Folder 9/17: Material used in preparing for the deposition of [Richard Nixon] R.M.N- [L. Patrick] Gray and Wiretap Investigation

8/3/2019 Folder 9/17: Material used in preparing for the deposition of [Richard Nixon] R.M.N- [L. Patrick] Gray and Wiretap I

1/87

SCftEEHEO lk lla!!l.1li.q\p \\7

II

1


2/87

--- STATEMENT ISSUED BY HR. MILLER'S OFFICEAs appears from th e s t i pu l a t i on fil ed in the United

Sta tes D i s t r i c t Cour t fo r th e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia by theSpec ia l P rosecu to r and the at torney for fo rme r Pres iden tNixon yes te rday , Mr. Nixon on Monday and Tuesday o f t h i svleek wa s examined under oath a t the Coas t Guard s t a t i on

what used to be the ~ I ] e s t e r n Whi t e House in San Clemente ,Cal i fo rn ia . Some members o f one of the Watergate grandj u r i e s were presen t . Th e examinat ion was conducted bysevera l members o f th e o f f i c e o f th e Spec ia l P rosecu to r andcons i s t ed o f a t o t a l of approximately e leven hours o fques t ion ing over th e tw o day per iod . The examinat ioncovered a wide range o f sub jec t s .

Mr. Nixon was no t under subpoena. His S\vorn t e s t i -mony in Cal i fo rn ia fo r th e D i s t r i c t o f Columbi a grand ju rywas vo lun ta ry and responsive to the expressed des i res o fth e o f f i ce o f the Spec ia l P rosecu to r f o r h is t e s t imonyr e l a t i ve to th e grand j u r y ' s ongoing inves t iga t ions . Itwas the former Pr e s id e n t ' s des i re to cooper a te with theof f i ce of the Spec ia l Prosecutor in th e areas which t h a tof f i ce des i r ed to i n t e r r o g a te him, and it was Mr. Nixon ' sf ee l ing in view o f the an t ic ipated length of h is t e s t imony ,


3/87

th e presen t s t a t e o f h is h e a l t h , and th e compli ca t ionsinev i t ab ly a t t endan t to extended t r a v e l , th e examinat ionwould be most e f f i c i en t ly conducted in Ca l i fo rn ia .

Mr. Nixon ' s dec i s ion to t e s t i f y fol lowed consUl ta t ion\vi th h i s medical adv iso r s . The examinat ion i t s e l f wa sconducted on Monday and Tuesday, June 23 and 24, 1975.

2


4/87

STATEr1ENT ISSUED BY MR. MILLER'S OFFICE

As appears from th e s t i pu l a t i on f i l ed in the UnitedSta tes Dis t r i c t Court fo r th e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia by theSpec ia l Prosecu to r and the a t to rney fo r former Pres iden tNixon yes te rday , Mr . Nixon on Monday and Tuesday o f t h i sweek was examined under oath a t the Coast Guard s t a t i onJ:a what used to be the Heste rn White House in San Clemente,Cal i fo rn ia . Some members o f one o f the watergate grandj u r i e s were presen t . The examinat ion was conducted bysevera l members o f th e of f i c e o f the Spec ia l P rosecu to r andcons i s t ed o f a t o t a l o f approximately e leven hours o fques t ioning over the two day per iod . The examinat ioncovered a wide range o f sub jec t s .

Mr. Nixon was no t under subpoena. His sworn t e s t i -mony in Cal i fo rn ia fo r th e Dis t r i c t o f Columbia grand ju rywas voluntary and responsive to the expressed des i res o fth e o f f i c e o f the Special Prosecutor fo r h is t e s t imonyr e l a t i ve to th e grand j u r y ' s ongoing inves t iga t ions . Itwas th e former Pr e s id e n t ' s des i re to coopera te with th eof f i ce of th e Spec ia l Prosecutor in th e areas which t h a tof f i ce desi red to in te r roga te him, and it was Mr. Nixon ' sf ee l ing in view o f th e an t ic ipa ted l eng th o f h is tes t imony,


5/87

the p r e se n t s t a t e o f h is hea l th , and th e compl ica t ionsi nev i t ab ly a t t endan t to extended t r ave l , the examinat ionwould be most e f f i c i en t l y conducted in Ca l i fo rn ia .

Mr. Nixon ' s dec i s ion to t e s t i f y fol lowed consu l t a t ionwith h is medical adv iso r s . Th e examinat ion i t s e l f wasconducted on Monday and Tuesday, June 23 and 24, 1975.

2


6/87

WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

I. . MemorandumALL STAFF DATE: June 27, 1975

Henry S. Ruth, Jr .

SUBJECT:

As some of you know, on Monday and Tuesday of thisweek, under extreme precautions of conf ident ia l i ty bothpreceding and during the two days, members of this Officetook sworn testimony from Mr . Nixon about matters pendingbefore Grand Jury I I I . The attached s t ipulation was releasedthis morning by Chief Judge Hart a t the Courthouse and ref lectsthe only matters about the sworn testimony that are permit tedto become public knowledge.Consequently, no member of this s ta f f sha l l speak tomembers of the pr ess, fr iends, and other persons concer ningany aspect re la t ing to the actual occurrence or content of thetestimony. As to those who were present dur ing the testimony,no comments sha l l be made outside the Office concerning anyaspect of what he or she saw or heard. In other words, we aret reat ing th is , as i s our obl igat ion, as we , ..ould any other matterinvolving grand jury testimony. Members of th e press may t ryto reach you a t home or in the office a t any t ime of day or

night for any scrap of detai l . None should be furnished. Allca l ls should be referred to John Barker.There , ..ill be no exceptions to the above ground rulesand no violat ion thereof wil l be countenanced.


7/87

..-

UNI'l'ED STATES DIS'rRIC'r COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN RE JANUARY 7, 1974GRAND JURY

Misc . No .,J!.'

WHEREAS on June 23 and 24 , 1975, Richard H. Nixonvo l un ta r i ly submi t t ed to an examination under oath a t th eSan Hateo Loran S t 'a t ion , United Sta tes Co as t Guard , SanDiego County, Cal i fo rn ia , sa id examination conducted bythe waterga te Spec ia l Prosecut ion Force on matte r s s u b j e c tto pending Grand Jury i n v e s t ig a t i ons , sa id examinationanc i l l a ry to and \v i th the consen t (based on th e hea l th ofRichard H. Nixon and o t h e r leg a l cons ide r a t ions ) o f th eJanuary 7, 1 97 4 Gr and Jury o f the United S t a t e s Di s t r i c tCourt fo r the D i s t r i c t of Columbi a , and s a id examinat iona t t ended by tw o Grand Jurors \ ,,r i th th e approva l of th eChief Judge o f t h i s Court; and

WHEREAS sa id examination \,'as taken fo r p resen ta t ionto and to be made a pa r t o f th e minutes of the a f o r e s a i dGrand Jury ; and

WHEREAS Richard H. Nixon, because i nqu i r i es have beenmade concerning t h i s mat te r , des i r es t h a t th e f a c t o f t h i sproceeding be made pub l ic , b u t only wi th th e consen t o ft he Cour t ; and

WHEREAS t he Spec ia l P r osecu to r has no ob jec t iont h e r e t o ;

N o \ ~ , THEREFORE , counse l fo r Richard H. Nixon and th eSpec ia l Prosecutor on t h i s 26th day o f June , 1975 , herebys t i p u l a te t h a t t h i s s t a t ement s h a l l be f i l ed with th e Court .

IIII

-IIi

II ,


8/87

So ordered:

CHIEF JUDGE

Dated:

- 2 -

r,--, '/" / ' ,y/ /4 I/ (.rJ--.-,e,r>- /HENRY S . RUTH, JR .Spec i a l Prosecu to r

fi.-/-..I ' . ,L- I

-.- ....


9/87

t I L/") -TO: J a y Horowi tzFROM: Frank Ma r t inRE: Nixon 's Testimony

I spoke with Stan Hortenson on Wedne s day and go ta br i e f ou t l ine o f h is impres s ion of Nixon 's respo nseto var ious ques t ions on both the wire tap and th e Grayinve s t iga t ions . Horten s on h a d done the qu es t io n ingon th i s matte r and Mil le r had taken th e no te s o f Ni xon ' sresponses . Mortenson did no t have those notes wi thhim and, t he re fo re , did no t give me a d e t a i le d rundown+l:.but should be ca l l ing me ear ly week fo r more de t a ilon Nixon 's responses . Given t h a t \'Ie have some adv ancewarning on Nixon 's l ike ly responses , we sho u ld ma k ean i n i t i a l dec i s ion as to \vhether or no t to t r y to developthe f u l l background in both i nves t iga t ions or to s pec i f i c a l l ybore in on the July 12, 1971, meeting Vii th Mardian a n d ' Ii+ - ~ \ ' ( . . \ \A


10/87

2 .

Nixon ' s r e c o l l ec tio n on th a t sub j e c t i s r a ther v ivid .Nixon claims t o b e l i e ve t ha t th e ta p s were neve r o f ve rymuch value bu t Kiss inger rea l ly wa n t e d th e w ire ta ps .Nixon assumes t h a t th e w ire t a ps we re di scon t inu e d be c a u seo f t h e i r Imv pr oduc t i v i ty ilnd has no explan a t i on fo r h isApr i l , 1973, comments concerning "knocking the \Vire tap so ff a f t e r the hu l laba lo ou t t he re . " As to the Ra d f ordt aps , Nixon s imply be l ieves t h a t they came o f f i n thenormal course as a r e s u l t o f Kie th dec i s ion . Ther e a r evar ious tape r e fe rences cons i s t en t with Nixon 's c l a imnot to have been in t imate ly involved in the w ire t aps andt h a t Kiss inger \Vas the one who was invo lved . S p e c i f i c a l l y ,

l/:(') \,on the July 6 , ~ t a p e , Nixon r e f e r s to the f a c t t h a t henever sa w any of the \v i retap m a t e r i a l and on th e Februa ry 27,and 28th t apes , Nixon r e f e r s to Kiss inger want ing th ewire taps and he, Nixon, assuming they were done, an d a l soto the f a c t t h a t Kiss inger loved the wire taps and used toread them a l l th e t ime. I f we want to go i n to th e areao f Kiss inger ' s " i n i t i a t i on" of the ~ l i r e t a p s , it se e ms t h a tNixon 's tes t imony \ , l i l l be s t r a igh t fo rward a nd t h a t t h i sa r ea could be handled by four o r f ive r e l a t i v e ly quick quest ion& .As to Nixon 's fa i lu re to r e c o l l e c t why th e wi re tap s werediscont inued, he could be pushed a little g i v en h i s s t a t e -i fment on the tapes conce rn ing the "hul lab a lo" b u t do e s n o t/I.seem t h a t t h i s would be very pr oduc t ive .I I . J u l y , 1971 - - San Clemente

According to Stan , Nixon has very little r e c o l l e c t i o n/ 1of the Ju ly 10 th , 1971, re fe rence to n o t \vorrying about

t aps on discovery ' \ and s i m i l a r l y , ras very little r e c o l l e c t i o no f the overhear problem as it was discussed in the July 1 2 ,1971, meet ing . Nixon does no t r e c a l l any r e l a t ionsh ipbetween th e El l sberg o r Pentagon Papers case and the wi r e t approblem. He also has no o r little knowledge concerning


11/87

3.

