Part of Slepp's ProjectsPastebinTURLImagebinFilebin
Feedback -- English French German Japanese
Create Upload Newest Tools Donate
Sign In | Create Account

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIR
Wednesday, August 22nd, 2007 at 11:41:28pm UTC 

  1. FOOTNOTE TO ATTACHMENT 44
  2.  
  3. 1 See 18 U.S.C. . 208(a); 5 C.F.R § 2635.401-403. See also, Ethical Rules for U.S. Attorneys, Sections 3-2.170-171, 3-2.220.
  4.  
  5.  
  6. ATTACHMENT 45
  7.  
  8. TO THE
  9.  
  10. DECLARATION OF BRIAN DAUTCH
  11.  
  12.  
  13. STATEMENT OF INFORMATION
  14.  
  15.  
  16. HEARINGS
  17.  
  18. BEFORE THE
  19.  
  20. COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
  21.  
  22. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
  23.  
  24. NINETY THIRD CONGRESS
  25.  
  26. SECOND EDITION
  27.  
  28. PURSUANT TO
  29.  
  30. H. Res. 803
  31.  
  32. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE
  33. ON THE JUDICIARY TO INVESTIGATE, WHETHER SUFFICIENT
  34. GROUNDS EXIST FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO
  35. EXERCISE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO IMPEACH
  36. RICHARD M. NIXON
  37. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
  38.  
  39.  
  40. Book V - Part I DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ITT LITIGATION
  41. RICHARD KLEINDIENST NOMINATION HEARINGS
  42.  
  43.  
  44.  
  45. MAY-JUNE 1974
  46.  
  47.  
  48. FOREWORD
  49.  
  50. By Hon. Peter W. Rodino, Jr., Chairman,
  51. Committee on the Judiciary
  52.  
  53.  
  54. On February 6, 1974, the House of Representatives adopted by a vote of 410-4 the following House Resolution 803:
  55.  
  56. RESOLVED, That the Committee on the Judiciary acting as a whole or by any subcommittee thereof appointed by the Chairman for the purposes hereof and in accordance with the Rules of the Committee, is authorized and directed to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of America. The co??ttee shall report to the House of Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendation it deems proper.
  57.  
  58. Beginning in November 1973, acting under resolutions referred to the Committee by the Speaker of the House and with a special appropriation, I had begun to organize a special staff to investigate serious charges against the President of the United States.
  59.  
  60. On May 9, 1974, as Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, I convened the Committee for hearings to review the results of the Impeachment Inquiry staff's investigation. The staff began its initial presentation the same day, in executive session, pursuant to the Committee's Impeachment Inquiry Procedures adopted on May 2, 1974.
  61.  
  62. By June 21, the Inquiry staff had concluded its initial presentation.
  63.  
  64. On June 25, the Committee voted to make public the initial presentation including substantially all of the supporting material presented at the hearings. The Committee also voted to make public the President's response, which was presented to the Committee on June 27 and June 28 in the same form and manner as the Inquiry staff's initial presentation.
  65.  
  66. Statements of information and supporting evidentiary material were compiled by the Inquiry staff in 36 notebooks and furnished in this form to each Member of the Committee. The notebooks presented material on several subjects of the Inquiry: the Watergate break-in and its aftermath, ITT, dairy price supports, domestic surveillance, abuse of the IRS, and the activities of the Special Prosecutors. In each notebook a statement of information relating to a particular phase of the investigation was immediately followed by supporting evidentiary material, which included copies of documents and testimony (much already on public record), transcripts of Presidential conversations and affidavits.
  67.  
  68. The staff also presented to the Committee written reports on President Nixon's income taxes, Presidential inpoundment of funds appropriated by Congress, and the bombing of Cambodia.
  69.  
  70. Book V, presented to the Commitee under the general heading of "ITT," dealt with two areas of the Inquiry. First, material was presented with respect to the possible relation between the 1971 settlement of three antitrust cases filed against ITT and ITT's pledge of financial assistance to the San Diego Convention and Tourist Bureau for expenses related to the 1972 Republican National Convention. Second, material no presented rich respect to the testimony of Richard Kleindienst and John Mitchell during Kleindienst's confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  71.  
  72. Every effort was lade to preclude inferences in the presentation of this materail. A deliberate and scrupulous abstention from conclusions, even by implication, was observed.
  73.  
  74. With respect to the Presidential recorded conversations, the Committee determined to hear the recorded conversations in their entirety. The Presidential recorded conversations were neither paraphrased nor summarized by the Inquiry staff. Thus, no inferences, or conclusions were drawn for the Committee. During the course of the hearings, Members of the Committee heard each recording and simultaneously followed transcripts prepared by the Inquiry staff. Each of these transcripts is reprinted under the appropriate Statement of Information.
  75.  
  76. During the course of the hearings, the Committee found it necessary to issue a subpoena to President Richard Nixonon requiring tape recordings of 19 Presidential conversations related Co the ITT matters before the Committee. The Committee also subpoenaed the President's copies of daily news statuaries which were compiled by White House staff members, from February 22, 1972 through June 9, 1972. The President has not yet responded co this subpoena.
  77.  
  78. Prior to the Committee's, issuance of the subpoena on June 24, 1974, the President furnished to the Committee an edited transcript: of a meeting he held rich H. R. Haldeman and John Mitchell on April 4, 1972 at: which the Kleindienst nomination bearings were discussed.
  79.  
  80. In a few instances, Ranking Minority Member Mr. Hutchinson and I determined, pursuant to authority granted us by the Committee, to defer the release of evidentiary material or to delete it for one of the following reasons:
  81.  
  82. l) Because the public interest in making the material public was outweighed by the potential prejudice to the rights of defendants under indictment and awaiting trial.
  83.  
  84. 2) Because the information was classified or otherwise required confidential treatment,
  85.  
  86. 3) Because the material was only marginally pertinent and was considered to be defamatory, degrading or embarrassing, or,
  87.  
  88. 4) Because the materail was not pertinent to Presidential responsibility within the outer limits of an impeachable offense within the meaning of the Constitution.
  89.  
  90. The Committee on the Judiciary is working to follow faithfully itc mandate "to investingate fully and completely" whether OF not sufficient grounds exist to recommend chat the House exercise its constitutional power of impeachment.
  91.  
  92. I believe that the readers of these volumes will see that the Committee's effort in carrying out its mandate has been to obtain an objective, impartial presentation which will enable each Member of the Committee to make an informed Judgment in fulfilling his or her constitutional responsibility.
  93.  
  94. I also believe that the publication of the record of these hearings will provide readers with a clear idea of the particulars of the investigation and that the proximity of the evidence will assure them that no statement of information is offered without supporting evidentiary material.
  95.  
  96.  
  97.  
  98. Signature of Peter W. Rodino
  99.  
  100.  
  101.  
  102. July 1974
  103.  
  104.  
  105. 1. By memorandum dated April 23, 1969 from Deputy Attorney Genera Richard Kleindienst, acting as Attorney General*, mid Assistanttant Attorney General Richard ??aren, head of the Antitrust Division, to John Ehrlichman, Counsel Co the President, Kleindienst and McLaren urged approval of the commencement of an antitrust action against the International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (ITT) challenging its acquisition of Canteen Corporation. Co??ent of the stoic no approved and on April 28, 1969 the suit was begun in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
  106. *Because Attorney General John Mitchell's former law firm had represented an ITT subsidiary, Mitchell recused hi??elf and Deputy Attorney General Kleindienst acted u Attorney General in connection with the litigation.
  107.         Page
  108. 1.1     Memorandum from Richard Kleindienst and Richard McLaren to John Enrlichman, April 23, 1969 with attached draft complaint (received from White Home)  70
  109. 1.2     Memorandum from Richard McLaren to Richard Kleindienst, April 25, 1969, 3 Kleindienst Confirmation Hearings (KCH) 1237       88
  110. 1.3     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Civ. No. 69c-924, Docket, 1-2    89
  111. 1.4     Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 96      91
  112. 1.5     John Mitchell testimony, 2 KCH. 539-40       92
  113. 1.6     Memorandum from Richard McLaren for the Attorney General, April 7, 1969 (received from Department of Justice)        94
  114.  
  115.  
  116.  
  117. 2. On August 1, 1969 two antitrust suits similar to the Canteen suit were commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut challenging ITT's acquisition of the Hartford Fire Insurance Company and Grinnell Corporation.
  118.         Page
  119. 2.1     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation and Grinnell Corporation, Civ. No. 13319, Docket, 1-2     102
  120. 2.2     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation and Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Civ. No. 13320, Docket, 1-2  104
  121. 2.3     Memorandum from Richard McLaren for the Attorney General, June 20, 1969 (received from Department of Justice)        106
  122. 2.4     Memorandum from Richard McLaren for the Deputy Attorney General, approved July 25, 1969 (received from Department of Justice)        120
  123.  
