Conversation 775-006

Transcript (AI-Generated)

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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

Yeah.

I think that totally makes a hell of a case for people.

Oh, yeah.

And, you know, the way you present it is extremely effective.

It's a charge.

I don't know if it's a charge.

Because I prefer to read.

But I apologize to other people.

They get it from charge.

So, you know, I don't think it's a charge.

Well, I don't think it is.

It's hard to say.

I find it a distraction.

People like to judge.

They get a visual in their mind.

That's the way it goes.

Well, we've got everybody up to the action now.

And Roger was very good.

He was very good.

How are we coming?

I wanted to ask you about the lawsuit.

Any other thoughts?

Yes, sir.

We have a lot to do on the line here.

I don't have a question.

The law might be more responsible.

I don't know if you can close it.

The complaint for the process, which is the relation to the re-election and the financial committee filed against Larry O'Brien.

That's what Matt Carpenter asked yesterday.

And he filed with Senator O'Brien.

And they've got some legal basis for it.

The value of it is depositions, which we can start taking.

We'll lift depositions from O'Brien, McEwen, also Gary Hart, members of the Democratic National League, and Cal Poly.

Well, normally they can't start 20 days after service, but we can see good advance priority.

And we will.

We're going to do this for a month daily.

But, we're increasingly taking deposition to the DNC by our defense counsel and the O'Brien Institute, and the other, as they point out, are wide ranging, cover everything from higher O'Brien sources of income, while chairing the DNC, certain sexual activities, and employees of the DNC.

And they should cause considerable problems for those being deposed.

Who's next?

I'll start this one.

O'Brien.

O'Brien has a question.

This would have the same allegations as any amended complaint that would be made before the amended complaint is sent by them.

And we'd make the allegations.

Uh, no.

So, libel action can't be based on a complaint because it's bruised.

So, we do it beforehand on the leaks of the complaint.

And it's not good.

That would follow the same deposition discovery schedule as our complaint for malicious abuse.

And the statement against Vance is libelous, per se, imputation of a crime.

But the problem is that Vance's post-condition government made it required to deal with the actual malice, which he can't prove.

They don't deal on a legal basis, otherwise we can't do it.

The dialogue is official.

It shows he doesn't cause malice in a crime.

That's what they said.

The point is, the final reaction would have obviously been his vengeance.

That's the whole point of that.

There's no legal reason.

Then they've got a counter claim on abuse of process, which is, will be used to, if the amendment claim is permitted to be filed by Reggie, then we'll counter the abuse of process on that one, so we'll cover that.

And they've got a First Amendment action they're considering against First Amendment rights to the Committee for Re-election and the National Committee, which will be filed against Bill Bryant.

You've got a cause of action there on the basis of rights associated with a person having to keep a political position and then impaired by the actions of the citizens of O'Brien and the DNC.

And we've made that a contention in our other actions, and they may pick up a separate distinct civil action against O'Brien by the committee on this matter.

That is an action.

Now, they don't really have a cause of action.

Vice Senator Dole has explored that.

The National Committee and Dole have not been.

Yeah, this is all that folks are about doing on the basis of the counterfeit tickets and my ads and the fact that they were trying to disrupt our business.

Yeah.

That, I think, kind of is the first event.

That's preventing a company to obstruct our rights over our business.

I think that's maybe what they're incorporating.

They're trying to counterfeit tickets in order to get the radicals inside.

Right.

Okay.

There's no cause of action against the cost of cars, but we'll go the other way on cost of cars, which is...

First, it should be to them to institute a suit against the violation of the campaign law set up by the government organization.

That would get them to do the same thing as the government does.

The obvious complaint is that it's a third party committee, which we'll put in a little bit of a discussion going on that.

Now, the one that makes the best of all is the possible argument to enjoin the government finance committee.

And as I told you a long time ago, we've been quietly ignoring the information regarding the way McGovern is setting up this finance committee and operating fund-raising activities for a district we call the Incorporation.

We've been getting the evidence, but we couldn't do anything about it until we filed this September 12th report to the DAO and had enough record that we were ready for that.

Of course, in the Washington Post storyline, it confirms that he is in the Incorporation, which is contrary to federal criminal law.

prohibition.

So we now put a task force, totally, on working on every possible action we can charge against this activity.

Develop a meeting where we can go into court immediately and join this violation of the law.

And this is the one you've always had hope for, that we may strike through a role here.

Are they already hurt?

Well, now they're doing this in order to cover up .

That's the status as of now.

A couple of them are on the monitor.

I think they're all harassed.

And the last one could be.

I don't know about that.

We've got a real problem.

We are working on it.

That's where you have common cause, because common cause is suing us on these.

