host: "washington journal" continues. host: on the 50th anniversary of the watergate break-in, two individuals who played a key on the 50th anniversary of the watergate break in, a conversation of two individuals when it came to the defense teams of watergate. we are joined by a former watergate assistant special prosecutor, and more recently the author of watergate girl, a truth and justice against -- and jeff shepard joins us. the principal deputy to the lead lawyer during watergate, and his recent book is titled the nixon conspiracy, watergate and the plot to remove the president. good morning to you, both thank you for the time. what a busy day.

jeff, remind us where you were on this day in 1972. >> i was in the middle of a five term -- i was the youngest lawyer on the staff, and i knew everybody involved. i did not know anybody in the break, and it was not of particular concern with me. i had a full-time job, i was working domestic policy issues, law and order. life moved on. it was a very busy and happy time, i could not have been prouder than to work on nixon's white house staff. >> and where were you on this day 50 years ago? >> i was a prosecutor at the national -- i lived in washington, near dupont circle. i read about the break-in in the washington post. >> and it was bob woodward who was one of the writers on that piece. and bob woodward back in 2011 talked about this day 50 years ago, here it is from his perspective.

>> recount for us that moment, that also was captured in the film. you are at the courtroom, with you here in the courtroom? >> what is interesting on this wonderful saturday, they sent me down to the arraignment hearing, and these were not your average d.c. burglars. they all had suits, hundred dollar bills in their pockets, very sophisticated electronic equipment. it was a mystery. the five guys that were paraded in the dodge. he starts asking them what they did, and the lead burglar who is named jane mccord. the judge said, speak up, mr. mccord. he said, speak up! he finally said, cia. those are electric words.

[laughs] >> and this is the article that appeared the next day in the washington post, this was the lead on it. bob woodward, one of the reporters on that story, five men, one of whom said that he was a former employee of the central intelligence agency. he was arrested at 10 to 30 yesterday, in what authorities described as an elaborate plot to bug the offices of the democratic national committee. the article goes on to note that there was no immediate explanation as to why the five suspects would want to bug the offices, or whether or not they were working for any other individuals or organizations. jill wine-banks, what was the original explanation of why they did that? >> there is no explanation. i will deposit to you that my theory is that there were so many dark money, there is cash in every white house safe, and they did not have to make decisions about, is this really going to help the committee to reelect the president? is this going to reelect

richard nixon? he had done some very good things as president. why would he need to do this? he won the election, with 49 states, and overwhelming landslide by the electoral college. there is no logical sense that this man came up with the idea, as well as many others in what is part of operation jump stone, which included luring delegates from the democratic national committee, which was meeting in florida onto a house vote, which was the headquarters hotel, with prostitutes and cameras, so that they could be blackmailed. it included a lot of other silly nonsense, that no campaign would be spending money on if they had to account for the money. >> how soon after the amount today -- the special prosecutor appointed, and when did you join that team? >> i joined pretty much immediately, we were appointed at the end of may, of 73.

11 months later. >> jeff shepard, within that 11 months, talk about your role over at the white house, and how it changed. >> we have to take one step back. i was on john's domestic staff, and my immediate supervisor lead the plumbers. one of the people that they hired on that union was gordon levy, and i had known gordon from being the white house fellow in treasury. i violently opposed his joint in staff, because he was such a loose cannon. it was one of those things that i lost. then he moved on, and went over to the committee to reelect the president. i remember walking down the hallway saying, he has come, he has gone, and nothing has gone wrong, they must think me a fool because i thought so hard. they kicked him out. and then my secretary, her roommate was the secretary for the plumbers union. there is this mystery of who else was involved in the break-in?

but not on site. she said, don't you know who it is? i said no, i'm not even watching, i've got other things to do. she said, let me give you his initials. g g l. i still did not get it. she said gee gordon. i said, oh no. oh, no. it all came back. it turns out, it is worse than what jill described. his proposals for a campaign intelligence plan are absolutely off the charts. he should not have been there, it should not have been allowed to go forward. but once john dean had hired him, he was put in charge of creating a campaign intelligence plan, and he did not watch him. it is like victor frankenstein. he created the plan by hiring gordon, and then he could not control him. nobody can control him.

