royce Javits.
How the hell have they got it to you?
Because they think they can't.
Well, maybe you'd better do it now before they get their breath.
It really takes a while.
It does, too.
Because everybody assumes that you've got this power that you've already made the move.
It'll be interpreted worldwide that you've already made the move.
You've given them the dollar.
And this has been a tremendous weapon we've held.
I agree that what's at stake is discretionary.
Well, that's what I'm talking about.
That is discretionary.
What is discretionary?
It's the authority to devalue up to 10%.
But what it takes away from you is the argument that John made, and which I believe you made, which is that Congress won't vote the authority unless you have a good deal.
Unless we have some trade matters.
And you've got to remember, we haven't got the trade matters yet.
I think we can get them if we'll hold firm, if we can get some good ones, if they're there, if you can get that written into it.
But when you start playing with it, then you've got a problem.
You've got to build.
You've got to build.
It's impossible.
It's built in variability.
This region might be a problem.
Forrest is the opposite.
And also, Pompidou said, the Congress cannot agree.
Here's the problem.
I see your point.
The Congress then...
I see what they want.
They want to see him in the play.
They would like to get in and indicate to us what we should negotiate.
We must make the deal and go to them and say, now you approve.
Well, no, that's not the bill.
Because that's what would happen if you wanted any bargaining points worked into the bill.
If you wanted clean, you could probably make that.
You could probably get a simple resolution of authority to the president.
But that means you're 20%.
That means you will lose the possibility of hiding behind Congress.
You will be the fellow who either says yes or no.
As it is now, both you and John Hughes very effectively liaise with the argument.
If we don't get a trade deal, Congress will never vote it.
This way they'll have voted it and you will have to say.
Nobody thinks you'll have any problem with the next session meeting.
Let me suggest this, John.
To get the congressional thing out of the way.
It seems to me that we should do that immediately, because they're barking around down there.
If you would like, sir, we've got the ranking members of banking and currency.
Is this banking and currency?
Yes, sir.
The ranking members of banking and currency.
There's no other... You don't have to have foreign currencies.
I would say we probably ought to include financial ways to meet.
Paul Volcker is a great...
great for them, but they're better meant to.
But it probably won't include any ways of naming his ranking members, because this is all appropriations.
The only reason you need to have them is they're a good man.
Well, don't have them if you haven't, sir.
But no, I don't know later if you can tell when they're in here.
In fact, they're up without him, right?
Yeah, obviously.
And you like the big five, right?
The big five, the speaker center.
Now, if that's the means of your approval, John, we try to aim for that at 11 o'clock today.
Yes, sir.
I guess we're an hour and 15 minutes, if we'd like to give him a brief time.
And do you want to raise, do you want to?
Yes.
Oh, I think I want to.
When I don't want to talk, what I will do, I'll open it up with a very, very brief statement, John.
And then I think I will, I'm going to let you, because I am not, I'm not going to do nothing.
Well, all right.
But let me, first, if I may suggest, why don't you open it up?
I'm just going to say it now.
We need to play it.
This, as far as we know...
before August the 15th, we had discussed all these possibilities when we were talking about convertibility and closing the goal and non-convertibility to the dollar.
We anticipated a great deal of what's happened since that time, and I have asked John to go to these meetings, realizing that we were, in effect, pitting ourselves against all the other nations of the world because we were asking something.
We have taken a very hard line, and frankly, fellows, I think it's paid off.
And now we have an agreement.
It's an agreement that is very much in our interest.
I'd like to be honest with you.
That's what I was going to do.
Then we can go on all the details.
But I think you ought to take credit because you were entitled to credit for all of the discussions, Mr. President.
If you recall, we had in June and July about this convertibility point with me.
We've been talking about these recessions and depressions and
and what it would do to world trade, and we discussed this in this office, we discussed it at Camp David, what convertibility meant.
You remember Arthur Burns was talking about, oh God, if you suspend convertibility, we'll have a depression, there'll be chaos in the international markets.
Different ones were predicting that there'd be a 300-point drop in the stock exchange in a matter of almost hours, if not days.
These were all the things that went into
It's your basic decision to suspend an infertility in the first place.
Second question, I'll make some of that, but I wish you would make it.
It's a little bit pumping for me to say so you can go on and say that.
I can see where you're getting at.
I don't want to sit there and they'll say, well, the president's bragging about what he's accomplished.
But I'll lay the thing.
We had a terrible problem there.
We negotiated.
And I'll play it to you in terms of why you recommend it and how tough.
And I said, people have said you've been too tough and so forth.
But now I know that we have a good agreement.
Now, with regard to Erwin's staff here, would it not be well, and by the way, he was supposed to have Peterson present, but he should be here.
Oh, yeah.
Would I not also have Schultz, McCracken, and Stein, both McCracken scientists on the street?
Well, I'd have all three of them.
And I'd have the other by all directors.
Now, does that cover your statement?
We don't want it too big, you know, because we've got San Henry, of course, you should be here.
Now, the other problem is should we have the state people?
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
The difficulty is if we have the state people, then we've got to do the foreign affairs, and that's full-time.
And that would bother me.
I think...
I don't think we better, and also the difficulty is they're likely to get into India-Pakistan or something like that, and I don't want to get this confused with India-Pakistan.
No, we better not have a state.
I think we just ought to say that we're...
other issues other issues at this point
Incidentally, I have a thought.
How would it be to let Samuels come over and just listen?
And I think also that, from your standpoint, let Volker come.
Well, I think that's, yeah.
It's just, you know what I mean?
These are guys who work.
And you can tell Bob, the way you can tell Bob, how you can tell Bill, is to send Samuels to come to do the audit, you know, recover to the State Department so he can be there, and so forth.
You see what I'm, I just, well, I think, you know, I'm going to open this up to state issues.
We're going to be, it'll go right down the tube.
Sam has come in, and he can report the bill, and their representatives, and instead of on our side, too, Senator Scott, I should be there to listen.
If Bill Everett is here in town, and he probably is, he's probably going to be here.
By all means.
By all means.
Right.
And we ought to put out a directive this morning in a gentle way that all public statements
And how do we refer to John?
You will.
You prepare that directly in the house for my signatures.
Because when these fellows start traveling over at State, they'll, especially on trade, those guys, they all want to do that.
Bob, John, Bob, before you, before you absolutely set the meeting call Mike.
and have them call my car and see if that's okay.
In other words, you can't come to them and invite them and they say, well, you should have consulted us.
See what I mean?
And then down the line, we don't care whether they've all come or not.
What can you say?
I think it's essential, Mr. President.
I've seen now enough of these negotiations.
And there's got to be one central focus for quarterbacking.
But that means also statements.
They should just say, refer any questions to Treasury.
We will refer any questions to Treasury out of my office.
Because while we have a good agreement, there are a lot of nuances where it can fall apart.
We've got to drive a hard bargain on trade and other things.
And these guys' instinct...
is to be the spokesman for the other side.
And also, their thing is to try to reassert the press on the press's prejudices, which will screw us.
I mean, I just don't want to have a question about that.
In fact, I don't want to state that.
There's a great deal of trade, Mr. President.
People say in the national tobacco industry $150 million a year.
We break this sister's thing, and we've got both of those properties.
Only to agree informally with me, he said, I understand.
California, tobacco in Virginia.
That he said,
grain, he said, was tough for them.
And above all, tough for the Germans.
But I think we get the French.
The one thing we have to avoid is to get news stories out saying Pompidou was defeated.
Because we need his help.
If John hadn't been the heavy for three months,
you wouldn't have gotten a damn thing out of these things.
Well, the president's held firm in the face of a hell of a lot of pressure, a lot of criticism, and I think you ought to take credit for it this morning.
But we shouldn't let the steam out of the valve now.
That's right.
That's why you should do either... We're not through by a long shot.
Our tendency is to overact on the thing, and soon it will... John, one thing I was trying to say...
When is your meeting tomorrow?
Friday.
Well, I'll meet with Schiller tomorrow at 9.30.
Oh, that's right.
Well, I can call him on the phone, but see, I'll have to call him in the morning.
John, John, John, call him on the phone.
You don't know by whom.
By the name of it.
So that if you don't have to have it today, if you can wait until happy mid-breakfast with it, you can find it anytime.
And we haven't had a stand on too far.
James Gilpatrick, John, has a problem with the child care of my new center people.
Give me a quote of the day, sir.
Would you like for us to send you to the new center?
No, no, no.
I want to go to the new center.
You can't.
The part is, I'm saying, you'll see what I mean.
It's funny.
They start as a country, and then they become more sane.
I go all the time.
The, uh...
at the time they were interviewing me on the story.
I said, look, if I got up in the morning and started the day to read the books, I could never get through the day.
So I said, I'll just read a quick news story.
I said, I've got to deal with the country.
I've got to read what they're writing in Dallas, Chicago, and the Washington Post, and I get a better balance picture.
James, go back there.
