Advanced Search
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.02.00-MITCHELL testifying that he was not involved in giving orders in the COVERUP] Mr. MITCHELL. I think that Mr. Dean, if he will go back and check his logs will find that I was out, of town in Florida when he started the, McCord dialog, and that there would be no reason in the -world for me to direct Mr. Dean to do anything vis-a-vis Caulfield or McCord, Or anybody else. Mr. THOMPSON. The, logs indicate, I believe, you were in Key Biscayne from January 1 through January 7. Mr. MITCHELL. I think it was December 20 through January 8, 1 believe. Mr. THOMPSON. All right, sir. Let me ask you about one, more, piece, of testimony, the meeting on March 22 which you had with Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Dean; I understand you met with them and that afternoon you met With the President. Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. I believe, that Dean testified that Ehrlichman turned to you and asked if Hunt had been taken care, of, or his money situation had been taken care, of, and you assured him that he had been taken care, of, is that correct? [00.03.10] Mr. MITCHELL. It is absolutely false as far as I am concerned because, I have never, to my knowledge, discussed any of these, payments 'with John Ehrlichman and any of the specifies of that nature with respect to -any individual, and I wouldn't, have known on the 22d of March whether Mr. Hunt had been taken care of or hadn't been taken care of. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you think Mr. Dean could be mistaken about these various points? Mr. MITCHELL. No, I think Mr. Dean may have, in putting together --how long was his statement? You know, it is awfully hard to recollect on what day -what was discussed. Mr. THOMPSON He did not seem to have any trouble at, the time. Mr. MITCHELL. Well, you said it, not, I. Mr. THOMPSON. Are you saying that perhaps Mr. Dean's memory might not have been quite that good ? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, it certainly cannot be with respect to the specifics of the March 22 meeting. I am sure of that. [00.04.14] Mr. THOMPSON. Or with these other- points about--well, is that a matter of memory as to whether or not you called him and asked that the, $350,000 he sent over, or as to whether or not, you requested that, Kalmbach be, used to make deliveries of moneys to families? Is that a matter of memory ? Mr. MITCHELL. I think it is a, matter of confusion of people. I think as you look at this total picture, you get two aegis, one over in 1701 and one over in--what is the' White House? 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Mr. THOMPSON. I am sure you know better than I, Mr. Mitchell. Mr. MITCHELL. And Mr. Thompson, this fellow, you know he. was just Carrying messages back and forth, according to his statement,. He had to have somebody over there as principals with which to get to do all of this, Unfortunately , at times, he, has picked out some of these, principals that just, were not on the scene at, the particular time, as I have indicated about the meeting of the, 28th. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you know of any other indications of this? Mr. MITCHELL. Well. I can go back through the testimony and I Sure Provide you With some, if that is your desire. Mr. THOMPSON. DO you recall that is you remember his statement or have you read his statement? Have, you read his statement? I assume that that you have---- Mr. MITCHELL. I have read his statement, yes. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you recall whether or not there are other points, without specifically naming in one. I if you cannot? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, there are. I am not sure I could pinpoint them today, but I can provide you -with material, if it is something. Mr. THOMPSON. If you return tomorrow--as I expect you tonight you could go through his statement--- Mr. MITCHELL. You mean I am going to be invited back tomorrow? Mr. THOMPSON. Most cordially. Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you. Mr. THOMPSON. And refresh your memory on those points. Some of the Senators might want to ask some questions. Mr. MITCHELL. I will attempt to do so, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. Let me ask you about one, more meeting. the meeting you had with, not with Mr. Dean, but Mr. Ehrlichman, on April 13 at the White House. Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Ehrlichman? Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL. If I am not Mistaken the meeting was On April 14. It. was a Saturday. [00.06.27] Mr. THOMPSON. What was discussed at that meeting? Mr. MITCHELL. Very little other than the fact that I had known that Mr. Magruder had tried to be the first one into the prosecutor's office and that he had already been there, and that Mr. Ehrlichman had learned that and had talked to Magruder and Mr. Ehrlichman advised me as to what Mr. Magruder was saying. I said. thank you very much and he said, would you not like to see the President? And I said under the circumstances of what is unfolding here. I think it would be inappropriate for me to see the President. So we left it at that. Mr. THOMPSON. Was this, in effect, telling you that from Ehrlichman's standpoint anyway from what was going on, that, you could anticipate problems? Mr. MITCHELL. That I could? Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL. I do not think it is so much that way as he was recounting to me what Magruder had said, which, of course, did involve Me. Now, as to Mr. Ehrlichman's motive. I am not trying to guesstimate that. [00.07.37]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.07.37-MITCHELL testifies denying that he played a central role in the coverup] Mr. THOMPSON. We have some evidence before the committee of a taped conversation between Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Kleindienst I wonder if you have any reason to believe that this or any other conversation that you might have had with Mr. Ehrlichman was taped? Mr. MITCHELL. In reflection, I would think that this conversation Probably was taped. Mr. THOMPSON. Why? Mr. MITCHELL. FOR or the reason that most of the time that I met, in John Ehrlichman's office, why, we sat on a sofa around a coffee table, and so forth. Mr. THOMPSON. This is the one, we heard about in the Pat Gray testimony about the documents? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes; I believe that is the same, coffee. table and set of chairs. But at this particular time, he invited me. over to sit in the, chair at his desk and fidgeted around a little bit. So it occurred to me that a in the pattern of operation might very well have had something to do with as to where the microphone was. [00.08.40] Mr. THOMPSON. Let me ask you one more question, Mr. Mitchell Obviously, the only verification, I suppose, direct verification of the fact that you were not the One who pushed Liddy, or to the contrary, the only one -who could definitely testify that, you did push Liddy would be Liddy himself. And, of course, he has not favored us with his testimony so far. I notice here a call in your logs on April 17 with a Mr. Peter Maroulis. Mr. MITCHELL. Maroulis yes, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. I believe he is Mr. Liddy's attorney? Mr. MITCHELL. That is correct. Mr. THOMPSON. Could you tell us the nature of that conversation? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir, that was a return of a call to Mr. Maroulis, who had made a, call to me, and Mr. Maroulis -within a day or two' came to see me, He was looking for guidance. What had apparently occurred, according to Mr. Maroulis, and I have not checked this out, with the parties to know whether it is true or -not, but the President had made his statement by that time, whichever one it was, in which he, asked everybody to come forward and disclose, what they knew about this matter. I guess that might have, been--well, whatever date it was, the President or somebody on his behalf had asked, I believe, Henry Petersen to go to Mr. Liddy's local counsel here in the District--Mr. Kennelly, and Mr. Kennelly carried the message from Petersen to Kennelly to Mr. Maroulis about, the fact that the President wanted everybody to come forward. [00.10.32] Well, Mr. Maroulis had spent a lot of time--he is a personal friend of Mr. Liddy. It was his opinion that Mr. Liddy had a valid case on appeal because of the errors made, by the court, and other matters that were, involved, and he wondered if I could give him any guidance as to what the President meant by that particular phrase, which apparently had been quoted verbatim from Peterson to Kennelly to Maroulis. [00.11.05] I told him that I could not add anything to it, that I had not talked to the President about it; I knew what the, President's wishes were, but he as a lawyer was going to have to make his own decision as to what his client's interests were. Mr. THOMPSON. Is that, the, last, conversation you had with him concerning Liddy's position? Mr. MITCHELL. That is the only conversation I have ever had with the gentleman. Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Mitchell, I have no further questions. [00.11.30-MacNEILL in studio] MacNEILL states that the questions from THOMPSON were aimed at testing the credibility of DEAN'S testimony. [PBS Network ID-title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"] [00.15.07-MacNEILL] MacNEILL states that Sen. TALMADGE will now question MITCHELL. [00.15.14]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.25.47-MITCHELL testifying about his role in the campaign prior to his resignation as Attorney General-Sen. TALMADGE has presented documents showing MITCHELL to have had an active role in the campaign at that time] Mr. MITCHELL. Senator. I have no recollection of the first, one relating to the Republican National Committee budget. I have a vague, recollection of this one in January having to do with the telephone Plan for the Florida primary, and I am quite sure that the writing at the bottom here in connection with the comment which says, "Hold for November pending standing In the polls"--"Hold for now," I guess it is, not November--"Pending standing in polls" is not, my writing. But--- Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous Consent that those documents be appropriately marked and inserted in the record at this point. Senator ERVIN. I believe the one he stated he had no recollection about will have to be identified by some other witnesses. Senator TALMADGE. Then the, ones he, identified- Senator ERVIN. The ones he identified will in be, appropriately marked as an exhibit and placed in the record as such. Mr. HUNDLEY. I think I should state with reference, to the second document that Mr. Mitchell had seen it and that he indicated that the handwriting on it, on the bottom was not his and I would note there, is no X on the, "Approved- or "Not Approved." Senator TALMADGE. I am not indicating that it was Mr. Mitchell's mark there, But it does corroborate that he was actively Involved in the, campaign- That was admitted by Mr. Mitchell, I might say. Mr. HUNDLEY. That 'Is a matter of dispute. Mr. MITCHELL. That is a matter of dispute, and I would like the chairman's indulgence for a moment to point, out that there, is no illegality about any appointee engaging the, carrying out any Presidential or political functions. Senator TALMADGE. I am not arguing that., Mr. Mitchell. You testified under oath in response, to a question of mine a moment ago that at the, request of the White House You were actively involved in the, campaign, If I can read the English language correctly, on March 14 of last year, you testified to the opposite before the Judiciary Committee. One or the other of Your Statements is in error. I am inserting them in the record only so the, public can draw their own conclusions as to which was in error. [00.29.52] Mr. MITCHELL. I dispute your statement with respect, to the, discussion before the Judiciary Committee and I would like to go back to my statement. and stand on that answer. Senator TALMADGE. That, is part, of the record and that, is the reason, Mr. Mitchell, that I inserted both of them in the record so the American people can draw their own conclusion as to which is correct,. I am not arguing with your testimony but, if I can read the English language in two different places they are the opposite of each other. You state that they aren't. If I understand English, and I learned it in a small country school, in Telfair County--- Mr. MITCHELL. So did I, Senator. a very small one. Senator TALMADGE- We both studied the same English, I assume. [00.30.38] Mr. MITCHELL. That is why I am surprised you don't agree with my interpretation. Senator TALMADGE. Let's get on to another matter. Senator ERVIN. Could I ask for his interpretation so I can understand it'? It is your position that working for a Republican candidate, for President gave you no responsibilities in respect to the Republican Party ? Mr. MITCHELL. That is it, entirely, Mr. Chairman. That is the question that I asked of Senator Kennedy. Senator ERVIN. Thank you. [00.31.10]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.15.14-committee table, Sen. ERVIN, Sam DASH, committee staff] Senator ERVIN. Senator Talmadge. Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Mitchell, in your testimony you have repeatedly referred to "White House horrors." What do you mean by that phrase? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, as we have discussed them here, Senator, they certainly involved the break-in of Dr. Ellsberg's doctor, I think we had better put it instead of the other phrase that is used, the Dita Beard matter, both with respect, to, apparently the removal of her from the scene is 'Well as visits or attempted visits. We are talking about the Diem cables: we are talking about the alleged extracurricular activities in the bugging area, the bombing, purported bombing of the Brookings Institute, and a lot of miscellaneous matters with respect to Chappaquiddick and this, that, and the next thing. Those are the areas of which I am talking. [00.16.27] Senator TALMADGE. Who was the author of the White House horrors? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, I do not know as I can answer for all Of those, Senator. I think that the affidavits that have been filed in some Of the courts and the stories that have come out in the press probably give You a better picture of that than I can individually. [MITCHELL commences hairsplitting] Senator TALMADGE. Did you play an active supervisory role in the campaign before you resigned as Attorney General? Mr. MITCHELL. An active Supervisory role? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. sir. Mr. MITCHELL. What I did was Succumb to the President's request to keep an eye on what was going on over there and I had frequent meetings with Individuals dealing with matters of policy also with individuals who would bring other individuals Over to introduce them to me and discuss their talents and their qualities with respect to filling- certain jobs in that particular area. Yes. sir, I did. Senator TALMADGE. You would consider, then, that you did play an active Supervisory role before you resigned as Attorney General? Mr. MITCHELL. Well. the word "supervisory" gets me, Senator. I am not quite sure of that. Senator TALMADGE. An active role before you resigned. Mr. MITCHELL. If You would change "supervisory" to "consulting", I think I would be much happier. Senator TALMADGE. Did it get beyond the consulting capacity? [00.17.54] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, it might have been in areas where I let them know lily opinion quite forcefully and strongly, but I think that would still I fit under the role of consultant. Senator TALMADGE. Didn't you testify to the contrary before the Judiciary Committee on March 114. 1972? Mr. MITCHELL. Senator. I am glad you asked me that. I was waiting for Somebody to. May I read the' dialog? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL. I was, hoping that would come up. Senator TALMADGE. I am glad to accommodate you, sir. [00.18.25] Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you. Because this subject matter has been bandied about, and I think quite unfairly. This is a question by Senator Kennedy: [Reading] Senator KENNEDY. Do you remember what party responsibilities you had prior to March 1? Mr. MITCHELL. Party responsibilities ? Senator KENNEDY. Yes. Republican Party. Mr. MITCHELL. I do not have and did not have any responsibilities, I have no party responsibilities now, Senator. Mr. MITCHELL. Now, it seems to -me that this committee has spent, about 6 weeks trying to make a distinction between the different parties and the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, and I look upon it the same way. Senator TALMADGE. Let's read a little further, Mr. Mitchell. Mr. MITCHELL. This is the only quote I have. Do you have something more, on that? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Let me read it for you. [Laughter.] Next question: [READING] Senator KENNEDY. No re-election campaign responsibilities? Mr. MITCHELL. Not as Yet. I hope to. I am going to make the application to the chairman of the committee if I ever get through with these hearings. [Laughter.] Mr. MITCHELL. I can't believe that the Washington Post could be so mistaken. Senator TALMADGE. May I send it to you for the refreshment of your memory, sir? Mr. MITCHELL. I would like, to see it, Senator TALMADGE. I will ask a member of the staff to show Mr., Mitchell page 633 of the hearings of Mr. Richard G. Kleindienst, resumed, an March 14, 1972. [document passed to MITCHELL, reading with counsel] [00.20.45]
Desert Storm: shootdown of Iraqi MiG-21 fighter
Heads-up display in plane cockpit records the shootdown of an Iraqi MiG-21 fighter.
Just Cause: CH-47D helo and crew
Dark scenes of CH-47D helo on ground, rotors turning. 00:58: Pilot points to bullet holes in helo's side. 01:41: Helo lifts off ground. 01:57: Helo in flight with crew at their stations. Shot out open rear door and windows shows terrain and ocean below. Helo touches down on field 12:36: Aerials in CH-47D show cargo, crew and cameraman. 15:18: Control towe in field. 15:25: CH-47D helo parked in field.
Just Cause: loading CH-47D helicopter
Army personnel talking in a group, forklift in area, truck backing up to a CH-47D helo. Supplies, gear, weapons are offloaded by Army personnel from truck to helo. Forklift places crate into helo. Crates are tied down.
Just Cause: military vehicles, damaged buildings
Several empty, parked military vehicles. Pan of surrounding area, damaged buildings, "Rio Hato" school bus.
Just Cause: US Army personnel
Activities of US Army personnel camped in tents on the beach.
Just Cause: home of General Manuel Noriega
Ext and int shots of elaborate house on beach showing some damage. Identified as home of General Manuel Noriega. CU pictures of Noriega and his family.
Just Cause: soldiers with prisoners
Int CH-47D helo in flight shows US military personnel checking wrist ties on prisoners. Photographer takes pictures. 26:50: Army soldiers walk with prisoners across field onto road. 27:44: Soldiers take prisoners on board CH-47D helo parked in field. 28:12: AVs of tent city and fields. 28:22: Soldiers take prisoners out rear door of helo.
Just Cause: supplies and humanitarian relief efforts
Scenes on flight line at Charleston Air Force Base with military personnel operating fork lift, placing humanitarian relief cargo onto K-loader. 33:25: Crew boards parked C-141B air transport, with snow on ground, then plane taxis toward camera and turns. 34:32: C-141 on flight line with rear doors open. Shots include K-loader with relief cargo. Airmen load cargo into the plane. 38:18: Interview with Senior Master Sergeant Tom Donovan, 437th Aerial Port Squadron at Charleston AFB. He discusses resupply and humanitarian relief for Operation Just Cause in Panama and difficulties encountered. 42:22: Donovan walks by cargo pallets on ramp. 42:50: Two Air Force trucks parked in front of air frieight terminal, then pan to 437th Aerial Port Squadron logo.