  124.  
  125.  
  126. 3. During 1969, 1970 and 1971, Harold S. Geneen, President of ITT, met on numerous occasions with White House staff members, other Administration officials and members of both houses of Congress to discuss various hatters, including international monetary policy, the Office of Foreign Direct Investment policy, antitrust policy, balance of payments, revenue sharing and expropriation by foreign governments. During the sunsnet of 1969 Geneen sought a personal meeting with the President to discuss the ITT antitrust cases. His request was denied because the President's advisers thought that such a meeting was inappropriate.
  127.         Page
  128. 3.1     Harold Geneen testimony, 2 KCH 776-80        132
  129. 3.2     Memorandum from Hugh Sloan to John Ehrlichman, June 30, 1969 (received from White House)     137
  130. 3.3     Memorandum from Dwight Chapin to Peter Flanigan, July 16, 1969 (received from White House)   138
  131. 3.4     White House "White Paper," The ITT Anti-Trust Decision, January 8, 1974, 1, 3        139
  132.  
  133.  
  134.  
  135. 4. During September 1969 Colonel James Hughes, Military Assistant to the President, spoke with Dita Beard, an ITT lobbyist, about the pending antitrust suit. Hughes reported on the conversation in a memorandum to Ehrlichman dated September 19, 1969.
  136.         Page
  137. 4.1     Memorandum from James Hughes to John Ehrlichman, September 19, 1969 (received from White House)      142
  138.  
  139.  
  140.  
  141. 5. In August 1970 officials and representatives of ITT held five with Administration officials, including Vice President Spiro Secretary of Commerce Maurice Scans, Assistant Attorney General and White House counsel John Ehrlichman and Charles Colson to cuss antitrust matters in general and the ITT antitrust litigation particular. In another meeting, Geneen and Attorney General Mitchell to discuss overall antitrust policy with respect to conglomerates. these meetings and in subsequent letters and memoranda ITT officials bought to persuade Administration officials that McLaren's antitrust views, as reflected in his conduct of the ITT litigation, were ill-advised and inconsistent with the Ad??ration's antitrust policy.
  142.         Page
  143. 5.1     Memorandum from Tod Hullin to John Ehrlichman, August 4, 1970 (received from White House)    145
  144. 5.2     Letter from Richard McLaren to Tod Hullin, July 30, 1970, with attached memorandum from Richard McLaren to John Ehrilchman (received from White House)       147
  145. 5.3     Memorandum from Richard McLaran to Tod Bullin, August 3, 1970, with attachment] (received from White House)  153
  146. 5.4     Letter from "Ned" [Edvard Gerrity] to Vice President Spiro Agnew, August 7, 1970, with attached memorandum (received from House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee)   163
  147. 5.5     Memorandum from John Poole to Files, August 7, 1970 (received from Department of Justice)    166
  148. 5.6     Memorandum from Tod Hullin to Richard McLaren, August 10, 1970 (received from White House)   168
  149. 5.7     Letter from Thorns Casey to Charles Colson, August 7, 1970, with attach??nt (received from White House)      169
  150. 5.8     Memorandum from Charles Colson to John Ehrlichman, August 10, 1970 (received from White House)       177
  151. 5.9     Memorandum from Ted Hullin to John Mitchell, August 11, 1970 (received from White House)     178
  152. 5.10    John Mitchell testimony, 2 KCH 540, 542-43, 546, 549-50     179
  153. 5.11    Memorandum from Edward Gerrity to John Ryan, August 10, 1970 (received from Michael Mitchell)       185
  154. 5.12    Memorandum from John Ryan to William Merr??, August 24, 1970, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcomittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversigth of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 154-56     186
  155.  
  156.  
  157.  
  158. 6. On September 15, 1970 the trial in ITT-Grinnell began. In memoranda dated September 17, 1970 from Ehrlichman to Attorney General Mitchell and October l, 1970 from Colson to Ehrlichman, the ITT litigation was discussed. Ehrlichman and Colson stated their concern that McLaren's conduct of the ITT cases constituted an attack on "bigness per se" contrary to the Administration's expressed antitrust policy.
  159.         Page
  160. 6.1     United States v. International Telephone and Telesraph Corporation and Grinnell Corporation, Civ. No. 13319, Docket, 5       190
  161. 6.2     Memorandum from John Ehrlicman to John Mitchell, September 17, 1970 (received from White House)      192
  162. 6.3     Memorandum from Charles Colson to John Ehrlichman, October 1, 1970, with attachment (received from White House)      193
  163.  
  164.  
  165.  
  166. 7. The trial of ITT-Grinnell was completed on October 30, 1970 and the case was taken under advisement. A Judgment for ITT on the merits was rendered on December 31, 1970. A notice of appeal was filed on March 1, 1971.
  167.         Page
  168. 7.1     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation and Grinnell Corporation, Civ. No. 13319, Docket, 1,6-7   214
  169. 7.2     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Opinion, December 31, 1970, 324 F. Supp. 19      217
  170.  
  171.  
  172.  
  173. 8. On March 3, 1971 at ITT's request Geneen and Willis Merriam, ITT Vice President and Director of Washington Relations, met with Ehrlichman to discuss antitrust matters.
  174.         Page
  175. 8.1     John Ehrlichman log, March 3, 1971 (received from SSC)       256
  176. 8.2     Letter from William Nerriam to John Ehrlichman, March 4, 1971 (received from White House)    257
  177. 8.3     William Merriam testimony, 3 KCH 951         258
  178.  
  179.  
  180.  
  181. 9. On March 20, 1971, on the motion of Solicitor General Erwin Gziswold, the time for the government to perfect ice appeal in ITT-Grinnell by filing its Jurisdictional statement was extended from March 31, 1971 to April 20, 1971.
  182.         Page
  183. 9.1     United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Application for Extension of Time and Order of the Supreme Court, March 20, 1971, and letter from the Deputy Clerk of the Supreme Court to Solicitor General Erwin Griswold (received from Department of Justice)        260
  184.  
  185.  
  186.  
  187. 10. On March 30, 1971 Merriam sad Thomas Casey, ITT Director of Planning, met with Peter Peterson, Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, to discuss a wide range of subjects including antitrust matters.
  188.         Page
  189. 10.1    Peter Peterson affidavit, April 29, 1974    268
  190. 10.1    Letter from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 7, 1971 (received from Peter Peterson) 271
  191.  
  192.  
  193.  
  194. 11. It the request of Ehrlichman who said he spoke for the President, Peterson met with Geneen end Merriam on Friday, April 16, 1971. They discussed various subjects relating to economic policy, including overall antitrust policy related to bigness. At the end of the meeting, Geneen and Merriam discussed ITT's specific antitrust problems, including the fact that the deadline for the government to perfect the ITT-Grinnell appeal was the following Tuesday, April 20. After the meeting Peterson telephoned Ehrlichman and reported on the meeting including the discussion of the ITT-Grinnell appeal. Ehrlichman indicated to Peterson that action was under way to postpone the appeal. The following week Peterson reported to the President on the meeting and his subsequent telephone call to Ehrlichman.
  195.         Page
  196. 11.1    Peter Peterson affidavit, April 29, 1974    278
  197. 11.2    Memorandum from Peter Peterson to the President, April 23, 1971 (received from White House) 281
  198.  
  199.  
  200.  
  201. 12. Also on April 16, 1971 Lawrence Walsh, a member of a law firm had lens represented ITT, telephoned Deputy Attorney General Kleindienst. Pursuant to that telephone conversation Walsh caused to be to Kleindienst a letter and memorandum urging that before the of Justice decided to pursue the ITT-Grinnell appeal to the Court it should undertake a review by all interested federal of the economic consequences of a Supreme Court decision favorable to the government. Copies of the rajah letter and memorandum were later that day to Peterson and Ehrlichman.
  202.         Page
  203. 12.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 250    284
  204. 12.2    Lawrence Walsh testimony, 3 KCH 1038-39     285
  205. 12.3    Letter from Lawrence Walsh to Richard Kleindienst, April 16, 1971 rich attached memorandum of (received from white House; reprinted at 2 KCH 26S-68 287
  206. 12.4    Memorandum from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 16, 1971 rich attached letter (received from Peter Peterson)       304
  207. 12.5    Letter from William Merriam to John Ehrlichman, April 16, 1971 rich attached letter and memorandum of Law (received from White House)       305
  208.  
  209.  
  210.  
