Advanced Search
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.17.49-MONTOYA questions DEAN about the strategy of the White House for dealing with Congressional investigations] Senator MONTOYA. And that was about the time that he was making this statement to the press? Mr. DEAN. Well, that preceded--that is correct. Of course, it was September 15 that that arose in his office directly and we are talking about a press conference in August, and during the following weeks, of course, there, was an ever increasing effort of the White House, to deal with the Patman committee hearings as I have so testified. Senator MONTOYA. When did the President tell you this? Was it before August 29 -when he made the statement at the' press conference or after? Mr. DEAN. It was after, September 15. Senator MONTOYA. It was approximately 17 days later. Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator MONTOYA. 17 or 13 days. In the, same. and as he "went, along, the, President said as follows: The other point that I should make is that these investigations, the investigation by the GAO, the investigation by the FBI, by the Department of Justice have at my direction had the total cooperation of the--not only the White House but also of all agencies of the government. [00.19.01-MONTOYA raises the alleged "DEAN REPORT", which DEAN claims never to have made] Senator MONTOYA. I want you to pay special attention to this. This is quoting the President still. In addition to that, within our staff under my direction Counsel to the President, Mr. Dean, has conducted a complete investigation of all leads which might involve any present members of the White House staff or anybody in the Government. I can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one in the White House staff, no one in this Administration presently employed was involved in this bizarre incident. [00.19.45-COMMON SENSE!] Senator MONTOYA. Now, I ask you this question: With respect to any project that you handled directly for the, President where a report was required, wouldn't you assume that if this Is true, that you would have been required to file a report? Mr. DEAN. Yes sir. Senator MONTOYA. And also if, assuming that this was true, wouldn't that report be available at the White House? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. [00.20.23-IF DEAN made a REPORT of his INVESTIGATION, why is there no such report available?] Senator MONTOYA. And so assuming the, correctness of the President's statement then it necessarily follows that If you made a complete investigation at his behest, and for him, that the President should produce that Dean report? Mr. DEAN. I already believe that. the White House has indicated there was no Dean investigation. I think that is one of the inoperative statements [Laughter.] Senator MONTOYA. But it is still your testimony that you were not requested by the President to make a report to him or to conduct this investigation. Mr. DEAN. Not at that time, Senator; that is correct. Senator MONTOYA. All right. [00.21.20] I want to go into this a little further the matter of the San Clemente conferences. Now, did you discuss specifically with Mr. Haldeman, with Ehrlichman and others Who might have been attending their matters directly dealing with the so-called coverup? Mr. DEAN. Yes we did. Senator MONTOYA. NOW Will you as succinctly as possible, as briefly as possible, relate for the record now just exactly what those discussions were with respect to the coverup? Mr. DEAN. Well, we had a lengthy discussion ranging over 2 days, and I have, estimated between 12, 14-10, 12, 14 hours--I do not know how many hours totally were spent in a discussion, that, basically were on how to deal with this committee. At the end of that discussion on the, last day of the discussion on Sunday afternoon, what I described as the bottom line question came up, because everything depended upon the continued silence of the, seven individuals who had either been convicted or had pleaded guilty. Would they remain silent during the duration of these hearings? I was asked that question. I said, I cannot answer that question, because I do not know. All I know, is that they are still making money demands. [00.23.03]
Jim Dandy, 100 To 1, Beats Gallant Fox; Which one is Third
Contrast and drop out spots in imagery Dark horse from California scores startling upset in the travers! Jockey Frank Baker boots home rank outsider six lengths ahead of heavily backed favorites.
Wedding Ceremony Performed In Plane High Over Cathedral
Wedding Ceremony Performed In Plane High Over Cathedral Couple are married in aircraft while flying at top speed over the city, believing that marriage in the sky is more binding than one on earth.
Lakewood Child Wins Title For 3rd Time in 39th Baby Parade
High contrast some overexposure some images All the fat babies, blond babies, dark babies, laughing babies and cross ones, 1,009 strong, in the annual contest, six-year-old Gloria Matthews again captures name of little miss america.
Coast Guard Seizes Crew Of 10 Britons & $200,000 Rum Cargo
Rolling, shaky, blurry imagery The liquor-runner Nova V. is captured by U. S. Revenue cutter and hauled to the barge office where barrels of original sheriff's malt and bags of William Penn were confiscated and the men held.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.23.03-DEAN discusses the decision process of EHRLICHMAN, HALDEMAN, MITCHELL, on raising money to pay off the Watergate Defendants] Preceding that, there had been a good bit, of discussion between Mr. Haldeman and Mr. Ehrlichman and back and forth to Mr. Mitchell as to who was going to raise the necessary money. I reported to them that there, was nothing I could do, this was out of my hands, that Mr. Mitchell had felt it, was not his responsibility to raise this money and he was not, interested in doing it. Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Haldeman said that they thought it -was his. Finally, they asked Mr. Richard Moore, who was also attending the meeting, to go to Mr. Mitchell and lay it on the line that it was Mr. Mitchell's responsibility. Now, I assume, they did that because Mr. Moore had spent time at the Department of Justice working very closely with Mr. Mitchell and knew Mr. Mitchell. He, was an older man and they felt probably sending Mr. Moore as a direct emissary from them, rather than myself when I had failed to accomplish what they thought was necessary, might solve the problem. I later learned that Mr. Moore indeed did go to New York and did raise this with Mr. Mitchell. but Mr. Mitchell virtually ignored the matter when it -was raised by Mr. Moore. [00.24.16] Senator MONTOYA. Were these, particular conferences at San Clemente designed to just discuss the matter of Watergate? Mr. DEAN. They were designed to discuss how to deal with this committee so that the coverup would not unravel up here before this committee. Senator MONTOYA. