Transcript
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
yeahthesebeaches we canthe watergate break in i apparently was one of thefew senior members of the white house staff who was here in the cityand the rest were either with the president's order orsomewhere else and so for thebrief time on the monday before thatthe presence of an event that i think they go back to late monday as i recall i
started all you do i called whisperdidn't just returned from the philippines and he and i had a meeting onmonday noonwhat instructions haveyou given i thought it wasreally fascinatingevents and in this matterhe kept kept up with the withthe developing events because i just i just five or so this isa real campaign issue the report to you frequentlyon what he was uncovering i saw atotal of nine times in the next two weeks there's an
unusually large number of timesand what did you see about doing very well among otherthings well twenty years ago i mean with respect or isthere isbeing told me a number of things that i havehere now he told me aboutbeing a general facts of the surveillance ofthe democratic national committee headquarters fact thatthe howard johnson's motel have been employed as a listening postwhich some of the birds possessions and the
fact that they used fictitious names of papersand that they have more money in theeconomyand not testify previously givenmeetings which the meeting which we held monday afternoon the time determiningfactor at once at one of the white house and that was as a resultof a report from the st louis what did you feel and turn it and i don't want to gointo all the detail you feel that mr dean was telling you almosteverything that was uncovering on a day by day basisand to get this to continue even after the first two weeksno siri believe it was
harrisburgmrlansing michigan i think we can savesome time monster and when i just want to go through with you over thecommunications that you had been to respect the watergate over the longstanding up until april fifteenth nineteen seventy threethatwork in the month until i saw him nine timesand eight of those times related to work in a month until iassign three times a moment to time warnerfor a long
time on september threetimes and not be able to tell us to that one of those meetingswith regard to the four million sales and i don't knowboysone was with regard towatergate to with regard to segregate which additional going to thegenerals on december five times twicejanuary seven times of whichwhat would be considered rude than seventy three yearslate february five times whichincluding will cost to work on the civil warand one of those times
no itdoesn'twhat about the january meetingwith respectandalthough we'reso in effect you might buy bean about what we just heardand then would you say that then during those times which met with himthat you weren't discussed fully all aspects of watergate erawhitehouse possible involvement and also possible involvement ofpersonality upbeatare you engaging and
speculation what was being used to who might be involved as a result of these conversationsand that what if you figured farmingknitwear discussed earlier conversations isn't that greatnow i will say that sowell then then as a result of all thisinformation and what you independently elected i use this as abasis are leaving messages the year the night to anypress conferences that you might have had that he might have had i meanor is nearly aspossible to talk over particularly technical mess for instancewhen civil that decisions were being vague this
is a conversation about a civilization with the rules of evidencewere quiet here say the gunman civil deposition workthat you have tosurvive good week mr ziegler eliminatetoo many press conferences and he might as well i don't think i thinkhe's aboutmyexistencethe issueandthat was it
he did we interviewvarious aspects of this case is that the lawbut you did you ever reach him on that watergate on the on theart or concern of the white house and so forth as well ibelievewhich wayis right nowthere were quite a few times by the white houseby the president with respect to the war and if itand another inmate thosein statements on august the twenty nine
nineteen seventy two the presidentin response to a question this is one of themin addition to that with the announced that under mydirection and saw that the president was pretty as conducted a completeinvestigation of orleans which might involve any present members of the whitehouse or anybody in the government i can say categorically thathis investigation indicates that no one in the white house thatno one in this administration president employee was involved inthis bizarre vague desire is thena subsequent day thepope the president is october fifth nineteen seventy twostate in response to a reporter's question
now when wetalk about a clean this but let's look at what happened what's happened tothe fbi assigned nine hundred and thirty he agents to thisinvestigation and bought it under policeconducted fifteen hundred interviewsthan none subsequentlyon during the press conference of april seventeen nineteen seventy threethe president's alliestwenty percent as a result of serious charges which came to myattention some of which were probably recorded i beganintensive new inquiries into this momentassistant attorney general and i have met at thelincoln ne yo be a review of the act which a company
in my investigation and also a review of the progress that the department ofjustice investigationthen he's made it as aresult on march twenty first i personally assume theresponsibility for coordinating intensive new inquiries into the matter and ipersonally or oppose conducting investigation to get all the facts and toreport them directly to me right here in this officethat he hasresponsibility do you conduct any further inquiry which was on marchthirtieth nineteen seventy three is that correct about that pressconference was it was seventy seven there's anotherthing that they don't want to
