← 906-018906-020 →

Conversation 906-019

TapeTape 906StartFriday, April 27, 1973 at 5:43 PMEndFriday, April 27, 1973 at 6:04 PMParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Haldeman, H. R. ("Bob")Recording deviceOval Office
AI Summary

President Nixon and H. R. Haldeman discuss the strategic handling of Haldeman’s and John Ehrlichman’s potential departures from the White House staff in the wake of the Watergate scandal. Haldeman conveys concerns from his legal counsel that resigning or taking a leave of absence could remove the protective 'mantle' of the White House and potentially influence grand jury decisions regarding future indictments. They weigh the optics of various options, ultimately considering a temporary leave of absence for the month of May to provide distance from the investigation while maintaining their positions.

WatergateResignationsH. R. HaldemanJohn EhrlichmanGrand JuryLegal StrategyWhite House Staff
AudioNARA Description

On April 27, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon and H. R. ("Bob") Haldeman met in the Oval Office of the White House at an unknown time between 5:43 pm and 6:04 pm. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 906-019 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 906-19

Date: April 27, 1973
Time: Unknown between 5:43 pm and 6:04 pm
Location: Oval Office

The President met with H. R. (“Bob”) Haldeman.

     Watergate
          -Haldeman’s conversations
               -John D. Ehrlichman
               -Frank E. Strickler, John J. Wilson
               -Haldeman’s and Ehrlichman’s departures from staff
                     -Public handling
                     -Effect on possible indictments of Ehrlichman and Haldeman
                           -Value of positions on White House staff
                     -Vacation
                     -Leaves of absence
                           -Duration
                                 -Ervin Committee
                                       -Haldeman’s appearance before committee
                                              -Grand jury testimony
          -Henry E. Petersen

Haldeman left at an unknown time before 6:04 p.m.
                                               -29-

                   NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUM

                                        (rev. October-2012)
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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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 want to give you a quick fill.
Talk to John.
He understands the point.
Talk to the lawyers, or to one of them.
I can't reach both of them.
Talk to Sterling.
He's deeply concerned.
He thinks it's a terrible mistake.
But I told him that I just was afraid that it was something that I have to do.
And they want to go to a letter.
with us and how the public can't even know it's going to be, because that's their concern, is what the press does with it.
As he said, you establish the conclusion here that there's something wrong.
And he said to them, once that happens in the public mind, you can't turn it around.
And he said that he doesn't think
that we're close enough here to indict them, that this will be the factor to break it.
He said if we get it to a point, in either case, where they're down to a point where they're just turned away in their mind, should we go or shouldn't we go on these guys, the fact that we're not on active duty in the White House could very well be the factor that would change their mind.
And that is what he's concerned.
He says the mantle is a deterrent, and it's a deterrent that we need.
And it's just during a sensitive time, we should maintain the maximum protection we can.
I know.
That's what I told him.
And he understands that.
And I asked him what his problems were.
And he said, on that basis, he wants to talk to Wilson, and then he wants us to work with them on what we write, how we say it, and hopefully what the response would be.
And they raised the question of, could you take a vacation rather than taking a leave of absence?
And I said, no, the first place vacations don't fit here, and that would be too long.
Hey, the other thought, which may have some merit, was, and it's something worth considering, was to take a leave of absence for the month of May, which would have a terminal point, which would require a question of, you either just come back, or you don't come back, or you take another leave of absence for the month of June.
It gets you past the indictments, and the period there, possibly past the earth sentence.
Uh, we're meeting with the urban council on Thursday afternoon.
We're meeting with the... Can you put it on the basis of the third year?
That you're going to be very important to Grand Jury before the meeting with the urban council?
The rest of the month of May.
That's correct.
The leave of absence for the month of May.
Which certainly doesn't tie it to current events so much as it ties it to, uh... Well, okay.
I've gotten, uh, Peterson's got a call about a matter.
Okay.
I'll call you back.
Take care.
← 906-018906-020 →