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator ERVIN. Senator Gurney?, [00.24.46-Sen. GURNEY continues to play batboy for the White House in questioning DEAN, trying to discredit DEAN'S story about enlisting KALMBACH to be the bagman for the payoff money to the defendants.] Senator GURNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a few questions, Mr. Dean. I would like to go back to the, Kalmbach meeting again when you and he first discussed this coverup money. Mr. DEAN. On the 29th, Senator? Senator GURNEY. June 29, Mr. DEAN. Yes. Senator GURNEY. You are, absolutely certain about that date? It could not have occurred in July, could it have? Mr. DEAN. The first meeting I had with him was when I flew in--he took the last flight, I believe, out of Los Angeles. We met the next morning The, records-- he very seldom stayed at the Mayflower Hotel and was staying at the Mayflower Hotel and I would assume that if the committee investigators would check the records of the Mayflower Hotel they could confirm that date. That is the best of my recollection, that it was the 29th. Senator GURNEY. This -was the June 29 date? Mr. DEAN. Yes. Senator GURNEY. Was there anyone else at the meeting? Mr. DEAN. No, sir. there was not. Senator GURNEY. And my recollection is that you had a short meeting in the coffee. shop, is that at right Mr. DEAN. I was to meet him in the, coffee, shop and I recall we sat down in the booth and it did not appear very private in the, booth, so We, decided to go to his room to discuss the matter. Senator GURNEY. And that, was there in the Mayflower Hotel? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. [00.26.28-Sen. GURNEY thinks he's got DEAN trapped in a lie] Senator GURNEY. Well, the committee has subpenaed the records of the hotel. I have a letter here from the Mayflower, and also one from the Statler Hilton. I would like a committee staffer to give these copies to the witness. Now, as You will see today, the letter is from the Mayflower Hotel, dated June, 27, 1973, addressed to Senator Gurney, Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, U.S. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. [00.27.27-KALMBACH never stayed at the Mayflower Hotel] Dear Senator Gurney, in reply to your request of June 27, 1973, to the best of our knowledge, the records do not reflect a Mr. Herbert B. Kalmbach as being a registered guest during the period of June 1, 1972, through July 1, 1972. Very truly yours, Ray Sylvester, Senior Assistant Manager. Then the other letter from the Statler Hilton, again addressed to me. This also has the subpena of the committee plus photostatic copies of the hotel records. The hotel record photostatic copy is not very good here, so I think we are going to have to go by the letter itself. At any rate, here is what it says: Attached, please find photostatic copies of a previous subpena served on the Washington Statler Hilton, registration card and folio B. 96403, for Mr. Herbert W. Kalmbach who 'Was registered in our hotel from June 29-30, 1972. Original folio and registration card were received in compliance with the Previous subpena by Angelo J. Lano, S.A.F.B.I. telephone number 324-2685. we are Unable to locate any further records on Mr. Kalmbach. Sincerely, William J. Utnik, General Manager. [00.28.56]
Daring British Ace Worries Police With Ground Acrobatics
Shaky, light in contrast, blur, rolling images R.L.R. Atcherley does some ground stunting that brings the hearts of the spectators into their mouths at the national air races, motorcycle officers chase plane while wing dips so low it stirs up dust from the field. The Lindberghs watch the fun.
'Goober dust' cops terrapin derby! - wins $7,100 for owner in 7th annual turtle trot.
Overexposure, rolling images 'Goober dust' cops terrapin derby! - wins $7,100 for owner in 7th annual turtle trot.
Coster champion retains crown!
Rolling, high contrast imagery Coster champion retains crown! - jim sainsbury achieves fame with load of 20 baskets in balancing contest.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.28.56-Sen. GURNEY thinks he has DEAN trapped in a lie about his meeting with KALMBACH] Now, as I recall, you have testified three times very positively that you met with Mr. Kalmbach in the coffee shop of the Mayflower hotel. Mr. DEAN. Absolutely. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. And then retired to his room in the Mayflower. How, do you account for or these records here? Mr. DE AN. The Only thing I can suggest is that Mr. Kalmbach may have been registered under another, Let me elaborate on that. Mr. Kalmbach often discussed matters in a code name. For example, after our discussion, he began referring to Mr. Hunt as "the writer." He began referring to Mr. Haldeman is "the brush." He began reefering to Mr. Mitchell as "the pipe." These would be, the nature of our discussions and this might explain the fact that he decided not to use his own name in registering in the hotel. [00.29.56-DEAN stands on his story in spite of Sen. GURNEY'S questioning] I think the person that could answer that best is Mr. Kalmbach, because I have a very clear recollection of walking into the coffee shop, meeting in the coffee shop, going to his room. It was a small room. He had not really had a chance to get a good night's sleep because he had been flying all night. To maintain further privacy, I recall him also turning on the television next to the adjoining door and we sat on the other side of the room and had the conversation in which I relayed to him everything I knew at that point in time. So I think Mr. Kalmbach will have to answer that question as to why his name does not appear an the register. [00.30.33-Sen. GURNEY REALLY thinks he's got DEAN now!] Senator GURNEY. Well, it also occurred to me that that could be the case, that he, was using an assumed name, but then when we ran into this other record at the Statler-Hilton Hotel, it just does not make sense, If he was coming into the, city under an assumed name so that no one would know he was here and no later record could be found, why in the world would he register under his own name at a nearby hotel, the Washington Hilton, and then engage another room over in the Mayflower to meet with you? It just does not add up. [00.31.04-DEAN appears a bit flustered, and has to admit he's not sure of the location of the meeting] Mr. DEAN. I see what you are saying. I have testified the Mayflower and I am never sure, which is the Mayflower and which is the Statler-Hilton. The hotel I recall, Is the one that is on 16th Street up from the White House, I know I walked up from the office to his room. Senator GURNEY. How long have, you lived in Washington? Mr. DEAN. I have been hereabout 10 years, Senator GURNEY. And you don't know the difference between the Washington-Hilton and the Mayflower Hotel? Mr. DEAN. I continually get them confused, I must confess. [00.31.50-GURNEY takes a potshot at DEAN. GURNEY is very smug saying this] Senator GURNEY. Well, I must say I am reminded of your colloquy with the, chairman yesterday. 'Mr. Dean, when you said what an excellent memory you had right from schooldays, right on down; that is why you were able to Reconstruct--- Mr. DEAN. That, is right, my memory is good, but I confuse some names often. I don't pretend to have a perfect memory. I think I have a good memory, Senator. Senator GURNEY. But you can't remember really now, after testifying three times very positively, whether it -was the Statler-Hilton or the Mayflower? [00.32.27-DEAN calmly points out that GURNEY is splitting hairs and missing the big picture] Mr. DEAN. Well, Senator, the point in substance here is the fact that the, meeting did occur. We met in the coffee shop. We, went from the coffee shop to his room. We had an extended discussion of the matter, and that is very clear in my recollection the substance of the event. Senator GURNEY. And one of the reasons I am curious about this, really, it, is less ,in attempt to try to confuse you than it is an attempt to try to pin you down. You haven't tried to conceal the meeting, and Mr. Kalmbach, of course, knows all about it, too, Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. And he is going to testify before this committee, there is no question about that. But, I cant understand the confusion in where, it took place, because it is an extremely important meeting, obviously This is where the coverup, as far as the financial part of it, first started. Are you sure the meeting didn't, occur somewhere else? Mr. DEAN. I can recall very clearly meeting Mr. Kalmbach in the coffee shop. The coffee shop was crowded, it was busy. We could not find a booth that was quiet. We went from the coffee shop to his room and as I say, I recall very clearly him turning the, television on, because there was a door, an adjoining door next to the room. Then we proceeded to have our conversation. It was a rather lengthy conversation. [00.33.52]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.33.52-GURNEY continues to try to discredit DEAN'S testimony about meeting KALMBACH to start the PAYOFFS to the arrested BURGLARS] Senator GURNEY. Well. could that particular meeting you speak of at the Mayflower have occurred some other time? Could it have been a later meeting or an earlier meeting? Mr. DEAN. No, sir. 