\vhy the wir , ' ap s we re no t d e s t r oy ed . As r e gards t he in d i-ca t ions o f t ;1e July 12th no tes th a t nevlspap e r p eop l eshould no t b," ca l l ed before the gr a nd j u ry , Ni xon ' s re co l l e c -tion i s th a t t h i s wa s bas ica l ly a pub l ic r e l a t i on s i ss ueregarding s u?pres s ion o f th e pres s . Nixon does rec a llMitche l l b e i 19 concerned about Hoover and about th e Vlire tap'\-lv.-'t-logs . Ni x r a l so r e ca l l s a concern th e ex i s t e ncethese wire '. " ) S might l eak to the pr e ss as o th e r th ing s hadbeen l e a k i to th e pres s and t h a t , th e r e f o r e , the Vlire tapsshould be d ( s t r oyed . Nixon seems to be confus ing th e even tsin Ju ly , 1 9 ' 1 , vlhich i s th e overhear problem , vl i t h even t sin October , 1971, \vhich i s th e o::s i s sue of ge t t i ng th e t,,,uf- o f l - 4 r u 1 . ~ (' o lJ.&4 ....... J\,uqwire tap mat 3r i a l away from H o o v e r ~ i n Ehr1ichman ' s posse s s i on .There a re a numbe r of t h in gs which a re in cons i s t en t withNixon 's r f C ) l l e c t i on o f th e Ju l y 12, 1971, meet ing espec iallyth e early r )te s conce rn ing the overhear problem and th ei n s t r u c t io r,s fo r Hoover to des t roy the log s which would in -d i ca t e th a "l. Hoove r would be coopera t ing in t h i s e f f o r t .In add i t io L , th e re i s Mardian 's s t ateme.n t t h a t " the FBI ' sgoing a ll (Ju t now" with r egard to t he El l sberg case . Also ,it should he noted t h a t th e Ju ly 12 , 1971, meet ing i s th et ime of tl ' form a t ion o f th e Plumbers un i t and t h i s wouldb e th e l c ,.c a l t h ing to have happened given th e cons i de r a t ionso f th e p : ) l ems o f " I n t e l l igence Opera t ions" caus i ngprobl ems v hen it comes to p r osecu t ions . On th e July 12 thmeet ing, : . would sugge s t p r ob in g po in t by po in t througho fEhr l i chma l ' s Do tes . , i th th e assurance/Hortenson th a t heha s gone over a l l t h i s mate r i a l again ,v i th Nixon and hasexp la inec to h im why th e Ju l y 12 events a re d i f f e r e n t fromth e Oc t d = r , 1971, even t s .I I I . H' " ve r Threa t

N n rec a l l s meet ing with Hoover in ea r ly Apr i l,1971, an l s t a t e s t h a t t h e r e was no th re a t from Hoover a nd


12/87

4.

t h a t he never rece ived any such th re a t . There i s somesuppor t fo r Nixon ' s " impress ion" in th e February , 197 3 ,WI"lt; -\-(.... - H " ( ) I . I ( ~ t ape s where he seems to i nd ica te d isagreeme nt l \ that Hooverwould ever threaten him. There i s , however, s i gn i f i c an tcontra d i c t ion fo r Nixon ' s pres e n t r e c o l l e c t i o n , in p a r t i c u l a r ,th e reference on the October 25, 1971, tape to Hoove rbr inging nthe temple dmm with him, inc lud in g me.," Nixonnow c la ims t h a t t h i s s ta tement has no meaning to him.I t seems t h a t Nixon i s confusing again events in Apr i l , 1971,August, 1971, and October , 1971. I would sugges t probingon the October 25, 1971, t ape r e fe rence above , as 'Vlel l asthe Apr i l , 1971, notes which indicate t h a t Hoover was u p s e tover Kle ind iens t and had threa tened to revea l the wi re taps .I would a l so probe on what wa s done to turno ff on th e Congress iona l i nves t iga t ion idea .IV . Gray ' s Nomination

Kle ind iens t

Nixon ' s r eco l l ec t ion i s t h a t t he re had been somei n i t i a l cons iderat ions cons i s t en t with the J anua ry 8, 1973,Haldeman no tes / to not l ~ ~ ~ Q G U t Gr ay . Nixonfu r the r r e c a l l s t h a t "'hen it came down to t r y ing to f indsomeone e l s e , var ious p o l i t i c a l f ac to r s ind ica ted t h a t th e b e s tthey could do would be to send up Gray. Thi s i s somewhat

\ ~ i th Ehrl ichmanconfirmed by th e February 14, 1973, discuss ion/concerningnomina t ing Gray. With regard to th e meeting with Gray,Nixon r e c a l l s th e main c o n c e r n ~ bein g how Gray wou ld handlethe vlatergate ques t ions , and t h a t t h i s i s \ ~ h a t he 'VIa spr inc ipa l ly concerned with probing Gray on. Also, Nixondoes not assume t h a t h is discuss ion with Gray concern ingthe need fo r a d i r e c t r e l a t ionsh ip between th e Direc to rand th e Pres iden t meant t ha t he expected Gray to engage inwire tapping o r t h a t Gray necessa r i ly knew about th e wire tappingt h a t Hoover had done fo r Nixon as p a r t of t h i s d i r e c t


13/87

5.

r e l a t ionsh ip with the Pre s iden t . Stan did not r e c a l l ,without h is no tes how Nixon r e sponded to the t ape r e f e r e n c e sI

t o th e l eaks to Time magazine. Oth e r than fo r s e t t i ngNixon ' s gene r a l concern over F e l t an d l eaks to Ti me as wel las th e f a c t t h a t he pushed fo r Sul l iv an during th i s meet ing ,the re does no t seem t h a t the re i s a l o t to be gained byprobing Nixon in d e t a i l on the February 16, 1973, meet ing.v. Time Magazine Story

According to Mortenson , Nixon ' s r eco l l ec t ion i s hazyand apparent ly he has little informat i on about t h i s per iod ,a t l e a s t from t h e i r i n i t i a l conve r sa t ion . Nixon s t a t e s~ t th a t he assumesj..Gray '&ftat R would n ot necessa r i l y h aveknown about the wire taps s ince t hey \vere c10sely he l d andhe be l ieves t h a t only Hoover, Sul l ivan , Kiss inger , Ha ig ,Haldeman, Ehrlichman , and Ni t c h e l l \'lOuld have such kno\,lledge.Nixon fu r the r assumes t ha t denying th e Time a l l e ga t ions wa ssomething th a t he rea l ly \vould o o ' l l ' e ~ E l . - : : -nave d e a l t w ith.There i s su b s t a n t i a l con t rad ic t ion fo r Nixon ' s view of theseeven t s . On th e bas i s o f the February 16, 1973, meetingwi th Gray , it i s c l e a r t ha t Nixon \vould be very concernedabou t another " t ru th fu l " s to ry to Time magazine and aboutth e p o s s ib i l i t y th a t Fe l t and/or Sullivan wa s th e source o fth i s s to ry . In add i t i on , we hav e the February 25, 1973, noteso f Hald eman ' s conversa t ion with th e Pres iden t conce rn ingth e f a c t t h a t Brandon and Saf i r e were known to Time magazineas s u b j e c ~ o f th e wire taps and t h a t t h i s would be an obviousconcern to Nixon. This i s bu t t r essed by th e f ac t t h a t inh is conversa t ions on the 27th and 28th vlith Dean, Nixon "con t inually re fe r s to Brandon and ~ : : ' o 1 t ~ ~ t 1 b ; l - 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ y concerned t h a t it might l eak o ut t h a t B i l l Saf i re had beenwiretapped . Saf i re ...,a s s t i ll on the White House s t a f f a tth a t time . In add i t i on t heHa ldeman notes c lear ly ind ica te


14/87

6 .

th a t Nixon had discussed t he sub jec t mat te r withEhrlichman \"hile they were a t Camp David. F i n a l l y ,the re i s a reference in the February 27th t ape toNixon discuss ing the vlire taps and saying "of course wehad to s tonewal l and say nothing happened." This obvious lyi nd ica tes t h a t th i s ,vas the decis ion t h a t had been reacheda t Camp David o r had been repor ted to Nixon by Ehrl ichmana t Camp David. Nixon, on the February 28th t ape makesan add i t iona l r e f e rence where Dean s t a t e s tha.t th e Timemagazine a r t i c l e i s be ing s tonewal led completely andNixon says "oh, abso l u t e l y . " It ,wuld appear t h a t as tothe i s sues in th e Gray inves t iga t ion , the ques t ion ingshould concent ra te on probing the events of the 2 4 t h J ~ 25th and 26th o f February . This i s due to the f a c tt h a t we have a c lea r ind ic a t ion t h a t Nixon spoke toEhrl ichman, bu t did no t knovl the subs tance of th a t con -versa t ion and it i s c l e a r t h a t Nixon l a t e r t a lked toHaldeman and he shou ld have some knowledge as to what wasdone to a s s u r e ~ Time a l l ega t ions would be "stonewa l l e d . "VI. Other Aspects

There are a few o ther more miscel laneous aspec t s o fthe ques t ioning which we should d iscus s whether o r no twe should probe deeply on. This inc ludes the Kle ind iens tknowledge o f the wire taps e i t he r as a r e s u l t of the Apr i l ,1971, t h r e a t , the July , 1971, San Clemente meet ing , andthe implementation of the or de r s given by Nixon a t t h a tmeeting, and f in a l ly discuss ions with Richard Moore con-cerning the wire taps e i t he r dur ing 1971, in d iscus s ionsabout r ep lac ing Hoover or in discuss ions about Su l l i v a n ' sdepar ture from the Bureau. Also, \'le should probe poss ib lywhether or no t Hoore had any knowledge a t the t ime of th eGray conf i rmat ion hear ings and the Time magazine a r t i c l e


15/87

7.

abou t the wire ! f l S . Fina l ly , the r e i s th e ques t ion o fwhe th e r or no t t ,e r e wa s o ther w ire tapp ing done in th ecourse o f the :: t sberg i nves t iga t ion . Ther e a re c lea rind ic a t ions in ..,0 Apr i l 19, 1971', conve r sa t ions , onewith Petersen a ld one with Moore, t h a t such wire ta ppingwas done and tb3. t Nixon knows a bou t it. There are ,however , in s op = of the se conve r sa t ions , some discla im e r sar..fIIehe e x t e n t ( f Nixon ' s knowledge . I did n o t g e t i n tospec i f i c s w it .l Stan concerning t h i s i s su e , a l though hedid s t a t e the e as to a no ta t ion in Ehrl ichman ' s July 1 0 ,1971, notes (e lcerning th e f a c t t h a t "Roger should bet app ing more , ' it i s Nixon 's r eco l l ec t ion t h a t he was n o taware whethe : or no t Rogers wa s t app ing a t all, nor d idhe give a spe - :i f i c or de r t h a t he should be t app ing , b u tt h a t t h i s wa s a genera l s ta tement abou t th e problem o fl eaks ou t 0: :he Sta te Department , and an i n d i c a t i o n t h a tthe re shoul . )e more , . , i retapping.

m d ' M . I I ; I - ( ~ , . . , . Hy i n i : : 3.1 j,FlElj,";Fi;] "n t h a t we should conce n t r a t eon July 10, . 2, 1971, on February 24, 25, 1973, andposs ib ly on t he Apr i l , 1971, m a t e r i a l s reg a rding Kle ind iens tand possiblE" knowledge o f the wi r e t aps .


