YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Howard Hunt (Part 1) Watergate Hearings Testimony

Howard Hunt (Part 1) Watergate Hearings Testimony — Transcript

by Patrick O'Dare · 37,110 words · 6,850 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00[Music]
0:09good evening
0:11i'm sydney james
0:13chairman of the board of the public
0:14television outlet in washington
0:16of which impact is a division
0:19i'm one of hundreds of interested
0:20citizens laymen and lay women who
0:23volunteer to serve on the governing
0:25boards of public television stations
0:27throughout the country
0:28in the first 37 days of this historic
0:31event public television brought you more
0:34than 200 hours of gavel to gavel
0:36coverage
0:37an average of five and one half hours a
0:40night
0:41and now we are making a fresh commitment
0:44we will continue our same basic format a
0:47brief introduction
0:48the unabridged proceedings from
0:50beginning to end with interruptions only
0:53for station identification
0:55and finally some
0:56commentary public television's decision
0:59to carry these hearings from gavel to
1:02gavel is based on a demonstrated
1:04interest in our doing so
1:06we have received hundreds of thousands
1:08of letters and phone calls here in
1:11washington
1:12and at public television stations across
1:14the country
1:15the message was very clear
1:17you thanked us for bringing the
1:19proceedings to you
1:20in full in the evening hours when you
1:23were at home
1:24many of you sent in checks in gratitude
1:26we thank you again for that
1:29you told us you had a learned a great
1:31deal about your government and about how
1:33valuable it was to eyewitness an event
1:36of such great moment
1:38and you told us to please continue
1:41thus
1:42the decision to do so was one in which
1:44all of us interested in public
1:46television participated including you
1:49and the public television station you
1:51are now tuned to
1:53and now let's go to today's hearings
1:56i want to emphasize that at the time of
1:58the watergate operation
2:00i considered my participation as a duty
2:02to my country
2:04i thought it was an unwise operation but
2:06i viewed it as lawful
2:08i hope the court will sustain my view
2:11but whatever that outcome i deeply
2:14regret that i had any part in this
2:15affair
2:17i think it was an unfortunate use of
2:19executive power
2:20and i am sorry that i did not have the
2:22wisdom to withdraw
2:24[Music]
2:29in the senate of the united states
2:32a resolution
2:33to establish a select committee of the
2:35senate to conduct an investigation and
2:37study of the extent if any to which
2:39illegal improper or unethical activities
2:42were engaged in by any persons acting
2:44individually or in combination with
2:46others in the presidential election of
2:481972
2:49or any campaign canvas or other activity
2:52related to it
2:55from washington npac brings you gavel to
2:57gavel videotape coverage of today's
2:59hearings by the senate select committee
3:01on presidential campaign activities here
3:04is npac correspondent jim lehrer
3:06good evening and welcome back to
3:08watergate e howard hunt the watergate
3:10saga's number one super spy was the lead
3:13off witness today as the senate
3:15watergate committee put its
3:16controversial show back on america's
3:18center stage the 55-year-old hunt using
3:22the spy terminology he learned firsthand
3:24as a cia agent for 21 years added a lot
3:27of fascinating inside stuff detail to
3:30what the committee and everyone else
3:32already knew about the watergate and
3:34ellsberg break-ins general intelligence
3:36gathering for the nixon campaign and
3:38other operations connected with his
3:40part-time work as a white house and
3:42re-election campaign operative hunt
3:45makes it clear that his close
3:46relationship with former white house
3:48aide charles coulson has deteriorated
3:50noting for the first time publicly that
3:52he believes coulson had prior knowledge
3:54of the overall lydia intelligence plan
3:56but not necessarily the specifics
3:59including the watergate break-in
4:02hunt a quiet meticulous man also recited
4:05the personal tragedies which have
4:06befallen him since watergate including
4:09the death of his wife in a plane crash
4:11all of this happened today of course and
4:14it occurred in the context of this day
4:16rather than when the committee broke for
4:18its summer recess august 7th there has
4:20been a flurry of activity since then
4:22particularly at the white house
4:25it began with a presidential television
4:27address and was followed by two
4:28televised news conferences the president
4:31continued to maintain he was not aware
4:33of any watergate activities he also
4:35chatted congress for not getting more
4:37done and sent them a new agenda as a
4:39sort of many state of the union message
4:41with us tonight is hugh saidi who
4:43observes the presidency for time
4:45magazine mr city it looks as if mr nixon
4:48has been on the offensive thus far has
4:50it worked do you think
4:52it seems to me that what we have
4:54observed here is white house theater
4:56more than commitment to national
4:58leadership perhaps will be proven wrong
5:01in the days ahead perhaps there is
5:03something more but once again
5:05we have all the stage props the press
5:07conferences the meetings the right
5:08things said and done
5:10but indeed we have in the country a
5:12frightening number of forces that are
5:14loosed unfettered inflation the price of
5:17food the energy crisis and yet it seems
5:19to me that they've devoted their time to
5:22the watergate
5:23problem and it's still the same problem
5:26still the same format and indeed we lack
5:29a clear voice a clear person in which
5:31the country has confidence the last
5:33gallup poll shows that mr nixon's
5:36popularity or the confidence in him has
5:39declined
5:40all right sir mr nixon of course has
5:42also been standing firm on those white
5:44house tapes on august 9 the senate
5:46committee went to court for an order
5:48directing mr nixon to release them three
5:50weeks later judge sarika ruled on a
5:52similar subpoena from special prosecutor
5:54cox that the judge should listen to the
5:56tapes in his chambers on september 6 the
5:58white house appealed the decision a week
6:01later the appeals court suggested that
6:02prosecutor cox and the white house work
6:04out a compromise but that also was
6:06turned down
6:08in addition to watergate figures jeb
6:10magruder and donald segretti have
6:12pleaded guilty in federal court and are
6:14now awaiting sentencing and four former
6:16white house staff members john
6:18ehrlichman eagle krogue david young and
6:20gordon liddy have been indicted in los
6:22angeles in connection with a break-in at
6:24the office of dr daniel ellsberg's
6:26psychiatrist
6:28our other guest tonight is jack murphy
6:30of the georgetown university law center
6:32mr murphy it seems as if the courts have
6:34taken over some aspects of the watergate
6:36scandal as mr nixon has requested so
6:39legally where are we now
6:41well we have fairly sharply drawn the
6:43issue of power of the president to
6:45withhold information
6:46versus the power of the courts to
6:48administer the criminal justice system
6:50and the power of the united states
6:51senate to implement its legislative
6:53mandate
6:54it's a critical constitutional question
6:56largely unresolved of course by the
6:57presidents we don't know how it's going
6:58to come out but i think it's clear that
7:01as with other constitutional litigation
7:03in the past the decision will be on a
7:05practical basis the courts will examine
7:07this matter and decide whether or not in
7:09these circumstances the presidency can
7:11survive intrusion into the privacy of
7:13his office
7:15for purposes such as the smooth
7:16administration of justice or for the
7:18purpose of the senate and implementing
7:19its mandate now how it will come out is
7:21hard to predict but that's the way the
7:22issue will be drawn all right
7:24back to today now with peter k on
7:26capitol hill setting the scene for e
7:29howard hunt and the senate committee in
7:31light of the developments that occurred
7:32over the summer recess
7:35watergate round two on its first day was
7:37something of an anti-climax
7:39two months ago e howard hunt's testimony
7:41would have been fascinating but at this
7:43point in time it seems to have been
7:45overshadowed by other events
7:47the indictment of john ehrlichman and
7:48others in the ellsberg break-in case the
7:51continuing battle over those white house
7:53tapes and of course a separate scandal
7:55involving vice president sparrow agnew
7:58now in the light of all this there was a
8:00feeling in the caucus room today that
8:02hunt's testimony about the watergate and
8:04ellsberg break-ins and other white house
8:06horrors
8:07seems to be out of date now you will
8:09hear new details new details about
8:11possible involvement of former white
8:13house special counsel charles coulson
8:16testimony buttress by memos and by
8:18transcripts of phone conversations and
8:21one of those memos contained a friends
8:23list to go with that famous white house
8:25enemies list
8:26the friends list consisted of
8:28sympathetic newsmen columnists such as
8:30william f buckley william white ralph di
8:33toledano jenkin lloyd's jones and
8:36stewart and joseph alsop
8:38newsman clark molinov kai's beach and
8:40willard edwards news executive neil
8:42freeman and abc's bill gill
8:45now this was intriguing but hardly
8:47sensational
8:48and even details of the famous howard
8:50hughes caper in las vegas failed to stir
8:53the committee the press or the galleries
8:55now maybe tomorrow if they could
8:57substitute howard hughes for howard hunt
9:00i guess not jim
9:02all right peter and i will be back to
9:04talk further with uh mr saudi and mr
9:06murphy at the close of the broadcast
9:08and as we've been doing each night that
9:10we replay these hearings here is an
9:12hour-by-hour rundown of the testimony in
9:14the first hour e howard hunt says that
9:16he believed he was acting on authority
9:18that was within the power of the
9:19president when he took part in the
9:21watergate break-in hunt also says it was
9:23white house aide charles coulson who
9:25asked him to fabricate cables linking
9:27the kennedy administration to the
9:29assassination of president diem
9:31in hour number two hunt tells how gordon
9:34liddy recruited him saying that attorney
9:36general mitchell wanted an intelligence
9:37operation hunt also testifies that he
9:40recruited a spy called a penetration
9:42agent to work inside the muskie campaign
9:44the spy who was to supply campaign
9:46schedules and contributor lists was
9:48later transferred to the mcgovern
9:50offices in the third hour hunt admits
9:52telling a crp attorney he had performed
9:54senior activities for the white house
9:56but denied that it was a threat to get
9:58money to provide for his family also in
10:00that hour hunt says he told gordon liddy
10:02let's junk it when mccord discovered the
10:04tape had been removed from the basement
10:06doors in the watergate building he says
10:08his advice to scrub the operation was
10:10ignored in the fourth hour hunt is
10:12pressed further about charles coulson's
10:14knowledge of the gemstone operation hunt
10:16draws the line between awareness and
10:18active participation also in that hour
10:20hunt says that when he sought disguises
10:22and photographic equipment from the cia
10:24no one there objected now to senator
10:27irvin in the caucus room of the old
10:28senate office building
10:34ah mr e howard hunt
10:36mr will you stand up and raise the right
10:38hand
10:39you swear that the evidence that you
10:41should give to the senate select
10:42committee on presidential campaign
10:44activities shall be the truth the whole
10:46truth and nothing but the truth for free
10:48god i did
10:50i let the records show
10:52that mr hunt
10:54is testifying on the
10:56auto
10:58grant granting him a use immunity
11:04council proceeded with the interrogation
11:06of the witness uh mr han are you
11:08accompanied by council i am i met the
11:11council would you please identify
11:12yourself for the record my name is
11:14sydney s sachs i'm a lawyer member of
11:17the bar the district of columbia
11:19and i'm accompanied by my partner mr
11:22robert m scott and my law clerk who's
11:25been helping in this case mr henry
11:27goldman
11:28mr hunt
11:29do you have any statement which you wish
11:31to read to the committee
11:33i do would you read it please
11:40mr chairman
11:41members of the committee
11:44my name is e howard hunt
11:47i am here today to answer questions
11:49bearing on your current investigation
11:52i think it would be better if you took
11:53the microphone and brought it closer or
11:55directed it close to your mouth
11:59i have been informed that it is
12:01permissible for me to make a preliminary
12:03statement
12:04and i want to take advantage of that
12:06opportunity
12:08i will describe my personal background
12:11my relationship to the watergate entry
12:14and events which have befallen me since
12:17that day
12:20i was born in 1918 at hamburg new york
12:24my father was a lawyer and judge
12:27my mother a pianist and housewife
12:30i was educated in the public schools of
12:32florida and new york
12:34and in 1940 graduated from brown
12:37university
12:39six weeks later i volunteered to serve
12:41in the armed forces
12:43while a destroyer officer on the north
12:45atlantic convoy run before pearl harbor
12:48i was injured and medically discharged
12:52later i volunteered and became an air
12:54force intelligence officer
12:56in 1944 i volunteered for the office of
12:59strategic services
13:01the forerunner of the cia
13:03and was sent to china where i was
13:05engaged in partisan warfare
13:08until the end of world war ii
13:11in 1949 i joined the central
13:14intelligence agency from which i retired
13:16on may 1st 1970
13:18having earned two commendations for
13:20outstanding contributions
13:22to operations ordered by the national
13:24security council
13:28during the 21 years i spent with cia i
13:30was engaged in intelligence
13:33covert action
13:34and counter intelligence operations
13:37i was trained in the techniques of
13:39physical and electronic surveillance
13:42photography
13:43document forgery
13:45and surreptitious entries into guarded
13:47premises
13:48for photography and installation of
13:50electronic devices
13:53i participated in and had the
13:55responsibility for a number of such
13:58entries
13:59and i had knowledge of many more
14:02to put it unmistakably
14:05i was an intelligence officer
14:07a spy for the government of the united
14:09states
14:12there have been occasions as one might
14:13expect when covert operations by the
14:16united states or other nations have been
14:18exposed
14:19such episodes have not been uncommon
14:23when such mishaps have occurred it has
14:25been universally the practice for the
14:28operation to be disavowed and covered up
14:32usually this has been done by official
14:34intervention
14:35with law enforcement authorities
14:38in addition
14:39the employing governments have paid
14:41legal defense fees salaries and family
14:44living expenses have been continued
14:48former cia director helms has testified
14:50before this committee
14:52in regard to some aspects of this
14:54practice
14:57after retiring from cia i was employed
14:59by a firm whose officials maintained a
15:01relationship with cia
15:04some months after i joined the firm i
15:06was approached by charles w colson
15:09special counsel to the president
15:11to become a consultant to the executive
15:13office of the president
15:16mr colson told me the white house had
15:18need for the kind of intelligence
15:19background which he knew i possessed
15:22this was the basic reason for my
15:24employment which i understood at the
15:26time was approved by john d ehrlichman
15:29and now understand was approved also by
15:31h.r holderman both assistants to the
15:34president of the united states
15:40from the time i began working at the
15:41white house until june 17 1972 the day
15:45of the second watergate entry
15:48i engaged in essentially the same kind
15:50of work as i had performed for
15:52cia
15:54i became a member of the special invest
15:56investigations unit later known as the
15:58plumbers
15:59which the president had created to
16:01undertake specific national security
16:03tasks
16:04for which the traditional investor
16:06investigative agencies were deemed by
16:09the president to be inadequate
16:11in this connection i was involved in
16:14tracing leaks of highly classified
16:16information
16:19these investigations led to an entry by
16:21the plumbers
16:22into the office of dr lewis fielding
16:25dr daniel ellsberg's psychiatrist
16:28the entry was authorized by mr eagle
16:30croak deputy john ehrlichman
16:33it was considered necessary because of
16:36the belief that dr ellsberg or his
16:38associates were providing classified
16:40information to the soviet union
16:43the operation was carried out with my
16:45assistance
16:46under the direction of g gordon liddy a
16:49lawyer former fbi agent and member of
16:52the plumber's unit
16:55the feeling entry occurred in september
16:571971.
16:59in late november i was told by mr letty
17:02that attorney general john m mitchell
17:05proposed the establishment of a
17:06large-scale intelligence and
17:08counter-intelligence program with mr
17:10liddy as its chief
17:13mr lydia and i designed a budget for
17:15categories of activities to be carried
17:17out in this program which came to be
17:20known as gemstone
17:22it was my understanding that the program
17:24had been approved by messers
17:26jeb stewart magruder a recent white
17:28house aide
17:30and john w dean iii counsel to the
17:32president
17:34later i learned that charles w colson
17:36special counsel of the president had
17:38approved it too
17:42in april 1972 mr liddy told me that we
17:46would be undertaking the watergate
17:47operation as part of the gemstone
17:49program
17:51he said he had information the source of
17:53which i understood to be a government
17:55agency
17:56that the cuban government was supplying
17:58funds to the democratic party campaign
18:01to investigate this report a
18:03surreptitious entry of democratic
18:05national headquarters at the watergate
18:08was made on may 27 1972
18:11and a second entry on june 17th
18:14the second entry was accomplished by a
18:16group two of whose members had been
18:18among those who accomplished the
18:20fielding operation
18:22i was indicted for my part in the
18:23watergate entry
18:26following indictment and prior to my
18:28guilty plea
18:30the court ordered the government to
18:31produce all material taken from my white
18:33house safe and other evidence
18:36some material was produced
18:38but significant material was withheld or
18:40destroyed
18:42because the government had withheld
18:44evidence i knew there was no chance of
18:46proving my defenses
18:48in addition
18:50my wife had been killed in an accident
18:51in december and i was deeply depressed
18:54and anxious to devote myself as quickly
18:57as possible to the welfare of my
18:58children
19:00accordingly i had no alternative but to
19:02concede that i was wrong
19:04and so i pleaded guilty hoping for
19:06merciful treatment by the court
19:09instead
19:10on march 23rd of this year i was
19:13provisionally sentenced to prison for
19:14more than 30 years
19:17the court stated that my cooperation
19:19with a grand jury and with this
19:20committee
19:21would be considered in determining my
19:23final sentence
19:25since being sentenced i have been
19:27questioned under oath on more than 25
19:30occasions
19:31often for many hours sometimes for an
19:34entire day
19:36i have answered thousands of questions
19:38by innumerable investigators
19:40prosecutors
19:41grand jurors and staff members of this
19:44committee
19:46i am informed that such intensive and
19:48repeated interrogation is the most
19:49extraordinary procedure and of dubious
19:52legality
19:54even so
19:55urged by the court to cooperate fully i
19:57have not contested the procedure
20:00in fact i have answered all questions
20:03even those which involve confidential
20:05communications between my attorneys and
20:07myself
20:09after my plea i learned of obstruction
20:12of justice by government officials
20:14i learned of willful destruction and
20:16withholding of evidence and perjury and
20:19subernation of perjury before the
20:21watergate grand jury
20:23this official misconduct deprived me of
20:25evidence which would have supported my
20:27position that a
20:29my participation in the watergate was an
20:31activity authorized within the power of
20:33the president of the united states
20:36and b
20:37if my participation was not so
20:39authorized i justifiably believe that it
20:42was
20:45within the past few days therefore i
20:47have asked the court to permit me to
20:48withdraw my plea of guilty
20:50and to dismiss the proceedings against
20:52me
20:54i believe the charges should be
20:55dismissed because
20:57based on revelations made public since
20:59my plea
21:00evidence is now available to prove that
21:02my participation was not unlawful
21:05and because
21:06to quote judge byrne when he dismissed
21:08charges in the ellsberg case
21:10quote
21:11the totality of the circumstances of
21:14this case
21:15offend a sense of justice
21:17the bizarre events have incurably
21:20infected the prosecution of this case
21:22unquote
21:25it has been alleged that i demanded
21:27clemency and money for my family and for
21:29those who helped in the watergate entry
21:32i did not ask for clemency
21:35mr liddy assured me that in accordance
21:37with established practice in such cases
21:40funds would be made available
21:42i did seek such funds
21:44but i made no threats
21:48now i find myself confined under a
21:50sentence which may keep me in which may
21:52keep me in prison for the rest of my
21:53life
21:55i have been incarcerated for six months
21:58for a time i was in solitary confinement
22:02i have been physically attacked and
22:03robbed in jail
22:05i have suffered a stroke
22:07i have been transferred from place to
22:09place manacled and chained hand and foot
22:12i am isolated from my four motherless
22:14children
22:16the funds provided me and others who
22:18participated in the break-in have long
22:19since been exhausted
22:22i am faced with an enormous financial
22:24burden in defending myself against
22:26criminal charges and numerous civil
22:28suits
22:29beyond all this i am crushed by the
22:31failure of my government to protect me
22:34and my family as in the past it has
22:36always done for its clandestine agents
22:40in conclusion i want to emphasize that
22:43at the time of the watergate operation
22:45i considered my participation as a duty
22:48to my country
22:49i thought it was an unwise operation but
22:52i viewed it as lawful i hope the court
22:54will sustain my view
22:57but whatever that outcome i deeply
22:59regret that i had any part in this
23:01affair
23:02i think it was an unfortunate use of
23:04executive power
23:06and i am sorry that i did not have the
23:08wisdom to withdraw
23:10at the same time i cannot escape feeling
23:13that the country i have served for my
23:14entire life
23:16and which directed me to carry out the
23:17watergate entry
23:19is punishing me for doing the very
23:21things you've trained and directed me to
23:23do
23:24mr chairman
23:26honorable members of the committee
23:28i thank you for your attention and your
23:30patience
23:31i will now undertake to answer your
23:33questions to the best of my ability
23:36uh mr hunt uh your statement
23:39has
23:40i think put sufficiently in the record
23:42introductory material concerning your
23:44background and your career
23:46and your present status under the
23:48sentence of judge rick and therefore i
23:50will not
23:51go into those questions or repeat that
23:55in the early part of 1971 mr hunt
24:01did you discuss with mr coulson the
24:03possibility of your obtaining a position
24:05at the white house
24:07i did
24:10do you have a telephone conversation
24:12with mr colson and who initiated that
24:15telephone conversation
24:18i had numerous telephone conversations
24:20with mr colson uh mr dash i i appreciate
24:23you being a little more specific yes um
24:27on july 2nd 1971 uh one or july first
24:30actually did you receive a telephone
24:33call from mr colts i did
24:36let me show you what reports to be a
24:39transcript of that conversation would
24:42you please look at it
24:52um
25:08i have examined the purported transcript
25:10of the dash
25:13uh does that purport to be or reflect
25:15the conversation you have with mr uh uh
25:17coulson it does yes
25:20now
25:21uh
25:23in that in that conversation mr colson
25:26uh does mr colson question you
25:29concerning your viewpoints and attitudes
25:31concerning the pentagon league papers at
25:34mr ellsberg
25:37yes
25:40and
25:42would you look at page two
25:45uh
25:46and the last line would you read that
25:50for the committee
25:53colson's question
25:54yes
25:59let me ask you this howard this question
26:02do you think with the right resources
26:04employed that this thing could be turned
26:06into a major public case against
26:07ellsberg and co-conspirators question
26:10mark unquote
26:12listen how and how did you respond to
26:14that on the top of the next page
26:17my response was as follows
26:20yes i do but you've established a
26:22qualification here that i don't know
26:24whether it can be met all right would
26:25you continue to read the next few lines
26:28yes
26:30you should have copies of that and i
26:32understand uh we're checking out a full
26:34set of all these exhibits were handed
26:37out and
26:38some of the people next to me have
26:40indicated that that particular
26:41transcript is not there
26:46are we making arrangements yes they're
26:47there
26:48they're being run off now they should be
26:50a part of a set that was given to every
26:52member of the committee and yourself mr
26:54thompson
26:57could we uh
26:58delay momentarily and we get copies i've
27:01had
27:02requests that we'll be able to follow
27:04along i would you
27:06oh i can continue the questioning uh
27:07without reference to that transcript
27:10mr thompson
27:11did you understand
27:12by the way
27:14mr hunt that from that conversation mr
27:17coulson was exploring
27:19the idea with you of a major effort to
27:22discredit mr ellsberg in the press
27:26yes
27:28now
27:29did mr coulson uh
27:31eventually offer you a position in the
27:32white house he did
27:37and i think you've indicated in your
27:38statement that he referred to specific
27:40qualifications can you repeat that what
27:43what did he indicate to you
27:44uh your qualifications led you to that
27:46particular position
27:48what qualifications
27:50the fact that i had an investigative
27:52background of some years
27:55and also that i had been involved in
27:57political action operations
28:02now were you enter interviewed by anyone
28:05besides mr golson
28:08yes
28:09who was that
28:12mr john d erlickman
28:16whose directions mr hunt did you work uh
28:19when you took this position under whose
28:21directions under mr colson's direction
28:25now can you describe your initial
28:26assignment under mr coulson
28:30mr colson instructed me to become the
28:32white house resident expert on the
28:34origins of the of the vietnam war
28:37at the same time i had a collateral a
28:39collateral responsibility for
28:41determining
28:42a certain leaks of highly classified
28:45information which included
28:47the leaks of the pentagon papers
28:50now is it true uh mr hunt that from the
28:53beginning of your employment
28:55mr colson asked you to collect what
28:58could be called derogatory information
29:00about daniel ellsberg
29:04yes
29:06now what what was to be done with this
29:08information when it was collected
29:11my assumption was that
29:13it would be made available by mr colson
29:16or someone in his confidence to
29:18selected members of the media
29:20did you by the way early in your
29:22employment
29:24uh collect the list of certain media
29:26representatives who might be interested
29:27in such material i did
29:33now how did you develop the information
29:35on mr ellsberg following the assignment
29:38you received from mr colson it was
29:40developed through
29:43an intensive study of
29:45reports furnished
29:46by the federal bureau of investigation
29:50were there any other materials that you
29:52used
29:55they were certainly overt materials
30:03i didn't hear your answer there were
30:05overt materials i mean by overt
30:07materials
30:09materials published in the press
30:14now let me be more responsive mr dash i
30:18have a feeling i've left something
30:20hanging here which i don't want to do
30:23the same unit the special investigations
30:26unit that was receiving information
30:28on a frequent basis from the federal
30:30bureau of investigation was also
30:32receiving reports from other government
30:34agencies
30:35such as the department of defense the
30:37department of state
30:38national security agency the immigration
30:41and naturalization service and so on
30:43so that
30:45as part of my reply to your question
30:48i would include
30:50those government agencies as sources of
30:53information on dr ellsberg
30:55i know do you recall mr colson asking
30:58you to interview colonel lucian connie i
31:01do
31:02uh who is uh colonel penny or who was he
31:05the time you interviewed him
31:07at the time uh i interviewed colonel
31:10conan he had just retired from the army
31:12i believe and was in the process of
31:14retiring from the central intelligence
31:17agency or had retired they're from
31:21he and i
31:22he and i had
31:24trained together in the office of
31:26strategic services for service in the
31:28far east
31:29and in fact we had shipped out to china
31:32together and worked in china together
31:33during world war ii i had seen him
31:35infrequently during the intervening
31:37years but we had
31:38maintained a friendly relationship
31:41do you recall when this interview took
31:43place your initial interview with mr
31:45konin
31:48it was on or about the 8th of july of
31:511971.
31:53excuse me mr dash could we could we
31:56confer for just a moment yes
32:05mr chairman
32:06is it possible that
32:08the photographers who are here right
32:10just a few feet from us and clicking
32:12their cameras
32:14could be asked to
32:16remove themselves to some more distant
32:18place so that there would be less
32:20distraction to mr hunt
32:25there are as you can see your honor
32:27maybe a dozen people here who
32:30are doing their jobs undoubtedly but it
32:32is a little distracting
32:44mr hunt do they distract you
32:46they do mr chairman well i don't
32:48have to ask the photographers to
32:51sort of get over the side somewhere
32:53where they won't distract mr hunt
32:59because i have dollars up to this
33:01committee until receiving this hunt's
33:02testimony
33:04thank you mr chairman and i apologize to
33:06the photographers involved
33:16all right now mr hunt
33:20you ready to proceed yes sir yes um
33:23could you just briefly describe that uh
33:25what what occurred i um did you
33:27initially interview uh colonel uh
33:30i did
33:31and did you follow that interview by a
33:33telephone conversation with mr with
33:34colonel kanin on the following day
33:38what were the circumstances that led you
33:39to make a telephone call after the
33:41interview
33:44during my initial interview with
33:47colonel konin
33:49on the
33:508th of july
33:53it developed that
33:54a portion of the tape recording of that
33:56conversation was inaudible
33:58accordingly mr colson suggested that
34:02i telephone him and attempt to
34:04reconstruct the inaudible portion of the
34:08telephone of the recorded conversation
34:10of the prior day
34:12mr colson at the same time
34:15was on another extension
34:18introduced himself to colonel conan as
34:20quote fred charles unquote
34:23and took a minor part in the
34:24conversation that ensued between colonel
34:26conan and myself uh do you have any
34:28explanation as to excuse me
34:43can't see them
34:48and i'm going to have to ask him to
34:50desist
34:51i hate to do that but i want the witness
34:54not to be destroy his attention
34:55distracted
35:01can you explain to the committee uh mr
35:03hunt why mr carlson wanted to be a part
35:06of that conversation and and why he
35:09chose a pseudonym uh as
35:11uh fred charles
35:14well you've asked me two questions uh i
35:17want to ask the first answer the first
35:18one why did you want to be a part of
35:20that conversation he wanted to be a a
35:22part of the conversation so that he
35:24could interpose himself to
35:27uh
35:30a specific question
35:32whatever specific questions might occur
35:34to him
35:35as relevant to the subject of our
35:37conversation in our prior interview
35:40and in effect to hear for himself at
35:42first hand colonel clineen's reply
35:45and why did he use the name fred charles
35:48to avoid being connected in colonel
35:50conan's mind with the white house do you
35:52know what the purpose of mr holson's
35:55asking you to interview mr colonel
35:56canine was yes
35:58could you explain that
36:01i would have to go back
36:03a number of years and
36:06make it a matter of record that colonel
36:07konin had worked for the central
36:09intelligence agency in vietnam
36:12i would say almost interrupted
36:14uninterruptedly since 1954.