know afterthat he had been there talking to you other people in the whitehouse have been talking to you and then and then when afew it goes in the washington post by mrwoodward and what'd and then mr bernstein and in factthat most of the information about which you environmental event the i meanpeople had already appeared in the washington post now give youread the washington post on about that timeduring the during the course of your different conferences witnessed thevoice of your different inquiries are you reading washington post aboutthe roberts' through with it and ms jarrettwell i'm certainly one
reliable informationand whataboutthe fbi there wasno information comingwell i think yeah i think i'll be in trouble i price of that is aleague that the fbi reports which we were receiving thatare on the on the base of them and from everything we knowabout him from everything the attorney general was telling us about everything that theidea of prosecuting attorneys were telling us could be reliableyou said that you conducted
in pursuant to instructions from the presidentinstructions which received on what is that now who did youinvestigate who did you interview and thenwith one objective in mind were you conducting the sandi was as i say it was not really an investigation in the technicalsense of the word and i have declined to identify it assuch of all time but as i said the toppeople whom i interviewed includedjohnny johnny johnnythe wholeconversation with mr gray which may or may not be considered to be includedin thatdid you interview
thosenono i doi think i should've done which was to settle it before you talk tosomebody in my situation going top lawyer says you're the treasure you don'tbelieve that the legal liability policy and a couple are due to goup more birds it would you say thatyou cannot get very intensiveinterviews with these people i can't i can't findthis to be an exhaustive investigation i thinkreasonably well on tuesday the lead an hour two hours most of themright and that's where they connected know
basic principle of stare was a feel forwhether anybody in the white house wasn't all so i felt that was ayear so most of the questions were not directly to what people likemr martinez girl rubio that the committee occasionally people told mebut my principal focus was to say what you know about people are not like you knowabout anybody else in the white house might be involved or not an individual white housei mean so what else do you know about him that might in any way involved in theincident not that was my principle was but the other part of my jobother than just interviewing these hugely was trying toget on top of these very complex law questions which mr dean had been working with andwhich i have now and it's a great deal of my time and imight say this was the this was the one of the president's principal vocals and there'sda
attorney client privilegejustthis morning and i don't want to hearpetitions in my questioning and i don't want toirritation answers now i'm really interested andtrying to ask that they knew what that would include does notduring the interviews that you hadn't you did you on occasiontake the conversations that these people want to look at onewhich were those of the estimates on the riverwell thanks in the possession of years thatall did youbuy any interviews
for their prescriptions in the sense of saying hey here'ssome were hearing yesterday a new head of those interviewswell i thinkthere is onemy interview with filmmaybe the questionisn't itone eightysix
people wantthingsjust so so imention this morning senatorand they want to do to tell thismay op what to do after they initially thought these interviewswith respect to each of the individualsthey you know they might have been involvedand the watergate affair june seventeenth floor in thecover up after june seventeen years that i knew named those
names yes sirit'sbeenit's been isbackmy interview with the
and also my interview a must be the one whichremains which is responsive to your question i think ismy interview with the reliable forty four o'clock in the afternoonhis attorneys andthey'll just come into the united states inthe interviewif you likein the interviewand according tothe survey to be some
specific approval i planned to makethe statementthat this was ameeting andin addition to that particular projectreporters and the fontainebleau hotel headquarters of the democratic convention where likewives to be whatit was this again this was a an interview which i held on april fourteen nineteenseventy three atthat point you know you understand the decision mr rivers i mean itit's funny thatthe proposal which was approved at that lawand its genesis and a million dollar proposal which
mr damon mr levey but there i asked himspecifically about the screen because as i said i was focusing on white house people in hisdescription of mr deans participation in planningwas quite mr liddy dole mrmcgrew he said that mr dean had authorized the one milliondollar big as the beginningtoday to mewedidn't have that kind of authority you believe thatand you know what mr mcgrew was telling me that i didn't know what to believe at this timeso many different there's a stories from so many different people i wasn't tryingto evaluate what to believe and whatnothe said that they took me through the before meetings in early nineteen