16/87

. Q).


17/87

w- \L -\-k.L l . . J ~ !t-'1 T ~ ~ C/V' d ' : " ~ 1 ~ ' ?/nnJ IN>\o '* \.J.4- k . ~ w UM.t.cA..r- WM tW,

" O \ ) t . n . ~ ~ r k ~ J : ~ I '

~ / " 1 / 1 ) ~ l l ~ " ' \ - .

ItllitH 1 ) l y ~ ~ ~ . , , \ . . ~

1\""- (/'\.J..v. -h- h ~ t N l \ tvr l.~ \ \ O ~ < t u ~ ~ e M . . ~ O ~ ~ t.l. , "''''''- eM.. i:k- \ \ ~ \ \ . t ~ ~ b i u - . . I ~ & u ~ ~ ~ ( . ! . o ~ .


18/87

+

'-(/n/13

7/10/11

t P l ~ ~ o t ' s lJL - \ . ~ J . . . A ~ "\ ;\ 6\.t. \.,.,.. .\0 \\ A M > ~ + ~ ~ f \ ~ " ~ 1 ! ~ ~ ~ " uu{.4t..:.1U.". l J ~ - \ - ~ ~ ~ \ ~

~ . c . 1 ~ ... -10, It(') I .

UO()ULl\. - ~ o y ) ~ - kW JQ . ~ I L ~ { \ - - L +1,\ I.: U M M ~ ~ k


19/87

+

I rl/'llhl t ' I ~ I ) ~ 1 1 1 -hL ..~ ) 2 i h ] ~ J ; } . ( . J l ~

I

~ ~ \ \ 1 \ - ~ - t ~ . . \ - u : . . . . . . . . . ' - ' J ~ ~ ~ ~ U M C L ! ~ t- ~ ~ ~

~ ( ) ~


20/87

... -


21/87

Chronology of Events re Removal of Wiretap RecordsApril 25 , 1969 - -

According to Kissinger, he meets with Nixon, Mitchel land Hoover on th i s day and it i s decided t ha t nexttime there is a major leak, wiretapping wil l be usedto t rack down the source of the leak.May 9, 1969 - -

William Beecher (NY Times) reveals secret Cambodiabombing. Four conversat ions between Kissinger an dHoover on th is date and a wiretap is ins ta l led onHalperin.

May 12, 1969 - -Attorney General signs authorizat ion for Halperin wire-tap (done three days ea r l i e r ) , as well as wiretaps onDavidson, Sonnenfeld, and Pursley.

Apri l 30, 1970cambodian invasion - - a t th i s time only wiretaps inoperation are Halperin an d Brandon.

May 4, 1970 - -Beecher (NY Times) reveals renewed secret bombing ofVietnam. Haig, on behalf Nixon requests wiretaps onBeecher, Pursley, Sull ivan and Petersen.

May 13, 1970 - -Haig, on behalf of Kissinger, requests wiretaps onLake and Lord. (Nixon apparently has a vivid reco l lec-t ion of Kissinger ins i s t ing upon the Lake wiretap be-cause Lake had been involved in the secret Parisnegot ia t ions and Kissinger was afraid Lake would ta lkto Muskie about these negot ia t ions s ince he was goingto work fo r Muskie.)

May 15, 1970According to Kissinger, a t his request , a l l wiretapl e t t e r s are sent from th i s time on to Haldeman ra therthan to Kissinger and Nixon.


22/87

r : : : : = = = = = = = : - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - ---2.

February 10, 1971 - -All wire taps then in operat ion (Halper in , Brandon,Sonnenfe ld , Beecher, Sul l ivan , Pe te r sen , Purs l ey ,Lake, Lord) a re discont inued. The day before Hooverhad asked Sull ivan fo r a list of a l l t aps then inopera t ion and noted on the bottom o f Sul l i van ' s memorandum " inqu i re of Colonel Haig whether any can be takeno f f . "

March, 1971 - -(Haldeman notes ind ica te poss ib le d i scuss ion o fHoover re t i remen t . )

A p r i l S , 1971 - -Congressman Boggs charges t h a t the FBI is wiretappingCongressmen. Nixon o r Haldeman c a l l s Hoover to r e -assure him o f t h e i r suppor t .Apr i l 6-11, 1971 - -

Kle ind iens t s ta te s tha t he would welcome a congress iona linves t iga t ion of the FBI. Hoover c a l l s Kle ind iens tand says any such inves t iga t ion might reveal wire tapsdone fo r th e Pres iden t . (See Liddy memo to f i l e sAugust 10, 1971.) Nixon r eca l l s a t th i s t ime havinga breakfas t with Hoover (Easter t ime) , b u t be l ievesthe re was no problem in t e rms o f Hoover th rea ten ing toreveal the wi re t aps .

Apr i l 12, 1971 - -Hoover sends memorandum, probably to a l l A s s i s t a n tDi rec to rs , cut t ing Mardian out o f Domestic I n t e l l i genceinformat ion and implying t h a t the FBI wiretap somepeople a t the Pr es i den t ' s r eques t .

Apr i l 13, 1971Nixon, Haldeman, Ehrl ichman d iscuss Hoover problem,Nixon s ta te s t h a t he discussed with Mitche l l Hoovermemo sugges t ing t h a t th e FBI had wiretapped somepeople fo r the Pres iden t .

February-May, 1971 - -Sometime during th i s per iod , Mardian probably l ea rnedo f th e wire taps in connect ion with prepar ing responses


23/87

3.

to Senator Kennedy's r eques t fo r a breakdown o fthe number of wire taps conducted by the FBI.(See May 7, 1973, Mardian in terv iew by Glanzer . )June 13 , 1971

Pentagon Papers publ ished.June 15, 1971

Wells prepares 6/15/71 memo re Morton Halper in .Also , Nixon meets with Ehr1ichman and Mitchel l fo ra genera l d i scuss ion o f th e Pentagon Papers andposs ib le grand jury a c t i o n s . Mitche l l , e a r l i e r t h a tday , had met with Hoover, Mardian and Kle ind iens t .Also , Sul l ivan in a memo r e f e r s t o E11sberg as a formera s s i s t a n t to John McNaughton, same d e s c r ip t i o n asSul l i van ' s handwri t ten notes on the Acid t r i p log .(Su l l ivan admits t h a t he probably consul ted t h i s login prepar ing h is June 15, 1971, memo.)

June 16, 1971 - -According to Colson, Nixon and Kiss inger are awareo f E11sberg-Ha1perin conver sa t ions .

June 17, 1971 - -Nixon meets with Ehr1ichrnan and Kissinger . Int h i s meet ing , the re i s a genera l d i scuss ion o f thePentagon Papers and two spec i f i c po in ts of no te .F i r s t , the re i s a d i scuss ion o f the Brookings I n s t i t u t eand the f a c t t h a t , accord ing to Torn Huston, theyhave a copy, o r th e or ig ina l , o f Johnson 's 1968 bombingh a l t f i l e . Nixon c i t e s "Huston ' s p lan" and says someone should go in and g e t th e f i l e s . Ehr1ichman's no tesof the meeting ind ica te the Pr es i den t ' s s t a t i ng"implement a t h e f t . " Second, in t h i s meeting t h e r ei s a d i scuss ion o f the f ac t t h a t E11sberg used drugs.There i s no spec i f i c r e f e r ence by Kissinger to beingaware o f th i s f ac t spec i f i ca l ly from the wire taps .Kiss inger s t a t e s t h a t E11sberg i s get t ing in to drugsand Nixon picks up on t h i s and says i s he tak ingdrugs . Kiss inger ' s response i s t h a t the re i s no ques -t ion about it, and Nixon says , "ge t it ou t , " i . e .meaning, l eak it to the press .


24/87

4.

June 25-30, 1971This i s the per iod o f the Marks i n t e rv iew con t rover sy ,r e su l t i ng i n the demotion o f Brennan and the subsequen t r e ins t a t emen t o f Brennan a t the i n s i s t ence o fthe Attorney Genera l . This i n c id e n t wa s probably d i s cussed a t th e Pr es i den t i a l l eve l and it appears from aJune 30, 1971, te lephone conversat ion between Mitche l land Nixon t h a t they were d i scuss ing t h i s problem andt h a t Mitchel l had been able to smooth it over withHoover.

June 25, 1971Complaint f i l ed aga ins t E l l sbe rg in Los Angeles and awarran t i s sued fo r h is a r r e s t .

June 28, 1971El l sberg i s ind ic ted on tw o counts - - one t h e f tcount and one espionage coun t . Also , El lsbe rgsur renders in Boston. (From th e t ime of El l sbe r g ' ssu r r ender to h is Los Angeles arraignment on August 16 ,1971, h is at torneys con t inua l ly made motions fo r thed isc losu re o f th e e l ec t r on i c su rve i l l ance informat ion .)

July 2 , 1971 - -I n t e r na l Secur i ty Divis ion r eques t s th e FB I to de te r mine whether o r no t Ellsberg has been overheard . Thismemo spec i f i ca l ly s t a t e s t h a t t h i s check i s in an t i c i pa t ion o f defense mot ions . )

July 6, 1971 - -Nixon meets with Haldeman, Ehrl ichman and Mitche l l .There i s a genera l d i scuss ion o f the p rogress o f th egrand jury . During t he conver sa t ion , Haldeman r a i s e sthe p o s s i b i l i t y o f checking the wire tap logs fo r anyinformat ion t h a t might be helpfu l . Mitchel l s ta te st h a t th e logs a re being reviewed a t th e Bureau. Haldeman then says t h a t he r eca l l s conversat ions of Sheehanbeing on t he logs . (In f ac t , the re was only oneSheehan conver sa t ion . ) Nixon asked , "Who's go t the t imeto read it," and no tes t h a t "I na t u r a l l y never sa w anyo f t h a t s t u f f . " Haldeman aga in s t a t e s t h a t in l i g h t o frecen t developments , those logs might have much moremeaning and Mitchel l again no tes t h a t they a re beingreviewed.


25/87

5.

July 2-9, 1971 - -Wells t e l l s Wannall there are no Ellsberg overhears .

July 9, 1971 - -Olson cal l s Brennan an d asks fo r an e l su r check onvarious grand jury witnesses, including Halperin,Warnke, Gelb and Sheehan. Also, on th i s dateMardian i s ins t ructed to go to San Clemente. Mardianclaims he was ins t ructed to do th i s in a ca l l fromHaldeman or Ehrlichman. I t should be also noted tha taccording to Dean, Mardian stated tha t he was going a tKleindiens t ' s ins t ruct ions .

July 10, 1971 - -Nixon meets with Haldeman, Ehrlichman an d Rose MaryWoods. The i n i t i a l discussion concerns the Nixon. Library, but l a te r gets in to Ellsberg. At one pointNixon says tha t Rogers should be tapping more. (Accordingto Mortenson, Nixon recal l s th i s merely as a generaloutburst tha t the State Department was leaking and thateveryone should be tapping more and not tha t he wasspeci f ica l ly aware of any wiretapping being done bythe State Department.) After th i s , someone s ta te s "regrand jury - - don ' t worry re taps on discovery rewitnesses." (Nixon does not recal l anything about th isre ference )

July 12, 1971 - -8:15 a.m. Mardian ha s breakfast with Ehrlichman.10:30 a.m. Dean meets with Ehrlichman to turn o ff theBrookings bombing. 11:00 a.m. Nixon meets with Haldeman,Ehr1ichman and Mardian.

