On April 13, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon, John D. Ehrlichman, White House operator, Lawrence M. Higby, and Manolo Sanchez met in the Oval Office of the White House from 9:16 am to 10:47 am. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 895-008 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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.
I'm late because I was talking to Kleindienst.
He was giving me a little readout on the grand jury.
He says Segretti took the fifth.
And the thing I was most interested in
was the Magruder situation.
And I didn't talk to him about Magruder specifically, but I talked to him about the PR problem that we would have with granting immunity to former White House people.
He said that their working policy is that where a witness has already testified, particularly if he's a fairly big fish, if he came back,
and sought immunity to change his testimony, they would not.
That they would force him.
Oh, no, no, no.
This is people who would be subject to perjury.
Now, see, Strong was absolving himself of any exposure to perjury.
I don't know.
I haven't had time to check.
I assume he did.
I assume he did.
But...
There would be no immunity, except as to those who might take the Fifth Amendment, who had not previously testified.
Mr. Strong was on down there and just taking the Fifth.
They'd given him immunity, of course, he could testify.
But, uh, uh...
But if somebody had testified previously, I said... Yeah.
They can't change that claim.
They would not bring it again.
I don't know if McGruder knows that, but that's an important, that's an important stoppage in the Senate.
Um, he says that undoubtedly, by reason of McCourt's testimony, they will recall Mitchell.
Mm-hmm.
And... And have him report that you're his son.
That's right.
If they have not done it before, then... That's right.
That's not what he's saying.
Now, uh, he said that... What did McCourt say?
Oh, he's got all...
He says it's all hearsay.
Yeah.
He says it's, um...
But as a man, it makes you more worried.
That's right.
That's right.
And he said, in fact, he said it's strictly hearsay.
He said Hunt didn't contribute anything to the case that wasn't already known.
He said that the probability is that unless Liddy would crack, and they don't see any likelihood of that at this point,
that, and if he cracked, that he would just contradict everybody, or would say, I'm the only actor.
So the probabilities are that there will be no indictments against, no new indictments against individuals.
Even McGrew.
In other words, they can't make a case on anybody right now, as the evidence now stands.
Now, of course, Dean hasn't been there yet.
And I've got to have a heart-to-heart with Dean this morning on the basis of this, so that he understands what the president wants.
He says that the corporate... What about the secretary, the one that he was, that Zicker was saying, Sally Harmon?
Yeah, he said so far they have not been able... Who did you prepare things for?
Well...
He didn't know.
I didn't ask him specifically about them, because I didn't want to appear too, too into it, but he said, let's see, anyway, he said, no new indictments, unless or until he contradicts all the witnesses up to date.
He said there are 11 or 12 misdemeanors to be charged against the committee to re-elect as a corporation or as an entity.
But he said there's been like, now he said,
As soon as we get through this phase that we're going through now, since Mitchell's been back, we get through the McCord phase, so to speak, they're going to turn to the whole issue of funds to pay off the defendants.
And so there are two possible crimes.
One is a violation of Campaign Practices Act for the misuse of campaign funds, if in fact campaign funds have been used to pay attorney's fees or living costs of defendants.
Then, he said, there is the question of obstruction of justice.
And I said, well, I wonder if you'd explain that to me.
Okay.
He said, if you give a man money to plead guilty, that is not a crime.
If he's guilty.
If you give a man money not to testify, that's a crime.
So, he said, this is a very tough...
offense to establish.
Well, I was going to say, it seems to me that we haven't, I say we, our people haven't predicted the main defense, and we should tell them not to testify.
Right.
They said they were going to plead guilty, and we felt sorry for them.
Right.
We shouldn't be helping them.
They're all guilty.
Well, that doesn't matter.
In fact, they're all.
Well, anyway, everybody knows they're guilty.
So that's the report on that.
It's not a crime to give a man money.
That's right.
Unless you are getting him to do that when he's not guilty in order to obstruct justice against somebody else.
But these fellows were guilty.
Why sure.
They were standing there with egg in their face and the police walked in, you know.
I suppose you could say that the man is guilty.
You are guilty, but the police don't.
Don't tell what you know will give you money.
Is that the way?
Is that what you're trying to do?
Well, actually, the non-testifying is the person to the crime.
The person who is guilty.
But when a guy is guilty, it's hard to prove that.
Well, yes.
Testify about what?
Testify about who he knows.
The acts of others.
Yes.
That's the story.
But I think that McCord and Hunt
Half testified.
Apparently the Cubans testified.
There wasn't anything.
So...
But McCarter said on that.
He was...
But McCarter probably testified.
He was given money to shut up.
Yeah.
That's right.
Yeah, I think so.
Hunter's not... McCarter will try and go through Mrs. Hunt to Parkinson.
At least that's what his public statement said.
I don't know if you noticed what happened to Urban overnight, but Ritchie slapped him down.
Well, I was going to ask why he did that.
Why Irvin did it?
Why Ritchie did it.
Well, I don't know why Ritchie did it.
He reaffirmed the doctrine of separation of powers in very forceful terms.
He gave Irvin a constitutional license.
Of course, Ritchie's absolutely right.
Sure.
The civil suits and the criminal suit thing should go forward.
Well, we'll file that away in our reticule, and someday that may be useful.
Let me ask you a couple of other things.
You've got to run on to him.
Well, no, that's all right.
I'm fine.
You sure?
Yes, sir.
No, I'm fine.
It's about security.
Armstrong.
I'd like to know if you can call him now.
Yes.
I'll tell you what I'll do.
I'll call him.
No.
Yes, he's all right.
What did I say?
Okay.
Have everything be clear.
You saw Mitchell's statement?
Yeah.
I hired on him.
If I had known that, I would have killed him.
Thank you.
Did Gordon go back yesterday?
Do you know what they said?
Can you find out and have Steve give me a note here in the President's office?
Thank you.
No, he did.
He did.
He contacted Silver, and they made an appointment to get together, and he's going to get the details.
Let me ask you about the, on that, the, my understanding, the money was returned to the committee.
It was not returned to the committee, is that correct?
The fund that Bob had?
Oh, yes.
Yes, it was.
Yeah, but why didn't it return to the group?
Because he was an official of the committee at that time.
Sure.
Yes, sir.
Yep.
Yep.
He was the designated receipt.
No, he wouldn't get a receipt.
It was interesting.
They were supposed to get a receipt.
And that's the way Dean had it set up, that the money, Dean acted as a contact.
The money you then, it's your judgment, is that it was actually obtained for the purpose of helping the defendant.
I don't know, but my suspicion is that it was viewed as free money by the committee, that is, not within the reportable money.
And so they were interested in not having it taken back into the bookkeeping process.
at 1701, and that's why everyone gave one to a room.
The money that was incidentally in the tent that was collected before April, didn't that go through the bookkeeping process?
Not all of it.
Some of it was in Herb's custody.
Some of it was siphoned off.
That's right.
Siphoned off at any time.
That's correct.
That's my understanding.
That a lot of Herb's money did go into the bookkeeping.
Yes.
But that they siphoned some off in advance.
Well, for this fund, for instance, for your own personal polling.
Oh.
So it wouldn't have to come out of the committee funds.
Then the rest of it was .
That's right.
That's right.
Some of it goes back to late 70, 71.