Imagine, if you please, a casserole composed of yesterday's spaghetti and Tuesday's duck overhatch, to which a hundred hopeful cooks, bursting with good intentions, had added a smattering of spinach, pickled beets, eggplant, avocado, cream cheese, Cajun maple syrup, malted milk, hard cider sauerkraut, coleslaw, gravenuts, two cans of motor oil, and with any topping, garnished with raw politics, or garnished with crocodile tears, this was the soggy mess deposited in the President's desk.
There's an addiction to a strong stomach, but this was too much.
On the other hand, John can use, in other words, use what basically
to put out.
Ziegler and Scali, our good soldiers, will do exactly what you say.
So whenever you want anything put out, you give them a call.
Say, look, bleep this out or that.
Because we want you to use them just like I would use them.
Well, I think, too, there's another thought that we've got some tough marketing ahead of us that we also need to be out there in some of these stores.
But the main thing we need to do, I think, is to translate this whole thing in terms of jobs.
And we've got to get a very simple way to describe it.
We've got to say, well, it's kind of like a store that's just been, of course, it's like a family that's just been buying and buying and buying more than this.
And finally they had to turn it around and they had to start selling something.
Actually, some of the things you said this morning on that NBC thing that I saw this morning, put it in very simple terms.
The one thing we have to be careful about is, we were talking about it on the plane yesterday, John, is to get some of our theoretical economists from going around saying no convertibility ever.
It's
That's our option, but if the French read this, that's a humiliation.
No, sir.
No, sir.
We've got to have it.
If you understand what we've got to say, look, we don't know what John Conway's and the President's view is on this subject, George, but for God's sake, don't say it, because...
And we, we must not, we must not, uh, embarrass ourselves.
He was at me again this morning.
He said he agreed to put it into the contract.
We'll never discuss convertibility.
You can't put... We wouldn't have him.
Well, we would not have him.
Irving Levine asked me the question last night.
He said, does this mean that we'll never go back to convertibility?
I said, Irving, never.
It's a long, long time.
But I'll tell you this, we're not moving.
We're in good shape on this with Trump, even on that answer.
Because I said, I said, Mr. President, I do not see in the future, in the foreseeable future, I do not see a time when we can even go back comparatively.
So it's a, do you remember when I said that to him?
So you made the distinction between hard and soft.
Hard and soft.
You know, I'm doing a great job.
All you agreed with him.
Supposing we said we won't agree to it, he can always put it on the agenda of meetings.
He can force us to discuss it, which is all we agreed to do.
That's all we agreed to do.
When you're sitting there with nine countries facing you, they all bring it up.
What are you going to do?
That's right.
Knowing these things here, as you know, we now, we're all in agreement, but as you know, except for the trade features that you're able to negotiate there, while this, this revaluation of exchange rates is by far the biggest part of the package, it isn't going to help us for quite a while.
But now, therefore, we have got to broker this thing from a political standpoint.
I think to be brought to the standpoint of first, that we have initiated, it seems to me, a whole new system.
I mean, the leadership, the office that Dean initiated has succeeded on the anti-inflation front.
It's now succeeded on the international front, that far beyond our hopes and dreams.
And also, we have paved the way for success in the job market.
So our three-legged stool was beginning to come into shape.
I think, too, that the fact that this
is enormously important in America's leadership position in the world.
It helps create world stability.
We're a good partner and all that sort of thing.
And it helps us evolve.
But what I mean is, I want some good PR on this damn thing.
And the way it's gotta be, what I'm suggesting is,
I know your lips will be quite sealed because of this thing that's coming up, but don't let the other side dominate the dialogue.
I'd like you to talk as much as you can, because you understand, and you come on very well.
See what I'm getting at?
But one thing we need to do, Bob, and they can do this through something as far as we really understand this, is the United States, since World War II, has been the dominant
exceed to the European community as being the financial center of the world, whether in London or Paris or whatever.
But in the August 15th move, the President has asserted that he will not only retain, in effect, the political and military leadership of the world, but he's now asserting the United States leadership in the financial world or monetary world, which is true.
One of the writers
put their finger on it fairly well by simply saying that, you know, we thought the world would kick us around.
And they were critical of us.
And they now found that we said, OK.
We haven't had any exceptions.
We're not suspending the dollars.
And Europe woke up to the fact that, my God, what have we done?
They found that they couldn't get along.
We couldn't get along without them.
And these stories are our answer, because we've got to be very careful for the next two or three weeks.
Oh, absolutely.
To give them equal credit.
Oh, I will do that.
Because that's what's in it for whom we do the deed, the real statement.
You're making the real statement.
You're really trying to find a line after it gets locked up that you want to move over the next year, over the next year, over the next year.
Right now, I'm looking for jobs.
Right, that's right.
And the thing, we've got to assert what it means in terms of jobs, expansion at home, and more than that, we can't leave the impression that we're going to have enormous immediate effect.
Because the truth of the matter is, it's real.
I will not begin to really show for 18 months to two years, which puts us far beyond the election.
And this is why I have been insistent on trade, trade, trade, because it's the only thing we're going to get out of it that has any political impact.
Burden sharing and trade.
Burden sharing, I'm just going to pull out of there.
You can't do it before 11?
No.
Oh, 12 o'clock.
Can they do it at 12?
They can do it at 12.
Well, that's fine with us.
That's probably the best time.
Oh, wow.
That makes sense.
All right, let's go ahead.
Did you want to get the cigarette out of the gun at all?
Well, yes, but you better go to the circle.
John, tell me the kind of point you want me to get, sir, here to open this thing up.
Well, I think you just ought to, not in a possible manner, but you ought to take credit for something.
I'm just saying that we want to, we're beginning to see the unraveling of this thing.
And we want you to know that we have seriously concerned ourselves with the very problem that we have now, which is the problem
The time before, August the 15th, when we were talking here in June and July, we saw what was happening in the movement of money.
We were talking about this whole problem, the domestic as well as the international economic picture.
When we began to talk about suspending the convertibility of the dollar, we had to try to anticipate what was going to happen to the world market.
What effect would it have?
What could we come out with?
We didn't know for certain.
knew, however, that we were going to be confronting every one of our major trading partners.
We inevitably had to.
We had to improve our trading, our competitive position in order to provide the jobs at home.
So, inevitably, this put us in a primitive conflict with our trading partners.
And we have found this to be so now that, generally speaking, they all say, oh, yes, we'll help.
We'll cooperate.
We'll do this and do that.
But when you get right down to it, what we're talking about
And what we have been talking about is the economic vitality of every country involved, with jobs in Britain, jobs in France, jobs in Germany, jobs in the United States.
We've been talking about taking this from every American product that's sold in the world markets, and every other product that's sold in the United States markets.
So when you get right down to it, these countries forget all this special energy.
They're bargaining for their economic value, and that's what we've been bargaining for.
And we haven't necessarily had to be tough because we were aligned against the solid phalanx of these countries who had a common purpose, not to give us any more than they had to.
And we've taken a very hard line and a very tough line, and we're still taking it.
And this is not over.
We just met with France.
We've got eight other countries in this group to go.
We're going to try to get an agreement as soon as we can.
But even then, it's not over, because we're still talking trade with Japan, trade with Canada, and trade with the European community.
So we want you to understand what's involved.
We want you to know how we approach it.
We need your help.
We don't want this to be a political football.
It just can't be a political football.
We're not going to get any political advantage out of it.
If anything, then we'll get a disadvantage.
Because I'll be the president that devalued the dollar.
Well, I have to take that in order to try to improve our competitive position.
But let John tell you about some of these.
I think you can take off the value of the dollar because it goes up.
But I think you, because you have been involved in it so deeply and intimately, I think you ought to at least without boasting at all, just say that you've been considering this since before August of 50.
Yes, we've been considering it.
Well, we can say everything.
We've been doing that internationally for crises about every few months.
That's right.
And just say you all remember that.
The Germans floating there, they're demarked in May.
And the problem, the problem finally, the old system broke down.
And that was one of the reasons that we had to move, because we had an August 15th amendment.
The reason it didn't have a great public intent was because our wage and price controls and our tax things had more of a immediate impact on it.
But it has enormous implications for the future.
And as far as the dollar is concerned,
after his relationship with other currencies was completely out of kilter and we're getting our friends beaten up because other currencies were richly controlled and so forth and the dollar was carrying a major person with a great disadvantage in America.
We had to face up to these facts and we came into this tough bargaining.
Is that the way it was set up?
Yes.
And that's why the Secretary had to be very, very tough and he was all that.
He did that and I had my clothes supported him because we, you know, something like that.
I'm going to set up a little long match, you know, because we take a lot of heat for being tough so far.
I want to say, why do we have to be tough?
Well, you're talking to a friend of the audience, and I think you ought to say you've been tough, because these folks, they like that.
Right.
See, I can sell that about you, and then you say that you wouldn't.
With the meeting, he's coming around.