Mardian In(1) Re National Securi ty tapsEapecial1y Special Coverage TapsBeecherSheehanHedrick SmithOverhearinqs would be disclosedI Referred IHRH (Haldeman) InPresident

:36514 Docld:31443850


26/87

6.

(2) Southern D i s t r i c t o f New YorkWhitney N. Seymour, J r .Summer In te rnsDisloyalLindsey- typesIncluding North Seymour

(3) M (Mardian): a number of documents ou tNSC hasH (Haldeman) has

(4 ) H (Haldeman) recover documents from Haig(5 ) Pres iden t - - ok obta in and destroy a l l logs(6 ) Te l l Hoover to dest roy(7 ) M (Mardian): Ordered only to go with grand ju ry

s b ~ r t of newspaperWitnesses o r newspaperIndictmentsAwait i n s t r uc t i ons from Attorney GeneralNow a t t h a t po in tCan make Sheehan (?) El lsbe rg cases now

(8 ) Pres iden t - - Let th e CommitteesEast landIchordH it the papers(9) E.G. Congress ional f i gh t CBSDon' t c a l l newspapers before grand ju ry

(10) 10 year St a t u t e of Limi ta t ionsEspionageAn inadequate s ta tu teNeed to inqu i re re law i s adequate

(11) M (Mardian): Question i s IchordEast land more dependable - -Ha s bes t lawyerKle ind iens t and M (Mardian) to Sen. E (East land)Pres ident requests hi m toDo it soon

(12) FB I going a l l ou t now(13) We'l l not deny Ichord th e s t u f fGet East land in too


27/87

7.

(14) Haig re tu rn documents to FB IThen to RM (Mardi an ) fo r des t ruc t ionHaig request the FB I (Sul l ivan) to des t roy a l lspec i a l coverageSull ivan wi l l con tac t Mardian

(15) 20% o f source documents miss ing (El lsberg)Can ' t be found in Government f i l e s(16) Mathias - - d i d n ' t de l i ve r h i s documents(17) Pres iden t phone c a l l(18) Gelb th e pr i nc i pa l co-consp i ra to r

Also on Ju ly 12 , 1971, the re i s the i n i t i a l ~ f o r m a t i o n o f th e "Plumbers Uni t . "Post July 12, 1971 - -

Mardian d ic t a t e s memo concerning the San Clemente meet ing .Next day, apparent ly a f t e r discuss ing the memo withKleindienst , Mardian dest roys th e memo and s tenographicno tes .July 13, 1971

FB I memo to I n t e r na l Secur i ty Divis ion which s ta te st h a t Ellsberg has never been overheard .July 16, 1971

FB I memo to In terna l Securi ty Divis ion which s ta te st h a t H ~ l p e r i n , Warnke and Sheehan have been overheardon fore ign es tabl i shment wire tap , bu t does not mentionHalper in wiretap o r any o the r overhears from spec i a lcoverage t aps .July 30, 1971

Wells leaves the FBI to go to work fo r Mardian. Note:Wells l a t e r t e l l s Smith t h a t as o f t h i s t ime he wasstill working with the wire taps . Also , Kathy Stone ' sr eco l l ec t i on t h a t she wa s to ld t h a t the wire tap recordswere over with "Brennan and Wells . "


28/87

8 .

August 4, 1971 - -Mardian c a l l to Mitchel l fol lowed immediate ly byMitche l l c a l l to Subl ivan . Liddy meets with Mardianand McGrath and i s to ld t h a t Wells w i l l head lEeand t h a t Wells i s the one man t h a t Hoover f ea r sbecause o f th ings Wells d id fo r Hoover while he wasin th e Bureau. (Note: It i s probably l ik e ly th a tNixon had conversa t ions wi th Mitchel l a t t h i s t imeconcern ing the "Hoover th re a t , " bu t we have no dai lydia ry in format ion or notes t h a t can l ead us to anysuch conversa t ion. )

August 5 , 1971 - -Mardian m ~ e t s with Kissinger and s ta te s th a t Hooveri s e i t h e r blackmail ing o r th rea ten ing to blackmai l th ePres ident with regard to the wire tap r ecords .

August 10, 1971 - -Liddy memo to f i l e s re meeting with Mardian. Duringth i s meet ing , Mardian recounts being i n K l e i nd i ens t ' sof f ice (Apri l , 1971) when Kle indiens t rece ived a c a l lfrom Hoover and Hoover threa tened to r evea l the wire taps .Mardian does no t tell Liddy t h a t it i s a th re a t to r e -veal the wi re taps , bu t only s ta te s t h a t apparen t lyKle ind iens t did no t pe rce ive what the th re a t was.

August 11, 1971 - -Young list of agenda of i tems to d i scuss with Ehrl ichmaninc lude "Hoover t h r e a t - - Mardian knows what it i s . "Nixon meets with Ehrl ichman. General discuss ion o fPentagon Papers case and the progress o f the SALT l eakcase . Ehrl ichman notes t h a t Hoover i s scared to deathof the Pentagon Papers case because he i s af ra id th a t ifhe doesn ' t do it r ig h t t h a t it w i l l hur t h is r epu t a t i on .Ehrlichman a l so s ta te s th a t Mitchel l has decided t h a tPat Gray i s the person to r ep lace Hoover and t h a t th emethod of doing t h i s i s to have Gray go over as Hoover ' sdeputy fo r about s ix months and then become Direc tor .August 16, 1971

Ellsberg i s a r ra igned in Los Angeles. U.S. AttorneyRobert Meyer s t a t e s t h a t he i s authorized by th e Jus t i c eDepartment to s t a t e t h a t El l sbe rg has never been over -heard on any e lec t ron ic surve i l l ance .


29/87

9.

August 28, 1971 - -Sul l ivan sends h is l e t t e r to Hoover c i t i n g a l l h isvar ious po l icy disagreements with Hoover ' s adminis t r a t i o n o f the FBI.

Late August , 1971According to Brennan, Sull ivan goes to Mardian 'sof f i ce with the wiretap logs b u t Mardian i s no tt he r e . Sul l ivan then br ings the sa tchel to Brennan 'sof f i ce and asks him to de l ive r it upon Mardian 's r e tu rn .Brennan does t h i s b u t cla ims not to have been aware ofthe contents of the sa t che l .

Early September, 1971 - -Mardian shows Wells th e wiretap records and suggestst h a t Wells may be asked to take cus tody of therecords .

Mid-September, 1971Nixon meets with Hoover and Hoover t e l l s Nixon t h a the would be wil l ing to leave if Nixon f e l t t h a t hewas a l i a b i l i t y fo r Nixon in the 1972 campaign.

September 30, 1971 - -Hoover f i r e s Sul l ivan .

October 2 , 1971 - -Mitche l l t e l l s Hoover t h a t th e wire taps were removedfrom the FBI with Hoover 's concurrence and t h a t th ewiretap records have been des t royed .

October 8, 1971Meeting of Nixon with Ehrlichman and Mitche l l . Mi tche l ld i scusses the f ac t t h a t Hoover i s searching a l l o v e rt ry ing to f ind the wiretap records and t ha t t h i s maylead to a conf ron ta t ion and suggest t h a t , r a the r thanMardian holding the records , they be given to Ehrlichman.Nixon concurs and it i s agreed t h a t should Hoover conf ront Mitche l l , it w i l l simply be s ta ted t h a t the wi re -tap records are in the "Pr es i den t ' s hands."

October 8-25, 1971 - -Mardian de l i ve r s the wire tap records to Ehrlichman.


30/87

10.

October 25, 1971 - -Meeting o f Nixon and Ehrlichman. Nixon and Ehrl ichmand iscuss Liddy 's memo on the FB I and dur ing th e courseo f t h i s meeting, Nixon s t a t e s t h a t with regard toHoover "we have a man on our hands who may br ingthe whole temple down with him, inc luding me." Theygo on to discuss the scenar io of ins tead of havingHoover r es ign , in January , 1972, t h a t a t t h a t t imehe would merely s t a t e t ha t t h i s i s h is l a s t year inthe Bureau and a f t e r the 1972 e l e c t i o n , whoever i sPres iden t can appo in t the new Direc to r and t h a t he w i l lonly s tay on u n t i l a f t e r th e ne w Direc to r i s conf irmed.There i s al so a d iscuss ion t h a t Hoover might agree toP at Gray being nominated as th e ne w Direc to r .

November 1 , 1971 - -3:00 p.m. Mitchel l meets with Hoover . It was probablya t t h i s meeting t h a t Mitchel l t e l l s Hoover t h a t th ewire tap logs have not been dest royed bu t a re inEhrlichrnan's of f ice . Hoover l a t e r t e l l s t h i s to F e l t .

November 2, 1971 - -Nixon meets with Ehrlichman. Th e t ape of t h i s meet ingdoes no t ex i s t , bu t notes i nd i ca t e t h a t the d iscuss ionswere genera l ly abou t s t r a teg ie s fo r ge t t i ng r id of Hooverand t h a t there i s no spec i f i c d iscuss ion o f the wi re tapproblem.


31/87

, ,, # o ~

MEMORt.,..NDUM FOR:FR OM:SUB JE C T :

His to ry

THE WHITE HOUSEWASH I NGTO ! ' J

October 22, 1971

BUD KROGHJGORDON LIDDY "7

~ - - - - - - '-

_ilTI-IE DIRECTORStIIP OF THE F B I

T h e FB I w as b o r n in another age . Six yea r s a f t e r the doughboyscarne horne from Fr ance a t the end of -World \Var I, A m e r i c a w?_ss t i l l r u r a l . OJ.tside of h e r ci t ies , paved roads were few. T he au ton1.obile \vas ju s t making i t s impact felt upon o ur society . T he UnitedSta tes had en tered \"corld W ar I wi th som eth ing like 60 0 Inach ineguns in it's en t i re a r m e d fo rces . Th e G e n n a n s had thousands and theyt e r ro r ized th e fannboy turned doughboy who re tu rned horne wi th t a les of i t s a -wesorne power .T h e c r i mi n a l e l emen t quickly ;-- exploi ted the ne\v technology and Ina r r ied the rnachine gun to the autolTIobile . Roving lTIobiJe b an d s sw e p tinto town and staged bank robb e r i es which w ere the l l l .echanized equi vaJent of wild w es t raid s . T h e hint e r lands w ere in t e r r o r of the Dil l inge r s , the Bar ke r s , the Floyds , the N e l sons , Bonnie and C-lyde .T her e a re towns in Indiana today with co n cr e t e pi l l boxes in t he i rmai n square bui l t in the 20's and 30 's as minia tu re Jviaginot l ines tode fend agains t what was ca l led " a \ . ~ t o - b a n d i t r y . II -Since- 1908 , there had existed in th e D ep ar h n en t of Jus t ice a slTIallunit known as the Bu reau of Invest igat ion. I t w as i ncompe t e nt andco rrupt . J . Edgar Hoover , a young Jus t ice D e par t Ine nl: l awyer , hin1.se l f in h is 20 ' s , was cal led upon by then Attorn e y G en e ra l H ar l aa F .Stone to se r ve as the 5th Directo r of the Bu rea u of Ir lvestig?_ t ion to -clean it up and tu rn i t into th e r esponse to the c r i mi n a l cha l l enge d e m a n d e d by the public .

