Jump to content
The Education Forum

Operation Sandwedge: Kennedy/Wallace


Recommended Posts

Richard Nixon, John Ehrlichman and Bob Haldeman were not terribly concerned during the first few days after the Watergate break-in. Ehrlichman’s first reaction was to check out if Tony Ulasewicz was involved. When he discovered he was not, Nixon relaxed, the authorities had not discovered about Operation Sandwedge. Nor would they without the help of John Dean and James McCord.

The story of Operation Sandwedge begins in 1967. According to Jack Caulfield: "My multi-faceted, twelve-year BOSSI experience convinced me in late 1967 that Richard Nixon was going to run and likely win the Presidential election in 1968. I subsequently approached the Nixon people from the 1960 Presidential campaign (with whom I had worked as a BOSSI detective) and made it known I was available for candidate/staff security purposes during the 1968 campaign."

BOSSI was the NYPD's Bureau of Special Service and Investigation. This unit provided security for world leaders and their families when they visited New York. It was while doing this job that Caulfield met Nixon. BOSSI also investigated political crimes in New York. In some cases it involved covering up political crimes. For example, the murder of Jesus de Galindez, the academic who had written a book critical of the Rafael Trujillo's military dictatorship.

Caulfield was interviewed by Bob Haldeman and Rose Mary Woods, and then appointed as Chief of Security for the Nixon Campaign Staff.

After Nixon’s election he decided that the White House should establish an in-house investigative capability that could be used to obtain sensitive political information. After consulting John Ehrlichman and H. R. Haldeman the job was given to Caulfield. At first Caulfield did the work himself but a few months later he recruited his old friend, Tony Ulasewicz, to help him.

This eventually became known as Operation Sandwedge. For those who don't play golf, a sandwedge is used to get you out of trouble in a bunker. What kind of trouble did Nixon have in mind? Well, when he recruited Caulfield and Ulasewicz, his main concern was to get elected in 1972.

In 1969 Nixon had two major concerns about the 1972 presidential election. One was that Edward Kennedy was not the Democratic Presidential candidate. Understandably he thought Kennedy had the best chance of all the Democratic candidates to beat him.

The other problem was the possibility that George Wallace would stand as a third party candidate in the 1972 election.

Operation Sandwedge was mainly concerned about making sure that Kennedy and Wallace did not stand in 1972. Interestingly, the first job given to Ulasewicz was to look into the Bobby Baker scandal. This is not surprising. Some people at the time believed that the Kennedy brothers had been blackmailed into accepting the Warren Commission report as a result of their involvement with Baker. I believe that there is truth in these rumours that were circulating in 1964. In fact, LBJ had employed Baker to set-up the Kennedy brothers.

Ulasewicz was also employed to investigate Edward Kennedy. As we know from Operation Gemstone, these investigations eventually turned into planting evidence in order to undermine Nixon’s enemies. This is what I believe happened in the case of Edward Kennedy.

I will look into this in more detail later but here is an extract of a taped conversation between Richard Nixon and John Dean on 13th March, 1974.

John Dean: Let me tell you something that lurks at the bottom of this whole thing. If, in going after Segretti, they go after Kalmbach's bank records, you will recall sometime back - perhaps you did not know about this - I apologize. That right after Chappaquidick somebody was put up there to start observing and within six hours he was there for every second of Chappaquidick for a year, and for almost two years he worked for Jack Caulfield.

Richard Nixon: Oh, I have heard of Caulfield.

John Dean: He worked for Caulfield when Caulfield worked for John, and then when I came over here I inherited Caulfield and this guy was still on this same thing. If they get to those bank records between the start of July of 1969 through June of 1971, they say what are these about? Who is this fellow up in New York that you paid? There comes Chappaquidick with a vengeance. This guy is a twenty year detective on the New York City Police Department.

Richard Nixon: In other words, we...

John Dean: He is ready to disprove and show that...

Richard Nixon: (Unintelligible)

John Dean: If they get to it - that is going to come out and this whole thing can turn around on that. If Kennedy knew the bear trap he was walking into...

Richard Nixon: How do we know - why don't we get it out anyway?