  211. 13. On Monday morning, April 19, 1971 Kleindienst told Walsh by telephone that Kleindienst did not think the ITT-Grinnell appeal would be delayed, In a memorandum dazed April 19, 1971 to Kleindienst, McLaren disputed the position taken by Walsh in his letter and memorandum of April 16 and urged that the ITT-Grinnell appeal not be delayed.
  212.         Page
  213. 13.1    Lawrence Walsh testimony, 3 KCH 1039        308
  214. 13.2    Memorandum from Richard McLaren to Richard Kleindienst, April 19, 1971 (received from Department of Justice)        309
  215.  
  216.  
  217.  
  218. 14. Beginning at 3:03 p.m. on the afternoon of April 19, 1971 the President met with Ehrlichman and George Shultz, Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The antitrust actions against ITT were among the subjects discussed. Ehrlichman said that the deadline for the ITT-Grinnell appeal was the following day and he reported that, despite his attempts to give the Justice Department "signals," the appeal was being pursued. The President then telephoned Kleindienst and ordered him to drop the appeal. After the telephone conversation the President expressed his concern that McLaren's actions with respect to conglomerates were contrary to the Administration's antitrust policy.
  219.         Page
  220. 14.1    Tape recording of conversation among the President, John Ehrlichman and George Shultz, April 19, 1971, 3:03 - 3:34 p.m., and House Judiciary Committee transcript thereof   312
  221. 14.2    Tape recording of telephone conversation between the President and Richard Kleindienst, April 19, 1971, 3:04 - 3:09 p.m., and House Judiciary Committee transcript thereof  346
  222.  
  223.  
  224.  
  225. 15. After the President's telephone call Kleindienst met with McLaren and Solicitor General Erwin Griswold and directed that the Solicitor General apply to the Supreme Court for another extension of time. At 4:30 p.m. Kleindienst telephoned Walsh and informed him that the Solicitor General was arranging for an extension of time for the government to perfect its appeal.
  226.         Page
  227. 15.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 250    350
  228. 15.2    Richard McLaren testimony, 2 KCH 252        351
  229. 15.3    Ervin Griswold statement, 2 KCH 242-43      352
  230. 15.4    Erwin Griswold testimony, 2 KCH 373, 378-80         354
  231. 15.5    Lawrence Walsh testimony, 3 KCH 103g        346
  232.  
  233.  
  234.  
  235. 16. On Tuesday, April 20, 1971, on the motion of Solicitor General Griswold, the time for the government to perfect its appeal in ITT- Grinnell by filling its Jurisdictional statement was extended from April 20, 1971 to May 20, 1971.
  236.         Page
  237. 16.1    United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Application for Extension of Time filed by the Solicitor General and Order of the United States Supreme Court, April 20, 1971, with letter from the Deputy Clerk of the Supreme Court to Solicitor General Ervin Griswold (received from Department of Justice) 360
  238. 16.2    United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Supreme Court Docket Apri1 19-20, 1971  365
  239.  
  240.  
  241.  
  242. 17. Also on April 20, 1971 Felix Rohatyn, an investment banker who was a director of ITT, met with Kleindienst to discuss the economic and financial fabrications of divestiture of the Hartford Fire Insurance Company by ITT. At the meeting Rohatyn asked to present these arguments to McLaren, and such a presentation was later arranged for April 29.
  243.         Page
  244. 17.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 96-97  368
  245. 17.2    Felix Rohatyn testimony, 2 £CKCH 114       370
  246.  
  247.  
  248.  
  249. 18. On April 21, 1971 the President met with Attorney General Mitchell and discussed, among ocher things, the ITT-Grinnell appeal. The President said that he did not care about the aeries of the case but that the business community believed that the Administration was being even rougher on it in antitrust matters than had previous admin- istrations. Mitchell argued that it was a political mistake to inter- fete with the appeal. The President agreed to heed Mitchell's advice to permit the appeal to be perfected.
  250.         Page
  251. 18.1    Tape recording of the end of a meeting between the President and John Mitchell, April 21, 1971, 4:18 - 6:13 p.m., and House Judiciary Committee transcript thereof  372
  252.  
  253.  
  254.  
  255. 19. During the 1eat ten days of April 1971 Geneen and Merriam of ITT wrote four letters to Administration officials --- one to Secretary of the Treasury John Connally and three to Peter Peterson -- containing references to antitrust matters. Two of the letters commented favorably on the ITT-Grinnell appeal delay.
  256.         Page
  257. 19.1    Memorandum from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 22, 1971, with attached letter from Harold G??neen to Peter Peterson, April 22, 1971 (received from Peter Peterson)        378
  258. 19.2    Letter from William Neff/am to 3ohu Connally, April 22, 1971 (received from white House)    386
  259. 19.3    Memorandum from Peter Peterson to John Ehrlichman Dick [sic] Krogh, April 27, 1971, with attached letter from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 26, 1971 (received from White House)         388
  260. 19.4    Memorandum from Peter Peterson to John Ehrlichman sad Dick [sic] Krogh, May 3, 1971, with attached letter from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 30, 1971 (received from White House 391
  261.  
  262.  
  263.  
  264. 20. On April 28, 1971 Ehrlichman wrote a memorandum to the President criticizing McLaren for failure to follow the Administration's antitrust policy, then under study by a Domestic Council Task Force, and recommending action to be taken. The President approved Ehrlichman's recommendations.
  265.         Page
  266. 20.1    Memorandum from John Ehrlichman to the President, April 28, 1971 (received from White House)        394
  267. 20.2    Memorandum from John Ehrlichman to Members of the Domestic Council, February 19, 1971 (received from Department of Justice)         396
  268. 20.3    Memorandum from Egil Krogh to Richard McLaren, Apr11 30, 1971 (received from White House )  398
  269. 20.4    Memorandum fro.- John Ehrlichman to John Connally, John Mitchell, George Shultz, Paul McCracken, Peter Peterson, and Peter Flanigan, September 14, 1971 (received from Department of Justice)       401
  270.  
  271.  
  272.  
  273. 21. On April 29, 1971 Rohatyn accompanied by four ITT representatives ??et with Kleindienst, McLaren and Antitrust Division and Treasury Department staff members. The ITT representatives presented ITT's position that there would be adverse economic and financial consequences if the divestiture of Hartford were required. Following the meeting McLaren caused these arguments to be submitted to the Treasury Department and to Richard Ramsden, an independent financial consultant who had previously rendered advice to the Antitrust Division.
  274.         Page
  275. 21.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 98     404
  276. 21.2    Richard McLaren test , 2 KCH 102-03 405
  277. 21.3    Felix Rohatyn testimony, 2 KCH 114-16       407
  278. 21.4    Richard Kleindienst notes of Apr11 29, 1971 meeting (received from Department of Justice)   410
  279. 21.5    Letter from Felix Rohatyn to Richard McLaren, Nay 3, 1971 (received from Department of Justice)     419
  280.  
  281.  
  282.  
  283. 22. Beginning in April 1971 Mitche11, Haldeman, Lawrence Higby, Gordon Strschan, William Timmons, Jeb Magruder and Robert Odle participated in the initial planning of the 1972 Republican National Convention and began to consider San Diego as a possible site. A memorandum from Higby to Strachan dated April 29, 1971 states that Haldeman discussed the possibility of a San Diego convention with California's Lt. Governor. Ed Reinecke. The memorandum states that Reinecke would, as a result of his discussion with Haldeman, cause a proposal for San Diego to be the convention size to be made to the Republican National Committee.
  284.         Page
  285. 22.1    Memorandum from William Timmons to H. R. Haldeman, April 20, 1971 (received from White House)       425
  286. 22.2    Memorandum from Lawrence Higby to H. R. Haldeman, April 20, 1971 (received from White House)        426
  287. 22.3    Memorandum from Gordon Strachan to H. R. Haldeman, April 21, 1971 (received from White House)       427
  288. 22.4    Memorandum from Gordon Strachan to H. R. Haldeman, April 23, 1971 (received from White House)       428
  289. 22.5    Memorandum from Lawrence Higby to Cordon Strachan, April 29, 1971 (received from White House)       429
  290. 22.6    Memorandum from Gordon Strachan to H. R. Haldemam, Nay 11, 1971 with attached memorandum from William Tim??ons to H. R. Haldeman, Hay 6, 1971, and attached report (received from White House)      430
  291. 22.7    Memorandum from Robert Odle to Jet) Magruder, Hay 19, 1971 (received from White House)      448
  292. 22.8    Memorandum from Robert Odle to William Timmons, May 20, 1971 (received from White House)    454
  293. 22.9    Letter from Ed Reinecke to Will/me Timmons June 2, 1971 (received from White House)         455
  294. 22.10   Memorandum from Robert Odle to Jab Magruder, June 15, 1971 (received from White House)     456
  295. 22.11   Memorandum from Gordon Strachan to H. R. Haldeman, June 23, 1971 with attached memorandum from Robert Odle to Jab Hagruder, June 22, 1971, and attached memorandum from William Timmons to H. R. Haldeman, June 21, 1971 (received from White House)       458
  296. 22.12   Memorandum from Cordon Strachan to H. It. Haldeman, June 25, 1971 (received from White House)      464
  297. 22.13   Memorandum from Cordon Strachan to H. R. Haldeman, June 29, 1971, with attached memorandum from Jeb Magruder and William Timmons to John Mitchell and H. R. Haldeman, June 26, 1971, and attachments (received from White House)   465
  298.  
