Operation Sandwedge: Kennedy/Wallace

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

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.

No doubt it is true that Knox recommended you to Segretti.  However, as I've already pointed out, Segretti seems to have recruited exclusively lawyers or law students.  Knox certainly qualified for recruitment on those grounds, as did you.  That Knox recommended you doesn't necessarily negate the possibility - and I posit this only has a hypothetical - that Segretti already had a list of potential candidates, with both of your names upon it.  To assume otherwise is to assert that Segretti was simply cold-calling everyone, and only seemed to find lawyers and law students.  The statistical odds against that are too staggering to accept.

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. 

Based upon the Timothy Maier article I posted a link to recently, Sprague must have been remarkably prescient to make the Nixon-Bremer connection, well before the Wal-Shot files in the Maier article entered the public domain.  Or Sprague had sources for the information, much of which has been borne out by the subsequent release of the Wal-Shot files.  That Sprague may have been wrong about the sentence in which your name is mentioned [which doesn't implicate you in anything, your own histrionical interpretation of the sentence notwithstanding], doesn't discredit anything else he contended.

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.

Which raises the point of how Sprague knew Segretti had been in Wisconsin.  One notes that the news coverage of '72 itemized a variety of places that Segretti had visited in his mission, but Wisconsin is conspicuous on the list only for its absence.  If no newspaper reported that Segretti had been in Wisconsin, how did Sprague learn this detail?  Tim, if you know of a news account that mentions Segretti in Wisconsin, please share it, for I've been unable to locate any such account.

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.

That's one interpretation, but surely not the only possibility.

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

I didn't realize Nixon had been assassinated.  What was that you were saying in the above sentence about "sloppy journalism at its worst?"

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.

Then presumably Sprague simply picked your name out of the phone book for inclusion in that sentence which you find so damning of him, but the genesis of which the rest of us merely find puzzling.

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,

Ah, yes, the question of how you located Turner...  You indicated that you'd prefer not to reveal how you found Turner.  Why?  National security reasons?

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.

This may yet prove to be true, Tim.  But the show's not over until the weight-challenged singer of the distaff gender has concluded her vocal contribution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Gore Vidal has suggested that E. Howard Hunt wrote the diary.

Actually, I believe Vidal compared the extant diary [minus the first 148 pages that weren't found until about eight years later] with Hunt's own writings, and dismissed the notion that Hunt ghost-wrote the Bremer "diary" because the "diary" showed greater literary talent than Hunt had ever demonstrated.  A small point, but...

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?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[John Simkin]

The link between Operation Sandwedge and Operation Gemstone was James McCord. in June 1969, Jack Caulfield employed former FBI agent, Jack Ragan, to place a wiretap on the telephone of newspaper writer, Joseph Kraft. At some time after this Caulfield began employing McCord for this work. This predates Operation Gemstone. On 21st December, 1972, McCord wrote a letter to Caulfield:

“Jack: Sorry to have to write you this letter but felt you had to know. if Helms goes, and if the WG (Watergate) operation is laid at the CIA's feet, where it does not belong, every tree in the forest will fall. It will be a scorched desert. The whole matter is at the precipice right now. Just pass the message that if they want it to blow, they are on exactly the right course. I'm sorry that you will get hurt in the fallout.”

Note the date. It was not until 19th March, 1973, that McCord wrote his letter to Judge John J. Sirica. The first letter suggests what McCord’s motivation for his confession. It seems McCord’s first loyalty was to Richard Helms and the CIA.

In February, 1973, Helms is sacked by Nixon. The following month McCord carries out his threat. Once again it seems that it was the CIA that exposed Watergate. However, as a result of the Senate Watergate Investigation, the focus was on Operation Gemstone rather than Operation Sandwedge. Why?

[Tim Gratz]

Robert wrote:

Which raises the point of how Sprague knew Segretti had been in Wisconsin. One notes that the news coverage of '72 itemized a variety of places that Segretti had visited in his mission, but Wisconsin is conspicuous on the list only for its absence. If no newspaper reported that Segretti had been in Wisconsin, how did Sprague learn this detail? Tim, if you know of a news account that mentions Segretti in Wisconsin, please share it, for I've been unable to locate any such account.

Robert, Segretti's contact with me in Wisconsin and my complaint to Rove about it is set forth in the Senate Watergate Committee report. It was aslo reported in the Wisconsin newspapers (in fact there is a reference to a report in the Milwaukee Journal in one of Mr. weberman's nodules). So Sprague could have easily learned of Segretti's effort to recruit me in Wisconsin either in the Watergate Committee Report or in the Wisconsin newspapers.

