Advanced Search
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Weather Bureau Activity
Weather Bureau Activity MCU man at work over what looks like a weather map or chart, making marks in pencil on the page. MS large map of the United States hanging on wall, pan LT to see men working, a desk plaque nearby reads "Forecaster". MCU teletype with yellow paper, tilt up to man tacking chart to the wall, pan to another man on phone seated in front of map.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Rural Scenes
Rural Scenes WS snow capped mountains against a blue sky, pan RT, distant cattle seen grazing in landscape in FG. WS lowlands with scrub trees, dry brown grass and mountains in the distance. Low angle MS old water tank on top of wooden platform against blue sky, rustic farm scene. WS farmland with stacks of hay scattered across sloping field, rustic wood fence seen in FG.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Hot Dog Factory
MS woman on production line at hot dog factory, with machine dropping sausages into little paper trays as she straightens them out. Process seems a little chaotic, with some trays holding just one dog, others piled high, and a few stray dogs spilled onto conveyor belt. Another woman weighing packets of hot dogs. CU of dogs on scale. LS factory with five women working at machines on one end of the floor which actually inject hot dogs into casings. Machines spit out wrapped packets at the other end.
Gunfight in Wild West
Gunfight in Wild West LS street in Western town, showdown between two men, one with rifle, the other looking like the sheriff in black suit and pistol. Strangely, onlookers are standing around BEHIND each of the men, which would not seem wise. The rifleman shoots, and the black-suited man falls, but draws his gun and kills the rifleman. The townspeople rush in to crowd around the victims. CU dead pistol-packer on the ground
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities June 14, 1973 - Testimony of Jeb Magruder
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.02.00--in to title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"] [00.03.57--MacNEILL] MacNEILL states that after testifying that he did order the GEMSTONE files destroyed, MAGRUDER will address the role of John DEAN in the Watergate and the COVERUP. [00.04.16--DASH] Mr. DASH. Now, as to Mr. Dean's participation, by the way, in these meetings, was Mr. Dean operating on his own, or what was your Understanding of Mr. Dean's role at these meetings? Mr. MAGRUDER. Mr. Dean was the person who had worked with us on many of these legal matters. He had brought Mr. Liddy to the meeting. he was a close associate of ours through Mr. Mitchell and, of course, all of us knew Mr. Dean very well. And he was one person from the, White House who worked with us very closely. It was very natural for Mr. Dean in this situation to be part of our meetings at this point in time because of his association and of his background. Mr. DASH. And would he, from your understanding, be representing any White House interest at these meetings? Mr. MAGRUDER. I think you would really have, to ask Mr. Dean that question. Mr. DASH. Now, did you instruct Mr. Reisner to destroy any other files? Mr. MAGRUDER. As I recall, I asked. Mr. Reisner to cull through my files, pull out. any sensitive material that could be embarrassing to us. There was the suit that was placed against, us by the Democratic National Committee that asked for immediate disclosure. As I recall, we all indicated that we should remove any documents that could 'be damaging, whether they related at all to the Watergate or not. [00.05.30] Mr. DASH. Mr. Sloan has testified before the committee, Mr. Magruder, that, shortly after your return and after the break-in, that you asked him to perjure himself concerning the, amount of money that Mr. Sloan had given Mr. Liddy. Could you state your own recollection of that discussion with Mr. Sloan? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, the, first, discussion--we had two meetings on Monday. The first, meeting was when I determined from him that the money was our money, and we, discussed that in his office.. And he came up to my office, and in attempting to allay his concerns or help him. in some sense give some advice, I think, we talked about what would he do about the money. My understanding of the new election law indicated that he would be personally liable for cash funds that were not reported. These were, not, reported funds. So I indicated at that meeting that, I thought he had 'a problem and might have to do something about it. He said, you mean commit perjury? I said you might have to do something like that to solve your problem and very honestly, was doing that in good faith to Mr. Sloan to assist him at, that time. Now, later we met, three times, twice that week and once after returned from his vacation. That was on the subject of how much money had been allocated to Mr. Liddy. Now. I, in thinking Of about 7 months from the time, we, authorized the funds, -to the time of the November election. I thought that Mr. Liddy should have received somewhere between $100,000 and $125,000, approximately. That was my guesstimate. Mr. Porter indicated that He had distributed about $20,000 Or $30,000 