  299.  
  300.  
  301. 23. In a memorandum dated Hay 5, 1971 Ehrlichman informed Mitchell that he desired to meet with McLaren about the ITT cases to achieve the agreed-upon ends discussed by the President and Mitchell.
  302.         Page
  303. 23.1    Memorandum from John Ehrlichman to John Mitchell, Hay 5, 1971 (received from White House)   526
  304.  
  305.  
  306.  
  307. 24. On May 12, 1971 ITT President Geneen discussed rich Congressman Bob Wilson, whose district included part of San Diego, the possibility of ITT financial support for a San Diego convention bid.
  308.         Page
  309. 24.1    Harold Geneen testimony, 2 KCH 647-48       528
  310. 24.2    Bob Wilson testimony, 3 KCH 866-67  530
  311.  
  312.  
  313.  
  314. 25. On May 17, 1971 the government's appeal in ITT-Grinnell was perfected by the filing of a Jurisdictional statement.
  315.         Page
  316. 25.1    United States v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, Notice of Docketing of Appeal, United States Supreme Court, Hay 17, 1971 (received from Department of Justice)  534
  317.  
  318.  
  319.  
  320. 26. By report dated Nay 17, 1971 Richard Ra??sden reported his findings on the ITT position with respect to the financial ramifications of divestiture of Hartford.
  321.         Page
  322. 26.1    Ramsden Report, International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, May 17, 1971, 2 KCH 103-10       538
  323. 26.2    Richard McLaren testimony, 2 KCH 103, 110   546
  324.  
  325.  
  326.  
  327. 27. On June 17, 1971 McLaren recommended to Kleindienst that the ITT suits be settled. His proposed settlement included the requirement that 1TT divest itself of Grinnell, Canteen, and certain other ITT subsidiaries, but permitted ITT to retain Hartford Fire Insurance Company. The basic terms of the settlement offer were put to ITT on a take it or leave it basis and were accepted. Details of the settlement Were then negotiated among ITT and Antitrust Division lawyers.
  328.         Page
  329. 27.1    Memorandum from Richard McLaren to Richard Kleindienst, June 17, 1971 (received fro,, Department of Justice)        550
  330. 27.2    Richard McLaren testimony, 2 KCH 110-13     553
  331. 27.3    Felix Rohatyn testimony, 2 KCH ll5  557
  332. 27.4    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 98-99  558
  333.  
  334.  
  335.  
  336. 28. San Diego's convention bid was authorized by the San Diego City Council on June 29, 1971. On July 21, 1971 ITT-Sheraton's President, Howard James, confirmed by telegram his company's commitment to the San Diego Convention and Tourist Bureau of $100,000 for convention- related expenses plus an additional $100,000 if and when $200,000 was raised by the Bureau from other non-public sources. The pledge was subject to the condition that the Sheraton Harbor Island Hotel, then under construction, be used as Presidential convention headquarters. The decision for San Diego to be the convention site was made within the Administration and transmitted to the Republican National Committee. On July 23, 1971 the Republican National Committee selected San Diego as the 1972 convention site.
  337.         Page
  338. 28.1    San Diego City Council resolution, June 29, 1971 (received from San Diego City Council)     563
  339. 28.2    Memorandum from Jeb Magruder to John Mitchell, June 30, 1971 (received from White House)    568
  340. 28.3    Memorandum from Herbert Klein to H. R. Haldeman, June 30, 1971 (received from White House)  569
  341. 28.4    Memorandum from William Timmons to Jeb Magruder, July 3, 1971 (received from White House)   574
  342. 28.5    Memorandum from Herbert Klein to the President, July 19, 1971 (received from White House)   575
  343. 28.6    Memorandum from William Timmons to the President, July 19, 1971 (received from White House)         576
  344. 28.7    Memorandum from Jo Good to Robert Dole, July 19, 1971 (received from White House)   578
  345. 28.8    Memorandum from Jeb Magruder Co 3ohm Mitchell, July 28, 1971 with attached memorandum from Robert Odle to Jeb Magruder, July 27, 1971 (received from White House)   582
  346. 28.9    Telegram from Howard James to Bob Wilson, July 21, 1971, 2 KCH 678-79       588
  347. 28.10   Harold Geneen testimony, 2 KCH 648-49      590
  348. 28.11   Resolution on Selection of the Site for the 1972 Republican National Convention, July 23, 1971     592
  349.  
  350.  
  351.  
  352. 29. On July 31, 1971, after riff and Antitrust Division lawyers had negotiated details of the settlement of the ITT litigation, the settlement no announced.
  353.         Page
  354. 29.1    Richard NcLaren testimony, 2 KCH 110-14     596
  355. 29.2    Pelix Rohatyn testimony, 2 KCH 115  601
  356. 29.3    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 99     602
  357.  
  358.  
  359.  
  360. 30. A Sheraton Harbor Island Corporation check for $100,000 dated August: 5, 1971 and representing the non-contingent portion of ITT's pledge yes delivered to r. he San Diego Convention and Tourist Bureau.
  361.         Page
  362. 30.1    Photograph of check from Sheraton Harbor Island Corporation to the San Diego Convention and Tourist Bureau printed in Washington Post, March 16, 1972. A13  604
  363.  
  364.  
  365.  
  366. 31. On February 15, 1972 the President no??inated Richard G. Kleindienst to be Attorney General Co succeed John Mitchell who yes leaving the Department of Justice and who later became Campaign Director of the Committee for the Re-election of the President. The Senate Committee on the Judiciary held hearings on the nomination and recommendation on February 24, 1972 that the nomination be confirmed.
  367.         Page
  368. 31.1    Announcement of President's Intention Co Nominate Richard Kleindienst to be Attorney General, 8 Presidential Doc??ents 440, 448     606
  369. 31.2    Letter from President Nixon Co John Mitchell, February 15, 1972, 8 Presidential Decuments 439       608
  370. 31.3    S. Exec. Rept. 92-19, Nomination of Richard Kleindienst, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972)         609
  371. 31.4    Chicago Tribune, February 25, 1972, Section 2A, l   612
  372.  
  373.  
  374.  
  375. 32. On February 22, 1972 columnist Jack Anderson obtained from an ITT source a memorandum dated June 25, 1971 purportedly written by ITT lobbyist Dita Beard addressed to ITT Vice President Merriam regarding the ITT-Sheraton convention pledge and settlement of the ITT antitrust cases. Anderson's investigative reporters contacted first Dita Beard Co discuss and confirm the memorandum's validity sad then ITT and Administration officials co discuss and attempt to confirm the events reported in the memorandum. On February 24, 1972 ITT personnel destroyed documents in the Washington office files.
  376.         Page
  377. 32.1    Purported memorandum from Dita Beard to William Merriam, June 25, 1971, (received. from White House) reprinted in 2 KCH 447-48      614
  378. 32.2    Jack Anderson Testimony, 2 KCH 449  618
  379. 32.3    Brit Hume testimony, 2 KCH 408-14   619
  380. 32.4    Felix Rohatyn testimony, 2 KCH 115-16       626
  381. 32.5    Washington Post, March 3, 1972, D15         628
  382. 32.6    Howard Aibel testimony, 2 KCH 704-05        629
  383.  
  384.  
  385.  
  386. 33. In a February 28, 1972 Department of Justice press release Mitchell said he had met Dita Beard only once, at a party given by Governor Louis Nunn of Kentucky in May 1971, Mitchell denied allegations that he had discussed the ITT antitrust cases with her. He also denied in the press release that he had discussed the ITT matter with the President.
  387.         Page
  388. 33.1    John Mitchell statement, Department of Justice press release, February 28, 1972 (received from Department of Justice)       632
  389.  
  390.  
  391.  
  392. 34. On February 29, March 1 and March 3, 1972 there were published three columns by Jack Anderson based in part on the Beard memorandum. The articles alleged a connection between the ITT-Sheraton pledge and the ITT antitrust settlement and purported Co involve both Mitchell and Kleindienst. As a result of the publication of the first two articles Kleindienst asked that his confirmation hearings be reopened.