36:18colonel konin
36:21had a high degree of intimacy with
36:24senior officials of the several
36:26governments
36:27that had held power in
36:29south vietnam
36:31he was also a military officer
36:34he spoke french he spoke vietnamese to
36:36some extent
36:39he was intimately familiar too and i
36:41believe that this gets to the crux of
36:43your question
36:45with the events leading up to the coup
36:48that resulted ultimately in the deaths
36:51of premier zim and his brother-in-law
36:56uh
36:56and was the was the interview supposed
36:59to be directed towards that coup and the
37:01uh underlying causes of that coup it was
37:04such a assassination of
37:08premier again
37:10it was
37:12do you have
37:14mr han a copy a transcript of that
37:18telephone conversation i think which the
37:19committee has provided you during the
37:21executive session
37:30i do
37:33now
37:35would it be also
37:36fair to say that the
37:38one of the purposes of the
37:40conversation was to
37:42get information from colonel kanine
37:44which might be derogatory uh against
37:48dr ellsberg
37:50one of the purposes yes sir
37:53as a matter of fact would you um
37:56turn to page four
38:08and you see that at the uh towards the
38:11third paragraph on the top of page four
38:13referring to um
38:15h which i take it to be yourself mr hunt
38:18and you say that after a reference to mr
38:21van
38:22that i'm getting very curious about that
38:25guy and what his connections with
38:27ellsberg would have been
38:30and then at the bottom of the page four
38:33you have fc and i take it that that is
38:36fred charles is that correct yes sir and
38:37that was mr carlson yes sir and his
38:40question
38:41for the record there was mr colson who
38:43recorded the telephone call not myself
38:46yes this uh the uh
38:48your statement for the record is that
38:50the
38:51call was recorded by mr colson yes sir
38:54uh do you uh and fred charles being mr
38:56colson stating do you think that
38:58ellsberg or van had any connections
39:02uh with the drug trafficking
39:04so that
39:06would be fair to say that there was at
39:07least an inquiry being made as to
39:09attempt to connecting
39:11mr ellsberg with drug trafficking
39:14yes sir
39:19now there was some
39:21if you turn to page six
39:26the transcript indicates that
39:28you were asking questions of colonel
39:30kanin concerning certain cables
39:33uh state department cables
39:37could you instruct the committee as to
39:39what the purpose of your request
39:41of the colonel keane were being led to
39:45i would never attempt to instruct the
39:46committee mr dash i would attempt to
39:49assist the committee yes sir
40:00mr colson and i were
40:03jointly interested
40:05in the circumstances that led up to the
40:09assassination of the
40:12president and
40:14i believe the premier of
40:17south vietnam
40:18we felt that somewhere there should be
40:21an
40:22instructive record of exchanges between
40:25washington and saigon
40:28we knew also that
40:30there were several channels that could
40:32have been utilized
40:33in addition to the
40:35normal state department
40:37communications with its embassy
40:40there was the normal
40:41cia communication channel with its
40:44station in saigon
40:46there were also so-called back channel
40:49communications facilities for both
40:51organizations
40:52there were communication cable
40:54facilities between what i was what i
40:57really were was directing your attention
40:59to perhaps this question might
41:01uh make it clearer was there an effort
41:04on the part of your questioning of
41:06colonel kunin
41:07to attempt to get some
41:09uh
41:10indication from colonel coming as to
41:11whether or not the kennedy
41:13administration was related in any way to
41:15the coup
41:26what this line of questioning has to do
41:28with the
41:30presidential campaigns of 1972.
41:33it's very interesting
41:34but i don't think it lies within the
41:36purview of the committee the uh
41:38senator gurney i think the following
41:40questions will indicate the line of
41:42questioning which uh
41:45could council simply state to the
41:47community of what he has in mind um i
41:50think mr hunt will answer a um a few
41:52questions uh that will
41:54follow the questions that i'm now asking
41:58which will show an effort by mr colson
42:01to
42:02try to
42:04discredit the
42:06kennedy administration and therefore the
42:07democratic party
42:10during the election
42:11and relating it to the assassination
42:14of
42:15premier diem and and for that purpose
42:18attempting to um
42:20uh bring uh the catholic vote uh away
42:24from the democratic party uh and to show
42:26that a democratic president had a role
42:31in the assassination of a catholic
42:32premier and i i thought this had to do
42:35with
42:37national security leaks that occurred
42:39way back in
42:40july 1971 this conversation i can't see
42:43how that can possibly relate to the
42:46presidential campaign of 1972. well the
42:48effort and i think that uh
42:50mr hunt has already responded to a
42:52question put by me to him that the
42:54purpose was to get the derogatory
42:56information and leak it to the press
42:58during the dependency of the
43:00presidential campaign
43:02mr chairman i think if i'm allowed to
43:04follow up with some questions i think i
43:05can show the connection
43:07mr chairman
43:09yes
43:10mr chairman much of the information
43:12being covered by mr dash and the point
43:14made by mr gurney are involved in i
43:16believe the legal concept of whether or
43:18not the questions themselves should
43:20state a conclusion or whether they
43:22should elicit facts
43:24from which the committee may draw
43:26conclusions
43:28in order to get the thing in some sort
43:30of order i would suggest if there is no
43:32objection and i ask unanimous consent
43:35that
43:36the transcript of the telephone
43:37conversation in its entirety may be
43:39entered in the record at this time
43:41i intended to do that is there any
43:43connection let the record show that
43:45that the transcript of the entire
43:47telephone
43:50conversation
43:52is hereby made a part of the record and
43:54mr marked
43:56appropriately as an exhibit
43:57and mr chairman rather than pursue the
43:59matter any further might i simply
44:01suggest
44:04that the
44:05council for the committee attempt to
44:08establish the factual situation
44:11and if need be
44:12state in narrative form the purpose
44:15those questions are intended to serve
44:18without trying to build a statement of
44:20conclusion on the basis of each question
44:22that after all is the fact-finding
44:24mission of the committee
44:25i don't want to
44:26[Music]
44:28horn swaggle us by making strict rules
44:30of evidence but i do think we'd get
44:32along faster if we could establish the
44:34facts and deal with the conclusions a
44:36little later well mr chairman i think my
44:38questions uh and the answers to the
44:40questions will establish the facts and
44:42will be quite relevant to the resolution
44:45under which this committee is
44:48operating and i
44:49will go to another question
44:51uh which will uh clarify that ms
44:53chairman before we go on does council
44:55understand what i'm saying yes i think i
44:57do cause council agree with it
44:59well i
45:02i would like to ask a line of questions
45:04uh uh senator baker that will
45:07demonstrate the facts that and the
45:09conclusions that the committee can draw
45:11but i will not draw the conclusions the
45:12committee will draw the conclusions yes
45:14well do i understand then the council
45:16agrees with me that the conclusionary
45:18part of this thing is the function of
45:20the committee oh yes but my my statement
45:22concerning conclusions was a response to
45:24a question put by senator gurney as to
45:27what the
45:30relevance of the question was to our
45:32resolution and therefore it was
45:33necessary for me to uh state
45:36uh the inference that was to be drawn
45:38from the uh questions that is relevant
45:40to our resolution otherwise i could not
45:42respond to senator gurney's question mr
45:44chairman i make the request of counsel
45:47that we proceed as promptly as possible
45:49stating the purpose for which the
45:50questions are asked without trying to
45:52establish a conclusion on the basis of
45:54each question
45:55our council of course is free to
45:58accept that recommendation vice chairman
46:00or reject it but i now place that before
46:02council for their consideration well mr
46:05chairman may i also make this
46:08observation
46:09actually all this material we're
46:12talking about here and questioning about
46:15that we've had before the committee in
46:17one form or another
46:19these are amplifications of that
46:22but i really think what we ought to do
46:24to get along with the committee business
46:26is to get to something new
46:28and not to rehash something old
46:31this isn't really a trial we're not
46:33seeking to
46:34uh
46:36corroborate testimony or evidence we've
46:38heard before what we're trying to do is
46:40to get some new facts and i would just
46:42suggest that following
46:44mr baker's suggestion
46:46possibly we could
46:48get this by a very short explanation of
46:50the council plus putting it in the
46:52record and then get on to new
46:54business mr chairman just a moment
46:58uh the evidence we've taken thus far
47:00indicates that mr hunt
47:02had much to do with the matters the
47:04committee is investigating and uh
47:07i think perhaps we make a little bit
47:09more on speed if we just uh question the
47:12witness
47:17mr hunt before you proceed mr dash mr
47:19chairman i agree with you and i hope
47:21very much that we will simply question
47:23the witness and not try to build
47:24statements of conclusion as we go along
47:26i fully intend to draw
47:28inferences and state conclusions of my
47:30own but that will come
47:32on or about february 28th so i hope that
47:34we can sharpen up questions to elicit
47:37facts without developing hypotheses as
47:39we perceive well that that's that's my
47:41intention uh senator baker
47:44and that's what i've been trying to do
47:45now at this uh early time of your
47:48employment at the white house
47:50mr hunt did you have access to state
47:52department cables covering the period of
47:55the dm assassination
47:57i did
47:58uh why did you have access to them
48:01because i had requested such access and
48:03it had been granted me now in the review
48:06of these cables did you notice any
48:08irregularity in sequence
48:10i did
48:12and what period did the gap in sequence
48:14occur
48:15the period immediately leading up to the
48:18assassination of the premier of south
48:21vietnam
48:22did you show the cables
48:24uh to mr coulson and offer an
48:26interpretation of them
48:27i showed him copies of those uh
48:29chronological cables yes sir and what
48:32interpretation if any did you give him
48:34concerning
48:35the cables
48:37i told him that the construction i
48:39placed upon the
48:41absence of certain cables was that they
48:43had been
48:44abstracted from the files
48:47maintained by the department of state in
48:49chronological fashion
48:51and that while there was every reason to
48:53believe on the basis of the accumulated
48:55evidence of the cable documentation
48:58that the kennedy administration was
49:01implicitly if not explicitly
49:04responsible for the assassination of zim
49:06and his brother-in-law
49:08that there was no hard evidence such as
49:11a cable emanating from the white house
49:13or a reply
49:14coming from saigon the saigon embassy
49:17what was mr coulson's reaction to your
49:20your statement and the showing of the
49:22cables to him
49:24did he agree that the cables uh were
49:27sufficient evidence to show any
49:28relationship of the kennedy
49:29administration
49:30and the assassination he did
49:33did he ask you to do anything he
49:35suggested i might be able to improve
49:37upon the record and uh what did you
49:40understand him to mean when he said to
49:42improve upon the record to
49:44create to fabricate
49:47cables that could substitute for the
49:49missing chronological cables did you in
49:51fact
49:52fabricate uh cables for the purpose of
49:55indicating the relationship of the
49:57kennedy administration and the
49:59assassination at the end i did
50:01and did you show these fabricated cables
50:03mr carlson i did
50:05what was his um
50:07response to
50:08the fabricated cables
50:10he indicated to me that he would be
50:13probably getting in touch with a member
50:15of the media
50:17of the press to
50:20to whom he would show the cables
50:23and
50:25were you in fact put in touch with a
50:27member of the media i was and who was
50:29that
50:30mr william lambert of life magazine
50:32and what was your instructions
50:34concerning
50:35uh the relationship that you were to
50:36have with mr lambert
50:38to show mr lambert the
50:41cables in the context of the other
50:43legitimate cables that i had acquired
50:45from the department of state
50:48to permit mr lambert to hand copy the
50:51texts of the fabricated cables
50:54but i having uh
50:56warned mr colson previously that the
50:59cables were
51:00not technically
51:02capable of withstanding
51:04professional scrutiny that mr lambert
51:07was not to be allowed to remove the
51:10cables
51:11for photocopying purposes
51:13uh did mr lambert uh use the information
51:17not to my knowledge
51:19now
51:19are you aware uh from your conversations
51:22with mr colson and the use of these
51:24cables
51:26any strategy that mr colson had with
51:27regard to catholic voters
51:34yes sir could you describe that more
51:37fully
51:38i believe it was desired uh
51:40by mr white by mr colson or at least
51:44some of his colleagues to demonstrate
51:46that
51:47a catholic united states administration
51:49had in fact
51:51conspired in the assassination of
51:54catholic catholic chief of state
51:57in another country now did you show the
51:59fabricated cables to colonel kanin
52:01i did
52:03under what circumstances
52:05uh prior to colonel conan's appearance
52:09on a
52:12i believe nbc
52:14tv network special concerning
52:16vietnam and did
52:19colonel kanin use any of this
52:21information from the fabricated cables
52:23in his
52:24program
52:30i would have to answer in these terms mr
52:32dash that i had shown him the
52:35fabricated cables in the broader context
52:37of the overall cables
52:39legitimate cables that he was then
52:42interrogated by a camera and interview
52:45crew and that i believe he made
52:48if not specific reference
52:50to the cables i had shown him at least
52:52they reinforced his own belief that
52:54there had been direct complicity by the
52:56kennedy administration
52:58in the uh events leading up to the
53:01assassination of the south vietnamese
53:02premiere
53:04all right now as a part of mr coulson's
53:06plan to publicly discredit mr ellsberg
53:10did you prepare a derogatory article on
53:12mr leonard boudin ellsberg's lawyer i
53:15did
53:16and you show this to mr colston
53:18i did and what was his suggestion when
53:21you showed it to him
53:22he indicated that he would be
53:26passing the information to a member of
53:28the press the the article that i had
53:30prepared
53:31and did in fact um uh the
53:34material that appeared in that article
53:36uh uh was it reflected in any news story
53:39that you were aware of yes uh can you
53:42state to the committee what particular
53:44news story
53:48it was an article authored by mr jerry
53:50terhorst who represented one of the
53:53detroit newspapers in washington
53:57it formed the second half of a story
53:59that mr horst was
54:01publishing on
54:03ellsberg and ellsberg's defense
54:06now did you subsequently in a memorandum
54:08to mr colson suggests the matter in
54:11which additional derogatory information
54:13might be developed
54:14on ellsberg and how the
54:16file
54:17a file might be constructed to destroy
54:19his public image and credibility
54:22yes do you have a copy that the
54:25committee
54:27provided you an executive session
54:30of a memorandum
54:32from you to mr colson dated july 28
54:351971.
54:38entitled neutralization of mr ellsberg
54:41i do
54:48now you'll notice
54:51in that memorandum uh mr mr han
54:56that
54:56on item i think number seven
55:00there is a reference
55:02to
55:05obtain ellsberg's files
55:07from a psychiatrist analyst
55:09do you see that reference as one of the
55:11items
55:12i do
55:14did you at the time you made that
55:15recommendation
55:16uh contemplate that it might be
55:18necessary to engage in a covert entry or
55:21break-in
55:24i did
55:29also
55:30there is a reference
55:33uh that a psychological assessment from
55:35the cia be uh requested of mr ellsberg
55:40is that correct yes sir
55:44what was the purpose of the
55:46psychological assessment mr hunt
55:51one of the problems the
55:53administration
55:55was having with the alzberg indictment
55:59i believe i'm probably being
56:00presumptuous in
56:02using so large a frame of reference
56:06was that nobody really could comprehend
56:08why ellsberg had done what he did which
56:10was to
56:12take possession of and publicize
56:16documents of the highest
56:19classification and sensitivity
56:23we knew that some had been made
56:25available to the soviet union by one
56:28means or another
56:30dr ellsberg's
56:33personally stated justification for
56:34having performed these acts
56:37was not comprehensible to any of us in
56:39the white house who were
56:41charged with determining his motivation
56:43and the manner of the leaks
56:46i believe that it was my initial
56:48recommendation that we attempt to probe
56:51or plumb dr ellsberg's mind
56:54by means of a covert psychological
56:56assessment we had no idea
57:00what type of an animal we were dealing
57:02with
57:02uh would it also be true mr hunt
57:05that information that might
57:07be obtained from the either the profile
57:10or psychiatric materials from
57:13his analyst
57:14might be used to discredit uh
57:16mr ellsberg
57:18might be used yes sir and if received
57:20would that also be
57:22presented to the press media
57:27i would have to qualify my reply mr dash
57:30by saying that it would depend upon the
57:31nature of the items that were discovered
57:34yes
57:35now
57:37uh do you know whether or not your
57:39recommendation uh on your memorandum on
57:41the neutralization of mr ellsberg
57:44was implemented
57:49in terms of each item sir yeah in terms
57:51of some of these items
57:55well i know that uh all over press
57:58material on ellsberg
58:00will continue to be collected
58:03a request was levied on the central
58:06intelligence agency for a covert
58:08psychological assessment dr ellsberg
58:14i believe that the central intelligence
58:16agency the fbi and perhaps the
58:19counterintelligence corps were requested
58:22to provide
58:23the plumbers group of their full
58:24holdings on ellsberg
58:31and in due course
58:33we did
58:35enter the office of dr feeling who had
58:37been dr ellsberg's psychiatrist to
58:38determine if there were any psychiatric
58:40notes
58:42now um
58:49mr chairman on this particular
58:51memorandum july 28 1971
58:54uh from mr hans mr colson
58:57the subject neutralization of ellsberg
59:00uh i like to have identified for the
59:02record and admitted evidence
59:05it will be appropriately marked as
59:06exhibited and received in evidence as
59:08such
59:20now i think you testified in your
59:22statement you've indicated that you
59:23indeed did engage in a break-in was it
59:26subsequently determined that an attempt
59:28should be made to obtain dr ellsberg's
59:30medical files from the psychiatrist's
59:32office
59:33yes sir
59:34um
59:38you have the a memorandum
59:40which the committee provided you
59:42did august 27
59:441971
59:46from mr ehrlichman to charles colton the
59:49colson
59:50with the subject hunt liddy special
59:52project number one
59:55i have such a memorandum
59:59august 27th
1:00:01i think this was previously put in the
1:00:02record by the committee
1:00:04attached to during mr ellison's
1:00:06testimony
1:00:10the water's coming
1:00:26do you have a copy that memorandum
1:00:29i beg your pardon you have a copy of
1:00:31that miranda
1:00:32yes sir i do
1:00:36let me just read the memorandum it's
1:00:37brief
1:00:39on the this is from mr erdogan mr colson
1:00:42on the assumption that the proposed
1:00:44undertaking by hunt and lydia
1:00:46would be carried out and would be
1:00:48successful
1:00:49i would appreciate receiving from you by
1:00:51next wednesday a game plan as to how and
1:00:54when you believe the materials should be
1:00:56used
1:00:57that's referring to hunt liddy special
1:00:59project number one
1:01:01mr hunt
1:01:03uh what
1:01:04from your understanding at the on the
1:01:06date of august 27 1971 with hunt and
1:01:09lydia special project number 1d
1:01:12i would assume to be the feeling entry
1:01:14based on the fact that mr liddy and i as
1:01:16of that date would just have returned
1:01:18from our initial reconnaissance of dr
1:01:20fielding's professional premises in
1:01:23beverly hills
1:01:26and would and would have made and
1:01:28submitted a feasibility study and that
1:01:30the reference there for hunt and lady
1:01:32special project number one uh would
1:01:34refer to the proposed uh covert entry of
1:01:38dr fielding's office for the psychiatric
1:01:41file yes
1:01:48now in fact
1:01:50you and mr lady did go to los angeles to
1:01:52determine whether a covert entry was
1:01:53feasible and you concluded that it was
1:01:55did you not yes and in fact uh you and
1:01:58mr liddy and three cuban americans mr
1:02:01barker mr martinez and mr diego di diego
1:02:04did break into dr fielding's office over
1:02:07the labor day weekend in 1971. that's
1:02:10true
1:02:12with one limitation that neither mr lady
1:02:14or i were ever in the premises of dr
1:02:16feeling
1:02:18and if there are no files of dr
1:02:21ellsberger family is that true none were
1:02:22found no sir
1:02:24now you recruited mr barker mr martinez
1:02:27and mr diego is that true
1:02:29yes sir uh well
1:02:31more specifically
1:02:32i obtained mr barker's cooperation and
1:02:35he obtained the cooperation of mrs
1:02:38martinez and de diego what was your
1:02:40prior relationship with mr barker mr
1:02:43barker had assisted me during the
1:02:46cia sponsored effort
1:02:49which came to be known as the bay of
1:02:50pigs operation
1:02:54did you take photos of the inside of dr
1:02:57fielding's office
1:02:58to show the forced open
1:03:01no sir
1:03:03did somebody of the group take photos
1:03:05yes sir right
1:03:07now
1:03:08to whom were these photos shown
1:03:12they were shown
1:03:13within room 16 to mrs krogan young
1:03:17now when you say room 16 mr krogan young
1:03:19by the time
1:03:20this program developed which led up to
1:03:23the covert entry of dr fielding's office
1:03:26you had begun
1:03:27to work
1:03:28with uh mr krogh mr yang and mr liddy
1:03:31was not that so yeah sure how did that
1:03:33occur because you originally i think
1:03:35testified
1:03:36that you were assigned to work for mr
1:03:38colson how did the transfer of
1:03:41relationship and assignment take place
1:03:43through a process resembling osmosis
1:03:46almost
1:03:48i
1:03:49had discovered early in my
1:03:51reading of the overt materials relating
1:03:53to the publication of the pentagon
1:03:55papers
1:03:56my research is into dr ellsberg's
1:03:58background that considerably more
1:03:59documentation would be necessary for my
1:04:02purposes
1:04:03i
1:04:04was so advised or informed of mr colson
1:04:08and he told me that these
1:04:10materials added to say classified
1:04:12materials bearing on my researches were
1:04:15to be found in room 16 and i should
1:04:17check with mr liddy for that purpose
1:04:20i found that the holdings
1:04:22that were
1:04:24in room 16 were quite extensive and i
1:04:27began as a matter of course and custom
1:04:29to go there every day to acquaint myself
1:04:33with
1:04:33additional information as it flowed into
1:04:36room 16 from the various government
1:04:38agencies that were making contributions
1:04:40so it was that i spent less and less
1:04:42time in
1:04:43office 33 338 which had been assigned me
1:04:47by mr colson and a great deal more time
1:04:50in room 16 which
1:04:52became known as the plumber's unit the
1:04:54special investigations unit
1:04:56and by the time you were you had filed
1:04:58your memorandum
1:05:00on neutralization of mr of um uh
1:05:03mr ellsberg uh you at this time were
1:05:06working with
1:05:07the so-called plumbers
1:05:09almost entirely yes sir
1:05:12now
1:05:13uh did you attempt to show the
1:05:15photographs that were taken during the
1:05:18fielding break-in to mr colson i did
1:05:21and uh
1:05:22what occurred when you did
1:05:25uh
1:05:26i told mr colson uh
1:05:29i would like to try to put a date on
1:05:30this uh mr davis
1:05:33do you have a date for that yes i do
1:05:44while howard hunt checks his notes for
1:05:46exact dates of plumber's activities
1:05:48we're going to take a short break public
1:05:50television coverage of the senate
1:05:51watergate hearings will continue after a
1:05:53pause for station identification
1:05:55unabridged coverage of these hearings is
1:05:57being broadcast as a public service by
1:05:59your local public television station
1:06:02this is pbs the public broadcasting
1:06:05service then npact continues its
1:06:07coverage of hearings by the senate
1:06:09select committee on presidential
1:06:10campaign activities here again impact
1:06:13correspondent jim lehrer
1:06:16as we go back to the hearings now mr
1:06:18hunt is discussing his report following
1:06:20the break-in at the office of daniel
1:06:22ellsberg psychiatrist
1:06:25on labor day weekend 1971 that is to say
1:06:28the third of september
1:06:31the entry in dr fielding's office was
1:06:34accomplished
1:06:36the following tuesday that is to say the
1:06:38first working day after labor day
1:06:41was the morning
1:06:43on which i attempted to show
1:06:45mr colson the
1:06:47photo polaroid photographs that have
1:06:49been taken by team members of the
1:06:51violated cabinets and dr feelings
1:06:54premises
1:06:56how did he react to attempting to show
1:06:58him the photograph he declined to look
1:07:00at what i had in my hand continued
1:07:02striding into his office without
1:07:04breaking his pace
1:07:05and said i don't want to hear anything
1:07:07about it
1:07:10now were you assigned by mr colson to
1:07:12interview a mister clifton demon of
1:07:14providence
1:07:17being told by mr
1:07:19being told by
1:07:20or
1:07:21by mr colson or
1:07:23anybody else that mr dumont allegedly
1:07:26had derogatory information on the
1:07:27kennedy family
1:07:29yes
1:07:32when was this
1:07:37i would say approximately late july of
1:07:41uh now it's true uh that um you
1:07:44undertook to um
1:07:46had this interview with mr vermont uh
1:07:49disguised
1:07:51yes sir and how did you
1:07:53obtain the materials for the disguise
1:07:57through the central intelligence agency
1:08:00and uh could you just very briefly
1:08:02uh tell the committee how you were able
1:08:04to obtain materials that would uh permit
1:08:07you to disguise yourself from the
1:08:08central intelligence agency
1:08:13shortly after my employment began at the
1:08:15white house i reported to mr colson
1:08:18that i had been given credible
1:08:19information to the effect that a mr
1:08:22clifton demat
1:08:23was believed to have information
1:08:26reflecting unfavorably upon certain
1:08:29members of the kennedy political
1:08:32grouping
1:08:33this having been based on the experience
1:08:36of
1:08:37an individual named clifton damat
1:08:40who had
1:08:41been an unofficial part of the kennedy
1:08:43entourage during the
1:08:44i believe 1960
1:08:47election
1:08:50mr colson uh felt that the lead ought to
1:08:53be followed up
1:08:55and asked me whether i could undertake
1:08:57to elicit
1:08:58information from him during an interview
1:09:01with the proviso
1:09:03that
1:09:05my connection with the white house not
1:09:07be revealed
1:09:09i said that this would
1:09:11require my
1:09:13having some sort of alias or false
1:09:15documentation
1:09:16and perhaps even physical disguise
1:09:19mr colson
1:09:21asked me
1:09:22whether or not i could provide it
1:09:24i said i could not and i in turn asked
1:09:26him whether or not
1:09:27such a disguise
1:09:29documentation might be available through
1:09:32either the
1:09:33secret service or the
1:09:35fbi representatives at the white house
1:09:38uh mr coulson indicated that uh
1:09:41the matter was too sensitive to involve
1:09:44either
1:09:44the secret service or the fbi and he
1:09:47inquired whether
1:09:49perhaps on a man-to-man a personal basis
1:09:51i might not be able to acquire
1:09:54documentation and disguise equipment
1:09:56from
1:09:57former associates at the
1:09:59central intelligence agency
1:10:01i told him that this was out of the
1:10:02question
1:10:04mr colson
1:10:05then
1:10:07postulated
1:10:09the thought or the question rather
1:10:12what would be required to obtain the
1:10:14cooperation of cia
1:10:16i said that it had been my past
1:10:18experience that a call from the white
1:10:19house brought almost instant response
1:10:22from the central intelligence agency mr
1:10:24colson said to me
1:10:25uh very well i'll look into it and get
1:10:28back to you all right then uh when was
1:10:31uh
1:10:32how were you informed and in what way
1:10:34were you notified that uh you could then
1:10:36go make contact with the cia for the
1:10:38disguise the precise details at this
1:10:41point
1:10:44entirely clear
1:10:47the crux of the matter is that i did
1:10:49receive at one point a call from mr carl
1:10:52wagner who was the principal of personal
1:10:54assistant to general robert cushman
1:10:57of the marine corps who was then the
1:11:00deputy director of the central
1:11:01intelligence agency
1:11:03setting up an appointment for me with
1:11:04general cushman at cia headquarters and
1:11:07you did obtain a disguise materials i
1:11:09did and so disguised you did
1:11:12interview uh mr demonic yes sir um what
1:11:15was the outcome of that interview mr
1:11:17hunt it was determined by both mr colson
1:11:20and myself that the information was
1:11:22useless
1:11:24now the latter part of 1971 mr hunt did
1:11:27you become aware of the fact
1:11:29that mr liddy was to become counsel for
1:11:31the committee for the reelection of the
1:11:32president i did
1:11:35and did mr liddy recruit you to help
1:11:38him develop a large-scale covert
1:11:40political intelligence plan for the
1:11:42committee to re-elect the president
1:11:44yes
1:11:45uh
1:11:46when was
1:11:48excuse me
1:12:07mr dash could i trouble you to
1:12:09repeat the question
1:12:11uh uh having to do with recruitment
1:12:14what
1:12:15the
1:12:16question the question that he just
1:12:19uh answered before the last question he
1:12:22would like repeat it please
1:12:24perhaps the
1:12:25reporter can repeat the question
1:12:28um
1:12:44i would like to modify that response if
1:12:45i might mr dash
1:12:48in late november 1971
1:12:52mr liddy approached me
1:12:54saying that
1:12:56the attorney general of the united
1:12:58states mr john mitchell required
1:13:01the establishment of a large-scale
1:13:03intelligence and counterintelligence
1:13:04program that he mr liddy was about to
1:13:08become its chief
1:13:09and mr liddy would like to assure
1:13:12himself of my cooperation
1:13:15was this the plan that came uh later be
1:13:18known as gemstone yes sir
1:13:21and i think
1:13:23who did you understand uh from the
1:13:25conversation mr liddy
1:13:27actually were directing the development
1:13:29of this political intelligence plan
1:13:33my understanding was as follows
1:13:36that the
1:13:37plan had been proposed and or required
1:13:40by the attorney general of the united
1:13:41states mr mitchell
1:13:43that
1:13:44messers john w dean iii then counsel to
1:13:47the president of the united states
1:13:49and mr jeb stewart magruder a recent
1:13:52white house aide were those who were
1:13:54active in its formulation
1:13:57now did you in fact help mr liddy
1:13:59prepare the detailed plan and budget
1:14:02of this plan
1:14:04i did with the exception of that portion
1:14:06of the plan which
1:14:07dealt with electronic surveillance
1:14:13now prior to the presentation of the
1:14:16plan and mr hunt the committee has al
1:14:18already had ample
1:14:20testimony concerning presentation of
1:14:23this particular plan
1:14:24uh to admit to attorney general former
1:14:26attorney general mitchell mr dean
1:14:28and mr magruder by mr liddy on january
1:14:3127 1972 and february 4 1972. now prior
1:14:36to that presentation ella
1:14:38prior to the january 27 presentation
1:14:41did you have a discussion with mr colson
1:14:44concerning
1:14:45that you would be giving fewer hours
1:14:49to the white house work because of the
1:14:51time that you would have to spend with
1:14:52mr liddy
1:14:54i told mr colson that uh because of the
1:14:58uh increased
1:15:00amount of time i was spending with mr
1:15:02liddy that i would be able to
1:15:04give far less time to mr colson
1:15:06than i had been in the past and uh what
1:15:09if anything mr colson say to you about
1:15:11that
1:15:12he said that he understood this
1:15:14and did he indicate by any words uh
1:15:17or statement
1:15:19uh that he understood the
1:15:21plan that you were working with uh mr
1:15:23lydion yes uh could you
1:15:27give us a little fuller explanation of
1:15:29that
1:15:33on one occasion and it must have been in
1:15:36in conjunction with this particular
1:15:37interview
1:15:39mr coulson told me that he had in fact
1:15:44supplied mr mitchell with my bona fides
1:15:48he further indicated that
1:15:50he was aware of the overall intelligence
1:15:53plan
1:15:54his only problem with it was that he
1:15:56would much prefer to see me heading it
1:15:59rather than mr lenny
1:16:01i told him that
1:16:03the situation was fine as far as i was
1:16:05concerned that
1:16:07i had cooperated with mr liddy before we
1:16:10got along well
1:16:12i had already a full-time job with the
1:16:15public relations firm and was not
1:16:17seeking
1:16:18full-time employment such as mr leddy
1:16:21had
1:16:22and is it true that this conversation
1:16:24took place in january prior to the
1:16:26january 27 meeting with with former
1:16:29attorney general mitchell
1:16:32who's meeting with uh you're meeting
1:16:34with mr mr carlson
1:16:37yes sir but who met with mr mitchell no
1:16:39i said did this meeting that you had
1:16:41with mr colson take place in january
1:16:44prior to the january 27 presentation by
1:16:47mr lydia the plan
1:16:49to attorney general uh mitchell to the
1:16:51best of my recollection it did and you
1:16:53know where
1:16:54the conversation with mr coulson took
1:16:56place
1:16:58between myself and mr colson in mr
1:17:00colson's office
1:17:02now did you tell mr colson at that time
1:17:05that you planned to recruit and use
1:17:08members of the same cuban-american
1:17:09community that had worked with you in
1:17:11the
1:17:12ellsberg break-in
1:17:18either on that or another occasion with
1:17:20your dash
1:17:21and uh mr colson was aware was he not of
1:17:25the role you and mr liddy played in the
1:17:27break in the dr fielding's office
1:17:30i was not so aware at the time i've come
1:17:33to understand that subsequently
1:17:37now at the time
1:17:39that
1:17:40mr colson
1:17:41was indicating to you that he was aware
1:17:43of a an intelligence plan that mr liddy
1:17:45was working on
1:17:47uh was there any other intelligence plan
1:17:49besides the gemstone plan that mr lydia
1:17:51was working on no
1:17:53and was it your impression therefore
1:17:55that mr golson was speaking of the
1:17:58so-called gemstone plan yes
1:18:01now
1:18:02mr hunt mr colson has submitted this
1:18:04committee
1:18:05an affidavit
1:18:08do you have a copy of that the committee
1:18:10i think has given you a copy
1:18:34the affidavit
1:18:36signed by you
1:18:38dated april 5 1973
1:18:41uh i think it's brief enough to read
1:18:44uh as i e howard hunt having been duly
1:18:47sworn to hereby depose and state as
1:18:49follows
1:18:50i understand that allegations and
1:18:52statements have been made to the effect
1:18:53that charles coulson former council to
1:18:55the president had prior knowledge or in
1:18:58some way was involved in or participated
1:19:00in the break-in of the democratic
1:19:02national committee headquarters at the
1:19:03war gate hotel on june 17
1:19:061972. i never had any time discussed
1:19:09with mr colson
1:19:11any plans with respect to this incident
1:19:14i have no knowledge whatever
1:19:16personal or otherwise that mr coulson
1:19:18had any prior knowledge whatever of this
1:19:20incident to my knowledge no one else
1:19:22ever discussed this matter with him
1:19:24prior to june 17 1972. uh did you
1:19:29sign this affidavit i did what were the
1:19:31circumstances which led you to sign this
1:19:34affidavit
1:19:37this affidavit was
1:19:39passed to me
1:19:41in the federal courthouse
1:19:42by my attorney my then attorney mr
1:19:45william old bittman
1:19:46prior to an appearance of mine before
1:19:49the federal grand jury
1:19:51to the best of my recollection mr betman
1:19:53indicated to me that he had received the
1:19:55affidavit and draft form
1:19:57from mr colson's office
1:20:00and wondered if there would be any
1:20:02problem with my part about signing it
1:20:05i
1:20:06indicated that i had no difficulty with
1:20:08it whatever
1:20:09and did in fact sign the affidavit all
1:20:12right now
1:20:13mr hahn does this affidavit that you
1:20:15sign
1:20:16negate the testimony just given that mr
1:20:19colson did inform you in january 72 that
1:20:22he was aware of what had been come to be
1:20:24known as the gemstone plan does it
1:20:25negate it does it negate it no sir and
1:20:28could you explain why it does not
1:20:30because the information that mr colson
1:20:33possessed in january and that i
1:20:35possessed in january referred only to
1:20:39an overall intelligence program it had
1:20:41nothing to do with a specific
1:20:43break-in at the democratic national
1:20:46headquarters
1:20:47and this particular affidavit deals only
1:20:49with mr colson's knowledge of the
1:20:51specific break-in at the watergate yes
1:20:53sir mr chairman i'd like to enter
1:20:56or have the affidavit
1:20:58identified and as an exhibit of the
1:21:00committee and admitted evidence
1:21:04the affidavit will be appropriately
1:21:06numbered and
1:21:07received in evidence
1:21:08as an exhibit
1:21:10now
1:21:11mr han
1:21:13it not true
1:21:15that you only recently told the staff of
1:21:18this committee an executive session
1:21:21specifically within the last week or two
1:21:23of the fact of mr coulson's knowledge of
1:21:25the so-called gemstone plan in january
1:21:2872.
