Advanced Search
Home int. bed/bath
Home int. bed/bath
Int. of a house
Int. of a house
Inside of house
Inside of house
Home int. ("old fashioned bathroom")
Home int. ("old fashioned bathroom")
Victorian or provincial style living room
Victorian or provincial style living room
Modern living room
Modern living room
Den or study
Den or study
Boys bedroom w/bunk bed
Boys bedroom w/bunk bed
Game room or playroom with bar
Game room or playroom with bar
Watching TV
Watching TV
Family at dining room, eating
Family at dining room, eating
Husband and wife talking at house
Husband and wife talking at house
Woman answers phone & talks
Woman answers phone & talks
Woman takes mink from closet and models it
Woman takes mink from closet and models it
Father and son talking, and daughter
Father and son talking, and daughter
Family at home
Family at home
Woman serves tea
ON PREVIEW CASSETTE# 93293 - TAPE 3 Woman serves tea
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973
[00.47.58] Senator MONTOYA. And prior to March 4, how many meetings. did he have at the Department of Justice with Mr. Mitchell? Mr. REISNER. Prior to March 4, Senator MONTOYA. Yes. Mr. REISNER. I would say he met several times a week with Mr. Mitchell. That could be verified exactly in the calendar. Senator MONTOYA. And what individuals accompanied him to see Mr. Mitchell at the Department of Justice during this time? Mr. REISNER. It would have depended on the nature of the meet If the meeting concerned advertising, for example, I am certain Peter Daly would have accompanied him. Senator MONTOYA. If the meeting were concerned with clandestine activities, who would have accompanied him? Mr. REISNER. Clandestine activities? Senator MONTOYA. Yes. Mr. REISNER. Well, this is retrospective in the sense that I think I knew there were activities that weren't generally-- Senator MONTOYA. Now that the names of the individuals have been divulged, were any of those names engaged in clandestine activities were any of those individuals at the Department of Justice with Magruder during any of these times? Mr. REISNER. Well, I have testified that Mr. Liddy and Magruder went to the Department of Justice. Other individuals I not certain, Senator MONTOYA. What about Mr. Dean? Mr. REISNER. Yes, in the notebook, in the calendar, it indicated that Mr. Dean attended that meeting. Senator MONTOYA. On how many occasions would you say Mr. Liddy accompanied Mr. Magruder to see Mr. Mitchell? Mr. REISNER. As far as I know, there was only one occasion. But perhaps the calendar shows more than that. Senator MONTOYA. Now, prior to June 17, were you aware or did you have any knowledge of any plans to bug the DNC or the McGovern headquarters? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Did you have an inkling that such a thing might be in the offing? Mr. REISNER. NO, sir, Senator MONTOYA. You did not ascertain this until after the matter was announced in the newspapers? Mr. REISNER. That is correct. Senator MONTOYA. Is that about right? Mr. REISNER. That is correct,. Senator MONTOYA. Now, were you aware, as AAto Mr. Magruder, of his activities with regard to employing individuals to disrupt any part of the Democratic campaign? Mr. REISNER. To Mr. Magruder's activities to employ individuals to disrupt the campaign, I cannot say that I was, There are individual incidents to which I have testified. For example, this Hoover funeral testimony that, I have discussed here today, where I overheard a phone call which indicates that it was related to an activity. I did not have any knowledge of any of that kind of activity except circumstantially. Senator MONTOYA. Were you aware of the instance where somebody from the CRP employed someone to park right in front of the White House and pose as a McGovern supporter? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Were you aware of other similar incidents? Mr. REISNER. Yes sir There is a distinction here which may not be a good one. The distinction is that it seemed to me at the time that the purpose of that individual sitting in front of the White Houseand I learned about the individual after he had been removed and then was replaced there-that the purpose of that was some sort of a public relations effort, that it was for the publicity value of it, not for &lay disruptive value. Now, I am not certain that that is a, very-- Senator MONTOYA. Publicity for whom? Mr. REISNER. Well, negative publicity for Senator McGovern would be the concept. If that negative publicity is disruptive, yes, sir. Senator MONTOYA. And you were aware of other instances? Mr. REISNER. Of individuals like that? Senator MONTOYA. Yes. Mr. REISNER. Well, yes, I have testified that I was aware of an individual who I think was referred to--I don't think--who was referred to as Sedan Chair and that that individual was obtaining information, it seemed, from the Humphrey campaign. Now, as to whether that individual worked for Mr. Humphrey and disgruntled at that moment and passed information, I can't say. could have been less negative. Senator MONTOYA. Well, were. you aware that there was a plan being executed to employ individuals to pose as McGovern supporters at the Democratic National Convention and to indulge in certain acts and