he was the substitute seat warmer until john mitchell came over from the attorney generals office and gordon threatened to kill him. he put his hand on gordon's shoulder, gordon said take your handoff, or i'll kill you. this was a scary guy, and nobody stood up to him. if i can tell one quick story, and then we will be through. a talking to pat mourning him, and pat was one of nixon's first counselors. he grew up in health kitchen, he news both sides. this business that we are, in the business of politics, it attracts some very intense people. you cannot keep them out, because we work off volunteers. the test is, what do you do when you first have an inkling that you have a nut on your side. we failed that's where we failed. >> taking this conversation into the -- hour at 10 am

eastern, and inviting yours to join this conversation, as we talk about two key players from that time on the 50th anniversary of the 1972 watergate break in. four nights as usual, republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8002, independents (202) 748-8003. did you do do -- >> i have equal time here? >> because of of course. >> because jeff someone here i would agree with. as one republican said, -- who worked for president trump, the fish stinks from the head. and when the top of the line is willing to sit -- for example, john mitchell sat in his office as attorney general and he did not throw gordon lady out of the office when he presented off his operation gemstone. this is before he became the head of he. was still the attorney general. and instead of saying, everything you are opposing is great, insane, and illegal, get

out of my office, he said, the budget is too high. cut the budget and i can approve it. so, gordon lady was not hired by john dean. i don't know where that idea came from. john dean certainly was involved, john dean certainly has suffered and prayed the price for his admission of his culpability and his role in this, but he became a prosecution witness who totally cooperated and so there's just a lot of things that are just not true. they hired this man. they kept him. they had them break in. there was actually, there was one attempt that failed, and two attempts, the second one, which was the first actual break-in, that put in the wiretapping devices, in the wrong places. and then they went back to fix them on the date of the arrest in june 17th, and you had for cuban americans who had been involved with the cia in the bay of pigs, you had james mccord who, was and have security up for, and he had g gordon liddy andy howard hounded. and the way that the

white house was involved became clear immediately. the bird of the burglars had hundred dollar bills, all sequentially numbered, that were from a campaign check that had been given to c. r. e. e. p. and cashed by one of the cuban americans in his florida bank. and the reason that the president said, uses the cia to stop the fbi from following the money, was because those checks, those dollar bills in their pockets would have been traced back to the campaign. so, there you have it. >> as we focus on this breaking, the question immediately became, at the time, how far up disco? i want to fast forward to about a year later. this is april, 1973, from a nixon office a white house tape. this is former president nixon talking about the man that we've been talking about here, jay gordon liddy. here's part of that tape. >> trying to reach the. i think -- may be able to get him in my office. he seems to be in

transit from someplace to someplace. but all report it to you when i see him. >> very good. >> in the meantime, on liddy a, i don't know the man, of course, and have no control of him. but -- to tell him the president wants everybody involved in this to -- everything they know.. >> -- first thing in the morning. >> -- we want to fight around your night you? want to fight around, okay -- the thing i want to be sure is that you understand it as far as liddy is concerned, i have no control of him. i don't know the middle. but since he was has raised the question that maybe not talking because of me. >> no, i don't want to leave that impression. >> what about mitchell? >> he's taking orders from

higher authority. >> -- since you are the highest authority. >> fine. >> he'll spray along. how counting--. >> i just want to be sure to understand that as far as the president is concerned, everybody in this case is going to talk. i know the truth. -- he'll have to call me on that with anybody. just say those are your orders. >> very good. >> fair enough? >> yes, sir. >> okay. >> all right, thank you, sir. >> henry, i've talked to john dean and didn't quite finished but he stepped out with it. i wanted to ask you this. he says that he thinks it's important that i tell's attorney gee attorney i -- don't know name -- whatever do a few minutes ago. >> now, so we are already trying to get in touch with him. >> let me say this. you tell him, if necessary, -- and i'll tell him, okay? >> all right. >> you tell him that i called you directly tonight and he had it direct from the president

and he needs to hear it from me, i'll tell him. >> that conversation happening -- of 1973, about 11 months before seven nixon aides were indicted by a grand jury on charges of conspiracy on watergate. what did you hear in that tape? >> well, this is one of 19 communications between richard nixon and henry peterson, the korean head of the criminal judiciary. and nixon wants the truth to commit. and gordon is following the code of silence, oh marta, it's a really, really interesting development, because if gordon had come clean -- which he did in his book ten years later -- then john dean could her couldn't have whipped up his fairytale about non-involvement. because dean hired lady. it's on the tape, it's on the march 21st tape. but that tape you played is perfect, of because years