Edited July 28, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Robert wrote:

Which  raises the point of how Sprague knew Segretti had been in Wisconsin.  One notes that the news coverage of '72 itemized a variety of places that Segretti had visited in his mission, but Wisconsin is conspicuous on the list only for its absence.  If no newspaper reported that Segretti had been in Wisconsin, how did Sprague learn this detail?  Tim, if you know of a news account that mentions Segretti in Wisconsin, please share it, for I've been unable to locate any such account.

Robert, Segretti's contact with me in Wisconsin and my complaint to Rove about it is set forth in the Senate Watergate Committee report.  It was aslo reported in the Wisconsin newspapers (in fact there is a reference to a report in the Milwaukee Journal in one of Mr. weberman's nodules).  So Sprague could have easily learned of Segretti's effort to recruit me in Wisconsin either in the Watergate Committee Report or in the Wisconsin newspapers.

The Senate Watergate Report must have been Sprague's source, for the coverage in the New York Times, Washington Post, et al, mentioned much about Segretti's travels, but failed to mention Wisconsin at all.  As a New York resident, I doubt very much that Sprague would have read a Wisconsin newspaper, and without a report in a mass circulation national periodical to tip him that Segretti had been to Wisconsin, there'd be no reason for him to do so at all, ever.

However, whether Sprague learned of you from the Senate Watergate report or from Wisconsin papers makes little difference.  Sprague's contentions about you and your purported affiliation with Cassini and Segretti remain unfathomable in either instance.  Had Sprague read the Watergate report account, he would have known that you not only didn't belong to a "group" with Segretti [at least wittingly], but that you had ratted him out to Republican higherups.  Putting the two of you together in that one cryptic sentence could only impeach the credibility of Sprague's work, and ascribing this to Turner is even more peculiar, if Turner's recent denial is correct.  [You obviously have your own reasons to wishing to depict Sprague as scurrilous, but he did have a reputable career as a writer, and was adjudged serious enough to be hired by the HSCA.  Consequently, your portrait of Sprague as sloppy, and his work as worthless, is somewhat at odds with reality.]   

I will continue to puzzle over this until a rational answer suggests itself. 

In the meantime, I noted that your habit of ignoring the uncomfortable has afflicted you again, Tim.  While I appreciate you answering one of my questions from my prior post, I did ask another and I can't quite conjure a reason for your skipping over it:

"Ah, yes, the question of how you located Turner...  You indicated that you'd prefer not to reveal how you found Turner.  Why?  National security reasons?"

Since you are making a clean breast of things and are anxious to remove the cloud of suspicion from over your head, it seems odd that you would be so reluctant to divulge this trifling little detail.  Odder still is that in your intial post about contacting Turner, you actually stated you'd prefer not to disclose how you found Turner, as though you fully anticipated the question would be asked [and it likely wouldn't have, had you not said that] and that to divulge your means of locating Turner would somehow shame you or implicate you in some fashion. 

Surely you have nothing to hide on so minor a score, Tim.  So, what's the big deal?

And since I'm in an inquisitive mood, do you recall who accompanied Ulasewicz when he visited you at your parents home?  Or even a physical description in the event that you don't recall his name?  Can you tell us why you gave Segretti your parents' home phone number, rather than your own home number, or your work phone number at the hotel? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Tim Gratz]

Robert, responding to your last question first: I sure wish I could recall who was with Ulasewicz. I do not have a copy of his book. John does. Perhaps Ulasewicz mentions it in his book. If he does not, it does make you wonder why. I do recall that when the Watergate stuff started to unravel, I heard the person's name. But his was not an otherwise common name. (For instance, when Bart Porter called me, I had heard his name as being a "mucky-muck" in CREEP.) Ulasewicz's companion stated he also worked in security for Nixon. He was shorter and thinner than Ulasewicz. I almost thought it was Caufield, although I know in his book Ulasewicz states that Caufield was in DC while he was in Washington, so I could be wrong about this.

Re why I gave Segretti my parents' number, I think I did so knowing I was expecting visitors from DC. I believe Segretti had both my apartment number and the number of a Wisconsin State Senator with whom I worked. (The Senator was a very moderate Republican with a lot of labor union support who was detested by the ultra-conservative faction of the State GOP.) In fact, as I recall, the FBI did not know my name but it was investigating Segretti's calls in Wisconsin. The FBI first contacted the State Senator and asked him why he had received several calls from Segretti. I had never discussed the Segretti incident with anyone in Wisconsin but the Senator inferred it was me and gave the agents my other numbers. When I later told the Senator the story he had quite a chuckle over it.

Re your comments re Sprague, I did read something indicating he had done good work for the HSCA. However, even before I discovered his little reference to me I concluded his book was overblown. He has little if any documentation for the grandiose charges he makes in the book. And recently, of course, we discovered that he erred about Harry Dean as well as about me and Segretti. So why Sprague wrote what he did about me (and falsely attributed it to Turner) baffles me as much as it does you. The fact that he attributes his information to Turner makes one suspect his error was deliberate rather than merely negligent.