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.20.45] Mr. MITCHELL. Senator, I still think that relates, that phrase that you read that isn't in the Washington Post, relates back to the same subject matter. [00.20.52-MITCHELL caught in a lie] Senator TALMADGE. You testified a moment ago in response to a question that I asked you that you did have campaign responsibilities prior to the time you resigned as Attorney General. And yet, on March 14, before the Judiciary Committee, I quote again: "Senator KENNEDY. No re-election campaign responsibilities?" That, is a question. "Mr. MITCHELL. Not as yet." Isn't that negative? Mr. MITCHELL That is negative. It relates back to the, Republican Party, Senator, in the way I read the context and this one was so intended. Senator TALMADGE. "No reelection campaign responsibilities?" I ask you who was running? Mr. Nixon ? And is he a Republican? Mr. MITCHELL; I think the answer to both those questions is "Yes." Senator TALMADGE. I would concur with that. I still don't, get, the thrust Of your testimony when you testified a moment ago that you had none, that you did have election responsibilities and yet before the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate on March 14, 1972, you testified exactly the opposite. Mr. MITCHELL. Senator, I go back to the statement that I made, before, that this refers to the Republican Party and this is the reason that I raised the question and responded to it and it, Was my intention to do so in that context. [00.22.19] Senator TALMADGE. Was not President Nixon running on the Republican ticket? He didn't, change parties, did he? Mr. MITCHELL. No, Senator. I stand On the answer that I have, given you. But the, question that I asked of Senator Kennedy was with respect to the, party and he referred to the, Republican Party, and that is the context in which I took it. [00.21.40-EVIDENCE of MITCHELL being very strongly involved in the campaign prior to resigning as ATTORNEY GENERAL.] Senator TALMADGE. Now, there is some stationery from the Committee for the Re-Election of the, President. There is a memorandum to the Attorney General, marked "confidential," December 3 1971. There is a lot of language here. "We recommend that the Committee for the Re-Election of the President assume all White House support activities." It is signed by Jeb S. Magruder and there are three blanks there: One, "approve," one "disapprove," the third, "comment," And by "approve", there is an X. Is that your X mark? Mr. MITCHELL. I haven't the faintest Idea. I don't remember the, memorandum but maybe if I looked at, it. I could tell. Generally I write my name rather than write an X. but I may be able, to identify my X. [00.23.35] Senator TALMADGE. We all admit, Mr. Mitchell, that you are entirely legible and that you write eminently well. Mr. MITCHELL. Senator, that looks like a good enough X to possibly be mine. I am not familiar with it, and I don't, recall the memorandum. Senator TALMADGE. You do not deny it? Mr. MITCHELL. I do not, deny that that could be my X. Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Chairman, I ask that, that be marked as an exhibit and be inserted in the record at this Point. Senator ERVIN. Without objection, it. is so ordered. The reporter will mark- it as an exhibit for the record. Senator TALMADGE.. I also ask that, the colloquy I have read between Senator Kennedy and the then Attorney General, John Mitchell. dated March 14, 1972, before the Judiciary Committee be made part of the record. And as further evidence, Mr. Chairman. I desire to send to Mr. Mitchell a number of documents here wherein he was exercising his responsibility as director of the campaign, one, dated June 22, 1971, one dated January 14, 1972, all marked "confidential," memorandum to the Attorney General one involving the Republican -National Committee budget, the, other a telephone plan for the Florida primary. I send them also to -Mr. Mitchell for identification and I ask that, they be identified, appropriately numbered, and inserted in the record at this point. [00.25.47]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.31.10-TALMADGE continues to question MITCHELL] Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Stans testified before the committee, Mr. Mitchell, he. stated his sole responsibility as chairman of the finance committee was to raise, the money and he testified that it was your responsibility as I recall., as chairman to determine the expenditures thereof. [00.31.45-TALMADGE asks if MITCHELL was responsible for the unaccounted spending in the campaign] Now, we had some more than, a million dollars in cash that was not accounted for during the. expenditure. Thus, as I understand it, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Stans -has implicated you as being responsible for these cash disbursements. Would you comment on that? Mr. MITCHELL. I don't believe that, that 'Senator, in all deference to you, is the testimony of Mr. Stans in any form, shape, or circumstance stances about that. By the time that, I became active. and 1 am Saying active as distinguished from consulting, in the campaign, we were working on budgets, which Mr. Stans and his people on the finance Committee, were part and parcel of, just, as I was on the political side, and we, -were working under the budget. Mr. Stans was part of that. [00.32.38] Senator TALMADGE. Let's see if we can clarify it. It was Mr. Stans' responsibility to raise the money, as I understand it. Is that an accurate statement? Mr. MITCHELL. No question about that. Senator TALMADGE. Whose responsibility was it to disburse it? Mr. MITCHELL. It was the responsibility--to disburse it? Senator TALMADGE. Yes, Mr. MITCHELL. Well, it, was actually disbursed by the finance committee but, I am sure that, is not, the, thrust of your question. Your question is who authorized the programs for which the money was spent. I think that that is the question? [00.33.06] Senator TALMADGE. Yes. who could call up over there and say give x number of dollars or write a check for such and such an amount? Who had the. authority to do that? Was it you or Mr. Stans? That is what I am trying to get at. Mr. MITCHELL. It, depended on the period of time involved. Mr. Talmadge. 