Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
LBJ's tape recording reveals his planned entry into 1968 convention & Nixon's "treason"
32 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter Fokes
Mar 17, 2013, 9:40:02 PM3/17/13
to
Peter Fokes
Mar 18, 2013, 6:18:32 PM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 21:40:02 -0400, Peter Fokes <pfo...@rogers.com>
wrote:
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>
>
>PF
You can listen to16/03/2013 broadcast here:
"Those interviews have never been broadcast until now ..."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r93sr
PF
wrote:
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>
>
>PF
You can listen to16/03/2013 broadcast here:
"Those interviews have never been broadcast until now ..."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r93sr
PF
Sandy McCroskey
Mar 18, 2013, 8:52:08 PM3/18/13
to
Daily Mail (and others) were clearly under the impression that the Johnson
phone conversation tapes had just been released, that the gist of this
story was totally new information.
phone conversation tapes had just been released, that the gist of this
story was totally new information.
Anthony Marsh
Mar 18, 2013, 10:22:52 PM3/18/13
to
On 3/18/2013 8:52 PM, Sandy McCroskey wrote:
> Daily Mail (and others) were clearly under the impression that the
> Johnson phone conversation tapes had just been released, that the gist
> of this story was totally new information.
>
I think what they meant was that the full tapes were just released
> Daily Mail (and others) were clearly under the impression that the
> Johnson phone conversation tapes had just been released, that the gist
> of this story was totally new information.
>
recently including more colorful language.
Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:44 PM PDT
What's new in BBC report on Nixon's treason on Vietnam? Not much
by Meteor Blades
Tweet
94 Comments
Over the weekend, a BBC report on declassified tapes depicted as fresh
news how President Lyndon Johnson privately labeled Richard Nixon
treasonous for his back-channel efforts to sabotage peace talks with the
North Vietnamese in 1968. But while the BBC report did provide
interesting information about LBJ briefly plotting to hijack the
Democratic Convention that year by landing in a helicopter on the roof
of the Chicago Hilton to announce himself a candidate for reelection,
the treason stuff is hardly fresh. That was reported widely when
declassified tapes became public in 2008. And the back-channel stuff has
been known publicly practically since it occurred.
Missing from the BBC story is something long ago reported. This was that
the Johnson administration itself actively suppressed a story the
Christian Science Monitor was prepared to publish about the Nixon
campaign's activities.
When 42 hours of White House tapes from 1968 were declassified four
decades later, The New York Times ran the headline In Tapes, Johnson
Accused Nixon’s Associates of Treason on Dec. 4, 2008. The next day, a
video of the ABC report on the matter was headlined on the network's
website LBJ Tapes Implicate Nixon With Treason.
LBJ tells Dirksen Nixon campaign treasonous
To be sure, the reporting in the Big Old Media at the time the tapes
were released was sparse. But a month later, in January 2009, Brooklyn
College Professor Robert "KC" Johnson at the History News Network
provided some details, including some transcripts and excerpts from the
tapes themselves. What Prof. Johnson pointed out were four
conversations, with Democratic Sen. Richard Russell, Republican Sen.
Everett Dirksen, Democratic Sen. George Smathers, and with Richard Nixon
himself, all caught on audiotape.
Without saying so directly, LBJ makes it pretty clear in this late
August 1968 conversation with Russell that he's having monitored the
conversations of Anna Chennault, an ultra right-wing Republican senior
adviser of the Nixon campaign team, and Bui Diem, the South Vietnamese
ambassador to the United States [emphasis added]:
Now, when we got that (pure by accident, as a result of some of our
Wall Street connections), that caused me to look a little deeper.
Richard Russell: I guess so.
President Johnson: And I have means of doing that, as you may well
imagine.
Russell: Yes.