'To the best of my recollection. this was the first time We ever talked about this matter and these were the circumstances under which -we talked about it. when he flew in from California. He had taken a late flight. he was tired, and we met in the coffee. shop, went to his room, as I have repeated, then had the discussion. Senator GURNEY. Let me just, try to refresh your recollection. Could this meeting have taken place out in front of the Hay-Adams Hotel? Mr. DEAN. In front of the Hay-Adams Hotel? Senator GURNEY. That is right, that you walked over from your office and he walked over from his hotel and met out in front of the Hay-Adams and discussed it there? Mr. DEAN. I have testified to a subsequent occasion when we met, after he had the, money in his possession, as he told me, and I believe he told me he was going to meet with Mr. Ulasewicz at that time. That was in Lafayette Park. I can recall very clearly being in Lafayette Park, because we stood and we each put our foot up on the bench and we were looking back over at the, White House and talking. He had his attachT case with him. I had -walked out of my office and this was some time after this initial me meeting. Senator GURNEY. That couldn't have, been the initial meeting, at least according to your recollection? Mr. DEAN No, sir. [00.35.23-GURNEY returns again to his effort to find some improprieties in DEAN'S use of CAMPAIGN FUNDS for personal expenditures, he is really beating a dead horse] Senator GURNEY. Well, I guess we will just have to wait for Mr. Kalmbach and find out what he remembers. Let's go back a little, bit to the credit cards again, You know, we had a discussion on that and the use of the. $4,850. I asked you why you couldn't use credit cards. Mr. DEAN. And I responded I preferred not to use credit cards. Senator GURNEY. Well, now, the committee, staff 'has brought, to my attention here a list of some of the checks drawn on your account. I wonder if the staff would furnish the witness with copy of these checks. Mr. DEAN. I can barely read the copy I have here, particularly the first one, Senator. Senator GURNEY. Well, I can't read the first one, either, but I really don't think that is important. The second one down Which is legible on my sheet here--is it on yours? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it is. [00.36.33] Senator GURNEY. That is a check as I see dated September 21, 1972. This was very close, of course, to the October taking of the $4,850. Here is a check made out, to the American Express CO. for $908.47. Mr. DEAN. That is correct, Senator GURNEY. Signed John W. Dean. Is this a check drawn on your account? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it is. [00.37.12] Senator GURNEY. Is this in payment of credit card bills? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it is. Senator GURNEY. Then we, go down a little. further on November 13. There is another check drawn to Bankamericard for $250.51. Is this also your check? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. Is this also for credit card bills? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it is. Senator GURNEY. Then going further down, there is another further check dated November 22, 1972, Bankamericard, $106.50. Is this your check? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it is. Senator GURNEY. Did that go for credit card payments? Mr. DEAN. Yes, it, did. Senator GURNEY. Then dropping further down, another In March to the American Express Co. for $531.45. Is this your check? MR. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. And another in April, American Express Co., Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. 'Now, I don't know whether there. are others or not, because we don't have all of the, financial records. Mr. DEAN. I am sure there are. Senator. Senator GURNEY. Do you have any recollection what those were for? Mr. DEAN. Off the top, I do not. As I have told the committee I am perfectly willing to turn over all of my financial records to the committee where these can be fully analyzed. I believe in my own records will be found the stubs that indicate that each expenditure is for a given credit card payment. I know that because of the result of some foreign travel, -when I did use my credit cards when traveling abroad, some, of the foreign travel particularly takes as much as 6 months to a year, which surprised me, to catch up to make a payment. Senator GURNEY. I See. Do you have an air travel credit card? Mr. DEAN. No,; I do not. Senator GURNEY. You would pay for your air travel either off American Express or Bankamericard? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. or by cash. Senator GURNEY. Let me ask the chief counsel of the. committee, have we subpenaed the financial records? Mr. DASH. We have subpenaed all the records of Mr. Dean and we also have, one, of our chief Investigators, Mr. Carmine Bellino, who will be going over those records with Mr. Dean. [00.39.18-DEAN totally defeats GURNEY'S effort to discredit his account of the meeting with KALMBACH (this tape, tcr= 00.28.56)-it's totally hilarious] Mr. DEAN. I might go back over one point. The name of the coffee shop at the Statler Hilton is the Mayflower. [Applause.] [the audience loves it, GURNEY appears chagrined, ERVIN pounds gavel] Senator ERVIN. The audience -will please refrain from applause or demonstrating their reaction to any testimony. Senator GURNEY. IS that What your attorney just told you? Mr. DEAN. Yes, he did. Senator GURNEY. His memory apparently is much better than yours-- Mr. SHAFFER. Mr. Chairman, that was' Mr. McCandless. I would like to give him credit for that. [Laughter] [00.40.01]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.40.01-GURNEY wraps up his interrogation on the subject of the Hotel meeting between DEAN and KALMBACH.] Senator GURNEY. Let me ask you, Mr. Dean, -what does that mean now, what is your testimony so that we can apt it on the record here? Mr. DEAN. What I would like to say I have a very clear recollection of meeting with Mr. Kalmbach in the coffee shop before our meeting in his room. I think Mr. Kalmbach can resolve, if it is important to the, Senator the particular location of that meeting. To Me, there was the substance of the meeting, that Was the important part and I think I have relayed to the committee the full substance of the meeting and what occurred as a result of the meeting.] [00.40.36] Senator GURNEY. NOW. What is your testimony as to what hotel? Mr. DEAN. To the best of my recollection , it was the Mayflower but I am perfectly--if am incorrect I will stand corrected. Senator GURNEY. Now, to get back to the payments for the credit cards here, of course, all I wanted to point out is