-H o o v e r m et the chal le nge . He fought l e chnology with technology,vir tual ly i ! 1 \ o ent ing prac t i ca l fo rens ic c r im -ll a l sc ience and the cr i rne


32/87

/,.

. ~ / ;'

/1I'/

1lab and organ iz e d prac t ica l m a s s id entif icat ion p 'r ocedur e s buil!;.l1pon th e new fin ge rp r in t technology. 2 F o r pat ronage hacks , hesubst i tuted young lawy e r s and account2.nts, depress ion hungry andeage r to -do a job . Hoove r knew each m?n by n a m e . T her e w as mt.:.tualt r u s t and respec t . By the late 1930 ' s , ski l l and d e dicat ion 'broughtsuccess and wi th success spread th e fame .of Hoover and h is l tG-men . "The organ iza t ion was parami l i ta ry in nature . Discipl ine w as s t r i c tand one thing becarne c r ys t a l c lear : the new F B I w as c r ea t ed in the:iJ:nage and l ikeness of .J . Edgar Hoover , and thou shal t not have fa l segods before thee . ( b e who found th is out was Melv in P u r v i s , the sma l l ,br i l l iant nernes is of .John Dill inger. By . the rnid 1930 's , Pur v i s T farne:r:ivaled Hoover ' s . On the back of b re akfa st c e r e a l s , ch i ld ren w e r eoffered ".J1..mior G -man " badges so tha t they could b e jus t l ike Melv inPur v i s and the FBI. Hoover crushed hirn . F ~ I hi s to r y w as rev.rri t ten,giving the cred i t to agent Samue l P . Crowley . Y ear s l a t e r , Pur v i s dieda suicide.M a s t e r of rnodern law enforcernent , rr..aster bur eauc r a t and char i sxnat icl e ade r , Hoover had good ins t incts and judgment . A t the heigh t of h isf ame he res i s ted the opportuni ty to form a nat ional pol ice fo rce b e cau s e he judged i t to be wrong for Arner ica . In 's tead he fo rmed theF B I Nat iona l A cad emy 4 t o t ra in s tate and loca l police to FBI s t anda r ds .'With World IVar II c a m e a new chal le nge - - Axis esp ionage .Again, Hoover exploi ted the l a t es t in technology - - pr imi t ive buteffect ive concealed sound r ecord ing equipment and disgu ised Inot ionpic tu re camer as . . The F B I had i ts own cont inuous wave back ch an n e lcommunicat ion systern from office to office and even Ha,vai i . F i n g e r pr ints w ere put on the then brand new IB M ca rd sort ing equipment inthe D.-C. N?tiona1 Guard A rmo ry . T he grea t ly expande d F B I could ,a t the end of 'World W ar I I ~ cla:iJ:n co r rec t ly tha t there had b ee n not onesuccess fu l ac t of en emy sabotage c a r r ied out in the UniteclStates in'World W ar II, as contras ted with the Bla ck Tom. explosions and othe rsabotage during World War. 1.

1. November 24, 19322. Jun e , 19303 . \Vho w as hard ly in a position to di s c la im it . Crowle y d ie d u n d e r theguns of " Baby F2.ce Nelson" four mo. : ths af te r th e death of Dil l inger .4. .July 29, 1935

-2 -

"'!-: -,


33/87

.I

!////

///1

r-----------------------------------------______5T h e cold w ar w as m ade to o r d e r fo r Hoover c.r.d th e FB I , and i t

'\vent in to the 19 5 0 's l e aa and h a r d. Ivl?s tere.l fe a ts of c land e s t inecour . t er -e f ip io nage w e re accompl i shed , and th e F B I w as r ight ly tobe f eared by foreign intel l igence agencies .Th e K or ea :rl ""Var brough t ano t her expans ion, b u t an in t e rn a l changew as tal , ing p lace . No l onge r were .d l agen ts recrui . ted h o m sk.ill.:,dpro fe s s i onal s such as l aw yet" s , accountants , sc ient i s t s and l i ngui s t s .Moreove r , the cul t of Hoover had b egu....'1. to flow e r , and a lo t of goodm e n were l e aving. I t was b e comin g m o r e di fficul t to replace them .Much is m ad e i n the popu lar p r e s s of the so - c al led "p et ty t y r ann ies . "Thi s is misplaced concern . C r a c k FB I agen ts accepted the 24-hourdiscipl ine and the sma l l annoyances . They knew tha t the inflated autor e c ove ry f igures , the Inet iculous r e c o rds they w e re fo rced to keepon in fo rmant contacts tha t were unju s t i f ied by product ion , the p r o -

. fe ss iona l image , e t c . , a l l helped Hoov e r when h e went be fo re Congre ssfo r appropr ia t ions . 6 T h e y were a l so aware t ha t in the c landes t ine war"aga ins t ru th less enemies every b it as profess iona l as they w e r e , l ackof discipl ine could b e d ea dly.T he "p e t ty t y r ann i e s" could be to l era te d bec a us e of one g r e a t psych icr eward . The FBI agen t kn ew .. hat he w as a rne lnber of an e l i t e corp s .He cons idered the discipl ine 1..inder which h e l abor e d tougher than theU. S. ~ \ l 3 r i . n e s and i.ts r eas ons for being ana l ogou s to that of the Corps .T h e coun t ry kn ew it too, and respec ted th e ~ g e n ac cordingly. Th ebu r den w as b ea rab le and n lo ra le high bec2.use the FB I , ~ g e n t s knew int he i r h e a r t s "\ '[e ' re N u m b e r One ."T hings St a r t To Go WrongIn the' e a r ly 19 50 's th e re em erg ed the pheno l11.enon of the "Bu r eaucl e rk . " . These we re yo ung m en without the educat ion p r e r e quis i t e sbrought in to the Ident i f icat ion Divi sion for t:':1.e nlo s l p a r t a s c le rksand sen t off to earn a n account ing d eg ree frOln such dubiou s ins t i tutio ns as Southeas te rn Univers i ty in W ashir:gton , D. C. T h ey then

5. T h e F B I had b ee n inves tigatin g the act iv i tie s , inler a l ia , of theColTHDunis t Par t y , U . S . A . , s ince i t ente red th e clolYlc, ; tic in tel l ig eaccf ield pursuant to sec re t in s t ruc t ions fro!,,- PL'cs id en l: Rooseve l t i ssuedS e p tc1.l1be r 1, 19 36 .6. And the h ighes t p ay in lin>.' e l l f o r c C ' n l c ; ~ t .fo r th e agen ts - - beginnin/ :sa la ry today is $11,000.

-3 -

-- - .--._ ._ - .. - .- . ; . . ; . . - - ~


34/87

//f;. /,

.:,,r!

/!

I

be carne Specia l Agent s and earneu a sa la ry they could not hope toapproach outs ide the FBI . Rec>.ched at an ea r ly age . they becaI\ let rue be l ievers in the cu l t of Hoover . 7 Jea lous of the rnore co mp et en t p rofess ional s ,. and unwilling to disagree with Hoover on an y th ing ,8 as they rose adrn in is t r a t ive ly by curry ing favor th roughf lat tery , the Bu r eau s ta r t ed to decl ine .Hoover ' s as se t s , how e v e r , continued to inc rease . T h e C r i m e Recor dsDivis ion of the F B I is without doubt one of t b ~ f inest publ ic relat ionsorgan i zat ions ever put together . 9 I t has a l eg i timate purpose . T nee:>,:traordinary reputat ion of the F B I and i t s agen t s , fos te red by theCr i rne Records Divis ion with i t s mot ion pic tures , books , rnagazinear t i c les , te levis ion and rad io shows , speech p ro g ram, p r e s s andCongress iona l contac ts , mean that an FB I agen t wil l be given infor mat ion by a ci t izen tha t the ci t izen 'would not en t rus t to any other a g e ~ c y . 'When the F B I agent says the in format ion wil l be kept in confidence, h eis bel ieved. The media im pa ct i s such tha t when a ci t izen is conf ron ted 'with a r ea l FB I agent , the agent is a t a t remendous psycholog ica l a d -vantage .But he r e , too , th ings s ta r t ed to go wrong. M o r e and mOre the C r i m eReco rd s Divis ion spent i ts t im e buildill.g up and protect ing the r epu ta t ion of Hoover . Hoover and the Bureau b ecame synonymous . . T o a t tackone w as to a t t ack the other . o long as the C r i m e Records Divis ioncould keep Hoover away frorn the pr e ss , it could work wonders . Bllt,cont ra ry to the w.i.dely held impress ion , Hoover is ' not a re t icent m a n .

7. And competi t ive r i tua l sycophants , baking cakes fo r H o o v er ' s b i r th -.day; sol ic i t ing ev e r m o r e f lowery serv ice club t es t imonia l s , e t ~ . 8. '-rhe lnost absurd lnanifestat ion of which led to a rewri t ing of th ehi s to r y of the Tro jan 'Var . F o r a speech on co mmu n i s m. a d ra f t s e n tto Hoove r fo r approval com.pared the U. S. Communis t P a r t y with th elegendary Tro jan Horse . The draf t carne back with the mar g ina l n o t a t ion in blue ink, "T h ey ' r e not hor se s , t hey ' r e snakes! -,- H ." T he draf t,vas "cor rec ted" and thus was born the Tro jan Snake.9. By Louie B. Nichols , who went on to b eco me Vice Pr es iden t of Schenleyb1clustr ies. After Nichol s lef t the FBI, Hoover r emark ed , "1 neve r w an tano ther m an to have such power i n t h i s organizat ion again. "

-4 -


35/87

I

IIn r ecen t y e a r s he h as b e come even m o r e of a hip-shooter; la telyeven depart ing the carefu l ly p repared scr ip ts 01 ' his Congres51.onalap p ea ran ces . Thus, the Berr igan pro::,lem, the Mart in L u t h e r Kingincident , the R a m ~ e y CIa rk q u o t e ~ and so on .