One other reason why I was never impressed with Sprague's book is that, if recollection serves me, it relies heavily on Prouty as a source, and I do not credit all that Prouty says.

Robert, there is a reason why I did not disclose how I found Turner's home phone number. I will say that it was not a very difficult process but I do not think Turner wants to be deluged with phone calls. You are certainly correct that it is a fairly common name. I can assure you there is nothing conspiratorial about how I obtained his phone number.

Re how Sprague got my name, I wonder if he picked it up from the Milwaukee Journal since his comment does mention Milwaukee and Bremer was from Milwaukee. I do not recall reading the coverage in the Milwaukee paper and I think I first found out about that coverage from the reference in one of weberman's nodules. But that, of course, is only speculation.

[Tim Gratz]

Re why Sprague wrote what he did, is it not clear that some assassination writers simply make things up?

There are several assassination books that I would call "sensational" (in the derogatory sense). I would include Sprague's book; Farewell America; the Gemstone File, plus the work of Mae Russell, etc.

Each of these books make very specific claims about who organized the assassination and in some cases who one or more of the shooters were. But the books do not reference any source. The implication is the author had inside information.

And yet the books posit, at least in some cases, information that is inconsistent and mutually exclusive. They cannot all be correct. Presumably, if even one of the books is correct in the important aspects of the case, each of the other books is wrong.

The conclusion must be, I would assume, either that the author was just making up most of his book, or he was dealing with a source that was feeding him a bunch of baloney.

[Tim Gratz]

Ron wrote (in a different thread):

EIR is the same outfit that says (in its book Dope Inc.) that Albert Alexander Osborne and seven of his assassins from Mexico were the shooters in Dealey Plaza. Its sole source for this was the Torbitt Document. I don't think I would call this "the world-wide state of the art in coverage of things of this nature."

This supports the point I was making in a previous thread.

I was reading one of these "books" this afternoon and it makes the categorical statement that William Seymour was impersonating Oswald (e.g. at the Odios); that he was the TSBD shooter; and that he was the one who fled in the Rambler station wagon.

Clearly not all these books are correct. Of course, if the theory I consider most credible is, none of these books got it right.

I hope that what readers take away from the brouhaha over the Sprague book is that when you read one of these books you should have with you one of those large (five pound?) containers of Morton's salt.

[John Simkin]

Very little is known about the people who took part in Operation Sandwedge. During the Sam Ervin Senate Watergate hearings Jack Caulfield, Anthony Ulasewicz and James McCord confessed to being members of this project. Caulfield also named a former FBI agent Jack Ragan as carrying out illegal wiretaps. However, Ervin and his committee showed no interest in others involved in these activities.

In his book The Taking of America, Richard Sprague suggests that Dennis Cassini, Donald Segretti and J. Timothy Gratz might have been involved. I would like to suggest two others who I think took part in these activities: Louis James Russell and Lee R. Pennington.

First of all I want to look at the case of the man who was usually referred to as Lou Russell. As we know, James McCord was keen to talk about what he knew about Operation Gemstone. However, although he had been recruited at a early stage to Operation Sandwedge, he refused to give any information about it. I suspect that is because it was Sandwedge that carried out the serious dirty tricks campaigns that even went as far as murder.

When he was writing his book, Secret Agenda, Jim Hougan attempted to interview McCord. He negotiated the interview via McCord’s attorney, Rufus King. Hougan was asked to list the topics he wanted to discuss. McCord, speaking via his attorney, said he was unwilling to talk about Lou Russell or Lee Pennington. In fact, he was unwilling to speak to any writer working on the Watergate case “who so much as expressed an interest in Lou Russell”.

This is an interesting position to take. McCord could not hurt either of these men. Both men had both died of heart attacks (Russell, July, 1973) and Penninton (October, 1974). Clearly he was not protecting these men, only those who were still alive and in some way linked to these two characters.

What do we know about Lou Russell? Who was linked to him?

Russell was in his youth a professional baseball player. After his retirement he became a private detective. In 1948 Russell met Richard Nixon and became his chief investigator into the Alger Hiss case. Later he became a staff member of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA). Russell also met two other men of importance during this period, James W. McCord and Lee R. Pennington, a member of the American Legion.

In 1971 Russell worked for General Security Services (GSS), the private guard service that protected the Watergate offices in Washington. He also did some part-time work for Allied Investigators, a company owned by John Leon. Russell also performed assignments for the lawyer, Bernard Fensterwald. This included investigations into the John F. Kennedy assassination.

