Evergreen: Dick
November 17: “I Am Not a Crook”
“Mr. President, George Gill of the Louisville Courier-Journal. Would you please tell us, sir, when did you personally discover that two of the nine subpoenaed White House tapes did not exist, and why did you apparently delay for a matter of weeks disclosing this matter to the Federal court and to the public?”
“Now, let me tell you . . , you can be very sure that this kind of subject is one that is a difficult one to explain. It appears that it is impossible when we have an Apollo system that we could have two missing tapes where the White House is concerned. Let me explain for one moment what the system was. This is no Apollo system. I found that it cost—I just learned this—$2,500. I found that instead of having the kind of equipment that was there when President Johnson was there, which was incidentally much better equipment, but I found—and I am not saying that critically—but I found that in this instance it was a Sony, a little Sony that they had, and that what they had are these little lapel mikes in my desks. And as a result, the conversations in the Oval Office, the conversations in the Cabinet Room, and particularly those in the EOB—those are the three rooms, only those three rooms, where they recorded—but as far as those particular recordings are concerned, the reason that you have heard that there are difficulties in hearing them is that the system itself was not a sophisticated system.”
Jesus, he’s sweating like a pig. This isn’t going to be another fucking Checkers speech is it? Well, here we go.
“I do not mean to suggest by that that the judge, by listening to them, will not be able to get the facts. . . . I think I know what is on these tapes from having listened to some, and also from having seen, from my secretary’s notes, the highlights of others. And I can assure you that those tapes, when they are presented to the judge and, I hope, eventually to the grand jury—and I trust, in some way we can find a way at least to get the substance to the American people—they will prove these things without question:
“One, that I had no knowledge whatever of the Watergate break-in before it occurred.
“Two, that I never authorized the offer of clemency to anybody and, as a matter of fact, turned it down whenever it was suggested. . . .
“And third, as far as any knowledge with regard to the payment of blackmail money, which, as you recall, was the charge that was made, that Mr. Hunt’s attorney had asked for $120,000 in money to be paid to him or he would tell things about members of the White House staff, not about Watergate, that might be embarrassing.”
Well, I for one would like to hear anything Hunt has to say about the White House staff, but yeah, that ain’t gonna happen. I’m sure he got whatever the hell he wanted.
“Now, I realize that some will wonder about the truth of these particular statements that I have made. I am going to hand out later—I won’t hand them out, but I will have one of your executives hand out—my May 22 statement, my August 15 statement, and one with regard to these two tapes. You can believe them if you want—I can tell you it is the truth, because I have listened to or have had knowledge of, from someone I have confidence in, as to what is in the tapes.”
Oh, yeah, right, of course we believe you.
“Mr. President, Richard Tuttle, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York. Could you tell us your personal reaction and your political reaction—and within that word I mean your credibility with the American people—to the discovery that the Dean and Mitchell tapes did not exist?”
“Well, my personal reaction was one of very great disappointment, because I wanted the evidence out, and I knew that when there was any indication that something didn’t exist, immediately there would be the impression that some way, either the President or, more likely perhaps, somebody on the President’s staff, knew there was something on those tapes that it wouldn’t be wise to get out. . . .
“But as far as these two tapes are concerned, even though they were not considered by the Ervin committee to be an indispensable part of their investigation, the fact that they were not there was a great disappointment, and I just wish we had had a better system—I frankly wish we hadn’t had a system at all, then I wouldn’t have to answer this question.”
Ha, no kidding. It would have been a whole lot easier to hide all this crap you were doing if you didn’t have the bright idea in the first place to record yourself for posterity.
“Mr. President, I’m Bob Haiman from the St. Petersburg Times in St. Petersburg, Florida. When Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Haldeman left your Administration, you said they were guiltless in the Watergate affair, and were, quote, ‘two of the finest public servants you had ever known.’ After what has transpired and been revealed since then, do you still feel the same way about both men and both statements?”
“First, I hold that both men and others who have been charged are guilty until I have evidence that they are not guilty, and I know that every newspaperman and newspaperwoman in this whole audience would agree with that statement. That is our American system.”
Wait, what?
“Mr. President, Joe Ungaro of the Providence Evening Bulletin. The Journal-Bulletin reported on October third that you paid $792 in federal income tax in 1970, and $878 in 1971. Are these figures accurate, and would you tell us your views on whether elected officials should disclose their personal finances?”