He sounds well.
Well, on this meeting with the leaders,
You've already, they said pretty good things, I understand the source of it.
I thought that we would have a picture on it.
It's a good follow-up story.
And you could say, well, Scali said it too.
But the general, the thing I can't emphasize too strongly, and I want you to force around here, is that there can be only one quarterback on this team.
It's a terribly, terribly sensitive thing, the way it's being interpreted and so forth.
The Secretary may have ideas as to when he wants to use the White House for this.
He may want to use you as a statement.
He may want to use the scholars on the list, or leave something out to our advantage.
But the point is, let's be sure, without bothering him too much, unless you have previous approval of what you said, that nothing is said
which is attributed to the White House, which he doesn't know about.
We operate pretty much on the basis of that.
Well, if you could do that, well, you know, that's right.
We're going to have a meeting, I believe it's 12 o'clock, and then we'll run down on this.
Without a question, we're going to do that.
It goes on and on in these negotiations.
But it is vitally important at this point that this story, which is going to be a long, long rainy story, that we get it out in the best possible context.
Our immediate problem over the next few days is to be sure that nothing is said which might jeopardize
And on the other hand, the Secretary will use the two
If, and when he sees fit, to pump out a line in case we want to.
I'd like you to watch the situation to see if the wrong line is getting out in order to correct that line.
And then let me just be sure that you're not bothering him too much.
at the present time.
Take a minute, John, to say what you said to me as to what you would like me to get out.
I think the point you made here that you said to us was basically take notes and use any of this that you want.
Understand what he's saying now, you can use.
How about, John, your various channels?
First, this triumvirate is beginning to take shape now.
First, we had the wage price freeze that shocked the inflation fund.
Secondly, the President had some major initiatives on the tax front, all of that, which I'm going to repeat.
That's that time, with the wage price freeze, the nine-page suit, you know, all that sort of thing.
Now, the third was on the international front.
It's beginning to gel.
It's beginning to take shape.
that the president's leadership in these three areas looks as if it's going to be a great success.
And it's one of the most sweet moves that any American president ever had to attack as many different problems.
And this was basically conceived and designed at the time of his pronouncements on August 15th.
That's what was embodied.
To have all three problems.
There's been a tendency by the revolution for many to interpret the economic policy as being solely an attempt to stop inflation.
Because that's right.
Now we've finally, finally, the broader picture reasserts itself again.
We have, this, the fight to stop inflation has succeeded, both days one and day two.
that God created through the gods, through the past, has now been signed into law, it will succeed.
And we believe in that.
A third, and one that is at least understood,
In the long run, the most important of all, the whole international monetary thing, we've enormously improved our economic position abroad.
And that, finally, is now the time to do all this.
That's exactly how it is.
Now, the next point we want to make is that devaluation has to be defined in terms of making American goods more competitive.
therefore creating more jobs in this country.
It ought to be interpreted in another way of saying, as a means of keeping jobs at home, or stopping exporting jobs.
That's what devaluation means to the average person.
We don't want to, we don't want to be caught up in this particular line that some writer with music disses.
It's like being sold.
The currency is a commodity.
And every country in the world fights to undervalue its currency because it simply means they don't sell anybody else.
That's what it means.
It means like the grocery store or the block that has the cheapest prices, if he has the same product, he's going to get the business.
And on that sort of, I mean, interruption, ever since World War II, the United States has been locked in place with regard to its currency, whereas other countries have been free to move up and down, revaluing all their currencies to help their situation.
Is that a correct statement?
That's correct.
Let's get the figures.
But I think there's other currencies of major trading measures have been backed
Their currency is burnt to the very last bit of pork, the first thing I'm talking about.
Sixty times, I believe, since World War II, that's a combined total devaluation, because all these countries want to try to get their currencies down.
Now, the order will go on to say that the dollar is not going to be undervalued.
We're trying to get it down to a point where it's somewhere near its value, because, in fact, it's been overvalued in terms of other currencies.
The next point we want to make is we really can't expect any great increase in trade for at least 18 months.
History has shown that the devaluation of currency around the world, it takes about 18 months to two years.
For the federal currency, I think, really, if I get a record, I would say long term, long term.
This not only was an indispensable move, but it is probably the most important one.
But short-term, it does not have immediate effects.
I wouldn't let them think that it's, I'd let them get, I'd give them a little support.
I mean, I would expect, for example, over the next few months, you're not gonna see something like that.
Long-term, it'll have dramatic effects.
That's right.
Now, there's another major point that I think needs to be made without boasting, and it ought not to come from the administration at all, but some writers and authors in the field ought to write an in-depth piece saying that no one's ever questioned that the
political and military leadership in the free world was in the United States to a major extent.
This move in the international field now has resulted in the president exercising a high degree of statewide leadership
That we can put out now.
I mean, that's a good one.
Also, in that case, John, you ought to, through your sources, pick up this line that he and some are using.
And in a sense, Senator, in a sense, though, there's similar principles that we help those around themselves.
And to prove this point, it's mutuality, basically.
It means that around the world, it means a more equal burden shared, basically.
He spelled this out that the President was advised by a great many people and who he has a high degree of confidence that it was in the national interest of the United States to contain the vote.
not go back to things like that.
And to take no responsibility.
And to take no responsibility, really, for other countries that they had, in fact, abused us, or they had used us, not abused us, but that they had used us economically, and that we really ought to be on the point of intervention, on the point of action in our approach.
As a matter of fact, the other satellite I know that I use, we have many problems with Dr. Burns,
reflecting the Europeans that this would lead not only to instability abroad, but possibly recession abroad.
That would not affect us now, but again, long term, it would be potentially very disastrous for the United States.
I wouldn't mention it.
I wouldn't mention it.
You haven't seen it.
No.
That shows them up.
But I, you know, we took his point of view.
Well, go ahead.
I wouldn't do it.
Well, a lot of Europeans said that, though.
That's what I'm talking about.
A lot of Europeans said, I just wouldn't give Dr. Burns specific credit, because he tends to draw a curve.
Like I said, these people want to say, well, do it by some other way.
You get them too close to home.
And I would simply say that the President made the decision on the basis of the responsibility and leadership which this nation has.
Sure, we've expended more in providing the security shield than perhaps is our fair share on a numerical basis.
Sure, we've expended more in terms of aid since World War II than our fair share on a dollar basis.
But what is freedom worth?
What is stability worth?
This world in which we live, it was to provide that basis for us to make this move in the monetary field.
So that you try to leave the states in the international monetary field as we have in the political and military field.
So that's my call.
There's one potential area of difficulty, and I found this particularly among the foreign reporters last night.
That is, that there's a tendency on the part of Europeans to see this as a victory for Pompidou as well.
Let's talk about that for a moment, because the more you talk about it as a victory over Pompidou, the more it is less evicted by President Nixon.
So I think we have to come up with a very subtle line here which does not offend the French, but which at the same time ensures the role that you have played, Mr. President.
This is what he's doing.
This is a very specific point.
Well, I would say that in the Azores,
So far as the price of the United States, no one won, no one lost.
This was not a bilateral negotiation.
It can't be that this was a bilateral negotiation, but the problem is what?
The lateral character.
We have yet to deal with the Germans and the Japanese and so forth.
And I would put it quite bluntly here that we considered the two presidents, Mr. and Mr. Johnson, at the outset, that anything we agreed to had to be
in the interests of both countries, or it could not be agreed to.
It would not be viable for each.
And this is very much in the interest of the Frank people.
And it's very much in our interest for different reasons.
But it's some of the same.
But we consider this very much in our interest.
And in that sense, we consider it a victory for us.
And John, I would love that.
posture of us as being in competition with Russia.
And the answer to it is this.
As far as we started out, it's been three things.
One, to increase our polarized percentage of burden sharing in military people.
We just got that in Russia.
They've contributed a billion dollars a year more than us.
That sounds like I got a lot of money in the air.
And the offset agreements
We've improved our prevention.
The offset agreement is perfect.
We can't go into that much detail, but the fact is that it was higher than the high position we had risen into ours.
Secondly, we are exceeding our expectations.
Secondly, we won't get a major real item.
That seems to be in the audience.
Thirdly, we wanted to get concessions from part of our trading partners around the world in trade matters.
And that is, we obviously are making tremendous progress.
I think the realignment of which was Morgan, which was basically, reflected the international realities, but was spared the American gospel.
Well, it worried me a little bit then.
I don't know what the hell.
This morning it doesn't seem to play quite that well.
And I don't think we want to get, let me put it this way, I don't think we want to, I think John's got a point, we must get down to the railing in the French.
We have a bigger game to play.
We've got heat coming next week.
And also, I think you might make something out of the fact that we're too big, we're big enough that we're not talking about coronavirus.
We're not trying to make petty points.
As I put it, the part where I was talking to John, I said that when we were talking about the numbers, I said, now we're going to reason it.
I said, no, I've got nothing.