According to the author, Jim Hougan (Secret Agenda): "Russell's apartment was a kind of way station for depressed hookers, a safe place with someone who did not mind listening to sad stories. No one objected, then when, Russell chose to idle away his leisure time in the apartments at the Columbia Plaza. He was a friend to many of the girls, a sometime customer, a freelance bouncer and a source of referrals."

In March, 1972, Russell left GSS to join McCord Associates. One of Russell's first tasks was to investigate the journalist Jack Anderson. He also purchased $3,000 in electronic eavesdropping equipment from John Leon of Allied Investigators. Russell's friend, Charles F. Knight, was told that this equipment had been purchased for McCord.

This equipment was used to tape the telephone conversations between politicians based at the Democratic Party National Committee and a small group of prostitutes run by Phillip Mackin Bailley that worked their trade in the Columbia Plaza.

On 16th June, 1972, Russell spent time at his daughter's house in Benedict, Maryland. That evening Russell travelled to Washington and spent between 8.30 until 10.30 p.m. in the Howard Johnson's Motel. This was the motel where those involved in the Watergate burglary were staying. However, Russell later told FBI agents that he did not meet his employer, McCord, at the motel. Russell then said he drove back to his daughters in Maryland.

Soon after midnight Russell told his daughter he had to return to Washington to do "some work for McCord". It was estimated that he arrived back at the Howard Johnson's Motel at around 12.45 a.m. At 1.30 a.m. Russell had a meeting with McCord. It is not clear what role Russell played in the Watergate break-in. Jim Hougan has suggested that he was helping McCord to "sabotage the break-in".

Later that night Frank Sturgis, Virgilio Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez, Bernard L. Barker and McCord were arrested while in the Democratic Party headquarters in Watergate.

Russell was interviewed by the FBI soon afterwards. He claimed that during the break-in he was in his rooming house. The FBI agents did not believe him but none of the burglars claimed he had been involved in the conspiracy and he was released.

Bob Woodward discovered that Russell had been working for McCord. He interviewed Russell but decided that he had not taken part in the Watergate break-in. According to Woodward: "He (Russell) was just an old drunk".

Soon afterwards Russell received a phone call from Carmine Bellino, an investigator who worked for Edward Kennedy and the Senate Administrative Practices Committee. It is not known was was said but as a result of this conversation Russell went to stay with Bellino's friend, William Birely on the top floor of the Twin Towers complex in Silver Spring, Maryland. Birely was also a close friend of Lee R. Pennington. Both men had been active members of the Sons of the American Revolution.

Russell now went to work for Security International, a company owned by James McCord and a former CIA officer named William Shea. He also carried out assignments for William Birely. According to Russell's daughter, Jean Hooper, this included several trips Rhode Island and Connecticut. In September, 1972, he did some work for Nick Beltrante at the George McGovern offices.

In April 1973, Russell suffered a heart attack. However, despite being unable to work, McCord continued to pay him as an employee of Security International. Russell did not have a bank account and his old friend, Bernard Fensterwald, paid his cheques into his Committee to Investigate Assassinations.

It was eventually discovered that Russell had indeed been involved in some way with the Watergate break-in. On 9th May, 1973, Sam Ervin asked his investigators to obtain Russell's telephone records, work diaries and bank statements. On 17th May, Deep Throat warned Bob Woodward that "everyone's life is a danger". The following day Russell suffered another heart-attack. This was the first day of James McCord's public testimony before Ervin's Watergate Committee. After a couple of weeks Russell was released from hospital.

Russell died of a massive heart attack on 2nd July, 1973. He was buried the next day.

Russell can be directly linked to Richard Nixon. Others who he appeared to have had a close relationship with him during the period include John Leon, William Shea, Carmine Bellino, and William Birely.

The most interesting of these links is with Bernard Fensterwald. He had used Lou Russell for many years. As Russell never had a bank account he used Fensterwald to cash his cheques from McCord and Shea.

In 1976 Fensterwald wrote a very interesting book about all the major characters involved in the JFK assassination and Watergate. It is a long book (592 pages) and mentions virtually everyone you can think of that played a small role in these events. The one man who does not get a mention is Lou Russell.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Robert, responding to your last question first:  I sure wish I could recall who was with Ulasewicz.  I do not have a copy of his book.  John does.  Perhaps Ulasewicz mentions it in his book.  If he does not, it does make you wonder why.  I do recall that when the Watergate stuff started to unravel, I heard the person's name.  But his was not an otherwise common name.  (For instance, when Bart Porter called me, I had heard his name as being a "mucky-muck" in CREEP.)  Ulasewicz's companion stated he also worked in security for Nixon.  He was shorter and thinner than Ulasewicz.  I almost thought it was Caufield, although I know in his book Ulasewicz states that Caufield was in DC while he was in Washington, so I could be wrong about this.

