My write-up today on volume 2 of Richard Nixon's memoirs will focus on Watergate-related issues.
talks about his White House's release of transcripts that his
Administration made of tape-recordings of his private presidential
meetings. Nixon says that the transcripts, while accurately
recording what he and others said, may have missed the sense behind what
was said: "An observation can seem like an intention; an
offhand comment appears deliberate and premeditated; a passing thought
can strike the reader as a prescription for action" (page 570). Nixon
made a similar point earlier in this book: that he did not necessarily
mean everything that he said. Sometimes, he recounts, he was acting
like a lawyer, playing devil's advocate while fishing for different
ideas and exploring multiple angles.
said that the transcripts shattered the views that many Americans held
about the Presidency, for the transcripts highlighted how rough the
political game could be, and how rough Nixon was willing to play it. Nixon states on page 571:
American myth that Presidents are always presidential, that they sit in
the Oval Office talking in lofty and quotable phrases, will probably
never die...But the reality of politics and power in the White House is
very different. It is a rough game, and the men I have known who have
made it there reflect the ability to play rough when necessary and come
out on top. There is noble talk in the Oval Office to be sure,
high-minded and disinterested. But there are also frustration, worry,
anxiety, profanity, and, above all, raw pragmatism when it comes to
politics and political survival."
As embarrassing as the
transcripts were to Nixon, at least according to Nixon's narration,
there were still accusations that the White House deliberately did not
transcribe a particularly incriminating part of one of the tapes.
On this part of the tape, Nixon said that he differed from Dwight
Eisenhower because he (Nixon) actually cared about his men, whereas
Eisenhower only cared about himself coming out clean. Nixon went on to
tell his Attorney General, John Mitchell, that the men "could go before
the Ervin Committee and 'stonewall it, let them plead the Fifth
Amendment, cover up, or anything else' if they thought they had to"
(page 574). This sounds like a cover-up and obstruction of justice!
But Nixon says that the tape goes on to record Nixon saying, "On the
other hand, I would prefer...that you do it the other way." Nixon's
just considering his options, I guess! At least that seems to be the
picture that he's trying to paint.
part of the tape did not appear in the White House transcripts, but it
was in the House Judiciary Committee's transcript of one of the tapes.
Nixon denies that the White House was trying to hide that part of the
tape; rather, according to Nixon, the White House omitted that part
because it was inaudible, whereas the House Judiciary Committee had the
ability to amplify the volume and thus catch and transcribe what was
said. Nixon notes that the Special Prosecutor himself could
not hear that particular part of the tape on his own copy. Nixon also
states: "It was utterly ridiculous to assume that we would have
deliberately omitted a damaging section of a tape that we knew the
Judiciary Committee already had in its possession" (page 574).
my blog, I've discussed a couple of times Nixon's acknowledgement that
he pressured the CIA to limit the FBI's investigation into Watergate.
At first, that sounded fishy to me, but then I read Nixon's account that
he released a document saying that he did so for national security
reasons. That made a degree of sense to me, since one of the Watergate
conspirators, E. Howard Hunt, had done tasks for the CIA, and so Nixon
would logically want for the CIA to know that an FBI investigation into
Watergate could uncover and publicize information on sensitive CIA
activity and projects, information that the CIA would not desire to be
released to the public, and thus the CIA would be acting wisely in
limiting the investigation.
In my latest reading, however, Nixon
appears to backtrack from this story, somewhat. Or, at least, Nixon
has questions about his story. On June 23, 1972, which was only
a week after the Watergate break-in, H.R. Haldeman told Nixon that John
Mitchell and John Dean contrived a plan to have the CIA restrict the
FBI, so that the investigation would not go into areas that they did not
"want it to go" (Nixon on page 576). Haldeman was also
telling Nixon that he (Haldeman) thought that John Mitchell, on some
level, knew about the break-in, even if Mitchell wasn't fully aware of
all of the details. Nixon was puzzled as he listened to the tapes. Nixon
knew that, in a later conversation with Haldeman (in May 1973), both
agreed that their motive in asking the CIA to limit the FBI's
investigation was national security----so that the investigation would
not "expose CIA operations" (Nixon on page 576). Yet, the tape for June
23, 1972 seemed to imply that there was a broader agenda behind getting
the CIA to restrain what the FBI was doing. Nixon says on
page 576: "Surely we could not have been so wrong as to have completely
rationalized a national security concern where none existed. I thought
that perhaps there would be something else, something helpful on another
Nixon did not release that tape, though he says that it's not because he thought it would be a "smoking gun" against him. In
retrospect, Nixon says that he should have gotten White House counsel
Fred Buzhardt's assessment of the content of Nixon's June discussions
with Haldeman, before releasing the tapes. Instead, Nixon released the
tapes after the Supreme Court ordered him to do so, which did not look
good for him.
Do scientists assume their conclusions?
34 minutes ago