John Dean: Well, we have sort of saved it.

Richard Nixon: Does he have any records? Are they any good?

John Dean: He is probably the most knowledgeable man in the country. I think he ran up against walls and they closed the records down. There are things he can't get, but he can ask all of the questions and get many of the answers as a 20 year detective, but we don't want to surface him right now. But if he is ever surfaced, this is what they will get.

Richard Nixon: How will Kalmbach explain that he hired this guy to do the job on Chappaquidick? Out of what type of funs?

John Dean: He had money left over from the pre-convention ...

Richard Nixon: Are they going to investigate those funds too?

John Dean: They are funds that are quite legal. There is nothing illegal about those funds. Regardless of what may happen, what may occur, they may stumble into this in going back to, say 1971, in Kalmbach's bank records. They have already asked for a lot of his bank records in conection with Segretti, as to how he paid Segretti.

Richard Nixon: Are they going to go back as far as Chappaquidick?

John Dean: Well this fellow worked in 1971 on this. He was up there. He has talked to everybody in that town. He is the one who has caused a lot of embarrassment for Kennedy already by saying he went up there as a newspaperman, by saying; "Why aren't you checking this? Why aren't you looking there?" Calling the press people's attention to things. Gosh, the guy did a masterful job. I have never had the full report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

John Dean: Let me tell you something that lurks at the bottom of this whole thing. If, in going after Segretti, they go after Kalmbach's bank records, you will recall sometime back - perhaps you did not know about this - I apologize. That right after Chappaquidick somebody was put up there to start observing and within six hours he was there for every second of Chappaquidick for a year, and for almost two years he worked for Jack Caulfield.

Richard Nixon: Oh, I have heard of Caulfield.

John Dean: He worked for Caulfield when Caulfield worked for John, and then when I came over here I inherited Caulfield and this guy was still on this same thing. If they get to those bank records between the start of July of 1969 through June of 1971, they say what are these about? Who is this fellow up in New York that you paid? There comes Chappaquidick with a vengeance. This guy is a twenty year detective on the New York City Police Department.

Richard Nixon: In other words, we...

John Dean: He is ready to disprove and show that...

Richard Nixon: (Unintelligible)

John Dean: If they get to it - that is going to come out and this whole thing can turn around on that. If Kennedy knew the bear trap he was walking into...

Richard Nixon: How do we know - why don't we get it out anyway?

John Dean: Well, we have sort of saved it.

Richard Nixon: Does he have any records? Are they any good?

John Dean: He is probably the most knowledgeable man in the country. I think he ran up against walls and they closed the records down. There are things he can't get, but he can ask all of the questions and get many of the answers as a 20 year detective, but we don't want to surface him right now. But if he is ever surfaced, this is what they will get.

Let us try to deconstruct what Nixon and Dean are saying in this passage. The man they are talking about who has discovered what happened at Chappaquiddick is Tony Ulasewicz, Caulfield’s field officer in Operation Sandwedge.

It was revealed during Caulfield’s testimony before the Senate Watergate Committee that Ulasewicz was ordered to set up a round-the-clock surveillance of Edward Kennedy. The idea was to dig up dirt on Kennedy. It is therefore almost certain that Ulasewicz, or one of his men, would have been watching Kennedy when he arrived in Chappaquiddick. After all, the idea that Kennedy had apparently arranged a party for six young women in an isolated house on a small island would have created great interest to Caulfield and his bosses, John Ehrlichman and H. R. Haldeman.

According to his book, The President’s Private Eye (1990), on 19th July, 1969, Ulasewicz received a phone call from Caulfield: "Get out to Martha's Vineyard as fast as you can, Tony. Kennedy's car ran off a bridge last night. There was a girl in it. She's dead." This phone call took place less than two hours after the body of Mary Jo Kopechne, the former secretary of Robert Kennedy, had been found. However, if Ulasewicz had been doing his job properly, someone would have been watching Kennedy’s car when it went off the bridge. Therefore, I suspect that the phone call did not come from Caulfield but from the person who saw it happen. The other possibility is that Ulasewicz did not get a phone call but was already at Chappaquiddick as he was the one who followed Kennedy.