seventy twoseparate this is this is a much looser now and thenhe said that at some point in time i get theinformal straw was his primary contacted the white housethat they have a right and intelligencecapability he said i got no problems for mr stanton so iread that it's an okay from cairo i asked him whether thewhite house and in fact thisisn't the onlyand the only people in the white house really focused on as having had any connectionwhatsoever with those workers to paulson's to be a ministernow i am an object here one particularavoiding the strong hand there's this at the white house was
just on the white house staffthat you are yeahduring the campaign i understoodthat he was going home and office to see it and back andforth how do you know this assignment also have you'vesince found out about this assignment and it was a great deal moreyou mean you didn't find out what you were at the white house about his owndesign i knew almost nothing about this but mr strouse assignmentwasn't until late inwewanted to find out why at that time he was obesekeep at both ends of his lawyers on all of
the actual desired did you know him as are you known tobe a very reliable young man well i didn't know him well enoughand the canadian thing to the crp oranything would you say that he was carryingout his assignment property i couldn't speculate as to that's whywell i just don't have that reliability is concern something occurs to bethe perpetual know i first interviewed mr straw wason the occasion of this having just returned from the ranger and hecame in and told methat he was looking for something to do he's just come back andtestify major three hundred and fifty thousand dollarsand he said i hadbecause
i remember that dateand i saidwell i don't announce it was the first thing i think he was with someadvice second thing it seems to me that you know this is they don'ttell us where you think you're going to stay in your test in fact that isprobably the only real gauge i have of listeners problems testimonyoverall i well then not what you find out aboutwhat conclusion did you reach with respect and strong as result of theinterviews that you had thatwhat he told me in the second interview that i hadwas correcti ama political
will to reach any conclusion from the interviews with respecthim as to what on it wasn't all either in the reidjune seventeenth a complicity on after all itout he told me that he had receivedfrom the committee to realize notice that they hada religious people and iconfronted <unk> which was that mr mcgregor had sent over to himabout what he had included specific reference and he saidno he wouldn't remember anything like mcconnell he was sure that he had never seen anything likethat he said that he didn't receive from ussome material designated sedan chair and looking himwhy somehow season of wire tapped informationfor census of the answer was not a lark
ascending the season mr aikmani'm just interested in what you concluded the interviews withrespect to these individual mr stahlwas that he was a message that he was not ona platter or executor of any plantbut simply accept that they are backing paul ii not whatconclusion did you reach with respect to her mrstack mr kohlmann oh i got mycar back as you'll see in this never have now given this that ithink i cracked it is best if i said thereviewers as my contemporaries conclusionof the best evidence yeti
know so senatorany indication as to what you know what kind of an inquiry you had connected withrespect to each individualis money raising effortseither very new circumstancesi want to makeyou you interviewed i and then you take thisconversation all for it and i've made this memorandum after workand in that i think you'll see that's my conclusion that heacted in the best that they thinking that he was simply engaged in raising money fori've been there
how many interviews did you not as a result of your beingcommissioned by the president they're going to thisisa long and take a new album that these interviews lot of this in the period between theanti of working that they don'tnow the presidentindicated that he had alsothe keywhat was this a statement of the present all about whenhe stated that iran wants the twentieth birthday as a result of serious charges whichcame to my attention some of which were publicly reported i began
intensive new inquiries into this momentone of the series of eventsi'm callingthis conversationright now the state of thestate is turning the investigation overi havethe reason why i don't need to be in anyway diminish the efforts of the investigators in the department of justiceand prosecutors also were doing an extraordinarily effective job right at this time
when i talked to regroup for instance he had already been to see the us attorneyas a result of their effortsand that was it the president is meeting with the attorneygeneral the reason they comparednotes as to always investigations and then dissolvingand then them would you say that that up untilmarch you were convinced andthen the president was convinced at the white house that there was no white houseinvolvement as you were convinced that it is certain i would saynow that because i believe and you kept saying yes to the president on the basis of informationwhich you were receiving from muscatine and others in the best of the best ithen why on january third way you so
concerned that mr hunt might blackmail the white houseyet anytime somebody well somr roylilley on january the third year with respectivelywell he was askingif it was not making any threats well i believe thetestimony which has been abused it indicated that mr hahnwas getting kind of nervous that mr parkerson part of this informationwhich she receives from its commitment to mr mitchell mr mitchell and journeyto the white house and then this conference was used to being usedalso and i don't thinkthat's going to be mrcotterill letters because i recall seeing the letter and that that was a