This is a much more serious .

Yeah, .

So, if those .

Now, they're making another .

Every statement they repair .

There's a master.

It moves every time.

You know, we can do it.

And Buzz moved again today.

I think he was going too far on the left, but he said, well, it's lighter.

Boy, that hit it.

You know, it wasn't maybe a line.

Buzz was just strapped into it.

All right.

He did it well.

He came off awfully well on television.

Did he?

Yeah.

He was a role model.

And he looked at one area.

And he said, is this much of a challenge to my integrity and the integrity of the President of the United States?

He's got to fight it.

He's got to fight on his head.

Yeah, that's right.

He did it.

And he was probably mad.

He really was.

No, he's the most telling point.

He was talking about getting on that.

That's what I thought was necessary.

Yeah.

And all the rest of it.

And forget about all the backup.

You don't have to make your team, make the turn, and then end up in the game.

That's right.

You don't have to.

You don't have to really.

As I was trying to say, responding to the question, first, you lost.

First, I was very hopeful.

Yes.

That's what we should.

First, I love that.

First, I love you.

Really?

The most, the first time I forget, the greatest public reaction I've ever heard is when you didn't answer the question.

You turned it down, first time, and then they demonstrated arrest.

And you had the public looking at the press man.

That's not quite your case.

It's just exactly the same one.

It was very interesting.

It was a reaction.

It obviously had to be.

It had to show that it was a reaction.

He played exactly the part we told him to leave off, and that's all.

So you can argue that they were justified, but I'm not sure they were.

Scott is a great barometer of the public.

When you've got this club in the district, you have to replay the basketball game.

That's exactly what I wanted to say.

That's my point.

I mean, these characters don't want to hear that.

But the country does.

What was the question?

Was the question about the vestibule?

No, no, this, well, the question, we were laying the question about the vestibule.

We came out way behind on goals, that's for sure.

discussion.

They're now saying that it goes back to the committee in February for another review and they could conceivably take the rules away from Russia.

I think we will deal with it.

The main thing about this is that everybody is naked.

I think there's a fine job that's starting to be released now, and it's very helpful.

Once a week it's done.

It's a good time.

Yeah, in terms of menace and so forth, they're all out.

It's very clear now that the Washington Post, the Air Times, they never tried to log in for the next two weeks.

That's what they call their short review.

Here's what they do in order to get to that.

That's great.

And this gives us sort of the working folks.

The short review is always to be bothered with, but there is a backup to it.

If there's an overview on base one coverage, the photo coverage review each day, they represent a headline coverage each day.

And they have to do this in order to get to that.

But this is an useful person of the record.

That's all right.

That was my great operation, I think.

I don't know.

We got a lot of help with that before.

We didn't have that.

I'm not sure.

Well, I said the case still.

I know where he is, Bob.

I know.

I have a case to lay before the Senate, but it's really very, very dramatic in existence.

They haven't updated this week.

They're not doing any better this week.

You ought to make your case on that, what you've already got.

But you ought to be able to say right up to Thursday night, it ain't gotten any better.

It wasn't any better last night.

Oh, sure.

Sure.

In case you're going to put this on the trial.

Why don't you just sit there in front of one of these and rep the goddamn complaint that was filed by the D.S.C.?

You can't do that with me.

Carpenter here in 25 seconds.

Out of what, four minutes?

Yeah.

I think that's right.

I'm sure his brother didn't invite him.

His wife?

No, his wife was on the bus.

He said that she felt like, well, his brother's close enough.

That made it a problem.

I have serious thoughts on work.

I haven't had much of that.

But I guess, I know that we're going to be murderers on and after this, and I'm going to set the table for you to leave, and I'm going to let the substitutions in the office.

I don't know what we're going to do with it.

I don't know.

I don't care which side they're on.

Are we going to get a letter out or something?

Right now.

That's the, the latest evidence is just out there.

All right, I'm sorry.

The other thing is, I'll pick up with you, Craig, but the other thing is, I'm having to kind of wait and see unless you have a suggestion.

Okay.

I'm giving a major speech on Craig's going for the creation of more commercial networks.

I just have to tell him what I'm doing.

All right.

That's a tough one for them.

What?

For that.

Oh, hell, that's right.

That's right.

They can't win on that.

But when cable comes in, I ain't got to talk about this part.

This is what, you know.

Well, they had a separate system.

No, they're really not.

All right.

Let's get that out right away.

That's what I think we need to do.

I want that.

I want this working.

That's going all out.

That's right.

That's what they were all going to do.

They're finished.

Well, I want them to know in a subtle way that over the next eight weeks, that's going to depend on how much we push or don't push.

Whatever happens, it's already in the dark.