President Johnson: Mrs. [Anna] Chennault is contacting their
[South Vietnamese] ambassador from time to time—seems to be kind of the
go-between, the Chiang Kai-Shek deal. In addition, their ambassador is
saying to ‘em that “Johnson is desperate and is just moving heaven and
earth to elect Humphrey, so don’t you get sucked in on that.” (He is
kind of these folks’ agent here, this little South Vietnamese ambassador.)
Now, this is not guesswork.
It certainly wasn't guesswork. The FBI was wiretapping everything coming
out of the South Vietnamese embassy in Washington under Johnson's orders.
Please read more about Nixon's "treason" below the fold.
It wasn't just the South Vietnamese being watched. "Overheard"
conversations had also revealed John Mitchell, Nixon's campaign director
who would soon be attorney general, to be suggesting that Hanoi also be
contacted and told the North Vietnamse could get a better deal with
Nixon as president. In his call to Dirksen, President Johnson laid it out:
“The agent [Chennault] says she’s just talked to the boss in New
Mexico and that he said that you must hold out, just hold on until after
the election,” Johnson said. “We know what [Vietnamese President Nguyen
Van] Thieu is saying to them out there. We’re pretty well informed at
both ends.”
Johnson then renewed his thinly veiled threat to go public. “I
don’t want to get this in the campaign,” Johnson said, adding: “They
oughtn’t be doing this. This is treason.”
A year ago, Robert Parry at Consortium News wrote in detail about the
taped conversations, including candidate Nixon's phone call to LBJ
denying that he would do anything to sabotage the talks:
[Nixon:] “I feel very, very strongly about this. Any rumblings
around about somebody trying to sabotage the Saigon government’s
attitude, there’s absolutely no credibility as far as I’m concerned.”
Armed with the FBI reports and other intelligence, Johnson
responded, “I’m very happy to hear that, Dick, because that is taking
place. Here’s the history of it. I didn’t want to call you but I wanted
you to know what happened.”
He could have called Nixon a fucking liar at that moment. But he didn't.
While some believe that Nixon's running mate, Spiro Agnew, may have been
the campaign's "cut-out," nobody, including Johnson, believed the orders
to Chennault were coming from anybody other than Nixon. But the fears of
Johnson and his top aides spurred them to keep the information to
themselves and to urge the Christian Science Monitor not to publish it.
Parry wrote:
So, Johnson consulted with [Secretary of State Dean] Rusk,
[National Security Adviser Walt] Rostow and Defense Secretary Clark
Clifford in a Nov. 4 conference call. Those three pillars of the
Washington Establishment were unanimous in advising Johnson against
going public, mostly out of fear that the scandalous information might
reflect badly on the U.S. government.
“Some elements of the story are so shocking in their nature that
I’m wondering whether it would be good for the country to disclose the
story and then possibly have a certain individual [Nixon] elected,”
Clifford said. “It could cast his whole administration under such doubt
that I think it would be inimical to our country’s interests.”
As more cables from Anna Chennault were intercepted after Nixon won the
election, Johnson phoned president-elect to remind him of his pledge to
push the peace talks forward or at least not block them. Without
directly accusing him, Johnson threatened Nixon with letting the media
know about the interference, and mentioned Agnew's reputed role as
intermediary. But the talks were stalled now. The Nixon campaign's
effort had succeeded. In his piece last March, Parry wrote:
Columnists Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson noted in a Nov. 17 column
that Johnson “learned that Saigon’s Ambassador Bui Diem had been in
touch secretly with Richard Nixon’s people. There were unconfirmed
reports that South Vietnamese leaders had even slipped campaign cash to
Nixon representatives.” [...]
But Johnson’s White House remained tight-lipped about its knowledge
of Nixon’s treachery. According to the documents in “The ‘X’ Envelope,”
the first detailed press inquiry about the peace-talk sabotage came from
St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Tom Ottenad who contacted Rostow on
Jan. 3, 1969, just 17 days before Johnson would leave office.