Ulasewicz admits that he was at Chappaquiddick before any journalists arrived. He also seems to have been there before the police detectives assigned to the case. This is confirmed by Sylvia Malm who was staying in Dike House at the time. Dike House was only 150 yards from the scene of the accident. Malm was interviewed by Ulasewicz before the police got to her. The same is true of Ulasewicz’s interviews with John Farrar, the scuba diver who pulled out Mary Jo’s body from the car (he claimed that the evidence suggested she had lived for a couple of hours after the car entered the water). These were only two of many who were interviewed by Ulasewicz just a few hours after the accident had taken place.

The information that Ulasewicz obtained during these interviews was crucial in undermining Kennedy’s story of what really happened when the car went off the bridge. Some of the information Ulasewicz obtained about the death of Mary Jo Kopechne was leaked to right-wing journalists like Arthur Egan of the New Hampshire Union Leader (owned by William Loeb, a supporter of George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party). Some of this information appeared in the New Hampshire Union Leader. However, many of the mainstream American newspapers, such as the New York Times, refused to publish this information. Ulasewicz claims that this was because of pressure applied on them by the Kennedy family.

What are we to make of John Dean’s comments: “If Kennedy knew the bear trap he was walking into”. This seems to suggest that Dean believes that Kennedy was set up at Chappaquiddick. Nixon obviously knows the story as he does not ask what Dean means by this statement. Clearly, by the way it is said, Dean is aware that Nixon knows what he is talking about.

Dean’s information has obviously come from Ulasewicz. He knows that Kennedy was set up because (i) he or his agent watched it happen or (ii) he was actually involved in setting him up. Mary Jo Kopechne’s death made it impossible for Kennedy to stand in 1972. Operation Sandwedge’s first objective had been achieved. Nixon would not have to face the man who stood the best chance of defeating him in 1972.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, I think the "bear trap" comment was simply Dean kissing up to Nixon's paranoia. Nixon believed, not entirely without basis, that the Kennedys were out to get him. He suspected the Watergate investigation was Teddy's doing. Dean was simply saying that if Teddy pushed the investigation Ulasewicz' research into Chappaqquiddick would be uncovered and be exposed to a much greater extent than could be controlled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first of Operation Sandwedge’s objectives was very successful: Edward Kennedy was not a presidential candidate in 1972.

The second major objective, stopping George Wallace from becoming a third party candidate, took longer. Wallace’s campaign came to an end when he was shot four times by Arthur Bremer on 15th May, 1972.

Researchers have usually concentrated on the links between Operation Gemstone and this assassination attempt. For example, soon after Richard Nixon heard the news he told Charles Colson that he was concerned that Bremer “might have ties to the Republican Party or, even worse, the President’s re-election committee”. Colson now phoned E. Howard Hunt and asked him to break-in to Bremer's apartment to discover if he had any documents that linked him to Nixon or his main political opponent in the presidential election, George McGovern. According to Hunt's autobiography, Undercover, Colson later phoned him to cancel this order.

However, it was Sandwedge that was the most important of these two dirty tricks operations. It was more likely that John Ehrlichman or Bob Haldeman would have been dealing with John Caulfield or Tony Ulasewicz over this matter. This was a much more professional operation and left few clues of its involvement in Nixon’s dirty tricks campaign. Ulasewicz explains in his book, The President’s Private Eye, that he had little respect for those involved in Operation Gemstone. He also outlined how he managed to distance himself from the White House during this period. The interesting question is: “Had Ehrlichman or Haldeman given Caulfield and Ulasewicz any instructions concerning Bremer, before or after the shooting of Wallace?

In 1998 Insight Magazine obtained the 5,413-page FBI report known as the WalShot Files - a 26-volume package spanning eight years from the day of the shooting of Wallace to 1980. This includes an interview with Vincent Femia, who was the deputy state's attorney for Prince George's County at the time. Fernia explains that Nixon stepped in to control the Bremer investigation shortly after the shots were fired. At the hospital, an FBI agent hung up a hospital phone, turned to Femia and barked, "That was the president. We're taking over. The president says, “We're not going to have another Dallas here.”