But Boyle tells me he was getting right down to the Welch, you know, worth of a point and a half.
Well, hell, I didn't know whether it should be 40 points, so he had me right where the hair was short.
So I said, now, let me say a present.
I'm not going to fire you like a Lebanese drug merchant.
That's what you said, but I don't think he ought to put that on.
Oh, put that on.
Oh, no, no, Lebanese, Lebanese, we're not supposed to be here, except in our gallery, I'm sure.
And, oh no, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Our friend from U.B.I., he was born in 1911.
Didn't say it was an Egyptian governor.
Mr. President, let me also say that you agree with this.
That it's a victory for the French as far as the evaluation is concerned.
But a victory is in the eyes of the beholder.
To the French, gold is a major ideological hang-up.
To us, it's not.
To us, devaluation means that we make our American goods more competitive and we make more American jobs.
I think your first statement is better because I don't think we ought to keep a scorecard and say we want to, they want to.
It isn't a question of whether we do the history, it's whether the press and we have to be ready to count on God.
I think we ought to raise it one level above.
It's a victory for everybody.
The way, John, you had put it first was we set out to get three objectives.
We got those three objectives.
They were in our interest, but in the long term, we want to talk to the Franks from their side.
They got some things they set out to get, and they got those.
I put it that way.
And so when you say about victory, there ain't nothing separate.
It depends on what we do.
But the truth of the matter is...
It's an interest of both, but actually, let me tell you the truth.
We won.
It looks to me as if the French got doctrine and we got practice.
The French got theory.
Otherwise, they got nothing that I can teach them.
That's a little wound they can put out.
You know, they can write on it, but the fact is we got what we wanted.
If John isn't true, you know what, I'm just going to keep it.
When you talk about raising the price of gold, he said that was going to cost us a lot of money.
And then I was trying to think, well, how are you going to raise the price of gold?
And, of course, he pointed out that the price of gold in the world market is higher now than it is even to the point that we're preparing to raise it.
And then I said, well, look, Frenchmen own their own gold.
He said, well, yes, we can.
But then he came back to the point, well,
Tell me, why does he want to raise it then?
Well, he wants to raise it because the French have a hang-up on gold, and because individuals have about $4 billion.
But my point is, in the event that the world market is higher than what we're prepared to raise it to, how does our race, you know, oh, you mean it raises the floor, and therefore the ceiling will go up.
Is that what you want to say?
He was pulling my leg on that then, Henry.
No, he wasn't really.
To the French, it's an irrational thing.
The Frenchmen have been hoarding gold since the French Revolution.
That's right.
And they don't understand the difference between the world market and the governmental market.
All they know is what they've got in their mattresses.
One of the things is they never traded in.
One of the disadvantages the French government has is that they cannot get the gold out of their people, no matter what the price is, because they don't trust their currency.
They keep it in mattresses.
The peasants, right actually, the peasants since the French Revolution have been hoarding gold.
They won't put it in the bank.
What they've got is their gold they don't draw interest on.
It's one of the, it's a mad national psychology.
So as far as Pompidou is concerned, as long as his peasants think the price of gold is rising, and they don't know the goddamn thing.
So his election next year, it creates a good climate among his peasants.
Even though it doesn't mean a goddamn thing.
It isn't good political action.
What did you mean last night in the background?
where you said the French are not going to revalue in the traditional sense, but they will revalue... Well, on a relative basis.
On a relative basis.
We're going to be affected by changes as far as those religious institutions evaluate.
What does that mean?
We're going down, let's just say, 5%.
We go down 5%.
The French stay where they are.
So what you said last night there, which John and I were asked this question, and I don't know if we can say it now, that the French have agreed not to move.
Can we say that?
No.
Okay.
Yes, but don't say it.
They're very nice.
Because I get that question based upon that background thing, and I should just say, and I have kind of a case to say, obviously when we deal with these, in the group of people, we will probably, some will be evaluated, some will remain where they are today, others will re-evaluate, depending on what the relative market is.
But we have to put the head of the center center between what the relative position of the market is.
What's your initial reaction to the Congress?
Then the other question, just one that I understand.
That's right.
The ones that do understand your opinion.
Oh, yeah, that's the point.
The ones that do.
Well, John, you've worked with those guys.
Yes.
You know, I'm with you in this meeting because of the making, because they haven't helped.
We could add a couple of guys who have been really pushing on it, like Royce.
Rocksmeyer and Javits.
They were both favorable to me.
Well, that's my point.
No, I was going to say, he had a real problem.
Well, unless you go...
They are second-ranked.
You should have the second-ranked and second-ranked.
See what I'm talking about.
I want to raise a long-term political probability.
You know, most of the Democrats who understand this are in favor of it now.
Isn't that conceivable that as a political issue later on, the Democrats will seize on it as the President has to cheapen the price of the dollar, which has always been a sacrosanct as mother but an apple pie?
That's what they're charged.
That's what they're charged.
Go back and just say, yes, the President wrote about matching the same position on the dollar.
If they want to, I don't think that's too much.
Well, we could say this is really something that affects us internationally as far as the prices.
It has a hell of a lot more, let me put it this way, this revaluation of the dollar in terms of how it affects jobs as compared with prices, it's 100%.
In other words, this is about jobs rather than about prices.
If we're a mentor to the mayor,
It's about jobs, rather than about prices.
It's about jobs and American products and their competitiveness in the world, which relates to jobs.
Tom's got a very balanced point, though, from a political thing that you, in that first story, sort of led to that devaluing the dollar.
It says to the ordinary
Well, in terms of the U.S. economy, your dollar, inflation, you've got to get your dollar here, not the price of gold.
They don't.
You can take it one way or the other.
It doesn't mean you take a trip abroad and buy a little less, or if you buy a foreign product here in the United States, it's nice.
But as far as the 95% of the American people who live at home and buy American, no change.
It's a pretty good common-man demagoguery on this, which you can say, yes, it'll be a little hardship for those who tour Europe and Nashville and Spain.
And it'll be a little tough on those who drink imported champagne every night, but it is a part of the guy that drinks California, Dave Loretta.
But also, Dave Loretta, watch out for you.
You really can't compare this to the past, because the past doesn't have to be a common market.
It has to be a weapon.
You didn't have where it is.
Of course.
Let me say this.
I think that, I mean, John, you can see the political effect devalued and gone.
I think you better, I think you just got to get it frontally and say that this is, this involved, this is really firing.
that affects the jobs, but as far as the price, the value of the dollar, it has, that America, their dollar basically, the Walmart, is gonna be stronger, and less subject to attack from abroad, rather than put it that way.
The question is whether the dollar is strong or weak.
As far as price is concerned, relatively.
As far as the, as far as the, because it always shows that something is reflecting an ancient situation, it's the real value of knowledge.
As far as the dollar, its strength will have a stronger dollar in the future because it will not be so subject to attacks as it has been in the past.
Wouldn't one line also get off the devaluation list?
When somebody made this devaluation list to say, let's get off these races, what we wanted was a realignment of world capitalists.
We wanted this reunited world currency to make ourselves more competitive and to keep other countries from taking a free ride on artificial exchange rates.
This realignment means that some get devalued and some get revalued.
These are loaded words.
So the real thing we did is to bring about a realignment of currencies that makes American goods more competitive and therefore provides more jobs.
I don't think we should get hung up on the...
We've got to get our semantics there.
Rather than devaluation, it's really realignment of world currencies.
Rather than devaluation of the dollar, it's really spare treatments for the dollar and the world.
Or it's realignment, devaluation of the dollar.
Rather than devaluation, it's...
I think that's a good way to put it.
It's a major effort, and a successful effort, to get fair treatment for the dollar in American borrowings, in American goods, in world trade.
And that way, that immediately takes away the question, who won or lost?
That's going to be a recurrent scene, Henry, no matter how I know.
Yeah, I know.
All right.
We have to, and we just have to say, well, gentlemen, we don't care.
It's quite obvious this must be a good deal.
The Franks are satisfied.
They think they have a very good deal.
But believe me, we are satisfied.
The Secretary of the Treasury couldn't feel better about it.
He thinks he's had a very, very, very successful deal.
He's been fighting for it for four months.
This is highly incidental.
Now, John, one way to get the winner or loss thing across is to get the personality of it.
Now, this is what I have to suggest.
I think that you could say that the president feels that this is a mean new indication.
The Secretary of the Treasury introduced a name to be served.
I've gone through the same process as well.
I know how to do this.
But first, the Secretary of the Treasury ran amends in the August 17th Senate for the evaluation.
There were some strongly opposed it.
I mean, on 11th August.
Second, the Secretary of the Treasury recommended that, with the President's support, took the very hard line in negotiating the crude intent.
The people said, he's too tough, too tough on trade, too tough on negotiations and so forth and so on.
And then third, as a result of his very astute bargaining and the position that he took, we now have
in an agreement that we have now in the beginning, in sight, we think, a final agreement, which will be very much in our interest to normalize what we want.