Interesting, and I thank you for what little you seem to recall.  It's only a shame that you didn't access the guest information about Ulasewicz and his companion when they stayed at the hotel in which you worked, as you had done with Segretti.  Presumably, you were less intrigued by them than the man named "Simmons" about whom they had come to quiz you.

Re why I gave Segretti my parents' number, I think I did so knowing I was expecting visitors from DC.  I believe Segretti had both my apartment number and the number of a Wisconsin State Senator with whom I worked.  (The Senator was a very moderate Republican with a lot of labor union support who was detested by the ultra-conservative faction of the State GOP.)  In fact, as I recall, the FBI did not know my name but it was investigating Segretti's calls in Wisconsin.  The FBI first contacted the State Senator and asked him why he had received several calls from Segretti.  I had never discussed the Segretti incident with anyone in Wisconsin but the Senator inferred it was me and gave the agents my other numbers.  When I later told the Senator the story he had quite a chuckle over it.

I'm sorry if I'm being thick here, Tim, but that paragraph seems remarkably convoluted.  Presumably, Randy Knox provided Segretti with your apartment number, and your day-job number with the Senator [whose name was?  And were you still working nights at the hotel at this time?]  So, by the time Segretti called you, you were already "expecting visitors from DC" to question you about his activities?  And because of this, you provided Segretti with your parents' phone number?  That makes it sound as though you were expecting to be asked about Segretti before you'd even heard from him.  You, and the Senator for whom you worked, were both quizzed by FBI about Segretti?  That was presumably after you'd met with Ulasewicz?  If you could break down the chronology a bit, this might make it easier to understand.    

Re your comments re Sprague, I did read something indicating he had done good work for the HSCA.  However, even before I discovered his little reference to me I concluded his book was overblown.  He has little if any documentation for the grandiose charges he makes in the book.  And recently, of course, we discovered that he erred about Harry Dean as well as about me and Segretti.  So why Sprague wrote what he did about me (and falsely attributed it to Turner) baffles me as much as it does you.  The fact that he attributes his information to Turner makes one suspect his error was deliberate rather than merely negligent.

Actually, I'd suspect just the opposite.  Had Sprague written the sentence about you with no attribution and left it a blind item, there'd be no way to check its veracity.  [And since his book is stunningly devoid of footnotes for much of what he asserted, it wouldn't have been out of place for him to do so.]  That he mentioned Turner, who was far more high-profile then than he is today, only invited readers to seek additional information from Turner.  Despite the fact that the Sprague book's initial print run was limited to 500 copies, I would find it rather remarkable that nobody had asked Turner about this provocative sentence - as it does imply somebody paid Bremer to shoot Wallace - until your phone call to Turner, thirty years later.

One other reason why I was never impressed with Sprague's book is that, if recollection serves me, it relies heavily on Prouty as a source, and I do not credit all that Prouty says.

Well, we all have our biases.  And based upon what Sprague reported about you, one can certainly understand why you'd question all else he reported.

Robert, there is a reason why I did not disclose how I found Turner's home phone number.  I will say that it was not a very difficult process but I do not think Turner wants to be deluged with phone calls.  You are certainly correct that it is a fairly common name.  I can assure you there is nothing conspiratorial about how I obtained his phone number.

I'm sure there isn't anything "conspiratorial" about it.  But that is precisely why it is so odd that you would not only refuse to divulge the method used, but also tell us in your initial post that you were reluctant to do so.  Clearly, based upon Turner's surprise at how you obtained his phone number, it seems he is "unlisted."  If Winslow was your source for this, as I suspect was the case, you only make it seem "conspiratorial" by refusing to say so.  And, since it seems that Turner is "unlisted," we hardly need worry that Turner will be "deluged" by phone calls.  While your solicitude and concern toward Turner's privacy is touching, it currently seems you'd prefer that nobody else confirm that your report of what Turner divulged to you is accurate.  Surely, that's not the impression you would seek to create, is it? 

Re how Sprague got my name, I wonder if he picked it up from the Milwaukee Journal since his comment does mention Milwaukee and Bremer was from Milwaukee.  I do not recall reading the coverage in the Milwaukee paper and I think I first found out about that coverage from the reference in one of weberman's nodules.  But that, of course, is only speculation.

Tim, if you didn't read the Milwaukee paper when your name was prominent in its coverage, it seems unlikely that New Yorker Sprague would have done so.  Again, even if he did read about you there, surely that coverage said nothing that would spur Sprague into linking you with either Segretti or Cassini.  It is as though Sprague merely picked a third name at random out of the blue, and inserted it with Segretti and Cassini.  For what purpose would a writer do such a thing? 

