Audio: Nixon On Fred Thompson: ‘Dumb’ But ‘Friendly’
Click HERE For The Actual Audio Clip.
Transcript:
President Richard Nixon: He’s (Sen. Howard Baker) just going, uh, overboard, um…and his counsel (Fred Thompson), I noticed, is suddenly working hand and glove with Dash. Well, Dash is too smart for that kid.
John Dean, White House Counsel: Sure. Runs circles around him.
Tricky Dick on Fred Thompson
ABC News
Fred Thompson has made much of his role 30 years ago as a young Senate lawyer helping to lead the investigation of the Watergate scandal and President Richard Nixon.
But a much different, less valiant picture of Thompson emerges from listening to the White House audiotapes made at the time, as President Nixon plotted strategy with his aides in the Oval Office.
Thompson’s job on the Watergate committee was to lead the Republican side of the investigation. He was appointed by his mentor, Sen. Howard Baker of Tennessee, who is now co-chair of Thompson’s 2008 presidential bid.
When Nixon’s aide H.R. Haldeman told Nixon of Thompson’s appointment, Nixon was less than impressed.
“Baker has appointed Fred Thompson as minority counsel,” Haldeman is heard saying on one tape.
“Oh sh–, that kid,” Nixon responds.
“I guess so,” Haldeman replies.
Nixon worried that Thompson’s Democratic counterpart, Sam Dash, would outsmart Thompson.
“Well, Dash is too smart for that kid,” Nixon says on another tape from March 16, 1973. The existence of the tapes were publicly revealed by a question from Thompson at a Watergate hearing and led to the president’s resignation. They are preserved at the National Archives in College Park, Md.
“Sure. Runs circles around him,” agrees an aide, John Dean.
As the investigation picked up speed, Nixon grew increasingly concerned about whether Thompson could stand up to the Democrats.
In this May 1973 recording, he shared his concern with then-chief of staff Alexander Haig.
“He’s talking to Fred Thompson. I said you’re not –,” Haig begins.
“Oh sh–, he’s dumb as hell. Fred Thompson,” Nixon interjects. “Who is he? He won’t say anything.”
In another conversation some weeks later, Nixon and his advisers were still describing Thompson as not very smart but at least beginning to play ball.
“Our approach is now, we’ve got a pretty good rapport with Fred Thompson. He came through fine for us this morning,” White House counsel Fred Buzhardt says on a tape from June 6.
“He isn’t very smart, is he?” Nixon asks.
“Not extremely so, but –,” Buzhardt says, interrupted by the president.
“But he’s friendly,” Nixon says.
“But he’s, he’s friendly,” Buzhardt echoes.
“Good.”
A few days later, White House aides are heard saying Thompson will be even more helpful than his boss, Sen. Baker, and that Thompson agreed to secretly help undercut the credibility of White House whistleblower John Dean.
“They’ve finally got [Dean] under oath,” Buzhardt says on a tape from June 11. “Uh, Thompson will work with us. So, good.”
“Does he realize that Dean has some problems?” Nixon asks.
“Oh, yes sir,” Buhardt responds. “Quite a few…He is willing to work with us; he is also now willing to work with us on shifting some focus to the Democrats. He’s finally made up his mind; he’s got to start looking at some of their stuff.”
Later in the tape, Buzhardt says, “[Thompson is] willing to go, you know, pretty much the distance now. And he said he realized his responsibility was going to have to be as a Republican increasingly.”
In his memoir of the Watergate era, Thompson admits to secretly alerting the White House to key evidence as it was discovered by congressional investigators.
Former Watergate committee investigator Scott Armstrong told ABC News that Thompson’s cooperation with the White House undermined the investigation.
“It was the equivalent of two prosecutors knowing about something and one of them going behind the scenes and telling the person being accused what the witnesses were saying about him,” Armstrong said.
Two months after Buzhardt’s comments, Nixon resigned. Thompson would later take credit for helping to reveal the secret White House taping system that led to Nixon’s downfall.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
I recall listening to FT on the TV during that era. I was impressed with him and remarked to my military colleagues that I thought that FT had a bright political future ahead of him. So what’s the beef? I don’t have any. I think at the last minute even FT figured that Nixon was a POS, even though FT may have started out as an ally of RMN.
My impression of FT at the time was that he came across as fair-minded. I still have that impression of him.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:25 pmI’m very interested to understand why you think that your obvious heavy bias in your interpretation of those very small soundbites is any better than the worst spin we’ve ever seen or heard from anywhere.
Wherein, you suggest that Nixon’s assessment of someone he didn’t even know, when surrounded by ‘yes’ men, is somehow valid when Nixon himself was the one to provide the evidence of his own demise. ( Now, THAT’S stupid!! )
To suggest Fred was “secretly” working for Nixon is actually very funny…Fred asked the question which made Nixon’s resignation possible!