Prosecutor Arthur Marshall was interviewed by Timothy W. Maier in 1998: Marshall admitted that: "We had concern that someone else was involved," Marshall says. "The question I always had is how the Secret Service found out who he was as quick as they did. They were in his apartment within an hour."

Forty-five minutes after the shooting, the WalShot Files show, a Baltimore FBI agent called the Milwaukee FBI office identifying Bremer as the shooter based on personal identification found on Bremer. The Secret Service identified Bremer's address at 5:35 p.m., it claims, after tracing his .38-caliber handgun. But 25 minutes earlier, at 5:10 p.m., when two FBI agents entered Bremer's apartment, a Secret Service agent already was there. The Secret Service agent told the FBI he was on an "intelligence-gathering mission."

When Colson asked E. Howard Hunt to go to Bremer’s apartment he understandably argued that it would be too late as by this time the police would have arrived. It was obviously important that someone got to Bremer’s apartment before the FBI did. They did. How did they manage that? Was that “Secret Service” agent involved in Operation Sandwedge?

In 1974 Wallace told United Press International that "he hoped the Watergate investigation would turn up the man who paid the money to have him shot." Wallace later said he believed the White House plumbers unit might have been involved.

The WalShot Files say Wallace had received a letter from Bernard Barker, one of the men caught in the Watergate break-in. The alleged letter is said to have claimed Bremer was paid by G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt for shooting Wallace. All deny the allegation. According to the WalShot Files, the FBI and Barker claim the letter is a fraud.

Ulasewicz does not of course mention George Wallace in his book. Nor was he cross-examined about his investigation of Wallace during his role in Operation Sandwedge by the Senate Watergate Committee. This is surprising as Jack Caulfield admitted when he testified that the investigation of Wallace was part of Operation Sandwedge. As Ulasewicz says in his book, he was relieved when the Senate Watergate Committee showed no interest in Operation Sandwedge. All they wanted to know about was his work with Operation Gemstone. This of course only involved the cover-up when he paid hush money to the Watergate burglars. In fact, without James McCord’s testimony, Caulfield and Ulasewicz would never have been forced to testify before the Senate Watergate Committee and Operation Sandwedge would have remained a secret.

Is there any evidence of any links between Operation Sandwedge and Arthur Bremer? There is only one. In Richard E. Sprague’s, The Taking of America, he has this to say about the attempted assassination of George Wallace:

In 1972 the Power Control Group was faced with another set of problems. Again the objective was to insure Nixon's election at all costs and to continue the cover-ups. Nixon might have made it on his own. We'll never know because the Group guaranteed his election by eliminating two strong candidates and completely swamping another with tainted leftist images and a psychiatric case for the vice presidential nominee. The impression that Nixon had in early 1972 was that he stood a good chance of losing. He imagined enemies everywhere and a press he was sure was out to get him.

The Power Control Group realized this too. They began laying out a strategy that would encourage the real nuts in the Nixon administration like E. Howard Hunt, G. Gordon Liddy and Donald Segretti to eliminate any serious opposition. The dirty tricks campaign worked perfectly against the strongest early Democratic candidate, Edmund Muskie. He withdrew in tears, later to discover he had been sabotaged by Nixon, Liddy and company.

George Wallace was another matter. At the time he was shot, he was drawing 18% of the vote according to the polls, and most of that was in Nixon territory. The conservative states such as Indiana were going for Wallace. He was eating into Nixon's southern strength. In April the polls showed McGovern pulling a 41%, Nixon 41% and Wallace 18%. It was going to be too close for comfort, and it might be thrown into the House - in which case Nixon would surely lose. There was the option available of eliminating George McGovern, but then the Democrats might come up with Hubert Humphrey or someone else even more dangerous than McGovern. Nixon's best chance was a head-on contest with McGovern. Wallace had to go…

Arthur Bremer was selected. The first contacts were made by people who knew both Bremer and Segretti in Milwaukee. They were members of a leftist organization planted there as provocateurs by the intelligence forces within the Power Control Group. One of them was a man named Dennis Cossini…

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 Cassini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz.