  393.         Page
  394. 34.1    Washington Post, February 29, March 1, March 3, 1972        634
  395. 34.2    Washington Post, March 1, 1972, Al  637
  396.  
  397.  
  398.  
  399. 35. On March 1, 1972 during his final press conference as Attorney General, Mitchell again denied talking to the President about ITT or any other antitrust case.
  400.         Page
  401. 35.1    John Mitchell press conference, Hatch 1, 1972, 1-2 (received from SSC)      640
  402.  
  403.  
  404.  
  405. 36. On or about March 1, 1972 a member of the staff of the SEC that ITT produce documents in the files of ITT's Washington, D. C. office. The SEC staff member contended that production of the documents was called for by subpoenas previously issued In connection With SEC proceedings. Attorneys for ITT collected documents believed to be included in the SEC demand.
  406.         Page
  407. 36.1    Michael Mitchell affidavit submitted to House Judiciary Committee, Hay l, 197&, with attachments    646
  408.  
  409.  
  410.  
  411. 37. On Thursday 14arch 2, 1972 pursuant to Kleindienst's request the confirmation hearings resumed and Kleindienst, testifying under oath, denied talking other than casually to the White House and White House staff about the ITT matter. He denied receiving any suggestions from the White House as to the action that the Justice Department should take in the ITT cases.
  412.         Page
  413. 37.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 95-96, 157     678
  414.  
  415.  
  416.  
  417. 38. On the same day an ITT attorney delivered copies of one or more of the documents collected by ITT attorneys from ITT's Washington office files to White House aide Wallace H. Johnson. The document or documents were the conveyed by Johnson to John Mitchell. During the following week copies of other documents taken from the ITT Washington office which mentioned the ITT antitrust suits and contacts between ITT and administration officials were delivered by ITT attorneys to Johnson.
  418.         Page
  419. 38.1    Michael Mitchell affidavit, submitted co House Judiciary Committee, May 1, 1974, with attach- mats  682
  420. 38.2    Wallace Johnson affidavit, April 25, 1974   713
  421. 38.3    John Mitchell log, March 2, 1972 (received from SSC)        717
  422.  
  423.  
  424.  
  425. 39. On the evening of Hatch 2, 1972 Dita Beard, having spent two days at the ITT offices in New York City, left Washington by airplane for Denver, Colorado en route to West Yellowstone, Montana. During the flight she became ill and on the evening of Hatch 3, 1972 she was admitted to a Denver hospital.
  426.         Page
  427. 39.1    Dita Beard statement, 2 KCH 741-42  720
  428. 39.2    Edward Gerrity testimony, 3 KCH 1167        722
  429. 39.3    United Air Lines passenger ticket, issued to D. Beard for Flight 175, Hatch 2, 1972 (received from United Air Lines)        723
  430. 39.4    Stewardess report on passenger illness of Mrs. Beard, occuring on Flight 175, March 2, 1972 (received from United Air Lines)        724
  431. 39.5    Letter from J. Edgar Hoover to Chairman James O. Eastland, March 5, 1972, 2 FCH 213         725
  432. 39.6    Medical Report by Dr. Joseph Snyder, Hatch 13, 1972, 2 KCH 637-39   726
  433.  
  434.  
  435.  
  436. 40. On Friday, March 3, 1972 Kleindienst, in his testimony before Senate Committee on the Judiciary, denied consulting with, reporting or getting directions from anybody at the White House about the ITT trust cases, He also testified that he did not recall why on April 1971 the Department of Justice requested a delay in the appeal of the ITT-Grinnell case Co the Supreme Court.
  437.         Page
  438. 40.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 95, 181, 191, 203-04   730
  439.  
  440.  
  441.  
  442. 41. On the afternoon of Sunday, March 5, 1972, the President and Haldeman returned to Washington, D.C. from Kay Biscayne. On Monday, March 6, 1972 the President had conversations with Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Colson. At about 1:30 p.m., shortly after leaving the President's office, Ehrlichman met with SEC Chairman Casey.
  443.         Page
  444. 41.1    John Ehrlichman log, March 6, 1972 (received from SSC)      736
  445. 41.2    Meetings and conversations between the President and John Ehrlichman, March 6, 1972 (received from White House)     737
  446. 41.3    Meetings and conversations between the President and H. R. Haldeman, March 1, March $ and March 6, 1972 (received from White House)         739
  447. 41.4    Meetings and conversations between the President and Charles Colson, March 6, 1972 (received from White House)      741
  448. 41.5    John Ehrlichman log, March 21, 1972 (received from SSC)     742
  449. 41.6    William Casey testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special. subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, Jun 27, 1973, 261-64, 309-30     743
  450. 41.7    William Casey calendar, March 6, 1972 (received from U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York)  749
  451.  
  452.  
  453.  
  454. 42. On Tuesday, March 7, 1972 in a prepared statement given under oath before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Kleindienst described the circumstances surrounding the request for an extension of time to appeal ITT-Grinnell. He omitted mention of the President's order to drop the case made during their telephone conversation o£ April 19, 1971.
  455.         Page
  456. 42.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 95, 249-50     752
  457.  
  458.  
  459.  
  460. 43. On March 8, 1972 Kleindienst testified before the Senate Committee an the Judiciary and denied again that he was interfered with, pressured, importuned or directed by anybody at the white House in connection rich the discharge of his responsibilities in the ITT cases.
  461.         Page
  462. 43.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 95, 323, 353   756
  463.  
  464.  
  465.  
  466. 44. In early March 1972 a White House cask force, consisting of Khrlichman, Colson, Moore, Dean, Fielding, Johnson, Assistant Attorney General Robert C. Mardian and others, was established Co follow the Kleindienst hearings; its activities continued throughout the month. was given the responsibility of reviewing White House files and collecting all documents relating to ITT, which he proceeded to do.
  467.         Page
  468. 44.1    Charles Colson testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Inde- pendence and the ITT Case, 218    760
  469. 44.2    Richard Moore testimony, 5 SSC 1947-48      761
  470. 44.3    Wallace Johnson affidavit, April 25, 1974   763
  471. 44.4    Robert Mardian testimony, 6 SSC 2348        767
  472. 44.5    John Dean testimony, House Interstate end Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, 66, 68        768
  473.  
  474.  
  475.  
  476. 45. On March 14, 1972 John Mitchell appeared before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and trice denied under oath that he talked to the President about the ITT antitrust litigation or any antitrust litigation. On the evening of March 14, 1972 the President and Mitchell had a telephone conversation which, according to Mitchell's logs, was their only telephone conversation during the month.
  477.         Page
  478. 45.1    John Mitchell testimony, 2 KCR 539, 552, 571        772
  479. 45.2    John Mitchell log, March 14, 1972 (received from SSC)       775
  480.  
  481.  
  482.  
  483. 46. On March 15, 1972 E. Howard Hunt met rich Colson. Johnson and It was determined that Hunt should interview Hoe. Beard the authenticity of the purported Beard memorandum. Hunt flew to Denver and interviewed Mrs. Beard in her hospital room. On March 17, after his return to Washington, he prepared a detailed summary of the interview.
  484.         Page
  485. 46.1    Charles Colson calendar, March 15, 1972 (received from SSC) 778
  486. 46.2    E. Howard Hunt testimony, 9 SSC 3734-35, 3752-53    780
  487. 46.3    Charles Colson testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, 201-03   784
  488. 46.4    Memorandum regarding Dita B?? March 17, 1972 (received from White House)    787
  489.  
  490.  
  491.  
  492. 47. "ITT" is written on Colson's calendar for the morning of March 18, 1972. Colson had three telephone conversations with ??he during the morning. That afternoon the President and Colson met for more than two hours.
  493.         Page
  494. 47.1    Charles Colson calendar, Hatch 18, 1972 (received from SSC)         796
  495. 47.2    John Mitchell log, March 18, 1972 (received from SSC)       797
  496. 47.3    Meetings and conversations between the President and Charles Colson, Hatch 18, 1972 (received from White House)     798
  497.  
  498.  
  499.  
  500. 48. On March 24, 1972 the President held his only news conference during the period of the ??eindienst nomination hearings. He stated that nothing had happened in the Senate hearings that shook his confidence in Kleindienst as an able, honest wan fully qualified to be Attorney General. He also praised the actions of Richard McLaren, and the administration, in having moved effectively to stop the growth of ITT.
  501.         Page
  502. 48.1    President Nixon news conference, March 24, 1972, 8 Presidential Documents 673-75    800
  503.  
  504.  
  505.  
  506. 49. On the morning of Hatch 30, 1972 Colson, Haldeman and NacGregor met. That afternoon Colson sent a memorandum to Haldeman stating that certain factors should be taken into account in determining whether to continue co support, or to withdraw, Kleindienst's nomination, including the possibility that documents would be revealed tending to show that the President yes involved in the ITT situation in 1971 and contradicting statements made by Mitchell under oath during the hearings. Haldeman and Colson each had several conversations with the President on that day.