But he gave it to LaRue as a member of the financial committee, right?
Right.
Why was it that Dean asked Vance what?
Who to give it to?
Oh, Dean and Baldwin's request.
I thought we want to get this money out of here.
Well, actually, it's Strong's request.
Strong said to Bob, what do I do with it?
Bob said, send it back to the committee.
Strong said to Dean, who do I send it to?
Dean said, I'll find out.
You're on good ground there, Baldwin.
I just wanted to be sure that I didn't miss something here.
Why did Sloan know all this?
Why did he specify it?
I think Sloan probably reconstructed a certain amount of this by just calling the people and asking them.
Why would Grant Drew or the U.S. Attorney be interested in knowing about the $350,000?
Is that trying to lead to their second basis?
Yes, yes.
Trying to find out the source of the money that went to the defendants.
Have they called LaRue?
No, not yet.
That would be in the second phase.
I would think so.
Is anybody, is anybody who is representing LaRue?
O'Brien.
Yeah.
Can you find out, or will you try to find out what does LaRue say?
I have, I have a preliminary rundown from O'Brien right now.
Could you give me an idea?
LaRue will say he never heard of anybody.
He doesn't know anything.
He's just a boy from Mississippi.
He's going to try and
And wave it away.
Yeah.
What in the Christ is going to happen?
I mean, you're trying to leave a hell of a mystery.
No, I don't think so, pretty much.
He's going back to the Grand Jury Monday morning to correct on the record.
He corrected the record on the phone with silver scheduling for early Monday morning.
That isn't going to hurt.
It's going to help, in my opinion.
It's a strong thing.
That was strong.
It's been very important.
I went back and checked.
It was 328.
So much was used for advertising.
It'll help in terms of his credibility.
Not only him, but Bob.
You told Bob that, therefore, don't even get his attention out and talk to him.
Right.
All right.
Let's move on.
Well, frankly, I think there's real exposure in this.
And I don't think that LaRue can get away with that because of taxes, if nothing else.
U.S. Attorney will say, well, look, Mr. LaRue, on your testimony, we've got a fellow here who says he turned over over $300,000 to you.
And you say you don't know anything about it.
Now, somebody owes income tax on $300,000.
Who is it?
And he'll say, I don't know.
Couldn't tell you.
Don't know.
Can't imagine where the guy got that idea.
Well, I don't know.
This is what O'Brien told me on San Clemente.
Oh, I understand.
I've already done that.
I've already done that.
I've passed the word to him.
By a third party.
What, would Mitchell have had Strong to go in and say he didn't turn it on and back?
Couldn't.
He couldn't.
Because it had already been testified that it didn't hold the truth.
Last November, he had told the U.S. attorney that he had it.
Who, Strong?
Yeah.
Oh, Strong said what?
What did he do?
The U.S. attorney called him and said, we have evidence that you have a fund of $350,000 at your holding.
He said, yes, sir.
That's before he turned it back?
Yeah.
Well, he didn't turn it back until he got the call.
That's right.
They said to Bob, say we've got this fund of money, and I just had a call about it.
What do I do with it?
Bob said send it back to the committee.
I forgot all about it.
Sure, we had forgotten that.
You know, we didn't need to have so much money for using it.
Yep.
What was it used for, that mailing?
Could you find out?
I'm trying to find out.
It was sent to Broody, the PR man, you know, one of the Broody brothers.
And I have asked him to find out for me.
Colson's coming in this morning, and I'm going to get into that with him.
He will remember, I'm sure, what it was for.
I got to Colson last night.
I didn't talk to him.
He's at the Middlesex Club.
Good.
It was good, too, anyway, you know, to let him deal with it.
These folks must not be able to go to me in business groups.
Oh, that's right.
That's right.
Did he tell you that he was coming in?
Well, I'll touch base with him, and he can give it to Kachigian.
Thank you.
Kachigian.
What a man.
Well, of course, he's only one man until Pat gets back.
Yes, he's got two men.
Well, but then I want Pat.
I want Pat to pick the people.
There isn't any point trying to pick a staff if you can't.
Because you'd never win on that.
Well, we'll encourage Pat to get guys he has confidence in.
They're developing, you know.
They've got to get down to digging these facts and go after it.
Rue will say, he never heard of anyone.
He doesn't know anything.
He's just a boy from Mississippi.
He's going to try and wave it away at anyone.
Yeah.
What in the Christ is going to happen?
I mean, you're trying to leave a hell of a mystery.
No, I don't think so, pretty much.
He's going back to the Grand Jury Monday morning to correct on the record.
He corrected the record on the phone with Silver.
Silver is scheduling for early Monday morning.
That isn't going to hurt.
It's going to help, in my opinion.
It's a strong thing.
That was very wrong.
It's being very important because I went back and checked.
It was 328.
Yeah.
So much was used for advertising.
Yeah.
It didn't help anything in terms of his credibility.
Not only him, but Bob.
Yeah.
He told Bob to therefore don't even get his head down.
Right.
All right.
Well, frankly, I think there's real exposure in this.
And I don't think
that LaRue can get away with that because of taxes, if nothing else.
U.S. Attorney will say, well, look, Mr. LaRue, on your testimony, we've got a fellow here who says he turned over over $300,000 to you, and you say you don't know anything about it.
Now, somebody owes income tax on $300,000.
Who is it?
And he'll say, I don't know.
Couldn't tell you.
Don't know.
Can't imagine where the guy got that idea.
Well, I don't know.
This is what O'Brien told me on San Clemente.
You owe it to O'Brien.
Oh, I understand.
I've already done that.
I've already done that.
I've passed the word to him.
By third party.
What, did Mitchell have strong to go in and say he didn't turn around on that?
Couldn't.
He couldn't.
Because it had already been testified that it didn't.
Well, now he's told the truth.
Last November, he had told the U.S. Attorney that he had it.
Who, Strong?
Yeah.
Oh.
The U.S. attorney called me and said, we have evidence that you have a fund of $50,000.
He said, yes, sir.
Yeah.
That's right.
Then he said to Bob, say we've got this fund of money, and I just had a call about it.
What do I do with it?
Bob said, send it back to the committee.
I forgot all about it.
I'm trying to find out.
It was sent to Baruti, the PR man, you know, one of the Baruti brothers.
And I have asked him to find out for me.
Colson's coming in this morning, and I'm going to get into that with him.
He will remember, I'm sure, what it was for.
It's good to anyway, you know, to let him feel.
These folks must not feel they ought to be in business groups.
Oh, that's right.
That's right.
Yeah.
Did he tell you that he was coming in?
No.
No.
Well, I had.
He said if you had told him to write something up.
Yeah.
And I said, for God's sake, also.
Chuck said, you were telling me that we ought to get into all these counterattack things.
And I said, wait a minute.
John tells me there's nothing in the black box.
He said, no, that's not where we're going.
Well.
I'll touch base with him, and he can give it to Kachijian.
And they can give it to him.
One man.
Well, of course, he's only one man until Pat gets back.
Yes, two men.
Well, but then I want Pat.
I want Pat to pick the people.
There isn't any point trying to pick a staff if you can't.
Because you'd never win on that.
But we'll encourage Pat to get guys.
He has confidence.
They're developing, you know.
Yeah, but they've got to get down and dig up these facts and go back to it.