Now, what about other countries?
Yes, we never wanted to screw somebody else.
We don't have, we don't have, in order to have a good agreement for ourselves, to have somebody else flush down the tube.
We can realize a good agreement for us is one that will let others survive, too.
We could have put a department a little harder, after all.
You know, if you really want to understand the relative position of France and the United States and of England and the United States, you can look at it this way.
John was playing something yesterday.
Every year, the American economy grows in France.
Every year, the American economy grows in England.
Every year, every year and a half, we grow in Germany.
About every three years, we grow in Japan.
The reason that I, this is good, this is good commentary, and Henry, you can get this out too, you know, with some people, put out that the President's relationship with the Secretary, that he was taking this, we know he took a lot of God in him.
The President considers that this is a major vindication of the common policy.
Do you get my point?
I'll get my point.
You see my point?
This is how, let me interject.
I won't talk about it, because if you do,
You run into all the disqualifications in the press, sure.
You just create more problems for being personal.
You run into all the press who don't want to build media.
That's the thing.
At the same time, he needs a little bit of it.
I don't need any of that.
Well, I think you do.
I don't.
No, it isn't.
But the first is true, and also they love him.
So let us do a little of this with you, John.
I assure you, I wouldn't jeopardize it.
Also, also, John, the other thing is I want, I want, I want to speak to Scali.
I want Connery to go into this meeting on Friday as the, he has the balls, what do they say, the greatest ball on Instagram.
I want to get a signal from you.
I've been talking to Henry Page, of course, but I want to get a direct from you on the Soviet summit thing that took place last night.
After talking to Al and Henry, I put out a comment that said that no U.S. official intended to suggest that we were canceling the U.S.-Soviet summit.
Well, I thought we had to go hard to dent the thing the other way.
Well, it has a little bit.
I'll be fairly hard on the Soviets today in terms of the support of India, but how do you want me to handle the Soviet thing?
We don't want to...
I mean, I can pull that on the ground.
Frankly, it's just...
I haven't reached that point.
Right.
I tend to say... First... What do you want to say when you say hard on the Soviets today?
Well, but we're concerned.
We have been concerned.
I don't know what we can say.
Look, at the present time, how about suggesting that we stop the Henry and be sure that we don't suggest something.
But I think it is really all.
I see that the
Their only interest will be, basically, the summit thing.
And I think, uh, it's going to be back in.
I want to be sure he understands, uh, what the position is.
Basically, and let me put it this way, he did not intend to test it on the first month of the summit, and, uh,
and then it only went highly theoretically.
If we went down the course, and if the Russians did not cooperate in trying to bring ceasefire, and to stop the cannibalization of one member of the United Nations by another, if that did not happen, then we'd stop one member of the United Nations from cannibalizing another.
Right, sir.
It actually causes major problems in other areas.
I mean, it causes major problems in other areas where we are trying to negotiate.
If negotiated, but it is done.
Negotiated, breaks down in one area, is actually done in another area.
However, at this point, we have not yet reached that.
And we believe that there may be, say,
I can talk to Andrew about this without him bothering you, sir.
Well, I want to get him nailed out.
We're waiting for him on a totally different matter.
The West Coast stock strike made probably recently on the 25th of December.
They would like to put out a statement.
We don't know where the power is either.
They'd like to put out a statement today that says if a renewed stoppage does occur and if an emergency should once again develop while Congress is in recess, I would have no remaining statutory remedies available short of calling the Congress back into session to consider special legislation before I remind the Congress that under existing law that you've accepted myself for no further means.
But in reading that draft, if you issue that, you don't issue it cold, and about 18 questions come immediately, which I don't know which direction to go.
Will the president call them back in?
Number one, are we asking that the- Not to comment on the situation, but he wants it clearly understood now that the only recourse he has, or the only action he can take under law is- Are we asking the Congress to do anything?
Are we asking the Congress to pass this legislation before they leave?
See, that's just sort of an idle praise.
No, all you're doing is putting the blame on him.
You say today as Congress prepares to go into recess, emergency strike legislation still languishes deep in committee files.
I find it prayerful to call attention to Congress the fact that offshore men are working only because of the judgments
They're going to stop as early as Christmas Day if they could.
You see, we're not asking for action, but we're threatening... All we're doing there is somebody putting the blame on Congress, right?
That's right.
I don't know what...
It's making clear the point that I don't know what the difference is going to make when they go out.
You've dramatized the need for the legislation.
You've got to know it.
They can't live without it.
Charlton Coulson's argument is that this will focus attention on the farm bill and on the fact that it's Congress's responsibility to keep the heat off the air.
I want to get him nailed out.
We're waiting for him on a totally different matter.
The West Coast stock strike may probably resume on the 25th of December.
They would like to put out a statement today that says if a renewed stoppage does occur and if an emergency should once again develop while Congress is in recess, I would have no remaining statutory remedies available short of calling the Congress back into session.
considered special legislation, for I remind the Congress that under existing law, the U.S. Secretary of State, myself, knows what it means.
In reading that draft, if you issue that, you don't issue it cold, and about 18 questions come immediately, which I don't know which direction to go.
Will the President call them back in?
Number one, are we asking that the- I'm not going to comment on the situation, but he wants it clearly understood now that the only recourse he has, or the only action he can take under the law, are we asking the Congress to do anything?
Are we asking the Congress to pass this legislation before they leave?
See, that's just sort of an idle praise.
No, all you're doing is putting the blame on him.
You say today as Congress prepares to go into recess, emergency strike legislation still languishes deep in committee files.
I find it imperative to call attention to Congress the fact that offshore men are working only because of the junctions.
They're going to stop as early as Christmas Day if they could.
You see, we're not asking for action, but we're threatening... All we're doing there is simply putting the blame on Congress.
Right.
That's right.
I don't know what...
It's making clear the point that I don't know what the difference is going to make when they go out.
They're going to test the need for the legislation.
You've got to know it.
They can't live without it.
Shultz and Coulson's argument is that this will focus attention in the Farm Bill on the fact that it's Congress's responsibility to keep the heat off the air.
That's... Well...
You can handle it, Ron.
I don't mind.
But I can say, I would say that we, we, we, this emphasizes the imperative necessity of the Congress as the highest priority in the past, transportation legislation, emergency legislation, transportation in the next session of the bill.
When the Congress resolves, one of the doctors is actually going to have to call back.
We will have to see how that ends.
I'm not going to borrow trouble.
I'm not going to borrow trouble.
But it will depend on the circumstances.
I need the training.
But there is no event.
If I can raise one more.
Just one.
Other questions will come.
If we say this now, and December the 25th comes, and there is a dock strike, and I know, I think it's expected there won't be.
I'm not sure.
But let's say there is.
Our expectation is wrong.
get to the 28th or the 29th, and we don't feel, the President doesn't feel it's a broad enough national emergency to call it back, and he doesn't, then aren't the farmers who were trying to influence by this going to have a more negative effect at that time than they would... Why don't you leave out the threat of calling it back and simply say, I want to make sure there's nothing more... Leave out the threat of calling it back and strike that out.
The idea of calling it back is ridiculous anyway.
We don't know what we're going to do with it.
See, and if you put that threat out, you don't do it.
The necessity for that, I just simply make the bland statement that the effect of it, if it comes, that there's, I don't know for the recourse, but the only recourse is for congressional action.
And therefore, I strongly again urge the Congress to end this up in the highest priority.
That's all I can do.
That's better.
That's better.
It's very interesting.
Henry, in order to get this India-Pakistan deal...
zero in, and we don't want that story to get in play, or to in any way be confused with our present story.
But they always try to zero in on the danger of some of that.
You know, that is, are we doing this or that?
He's already fooled his son.
But I was suggesting that the way that you cool it some more, it is without hurting our game plan.
The question, you get a press one.
You issue a press one.
I think it comes up.
Yeah, it may not.
But if you don't run, you don't have a question.
If it comes up, it seems to me that what I just gave you in the last area, I really can't see what you mentioned there.
What about the... Oh, that is it.
That is, but what we, what John Lee simply said, that this is a, as far as the, as far as this in nature, it's not this, you know, we say that was, the remarks that were made were purely in a hypothetical situation.
We have not reached that point.
at this time, and we are very hopeful that point is answered.
But obviously, gentlemen, what we are, that where negotiations break down in one field, they endanger the possibility of successive negotiations in other fields.
That's all we're trying to say.
Actually, I can use what Henry said to the pool
In fact, in attacking the assumption they drew from what he said, because this is basically what he said.
Well, first of all, Mr. President, if our game plan works out, it's all going to be moved.
I wouldn't like to have a whole range of stories, some of them down the tube and all that kind of stuff.
Well, that I don't see.
That we can easily avoid.
But what I would like to, if our game plan works out on either of the two tracks on which it is now, then by Friday,
what was done yesterday will answer the question of what the hell did you do to get this settled?