Ottenad outlined the activities of Anna Chennault on behalf of the
campaign and pressed Rostow to confirm that the administration was aware
of the subterfuge. Rostow responded, “I have not one word to say about
that matter.” [...]
As published, Ottenad’s article began, “A well-known top official
of committees working for the election of Richard M. Nixon secretly got
in touch with representatives of South Vietnam shortly before the
presidential election. It was in connection with an apparent effort to
encourage them to delay in joining the Paris peace talks in hopes of
getting a better deal if the Republicans won the White House.”
There wasn't much follow-up, although several biographies have briefly
mentioned the story. Chennault later admitted her role.
The consequences of the failure of the peace talks? Another 22,000 dead
Americans, and millions more dead Vietnamese, dead Laotians, dead
Cambodians.
Richard Nixon did not start America's involvement in that war. Nor did
he invent the Gulf of Tonkin lie that spurred everyone but two senators
in Congress to authorize the use of conventional military force in
Vietnam. Nor did Nixon, like Johnson, send wave after wave of soldiers
to kill and be killed even while full well knowing, along with Secretary
of Defense Bob McNamara, that the war could not be won. But even as
troops were withdrawn, Nixon prolonged the war in Vietnam, bolstered a
tiny, rag-tag band of extremist Maoists called the Khmer Rouge into a
formidable and soon-to-be genocidal force, and eventually negotiated in
peace talks what could, at the very least, have been done half a decade
before had winning the election not been worth spilling so much blood.
But dead traitors can't be tried.
________________________________________________________________________
MSNBC reported tonight that Anna Chennault was caught on tape offering
the South Vietnamese the secret deal to pull out of the peace talks.
Sandy McCroskey
Mar 19, 2013, 3:06:25 PM3/19/13
to
If you read what you posted, you would see that there was nothing there
about any "full tapes" having been "just released."
> Accused Nixon???s Associates of Treason on Dec. 4, 2008. The next day, a
>
> ???President Johnson: And I have means of doing that, as you may well
> imagine.
>
> ???Russell: Yes.
>
> ???President Johnson: Mrs. [Anna] Chennault is contacting their
> [South Vietnamese] ambassador from time to time???seems to be kind of the
> earth to elect Humphrey, so don???t you get sucked in on that.??? (He is
> kind of these folks??? agent here, this little South Vietnamese ambassador.)
>
> ???Now, this is not guesswork.
> Van] Thieu is saying to them out there. We???re pretty well informed at
> both ends.???
>
> Johnson then renewed his thinly veiled threat to go public. ???I
> don???t want to get this in the campaign,??? Johnson said, adding: ???They
> oughtn???t be doing this. This is treason.???
> around about somebody trying to sabotage the Saigon government???s
> attitude, there???s absolutely no credibility as far as I???m concerned.???
> place. Here???s the history of it. I didn???t want to call you but I wanted
> you to know what happened.???
> I???m wondering whether it would be good for the country to disclose the
> story and then possibly have a certain individual [Nixon] elected,???
> Clifford said. ???It could cast his whole administration under such doubt
> that I think it would be inimical to our country???s interests.???
> touch secretly with Richard Nixon???s people. There were unconfirmed
>
> But Johnson???s White House remained tight-lipped about its knowledge
> of Nixon???s treachery. According to the documents in ???The ???X??? Envelope,???
> that matter.??? [...]
>
> As published, Ottenad???s article began, ???A well-known top official
about any "full tapes" having been "just released."
> video of the ABC report on the matter was headlined on the network's
> website LBJ Tapes Implicate Nixon With Treason.
> LBJ tells Dirksen Nixon campaign treasonous
> To be sure, the reporting in the Big Old Media at the time the tapes
> were released was sparse. But a month later, in January 2009, Brooklyn
> College Professor Robert "KC" Johnson at the History News Network
> provided some details, including some transcripts and excerpts from the
> tapes themselves. What Prof. Johnson pointed out were four
> conversations, with Democratic Sen. Richard Russell, Republican Sen.