that all this was under the sponsorship of the CRP? Mr. REISNER. Lot me be specific about this, because just a minute ago, when I said I was aware of that individual, what I was aware of was the purported fruits of his activity. You know, that is how I learned about the individual. Now, as to a plan to employ someone there, I listened to a conversation in which Mr. Liddy basically bursts into Mr. Magruder's office and said, "I have this idea." Now, I don't know whether--and the idea was to employ supporters who would pose as McGovern supporters--I presume it was McGovern supporters. Senator MONTOYA. At the Democratic National Convention? Mr. REISNER. The Democratic. National Convention. Senator MONTOYA. Tell us more about that conversation. Mr. REISNER. The nature of the conversation was Mr. Liddy coming in and saying, "I have this great idea." The idea, I think, was employing some sort of demonstrators who would wear McGovern identification badges or something. Senator MONTOYA. What kind of identification badges would they wear? Mr. REISNER. There was on one occasion, Senator, and I think I described this to your staff, a woman who would have disrobed at the Democratic National Convention. That was the nature of the conversation. Now, maybe that is important to point out, because I have no idea whether Mr. Magruder would have said that was a good idea or not.[Laughter.] He certainly did not indicate it was a good idea at the time. just was amazed. [Laughter]. [00.54.18]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973
[00.54.18] Senator MONTOYA. Mr. REISNER. are you aware of any plans along these same lines with respect to the conduct of the Demo National Convention in Miami? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Now, do you know whether or not Mr. Magruder employed any of the individuals that were engaged in the bugging or trying to disrupt the campaign activities on the part of the Democrats? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. The most accurate--I mean the most information I have ever seen about that has been in the newspaper recently. Senator MONTOYA. Did you know Mr. Segretti? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Do you know whether or not he visited CRP headquarters? Mr. REISNER. I don't know. I wouldn't have recognized him. Senator MONTOYA. Now, when you kept the log, did this particular log which you presented to the committee reflect all the appointments that Mr. Magruder had? And can you tell us what other individuals at the White House Mr. Magruder met? Mr. REISNER. Well, sir, to my knowledge, the diary that was kept by My secretary would reflect his schedule accurately. All individuals that he met with, unless he would have just stopped by their office to see them, would be reflected in that calendar. Senator MONTOYA. Did Mr. Magruder meet very frequently with Mr. Liddy in his office or in Mr. Liddy's office? Mr. REISNER. I do not know about Mr. Liddy's office. I do not imagine that he did. It seems to me that he probably met with Mr. Liddy on a number of occasions, but not frequently. Their relationship was not one that--they did not, get along very well. Senator MONTOYA. NOW, it, is my understanding, as has been testified to here, previously that on the evening when you and Mr. Odle decided to take out some secret, files from Mr, Magruder's desk, you took what was known as the advertising file and that you turned over what has been called the strategy file to Mr. Odle to take home with him. That is correct, is it not'? Mr. REISNER. Yes. I took home some things in addition to that. Senator MONTOYA. What else did you take home? Mr. REISNER. I took home--the first thing that I remember taking out of Mr. Magruder 's desk was a document which was the June wave of polling information. There was a wave of polls that was conducted in Me spring. That was the most, sensitive polling information that we had. There was some analysis of that, polling information. There was also a file, a large, thick file that contained the operating plans in the key States that we considered important, following, beginning In July. In addition to that, there was this advertising file. In fact, what that was was not our advertising file concerning the November group at the Committee for the Re-Election of the President advertising; that file concerned the creation of the Democrats for Nixon, which had not at that time been created. Mr. Connally had not returned from his trip and it was very sensitive at that time. Senator MONTOYA. Why- was it, sensitive? Mr. REISNER. Well, I do not, think it was agreed to at that time that Mr. Connally would head the Democrats for Nixon. In addition to that, I know that there were a number of Democrats all over the country who might or might not wish to be supporters of the President. Senator MONTOYA. Was the advertising file such that it contained advertising or plans for advertising, something derogatory against Democratic candidates? Mr. REISNER. No. I believe that all it Contained at that time was-- the Democrats for Nixon did later conduct negative advertising. I Mean it was shown on national television. But at that time, all that that file contained, to my knowledge, was the ad copy for the ad that was going to represent the formation of the Democrats for Nixon. Senator MONTOYA. Up to that time, you did know what was in the Gem file or you knew that there was something very strategic in the Gem file? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. All I knew was that Mr. Magruder considered it important. [00.59.01]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973