Up to now, we've done it all through tractions.
And the British, we're going to... Well, now we're in the middle of it, because he's got a good point there, because so they know we're working on the Soviets.
So I think you can look very good on this if either of the two things we're now doing is working, so we shouldn't pull away from it too much.
Secondly, and that goes... Why don't you just say that, as indicated in the background, if negotiations fail in one area, it naturally jeopardizes the possibility of a successful negotiation in other areas.
But we are working to make these negotiations succeed, and we are hopeful of success.
That's fine.
And I would say that they very much like to speculate about what's going to happen until we see what does happen.
Well, you don't want to stand on my quote from last night, though.
Stand on my quote, not on yours.
Well, we are on the record.
Right.
We're on the record at the White House saying after our discussions that we were not contemplating canceling the U.S.-Soviet summit.
Now, do I back off of that or stay with it?
I think what you should stick with, Ron, is what the President just gave you.
Uh, and say we are not now...
The issue of canceling the summit does not now... That issue is not yet a live issue.
It's not yet a live issue.
It's not yet a live issue.
What we are saying is that... What Dr. Kissinger said referred to the future.
of a breakdown of negotiation and continued Soviet encouragement.
We are hopeful that this will not occur.
And we are working hard that this will not happen.
And we are very closely, I would say to them immediately, the President is very close, is very close to... No, we don't want to get Chinese.
We're working toward that end.
We're working through all channels toward that end.
Look, if you'd seen Vorontsov yesterday, he came in here to give me some reassurance.
Please give me some reassurance.
They're sweating it out a hell of a lot more than our press is.
This isn't a big problem.
I just wanted to make sure that I didn't .
This is good.
If you say, incidentally, this .
We do see that we want to keep the section.
It's a little steep in the corner.
Okay?
You know, generally speaking, you know, coming back to the other thing, I was just thinking, Henry, what a hell of a pleasure it is to work with Hunk Huck.
You know, you compare him to some of our other captain people.
They began trying to think how the hell they could get their name.
Like, my life threw out that fence of building him up.
He didn't want to do it.
But we have to do it.
We have to do it.
He deserves it.
Yeah, but he's coming out fine in this, too, Mr. President.
Yeah, but there's so much that he deserves.
It is the way we've got some heat for his position.
I think we have two places.
One is now.
The other is one after the agreement is lost.
The other leaders don't want to give the impression that Pompidou and you ran something down their throat.
If this G-10 meeting works this weekend,
Then we could get out so, Mr.
Gentleman, we don't talk about victory.
All we can say is, this is what we asked for and this is what we got.
You draw your own conclusions.
Because when John was outside, he's going to call you.
He's concerned that we've grown too much now.
He doesn't want too much growing before Friday and Saturday before he's locked in.
That's right.
Don't grow.
I'll just say that we have a lot of hard negotiating left to do, gentlemen.
But we've made a very positive first step.
Excellent.
He was a very positive person.
There's a lot of negotiating to do.
He made a very positive version.
But all in all, it was clear.
And I think that they, that after, you know, I noticed that son of a bitch, Schultz, Schultz got out in Iceland and set the hope for agreement.
And his first story had faded, you know.
Which was good.
But he ran into the trap.
He ran into the trap.
What I enjoyed a good deal was the fact that a number of guys had to burn up their stand-in.
Well, they had, you know, the president came to the Azores, and although he spent a good deal of time with President Pompidou, it appears that very little constructive has come out of me.
I forget the relationship of when...
We walked out, the president walked out with Pockadoo and laid this.
It was good.
Did they detect it?
Oh, yes, sir.
You rode the plane to the house.
Well, see, not many of these people knew much about what it was about.
They understood that something had happened.
Oh, yes, they understood.
Well, they do a little bit now.
Fortunately, there were a couple of good Germans on there.
Good German reporters.
We're saying, you know, Henry has often made the point that the European reporters are better than ours.
But these German reporters were talking to these things that were coming up this morning.
He said the Vice President is in need of all of these.
with Skip Isaac and some of these guys and explain this and that to you.
So thank you.
I'd like to share one thing with you.
One is, I didn't have a chance to tell you in the age of, I called Brooke and Kennedy that Sector was going to be released a few hours before it happened.
Oh, that's changed.
That's the guy that you need from Massachusetts.
I said, Mr. President asked me to do it.
Here's a letter from Ted Kennedy's mother's statement.
President, you may now do it.
On this?
On the effect of release.
I called him only an hour before he was released.
I gave him nothing.
And that was the middle of the night, so he couldn't do a goddamn thing.
Nineteen years in prison.
But he gives you personal credit.
Resurrection is the highest praise I've ever seen.
I want to contribute to the administration's overall foundation, hand-in-hand with the partners of the department.
There's also this dramatic military concern
You know one thing about Kennedy, he'll say that one thing and the next thing he'll kick you in the ass.
But he'll mention those both ways.
Sure, but at least it's very important.
You know that story about a very good little ride?
It's a very good human interest story.
It was a good television ride.
Because they're fascinated with, you know, the story of the guy who's been in solitary confinement for most of 19 years.
It's sort of a fascinating...
The girls, you know, too let out.
And that's a common thing.
Also, I am convinced that it has a very sanitary effect on our POW lives.
The very fact that we've got these...
The next time they come out, they come in and say, now, ladies, I never said a word to you about what the President did.
in this appeal of clemency until the men were actually, until these people were out.
I think also, Mr. President, that when you go there, you should tell Mao or Downing, who sentenced a commuter, make another appeal to him, and I think your chances are at least 50-50 that you'll get him during the next year.
The military people, they can't release until the war in Vietnam is over there, too.
They can release anybody.
They said they can do anything for us on our quarrel.
And now, Mr. President, what I wanted to check with you, just to make sure you approve, I'm having Barranzos in at 11, sir.
And I propose to tell him the following.
Look, the Security Council then can go on for...
Uh, what you and we have in mind, what you and we can do is...
The President was very impressed by these assurances he gave you yesterday.
And by his letter of impression.
Well, then I've told him already, we weren't impressed with it, Mr. President.
I, I feel, I told him that was just words, but we needed something complete.
Uh, he was very impressed with these assurances.
Now, if we could make these formal, that the President writes you a letter, and you respond,
Or they do write out a letter and re-respond.
It doesn't make much difference who takes the first step.
In which you say that you know there's no military action planned against West Pakistan.
Just put it in a letter.
And territorial integrity that we both published these letters sent.
We have symbolized Soviet-American concern for peace.
And the beauty is...
I'm telling you, the beauty will only be beautiful if we do it fast.
We can then go to the Chinese and say, look, we said that.
Gotcha.
I mean, if we get out of this with the Chinese...
I just like the idea of a Soviet America, our... We've laid it out to set it up by training them.
Now, let's go right to where... One of two things are going to happen.
It's going to happen today, Mr. President.
Either they vote for the British resolution and the Security Council, which case they'll take credit for it.
or they will not vote for the British Restitution and exchange these letters.
Yeah.
But will you tell the President of America that an exchange of letters would be good even if they would vote for him?
Exchange of letters is to tell him the President believes that it would be very salutary to our relations if we had an exchange.
Well, we have always devoted, but I don't know.
It's in the PK.
Well, I know.
We tell them, you know, what you tell them.
You tell the PK, the president, he didn't care what the Security Council did.
He wanted to have it directed from the right, but he's forced it.
Well, if they're not disposed with us at the Security Council, we have five.
Okay.
Because we're really, the Chinese thing is almost miraculous that we brought it to this point without them blowing on it.
Yeah.
Okay.
I think it'd be too much collusion if we had an exchange of letters after there's already been a vote.
Well, I was going to suggest this.
We have found one thing that has been very helpful here, and you should know it.
And I think that what I would like for you to do, I think you've got to use him.
more entertainment, all the other tricks.
Use him.
He'll do exactly what he said.
He'll argue with you.
He'll raise a PR point.
Not like he raised a hell of a good public relations point.
We cannot allow the political issue that Nixon devalued the dollar.
You see, that must not be the issue.
He's right about that.
That is a PR point.
It's enormously important.
We have got to knock that down.
So I think that we have to use them in the exploring field.
You've got to use scouting more.
What I'd like to use is bringing in whatever you can to meet with the anti-scouts, but not as little to feed us.
And you haven't known him to leave yet?
Oh, yeah.
He leaves like crazy, but... Well, if he leaves, would you talk him out to him?
I don't think he has, and he's been told not to.
Well, I can bring him into meetings.
Well, he'd like to be a picture.
I mean, Ziegler doesn't leak.
Ziegler is perfect.
Well, this county has more credibility than they ever had, you see, as an expert in some of these fields.
So I want to use more.
I'm just getting at it.
And also, if you don't break it, the problem is, then he's going to talk about things he doesn't know, and we'll screw it up.
The PNAR site is so important that I just use it.
I'll bring him into as many meetings as I can.