> Everett Dirksen, Democratic Sen. George Smathers, and with Richard Nixon
> himself, all caught on audiotape.
>
> Without saying so directly, LBJ makes it pretty clear in this late
> August 1968 conversation with Russell that he's having monitored the
> conversations of Anna Chennault, an ultra right-wing Republican senior
> adviser of the Nixon campaign team, and Bui Diem, the South Vietnamese
> ambassador to the United States [emphasis added]:
>
> Now, when we got that (pure by accident, as a result of some of our
> Wall Street connections), that caused me to look a little deeper.
>
> ???Richard Russell: I guess so.
> website LBJ Tapes Implicate Nixon With Treason.
> LBJ tells Dirksen Nixon campaign treasonous
> To be sure, the reporting in the Big Old Media at the time the tapes
> were released was sparse. But a month later, in January 2009, Brooklyn
> College Professor Robert "KC" Johnson at the History News Network
> provided some details, including some transcripts and excerpts from the
> tapes themselves. What Prof. Johnson pointed out were four
> conversations, with Democratic Sen. Richard Russell, Republican Sen.
> Everett Dirksen, Democratic Sen. George Smathers, and with Richard Nixon
> himself, all caught on audiotape.
>
> Without saying so directly, LBJ makes it pretty clear in this late
> August 1968 conversation with Russell that he's having monitored the
> conversations of Anna Chennault, an ultra right-wing Republican senior
> adviser of the Nixon campaign team, and Bui Diem, the South Vietnamese
> ambassador to the United States [emphasis added]:
>
> Now, when we got that (pure by accident, as a result of some of our
> Wall Street connections), that caused me to look a little deeper.
>
>
> ???President Johnson: And I have means of doing that, as you may well
> imagine.
>
> ???Russell: Yes.
>
> ???President Johnson: Mrs. [Anna] Chennault is contacting their
> [South Vietnamese] ambassador from time to time???seems to be kind of the
> go-between, the Chiang Kai-Shek deal. In addition, their ambassador is
> saying to ???em that ???Johnson is desperate and is just moving heaven and
> earth to elect Humphrey, so don???t you get sucked in on that.??? (He is
> kind of these folks??? agent here, this little South Vietnamese ambassador.)
>
> ???Now, this is not guesswork.
>
> It certainly wasn't guesswork. The FBI was wiretapping everything coming
> out of the South Vietnamese embassy in Washington under Johnson's orders.
>
> Please read more about Nixon's "treason" below the fold.
>
> It wasn't just the South Vietnamese being watched. "Overheard"
> conversations had also revealed John Mitchell, Nixon's campaign director
> who would soon be attorney general, to be suggesting that Hanoi also be
> contacted and told the North Vietnamse could get a better deal with
> Nixon as president. In his call to Dirksen, President Johnson laid it out:
>
> ???The agent [Chennault] says she???s just talked to the boss in New
> It certainly wasn't guesswork. The FBI was wiretapping everything coming
> out of the South Vietnamese embassy in Washington under Johnson's orders.
>
> Please read more about Nixon's "treason" below the fold.
>
> It wasn't just the South Vietnamese being watched. "Overheard"
> conversations had also revealed John Mitchell, Nixon's campaign director
> who would soon be attorney general, to be suggesting that Hanoi also be
> contacted and told the North Vietnamse could get a better deal with
> Nixon as president. In his call to Dirksen, President Johnson laid it out:
>
> Mexico and that he said that you must hold out, just hold on until after
> the election,??? Johnson said. ???We know what [Vietnamese President Nguyen
> Van] Thieu is saying to them out there. We???re pretty well informed at
> both ends.???
>
> Johnson then renewed his thinly veiled threat to go public. ???I
> don???t want to get this in the campaign,??? Johnson said, adding: ???They
> oughtn???t be doing this. This is treason.???