'Before their budgets were put together, it was done in the way you said, that we authorize this program and so-and-so can get so much money. Senator TALMADGE. When did you take over as chairman of the committee? Mr. MITCHELL. I didn't, become chairman. I became campaign director, Senator Talmadge. Senator TALMADGE. What date was that? Mr. MITCHELL. It was announced on the 9th of April. But, I had been working, as my time would allow. plus a vacation, from the 21st of November through the 3d or 4th of April in trying to put together working budgets under which these moneys would be expended, Senator TALMADGE. Thereafter then was It your responsibility to authorize authorized disbursements? Mr. MITCHELL. In connection with the budget., yes. Senator TALMADGE. And so-- Mr. MITCHELL. That, is up until the 1st of July. Senator TALMADGE. When you resigned and that, was sole your responsibility during that period? Mr. MITCHELL. No. as you have heard from the discussion here, this morning -when Mr. Stans consulted me about, it, because of the many other things that I was doing, including putting together the political organizations in the 50 States. I told Mr. Stans that Mr. Magruder had continuing authorization which, of course, Is part, of Mr. Stans' Testimony, to authorize expenditures of Money. [00.34.38-TALMADGE charges MITCHELL with approving the payments of money involved in the COVERUP-MITCHELL tries to split hairs and dodge the question] Senator TALMADGE. Then the expenditures that were paid out by Mr. Sloan, as I recall, various lawyers fees, and bail fees, and living expenses, were authorized by you, Is that a correct statement? Mr. MITCHELL. To my knowledge, Mr. Sloan never made such payments. Senator TALMADGE. Who did? Mr. MITCHELL. To my knowledge there was never any money paid out of the committee for that purpose.. Senator TALMADGE. There was some--- Mr. MITCHELL. If I can go back to my testimony a few minutes ago Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL [continuing]. When this matter was first brought up it was turned down and turned down cold. The money that was used, if it was bail money and I am not, sure of that, but, attorneys' fees and support, were not committee moneys. Senator TALMADGE. Where did that money come from? Mr. MITCHELL. Well I believe Mr. Stans testified, and I am no expert on this subject matter because I don't know all of the answers to it, I believe Mr. Stans testified that at Mr. Kalmbach's request and this is the first public knowledge that I have as to how this got started, that on the 29th of June Mr. Stans turned over moneys that were not part of the campaign moneys to Mr. Kalmbach in the amount of $75,000. [00.35.58] Senator TALMADGE. I believe he, testified that he checked with you on that and you authorized it, is that correct? Mr. MITCHELL. Who did this? Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Stans, as I recall. Mr. MITCHELL. No, he did not, No, sir, I beg your pardon. Senator TALMADGE. Who authorized that disbursement? Mr. MITCHELL. That was not a disbursement of campaign funds. This was moneys that Mr. Stans testified that, he had outside of the campaign, and that he turned them over to Mr. Kalmbach at Mr. Kalmbach's request, Mr. Kalmbach having said this -was for an important White House mission and I am quite certain that is the testimony. [00.36.29]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.36.29-Sen. TALMADGE continues to question MITCHELL about the coverup] Senator TALMADGE. How does a campaign get money outside. the campaign? [Laughter.] Mr. MITCHELL. This has always been a, very interesting question to me. [Laughter.] Because, for this very reason that the more I bear about all these moneys everybody says that, they came, from 1968, 1968, and here I was the campaign manager in 1968 and only won by 600,000 votes and they had all this money in the bank. That was a hell of a thing to do to me. Senator TALMADGE. I agree. Mr. MITCHELL. I regret. it, I resent it. Senator TALMADGE. It wasn't but one campaign, was it, in 1972? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, I am talking about 1968. Senator TALMADGE. Yes, you are talking about leftover campaign money. Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, this is what. I understood. [00.37.18-TALMADGE inquires about the campaign slushfund used to fund the coverup-a shady financial arrangement, and illegal] Senator TALMADGE. But you referred to funds outside the campaign at the disposal of the campaign committee when there was only one and I was wondering how you collected campaign money outside a campaign? Mr. MITCHELL, This -was not collected. this was held except for one item, and I am sure the staff is much more, familiar -with Mr. Stans' record than I am but I think he testified that the $75,000 was made up of $45,000 that, he had in a safe deposit box that came from the 1968 campaign and $30,000 that, had come from some Filipinos -who were to be returned, if I am not, mistaken that is the $75,000 and he did not come to me on it. [00.38.00] Senator TALMADGE. There was a great deal of testimony that this committee has had, as you know, about disbursement, of funds, and we found that over a million dollars was disbursed in cash with no checks to support, it. or anything else. Some cash was bandied around in large amounts, and it. was amazing to me that a man as able a certified public accountant as Mr. Stans -would let money be handled in such a loose fashion. You would concur that you ought not kick around a million dollars in cash without accountability wouldn't You? Mr. MITCHELL. I would subscribe to that wholeheartedly. In fact, I would go down to half a million or a quarter of a million. Senator TALMADGE. OF even $1. Mr. MITCHELL. I agree with that, [00.38.44] Senator TALMADGE. -NOW. you mentioned these Dahlberg and Mexican checks. Mr. Stans testified that you met with him on June 23, 1972, regarding those checks, is that a correct statement? Mr. MITCHELL. yes, sir. If I remember correctly, Mr. Stans and I had lunch on that day and we had a further meeting which has been totally screwed up In the testimony here on the 24th. Senator TALMADGE. Do you want to try to correct it? Mr. MITCHELL. I would be delighted because of the various versions and it was a matter of some concern of this committee because of the implication that Mr. Stans brought into the picture of having information about the Watergate which Is not true. With respect to the 23d, to the best, of my knowledge, it does show that Mr. Stans and I had lunch in my diary. Now the 24th, this is the Sequel of the Mardian-LaRue debriefing or interviewing of Liddy and the information they got from Magruder's involvement with Liddy in the payment of money and it resulted in Mardian going to talk to Magruder and getting this story that it was only $40,000 at the most that I could have given Liddy or whatever the number was $40,000 or $50,000, and