telephone call from service provider mr bittman i remember i went to mrgolson zappos precipitated the meetingit'sb andamong senator among trial have some comments about a conflict in evidence public television'scoverage of the senate hearings will continue after a pause for station identificationon a bridge to coverage of these hearings is provided as a public service by the member stationsof pbs a public broadcasting servicefbthe
painhasbeenit's
bfrom washington and pikecontinues its coverage of hearings by the senate select committee on presidential campaignactivities here again correspondent robert mcneil as the hearings resumesenator monterey is wrapping up at that point senator worker has some questions about thepolitical espionage done by tony lutz yeahit's been able
topassbyi believe the last question i asked youwhydave plemmonsyouknow well i think
first take the assumptions of your question senator i can agree that therewas so much concern around the white house for clemency for mrthe fact is it and if that happens because paulson had a verystrong concerns about this for its melancholy in this finalminute news is letter word said that mr golson in effect had abandoned hisfriend and the post was moved by thisit was the occasion for a meeting about what kind of a contact mr golsonmight mate with us per month to reassure itmost always is the purpose of the meetingwas bwhich was a very compellingwell
ms nicholson testified about this meetingthe great concern and that he mightbuild the little men to get something which would beunsavory to the white house fiscal suicide i believe you did or someone else in the testimonyof these yearsnoat that meetingand the talk was that under no circumstances should be offeredmore stability discuss the jubilee is yesoh youdo mr mccourt at that time
i believe that was a region with their wholeunit at some at some other candidate comerminein korea during interviews and some of these people did mr caulfield that ever communicateto you that that missile into work permits tobe had communicated an operanow a pennyi believe you have just fiveyear that when the president authorizedinvestigation of the overnight thatand then in thatdiscussion there was no confirmation that immigration the commandit was never discussed it and it
also stated that you were unaware thatwhere anyone else have given theauthority but you're testimony was going to assume that most peoplehad given permission to go intothe elders i saw you assume the military rightnowwhich isat twenty seveni believe that they're doing avery fine justify this as a legalinternet and not worry because thefactory which yeah
gets to the president my heartover the security ofironing out if thisparticular thing for the region contemplates that thepresident take such measures in order for them to beyour interpretation is correct thepresident did not take any measure to give a partythe recall as you have testifiedyou just assumed that he had authority but you're not sure thatit and then there wasthe only person there that authoritynow when you say that it was
not illegalmy assumption was notanact i was livingright if the president had notcontemplated when he get humans in fire or this investigationgo well i suppose it's the difference between major general agencyand what we used to call a special agency a law school but wouldn't you say thatyou agree that specific authorityto get a new president of the united states was necessary in order tomake it valid know i would think that the agents were talking aboutconstitutional rather than statutory power that a general delegationof capacity to mr crowe would be required rather than some
specific authorization to some specific activitieshe was my only reasonand in new yorkand thatworries which is where it was illegalwell here again your misstating what i understand about the mostimportant thing that i said i have to assume was what past week when mrcrow and that is not let me because i don't know i doknow what passed between the president and mr groh and that was a delegation of very generalauthority on this subject and in my opinion that delegation of authority was verybroad and varied the right now i
played it at you mr eckman that your testimonyhas been contradicted by many of thewitnesses who appeared beautiful and i believe that thiscommittee has the taskagainst the testimony others with respect to other measuresmrdean mikhail mr magruder strongthrough the callback ms cloe ibelieve you have indicated to your testimonythe victory of daysand another one detail and itis the duty of this committee to judge your testimonyagainst this background and against all these threads of testimony
about these individual that's all i kept saying as chairmani'm not a lawyer between mytestimony in some of those here at the lot number to understand thefunction of the committing of the legislative agendaso i don't think that you're necessarily in the business ofmaking findings of fact just to the testimony of specific what's passing that themore it seems to me thatwhether there are on what's any evidence is not nearly as importantas to whether or not and what's in the evidence for supportone side or the other by corroborating independence on the touri hope that you'll find impossible the other members of the committee will find impossible to
examine the various expensive pieces of evidence such as a letter from the cia andthe fbi determine which ofconflicting testimony and i'm sure that we will do that ipersonally will i can assure you mr ali the weight of the testimonyand then i would also give consideration to any documentary evidenceherethankyoumendes memorandum of aprilsex object lesson they sharetheyknew or was