Well, I wanted to pass on to you my talk about Connelly.
Oh, yes.
Right.
I got your message about the energy message, and that's done.
I just want to be sure he has a look at it.
Right.
So that he can mark the political things.
Right.
That was done alongside.
Well, it was very good.
He's fine.
Actually, what the hell do you think we should do, John?
Well, he is...
And really, for all of them going up and taking on the committee, basically, I went through it for a while.
Maybe all of them could not have said, thanks, and all that sort of thing.
He said, well, maybe we have any skills on the sheet there.
Of course, he sees it as a, and I said, well, and I threw up, and I said, well, John, I said, I'll look here.
I threw up, and I said, okay, some people think that.
I said, I don't know what, I was not aware of that.
No.
Because he said, if he's guilty, do it.
But if he's not guilty, you've got to, you should defend him or something.
Because he's after all, it's not right.
And in regards to public opinion and all the horror and all that bullshit, you should defend the man.
That's his view.
Donald.
as to what to do and so forth.
He felt, he feels very strongly that we need what he called a very good, independent lawyer in here who was advising me.
He started, I told him about Garment.
He thought that was good.
I don't know if he has that knowledge of Garment's expertise here.
Moore came up with this last night, too.
He said Garment is fine, but he says he's compromised.
He was Mitchell's partner.
I know, it's a public solution.
Yeah.
See, what John Connolly wants is an independent man who can go out and say things publicly.
Yeah.
He likes very much that idea of the Dean of the Texas Law School, right?
Right.
A hell of a good man.
A hell of a good man.
And your guy, .
I like where I said it.
Right.
Now, what would you do if the president recommended a man to conduct an investigation of the violence?
No.
See, Moore's formula goes like this.
Moore's.
Dick Moore.
He says, Dean takes a leave of absence.
Does he believe he should?
Yeah.
Yeah.
He says he's got a conflict of interest.
The ethical thing is for him to take a leave of absence.
Then he says, sooner the better.
Then he says, you've got a vacancy, counsel of the president.
Can't be government, Mitchell's partner, president's partner.
Shouldn't be a low-stature guy.
Should be a high-stature guy.
Of the chappy rose, and then I tread right on you.
Yes.
Why not?
Why not?
acting or special or temporary?
Well, he's got a, he's got his professorial.
Well, we've got, we've got a couple of names.
Uh, Ed Lombard, the former chief justice of the second circuit is available.
Former US attorney, 70 years of age, very vigorous.
He's a possibility.
I've got a couple other names up there that I can't remember on hand that I've scrounged from around.
Yeah, right.
I did.
Very high.
I ran a whole list by him.
He knocked a couple off.
I didn't run by in the sense of counsel to the president, but I said, I'm just trying to get a list of names.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
As he goes around here and talks to our people, you find out they are honest men.
That's the point.
Then, then... What's his scenario?
Well... Don't let me hold you.
No, no, no, no.
I don't have anything until Colson gets here, so I'm fine.
Now, his thought is a whole integrated series of steps.
Right.
And I don't want to come at you with the whole thing until we're ready, because there's some loose ends and zigglers in this, and we're working on it.
But it would be, as a part of that,
the dean takes a leave, and then we get a prestigious guy to come in.
Now, Lombard will be, I suspect, less facile as Triumf Council, sitting up there in the Erdogan Committee, for instance, than Wright would be.
Wright's a showman.
He's also an eminent constitutional authority, and could give Erdogan— I'd vote for him before Lombard.
Yeah.
I'm just starting to think, I'm just wondering if a guy was, well, he's a showboat maybe.
Yeah, he is.
Come in and have a hurrah here.
Do you know him?
I know him, sure.
Call him.
You want me to call him?
Okay.
The president's talking to John McConaughey about this.
We're in need of this.
We have a free hand.
We can deal with it.
We can do great service to the country if you would come in and handle this for us.
Till the fall, anyway.
Yeah.
Uh, I, incidentally, I called Whizzer White and said, could I come up and see you?
He says, I know why you're calling.
He says, you're calling about the goddamn FBI.
And I said, right.
He said, save your trip.
He said, I have never seen a story get started that whirled around this town worse than this story about me and the FBI.
And he said, the hell of it is that I think it's an important job, and you need a good man.
And I don't want to crap on him.
So he says, I can't knock the story down in any kind of an effective way.
So he said, I'd just appreciate it if you'd do everything you could to turn it over.
The congressman last night braced me on divine.
Oh, yes, that's building.
There's a petition going around the house.
I told Sam, and I said, Sam, you're too close to me to go in.
He wouldn't be the right man, I believe.
I don't think so.
He's too passionate, you know, too ideological.
He's right where he is.
We've got the best man, Berg.
Berg's still available, as far as I know, and get that trial over.
As you notice, Ellsberg's lawyer has heart trouble.
So Bernd told the assistant trial counsel to get ready to finish the case.
He wasn't going to wait.
And he's pushing it along.
Get everything in Senate, and I'll get the damn case under.
He wants the job.
I think he does, yeah.
Sure he does.
But now, what is the rest of the more scenario?
Well, it has to do with public statements.
Does he?
What is his view about ?
He's for it.
Now, Ziegler is the guy who's most vigorous for these statements, and Dick and I keep saying, Ron, what are they going to say?
Is this going to be an encyclopedia, or is this going to be a Reader's Digest version?
And Ron says, well, it's a Reader's Digest version.
And we say, okay, now, we can agree to the principle on that, but until we can see those statements sitting right in front of us,
We're kidding ourselves.
So that's the exercise that's going on right now, is the statement writing.
And let me say, on the statement writing, though, I am not as concerned as some are, John, about the fact, well, if you say something, if it is untrue, I'm concerned.
Sure.
But the fact you don't tell everything, I'm not as concerned, because the disclaimer should go in.
Now, the purpose of this statement, I want to emphasize,
is to cover the charges that have been made today.
And the other charges that have been made, I will respond quickly to them.
I mean, I can't anticipate other charges.
I think that disclaimer on Bob's is essential because he said, no, you've all done that ridiculous thing.
I don't believe Bob should try to anticipate.
I wouldn't try to make their case on things that they may not know about.
I understand.
This money thing, you'd say, he ought to cover that.
He ought to cover this.
There has been, in fact, there's been a story, hasn't there?
Money funds, yeah.
He controlled funds.
Yeah, he controlled funds.
Let me tell you what the situation is.
There was a thing under the 17th campaign for $50,000 that was left for the purpose of this.
He said that fund was kept in the safe of that house, which at only $28,000 was used for certain ads.
of course, the campaign.
After the campaign was over, I directed it to be returned to the campaign committee, and it was returned on support of the thumb treatment, not on reuse in that period.
I stated right off, and that blows that story with a little wonder.
So, Grady, pleading self-discrimination, I guess, is not good, but we expect some things that aren't good, don't we?
What is the degree of everything on the Self-Defamation Act?
I apparently did.
He just was airtight.
And they only had him on about 40 minutes, and they said they weren't going to get any place.
What did Chapin say then?
What was his story?
Chapin said that he and Strong had come to Bob with this idea, and that Bob had approved it and said arrange a financing with Combox.
And that Chapin had not touched base with Bob
frequently about it, that Bob did not supervise it, that Japheth did not supervise it, that he had sporadic contact.