1:21:32may i consult with council
1:21:36members
1:21:45is
1:22:11i think i would appreciate having mr
1:22:14repeat the question
1:22:20uh is it not true that you only recently
1:22:23told the staff of this community
1:22:24executive session
1:22:26specifically within the last week or two
1:22:28of the fact that mr polson's knowledge
1:22:30of the so-called gemstone break-in
1:22:33in january i don't usually break the
1:22:35gemstone plant
1:22:37in january 1972.
1:22:45the answer is yesterday
1:22:47the answer is a difficult question
1:22:55um
1:23:13in the interest of accuracy uh
1:23:15mr dash
1:23:17uh let me say or repeat testimony i have
1:23:21given in the executive session
1:23:23to the effect that
1:23:25on an occasion when i introduced mr
1:23:28liddy
1:23:29and mr coulson for the first time
1:23:31following that particular meeting mr
1:23:34cole's mr liddy said to me as we left mr
1:23:37colson's office i believe i may have
1:23:38done us some good which was indicative
1:23:41to me
1:23:42uh that he they had been discussing the
1:23:44gemstone plan
1:23:48however only
1:23:50recently and i have said that from the
1:23:52beginning of the interrogations
1:23:55however
1:23:56i have
1:23:58within recent weeks let us say
1:24:02added to my testimony
1:24:04to
1:24:08to state in effect
1:24:11to enable me to provide a positive
1:24:13response to the question you just posed
1:24:15me
1:24:19isn't that true
1:24:20mr hunt that on may 14 1973
1:24:25in
1:24:26page 2
1:24:29323 of the transcript
1:24:32uh that in a in specific questions that
1:24:35i put to you
1:24:37uh whether or not
1:24:40any uh other person than the persons who
1:24:43had been involved in the discussion mr
1:24:45liddy
1:24:46and a named person such as mr mitchell
1:24:48mr dean mr magruder
1:24:51knew about the
1:24:52overall intelligence plan
1:24:54let me just
1:24:56quote your statement on page 323
1:24:59uh
1:25:00and my question
1:25:02my question during that time
1:25:04did you ever indicate in the presence of
1:25:06mr mccord
1:25:07that these plans would have that you
1:25:10were in touch with other persons
1:25:11yourself
1:25:12in the white house mr colson or anybody
1:25:15else concerning these plans
1:25:17mr hunt
1:25:19no sir i would not have done that
1:25:20because it was true the best of my
1:25:23knowledge mr colson had no specific
1:25:25knowledge he had no knowledge of my
1:25:27dealings with mr liddy for me
1:25:30now that mr colson had collateral
1:25:31knowledge
1:25:32of awareness he did not confide in mid
1:25:35and what i'm asking
1:25:37mr lydia is is not true that
1:25:39on may 14th 1973
1:25:42that your statement was that mr colson
1:25:44did not to your knowledge have any
1:25:46awareness of an overall intelligence
1:25:48plan
1:25:50excuse me mr chairman i'd detect a
1:25:53little bit of confusion if i could have
1:25:55just have one minute to talk to mr hunt
1:25:57i think it might expedite this
1:26:19can we reduce this to just
1:27:00uh
1:27:02i think i have a notion mr dash as to
1:27:04the line of questionings you are about
1:27:06to pursue
1:27:08in order to refresh mr hunt's
1:27:10recollection as to the testimony he
1:27:12recently gave an executive session
1:27:14and
1:27:15i it was
1:27:17it was clear to me
1:27:19before you undertook this last question
1:27:21that he didn't quite clearly understand
1:27:23what you were driving at and he and i
1:27:25have now discussed that briefly
1:27:28and i think perhaps if you will
1:27:31ask your first question
1:27:33or perhaps i could ask it he could
1:27:35quickly answer and we could go on to
1:27:37something else i think what you were
1:27:39asking him is whether in the past few
1:27:41weeks he had added to his
1:27:44explanation of his conversations with mr
1:27:48colson
1:27:49the fact
1:27:50that in january of 1972
1:27:53there was a conversation between him and
1:27:55mr colson which indicated that mr colson
1:27:59had knowledge of the gemstone program
1:28:01yes and uh i think he can answer that
1:28:03quickly right and the question was that
1:28:05um that i put to you is isn't this the
1:28:08first time you've told the committee
1:28:09that
1:28:11yes sir
1:28:12uh how uh
1:28:14have you told any prior to telling the
1:28:16committee that have you
1:28:18informed any other investigative body
1:28:20including the grand jury
1:28:22that is presently sitting uh about that
1:28:25information no sir
1:28:28can you explain
1:28:29uh to the committee uh mr hunt
1:28:33what appears to be contradictory
1:28:34testimony in the executive session and
1:28:37now before this committee as to mr
1:28:39coulson's prior knowledge of this
1:28:41general plan i can attempt to mr dash
1:28:44would you please do that yes it derived
1:28:46as a result of repeated questioning by
1:28:51the
1:28:51committee staff
1:28:53concerning events which transpired
1:28:56on the occasion of my having introduced
1:28:58mr lydia mr colson for the first time
1:29:04a theory of
1:29:07mr colson's perceptions of the meeting
1:29:09was entered into and developed which
1:29:11brought back to my mind for the first
1:29:13time
1:29:14the prior conversation that i had held
1:29:17in january with mr colson
1:29:20and
1:29:23mr dash may i ask that the record be
1:29:26clear
1:29:27that there is no contradiction between
1:29:30mr hunt's testimony on this point today
1:29:34as against his testimony in the
1:29:36executive session i think that might
1:29:38have been in inferred
1:29:41question the record is clear on that i
1:29:43uh again
1:29:44i made it very clear that mr hunt is
1:29:46testifying today
1:29:48consistently with what he's told the
1:29:50committee within an executive session
1:29:52the last week or two
1:29:54and i was pointing out
1:29:56uh in the interest of fairness
1:29:58that mr hunt had not given us this
1:30:00testimony in earlier occasions and miss
1:30:02don has just given us an explanation
1:30:04of why he had not
1:30:06uh i would like to follow that up mr
1:30:08hunt and ask you
1:30:10whether or not
1:30:11your motion that is now pending in the
1:30:14court for
1:30:16the
1:30:18removal of your plea of guilty your
1:30:19withdrawal of your plea of guilty
1:30:22in which you've indicated in the motion
1:30:24that you believe that mr colson approved
1:30:26the
1:30:27overall plan
1:30:28has any relevance to your
1:30:30recent testimony before the executive
1:30:33session or before this committee
1:30:39i'm a little troubled mr dash by your
1:30:42use of the word relevance
1:30:46you might want to ask me that i'll put
1:30:48the question more directly mr hahn
1:30:51uh are you now
1:30:53giving us your
1:30:55best recollection of what truthfully
1:30:56transpired uh in january as opposed to
1:31:00what you were
1:31:02telling us earlier during the period of
1:31:04interrogation yes
1:31:09about 10 minutes ago is the burden
1:31:12is the burden of the query inquiry
1:31:15that
1:31:16mr hunt is now giving us information for
1:31:19the first time and only recently gave it
1:31:22to us in executive session
1:31:24as distinguished from his earlier
1:31:25appearances in executive session by
1:31:27reason of or connected with the fact
1:31:30that he is attempting to change his plea
1:31:31from guilty to not guilty yes and um
1:31:35now is there any implication in
1:31:37council's question that the two are
1:31:38inconsistent but that rather this is
1:31:40additional information that may have
1:31:42bearing on the uh uh application of mr
1:31:46hunter so the last question that i put
1:31:47to mr haunt and perhaps you can answer
1:31:49it
1:31:50is there is there any motivation on your
1:31:53part
1:31:54to give us this more recent testimony
1:31:57concerning mr polson's
1:31:59awareness of the plan
1:32:01connected in any way to your motion
1:32:03to enjoy your plea guilty no sir and if
1:32:05i may consult with counsel there's
1:32:07another point i would like to make
1:32:09pertinent to this
1:32:32i would like to add mr dash that my
1:32:34legal position uh vis-a-vis the most
1:32:36does not depend upon mr colson's
1:32:39knowledge and non-knowledge
1:32:40at that time
1:32:42all right now mr han after the february
1:32:444th
1:32:45meeting um that mr liddy had with the
1:32:47former attorney general
1:32:49in which uh there was another turn down
1:32:52on the so-called diddy plan
1:32:54did mr liddy ask you to introduce him to
1:32:56mr colson
1:32:57he did
1:32:58and what reasons did he give you for
1:33:00this
1:33:02he indicated to me that
1:33:07first of all he admired chuck colson as
1:33:09a man who got things done
1:33:12he expressed his own desire for a
1:33:16substantial position in the forthcoming
1:33:19administration
1:33:21he indicated to me that uh
1:33:24inasmuch as john mitchell would be
1:33:26leaving the administration and he liddy
1:33:29was known and identified as a mitchell
1:33:32man
1:33:33that mr liddy would like to
1:33:36touch base
1:33:38with mr colson who would be staying on
1:33:41in the administration at least through
1:33:42the election
1:33:44and so uh have another
1:33:46power base
1:33:48power base as it were on which he could
1:33:50depend uh at such time did you arrange
1:33:53such a meeting i did
1:33:55and you know when that approximately
1:33:57took place
1:33:59no sure
1:34:00um but what do you recall was in the
1:34:03month of february
1:34:07yeah i consult my notes
1:34:09today
1:34:25i would relate it to the phone call
1:34:27concerning which mr magruder has already
1:34:29given testimony
1:34:31all right now when you did you introduce
1:34:33mister lydia to mr carlson i did after
1:34:35you did what did you do
1:34:39uh i withdrew to the back of the room
1:34:41and sat uh smoked my pipe leaf and
1:34:44leafing through a magazine while mr lady
1:34:46converse with mr colson and why did you
1:34:48withdraw to the back of the room
1:34:50uh
1:34:51mr liddy having given me the preamble
1:34:54the reasons for his desire to meet mr
1:34:56colson i felt that it was a personal
1:34:58matter
1:34:59and did not want to involve myself or
1:35:01interpose myself in any way how long did
1:35:04the meeting take place approximately 10
1:35:0612 minutes did you observe mr carlson
1:35:09use the telephone during that meeting on
1:35:10several occasions
1:35:12after the meeting did you have a
1:35:13conversation with mr liddy i did why did
1:35:16mr lady tell you
1:35:17he said quote i think i may have done us
1:35:20some good unquote
1:35:22at that time uh what was your
1:35:23interpretation of that message i
1:35:25realized that he had been speaking with
1:35:27mr colson about the
1:35:29gemstone operation why
1:35:33why did you draw that interpretation
1:35:35from the statement i i think i've done
1:35:37it some good because that was the only
1:35:39uh
1:35:40common subject concerning which he could
1:35:43have done us any good all right now the
1:35:45committee has already heard testimony
1:35:46from uh mr magruder
1:35:49that while you were in mr coulson's
1:35:50office mr colson telephoned mr magruder
1:35:53and urged him quote
1:35:55to get off the stick and get the budget
1:35:57approved for mr liddy's plans
1:36:00now
1:36:01what
1:36:03plans of mr liddy could mr coulson have
1:36:05been referring to at that time
1:36:08could only have been the gemstone
1:36:10concept
1:36:12why did you say that that was the only
1:36:14one that was under consideration
1:36:17now during part of this period uh mr
1:36:20hunt
1:36:20when you were working for mr liddy
1:36:23between december 1971
1:36:25and march 72
1:36:27did you receive any other assignments
1:36:29from mr liddy for political espionage
1:36:31against democratic candidates for uh the
1:36:34presidency specifically did you have a
1:36:37daily dealings with a person known to
1:36:39you as fat jack
1:36:41yes sir
1:36:42could you describe
1:36:44how these dealings took place what the
1:36:46assignment was
1:36:50there came a time when mr liddy asked me
1:36:53as an accommodation to
1:36:56meet with a gentleman who was handling
1:36:58an agent inside muskie headquarters
1:37:01he described
1:37:02the gentleman's physical appearance
1:37:05uh
1:37:06we arranged a
1:37:09a meeting point in front of the roger
1:37:11smith hotel
1:37:12i gather that mr lady also described
1:37:16my appearance to the other gentleman so
1:37:18that at the appointed time we had no
1:37:19difficulty in recognizing each other
1:37:23what was the purpose of these meetings
1:37:25so that i could pick up material that
1:37:27derived from muskie headquarters from
1:37:29this penetration agent
1:37:31what kind of materials mr hunt uh were
1:37:33these
1:37:35uh they were in photographic form
1:37:37and could you describe the nature of the
1:37:39of the photographs on only one occasion
1:37:41did i have uh
1:37:43did i look into the envelope i saw that
1:37:46there were advanced schedules
1:37:49perhaps some
1:37:50[Music]
1:37:52policy statements
1:37:55material of
1:37:57of
1:37:58medium value i would say
1:38:01was uh
1:38:02the person you knew was fat jack paid
1:38:04for this work i have no way of knowing
1:38:07uh
1:38:08did you at any time in any envelope did
1:38:10you
1:38:11delivered see any money yes
1:38:14and was that given to him
1:38:16it was
1:38:18my understanding uh to amplify that
1:38:20point for mr dash
1:38:22was that the money was to go to the
1:38:25to pay for the photographic services
1:38:27that had been rendered to fat jack
1:38:30did you know who he was in touch with
1:38:32no
1:38:33did you
1:38:34have any knowledge at that time or this
1:38:36date
1:38:37of the real identity of the person you
1:38:40knew as fat jack no
1:38:42did you yourself recruit a person to
1:38:45infiltrate infiltrate the campaign of a
1:38:47democratic presidential candidate i did
1:38:50and could you tell us who and in what
1:38:53campaign
1:38:54his name was thomas gregory he was a
1:38:57student whom i recruited to pose as a
1:38:58volunteer to work inside muskie
1:39:01headquarters and what was his assignment
1:39:03his assignment was to acquire
1:39:06for us
1:39:07policy papers working papers
1:39:10advanced schedules of the muskie party
1:39:13uh list of count
1:39:14contributions of contributors
1:39:17uh bank statements that sort of thing
1:39:19that uh would normally flow out of a
1:39:22political uh
1:39:24campaign headquarters and did there come
1:39:26a time when you uh transferred mr
1:39:28gregory to the mcgovern campaign they
1:39:30did and what was his assignment there
1:39:33it was uh the same with
1:39:35one edition
1:39:36what was the addition the addition was
1:39:40to prepare
1:39:42for an electronic surveillance or
1:39:44electronic penetration of mcgovern
1:39:46headquarters and uh how was he to
1:39:49prepare for that
1:39:50he prepared for it initially by
1:39:52providing
1:39:54me
1:39:54with a floor diagram of the mcgovern
1:39:58office building
1:40:01i introduced
1:40:03mr gregory and mr mccord who i in april
1:40:06met for the first time
1:40:09mr mccord then
1:40:11told mr
1:40:13gregory what would be required
1:40:16to satisfy his own particular technical
1:40:18interests
1:40:20mr gregory took mr mccord through the
1:40:23uh mcgovern headquarters
1:40:26they continued as it were doing doing
1:40:28business between themselves
1:40:31in connection with the electronic
1:40:33surveillance attempt was there in fact
1:40:35an attempt to break into the mcgovern
1:40:36campaign headquarters
1:40:39there was an attempt to enter it yes sir
1:40:41uh what happened
1:40:43uh it was unsuccessful
1:40:45um now was this activity part of the
1:40:48overall gemstone plan yes
1:40:50now during the same period and prior to
1:40:52the watergate break-in mr hunt
1:40:54did you and mr liddy work on a political
1:40:56espionage plan involving a target in las
1:40:58vegas
1:41:03apart from gemstone
1:41:05yes
1:41:05yes
1:41:07uh what was the target and how did you
1:41:09learn about it excuse me
1:41:31you
1:41:49i take it mr dash uh you have no
1:41:51objection to my reciting this
1:41:53chronologically yes i have an objection
1:41:55to you responding my question
1:41:58in the best way you can yes sir
1:42:02there came a time when my employer mr
1:42:05robert bennett
1:42:06informed me that
1:42:08he had heard a rumor around las vegas
1:42:11to the effect that a publisher named
1:42:14hank greenspun
1:42:15had information which could quote blow
1:42:18musky out of the water in case muskie
1:42:20became a candidate
1:42:23i reported by a very brief memo this
1:42:26information to mr liddy
1:42:29mr lady responded enthusiastically
1:42:32seeing in it initially an opportunity
1:42:34for us to
1:42:35travel at the company expense as it were
1:42:38to las vegas and have an enjoyable time
1:42:45very shortly there after his initial
1:42:48reaction mr lady
1:42:50informed me that
1:42:52he in effect had been able to confirm
1:42:54the rumor or at least that he had heard
1:42:57from another source
1:42:59of this rumor
1:43:00and that there was a disposition on the
1:43:02part of his principles to pursue it
1:43:06i reported this matter back to mr
1:43:08bennett
1:43:09and within a short uh period of time
1:43:12mr bennett introduced me to a mr ralph
1:43:16winte
1:43:17who was then the head of security for
1:43:21either the hughes tool company or one of
1:43:23its many subsidiaries
1:43:26at our initial discussion
1:43:28uh mr bennett mr winney and i
1:43:31discussed las vegas
1:43:34the nevada political situation
1:43:37litigation then in progress and perhaps
1:43:40still in progress between
1:43:42robert mayhew mr hughes
1:43:46the
1:43:47position of political
1:43:49politically speaking vis-a-vis
1:43:52mr greenspun and mr hughes
1:43:55the allegation that
1:43:57mr greenspun or others had
1:44:00bribed or bought certain judges in
1:44:02nevada
1:44:04and so on
1:44:06this came to
1:44:08this discussion reached the point
1:44:11where mr bennett suggested that there
1:44:13was a commonality of interest
1:44:19between
1:44:21the hughes tool company and
1:44:24mr lydian myself
1:44:27mr winney
1:44:28and i was due to my office
1:44:32where he indicated
1:44:34that he was disposed to cooperate with
1:44:36me in the matter
1:44:46i had no prior experience of las vegas
1:44:49and
1:44:53he said that he would
1:44:55attempt to produce a floor diagram of
1:44:57the greenspun office
1:45:00i asked him whether
1:45:02uh his firm
1:45:04with its uh multitudinous interest in
1:45:06las vegas could provide us with
1:45:08support facilities such as hotel rooms
1:45:10automobiles and so forth he indicated
1:45:13that would be no
1:45:14problem i'm sorry
1:45:17i'm sorry all right um now did in other
1:45:20words what you're saying is that the uh
1:45:23your conversation mr winney
1:45:25indicated that the hughes two company
1:45:27also was interested in
1:45:29gaining information that may be in the
1:45:31possession mr greenspun
1:45:33that was related to their
1:45:35lawsuits that were pending is that true
1:45:37yes sure and that you were asking for
1:45:40assistance
1:45:41from them with regard to their resources
1:45:43out in las vegas yes sir did that
1:45:46include a um
1:45:48an airplane or escape plane should that
1:45:49be necessary that came later mr dash i'm
1:45:52just trying to uh the answer is yes but
1:45:55uh
1:45:58during this discussion
1:45:59uh
1:46:00therefore did you by the way go out to
1:46:02los angeles and further communicate with
1:46:04mr winning i did and was that for the
1:46:06purpose of determining whether or not
1:46:09you could agree on a plan to
1:46:14make an entry
1:46:15and locate a safe in the greenspun
1:46:17office i would have to answer in this
1:46:19form mr dash that there came a time
1:46:22approximately two weeks later following
1:46:24my first meeting with mr wendy
1:46:27that mr liddy and i had other reasons to
1:46:30go to the west coast
1:46:32and i informed mr wendy that i would
1:46:34that we would be at the beverly wilshire
1:46:37hotel on a particular date
1:46:39at that time mr wendy joined us and i
1:46:42introduced him to mr liddy i believe
1:46:44under pseudonym for the first time
1:46:47during the course of that conversation
1:46:48the question of an aircraft was aired
1:46:52for the first time and was it was it
1:46:54part of the plan should it should it
1:46:56follow through
1:46:57uh and should there be a safe that um
1:47:00there would be an entry
1:47:01and that the contents of the safe would
1:47:03be emptied and at a different place you
1:47:05would divvy up what belonged to hughes
1:47:07and what belonged to
1:47:10your interest yes sir
1:47:12uh what what happened about that to that
1:47:14plan did it ever did it ever
1:47:16uh was it fruitful
1:47:18uh mr winney had indicated to me that uh
1:47:21and to mr liddy also
1:47:23that
1:47:24he could provide the uh
1:47:27on the ground support facilities would
1:47:30be required for an entry operation if
1:47:32such an entry operation were
1:47:34devised but that with regard to the
1:47:37aircraft he would have to refer to his
1:47:39superiors for authorization
1:47:42it so happened that
1:47:45following
1:47:46the meeting among mr wendy mr liddy and
1:47:49myself
1:47:51the muskie candidacy was
1:47:53rapidly losing impetus
1:47:56and
1:47:58no one
1:47:59was particularly interested in the
1:48:02information that mr greenspun might have
1:48:05possessed if in fact he ever did
1:48:07concerning mr musky so the plan was
1:48:09dropped
1:48:10the plan was dropped and
1:48:12either mr bennett or mr wendy told me at
1:48:15a later date that many event the
1:48:17availability of the aircraft had been
1:48:19declined
1:48:20i know mr hunt with regard to the
1:48:22democratic convention in miami
1:48:24uh did you give any assignments to mr
1:48:26barker
1:48:28i did
1:48:29and uh what what if any assignment did
1:48:31give mr parker
1:48:36we're speaking now only of the
1:48:37democratic convention maybe not
1:48:43mr barker's principal assignment was to
1:48:46develop a
1:48:48network of informants
1:48:50along the
1:48:51miami beach
1:48:53hotel complex
1:48:55who could report
1:48:57to us
1:48:58concerning campaign developments
1:49:02convention developments
1:49:03policies of individual democratic
1:49:06candidates
1:49:07did he also have a an assignment to
1:49:09procure a houseboat for as a base for
1:49:12electronic surveillance
1:49:13yes
1:49:14and uh did he also have an assignment to
1:49:16recruit
1:49:17some um
1:49:18persons who might be um disreputable
1:49:21looking young men uh hippies opposed to
1:49:24pose as mcgovern supporters
1:49:26yes and what were they supposed to do
1:49:29they were supposed to demonstrate in
1:49:31front of the doral hotel
1:49:34some evening and
1:49:38behave outrageously
1:49:41to bring this credit upon
1:49:44the bulk of
1:49:45the youthful mcgovern supporters
1:49:48uh now mr hunt you and i think you in
1:49:50fact did participate in the break-in of
1:49:52the democratic national committee
1:49:53headquarters at the watergate on about
1:49:55may 27 1972 is that not true
1:50:00i don't know what the word participate
1:50:02uh
1:50:03embraces i was you were not you did not
1:50:05make an entry yourself no sir but you
1:50:07were
1:50:08participated
1:50:10and is it not true that you recruited mr
1:50:12barker
1:50:13to bring up a team of cuban americans to
1:50:15assist in this plan yeah sure and that
1:50:18uh is it true that it was his job to
1:50:21engage in photographing a democratic
1:50:23party documents
1:50:24yes sir
1:50:26now
1:50:27it is true is it not that you also
1:50:29participated in the second
1:50:30break-in using the participating as we
1:50:33indicated before that you yourself did
1:50:35not break in
1:50:36the democratic national committee
1:50:38headquarters at the watergate on june 17
1:50:401972. yes
1:50:42where were you situated mr hunt when the
1:50:45entry team was arrested
1:50:47in room 214 in the watergate hotel which
1:50:50is another building what did you do
1:50:52immediately after you were aware that an
1:50:54arrest had taken place
1:51:00i closed up
1:51:03mr
1:51:03[Music]
1:51:05mccord's
1:51:06briefcase which contained electronic
1:51:08equipment
1:51:09and with mr lighty liddy we left the
1:51:11premises
1:51:13i drove to the white house
1:51:15where i
1:51:16inserted the briefcase belonged to mr
1:51:19mccord into my two drawers safe
1:51:25i went
1:51:26i believe i called
1:51:27mr douglas caddy's
1:51:29apartment he being an attorney
1:51:32who was mr caddy mr douglas kennedy an
1:51:35attorney and former employee of the
1:51:37mullen company
1:51:38and asked him if he could receive me at
1:51:40uh that early hour in the morning did
1:51:42you take any money out of the safe yes
1:51:44sir i did how much i took out ten
1:51:46thousand dollars what was that uh where
1:51:48did you get that money that was
1:51:49contingency money that had been provided
1:51:51me by mr letty for a contingency just in
1:51:54case there was this kind of trouble yes
1:51:55sir in case there was a mishap and uh
1:51:58what did you do with that money i took
1:51:59it uh during the course of the early
1:52:01morning to mr caddy's apartment and gave
1:52:03it to him on behalf of the five men who
1:52:05had been arrested
1:52:06uh now did you make an analysis or
1:52:09review of what of the contents of your
1:52:10safe
1:52:11uh at that time or at a later time no
1:52:14sir not at that time
1:52:16when did you if you did
1:52:18excuse me
1:52:35mr hunt this might help you you recall
1:52:38returning to your office at the eob
1:52:41and um
1:52:44looking at looking through the contents
1:52:45of your safe
1:52:47yeah sure
1:52:49and uh you recall that that was on or
1:52:51about june 19th 1972.