to Liddy, so I assumed that Mr. Sloan probably distributed Somewhere under $100,000. Now, I will fully admit that I had hoped that the figure was as, low as possible, and we all hoped that it -was low, Mr. Sloan would not tell me what the figure was. He refused to tell me the figure. He said, I cannot tell you the figure. I Said, just tell me, what. it IS; so We can work On the solution of this problem, If we do not know how much you gave Mr. Liddy, how can we determine what the money went for? On the third meeting, he and I went out and had a couple of drinks and he still would not discuss the facts of this sit situation with me. I did not at that, time or In any of those meetings ask him to do, anything relating to money other than tell me what the figure was and that I hoped it, was a low figure. And I certainly did hope it was a low figure. But I had no problem accepting a higher figure, because I thought we could work something out relating to any figure within reasonable limits. I think the. real problem was that he knew it was $199,000 and I was aghast at that figure. because there was no way Mr. Liddy should have received that much money in that, short period of time. It was only 2 1/2 months since its; approval. [00.08.23]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.13.53] Mr. DASH. At the, time. you were interviewed by the FBI, had the story been developed? Mr. MAGRUDER. We still had not, come up with the, money amount, but other than that, we basically had developed the guidelines to the story, yes. Mr. DASH. When you were interviewed by the, FBI, did You tell this false story to the, FBI? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes: I did. Mr. DASH. You say you were next brought before the grand jury when? Mr. MAGRUDER. In August, August 18. Mr. DASH. When You testified to the grand jury that time. did you testify to the false story? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. I did. [00.14.23] Mr., DASH. What role did Mr. Dean play in preparing you for your second grand jury appearance? Mr. MAGRUDER. On the day before the grand jury appearance, was aware that I was a target of the grand jury at that time. So. I was briefed by our lawyers and Mr. Mardian. Also, I was interrogated for approximately 2 hours by Mr. Dean and approximately 1/2 hour in a general way by Mr. Mitchell. Mr. DASH. 'Now, after You appeared before the grand jury for the, Second time, did Mr. Dean give you a any report? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes: the day after Mr. Dean indicated that I would not be, indicted. Mr. DASH. Did he tell You how he knew that Mr. MAGRUDER. No ; he' did not,. Mr. DASH, By the, way, were You not aware of Mr., Dean's participation you were aware were you not,, that Mr. Dean worked in the White House and did report to Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Haldeman? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. Sir. Mr. DASH. And I think you yourself, when you testified before us in executive session, indicated that YOU were familiar with the roles that YOU played at that time and that Dean played? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes; that is correct. Mr. DASH. What was your understanding, therefore, when Mr. Dean was working with You prior to Your appearance before the second grand jury? Was he doing this on his own, or was he doing it as a representative for other Persons the White House? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, again, it is an assumption On my part, I think I should be very careful. He was in a staff and did report to the gentleman you mentioned. Consequently you would assume, and I did not know and at no time did I know, that he was directly reporting back to either Mr. Haldeman Or Mr. Ehrlichman. I did assume this but that was only an assumption form my work at, the White House myself, Mr. DASH. Were YOU again called before, the grand jury prior to the trial, the first trial ? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. Mr. DASH. When was that? Mr. MAGRUDER. That was in September, the middle of September. Mr. DASH. Did you know -why you were being called before. that grand jury? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. At that time, they had gotten a copy--they had subpenaed my, diary and my diary contained Meetings, primarily the meetings in January and February, with Mr. Liddy that we knew they very interested in. So consequently, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dean, would be, and I met to try to determine how I would answer--- Mr. DASH. You mean prior to your appearance before the grand jury in September? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. What was the, purpose of that meeting? Mr. MAGRUDER. The purpose was to develop the story in effect of what took place at those meetings, Mr. Dean asked if he could be removed from those meetings, and I said that would not Work, because too many people knew he had attended those, meetings. Then Mr. Mitchell and 'Mr. Dean, and I agreed that we would indicate--would indicate--that the first. meeting never occurred, that We had canceled it, and that at the second meeting, we had discussed the new election law, which actually had been passed that week and that I introduced Mr. Liddy to Mr. Mitchell and he had not met Mr. Mitchell, it turned out that he, had met Mr. Mitchell, but I was unaware of that. So I indicated to the grand jury that, it was an informal meeting to introduce Mr. Liddy and also to discuss the new election law, Mr. DASH. Was any suggestion made that you might erase entries in the diary? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes; as I recall, one of the individuals indicated that. I think we agreed that erasures could be, determined by the, Federal Bureau of Investigation if anything was erased. Mr. DASH. During your appearances before the grand jury or preceding it and When the story that -was indicated was being developed, what if anything- was told to you or discussed with you or by you concerning the question of executive clemency for yourself or for those who were going to accept the blame in the story? [00.18.15] Mr. MAGRUDER. Again I would like to be very careful here. I think that--during the time, of course, since I knew I Was a target of the grand jury I was somewhat, concerned about, what would happen to me if I Was indicted, So I went through the same type, of thing that the other defendants in the, trial did and asked Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Dean for the kind of assurances that they did. They made those assurances to' me, but they--- Mr. DASH. What assurances specifically? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, they made assurances about income and being taken care of from the standpoint of my and a lob afterwards, and that, type of thing, and also that, there Would be good opportunity for Executive clemency. But. having worked at the White House and being aware of our structure there, I did not take, that as meaning that had a direct relationship to the. President at all. In fact, the, use of his name was very common in many cases where it. was inappropriate; in other words, where he had not had any dealings in the matter. So I knew that this did not necessarily mean it came from the, President or anyoue else other than 'Mr. Dean or Mr. Mitchell, Mr. DASH. But you did not know to the contrary. Mr. MAGRUDER. NO, I did not know to the contrary. [00.19.29]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.19.29] Mr. DASH. Did you know or have any knowledge of any plans to pay attorney's fees or salaries to defendants or support. for the families of the defendants? Mr. MAGRUDER. I was aware that they were being taken care of because, of course, One of the questions I had if I was going to--particularly before the second grand jury appearance where I had to decide, to go up and tell this coverup story--that I wanted assurances that the other seven defendants, the seven defendants would hold and I was assured they were being taken care of. That -was the extent of my knowledge. Mr. DASH. Were you aware of any concern about any one of the defendants during this period of time? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, at varying times there, -was concern over particularly Mr. McCord. I think Mr. Hunt to some extent at, various times and also I think Mr. Sturgis who I did not know. They were three, who were brought up most frequently. Mr. DASH. Were you aware of any plans to propose a CIA defense for the defendants? Mr. MAGRUDER. Again, in these series of meetings that we had from the, period, from the break-in to September, that defense, -was discussed in general terms at meetings I attended but, I could not be specific about it. Mr. DASH. -Now, you testified at, the first, Watergate trial? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. And at that trial did you tell this same false story that you testified before the grand jury and told the FBI? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. [00.20.50] Mr. DASH. By the time of the trial in January all seemed, Mr. Magruder, to have worked well according to the plan that you had worked out, with Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dean, -Mr. LaRue and Mr. Mardian. At what time, to your recollection, if it did occur did the plan begin to crumble? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, I think that as soon we realized that the grand jury was going to reconvene much more so than McCord's statement because I knew Mr. McCord's statements would be hearsay, but as soon as I knew the grand jury was going to reconvene I knew that things would be difficult to hold. I knew I could not go through the same process, now that, the election was now over and the, reason for the coverup from my standpoint was now no longer valid. But also I knew that Mr. Reisner, the one--from my standpoint the only mistake the, prosecutors made was in going through the organization they missed Mr. Reisner, and if they had caught Mr. Reisner I think this story would not have been made but I knew they would get to Mr. Reisner now because it had been obvious he, had been my assistant at that time and so as soon as I knew that, and as soon as I knew Mr. Dean began to indicate some reluctance to discuss those, meetings in the same terms that I had discussed them at the grand jury, I knew the story would not hold up under a second investigation by your committee, which, of course, had begun to hold hearings. and also the grand jury. Mr. DASH. Did you have