I was reading Richard E. Sprague's book, The Taking of America, today. I came across an interesting passage suggesting that the Power Control Group was involved in the plot to assassinate George Wallace. It includes this passage:

<span style='color:blue'>What evidence is there that Bremer's attempt on Wallace was a directed attempt by a conspiratorial group? Bremer himself has told his brother that others were involved and that he was paid by them. Researcher William Turner has turned up evidence in Milwaukee and surrounding towns in Wisconsin that Bremer received money from a group associated with Dennis Cossini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz. Several other young "leftists" were seen with Bremer on several occasions in Milwaukee and on the ferry crossing at Lake Michigan. </span>

That would not be our Tim Gratz would it?

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAchp8.html

________________________________________________

GREAT book and it's online for all to read.

I await Mr Gratz' response with baited breath, anticipating a prompt denial.

I did notice the Donald Segretti connection some time back.

Gee....wonder what this means )

Dawn

There is another interesting link between Arthur Bremer and E. Howard Hunt. On 15th May Arthur Bremer attempted to assassinate George Wallace. As a result Charles Colson ordered Hunt to break into Bremer's apartment to see if he could find any information that the Democratic Party was involved in the assassination. However, some have claimed that Hunt's role was to remove incriminating documents from Bremer's home. Some people believe that the documents that Hunt got from Bremer's apartment were in his safe in the White House. These were passed by John Dean to L. Patrick Gray, acting head of the FBI. Gray destroyed these documents six months later at his home. There are some people who believe these were never destroyed but were used to blackmail others into silence about what they knew about the assassination of JFK.

Hunt claims that he never went to the apartment. In Undercover, he says that Colson called and ordered him to get into the apartment and see what he could find, but Hunt wondered how he was going to get into an apartment that was secured by FBI agents, and his wife Dorothy told him to ignore the order. Hunt was going to go anyway, but Colson called him back and told him to forget about it.

Ron

http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr599-bremer.html This has some data on Cossini. I did a search on Gratz and hypnosis. Seems there is a Irwin Gratz that uses hypnosis in pain control. Love to know Tim's DADS name ? THANKS Steve Gaal

. As a result Charles Colson ordered Hunt to break into Bremer's apartment to see if he could find any information that the Democratic Party was involved in the assassination.

..... There are some people who believe these were never destroyed but were used to blackmail others into silence about what they knew about the assassination of JFK.
___________________________--

Oh if only someone could prevail upon Chuck Colson to tell all. Bare his "Christian" soul. I have no reason to believe he is not a Christian, but he has never been forthcoming, and certainly does not respond to people like us with questions about his FULL role in Watergate.

I wrote to him two years ago and did not receive a response.

It's Colson's position that we'll all know the truth in the Sweet By and By.

Ron

Tim's been tumbled!

Although I am certain that J. Timothy Gratz is our Tim Gratz, this in itself does not mean that Richard E. Sprague/William Turner is right that "Bremer received money from a group associated with Dennis Cossini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz". We know that Tim was connected to Segretti. I will be interested to hear if he was also associated with Dennis Cossini.

According to "newspaperwoman Sybil Leek and lawyer-turned-investigative-reporter Bert Sugar, while Bremer was at the Lord Elgin hotel in Ottawa, he met with a Dennis Cossini. Famed conspiracy researcher Mae Brussell and Alan Stang identified Cossini as a CIA operative. Cossini was found dead from a massive heroin overdose in July, 1972, just two months after the Wallace shooting. Cossini had no history of drug use." See:

http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr599-bremer.html

[quote=John Simkin,May 7 2005, 09:51 PM]
[quote=Mark Stapleton,May 7 2005, 08:12 PM]Tim's been tumbled!

[/quote]

Although I am certain that J. Timothy Gratz is our Tim Gratz, this in itself does not mean that Richard E. Sprague/William Turner is right that "Bremer received money from a group associated with Dennis Cossini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz". We know that Tim was connected to Segretti. I will be interested to hear if he was also associated with Dennis Cossini.

According to "newspaperwoman Sybil Leek and lawyer-turned-investigative-reporter Bert Sugar, while Bremer was at the Lord Elgin hotel in Ottawa, he met with a Dennis Cossini. Famed conspiracy researcher Mae Brussell and Alan Stang identified Cossini as a CIA operative. Cossini was found dead from a massive heroin overdose in July, 1972, just two months after the Wallace shooting. Cossini had no history of drug use." See:

http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr599-bremer.html

[/quot_____________
______________________________

Great piece, just re-read it last week, in fact.

Was gonna suggest it when I first saw this post.

Thanks for posting it for others to read.

Dawn

John, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to discover this passage.

In all candor, I consider it libelous and legally actionable. It clearly implies I was associated with a group involved with the Wallace shooting.

The only group with which I was associated was the College Republicans. I had never heard of Arthur Bremer until the Wallace shooting and never heard of Dennis Cossini until I myself happened across this passage in Sprauge's "book''.
Nor have I ever heard of an Irwin Gratz until Mark's post.

The record is clear that rather than being "associated" with Segretti, immediately after being approached by him I reported his activities. See the Senate Watergate Committee Report and ulasewicz's memoirs.

The passage even suggests I was a "young leftist"! Talk about adding insult to injury!

Decency requires, I suggest, that you publish a retraction stating you are not aware of any evidence whatsoever that I was ever associated with Segretti, Bremer or Cassini. I know Sprague is dead.

John, did you ever attempt to contact Willam Turner about the accuracy of the passage in Sprague's book before publishing it?

I consider most of Sprague's book to be as incorrect as this passage, by the way.

John wrote:

Although I am certain that J. Timothy Gratz is our Tim Gratz, this in itself does not mean that Richard E. Sprague/William Turner is right that "Bremer received money from a group associated with Dennis Cossini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz". We know that Tim was connected to Segretti. I will be interested to hear if he was also associated with Dennis Cossini.

John, Sprauge may have Turner wrong here (I have more respect for Turner than Sprague). It would be interesting to learn the "group" to which he refers.

It is wrong to assert that I was "connected to Segretti". The Senate Watergate Committee Report almost elevates me to heroic status by noting that I was apparently the ONLY person approached by Segretti that REJECTED his approaches. Okay?

Mark wrote

Tim's been tumbled!