1:52:53yeah sure
1:52:55uh
1:52:56did you what was uh just very briefly uh
1:52:59can you describe the contents of your
1:53:00safe at that time
1:53:02what you have in there
1:53:10there's a great deal of material just by
1:53:12categories uh
1:53:15there were the
1:53:16fabricated vietnamese cables that i had
1:53:19shown to
1:53:20mr colson mr conin and
1:53:24mr lambert
1:53:26[Music]
1:53:28there was material relating to gemstone
1:53:32there was uh
1:53:34there were transcripts of
1:53:36my conversations with mr clefton damat
1:53:39for example
1:53:41there was a
1:53:43very substantial amount of material
1:53:46part of which was
1:53:47was shown me at the time of discovery by
1:53:50the united states
1:53:52attorney perhaps i'm not being
1:53:54responsible that's right you're being
1:53:55responsive did it also include
1:53:57the briefcase which included mr mccord's
1:54:00electronic equipment oh yes that was
1:54:01there now did you inform anyone on that
1:54:04day
1:54:05of the contents of your safe i did who
1:54:07was that
1:54:08uh mr colson secretary what's her name
1:54:11her name was mrs joan hall and did you
1:54:15characterize or say anything about the
1:54:17contest yesterday i did
1:54:20before i left the white house for the
1:54:22last time i stopped by mr colson's
1:54:24office not to see him
1:54:26but simply to inform mrs hall whom i
1:54:29knew held a combination of my safe
1:54:34you got to contain sensitive material i
1:54:37simply said to her
1:54:39uh
1:54:40i just want you to know that that safe
1:54:42is loaded
1:54:45now did you hear from mr liddy
1:54:47during this period of time
1:54:50which period of time
1:54:51shortly after around june 19th or around
1:54:54that yeah sure i did and what if
1:54:56anything did he tell you
1:54:57uh on
1:54:58[Music]
1:55:00toward midday on the 19th i got a
1:55:03telephone call from him at my mullen
1:55:05and company office
1:55:07saying that he needed urgently to meet
1:55:09me and we met
1:55:10on the corner at the usia building which
1:55:13i believe is
1:55:14the 17th of pennsylvania avenue
1:55:18we met
1:55:19walked around the block during the
1:55:21course of the conversation he told me
1:55:23that
1:55:24it was necessary for me to get out of
1:55:26town that they
1:55:27quote
1:55:28unquote wanted me to get out of town did
1:55:30he undergo who they were not at that
1:55:32time right
1:55:34uh
1:55:34and then uh
1:55:36was it a fact that that uh particular
1:55:37order was rescinded
1:55:39he told me that it was yes
1:55:41now in fact you did leave the washington
1:55:43did you know i did
1:55:45and
1:55:47did you
1:55:48ultimately go to california i did
1:55:50and at that time did you make
1:55:52arrangements to obtain council
1:55:57i obtained local council in california
1:55:59but not washington council
1:56:01well through local what uh in california
1:56:04who did you meet what the california
1:56:05council i was staying at the home of an
1:56:07attorney an old friend named morton b
1:56:10jackson
1:56:11mr liddy appeared out there unannounced
1:56:13on the 21st
1:56:15of
1:56:17june
1:56:18i reiterated my request to him that he
1:56:22or somebody obtained counsel for me in
1:56:24the washington area
1:56:26mr lady gave me a thousand dollars
1:56:29uh and said this will help with jackson
1:56:33i then gave thereupon gave the uh a
1:56:36thousand dollars in cash to mr jackson
1:56:38retaining him as my council on the west
1:56:40coast and did mr jackson refer you to
1:56:43any washington lawyer in due course he
1:56:45did yes and what lawyer was that
1:56:47he referred me uh
1:56:49some time later to two attorneys
1:56:54neither of whom were known to i believe
1:56:56either mr jackson or myself
1:56:59uh
1:57:00simply through an alphabetical process
1:57:02uh i decided
1:57:05to retain mr to inquire of mr bettman
1:57:08whether or not he he'd be very
1:57:09interested in representing me and did
1:57:11you retain mr bittman william bittman i
1:57:13did
1:57:14and when did you first meet mr bittman
1:57:16uh in washington on the night of uh july
1:57:203rd
1:57:21what was your understanding mr hunt
1:57:23concerning legal fees and support of
1:57:25your family
1:57:27that
1:57:28you would receive what general
1:57:29understanding did you have
1:57:32at the time mr liddy appeared at home
1:57:35mitchell jackson on the 21st of june
1:57:38i
1:57:40raised the question with him as i had
1:57:42with several other people since i had
1:57:44left washington
1:57:46concerning council
1:57:48furthermore how council fees living
1:57:51expenses and so forth are going to be
1:57:52taken care of
1:57:54mr liddy said don't worry about that
1:57:56it's all going to be taken care of just
1:57:58like the company
1:58:00or the agency to me that meant in
1:58:02traditional cia or clandestine services
1:58:04fashion
1:58:06he then produced a thousand dollars
1:58:08which
1:58:09was pretty hard evidence that there was
1:58:11money available for this sort of thing i
1:58:13now i
1:58:15later
1:58:16might i just continue one thought so i i
1:58:19said to him well by now the paralysis
1:58:22that uh gripped the white house and crep
1:58:26in the wake of the arrest must have
1:58:28ebbed to some extent please tell me who
1:58:31was the action officer now and he said
1:58:35it's martian or at least it was as of
1:58:37the time that i left
1:58:39this morning
1:58:41and
1:58:41i found that encouraging news
1:58:44well now
1:58:45when you return to washington and you
1:58:47retained mr bittman
1:58:50did there come a time when
1:58:52mrs hunt your wife had a contact with mr
1:58:55o'brien paul o'brien
1:58:57at the committee to reelect the
1:58:58president i believe she had that
1:59:01contact with mr o'brien before i
1:59:02retained it returned to the
1:59:04east coast and what was the purpose of
1:59:07that contact to continue to seek counsel
1:59:10and to
1:59:12make sure that
1:59:14the arrested men and
1:59:16those of us who were still out
1:59:19would be taken care of in customary
1:59:21fashion well it's your knowledge was she
1:59:22assured by mr brian that
1:59:26support money for council and for the
1:59:28family would be forthcoming i don't
1:59:30believe that she received
1:59:32that sort of assurances from mr o'brien
1:59:35as i recall her relating the incident to
1:59:37me
1:59:38mr o'brien
1:59:40was horrified by the revelations
1:59:42but said he would look into them
1:59:45and you say horrified by the revelations
1:59:46what revelations the revelations that my
1:59:49wife had given him
1:59:51well do you know what revelations your
1:59:52wife had given mr ryan i understand and
1:59:55again this is only hearsay from
1:59:57from my late wife
1:59:58was that she had told him that we had
2:00:00been acting
2:00:02on the behalf of the attorney general of
2:00:04the united states and the
2:00:06council of the president of the united
2:00:08states
2:00:09that we have been
2:00:10apprehended
2:00:12men were in jail that
2:00:14bond money
2:00:15bail money council fees all that sort of
2:00:18thing were needed and needed immediately
2:00:21and my understanding is that this of all
2:00:23was news to mr o'brien at that time he
2:00:26did say however that he would look into
2:00:28the matter immediately now there did
2:00:30come a time did they're not after you
2:00:32would retain mr bittman
2:00:34uh that you received a
2:00:36call or your mrs hunt received the call
2:00:39from mr rivers yes
2:00:41and
2:00:44what did mr rivers have to say to your
2:00:46knowledge
2:00:48my
2:00:48late wife reported to me that
2:00:52and we're skipping now over the the
2:00:55authentication of mr rivers
2:00:58in any event when mr mrs hunt responded
2:01:00to the gentleman whose operational alias
2:01:03we knew was rivers
2:01:04and knew him to be an appropriate person
2:01:06for him to deal with
2:01:09when you say that we're skipping the
2:01:10authentication are you we're skipping
2:01:12over his authentication yes
2:01:15um
2:01:16did you first was a call first made by
2:01:18mr rivers to mr bittman yes and what was
2:01:21mr bittman's reaction to that call uh he
2:01:24rejected it and declined to speak of mr
2:01:26rivers and then what did he do with
2:01:28thereafter
2:01:29uh
2:01:30and then what did he do thereafter
2:01:32uh
2:01:33within a day or so he had occasion to
2:01:36be in conference with mr paul o'brien
2:01:38and possibly mr parkinson
2:01:41and mentioned
2:01:42this call as a curious matter i believe
2:01:44at that point
2:01:45he was assured that mr rivers was an
2:01:48appropriate person for mrs hunt to be in
2:01:50touch with
2:01:51and then again was the report is that
2:01:53when mr bittman called you up mrs hunt
2:01:55yes
2:01:56and what arrangements were made at that
2:01:58time
2:02:02that mrs
2:02:05excuse me
2:02:13with regard to further contact with mr
2:02:16rivers
2:02:17yes
2:02:22that by means of public television
2:02:26the usage of public telephones
2:02:28mrs hunt and mr rivers would speak with
2:02:31each other which in fact they did
2:02:34all right were you aware that payments
2:02:35were in fact made uh by mr rivers uh
2:02:38two uh mrs hunt yes
2:02:41by the way i think the record will show
2:02:42that we've already had testimony as to
2:02:45the identity of mr rivers as mr tony
2:02:47yolasowitz did you know by the way at
2:02:49the time that mr rivers was a mr tony
2:02:52elassowitz no sir
2:02:55did you have occasion to see
2:02:58a series of accounts or a couple of
2:02:59accounts that mrs hunt
2:03:01made to mr bittman concerning payments
2:03:03that she received from mr rivers only
2:03:06recently
2:03:07and was that by this committee yes
2:03:11now
2:03:13i would i would like to say uh
2:03:15i have been shown them by the i've been
2:03:17shown copies by the committee
2:03:19i have been shown what's reported to be
2:03:21originals by mr bettman
2:03:23who i believe it was submitting them to
2:03:25the
2:03:26grand jury right and and they indicate
2:03:28to you that payments were made covering
2:03:31uh mr mccord mr barker and the other uh
2:03:34persons who had been arrested yes
2:03:43did it come at time mr hunt
2:03:45when you went to your attorney mr
2:03:46bittman and and tell him that you wanted
2:03:48to plead guilty
2:03:50yes what was the uh occasion for that
2:03:53i had made up my mind following my
2:03:57in fact during my return flight from
2:03:59chicago after the death of my wife
2:04:02that was on december 10th my wife was
2:04:04killed in a plane crash
2:04:06at midway airport on december 8th
2:04:11and in fact you did not plead guilty i
2:04:14did
2:04:15uh after your wife's death um did you
2:04:18receive a call from mr bittman
2:04:19concerning funds that he had for you i
2:04:21did
2:04:22and uh did you receive those funds
2:04:26i did
2:04:27you recall how much that was
2:04:29on the first occasion yes or do you want
2:04:32to share at him
2:04:34you have you
2:04:36do you have them in syria adam perhaps
2:04:37we can expedite this by you're just
2:04:39giving us a very brief statement of the
2:04:41funds that you did receive
2:04:44through mr bittman
2:05:33on the 3rd of july 1972
2:05:36i retained mr bittman with a 1 000 cash
2:05:40payment
2:05:47some days later mr bittman reported to
2:05:49me
2:05:50in a letter
2:05:52and also verbally that he had received
2:05:54the sum of twenty five thousand dollars
2:05:57as a further retainer he indicated the
2:05:59money had come to him uh anonymously
2:06:02and had been delivered to his office
2:06:04that it was to be used in my behalf and
2:06:06considered as a retainer
2:06:09later on perhaps
2:06:12in the month of october i had no date
2:06:14for
2:06:14this i was informed by mr bettman that
2:06:18an envelope had been delivered to his
2:06:20office
2:06:22for me i opened the
2:06:24envelope in his presence and counted out
2:06:26twenty thousand dollars which i
2:06:28turned over to him
2:06:39early in january
2:06:42or late december of 72
2:06:47no
2:06:49january of 73 or late december of 72
2:06:53mr bittman telephoned me to inform me
2:06:56that he had received
2:06:58an envelope at his house
2:07:01he told me that this had been left in
2:07:04his mailbox
2:07:06previous telephonic instructions were to
2:07:08the effect
2:07:09that
2:07:11it was an envelope for me
2:07:13i received the envelope on open from his
2:07:16hands i took it to my
2:07:18home and
2:07:20found her to contain fifteen thousand
2:07:21dollars
2:07:23i gave twelve thousand dollars of those
2:07:26funds to dr manuel our teammate who
2:07:28assisted the defense funds
2:07:30of the foremen from miami
2:07:33it having been my prior understanding
2:07:35from a conversation with my wife that a
2:07:37committee was being formed in miami for
2:07:40the defense of the four miami men
2:07:43then i
2:07:44subtracted three thousand dollars which
2:07:46she had told me
2:07:48she had placed the disposition
2:07:51of other defendants from our own funds
2:07:54and i thereby therefore thereby
2:07:57reimbursed myself to the extent of three
2:07:59thousand dollars and the rest went to
2:08:01miami mr hahn i think it might expedite
2:08:03matters
2:08:05if if you do have a a record of that if
2:08:08you could provide the committee with a
2:08:09record of those payments
2:08:11and let me just ask you
2:08:13uh but you have the total figure that
2:08:15you paid mr uh littmann uh
2:08:19by way of a fee that you received
2:08:21through these mains
2:08:23that i received the house sir that you
2:08:25received through the support money that
2:08:27was coming in either through mr rivers
2:08:29uh or through any other source
2:08:33i'm not sure i understand i'm asking for
2:08:35the total amount of money
2:08:37that uh you paid mr bittman and legal
2:08:39fees
2:08:40that mr bittman was paid
2:08:42yes
2:08:43that mr bitten was paid
2:08:46156 000 and would you submit to us a um
2:08:50a statement
2:08:51of the details which you were giving us
2:08:53this little
2:08:54uh
2:08:56moment ago i think would uh help us
2:08:58expedite the uh
2:08:59questioning
2:09:00we'll be glad to yes
2:09:02uh now
2:09:05did you ever call mr uh coulson to
2:09:07complain about the problems of the
2:09:09payment of fees
2:09:11i did
2:09:12and you recall when you made that call
2:09:14on november 24th
2:09:16last um
2:09:18now do you have a copy of that of a
2:09:21transcript that mr colson made of the
2:09:23telephone call
2:09:32i do
2:09:33yeah
2:09:35uh and during that call
2:09:37what in effect uh
2:09:39were you telling mr colson
2:09:41uh why did you make that call
2:09:45i made the call mr dash because
2:09:49my wife uh it indicated to me that
2:09:52because she had been placed in a very
2:09:54false and difficult position
2:09:56the vis-a-vis the cubans and the other
2:09:59people who were or had become her quote
2:10:02clients unquote
2:10:04she was unwilling to continue in the
2:10:05role that she had agreed to
2:10:08accept at the urging of mr rivers that
2:10:11is to say
2:10:12to be the go-between
2:10:18she felt also that perhaps because she
2:10:21was a woman
2:10:22her words her
2:10:24urgings her representations
2:10:26were receiving insufficient weight or
2:10:29not being seriously enough received by
2:10:32whoever the sponsors were
2:10:35and
2:10:36it was in that spirit that she asked me
2:10:39to
2:10:40communicate with mr colson which i did
2:10:43all right now on page three of that
2:10:45transcript
2:10:48uh did you say the
2:10:50following uh
2:10:53all right now we've set a deadline now
2:10:55for close of business on the 25th of
2:10:57november and i take it that's a deadline
2:10:59to receive funds for the resolution on
2:11:02the liquidation of everything that's
2:11:03outstanding
2:11:05and this they're now talking about
2:11:07promises from july and august
2:11:09it just has been an apparent unconcern
2:11:12of course we can understand some
2:11:14hesitancy prior to the election but
2:11:16there doesn't seem to be any of that now
2:11:18of course we're well aware of the
2:11:21upcoming problems of the senate and
2:11:25did you make that statement uh during
2:11:26that that call
2:11:29does this does this transcript by the
2:11:30way
2:11:31reflect the uh to your recollection a um
2:11:35the conversation you had with mr golson
2:11:39you recall that we
2:11:40showed you that transcript during the
2:11:42executive session i do mr dave you've
2:11:44had a chance to read it
2:11:45yes sir yes
2:11:48what is your answer to my questions
2:11:50whether
2:11:52that statement was made it appears in
2:11:53the transcript
2:12:01i have no specific recollection of
2:12:03making the statement mr dash however in
2:12:05as much as it appears in a transcript i
2:12:07accept it in good faith and
2:12:09will say under those circumstances that
2:12:11i made the statement and i'll just make
2:12:13any one further reference on page five
2:12:15if you look at the large paragraph at
2:12:17the top
2:12:19uh
2:12:23and where you say well that's fine for
2:12:26we're protecting the guys who are really
2:12:28responsible
2:12:29but now that's and of course that's a
2:12:31continuing requirement but at the same
2:12:33time this is a two-way street and as i
2:12:36said before we think that now is the
2:12:38time when a move should be made and
2:12:40surely the cheapest commodity available
2:12:42is money
2:12:43you see that statement yes sir
2:12:45would you adopt that as something that
2:12:46you would have said during that
2:12:47conversation yesterday
2:12:54that you would have said or that you did
2:13:01i will accept it as a statement that i
2:13:02made
2:13:09now after you stop
2:13:11receiving funds
2:13:13from various supporting sources did mr
2:13:15bittman ask for more funds from you
2:13:20mr bittman informed me
2:13:23of the current state of my deficit
2:13:25balance with him yes
2:13:27mr chairman i i
2:13:29should have this
2:13:30conversation with the howard hunt
2:13:33late november 1972 which is
2:13:36uh that was reported that mr colson
2:13:39identified as an exhibit and entered
2:13:41evidence
2:13:43it will be um received in evidence as an
2:13:45exhibit and appropriately numbered as
2:13:47such mr chairman could i ask a question
2:13:49about it just very briefly
2:13:52mr trump were you aware that this
2:13:54conversation was being recorded no sir
2:13:56did you how did you come to know of its
2:13:59existence
2:14:04i can't recall whether i learned about
2:14:06it through the grand jurors or through
2:14:09this committee could i ask council how
2:14:10we received it oh we received this from
2:14:13mr uh colson promised yes
2:14:19i might say i felt that i in retrospect
2:14:22that i was set up on this one
2:14:24i'm sorry i didn't hear you i was set up
2:14:26as it were because i had requested
2:14:30uh an opportunity to speak with mr
2:14:31colson and the message i got back was
2:14:33that if i would call him from the phone
2:14:35booth at a particular time
2:14:37on a particular day he would speak with
2:14:39me
2:14:40obviously he had his recording equipment
2:14:43running at that time
2:14:46you have any reason to suspect that any
2:14:48part of the transcript is not correct
2:14:53no sure thank you but it is true in
2:14:56following up on your statement that you
2:14:57may have been set up uh having had a
2:14:59chance to read this transcript is it not
2:15:01true that throughout
2:15:02throughout the transcript mr colson uh
2:15:05repeatedly says to you whenever you wish
2:15:07to give many facts that he doesn't want
2:15:08to hear anything about the facts
2:15:10not to tell him anything
2:15:13that that goes through the entire
2:15:15transcript certainly does
2:15:17uh i i think i asked you did mr bittman
2:15:19ask you for any additional funds
2:15:22after the support money and stop
2:15:24i don't know if you would answer i
2:15:25thought i'd reply to that question mr
2:15:27daniel
2:15:29could you i didn't hear your answer
2:15:34mr bittman kept me informed
2:15:37from time to time of the state of my
2:15:39deficit balance with his firm
2:15:42i did not
2:15:44interpret that
2:15:45as a demand for funds but rather he was
2:15:48keeping me informed of how much money
2:15:50was owed
2:15:52at that juncture i was not considering
2:15:57deltso de hogan and heartson as being
2:15:59personal debts of mine although i came
2:16:01later to accept them in that spirit i
2:16:04felt that they should be paid by the
2:16:08people or groups who had sponsored our
2:16:11our gemstone program
2:16:14and i encourage mr to turn to
2:16:16others for the payment of his fees
2:16:18rather than myself now there came a time
2:16:20when mr bitland was required to withdraw
2:16:21as your council did they not yes
2:16:24and
2:16:25you
2:16:26retained a minute
2:16:37mr dash i don't know that i can say of
2:16:38my own knowledge that he was required to
2:16:41withdraw as my counsel um i meant
2:16:43required by his own action uh he did
2:16:45withdraw as your counsel did he not he
2:16:47did uh that was not your action you did
2:16:49not no sir right you did not
2:16:51this was his own
2:16:53uh volitional action
2:16:57to your knowledge
2:16:58uh then you've retained uh in this
2:17:00mr sacks the council you retained
2:17:02immediately thereafter yes sir
2:17:05um
2:17:12did there come a time uh mr hunt when
2:17:14you uh wrote to mr coulson uh
2:17:18uh concerning um
2:17:20uh the problems that you were having
2:17:22wrote a letter to him
2:17:23yes sir
2:17:27what was the occasion of that letter
2:17:32i believe the letter uh
2:17:34do you have a copy of it a copy of a
2:17:36letter dated december 31 1972.