  507.         Page
  508. 49.1    Memorandum from Charles Colson to H. R. Haldeman, Hatch 30, 1972, 55C Exhibit No. 121, 8 S5C 3372-76        805
  509. 49.2    Letter from William Merriam to John Connally, April 22, 1971 (received from White House)    810
  510. 49.3    Letter from William Merriam to Peter Peterson, April 30, 1971 (received from White House)   812
  511. 49.4    Letter from 'Ned" [Edward Gerrity] to Vice President Spiro Agnew, August 7, 1970, with attached memorandum (received from House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee)  813
  512. 49.5    Memorandum from John Ryan to William Merriam, August 24, 1970, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, 154-56, and partial handwritten copy of memorandum (received from White House)  816
  513. 49.6    Memorandum from Herbert Klein to H. R. Haldeman, June 30, 1971 (received from White House)  820
  514. 49.7    Memorandum from Richard Kleindienst and Richard McLaren to John Ehrlichman, April 23, 1969 (received from White Home)       821
  515. 49.8    Memorandum free Ted Hullin to Richard McLaren, August 10, 1970 (received from White House)  827
  516. 49.9    Memorandum from John Ehrlichman to John Mitchell, September 17, 1970 (received from White House)    828
  517. 49.10   Memorandom from John Ehrlichman to John Mitchell, Nay 5, 1971 (received from White House)  829
  518. 49.11   Memoranda from John Ehrlichman to the President, April 28, 1971 and Nay 3, 1971 (received from White House)        830
  519. 49.12   a. R. Haldeman testimony, 8 SSC 3216, 3218-19      834
  520. 49.13   H. R. Haldeman calendar, March 30, 1972 (received from SSC)        837
  521. 49.14   Meetings and conversations between the President and H. R. Haldeman, March 30, 1972 (received from White House)    838
  522. 49.15   Meetings and conversations between the President and Charles Colson, March 30, 1972 (received from White House)    839
  523.  
  524.  
  525.  
  526. 50. On April 4, 1972 Mitchell returned co his office after about two weeks in Florida. That afternoon he met with the President and Haldeman at the White House. According to Haldeman's testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, notes Oaken during the meeting indicate that the Kleindienst hearings were discussed.
  527.         Page
  528. 50.1    John Mitchell log, March 21 - April 4, 1972 (received from SSC)     842
  529. 50.2    Meetings and conversations between the President and H. R. Haldeman, April 4, 1972 (received from White House)      845
  530. 50.3    H. R. Haldeman testimony, 7 SSC 2866, 2881  846
  531.  
  532.  
  533.  
  534. 51. On April 27, 1972, the final day of the Kleindienst confirmation hearings Kleindienst, referring co his earlier testimony about communications with persons at the White House, testified that if someone had called him to instruct him on the handling of the ITT case, he would remember such a call. Kleindienst said that no such conversation occurred.
  535.         Page
  536. 51.1    Richard Kleindienst testimony, 2 KCH 95, 3 KCH 1673. 1682   850
  537. 51.2    Richard Kleindienst statement, October 31, 1973, reprinted in New York Times, November 1, 1973, 33  853
  538.  
  539.  
  540.  
  541. 52. The press provided extensive news coverage and frequent editorial commentary on the Kleindienst confirmation hearings. John Mitchell's denials that he discussed the ITT cases with President Nixon were reported. Richard Kleindienst's descriptions of his role in the ITT-Grinnell appeal and settlement were also reported; these descriptions omitted reference to the President's order that the appeal be dropped.
  542.         Page
  543. 52.1    Newspaper articles from The New York Times and The Washington Poet, February 25 - June 28, 1972, regarding hearings on the Nomination of Richard Kleindienst to be Attorney General         856
  544. 52.2    The Washington Post, March 10, 1972, A-l, A-12      857
  545. 52.3    The New York Times, March 15, 1972, 1, 34   858
  546. 52.4    The Washington Post, April 27, 1972, A-l, A-7       859
  547. 52.5    The Washington Post, April 28, 1972, A-l, A-6       860
  548.  
  549.  
  550.  
  551. 53. By letter dated April 25, 1972 from Senator Eastland, Chairman the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, co SEC Chairman William Casey, Eastland requested access co ITT documents in the possession of SEC. This request was denied by Chairman Casey. If Chairman Casey complied with the Senate Judiciary Committee's request the SEC would the Committee with, along ocher things, the following not obtained by the Committee during the course of the Kleindienst hearings:
  552.  
  553. Letter dated April 22, 1971 from Harold Geneed to Peter Peterson concerning their April 16, 1971 nesting rich memorandum on antitrust policy attached.
  554.  
  555. Letter dated April 22, 1971 from William Merriam to John Connally relenting to the ITT antitrust litigation.
  556.  
  557. Letter dated April 26, 1971 from William Merriam to Peter Peterson referring to planned antitrust legislation.
  558.  
  559. Letter dated April 30, 1971 from William Merriam to Peter Peterson referring to Solicitor General Griswold's request for am extension of time Co perfect the ITT-Grinnell appeal.
  560.  
  561. Letter dated August 7, 1970 from Thomas Casey of ITT to Charles Colson discussing the pending ITT antitrust litigation.
  562.  
  563. Letter dated August 7, 1970 from "Ned" [Edward Gerrity] to Vice President Spiro Agnew with memorandum about ITT antitrust litigation attached.
  564.  
  565. ITT Later-corporate memorandum dated August 10, 1970 from Edward Gerrity to John Ryan discussing, among other things, Richard McLaren and the Administration's merger policy.
  566.  
  567. ITT inter-corporate memorandum dated August 24, 1970 from William Merriam to John Ryan discussing, among other things, the ITT antitrust litigation, Richard McLaren and contacts with the Administration.
  568.         Page
  569. 53.1    Letter from Senators Kennedy, Bayh, Hart, Burdick and Tunney to Chairman James Eastland, April 19, 1972, 3 KCH 1664         865
  570. 53.2    Letter from William Casey to Chairman James Eastland, April 26, 1972, 3 KCH 1664    866
  571. 53.3    Letter from Edward Kennedy to Chairman Harley Staggers, December 13, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legis lative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 28-29       867
  572. 53.4    Michael Mitchell affidavit, submitted to House Judiciary Committee, May 1, 1974, with attachments   869
  573.  
  574.  
  575.  
  576. 54. On June 8, 1972 the Senate confirmed Kleindienst's nomination. On June 12, 1972 he became Attorney General.
  577.         Page
  578. 54.1    Congressional Record, June 8, 1972, S9114-15        902
  579. 54.2    President Hixon remarks at swearing-in cere- monies for Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General, June 12, 1972, 8 Presidential Docu- ments 1024     904
  580.  
  581.  
  582.  
  583. 55. On three occasions in September 1972 Congressman Harley Staggers, Chairman of the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, requested from SEC Chairman William Casey access to material received from ITT by the SEC in connection with the SEC's investigation of ITT. Chairman Casey discussed Chairman Staggers' request with Mitchell, Dean and Colson. By letters to Chairman Staggers, Chairman Casey refused the requests. The ITT material was transferred by the SEC to the Department of Justice on October 6, 1972. In addition, an envelope containing other documents obtained from ITT which reflected contacts in 1970 and 1971 between representatives of ITT and Administration officials was delivered separately by the SEC to the office of Deputy Attorney General Erickson.
  584.         Page
  585. 55.1    Letter from Chairman Harley Staggers to William Casey, September 21, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 5    907
  586. 55.2    Chairman Harley Staggers statement, House Interstate and Foreign Coerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 23    908
  587. 55.3    Letter from Chairman Harley Staggers to William Casey, September 28, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 6-8  909
  588. 55.4    William Casey testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, 230, 235, 241, 250-51, 260-62     922
  589. 55.5    Letter from William Casey to Chairman Harley Staggers, September 26, 1973, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 5-6  920
  590. 55.6    Letter from William Casey to Chairman Harley Staggers, October 6, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 8-9     922
  591. 55.7    Letter from William Casey to Ralph Erickson, October 5, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 135-36    924
  592. 55.8    Charles Mallory testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry into Withholding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 86-89        928
  593. 55.9    Ralph Erickson testimony, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Hearings on Legislative Oversight of SEC: Agency Independence and the ITT Case, 128-30, 149-64   930
  594.  
  595.  
  596.  
  597. 56. In 8 letter dated October 17, 1972 Chairman Staggers requested from Deputy Attorney General Erickson access to the ITT materials referred to the Department of Justice by the SEC. Erickson denied the request on the grounds that disclosure might prejudice any future criminal proceedings.