>
> A year ago, Robert Parry at Consortium News wrote in detail about the
> taped conversations, including candidate Nixon's phone call to LBJ
> denying that he would do anything to sabotage the talks:
>
> [Nixon:] ???I feel very, very strongly about this. Any rumblings
> A year ago, Robert Parry at Consortium News wrote in detail about the
> taped conversations, including candidate Nixon's phone call to LBJ
> denying that he would do anything to sabotage the talks:
>
> around about somebody trying to sabotage the Saigon government???s
> attitude, there???s absolutely no credibility as far as I???m concerned.???
>
> Armed with the FBI reports and other intelligence, Johnson
> responded, ???I???m very happy to hear that, Dick, because that is taking
> Armed with the FBI reports and other intelligence, Johnson
> place. Here???s the history of it. I didn???t want to call you but I wanted
> you to know what happened.???
>
> He could have called Nixon a fucking liar at that moment. But he didn't.
> While some believe that Nixon's running mate, Spiro Agnew, may have been
> the campaign's "cut-out," nobody, including Johnson, believed the orders
> to Chennault were coming from anybody other than Nixon. But the fears of
> Johnson and his top aides spurred them to keep the information to
> themselves and to urge the Christian Science Monitor not to publish it.
> Parry wrote:
>
> So, Johnson consulted with [Secretary of State Dean] Rusk,
> [National Security Adviser Walt] Rostow and Defense Secretary Clark
> Clifford in a Nov. 4 conference call. Those three pillars of the
> Washington Establishment were unanimous in advising Johnson against
> going public, mostly out of fear that the scandalous information might
> reflect badly on the U.S. government.
>
> ???Some elements of the story are so shocking in their nature that
> He could have called Nixon a fucking liar at that moment. But he didn't.
> While some believe that Nixon's running mate, Spiro Agnew, may have been
> the campaign's "cut-out," nobody, including Johnson, believed the orders
> to Chennault were coming from anybody other than Nixon. But the fears of
> Johnson and his top aides spurred them to keep the information to
> themselves and to urge the Christian Science Monitor not to publish it.
> Parry wrote:
>
> So, Johnson consulted with [Secretary of State Dean] Rusk,
> [National Security Adviser Walt] Rostow and Defense Secretary Clark
> Clifford in a Nov. 4 conference call. Those three pillars of the
> Washington Establishment were unanimous in advising Johnson against
> going public, mostly out of fear that the scandalous information might
> reflect badly on the U.S. government.
>
> I???m wondering whether it would be good for the country to disclose the
> story and then possibly have a certain individual [Nixon] elected,???
> Clifford said. ???It could cast his whole administration under such doubt
> that I think it would be inimical to our country???s interests.???
>
> As more cables from Anna Chennault were intercepted after Nixon won the
> election, Johnson phoned president-elect to remind him of his pledge to
> push the peace talks forward or at least not block them. Without
> directly accusing him, Johnson threatened Nixon with letting the media
> know about the interference, and mentioned Agnew's reputed role as
> intermediary. But the talks were stalled now. The Nixon campaign's
> effort had succeeded. In his piece last March, Parry wrote:
>
> Columnists Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson noted in a Nov. 17 column
> that Johnson ???learned that Saigon???s Ambassador Bui Diem had been in
> As more cables from Anna Chennault were intercepted after Nixon won the
> election, Johnson phoned president-elect to remind him of his pledge to
> push the peace talks forward or at least not block them. Without
> directly accusing him, Johnson threatened Nixon with letting the media
> know about the interference, and mentioned Agnew's reputed role as
> intermediary. But the talks were stalled now. The Nixon campaign's
> effort had succeeded. In his piece last March, Parry wrote:
>
> Columnists Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson noted in a Nov. 17 column
> touch secretly with Richard Nixon???s people. There were unconfirmed
> reports that South Vietnamese leaders had even slipped campaign cash to
> Nixon representatives.??? [...]