Elsewhere, you have used the word "sensationalism" to explain it.  However, since you are/were hardly a household name, there's nothing "sensational" about it.  [unlike, say, "Robert Redford or Ted Kennedy or John Lennon were associated with Segretti and Cassini."]  Curiouser and curiouser...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[John Simkin]

Here is a very interesting account of what Lou Russell might have been up to. It also provides information that Russell was murdered. I clearly need to do some more research into Carmine Bellino.

Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (2005)

One of the major sub-plots of Watergate, and one that will eventually lead us back to the documented public record of George Bush, is the relation of the various activities of the Plumbers to the wiretapping of a group of prostitutes who operated out of a brothel in the Columbia Plaza Apartments, located in the immediate vicinity of the Watergate buildings. Among the customers of the prostitutes there appear to have been a US Senator, an astronaut, A Saudi prince (the Embassy of Saudi Arabia is nearby), US and South Korean intelligence officials, and above all numerous Democratic Party leaders whose presence can be partially explained by the propinquity of the Democratic National Committee offices in the Watergate. The Columbia Plaza Apartments brothel was under intense CIA surveillance by the Office of Security/Security Research Staff through one of their assets, an aging private detective out of the pages of Damon Runyon who went by the name of Louis James Russell. Russell was, according to Hougan, especially interested in bugging a hot line phone that linked the DNC with the nearby brothel. During the Watergate break-ins, James McCord's recruit to the Plumbers, Alfred C. Baldwin, would appear to have been bugging the telephones of the Columbia Plaza brothel.

Lou Russell, in the period between June 20 and July 2, 1973, was working for a detective agency that was helping George Bush prepare for an upcoming press conference. In this sense, Russell was working for Bush.

Russell is relevant because he seems (although he denied it) to have been the fabled sixth man of the Watergate break-in, the burglar who got away. He may also have been the burglar who tipped off the police, if indeed anyone did. Russell was a harlequin who had been the servant of many masters. Lou Russell had once been the chief investigator for the House Committee on Un-American Activities. He had worked for the FBI. He had been a stringer for Jack Anderson, the columnist. In December, 1971 he had been an employee of General Security Services, the company that provided the guards who protected the Watergate buildings. In March of 1972 Russell had gone to work for James McCord and McCord Associates, whose client was the CREEP. Later, after the scandal had broken, Russell worked for McCord's new and more successful firm, Security Associates. Russell had also worked directly for the CREEP as a night watchman. Russell had also worked for John Leon of Allied Investigators, Inc., a company that later went to work for George Bush and the Republican National Committee. Still later, Russell found a job with the headquarters of the McGovern for President campaign. Russell's lawyer was Bud Fensterwald, and sometimes Russell performed investigative services for Fensterwald and for Fensterwald's Committee to Investigate Assassinations. In September, 1972, well after the scandal had become notorious, Russell seems to have joined with one Nick Beltrante in carrying out electronic countermeasures sweeps of the DNC headquarters, and during one of these he appears to have planted an electronic eavesdropping device in the phone of DNC worker Spencer Oliver which, when it was discovered, re-focussed public attention on the Watergate scandal at the end of the summer of 1972.

Russell was well acquainted with Carmine Bellino, the chief investigator on the staff of Sam Ervin's Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Practices. Bellino was a Kennedy operative who had superintended the seamy side of the JFK White House, including such figures as Judith Exner, the president's alleged paramour. Later, Bellino would become the target of George Bush's most revealing public action during the Watergate period. Bellino's friend William Birely later provided Russell with an apartment in Silver Spring, Maryland, (thus allowing him to leave his room in a rooming house on Q Street in the District), a new car, and sums of money.

Russell had been a heavy drinker, and his social circle was that of the prostitutes, whom he sometimes patronized and sometimes served as a bouncer and goon. His familiarity with the brothel milieu facilitated his service for the Office of Security, which was to oversee the bugging and other surveillance of Columbia Plaza and other locations.

Lou Russell was incontestably one of the most fascinating figures of Watergate. How remarkable, then, that the indefatigable ferrets Woodward and Bernstein devoted so little attention to him, deeming him worthy of mention in neither of their two books. Woodward and met with Russell, but had ostensibly decided that there was "nothing to the story. Woodward claims to have seen nothing in Russell beyond the obvious "old drunk."

The FBI had questioned Russell after the DNC break-ins, probing his whereabouts on June 16-17 with the suspicion that he had indeed been one of the burglars. But this questioning led to nothing. Instead, Russell was contacted by Carmine Bellino, and later by Bellino's broker Birely, who set Russell up in the new apartment (or safe house) already mentioned, where one of the Columbia Plaza prostitutes moved in with him.