later, not years later, months later, nixon nixon says on the air, i told him he should tell the truth, and i told him if he wanted to hear directly from me i would talk to him and peter markle's, who was a ladies lawyer, cause fell like a boy, or the associate special prosecutor, and says, henry peterson never told us that. he never made that offer that we could come in and see the president. if he had the d would have come clean. >> -- nixon wants the truth to come out, is that when he heard on that tape? >> it isn't what i heard on the tape. and it isn't what i heard in mounds of evidence, in hours and hours and hours of tapes. what we know is the burglary happened on the 17th and the cover of started immediately with calls out to where the president was on the plane flying from florida back to washington. holden, we now know, had a conversation with him. and we know that because recorded his daily diary he. kept terrific notes, and if you flip forward to june 20th, which is the tape that has the 18 and a half minute gap, for which nixon blamed his

secretary, rosemary which i, who came to court and told a fanciful tale that is definitely not true, that you raised it, it wasn't the way she test she testified to. and we don't know exactly what's on that because the notes that feldman had were is little bit vague all we know that was a discussion, is explicitly, of watergate. we now know from his recording of that day was he says, yesterday, flying back, i talked to the president. he's very concerned and upset about watergate. we know that someone was dispatched to rick kleindienst, who was the -- two -- golf course, to get these men out of jail so they wouldn't talk. we know that

hash money was paid. we know that richard nixon said, how much is it going to cost a? million dollars? on your where we can get it. so, and there is no -- doubt it would be budget no budget we would be wrong on the tape. >> how many people were eventually convicted as part of the watergate investigations? >> while many more than you think because there was a conspiracy cover-up case. but in addition, there were campaign contributions violations and one of the things i want to make clear is that it is that money was so available, and the post-watergate legislation which stopped it has been undone by the supreme court in the citizens united decision, the snow that dark money is back in politics and available to be used for -- and when jeff refers to the plumbers, just so the audience knows, the plumbers were hired to stop leaks, supposedly, and really one of their first break-ins was ellsberg for the pentagon papers. they broke into his psychiatrist's office to try and get something to use against him, which they failed to do. >> the photos, just to show our viewers, before we take some calls from those of yours. joel wine-banks, from back doing

investigations, 1970, three this picture dates from as part of the legal team and then a photo of president nixon's legal team in the oval office. jeff shepard, where are you in that photo? >> i'm probably not in the photo, because that was the team that appeared in public. i was part of the solicitation team that did the planning and the analysis. on the one who transcribed the tapes, and one that kept the document -- either people went into court to present the case. jim sinclair. i hired all the staff but i wasn't recording to thank my, i was reporting to--. >> you guys hear, and taking calls on this, the 50th anniversary of the 1972 what a great break in. let us know your questions, your comments. we are going to start with caroline, out in mount vernon, new york, light for democrats, good morning. >> good morning. my question to your panel there is, if it wasn't for it's a security guard who discovered the break-in you -- keep talking about the break-in -- but it was an african american

security guard who discovered at the break in and he was never given the credit. in fact, he was demonized for discovering the bacon and he ended up dying of broke. what did you have to, what do you have to say about that? >> his name was frank willis, the washington post, today, with a story about franklin willis. there's a picture there. jill wine-banks, you want to take this one? >> caroline, you are totally correct. it was his astute watching of the doors. and the burglars were stupid, and they were foolish. they taped the door and the tape was removed and they retaped it. and that's what made him so suspicious. and that's when he called the police. they also had, across the street also wanted the watergate complex, they had to

howard johnson look out. and then look at had a walkie talkie. this is in the days long before there were cell phones, and he was supposed to be watching while they were in there to make sure that there was no police involvement, nothing happening. well, the police pulled up, and he supposedly was watching television. there's now another story that i read recently, but in any event, he failed to notice, in part because they didn't pull up in a police car. they were in an unmarked car, and they were in plain clothes. they were actually dressed as a piece, if anybody remembers what hippies dressed like in the 70s. but he didn't notify them. and so, they were caught red-handed. and it is a shame about what happened to mr.

wallace. i didn't know what happened to him, of course, until watching gaslit, which does portray him very sympathetically. so, your right. it's terrible that he didn't get his due. i credit him a lot. >> mr. shepard? >> in any significant event, the kennedy assassination, a landing on the moon, and the facts don't always align. and while jill can say, well, that was stupid they retaped at the door, the question is, why did james mccord retape the door? the other people didn't know why. did he disappear? >> and this is the berkley who in that video that we show whispered cia. >> there's a series of books there. fascinating books. they may or may not be true. i have nothing to, personal experience, to comment. they're called the doubter books. and it begins

with jim hogan and the secret agenda, and linn kholodny and silent coup, and they go through all these discrepancies of what on earth was going on because we don't fully understand. even today, 50 years later, we don't understand that break-in. >> two people ever fully understand it? >> no, i think it's gone. i think people have died, there's so many contradictions. i'm, jill and i can sit here for three hours and dispute just what we said this morning, because her take on what happened is very different from my take on what happened. >> -- i think we found something, -- i.