  598.         Page
  599. 56.1    Letter from Chairman Harley Staggers to Ralph Erickson, October 17, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Sub- committee on Investigations, Hearings on Lagis- lative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry Into With- holding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 9-10    950
  600. 56.2    Letter from Ralph Erickson to Chairman Harley Staggers, October 26, 1972, House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, Special Sub- committee on Investigations, Hearings on Legis- lative Oversight of SEC: Inquiry Into With- holding and Transfer of Agency Files Pertaining to ITT, 10-11   952
  601.  
  602.  
  603.  
  604. 57. On January 8, 1974 the Office of the White House Press Secretary issued a "White Paper" entitled, "The ITT Anti-Trust Decision," describing the President's role in the ITT antitrust cases and their settlement.
  605.         Page
  606. 57.1    White House "White Paper", The ITT Anti-Trust Decision, January 8, 1974     956
  607.  
  608.  
  609.  
  610. 58. On May 16, 1974, Richard Kleindienst pleaded guilty to one count of refusing or failing fully to respond to questions propounded to him by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on March 2, 3, 7, and 8 and April 27, 1972.
  611.         Page
  612. 58.1    United States v. Kleindienst information, May 16, 1974, with attached Watergate Special Prosecution Force press release     966
  613. 58.2    Letter from Leon Javorski to Herbert J. Miller, May 10, 1974 (received from Watergate Special Prosecution Force)    969
  614.  
  615.  
  616.  
  617. ATTACHMENT 46
  618.  
  619. TO THE
  620.  
  621. DECLARATION OF BRIAN DAUTCH
  622.  
  623.  
  624. 32.1 PURPORTED DITA BEARD MEMORANDUM, JUNE 25, 1971, 2 KCH 447-48
  625.  
  626. 447
  627.  
  628. PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
  629.                Washington Office
  630.  
  631. 1707 L Street, N.W.
  632. Washington, D.C. 20036
  633. Tel. (202) 296-6000
  634.  
  635.  
  636. To:     W.R. Merriam Date: June 25, 1971
  637. From:   D.D. Beard
  638. Subject:        San Diego Convention
  639.  
  640.  
  641. I just had a long talk with EJG. I'm so sorry that we got that call from the White House. I thought you and I had agreed very thoroughly that under no circumstances would anyone in this office discuss with anyone bur participation in the Convention, including me. Other than permitting John Mitchell, Ed Reinecke, Bob Haldeman and Nixon (besides Wilson, of course) no one has known from whom that 400 thousand committment had come. You can't imagine how many queries I've had from "friends" about this situation and I have in each and every case denied knowledge of any kind. It would be wise for all of us here to continue to do that, regardless of from whom any questions come; White House or whoever. John Mitchell has certainly kept it on the higher level only, we should be able to do the same.
  642.  
  643. I was afraid the discussion about the three hundred/four hundred thousand committment would come up soon. If you remember, I sug- geared that we all stay out of that. other than the fact that I told you I had heard Hal up the original amount.
  644.  
  645. Now I understand from Ned that both he and you are upset about- the decision to make it four hundred in services. Believe me, this is not what Hal said. Just after I talked with Ned, Wilson called me, to report oh his meeting with Hal. Hal at no time told Wilson that our donation would be in services ONLY. In fact, quite the contrary, There would be very little cash involved, but certainly some. I am convinced, because of several conversations with Louie re Mitchell, that our noble committment has gone a long way toward our negotiations on the mergers eventually coming out as Hal wants them. Certainly the President has told Mitchell to see that things are worked out fairly. It is still only McLaren's mickey-mouse we are suffering.
  646.  
  647. We all know Hal and his big mouth. But this is one time he cannot tell you and Ned one thing and Wilson (and me) another!
  648.  
  649. I hope dear Bill. that all of this can be reconciled -- between Hal and Wilson -- if all of us in this office remain totally ignorant of any committment ITT has made to anyone. If it gets too much publicity. you can believe our negotiations with Justice will wind up sho?? down. Mitchell is definitely helping us, but cannot let it be known. Please destroy this, huh?
  650.  
  651.  
  652. 34.1 WASHINGTON POST, FEBRUARY 29, 1972, B11
  653.  
  654.  
  655. The Washington Merry-Go-RoundTHE WASHINGTON POST Tuesday, Feb. 29, 1979 B11
  656.  
  657.  
  658. Secret Memo Bares Mitchell-ITT Move
  659.  
  660. By Jack Anderson
  661.  
  662. We now have evidence that the settlement of the Nixon administration's biggest anti-trust case was privately arranged between Attorney General John Mitchell and the top lobbyist for the company involved.
  663.  
  664. We have this on the word of the lobbyist herself, crusty, capable Dita Beard of the International Telephone and Telegraph Co. She acknowledged the secret deal after we obtained a highly incriminating memo, written by her, form ITT's files.
  665.  
  666. The memo, which was intended to be destroyed after it was read, not only indicates that the anti-trust case had been fixed but that the fix was a payoff for ITT's pledge of up to $400,000 fo the upcoming Republican convention in San Diego.
  667.  
  668. Confronted with the memo, Mrs. Beard acknowledged its authenticity The next night, badly shaken and acting against the wishes of ITT officials who wanted her to leave town, she met with my associated Brit Hume at her home to try to explain the document.
  669.  
  670. By this time, she said, ITT security officers from company headquarters in New York had put most of her office files through a document shredder to prevent their being subpoenaed after disclosure of the memo.
  671.  
  672. She said se met with Mitchell at the Governor's mansion in Kentucky during a dinners reception given by Republican Gov. Louie Nunn last May after the Kentucky Derby.
  673.  
  674. At the governor's reception, she said, Mitchell took her and Nunn aside and to her astonishment and shock, launched into an hour-long diatribe against her. He criticized her for putting pressure through Congress, on the Justice Department and the White House on the anti-trust cases.
  675.  
  676. She said Mitchell confided to her he was sympathetic to ITT but had been prevented until then form helping the company because of the zeal of the Justice Department's anti-trust chief, Richard McLaren.
  677.  
  678. After his harangue, Mrs. Beard said, Mitchell agreed to discuss the anti-trust matter and asked bluntly, "What do you want?" meaning what companies did ITT most want to keep if the anti-trust cases were settled.
  679.  
  680. "We have to have Hartford Fire because of the economy," Mrs. Beard recalled saying.
  681.  
  682. She said she also told Mitchell ITT wanted to keep "part of the Grinnell Corporation," a manufacturing concern. She said Mitchell at first replied, "You can't have part of Grinnell," but he subsequently relented.
  683.  
  684. And, she said, when the Justice Department announced its settlement with ITT on July 31, more than two months later, it conformed to the agreement she had made with Mitchell.
  685.  
  686. Mrs. Beard insisted the subject of the GOP convention never came up with Mitchell and was never a factor in the anti-trust matter. But this clearly contradicts her memorandum, which was written about six weeks after the Kentucky Derby dinner.
  687.  
  688. It is addressed to W. R. (Bill) Merriam, head of ITT's Washington office. It is marked "Personal and Confidential" and its last line asks, "Please destroy this, huh?"
  689.  
  690. The memo warns Merriam to keep quiet about the ITT cash pledge for the Republican convention. "John Mitchell has certainly kept it on the higher level only," the memo says, "we should be able to do the same...
  691.  
  692. "I am conviced, because of several conversations with Louie (Gov. Nunn) re Mitchell that our noble commitment has gone a long way toward our negotiations on the mergers coming out as Hal (ITT President Harold Geneen) wants them.
  693.  
  694. "Certainly the President has told Mitchell to see that things are worked out fairly. It is still only McLaren's mickey-mouse we are suffering...
  695.  
  696. "It (the convention commitment) gets too much publicity, you can believe our negotiations with Justice will wind up shot down. Mitchell is definitely helping us, but cannot let it be known."
  697.  
  698. ITT Replies
  699.  
  700. ITT issued the following statement yesterday.
  701.  
  702. "There was no deal of any kind to settle our antitrust cases. It is unfair to the individuals involved to even suggest such a possibility. Agreement was reached with the Justice Department only after hard negotiations between our outside legal counsel and the then-Assistant Attorney General Richard McLaren and his staff.
  703.  
  704. "Neither Mrs. Beard nor anyone else except legal counsel was authorized to carry on such negotiations. The June 25, 1971, memorandum attributed to Mrs. Beard was seen for the first time by the ITT official to whom it was brought in by a member of Mr. Anderson's staff last week.
  705.  
  706. "The San Diego contribution of the Sheraton Hotels was made as a non-partisan joint effort of the San Diego community and was purely in support of a local situation. Sheraton has two hotels under construction which would be completed in time for the convention. There was no tie-in of any kind between this local joint participation and any other aspects of ITT's business."