2:17:41december 31st yes yes sir i believe the
2:17:44letter is self-explanatory right and uh
2:17:47and this letter
2:17:49followed the death of your wife yes sir
2:17:51and was it a um
2:17:54a letter in which you were again asking
2:17:56for assistance for mr coulson
2:18:00in effect yes sir
2:18:10now
2:18:11uh
2:18:12what uh did you get in response from mr
2:18:14golson uh after writing that letter
2:18:18indirectly
2:18:20well
2:18:21how indirectly how what kind of response
2:18:22who contacted you through council yes
2:18:25and what did he tell you
2:18:27that
2:18:28mr colson
2:18:30would be meeting with him on i believe
2:18:32the third or fourth of january and did
2:18:35mr bittman and mr carlson meet
2:18:38i understand that they did and uh did mr
2:18:41bittman uh
2:18:42give you the results of that meeting
2:18:44he did and what uh what if anything did
2:18:47mr bittman tell you about the meeting
2:18:48you have mr coulson
2:18:58first of all that
2:18:59mr colson was
2:19:01a great and good friend of mine that he
2:19:04so considered
2:19:05himself to be
2:19:07that
2:19:08i was a fine patriotic fellow
2:19:11that of worst came to worst he would
2:19:13take my children into his own home
2:19:16that uh
2:19:20he was very sorry that i had ever become
2:19:22involved in this entire scheme
2:19:27the other two matters i ought to say
2:19:29parenthoodly
2:19:31that i had asked mr bedman well first of
2:19:33all the rationale for the the meeting uh
2:19:37to understand mr coulson's response i
2:19:39really should go back a little mr mr
2:19:42dash
2:19:43i had asked
2:19:44mr colson to receive
2:19:46mr bittman
2:19:48for the following reasons one i wanted
2:19:50mr colson to be very sure
2:19:53about the reasons for my
2:19:55plea of guilty i wanted him to
2:19:57understand all the circumstances the
2:19:59factors that had weighed on me
2:20:01in making my
2:20:02and making my plea or complete i was
2:20:04about to make
2:20:06secondly there were two
2:20:08cia matters which were unresolved and
2:20:11which i felt white house intervention
2:20:13could be to say the least very useful
2:20:16thirdly there was
2:20:20an active motion on
2:20:21part of my council for the suppression
2:20:24of certain evidence obtained from my
2:20:26white house safe through the drilling
2:20:28free the unorthodox drilling
2:20:30and seizure procedures that have been
2:20:32employed by mr dean and company
2:20:34and i wanted all of these matters
2:20:36discussed
2:20:37with mr colson at that time
2:20:39uh what mr buckman reported back to me
2:20:42i've already indicated to you
2:20:44i got no information from him concerning
2:20:49mr carlson's assistance with the cia
2:20:51managers had to do with my annuity and
2:20:53the changes of survivorship benefits
2:20:56for my annuity other than to say that mr
2:21:00carlson would always be delighted to
2:21:02help me to the extent that he could
2:21:06whether as a private citizen or in the
2:21:08white house but purely as a personal
2:21:10matter
2:21:11the suppression motion
2:21:13i do not think was supported was
2:21:15reported back to me until the following
2:21:17day when after mr and mr coulson
2:21:20had met a second time uh did you
2:21:23ask mr bittman to transmit any message
2:21:25from you on your plea of guilty decision
2:21:28concerning the length of sentence you
2:21:30might obtain or any
2:21:31uh clemency or consideration that the
2:21:33government might give you if you pleaded
2:21:34guilty no sir
2:21:36uh mr chairman i uh the letter of
2:21:38december 31st which precipitated the
2:21:40meeting
2:21:41uh between mr bitten mr pulse and i'd
2:21:43like to have
2:21:44uh identified as an exhibit and entered
2:21:46in evidence
2:21:51it will be received in helping the
2:21:52science themselves and exhibited
2:21:53appropriately numbered as such
2:21:56mr excuse me mr dash may i ask
2:21:59when the committee plans to recess
2:22:05twelve thirty
2:22:10mr chairman mr chairman
2:22:13mr i'd like to
2:22:15just pose a question to the
2:22:17witness since he's been relating
2:22:19conversations between he and mr bitten
2:22:22bittman
2:22:24do i understand it that the witness is
2:22:26waving
2:22:28the attorney-client privilege
2:22:31in this particular instance i'm a little
2:22:32bit confused i want to make sure that i
2:22:34understand the witness understands what
2:22:37strength is he read a statement which i
2:22:39believe he said he was waving no i'm
2:22:41sorry mr chairman there may be some
2:22:43confusion i'm glad you asked that
2:22:44question senator
2:22:47the
2:22:48attorney attorney-client privilege as to
2:22:50mr bittman and as to me
2:22:53has not is not being waived
2:22:57uh the council
2:23:00mr sachs and mr hunt
2:23:02made that statement also senator weiker
2:23:05in executive session and agreed to
2:23:06answer certain questions concerning
2:23:10conversation with mr bittman reserving
2:23:12the right not to waive
2:23:14uh all of his relationship in terms of
2:23:16his attorney client relationship well i
2:23:18i think it's important to point this out
2:23:20because obviously the chairman and
2:23:21myself were laboring under the same
2:23:23apprehension that possibly there might
2:23:24be a waiver here and i'm more than glad
2:23:26to have counselor stated well senator i
2:23:28think i should supplement what i said by
2:23:30saying that as the committee knows
2:23:34that judge sarika
2:23:36stated
2:23:37that his cooperation with this committee
2:23:39and with the grand juries would be
2:23:40weighed
2:23:41by him in the ultimate sentence which he
2:23:43imposes
2:23:45under the force of that
2:23:47statement of judge sarika
2:23:50we have
2:23:51we have advised mr hunt to answer fully
2:23:54all the questions
2:23:55but we believe that that does not
2:23:57constitute a waiver as it would in more
2:24:00more voluntary circumstances
2:24:03i made the statement i
2:24:06had on the basis of
2:24:08this statement and
2:24:10on page five of his prepared statement
2:24:14he said in fact i have answered all
2:24:16questions even those which involve
2:24:18confidential communications between my
2:24:20attorneys and myself
2:24:24senator i
2:24:26you have corrected our statement our
2:24:28statement was ambiguous we did not mean
2:24:31all attorneys
2:24:32there were
2:24:33the privilege has been waived as i
2:24:35understand it with uh with mr jackson
2:24:38and
2:24:46mr sex would you like to have a uh
2:24:48oh your client like to have recess now
2:24:50instead of waiting on i do thank you
2:24:54senator that my client would appreciate
2:24:56a rescue okay but just to finish that
2:24:58question we were a little inaccurate in
2:25:00that statement i'm sorry he has waived
2:25:03one privilege that with mr jackson yes
2:25:06well you i would ask you to indicate the
2:25:08committee if any questions are asked
2:25:11on points that you think he has not
2:25:13weighed on his right well he is
2:25:15answering all questions senator but he
2:25:18is stating that by doing that he is not
2:25:20waiving his privilege mr chairman may i
2:25:22make sure i understand the situation
2:25:25just one brief moment
2:25:27attorney-client privilege is a personal
2:25:29privilege to the client and not the
2:25:30attorney and it would apply to each
2:25:32question that's asked and if this
2:25:34witness chooses to exercise the
2:25:36privilege he will claim that uh
2:25:39privilege before answering a specific
2:25:41question is that correct sir
2:25:44if there is any further concern if
2:25:46there's any further concern with
2:25:48attorney client we will know it at the
2:25:49time the question is asked
2:25:52yes senator but i'm afraid that to me at
2:25:54least your question reflects a little
2:25:56confusion
2:25:58he is not refusing to answer questions
2:26:01as to conversations between him and his
2:26:03counsel which he normally would do if he
2:26:06were claiming the privilege
2:26:08at the same time he is not waiving the
2:26:10privilege no i'm not confused i don't
2:26:13understand that but i'm not sure that
2:26:16i'm not sure that that's a discernible
2:26:18distinction in the body of the law
2:26:20either you claim privilege or you don't
2:26:22claim privilege well
2:26:25he is answering the questions i think
2:26:28the issue
2:26:29as to whether
2:26:31his answers constitute a waiver
2:26:34may come up one day if an effort is made
2:26:37to question mr bittman
2:26:40but this witness is under judge sarika's
2:26:42admonition that if he doesn't answer the
2:26:44questions he's going to be in trouble
2:26:47so he is answering all questions he is
2:26:50not claiming privilege when as to his
2:26:52answers to questions but he is not
2:26:54releasing mr bittman at some point judge
2:26:57sirica or some other judge will have to
2:26:58pass on the legal effect of those
2:27:00answers that is my question to you is
2:27:03for the purposes of this committee's
2:27:05deliberations if we are confronted with
2:27:08an executive with an attorney-client
2:27:10privilege we will be notified of it at
2:27:12the time of the question i presume by
2:27:13you or by your client i take
2:27:16i take that to mean that if there comes
2:27:19a point in these hearings when mr hunt
2:27:21wants to refuse to answer a question by
2:27:24the committee on the ground of privilege
2:27:26you would like to be notified the answer
2:27:28to that is yes you will be notified
2:27:30thank you very much thank you
2:27:32the committee will
2:27:34the committee will stand in recess to
2:27:35two o'clock
2:27:42as the senators give mr hunt a breather
2:27:44and also recess for lunch we're also
2:27:46going to pause briefly public television
2:27:48coverage of the senate watergate
2:27:49hearings will continue after this pause
2:27:51for station identification
2:27:53unabridged coverage of these hearings is
2:27:55being broadcast as a public service by
2:27:57your local public television station
2:28:00this is pbs the public broadcastington
2:28:03impact continues its coverage of
2:28:05hearings by the senate select committee
2:28:06on presidential campaign activities
2:28:09here again impact correspondent jim
2:28:11lehrer
2:28:13as we go back to the hearings chief
2:28:14counsel sam dash is following up his
2:28:16questions about hunt's request for money
2:28:19involving his attorney and charles
2:28:21coulson
2:28:27committee will come to over
2:28:56uh mr sacks did you want to amplify your
2:28:58remarks concerning
2:29:01the
2:29:02attorney-client privilege
2:29:03mr chairman
2:29:05when we recessed
2:29:07shortly after noon
2:29:09i was under the impression that
2:29:11the question of mr hunt's waiver of
2:29:14privilege was absolutely clear
2:29:17but i'm told by those with whom i'm
2:29:19associated that it was not absolutely
2:29:22clear
2:29:23so i would very briefly like to try to
2:29:25make it clear
2:29:27our position mr hunt's position with
2:29:30regard to the privilege which existed
2:29:32between and exists between him and mr
2:29:35bittman is
2:29:37that mr hunt under the pressure
2:29:41of judge sarika's admonition
2:29:44has answered and will continue to answer
2:29:48all questions regarding conversations
2:29:50between him and mr bittman
2:29:53which because of the privilege he would
2:29:55not in my opinion have to answer he is
2:29:57going to answer those questions
2:30:00but at the same time our position is
2:30:03that by answering these questions he is
2:30:06not
2:30:07waving the privilege insofar as any
2:30:11statements or testimony by mr bittman
2:30:13might be concerned
2:30:15now this did come up as we said in the
2:30:18executive committee session and i have
2:30:21during the recess found the page at
2:30:23which a more lengthy discussion appears
2:30:26and it is page 452
2:30:29of the september 20 session
2:30:32yeah well your position is very clear
2:30:34thank you very much mr chairman
2:30:37i'm terribly sorry to say it didn't
2:30:39quite clear to me
2:30:42is this a fair restatement of your
2:30:44position then that as far as
2:30:48the doctrine of attorney client is
2:30:50concerned
2:30:52to the extent that mr hunt for whatever
2:30:54reason chooses to answer questions that
2:30:56otherwise might be protected by that
2:30:58doctrine he has waived that doctrine as
2:31:02to himself and the answers he thus makes
2:31:04but he has not waived it as far as any
2:31:06other statements by mr bittman might be
2:31:09concerned
2:31:10on other subject matter or on that
2:31:12subject matter beyond his statement
2:31:19senator baker
2:31:22i would prefer if you would permit me
2:31:26not to take the position at this time
2:31:29that by mr hunt's answering questions he
2:31:32has waived the privilege as to himself i
2:31:35would prefer to phrase it
2:31:38that he has answered the
2:31:41uh without taking the next step and and
2:31:45stating as his position the legal
2:31:47conclusion that one might want to
2:31:50might want to argue right mr chairman i
2:31:52don't know i don't think the net effect
2:31:54is any difference between not it's not
2:31:56important for the purposes of the
2:31:57committee to resolve that question as i
2:31:59said earlier on
2:32:01i suppose if the issue ever arises that
2:32:03the court would have to decide that we
2:32:05would not
2:32:06but the point that keeps sticking in my
2:32:08mind and i want to be clear on is that
2:32:10we are not precluded from discussing
2:32:13these matters with mr pickman at least
2:32:15in so far as mr hunt has alluded to
2:32:18well our position is that you are
2:32:20precluded
2:32:21that is what we are not waving
2:32:25we are not waving mr hunt's right
2:32:28to maintain the confidentiality
2:32:31of his communications with his lawyer
2:32:34in so far as
2:32:36that lawyer's testimony might be
2:32:38concerned
2:32:39now you may argue senator baker as you
2:32:41have suggested or one may argue
2:32:44that by answering questions as he has
2:32:47by operation of as mr hunt has by
2:32:50operation of law that privilege has been
2:32:53lost we recognize that that point may be
2:32:55argued
2:32:57we will take the opposite position
2:32:59because he has not volunte voluntarily
2:33:03answered the questions concerning his
2:33:06confidential communications with mr
2:33:08pittman
2:33:10now i think since the con since we have
2:33:12gotten into into it this far i
2:33:15i really then must make one other point
2:33:17which does appear in the executive
2:33:20committee record
2:33:21and that is that
2:33:24our office has been in this case a very
2:33:26short time
2:33:28we were retained sometime during the
2:33:29month of august
2:33:31and
2:33:32since we were retained
2:33:34we have had other matters of urgency
2:33:37which have prevented us from devoting
2:33:39full time to this case
2:33:42we have devoted a quite a number of
2:33:45people in our office have devoted a
2:33:46great deal of time to the case but even
2:33:49so
2:33:50we certainly
2:33:52under these circumstances do not
2:33:54feel
2:33:55uh
2:33:56as
2:33:57are not as acquainted or not as familiar
2:34:00with the terribly complicated factual
2:34:03situations that surround this case
2:34:06not sufficiently acquainted with them to
2:34:08be able to advise mr hunt
2:34:12intelligently as to
2:34:14what consequences if any
2:34:16might flow from his waiving that
2:34:18privilege
2:34:19therefore
2:34:20our reasoning is that if in that
2:34:24state of inadequate knowledge we were to
2:34:27advise him to waive the privilege it
2:34:30really wouldn't be competent advice
2:34:33therefore feeling unable so to advise
2:34:36him we have on the contrary advised him
2:34:38not to waive it and he has a he is
2:34:41following our
2:34:42advice well mr chapman i think i'll
2:34:45conclude our
2:34:47colloquy on legal principles and
2:34:49doctrine here by simply saying the
2:34:50underlying reason and rationale for
2:34:53pressing you on that point is to make it
2:34:55clear that
2:34:57as we proceed
2:34:58first there may be other questions of mr
2:35:01hunt these will be his relationship to
2:35:03mr bittman there may be questions of mr
2:35:05pittman
2:35:06but
2:35:07i think the very best way to handle this
2:35:09now is to deal with each question one at
2:35:12a time and to see how the doctor might
2:35:14apply it at all thank you mr chairman
2:35:20yes
2:35:23speaking for myself and and the
2:35:26committee
2:35:27would have to make up its own minds
2:35:31to this particular opinion
2:35:33i
2:35:34i would not want this committee
2:35:37to engage in
2:35:39any activity which in effect would force
2:35:43your client
2:35:45mr sax
2:35:47to give up any of his
2:35:49civil liberties or his rights or his
2:35:51privileges whether those are granted by
2:35:52law or by usage
2:35:55and i want to make that point clear now
2:35:57it's quite one thing for the committee
2:35:59to vote immunity
2:36:01and handle the
2:36:03question and answer process
2:36:06within certain guidelines which have
2:36:08been well established by the law
2:36:10it's quite something else
2:36:13to sit here and
2:36:16and imply that
2:36:18that the committee is being forced to do
2:36:21something that i don't think any
2:36:22committee or court or anyone else in
2:36:24this land has the right to do which is
2:36:26to
2:36:27take an individual and in effect force
2:36:30him to give up
2:36:32his civil liberties or his rights or his
2:36:35privileges i say whether those things
2:36:37whether those matters were granted by
2:36:39law or by usage
2:36:41uh mr chairman i i think the record also
2:36:43should
2:36:44show
2:36:45that when this issue came up in
2:36:46executive session
2:36:48that um i made it very clear to council
2:36:52uh just as senator wyker has just um
2:36:54mentioned
2:36:55that
2:36:56this committee did not want counsel
2:36:59either to advi to advise mr hunt to
2:37:01waive uh client attorney privilege or
2:37:03for mr hunt
2:37:05to waive any right that he has
2:37:07uh solely because he's under a
2:37:09sentencing procedure which might call
2:37:11upon the committee to make a report to
2:37:13jetserika and that all we wanted
2:37:15uh was his own
2:37:18statement of the facts based on what he
2:37:19wished to give us
2:37:21recognizing that there was a fact in
2:37:22history that he is under such a
2:37:24sentencing procedure but
2:37:25i emphasized over and over again
2:37:28to mr hahn that he should not
2:37:30make any judgment with regard to this
2:37:32committee
2:37:33based on any concept of coercion but
2:37:35should make the decision
2:37:36uh voluntarily and based on on the
2:37:39advice of his own counsel
2:37:41mr chairman if with your permission i
2:37:43must i would like to reply to what
2:37:45senator weiker and mr dash have said
2:37:49i don't think any useful purpose would
2:37:51be served at this time
2:37:54in trying to reenact the many
2:37:56conversations or recount the many
2:37:58conversations which have taken place
2:38:00between
2:38:01members of the staff and council for mr
2:38:04hunt
2:38:07regardless of whether those
2:38:09conversations have included
2:38:12statements from which we might have been
2:38:15entitled to believe
2:38:17that if mr hunt did not waive this
2:38:19privilege
2:38:20he would receive a bad report to judge
2:38:22sarika
2:38:24regardless of the of how that factual
2:38:26matter might be
2:38:28resolved
2:38:30the fact
2:38:32is and i don't think anyone can dispute
2:38:34this
2:38:36that at the moment that mr hunt was
2:38:39sentenced by judge sarika for a period
2:38:42of more than 30 years
2:38:44under a provision of the law
2:38:47which gives judge sarika the right
2:38:50to amend that sentence to change the
2:38:53sentence
2:38:54after receiving reports from prison
2:38:56authorities
2:38:58judge sarika in a lengthy statement
2:39:02included a very clear
2:39:04statement
2:39:06that he would weigh
2:39:08that was the word he used
2:39:10the cooperation that mr hunt gave to
2:39:12grand juries in this committee
2:39:15in his final sentence
2:39:19now
2:39:20we think that we have no alternative
2:39:23but to read that
2:39:26as a as a warning
2:39:28that
2:39:29if mr hunt does not answer all questions
2:39:33and if he does not waive this privilege
2:39:37judge sarika may say well you
2:39:39you
2:39:40you did not waive your privilege you did
2:39:42not cooperate
2:39:44your sentence must be more severe
2:39:47now it is possible of course that judge
2:39:48sarika would not take that position
2:39:51but there is very definitely
2:39:54a
2:39:55a likelihood if indeed not a probability
2:39:58that he will based on what he has said
2:40:00so whatever this committee does
2:40:03with regard to
2:40:07articulating the notion
2:40:09that mr hunt should or should not waive
2:40:12his clear his privilege mr hunt is
2:40:15testifying and has been under that
2:40:17threat
2:40:19also mr hunt is testifying in a sense
2:40:22involuntarily because he's only
2:40:25testified pursuant to an order of
2:40:26immunity
2:40:28under statute
2:40:29which says that the testimony gives
2:40:31before this committee cannot be used
2:40:33against him elsewhere
2:40:34and uh if that if that statute means
2:40:37what it
2:40:39says
2:40:40it couldn't his testimony for this
2:40:42committee cannot be used for any purpose
2:40:44even to establish a alleged wave of a
2:40:47privilege it would seem to me
2:40:49logically and uh justly
2:40:51with with with great pleasure i agree
2:40:54with you mr chairman well
2:40:56i want to make one thing clear speaking
2:40:58for myself and my own questions on this
2:41:00matter
2:41:02that
2:41:04outside of the grant of immunity if
2:41:07there is any question that i pose
2:41:09to your client
2:41:14which
2:41:14question you consider
2:41:18under
2:41:19normal conditions to be
2:41:21violated of your client's rights
2:41:25but you're permitting your this is
2:41:26outside of the grant of immunity but
2:41:28you're permitting your client to respond
2:41:30because you feel that you're under
2:41:32pressure
2:41:33i want you to advise me counselor
2:41:36because i don't want the answer
2:41:38senator i appreciate your
2:41:40your
2:41:41the expression you've just made but i'm
2:41:44not really sure that it is possible for
2:41:46me
2:41:47to
2:41:48advise mr hunt within those within that
2:41:51suggestion
2:41:54we're talking to judge sarika
2:41:57as well as to this committee we're
2:41:59talking to the judge who is sentencing
2:42:01mr hunt
2:42:03and i really with those deference
2:42:06suggests
2:42:07that you gentlemen really can't help
2:42:08yourselves
2:42:10but
2:42:11exercise but carry out
2:42:14but by your questioning but carry out
2:42:17the
2:42:18the warning
2:42:19that miss or the
2:42:21well in a way you can't keep yourself
2:42:23from holding the sword that judge sarika
2:42:26is holding over his head
2:42:29but i think it's perfectly possible for
2:42:31your client to go ahead and respond to
2:42:33questions within the grant of immunity
2:42:34if you will without going
2:42:37afield
2:42:39and being in the position of violating
2:42:41other rights which he has and the
2:42:43attorney-client privileges is that type
2:42:45of a situation let me add please
2:42:48that by what i have said i do not mean
2:42:50to suggest
2:42:52that
2:42:54mr hunt is not motivated also to some
2:42:57extent
2:42:58by a desire to do what now appears to be
2:43:01the thing that his country requires
2:43:03this he respects the authority of this
2:43:06committee and its purposes and he does
2:43:08desire to tell the truth
2:43:12he is not
2:43:15well i i think that makes the point the
2:43:17only other thing i would have to say i
2:43:18think is that we have here is a
2:43:21six or eight inch pile of transcripts
2:43:25reflecting the questions and answers
2:43:27that have already been
2:43:30made to him and give and given by him
2:43:33and it is of course possible that
2:43:35questions will be asked today that
2:43:37haven't been asked but it's fairly
2:43:40unlikely that anything new will be
2:43:42touched on so while senator you may ask
2:43:44a question and be willing that we not
2:43:47answer it on that basis the great
2:43:49likelihood is it will already have been
2:43:51asked and answered
2:43:55i just have a couple more questions mr
2:43:58chairman
2:44:00mr han
2:44:01shortly before
2:44:03your sentence
2:44:04on march 23 1973
2:44:07did you meet with
2:44:09mr paul o'brien
2:44:10in mr bittman's office
2:44:15i met with mr paul o'brien and
2:44:18the law offices of hogan and hartson
2:44:21not specifically in the promises
2:44:23assigned mr pittman
2:44:25and can you just very briefly tell us
2:44:27the what you told mr o'brien what mr
2:44:30o'brien told you at that meeting
2:44:32i'd be glad too
2:45:08i believe mr dash referring to the
2:45:10second meeting i had with mr o'brien
2:45:13yes just prior to yourself yes
2:45:14[Music]
2:45:17uh i had requested
2:45:19that mr bittman
2:45:22arrange a meeting between myself and mr
2:45:24o'brien inasmuch as
2:45:27mr bittman had
2:45:29kept me apprised of the extent of my
2:45:31legal indebtedness to the farm of hogan
2:45:33and hartson
2:45:37mr o'brien i knew was the current
2:45:40contact
2:45:41that mr bittman had on the committee
2:45:44not only for matters relating to the
2:45:46various civil suits that have been filed
2:45:49but also and more relevantly to
2:45:53in connection with
2:45:55the payment of legal fees for mr
2:45:57bittman's services in my behalf
2:46:03mr bittman indicated to me that his
2:46:06representations for the payment of legal
2:46:08fees
2:46:09had been ineffective and i suggested to
2:46:13mr bittman that
2:46:14he permit me to speak with mr o'brien
2:46:17about that matter
2:46:19that is the background of the meeting
2:46:20itself
2:46:22when
2:46:25mr o'brien came to the offices we were
2:46:27shown into a private interview room
2:46:31and
2:46:33i
2:46:34spoke
2:46:34to mr o'brien at some length
2:46:37about the size and nature of the legal
2:46:40bills
2:46:41i think at that time they amounted to
2:46:43approximately 60 thousand dollars
2:46:46i told him at the same time that i was
2:46:49very much concerned about the future of
2:46:51my family
2:46:53that i would very much like to have the
2:46:55equivalent of
2:46:56two years subsistence available to them
2:46:59before i
2:47:00was incarcerated that incarceration
2:47:03being due within a very short period of
2:47:04time and i
2:47:07put it to mr o'brien
2:47:09that i had engaged as he might or might
2:47:11not know in other activities which i
2:47:13believe i described described as simi
2:47:16activities
2:47:17for the white house i don't believe that
2:47:19i specified them
2:47:21however i did make reference to them and
2:47:23i the context of such reference
2:47:26was that if anyone was to
2:47:29receive
2:47:31benefits at that time
2:47:33in view of my long and loyal service if
2:47:36not hazardous service for the white
2:47:38house but certainly i should receive
2:47:40priority consideration
2:47:42would mr o'brien be able at least to
2:47:45draw an inference from his part
2:47:47that because of the so-called simi
2:47:49activities you said that you engaged on
2:47:51behalf of the white house that if you
2:47:53weren't paid
2:47:55the sum of money that these may become
2:47:56public
2:48:02i'll answer in just one
2:48:15this moment
2:48:31is
2:48:58dash an answer to your question uh i
2:49:00would have to say that uh
2:49:04mr o'brien might have
2:49:06assumed any number of things from
2:49:09uh our colloquy
2:49:10however
2:49:13i would
2:49:14with a great deal of deference and
2:49:20begging the pardon in advance of
2:49:22the chairman of the committee
2:49:25quote from a certain testimony given in
2:49:28the early sessions of this committee
2:49:32the first green bomb volume page 325
2:49:35when mr alts was being questioned and mr
2:49:38irvin
2:49:39the senator irvin said
2:49:42and i quote well
2:49:43where two men communicate with each
2:49:45other by word of mouth
2:49:47isn't there a two-fold hazard in that
2:49:49communication in first that the man who
2:49:52speaks may not express himself clearly
2:49:54may not say exactly what is in his mind
2:49:58and if he does the man who hears it may
2:50:00put a different interpretation on the
2:50:02words than the man who spoke them
2:50:04unquote
2:50:06well mr hunt there has been considerable
2:50:09testimony which we will not get into now
2:50:11before the committee
2:50:13uh which indicated that both mr dean and
2:50:17mr mitchell and a number of others
2:50:20believed that there was considerable
2:50:22pressure being placed by you
2:50:24uh at that time for money and that uh
2:50:27the danger of not uh paying you was that
2:50:31there might be some public exposure of
2:50:33the seeming matter in fact mr ehrlichman
2:50:35testified that there was a blackmail
2:50:37threat so
2:50:39the question puts you was that you
2:50:40intend
2:50:41by telling mr o'brien
2:50:44that one the sixty thousand dollars had
2:50:46to be paid and two you had engaged in
2:50:49certain other simi matters
2:50:51on behalf of the white house did you
2:50:52intend
2:50:53to create that threat that unless that
2:50:55money was paid
2:50:57you would
2:50:58make public
2:51:00the acts that you would engage on behalf
2:51:01of the white house no sir
2:51:05now what was mister how did mr o'brien
2:51:07respond to you
2:51:09when you asked for this money
2:51:11well it was more than simply a
2:51:14question of asking for money mr dash it
2:51:16was a
2:51:17it was really my first opportunity to
2:51:20catalog the many difficulties we had had
2:51:23that is to say my late wife
2:51:25principally and to some extent myself
2:51:29in
2:51:33finding the
2:51:36the means to
2:51:38defend ourselves
2:51:40that had been promised us as long ago as
2:51:43the previous june 21st
2:51:46of
2:51:49i told
2:51:53mr o'brien told me i should say
2:51:56that he was finding himself
2:51:58increasingly ineffective as a go-between
2:52:01i don't recall whether he used the word
2:52:03impotent or impotence
2:52:05but he felt that
2:52:08his position was a very difficult one he
2:52:11recognized that assurances had been
2:52:13given
2:52:14that to some extent they had in the past
2:52:16been carried out but he felt that he was
2:52:19becoming less and less effective as an
2:52:21intermediary did you imagine mr coulson
2:52:23to you for that reason
2:52:25mr
2:52:26o'brien suggested that i originate and
2:52:30send to mr colson what he termed a
2:52:32strongly worded memorandum or a
2:52:36tough or a hard memorandum to mr colson
2:52:41and um
2:52:42what did you what did you do after that
2:52:44did you
2:52:45write such a memorandum to mr carlson
2:52:47i did not write the memorandum of mr
2:52:49colson but in response to mr o'brien's
2:52:52suggestion
2:52:54i
2:52:54believe that
2:52:57orally i express surprise
2:52:59that he would
2:53:00have brought mr colson's name into
2:53:05the dealings at this late stage of the
2:53:07game
2:53:09i asked him why he wanted me to send the
2:53:11memorandum to colson
2:53:13and mr o'brien said to the best of my
2:53:15recollection well there are some of us
2:53:17who feel that chuck stayed out of this
2:53:18too long
2:53:20that
2:53:22it's time he got his feet wept along
2:53:24with the rest of us words to that effect
2:53:27my response was equivocal i did not
2:53:29indicate to mr o'brien whether i would
2:53:31or would not address such a memorandum
2:53:34but i was disturbed by his suggestion
2:53:36all right now after that meeting with mr
2:53:38o'brien did you take steps
2:53:41uh to either try to have a meeting with
2:53:43mr colson to write to mr colson
2:53:45what
2:53:46uh what efforts did you make to follow
2:53:48up on mr o'brien's suggestion
2:53:54excuse me
2:54:00i
2:54:00[Music]
2:54:01reviewed it once for mr bittman upon mr
2:54:04o'brien's departure the substance and
2:54:07thrust of mr o'brien's conversation
2:54:10i told mr bittman that i had no
2:54:13intention of writing the recommended
2:54:15memorandum but i thought that i should
2:54:17get in touch
2:54:18with mr colson so that i could explain
2:54:21the situation to him notify him
2:54:23of the suggestion that had been made by
2:54:26o'brien whom i classified
2:54:28politically speaking as a mitchell man
2:54:31and
2:54:32we haven't gotten into this in
2:54:35testimony so far
2:54:38before this committee
2:54:39but there appeared to be a definite
2:54:41division
2:54:42within the white house itself
2:54:44at least in the lower levels between the
2:54:46so-called mitchell men and the so-called
2:54:49colson men
2:54:51accordingly i found it
2:54:53rather bizarre
2:54:54that mr o'brien a mitchell man would
2:54:57suggest that i
2:54:59seek help from colson and as much as mr
2:55:01mitchell
2:55:02had been the progenitor of the gemstone
2:55:05plan and was at least in theory
2:55:07responsible for seeing that the
2:55:10assurances that were implicit and
2:55:12explicit in gemstone were carried
2:55:14out mr bittman to my knowledge
2:55:18did get in touch with the office of the
2:55:21law offices for by then mr colson was in
2:55:24private practice with the law offices of
2:55:26coulson and shapiro
2:55:28and made these representations in my
2:55:31behalf i.e that i desire to meet with mr
2:55:34colson
2:55:36uh a day or so later i was informed by
2:55:38mr bettman
2:55:39that although mr coulson would not see
2:55:42me his partner david shapiro would see
2:55:45me and he would see me the following
2:55:46friday i believe the 16th
2:55:49of
2:55:50february
2:55:53early in the afternoon
2:55:54and did you have that meeting with mr
2:55:56shapiro i did and did you tell mr
2:55:58shapiro
2:55:59uh substantially the same things that
2:56:01you told mr o'brien
2:56:03i did
2:56:05and including the other activities that
2:56:07you engaged in on behalf of the white
2:56:09house i did not specify them i i
2:56:11referred to them i might add that the
2:56:14the context of our meeting was entirely
2:56:16different
2:56:18whereas
2:56:19mr
2:56:20o'brien had approached me
2:56:22i might say almost apologetically
2:56:25mr shapiro approached me rather
2:56:27aggressively and subjected me to a
2:56:28lengthy
2:56:30monologue which i considered to be
2:56:31highly self-serving
2:56:35my response was that i had
2:56:38expected actually to see colson although
2:56:41i could understand and for
2:56:44purposes of record
2:56:45they might want it to appear that i had
2:56:47met only with shapiro rather than with
2:56:49colson
2:56:50i had not really expected to be received
2:56:53by a colson surrogate
2:56:55now did you make it clear to mr shapiro
2:56:57and mr o'brien that you needed to get
2:56:59the money prior to the date of sentence
2:57:02yes yeah that if i was there
2:57:05that i was to make if it was to be of
2:57:07any assistance to me
2:57:09in terms of
2:57:12making prudent distribution of it among
2:57:14members of my family my my dependents
2:57:18taking care of insurance premiums and
2:57:20that sort of thing that would
2:57:22have to be delivered to me before i was
2:57:25in jail this
2:57:26it was not only implicit but explicit as
2:57:29well mr dash
2:57:30now
2:57:31what did mr shapiro say to you when you
2:57:34made those representations to him
2:57:36he indicated to me uh
2:57:40that he would use his own discretion
2:57:43as regards uh
2:57:45such portions of my uh conversation as