that you did frequently use your credit cards. Is that not correct? [00.41.07-DEAN responds to GURNEY beating a dead horse about DEAN'S personal finances] Mr. DEAN. Yes, I did use them but as I say, I prefer not to live on credit. When I made the reference to that I have other credit cards as when my records -will reveal when they are turned over to the committee when my full checking account is reveal revealed it will note that most of my expenditures are paid for by check. There is nothing more shattering to me than to see a check come through like this September 27 check for 900-and-some dollars because I can never remember that I am expecting such an amount and I live basically on my salary and I do not like to reach into brokerage accounts and capital to make expenditures. So as I say, I think this is fully revealed to the committee when my financial materials are, gone through in great detail and the committee, if that is their desire, are welcome to have those records. [00.42.03] Senator GURNEY. But it is not your testimony that you use, credit cards only for expenses in connection with your job. You do use credit cards also for personal expenses is that correct? Mr. DEAN. Well, for example, Senator, when I was at the Republican Convention, and often traveling on behalf of the Government, I knew I would be reimbursed for some of those expenses. Rather than to go to some elaborate, procedure when you are checking out of a hotel, I stayed at the Doral Hotel, I had a bill there for several days, the, easiest way to cheek out, is to use a, credit card, particularly When you know you are going to be reimbursed because it is a, Government-related expenditure or a job-related expenditure and the like, and I think that that will be reflected when -Mr. Bellino goes through my financial records that that was often the, case with some of these expenditures. [00.42.57] Senator GURNEY. Well, I have no doubt it is, I am sure that -will be true but my question was do you not use credit cards for personal expenses, too? Mr. DEAN. Yes; I do. Senator GURNEY. That is all I was asking. Mr. DEAN. Yes. Senator GURNEY. Another point that I am interested in here is this meeting of March 21 with the President which, of course, 'was an extremely important meeting. I was going over that yesterday, and there was one part of that that I must say totally confused me. I just did not understand it. [00.43.38-Sen. GURNEY challenges DEAN'S account of meeting with NIXON on March 21; GURNEY contends that this was the first information NIXON got on WATERGATE, DEAN contends that he knew of the COVERUP long before.] Summarizing briefly, you mentioned, of course, that you talked to the, President about perjury being committed, you talked "about the coverup, if it was going to' continue it would require, more perjury and more money because of the demands that were being made upon, by these convicted people, and you said it, was time, for the surgery on the cancer, itself and all those involved to stand up and account for themselves. In other words, a rather complete briefing to the President on the whole Watergate affair, I just touched some of the highlights there. But then, You also made this statement: After I finished I realized that I had not really made the President understand because he asked me a few questions after he asked me a few questions he, suggested it would be an excellent idea if I gave some sort of briefing to the Cabinet and that he was very impressed with my knowledge Of the circumstances but he did not seem particular particularly concerned about their implications. [00.44.49] Senator GURNEY. Well, I must say I Overlooked that, I think, totally when the testimony was first given, and I must say it does not seem to make, any sense, to me at all. [00.45.00-GURNEY continues to attempt to discredit DEAN'S assertions that the PRESIDENT knew of the Watergate COVERUP before March 21, 1973.] If the President was now fully knowledgeable about this whole, coverup business, and a part of It, as I think you have indicated before the committee here, why in the world would he want the Cabinet briefed? Mr. DEAN. Well, as I--when the matter came up, the conversation had tapered down and we were into a light, question and answer session about some of the areas that I had gone into, and I must say that I had a similar reaction, and I said to the President, Mr. President, I do not think this is the sort of thing that I could give a briefing on even a tailored-down briefing on. But he felt it might be important that I explained some of the parameters Of the problem and the like. It was not a lengthy matter. I felt at some time during my presentation that he was very sort of impressed with the way I was giving the presentation. I tried to, I -was trying to, really give one of the most dramatic speeches I had ever given in my life. [00.46.10]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.46.10-Sen. GURNEY tries to discredit DEAN'S assertions that NIXON knew of the Watergate COVERUP before March 21, 1973] Senator GURNEY. Well, it still is totally--- Mr. DEAN. I might add I never did give a briefing to the Cabinet and that was dropped immediately in the conversation, I added that because it stuck in my mind that as one of the points that I really did not feel that I had made the full implications of this thing clear but that is the sort of thing that as you noted in the testimony, it was noted very clearly in my mind when the, suggestion came Up. [00.46.37-GURNEY is taking the improbability of NIXON'S response as an indication of innocence. It's important to note that he is ignorant of the TAPING SYSTEM in the WHITE HOUSE-it all makes more sense if you understand that NIXON is speaking "for the record"] Senator GURNEY. Well. that occurs to me too, that maybe the President did not understand for some reason. I cannot imagine a President Of the United States, knowing that his two chief aides, 'Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, yourself, and Mr. Colson. LaRue, Mardian, Magruder. Mitchell, all these people being involved in this criminal activity or possibly involved in this criminal activity. I do not want to accuse them of crimes over this national television here, but these supposedly were all involved in this and then there was coverup money with his personal attorney Mr. Kalmbach and all of these things went on, and if he knew that, as' I understand, your thesis is how In the world would he have suggested anybody who had total, knowledge of this like you. suggested them to go to *the Cabinet and tell them about it? [00.47.36] Mr. DEAN. May I respond in several parts you have stated that I have a thesis. I have no thesis, I have -no wish other than to report by this committee the facts as I know them. Second, this was a part of a dialog that followed. I do not, think the President had any intention of sending me in to report in full as I had just reported to him, I made it, the comment. in my testimony because it stuck In my mind as evidence of the fact that The President did not really still realize the implications of what I was talking about and it recalled to me the and earl' earlier occasions when I tried to raise with him my own involvement in this matter and explain the obstruction of justice involvement and he did not seem to want to hear it or get into it or anything of that nature. So that is why it is in the testimony because it is the sort of thing. Senator, as you, when you re-read the testimony, it pops right off that page and it stuck right in my mind the same way. [00.48.36] Senator GURNEY. Well, it did, and I must say it rather startled me, I really did not