And that was it.
He was very bold, free, forthcoming.
He felt that he had had a good piece of testimony.
And then Glanzer, the Assistant U.S. Attorney, just landed all over him afterward and said, this is a terrible thing you've done.
to smirch the White House, and he agreed.
Eight and a half.
So that's kind of simple, Dwight, as he left.
But I suspect that that is a part of a Silbert-Blancer game.
To prove that they're— A hard guy and a soft guy.
Silbert is nice.
He's friendly.
And he's buddy-buddy.
And Blancer's a mean bastard.
And so when Silbert calls Chapin next week, he'll say,
Listen, that Glanzer, you know, he's really out to get you.
What I meant is that Glanzer and the U.S. Attorney, I think, are trying to make the case that they are being used as harm in the White House.
Oh, sure.
Sure they are.
And wouldn't you?
Sure.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Because they know they're trying to go out there and account.
The thing Strong told me that I didn't realize is that this stranger is predominantly black.
Yeah, I heard that.
Three out of three whites.
Must be unbelievable.
What a zoo.
All right, now the rest of the Senate.
Well, let me hedge on this with you, because I'm not really, and there's parts of it that we've talked about that I don't want to advance.
None of that's for me.
Thanks.
No, no, I didn't want it.
I just didn't want you to go to trouble.
Thank you.
There are parts of it that we don't feel comfortable with and that we want to come at you with later today.
I'm inclined to think that the part of it that has to do with our public relations stance toward the Urban Committee needs a lot more work, and that's part of the problem.
They've got quite an elaborate scenario for making us appear forthcoming with the Urban Committee that I don't think is going to come off, and I want to work on that.
We'll get back to you.
Oh, no, it must appear to be forthcoming, but the committee is out to get us.
That's Conway's point.
Conway says the committee is the enemy.
If your enemy here, and he says you don't have any goddamn delusions about that committee, get up there and fight them.
That's his view.
Which, of course, he believes fighting in the public and thinks, and he thinks Bob could go up and fight him and make the committee look bad.
That's what he really thinks.
He thinks that, and he took right out to the court and said Bob goes up there and
He's outraged.
He takes all these senators and so forth.
He can make a committee with that.
Now, let me just run a scenario.
The other thing, however, in fact, the reason I'm disappointed that it could come out of the grand jury is that it's the best thing to have here is to have the legal system in its operation indict some people.
So that the Irwin Committee doesn't have to do it.
You see, that's the thing that concerns me.
And that's why I'm really amazed that they told me that nothing's going to happen to McGruder.
On the other hand, you say you're going to have a hard, hard talk with Dean.
What do you tell him?
What's your present view behind it?
I have to tell him that as matters are now going,
Nothing has stirred up this grand jury so far, so that he, Dean, will be the operating, efficient cause of a change of direction in this thing.
All right.
Now, I have to assume that that isn't going to make any difference to Dean.
Because he's prepared.
He's prepared to go down and just tell the truth, just tell what he knows.
not reach out and tell them.
Very, very, shall we say, limited way.
Oh, you want me to answer a question?
Like Strong, I must say, going over to Strong gave a very detailed rundown.
Glanzer, while he was snide in his manner, was not very thorough in asking the
the, uh, reach out questions.
And, uh, it surprised me a little bit, because they could have asked Strong some much tougher questions.
Now, for example, if Dean, in the afternoon, I think, gets in there, he's going to have to say that he talked to the group.
Yes.
What in the name of the Christ does John Mitchell want Dean to do here?
He wants him not to go to the grand jury.
All right, can we do that?
What's that?
Let me ask you that.
Oh, I suppose, uh, under, uh,
Ritchie's doctrine, for instance, that she could invoke executive privilege, even what?
Well, why not?
Cover it.
I mean, that's a... Cover it, one day.
Cover it.
Yep.
You'll take it to the grand jury.
You keep away from the defendant, not the grand jury.
That's it.
That's the point.
That's consistent with your theory, that that's the form in which you've set it down.
Right.
And also, it's an area where he acted.
He should act.
That's right.
And he's only going to say what he did, what he observed.
He should say that.
He should say that.
The U.S. attorney, I will answer questions only.
As to what I did, I cannot answer questions.
as to what I know from others.
I mean, what I know from others, because I was conducting my investigation.
But I will tell you what I did, what I know.
But we think that's what he'd say.
Now, in the aftermath, they didn't really have to say it.
He talked to the room.
You'll have to say, I've done that.
I've done that.
I've done that.
See, I encountered the fact that Garment was meeting with O'Brien yesterday.
So I gave Garment a note to give to O'Brien.
It was a written-out note.
abbreviated the facts that Strawn testified as follows regarding giving the money to LaRue.
Now, Brian will know what to do with that.
What in the name of Christ is John Mitchell doing here?
What in the name of God is he?
Or is it just...
Well, I assume he's got as good sources as I have in the grand jury.
Or Peterson or somebody.
And he knows that as of right now, they're not going to indict him.
Well, that's good.
Now, his theory is, if I could just get those guys in the White House to keep Dean away from that, maybe I can get through this thing without this boat getting rocked.
Well, figure your odds here.
Yeah, somebody else will get it done.
that it'll come out some other way.
Because in the money end, the weak read is Sloan.
And they haven't had him back yet.
But after the election, Sloan went back in as a consultant to the committee to reconstruct the financial records of the committee.
So he not only knows the before, but he knows the after.
I don't know whether John feels that Sloan is under control or not, but I'd sure hate to have my life riding on Sloan's dependability at this point.
He's just not very strong.
So, that weakens the odds some.
You've got Morris Sands, who has gotten a lot of hang-ups of one kind or another, and who's up very tight about this whole grand jury thing.
So Mitchell's got a problem there.
I don't know.
I doubt it.
I doubt it.
I think that practice over there was always to keep more in the dark about it.
Now you've got a whole town full of guilty lawyers.
And you've got this one crazy one from New York.
What's his name?
I forget his name.
Jewish one.
Yeah.
Who...
He's running around saying a lot of reckless stuff.
And that he objected to that, and that's why he was fired, you know, all that.
Now, he's my court lawyer.
So, it's not a very...
I think that that is one that can be obfuscated.
You just got to...
It's a PR problem.
And it must be John, because that's the one that potentially could involve Bob, I guess.
Well, and John.
John Dean.
And me, to the extent that Dean came over and asked me.
The knowledge.
Sure.
Although you had pretty good answers.
I had first-rate answers, as far as that's concerned.
But nevertheless, you know, I was... Why didn't you answer me?
No.
Correct.
Now, back to the question of Mitchell and whether he has a right to feel secure, I think he has every reason not to feel secure, by reason of the fact that so many people are involved in all of this.
You've got Kambach floating around out here.
Grand Jury has not even come near Kambach.
But the Urban Committee has its footprints all over for Kambach's concern.
The Urban Committee will be holding hearings before the Grand Jury recesses or is discharged.
CARL HULSEVITZ.
Well, then my proposal is that we can't get the Grand Jury to act on anybody before the Urban Committee starts its hearings.
That's not going to happen.
No.
That's not going to happen.
I could cause that to happen, I think.
Uh, talk to Colson on that point, we'll see what we can do.
Sure.
You bet I will.
Let's get his advice.
All right.