This just shows Mark will uncritically believe whatever he reads!

Did you consider taking legal action against Sprague while he was alive?

Do you know why he named you as being part of this group? As you pointed out you are on record as having rejected Donald Segretti’s offer to join the “dirty tricks” campaign. Several people willingly joined Segretti and were later named during the Watergate investigation. Why didn’t Sprague name one of them? Why should he pick on you? I am sure there must be an explanation for this but I cannot at the moment see what it is.

John, Srague was already dead when I first read this, or I would surely have sued him!

Of course the Senate Watergate Committee Report had been published before he wrote this. The only thing I can think of why Sprague connected me is that Bremer and I were both from Wisconsin and Segretti had approached me in Wisconsin. But in my opinion this shows just how irresponsible some "journalists" can be. Sprague makes McCarthy look like a saint! I tend to doubt his whole statement that Bremer received money from a group connected to Segretti. With what "group" was Segretti connected with? CREEP? Why didn't Sprague name the group? Do you see why I have a personal reason to doubt every statement Sprague makes in his book? This just shows he didn't bother to check his facts.

""Researcher William Turner has turned up evidence in Milwaukee and surrounding towns in Wisconsin that Bremer received money from a group associated with Dennis Cossini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz. Several other young "leftists" were seen with Bremer on several occasions in Milwaukee and on the ferry crossing at Lake Michigan. ""

Are we going to see the evidence that William Turner turned up.... for clarities sake here....We all can say and quote anything we would like, but we must be prepared to have the documentation and or evidence to prove such an accusation, if not noted as being supposition.....


IMO...B

Thanks, Bernice! That was my point in asking John if he had attempted to contact Turner to determine what Sprague was talking about before he posted the paragraph.

And why does Sprague call them "leftists"? I have no knowledge that Segretti ever posed as a leftist, and I certainly never did.

I can also state that I was never contacted by Sprague or Turner.

This whole paragraph just seems cock-eyed.

Here are some references (from the Amazon "Search Inside the Book") from the memoirs of Anthony Ulasewicz where he reports his trip to Wisconsn to investigate my complaint against Segretti (who was using the alias "Simmons"). It was while Ulasewicz was in Wisconsin with me that his boss found out that Segretti was working for Haldeman (through his aide Dwight Chapin as I recall).

1. on Page 238:
"... arrived in Wisconsin to check out what a guy named Don Simmons was up to. On December 18, 1971, Timothy Gratz, Chairman of Wisconsin's Republican Party College Organization, received a call from a man calling himself Don Simmons. Simmons said he ..."

2. on Page 239:
"... THE ROAD TO WATERGATE money. When Gratz reported his meeting with Simmons to top Republican officials in Wisconsin, who in turn passed the information along to the ..."

3. on Page 240:
"... Tony," Caulfield said. "Simmons is Haldeman's man. Get out of there. Back off. Simmons will be told to lay off Gratz." When I returned to Gratz's apartment I told him that the matter had been taken care of and that he ..."

It is clear that you were not part of the plot to assassinate George Wallace. If you had been part of such a plot you are unlikely to have used your real name when you joined the Forum. I suspect that the reason William Turner said you were is due to some documents he has seen. Maybe you were the victim of some conspiracy. This might explain why Turner wrongly describes you as a “leftist”.

Let us look at what we know about Nixon’s dirty tricks campaign and George Wallace. The polls in January, 1972, shows that if Wallace ran as a independent he would get 13 per cent of the vote. It was believed by the Republicans that if Wallace withdrew from the contest, his supporters would vote for Nixon instead.

Operation Gemstone had two main objectives: (1) To get the Democrats to select a left-wing candidate that Nixon could defeat. (2) To get Wallace to drop out of the contest.

Most of the Operation Gemstone papers were destroyed before the Watergate investigation could take place. However, some documents did survive to show how the “Plumbers” achieved objective (1). This was highly successful and they got George McGovern as the candidate.

However, some evidence has emerged that helps us understand the campaign against Wallace. Bob Woodward heard via a Senate attorney that an hour after Wallace was shot Howard Hunt received a phone call from Charles Colson. Hunt was asked to fly to Milwaukee and break into Bremer’s apartment and “bring back anything that might help in connecting Bremer to left-wing political causes”.

This was later confirmed by Colson, Hunt and Ken Clawson. Hunt claims he did not carry out the assignment. He might be telling the truth. I suppose even people like Hunt tell the truth sometimes.

Colson and Clawson claim that they wanted Hunt to find information that Bremer was linked to George McGovern. After all, if such information could have been found, it would clearly hurt his campaign to become president. However, those who know anything about Nixon’s dirty tricks campaign have raised concerns about the truth about these statements.

For example, why not rely on the FBI to discover these documents if they existed? Why would the FBI hide this information?

An alternative view was that Hunt was not asked to find documents that linked Bremer to McGovern. Instead he was asked to plant documents that suggested a link between Bremer and McGovern. Another possibility is that Hunt was asked to remove documents that linked Nixon to Bremer. If these documents existed, it would have destroyed Nixon’s chances of being re-elected.

When the FBI arrived on the scene they found both left-wing and right-wing propaganda in Bremer’s apartment. Local reporters claimed that the FBI left Bremer’s apartment for around 90 minutes before coming back and sealing it. During this time reporters and other unidentified figures took away papers from Bremer’s apartment. The FBI strange behaviour has never been explained. It was as if someone in authority and asked them to make it possible for Bremer’s property to be looted.

The Washington Post received an anonymous phone call saying that a member of the Plumbers had met Bremer before he shot Wallace and that he was given a large sum of money in $100 bills. Woodward and Bernstein investigated this story but was unable to obtain any confirmation of this meeting.

Colson admitted that Nixon took a keen interest in the assassination attempt on George Wallace. He immediately voiced concern that Bremer “might have ties to the Republican Party or, even worse, the President’s re-election committee”.

Why should Nixon say this? Is this what he meant when it was suggested to Richard Helms that Watergate had something to do with the JFK assassination. Had Bremer being playing a similar role to Oswald? Had the CIA done something it had done before? Did Nixon believe he was being set-up? Or had Bremer being working for CREEP? If so, what had gone wrong? Why had the contents of Bremer’s apartment been sorted out before the assassination?