understand why I did not hear it the first time, and that same thing occurred to me that maybe, even on March 21 he was not totally aware of all of these things that you testified to here these last 5 days, otherwise. I cannot understand why he would have suggested that you go to the Cabinet with it. Well, let us get on here. Late in March or early April you did decide that you had had enough of this business and that you wanted out of it. Mr. DEAN. Senator. you said early April, Senator GURNEY. Late in March or early April. Mr. DEAN. Excuse me, I did not hear that. Senator GURNEY. You decided that you had had enough of this coverup, and you wanted to get, out of it, and go on your own course., and as I would put it, maybe come clean, is that a fair way of saying it? [00.49.33-DEAN tries to explain his motivations and desire to end the coverup in a way that would protect NIXON, NIXON of course was not receptive to these ideas] Mr. DEAN. Senator, what, I wanted to do I was trying to work internally within the White House. I was very anxious to get the President out in front on this issue. I had conversations from Camp David with Mr. Moore, exploring further ideas. We had explored this on countless occasions, on how to end it, how to get the, President out in front of it, have the President taking the action to end it, decisive action to end it. By the time I went to Camp David I realized that I had not accomplished what I was trying to do internally and began to think about that I might have to be the one, to stand up and take my own steps. Senator GURNEY. And taking your own steps, of course, would be revealing and telling the whole story, is that not what you mean? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. [00.50.33-GURNEY tries to use the fact that DEAN took the fifth before the GRAND JURY to discredit his testimony-suggestion that DEAN used charges against NIXON to get immunity from the SENATE COMMITTEE] Senator GURNEY. Well, now, you went before, the grand jury last, week, did you not? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. Did you tell them the, whole, story? Mr. DEAN. I decided to exercise my constitutional rights at that point in time. Senator GURNEY. What do you mean by that? Mr. DEAN. I invoked the fifth amendment. Senator GURNEY. You did not tell them anything, did you? Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I did not. [00.50.52]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (1/2
[00.57.50-GURNEY wants to suggest that DEAN has cooked up his allegations against the PRESIDENT to get an immunity deal from the committee to protect himself from prosecution] Senator GURNEY. But none of what has transpired here as far as your testimony is concerned can be used against you in a further criminal proceeding Isn't that correct? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. If it is impossible-or If it is possible to take the lead problem out of an individual's testimony. Senator GURNEY. Now, just in summary, Mr. Dean, I wonder if we can go over the salient points of the 5 days. Again as I understand it, to your own knowledge you have no knowledge that President Nixon was ever involved in the, planning or the break-in at Watergate; is that correct? Mr. DEAN. I have no direct knowledge of that, that, is correct. [00.58.35-GURNEY tries to get the last word on DEAN by asking for a summary of DEAN'S infrequent contact with NIXON in 1972, hoping to leave the impression that NIXON was out of the loop on WATERGATE and the COVERUP] Senator GURNEY. Then. in the year 1972 the only meeting you ever had with the President on Watergate was on September 15, is that correct? Mr. DEAN. Yes, and I believe -we have been over that in detail. Senator GURNEY. We have been over that in detail, and I don't think it would serve any purpose to go over it again. [00.58.52] In 1973 the two occasions that you did discuss Watergate -with him prior to March 21, was that meeting on February 27, is that that correct? Mr. DEAN. Well, as I, in answering Senator Baker's questions yesterday I don't know if you were present, Senator. we, were, going through all of the circumstantial situations leading up to the meetings that occurred in February and March. and the fact that there was a developing strategy that had occurred in California at the La Costa meetings and on the tall end of those and consistent with those I had a number of meetings with the President where subjects related to that particular California policy-setting meeting were being continually discussed. [00.59.49-GURNEY wants to pin down that DEAN can't link NIXON to any according-to-hoyle CRIMES before February, 1973] Senator GURNEY. I understand that, but I mean the direct involvement of the possible criminal activities of Watergate February 27 -was the first meeting was it not, when, as you testified the question of obstruction of justice came up, isn't that correct Mr. DEAN. That, is correct. Senator GURNEY. And you stated that you might be implicated in some way in that, and the President said no. he didn't think- so. Isn't that the substance of that? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator GURNEY. Then, on March 13 you also- Mr. DEAN. That was, I believe, on the 28th that came. up, Senator. Senator GURNEY. Twenty-eighth. All right. Then one other meeting on March 13 you had another conversation with him that involved this Executive clemency business, Isn't that correct? [01.00.35-DEAN discusses CLEMENCY and PAYOFFS, and his discussion with NIXON on those subjects-DEAN tells the same story he has been telling for 5 days] Mr. DEAN. On March 13 we discussed both clemency and the fact that this was no money. The way the clemency came up as you will recall is that at the he end of another conversation I raised with him the fact that there were demands being made for money, for continued money, there was no money around to pay it. He asked me how, you know, how much it was going to cost. I gave my best estimate, Which I said was $1 million. He, in turn, said to me, "Well, $1 million is certainly no problem to raise." and turned to Mr. Haldeman and made a similar comment, and then he came back after, just a brief discussion on that, and I remember very clearly the way he pushed his chair from His desk as he was looking back at Mr. Haldeman to get, you know, the same message through to Mr. Haldeman, you know, that $ 1 million is no problem. Then he came back up, he rolled his chair back up toward the desk and said to me who is making the principal demands for this money at that point in time. [01.01.38] I said they were coming principally from Mr. Hunt through his attorney, and he turned to the discussion of the fact that, he had talked with Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Colson about clemency for Mr. Hunt and he expressed annoyance at the fact that Mr. Colson had come to him contrary to an instruction that the President was aware of that Colson wasn't to raise this with him. Senator GURNEY. So there -were discussions- Mr. DEAN. Then we went on to discuss the delivery, you know, how this money was delivered and I told him that it was laundered and told him I was learning about things that I had never known about before, and I recall very vividly how Mr. Haldeman thought this was very funny and started laughing. [01.02.23] Senator GURNEY. So there were really two main discussions on Watergate, the money, the coverup money that you have just discussed and also the Executive clemency, and Mr. Haldeman was present during these discussions? [01.02.37-DEAN tries to steer GURNEY away from his strictly legalistic construction of the COVERUP. GURNEY wants to