Get his advice on Monday night before everybody leaves.
All right.
Now, the way I would handle the home and so forth and so on, if he is going home, before they're heading home, I can say, I came back to the line on Monday night, or Monday morning.
I don't know if we should be that slow.
Here's what we should have.
I'm just not sure if I can believe the television confrontation, the spectacle of the White House people being dragged before the committee.
But this is right.
And also, it's a formal public session.
We would say that the White House people will meet with the members of the committee in executive session.
Now, that means without correction, I understand.
the committee will have the option of making all testimony public.
That way the intricate constitutional questions, separation of powers, can be discussed as they should be in the judicial atmosphere rather than in a public arena.
Insofar as the separation of powers is concerned, too, that the executive session shows respect for the separation, whereas it avoids the public confrontation between the legislative and the executive, and yet does not suppress any of the
All the information should be put out to the community.
We are not trying to suppress the information.
We simply believe that these matters are so intricate and so forth in the public that they should be discussed in a calm, rational, judicial manner with people and not in a showboat atmosphere and so forth.
Now, who agrees with me?
If you could get an executive session, it would be hard.
I'll take it in a minute.
Yes, sir.
If you could not, in other words, would you figure you could not get it?
I think I probably won't, but... Is that what your current offer is?
My offer is only no television.
It is not executive session.
Well, as a matter of fact, it's broader than that.
I've said courtroom rules, which is to say no stills, no movies, no television.
I don't know what you say executive session.
I don't know.
I think what I ought to do is phone Baker and say, well, your colleagues, Brock and Bush, sort of cracked out on you.
And they certainly didn't sustain the burden of proof over here.
With regard to going to California?
Yeah.
Because that is true.
Brock particularly?
No, Bush particularly.
What did Brock say?
Well, Brock said, well, I see your argument.
And he says, I wish that.
Bush said, I'm straight on the fence.
He says, I can see negatives both ways.
And he said, marginally, he said, I'd like to see it all aired and all that.
And he said, I think your boys have made good witnesses.
But at the same time, I say, I put the other argument.
He says, at the same time, I see the negatives you express.
He says, I guess I'm square on the fence.
OK. With regard to the next question, the way I would handle all of them,
rather than having, I'm just getting around to this theory, not having the committee have to bring everything out, and the White House doesn't.
Here's where I disagree with Connie.
I believe that there's enormous merit in the White House having conducted, even while Dean is still here, on our own initiative, the President's man stepped forward and said,
I think it's very remote that he would be.
Stone and Chapin showed his role in this to be so perfunctory that I doubt seriously that they'd call him.
I think on the Segretti thing, that both Strawn and Chapin are telling the God's truth.
All of them didn't know Segretti, never met him, none of them called him, as far as I know.
I mean, not to what the Christy would, you know, Chapin was, you know, out doing his little games as the top-of-the-band man.
Well, you would favor statements.
I'd favor statements.
Here's what I would do.
I would conquer it one way.
I would put out the defense statement.
I would not, at this point, throw out, I would only talk in general terms of what the Democrats did.
I would save that for the committee.
In other words, so that you've got a hell of a bang to give them and then put the white paper up and the charges against the Democrats when the Democrats come at you on your testimony.
Otherwise, if you throw the whole thing out then,
they'll have a chance to dress it away.
I'd give us a little time to get that white paper together.
I really want this done, John.
I don't want you to kick the asses around like they've ever been kicked.
I want Colson, Buchanan, and all these people, you know, find whatever they can.
There's bound to be some material to get for the earliest people.
There's a chapter and verse.
That's how, you see what I mean?
That allows us then, that gives you something to, the committee will not expect that.
But then he should, all of his statements should in fact say, he says in general terms, we have to meet, we have to deal with the fact that we have all of these other problems.
But his general speaking is all out of time on the Democratic, on the McGovern campaign for their violence and so forth and so on.
The all out of time chapter and verse should come
before the committee, so the demands, that can be the lead before the committee.
At this time, it should basically be defensive.
Defensive and open.
Otherwise, the problem with his going up to the committee and doing it is that the attack on the Democrats will be lost, and his omissions on Segretti and all the others, and that's gonna be the big news.
I'd like to get the Segretti admission, the money admission, and all that sort of thing out now,
Yeah, sure do.
I think it does.
It helps now also.
Now, another way to do this is, you know, we've talked about having the leadership and the cabinet and all that kind of thing.
And doing a modified version of that would be
to call together the White House staff, or a substantial portion of it, and let Haldeman talk to the White House staff about all this.
Most of them are pretty much in the dark.
I know, but they aren't the ones.
why do i ask that well i'm trying to compose a friendly forum well so they go out and say everything what good will they do
I'm not thinking of it in terms of going out as much as I am the fact that there was just the fact of an error.
In other words, the report would be, here's Haldeman's statement.
He also freely discussed the matter at a meeting of the White House staff yesterday, period.
It's contributory.
It's certainly not
decisive but it is the fact that it is being freely discussed if you go it up to the yeah i wouldn't want that if you go up to the cabinet i feel you shouldn't have the cabinet you shouldn't have the leaders they're not quite it was my idea to do the fact that it just looks like you're escalating the goddamn thing yeah beyond belief you know here's it's like the court of your peers the house of lords sitting out here and asking all the gentlemen and saying yeah
Well, the thing I've been concerned about is that the White House is being pictured as afraid to talk about this and all bound up and all that kind of thing.
And it wouldn't.
Well, you can say here's a statement I'm going to make tomorrow.
You should be interested in calling it.
Because it doesn't involve all of us.
Let me just explain what this means.
And then that's it.
And then again, claw some backgrounds and says, you know, it's being freely discussed.
the Haldeman statement.
I don't think as far as the others, I wouldn't give a damn.
I mean, Coulson is on his own.
I don't think whether Coulson makes a statement or not, I don't want that to...
I think Coulson's statement would just be, I didn't do it.
That's right.
I think really Haldeman's is the one that matters.
He's the only one that's on the White House staff.
He also, in his statement, should say that I have, that is the report that I personally, he, Haldeman personally,
every member of the White House staff who was present, who was a member of the staff in that period, including those from your Senate period, and all of them have denied any decision.
In other words, all of them could speak basically for the whole White House staff.
I kind of like that idea.
All of them have denied it in person.
But then, I wouldn't have others go out.
Dane, I wouldn't have Dane make a statement.
I mean, that's...
I think basically it's sort of the idea that all of the speech was bad.
And all he says is that they personally denied it.
And then use my sward statement there.
There's no reason why you can't say all of the given sward statements provided sward statements that they were not involved in this.
Now they say, but what about the aftermath of the ransom?
Well, let that come when it does.
You see what I mean?
In other words, Baldwin, in his position of leadership in the White House staff, would say, I think you should know, you should know every member of the White House staff that's in the sworn state.
Now here is the situation as far as I'm concerned, you know, what we've done.
And he should cover cheaper than his state.
He should cover stronger than his state.
See what I mean?
He'd have to.
Right.
He would not.
They were close.
He would not cover close.
You know what I mean?
Or B, they haven't, you know, that's up to them.
I don't think that a Coulson statement, that's why before you get to Coulson, don't have it.
It's like the album on the set.
It'll make it difficult for the others.
Would you agree with me that a Coulson statement is pretty good?