By 1973, minority Republican staffers at the Ervin committee began to realize the importance of Russell to a revisionist account of the scandal that might exonerate Nixon to some extent by shifting the burden of guilt elsewhere. On May 9, 1973, the Ervin committee accordingly subpoenaed Russell's telephone, job, and bank records. Two days later Russell replied to the committee that he had no job records or diaries, had no bank account, made long-distance calls only to his daughter, and could do nothing for the committee.

On May 16-17, 1973, Deep Throat warned Woodward that "everybody's life is in danger." On May 18, while the staff of the Ervin committee were pondering their next move vis-avis Russell, Russell suffered a massive heart attack. This was the same day that McCord, advised by his lawyer and Russell's, Fensterwald, began his public testimony to the Ervin committee on the coverup. Russell was taken to Washington Adventist Hospital, where he recovered to some degree and convalesced until June 20. Russell was convinced that he had been the victim of an attempted assassination. He told his daughter after leaving the hospital that he believed that he had been poisoned, that someone had entered his apartment (the Bellino-Birely safe house in Silver Spring) and "switched pills on me."

Leaving the hospital on June 20, Russell was still very weak and pale. But now, although he remained on the payroll of James McCord, he also accepted a retainer from his friend John Leon, who had been engaged by the Republicans to carry out a counter investigation of the Watergate affair. Leon was in contact with Jerris Leonard, a lawyer associated with Nixon, the GOP, the Republican National Committee, and with Chairman George Bush. Leonard was a former assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Nixon administration. Leonard had stepped down as head of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) on March 17, 1973. In June, 1973 Leonard was special counsel to George Bush personally, hired by Bush and not by the RNC. Leonard says today that his job consisted in helping to keep the Republican Party separate from Watergate, deflecting Watergate from the party "so it would not be a party thing." As Hougan tells it, "Leon was convinced that Watergate was a set-up, that prostitution was at the heart of the affair, and that the Watergate arrests had taken place following a tip-off to the police; in other words, the June 17 burglary had been sabotaged from within, Leon believed, and he intended to prove it." Integral to Leon's theory of the affair was Russell's relationship to the Ervin committee's chief investigator, Carmine Bellino, and the circumstances surrounding Russell's relocation to Silver Spring in the immediate aftermath of the Watergate arrests. In an investigative memorandum submitted to GOP lawyer Jerris Leonard, Leon described what he hoped to prove: that Russell, reporting to Bellino, had been a spy for the Democrats within the CRP, and that Russell had tipped off Bellino (and the police) to the June 17 break-in. The man who knew most about this was, of course, Leon's new employee, Lou Russell."

Is it possible that Jerris Leonard communicated the contents of Leon's memorandum to the RNC and to its Chairman George Bush during the days after he received it? It is possible. But for Russell, the game was over: on July 2, 1973, barely two weeks after his release from the hospital, Russell suffered a second heart attack, which killed him. He was buried with quite suspicious haste the following day. The potential witness with perhaps the largest number of personal ties to Watergate protagonists, and the witness who might have re-directed the scandal, not just towards Bellino, but toward the prime movers behind and above McCord and Hunt and Paisley, had perished in a way that recalls the fate of so many knowledgeable Iran-contra figures.

With Russell silenced forever, Leon appears to have turned his attention to targeting Bellino, perhaps with a view to forcing him to submit to depositioning or other questioning in which questions about his relationship to Russell might be asked. Leon, who had been convicted in 1964 of wiretapping in a case involving El Paso Gas Co. and Tennessee Gas Co., had weapons in his own possession that could be used against Bellino. During the time that Russell was still in the hospital, on June 8, Leon had signed an affidavit for Jerris Leonard in which he stated that he had been hired by Democratic operative Bellino during the 1960 presidential campaign to "infiltrate the operations" of Albert B. "Ab" Hermann, a staff member of the Republican National Committee. Leon asserted in the affidavit that although he had not been able to infiltrate Hermann's office, he observed the office with field glasses and employed "an electronic device known as 'the big ear' aimed at Mr. Hermann's window." Leon recounted that he had been assisted by former CIA officer John Frank, Oliver W. Angelone and former Congressional investigator Ed Jones in the anti-Nixon 1960 operations.

[John Simkin]

Greetings.  I am adding the names John Leon and and John Paisley - both very significant, I believe - to the list, if I may.  Leon's death followed Russell's by about ten days (another heart attack; this one on the eve of a press conference and after collaboration with a certain George H.W. Bush) and reading about it in Jim Hougan's masterwork "Secret Agenda..." literally gave me the creeps - pun intended, as usual. 