I know.

come Christmas over there.

Oh, there you go.

I need your media problems to be so serious that you've got to, for instance, lay the foundation in a people's mind and not to trust the media.

That's the thing.

Lay off that for a while.

Analyze it.

I'll do it.

I'll arrest you.

See you again.

Yeah, well, we haven't laid off of it.

I don't think we should lay off of it.

We keep it going.

We've changed our basis.

We're putting pressure on the capital.

Can I urge you guys to get off that bridge?

I know there's some things wrong with the record, but that's the state we're dealing with.

I've heard of it.

Now, this road again, for instance, in the context of self-care, just a few days, not as much as the reason for it.

It says the reason they aren't endorsing, and the policy will not endorse, and this is an excuse, but they're saying it's because of the reaction of the, the highly adverse reaction of the guilt endorsement, which they felt was wrong.

And that if it's wrong for the guilt endorsement, it's wrong for the public.

It does keep popping up as frequently, though.

Well, it's not written on the law.

It's not written on the law.

It's the kind of thing that people, when they do have a forum, when they're talking on issues and answers, or when they get a crack at the evening, they ought to talk

It's always good to have people here.

They love it.

I do think it's the fact that some of the press is very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very,

National Congress of Jurors.

We always suggest that we go to the Congress of Jurors.

It's a good idea.

If you like it.

Sorry.

No, the reasons for the intervention are very cautious.

Please don't move.

Uh...

Well, you know, we've got a bumper sticker out there, which is to both predicts that your butts depend upon it.

Both of them.

The farmers are doing it.

They love it.

I just thought it really caught on.

Your butts may depend on it.

Oh, my God.

That's why I said around here, Mike says I love it.

I don't know why I said that around here.

Great, man.

In many cases, that might be replaced by a little more confident, but more exciting.

I'm just a confident man.

He's not dumb.

Smart, funny, eager is also exciting.

Correct.

Absolutely.

He's probably substantially more confident than Hartman, as well as more accepting.

He's more well-known than Hartman.

He'll be a little stronger.

Hartman's not a strong guy.

Hartman's a nice guy.

He's an awfully sweet guy.

We've got an honest Catholic for Christ, as far as science is concerned, and I can take it forward for our congregation.

If you don't have any more questions about the commission deal, do you think we ought to talk to Platt?

Obviously, other than what he said this morning, he's talking about putting out the records, though.

Yes, we have.

Not at all.

Not at all?

It is.

Guys, listening to him and working with him, that's it.

Well, you see, the problem that I see is that the department might immediately say, well, we'll take it.

Give us a counsel, an officer, a counsel.

You've got a criminal prosecution pending, and they can't do any more than review the sufficiency of the investigation.

Our group, of course, would have absolutely persuaded that the investigation was a good one, but they couldn't pursue the investigation other than the criminal investigation.

They can say, well, that we're already being involved, and the people are here, and I can go to their council to go around and turn around their hands.

Well, they talked to everybody here.

But the point is, the word comes to the operative.

We would have to give it to the council, though.

I think they're going to have to have some staff man.

I mean, men like that are traditional to say, well, if he sends it over to my dad, we're going to get the staff man.

But that big staff guy out of Justice or the FBI or whatever,

I don't think that, I don't believe that's a premise.

The operative word clarifies that.

Well, we've sworn up that we were never going to create another commission.

But remember, every other one I've done, I'm not doing this.

This is to be done by the Attorney General for the purpose of his thing.

I was in prison.

Yeah.

Well, I think even Dick making that offer publicly just cuts that issue.

I mean, if voting warrants says no, that I can't do it, or I don't want to get involved in the campaign, then fine.

I mean, at least...

Because I don't think Gardner is responsible, and I think Carson is not responsible.

What would he do?

Well, I think he might go out and give that material.

Yeah, he'd start cutting it around.

He'd give his staff all that material.

That's right.

Well, I think he's not a lawyer.

I think he's not called a lawyer.

I don't think he's a lawyer.

No, the American Bar, if you always could, you'd put it before one of their standing committees.

And you know, the President of the American Bar this year is a guy you can trust.

That's not impossible.

Yeah, it is.

The American Bar Association.

I think the American Bar Association is a captive of ours.

Not without the service of the President of the American Bar Association.

So I agree with that.

I agree.

OK. We started out to go to that ..

But I don't think that the .. We're approaching ..

or here's an idea that might be a real hero that should be prepared for me.

You know what I would do?

I'd be good.

You have to announce it before they say it.

That's right.

They say it's before the indictment.

If we expect indictments in the next couple of days, when the indictments are brought, I will tell you all of the stuff.

So it doesn't appear that you can react to the whiteboard.