/ The concern with imag e , the cu l t i sm, h as finally t aken i ts to l l .Virtual ly any genuine innovation or imag inat ive approach i s s t i f ledfor fear of outs ide cr i t ic i sm. That which occurs i s often done byfield agen ts on the i r own initiative, with g rea t pains tak en to preven tBu reau H ead q u a r te r s f rom l earning of. it . The mo ra l e of th e F B Iagen ts in the f ield has deter io ra ted b ad ly , not because of th e rule onha i r cu t s and no coffee a t the desk, etc . , but b e cau s e in h is h e a r t theF B I agen t can no longer s a y , "We ' r e Nu m b er One. "The P r e s e n t Si tuat ion

The gr ea t e s t decl ine has been in the p e r fo rman ce of the Domes t icIn tel l igence Division. As prev ious ly repor ted , a l l clandes t ine ac t iv i t i eshave been t e rminated . Liaison with the in te l ligence comm uni ty h as been dis rup ted and key m en e i ther fo rced out o r relegrt ted to pos t s wherethe i r ski l l s cannot be exploited . Should the Peoples Republic of Chinabe admi t ted to the United Nations, th e e s tabl ishment of i t s delegat ionwi l l br ing a quantum i n c reas e in the presence on U. S. soi l of s o me ofthe f ines t espionage agen ts in ;(h e world . Thus, the Donl est:ic In te l l i gence Division, the one mo s t badly de t e r iora ted, \


36/87

/ "/

//a rc not n e w , and a re dis regarded


37/87

////I

T h e m o s t c om pe llin g r eas o n again s t t ~ , k i n g act ion in 1972 is theprobabi l i ty t ha t i s sue - s tarve d De rnocI"2.ts cay, b e counted upon toexploi t th e mat te r even to the point of i r re spons ibi l i ty .T h e que s t ion can, t h e r e fore , b e r ef in ed fur th e r : should J . E d g arI Ioover be re luove d as D ir ec to r of the F B I b etvJeen now an d the endoJ th e y ea r?A r g u men t s Agains t Imrnedia te R e m ov a l

1. . H o o v e ~ could r es i s t and m a k e good his th r e a t ag a in s t thePres i d en t . I a m u n a w a r e of th e nature of the t h r ea t and, t h e re fo re ,cannot co:rn:rn ent on the accep tab i l i ty of th e r i sk involve d.

2. R e m o v a l of Hoover wil l not gain the Pres i d en t an y votes onth e lef t . The an t i -Nixon bias of th e l eft is vi sce r a l , . not r a t ional .On th e other hand, s o m e of the r igh t could be a l ienated if th e s u c c e s s o rn a m e d is not accep tab le .

3. T he s u cces s io n could beco rne an ' i s sue unle ss someone is n am e dwho would be acc eptable to both the lef t and th e r ight , a dif f icul t pe r sonto ident i fy.

4. \Ve would be p res en t e d ' .vith th e prob lc lu of finding a sui tables u c c e s s o r in a shor t p e r iod of t ime .

5. E v en ,vere the Peoples Republ ic of Chi.na


38/87

I th ink we rnus t assmne tha t there wil l be no le t - up of t ru ly damagingdi sc lo sur e s .

-:tv1:txine C he s hi r e s tates in the 'Washington Po s t fo r Octob e r 21 s t that " a f o r m e r FB I off ic ia l [Sul l ivan] took. copies ofenough r ecor ds with him when he left to wri te a book. Nowhe is looking fo r a journa l i s t co l l abora to r . "

I Etm in formed re l iab ly tha t Sull ivan " want s to be vinclic a t e d . " A t 59 and 'out of office, there is no payoff fo r h imin r ema in in g quiet. Others rnay follow Sullivan's exaUlple.

E va l ls and Novak in the i r co lumn of Octob e r _11th saidtha t t he r e w as "m o r e to corne. "

Life is bel ieved to have anothe r m a j o r s tory in th e works .Sull ivan has b een "keeping book" on Hoover fo r some t i rne.

He is a ski l led wri te r who authored Hoove r 's book on C ~ r n . . . - - n u . ' : i s m . 1 2 H is book could be devastath'1g should he choose to expose suchn1.atters as the superv i sor who handled Hoover ' s ' s tock por t fo l ioand tax m a t t e r s ; the p2.h'1ting of Hoover ' s house by the FBI Exhib i tSection; the ghos t vil"it.ing of Hoover ' s book s by FBI clup loyees ;tbe rewri t ing of FBI h i s to ry and the "donat ion" by "admir ing"faci l i ty owners of accolnrnocb.tions and se r v i ce s which a l: e often

c in f ac t undenvr i t t en by elnployee contribut ions; and the dismant l ingof th e nat ion ' s counter -esp ion age c a p a b i l i t ~ r .

In the past , when the F IE was p er forrning i t s ITl lS s ion inan out standing man n er , aggr ieved f o r mer high officials heldt.he ir tongues in the bel ief tha t to go publ ic would h u r t miss ionp e r f o n n ance . No\\( that per fo rn lance h as fal len off, Sull ivan(obviously ) and others n ~ a y wel l bel ieve that the '-'lay b e s t to p r o t ec t the FB I is to at tack so th a t the p r o b 1 e n ~ can be r em edied.

12 . A Stu


39/87

2 . T } 1 ( ~ r e will b", no upheaval il l the F B I should Hoover berep laced i rnrnedia te ly . T he vas t major i ty of 2-gents would appro,c: .A few old cron ies , such as Clyde Tolson , could b e expected to 'res ign in a huH with, perhaps , som.e public co mmen t .

3. Irr....rnediate r emo v a l "would guaran tee tha t the P r e s i d e n t wode lappoint the next D i rec t o r of the FBI , so rnething akin in impor tanceto a Su p reme Cour t appointment opportuni ty .

4." 'I'll(; Hoover incum.bency would be undercu t as a fac tor inthe fo r thcoming Berr igan and Ellsberg t r i a l s .

5. The m a t t e r would be over and done with now and r emo v ed a sa potent ial i s sue for the 1972 campaign .

6. Inact ion, plus fu r ther d i sc losures in the pres s , 'could l ead.to charg es tha t the Pr es iden t k.l1ew, or ought to have known, of theser ious d e te r io rat ion of the FBI, and fai led to ac t out of concern fo rhi s r e - ele ct ion.

7. Shor t t e r m , a p r o mp t removal could enhance th e Pres iden t ' siI n"age as an act ion or iented Pr es iden t and confound hi s cr i t i cs .

8. Long t e r m , the actioI1;::coulc1 be co mp ar ed legi t imately tothe resolute stand taken by Pr es iden t T ru man in the Douglas MCLcArthurcase which, unpopu la r a t the t i lu e , i s now viewed as a p l u s in h i spres idency .

9. T he country i s , in m y judg m e n t , r eady fo r the chang"e: T hesi tuat ion is sonlewhat ana logous to tha t of China .Methods

1. The nlOst de s i rab le method would be fo r Hoover to ask thePr es iden t to find a successor as the "unfounded " personal a t t acks upon"Hoover a r e , in his j udgment , harmfu l to the national in te res t jn gen-e r a l and to his b e loved FBI in par t icula r . This might be brought abou tthrough a IV1:itchcll-I-Ioover conversa t ion .

- 9 -

"':'.'


40/87

2. .A second amicab le method would be fo r the Pres ider t thimse l f to expr e ss the above senti.."Tler:ts to Hoover. He lu igh twel l coopera te on that bas i s , w ere thi!1gs handled adroi t ly .

3. T he Pr es iden t could s imply a rmounce now tha t on Janua ry I, 1972, he wil l not take the af f i rmat ive act ion of seeking toexernpt l'vh:. Hoov-er fo r another yea r from the mandatory r e t i r e -

. m e n t prov i s ions of the lavr, s tat ing that he cannot in good consciencedo so as ne i ther he n o r the country has the r ight to expect so m u chof one man , and that he wishes to announce whom he sha l l nominateas a successor :qow so tha t there should be not the s l ightes t e l emen tof par t i san poli t ics involved in the changeover .C o m m entHoover is in h is 55th y e a r with the Depar tment of Just ice. 13 Even h is secre ta ry dates f rom the f i r s t wor ld w ar . 14 T h ere is no dishonor:, exp r e s s o r i lupl ieq in ask ing a m an in such c i r cu ms t an ces to give upthe burden of office.

..

Recornrnendat ionA f t e r weighing a l l of the foregoing, I bel ieve i t to be in the bes tin t e r e s t s of the Nat ion, the Pres i d en t , the FB I and M r. Hoover ,th a t the Dir ec to r r e t i r e before the end of 1971.

13 . Since July 26, 1917.14 . Helen \V . Gandy, .who b ecame H o o v er 's sec r e t a r y on ~ { a r c h 25,1918 .

-1 0 -

,. --


41/87

J' l : \1...\. Q:1)

& u ~ t - \ ( ; M - \ ' P ~ , , ~ ~ ~ t f o . A u . . . u J \ . . ~ " ' t ~ ~ u ~ L t u . ~ 0.{ ~ H t < . . . t . . . : > l ~ ~

~ f . A . A . M - RA..- wl,....o\- /locv...- w ..t. ~ \ \ I l . . r t t ~ l l - w (\\'"


42/87

Ex 4- ~ , ~ ~ - r ~ \ ~ h ~ ~ (J) 1 t C . ~ h .. u . . . ~ ~ 4 N ...- c l v , ~ ~ ~ C f L CD f \ ~ ~ fc:. -t- ~ r - - ' 0,.. \ )E- : : r \ ) ~ / I-J n {- " A ~ , \-\" \")

- ~ H k


43/87

Ex '3-

~ " ~ ll\\1, r D ~ 1 " r t ~ IAre.- (p t)

(.cM.. P - a ( ) " " , ~ \ - \ ~ c . ~ ~ " f f c , \ ~ )

, f 1-,,(>'1 ~ U ~ ~ F 8 1 ~ - 1 t J . . ~ t>t.u..\ ~ U \ ~ - 1U.CA.h A ~ ~ A--\ W\\. ~ ~ ( . . a \ o ~

~ ~ & . . . . (\ ~ ~ .

, / / 0 / 1 1 N ~ k t - ~ - - - - -- " \ ~ ~ l \ \ " ~

- ( ~ v . + - I f ~ i \ (PuJ-"r'"' r..4fJ4,1 2 d ~ - sh.ecJJJ 6e.. +Arfl4' \ ~ G. ....... J u ~ - J.OM--\ woN)

+ ~ ~ OW\.. A . ~ ( . . A ) V ~ - ' t t A - ~ s-h.-\-J- r--tAil J\)E:; Hft\t ~ l ' t ~ ~ ,

W. ~ ~ \ , ~ wJk. RC,K. 7 ell JMt1 (O"tiJ, ~ u ) . l . . . \(( t--\. \ . . . J ~

CV\M VJ( \-\k . ~ & \ . t ~ wi \ < G l ~

H '\


44/87

:r-J:::, U~ !r-f1-----I1- --

ir--,

,i_I

:36514

7/12/ ) / #4 ( U } ( ; J t J 7 J ~ } / J I ! ~ ) ! I ~ t . . . . ~ L . . . . C 2 1 . t < -.G J : t ~ / ' I l . c . V l ~ ~ / ~

.L:."-A-- ~ U \ ~ P O ~ b , .pc> i ~ " - ' - i--/ .. W\. ( V . h . ~ t . . .'iu ... k u A l J ~

Docld:31443850


45/87

- ~ ~ D ~ \ k k c A .l l J I- \.\",.u..':")E l\ ~ . c . ' f

"f"d Ca:c::J& ~ f U ; : L ~ - q((M r\- ~ \ : ci ~ f \ ~

"'" cJt '. t > o \ - ~ .


46/87

,-------------------


47/87

(\ ( ltJJ\P) t \ P - ~ ~ 1 (l \ 7...