this of course, quite contrary to -what 'Mr. Liddy had told Mr. Mardian. [00.40.36] Mardian came up and got his secretary to get Sloan in from his house, into the office, the 24th being ,I Saturday where there was this confrontation and by the way, I would like to interpolate here that this is the only meeting that I ever had with Hugh Sloan at any time after June 17 and it wasn't in connection with his going to the FBI as he has testified to. The meeting took place with Mardian, Magruder, and Sloan, in which Magruder was saying, "Well, it couldn't have been more, than $40,000 or $50,000" and Sloan was saying , "It is much, much more than that. But I won't tell you because I am going to have to talk to Mr. Stans." [00.41.20-MITCHELL explains the "going gets tough" statement to SLOAN] And this is, by the way, where I will also have to put the record straight. Sloan was a pretty low individual on that particular day and it was then that Mardian hit him On the hack to buck him up and I don't want to take credit for this statement, that, was reported by me to be made that when the going gets tough the tough get, going. It, was Senator Muskie -who had said it just a couple of days before it happened. Senator TALMADGE. You did not make any such statement, is that correct? Mr. MITCHELL. I made the statement and I made it in the context. Senator TALMADGE. You did not quote. Senator Muskie as being the author thereof? Mr. MITCHELL. I did indeed in connection with respect, to the nature of the tough campaign he had and the one that we were having. Senator TALMADGE. Were. you saying that for Mr. Sloan's benefit at that particular time? Mr. MITCHELL. I was saying it for the total people there who were in a hell of a knock- down- drag-out donnybrook over what they could not agree on. Now, the sequence is shown by my log that after that meeting Mr. Sloan apparently went back to Mr. Stans, -who had received the information about the Liddy payments the day before, I believe, on June 23, Mr. Stans called me, and Mr. Stans came up and saw me alone. There, was not, any Jeb Magruder and there was not any Mardian in the meeting that, according to Magruder, I asked Mardian to step out so that I could discuss the matter. That -would be the last thing in the world I would do because Mardian was investigating the circumstances at the time. [00.42.48]
African Lion V
11:49:15 Lioness wounded (small wound) 11:49:23 Lioness resting close 11:51:49 Lioness near plover's nest 11:53:02 Lioness hunting 11:56:02 Lioness's eye and ear 11:58:02 Lioness hunting from the rear 11:58:31 Lioness hunting, skylined and trotting 11:59:17 Lioness's hunting wildebeest and zebra 12:01:21 Lioness relax after failed hunt 12:03:23 Lioness in high grass - little yawns 12:07:35 Lioness tip of tail
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973 (1/2)
[00.15.49-GURNEY allows MITCHELL the chance to deny again that he was involved in receiving wiretap information from Watergate] Senator GURNEY. That Is right. And you also testified that your logs showed that you had no meetings with Magruder when no one' else was Present. That Is I wanted to nail down. Would You amplify that again? Mr. MITCHELL. What I am saying is during the period from what is referred to is the first break-in, which was--and of course, you got mixed testimony On whether it took place on the 28th of May or the 30th of May--I did not know when it took place. Mr. Magruder said that 1 to 1 1/2 weeks thereafter, he came in to my office and showed me this material and that I did not like it. therefore. I called Mr. Liddy up and I chewed Mr. Liddy out and told him to get moving. What I am Saying is that my logs do not show a meeting with Mr. Magruder during the May period to the June 17 period in the morning that did not have other people there for other business. Secondly I have testified, which happens to be the fact, that I never Saw or talked to Mr. Liddy from the 2d day of February until the 15th day Of June Of 1972. Senator GURNEY. I recall that, and that lends me to the next question, which I really am getting at which I think Is the important question How were these logs prepared? Who prepared them? How would the committee know, for example, that they are precisely accurate? [00.17.33] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, what had happened. Senator, was that over in the Justice Department, the secretaries that I had over there followed the practice that was always handled in the Justice Department--nobody got in the door without their being recorded and Nobody made a telephone call in or out without them being recorded and it records whether the call came in or out, whether you talked, or where the call was placed. Much to my surprise, I found out later on, after they came over with me to the law office in the Committee To Re-Elect the President, they continued to do the same thing. I did not even know they were doing it until after June 17, when we got talking about a lot of these things and found out that they had continued to do this. [00.18.23] Senator GURNEY. So your secretaries, after you went to the Committee to Re-Elect, were the same that you had in the Justice Department and they always followed this procedure, of reporting everybody who came in and phone calls in and out? Mr. MITCHELL. My secretary, Miss Lee Jablonski, was the one who continued to do that; yes, sir. Senator GURNEY. Going on to this- Mr. MITCHELL. May I also add so that I will be fully responsive to your question about, this meeting, so-called, by Magruder, that I would point out, and I think that it is very persuasive, at least from the, way I look at, it, that when Dean met, Liddy on June 18--in Other words, this -was the first time that anybody had really ever talked to Liddy, according to Mr. Dean's testimony which is in the record--Mr. Liddy complained to Mr. Dean that Magruder was the one that made him go into the, DNC the second time. around, et cetera, et cetera. Now, if Mitchell had called him up to the, office, I am sure Liddy is not stupid enough to try to hide behind Magruder if he had Mitchell to hide behind. Senator GURNEY. Incidentally, on that point, Magruder. pushing Liddy to do this work over at the DNC, do you have any evidence that Magruder in turn was pushed by anybody to push Liddy? Mr. MITCHELL. No; I do not. I tried to answer that before- Senator GURNEY. I know you touched on it. Mr. MITCHELL. Insofar as' I have, -no personal knowledge of it. As I say, the Dean statements and testimony is replete with who called whom and -who was afraid who was going to take over