He's screwed himself.
He's already handled that.
I'm going to encourage him to just fly low for the time being.
But the Holden statement will have great meaning.
Well, then... All of this is a statement.
And we replace Dean, in effect.
Dean goes on paid leave.
You can pay him, you know, the whole time since he's commissioned.
I discovered that you can grant unlimited leave to commissioned personnel.
I would say that he's going on leave until this matter is cleared up.
Is that what he says?
I think so.
He comes to you with that.
He says...
The more I'm drawn into this, the more it's apparent to me that I have a conflict of interest because I've got to be concerned about my own personal situation.
Because I had to charge myself when I kind of conducted the investigation, and I asked him to place you on leave until he goes on leave.
And if anybody asks about the pay, yes, he's on pay.
And that's commonly done.
He's working up overtime.
He's on annual leave or he's on...
And I'll call this morning to see what his availability is.
And I'll get these other names for you.
You may see someone there that you like better.
I like Ray the best.
I like his monster.
Yeah.
He'd be damn good with Irvin, you know, because he's full of southern anecdotes and he smokes stogies and he's the same kind of a...
constitutional hit shooter, you know.
And so they get along fine.
I don't mean get along in a buddy-buddy sense, but I mean in a sense of being able to talk.
Tommy, whatever it says, Tommy the clerk is very close to her.
And that's another thing.
Is he too, is it completely out of the possibility that you could get Tommy the clerk to do this job for us?
You can probably jump at it in a minute.
Well, don't just throw it out.
He's 71 years old.
He knows about this man.
He knows about my house.
He knows exactly where it is.
And so forth and so on.
So, sir, I've got an end of this email public relations.
Yeah.
That's intriguing.
Colson probably knows what flies there are on him.
Why don't I find out?
One of them is Greg.
Oh, well, he's got two or three gals stashed around him.
He should have them.
He's a bachelor.
Yeah, so where would he be in a few years?
That's his problem.
You might ask about Tom.
I will.
But I think Greg, let's move on that today.
I think that these are the things.
Yeah, I think we obviously don't have a candidate at the moment.
We have to wait and burn it off.
Right.
Unless we come up with some super star-like white, you know.
Okay.
Do you have any... That's another one.
That's why I said, did you ever get cold water?
Never did, no.
He never could fight.
He's still bouncing around.
He's out in Arizona, California, and he's all around.
I've still got a call on for him, and I'll get it.
I've tried to debate quite a bit.
I suspect that's where it ends up.
One of my, one of the rats, a conservative yesterday, shared back how he felt about legal services outside the White House staff.
Some of the White House staff disagreed with the services.
Well, I don't disagree, you know.
Well, I mean...
I don't know about legal services.
It's objective, I guess we're talking about.
I think it's, but it's the independent corporations
we're going back in with the same bill we were in with last year.
And Phillips would like to modify that bill in ways that, in effect, would do away with legal services.
I mean, it's cleverly done, but that's what it is.
That's buying trouble that I just don't think you deserve.
It's a doctrinaire, conservative position, and it
You will have the Bar Association down on you.
One last one.
I've got a message.
Our bill is a middle road.
Yes.
Did Bob tell you about his meeting with Iga?
No.
I don't see Bob.
What is it?
He saw Iga.
He saw him two, three days ago.
And your vice president has problems of his own.
Yes.
No, no.
Something else.
Legal?
Kind of.
Apparently.
No, no.
Just back when he was governor.
Okay.
Yep.
Somebody find him?
Apparently, there's an investigation going on in Maryland.
And he asked Bob for help and turned it off.
And why does he go out and say that he is appalled and appalled at the way the White House should have his hand?
It's classic.
I mean, it's just ludicrous.
It's ridiculous.
I mentioned it to you.
Bob asked you to do it.
I can tell you that I told him that he felt he had been ready to switch.
He did, because of this.
And I said, you were absolutely right.
And he is not as, he feels that on this thing, he says, look, there's, he's getting over, as far as you get the main thing already, and he said, I said, well, they're going to go on campaign financing.
He says, it doesn't make any difference.
That's kind of, that's kind of, that's, I mean, people would get a little tired of the campaign financing.
From a bang to a whimper.
And he, he says that, and also, he doesn't, he isn't so concerned about the cigarette.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
Well, my preference all the way through has been to get Dwight or somebody to go out front and tell the damn Segretti story.
It isn't that bad a story.
I was hopeful we'd get Dwight and Segretti to do it together.
But apparently Segretti's lawyer has told him not to.
Then maybe Hall would tell him.
Ask all of them.
Here's a Segretti story.
Whatever you say.
Or even then, Chasen should make a statement separately.
Well, Chasen can make a written statement.
Chasen's a
Not a terribly good witness, I'm afraid.
And, uh... Well, I had someone in the chamber pass a written statement.
That's what I had in mind.
I didn't call him and shoot him for the statement.
Oh, I did, too.
At this point.
I did, too.
Uh... How about this?
How about...
He says, I have here a statement from Chuck Chapin.
All right.
How about this?
To add a little spice.
At this White House staff meeting of mine, Chapin comes.
Why we respected the White House staff
And he tells the Segretti story.
Now he'd feel comfortable there.
And then we put on a rhythm scene.
Yeah, I think it would.
Because it would emphasize the separation.
I would let them ride side by side, I think.
You'd have the two pictures.
It wouldn't just be, it wouldn't just be Haldeman that you'd be focusing on.
That's the danger in this that I see.
You refocus everything on Bob.
Right.
Now, I talked to Ziegler and Moore quite a lot about how to, how to address Bob's image.
And they both
I agree that we've got to do something.
They both reject out of hand the idea of taking lead advances.
They say, and there are a lot of good reasons.
I'm glad you're ready, Howard, because at this point, there's going to be a race.
Well, I think that's just my idea.
You've got to be on Anderson's edge.
Sure.
It's the typical clack.
The weak points that give.
But they both argue that that's a plea of guilty.
All right, fine.
But they do say... Connolly's point is this, John, you understand.
You've got to make a decision, John.
You can't have it.
You can have it halfway.
You were mentioning the next time you went to a place where we'd have it halfway, where it wasn't, but D, you need to take a plea of that.
That is halfway, but it's the only right thing to do.
Yeah.
But you can hang it there in conflict of interest and ethical...
But in the case of Oliver, you realize that if we decide that he doesn't take a leave of absence, then we've got to decide to make an all-out fight.
We've got to go to war.
And also, we've got to stick with him.
And that means stick with him if the whole goddamn Republican caucus comes out.
I understand.
You understand?
I understand.
That's going to be tough.
But I am totally prepared to do it because I...
Frankly, that's the way the battle, the cookie crumbles, that's the way it's going to crumble.
But I want this story and Segretti and the rest out before Holloman ever goes for that convention.
I'm thoroughly convinced of that.
Well, the experts say that Holloman taking a leave would be read as a plea of no contention, so to speak.
And...
Well, there's a way to do this by freeing him up from some of the day-to-day responsibility, which we know has been going on, and by encouraging him to do a lot of this kind of thing.
And they think he should, and that he would be effective at it.
Now, I haven't talked to him about it because I didn't even want to get into this whole subject with him yesterday, but I think it's time to do it.
He and I are going to get together about his statement a little later and go through it.