This interview between Sherman Skolnick and Aguay Banar, a.k.a. "Ciba" took place on the Chicago public access television program, "Broadsides" in 1995.

SKOLNICK: At the time Wallace was shot -- so to speak into a wheelchair and not into the cemetery -- he was running for President and pulling about 21 percent of the vote.

CIBA: Which comes to 26 million popular votes.

SKOLNICK: But because of the different states that it was into, he could have had the whole thing thrown into the House of Representatives, where it would have been a turmoil.

Recently we did a show with spokespersons for some third-party candidates, including those for Perot. And I raised the same question. (Perot had 19 percent in the '92 election.) And when I raised this question, they said, "Oh, so if Perot had 21 percent, like Wallace, they'd have to shoot him?" I said, "In my opinion, yes." Why is that? I mean, some of us believe that the ultra-rich believe in the bullet, not the ballot. Is that the bottom line?

CIBA: The bottom line is money, the almighty dollar: who can best serve the interests of the Northeastern Atlantic elite and the Southwestern Pacific elite.

SKOLNICK: Just prior to Wallace being shot, he had made a statement. He said, "There's not a dimes worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties." (He was a third-party candidate, very populist.) He said, "If I'm elected, one of the first things I'm going to do is tax the Rockefeller Foundation." When I heard that, I said, "Wallace, you haven't got enough life insurance." So you weren't able to get Wallace on video, but you still got pictures.

CIBA: One of the questions that I asked the Governor in writing was, "Was there a conspiracy behind the shooting of your person?" He said, "Yes. Definitely a conspiracy." And then he looked up, on the page, to where a previous question had been asked regarding Richard Nixon. And with the stub of his cigar he poked at the name of Richard Nixon. He said, "Conspiracy! Conspiracy!" And he jabbed at the name of Nixon on the page.

SKOLNICK: What else leads you to believe that there was a conspiracy?

CIBA: There was no way that Richard Nixon was ever going to be re-elected with Wallace in the campaign. To get back into the Oval Office, you had to do away with Wallace so that most of those 26 million votes -- which were center, or right of center -- would come over to the side of Nixon.

SKOLNICK: What do you make of the fact that 6 weeks after they took Wallace out of the campaign by almost killing him, the Watergate break-in occurred?

CIBA: The Watergate break-in was nothing more than a contrivance: a poorly executed mission that had, at its very bottom, a very sharp hatchet. And the hatchet was aimed at Nixon's head. The Watergate break-in was designed to be found, and to point the blame at Nixon and bring him down.

SKOLNICK: E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, and others, were involved in the break-in at the Watergate. And there's reason to believe that the White House sent E. Howard Hunt to Arthur Bremer's [Bremer found guilty of shooting Wallace] apartment in Milwaukee...

CIBA: ...on orders from Charles Colson.

SKOLNICK: Bremer's apartment, after the shooting of Wallace, was not sealed off; stuff could have been planted there, such as fake diaries. In other words, Arthur Bremer's diary showed up.

CIBA: Yes, but the diary showed up in the car.

But when Bremer shot Wallace, the first people that went physically into the apartment were from a bogus news organization known as "TIPS" -- Transcontinental International Press Services. Now they are a creature of the Guardians, which are the militant wing of the Church of Scientology. And I'm talking about the branch in Los Angeles.

SKOLNICK: The Secret Service allowed Bremer to penetrate Nixon's security. In other words, if you create a vacuum where a would-be assassin can penetrate Secret Service security, then it becomes easy to kill somebody. Like they did with Dr. King: withdraw the security.

CIBA: Bremer was in the city of Ottawa, Capital of Canada, when Nixon was visiting Pierre Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minister at the time. Bremer and Frank Sturgis stayed at the Lord Elgin Hotel, in Ottawa. They stayed in the same section of the Hotel. Frank Sturgis was the control officer of Arthur Bremer on the road. It was he who was passing on money and information to Bremer.

Sturgis and Bremer stayed in the same section of the Lord Elgin Hotel that the Secret Service detail of Richard Nixon was staying in.

SKOLNICK: Could Bremer, at one point, have targeted Nixon for assassination?

CIBA: You will recall that the same mythology was created in the assassination of John Kennedy: that Oswald was after Nixon and then, because security was so tight, he instead trained the crosshairs of his weapon on Jack Kennedy. The same thing here: they want you to believe that Bremer was after Nixon and because security was so tight, again, the "lone assassin" trained his gun on someone else --Wallace.

I was joking, boofhead. No sense of humor, Tim.

A couple of points on this issue.

1. While I have respect for Tim and have no reason to doubt his sincerity, I think it would prove helpful if he were to tell us the whole story of his relationship with Segretti and the Nixon campaign. After all, if it turned out I was a former publicist for the Kennedy family, I wouldn't expect anyone here to take me seriously unless I was willing to disclose my experiences working for them, good and bad. Specifically, I think Tim should come clean on what kind of "rat-fucking" he was asked to perform by Segretti, and what kind of "rat-fucking" he did perform on behalf of the GOP, before and after meeting Segretti.

2. A few years back, I had dinner with my best friends' relatives from Maryland, including his cousin and her husband. Over random discussion, I discovered that the husband worked at the State hospital where Bremer was kept, and that Bremer had been considered sane for years and had been elevated to the position of trustee, whereby he was basically an un-paid orderly. He told me that Bremer was only kept locked up for political purposes. Since Bremer didn't actually kill anyone, this seemed a bit strange. The thought occurred: was Bremer kept locked up to keep him away from the U.S. public, or to keep the U.S. public away from what Bremer might have to say? I'm still wondering.

3. At one point, while looking through old magazines to read contemporaneous articles on Watergate, I came across the curious fact that Maryland Congressman William Mills killed himself in a neighbor's barn within a year or so of the Wallace shooting. I suspected a connection between the two shootings, but was unable to come up with anything concrete. Of course, Agnew was also from Maryland. If anyone knows of any connection, or of any book that examines the Maryland connection to Agnew, the Wallace shooting, and the Mills shooting, I'd be appreciative of the tip.

Pat, I think my post in another thread adequately summarized my dealings with Segretti.

