Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, July 10, 1973
[00.38.44-DASH interrogates MITCHELL about the COVERUP. MITCHELL engages DASH in a great deal of Hair-splitting about his working relationships with the President and the high-level White House staff] Mr. DASH. Well, did Mr. Dean in carrying back the messages from Mr. Haldeman and Mr. Ehrlichman, indicate that he had in fact informed them of the actions that had been taken--the strategies performed by your group? Mr. MITCHELL. I cannot say that he did or did not, I would have to believe that Mr. Dean was reporting to those gentlemen over there. Mr. Dean, as a proper lawyer, proper counsel, was very, very limited in his discussions of -what he did or said -with people in the White House and that is the way, of course, he should have acted. Mr. DASH. I think you testified that you at least discussed with Mr. Haldeman and Mr. Ehrlichman the problems involved in the Liddy operations, the Ellsberg, and other situations? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, and that -was somewhere down the line, probably much later than the time frame of which you are talking about in relationship to Mr. Magruder's appearance before the grand jury. Mr. DASH. All right, now, let us look very briefly to the so-called-wiretapping of the journalists and Mr. Kissinger's staff as a result of the wiretaps? the SALT talk leaks. Were you aware of the leaking and those wiretaps? [00.39.58] Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Dash, I find it hard to give you a specific answer other than the fact that, yes, I 'was. To what extent, I do not know. This happened in 1969 and they were national security wiretaps. They should have a full record of everything that was handled in the Department of Justice, because every security tap, -whether it be a strict national security dealing with foreigners or whether it, is the type that the court, has since frowned upon, is filed the Department of Justice. Mr. DASH. 'But this -would require your authority as Attorney General, would it not? [00.40.46-MITCHELL tries to downplay his role during his entire term as ATTORNEY GENERAL in surveillance and law enforcement policies that were constitutionally questionable, domestic wiretapping, etc.] Mr. MITCHELL, I would believe that the FBI -would-probably not operate without it. I am not sure of that, but I believe that that would be the case. Now, let me go on to point out two other things. -No. 1, I do not recall there being that many people involved. I remember some members of the National Security Council that they thought were very suspect. The second point I would like to point out, which gives me memory problems, is, that in the newspapers, accounts have said that some of these were, on for l year and a half or 2 Years, or something to that, extent,. Well, -we have a rule that I put in the Department that where they had these national security taps, they had to be reviewed every 90 days. SO there again, I would have had a memory jog along the way if this be the Case'. So what I am saying, is that, I think Your best evidence is over in the Department of Justice and not my recollection. [00.41.52] Mr. DASH. Well, would the President's recollection be of assistance, Mr. Mitchell? Are you aware of the President's statement of May 22? Mr. MITCHELL. I am aware of that, reference in the statement of May 22. I do not know where it came from. It may quite conceivably be correct. I brought the matter up through a correspondence with Mr. Ruckelshaus 'and I thought I got very fuzzy answers, back, but as I say, the evidence is in the Department of Justice and you ought to have access to it. Mr. DASH. Well, you do recall that In that statement of the President, the President did say that these areas did have the approval and were selected, along, with others, by the Attorney General of the -United States, who was you at the time? [00.42.39] Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Dash, I have seen a lot of statements that come out that--I am not referring to the President-but in which people who dig out the information frequently get their facts wrong. Mr. DASH. This is a very important statement by the President on May 22. Mr. MITCHELL. I thought Mr. Buzhardt's Statement was Quite important as far as I was concerned, too, but. I think we found out what the distinction was there, Mr. DASH. You are not suggesting Mr. Buzhardt prepared the May 22 testimony? Mr. MITCHELL. I am not suggesting anything. [00.43.13] Mr. DASH. Did you believe, Mr. Mitchell--and I use the term belief at this point--have any belief as to whether the President was aware of the events either prior to or after the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters? When I say events. I mean the actual bugging or the coverup which took place thereafter? [00.43.31] Mr. MITCHELL. I am not aware of it and I have every reason to believe, because of my discussions and encounters with him up through the 22d Of March. I have very strong opinions that he was not. Mr. DASH. Now do you arrive at that conclusion? Was it by particular conversations with the President that he talked to you about this subject, or did you talk to him about this subject? Mr. MITCHELL. NO, it is primarily--I do nor want to say no to it, and I will explain the natures of the conversations, if you so desire. As a matter of fact, you may go through that list and I will get a Chance to do them one, by one. What. I am saying- is that I think I know the individual, I know his reactions to things, and I have a very strong feeling that, during the period of time in which I was in association with him and did talk to him on the, telephone that I just do not believe that he had that information or had that knowledge; otherwise, I think the type of conversations we had would have brought, it out.