According to William Turner he cannot remember discovering this information. Maybe, Sprague made a mistake. Was it another researcher who supplied him with this information? Or did Sprague make it up? That is of course possible, but if he did, why did he select Tim Gratz’s name? At this time, according to the public records, the only involvement Tim had in this matter was the statement he gave to Ulasewicz concerning Donald Segretti’s attempts to recruit him into Nixon’s dirty tricks campaign. If Sprague wanted to falsely implicate Nixon into the assassination attempt on Wallace, there were far better names to use. In fact, because of his public record of reporting Segretti, Tim was the last person anyone would have believed was involved in some sort of conspiracy against Arthur Bremer. Yet he decided to set up Tim Gratz. Why?

Then there is the question why Tony Ulasewicz was sent to interview Tim Gratz. It seems very strange that the chief field officer of Operation Sandwedge should be chosen for this task. What was Ulasewicz really doing when he interviewed Tim? Is it possible that this meeting was about something else? Is it possible that the meeting was also about providing Tim with a cover-story? Is it possible that information about Dennis Cassini and Tim Gratz being involved in some sort of Nixon conspiracy against Arthur Bremer had already leaked out. Is this the information that eventually found its way to Richard Sprague. Was Ulasewicz’s task to give Tim a cover story? If so, Tim can consider himself lucky. Look what happened to Dennis Cassini?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Colson asked E. Howard Hunt to go to Bremer’s apartment he understandably argued that it would be too late as by this time the police would have arrived. It was obviously important that someone got to Bremer’s apartment before the FBI did. They did. How did they manage that? Was that “Secret Service” agent involved in Operation Sandwedge?

John, while I suspect Sprague's mention of Tim was just sloppy journalism, which my reading of conspiracy literature confirms is widespread, I do have something to add in regards to possible Secret Service involvement. I came across this just the other day.

Nixon: an Oral History of his Presidency by Gerald and Deborah Strober. Page 263 (paperback Edition)

"Alexander Butterfield I was privy to something that has never come out: that there was a guy on the White House staff--a sort of catch-all guy; a former Secret Service agent who had been on Nixon's detail when Nixon was vice-president. They used him when Teddy Kennedy started getting some popularity, and Nixon was worried. They put him back on duty, on Teddy's detail. Of course, they thought Teddy was fooling around; they were going to get some information on him; he must have had a lady someplace. So he made weekly reports to Haldeman. I was aware of that. It's abuse of power, technically, and I imagine LBJ did worse things."

I think you'll agree this raises all sorts of questions. Who was this man? Could it be Bob King, Maheu's former partner, who'd been with Nixon during his vice-presidency? Watergate records indicate Nixon talked to King the day Hoover died. Just a coincidence? While King was never with the Secret Service as far as I know, he had been former FBI. If not King, then who? If he had indeed been with the Secret Service, could this man have been someone who'd been on JFK's detail as well? I think we need to figure out who this man was. Does anyone have a list of Nixon's detail? Teddy's brief detail in 72? I believe this could be important.

I think it's also important to determine what Butterfield meant by "catch-all" guy. What does a former Secret Serviceman, now "catch-all" guy, do? Could this man have been working in co-ordination with Ulasewicz and Caulfield?

Butterfield's statements, as with his statements regarding the White House tapes, could lead to the discovery of much much mischief.

--------------------

Pat Speer, wanna-be writer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(John Simkin @ Jul 26 2005, 04:23 PM)

When Colson asked E. Howard Hunt to go to Bremer’s apartment he understandably argued that it would be too late as by this time the police would have arrived. It was obviously important that someone got to Bremer’s apartment before the FBI did. They did. How did they manage that? Was that “Secret Service” agent involved in Operation Sandwedge?

*

John, while I suspect Sprague's mention of Tim was just sloppy journalism, which my reading of conspiracy literature confirms is widespread, I do have something to add in regards to possible Secret Service involvement. I came across this just the other day.