  707.  
  708.  
  709. 34.1 WASHINGTON POST, MARCH 1, 1972, B15
  710.  
  711.  
  712. The Washington Merry-Go-RoundTHE WASHINGTON POST Wednesday, March 1, 1972 B15
  713.  
  714.  
  715. Kleindienst Accused in ITT Case
  716.  
  717. By Jack Anderson
  718.  
  719. We have now established that Attorney General-designate Richard Kleindienst tod an outright lie about the Justice Department's sudden out-of-court settlement of the Nixon administration's biggest antitrust case.
  720.  
  721. The case involved the International Telephone and Telegraph conglomerate, which appeared on the way to a Supreme Court showdown with the Justice Department over ITT's takeover of the huge Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
  722.  
  723. Last July, however, the case was abruptly settled. The terms, considered highly favorable to ITT, were announced at the same time ITT secretly pledged up to $400,000 to support the Republican convention in San Diego this year. A check for $100,000 has already been written.
  724.  
  725. Denying any connection between the convention cash and the antitrust settlement, Justice Department's antitrust staff had been free from any political pressure from above.
  726.  
  727. "The settlement between the Department of Justice and ITT was handled and negotiated exclusively by Assistant Attorney General Richard W. McLaren (then head of the antitrust division)," Kleindienst said in a letter to Democratic National Chairman Larry O'Brien.
  728.  
  729. However, we have now learned that Kleindienst himself held roughly a half-dozen secret meeting on the ITT case with a director of the company before the settlement was reached.
  730.  
  731. The director, Wall Street financier Felix Rohatyn, conceded to us that he met in private with Kleindienst, who was then Deputy Attorney General, at the same time McLaren was negotiating with ITT's lawyers.
  732.  
  733. "I was supposed to make the case on the economic side of it," Rohatyn told my associate Brit Hume. He said he particularly stressed to Kleindienst ITT's arguments for keeping Hartford Fire.
  734.  
  735. Kleindienst Duplicity
  736.  
  737. Kleindienst's duplicity is further evidence that the administration has much to hide in the ITT affair, which looks more suspicious the more we investigate it.
  738.  
  739. Not only Kleindienst but his boss, outgoing Attorney General John Mitchell, has now been linked to the settlement. Mitchell had officially disqualified himself from the case because of an old relationship with ITT. Yet Dita Beard, the company's top lobbyist, has now acknowledged that she arranged the settlement with Mitchell in a private conversation at the governor's mansion in Kentucky after last year's Kentucky Derby.
  740.  
  741. Her admission came after we obtained an extraordinary confidential memo, written by her, from ITT's files. The memo suggested strongly that the settlement was made in exchange for ITT's pledge of cash support for the Republican convention.
  742.  
  743. Mrs. Beard also told us that the day after we confronted her with the memo, ITT security men from New York shreded many of her office files because they feared the papers might be subpoenaed when the memo became public.
  744.  
  745. Mitchell would not discuss the matter with us. John Hushen, a Justice Department spokesman, told us there was "no truth" to Mrs. Beard's story. He acknowledged, however, that Mitchell had spoken to Mrs. Beard at the governor's mansion.
  746.  
  747. We gave Hushen specific questions to ask the Attorney General. But four hours later, after conferring with Mitchell, he called us back without the answers.
  748.  
  749. Instead, he urged that we withhold our story on Mrs. Beard's version of events until, as Hushen put it, "we get all our ducks in a row." He said Mitchell would "prove" the falsehood of Mrs. Beard's incriminating memo, but three days later, no proof had appeared.
  750.  
  751. Republican Names
  752.  
  753. The June 25, 1971, memo is studded with such big Republican names as President Nixon, Mitchell, California Lt. Gov. Ed Reinecke, San Diego Congressman Bob Wilson, White House aide Bob Haldeman and H. S. (Hal) Genoen, ITT's president.
  754.  
  755. It is addressed to W. R. (Bill) Merriam, manager of ITT's Washington office. "I thought you and I had agreed very thoroughly that under no circumstances would anyone in this office discuss with anyone our participation in the Convention, including me," Mrs. Beard wrote.
  756.  
  757. "Other than permitting John Mitchell, Ed Reinecke, Bob Haldeman and Nixon (besides Wilson, of course) no one has known from whom that 400 thousand commitment had come ... John Mitchell has certainly kept it on the higher level only, we should be able to do the same..."
  758.  
  759. "I am convinced, because of several conversations with Louie (Nunn) re Mitchell that our noble commitment has gone a long way toward our negotiations on the mergers eventually coming out as Hal (Geneen) wants them. Certainly the President has told Mitchell to see that things are worked out fairly. It is still only McLaren's mickey mouse we are suffering ...
  760.  
  761. If (the convention cash) gets too much publicity you can believe our negotiations with Justice will wind up shot down. Mitchell is definitely helping us, but cannot let it be known. Please destroy this, huh?
  762.  
  763.  
  764. 34.1 WASHINGTON POST, MARCH 3, 1972, D15
  765.  
  766.  
  767. The Washington Merry-Go-RoundTHE WASHINGTON POST Friday, March 3, 1978 D15
  768.  
  769.  
  770. Contradictions Cited in ITT Case
  771.  
  772. By Jack Anderson
  773.  
  774. The Justice Department and International Telephone and Telegraph are now trying to lie their way out of a scandal over the suspicious, sudden settlement of a landmark antitrust suit against ITT.
  775.  
  776. In earlier columns, we disclosed a remarkable ITT memo indicating the Justice Department granted the favorable settlement in exchange for cash support of the upcoming Republican convention in San Diego.
  777.  
  778. The author of the memo, ITT lobbyist Dita Beard, told us she arranged the settlement herself in a private conversation with Attorney General John Mitchell at a Kentucky dinner party.
  779.  
  780. Mitchell refused to talk to us. A spokesman, John Hushen, urged us to withhold our story until he could "get our ducks in a row." He then waited three days before calling us back with a terse statement from Mitchell.
  781.  
  782. The statement says the Attorney General "was no involved in any way with the Republican National Committee convention negotiations and had no knowledge of anyone from the committee or elsewhere dealing with International Telephone and Telegraph"
  783.  
  784. This is false. In mid-May last year, California Lt. Gov. Ed Reinecke and an aide, Edgar Gillenwaters, met with Mitchell in his Washington office to discuss efforts to hold the convention in San Diego.
  785.  
  786. Mitchell ??
  787.  
  788. We could not reach Reinecke, but Gillenwaters told us he and Reinecke personally informed Mitchell that ITT had offered to put up as much as $400,000 to support the GOP convention in Sand Diego.
  789.  
  790. "He liked the idea of (having the convention in) San Diego," Gillenwaters said of Mitchell. "He didn't need any persuading. He said, "If you can do it, more power to you."
  791.  
  792. ITT also issued a statement on the matter which insisted that only its lawyers were authorized to deal with the Justice Department on the antitrust cases. "Neither Mrs. Beard nor anyone else except legal counsel was authorized to carry on such negotiations," the statement said.
  793.  
  794. This is also false. Felix Rohatyn, an Investment banker and director of ITT, told us he held a series of about a half-dozen merger negotiations with Deputy Attorney General Richard Kleindienst. Rohatyn said he was specifically authorized to "make the case on the economic side" by ITT President Harold S. Geneen.
  795.  
  796. Rohatyn's acknowledgment also puts the lie to an earlier statement by Kleindienst, who has been names to replace Mitchell as Attorney General. On December 13, Kleindienst wrote to Democratic National Chairman Larry O'Brien to deny that high-level political pressure had been exerted on the Justice Department's antitrust staff in the ITT case.
  797.  
  798. "The settlement between the Department of Justice and ITT was handled and negotiated exclusively by Assistant Attorney General Richard W. McLaren (then head of the anti-trust division)," the Kleindienst letter said.
  799.  
  800. Obviously, if Kleindienst were holding secret talks with Rohatyn on the case, it could not have been "handled" and negotiated "exclusively" by McLaren and ITT's lawyers.

Paste Details

Update the Post

Either update this post and resubmit it with changes, or make a new post.

You may also comment on this post.

update paste below
details of the post (optional)

Note: Only the paste content is required, though the following information can be useful to others.

Save name / title?

(space separated, optional)



Please note that information posted here will expire by default in one month. If you do not want it to expire, please set the expiry time above. If it is set to expire, web search engines will not be allowed to index it prior to it expiring. Items that are not marked to expire will be indexable by search engines. Be careful with your passwords. All illegal activities will be reported and any information will be handed over to the authorities, so be good.

comments powered by Disqus
worth-right worth-right