I met him only one time, in the lounge of the Park Motor Inn, a fancy hotel across from the Wisconsin Capitol building in Madison, WI. He had originally contacted a Randy Knox, who had been the chairman of the University of Wisconsin Young Republican Club. He had only talked to Segretti over the telephone; Knox said he was too busy to get involved and Knox gave him my name.

Segetti, using the name Simmons, said he wanted to organize a "dirty tricks" campaign against the Democrat candidates. I do not remember all of the things he mentioned but I do remember he suggested printing counterfeit tickets to Democrat fund-raising dinners and passing them out to hungry indigents. His primary emphasis to me, however, was to find a college student to plant as a spy in the Muskie campaign.

Although I did not tell him this, I was immediately suspicious of him. I could not believe that the ideas he was proposing could have been endorsed by either the White House or CREEP. Segretti implied to me that he had authority from the very highest level but his sponsor would deny it. My suspicion was that he was in fact an agent provocateur for the Democrats manipulating to implicate Republicans in embarrassing situations or was working for a wealthy Nixon supporter who had not cleared his activities with either the WH or CREEP. In either event, I was convinced that what Segretti was proposing would hurt the Nixon campaign because I was certain his activities would be discovered. Moreover, I was concerned about both the ethics and the legality of some of the "pranks" Segretti was proposing.

So I immediately contacted my "superior", the National Chairman of the College Republicans, told him the story, and asked him to check on it with the highest authority in CREEP.

A week or two later someone in CREEP called me back and said they had not heard of Simmons and that I could cooperate with him if I chose to do so. I considered this a ridiculous response. If they had of heard of the guy, they darn sure should want to find out what he was up to. The last thing they needed, IMO, was some "loose cannon" trying to sabotage the Democrats and play dirty tricks on them. I was convinced that whether it was a Democrat or a Republican sponsoring Segretti, what he was doing was wrong, would be discovered, and would hurt the Nixon campaign.

So I reinitiated my contact with the CRNC Chairman and told him of the response.
He agreed with me.

A short time later I was recontacted by CREEP. I believe it was Bart Porter who called me. This time they said they were concerned about "Simmons" because they had received similar reports from New Hampshire. They suggested I ask Segretti to meet me for lunch in Washington so they could observe and photograph him. I told them I thought this would only make Segretti suspicious. They then asked me when Segretti was next scheduled to call me. (He kept calling to see if I had yet located a spy for the Muskie campaign; I kept stalling him.) I told them the date of his next scheduled call. That is when they sent Ulasewicz out.

He was going to tape record the call. The call was going to go to my parents' phone. Ulasewicz set up his recording equipment on the phone but the call never came. This was the first time Segretti had missed a scheduled call. Ulasaewicz then told me I should call him if Segretti ever contacted me again.

For along time I wondered if the entire Ulasewicz trip to Wisconsin had been a ruse to get me off their back. It was suspicous to me that after I contacted Washington Segretti stopped calling me. It was only after I read Ulasewicz's memoirs did I understand that, according to him Segretti was being "run" out of the WH without the knowledge of CREEP and that CREEP only discovered the Segretti operation because of my protestations.

Again, according to the Senate Watergate Committee Report, I may have been the only person contacted by Segretti who refused his entreaties.

I hope this answers your questions, Pat.

I am always amused when I watch the movie "All The President's Me" and see Segretti's receipt from the Park Motor Inn. Segretti did everything by credit cards so when he was discovered he left a very lengthy paper trail. The FBI found out about Segretti's contact with me through his phone calls to me and I was interviewed by two FBI agents during the pendency of the Watergate hearings.

John wrote:

It is clear that you were not part of the plot to assassinate George Wallace. If you had been part of such a plot you are unlikely to have used your real name when you joined the Forum. I suspect that the reason William Turner said you were is due to some documents he has seen. Maybe you were the victim of some conspiracy. This might explain why Turner wrongly describes you as a “leftist”.

John,I guess I must now admit that there were some members of the Young Republicans so far to the right that they considered me a "leftist" (if you can imagine that!). That, however, is not, I am sure, the reference to "leftist" in the book.

There is a stronger reason to know I was not part of a plot to assassinate Wallace. For heaven's sake, I objected to the morality of Segretti's printing counterfeit tickets to dinners! And I do not recall if this was one of the things Segretti proposed to me but he would print fliers attacking a Democrat candidate attributing the fliers to another Democrat's campaign, to create disharmony within the Democrats--obviously illegal and I think Segretti's criminal conviction may have related to this activity.

I want to repeat however that you do not KNOW that Turner made the statement attributed to him by Spague. It may be solely Sprague's deliberate or unintentional misinterprtation of something he heard. As I stated above, I have respect for Turner but none whatsoever for Sprague. IMO Sprague's book is full of unsupported, wild charges and his statement linking me to Bremer is adequate proof of that. In fact, my knowledge of that error alone is sufficient reason for me to reject every single statement in Sprague's book. You would feel the same way about a book that made a wild charge that you knew from your personal knowledge was false.

Tim, this is a fascinating story. I think it helps to explain why William Turner mentions you in regard to the plot on George Wallace. According to Sprague the information on you comes from William Turner’s Report of an Investigation. This apparently was funded by the Committee on Government Intelligence. It indeed would be interesting to contact Turner. Does anyone have his contact details?

Tim, I think you are wrong to describe yourself as playing a bit part in the Watergate story. In fact, I think you could have been a key figure.

The main problem with running a covert dirty tricks operation against your political opponents is that if it is revealed before the election, it has the potential to destroy your own campaign. Once you contacted CREEP you became extremely dangerous to Nixon’s chances of being re-elected.

I am sure you are right to suggest that CREEP warned off Segretti from making contact with you again. However, it was not enough to break-off contact. You were obviously an idealistic Republican and had the potential to be another “Deep Throat”. Therefore they had to provide documents that discredited you. I suspect that these were the documents seen by William Turner. These documents portrayed you as a “leftist” linked with Arthur Bremer. We now know that at this time Bremer was being given money before the assassination attempt on Wallace by one of the Watergate burglars (Bernard Barker). We also know that Hunt was asked to break into Bremer’s apartment. This was probably an attempt to plant documents linking Bremer with George McGovern (or as Nixon liked to call him and his supporters “leftists”).