Nixon: an Oral History of his Presidency by Gerald and Deborah Strober. Page 263 (paperback Edition)

"Alexander Butterfield I was privy to something that has never come out: that there was a guy on the White House staff--a sort of catch-all guy; a former Secret Service agent who had been on Nixon's detail when Nixon was vice-president. They used him when Teddy Kennedy started getting some popularity, and Nixon was worried. They put him back on duty, on Teddy's detail. Of course, they thought Teddy was fooling around; they were going to get some information on him; he must have had a lady someplace. So he made weekly reports to Haldeman. I was aware of that. It's abuse of power, technically, and I imagine LBJ did worse things."

I think you'll agree this raises all sorts of questions. Who was this man? Could it be Bob King, Maheu's former partner, who'd been with Nixon during his vice-presidency? Watergate records indicate Nixon talked to King the day Hoover died. Just a coincidence? While King was never with the Secret Service as far as I know, he had been former FBI. If not King, then who? If he had indeed been with the Secret Service, could this man have been someone who'd been on JFK's detail as well? I think we need to figure out who this man was. Does anyone have a list of Nixon's detail? Teddy's brief detail in 72? I believe this could be important.

I think it's also important to determine what Butterfield meant by "catch-all" guy. What does a former Secret Serviceman, now "catch-all" guy, do? Could this man have been working in co-ordination with Ulasewicz and Caulfield?

Butterfield's statements, as with his statements regarding the White House tapes, could lead to the discovery of much much mischief.

--------------------

Pat Speer, wanna-be writer

A good thought, Pat.  However, a few things to bear in mind. 

Butterfield, who has been repeatedly described as having his own CIA background or connections [veracity undetermined, to my knowledge], wasn't part of the Nixon entourage back in the '50s and would have no way of knowing for certain whether the "catch-all" guy actually had been a Secret Service agent assigned to Vice President Nixon.  No doubt, whomever the "catch-all" guy was, he was a SS agent in the 1970s, if Butterfield is to be believed.  [One must explain, however, the means by which Nixon insinuated a hand-picked SS agent into his rival's protective detail.  If one could do that, one might also be able to explain many anomalies regarding the attempt on Wallace.]

The presence at Bremer's apartment of a SS agent, well before SS had even identified Bremer let alone where he lived, suggests impersonation of an SS agent, rather than a real one, particularly a real one assigned to Teddy Kennedy at the time.

It seems that any fair reading of the evidence in this matter must at least entertain the notion that the SS agent in Bremer's place was probably as genuine and legitimate as the SS agent encountered by witnesses and bystanders in Dealey Plaza.  ["Hey, it worked before; let's use it again."]  Flashing a superficially satisfying set of SS credentials would no doubt give somebody access into Bremer's apartment, even if already quarantined by cops and FBI, and egress.  In this instance, the "SS agent" seems not to have been challenged by anyone at Bremer's apartment, as he was the first to arrive.

By the way, Pat, can I suggest that you delete "wanna-be" from your signature adage?  You write well and clearly, no "wanna-be" qualifiers required.  Old joke: a fellow who's written one book is known as a fellow who's written a book; if he's written two books, he's an author; if he's written three, he's a hack. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John wrote:

Is it possible that information about Dennis Cassini and Tim Gratz being involved in some sort of Nixon conspiracy against Arthur Bremer had already leaked out. Is this the information that eventually found its way to Richard Sprague.

John, use some judgment here. It is clear I first met Segretti in December of 1971. Randy Knox, who I assume is still alive, can confirm that he was the person who gave Segretti my name.

It seems clear to me that Richard Sprague, whose book proposes a grand conspiracy theory involving all or most of the assassinations, plus the attempt on Wallace's life, was attempting to link Nixon or Nixon's people to Bremer. Segretti was involved in "dirty tricks" for Nixon and had been in Wisconsin, so Sprague links Segretti to Bremer. And since Segretti had seen me in Wisconsin, Sprague then adds me to the group. He may very well not have even read the full story about how I tried to stop Segretti.

This was sloppy journalism at its worst. And I suggest Sprague may very well have drafted the sentence so that it was vague and so, if sued, he could argue about its meaning.

And remember Sprague also falsely linked Harry Dean to the assassination of Nixon.

Sprague was a charlatan. He had no interest in the truth. He could easily have interviewed me. I always had a listed phone number in Wisconsin.

