Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Watergate Hearings - Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, May 22, 1973 - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord). Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
[close-up of Senator Sam ERVIN at committee table] Before gaveling meeting to order, ERVIN jokes with a photographer, saying that "THERE IS AN ELUSIVE QUALITY ABOUT MY HANDSOMENESS WHICH NO PHOTOGRAPHER HAS YET CAUGHT", to general laughter in the room--[file under ERVIN, DIXIECRAT, HUMOR] [ERVIN bangs gavel one time] Senator Sam ERVIN. The committee -will come to order. Mr. Sam DASH. Senator Baker will be opening the questioning of Mr. McCord, but before that, Mr. McCord, it has come to our attention that there is concern among a number of Cuban-Americans and others of Latin nationalities that in your references in during your testimony, and I am not suggesting that it is your in intention to cast any aspersions, but that you have referred to others who participated with you by their proper names but in your reference, to those who are Cuban-Americans you have referred to them as Cubans. Would you in your testimony in the future when referring to the participants who worked with you, use their proper names and when not necessary not use a nationality or ethnic reference. Mr. James McCORD. I would be very glad to. Senator Howard BAKER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. [cut to shot of BAKER, ERVIN, and DASH at center of table, then to close-up of BAKER alone] Mr. McCord and Mr. Fensterwald, I appreciate your agreeing on Friday to respond to rather general and even possibly ambiguous question. But to reiterate the questions, so it is in perspective for today's hearings, my purposes were these: I remarked that I thought that your testimony had been very thorough and very exact. We are grateful for the several memorandums that you provided the committee and from which you have testified which I believe adds to the element of concern and the element of sensitivity to exactitude which you've exhibited. I also express the concern that no notwithstanding very thorough interviews and one executive session with the committee, I continue to have the feeling that there is still a substantial amount of information which you may not think is relevant to this inquiry but which, in fact, may be relevant in terms of other witnesses, [cut to close-up of McCord, with serious expression, and counsel, with even more serious expression-- note general pattern of alternating shots of witness and interrogator] in terms of the general pattern which emerges. I indicated, therefore, that I would be grateful if you would search your mind and recollection within the boundaries and framework of the jurisdictional qualifications of this committee and within the scope of the general areas of inquiry which we have probed so far. As you probably know, the resolution, Senate Resolution 60, which was passed by the U.S. Senate, provides for an investigation into Presidential campaign activities in 1972, to ascertain whether or not there were illegal, improper, or unethical activities. Beyond that, Mr. McCord as you and Mr. Fensterwald can surmise this committee is interested in broad categories of interest. We want to know, of course, of illegal activity or activity which is now known to be illegal, such as the break-in at the Watergate, the Democratic National Committee. The so-called cover-up, the allegations that efforts were made by some to conceal the involvement or connections involved. The money that was involved in the campaign activities, the source, the accounting procedures involved, if any, and the disposition of those funds and for what, purpose. We want to know who is involved and what their relationships are. Those are the general areas that we have probed so far. My reason for reiterating it is to put, I hope, your further response into perspective and to add one additional caveat. Not only do I not know what I might ask you in these respects beyond what you have testified, but I do not want to limit you by a description that I have made of the contribution that you can make to this committee. I believe you to be a very, very important witness, and I reiterate this is not an adversary proceeding. You are not a defendant in this forum and I am not a prosecutor of a defender. So with that, Mr. McCord, if you have a further statement to make I would be grateful for it. That may or may not generate further questions that I will have as we proceed with the testimony. Mr. MCCORD. All right, sir. I will try to give as much information as I can. I realize the very large scope of the committee's activities. I realize that it is also possible that the committee may have an impression from me which I apologize for [WS of entire committee table] that I may have more information to offer than I really do. I think I will do my best to set forth in this memorandum today, this statement, things that have come to mind that it would appear you would be very interested in and to respond to questions therefrom and to do anything further that the committee may want to amplify what I have said or to develop any further information that may be helpful to you. Senator BAKER. Thank you sir.