>> i don't think we'll ever know anything about the 18 minute gap, i don't think we'll ever know about 30 and what was the motivation of him doing these crazy things. you had a question earlier on your earlier program, what else is there to come out? and i think what is significant to me is the surfacing of four batches of documents, internal documents from the special prosecutor's office. and those documents undercut the whole narrative that we've been told since 1974. and we can get into those, but the internal documents in the ervin committee on two out for two more years, of the impeachment committee on two out for two more years. this is going to continue to unfold, easily, for our lifetimes. >> -- brian from albuquerque, new mexico, independent, brian, you're on with our panel. >> a couple comments into question. there is a similarity between nixon and trump, because the more you learn more about these men the worst they look. and then a difference would be that trump is a better criminal. he learned from roy cohn and the rest of the new york city mafia on how to do it. another thing that has developed and now since watergate is now we have the right wing propaganda media eco sphere that has spread manure and disinformation. some people really can't figure out what is going on. it's distract, distract, distract. counter charge, and that is the state of play in the politics of america, unfortunately. >> well, brian, let's take that

up. jeff shepard, i'll let you start this time. >> that is a dramatic difference now from then. back in the era of watergate, there was a single narrative and nobody deviated from that narrative. there was no alternative source of news. today, you can get a wide variety of news. you pick what you want, but it can't all be true, and it is vicious. but your question earlier, what is social media had existed back during watergate? well, want if there had been people who got on the air to defend nixon? they could have dumped on gordon liddy, they could have dumped on john dean. the idea john dean is some sort of hero is a fantastic fraud. so that has changed dramatically. nixon and trump both are thin skinned. but dramatically different people. >> i agree with jeff that they were both thin skinned. both seemed to be socially awkward and always feeling like they weren't part of the in group and fighting for that. i am not

a psychiatrist, this is just based on readings i have had and i think you would agree with that. >> they were outsiders, i completely agree. >> they were outsiders and that motivated them to some degree. as i said in the beginning, i give nixon credit for opening china, for passing title ix, which the anniversary is i believe this week, also. for starting the epa. so i think that to your question, i think there were some good things that nixon accomplished. in terms of the media landscape, that is one of the crucial differences between then and now. back then, we had three networks. they all had the same facts. everybody agreed on the facts. the other big difference is that we had bipartisanship. not only was the ervin committee and the rodino judiciary committee both completely bipartisan, but the country was bipartisan. people talked to each other. we debated the policy implications of facts, we didn't debate

facts. now, if we had that same landscape that we have now, if there was a fox news, if there was the social media and oan and newsmax, et cetera, i think that richard nixon might have survived. because people would have believed the propaganda. say it loud, say it often, and people believe it. the facts are something that we need to get back to and that have gotten lost in the trump era. >> about halfway through our discussion this morning with jill wine-banks, and jeff shepard, the author of the book, the nixon conspiracy, a former deputy to the special white house counsel to the nixon

administration. taking your phone calls on this, the 50th anniversary of the watergate break in. this is -- of west palm beach, florida. independent, good morning. >> good morning. just a quick comment and a question for mr. shepard. miss banks had mentioned the bipartisanship on the ervin committee. sam dash was secretly rehearsing -- it was a sham. now, for mr. shepard. could you please comment more on the documents that you found that the prosecutor stole that indicate that they lied about the grand jury tampering, trying to connect president nixon. and connect president nixon.their own witnesses balked in court and they hid exculpatory evidence. these people, these prosecutors should be disbarred. the doj complaint has been filed, and i hope it goes through. thank you very much. >> well that's absolutely true. what has surfaced from these internal documents the prosecutors office -- >> they are available on your website. >> yes they are. i posted all

of mine because jill says facts are what matter. >> you've noted that they are for the washington journal segment. so if our viewers want to go find it, they can find it on your website there. >> yes, they can. if they do, my website forward slash six dash 17, they will get just the documents i'm going to quickly summarize there. there are ones that detail ex parte meetings with the judge. the fact of the matter is special prosecution staff was meeting secretly with judge sirica to work out things for the trial. you don't know at the bigger surprise is, that they were doing it, which was absolutely a no no. or that they were writing memos describing how they did it. and the opening memo, which is dated december 27th, it says when the four of us, the four top prosecutors met with you, judge sirica and judge gesell at your request, this is what we discussed. that's just unbelievable. if that had been known, none of those people could have been involved in the prosecution. then you have a series of memos, the one i told