CP M. A- M ~ , . . . . k i , p o ~ . . - - 1 w f)/Sc.. - M.I)I - 4.t

(fj) 1/ - 7Uut1t'L l u ~ 11ft;,(3) 7T - t J ~ I ~ 6 f t + , P 1 AtwiJ ~ J / 4,/r .f,r)f

~ I I v (A . -h ~ . . . , . ~

- /lll J " ~ M ~ r ruci.. t1 J C . J C . C J I " ~ GPVt I k ~ &.u ffV)'J ft.-./.Y

- i l l J0c.l I ~ ~ JCIW.oC... :k -?.-le / I ; ~ o/ll-lV'1 A r

- tk 110 P . f , ~ 1 J wL. ( ) " . , - h . . u J : - ~ fo 6!# fIlXW f}ftx;tJ-I..-t- (,.IU l.c.A.-.) ,v; tr , l ~ e t " 7 b J l u ~ ()Jl rw.t ~ ( ) ~ k .7 ' - " ~ ,b.ft-; -pi.,'.JJr- 14 ~ 1 < : . ..

w/d" ' ! r " ! J J ~ , w i j ~


48/87

e.J (f)tw..s (j)~ ~ . @eJ- ~ , ~ i 1 deJ t- J l A c ~ - Jo 'Jut) ; u . . ~ p f \ ' ' ' ~ 4

.JIv.;..,.. W ! O ~ J r u ; J ~ b'l F1J I.

- Jd ~ 1 1 ~ fUuA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c,_ M.ow!- i1>1 W I'r1 It 1 0 ~ ~ ( { (J(lf~ v ~ ~ I L ~ . @ (-

, . ; - . ~ I H . . . - , t ( ~ / - ' ) {" .. ~ i M M 17 - I f ~ J I 11 - ~ J ~


49/87

5.

L t e r in the same meeting, it i s s ta ted th a t Haig i s torecords kU- t he FBI and t h a t--to Mardian f o c t i o n

i s s ta ted th a t H a i g u l d r ~ q u e ~ t the FBI,--r. s d e s t r O y rd s .fol lowed by a s ta tement th a t Sull ivan w i l l contac t

erni i l(1) Do you r e c a l l th a t the f i na l reso lu t ion ofth i s meeting was t h a t Mr. Mardian and Mr. Sul l ivanwere to cause a l l records of these wire taps to bedest royed.As you can see from Mr . Ehrl ichman's notes , t here i s

no mention of any dispute between Mr . Sul l ivan and Direc torHoover. As your a t torneys have informed you, t here i s someevidence th a t in ear ly August , 1971, t here wa s a concernexpressed by Mr. Mardian to Dr. Kiss inger , to the e f f e c t th a tMr. Hoover could no t be t rus ted with cont ro l o f the wire taprecords . With t h i s background, do you now r e c a l l th a t a tth i s July 12, 1971, meeting - -

(1) The pr inc ipa l concern was th a t "overhear ingswould be disc losed" and(2) That any concern abouYhow Hoover might "use"these wire tap records d id not a r r i t e u n t i l sometimea f t e r th i s Ju ly 12, 1971,Also , as you can see from Mr. Ehrl ichman's notes , the

ins t ruc t ion given with respec t to the logs was th a t theyshould be dest royed , and t here i s no i nd ica t ion t h a t thelogs should be de l ive red to Mr . Ehrl ichman. Your a t torneyshave reuiewed with you the t r a n sc r ip t of a t ape recording

\Of an October a, 1971, meeting th a t you had with Mr. Mitchel land Mr . Ehrl ichman. I t i s c l ea r from th a t t r a n sc r ip t th a t it

as a t th i s October a, 1971, meeting th a t the dec i s ion was


50/87

6.

made to de l i ve r the wire tap records to Mr. Ehrl ichman.With th i s background, do you now r eca l l - -

(1) That a t t h i s f i r s t meeting with Mr. Mardianthe i n s t r uc t i on given was to dest roy the logs andt ha t sometime l a t e r a d i ~ s i o n was made to give thelogs to Mr. Ehrl ichman.

Also dur ing t ha t October 8 , 1971, meet ing , Mr. Mtichel lr e f e r s to these wire taps as being "par t of th e over a l linves t iga t ion of the Pentagon Papers and t h i s whole mess."

(1) Do you r e c a l l Mr. Mitchel l or o the rsr e fer r ing to the f ac t t ha t these wire tap r ecordswere being used to help in the inves t iga t ion ofthe

l..iJJr During a Pentagon Papers and/or Mr. El lsbe rg .' I'\.. H'1 "lconversat ion on October 25, 1971, you d i scussed1\with Mr. Ehrl ichman, Mr. Liddy 's memorandum concerning J .(4l-p'))Fy-6

/0

Edgar Hoover. In t h a t m e m o ~ M r . Liddy s ta te s tha t one of thel ) l ~ r g u m e n t s aga ins t at tempt ing to remove Mr. Hoover i s tha t ,Ex (,-= - "Hoover could r e s i s t and make good h is t h r e a t aga ins t "the(P 1 ) (p1)President; . "A During th i s meeting w i ~ Mr. Ehrl ichman you s ta te )..

t h a t in J . Edgar Hoover "we may have/our hands here a manwho wi l l pu l l down the temple with him, inc luding me."

(1) Do you r eca l l whether o r not you were awaret h a t Mr. Hoover had "indica ted to you o r o the rs t h a the might d isc lose these wire taps?(2) What was it t h a t Mr. Hoover could do orr evea l t h a t would enable him to pu l l you downwith him.


51/87

.. -

+

/1

~ I ! ( , . U . ; c v . ~ ~ i : -" " " - - . __cD 00 ~ u l \ , Q , A ~ ) . c ~ < . A . . \C\.') \~ ~ u ~ 4 . v . . . v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ 1Jt\"L

l ~ b . Q u . J t :


52/87

1


53/87

:L


54/87

(i) I \ ~ ) 6 ) t-\ n. -\.. ""-t u : - ~ \ . ~ . ( . . ~ tl...- Nt


55/87


56/87

QUESTIONS

(A) As you are aware we would l i ke to ask you somequest ions concerning the wire tapp ing of newsmen andmembers of the NSC s t a f f

c2) Did you approve t h i s progr.am o f wire tapping?(3) Did you have a conversat ion with Henry A.Kissinger concerning p lac ing a wiretap on Lake?( ~ ) Did Henry Kissinger r eques t t h a t Lake betapped?

Did Henry Kissinger r eques t t h a t anyone el sebe tapped?(l) In a conversat ion with Henry Peterson on4/19/73 you r e f e r to the f ac t t h a t t hese wi re -taps were d iscon t inued"a f te r the hul labalo ou tthere ; " why were these taps d iscont inued on 2/10/71?

(B) On June 13, 1971, th e New York Times began pub l ica t ionof the Pentagon Papers . There i s evidence t ha t in thedays immediately fo l lowing t h a t pub l ica t ion you discussed

~ ~ ~ * with Henry Kissinger /and o the rs ,Dan ie l El l sberg) and t h a t~ , ~ Henry Kiss inger , poss ib ly in add i t ion to o t he r s , informedH l . i , ~ Y O U t h a t Mr. Ellsberg used drugs (6/17/71 t ape ) .~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ (1 ) Did Henry Kissinger or anyone e l se informyW~ } ~

f~ i ~ ~ '.,a. ~ ~ ~ ,

) : ~ I f ~ j ' V \ - , ~ ,

v.,.\f'\ \\I\it \t\

you t h a t they had informat ion from the wire tapsconfirming t h a t El l sberg used drugs?(2) I show you t h i s l e t t e r from J . Edgar Hooverto you dated 9/3/69 and d i r ec t your a t t en t i on tothe second paragraph concern ing Mr. El lsbe rg . DidHenry Kiss inger , John D. Ehrl ichman, H.R. Haldeman,John N. Mitchel l , o r o thers inform you about thesubstance of t h i s informat ion? Were you informedt ha t t h i s in formation came from a wiretap? Whoe l se knew about t h i s wiretap informat ion?\ ~ O C ) W - ~ V v . u ~ ~ \ ~ - e h ~ W \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I J . > ~ l)l.\:",{ L ~ 7 ) ) LJ:tu l .u'P ' f ) ~ :


57/87

2.

(3) Were you aware of any o the r overhears( in te rcep ts ) of E11sberg, in pa r t i cu la r , over-h e a r s o f E11sberg and Halperin?"lAo . .~ ~ ~ (4) On 4/19 / 73 in separa te c o n v e r s a t ~ o n s w ~ t h , - ff..-.t.... 1 -- Richard Moore and Henry Petersen ~ n d i c a t ft h a t there was wire tapping conducted e i the r bythe FBI or o the rs in connect ion wi th the PentagonPapers i nves t iga t ion i Do you have any knowledgeof such wire tapping? ) Who, other than yourse1 ,would know i f such wire tapping was done1Kiss inger , John Ehr1ichrnan, Buzhardt , Helms,Haldeman, Mitche l l , Haig, .

On July 6, 1971, a t a meeting you had with Mitche l l ,~ ' 1 ~ t c . . \ v " Ehr1ichrnan, Haldeman you were i n f o r r n e a ~ t h a t the records

of these wire taps were being reviewed a t the FBI in orderto determine whether o r not these records conta ined any

! t nformation helpfu l to the Pentagon Papers invest igat ion . (Til.. r)July 10, 1971, in a discuss ion you had with Ehr1ichrnan,was s ta ted t h a t in connect ion with the grand jury

inves t iga t ion the re was no need to worry about wiretapsbeing disc losed through discovery motions.

(1) Did Ehr1ichrnan s ta te t ha t he had discussedth i s mat te r with Mardian?(2) Did Ehr1ichman or anyone e lse t e l l you t h a tdian had been to ld to corne to Sa n Clemente to

discuss t h ~ r subjec t with you?July 12, 1971, you met a t 11:00 a.m. with Mardian,

Ehr1ichman and Haldeman. Ehr1ichman's notes ind ica tet h a t when Mr. Mardian carne in to the meeting the f i r s t subjec t

7discussed was:

"Re: Nat ional Securi ty Taps"(Espec ia l ly) - - Spec ia l Coverage Taps~ ~ ! VQ. ~ , > : .. .--


58/87

:36514

(William) Beecher(Ni tL Sheehan

3.

Overhearings would be disc losed .Referred

(2 ) Do you r eca l l t ha t these NSC wiretaps weredi scussed a t t h i s meeting?(3) Do you r eca l l Mr. Mardian l i s t i n g any nameso f people tapped o r overheard, other than Messrs.Beecher, Sheehan, and Smith? t \ ~ l / l t ~ f ~ ) (4) Di d Mr. Mardian have with hi m a list o fpeople who had been wiretapped?(5) Di d Mr. Mardian s t a t e tha t "overhear ings would

.....- be disc losed"?(6) Did Mr. Mardian s t a t e t ha t the Jus t i ce Depart -

ment expec ted El l sberg ' s at torney to f i l e motionsrequir ing overhears to be di sc losed?(7) Di d Mr. Mardian s t a t e t h a t he expec ted t h a ta t to rneys for Messrs. Beecher , Sheehan o r Smithwould f i l e motions requir ing overhears to be di sc losed?

At t h i s t ime Hoover, Will iam C. Sul l ivan and a very fewother s in the FB I and Jus t i ce Department knew about t hesewi re taps .

(1 ) Did Mr. Mardian s t a t e tha t a number o f peoplei n the FB I would have to be to ld about t hese wire taps?(2) Did Mr. Mardian s t a t e t h a t a number o f peoplein the Jus t i ce Department would have to be to ldabout these wire taps?(3) Di d Mr. Mardian s t a t e tha t a number o f peoplein the B o ~ o n and Los ~ e l e s U.S. At torney ' s Off iceswould have to be to ld about these wire taps?