Yes, there is a draft.
In my opinion, it's not suitable.
Yes, it doesn't have any bite.
It's very bland.
It tries to trick too much.
It doesn't have any of the juicy stuff in it that will make a good copy, like the magician and the pizzas and the ambassadors and the funny stuff.
You know, he had a magician down in the Virgin Islands that kept showing up at people's dinner parties.
He says, I am Alfonso the Great of St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands.
And he arrives with boxes of birds.
Well, you're a candidate, or you're an advancement, and you're putting on a big fundraiser for your candidate.
And three hours before your dinner, you're rushing around making sure everything's all right, and a magician arrives with birds and rabbits and props and all that stuff.
He says, where do I sign up?
What is the situation regarding other things?
Did he do the kind of letters?
I don't think he did.
Well, he did the Humphrey Jackson sex perversion letter.
And he did it with a phony letterhead that he had printed by some Cuban printer down in Miami that Hunt had given him.
And he did not put the correct committee designation on it.
So it's a violation of either mail or campaign practices, I'm not sure which.
But it's a kind of a statute.
It's a misdemeanor.
Yeah, because he's a lawyer.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I think this is what he's afraid of.
No, no.
But...
But I think this is what's concerning, that he'll end up being disbarred.
Legal anyway.
Maybe they can't prove it.
I don't know.
I don't know.
If I were him, I'd sure make a fight of it.
You know, I mean, it's a penny-handy violation.
But there's been so much notoriety that he's probably... His attitude toward the committee, I think, would be not to go, wouldn't it?
I assume so.
Well, Henry's already done that.
Henry has met with what amounts to executive sessions of the House Foreign Affairs Committee up there in the committee room.
Now, the reason that I would do that, I would then follow that up by saying, in Irving, before Irving comes to town, or before he gets a chance to bless them, I would put that out that we have offered to appear in the executive session of the committee, and then put, with all testimony, to be made public.
by the majority of the committee.
There's no agency except for the proper way.
That also spans with my position that we do not appear to work formally.
All right.
Where do we go from there?
Let's suppose that the committee insists on public televised hearings.
What do we do?
Stay away?
We can't.
They want our witnesses out.
They don't want the president to be in the position of not letting his people testify.
No, no.
Let's give him a choice, you see.
Now, can't we have it both ways, in a sense?
Can't we insist on this?
Let me communicate this to Baker.
And then can't we say it is obvious that it is not just information that the committee is after?
I mean, in other words, I'll take them on after the thing is settled.
They want a service.
And they're going to get Sam Urban a red jacket and a black top hat so he can be the ringmaster.
And we made an offer for
testimony under oath in executive session with a testimony to be made public so that everybody would know what these people testified to.
But no, they wanted to see themselves on television.
Yes, they want to have this rather than munitions.
Maybe the service or something.
But the point being that everybody in the country now has to recognize that that's their vote.
And then say, once we recognize this, then we know how to relate to a committee like that.
And we will.
And we're going to go up there.
And our guys are going to have been slandered, and they're going to go up there and clear their names.
But let everybody recognize that they're not going to a committee that's interested in the facts.
They're going to a committee that's interested in their television ratings.
Start the attack on the committee.
They've got to be prepared, I realize.
That's why they've got some of the walls.
Well, we have a better bargaining position at the moment than we did before, because we have been negotiating.
It's beginning to seep out.
The Tribune had a story this morning, apparently, that negotiations were underway.
I think what I want you to leave it up right now.
Well, what I ought to do.
I'd like to get that leaked out that there have been some negotiations, and we're making progress.
All right.
And then if you do have a negotiation with regard to public, you might even do that and trade it off.
Why don't I do this?
Why don't I call Aldo Beckman and say, Aldo, geez, that story has really hurt me.
I can't stand the publicity.
We are negotiating and we are making progress, but please take it easy until we get the thing wrapped up.
Well, but I had a little gasoline to the fire.
I won't ask you if I'm good or anything.
But I've confirmed his story for you.
I was interested.
Call him and say, look, I want to confirm.
You are with him.
You can't quote him.
We are team.
And I would suggest that you just keep right on it.
Keep right on it.
Remains.
Now, see, what that does is it screws Urban with his committee.
Yeah.
Because they want to negotiate.
Sure.
They want control.
You see, get it back to Connelly, so that we can think of these two different ways, John.
I don't have a point with him.
I got Chuck in about 30 minutes.
Let's really run by Connelly.
He's not used to the medium, you know.
Question and answer.
Question and answer.
The lab, the site, the market, this and that.
Connolly was murdered.
But you see, that's where Connolly's advice is in control.
Do you agree or not?
Well, it doesn't fit, Bob.
My point is, if then you're not going to fight the committee, then you've got to fight the committee on the outside.
In other words, take them.
Take their headlines away from them.
Take their headlines away from them.
Right can do that.
Right is enough of a... Yeah.
But think about what I mean when you take their headlines away from them.
First you take their headlines away by image.
Haldeman and Chip going off and making their whole statements.
Yeah.
See, that was the reason I thanked the urban monitor, Richie.
He was afraid that the depositions would bleed off all because of McCordson.
We want them to get out of there.
I think Richie's right.
Richie saw that.
Richie saw that, and he said that, you know, the senator's trying to keep this out of the press.
Smarter than he thought, sir.
No, Urban's trying to keep everything for his committee.
We're not going to allow that.
So I am convinced we've got to do this other course when we talk about things, but now you've got to kick him in the ass and get those things written.
Okay.
I'll take a look at them.
You're welcome.
All right.
Okay.
I have some ideas, sir.
The beauty of it is it can be a written statement, and that's not a given.
You don't have any writers around here, of course.
Get it to Buchanan.
Can he get back on vacation?
He's the only one that can write decently and this kind of thing.
What I mean, need not decently.
You don't want to have this written by a rate-priced urban company.
We understand that.
This is how he headed it.
As far as he headed it, by a nut-cutting time.
We can dex the patent.
That's the reason he's down there, leaving right there.
But he could work in there.
He'll get somebody else.
Well, no, he's working.
But he wanted to get work with Warren.
I think that was the reason he went down.
You understand what I mean?
Absolutely.
Just get the headline cutting things in there, this and that.
And, uh, the, uh...
Interesting, last night, a few Democrats were there.
Well, and, uh...
particularly the guy that spoke to an extreme, Joe Wagner, he says, he says, I think it's bad politics to have all this competition.
We ought to get, we ought to get, he was talking about the vetoes.
He said, we've got work to do for this country.
He said, I think this is our area where I want to get to work.
I support the president, but on this vetoes, I'll support him in the future.
It's just, I'll be just a vetoes and veterans bill.
But you're going to lose it.
I had to leave before he put him on.
I heard McClellan.
He was very good.
Scott?
Scott was magnificent.
He was one of those devs.
He could be good.
Porter was awful.
I thought he wasn't quite as good as he usually is.
But Porter was pretty strong.
It was interesting to see guys like bowling there.
Right.
A lot of talk about economic stabilization.
They're really upset with Albert.
They're really upset with Albert.
He changed signals off the middle of the street.
What do we do now?
Well, there's a lot of heavy lobbying going on.
The boys said in the sand meeting this morning, it's the heaviest they've ever seen.
Which way?