force DEAN to admit that he can't strongly pin NIXON to involvement in actual CRIMES] Mr. DEAN. Well, Senator, not to take anything away from your interpretation but a lot, of the discussion that occurred regarding the press conferences the. positions we were, going to take on executive privilege, and the, like, had direct, implications on unraveling the Watergate. Senator GURNEY. Well, I understand that. Indeed, I do, but I am talking about the criminal activities. Certainly press conferences, Executive clemency do not involve any criminal activity. I am just trying to pinpoint the criminal parts of it, and then, of course, there was the meeting on March 21. Mr. DEAN. I might add that In, as I told you, in one point in time when I went to discuss this with counsel, who is an experienced prosecutor, he said that oftentimes intervening events show intention and purpose. That is why I have tried to report everything I know to the committee as fully as I know. Senator GURNEY. I understand that, and I as a committee, member am extremely glad you did, because I do think it sheds a lot of light and it will help the deliberations of the committee when other witnesses come before it. I am not in any way deprecating the importance. of all of the events that surrounded these transactions in Watergate, but I am trying to pinpoint the criminal parts of it. And that really is the sum and substance of your direct knowledge, direct conversations -with the President on the criminal activity? Mr. DEAN. On the March 13 meeting. Senator GURNEY. Well, I also said the March 21. Mr. DEAN. THAT is correct. We have gone over the March 21 meeting. Senator GURNEY. Yes; we don't need to go over it again. I am just pinpointing that time----- [01.04.28-TAPE OUT]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.04.13-Sen. GURNEY wants to pin DEAN down to state that he can't prove NIXON knew of any CRIMES prior to March 1973. DEAN'S definition of the coverup is broader than GURNEY'S strictly criminal definition] Senator GURNEY.----direct knowledge, direct conversations -with the President on the criminal activity? Mr. DEAN. On the March 13 meeting. Senator GURNEY. Well, I also said the March 21. Mr. DEAN. THAT is correct. We have gone over the March 21 meeting. Senator GURNEY. Yes; we don't need to go over it again. I am just pinpointing that time and that date. Mr. DEAN. Then we jumped where the next in a series of meetings was in the April 15 period, Senator GURNEY. Well, I realize, that, but I am really not interested in that. I am not, trying to cut, you off here, but of course, the President himself later said "that March 21 was the time when he, first really realized the full implications. So I was just, bringing us down to that date. [01.04.52] Mr. DEAN. I would recall how, that came up, that the President selected that date, was as the, result of a discussion that had occurred on March 15--April 15, when he was searching his mind, I was being lead through a series of rather leading questions by the President and at one point in the conversation, he said to me, do you recall what day it was that you gave me. the report on some of the implications of the day the Watergate case? Then before I even got an answer out that. I didn't remember the exact date in March, he said, I believe, it was the 21st. I said, I will have to check. It was the next day that, when I -was in his office again that afternoon, talking about a press statement that he was going to put out, he said, I have gotten the confirmation now and I believe it, was the 21st. And he referred to it at that, time as my cancer on the Presidency statement. That is the way I led that off and that, is the, way I had referred to it and that is the' way he reefered to it. Senator GURNEY. Thank you, Mr. Dean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I have. no further questions. [01.06.16--MacNEILL] MacNEILL states that GURNEY has completed his questions about DEAN'S finances and DEAN'S meeting with Herbert KALMBACH to start the PAYOFFS. States that the debate over what is proper questioning is not finished, and the hearings will resume with more such debate. [01.06.40-PBS network ID-title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"] [01.09.50-MacNEILL] MacNEILL states that Sam DASH and the Senators are offering opinions about the admissibility of testimony in court, and presumably about the relation of that standard to the committee's task [01.10.02]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.27.32-Sen. INOUYE continues to question DEAN about the degree of his involvement in spying and ENEMIES LIST projects in the White House-DEAN is a bit defensive] Senator INOUYE. How was this memo implemented? Could you give us examples, concrete examples? Mr. DEAN. The memo itself was never implemented. I never did have a political enemies project, that -was in any way operational. Senator INOUYE. However, we do have evidence, here that, for example a TV commentator with CBS was, in fact, audited by the Internal Revenue Service just for the purpose of harassment, isn't that Correct? Mr. DEAN. Well, I know Mr. Schorr had an FBI investigation. Senator INOUYE. Oh, it was an FBI? Mr. 'DEAN. Yes, it was. I know there were other instances. These did not come from me. Another instance, many times, members of the staff who were operating in the political area would want to see a tax return. My office, was supposed to be the office to have the facility to receive from Internal Revenue tax returns. I never called at any time I can ever remember while I was there to the Director of the Internal Revenue 'Service re requesting he send over a tax return on any individual to my office. Senator INOUYE. Have you ever seen tax returns Mr. DEAN. Have I other than my own? Senator INOUYE. Other than your own. Mr. DEAN. Only in connection with clearing individuals who voluntarily submitted them in relationship to a nomination for a Presidential appointment. Senator INOUYE. In your memo, you speak of granting availability, Federal contracts, et, cetera. I reefer you to exhibit No. 53. It is a memo for you from Gordon Strachan and it relates to Mr. Chet Huntley. It says here "John Whitaker has ordered the Department of Agriculture to quit dragging its heels on Big Sky," Was this a political favor? Mr. DEAN. What is the number of the exhibit,' Senator Senator INOUYE. I believe it is 53, sir. [01.29.47] Mr. DEAN. I recall the exhibit you are referring to, but it is not 53 in my sequence here. I believe that might be in 4, 5, 6, or 7. Well, anyway', I can answer the question. I recall there is a notation on it. [01.30.06-an example of the WHITE HOUSE'S tactics for "screwing our political enemies"] There -was at one point in time an effort, because of a comment--a rather hostile comment that Mr. Huntley had made regarding the President--there was an effort that I initially was unaware of to make it as difficult as possible for him to get his Big Sky project moving. Apparently, he needed assistance from the Department of the Interior. I would receive periodic calls asking me what is happening on that, and the like. I would, in turn, call John Whitaker, who is the person on the Domestic Council staff who had dealings with the Department of Interior. At one point in time, apparently, there was a change in heart on Chet Huntley and there was a turnaround, and Interior was given the signal that they should sign off on whatever it was he needed to get his Big Sky project accomplished. Now, I would have to review the document, that you are reefering to, and that may well answer your question. [01.31.12] Senator INOUYE. I believe this line of questioning IS very important, because your exhibits have listed, I would say, a couple of hundred names of very distinguished Americans most of them, and other exhibits have suggested that extra-legal activities had been carried out in connection with these names Now, there are Members of the Senate and Members of the House whose names have appeared, but, to date, you have been able to tell us of the possibility of a man from CBS, and Chet Huntley. @ [01.31.55]