2:57:48he chose to convey to
2:57:51mr colson
2:57:53i responded rather angrily that
2:57:56i felt that he should
2:57:58convey all
2:57:59of my
2:58:00what i had to say to mr colson but
2:58:03despite what you consider to be
2:58:05an unsatisfactory reception by mr
2:58:07o'brien and mr shapiro you in fact did
2:58:10receive a large sum of money prior to
2:58:12being sentenced is that not true
2:58:14yes
2:58:15and how much did you receive uh
2:58:18seventy five thousand dollars and you
2:58:20remember when you received that
2:58:25would it refresh your recollection if
2:58:26the record would show that you received
2:58:27it on march 20th
2:58:30i would have said 20th or 21st if the
2:58:32record shows the 20th that's perfectly
2:58:34satisfactory there's just a few couple
2:58:35days before the center yes sir
2:58:40and what did you do with that money uh
2:58:41mr hunt
2:58:44i put it in the safe deposit box and did
2:58:47you pay eventually and did you
2:58:48eventually pay mr bittman some of that
2:58:50money no
2:58:54did you what did you uh did you pay mr
2:58:57bittman any money out of that son i paid
2:59:00mr bidman sixty thousand dollars it came
2:59:02the drive from the proceeds of my late
2:59:04late wife's insurance policies
2:59:07i have no further questions mr good
2:59:09may i have the indulgence of the
2:59:11committee for just one second
2:59:41yes
2:59:59us
3:00:34mr sax it has been suggested to me that
3:00:37i may have misspoken a moment or so ago
3:00:40in which case
3:00:41i want the record to reflect that i did
3:00:43in fact
3:00:45inform mr o'brien of the fact that i had
3:00:49taken part in other seeming activities
3:00:52in behalf of the white house
3:00:54i hope the record is clear in this i
3:00:56don't believe that i specified to mr
3:00:58o'brien what they were however i made a
3:01:01generic reference
3:01:03to them
3:01:04is there any uh
3:01:07response was clear by the way that's 75
3:01:09000 you received just before you were
3:01:11sentenced uh
3:01:13and what matter did it come do you know
3:01:14the
3:01:15uh how you received it
3:01:18yes sir it came in an unknown and in an
3:01:21unopened envelope that was handed me by
3:01:24mr william bittman
3:01:26and he indicate to you how he received
3:01:27it
3:01:28yes he did you tell us what he said
3:01:31i received a telephone call from him at
3:01:34my residence indicating that he had
3:01:36received telephonic notification
3:01:39that
3:01:39an envelope would be left in his mailbox
3:01:42for me
3:01:44at a certain time
3:01:47he inspected his mailbox following that
3:01:50particular time found an envelope there
3:01:52and telephoned me
3:01:54i then went to his home which is a short
3:01:55distance from my own residence
3:01:57and
3:01:58received the envelope from him
3:02:00i have no further questions at this time
3:02:02mr chairman
3:02:08mr hunt you state
3:02:09in your opening statement that
3:02:11in your opinion the watergate break-in
3:02:13was an unfortunate use of executive
3:02:15power
3:02:16what executive power are you referring
3:02:18to
3:02:24i am referring to the power delegated to
3:02:27the attorney general of the united
3:02:28states by the president of the united
3:02:30states
3:02:32who involved in the watergate break-in
3:02:34of the planning of the break-in
3:02:36had that power in your opinion
3:02:42well
3:02:43uh we're referring to the watergate
3:02:45break-in solely yes sir your statement
3:02:47refers to
3:02:48the watergate breaking solely i believe
3:02:50the watergate to break in was a part of
3:02:53the gemstone operation
3:02:55an integral part of the gemstone
3:02:57operation it was financed out of
3:02:59gemstone funds
3:03:00gemstone personnel
3:03:02accomplished it
3:03:04the concept
3:03:06as i understood it from mr lydian again
3:03:08i must be very clear that this is
3:03:09hearsay
3:03:11information
3:03:12that the private project the program if
3:03:14you will had been
3:03:16conceived proposed engendered by the
3:03:19attorney general of the united states
3:03:21with the assistance of the
3:03:23council to the president mr john w dean
3:03:26iii
3:03:27and with a former and very recent white
3:03:30house aide mr jeb stewart magruder the
3:03:32proposal had been put to me by
3:03:35at the time by mr gordon liddy who was a
3:03:38full-time white house employee with whom
3:03:40i had worked in the fielding and other
3:03:41operations
3:03:42do you consider the watergate break-in
3:03:44then a legitimate governmental operation
3:03:51excuse me
3:04:04in the context in which the
3:04:07in uh
3:04:09a requirement was levied on me i did yes
3:04:11sir
3:04:12what context was that
3:04:14was that foreign monies were reported
3:04:17to be
3:04:18uh
3:04:21two have been
3:04:23sent or received by the democratic
3:04:25national committee and when was that
3:04:27information related to you in april of
3:04:301972
3:04:32april of 1972. yes sir
3:04:34uh have the water heat plan to your
3:04:37satisfaction been approved prior or
3:04:40subsequent to that time
3:04:41the actual watergate break-in was not
3:04:45approved
3:04:46for that up that
3:04:48aspect of the gemstone program was not
3:04:50approved
3:04:52until
3:04:53the time coincident with my receipt of
3:04:54the information concerning
3:04:57the
3:04:58report having to do with the receipt by
3:05:00the democratic national committee or the
3:05:02probable receipt of foreign monies
3:05:05but the discussion about the gemstone
3:05:07plan
3:05:08uh had been taking place prior to that
3:05:10time had it not according to any
3:05:11information in november of the prior
3:05:12year
3:05:16when did you in your mind when did you
3:05:19agree to become a part of that plan
3:05:23could you specify
3:05:24what plan do you mean the gemstone or
3:05:26the water gemstone plant
3:05:35almost as soon as mr liddy made the
3:05:37proposal to me
3:05:39he having invoked the names of the
3:05:41attorney general and mr dean at that
3:05:43juncture
3:05:45[Music]
3:05:49yes sir
3:05:51i had no hesitation on associating
3:05:53myself for the operation
3:05:55and when did it first come to your
3:05:56attention that the democratic national
3:05:59committee headquarters were going to be
3:06:01broken into
3:06:03not until april the following year
3:06:08just before or after you were informed
3:06:10that foreign money was coming into the
3:06:12dnc
3:06:15not until
3:06:19perhaps i misunderstand you senator uh
3:06:21the watergate break-in did not i'm not a
3:06:23senator i thank you
3:06:25thompson excuse me sir
3:06:28uh
3:06:28the
3:06:30we did not begin to formulate plans for
3:06:32the watergate break-in until after
3:06:35the reception of the report
3:06:37to the effect that foreign monies were
3:06:40being received by the democratic
3:06:41democratic national committee but a plan
3:06:44was underway which included the
3:06:45possibility of
3:06:47surreptitious entry before that time yes
3:06:50sir
3:06:51and you
3:06:52associated with that plan
3:06:54on the authority in your mind of the
3:06:56attorney general although you did not
3:06:58know the specifics
3:07:00at that particular time as to why he was
3:07:02authorized to set up such a plan in
3:07:04motion
3:07:10what i'm getting at mr hunt is i wonder
3:07:12what what was in your mind at that time
3:07:14as to
3:07:15as to what the attorney general could do
3:07:18and could not do surely anything that he
3:07:20decided to do would not necessarily be
3:07:22a legitimate activity whether or not the
3:07:25president
3:07:26went along with it
3:07:28i'm wondering what justification you had
3:07:30in your mind for subscribing to a plan
3:07:32which was designed toward an opposition
3:07:35party in the election year
3:07:39i can
3:07:40really see only this mr thompson
3:07:45and having spent 21 years in cia
3:07:48following orders without question and a
3:07:50prayer in a prior five years with the
3:07:52armed services
3:07:54following orders without question it
3:07:56never occurred to me to question the
3:07:58if you will the legality the propriety
3:08:01of anything that might be ordered by
3:08:04the attorney general of the united
3:08:05states
3:08:06and you took mr lady's word for that i
3:08:09did
3:08:15the other activities that you were
3:08:18engaging in during
3:08:20the period of time that you worked in
3:08:21the white house i believe you mentioned
3:08:24of course the entire ellsberg situation
3:08:26which i believe you
3:08:27say was a matter of national security at
3:08:29that time
3:08:31the
3:08:31the greenspun situation the information
3:08:34that you understood you might have had
3:08:35on senator muskie
3:08:38the
3:08:39i believe the overall gemstone plan also
3:08:41included perhaps a
3:08:44airplane surveillance of
3:08:46opposition planes or something of that
3:08:48nature they did not
3:08:50it did at one point yes sir
3:08:53may i specify that uh anything having to
3:08:55do with electronics
3:08:57was drawn up by mr lady in conjunction
3:08:59with
3:09:00a specialist whom i later came to know
3:09:02as mr mccord i had nothing to do with
3:09:04that budget all right
3:09:06also
3:09:06your activities included
3:09:09the
3:09:11convention situation that you referred
3:09:13to getting people recruiting people down
3:09:15there in a political context
3:09:18i'm just wondering when
3:09:21if the foreign money situation was the
3:09:23only thing outside of the purely
3:09:25political context that came to your
3:09:27attention
3:09:28as a justification for the gemstone
3:09:30operation
3:09:33i was never given any other
3:09:35who told you excuse me
3:09:49who told you that foreign money was
3:09:52coming into the dnc mr lady
3:09:55where did he get his information i
3:09:57believe that he was receiving it from a
3:09:59government agency
3:10:01from a government agency yes did he
3:10:04specify which agency no sir did you have
3:10:06an opinion as to which agency yes sir
3:10:09what was your opinion my opinion was it
3:10:11came from the fbi
3:10:17did you have any independent
3:10:18corroboration of that
3:10:21assertion no sir
3:10:23did you make any inquiry
3:10:25no sir
3:10:29do you believe it
3:10:37you believe do you remember whether or
3:10:39not he told you the particular agency or
3:10:41you just concluded that in your own mind
3:10:44did he tell you that it was an agency or
3:10:46did you conclude that in your own mind
3:10:49i would go back to our mutual experience
3:10:52in the plumber's organization
3:10:54at which time we were receiving
3:10:56daily
3:10:58reports from
3:10:59most of the investigative agencies of
3:11:01the government
3:11:03with relation to the ellsberg case
3:11:06mr uh
3:11:08had on the basis of prior associations
3:11:10in the fbi
3:11:12a private channel
3:11:16a person or persons who would telephone
3:11:18him or send him memoranda from time to
3:11:20time
3:11:21providing him with infirm information
3:11:23which was not distributed
3:11:24generally within the white house that is
3:11:26to say
3:11:27there were really two channels reporting
3:11:29from the fbi into the white house
3:11:33there was
3:11:34the j edgar hoover
3:11:38channel to let us say mr ehrlich one of
3:11:41mr krogh
3:11:42we would see copies of those memoranda
3:11:45there were also materials were coming to
3:11:47mr lady from mr martian in the justice
3:11:50department
3:11:51and i believe telephonic information
3:11:54that came to mr liddy from
3:11:56close uh and old time associates to
3:11:59visit the fbi
3:12:00so i had every reason to believe that he
3:12:02was still well plugged into the bureau
3:12:07did he tell you precisely
3:12:09the source of these foreign monies
3:12:13the country
3:12:14yes your individual what did he tell you
3:12:16cuba
3:12:18what would be the normal
3:12:21procedure
3:12:22with regard to investigating a matter
3:12:24like that if any organization
3:12:28in this country
3:12:29was receiving money from a foreign
3:12:32country especially a
3:12:34communist country
3:12:37the
3:12:38practice normally would be to
3:12:41lay a requirement on the
3:12:43cia abroad
3:12:45and the fbi at home however
3:12:48the president had established the
3:12:49plumbers unit because certain
3:12:51traditional agencies of the government
3:12:53had been
3:12:54deemed inadequate in the performance of
3:12:56their divvies
3:12:58was the plumber's unit uh
3:13:00in any way operative in april of 1972
3:13:05yes indeed
3:13:07you know whether or not they were
3:13:08looking into this matter no sir
3:13:11you don't know whether or not they were
3:13:13i'm quite sure they were not
3:13:16nobody else was as far as you know no
3:13:18sir
3:13:26with regard to the actual scene
3:13:29who was in charge of the various
3:13:30operations on the night of the break-in
3:13:33the early morning hours of june 17 1972.
3:13:40the responsibilities were the same as
3:13:42they were during the prior break-in on
3:13:43may 27th
3:13:45i had to just say i was an overall
3:13:47charge of the entry operation i planned
3:13:49it
3:13:50and with mr mccord's help
3:13:53surveyed the groundwork developed the
3:13:54operational plan
3:13:57mr mccord had certain electronic
3:13:59responsibilities the
3:14:01precise nature of which i was unaware of
3:14:06my team that is to say the
3:14:09foreman from miami were charged with
3:14:12photographing documents that would bear
3:14:14on the object of our search
3:14:16while mr mccord what about his
3:14:18electronic business
3:14:21did you tell any of the cuban americans
3:14:24about the foreign money information that
3:14:26you had i did what did you tell i told
3:14:29mr barker and this
3:14:31was the basis on which
3:14:33i secured his cooperation initially do
3:14:36you know whether or not he related this
3:14:38to
3:14:40the people he enlisted to assist him in
3:14:42operation
3:14:43i believe he may have
3:14:46if i can amplify a bit mr thompson
3:14:49when i approached
3:14:51mr barker with the requirement for an
3:14:54entry into democratic democratic
3:14:56national headquarters
3:14:58i told him that we wanted to verify
3:15:01a report to the effect that castro money
3:15:03was reaching democratic national
3:15:05committee coffers
3:15:07mr barker's immediate response was that
3:15:09rumor is all over miami i've heard all
3:15:12about it you don't need to tell me
3:15:13anything more
3:15:14did you tell him anything more about it
3:15:16i knew nothing more about it
3:15:18and did he operate then on your
3:15:20information he did
3:15:25was there any financial reward in any
3:15:28way for mr barker any of the other cuban
3:15:31americans
3:15:32out of the watergate break-in there was
3:15:35compensation for them for time lost from
3:15:38their normal businesses yes but was
3:15:41there anything additional to that
3:15:43not that i know of no sir
3:15:45what about the
3:15:46breaking of dr fielding's office was
3:15:48there any
3:15:50benefit
3:15:52coming out of that for them other than
3:15:54just expenses time
3:15:56or money for time lost from work that
3:15:58sort of thing no sir that was all what
3:16:00was told the cubans with regard to that
3:16:03operation with regard to breaking dr
3:16:05fielding's office the reason the
3:16:06necessity for it
3:16:10i told mr barker originally
3:16:12in miami that
3:16:14break-in would be necessary an entry
3:16:16operation would be necessary on the west
3:16:18coast
3:16:20as we had
3:16:21information
3:16:23to the effect that
3:16:26a
3:16:28man who i believe i describe as a
3:16:30traitor to the united states was passing
3:16:32classified informations to a foreign
3:16:34power
3:16:36were you the one who
3:16:38enlisted mr barker's aid to come to
3:16:40washington during mr hoover's funeral i
3:16:43was
3:16:45did he in turn enlist the aid of other
3:16:46cuban americans to to come with him he
3:16:49did
3:16:50and what was the reason for your
3:16:52arrangement them to come to washington
3:16:55this was in response to an urgent
3:16:56requirement by mr liddy
3:16:58who indicated to me that he had
3:17:01information
3:17:02again i assume this to be from a u s
3:17:05government agency
3:17:06to the effect that in conjunction with
3:17:08the peacenik demonstration on
3:17:12capitol hill premises
3:17:14that an effort would probably be made to
3:17:16desecrate the catapult
3:17:19of j edgar hoover who was then lying in
3:17:21state here in the rotunda of the capital
3:17:23it was
3:17:24desired
3:17:26that
3:17:28perhaps as many as a ten or a dozen men
3:17:31would be brought up from miami so that
3:17:32they could circulate through the crowd
3:17:35sense their temper
3:17:36and if a surge was made from the focus
3:17:39of the
3:17:43demonstration then in progress that
3:17:46these men could interpose themselves
3:17:48around the casket of
3:17:49jade jehovah and prevent its desecration
3:17:53did they further
3:17:55that if a viet cong flag was unfurled by
3:17:58the demonstrators who included such
3:18:01notables as
3:18:02mrs kunstler and ellsberg jane fonda the
3:18:06sus sutherland and so forth
3:18:08that uh that flag be obtained
3:18:11taken from them and turned over to mr
3:18:13lady
3:18:14did they come
3:18:16they did
3:18:18did they
3:18:19subsequently engage i believe in
3:18:20fisticuffs for some of the demonstrators
3:18:22i've heard that alleged
3:18:24did they receive any financial reward or
3:18:26benefit out of that operation except for
3:18:28their expenses coming and going not to
3:18:30my knowledge
3:18:32with regard to the fielding break-in in
3:18:35the dnc break in
3:18:37as far as you know their motivation was
3:18:41first of all that they were doing
3:18:42something to
3:18:43expose a traitor
3:18:45and secondly that they were
3:18:48trying to uncover or verify reports that
3:18:50uh
3:18:52castrol money was coming in the
3:18:54democratic national committee
3:18:55headquarters yes you know that's the
3:18:57sole basis of their action yes sir
3:18:59although there was speculation of course
3:19:00that hanoi money might be coming in as
3:19:02well
3:19:03that what there was some speculation
3:19:05among us that money from hanoi might
3:19:08also be coming in as well but this was
3:19:10not part of the corpus of mr liddy's
3:19:12representations to me
3:19:14who told you that
3:19:21nobody told it to me mr thompson
3:19:23senator mcgovern though for some time
3:19:25had been
3:19:27saying that he would in effect or call
3:19:28to hanoi if it meant to
3:19:30let the release of our prisoners
3:19:33and we felt that if
3:19:35castro money might be coming into
3:19:37democratic national committee coffers
3:19:39that money might also be coming from
3:19:41hanoi as well
3:19:43did you tell mr barker to look for any
3:19:45particular kinds of documents when he
3:19:47when he entered the dnc that night yes
3:19:49sir what did you generally look for
3:19:51financial documents ledgers
3:19:53account books that sort of thing
3:19:55would mr mr barker know
3:19:59if he came across significant documents
3:20:01in this regard do you think
3:20:03did he have any background and
3:20:06huge political campaigns or
3:20:08finances
3:20:11my presumption
3:20:13our operational presumption was mr
3:20:15thompson that
3:20:16during the course of
3:20:19his search
3:20:21mr barker would come across ledgers in
3:20:23the comic books of some kinds all
3:20:25political parties being required to keep
3:20:26them his instructions were to photograph
3:20:29in effect any any page with a figure on
3:20:32it later on a determination would be
3:20:34made
3:20:36as to the significance and validity of
3:20:38those
3:20:39figures sources of the funds and
3:20:41contributions
3:20:42we've heard testimony about how the
3:20:44injury was was carried out that night i
3:20:46believe
3:20:47we've heard testimony about how the
3:20:48injury was carried out that night and
3:20:50you correct me if i
3:20:51misstated
3:20:52i believe mr mccord first take the locks
3:20:55on the door
3:20:56and return found that the tape had been
3:20:58removed
3:20:59and then there was a discussion among
3:21:01the people there as to whether or not
3:21:02entry would be re entry would be made
3:21:04after finding that situation there do
3:21:07you recall such a discussion among
3:21:08yourself mr lady mccord and the cubans
3:21:11yes sir
3:21:12uh relate that discussion to us as best
3:21:15you can remember
3:21:17mr mccord came up to room 214 where
3:21:21we were waiting i'm speaking now the
3:21:23watergate hotel
3:21:24and said that he had
3:21:26[Music]
3:21:27previously taped the locks on the entry
3:21:30door in the basement of the watergate
3:21:32office building
3:21:34he said that
3:21:36on returning just prior to our
3:21:39to the meeting that was then in progress
3:21:42he had noticed that the tape had been
3:21:44removed and he had retaped the door
3:21:47i asked him why he had done that and he
3:21:50said that he had noticed a large pile of
3:21:52mail sacks
3:21:54in the vicinity and he felt that the
3:21:56mailman on exiting the watergate
3:21:59office building premises had taken
3:22:01off the tape
3:22:03that he told you that he had already
3:22:04retaped the door at the time i had
3:22:06re-taped the door yes was at that point
3:22:09i said
3:22:10let's junk it
3:22:11meaning let's scratch the operation
3:22:16mr lady and mr mccord
3:22:19talked between themselves and the
3:22:20decision was made to go
3:22:22did you hear the conversation between
3:22:24lydia and mccoy
3:22:26i walked away
3:22:27as i recall i walked over the window i
3:22:29thought that it was very foolhardy to
3:22:31proceed on that basis
3:22:33i might add that i had argued for three
3:22:35days in advance ineffectively with
3:22:38with mr liddy prior to
3:22:40the 17th of june against the second
3:22:43entry in the watergate why
3:22:46because it had been known to me through
3:22:50the court reports mr mccourt had made
3:22:53that mr o'brien was no longer in
3:22:55residence there and that there was
3:22:56evidently a
3:22:58large-scale movement
3:23:00of books files call of what you will
3:23:02from
3:23:04the watergate office to the
3:23:07convention headquarters of the democrats
3:23:09in miami
3:23:11i felt that the in effect the bird had
3:23:13flown
3:23:14did you hear any of the conversation as
3:23:16to who made the final decision of who
3:23:18was for or against reentry
3:23:21i think it was a mutual decision common
3:23:23decision between mr lady and mr mccourt
3:23:27mr mccord gave what reason and his mind
3:23:30for the
3:23:31for the tape having been removed as to
3:23:32who removed it that he had seen
3:23:36immediately adjacent to that door
3:23:39a pile of large mail sacks which he felt
3:23:42had been collected by the mailman
3:23:44and on exiting the the building
3:23:47the mailman must have noticed the lake
3:23:49was
3:23:50that the
3:23:52lock was taped
3:23:54and had removed the tape
3:23:56and mr mccord was convinced he told us
3:24:00that
3:24:02it would just happenstance
3:24:04he thereupon retaped the lock came up to
3:24:07our room
3:24:08and said in effect i'm ready to go let's
3:24:10go
3:24:10how did you get the door back open
3:24:13to retake it
3:24:14i don't know
3:24:18was there any discussion about buying
3:24:19off a guard perhaps
3:24:21no sir but there was money available for
3:24:23that
3:24:24do you know why that was not uh carried
3:24:26out
3:24:27no sir i don't believe that it uh it
3:24:29hadn't been necessary in our first entry
3:24:31we
3:24:31didn't even attempt it the second time
3:24:33ron
3:24:35did you know at the time that uh some of
3:24:37the people who were going to make the
3:24:38entry were carrying 100 bills on them
3:24:40and numerical sequence that could be
3:24:42traced
3:24:45i don't think i knew that they were
3:24:48carrying
3:24:49sequential bills on them no sir
3:24:52was any check made of things of that
3:24:54nature as to what was
3:24:57on the persons of the people making
3:24:58entry and what would be done or what
3:25:01what would happen
3:25:02they were told to
3:25:05take their personal wallets billfolds
3:25:08and so forth
3:25:09and put them
3:25:12or leave them behind in room 214
3:25:15which i believe they did they were then
3:25:16provided a couple of them were provided
3:25:18with false documentation
3:25:20which i had received from the central
3:25:22intelligence agency
3:25:24we felt the flash documentation plus the
3:25:27money that they had on them would be
3:25:28sufficient to
3:25:30get them out of a local guard type
3:25:32situation
3:25:34after the break-in did you have occasion
3:25:36to call mr mccord
3:25:39and talk to him about uh mr baldwin
3:25:42thank you just hiring mr baldwin yes sir
3:25:44i didn't relate that conversation
3:25:48uh at about the time
3:25:52that mr baldwin began
3:25:55telling his story to the los angeles
3:25:57times
3:25:59when was that how long after the
3:26:01break-in would you say
3:26:05may i consult myself
3:26:07should be a matter of record
3:26:26so
3:26:51mr thompson i would have to place it as
3:26:54a guest
3:26:55sometime toward mid-july
3:26:58or even late july at a time when
3:27:02uh
3:27:03mr mccord was no longer in the district
3:27:06columbia jail
3:27:07and at the time when
3:27:10mr baldwin had begun so to speak to
3:27:13sing
3:27:15all right would you relate the
3:27:16conversation
3:27:17i was
3:27:22quite disturbed by the revelations that
3:27:24mr baldwin was making
3:27:27i telephoned mr mccord
3:27:30and asked him uh to explain and affect
3:27:32the circumstances surrounding this
3:27:35uh
3:27:36parent disloyally on the part of a man
3:27:38he had hired
3:27:43mr mccord said that he
3:27:45himself mr mccord was short on funds
3:27:48i suggested that he sell the van which
3:27:50uh
3:27:52mr baldwin had for some reason driven to
3:27:55mr mccord's home in the wake of the
3:27:57operation
3:27:58against my instructions to take it
3:28:00elsewhere
3:28:01department did you you say against your
3:28:03instructions yes i
3:28:06following the break-in i
3:28:08and i i probably should go back to
3:28:10clarify the record
3:28:12uh in a very minor way i've been asked
3:28:14before the lunch break
3:28:17but to recount my own movements
3:28:20following the
3:28:21watergate the arrest of the five men i
3:28:24did not go directly to the white house i
3:28:27went over to the howard johnson motel
3:28:30and
3:28:31spoke with a man whom i had not
3:28:33previously seen
3:28:34or met but whom i knew to be an employee
3:28:36of mr mccord's
3:28:38and told him to load all of his
3:28:41equipment into the van that mccord had
3:28:44and to drive away get away from the
3:28:46premises he said where shall i go shall
3:28:48i take it to mccord's home i said no any
3:28:50place but that i don't care where you
3:28:52take it drive it into the river i don't
3:28:54care
3:28:55in any event is
3:28:57it's developed mr mccord
3:28:59took the van mr baldwin took the van to
3:29:03mr mccord's house and left it there you
3:29:06know how far his house was from the
3:29:08howard johnson's hotel
3:29:11was it closer to the court's house yes
3:29:13no it was a substantial drive i would
3:29:15guess 15 to 16 miles if not more all
3:29:18right go ahead you were talking about
3:29:20your conversation if that's all you have
3:29:22to relate on that yes sir
3:29:24you pick up your conversation with mr
3:29:26mccord about that yes
3:29:28so uh i was rather critical of mr mccord
3:29:31for the performance of his employee
3:29:34and mr mccord on his part was rather
3:29:37defensive
3:29:38he indicated to me that
3:29:40in the wake of the arrests that baldwin
3:29:43had felt himself abandoned
3:29:45and had gone directly to the committee
3:29:47for the re-election of the president
3:29:49to seek instructions and or financial
3:29:51assistance and he had been rebuffed
3:29:54feeling himself thus abandoned and cast
3:29:56upon his own resources i am again
3:29:58quoting mr mccord to the best of my
3:30:00recollection
3:30:02mr baldwin sought counsel in
3:30:06connecticut and retained two attorneys
3:30:08who
3:30:09in whose hands
3:30:12he subsequently remained
3:30:14it was on the basis of their advice
3:30:16that he began uh giving interviews the
3:30:19first of which was i believe the los
3:30:21angeles times
3:30:23was that the only conversation you had
3:30:25with mr mccord about baldwin
3:30:27the best of my recollection sir all
3:30:29right you didn't know baldwin except
3:30:31through mccord i'll take it i
3:30:33saw him
3:30:352 30 odd hours the morning of june 17th
3:30:39in a darkened room
3:30:40i would never have been able to identify
3:30:42him except through the photograph that i
3:30:44saw in the newspaper all right
3:30:46you've been asked this morning about uh
3:30:49what in your opinion mr mr colson knew
3:30:52about an overall plan or or a gemstone
3:30:54plan and i'm not sure that i'm
3:30:56i have that uh straight in my mind you
3:30:59refer
3:31:00to that first of all to a conversation
3:31:02you had
3:31:03with mr colson in january i believe of
3:31:06this year
3:31:07when you uh
3:31:09of 1972 when you told him that you were
3:31:12in effect going to the committee to
3:31:14reelect
3:31:16then we would
3:31:18refer to a conversation you had with
3:31:20liddy after the meeting that you had
3:31:21with lydia and colson in colson's office
3:31:24when mr lady said that
3:31:26he thought colson would help
3:31:34just what in your opinion
3:31:37did mr colson know
3:31:39first of all just what in your opinion
3:31:41did mr colson know about the gemstone
3:31:43operation and what is the basis
3:31:46of that opinion
3:31:54you excuse me
3:32:14we're fine
3:32:22yes
3:32:39ugh
3:33:01to address myself to your question mr
3:33:03thompson
3:33:06and i'm reading from some notes that
3:33:07i've compiled is that permissible yes
3:33:09sir when did you compile it
3:33:12within the past
3:33:1410 days
3:33:16was it before or after the grand jury
3:33:19session when you first uh
3:33:21related to the staff uh the fact that in
3:33:23your opinion mr colson
3:33:25did know about the gemstones it was in
3:33:27connection with that uh
3:33:30was it before
3:33:40before or after
3:33:42that session
3:33:44it was uh
3:33:47at the same time
3:33:49well it couldn't have been exactly the
3:33:50same time
3:33:52in order to make my presentation to the
3:33:55committee an executive session
3:33:57i prepared the notes that i
3:33:59am now requesting permission to read
3:34:01had this question or similar question
3:34:04that i just posed to you concerning his
3:34:06knowledge been posed to you in executive
3:34:08session before you made these notes yes
3:34:10sir all right go ahead
3:34:15in late january 1972 i told colson that
3:34:18as a result of my increasing involvement
3:34:20with gordon lydia i would be unable to
3:34:22give anything like as much time to
3:34:24coulson as i had in the past
3:34:26coulson said that's all right you can be
3:34:28a lot more useful over there
3:34:31i.e working for liddy
3:34:33i remarked that he was probably aware of
3:34:36the large-scale intelligence program
3:34:38that had been conceived in which mr
3:34:41liddy was heading
3:34:42colson said i'd have much preferred that
3:34:44you had it
3:34:47he indicated at the same time that he
3:34:49had already provided bonafides on my
3:34:52part to mr mitchell
3:34:55i replied that i liked the arrangement
3:34:56with liddy that i had worked with and
3:34:58had full confidence in lady at the same
3:35:01time i had a rather demanding job at
3:35:04modeling company and i told colson that
3:35:07i would like to be able to be available
3:35:09to him coulson
3:35:10within the limits of my physical
3:35:13capacities and said that i assumed i
3:35:16would maintain my white house office and
3:35:18safe
3:35:19colson said that was no problem
3:35:24this is the background for coulson's
3:35:26perceptions
3:35:28when i called on him with liddy about a
3:35:30month later
3:35:31colson knew that i had been engaged in
3:35:33covert activities with liddy
3:35:35uh he in fact i've been given understand
3:35:38actually finance the feeling entry
3:35:41when did you learn that i learned that
3:35:49in conjunction with an appearance i made
3:35:52before the watergate grand jury
3:35:55you were told that at that time yes
3:35:57by financing the fielding entry of what
3:35:59what could you build a bit more specific
3:36:01as to actually what they told you he did
3:36:03that he provided the monies which were
3:36:06used by mr lady for that purpose
3:36:08did uh were you told who he gave the
3:36:10money to
3:36:12i'm sorry sir well you told who he gave
3:36:14the money directly to
3:36:15who is he mr colson
3:36:18well i have testified that uh
3:36:20that i saw mr mr cole give money to mr
3:36:24liddy
3:36:25but it was not until recently that i
3:36:27learned
3:36:28uh that mr
3:36:30krogh received the money apparently from
3:36:32the hands of mr colson
3:36:35and you don't know anything about the
3:36:36circumstances of his giving money to
3:36:38crow
3:36:39soon no sir i do have the money no sir
3:36:42all right go ahead
3:36:46carlson also acknowledged that there was
3:36:48that he was aware of a plan conceived by
3:36:51the attorney general to secure
3:36:52intelligence on radical groups and
3:36:54democratic candidates that being the
3:36:56gemstone program
3:36:58and that i was working on this with
3:37:00liddy as a covert collaborator
3:37:02this was in january january meeting
3:37:04yesterday the january meeting
3:37:14so we actually said use the word
3:37:16gemstone no sir
3:37:18would you read that last portion again
3:37:22i was not reading i was interpolating i
3:37:25see what exactly
3:37:26did he say other than what you've
3:37:28already related i believe in response to
3:37:31your inquiries whether or not he was
3:37:32aware of a large-scale intelligence plan
3:37:34he said i'd rather you hit it this was
3:37:36my summation of of the conversation i
3:37:38had said earlier
3:37:40i remarked to mr colson that he was
3:37:42probably aware of the large-scale
3:37:44intelligence program that had been
3:37:46conceived in which mr liddy was heading
3:37:49he said that he was and in fact that he
3:37:51had checked my bona fides on behalf of
3:37:54the attorney general
3:37:55when did you conclude in your own mind
3:37:57that he was in fact
3:37:59uh aware of it as soon as he said it in
3:38:01that meeting
3:38:03yes
3:38:04but what about the meeting in february
3:38:07after
3:38:09you left i believe you had a
3:38:10conversation with mr lydia if my memory
3:38:11served me correctly i believe in
3:38:13executive session you said something to
3:38:14the effect that
3:38:16that was the first time that you really
3:38:18became aware or you concluded in your
3:38:20own mind that coulson must have been
3:38:21aware of exactly what was going on with
3:38:23regard to the gemstone plan i said i
3:38:25said that mr thompson at an early
3:38:28session of the executive
3:38:30in an early executive session
3:38:32however subsequently due to
3:38:34a different line of questioning
3:38:37by councils of this committee i was able
3:38:40to
3:38:41reconstruct events that had not at that
3:38:44point been fresh in my mind
3:38:50let's see if this is the line that
3:38:52you're referring to i'm referring to the
3:38:54transcript september 20
3:38:571973 thursday
3:39:09i'll start reading at line 11.