Against the rollback.
Industry, cattle growers, milk producers, a lot of people are in there.
And they're not at all sure that Albert can carry it.
So, as a matter of fact, Albert Mayfold, he's getting just really reamed out by the Oklahoma cattle growers.
And so, they will know better today.
Getting back to our scenario, you see, keep the link in the committee, and that also gets us back to the screen.
What can we do?
God damn it, you don't want to mention her.
You don't want to mention her, John.
I mean, you have to, you feel really, I mean, let me put it this way, if I thought that taking the heat of being covered up, just let me put it this way, it's a cover up, so if that one tries to do this one, if we have it together at this point, I mean, and it's that one, I mean, Christ is different.
Everything we do, it doesn't help.
It's going to be covered up until they nail somebody.
I mean, you just be sure of that.
So I'm not so sure.
In other words, apparently it's like the reaction to the statements that were gone on a week ago.
Let me give sort of the witness speech to Dean and indicate to him what my information is.
And I kind of see what he says.
Sure, we don't want to hurt Mitchell.
That's right.
I think the question really is whether Cliney's estimate is correct.
Dean has his ways of checking that.
You see, there is a story.
You see, the U.S. Attorney has been lulling people out there on the idea that Liddy has told us everything.
I don't think Liddy told them a goddamn thing.
He may have told them something.
I don't think he told them much.
I agree.
Now the question is whether or not Sally Harmony said she mailed, typed copies for Holden.
That's the thing I'm concerned about.
Do you think she did?
I don't think so.
You haven't been able to mail that?
We know copies came in.
Apparently three copies of Strong and All Things was watergate shut.
Now Chuck, when I talked to Chuck a little while ago, or last night in Boston, he said, I've got some bad news.
that I think he better have.
So he's evidently got something that his lawyers dredged up.
I think I'll listen to him, see what he's got.
I'll talk to Dean.
And then he'll come back to us as to what Dean ought to do.
The judge got us dead.
That's what he said.
Hidden in the cable area.
He was up in the city, and I didn't want to talk to him on the phone.
So I said, well, you come on in tomorrow.
Maybe hunt.
No, their clients said hunt was just a cipher.
I know.
Maybe the nuns.
Obstructors.
Say, look here.
Well, we won't bore him trouble.
We'll see what he's got.
I'll bet the band will move to some crap shop.
That's a safe bet.
Right.
God, I hope it doesn't affect Holland.
Well, don't worry about it.
We'll see what it is.
I'll let you know after I've talked to him.
The making of the colonies, I just, that's what I'm hearing.
Yeah, that's a tough one.
But you just never know.
Did Connolly get into the economy at all with you?
No more than a paper indicator.
He said, well, I said, we didn't want to destroy the world.
So he said, act.
He first should be a better spokesman, he said, than that.
Second, to act decisively in two or three areas like Lumber and others, that is just me.
There was a reason why he did it.
Which is a psychological question as well.
The question is whether or not the threes kill the blue.
That's that.
No.
Green's back.
Green's back, was it?
Yes, he's back.
Alan Green's back.
I had him read the paper that Stein had done and write about a page and a half for me of his reactions.
He's got an interesting angle that I haven't heard any of these other fellows talk about in specific terms.
But he says Sony and Datsun and all of these foreign products were so competitive that they tended to keep prices down.
when we devalued, they were less competitive and it gave our other price setters flexibility up.
He said the other, another fact, he said phase two never hurt anybody.
Virtually all his clients, for instance, never got to the ceiling because the market wouldn't let them.
So he says there's a mythology in this country
Now, that you can have wage and price controls and they don't hurt.
He says, conditions have changed.
You put wage and price controls on now.
He says, this is the biggest boom that the United States has had in the last 50 years.
And we're in right now.
He said, you put wage and price controls on now, and it's going to hurt a lot of people.
And he said, politically, you'll never hold them on.
And then, look what happened.
Then look at it, because he says, I'm looking at November 1974.
And he said, almost anything you do now in the way of controls is going to react unfavorably in the summer of 74.
So he said, just keep your political hats on around here when you analyze this thing.
I have that in mind.
I put that in my heart.
the controls are the right move, politically, and maybe economically.
But that's a question.
I said, now, at the present time, we've got a boom in inflation.
Now, so in order to control inflation, we do something that doesn't control inflation, but perks the boom.
So again, we'll have inflation, but without a boom.
I said, I think if we've got a choice, we'll get a boom.
And that's what I did.
That's what I did.
I believed more and more that it would create a span.
Ended up saying, it's going to be very hard to be patient.
But man, he said, the payoff is going to be fantastic.
Because he said, you can come out of this.
It's just natural forces.
Natural forces are going to bring you out of it.
And he said, it'll moderate.
On the other hand, I got an absolutely inflammatory letter from Peter Irvin, right?
says, freeze everything.
Freeze everything.
Always went way back.
And it's a kind of thing that will be found in the collected letters of Pierre and Frederick for the President of the United States.
It's written with that sort of heart.
he says this is a raging inflation and it's really bad and it's as bad as Brazil and only Uruguay is worse and so on and he said your advisors are all knuckleheads and they are held in contempt all over the nation and you have no spokesman and the consumer confidence factors are way down and we're headed for a recession that's why we have a little
He doesn't even mention the book.
He doesn't?
No.
And as a matter of fact, he's talking about distribution.
Well, he's artful about it.
He mentions in passing that there are indices of consumer confidence, like the Michigan survey.
Then he skips to saying consumer confidence is down.
If you don't read it very carefully, you assume that that's what the Michigan survey shows.
So I've sent out for the Michigan survey to see what the correlation is.
Yeah.
Because he may be saying what he appears to be saying, or he may be hurtful about it, and I'm trying to figure out which it is.
But anyway, I told Greenspan that I was expecting a letter from Gregg Frey.
And he said, well, he told me about some of Gregg Frey's recent mistakes.
And he said, just be awful careful with this guy.
He's very mercurial.
and very political, and frequently wrong.
So he said, just watch yourself.
Try to figure out what his orders are.
I think you ought to read both of those, plus the thing I'm getting from Arthur.
I don't need to see it written for you.
I know exactly how to do this.
Well, OK.
He goes, I want to see, I would like to see Greene's Fence, and I want to see Arthur Carter.
There's no reason for him to read something that indicates all this sort of, which is basically, Renfrew is almost, he's the street, and Wall Street is basically down for a number of other reasons in its attitude.
Well, I don't know.
Greenspan managed to hold it to a page plus, and it's coaching.
Arthur called last night and said that he's been delayed getting his out to be here today.
So I'll put it in your weekend reading.
I'll be around tomorrow if there's anything.
Let's come back to this.
On this thing, when will we see Dean?
Well, I'll go see him right now if he's here.
Now, he's been spending a lot of time at home.
Do you want to see him before you see Colson?
I'd like to see.
I want to talk to Bob also and get posted on some things that he knows about that I don't.
As posted as I can be about Chuck.
And then I'll see Chuck.
And if I haven't seen him, I'll see him after that.
I'll say what I'll do.
I'll go drop in on Bob and tell him you want to see him hit it for a couple quick questions.
I'm going to send it down.
Four or five minutes, please.
I'll let you know after.
After you've got the proposal, I can't tell you.
He's got to run.
All right.