Penn Ties 16-year-old Mile Relay Mark In Classic Track Meet
High contrast, rolling images Spring carnival marked by Homeric efforts of Ohio State University team that upset quarter-mile and medley events. Spills that carve nicks in hurdlers' shins feature a hard fought contest in the rain before crowd that almost filled the vast stadium at Franklin Field.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.10.02-side view committee table--] Senator ERVIN. Senator Inouye, if you will yield for just a moment, Mr. Dash said he wanted to make a statement concerning his understanding of the rule of evidence. Mr. DASH. I think the question has come up from time to time and has been mentioned either by witnesses or by members of the committee as to admissibility of certain hearsay evidence. A memorandum of law has been submitted to all members of the committee. The leading case of the, Supreme Court is Krulewitch v. United States and that case has been the position of the committee and the counsel working on the committee that even hearsay testimony, and most of the hearsay testimony admitted falls within this rule, is an exception to the hearsay rule. [01.10.52] The Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that, where there is a conspiracy and there are overt acts--and I think at this stage of our hearings, there has been sufficient testimony which would go to a, jury In a criminal case indicating that a conspiracy has occurred and that there have been overt acts--that therefore, the statements of a coconspirator in the furtherance and in the course of the conspiracy, although hearsay, is an exception to the hearsay rule and is admitted in every, court in this country. [01.11.28] Therefore, even Mr. McCord's testimony which was initially hearsay, following up on the evidence of other witnesses which established the conspiracy and overt acts, that the Supreme Court has ruled in Krulewitch and other cases that that, testimony is admissible and goes to a jury and is used against the defendants that may be charged as conspirators as any other testimony and is an exception to the hearsay rule. Therefore, I think it. should be made very clear, and a memo has, been given to every member of the committee that the hearsay evidence that has been admitted before this committee would be admissible in any court of law in this country under the Krulewitch decision, excepting Conspiracy and co-conspirator's statements from the hearsay rule. [01.12.19-GURNEY is not pleased with this statement] Senator GURNEY. What the chief counsel is saying, then, is that some people may be indicted on conspiracy, is that it, in addition to obstruction of justice and other things? Mr. DASH. Oh, quite certainly, Senator. The evidence before this committee, and I understand the evidence, being considered by the prosecutors, includes the doctrine of conspiracy with two or more persons engaged in the commission of a crime that is a conspiracy. I understand that even Mr. LaRue, who just recently pleaded guilty, and this was made public knowledge, pleaded guilty to a conspiracy count rather than any other count, and that conspiracy is a major crime in this inquiry and in the inquiry made by a special prosecutor. [01.13.04] Senator GURNEY. Did you say Mr. LaRue pleaded guilty to conspiracy ? Mr. DASH. Yes. Senator GURNEY. I thought it was obstruction of justice? Mr. DASH. No; conspiracy to obstruct justice, Senator, Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, could I say a word on this subject? Senator ERVIN. Sure. [01.13.16-Sen. BAKER weighs in in the debate, and points out that the time for hairsplitting is done.] Senator BAKER. I do not mean to be facetious and I do not mean this to be critical of Mr. Dash, who is a fine lawyer, and Senator Gurney, who is a fine lawyer and a fine Senator, but this committee is too far gone, to start worrying about hearsay and we are too deep into the business of finding the facts to try to second-guess what a court will admit or will not admit. I have spent, a lifetime being surprised on what a court would admit or -would not admit, depending on my point of view. I think it was Oliver Wendell Holmes who said lawyers spend their professional careers shoveling smoke and I have no desire to shovel smoke. [01.14.02] So I really recommend, Mr. Chairman, and once again, this is not a criticism of the committee or counsel, I recommend that we not think of ourselves as a court or a jury or a judge, and that we try to follow the facts wherever they lead us with the full foreknowledge that what we do will have little if any, effect on how the rules, of evidence are applied if there is in fact litigation, either civil or criminal, based on these same facts. [01.14.37] So I think that rules of this committee are important and the rule against hearsay and its exceptions--and the hearsay rule is virtually emasculated by the hundreds of exceptions to it--but I think the rules getting along with the business themselves are -far less important than us getting business at hand. So I very much hope that we do not fall into the business of extensive objections, the argument of objections, and the arguments about rules of law that may apply. If we, get too far out of bounds, I think we ought to qualify the quality of the evidence so that we can take that into account. But I do not think, and I hope we do not start admitting and excluding evidence. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [00.15.21-ERVIN defends the committee's practices on evidence] Senator ERVIN. I would just like, to make the Observation that Felix Frankfurter wrote a very interesting article at the time about the Teapot Dome and he laid great stress on the wisdom of the fact that congressional committees should not be bound by technical rules of evidence I do think, however that it was well for Mr. Dash to make his statement, because I have read several articles by commentators who are not lawyers, and who were criticizing the committee on the ground that it had received hearsay testimony, I am not concerned in much about criticism, because I have been criticized very much over the years and I am sort of inured to It. but, I think it is well for the general public to know that, under the rules governing the admissibility of declarations of co-conspirators the great bulk of the hearsay testimony that has been received in this case would have been admissible in a court of law for an indictment charging a conspiracy to obstruct justice. [01.16.39] I think the observations of my friend from Tennessee are correct, that we are not judges and we are not, juries. We are members of a legislative body seeking to determine whether or not the facts before, us indicate that new legislation may be necessary. [01.16.58]
Tallest Structure In World Officially Opened To Public
Same as catalog # 340398 Ceremony marks dedication of the empire state building exercises are opened by alfred e. Smith waving his good-luck brown derby toward the towering pinnacle as his grand-children aid him in unlocking the doors of the mammoth edifice.
Builds ships in bottles as hobby!
Builds ships in bottles as hobby! Unique models require six months of Harold Bodkin's time to construct.