[00.59.01] Senator MONTOYA. Why did you, as administrative assistant. to Magruder, give the Gem file, then, to Mr. Odle to take home when it Was the only really sensitive file in the whole bunch? Mr. REISNER. Well, it is sensitive in retrospect. It, is sensitive in the fact that we, now know it appears to have concerned illegal activities. If that was ordinary intelligence, just, things that Mr. Liddy had been gathering somehow, through his sources or whatever, in a perfectly legal way, it would have been sensitive, but it would not have been any more sensitive than anything else that was taken home. I gave it to Mr. Odle because I was told to give it to Mr. Odle and my relationship with Mr. Odle and his with Mr. Magruder was one of trust. I mean there was no reason not to give it to him. I was just asked to. I am certain I would have taken it home if Mr. Magruder had said it the other way. Senator MONTOYA. Did you on that day do any shredding? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Did you on any subsequent day do any shredding? Mr. REISNER. Yes, sir. Senator MONTOYA. Tell us about that. Mr. REISNER. Subsequently, on Monday morning, as I have indicated--on Friday I had been given a document. I presumed it was a document. I had been given an envelope which was marked "sensitive material." When I was given that envelope-- Senator MONTOYA, Who gave you that envelope'? Mr. REISNER. Mr. Liddy. When I was given that envelope by Mr, Liddy, be indicated to me that it was a copy or an extra. It was standard operating procedure for me to get rid of copies. There were five copies made of all the documents that were given to Mr. Mitchell and clearly, that, was not necessary for the files. Many of them were sensitive and I would get rid of them. Now, on that Monday morning following the 17th, I discovered that I had not in fact taken home that copy--I had not given that copy to Mr. Odle as I had been instructed to, Senator MONTOYA. I understood that from your testimony, but the point I am trying to make is did you shred many documents after June 17? Mr. REISNER. Oh, no; not many. It is conceivable that Mr. Magruder might have put something in his out box and said, "destroy"-- just written "destroy" on the thing, or "shred", or something, Senator MONTOYA. Did you, on your own, take and examine files and cull out sensitive documents and shred them? Mr. REISNER. There is a distinction. The distinction is that if it had been an original, it is extremely unlikely that I would have destroyed something that was an original without having Magruder indicate that he did not need it any more. If it was a copy, I am certain I destroyed many copies. Senator MONTOYA. Well, after June 17, did you receive instruction and pursuant to those instructions, if you did receive them, proceed to categorize documents as sensitive or confidential and then proceed to shred them? Mr. REISNER. No, sir. The instructions were, find those sensitive materials that may be in the files and give them to me, which is what I did. Senator MONTOYA. And I think you indicated in the previous testimony that you. wanted to centralize the sensitive documents in one particular file. That you did, too, did you not? Mr. REISNER. What, I did was I culled the files to find things sensitive, gave them to Mr. Magruder. It is conceivable that he Put them all in one file, It is conceivable be might have given them back to me and they might have--I don't think so. I think it was a pretty random selection of materials. Senator MONTOYA. NOW YOU mentioned the easel a few minutes ago. What about the charts that were in Mr. Liddy's or 'Mr. Hunt's room Which were, going to be used at the Attorney General's office? Did you see those charts? Mr. REISNER. No, sir; I did not, see anything that I could------ [01.03.06--TAPE OUT]
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973. Testimony of Robert Reiser
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973. Testimony of Robert Reiser, aide to Jeb Magruder Senator Joseph Montoya (D New Mexico). Now you mentioned the easel a few minutes ago. What about the charts that were in Mr. Liddy's or Mr. Hunt's room which were going to be used at the Attorney General's office. Did you see those charts? Robert Reisner, aide to Jeb Magruder. No, sir. I did not see anything that I could identify as charts. I saw a package at approximately the same time. The size and shape of the package was such that it could easily have contained charts, but it might not have. Senator Joseph Montoya (D New Mexico). When was that package taken on that February 4 visit to the Attorney General's office? Robert Reisner, aide to Jeb Magruder. I did not see Mr., Liddy leave for that meeting and I don t know. Senator Joseph Montoya (D New Mexico). That is all, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the witness.