Perhaps you may learn to trust my judgment. I was correct about Segretti (although I do admit I could not conceive that people linked to the Nixon campaign would be behind Segretti's operation). And before I knew how to contact Turner, I wrote at least twice on this Forum that the mistake in the Sprague book was not the fault of Turner but of Sprague. One can easily deduce this by simply comparing the responsible writing of Turner with the recklessness of Sprague. So my judgment of Turner vs. Sprague turned out correct as well.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The presence at Bremer's apartment of a SS agent, well before SS had even identified Bremer let alone where he lived, suggests impersonation of an SS agent, rather than a real one, particularly a real one assigned to Teddy Kennedy at the time.

It seems that any fair reading of the evidence in this matter must at least entertain the notion that the SS agent in Bremer's place was probably as genuine and legitimate as the SS agent encountered by witnesses and bystanders in Dealey Plaza.  ["Hey, it worked before; let's use it again."]  Flashing a superficially satisfying set of SS credentials would no doubt give somebody access into Bremer's apartment, even if already quarantined by cops and FBI, and egress.  In this instance, the "SS agent" seems not to have been challenged by anyone at Bremer's apartment, as he was the first to arrive. 

I'm not sure if the 1972 Teddy scare was over by May, but I was wondering if this might have been the same guy, who was simply transferred from Kennedy to Wallace, or even better, was just working behind the scenes with Wallace

As for my "wanna-be" status, until I show my girlfriend I can get paid to write, I'm afraid it shall remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, suggestion: switch to "the Commies did it" scenario.

According to some people, you will then receive money from the CIA and be issued a (secret) membership card in Operation Mockingbird.

But the money may not be worth the abuse!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it is worth (now that John seems to be implying that the true reason for my January 1972 meeting with Anthony Ulasewicz was to plot some dastardly deed) I should mention that there were two witnesses to my meeting with Ulasewicz.

I had given Segretti (known to me as "Simmons") my parents' phone number, not my apartment number. So Ulasewicz and his colleague met me at my folks' house on Alder Road in Madison. Ulasewicz then dismantled my folks' telephone headset and atttached wires to it hooking it to a conventional tape recorder. But the call from Segretti never came.

And you know the rest of the story.

My mother died a few years ago but my father is still alive and very mentally alert.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Alexander Butterfield I was privy to something that has never come out: that there was a guy on the White House staff--a sort of catch-all guy; a former Secret Service agent who had been on Nixon's detail when Nixon was vice-president. They used him when Teddy Kennedy started getting some popularity, and Nixon was worried. They put him back on duty, on Teddy's detail. Of course, they thought Teddy was fooling around; they were going to get some information on him; he must have had a lady someplace. So he made weekly reports to Haldeman. I was aware of that. It's abuse of power, technically, and I imagine LBJ did worse things."

Very interesting post. Some people suspect that Alexander Butterfield was a CIA spy planted on Nixon. Butterfield initially claimed that Haldeman had approached him to join the Nixon team. Haldeman said that Butterfield approached him for a job. Evidence later emerged that Haldeman was telling the truth. Butterfield cannot explain why he made this mistake.

Butterfield was one of the few who knew about Nixon’s tape system. This information was leaked to Bob Woodward by Deep Throat. It was also Deep Throat who told Woodward about the edited tape. Again, very few people knew about this. It is almost certain that Butterfield was one of those supplying Deep Throat with information.

The phoney SS agent was probably recruited as early as 1969 as part of Jack Caulfield’s operation. It is even possible that Tony Ulasewicz played this role. Whoever it was they were able to plant the Bremer diary and the left-wing literature found in Bremer's apartment. Gore Vidal has suggested that E. Howard Hunt wrote the diary. I think this is unlikely as I don’t think Operation Gemstone had anything to do with the the Arthur Bremer operation (Colson foolishly got involved as he did not know about Operation Sandwedge). The diary was very important to Sandwedge as it revealed that Bremer had initially targeted Nixon. This information was used to argue that Nixon could not possibly be involved in the Wallace assassination attempt. The SS agent would also have been used to remove any information that linked Nixon and the Republicans to the assassination.