See what I mean?
We can do it.
I have him sit into these other meetings with other leaders and so forth, and he's good at pumping the news out.
He pumps it like hell.
You know, he knows the Stuart Hensley and some of these guys very well.
And there are times that you won't want to do something but have him do it.
Oh, yeah.
Well, I'll make sure that he gets into as many meetings.
But just to, you know, you do call him and Ron and always put Ron with him.
Sometimes he won't.
He is dying to get into the special action group meetings.
That I do not like because that's very tactical, very fast-breaking, and unless he understands the game plan,
You put out their own...
But the game plan isn't explained to these people either.
They're just told what they're supposed to do.
Well, if you don't do that, you just get to sit down and figure out a way.
What did you and Bob talk about?
About how you can use him effectively to pump the PR on him.
He is...
He's passionately on our side.
He knows how the state is trying to screw us, and he wants to get our mind out of him.
That's the point.
And he can do it.
In other words, he'll pump it out, but he's got to, I always start with people who are loyal.
I mean, like I use Sapphire this way.
Sapphire's a great painter, but he's totally loyal.
So I call Ben and I give him something to puff out in order for him not to give out something that he does for loyal intentions, but which chooses.
See, my point?
Always give a guy a little something to say.
That's what I think is the best.
Rather than to think he's just out there in the dark and taking his crush with a mouthful of wine.
See, don't tell them necessarily the most fundamental things.
Those have to be closely guarded.
I understand the difference, but you could use them effectively.
But I think, Mr. President, on this, this flap, I have to confess, was unintentional and probably a mistake.
I mean, on the even canceling of the... No, I know about that.
But if you read the pool report, you'll see how they let me into it, because what I was saying is word for word what you were saying is...
These things, those things have never really happened.
But actually, if this thing, if the game plan works out, I think it has the advantage of giving you credit.
On the previous game plan, all that would have happened was that the British...
everyone votes for it and then they say the uh the americans were saved by the god damn british now we can make now no one will doubt we're in the game yeah i would say that's why uh we were just lucky we probably wouldn't have intended to have this kind of a play but i think we may get a benefit from it
But the shift was intense.
We mustn't get too upset about what we call flat or something like that.
Things are not perfect.
Sometimes those things that turn out to be accidents are a thing of good for us.
In any event, you can't change it.
Well, you can almost always turn an accident to be good.
That's right.
I frankly think it is.
It also happens to be totally true.
It helps us.
It is exactly what I told the Russian.
Right now it helps us with the Chinese.
It...
puts a little more scare into the Indians.
It helps us with attacks.
And if we turn it now into a positive, it will help us with the Russians.
I'll take it.
It helps us with our U.S. conservatives, too.
It helps you with the U.S. conservatives.
And it helps you with the people who say you're taking this only for political reasons.
That's right.
Because you are going to drive them to lie.
No, no, I didn't.
But I heard you last night.
No, no, you were.
Well, I didn't get followed by such things.
None of a shit.
Now, what's it going to do here today?
Do you have any time to double up any?
Yeah.
Would you have time, if you could recall, to...
you'd dictate to Connolly's talking points so that I can have that.
You would have that.
Yeah, I could do it at this minute.
Yeah, you'd dictate that so that I could have that by noon.
If you meet with Burroughs off at 11.30, leave.
Yeah, that was just dictating.
Well, then you'll be ready, available for the other meeting at 12.
You won't be quiet, so you just have to introduce Connolly.
Got it.
If you get under your opinion as to what they ought to be, not too long, just stop at the page.
Okay, I'll get that done.
He will now say that he really reflects that he ought to treat other people just the way that he was treated.
He knows very well that he shouldn't have left that much of a scare to people.
Didn't you?
It's great to make the point.
I didn't want to worry about it.
It's done.
It's done.
I don't know the rest of Canada about it.
It's a new world.
It's got nothing to do with his people.
Well, let's think about Florida again.
Probably should.
Probably should.
Because if I went down, I'd get down about three, four a day.
Four.
And I'd have to take a swim.
And then all day tomorrow, which is Thursday, all day Friday, come back Saturday.
So I'd have three nights.
The only thing you have impinging is the time interview.
That could be moved to Sunday afternoon if you wanted to do that.
Could it?
Sure.
You can do it back here at the White House after you come back from New York.
They had to do it by the 20th, on Sundays the 19th.
And they'll understand, with all the stuff breaking and the meetings coming and everything.
Some of you are, I can do it Monday morning.
No, you leave first thing Monday morning.
We'll ask them if they'd like to do it Sunday.
That would save you having to take time in Florida.
That way you'd have all of Saturday morning in Florida.
Leave there about an hour.
What is your view about the press thing at this point?
I don't think you want to...
I don't think there's anything to be gained.
Oh, Christ, with this thing, you've got another bombshell going.
We've got a latent bombshell going, and now you added tax to it.
I don't think...
Yes, uh... Did I begin to cut it?
You... Is it real, Christ?
Yes.
Come on.
Yeah, I can't even hold it, I...
It's not reasonable.
Let everyone get out of here.
You know, one of the things you can't say right now, because I don't want you to ask my father about it, but he didn't tell me about it until she told me about it.
And he really told me shit.
And I couldn't tell him, well, I could have, but I had to say I was dead.
And he told me, I mean, that's a bunch of bullshit.
You know what I mean?
He said, well, he is, he's, you know, talking about places.
I don't know.
I've never gone into a store and asked him if I could cut the price.
He loves to hang them.
He loves to hang them and all that.
It was enormous.
It was enormous.
Well, you were saying about the idea that it was going well.
Yeah, it's, you know, it's been rippling out, and it rippled into the magazines.
As a result of the outstop story and all that.
It's, you know, it's being used as another Nixon, a possible Nixon blockbuster, another big bomb.
And it's what the property tax point holds.
And it's all positive so far.
There's only a little glimmer of an attempt to say that, you know, Nixon has now...
It was a highly partisan thing from somebody, a political guy, saying that Nixon's now got all this tax relief for the rich, and the only way he can pay for it is to stock a new tax for the poor.
So he's talking about another sales tax to...
I'm sure that that's the courage to take it away.
But then that has got very good leads to quarrels with just the parents for a change.
Yeah, but they're trying to make a point that it's totally regressive, you know, that they don't know the specifics.
I mean, there's some other non-regressive features built into it, too, so you know for sure.
That's the thing, that's rumbling around.
Unless I'm not going to press the thing off, I'm just not going to worry about it.
I don't think you want to get into one this week.
Then why don't we do a press thing?
Well, I'm not so sure you would.
I'm not sure you would be a bad man during the course of these meetings.
Why don't you give a little to the press?
You are not really pulling out.
I haven't given a Q&A.
Maybe you will after one of these meetings, maybe you want to do a little talk, something prompting to you today, because it just goes on the meeting.
And I'm just right with that.
And if we go with the one-on-one on the 3rd, or I plan to do that, and then maybe you do your Vietnam announcement, then maybe have a press conference that week, you know, the 14th of January or something, mid-January.
I don't think you need it now.
I really don't.
And I don't think we need to, I don't think they can make a hell of a big issue because they don't have enough press conferences.
I mean, I don't think the country cares that much.
The country doesn't care, and they've made that issue, and it's gone.
You know, nobody, it's not something they should make effectively anymore.
Well, it's true, but I don't, I just don't do it because I don't care.
I've got too many major issues that are not best discussed in the press conference.
Right.
And that,
We don't have any problem with that.
That also loves me off the hook, which is a bad idea.
See, I have to concentrate quite a bit to get a press conference.
That's right.
And I don't really think I... Look, another big meeting will make good news.
I mean, it is going to be big news.
But the fact we meet is the British-American meeting is always good, right?
Sure.
And the front meeting, well, they're all going to be...
These meetings have, especially now, the fact that you've bombed them out of this first one.
Now they can't assume anything anymore.
And then of course you've got the group of 10, which is another argument for not having hours this weekend, is that you've got the G10 meeting here.
And you shouldn't get into talking about things while Conley's in the middle of negotiating.
I have a thought.
I have a thought about Colin.
You know, it's such a burden for him that he might want to
down at the beginning of the meeting, arrive that evening and be there the next day.
You know what I'm getting at?
He's going to have a hell of a time.
You know, the brownie.
I mean, the EP, yes.
He's going to have to finish his thing.
And if you can talk to him, I don't know how great he should feel, but there's a downgrading back, his part.
But having, being in the middle of the group of 10, you know, give him, it'll help him, and you let him come down, you know, later today, you know, I figured, you see what I mean?
Rather than having to go down early in the morning and park around.
See?
I can't believe that we probably, I probably just want to go to Florida.
I think you should.
The crappy weather here, Kent is worse.
You can't get outside.
Well, I guess I go.
It's 82.
I don't think, it's 82 in Florida, and the ice wind is kind of famous.
Is it that people think I should stick around for that?