Did Segretti ever write a book about his relationship with CREEP? I know he is still active in Republican politics in Orange County. I wonder if he would be willing to join the forum and answer a few questions.

John, there is even more to the story. During the Watergate investigation, when Segretti's activities began to be exposed, I received a call from Randy Knox. Knox reminded me of the Donald Simmons that he had introduced me to and asked whatever had happened. He said he was asking because what Simmons had proposed to him sounded like what Segretti was doing. He asked me if I thought Simmons was indeed Segretti. I told him I was not sure because I had never seen a photo of Segretti. He asked me if I thought I should contact the FBI with the Simmons story. I replied that I certainly would once I could verify that Simmons was indeed Segretti. Well, the very next week Segretti's photo was in either Time or Newsweek and then I knew. I have to admit I had a bit of trepidation about contacting the FBI because I thought the information I had could be "dangerous knowledge" so I can understand why some witnesses in the Kennedy assassination could be fearful of contradicting the official story. (I should add that I have no reason to believe that the Nixon administration would actually silence witnesses although as I recall someone once talked, apparently half-seriously, of killing Jack Anderson.) The decision to contact the FBI became moot when, within a week after my verification that the man I had met as Donald Simmons was indeed Donald Segretti, I was contacted by two FBI agents at my place of employment. Gordon Winslow suggested I ought to get a copy of the FBI reports just for my scrapbook.

I agree it would be interesting to contact Turner to see what his report was about and your speculation that I was being "set up" in case I came forward before the election is certainly interesting.

My judgment was proven correct that what Segretti was proposing was morally wrong and illegal. I was wrong in believing that his plans could not possibly be endorsed by "mucky-mucks" in either the WH or CREEP. (If for no other reason that that most of his proposed "pranks" did not seem sufficiently important to risk the consequences had they been discovered.) I was also wrong in assuming that Segretti's operation would be exposed before the election to the detriment of Richard Nixon. In retrospect, it surprises me that none of the intelligence arms of the Democratic candidates apparently ever caught on to Segretti's tricks.

One interesting anecdote. I do not know why he did it but Ulasewicz made a point of showing me that he always carried several bags of quarters so he could pay cash for all of his phone calls to avoid a paper trail. Well apparently this common sense was not apparent in the White House since Segretti's credit card records showed every hotel where he stayed and every phone call he made.

Finally, I am sure many of you know that there was a Democrat prankster who pulled "dirty tricks" on the Nixon campaigns dating back to 1960. If I recall correctly his name was Dick Tuck. I do not recall what pranks he pulled or whether he engaged in illegalities as Segretti did but I suspect that Tuck was the Nixon White House's "inspiration" for the Segretti caper.

Dawn Meredith wrote:

GREAT book and it's online for all to read.

I await Mr Gratz' response with baited breath, anticipating a prompt denial.

I do not want to "pick on" Dawn but the above is further demonstration that she lacks critical judgment at least as far as the Kennedy assassination.

It is a matter of historical record that I objected to Segretti's dirty tricks and immediately reported his approach to me (see both the Senate Watergate Committee Report and "The President's Private Eye" by Anthony Ulasewicz). Therefore, it is clear that I was never "associated" with Segretti or participated with him in a scheme to fund Arthur Bremer.

Therefore, it is also clear that the statement in Sprague's book is wrong.

Any astute reader of the historical record will thus recognize Sprague's error. And since Sprague should also have known my record with Segretti, it shows that his scholarship was flawed, rendering every single statement he makes in his book questionable.

But Dawn, of course, will believe uncritically ANYTHING written in a book that attempts to link the Kennedy assassination to the power structure.

I contrast her with, for instance, Bernice, who requested to see the actual evidence to support it before uncritically accepting the statement. And I also suspect that even when John originally posted the statement in the Sprague book he knew the statement to be false.

Dawn, I am NOT trying to pick on you. I just hope that perhaps this little incident will teach you not to accept at face value everything you read in a book merely because you agree with the author's POV re the assassination.

And, BTW, in my opinion Sprague's book is TRASH. Better stated, I think it is full of speculative statements that lack any historical support whatsoever so it ought to be classified as fiction. Contrast it, for instance, with Larry's great book where he does his best to show the basis for almost every single factual assertion that he makes.

Tim, some of the books I've read on Nixon get into the Dick Tuck thing, and how Nixon revealed his utter lack of humor by justifying his dirty tricks by recalling Dick Tuck, when Dick Tuck's style was actually very light and humorous. The classic Dick Tuck story occurred during Nixon's 62 campaign for California Governor. Nixon was campaigning in Chinatown in an assembly hall lined with Chinese banners. The way the story goes, it wasn't till after Nixon spoke that one of his Chinese supporters told him that the banners, written in Chinese, said, "Ask Nixon about the Hughes loan!"

And now for a left-field question. In your early years as a collegiate Nixon supporter, you didn't happen to run across Karl Rove, did you?

There is a fascinating bit of information about Arthur Bremer in John Dean’s book, Lost Honor (1982). Dean describes his efforts to discover the identity of Deep Throat. Dean was friendly with Woodward’s editor (Barry Sussman) at the Washington Post. Dean asked Sussman if he knew the identity of Deep Throat. He admits he doesn’t but offers the clue that Watergate was not the first story that Deep Throat helped Woodward with. Woodward first used Deep Throat when he was working on the story of the assassination attempt on George Wallace. Deep Throat gave Woodward a great deal of information about Bremer within a couple of hours of the assassination. This included his name (at that time it had not been released to the press). This raises two questions:

(1) Why did Woodward think Deep Throat would have details about Arthur Bremer?

(2) How did Deep Throat have details of Arthur Bremer?

Pat wrote:

And now for a left-field question. In your early years as a collegiate Nixon supporter, you didn't happen to run across Karl Rove, did you?

Pat, when I was the State Chairman of the Wisconsin College Republicans, Karl was the National Chairman of the College Republicans so indeed I knew him well. We conducted a seminar on college political organization in Wisconsin and worked together on a project to assure passage of the constitutional amendment lowering the voting age to eighteen.

So when I needed to contact someone at the upper level of CREEP about this Simmons guy who was, in my opinion, suggesting involving college-age Republicans in inappropriate behavior, I contacted Karl and he was the person who contacted the mucky-mucks at CREEP on my behalf.