First Yale-harvard Rugby Game Ends In Eli Defeat; Score 14-3
High contrast, rolling images After many scrub contests, traditional american college foes play for the records. English university that make this their major sport have nothing on the rough and ready manner in which the blue and crimson toss each other around.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.16.58-BAKER continues the committee discussion of what evidence may properly be considered by the committee] Senator BAKER. I might say. Mr. Chairman, that by explaining my point of view. I have fallen into the trap that the chairman just, warned me against. He and I had a brief conversation a moment ago, and I am sure he will not think it, a breach of confidence to repeat it. He said, Howard, he said, do not try to explain--your friends do not require it and your enemies will not believe it. Senator ERVIN. I agree with you. I was not trying to explain, I was just trying to enlighten some of our commentators. I would like to put in the record a legal memorandum which sustains the points made by Mr. Dash. [01.17.36-THOMPSON checks into the debate, suggesting perhaps the committee ought to be more selective in accepting evidence] Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman, on that point. I do not want to belabor the matter If I am in error. I want to be corrected for my misinformation, but I think what Mr. Dash has said is completely correct. I think there might be one additional consideration. It goes to the point of admissibility under any circumstance about what this witness thought another man was thinking at any particular time, his mind as to what some, other individual was thinking or his impressions of his thoughts. and I think. that is a completely different matter. With that statement, I would like to subscribe to everything you and the, co-chairman and Mr. Dash have said. Senator ERVIN. I agree with you on that. Mr. DEAN. I just want to---- [01.18.19-ERVIN tells a HUMOROUS country ANECDOTE] Senator ERVIN. I am from near Watauga County in North Carolina, the county where Rufus Edmisten comes from. 'This man had been in court over in Boone, the county seat. He came back that night, and was in the country store and he mentioned the fact that he had been over to the court in Boone, and somebody asked him -what, was going on there. Well, he said, there was the judge sitting up there; there -was the jury sitting over in the jury box. And there were the lawyers. He said, some of the lawyers were objecting and others were excepting and the costs were piling up. [01.18.58] Senator BAKER. You know, Mr. Chairman. if this is storytelling time [LAUGHTER], my distinguished chairman is going to have to suffer for having Set the example for me. But in the course of all of our testimony, to the extent that we have conflicts in it, I am reminded of an old lawyer in Scott County, Tenn. named Haywood Pemberton who was employed to defend a man. He said, I have just shot a man, Haywood, will you defend me? He said, of course I will defend you. Did you kill him? He said, no, I have just wounded him. He said, that is all right, but just remember, he will be an awful hard witness against you. [LAUGHTER] [01.19.42] Senator ERVIN. I believe the, witness wants to make some observations. Then we will go to Senator Inouye. Mr. DEAN. I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, that as you know, I am here under compulsion of the committee and I have tried to withhold nothing from the committee at any time and I did not want these conversations to reflect, that there has been any hesitancy on this witness to answer any question put to him and to answer it fully and honestly. [01.20.15] Senator ERVIN. Senator Inouye? Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, I regret I have no Hawaiian stories to tell. [Applause.] Senator INOUYE,. Mr. Chairman, in order to avoid confusion, I wish to advise the Chair that the questions I am about to ask Mr. Dean were not prepared by the Office of the Counsel of the President. [01.20.46--Sen. INOUYE addresses previous testimony given by DEAN, regarding the climate of spying in the White House] Mr. Dean, I will refer to testimony received yesterday. To the following statement, you made your response. This is the statement: [QUOTING] Mr. Dean, you have. depicted all others in the White House as excessively Preoccupied with political intelligence, use of overt methods of security, and your-self as a restraining influence on these pre-occupations. And, Mr. Dean, this was your response: I do believe I was a restraining influence at the White House to many wild and crazy schemes. I have testified to some of them. Some of them I have not testified to. Many of the memorandums that came into my office became a joke; in fact, some of the things that were being suggested, I think if you talked to some of the other members of my staff or if your investigators would like to talk to them, they would tell -you some of two things that we would automatically file, just like the political enemies project. Many of these just went right into the file and never anything further until extreme, pressure was put on we to do something did I ever do anything. So I do feel I had some restraining influence. I did not have a disposition or like for this type of activity. [01.22.13]
Perk Campaign
Preview Cassette 220566 Mayor Ralph Perk Campaign
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 29, 1973 (2/2)
[01.22.13-INOUYE confronts DEAN'S claim to have been a "restraining influence" on spying and punishing political ENEMIES in the WHITE HOUSE] Senator INOUYE. Mr. Dean, I would like now to refer to a memo dated August 16, 1971, and you have testified that this -was prepared for Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, and others at the White House. It is dated August 16, 1971. It is classified "Confidential." Subject: "Dealing With Our Political Enemies." I would like to read part of this: [01.22.43-DEAN was an architect of WHITE HOUSE plans to "screw our political enemies"] [QUOTING] This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with Persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration. Stated a bit more bluntly--how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies. After reviewing this matter with a number of persons possessed of expertise in the field, I have concluded that we do not need an elaborate mechanism or game plan, rather we need a good project coordinator and full support for the Project. In brief, the system would work as follows, [01.23.19-INOUYE reads from a memo written by DEAN outlining a White House plan to "screw our political enemies".] Key members of the staff (e.g., Colson, Dent, Flanigan, Buchanan) should be requested to inform us as to who they feel we should be giving a hard time. The. project coordinator should then determine what sorts of dealings these individuals have with the federal government and how we can best screw them (e.g., grants availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution etc.). The project coordinator then should have access to and the full support of the top officials of the agency or department in proceeding to deal with the individual. [01.24.00] Senator INOUYE. This is a very important memorandum. Is this your idea, of restraining influence? [01.24.10-DEAN explains that he prepared the memorandum on "how to screw our political enemies" in collaboration with others and only under intense pressure to do so, consistent with earlier testimony] Mr. DEAN. As I said, Senator, in the memorandum, first of all, as I answered that question yesterday, it took a good bit of push before I would prepare even a document like that, I had request after request after request to prepare this. I didn't know a thing about how to handle something like this, so I went, and talked to other people about it. I think that is indicated in the memorandum itself. I also made it very clear in the he memorandum that. this is something that I personally was not going to get involved in. Whoever that project coordinator was going to be, it was not going to be John Dean because, I just didn't want to get involved in doing the sort of things they -wanted. [01.24.52-DEAN states that suggestions for ENEMIES LIST activities were constantly sent to his office, and he ignored them as much as possible] As I say, when the thing didn't float, they kept sending their political enemies suggestions back to me. I never did a thing to get a project coordinator. There was some rather loose talk about individuals who might handle this; I can't even recall their names now. I made no effort to find somebody to head this up and while there was a conception on behalf of some who kept sending these things in for my political enemies project, there. was no political enemies project operating out of my office. [01.25.23-DEAN states that he wrote the memo as a minimum possible step to satisfy his superiors] So I thought that while the memo had gone out and you know, satisfied my superiors that something was being done, in fact, it was not, being done, So I felt there was a restraint. [01.25.36] Senator INOUYE. It is your testimony, then, that this memo described an activity which in the minds of your supporters, was considered important? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator INOUYE. It was not a wild or crazy scheme? Mr. DEAN. To me it was a wild and crazy scheme, because I felt I just didn't operate that way. [01.26.02] Senator INOUYE. Was it considered wild or crazy scheme for Mr. Haldeman or Mr. Ehrlichman? Mr. DEAN. No. sir. Senator INOUYE. In your testimony, you have submitted several exhibits With of names--politicos Members of Congress, members of the media. and members of the entertainment field, et cetera, Mr. DEAN. I might add also, Senator, before we go forward, I didn't believe that list is complete in and of itself, it just happens to be a part that I received and had access to before my files were shut down. There may well be additional names and additional information available on that. Senator INOUYE. Mr. Dean. I believe one list would have been enough. Mr. DEAN. Indeed it would. [01.26.57] Senator INOUYE. And on one of your exhibits, you had a copy of a memo which suggested that certain things be done, such as calling the Internal Revenue Service. Now, in addition to that, you testified that in one of your meetings with President Nixon, you quoted The President as saying, "We will take care Of them after the election." when the President referred to enemy newsmen. Is that correct, sir? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. [01.27.32]