3:39:11it's in late january
3:39:14page 467.
3:39:23[Applause]
3:39:34start reading about line 11 and i'll be
3:39:35skipping some if you want to take the
3:39:37time to read the part in between of
3:39:38course that's
3:39:40perfectly all right in late january 1972
3:39:42i told charles colson that as a result
3:39:44of my increasing involvement with gordon
3:39:46lee
3:39:47i'd be unable to give him anything like
3:39:48as much time to coulson as i had in the
3:39:50past he said that's all right you can be
3:39:52a lot more useful over there
3:39:54that is to say working for or with liddy
3:39:57i remarked that he coulson was probably
3:39:59aware of the large-scale intelligence
3:40:00program that had been conceived which mr
3:40:02lady was heading
3:40:03colson said i would have much preferred
3:40:04that you headed
3:40:06i replied that i liked the arrangement i
3:40:08had worked with and had confidence in
3:40:10lady
3:40:11besides i had full time work with mullen
3:40:13in the company i told colson i would be
3:40:16i would continue to be available to him
3:40:18within the limits of my time
3:40:20i'll assume i would maintain my white
3:40:22house office and save coulson said this
3:40:24would be
3:40:25no problem
3:40:27then if i may
3:40:34i'd like to move over to
3:40:36page 471
3:40:44he
3:40:57the senators now go to the senate floor
3:40:59for a vote on a military aid bill and as
3:41:01they do that we're going to pause
3:41:02briefly public television's coverage of
3:41:05the senate watergate hearings will
3:41:06continue after this pause for station
3:41:08identification
3:41:09unabridged coverage of these hearings is
3:41:11being broadcast as a public service by
3:41:13your local public television station
3:41:16this is p b s the public broadcastings
3:41:19from washington n pact continues its
3:41:21coverage of hearings by the senate
3:41:23select committee on presidential
3:41:24campaign activities here again impact
3:41:27correspondent jim lehrer
3:41:29as we go back to the hearings howard
3:41:31hunt is being questioned by minority
3:41:33council fred thompson
3:41:35my name is
3:41:50mr hunt with not reading on
3:41:53let me see if i can summarize the
3:41:54situation you correct me if i'm wrong
3:41:57i got the impression from reading the
3:41:58transcript that
3:42:00the question was posed to you as to as
3:42:02to
3:42:03how could it be that
3:42:05that you would be brought
3:42:07that such a conversation could could
3:42:09come about with between mr lydia and mr
3:42:11colson
3:42:13what would be
3:42:14a plausible explanation for that and
3:42:16possibly your being there and what kind
3:42:18of an explanation
3:42:19would be plausible with regard to what
3:42:21mr liddy told you afterwards
3:42:23and you in effect concluded that uh well
3:42:25the only plausible explanation would be
3:42:26mr colson must have known about it
3:42:28beforehand
3:42:29would that be a fair summary of what you
3:42:32stated in an executive session
3:42:34yes sir
3:42:35well if that's the case then that would
3:42:37indicate that it was after the february
3:42:39meeting that you concluded in your own
3:42:41mind anyway that mr colson was aware of
3:42:44the gemstone plan
3:42:45and not before that time
3:42:56i get the impres
3:42:57i got the impression that you were
3:42:59saying that after the february meeting
3:43:01was the first time you realized in your
3:43:03own minds when it struck you mr colson
3:43:06must have been aware of the overall plan
3:43:10at that time yes sir
3:43:16well then when you had the january
3:43:17meeting with mr colson and you discuss
3:43:20the reasons for going to the committed
3:43:21re-elect
3:43:22i assume that
3:43:24you did not
3:43:25come away from that discussion with a
3:43:27feeling that he had an awareness of the
3:43:29overall gemstone plan
3:43:31i'm sorry mr thompson but i couldn't
3:43:33tell if you said awareness or
3:43:35unawareness so i missed that awareness
3:43:38awareness
3:43:40is it clear to you i
3:43:42believe i'm having difficulty now in
3:43:44discriminating between questions mr
3:43:46thompson i'm terribly sorry i'm not
3:43:48trying to be obstructive i want to be
3:43:49responsive
3:43:52could you restate
3:43:54the
3:43:56question as
3:43:58it stands
3:44:01let me put the question to you
3:44:03just the way it was putting executive
3:44:04sessions in with time
3:44:07i've already related where you stated
3:44:09that you had a conversation in january
3:44:10with mr coulson about the overall
3:44:12intelligence plan
3:44:14mr dash asked you other than the
3:44:15particular intelligence plan that you
3:44:16were working with mr lady on which mr
3:44:19later was getting approved for mr
3:44:21mitchell which is known as we know now
3:44:23the gemstone plan was there any other
3:44:24plan in effect
3:44:26mr hunt no sir mr day so in restating it
3:44:29the gemstone plan was the only
3:44:30large-scale intelligence plan which was
3:44:32in existence at the time so mr colson's
3:44:34statement to you that he was aware of
3:44:36this plan could only refer the gemstone
3:44:38plan yes sir
3:44:39and that is what led you to believe
3:44:42that in fact that uh
3:44:46when you in february
3:44:48introduced mr liddy's mr colson that mr
3:44:50lady
3:44:51on his arm while you were there in the
3:44:53rear of the room urged coulson's
3:44:54assistant on this plan that mr colson
3:44:56was already aware of the gemstone plan
3:44:58did not need any further information
3:44:59provided by you
3:45:01person he would entrust and this would
3:45:03be the basis upon which he made the
3:45:05telephone call to mr magruder
3:45:07mr thompson i'm sorry but we don't have
3:45:10the page and we're not following it's
3:45:11going a little too fast if you direct us
3:45:13to the page i'm reading from pages 471
3:45:16and 472.
3:45:34i think our problem is that we that
3:45:37doesn't quite know what the question is
3:45:39when did you first become aware in your
3:45:41own mind that mr colson knew about the
3:45:43gemstone plant
3:45:44in january
3:45:46in january yesterday all right
3:45:48now mr dash has referred to an executive
3:45:50session on may the 14th 1973
3:45:54would it be fair to say that this
3:45:56executive session the statement which he
3:45:58referred to
3:45:59where he questioned you as follows
3:46:02uh mr das actually when did you first
3:46:04learn from mr lady that the sign was
3:46:06okay the go sign referring to the
3:46:08approval by the attorney general
3:46:10well i would put it very late in march
3:46:12very late in february if not in early
3:46:14march mr dash now it was around that
3:46:16time that you met with mr mccoy in march
3:46:19yes sir during that time did you ever
3:46:21indicate in the presence of mr mccord
3:46:23that these plans would have that you
3:46:25were in touch with other persons
3:46:27yourself in the white house mr colson or
3:46:29anybody else concerning these plans
3:46:32no sir
3:46:33mr hunt no sir i would not have done
3:46:35this because it was true to the best of
3:46:38my knowledge mr colson had no specific
3:46:40knowledge he had no knowledge of my
3:46:42dealings with mr liddy from me
3:46:45now if mr colson had collateral
3:46:47knowledge or awareness he did not
3:46:48confide in me
3:46:50mr dash besides these people who were
3:46:53meeting and that would be mr mitchell mr
3:46:55dean
3:46:56mr magruder and yourself
3:46:58and the cubans who came up for that who
3:47:00else to your knowledge was aware of this
3:47:03activity
3:47:04mr hunt of the overall project mr dash
3:47:07yes mr hunt i have no personal knowledge
3:47:09of anyone
3:47:11would you say that that is inconsistent
3:47:13with your present testimony yes sir mr
3:47:15thompson and let me
3:47:17try to reconcile this as best i can as i
3:47:19believe i have in subsequent testimony
3:47:23that until
3:47:26a matter of some two weeks ago perhaps
3:47:28less
3:47:30it had been my
3:47:31firm conviction that there had been no
3:47:35substantive knowledge on the part of mr
3:47:37colson concerning
3:47:39the
3:47:40gemstone or the overall intelligence
3:47:42plan
3:47:43however
3:47:44following a line of questioning embarked
3:47:46upon by mr dash
3:47:50a
3:47:51train of thought was sparked which led
3:47:53to my recollection of the january
3:47:55meeting with mr colson which then became
3:47:58significant to me
3:48:00on that the basis of my
3:48:02of the january my reconstruction of our
3:48:05january meeting i was able to postulate
3:48:08what mr coulson's perceptions might have
3:48:10been during the
3:48:11uh his meeting with liddy and myself in
3:48:15february
3:48:17and it is to that that i gave have given
3:48:19my most recent testimony
3:48:23so you in effect did not
3:48:25remember
3:48:27up until the time mr dash embarked on
3:48:29that line of questions that is correct
3:48:31that you had discussed this matter in
3:48:32january with mr colson and he indicated
3:48:34he was aware of it
3:48:37that is correct
3:48:41would you not consider that a
3:48:42significant piece of information
3:48:49i consider it a piece of significant
3:48:51information now yes sir
3:48:54well in january i was not uh
3:48:58acutely conscious of it in terms of
3:49:00significance or did you realize the
3:49:02significance of it in may the 14th when
3:49:04you stated that
3:49:06as far as you know mr coulson and no one
3:49:08else had knowledge of the plan may 14th
3:49:10i did not recollect it mr thompson
3:49:13since the since may 14th and your
3:49:16testimony here and
3:49:18the testimony executive session where
3:49:20this was brought out
3:49:21you have filed a motion i believe set
3:49:23your pleading aside
3:49:24to set your plea of guilty aside i
3:49:26believe have you not
3:49:28yes sir
3:49:29and if i understand it that motion is
3:49:31based in part
3:49:33upon
3:49:34the
3:49:36what's what you might say uh executive
3:49:38approval of some kind of the plan which
3:49:40would justify the plan at least in your
3:49:42mind at that time
3:49:45and you mentioned
3:49:46mr dean you must mention mr magruder
3:49:50mr mitchell i believe and also mr colson
3:49:53in your pleadings and uh
3:49:56with regard to your motion that you
3:49:57filed set your plea aside is that
3:49:59correct
3:50:00yes you are
3:50:02with all deference mr thompson let me
3:50:06point out that mr dash has previously
3:50:08asked me in effect the same question
3:50:11and i've responded i believe the the
3:50:13record will show
3:50:15that my
3:50:16plea is not based
3:50:18substantively upon
3:50:20mr colson's involvement or
3:50:22non-involvement
3:50:24on my
3:50:25theory to understand was based upon what
3:50:27i understood your original testimony to
3:50:28be that this was
3:50:30this latest information response to mr
3:50:32dash was additional information but was
3:50:34not inconsistent
3:50:36now as i understand you say that it is
3:50:38inconsistent but it's based upon your
3:50:39failure to previously remember
3:50:41i'd also like to to ask you concerning
3:50:46a
3:50:46letter which you wrote mr coulson on
3:50:49august 9
3:50:51which i'd like to furnish you a copy of
3:50:52if you
3:50:54at the present time if you don't have
3:51:14it is an exhibit this was furnished to
3:51:17us this this is an exhibit part of the
3:51:19record this was furnished to us uh
3:51:22by mr colson i believe
3:51:25this letter to uh
3:51:27coulson dated august 9 1972
3:51:30and the first part of it i won't go into
3:51:32it unless you care to it has to do with
3:51:36the fact that
3:51:38you were removed from mullins hew
3:51:41account
3:51:42and the last paragraph you say let me
3:51:44say
3:51:45i profoundly wretch are being dragged
3:51:47into the case through association with
3:51:49me
3:51:50superficial and occasional though the
3:51:53association was
3:51:55what small satisfaction i can dredge up
3:51:57at the moment is the knowledge that i
3:51:59was not responsible
3:52:01for the affair its outcome
3:52:03all this pales of course besides the
3:52:04overwhelming importance of reelecting
3:52:06the president you may be confident
3:52:08that i will do all that's required
3:52:11toward that end
3:52:13was it your opinion at that time that mr
3:52:16coulson was being dragged into the case
3:52:17solely because of his prior friendship
3:52:20with you or
3:52:22do you now feel like that he was
3:52:23possibly being dragged in because he
3:52:24knew of the plan
3:52:26from the very inception
3:52:28because of his what would he say because
3:52:30he knew the gemstone plan perhaps in
3:52:32some way participated in it
3:52:34he was being dragged into the watergate
3:52:37case
3:52:38by the press because he had been my
3:52:40sponsor in the white house
3:52:42and because my
3:52:44uh
3:52:46one of my alternate telephone extensions
3:52:48was out of his office that was the how
3:52:50the
3:52:51connection had initially been
3:52:52established
3:52:54and i regretted that
3:52:56so that was the sole basis that you had
3:53:00before in your mind at that time for
3:53:02feeling that he was being dragged into
3:53:03the case would that be a fair statement
3:53:06we're talking watergate case now yes sir
3:53:09all right
3:53:10with regard to the telephone
3:53:11conversation that was
3:53:13recorded by mr colson in late november
3:53:15of 1972 if i can refer to page six of
3:53:18that
3:53:21and of course you said i believe in
3:53:22retrospect you probably feel like that
3:53:24you
3:53:25were being set up with regard to that
3:53:28of course mr colson's statements could
3:53:29have been self-serving but
3:53:33do you have that before you i believe
3:53:34that was furnished a moment ago
3:53:57page six
3:54:02state uh
3:54:04let the six set of sentences down mr
3:54:07coulson states
3:54:09i'll leave out some of the language here
3:54:12i said if i had ever known it was coming
3:54:13i would have said to you as a friend
3:54:16uh don't get involved i mean if you and
3:54:18i if we had a conversation like that i
3:54:20would have said my god but the point
3:54:22i've made is that you're smart among
3:54:23other
3:54:24qualities you are a brilliant operator
3:54:26and brilliant operators just don't get
3:54:28into this kind of thing
3:54:30and this is why i don't want to know any
3:54:32different this is why i was asked by the
3:54:34bureau
3:54:35what what about hunt and i can honestly
3:54:37say look i've known this guy a long time
3:54:39and he's a smart fella and for the life
3:54:40of me i can't conceive that he'd ever
3:54:42get himself
3:54:43into this kind of a situation so i want
3:54:45to be able to say that stay in that
3:54:47position
3:54:48that's why i don't want you to tell me
3:54:50anything beyond that give my love to
3:54:52dorothy will you
3:54:53and you respond all right i will
3:54:56of course here mr hunt he
3:54:59not only
3:55:00presumably be denying any knowledge
3:55:02about
3:55:04any such operations or plans himself but
3:55:06is denying knowledge of
3:55:09your participation
3:55:11in such plans
3:55:13did you not respond at that time
3:55:16uh
3:55:17and refer back to some of your previous
3:55:19conversations you've had with mr colson
3:55:21if
3:55:22he knew about it and
3:55:23the plan the gemstone plan and he knew
3:55:26of your participation in the gemstone
3:55:28plan
3:55:30i believe that our conversation was
3:55:31focused on watergate on the watergate
3:55:34entry that failed
3:55:37so
3:55:38your testimony is as far as you know
3:55:40although he was aware of the overall
3:55:42gemstone plan he was not aware of the
3:55:44watergate break in yeah sure all right
3:55:46mr chairman i have a question
3:55:56the plumbers had uh
3:55:58who who who were members of the plumbus
3:56:04the unit was directed by mr eagle crow
3:56:06jr his deputy was mr david young mr g
3:56:10gordon lady was a full-time member of
3:56:13the unit
3:56:14the stenographer typist was a miss
3:56:16kathleen channel c-h-e-n-o-w
3:56:19and i was
3:56:20a part-time consultant
3:56:23now did the plumbers have our secretary
3:56:25name is
3:56:26miss mrs janelle
3:56:30janelle
3:56:33i'm not aware of one by that name
3:56:39yes yes sir i just gave her name miss
3:56:41kathleen chenowski
3:56:43now um
3:56:44the telephone
3:56:46that
3:56:48the diplomas used
3:56:50was listed in her name in uh
3:56:53alexander her home in alexandria wasn't
3:56:56it
3:56:57so i understand and uh and yet it was in
3:57:01uh the offices which the uh
3:57:03plum was occupied in an executive office
3:57:06building yes that's where the phone was
3:57:08but it was listed on that example now
3:57:09why was that
3:57:11that was uh the inadequate response
3:57:14by the
3:57:15communications unit at the white house
3:57:18to my request for a sterile telephone
3:57:22a sterile telephone is one that can't be
3:57:24found very readily or traced isn't it
3:57:25can't be found at all
3:57:28and so uh
3:57:30you use that uh telephone to
3:57:33have conversation a long-distance call
3:57:35receive long-distance calls and make
3:57:37long-distance calls to uh
3:57:39uh
3:57:40bernard barker didn't you
3:57:42among other justice senator
3:57:44how long have you known bernard barca
3:57:47since 1959 or 60 and um
3:57:51you made the arrangements with bernard
3:57:53barca
3:57:54and
3:57:56martinez and sturgis and gonzalez
3:58:00to uh participate in the the
3:58:02entry of the watergate didn't you to be
3:58:04precise mr chairman i made uh
3:58:07arrangements with mr barker mr barker
3:58:09made subsequent arrangements with the
3:58:11other gentleman
3:58:12now um
3:58:14we have elders before this committee
3:58:16to the effect that uh
3:58:19before
3:58:20miami residents
3:58:22had in their possession
3:58:24either in their pockets or in their
3:58:26hotel rooms in the watergate
3:58:28uh 5300 to 53 100 bills at the time they
3:58:32were
3:58:33apprehended in the watergate do you know
3:58:35where that money came from yes sir where
3:58:38did it come from mr gordon lady
3:58:41do you know
3:58:43how it happened we have testimony here
3:58:45also to the fact that this money was
3:58:47part of a deposit
3:58:49and which was temporarily made in mr
3:58:52barker's bank of the bank account over
3:58:55his firm's bank account in miami florida
3:58:58consisting of four mexican checks
3:59:00totaling eighty nine thousand dollars in
3:59:02what is called a dog a dial burger check
3:59:04of twenty five thousand dollars do you
3:59:06know how that money happened to be
3:59:07deposited in unless debarco's the
3:59:10bank account of his farm's bank account
3:59:12in miami
3:59:14in this way
3:59:15mr chairman that
3:59:17mr barker was performing a service for
3:59:20mr liddy
3:59:22in negotiating the checks
3:59:25that is to say passing them through his
3:59:27bank account
3:59:28and delivering the proceeds to mr liddy
3:59:31how long did mr lydia know
3:59:34mr barca to your knowledge since uh
3:59:36december or january
3:59:40december 71 january 72.
3:59:43you um
3:59:45no i do i beg your pardon i would have
3:59:47to go back to the ellsberg entry he knew
3:59:49them from the summer
3:59:50the summer months of 1971.