you about for margolis. saying that if you told me that nixon wanted us to tell the truth, i could have condensed. you have series of prosecutions that democrats who are guilty as can be aren't prosecuted for. and republicans who weren't that involved, chuck olson, where the prosecutors said the chances of conviction are just 50/50. but they still indicted chuck because he was such a prominent republican. >> jill wine-banks? >> i would believe that bill bittman should have been indicted. and the reasons that he wasn't are numerous and not all that important. but that doesn't excuse the guilt and

culpability of a convicted felon, charles colson, who was very much involved. as to these documents that jeff is referring to, they have long since been debunked and denied. there is no truth to them. they are not representative of what he is alleging was said. and i think that if you want to have a fair discussion, you need to have the people -- i was not one of them, the people who are at a meeting like that. so i can't comment from personal knowledge. i know from talking to richard ben-veniste that that is not what happened. there was no secret ex parte meeting. no one on our staff would have ever agreed to do that, ever. so it just isn't true. and it's one of those things where you can say it loud and you can say it often. you can repeat it again now. but that is not going to necessarily make it true. i would love to have someone who has personal knowledge of this response to it. >> let me bring in ron from san clemente, california. republican. good morning. >> hey, good morning, john. what a great panel. listen, a couple of things here that might enter into this. if you recall the nixon break-in, remember that famous quote that

-- how much would that cost, a million dollars? he said, that's no problem. one of the things that happened to me personally is i could have been a person that was going out and getting money for the republican party here in orange county, california back in 72. at that time, you could get those who work collecting money, they could get 20% of whatever they collected. and when they did that, that money just disappeared. and what happened was there is a famous bank robbery in san clemente called inside the vault. the true story of a master bank burglar. but emile di cento, and i might be saying the last name, but

jimmy hoffa had inside information about nixon. he had buried millions and millions of dollars and banks threat orange county. this happened to be one. they broke into this bank and got about $10 million out of a safety deposit boxes. >> not a story i've heard before. is that when you've heard before? >> no, in this business you will get wild stories. i have never heard this. now, it's true that there was a lot of money because people were terrified of george mcgovern. and the committee to reelect had raised $10 million before the new law came into effect. so there was too much money and too little supervision. and it blew up. but we have seen recently proof of how other campaigns get carried away and try very, very hard to win. i never knew anything about orange county banks or 20% kickbacks. i could raise money for 20% kickback. >> jill wine-banks, let me give you gaylord out of oakville, california. democrat. good morning. >> how are you doing. i have a

nice little story. my dad was appointed by richard nixon to be federal marshal of southern central california. and he was the one that was originally supposed to subpoena nixon in 1972. no, 73. and i was in high school, and i have the same name as my dad. so a bomb threat was called in against me in high school, and my dad's marshals had to come and put me in a protective custody while the bomb squad checked my car. so then the saturday night massacre happened and the watergate prosecutor was fired. and then in 74, the new one was hired and my dad was given orders to serve nixon with two subpoenas down inclined -- san clemente. he had given me a surfing pass to serve in front of his house. when i entered the marine corps base next to

nixon's estate, which is on -- the guard at the kiosk saw that it was campbell. they are going to come up to see you. and he took my passed away and borrowed my past, threw down on the ground. and my surfing but he was with me. we all looked at each other and we couldn't believe what was happening. and he goes, don't ever come on navy property again. so we went down the street and surf there, picked up on two twin sisters, went to a party at my friends house, his mom worked for bechtel who was building the nuclear plant. they told me that they built the nuclear power plant backwards. >> it sounds like you might have a book and you from your stories. let me give jill wine-banks a chance to add some details what we're hearing about. >> it's a great story, gaylord. i'm glad you shared with us. i'm not sure if you have a question, but i would say that if your father was serving him with a subpoena, it seems to me that there wasn't that much of a struggle. because jeff's bosses in the white house offices agreed to accept all of

our subpoenas. >> they accepted them. >> yes, that i will say this. when we first realized that we needed to subpoena him, when we first found out about the tapes, our -- archibald cox said we will just ask them to write a nice letter. we will ask them. which they of course paid no attention to. >> which he did. and we declined. basilone >> right. and we then had to subpoena them. and there was a discussion in the office of how do you serve a subpoena on the president of united states? you can't knock on the door and say, hi, i'm the marshall here with a subpoena. and then i think it was phil, who you just mentioned, who said well, let's call and ask if they will accept it. and we called and they said, yes, of course we will accept it. there was no real issue about serving the subpoena. that was getting answered, that was a different story.