No.
See, I'm supposed to have several hopes I will stick around, but what the hell?
Not anymore.
At least that's not what he said.
He wanted you to be back here last night to make his maneuver credible.
As it turned out, he didn't.
He said on the plane he could go on to Florida now instead of me.
Yeah.
He always says it's done.
Yeah.
But as far as the people in the country are concerned, it is going to make any difference.
I'm glad I came back, though, because coming back and meeting with the Congress is a tremendously important symbolism.
Tremendously important.
And that gives you the story for today.
We've done that.
And you can have a great time.
Wraps up this meeting.
Thank you.
Are there any new kind of things that we could give the leaders today that we haven't made talent yet?
You probably know none of this stuff.
I can't give the notes because I've given notes on my job.
I don't know, but that's not, I mean, I meant something more significant.
They all have that.
Well, it's a 50 cent thing, you see.
What I'm thinking about is what do we have?
You see, they have just about everything right now.
Well, for example, we'll give them the money clip.
We'll give them the money clips.
How do we give them the money clips?
The money clip is a good symbolic gift for each other.
What do you give it to them anyway?
You know what they have?
I'll just give them another one symbolizing God.
I believe it would take five after mine.
I don't know if he's the chairman.
We're just waiting for things to all line up.
And it's another time.
I don't know if you have it.
Why?
I don't have it.
I don't have it.
I don't have it.
Have one in each place at the table there so that we don't have to just have them on each place.
Why don't you give it to the other people, too?
Everybody in the room.
The staff people, too.
It's kind of a nice gift.
The staff people, too.
The money, of course, is about $4 or $5.
I wouldn't waste that kind of money.
I thought it was at you.
Well, it's not that bad.
Damn.
I think it's just the members of Congress this time that should get them.
And the members of Congress are not included.
We have to thank the wives, haven't we, for giving them contacts already?
Almost all the wives.
All these wives, perhaps, haven't been given them.
We're trying to pick up something new for next year.
We're working on this.
The money club is a nice point here.
Just put it around for each member of Congress, okay?
So, yeah, the only, well, the other thing that holds us back.
Well, nothing holds you back.
Ehrlichman wants to see it for a couple minutes before you go on the antitrust section on the networks.
He's going to get a signal on that, apparently.
But he's gone until 1215.
So you can catch it for a minute after the congressional meeting.
I can do that on the phone.
There are three possible bill-signing things that you might want to ceremony on.
One is cancer, the other is economic stabilization, and the third is the Alaska claims.
Alaska claims, I think, is ridiculous.
I won't do that, do anything on it.
Economic stabilization might be worth doing, and cancer probably is worth doing.
All of them can wait until next week.
And with all the stuff we've got bouncing around, I think we should go now.
I think we should wait until next week.
And by waiting until next week, Congress is gone, and you can invite them without getting any of them there.
You might be somewhere to invite them now while they're here.
Those are the only things that just, why don't we do it next week?
We'll need it next week.
Let's kind of do it by the 22nd or something.
Also, by doing it now, you make it look like Congress did something good.
I don't think you want to at the moment.
Yeah, we should do our whole deal and do it next week.
So I'm going to be here 22nd, 23rd.
Let's do it those days.
It's not much.
Fair.
Okay.
Now that...
That's it.
I think otherwise I'm going to get here and get bogged down.
And also everybody feels that they'll have to be in it when I'm going to talk about it.
There were several terrific suggestions by Peterson in that memorandum.
I want those passed around and they'll get that as quickly as possible.
But tell Peterson.
Well, Peterson, Bob, the way to impress him is to show him the memorandum, which he will, that I had worked on it on the way back, and that you're going to implement it with him.
If I can place it, I can implement it as a commerce.
So if you're right, the guy, he can get the best out of it.
I mean, he's got ideas there about jobs that are so important.
Oh, the other thing did you speak to earlier was about the fact that I wanted to include in the budget the money for the SSG in some way.
He's working on it.
He says it's a hell of a problem because he probably symbolized it.
He's got to get going on it.
He's taking a swing at that.
I talked to him about the SSG.
Really?
I think we did something.
I think we could pass the SSG next year.
You agree?
I think probably so.
Rose has something.
It's just that in the closing of that day in the life of the president, they want to have music playing while you're in the Lincoln sitting room.
And they don't have, they want to play the kind of music you would be listening to while in the room.
There was no music on at the time, so they're going to super it on the track.
And Julie, I thought you ought to select what it should be.
And she says, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Rachmaninoff, or Liszt.
Well, it shouldn't be, uh... And Rose is suggesting it should be something that's not too heavy.
Well, I don't play, uh... No, but you can take a Tchaikovsky or, well, any one of those.
You can get a fairly not heavy... Well, I would say, uh...
Why don't they take something, a swan light or a sleeping beauty?
Wait a minute, wait a minute.
Let's see if we can put it behind an armature.
Maybe it sounds better.
Oh, it did.
Swan Lake, Swan Lake.
Of course, you can be either one of the three.
Swan Lake, good.
Swan Lake, Swan Lake, Pursuit of the Beauty.
I mean, in the R&D, in the R&D renditions, or, well, Argo, I don't know what's in the name.
Either one.
Argo, you know, that's the audience.
Pursuit of the Beauty.
Swan Lake, Pursuit of the Beauty would be.
Also, that's the next rendition, the Russians, yeah.
Okay.
Now, we wanted to try and get out of one point.
Well, I don't think you should go.
No argument with the other one.
Would you hit me, actually, please?
All right.
You're going to get a lot of this congressional hassling, bill-signing.
Well, it isn't all that, is it?
Also, even the staff is.
I'm going to get in trouble.
I have a bunch of problems to tackle around.
And do I do this?
I don't think that we would.
In fact, on the timeline, maybe I would just sit and do it there.
I don't know.
Maybe they'd rather do it in the White House on Sunday afternoon.
I don't want to take Don, but it's really easier for them to come down here.
I don't want to bomb Sunday afternoon here.
You don't think so, don't you?
Sunday afternoon would be fine for me, so that I could finish the day and come back to you.
Let's make it, though, in the afternoon, so that, well, it has to be because you're going to church, and, yeah, come back.
I'll make it about four o'clock.
About four o'clock would be nice.
Why don't you make it five o'clock, if you can?
Because I actually want to go to the end of the man.
Good.
Which is a nice touch, after all.
I wouldn't look for a reporter, but this is in publishing.
I even have the interview up in Linden City.
Sure, sure.
I could serve a personal time.
If you want to do it here, then go over there for a contact.
I mean, you know, see the Christmas in the White House stuff and all that.
I can take them on a tour.
And there is a staff open house sometime on Sunday, but I think it's earlier.
I'm not sure.
I'll find out.
Well, it is.
You can avoid that.
I don't really have to do it.
No, it's, no, there's one Saturday and one Sunday.
It's just so they can see the difference.
Sure.
They don't know what to do on it.
Pat went down there.
Pat was really well.
Which is a hell of a thing for them to do.
It was nice.
Yeah.
But I shouldn't have gone.
Well, you should.
And they don't need to.
I told them I didn't need to.
I just felt that in my case, my gut, I was a little tired.
And it would have been a nice thing, but what the hell.
If you're going to go, we'd better set it up, because it takes them two hours to get the plane.
One o'clock.
Is one here too early?
No.
If you leave here at one o'clock, that's okay.
Or 1.15.
The problem is that I'm not sure of that.
You want them out of here before you go?
Yeah, I'm not sure of the leaders.
I don't want that helicopter going in here.
Why don't we set it for 1.15?
But hold it.
The helicopter will be here at 1.15.
Okay.
But hold the thing.
Delay that.
We want to get the finest signal from that.
Pull it to the leaders you're on.
Don't bring it in to the leaders you're on.
Oh, Frank, you've got to show we don't have to rush that much.
It's made at 1.30.
We know that we've gone to that.
I would think it'd be gone by 12.30.
This meeting, it'll take an hour.
Really?
I've never been to any of the congressional meetings.
It didn't take an hour.
They'll send questions.
They'll call me and have to answer.
No, no, maybe not.
Since it's 12 o'clock, they may want to get out in the morning.
What's that got to do with it?
It's 1 o'clock.
Should we say 1?
Yeah.
1 o'clock, but we'll hold it.
We'll just get out and solve it.
It doesn't come in during the meeting.
Huh.
That's good.
VB's not here after all, so that's all right.
Good.
And Clark's asking on a special and personal appeal that Cook and Corallo must be permitted to sit around the wall at this meeting, so they can be assured.
This is one of the very kind of chairmen.
That's good.
Well, they work like hell.
Okay, let me set this up.
He says, we could leave him on a ball.
Yeah, or, or, as soon as we have a clear command.
That's just terribly young.
to be ready in one, and you can stop as long as you want.
Might as well get there in time.
I really think that I ought to be in the right direction.
I think that I ought to.
I get constantly back to the fact that