3:59:53now
3:59:55you worked on mr colson in the white
3:59:57house didn't you yes sir and uh
3:59:59when you were operating with the
4:00:01plumbers there you made uh reports to mr
4:00:05colson you know what you're doing what
4:00:06you recommended
4:00:09occasionally yes sir
4:00:11well i have in my hand here what reports
4:00:14to be a copy of a report from you to
4:00:16charles colson dated july the 28th
4:00:201971 in which you recommend to him
4:00:25without a
4:00:26hamburger witness and let him
4:00:28you have a copy that yes we have a copy
4:00:30of that july 28th memo yes can you
4:00:33identify that as being a copy of a
4:00:35report you made to mr colson yes mr
4:00:38chairman
4:00:40and in that report you recommend among
4:00:42other things that uh to mr colson that
4:00:45uh
4:00:47they should obtain ellsberg's files from
4:00:49his psychiatric analyst
4:00:53did you not yes sir among other
4:00:55recommendations
4:00:57and um
4:00:59you knew that uh the owner that you
4:01:02could
4:01:02there was no way in which you could
4:01:04obtain that uh quote that um
4:01:08report
4:01:11except by a surreptitious entry didn't
4:01:13you
4:01:17otherwise you knew it was privileged on
4:01:18the law of california
4:01:23senator i was not
4:01:24limiting
4:01:26my options at that point simply to a
4:01:28surreptitious entry
4:01:31what i had described
4:01:32here was a desirable product
4:01:35uh the means of obtaining it
4:01:38had not yet clarified themselves and it
4:01:40would not we're not two for in fact a
4:01:42month
4:01:43well
4:01:44you thought it was desirable to get the
4:01:48his files from his
4:01:50psychiatric analyst in order that the
4:01:52cia might use them to carry out your
4:01:55second recommendation in that letter
4:01:57to perform a covert psychological
4:01:59assessment or evaluation of ellsberg yes
4:02:02sir yes
4:02:05and the objective
4:02:07the objective of the surreptitious entry
4:02:09into the office of dr felin
4:02:11or ellsberg's
4:02:13was for the purpose of getting that the
4:02:15records
4:02:16of
4:02:17his records concerning ellsberg
4:02:19photographing them yesterday photographs
4:02:22let the records show that this uh
4:02:26letter of july of the 20th 28th
4:02:291971 identified witnesses received as an
4:02:32exhibit
4:02:34receiving evidence as exhibit can be
4:02:36appropriately marked
4:02:40now
4:02:41do you have a copy of our
4:02:43memorandum from but uh probe you know is
4:02:46bud kroger that's a nickname for you
4:02:48know eagle kroger yes sir from bud
4:02:52krogan david young to charles coulson
4:02:56in uh which they also will join your
4:02:58recommendation for complete
4:02:59psychological assessment evaluation
4:03:01ellsberg the cia
4:03:07under what date mr chairman august the
4:03:10third 1971 i have such a memorandum
4:03:13and um so mr coulson didn't know about
4:03:16the operations being carried on by the
4:03:18plumbers didn't he
4:03:20back in july and august
4:03:231971
4:03:32i would not on the basis of this
4:03:33memorandum alone mr chairman want to
4:03:35presume that mr colson had comprehensive
4:03:37knowledge of everything the plumbers
4:03:39were either doing or contemplating as of
4:03:41that day
4:03:43but you didn't know as early as july
4:03:44that you thought that they ought to
4:03:47have
4:03:49the files that obtain the files of
4:03:52ellsberg's psychiatrist dr field obtain
4:03:55access to them did you ever talk to that
4:03:58colson about that matter i recall no
4:04:00further conversation with mr colson
4:04:02other than the memorandum of suggestion
4:04:04to him which was responsive
4:04:07to
4:04:07a suggestion which he made to me
4:04:10now did you make a report of john
4:04:12erdickman about the surreptitious entry
4:04:14into the psychiatrist's office
4:04:17no sir
4:04:21he testified before this committee that
4:04:23after it was done that you were made
4:04:27mr chairman if i may clarify
4:04:30i wish you would finally following views
4:04:32following the surreptitious entry into
4:04:34dr fielding's office
4:04:37mr liddy and i compiled a very brief
4:04:40report
4:04:41which we
4:04:44presented to messers young and croak and
4:04:48whether it went to
4:04:50mr ehrlichman is another matter yeah you
4:04:53don't know about that i have no personal
4:04:55knowledge of that
4:04:56now um
4:04:58you spoke about um
4:05:03you spoke about mr bittman telling you
4:05:06that he had received a telephonic
4:05:09communication
4:05:11which uh was followed
4:05:13by the
4:05:15deposit of
4:05:1775 000 in our envelope
4:05:22for you
4:05:23i believe in his home
4:05:25uh did he tell you who he received the
4:05:27telephone call
4:05:29referring to mr bitman sir yes
4:05:32no he did not
4:05:37you you having the knowledge of the
4:05:38source of that seventy five thousand
4:05:40dollars no sir
4:05:45i understood you to state
4:05:47that you had you had been promised
4:05:51on about june 21st 1972
4:05:55uh that you would have money punished
4:05:57you for
4:05:58your um
4:06:00uh
4:06:01sport and also forward council fees that
4:06:05you were given assurances that effect at
4:06:06that time is that correct yes sir who
4:06:09gave you those assurances mr gordon lady
4:06:17my ten minutes is up so i don't know
4:06:31mr chairman thank you very much i
4:06:33am sure i can finish the line of
4:06:35questioning i have in mind in about 10
4:06:37minutes and then
4:06:39we'll be able to proceed to
4:06:44finish possibly this afternoon's inquiry
4:06:46at a fairly early date i understand
4:06:47that's the wish of counsel and of the
4:06:49witness
4:06:50mr trunt you've already testified about
4:06:52how you were employed as a white house
4:06:54consultant
4:06:56and i won't extend our conversation
4:06:58about that much further except to say
4:07:00you were employed first by mr colson
4:07:03i believe you and mr colson had been
4:07:06associated in the or or had been
4:07:09together in the alumni association of
4:07:11brown university
4:07:13but you were both the alumni of graham
4:07:15yes sir and that uh mr colson was aware
4:07:19of your previous history and background
4:07:21with the central intelligence agency and
4:07:23his predecessor
4:07:25yes sir would you briefly tell us of
4:07:27your cia and intelligence background or
4:07:31if you want me to i can briefly read the
4:07:33resume that staff has supplied me and
4:07:35you can correct it would it be more
4:07:37convenient to do it that way i prefer
4:07:39that you do it sir the information we
4:07:41have is that you graduated from brown in
4:07:431940
4:07:45and entered the navy
4:07:47you were discharged after being injured
4:07:49in an accident sea
4:07:51in 1942-43 you're an editor for the
4:07:53march of time and a war correspondent
4:07:56for life magazine
4:07:58and from 1943 to 1946 she worked with
4:08:01the office of strategic services
4:08:04using the army air force as a cover
4:08:08you trained people in clandestine
4:08:10intelligence work in orlando florida
4:08:13then you were assigned to work with
4:08:14chinese gorilla bands behind the
4:08:16japanese lines you're based for a while
4:08:19in kunming in southern china
4:08:22and your oss unit won a presidential
4:08:24citation in 1946
4:08:27you obtained a guggenheim fellowship and
4:08:29spent a year in mexico reading spanish
4:08:31reading learning spanish and writing
4:08:34and for two years you're a movie script
4:08:36writer
4:08:37the cia was created in 1947 and in early
4:08:401949 you joined that agency
4:08:44after a short period at washington
4:08:45headquarters you were sent to paris as
4:08:47an attache at the american embassy
4:08:51uh
4:08:53during 1949 and 1950 you were in vienna
4:08:57austria from 1950 to 1953
4:09:00you were in mexico city and from 1953 to
4:09:031956
4:09:04your cover possession was that of a
4:09:06political adviser to the defense
4:09:08department of latin america japan spain
4:09:11and several european countries
4:09:14during this period you were actively
4:09:16involved in the overthrow of the
4:09:18guatemalan regime
4:09:20from 1957 to 1960 you were cia stationed
4:09:25chief
4:09:26in montevideo where your cover was first
4:09:29secretary
4:09:30at the american consulate
4:09:33uh when the cia sought to reassign you
4:09:36from that position
4:09:38there was a good bit of
4:09:40dispute over whether you should or
4:09:42should not and there are rumors that
4:09:43president benito nardone the president
4:09:46of uruguay was asked to intervene on
4:09:48your behalf to keep you stationed there
4:09:51at any point in this summary which i
4:09:53repeat as a staff summary
4:09:55if you have a disagreement feel free to
4:09:57tell me so
4:10:00your cover as a consultant to the
4:10:02department of defense from 1960 to 1965
4:10:05in 1960 you ordered back to washington
4:10:08from uruguay to participate in the
4:10:09preparation for the cuban invasion
4:10:12uh you resigned from the foreign service
4:10:15in 1960 for the purposes of a more
4:10:17effective cover and moved to mexico and
4:10:19then to miami
4:10:21posing as a rider who suddenly had come
4:10:23into an inheritance
4:10:25for the next 19 months your avias was
4:10:27eduardo
4:10:29you acted as the cia's representative to
4:10:31the cuban revolutionary council the
4:10:33prospective post-castro group
4:10:36and whose name the invasion brigade was
4:10:38being trained in guatemala
4:10:40you resigned your job when the uh when
4:10:43certain disputes arose after the
4:10:45assignment of certain people to
4:10:47the provisional government of cuba
4:10:52and went to
4:10:53miami to serve with the cuban council
4:10:57after the invasion of cuba failed
4:11:01you served as personal assistant to cia
4:11:03director alan w dulles
4:11:06your subsequent activities are not
4:11:08entirely known in 1963 the american
4:11:11ambassador in madrid refused to
4:11:13accept you as deputy chief of the local
4:11:16cia station
4:11:19however you were in madrid on unknown
4:11:22business from 1965 to 1966.
4:11:27according to information staff supplies
4:11:29the
4:11:311966-1967 edition of who's who listed
4:11:34you as a retired government official
4:11:36living in madrid
4:11:38he returned to washington in 1968
4:11:43purchased a home in potomac maryland and
4:11:45retired from the cia on april 30th 1970.
4:11:50from 1970 to 1971 you were vice
4:11:53president of the robert r mullen company
4:11:55where you continued to work until you
4:11:57became a white house consultant in july
4:11:59of 1971
4:12:00until your dismissal
4:12:02on june july 17 1972. is that a fair
4:12:06sketch of your career
4:12:08reasonably fair yes sir
4:12:11was colson aware of this extensive
4:12:14rather extensive intelligence oss bay of
4:12:17pigs and cia involvement yes sir
4:12:20did you discuss that as a precondition
4:12:22to your employment
4:12:24i discussed it with him over a period of
4:12:26years
4:12:30at the time you went to work with
4:12:32mullins and company
4:12:34were you aware of or is the fact that
4:12:36mullins and company had ever been
4:12:38cooperative with or had any connection
4:12:40with the cia yes sir
4:12:42were you aware of that
4:12:44yes sir
4:12:47after you became a consultant at the
4:12:49white house did you contact the cia
4:12:51about your new position
4:12:56i certainly let uh former associates
4:12:58know of my new white house connection
4:13:08did you talk to general cushman
4:13:13general cushman uh in in a different
4:13:14context sir had you served with general
4:13:17cushman in the oss or the cia in europe
4:13:20had you ever for instance shared an
4:13:21office with him i had back in the 50s at
4:13:25cia a headquarters
4:13:28did washington talk on a number of
4:13:30occasions to cia officials about your
4:13:33duties and responsibilities to the white
4:13:34house during your tenure as a consultant
4:13:36there
4:13:37no sir
4:13:38on more than one occasion yes sir
4:13:41on how many occasions
4:13:42well including
4:13:44medical staff people
4:13:47i would say half a dozen
4:13:51could you name
4:13:52them i say half a dozen occasions all
4:13:56right could you name the people that you
4:13:57talked to
4:13:58well dr bernard malloy
4:14:01of the medical office was that in
4:14:03conjunction with the ellsberg profile
4:14:05yes sir
4:14:07i may have spoken in that same
4:14:09connection with mr howard osborne the
4:14:11director of security
4:14:12what was that in connection with also
4:14:14the ellsberg profile
4:14:17i spoke with you john caswell
4:14:21in connection with
4:14:22a refreshment of my memory concerning a
4:14:27french leaked scandal that seemed to me
4:14:29to parallel the ellsberg affair
4:14:37i spoke with uh
4:14:40director helms secretary about my
4:14:42position
4:14:43what was that about
4:14:45simply notifying her asking her to pass
4:14:48along to
4:14:49mr helms the fact that i now held a
4:14:51consultancy at the white house
4:14:57what support did you receive from the
4:14:58cia
4:15:00let me ask you this to begin with did
4:15:01you ever seek or were you ever given or
4:15:03have access to the cia personnel records
4:15:06for the sake of recruiting for your
4:15:08assignment at the white house
4:15:10not in so broadest sense
4:15:13senator
4:15:15i had asked the out placement service to
4:15:17provide me with the resumes
4:15:19of retirees who possess certain limited
4:15:22qualifications what were those
4:15:24qualifications they had to do with
4:15:26photography and the syrup teacher's
4:15:28entry did the agency from their
4:15:30personnel office supply you with that
4:15:32information
4:15:33with some information yes sir did you
4:15:35use that as a basis for recruiting
4:15:38as a basis for attempted recruiting yes
4:15:41sir but it was used for the purpose it
4:15:42was sought for that is to identify
4:15:44people who might be useful to your
4:15:46assignment exactly
4:15:48did they also supply you with logistical
4:15:50support with wigs with false
4:15:52identification papers with cameras with
4:15:55tape recorders with photographic devices
4:15:58with photographic processing and
4:15:59printing were those things all supplied
4:16:01to you by the agency yes sir did anyone
4:16:04ever protest at the agency ought not to
4:16:06be involved in this
4:16:08not within my hearing did you ever
4:16:09discuss it with general cushman or with
4:16:12director helms no sir none of those
4:16:15support facilities i'm sorry i
4:16:18i drew a false inference from your prior
4:16:20question
4:16:21all right well let me break it into two
4:16:22parts did you ever discuss with director
4:16:24helms
4:16:26your request for personnel information
4:16:28or logistical and technical support no
4:16:32sir ever
4:16:33never or with the secretary
4:16:35no sir did you ever discuss it with
4:16:37general cushman yes sir why didn't you
4:16:39discuss it with helms he was the
4:16:41director i was directed to general
4:16:43cushman you're what i was directed to
4:16:46consult with general kush my home
4:16:52this requires a little bit of telling
4:16:54senator baker watson
4:16:56i'm sorry senator this requires a little
4:16:59bit of of of telling
4:17:01of explanation oh i see all right
4:17:07how much telling i have about how much
4:17:09time do i have left i've got three
4:17:11minutes why don't we save that i've got
4:17:13a few other things i'd like to get to
4:17:16there was a tape made of your
4:17:17conversation with general cushman on one
4:17:20occasion and we've had a transcript of
4:17:22it have you seen that transcript i have
4:17:24sir
4:17:26you'll notice i'm sure from a reading of
4:17:28it that there are substantial portions
4:17:30of the transcript which are incomplete
4:17:31some of them assigned to interference
4:17:33from aircraft noise
4:17:35can you help supply some of those
4:17:37omissions can you tell us what you
4:17:38talked about no sir why can't you i'm
4:17:42unable to
4:17:44unable to because you don't know or
4:17:46unable to for some other reason no sir
4:17:48i'm able to because i don't know and
4:17:50have no recollection and had no
4:17:52recollection thereof you don't recall
4:17:54who told you to see cushman instead of
4:17:56helms
4:18:01i received a call from general cushman's
4:18:06assistant or his principal
4:18:07administrative assistant mr carl wagner
4:18:09on one occasion shortly after i had a
4:18:11conversation with mr colson relevant
4:18:14to the acquisition of certain technical
4:18:19mr materiel
4:18:19it was mr wagner who told me that
4:18:22i should
4:18:24meet with general cushman and i assume
4:18:26this to be responsive to a call which
4:18:28general cushman had received from some
4:18:30member of the white house staff
4:18:33but you don't know who
4:18:36at the time i did not know you know now
4:18:38sir yes sir
4:18:40john ellickman
4:18:41can you give us the date and
4:18:43circumstances of that call
4:18:47i don't believe i can no sir
4:18:49have you seen the xerox copies of the
4:18:51photographs taken in dr
4:18:56fielding's office that were supplied for
4:18:58this record
4:19:02taken in his office yes sir there are
4:19:04xerox copies of photographic prints that
4:19:06were taken inside dr fielding's office
4:19:09i believe i've only seen xerox copies of
4:19:11photographs taken externally
4:19:14have you seen any copies of photographs
4:19:16taken inside
4:19:18i may have sir but i i don't recall i'd
4:19:20be very happy to identify them right
4:19:23this is what i this is really what i
4:19:24want to find out you delivered the
4:19:26photographic film or someone delivered
4:19:28it for you to the ci to be processed and
4:19:30printed is that correct
4:19:32yes sir and they did process it and
4:19:35printed it and gave you the prints and
4:19:36the negatives as i understand
4:19:39they certainly gave me the prints
4:19:42as to the negatives i'm not sure you
4:19:43know whether cia still has copies of
4:19:45those prints or negatives i have no idea
4:20:00mr hunt
4:20:02i'm dealing now in language that i'm not
4:20:04totally familiar with but i'm given to
4:20:06believe they are words of art or phrases
4:20:08of art in the intelligence community
4:20:13did you have a letter of instructions
4:20:17or its equivalent
4:20:18with respect to your general operations
4:20:21in the intelligence field and with the
4:20:23watergate and fielding situations in
4:20:25particular
4:20:27no sir do you understand what i'm
4:20:28speaking uh yes sir a letter of
4:20:30instructions is mean swat in lay terms
4:20:34it is a brief
4:20:37its instructions in writing on the
4:20:38general description of the job you're
4:20:40about to undertake and an authorization
4:20:42and an authorization does it all also
4:20:44include what to do in case you get
4:20:46caught no sir
4:20:52there was conversation about
4:20:55by general cushman i believe about
4:20:57certain paraphernalia that was given you
4:20:59that was not used in the ellsberg
4:21:01situation
4:21:02and we've had material described as i've
4:21:05described you and driver's license false
4:21:07identification cards wigs tape recorders
4:21:10cameras
4:21:11and the like if they weren't used in
4:21:13ellsberg what were they used for
4:21:17i believe everything was used uh with
4:21:19the exception of the tape recorder oh
4:21:20where was the tape recorder used
4:21:23tape recorder was used for
4:21:26the transcription of overt interviews
4:21:29over in interviews of whom
4:21:34in one case with mr clifton dumas who is
4:21:37that
4:21:38he is a
4:21:39government employee
4:21:41a former government employee at least
4:21:43who is a contact and former employee mr
4:21:45robert bennett my one-time employer
4:21:49do you know anything about the dahlberg
4:21:52checks and the mexican money
4:22:00may i inquire sir
4:22:02let me just ask you a specific question
4:22:03do you know whether or not from your
4:22:05experience with cia
4:22:07or other operations mr dahlberg was ever
4:22:09considered as a cia contact i have no
4:22:12knowledge of that no sir
4:22:18i'm told mr chairman that my time has
4:22:20expired i thank you
4:22:22a bit
4:22:25this is something wrong committed been
4:22:27requested
4:22:29by
4:22:31the witness and his counsel to recess at
4:22:33this time
4:22:39before we do however i'd like to put in
4:22:41the record the
4:22:44memorandum of august the third 1971 for
4:22:49charles colston from
4:22:50bud krogan david the young
4:22:54that'll be appropriately number this
4:22:55exhibit and the committee will stand in
4:22:57recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow
4:23:08so it was a relatively short day in
4:23:11watergate committee terms at least as we
4:23:13heard at the beginning hunt's physical
4:23:15condition is not the best and it was
4:23:16clear that he tires easily well peter k
4:23:19spent the day on capitol hill with uh ye
4:23:22howard hunt today and now peter's back
4:23:24to talk about the mood of these hearings
4:23:26and what happened today along with hugh
4:23:28seidi who is washington bureau chief of
4:23:30time magazine and jack murphy of the
4:23:32georgetown university law center peter
4:23:34gentlemen a lot was at stake at the
4:23:36hearings today the future course of the
4:23:38committee's work the
4:23:41possibility of future network coverage
4:23:43and not least of all the public
4:23:45acceptance of the need for future
4:23:46hearings and all of this rested on the
4:23:49first witness on e howard hunt and there
4:23:51was a feeling where i sat up in the
4:23:53committee room and i must admit i shared
4:23:55it that hunt bombed did he really let
4:23:57them down that it was a a not too
4:23:59productive and not too interesting day
4:24:01uh how does it look from your end hugh
4:24:03well i think you've been infected by
4:24:05that nixon virus that is to turn this
4:24:09down turn it off
4:24:11i seem to believe that the american
4:24:12people want this i admit quite honestly
4:24:15that
4:24:16some people persist
4:24:17in this idea that the hearing should be
4:24:20stopped television turned off there are
4:24:22a few polls that suggest this but by and
4:24:25large the preponderance of scientific
4:24:27evidence the polls show quite the
4:24:29opposite the networks show higher
4:24:32listenership for the hearings
4:24:34your network here shows higher
4:24:36listenership i think they still want
4:24:38them quite honestly i think another
4:24:40factor enters this i suspect maybe
4:24:42washington has grown more bored with the
4:24:44hearings than the people out there and
4:24:46that's perhaps what happened with mr
4:24:48hunt he wasn't as explosive as we're
4:24:50used to around here but i think it was
4:24:53highly significant deeply moving from a
4:24:55human standpoint and rather fascinating
4:24:57in detail
4:24:59well as far as the nixon virus you're
4:25:01closer to the man than i am so i suspect
4:25:03that if you've avoided the virus maybe
4:25:05the rest of us have too but
4:25:07but seriously uh
4:25:09even sam dash
4:25:11uh if you remember the testimony during
4:25:13the morning session how disjointed it
4:25:15seemed to be and the fact that when they
4:25:17went over and over again did coulson
4:25:20really know or didn't he know and
4:25:21nothing ever seemed to get pinned down
4:25:23and finally we talked to dash during the
4:25:25lunch and break and he was he admitted
4:25:27that that hunt was a sick man a broken
4:25:29man and that he just really hadn't
4:25:31panned out in public session as they
4:25:33hoped he had an executive session and
4:25:35since they could bring back anybody they
4:25:37want to do for the lead-off witness it
4:25:39seems to me that they got something
4:25:40something of a dead
4:25:42excuse
4:25:43i was going to say from a lawyer's point
4:25:45of view i was relatively bored with the
4:25:47proceedings today this is a slightly
4:25:49different attack than you two are
4:25:51discussing not a question of the
4:25:52public's
4:25:53uh satisfaction or association with the
4:25:56hearings but rather
4:25:57the manner in which these questions were
4:25:59asked and the answers elicited it was
4:26:02not sharp it was not focused it may very
4:26:04well have been that my dear colleague
4:26:06and kind-hearted friend sam dash was
4:26:09somewhat conditioned by hunt's evident
4:26:12weakness and was not coming through as
4:26:14strongly and as firmly as he has with
4:26:16previous witnesses but had this been a
4:26:18case before a jury i'm sure that the
4:26:20jurors would have been extremely
4:26:21confused about what was going on
4:26:23i would like to interject one thing
4:26:24first of all i i disagree with you and
4:26:27uh and peter uh first place i don't know
4:26:29who you're comparing e howard hunt with
4:26:32in terms of prior witnesses and i would
4:26:34like to get to the to the substance of
4:26:36what was said today regardless of who
4:26:37was bored or who wasn't bored hugh how
4:26:40would you characterize uh what was said
4:26:42today by e howard hunt in terms of
4:26:44filling in some cracks here and there
4:26:45well just one comment first i agree
4:26:48don't let's not cast it in terms of show
4:26:50business i think that's an insult to the
4:26:52american public i think that's gone far
4:26:54deeper now they've spent several weeks
4:26:56contemplating this thing i think their
4:26:58perception of it goes beyond what we
4:27:00understand that's the point i was going
4:27:01to make and you made it much better it
4:27:03should not be viewed in terms of showbiz
4:27:05that's right and i think that in terms
4:27:06of that i found this
4:27:09fascinating i found howard hunt's
4:27:11personal story to be at the one of the
4:27:13crux of the tragedies of this whole
4:27:15thing that here is a man carrying out
4:27:17orders as he thought for whatever
4:27:19lapse or whatever reason
4:27:21from his own government he stands to
4:27:24spend the rest of his life in jail he
4:27:26has four motherless children
4:27:29and there isn't
4:27:30the best of my knowledge a statement of
4:27:33remorse from the white house from these
4:27:35people that put him into this business i
4:27:37have not detected it from the president
4:27:39i have not detected it from magruder
4:27:41from any of these people dean
4:27:43from uh from ehrlichman or haldeman i
4:27:46find that just appalling and i think out
4:27:48in the american public that's one of the
4:27:50things that makes people
4:27:52so uptight about this or disturbs them
4:27:55so much that there is no expression of
4:27:58what was done wrong to these other
4:28:00people not only that not only hunt but
4:28:03the people were victimized like by this
4:28:05or no expression of remorse about what's
4:28:07happened in the country they still stand
4:28:09there say i didn't do it let's cover it
4:28:11up
4:28:12let's go on all right i would agree that
4:28:15the human story of howard hunt was an
4:28:17interesting one but substantively what
4:28:19did he add to the total of knowledge we
4:28:21have he did implicate for the first time
4:28:24charles coulson and i think we ought to
4:28:25talk about that in a minute but i think
4:28:27we ought to talk about it in the context
4:28:29of who cares about charles coulson right
4:28:32now really i mean now we're getting on
4:28:34we're worrying about uh sparrow agnew
4:28:36we're worrying about a number of other
4:28:37things
4:28:38the presidential tapes but what's a
4:28:41drama you know to put it in howard
4:28:42baker's uh own words or to paraphrase
4:28:44him we we can't hold a hearing on how
4:28:47much did charles coulson know and when
4:28:49did he know it who cares well we're
4:28:51beginning to penetrate though little by
4:28:53little a little deeper don't you feel
4:28:55now here's a man that has denied all
4:28:58implication up till now here's a man
4:29:00described by some as the president's own
4:29:02man it's just we're penetrating just a
4:29:05little more aren't we i have that
4:29:07feeling well i think that's right you do
4:29:09have this notion that the coulson knew
4:29:12more about this earlier on than we
4:29:14thought that is some added dimension the
4:29:16other hand you have confirmation of the
4:29:19notion that there was no discussion of
4:29:20clemency between uh coulson and uh
4:29:24the lawyer for this man which confirms
4:29:26the other side which was saying that
4:29:28this was not an issue ever between these
4:29:30respective parties uh yeah i was just
4:29:33going to interject jack what about this
4:29:35long and somewhat hard to follow
4:29:37argument on the attorney-client
4:29:39relationship
4:29:40i know i got lost in it maybe as an
4:29:42attorney you can clear it up well i i
4:29:44think it was confusing usually uh the
4:29:47rule is that if you have uh in effect
4:29:49waive your privilege with respect to any
4:29:51portion of
4:29:52general information
4:29:54uh you waive it as to all if you consent
4:29:57to its disclosure either by yourself of
4:29:59course or through your attorney or
4:30:00someone else you waive it as to all
4:30:02relevant information this is i can read
4:30:04you a rule about it a person who would
4:30:06otherwise have a privilege to refuse to
4:30:08disclose or to prevent another from
4:30:10disclosing a specified matter has no
4:30:12such privilege with respect to that
4:30:13matter if the judge finds that he
4:30:16without coercion and with knowledge of
4:30:17his privilege made disclosure of any
4:30:19part of the matter and that i think is
4:30:21is the the critical question without
4:30:23coercion the suggestion today was that
4:30:26because of the outstanding provisional
4:30:28sentence of judge sarika coupled with
4:30:30judge sirica's injunction that
4:30:32mr hunt ought to cooperate mr hunt is
4:30:35taking the position i think through his
4:30:36attorneys that he is being coerced into
4:30:38speaking uh contrary to the right he has
4:30:40under his privilege and that should
4:30:42sometime arise later when the question
4:30:44is does mr bittman have to speak about
4:30:46the matters with respect to which hun
4:30:47has now testified uh bittman may have to
4:30:50take the position that the the coercion
4:30:52involved in sarika's order uh invoke
4:30:54this exception to the rule uh about
4:30:56waver i don't know i've made that any
4:30:58clearer but it's an unusual proposition
4:31:00legally and normally what hunt had said
4:31:02said today would have waved the
4:31:04privilege for him and opened up but i
4:31:05think they there may be a backstop
4:31:07position and that was what mr sachs was
4:31:08talking about let me ask you a much
4:31:10simpler legal uh question uh mr hunt
4:31:12testified that
4:31:14he paid mr bittman 156 000 in legal fees
4:31:18that's an awful lot of money to plead a
4:31:20client guilty as legal rates become that
4:31:22inflated i i was i think that's a good
4:31:25point the inflation has really caught up
4:31:27with the legal professional decline tell
4:31:28the legal profession i can't really
4:31:30comment on on the practice of uh another
4:31:32colleague in the bar i will say
4:31:34euphemistically i thought it was an
4:31:35extraordinary figure
4:31:38hugh um
4:31:39or jack or jim or anybody but
4:31:42uh we saw i think
4:31:44more partisanship in the first hour this
4:31:47morning with everybody except senator
4:31:49wyker on the republican side fred
4:31:51thompson senator gurney senator baker
4:31:54all of them chipping and
4:31:56snarling a little bit at some of sam
4:31:58dash's questionings and some of the
4:32:00procedure do you think that's going to
4:32:02be the pattern now oh probably i think
4:32:04you know these things change in nature
4:32:06as they go along there isn't any
4:32:08question of that and i suppose it'll be
4:32:10cast in more partisans
4:32:12partisan tones indeed the
4:32:15there's part of this
4:32:17offensive that we talked about earlier
4:32:19to try to to try to picture it as that
4:32:22you know but
4:32:23once again you know
4:32:25in this nation of ours
4:32:27not as some would have it you don't have
4:32:29to listen to these hearings you know the
4:32:31american public can get up with a
4:32:33minimum amount of effort walk over and
4:32:36with very slight further effort turn the
4:32:38television knob and turn the hearings
4:32:41off here's the thought they don't have
4:32:43to read about them in the morning
4:32:45all of this thing so you know the this
4:32:48argument
4:32:49indeed that we have about uh
4:32:52what's involved here and
4:32:55the partisan charges and what should be
4:32:57broadcast seems to me
4:32:59you know as we can leave it to those who
4:33:01want to see it and those that don't can
4:33:04walk away from it
4:33:05gentlemen thank you both very much jim
4:33:08okay you've heard what uh
4:33:10the four of us think about today eat
4:33:13howard hunt's first day and now you can
4:33:15take that any way you want to and form
4:33:17your own opinions and draw your own
4:33:19conclusions we will be back tomorrow
4:33:21night for the committee's 39th day and e
4:33:25howard hunt's second until then for
4:33:28peter k and impact i'm jim lehrer thank
4:33:31you and good night
4:33:33from washington you've been watching
4:33:34gavel to gavel videotape coverage of the
4:33:36hearings by the senate select committee
4:33:38on presidential campaign activities
4:33:40this program was made possible by grants
4:33:42from the corporation for public
4:33:44broadcasting and the ford foundation
4:33:47this has been a production of mpact a
4:33:49division of the greater washington
4:33:50educational telecommunications
4:33:51association
4:33:58[Music]
4:34:05my

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Howard Hunt (Part 1) Watergate Hearings Testimony by Patrick O'Dare, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 37,110 words across 6,850 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.