John wrote:

Deep Throat gave Woodward a great deal of information about Bremer within a couple of hours of the assassination. This included his name (at that time it had not been released to the press). This raises two questions:

(1) Why did Woodward think Deep Throat would have details about Arthur Bremer?

(2) How did Deep Throat have details of Arthur Bremer?


John, this is very interesting information and great questions!

Query if Deep Throat was trying to bring Nixon down through his revelations, wonder whether he was CIA connected?

You can find all the information I have on Arthur Bremer here:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbremer.htm

It seems to me that the removal of George Wallace from the 1972 presidential campaign was far more important than bugging Larry O’Brien’s phone. At the time Wallace was polling 21% of the vote.

I have long suspected that the Watergate break-in was not real reason why Nixon was being blackmailed. Was this just Hunt’s way of applying pressure on both Nixon and the CIA? It was only when they murdered his wife did he realize that this time he had taken on more than he could cope with.

QUOTE (John Simkin @ May 10 2005, 06:53 AM)

You can find all the information I have on Arthur Bremer here:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbremer.htm

It seems to me that the removal of George Wallace from the 1972 presidential campaign was far more important than bugging Larry O’Brien’s phone. At the time Wallace was polling 21% of the vote.

I have long suspected that the Watergate break-in was not real reason why Nixon was being blackmailed. Was this just Hunt’s way of applying pressure on both Nixon and the CIA? It was only when they murdered his wife did he realize that this time he had taken on more than he could cope with.

Thanks John

I have long heard rumors about Artie Bremer, the Watergate characters and an illegal search/planting trip to his apartment after the near fatal shooting of George Wallace.

Reading Abuse of Power by Stanley Kutler, I noticed Nixon's principle area of concern when he talked to Dean and Haldeman in March 1973, was Colson.

Colson and Hunt had been involved in bigger things than Watergate, or Ellsburg's psychiatrist's office burglary.

And this is it. The Colson/Bremer link, known to Nixon, and that fear was
captured on tape.

Also "Tom Pappas,"" the Greeks," and a phony "Cuban Committee" was the first place Nixon suggested Dean look for hush money for Hunt and the Cuban burglars.

{And as far as Tim Gratz, this is very sad. He participated in some typical YAF gung-ho College GOP stuff thirty years ago, and maybe he's still the clip/file watchdog for the "alternative press".

TIM GRATZ theory of Castro and the KGB killing Kennedy is absurd, and his sources, Angleton and Helms via Trento are abysmal .......

Actually, Tim, I have The Senate Watergate Report, and knew that Rove was the man you referred to as your superior in a previous post. I was playing Sherlock to see if you'd deny it. Now, when you recounted your story for us, why did you leave him out? If it was my story, I'd think people were interested that Karl Rove was suspicious that Segretti might be a set-up, and would tell them all about it. Were you trying to hide your relationship with him, so you'd have more credibility with those of us here in the center or on the left? Were you being protective of him, trying to keep his name separate from right-wing criminals of the past? Were you hoping to avoid having to answer annoying questions like these? Or was it just an over-sight?

Here's an image of Bremer being led from court.

James

Pat wrote:

Actually, Tim, I have The Senate Watergate Report, and knew that Rove was the man you referred to as your superior in a previous post. I was playing Sherlock to see if you'd deny it. Now, when you recounted your story for us, why did you leave him out? If it was my story, I'd think people were interested that Karl Rove was suspicious that Segretti might be a set-up, and would tell them all about it. Were you trying to hide your relationship with him, so you'd have more credibility with those of us here in the center or on the left? Were you being protective of him, trying to keep his name separate from right-wing criminals of the past? Were you hoping to avoid having to answer annoying questions like these? Or was it just an over-sight?

Pat, it was not an over-sight, of course. Just wanted to see which of the Forum members would be the first to pick up on this. Should have known it would be you! Of course, being the right-winger that I am, I am proud to have met Rove, who almost single-handedly turned the State of Texas Republican and helped elect our current President. It may amuse members of the forum to know that in the College Republicans Rove was known (heaven forbid!) as a moderate, and he was only allowed to become National Chairman upon his agreement to select as Executive Director of the College Republicans a man whose name you will be familiar: Lee Atwater (because Atwater was known to be "rock solid" conservative but Rove was reportedly "squishy" (a Nixon man after all). (The same people who mistrusted my allegiance to the conservative cause!)

Pat, would you mind posting the brief sentence or two from the Watergate Committee Report that refers to me and Rove? Thanks!

By the way, when I knew Rove, he was as skinny as a pencil. After I graduated from college, I only saw him once when he flew to Wisconsin to try to solicit business for his direct mail business. Sometime I'll tell you how I, as a prank, almost scared Karl to death on a cold Wisconsin night!

On page 256 of The Senate Watergate Report (paperback edition), referring to compaints about Donald Segretti's activities, it says "Such a complaint was sent from J. Tim Gratz of Madison, Wisconsin, to Carl Rove, President-elect of the College Republicans. This complaint was eventually assigned to Anthony Ulasewicz, who flew out to Wisconsin to investigate this mysterious individual. Ulasewicz did not succeed in tracking down Segretti, but while he was out in Wisconsin, he received a call from Jack Caulfield who informed him that Segretti worked for CRP." END QUOTE

As a result of his "discovery," Segretti, who'd been working for Chapin, was placed under the authority of Liddy and Hunt. After the Watergate arrests, his phone number was found in Hunt's phone book, which led to an FBI investigation. Woodward and Bernstein picked up on this and figured out what was up and wrote a story on Segretti's activities before the election. The Senate Watergate Report devotes several pages to the press releases and statements of Dwight Chapin and press secretary Ron Ziegler between the Post story and the election, and concludes that the men repeatedly flat-out lied to protect Nixon from the scandal, and that this lie was orchestrated and spread by Dean, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Clark MacGregor, and others.

So, since Tim's actions led to Segretti working with Hunt, and Segretti's phone number being in Hunt's wallet led to even more White House intrigues and lies, only to be uncovered to the detriment of the President, does that mean Tim was CIA? (Just kidding.) The more I read, the more it's clear that Nixon and his boys hung themselves.