“Well, the answer to the second question is, I have disclosed my personal finances, and an audit of my personal finances will be made available at the end of this meeting, because obviously you are all so busy that when these things come across your desk, maybe you don’t see them. I can simply point out that that audit I paid for—I have not gotten the bill yet but I know it is several thousands of dollars—and I think that that audit is one that is a pretty good one. . . .
“I paid $79,000 in income tax in 1969. In the next two years, I paid nominal amounts. Whether those amounts are correct or not, I do not know, because I have not looked at my returns, and obviously the Providence Journal has got much better sources than I have to find such returns. And I congratulate you, sir, for having such a lively staff.
“Now, why did I pay this amount? It was not because of the deductions for, shall we say, a cattle ranch or interest or, you know, all of these gimmicks that you have got where you can deduct from, which most of you know about, I am sure—if you don’t, your publishers do. But the reason was this: Lyndon Johnson came in to see me shortly after I became President. He told me that he had given his Presidential papers to the government. He told me that under the law, up until 1969, Presidential or Vice Presidential papers given to the government were a deduction, and could be taken as a deduction from the tax. And he said, “You, Mr. President, ought to do the same thing.” I said, “I don’t have any Presidential papers.” He said, “You have your Vice Presidential papers.” I thought a moment and said, “All right, I will turn them over to the tax people.” I turned them over. They appraised them at $500,000. I suppose some wonder how could the Vice President’s papers be worth that. Well, I was, shall we say, a rather active Vice President. All of my personal notes, including matters that have not been covered in my book—which I don’t advise other people to write, but in any event I wrote one and I will stand by it—all of my papers on the Hiss case, on the famous fund controversy in 1952, on President Eisenhower’s heart attack, on President Eisenhower’s stroke, on my visit to Caracas when I had a few problems, and on my visit with Khrushchev, all of those papers, all of my notes, were valued, many believe conservatively, at that amount.”
OK, starting to go off the rails now.
“. . . Now, no question has been raised by the Internal Revenue about it, but if they do, I will be glad to have the papers back, and I will pay the tax because I think they are worth more than that. . . . Since 1969, of course, I should point out Presidents can’t do that. So, I am stuck with a lot of papers now that I have got to find a way to give away or otherwise my heirs will have a terrible time trying to pay the taxes on things that people aren’t going to want to buy.”
Ah, here comes the whiny, put-upon Dick Nixon we know and love.
“ . . . I noted in some editorials and perhaps in some commentaries on television, a very reasonable question. They said, ‘How is it that President Nixon could have a very heavy investment in a fine piece of property in San Clemente and a big investment in a piece of property in Florida,’ in which I have two houses, one which I primarily use as an office and the other as a residence, and also an investment in what was my mother’s home, . . . those three pieces of property.
“I want to say first, that is all I have. I am the first President since Harry Truman who hasn't owned any stock since ever I have been President. I am the first one who has not had a blind trust since Harry Truman. . . . I felt that in the Presidency it was important to have no question about the President’s personal finances, and I thought real estate was the best place to put it.
“But then, the question was raised by good editorial writers—and I want to respond to it because some of you might be too polite to ask such an embarrassing question—they said, ‘Mr. President, you earned $800,000 when you were President. Obviously, you paid at least half that much or could have paid half that much in taxes or a great deal of it—how could you possibly have had the money? Where did you get it? . . . How is it possible for you to have this kind of investment when all you earned was $800,000 as President?’
“Well, I should point out I wasn’t a pauper when I became President. I wasn’t very rich, as Presidents go. But you see, . . . when I left office after four years as a Congressman, three years as a Senator, and eight years at $45,000 a year as Vice President, and after stories had been written, particularly in the Washington Post, to the effect that the Vice President had purchased a mansion in Wesley Heights and people wondered where the money came from, you know what my net worth was? Forty-seven thousand dollars total, after fourteen years of government service, and a 1958 Oldsmobile that needed an overhaul.
“Now, I have no complaints. In the next eight years, I made a lot of money. I made $250,000 from a book and the serial rights also. . . . But also in that period, I earned between $100,000 and $250,000 every year. So that when I, in 1968, decided to become a candidate for President, I decided to clean the decks and put everything in real estate. I sold all my stock for $300,000—that is all I owned. I sold my apartment in New York for $300,000. . . . And I had $100,000 coming to me from the law firm. And so, that is where the money came from.
“Let me just say this, and I want to say this to the television audience: I made my mistakes, but in all of my years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public service—I have earned every cent. I have earned everything I have got. And in all of my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice. And I think, too, that I could say that in my years of public life, that I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their President is a crook. Well, I am not a crook.”
And, we have our headline!