Come on now Bash! You apparently have another candidate in mind and can’t find anything better to hold over the next Presidents head…don’t feel alone, no one else can find anything either.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:22 pmWell, let’s keep some perspective here. “Dumb” means he’s not going to carry Nixon’s water. “Friendly” means he’s not hostile. What Nixon thought of FT 30 years ago is of no consequence. I sometimes wonder how Nixon was elected–he has negatives just like Billary. In fact, Billary is positively Nixonian.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:33 pmIn reviewing the 1968 election, it occurs to me that Billary is taking a page out of the Nixon playbook. By all accounts, Nixon should not have won, especially with Wallace in the race. Humphrey was the Democrat, the “happy warrior.” What Nixon did, and Hillary is doing, is casting the Iraq War as a disaster (like Vietnam) and the party whose President presides over it a disaster (like the 1968 Dems), and showing how divided the GOP is over it (like the Dems in 1968). She’s making ambiguous statements about the war, just like Nixon did. She’s trying to make 2008 a replay of 1968, when the party presiding over an unpopular war was tossed out, for a rather unappealing person from the other party (Nixon). Think about it.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:44 pmIf memory serves, those same White House tapes had Nixon going on extended rants about the Jews. Should we all start putting on tin foil hats and worrying about the media conglomerates and law firms?
We have a handful of words spoken and hearsay to contradict the very plain historical fact that he didn’t do those things they wanted. Nor has his record in the intervening years shown any similar pattern of behavior.
October 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pmYeah. Who gives a rats ass what Nixon thought about anything or anybody.
Oh wait…. I do have a newfound appreciation for the policy of assassinating dickhead dictators and installing other dictators more friendly to our cause.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:01 pmWinghunter, you said:
“…why you think that your obvious heavy bias in your interpretation of those very small soundbites…”
My OBVIOUS bias in my INTERPRETATION…?
Chill out, dude, I posted a story, didn’t add anything, didn’t take anything away. Didn’t interpret anything, and have no biases. Where the hell did you gather that information from?
I personally haven’t decided who I will vote for yet, I’ll wait until I’ve made sure I understand where each candidate is coming from.
What’s obvious here, is you are a bit touchy. Relax…I don’t dislike Fred, as a matter of fact, he doesn’t have a line through his name on my list of candidates, which means he still has a great shot at getting my vote.
Chill…have a cigar.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:17 pmNixon did acknowledge China though
and we don’t see him as a nuts here ; he stopped Vietnam war because of the numerous riots across the country ; he did not want a civil war but gather the different opinions people ;
he had respect for De Gaulle who did the same for France in 1945 (and de Gaulle had the same respect for him) to avoid a civil war too, he buried the warmonger hachet
it’s rare and though pertinent for de Gaulle to praise an american president
hey, Dan, stay out !
October 9th, 2007 at 2:59 pm“…he stopped Vietnam war because of the numerous riots across the country…”
You really do not know much about history do you?
There are these things called ‘books’ which, if you haven’t actually lived through that period of history, you might find to be helpful. Perhaps more than one on a subject. And don’t just read what you already believe. K?
October 9th, 2007 at 3:21 pmMr professor, I can’t know perfectly everything (only ones that matters for me) but I wait your edifiant course if you are kind enough to give me one ; depends on the tone though, I can be deaf sometimes
October 9th, 2007 at 3:30 pmlike I said… read a book or two or three before you try spinning revisionist history all over the web. Or at least spend some more time over at the kos. They’re much better at it than you.
There… school’s out… run along and do your homework.
October 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pmyeah, you just missed the point, I ain’t looking for a book on Mr Nixon, unless it falls onto my hands, I’ll may-be try to read it because of your insistance, but of course it will not be the correct one
October 9th, 2007 at 4:05 pmwell then do you know what you say about Nixon is ‘true’ if you’ve not studied it at all and/or were alive at that time?
October 9th, 2007 at 4:36 pmUh…that would be ‘true’ as in facts based upon evidence as opposed to what you think that feels right today.
“that would be ‘true’ as in facts based upon evidence as opposed to what you think that feels right today.”
yeah, and you know what I feel right today of course, I wonder if I feel something anyway, I am just curious
October 9th, 2007 at 4:50 pmI have no pony in the race because I’ll be pulling the Republican lever. But I have to admit, the more I learn of Fred Thompson, the less impressed I am.
He apparently has little or no record of great accomplishment as a Senator, voted against the impeachment of Billy Bob Clinton, and appears to like to spend great sums of our money with less than stellar results. I really hope somebody else is the candidate of choice.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:04 pmFrenchie:
Once again, you totally missed the point of the orginal discussion. Why don;t you try sticking to the points of the discussion instead of walking off on some idiotic tanhent, that has nothing to do with the posting. Are you ADD or something?
October 9th, 2007 at 5:46 pmFrenchie:
The posting is on Nixon’s view on Thompson. It is not on Nixon in general. Or his policies. I know you don’t read English very well, but maybe you’d be better off going over to the Daily Kos. They don’t know anything about history either.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:49 pmStill don’t know about Thompson…might be an alien plant.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:20 pmDan,
WTF es ist mir Scheiz egal
October 10th, 2007 at 3:01 amFrenchie:
Sailed right over your head didn’t it my little french poodle. ROFLOL
October 10th, 2007 at 5:48 am