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. McCORD. One statement that we did not get into on the last meeting I think primarily because of the factor of time, was a memorandum which I had written to the committee dated May 4, 1973, the subject of pressure on the defendants to blame the Watergate operation on CIA, and other matters. I'm prepared to go into that statement at this time if it has your approval. Senator BAKER. Thank you very much. Is that letter a part of the record? Mr. McCORD. No, sir. Senator BAKER. Do you have a copy of it? Mr. MCCORD. Yes, Sir. Senator BAKER. Might it be introduced, Mr. Chairman, as an exhibit? Senator ERVIN. Yes. Senator BAKER. I understand copies have not been supplied to the committee, but if there is no objection, I would like to ask it be made an exhibit in the record at this point. Senator ERVIN. I think it might be well to have it printed in full at this point in the body of the record, if there's no objection. Senator BAKER. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. MCCORD. I can read the statement if you like. I have previously referred to political pressure which was applied to the seven Watergate defendants. One area of pressure which was applied was that of December 1972, in which intense pressure was applied on some of the defendants to falsely claim for purposes of a defense during the trial in January 1973, that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. This would have had the effect of clearing the Committee for the Re-Election of the President & the White House of responsibility for the operation. In two separate meetings in December 1972 it was suggested that I use as my defense during the trial the false story that the operation was a CIA operation. I refused to do so. I was subsequently informed by Bernard Barker just before the trial began in Jan 1973, that E. Howard Hunt and other unnamed persons in Miami had brought intense pressure to bear against the Cuban-Americans and by those-- I will digress from the record to read to whom I was referring-and the identities of these persons, came to me in conversations with Mr. Bernard Barker and some of the other individuals involved. Specifically I was referring to Mr. Bernard L. Barker, to Mr. Eugenio R. Martinez, to Mr. Frank A. Sturgis, to Mr. Virgilio R. Gonzales - I will restate the sentence, I was subsequently informed by Bernard Barker just before the trial began in January 1973, that E. Howard Hunt & other unnamed persons in Miami had brought intense pressure to bear against the Cuban-Americans who were defendants to use the same story that it was a CIA operation, as their defense, that my stand taken against it had been the decisive factor, according to Mr. Barker, causing this ploy to be dropped, that Hunt was very bitter about it. Mr. Hunt's bitterness was later revealed early in the trial when the same individuals advised that Hunt had said that "I was responsible for our being in the plight we were in, for not going along with the CIA thing."
Watergate Hearings - testimony of James McCord (Jim McCord) May 22, 1973
Mr. MCCORD. At a later time, I heard from Barker that he had been told that Cuban money was suspected of being funneled into the McGovern Campaign. I have no knowledge that this suspicion was ever verified. The two December 1972 meetings with me were on Dec 21, 1972 & on Dec 26, 1972. Present at the first meeting with me at the Monocle restaurant in Washington, D.C., were Gerald Alch and Bernard Shankman, my attorneys. Present at the second meeting was Gerald Alch, and the meeting was at his offices in Boston, Mass. In the 1st meeting, Alch stated that he had just come from a meeting with William 0. Bittman, attorney for E. Howard Hunt, and I received the impression in the discussion that followed that Alch was conveying an idea or request from Bittman. There followed a suggestion from Alch that I use as my defense during the trial the story that the Watergate operation was a CIA operation. I heard him out on the suggestion which included questions as to whether I could ostensibly have been recalled from retirement from CIA to participate in the operation. He said that if so, my personnel records at CIA could be doctored to reflect such a recall. He stated that Schlesinger, the new Director of CIA, whose appointment had just been announced, "could be subpoenaed and, would go along with it." I had noted in the newspapers of that day, December 21, 1972, that it had been announced by the White House that Mr. Schlesinger had taken over as Director of CIA, and that it had been decided that Pat Gray would be supported by the White House to be permanent Director of the FBI.