>> there was the obituary from the los angeles times back in 2009. gaylord campbell dies at 81. the u.s. marshal served subpoenas on richard nixon. >> that is great. great story, gaylord. >> jill and i agree on this. one of the nice things that can be said in this difficult situation is that white house never ignored the law. never displayed inslee disobeyed the law. there was a break-in and a cover-up, there was no doubt about that. but in the relations with a special prosecutor, we did respond to the subpoenas, we did obey the court orders. that is different from the situations being alleged today. one of the great differences is at least nixon's defense team was not ignoring the rights of the courts or what was needed in due process.

>> you want to turn over the tapes. >> it's like saying, well, other than the leak how did you like the play? when you get down to it, there was definitely stonewalling. jeff and i will agree that they did not give us the tapes. the reason that there was a saturday night massacre is because they were refusing to turn over the tapes. they had proposed a ludicrous solution, the stand is compromised by which the white house would transcribed the tapes, which we now have and we know are not accurate reflections of what was on them. and they are hard to hear, so in fairness, it is a herculean task to get it right. but they wouldn't give it to us, they propose this, and it was decided that archibald cox should go to the american people and say, this is why i need the tapes. this is why i have a right to the tapes. the courts had ordered the -- that they be turned

over. they said we have a right to them. and so, that is where we got down to it. and nixon said, i'm not giving it to them. find -- that was the order they gave to the attorney general. the attorney general said, i will not. there is no cause. and i promise when i was confirmed that i would only fire for cause. so he was gone. the deputy attorney general became the acting attorney general. he said, i made the same promise, i won't do it. the solicitor general became the acting, and he paused the saturday night massacre by firing cox. >> about 20 minutes left our panel. go ahead. >> on the monetary level, the idea of third-party authentication -- they won't give you the tapes with give you a certified transcript. that was cox's idea. there is a six-page memo posted on my website where he says, here is what we ought to do. now, we rejected it. then the court rules that you have to turn it over, but please try to work this out together. we came back and said, well i'm going to try that idea. then comes misunderstandings, because richard son, who was the

attorney general, convinced owl haig and -- this may be uncanny -- that if cox didn't death except his third idea of the rideau party authentication, richard stone was prepared to let him go. as it unfolded, it didn't work. she's right, richardson resigned, ruckelshaus got fired, -- fired cox. but he didn't dissolve the special prosecution office, he put it back under the department of justice. >> which is the same as dissolving as. if you're not independent, but the other thing is, let me just say that the reason you cannot accept the body authentication is it's not admissible evidence. you need the actual tapes. and so, if there was such a memo from cox, and i haven't read, so i can't comment, i'll try and go on your website and look at it, or you can email it to me, it was not, by the saturday night, it was never something that we would have accepted. it's not

admissible evidence. >> as jeff shepard said earlier, i think we could do with three hours on this. and -- just find. but will field records. >> it's really not i don't like you and you don't know what you're talking about, it hears the documents. as john adams said, -- years ago, facts are stubborn things. >> we are bringing catherine out a popular beach, florida, independent, good morning. >> yes, good morning. i love jill. she always has something to say that's relevant. and she's always backing it up with facts. >> thank you, catherine. >> and that's very rare. on the saturday night massacre, what was it like to be working on those circumstances, where people are being thrown under the bus and having to resign and everything, like it's at such a rapid case? >> oh, that's such a great question and i'll try to answer

it quickly, but it's a great story. we had this press conference and archibald colleagues i think everyone should listen to that recording of his press conference because he's an admirable man of great integrity and calm, quiet but, he was wonderful. when it ended, i was supposed to leave for new york for a family wedding. and i got together with my team and i said i, can't go, obviously it. and they all said, it's saturday night in washington, what could have possibly happen? go! >> over three day weekend. >> of a three day weekend. so i go to the airport, i get on the shuttle, i fly to new york, i go to the waiting, and this is, again, no cell phones, no twitter. no, nothing. there's barely a computer. and so i come back from this wedding and get to my hotel, and the desk clerk literally flights out from behind her desk and says, i have a message for you. and he handed to me, and it says, your office has been seized by the fbi. return immediately.