You're going to get it instantly.

You've got to be counterintuitive before it happens.

and so forth and so on.

Because I am perfectly satisfied that we conducted most of their investigations.

We have an initiative put out.

We have questioned a lot of life members of the White House, and we've got life members of this and that.

We have connected so that all that, put that all in one paragraph.

He said to me, he said, there will be no question that any political men here, under the president's direction,

the third of the operation, the best of the eighth time, all of them, she was in a very good stretch.

And that, in other words, Chris, they asked him to share with his brother, and he wanted him to take him to the site.

There are a whole record of it.

Yeah, because I have a whole record of this.

He was in the same church as my father.

See?

Now, if I didn't get them to agree, or wanted to agree before they would do it,

see, we're having to turn it over and have to turn it down, because we think it would be bad.

You ought to get that better agreement.

We shouldn't announce it before getting that too great a deal to it.

See, now you have to, you have to look at the system.

You have to ask for it.

You ought to be able to talk about it if you have to.

Oh, yeah.

They read about it.

They read it in the paper.

They say, what the hell is this?

We're being used.

Okay, yeah, I wasn't able to say.

I asked if Justice wanted to do it, and he said no.

Well, he doesn't.

He should.

But, unfortunately, Justice Fortas, I'm going to ask if Fortas, somebody agreed to it.

Fortas did it.

I don't think Fortas did it.

He was the biggest thought that I had when the sentence hit.

I can't believe that word.

No, we just, we just reaffirmed it.

I think it was for us that it can't be centered forward.

And I talked to him when we did it.

Yes, sir.

And he was, he was very, well, we got a couple other things.

Well, I said earlier, and when they, they, they say about the coverage, he made it very clear that this would go along.

He's not with that.

I don't know if Fortis is good.

There's no question.

I'm just saying, whether he'd be good in the public mind.

The reason he is.

Oh, he's great in the public mind.

But people would think that we screwed him, and this is his opportunity to get even with us.

That's why I'm turning it over to a guy who is different.

You're giving a guy who would have every motive to embarrass you the opportunity to look at him.

He's going to the extreme.

He's going to get some of that.

Okay.

You know, on me going to the White House and talking about this with the Lord, I said, God's going to arrest me.

The only way that I think it can be done, and I've mentioned this before, is to take out that goddamn bandit diary.

You don't need the bandit diary, since you have the lunch there.

There's only way to serve a dinner, and that's to take that.

No, we don't.

I don't know what it is, but that's what I'm going to be using for these .

State National as a serving room for the state dining room.

Now, it could be, well, try to find out some place.

Well, they make a lot of part of the family dining room and the serving room out of the rest of it.

I mean, I was thinking about that this morning.

We really ought to knock out the family dining room and make it a main street, a serving room that everybody can serve at least a meal in the dining room.

Well, any of them can do that, but basically,

Maybe you just have one restroom, one lady, not just ladies.

It's a ladies' restroom.

That's right.

I'll start commanding those downstairs.

Wouldn't it be good?

I really think so.

Well, I hear you can try.

The other thing, awesome kitchen, boys.

We have, as you've seen, an unbelievably decryption-looking kitchen.

second floor, you know, and I know that Pat is doing, or redoing, our second floor medication, which I think is very nice, you know, redoing it now, because it's going to cause a lot of problems, you know, the California style, with a beautiful pantry for serving drinks and so forth, but we've got the kitchen there.

I would like to have the best kitchen in the world go into that thing, but nothing's done there.

put in a beautiful modern kitchen with a nice pantry on the pantry.

It's for the reason that when we have guests, they like to go sometimes and make some drinks.

Of course, it's not even them.

There's Negroes around.

There's so many of them.

They're always in the way.

They can fix it in a way that you can slip it in the pantry and have it just cut off from the rest of it.

You know what I mean?

But it's got to be a nice idea to put in a really beautiful kitchen in the violence.

Yep.

No reason why I shouldn't have one with the most modern stoves and the

but a main kitchen type kitchen so that you can go into it.

A kitchen so that we can go in and use it ourselves.

And also a pantry where we can go in and have a drink.

But for some, we can go in and make a sandwich out of the icebox if we want to.

Or some people like to go in and cook scrambled eggs for themselves or something like that.

But that's an institutional kitchen.

You don't need an institutional kitchen up there.

they've got to put in an old fashioned, they can put in a, another thing I think I will do is find bedrooms to put in there, you know, to put in a, what you said, there's plenty of room there, like they have in Madison Hotel, the small room, you see, so that you don't have to, so you don't have to go in the kitchen to get a Coca-Cola or if you want a good drink or something like that.

Good job.

Okay, she's back.