what and so forth. And I have no personal knowledge of it. [00.20.23]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.42.48-MITCHELL tries to contradict testimony given previously by others] Senator TALMADGE. Was that the first--excuse me. Mr. MITCHELL. I am going into this because, Mr. Stans' credibility 'with respect to his knowledge of the Watergate was quite, severely impugned apparently more severely in the executive committee meeting by Magruder than it was later in public testimony. Senator TALMADGE. Was that the first time you had knowledge Of the Watergate break-in, bugging that day, that conversation? Mr. MITCHELL. On the, 24th? Senator TALMADGE. Yes. Mr. MITCHELL. No, my---- Senator TALMADGE. That was the first time you were. debriefed on it, was it not? Mr. MITCHELL. No, I had been debriefed, Senator, as I mentioned a little earlier either on the 21st Or 22d. Senator TALMADGE. Did you get, full details of it at that time? Mr. MITCHELL. It Was coming from Liddy who was, as I went through with Mr. Thompson, was involving Magruder and said that that he got his approval in the White House and a lot of things that--- Senator TALMADGE. Did he say who authorized the approval in the White House? Mr. MITCHELL. No, he did not. No, he did not. [00.43.58] Senator TALMADGE. The, White House was definitely interested in the campaign, of course, was it, not? Mr. MITCHELL. The campaign what, Senator? Senator TALMADGE. The campaign for reelection. Mr. MITCHELL. No, there is no question about it,. Senator TALMADGE. With whom In the White House did you discuss the Watergate break-in? [00.44.12] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, it depends, of course, as I testified earlier this morning in the context of it. Talking with, starting at the top, with the President, I believe it was the telephone Call that I had On the 20th Of June in which was before the which--this debriefings that I had had and had not any particular knowledge of it, discussed it to the point where I thought it was ridiculous and thought I had been very remiss as being the campaign director and not ever being able to keep a rein on the individuals that were for the campaign, at that time I had my mind, of course, the fact that Mr. McCord was the only one who was involved in the particular incident. Senator TALMADGE. Let me see if I can identify that telephone call, that was on the 20th of June, according to the logs that the committee has. that took place by telephone between 6 p.m.. and 6:12 p.m.. is that correct? Mr. MITCHELL. That is the one, sir. [00.45.20] Senator TALMADGE. What did you fell the President about the Watergate break-in at that time? Did you tell him employees of the Committee To Re-Elect the President were involved in it? Mr. MITCHELL. I assume the President knew that because It had been in the newspapers by then, to my recollection but what I really recall about the conversation was more. Senator TALMADGE. Did you tell him Magruder was involved? Mr. MITCHELL. I did not know Magruder was involved in it at that time. Senator TALMADGE. Who did you tell I him was involved? Mr. MITCHELL. The only ones I knew -were Involved at that time Were the he five that that were accosted on the premises. Senator TALMADGE. When did you talk with Mr. Haldeman about the break-in? Mr. MITCHELL. I have no recollection of it but it -was some time thereafter. Senator TALMADGE. Was it shortly after June 20? Mr. MITCHELL. I would probably believe that would. be the case. Senator TALMADGE. When did you talk to Mr. Ehrlichman about it? [00.46.15] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, I talked to Mr. Ehrlichman--Mr. Ehrlichman Called me In California when I was out there and asked me. in effect, I think there has been testimony to the effect here that somebody suggested he do it. He called me out there and asked me what it was all about and I said. "I do not know. we will find out and we will get back to you." That was the substance of that conversation. Senator TALMADGE. That was either the 17th, 18th, 19th, or thereabouts? Mr. MITCHELL. It was either Saturday or Sunday because on the 19th, which was Monday, we left rather early for I for the return to Washington. Senator TALMADGE. When did you talk to Mr. Colson about It? Mr. MITCHELL. I have no I idea but it would have been somewhere much further down the line. Let me point out----- Senator TALMADGE. Sure. Mr. MITCHELL [continuing]. Senator, that if you would have, I know you are reading from one of these minicharts but some Of the things they do not have up there, is that there is an 8:15 a.m. morning meeting in the White House. Senator TALMADGE. YOU should have ample opportunity to state, whatever you want to, Mr. Mitchell, if that, chart, is different from your views do not hesitate, to say so, we want the facts, Only the facts. Mr. MITCHELL. I cannot see it from here and it, does not make any difference anyway, because, I have got a directory here but what I Would point out, is that, during this period which I have--which I have testified to earlier today, until I left, the committee, as the campaign director, there was a meeting at 8:15 a.m. in the White House every morning. This was the regular staff meeting that involved legislative liaison, Dr. Kissinger, General Haig. et cetera. So, I say when you ask me when did I first, talk to these, people, about the, Watergate, of course, it was a continuing subject matter basically in the concept of the, political problems that presented because by the, I guess the, 20th or certainly the 21st, the Democrats had threatened their lawsuit, they filed it, I think, On the, 22d and -we had had a, verbal press battle over the circumstances from then on constantly day in and day out about the matter. [00.48.28]
Wilburn Brothers Show No. 383
Wilburn Brothers "I'm Gonna Tie One On Tonight" Loretta Lynn "You Wanna Give Me A Lift" Willis Brothers "Gypsy Rose and Me" Wilburn Brothers "Take Good Care of Her" Wilburn Brothers "Sing Your Heart Out Country Boy" Hal Rugg "Time Changes Everything" (Instrumental) Loretta Lynn "The Third Man" (Gospel) Willis Brothers "The Chicken Song"
Wilburn Brothers Show No. 372
Wilburn Brothers "Happy Street" Loretta Lynn "You've Just Stepped In" Compton Brothers "Haunted House" Wilburn Brothers "I'm Leavin'" Loretta Lynn "I Walked Away From the Wreck" Hal Rugg "Marie" (Instrumental/Steel Guitar) Wilburn Brothers "Give Me The Roses Now" (Gospel) Compton Brothers "Charlie Brown"