and when i flew back immediately, the fbi had made it a crime scene, things were taped up. i tried to get something personal out of my desk and the fbi said, i wouldn't do that, ma'am. i mean, it was -- and then we talked about, should we resign in protest? and archibald cox said, you know this case, you know the facts. do not give the president what he wants. if you can continue the investigation, it is your obligation to stay and do this investigation. and so, we did not resign. and we were eventually restored to our independent status by moving us back into the upper department of justice. that made us under the president, which is a ridiculous way. you can't investigate the president that you are working for. >> jeff shepard, what's the moment like that from those years that sticks out for you? >> well, there were so many. i

think the most dramatic moment was when fred lazar called me down after the supreme court ruling saying the tapes had to be turned over, and he explained what was on the table. he just heard which i named the smoking gun tape, where the president was heard to agree that we'll get, john dean's idea, we'll get the cia to tell the fbi not to interview these two individuals. and i sat there, i have written an essay about this. the moment in the room with the nixon presidency died. because his lawyers misunderstood the tape. it's generally misunderstood today. and they thought he was trying to interfere with the investigation. what dean was trying to get done was to protect the identity of two democratic donors. there was no question from day one that the burglars money came from c. r. e. e. p.. but the fbi was looking into was how did the money get to c. r. e. e. p. in the first place? that would have disclosed prominent

democrats. so you could say, yeah, well it's still an obstruction. but it was a well intentioned effort to protect. now, that's been unknown for 40 years. even though with john dean's idea, and it wasn't until this book in 2014, footnote on page 55, he says, you know, this has been misunderstood for 40 years. and the lawyers were wrong. and when the department looked into it, there's there was no wrongdoing, and he ends the quote by saying, if the president had known, he might have lived to fight again another day, in short the smoking gun was shooting like the. >> let me take our timeline to the events of august 8th and august 9th in 1974, from the nixon library. here's a look at some of those events. >> president nixon stunned the country today by admitting he held back evidence. >> he acknowledges that what the transcripts say as, mr. nixon puts it, and variance with what he told the american people on other occasions. >> rumors of president nixon's

imminent resignation swept washington as a world today. >> president nixon reportedly will announce his resignation tonight. >> from the discussions i have had with -- and other leaders with congressional and other leaders i have concluded that because of the watergate matter, i might not have the support of the congress that i would consider necessary to back the very difficult decisions and carried out the duties of this office in the way the interests of the nation will require. i have never been a quitter. to leave office before my term is completed is abhorrent to every instinct in my body. but as president, i must put the interests of america first. america needs a full-time

president and they fall down congress. particularly at this time, the problems we face at home and abroad, to continue to fight through the months ahead for my personal vindication would almost totally absorb the time and detention of both the president and the congress in a period when our entire focus should be on the great issues of peace abroad and prosperity without inflation at home. therefore, i shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. >> i, gerald are for old, do solemnly swear that i will faithfully execute the office of president of the united states, the office of president of the united states. >> and we'll do the best of my ability. >> and we'll do the best of my ability. >> preserve, protect and

defend. >> preserve, protect and defend. >> the constitution of the united states. >> the constitution of the united states. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. >> congratulations, mister president. [applause] >> joe one thank, we both started talking about where you were 50 years ago today. where were you 50 years ago on august 8th of 1974? >> i was in the office of the watergate special prosecutor, and my first reaction to this, of course, sad day that the country had come to this. my second reaction was, leon jaworski said we couldn't indict a sitting president. he was now a private citizen. and so i went to leon and said, okay, whatever argument we had about disrupting our government to indict a sitting president, he's now a private citizen. the evidence is overwhelming of his guilt. and so we should indict him. and i do want to just respond about the smoking gun tape. it is a smoking gun tape.

it is not misunderstood. it is clearly a statement by the president that involve him in the cover-up. and we're going to talk about people who haven't gotten recognized. i think james mccord, you know, we talk about franklin willis not having gotten recognized, lo judge siricca on the eve of sentencing said you are right in all of your suspicions. suspicions, perjury occurred, he laid out the cover-up right before being sentenced, and that's what led to the appointment of the urban committee and the appointment of the special prosecutor. host: geoff shepard, i am sure you want to respond to some of that, but can you start with your emotions? >> nixon directed them to listen to the tapes on june 23, there might be some problem. fred was appalled, and decided

she needed a witness when he decided to tell the people of san clemente the reaction to that tape. i was that witness. so i heard the half of the conversation where he was saying it was a pretty bad situation. i was the one who transcribed that tape and called it the smoking gun. i've got a two week head start on the nation. i know it is over. august 8, we demanded the tape be made public. it was made public august 5, and that's when all the support disappeared. i said to haig, we've got to have a staff meeting. these people have held on through the long winter of watergate, but when that tape comes out, there is no reason to be here and they are all going to fit.