By the way, Tim. the Washington Post ran a Watergate-related story on your buddy Rove, claiming he'd conducted training sessions for College Republicans on the nuance and technique of Nixon-style dirty tricks. Would you know anything about that? Evidently, Rove claimed the story was a lie planted in the Post by a College Republican rival, Terry Dolan. Did you know Dolan? Who's the liar? Rove or Dolan?

Pat, as I understand it Segretti was being run out of the WH and with the compartmentalization of such operations, even the big mucky-mucks at CREEP were unaware of him when I first complained to CREEP about him. I think what happened was during its investigation of Segretti, someone at CREEP contacted the White House and that was when CREEP found out who Segretti really was. This comports with Ulasewicz's memoirs.

At the time Segretti was almost frantic to get a spy in the Muskie campaign. Muskie was seen as a threat to Nixon. As you know, it is POSSIBLE that some of Segretti's "tricks" may have doomed the Muskie campaign.

Had Segretti's operation been discovered at the right time in 1972, it is possible it might have doomed Nixon's campaign. For instance, Segretti's violation of the campaign finance laws and his distribution of campaign literature attributed to false sponsors. Had it become known that the person engaging in such tactics was being run out of the White House, is it not likely that information might have cost Nixon the election?

Pat wrote:

By the way, Tim. the Washington Post ran a Watergate-related story on your buddy Rove, claiming he'd conducted training sessions for College Republicans on the nuance and technique of Nixon-style dirty tricks. Would you know anything about that? Evidently, Rove claimed the story was a lie planted in the Post by a College Republican rival, Terry Dolan. Did you know Dolan? Who's the liar? Rove or Dolan?

Pat, that is an interesting story. Dolan was a rival for Rove's job as Chairman of the College Republicans and a bitter fight was waged over who was properly elected. As I recall, the fight was finally resolved by the then-Chairman of the Republican National Committee, a gentleman named George H. W. Bush.

Funny you raise the point about the seminars. The lady I married was raised in Wisconsin Dells and just tonight I was showing our daughter a booklet I found about Wisconsin Dells. It is a great tourist location for families. Well, what brought on the memories was that Rove and I had sponsored a seminar on college organization at a resort in Wisconsin Dells. I can tell you that at that seminar there was nothing about dirty tricks. Of course, I cannot speak about any seminars Rove may have conducted in other states. We essentially discussed basic political organization.

For instance, I was once the youth director of a gubernatorial campaign in Wisconsin. Every week-end we ran off on a cheap printing machine thousands of one page fliers (usually detailing my candidate's support for youth-related issues) and we would ship the material to our college organizations throughout the state. My candidate won "mock elections" on every single campus where they were held, even the more liberal campuses. (Not a dirty trick but we only organized the mock elections on those campuses we knew we could probably win.)

My candidate lost the general election to a Democrat named Pat Lucey. Lucey had an interesting background. He was an avid Kennedy supporter in 1960 when much of the Wisonsin Democrat hierarchy supported its neighbor Sen. Humphrey. (The very left-wing "Capital Times" newspaper in Madison was strongly against JFK, perhaps because it was operated by a Norwegian Lutheran.) Lucey was then as I recall state Dem chairman so his assistance in helping JFK win the 1960 Wisconsin primary was probably very instrumental in JFK's securing the nomination. So the role of Pat Lucey in electing JFK should not be minimized.

In 1980 Lucey ran for Vice-President on a third-party ticket headed by liberal Republican John Anderson. I do not recall whether the Anderson-Lucey campaign drew enough votes from Carter to help elect Reagan.

My short answer to your question then is that at least from my own experience in Wisconsin Rove's seminars did not involve dirty tricks. I am sure my answer would be confirmed by the other thirty or so collegians who attended the seminar.

. Segretti implied to me that he had authority from the very highest level but his sponsor would deny it. My suspicion was that he was in fact an agent provocateur for the Democrats manipulating to implicate Republicans in embarrassing situations or was working for a wealthy Nixon supporter who had not cleared his activities with either the WH or CREEP.

It was only after I read Ulasewicz's memoirs did I understand that, according to him Segretti was being "run" out of the WH without the knowledge of CREEP and that CREEP only discovered the Segretti operation because of my protestations.

__________________________________

Do you HONESTLY believe that Segretti was "run OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, without the KNOWLEDGE of the WH or CREEP"?????

And that the WH "found out" about Segretti because you did not wish to engage in his dirty tricks???

How quaint, or should I say naive.

Dawn

I am still amazed that Nixon and his people actually called themselves "CREEP". So utterly fitting.

I wondered what a "critical reporter" was doing in Madison Wisconsin back in the day....now we know.....he was a henchman of Donald Segretti, Karl Rove and various authorized dirty tricksters......Tim Gratz was the guy infiltrating a liberal college town and getting mixed up with ARTHUR BREMER.

You have definitely been tumbled, Tim.

All your bonhomie and bombast won't get you out of this one, fellow member.

You know all this along, that YOU YOURSELF was a published figure in the PLUMBERS 1972 disruptions and agents provocateur actions

{Culminating in the shooting of GEORGE WALLACE, Tim?}

You should have come clean long ago, the cover up establishes the error, once again.

No more Castro did it theories, okay?

No more KGB killed JFK windbag schemes, okay?

No more world exclusives based on the obscene ramblings of Gerry Hemmings, Okay?

Sayonara baby

I hope you're kidding, Shanet. While Tim's theories are, in my opinion, not supported by the evidence, they are, on the surface, no more wacky than body alteration theories or military coup theories. I think Tim has handled the inquistion on his Segretti and Rove connectiions about as well as could be expected. You know and I know there are right-wingers spread all over our land, who take it on faith that their government is the good guy, and are constitutionally opposed to seeing things any different. I suspect that is the case with Tim. His acknowledgement that Nixon abused his power, and was not merely set-up by the big bad evil CIA, is proof he's not a total dupe for the GOP. (I just wish he'd say ONE bad thing about Rove or Bush, so we could be sure he's not insane...)

Yuchh, yucch, yucch. How did I put myself in the postion of defending Tim, when a few posts ago I was trying to nail him for hiding his relationship with Rove?