ittruenicoit's underscoredagain for a vote on amendments to the campaign reform act as they come back to the year interim centerworkers questions about campaign ethics conflicts and john mitchell says the money andpossible cia involvement in the cover up it'sbeen greatit'sband specifically
davidpresident as thenation's chief executive but he is also a longstanding tradition hispolitical party leader any presidenthas a political role whether he's going to run for re election or notbut it is again today andinformation and the president is apoliticianyou need permissionviewers
conventionalyou take an existingnixon political money by check and inappropriateemployers monitor simonsso far asi'm awareortwo
so i like to try to get into the general nature of theinvestigation and the other investigations about is thefact that these investigations of these investigations were background checks onindividuals and time to talk rest of all facetssexual habitsitisusa
usathis testimony regarding characterizes entirenation that us marinesrespondednational security measuredomestic security measurethat would be a politicalmotiveyou indicate thatyou're a longwas responsible in near council president
and turning over political information orinformation issues ordersjoin us comments of thiscommittee as to the informationwhich you turned over to the presidentand againus i don't knowwhat they do with us concerns referring to year in response to aquestion senator i can only speak poorly about six or seven monthsthat thisi think that the investigations which hedid at the time i was baffled nineteen sixty nine and thefirst month or two nineteen seventeen perhaps not in any way relate
to the political campaign in nineteen seventy twoso i don't know that this isn't the scope of europe are not just generallyprobably agree on the election campaign the leadgroup activities of the election in any eventthe one principle investigation that irecall mystery alaska what's reported to meah and i'm sorry but i don't have i don't think there were verymany major ones of a political nature of my recollection isthat a great deal of what he did had to do witha black panthers anotherviolent violent group intelligence and that's that's the other thing that stands out in ourcollection of mystery alaska rates was sent to
doandit slips my minds just with the baden that was what i do recall iskeeping us informed on a regular basis of the violence as they become became available wherenothingreportingof course with us was justified part of information to see is amatter of public record other information hereceived was a matter of hours everyway
to have something like that you lesson which investigates whathappens is there some reason why possibly the law enforcement on this isanother julie we got thisconnection with the newark police department one point in time that the indianintelligence involving while groups of thatand yet sources particularly in the new york police departmentintelligence division and so he when the recipient of information because of that formerassociation well for years or wizardsof inadequacy or in normal a previously all whati previously testified at its center that we were not gettingan accumulation intelligence from the policeand sheriff's offices in the state police of the various municipal state
organizations and that it was sometime i think it was probablythe second year or possibly into the third year before there was set up andthe justice department a facility or accumulating all this material estimates andthat of sixty seven months only working out assaults when i was counsel i didn't havea makeshift job of getting some of this informationjoin ushiring in theus i dohe was he was fired
This record is featured in ““Gavel-to-Gavel”: The Watergate Scandal and Public Television.”
Series
1973 Watergate Hearings
Episode
1973-07-27
Segment
Part 3 of 5
Producing Organization
WETA-TV
Contributing Organization
Library of Congress (Washington, District of Columbia)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/512-ms3jw87h0p
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/512-ms3jw87h0p).
Description
Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer anchor gavel-to-gavel coverage of day 30 of the U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. In today's hearing, John Ehrlichman testifies.
Broadcast
1973-07-27
Asset type
Segment
Genres
Event Coverage
Topics
Politics and Government
Subjects
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Media type
Moving Image
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Credits
Anchor: MacNeil, Robert
Anchor: Lehrer, James
Producing Organization: WETA-TV
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2341714-1-3 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Preservation
Color: Color

Identifier: cpb-aacip-512-ms3jw87h0p__2341714-4-3.mp4.mp4 (mediainfo)
Format: video/mp4
Generation: Proxy
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-27; Part 3 of 5,” 1973-07-27, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed May 19, 2019, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-ms3jw87h0p.
MLA: “1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-27; Part 3 of 5.” 1973-07-27. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. May 19, 2019. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-ms3jw87h0p>.
APA: 1973 Watergate Hearings; 1973-07-27; Part 3 of 5. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (WGBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip_512-ms3jw87h0p