However, this operation did not go smoothly. Local reporters got access to Bremer's apartment soon after the killing. Some took away documents. Did some of this information get passed to Sprague?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you imply Sprague made up the reference to Turner as a cover story?

And if a local reporter had information tying Segretti to Bremer, why would he not expose that story when Segretti's name first surfaced in the Watergate matter? Most reporters who have information to support an incredible story do not just give it away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also suggest that it would not have made sense to involve me in any Bremer plot (which I happen to think did not exist, anyway). At the time I had a fairly high profile in the Republican Party being the State Chairman of the Wisconsin College Republicans.

I am not even sure what supposed role a young person such as myself would have played in the operation John posits. But surely the plotters could have found a young Nixon supporter from the Milwaukee area, a person with a much lower profile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you imply Sprague made up the reference to Turner as a cover story?

And if a local reporter had information tying Segretti to Bremer, why would he not expose that story when Segretti's name first surfaced in the Watergate matter?  Most reporters who have information to support an incredible story do not just give it away.

No I believe Sprague made a genuine mistake by naming William Turner. Obviously Turner would have been able to point out at a later stage that he did not give him that information. If Sprague was just interested in setting you up he would not have used William’s name.

You ask why a journalist with information about the Bremer assassination would not have used it himself. Let me tell you the story of Thayer Waldo, a journalist with the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Waldo was the first journalist to arrive at Dallas Police Station after the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He was there when they brought in the rifle found in Texas School Book Depository. Later he watched them bring in Lee Harvey Oswald. Waldo told the Warren Commission that he had an important informant in the Dallas Police. His name was Lieutenant George Butler. According to Michael Benson, Butler was an associate of Haroldson L. Hunt. Butler was also the man in charge of Oswald's transfer when he was killed by Jack Ruby.

Waldo told Mark Lane that he had discovered that Jack Ruby, J. D. Tippet and Bernard Weismann had a meeting at the Carousel Club eight days before the assassination. Waldo added that he was too scared to publish the story and other information that he had about the assassination. Lane introduced Waldo to Dorothy Kilgallen. Her article on the Tippit, Ruby and Weissman meeting appeared on the front page of the Journal American. Kilgallen was of course later to die in mysterious circumstances.

Why was Waldo so scared. Well it could be something to do with the deaths of two other journalists, Bill Hunter (Long Beach Independent Press Telegram) and Jim Koethe (Dallas Times Herald). On 24th November, 1963, Hunter and Koethe interviewed George Senator. Also there was the attorney Tom Howard. Earlier that day Senator and Howard had both visited Jack Ruby in jail. That evening Senator arranged for Koethe, Hunter and Howard to search Ruby's apartment.

It is not known what the journalists found but on 23rd April 1964, Hunter was shot dead by Creighton Wiggins, a policeman in the pressroom of a Long Beach police station. Wiggins initially claimed that his gun fired when he dropped it and tried to pick it up. In court this was discovered that this was impossible and it was decided that Hunter had been murdered. Wiggins finally admitted he was playing a game of quick draw with his fellow officer. The other officer, Errol F. Greenleaf, testified he had his back turned when the shooting took place. In January 1965, both were convicted and sentenced to three years probation.

Jim Koethe decided to write a book about the assassination of Kennedy. However, he died on 21st September, 1964. It seems that a man broke into his Dallas apartment and killed him by a karate chop to the throat. Tom Howard died of a heart-attack, aged 48, in March, 1965.

All three men could have died as a result of what was found in Ruby's apartment. No wonder any journalist who found anything of importance in Bremer's apartment would have been reluctant to publish it. The obvious thing to do was to pass it on to a braver journalist in the way that Thayer Waldo did. Maybe this journalist passed it onto someone who eventually passed it to Sprague. That person probably asked not to be identified. Maybe that is why William Turner found Tim Gratz's phone call so disturbing.

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, this is really getting to be ridiculous.

Let me suggest the following:

You will find few assassins, I suspect, who have never smoked a cigarette, never drank anything other than an occsasional glass of wine at dinner, and never used any controlled substances.

Now I had asked you to post your entire e-mail exchange with Turner. You have not yet done so. Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...