>
> But Johnson???s White House remained tight-lipped about its knowledge
> of Nixon???s treachery. According to the documents in ???The ???X??? Envelope,???
> the first detailed press inquiry about the peace-talk sabotage came from
> St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Tom Ottenad who contacted Rostow on
> Jan. 3, 1969, just 17 days before Johnson would leave office.
>
> Ottenad outlined the activities of Anna Chennault on behalf of the
> campaign and pressed Rostow to confirm that the administration was aware
> of the subterfuge. Rostow responded, ???I have not one word to say about
> St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Tom Ottenad who contacted Rostow on
> Jan. 3, 1969, just 17 days before Johnson would leave office.
>
> Ottenad outlined the activities of Anna Chennault on behalf of the
> campaign and pressed Rostow to confirm that the administration was aware
> that matter.??? [...]
>
> As published, Ottenad???s article began, ???A well-known top official
> of committees working for the election of Richard M. Nixon secretly got
> in touch with representatives of South Vietnam shortly before the
> presidential election. It was in connection with an apparent effort to
> encourage them to delay in joining the Paris peace talks in hopes of
> getting a better deal if the Republicans won the White House.???
> in touch with representatives of South Vietnam shortly before the
> presidential election. It was in connection with an apparent effort to
> encourage them to delay in joining the Paris peace talks in hopes of
Sandy McCroskey
Mar 19, 2013, 5:04:58 PM3/19/13
to
pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> PF
>
> While the tapes are recent releases,
Sure, 2008 is relatively "recent."
> the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
> wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
> entitled The Palace File.
>
> As I recall it, Johnson asked HUMPHREY if he wanted him to come forward
> with what he knew, and Humphrey, perhaps concerned that Johnson's taping
> Nixon would reflect badly upon himself, said "No." As I recall it, that
> was it for Johnson. He pulled back from Humphrey, and sunk back into
> Texas.
>
> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> PF
>
> While the tapes are recent releases,
Sure, 2008 is relatively "recent."
> the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
> wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
> entitled The Palace File.
>
> As I recall it, Johnson asked HUMPHREY if he wanted him to come forward
> with what he knew, and Humphrey, perhaps concerned that Johnson's taping
> Nixon would reflect badly upon himself, said "No." As I recall it, that
> was it for Johnson. He pulled back from Humphrey, and sunk back into
> Texas.
>
Anthony Marsh
Mar 20, 2013, 11:23:06 AM3/20/13
to
On 3/19/2013 3:05 PM, pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> PF
>
> While the tapes are recent releases, the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> PF
>
> wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
> entitled The Palace File.
Did they have the tapes then? If not then all they had were rumors, not
> entitled The Palace File.
proof.
pjsp...@aol.com
Mar 19, 2013, 3:05:32 PM3/19/13
to
On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>
>
>
>
>
> PF
While the tapes are recent releases, the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
entitled The Palace File.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>
>
>
>
>
> PF
While the tapes are recent releases, the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
entitled The Palace File.
Sandy McCroskey
Mar 21, 2013, 12:23:58 AM3/21/13
to
On 3/20/13 11:23 AM, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 3/19/2013 3:05 PM, pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PF
>>
>> While the tapes are recent releases, the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
>> wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
>> entitled The Palace File.
>
> Did they have the tapes then? If not then all they had were rumors, not
> proof.
>
You think *Johnson* needed "proof" of what he himself said in his phone
> On 3/19/2013 3:05 PM, pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 17, 2013 6:40:02 PM UTC-7, Peter Fokes wrote:
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21768668
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PF
>>
>> While the tapes are recent releases, the story is OLD. LBJ and Clifford
>> wrote about it in their memoirs. It was later documented in a book
>> entitled The Palace File.
>
> Did they have the tapes then? If not then all they had were rumors, not
> proof.
>
conversations, in order to be believed about this?
Too funny!
/sm
0 new messages