Docld:31443850


59/87

4.

(4) Did Mr. Mardian, o r anyone e l s e , s t a t e t h a tthey feared t h a t these people in the "bureaucracy"

""' would "leak" the f ac t tha t these wire taps had occurred?Ehrl ichman 's notes r e f l e c t t h a t you s ta ted t h a t var ious

't( people in one o f the u.s. Attorney 's of f i ce s were "d i s l oya l . "~ ~ ) ,l (1) Were you prompted to make th i s observat ionin l i g h t o f the p o s s i b i l i ty t h a t if these wire taps

became known to var ious people in the Jus t i ce De-par tment and u.s. Atto rney ' s Off ices some o f thosepeople might be "d is loya l" and would "leak" to thepress the f ac t tha t these wire taps had occurred?Ehrl ichman 's no tes go on to indica te tha t Mr. Mardian

s t a t ed t h a t the re were a number o f wiretap documents ~ t t ~ in var ious f i l e s and tha t the NSC had some o f these documentsand t h a t Mr. Haldeman had some of these documents. Therei s then an i n s t ruc t ion tha t Mr . Haldeman should g e t fromHaig a l l the wire tap documents t h a t were ' in NSC f i l e s .Following th i s you s t a t e t h a t you agree and t h a t a l l thewiretap logs should be obtained and dest royed. It i s thens ta ted t h a t someone should t e l l Hoover to dest roy the wiretaprecords .

(1) Do you r eca l l giving an i n s t ruc t ion todest roy the wiretap records?(2) Do you r eca l l giving an i n s t ruc t ion tha tsomeone should t e l l Hoover to dest roy the wire taprecords?(3) Who wa s ins t ruc ted to con tac t Hoover?(4) What discuss ion occurred concerning whethero r no t Hoover would agree to dest roy the logs?(5 ) What, if any, l a t e r d i scuss ions did you havewith Hoover concerning the wire taps o r the wiretaprecords?


60/87

- wk..o 'i:'-\ \ " I , ~ '/12./"7' ~ ~ ) - + ~ \ l c . . ~ ~ I t t ~ . 7) l1 - /J l


61/87

TH E WHITE HOUSE (/) 1WA S HINGTON V( 'I

bPh. 1]N/,, if?!! Ji7t.

----.,


62/87

IFOIA(b)6FOIA(b)7 - (e )

. . - _. . .. - -_. --._._-- -\ ___ __ o w ~ __ __ ~ ~ ~ .. . - __! ___ _____ _ lI.V1.1 .. _. l , J ~ ~ / U .

. ( " \ ' I ~ I ' -- -- . - ... --\1

__ __ _____ - _ _ . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _-____ _ -__ _ .__-__ -.....J}JLo...}ltlS-__4- - -- - - ___ _. _.. _ _. ____.._._.__ ..

w,i\. +IIt-'-' M . .. _ . _ _ ___.__ _() AAx. w ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ .- \.-.- -.---. .) Q\4- .. - ~ ~ ~ __ _. __ ______ - - . . . . W __ __ .. __~ < J . . \ , ! J , , ' ' ' . t L . ~ . l . I ~ _______

# . ' b L ~ ~ ~ } ' ~ t . ~ ~ ) ! ' "- cT-- -. .-- --

_______+-________~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A M ~ ~ ~ -_____ _- - I ' - - -- ---.- - --:..-Jt..cL C\.&.oJ -{ IE \0\ ~ ~ \ \ _- _. - --.------- .--- .- .. ....------- --.-- -.-.----.-- '---1-----. ---t - . - - - - - - ~ ~ - : - ~ f " " ~ 4 ! d L 1 l " j - K L 7 L - ~ - ' ( l j J L --, - - - - ----- - --- --- ----------- -- - - -_ ._-----_. - _.- -_._---- - - - - - -_._ - --_ ._. _-__ _ ._._ .. ..._--_ .. ._ - - -- - -- - - - - - -_ .-

\- , --- ---1\r - - - - ----- - - - - - - - --------- --_._----_ .. -:36514 DocId:31443850


63/87

t

-( wVI t.u b-


64/87

J.;J Iu. r ~ 1 t . \ fl.",-

~ c , I( f ? 1 t ~ )+

... -

- - - ~ - - - - - - -


65/87

- - - - ' - - - - ' ~ ~ -

tu.. ~ ' - - u . . a ~ \-0 ~ 6 ~ ~ v v - kW t l , J : ~ ~ j f ' k U A . ) ~ HS L q,,-\-I\tf'

Q) 1 ) ~ J . J6U ~ N > ( ) 4 . - +k.:.. . ~ ~ ~ w . J " ' t ~ 1,G) th1) t J M . v v \ ' ~ VJ)

---'---+1 ' l-\- f\ k ~ t J J V A . ~ j'>. vi ~ 1 ' Jv.... ~ ( \ , " - ' - '1'__ __+-

t)\& Hf\\c ~ \ J . . - " Y - r ~ C \ 1 u --b-t.- ,. I\N'",--L ? -( ! ) i J H A ' ~ ~ ~ { \ ~

__ _ b-L t A - ~ ~ ? - t i L : r . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - - - " ~ -' P ~ ~ c M - '-I / l


66/87

\

--- +

1-----

1--+-


67/87

----t-

-+-

-i---

-4-- -


68/87

-}-_ . -_ .. . .--!---- -------- ---__ - - - - - - l _ : b ~ _ ' L ~ c ; t L l ... \ I\.L - - " - - - - "

__J , ~ ~ ___ L ~ 1 -- - - t .. -- -..... ------.. --.- - - - - -. __< J 2 L ~ i ; ____.t...;:t"., .. .k __ __... ... _._ ._ . __ ... __ . . : _1-L . __ __.._ _ _. _. __ __ .w Ji. Qe 1:1.2_ .._ . _ _ _.._. ____.__

'"}..._ -- - - - - - - - .. -.- - - - ------

___ - - + - - - - - ~ = - = . . . . ~ J S t S . c . . ~ . . ..... .__ -+__ ~ _ ' _ _ _ ' _ ' _ ' ~ \ _ _ ' _ " 't J . ~ ~ k l v - . IkkJ... AA' i j ~ _____ _- - - - t-.--.

-. --1-----. ----_._ ._-- --:36514 DocId:31443850


69/87

I


70/87

+

~ - - - - ~ - - -


71/87

__ - + - - _ - - - - - - " L ! . ~ ~ " ' _ ' ____________ ----..

c--f----- - ------- - - ~ - - + - - - ---- - ~ ~ ~

- - - - - - - - - - ~ - -


72/87

--------- -- - - ----QM ~ R A I""--;r- - - t(- --- -- ' --n/'IS'C +e(pfJ


73/87

T k ~ --~ - - - -

- H, E/ t- pf..f- A v n - - 1 ~ - f2-,Jji/\,L( - ~ ' f f.j(-

_ _ _ ' : ; := - - - - . : . . . . . ______ IV'A_ (1'Af " W

t-- -+


74/87

4 .

(4) Did Mr. Mardian, or anyone e l s e , s t a t e t h a tthey feared t h a t these people in the "bureaucracy"would "leak" the f a c t t h a t these wire taps had occurred?

Ehrl ichman 's notes r e f l e c t t h a t you s t a t ed t h a t var ious~ u ( , people i n ~ t h e u.s. At tor ney ' s Office(in-MeW Y O l ~ were"d i s loya l . " The j " ' l . N ' 9 b ~ ; i . _ that: I!:hese peep] Q !:Tere- " d i s -

(1) Were you prompted to make th i s observa t ionin l i gh t o f the p o s s ib i l i t y th a t if these wire -taps became known to var ious people in the Jus t i ceDepartment and U.S. At tor ney ' s Off ices some o f

, . . ~ , , \ . . t those people be "d i s loya l" and would "leak"to the press the f a c t t h a t these wire taps had occur red?


75/87

-+

6> ~ ! ~ ~ . u . l +t,l ~ ?


76/87

f- -

+


77/87


78/87

1---1- -


79/87

1----- -+-1__~ C t > " " " , , - 1 L o ~ ~ J ' - L ~ ~ l L = - - - " " " ' -

1-t

+--r-+

l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t b ~ ~ ~ , ~ k ~ W \ ~ ~ ) Ci> W'CA/\ _ _ _

tA.

LV b\'UooU- \u ----+----- u\l ~ D U \ . .U


80/87

WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTI CE

iV1emorandumTO Jay Horowitz DATE: May 15, 1975

' ROM Frank M a r t i n ~ SUBJECT: Quest ion ing Nixon

Th e fol lowing i s an ou t l i ne of events whichNixon should be ques t ioned about with regard tothe Gray and wiretap i nves t i ga t i on .

Hoofth

2. Why were a l l the wiretaps discont inuedFebruary 10, 1 971?3. Hoover- Boggs-Kleindiens t controversy ear ly

Apr i l , 1971. Did Hoover th re aten to revea l the wire taps?Did Nixon, o r anyone to Nixon 's knowledge, d iscuss withKle ind iens t the wire taps on th e f ac t t ha t Hoover mightrevea l the wi re taps?\ 4. Pentagon Papers - - Did Nixon i n s t r u c t orfJ ~ t t was he aware of anyone in th e White House, Departmentof J u s t i c e , o r FB I r e v i ewing th e wiretap l e t t e r s and /o r\ ~ > ~ l , -logs \vith regard to the Pentagon Papers leak o r the

, - ~ \ U O ____ l e a ~ Was Nixon aware t h a t El lsbe rg had been overheard?sameT ques t ion on Sheehan , Smith , Beecher , Halper in , ~ v a r n k e/.': 1 elb. Also , \vas any wiretapping done by the FB I o ranyone e l se with regard to the Pent a gon Papers l eak?

cc : Fi l e sChronRuth (2)Da..Y.:iS-1a r t { n )r1a r t i n Chron


81/87

2.

vlhat was the f u l l subs tance o f tExon ' s con-v e r s ~ o n with Ehrlichman on Ju ly 10, 1971. Ehr l ic h man's notes r e f l e c t - - "Re : Grand Ju ry , d o n ' t worryre : taps on d i scovery ."

What was the f u l l subs tance of Ju ly 12, 1971,meetlng with Mardian? ("Overhearings would be d is closed ." ) With whom did Nixon l a t e r discuss the "over hear" problem - - Kiss inger , Haig, Hi t che l l , Moore,Kle ind iens t , o ther s? Did Nixon make any d i c t a b e l trecording o f h is r eco l l ec t i on of t h i s meeting or l a t e rmeetings on the subjec t?(J) When, where and from whom did Nixon l a t e rr ece ive r epor t s on what had been done as a r e s u l t o fh is July 12, 1971, order to destroy the logs? Whywere the logs and o the r records no t dest royed?(2) Did Hoover, in ear ly August , 1971, o r a tany t lme in the Summer or Fa l l o f 1971, i nd i ca t e t h a the might revea l the exis tence of these wire taps? I fso , did t

Documents

Folder 9/17: Material used in preparing for the deposition of [Richard Nixon] R.M.N- [L. Patrick] Gray and Wiretap Investigation