jerry ford is going to inherit a staff list white house. we are going to have an all hands meeting and you need to tell people to hang on. he does it, and i wrote the talking points. you can't tell him what is coming. there are only three or four of us that no. so you go to the -- remember, i am the youngest lawyer on staff. the two lawyers dictated what he said, you know? that i was not fair to my lawyers, i did not tell them what was going on. they may have misrepresented to the congress and the arts the situation. the lawyers abandoned him. but congress, congressional leadership came down and said, you've got to stop. we are going to get wiped out in the midterms and this very competitive, very tense national figure had to bring his peace to resigning, to quitting. it's the last thing he would

have ever done, and it was terrible. but i was in the room the whole time, he says goodbye to the staff the next morning, goes out on the south lawn -- host: the famous picture? guest: the famous picture. it was a horrifying time, but i thought he should resign. guest: that's because facts mattered back then and he did respect democracy and was willing to sacrifice, because he knew the facts were there and believed in our system of justice. but i want to add one interesting story. he was so ashamed, he could not tell his wife and daughters, and he went to his secretary, who was blamed for the 18 and a half minute gap, he said you have to go to them, and she told them he was going to resign. host: the line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning.

we can all agree people have different personalities and different levels of morals and character. the people who support trump know he asked the secretary of state to find 11,000 votes. they know he pushed pence to do his dirty work. americans vote on character, morals and facts. a great example is scandal free president obama. your thoughts? guest: well, of course i agree with you. i would say the same is true for president biden. it is really a shame that with the media platforms we now have available, people can get into silos and hear only one perspective. that's really -- it's a shame. host: colin, you wrote recently warnings for --. guest: this shows the three

branches of government linked arms to drive it duly reelected president from office. you had sam dash meeting in a series of secret meetings with the judge. you have the watergate special prosecution force. i can show you indications with at least 10 meetings with the judge. the watergate staff was staffing the impeachment committee. they transferred it to the hill. worst of all, if you go back on august 5, when we release the smoking gun tapes, ruins nixon, he has already been named a co-conspirator and recommended for impeachment. what did this press -- special prosecutor tell the jury in secret that nixon had personally done? that's what's in my book. that is what was discovered when the roadmap was unsealed at my

court petition. guest: ok, now i have to speak the truth -- host: i have to give the books name -- -- guest: let's look at the roadmap to impeachment. that was done because there was a viable impeachment committee working. we had evidence that proved both crimes and impeachable offenses, and remember, impeachment does not require a crime. because the prosecutor at the time believed that impeachment was the proper procedure rather than indictment, number one, the unindicted co-conspirator was not named in the indictment. he was on a secret list that was filed with the court, voted on by the grand jury, and included

the unindicted co-conspirators. there was no public shaming and he was not named in public until the time of trial. and there was no reason for him to be an unindicted co-conspirator. we went to the court and asked for permission to save the time of the judiciary committee reinventing the wheel and having to call in the same witnesses, get the same tapes -- the court gave us permission. it was approved, it was turned over -- this was done in open court. there was nothing secret about this. we had a briefcase of tapes and documents that was given to the house judiciary committee, which they did use as part of drafting articles of impeachment. the articles of impeachment were bipartisan in their approval and it never went to trial because the smoking gun tape was discovered before that. the republicans said, we won't

support you anymore. you are out. this is too awful. you have committed crimes and must go. host: jill wein-banks, we have about two minutes left. i want to give you each a minute of that. geoff shepard first, looking back 50 years ago today. what is most significant for you on this anniversary? >> most significant is the knowledge of what was in that roadmap. we never knew what nixon was accused of. the roadmap is posted on the website for the national archives, and you can read it for yourself. they accused president nixon of personally authorizing the payment of blackmail to howard don, and they said he did it on wednesday afternoon, march 21. but the chain of events they needed to have to prove that didn't exist. there was a missing link, so they made it up.

that's with proven in my book. host: jill wine-banks, your final minute? guest: there's not enough time for me to answer the absurdity of that comment, but it is absolutely a fact that the roadmap was not an accusation or criminal indictment. it was very, very carefully drafted as, here is a topic you will find information about. we drew no conclusion about them being crimes or even impeachable offenses. this is what you should be looking at. this is evidence you can look at. that's what they did. and a bipartisan house voted the impeachment. before it could be tried, richard nixon admitted his culpability and he resigned -- i am sure it was humiliating to him, but he did the right thing for the country. host: to our viewers, if your

conversation -- this conversation interests you this morning, you can learn more

solely by the washington posts reporting. in the next hour will discuss and examine how the heroic journalist journalist myth of watergate took hold. and why it is so tenacious.