a meeting with Mr. Haldeman in January 1973? Mr. -MAGRUDER. Yes; I did. Mr. DASH. Could you briefly tell us what the nature of that meeting was and what was discussed? Mr. MAGRUDER. The meeting was for two purposes. I was the director of the inaugural at that time and was to discuss future employment regarding myself and also at that time there was a problem regarding Mr. Porters employment and I had made certain assurances, Mr. Mitchell had, about his employment and I wanted to be sure Mr. Haldeman was aware of that. And then, third, and I realize now that these were probably taped conversations. I had some conversations with Mr. Dean in his office where he indicated a certain lack of memory to events, and I became rather concerned. He indicated at one point that, "wasn't that surprising how this plan was ever put into operation, and I said , "Well, John, surely you remember the, meetings we attended" and he didn't seem to remember those meetings, and I said to myself something is going to happen here. if that continues. I think as it turned out these conversations were taped, so I thought I had better see, Mr. Haldeman and tell him what had actually happened. I thought probably that, this -was becoming scapegoat time and maybe I was going to be the scapegoat, and so I went to Mr. Haldeman and I said I just. want you to know that this whole Watergate situation and the other activities was a concerted effort by a, number of people, and so I went through a literal monologue on what had occurred. That, was my first discussion with Mr. Haldeman where I laid out the, true facts. Mr. DASH. Do you know what, day or date approximately in January that occurred?, Mr. MAGRUDER. It would have been before the inaugural because we were still working on. the inaugural but, I would have, to look in my diary as to what date specifically. Mr. DASH. Did there come a time when you met with Mr. 'Mitchell sometime after the trial? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. Well, the McCord letter basically activated a great concern in the sense---- Mr. DASH. That letter, I think the record will show, was March 23' Mr. MAGRUDER. That. is correct. Mr. DASH. That, was read out by Judge Sirica in the courtroom on the Sentencing on March 23. Mr. MAGRUDER That is Correct, and that, of course, accelerated THE process of concern on, I think, all of the participant parties, I, on Monday, the 25th, went to see the two lawyers for the committee. As you are aware at this time I did not have my own counsel so I was dependent on counsel basically from our committee, and I went over my problems which I think were, more acute at I that time than the problems with them, the other participants and they agreed that, I had a serious problem and suggested that I see, retain my own counsel. I think they then transmitted that concern of mine to Mr. Mitchell because on Tuesday he called me in the, Commerce Department and asked me, to come to New York. I flew to New York that afternoon and discussed with him--- Mr. DASH. Do you know, what date that was? Mr. MAGRUDER. That would be March 27. Mr. DASH. 27? Mr. MAGRUDER. A- Tuesday. Mr. DASH. And the year we are talking about 1973? Mr. MAGRUDER. 1973. [00.25.50]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.25.50] Mr. DASH. What was your discussion with Mr., Mitchell in New York? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, I went through all of the problems I thought could occur because of the problems that, renewed interest in this case -would bring from your committee and from the grand jury and indicated what, should I do, and he indicated that I should hold, that, he would take care of things, that, everything would be taken care of. Now, at that time I realized that he, was no longer directly involved at the White House, as he had been. and so I asked to see Mr. Haldeman with him the next day he was going to Washington. Mr. DASH. But, at that meeting, Mr. Magruder, what did you ask Mr. Mitchell, to assure you of ? Mr. MAGRUDER. Again I asked for the same assurances of salary and being taken care of if I had to go a away for any period of time. Mr. DASH. Did you mention Executive clemency? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. I did. Mr. DASH. Then you said you asked for a meeting With Mr. Haldeman? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. I feel that it would be appropriate since this was something now that he was more directly involved on a day-to-day basis. Mr. DASH. Did you have, that meeting with Mr. Haldeman? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, I did. Mr. DASH. When? Mr. MAGRUDER. On the following day, Wednesday, Mr. DASH. Who was present,? Mr. MAGRUDER. Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Mitchell, and myself. Mr. DASH. What, was discussed? Mr. MAGRUDER; Well, we. discussed the same things that we had discussed with Mr. Mitchell, that, I discussed with Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Haldeman, was very careful to indicate to me that he would help me in any way as a friend but could make no commitments for the President indicated that the real problems were differences of opinion over meetings. particularly the January and February meetings, Where, Of course, my view was that since the, three, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dean, and I, had' agreed to my testimony that they, therefore, should stay with that, agreement. Mr. Mitchell indicated, of course, he was willing to do this but -Mr. Dean indicated that he had some question about it, Mr. DASH. But Mr. Magruder, at this time everybody knew. Mr. MAGRUDER. Mr. Haldeman--- Mr. DASH. Everybody knew that, that agreement was an agreement based on a false story. was that not true? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, that is correct, Mr. DASH. And Mr. Haldeman knew that, then, did he not? Mr. MAGRUDER. I cannot recall in my meeting with him in January whether--yes, I am sure I did discuss those meetings, yes. Mr. DASH. So the attempt to get together and agree on that meeting was an attempt to get together and agree on at least from Your point of view, would be the full story? Mr. MAGRUDER. That is correct, Mr. Haldeman recommended that Mr. Dean and Mr. Mitchell and I meet, which we. did that afternoon. Mr. DASH. What was the result of that meeting? Mr. MAGRUDER. I realize that Mr. r. Dean had different opinions then as to what he, would do probably, and so then my--I thought that probably it was more, appropriate that even on that, Monday that I get separate counsel so that I could get, advice independent of the individuals who had participated with me in these activities. Mr. DASH, In other words, you really could not agree at the meeting with Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Dean. Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, it was cooperative. Mr. DASH. What was Mr. Dean's position? Mr. MAGRUDER. He would not indicate a position. Mr. DASH. All right. Did there come a time. when you did get independent counsel? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Mr. Parkinson, who was counsel of the committee, recommended Mr. Bierbower and on that Saturday I went to meet him, he was out of the country, and I met him and we agreed, he agreed to be my counsel that Saturday evening. Mr. DASH. Did there come, a time when you decided that you should go to the U.S. attorney's office? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, that is correct. Mr. DASH. When did you go to the U.S. attorney's office? Mr. MAGRUDER. We agreed, they discussed the things with the U.S. attorney, I think on April 12 and I saw them informally on April 13 and saw them formally on April 14 on Saturday, April 14. Mr. DASH. At that time did you tell everything to the assistant attorneys? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, I cooperated. Mr. DASH. Who did you meet with? Mr. MAGRUDER. Mr. Silbert, Mr. Glanzer, and -Mr. Campbell. Mr. DASH. Did you tell them everything you are, now telling this committee? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. Mr. DASH. Did you have a meeting afterward with Mr. Ehrlichman? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Mr. Ehrlichman called while I was with the' U.S. attorneys and asked me would I come, over and talk to him about the case. We talked to the U.S. attorneys and they agreed as a courtesy that we should and Mr. Bierbower and the other attorney with Mr. Bierbower and I went to see Mr. Ehrlichman that, afternoon. Mr. DASH. Then, according to that meeting that you had with Ehrlichman what happened? Mr. MAGRUDER. We told him in rather capsule form basically what I told you this morning. Mr. DASH. All right. Now, I have just, two final questions. I want to go back to the, time when you came back from California to Washington, putting you back to around June -24. Do you recall having a meeting with Mr. Stans and with Mr. Mitchell? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Sir. [00.30.45]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.30.45] Mr. DASH. At that time, do you recall whether Mr. Stans was informed as to what occurred, actually the true story, not the So-called false story? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, my recollection and when we discussed the other day, I think it was rather quick because we were trying to fold up. The, discussion was in three parts. Earlier that morning Mr. Sloan had come to our office. Mr. LaRue, who he had indicated in testimony, Was With him, was in there that, weekend he was in Mississippi. Mr. Sloan came up and, as I recall, Mr. Mardian, myself and Mr. Mitchell were in the office and that is at the time when 'Mr., Sloan, who was asking for guidance and Mr. Mitchell indicated the statement about when the going gets tough the tough get going and we knew Mr. Sloan -was rather disturbed with that. My understanding was he, went down and talked to Mr. Stans and Mr. Stans called and said he wanted to talk to Mr. Mitchell when he came up. Mr. Mitchell indicated I should stay in the meeting which I did. It was not a long meeting and basically three things were discussed in general terms, On(, was first, Mr. Stans wanted to know what had happened. We told him, that things had not gone right, that things had gone wrong. we did not say that either Mr. Mitchell nor I Were directly involved In Liddy's activities, but, that things had gone wrong and we knew they had gone wrong and we, knew that Mr. Liddy was involved. we discussed in fact that Mr. Liddy probably at some point I in time would I