Anyhow, Dawn, I think you misunderstood the story. Segretti was hired by the WH, not CRP. CRP had Liddy and Hunt working on their own dirty tricks. After Tim grew suspicious of Segretti, CRP was informed and Liddy and Ulasewicz began to investigate to find out if Segretti was working for the Dems. Somewhere someone involved in the WH and CRP, Magruder?, realized that the suspected Dem was their own man. It would be a comedy if it weren't so tragic. Anyhow, to avoid any more confusion, Segretti was moved over to CRP, which is why his phone number was in Hunt's phone book, which is why the whole thing was exposed, which is why an orchestrated cover-up took place. That this cover-up was sponsored by the President in order to prevent Segretti from becoming a campaign issue helped steer the Watergate investigation. So Tim played a role in history.

I am confident Pat has the story right almost exactly right.

For purposes of security, the White House pesonnel running Segretti did not even let the highest officials at CREEP know of the Segretti dirty tricks operation. Of course, it is possible that Mitchell knew about Segretti but the person(s) at CREEP that Rove contacted for me were unaware of his operation. It was when CREEP became concerned about Segretti because it heard about him also operating in New Hampshire that it started a full-fledged investigation.

Although Ulasewicz writes that CREEP first found out about Segretti's WH ties while he was in Wisconsin, I have sometimes wondered whether his whole trip to Wisconsin was a ruse to get me off their case because they had discovered who Segretti was before his trip to Wisconsin.

As far as my having a (minor) role in history, I am not sure that my attempting to stop Segretti accomplished anything. Query if I had and Muskie would not have been derailed--then maybe Nixon would have still beat Muskie but perhaps by a lower margin? The question is what effect my story would have had had Segretti been caught during the campaign.

And Pat for your benefit there are in fact several matters with which I do disagee with Rove and Bush, among them their close ties to the tobacco industry and the push for tort reform.

Dawn wrote:

Do you HONESTLY believe that Segretti was "run OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, without the KNOWLEDGE of the WH or CREEP"?????

And that the WH "found out" about Segretti because you did not wish to engage in his dirty tricks???

How quaint, or should I say naive.

Dawn, perhaps you misunderstood what I wrote.

I thought what Segretti was proposing was stupid, unethical and probably illegal. I was in fact naive because I did not think anyone at either the White House or CREEP would engage in such activities--in part because, regardless of the ethics, if they were discovered they could cost Nixon the election. Therefore I thought Segretti was either an agent provocateur for the Democrats or his operation was being financed by a well-meaning Republican high-roller. In either case, I was convinced that CREEP had to identify Segretti and stop him.

Only after the Watergate investigation did it come out that Segretti was originally being controlled by the WH without the knowledge of most people at CREEP. My recollection is Dwight Chapin was running him but he was reporting to H. R. Haldeman. I do not recall if it was ever determined who first came up with the idea for Segretti. I suspect it was Haldeman. Whether Nixon knew about the Segretti operation is another issue.

While I believe in the "conspiratorial" view of Watergate set forth in "Silent Coup" that does not explain the Segretti operation, in my opinion. So while the Watergate burglary might have related to a CIA operation, or to the call girl ring operating out of the White House, I don't think Segretti was set up to doom the Nixon administration. If he had been, then someone would have exposed him before the election.

Shanet, how can you POSSIBLY state I was a "henchman" of Donald Segretti when I objected to what he was proposing and would not take "No" for an answer when CREEP first told me they did not know who he was and did not care what he was doing? I did my best to stop him and when he stopped calling back I thought he had been stopped. Interestingly, if I recall right, although Segretti had his little pawns working against the Democrat candidates in other primary states, he never tried anything in Wisconsin again, so I did succed in shutting down his operation in Wisconsin.

And if you do not detract your statement that I knew Arthur Bremer, I may jolly well sue you!

retracted, I should have said
"Tim Gratz is on record as somehow mixed up with the artie bremer colson WH segretti operation"

Did you ever see, meet, observe or have information about Bremer before he shot George Wallace?


You have no idea what this exposure has done to your cogency.

///////////

Shanet, I'd never heard of Bremer, or Cassini for that matter. Never heard of Cassini until a few months ago on the Internet.

Is it not clear to you I was trying to stop Segretti's operation because those parts of it which were not illegal were stupid and probably unethical and I was sure he would get Nixon in trouble? Unvelievable Haldeman would authorize such nonsense!

Tim,
Sorry I turned sharply on you, but these are still very hot issues with me.

The interference wasn't limited to Donald Segretti, although he became a parody example of NIXON's approach to political campaigning.

Murray Chotiner and Bob Haldeman were famous for getting swept along by each other, Nixon, Colson or whoever was the most ruthless one at the time.

For one example, did you know that Haldeman sent out 400,000 pieces of mail illegally identified as DEMOCRATS FOR NIXON (a non existent group)?

The MOCKINGBIRD PROGRAM, CO-INTEL PRO, Segretti's dirty tricks squad, the systematic interference with campus and left wing newspapers, the infiltration and introduction of AGENT PROVOCATEURS into the campus politics....

These are related subjects,
related programs,
and here is where we find (historically now)
KARL ROVE
& YOU !

Shanet, I accept your apology. Thanks.

You wrote:

For one example, did you know that Haldeman sent out 400,000 pieces of mail illegally identified as DEMOCRATS FOR NIXON (a non existent group)?

Not sure of Haldeman did this or his stooge Segretti. Obviously this was a violation of campaihn finance laws and I think some of the people Segretti recruited were convicted for such shenanigans.

All I can say about Rove is he never mentioned dirty tricks in the seminar he taught in Wisconsin, or in any of his private dealings in Wisconsin. (I understand others have claimed he played "hard ball" politics in other states but my knowledge is limited to his activities in Wisconsin, of course.)

You know I now realize I played an even more important role in history than the Segretti matter. I remember one bitter cold night in Wisconsin; Rove had flown in to speak at College Republican Clubs and I was driving him (and two Wisconsin college students) on a snow-slick road between LaCrosse and Eau Claire (both beautiful cities on the Mississippi River. Now, had I not beem such an expert driver, Texas might still be Democrat, George Bush would still be managing the Texas Rangers . . . and Al Queada probably would have nuked NY or DC under gutless Gore! So I think that by saving Rove's life that night it is safe to say I played an important role in the 21st century fight to save Western civilization from the scourge of terrorism!