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973. Testimony of Robert Reiser
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973. Testimony of Robert Reiser, aide to Jeb Magruder
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973.
Watergate Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 5, 1973. 13.05 [LEHRER in studio] [**SEE RESTRICTIONS FIELD IN RIGHTS AREA**] LEHRER remarks that the day's testimony featured two witnesses who had access to the sensitive files but did not read them because they were not supposed to. States that the Republicans obviously have no reason to fear for security within their own campaign. Notes the mention of political spies, in the GEMSTONE files. States that the next days witness, Hugh SLOAN, who quit the campaign after Watergate, will offer a different perspective. rumored that he left because he was asked to take part in the COVERUP. This is part of a plan to skip over more details of the BREAK-IN and concentrate on the aftermath. [cut Correspondent Peter KAYE in committee room with Sam DASH] KAYE asks when the tesimony will be given by John DEAN and MAGRUDER, the "Big Boys" of the scandal. DASH discusses his plans to wrap up the hearings within the requirements of the Senate Resolution. DASH says the next phase will be investigating the COVERUP. [cut MacNEILL in studio] MacNEILL remarks that DASH has done most to set the course of the investigation, laying a foundation for the investigation, before proceeding to the big fish [cut LEHRER] LEHRER introduces guest commentary from Alan BARTH, a journalist, and Adrian FISHER of Georgetown University Law School. Commentarty about the Committee's refusal to delay the proceedings as per the request of Archibald COX, Special prosecutor. FISHER says it was a good move, because after the trials and appeals start, it will be impossible to conduct such an investigation. BARTH says he was impressed by the Committee's action of backing off of forcing LIDDY to testify. Says there's an ugly legacy of Congressional Committees of forcing Witnesses to plead the Fifth Amendment publicly and embarassing them. FISHER states that the activities of the Senate Committee have given a kick in the ass to the criminal investigation of Watergate [paraphrase] BARTH states that the simultaneous action of the Special Prosecutor has served to check the excesses of Congressional Committees generally. LEHRER introduces the next day's testimony of SLOAN as more "background", with careful, methodical proceedings. Notes that the hearings have brought "real people" like REISNER and HARMONY to the public view, reflects on the human aspect of the unfolding scandal, and "new famous people" created by it. Solicits viewer response. Signs off {title screen "SENATE HEARINGS ON CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES"] [PBS Network ID] [00.25.22--TAPE OUT]
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 6, 1973
[00.02.00--NPACT logo/black screen--image of page with text of Senate Resolution 60, Robert MacNEILL v.o. reads resolution text--MacNEILL in studio] **SEE RESTRICTION FIELD IN RIGHTS SECTION*** MacNEILL introduces testimony of Hugh SLOAN, former treasurer of Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President, which focuses on the financial practices of the campaign, payment of cash funds to Gordon LIDDY to conduct operations, and efforts by his superiors, including Jeb MAGRUDER, John MITCHELL, and Fred LaRUE to get SLOAN to keep silent about the payments, leading to SLOAN'S resignation from FCRP Jim LEHRER states that a new group of top White House staff has been hired to replace those who were fired or resigned due to the scandal. Further states that the course of the hearings and with many witnesses still to come, it will be necessary for the Senate Committee to hold more hearings. [Senator BAKER with reporter Peter KAYE.] BAKER states that the committee will go to a 3-day per week schedule for the forseeable future [LEHRER in studio] LEHRER states that the bulk of SLOAN'S testimony (recorded earlier) focused on the financial practices of the committee, and his futile attempts to get his superiors (MAGRUDER, MITCHELL, etc.) to investigate the Watergate matter fully, On one trip, to MITCHELL's office, SLOAN was asked what happened in the meeting: [00.05.45--shows SLOAN testifying, states that MITCHELL'S response to his concerns was "When the going gets tough, the tough get going". ] LEHRER states that watching the hearings in full will give all viewers a chance to judge for themselves the truth of SLOAN's testimony, Gives SLOAN's background--educational, governmental, political history. States that SLOAN'S testimony made a big impact on the committee, particularly Senator ERVIN [00.07.38--cut to Senator ERVIN ] Senator ERVIN tells SLOAN that his testimony has restored ERVIN'S faith in the saying that "An honest man is the noblest work of God." [MacNEILL in studio--seen to chuckle at ERVIN'S remarks] [00.07.58]