have To terminate his employment from the, committee, Then, as I recall, we Indicated to Mr. Stans the problem we had with the money, and. would he try to work with Mr. Sloan to see if Mr. Sloan would be more cooperative about happened with the money and how much there was and Mr. Stans indicated that he would. In recollecting as best as I could that, meeting we did not get. into great. detail as to What had actually happened at the Watergate. Mr. DASH. All right. Your I testimony now here in public session, and you are correcting some of the statements you made in executive' session, Which I believe the testimony will show that you did indicate to Mr. Stans that you and Mr. Mitchell were involved. Mr. MAGRUDER. I do not think I said that in executive session but, as I recall, and I did not remember that meeting in great detail until we talked about It. we did not, say we were directly involved. I think the impression was given that, we were certainly aware of what happened, I think Ilk that would be a fair statement. That we were aware. of what had happened and there was an operation that occurred while we Were In effect, while he was, In effect, In charge of the campaign. Mr. DASH.' And basically, you were telling Mr. Stans how this money was spent, Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes. that is correct. Mr. DASH. All right. -Now. later when you say that assurances were made or you heard assurances were being made that the criminal defendants and their families would be taken care of by financial support and otherwise, do you recall who gave you those assurances? Mr. MAGRUDER. Primarily Mr. Dean and Mr. Mitchell. Mr. DASH. NOW, did you testify before the grand jury under any immunity provision? Mr. MAGRUDER. No, sir. Mr. DASH. '"Then did you most recently testify before the grand jury? Mr. MAGRUDER. That would have been probably 2 weeks after the April 14 discussion With the prosecutors. Mr. DASH. What understanding do you have with the prosecutors with regard to yourself at this point? Mr. MAGRUDER. As I understand it, I will plead guilty to a 1-count felony charge of conspiracy. Mr. DASH. And will you be a witness at the criminal trial? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. Mr. DASH. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. Senator ERVIN. Senator Baker. Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, thank you -very much. As we did on yesterday, we made an effort to rotate the, questioning among members of the, committee so that the sequence is not exactly the same. We intended to try that again today with the Chairman's concurrence and to rearrange. the sequence of things in a different way. I will now follow Mr. Dash, I will yield then in our turn to Senator Weicker and Senator Gurney, and instead of minority counsel following after majority counsel, minority counsel will conclude the questioning of this witness. [00.35.04] Mr. Magruder, I am not clear in my mind about who originated the idea of the clandestine intelligence operation and when that was done. Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, Mr. Liddy was brought over to me at, the committee in December and I was told that, he would handle our intelligence-gathering operations, by Mr. Dean. He indicated that Mr. Mitchell had approved this. We did not, discuss in detail at that meeting what these operations would be. Senator BAKER. Did you discuss electronic eavesdropping Mr. MAGRUDER. No, we did not. Senator BAKER. Did you discuss, the Democratic, National Committee? Mr. MAGRUDER. No , we did not. [00.35.48] Senator BAKER. But, the chain of events is that Mr. Dean recommended. to you Mr. Liddy. Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, sir. Senator BAKER. It, is your understanding that Mr. Mitchell had recommended Mr. Liddy? Mr. MAGRUDER. My understanding is they had met in November, November 24, Mr. Liddy, Mr. Dean and Mr. Mitchell at that at time it was agreed he, would become our counsel and handle our intelligence operations. [00.36.10]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 14, 1973
[00.36.10] Senator BAKER. What was the nature of your concept of intelligence operations at, that, point? Mr. MAGRUDER. My concept? Senator BAKER. Yes: or Mr. Dean's or Mr. Mitchell's if you know? Mr. MAGRUDER. I do not know what. their concept was. My conception was simply one of gathering as much information through sources in the Opposition's committee Would have been my concept at that time. I think -Mr. Porter has indicated some activities we has at. that time of that, nature. Senator BAKER. Do you now have any further information on that would shed any light on what Mr. Mitchell or Mr. Dean had in mind at that time about intelligence operations? Mr. MAGRUDER. The only thing I know is that Mr. Liddy, and this would be hearsay, of course. told me that Mr. Dean and other individuals and I cannot, honestly recall their names, had Indicated to him he would have $1 million for his plans, and I think in concept because these were very extensive, plans that he had obviously been working on them before he came to the committee. Senator BAKER. Who was present when Mr.-. Liddy made that remark? Mr. MAGRUDER. No one, sir [00.37.24] Senator BAKER. And it is your understanding of that conversation that Mr. Liddy said he would have $1 million for his plan? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Senator BAKER. Since that is a rather handsome sum, did it pique your curiosity about what he was going to use $1 million for, or what his plan was? Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, I thought at that time it was inappropriate for me to discuss that type of sum, it was exactly as you say, a handsome sum I said as I would normally do with any staff member we will have to go see Mr.-. Mitchell before any approval is given. Senator BAKER. And you did too see Mr. Mitchell, I believe, On January 27? Mr. MAGRUDER. That is correct. Senator BAKER. 1972? Mr., MAGRUDER. Yes, Sir. Senator BAKER. Had you participated in the formulation of this $1 million plan of Mr. Liddy's? Mr. MAGRUDER. No. sir. Senator- BAKER Had Mr. Dean participated in it Mr. -MAGRUDER. I do not know. Senator BAKER. But in any event on January 27, February 4, and March 30, as my notes reflect, you, Mr. Liddy, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Dean Met. -to discuss the Liddy plan? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Sir. Senator- BAKER. And at, the third of those meetings a plan was approved at approximately one-fourth or exactly I guess, the original Liddy proposal? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Sir. Senator BAKER. Many of the details of that plan. if not in fact. all of the material details of that plan in its final form were discussed Mr. Mitchell and .Mr. Dean? Mr. MAGRUDER. No sir, Mr. Dean was not. at. the, last meeting. Senator BAKER. All right. Fine. Only at. the, first, and second meetings? Mr. MAGRUDER. Yes, Sir. Senator BAKER. So Mr. Dean was not present when the, assent on plan in its final form was given? Mr. MAGRUDER. That is correct. Senator BAKER. Where was that meeting, the third meeting? Mr. MAGRUDER. In Key Biscayne, Florida. Senator BAKER. Who was present?. Mr. MAGRUDER. Mr. LaRue, Mr. Mitchell, and myself Senator BAKER. It is important for us to 'know, Mr. Magruder, know what took place at that meeting. It, is important for me to know exactly how the assent was given, and the scope and the extent of the knowledge of Mr. Mitchell Mr. LaRue, and your knowledge of the content of the. plan and the. Consequences that would flow from it. Can you enlighten us further in that respect? [00.39.38] Mr. MAGRUDER. Well, as I recall, it was the last, subject we brought up at our meeting. It was in the for form, as discussed in 8 1/2b x 11 sheets of paper without any heading, it had the figures and the amounts and it was quite obvious as to -what they were for. There would be, dollars next to equipment, as an example, and so on, and we discussed the pros and cons, 'Mr. LaRue and Mr. Mitchell and I, not any great feeling of acceptance to this plan, -with the exception that supposedly these individuals -were, professional , the information could be valuable, and that after starting at this grandiose sum of $1 million that probably $250,000 would be an acceptable, figure. I think we all had questions about Mr. Liddy but he had come with a, recommendation and Mr. Mitchell made some notes on his copies, indicated the targets as we had discussed previously, and as I recall, Mr. LaRue who -was acting as the telephone answering service at that time, and many calls came in to us at that time,, and be was answering the phones so I do not think Mr. LaRue was there at all or was not discussing this problem at all points in the time of our discussion, and Mr. Mitchell simply signed off on it in the sense of saying "OK, let's give him a quarter of a million dollars and let's see what he can come up with." Senator BAKER. Are you conveying the impression. Mr. Magruder, that the decision was sort of not made or that it was passively made under the circumstances? MAGRUDER. I don't want to say it wasn't made, the decision was made. Only Mr. Mitchell had authority to authorize any sums in that campaign. [00.41.31]
Forecasting Office
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. Interior views of modern national Weather Service forecast office
NOAA Weather Radio Broadcast
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather radio boradcast. NOAA weather radio broadcast utilizing Specific Area Message Encoding (SAMES) (11:16).
Weather balloon Release
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. Weather balloon release
NOAA P-3 Hurricane Research Aircraft
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. NOAA P-3 Hurricane Research Aircraft National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) P-3 Hurricane research aircraft (12:11), P-3 aircraft into the eye of Hurricane Edouard 8-25-97 to 8-29-97 (13:05).
Gulfstream IV Hurricane Research Jet
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. Gulfstream IV hurricane research jet (13:58) - on ground (fueling?), flying in air, activity on board - someone shows off research equipment for camera. Note: This footage has logo/watermark in corner.
Vortex Experiment
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. Vortex experiment: National severe storms laboratory.
Selected Tornadoes
Logo in the bottom right cannot be removed from master material. selected tornadoes good severe weather footage.