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.48.28-Sen. TALMADGE interrogates MITCHELL about the first stages of the coverup] Senator TALMADGE. Did you talk to Mr. Colson about the same time? Mr. MITCHELL. I am sure that I would because he would have, attended those meetings. Senator TALMADGE. Did you direct Robert Mardian to telephone Liddy on June 17 and ask him to try to persuade Mr. Kleindienst, then the Acting Attorney General. to arrange for Mr. McCord to be released from bail as Mr. Magruder has testified? Mr. MITCHELL. NO, sir. I am sure, I assure you, that would not be the case. There was some conversation that somebody might call up the Acting Attorney General to find out, what the hell happened but I noticed in Mr. Magruder's testimony he said that, I selected Mardian because, Mardian was, a great, friend of Liddy's and if there was anybody who were on the opposite ends of the stick it would have been Mardian and Liddy. Senator TALMADGE. -Would You say then that Mr. Magruder committed perjury before this committee? Mr. MITCHELL. I cannot, characterize anything as perjury. Senator. That does not. happen to be, a fact, what you have just said, and I have just denied it and I am sure, the other people who were present Will also deny it. Senator TALMADGE. You are a good lawyer. Mr. Mitchell, testifying under oath to a lie is commonly referred to as perjury, is it not? Mr. MITCHELL. Well, Yes; but you also have to have intents, I think, along with it under certain circumstances and I am sure, that some of these conversations have rot garbled and mixed up in the, intervening year and a half or so. I would not, want to characterize anybody---- Senator TALMADGE. What you are saying is intentions might be good but, his facts are wrong, is that correct? Mr. MITCHELL. Could very well be that the recollection was not quite accurate. There are many of other circumstances some Of which I testified to and some of which I presume I will in connection with my answers relating to Mr. Magruder's testimony where I know damn well that, he has transposed events and got them mixed into other circumstances. [00.50.31] Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Dean has testified before this coil in committee that there was a meeting on March 22, 1973. When you met with him. Mr. Haldeman and Mr. Ehrlichman and you said that there was no more money problems for Mr. Hunt. Did this meeting take place? [00.50.51] Mr. MITCHELL. The meeting had taken place, Senator, I covered this earlier this morning and it to this effect. the meeting took place prior to a meeting with the President. It was, on March 22. those participating were Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Dean, and myself. Dean's testimony Is to the effect that, Ehrlichman asked me if Hunt had been paid or if his problems had been taken care of. and I am reported by Dean to have answered yes. something. To the contrary, I deny that it ever existed as far as I am concerned because I would not, know whether Hunt's problems have been taken care of or not, Senator TALMADGE. Then, you are telling this committee Mr. Dean was in error when he made this statement? Mr. MITCHELL. This may be another one of these cases where on---- Senator- TALMADGE. Intentions were good and his facts, were wrong? [00.51.38] Mr. MITCHELL. Well, he probably got the parties mixed up. I do not recall ever having talked to John Ehrlichman about payment of money to anybody in connection with the Watergate. Senator TALMADGE. I believe you stated you later met with the President that day? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes sir. we did. Senator TALMADGE. Mr. Dean said--he testified--you talked with the President about dealing with the Ervin committee at that point, is that correct? Mr. MITCHELL. Excuse me. this is a side joke that we have, he is afraid I am going to pronounce the chairman's name wrong as I have from time to time. The word "dealing: is a pretty broad term. Actually. the subject matters were a number that did have to do with the committee and it was also, of course the basis, the subject matters were the basis for discussion that took place previously that morning among Haldeman, Ehrlichman Dean, and myself in the meeting that we Just got Out of. The real problem that was discussed -it that particular time 'Was the problem the President was having in connection with executive privilege and that was the real focal point of it and, of course. that Was right in the middle of the Gray hearings where the concentration was on the executive privilege matter. The other aspects of it were as to who was to be the liaison in connection with the White House working with this committee, up here, and I believe that Mr. Dean is correct in testimony that during the meeting the President Called Mr. Kleindienst to ask him if he had met with the chairman and the vice chairman of the committee on the Subject matter to start discussing matters of privilege and the other relationships in that area. [00.53.36] Senator TALMADGE. Did you convince the President at that time that he ought to waive executive privilege? Mr. MITCHELL. I urged it. senator TALMADGE. Why was he so insistent on what he called executive privilege, Mr. Mitchell? Mr. MITCHELL. Well of course, I can't always--I can't say always, If can't read the President's mind but I -would believe that whatever the President does in this area he does it in connection with the Presidency and not in connection with some individual. problem that he may have at a particular time. [00.54.06]
Grizzly & Black Bears 7
(Tape 1) 05:42:19 Black bear catches chum salmon 05:43:21 Black bear plays in water and runs into woods 05:44:49 Black bear runs out of woods 05:44:55 Black bear plays in water and runs into woods 05:45:15 Black bear stands upright in water and plays with a log 05:47:59 Black bear stands upright and licks bait off of tree 05:50:31 Black bear eats wild grapes
Red Fox 2
(TAPE 1) 02:20:28 Male brings mourning dove to the pups 02:21:33 Red pup at den with dove, 48 days old 02:22:46 2 pups with dove, stealing the dove from each other 02:28:30 Red pup at den 02:32:35 Silver and red pups at den, 52 days old 02:32:59 Male and red pups at den 02:34:23 2 silver and 1 cross phase pup Cross pup with a bone shot continued on tape 2
Pronghorn Antelope 1
(Tape 1) 10:25:57 Buck urinating then flehmen, herd harem. 10:27:04 Buck with its ears back, aggressively chasing off others. 10:27:44 Snorting buck. 10:27:56 Buck running after rival and then back again. 10:32:52 CU of buck. 10:33:59 Buck lies down and gets up. 10:35:48 Rump hair of buck flared in alarm. 10:37:29 Snorting, chasing rival, running towards camera and then going after rival.