This from the Tarpley site on Russell, which references Leon: "I think Russell had also worked directly for the CREEP as a night watchman. Russell had also worked for John Leon of Allied Investigators, Inc., a company that later went to work for George Bush and the Republican National Committee. Still later, Russell found a job with the headquarters of the McGovern for President campaign. Russell's lawyer was Bud Fensterwald, and sometimes Russell performed investigative services for Fensterwald and for Fensterwald's Committee to Investigate Assassinations. In September, 1972, well after the scandal had become notorious, Russell seems to have joined with one Nick Beltrante in carrying out electronic countermeasures sweeps of the DNC headquarters, and during one of these he appears to have planted an electronic eavesdropping device in the phone of DNC worker Spencer Oliver which, when it was discovered, re-focused public attention on the Watergate scandal at the end of the summer of 1972. " And there's that guy Fensterwald again...worth an entire site.

John Paisley's demise was both scary and fascinating. Hougan put the story - and Paisley's background - into an appendix to "Secret Agenda....", most notable as one of the many sections of this great work that addresses how "Watergate" still impinges upon things of which we know and others we don't and probably won't. Paisley was CIA Liaison to the Plumbers, was likely to be handling any data sent back to the US from LHO and was a member, along with Carl Bernstein and various CIA Officers, of a private D.C. area "social club" also frequented by a D.C. pimp named riggin with whom Bernstein had an acquaintance. Impinges indeed. Gee, I like that word.

Great posting.

I did not know that John Leon died as well at this time. I am sure the John Paisley death is connected. Also the death of Lee R. Pennington (also of a heart-attack). I will start a new thread on Paisley.

I am sure Fensterwald was CIA. I suspect his role was like that of Dick Billings. It was an attempt to keep tabs on the investigation. I expect he was doing the same thing with Watergate. I will also start a thread on Fensterwald (I know Pat Speer is a fan of his).

What do you know about Carmine Bellino and William Birely? See my postings here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4487

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4547

[Mark Knight]

Russell now went to work for Security International, a company owned by James McCord and a former CIA officer named William Shea. He also carried out assignments for William Birely. According to Russell's daughter, Jean Hooper, this included several trips Rhode Island and Connecticut. In September, 1972, he did some work for Nick Beltrante at the George McGovern offices.

Re my job in Rhode Island, it was lined up BEFORE I met Segretti.

Russell...Rhode Island...

Gratz...Rhode Island...

Hmmmmm......can we get an actual time frame on either--or both--of these events from 1972?

[John Simkin]

For an overview of what I think was going on see:

Nixon, Watergate and the JFK Assassination

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4558

[John Simkin]

My copy of Anthony Summers’ The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon arrived this morning. It has in fact nothing about Operation Sandwedge and Jack Caulfield and Tony Ulasewicz are barely mentioned. However, the book does have some interesting information on Lou Russell (including a photograph) and a man called William Gilday who could have been used as a Sandwedge operative.

Apparently Russell worked for the FBI during the Second World War. One of his assignments was to investigate Alger Hiss. Hoover was so keen to get Hiss he put Russell into contact with Nixon, who was his man in Congress. Russell, Nixon and Whittaker Chambers worked together against Hiss. They must have worked with Nathaniel Weyl on this as he provided the key information that Hiss was definitely a member of the American Communist Party. As most members will know, Weyl was a member of this forum but died a couple of months ago.

The really interesting information from the book concerns a man called William Gilday. In 1974 Gilday contacted the New York Times to say that in 1970 he was recruited by a Nixon aide to take part in operations against certain politicians. According to Gilday this ranged from dirty tricks to murder. Two of the politicians targeted were Edward Kennedy and George Wallace. Summers spoke to Gilday, who was based in Boston. Gilday showed him photographs that convinced him he was telling the truth. Gilday was later convicted of murdering a Massachusetts policeman in 1976. Gilday claims he was set up because of his political beliefs. Gilday was tried and found guilty for the killing of the Boston police officer and was sentence to death. His sentenced was later reduced to life imprisonment. He is presently incarcerated in MCI Shirley in Shirley, Massachusetts.

William Gilday (W33537), who is listed as being a political prisoner, can be at MCI Shirley, PO Box 1218, Shirley, MA 01464-1218

Interestingl, Gilday, like Lou Russell, was a professional baseball player. Was it Russell who suggested that Nixon employ Gilday? If so, was it attempt by the left to infiltrate Nixon's dirty tricks campaign? at the time Gilday was a member of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and an anti-Vietnam War activist.

Summers does not name the aide for legal reasons but implies that it was Charles Colson. Summers quotes from a taped conversation between Colson and Nixon. Colson says on the tape: “I did things out of Boston… I’ll go to my grave before I ever disclose it.”

Summers also reproduces another conversation between Colson and Nixon two hours after Bremer shot Wallace.

Nixon: “Is he (Bremer) a left-winger, right-winger”.

Colson: “Well, he’s going to be a left-winger by the time we get through, I think.

Nixon (chuckling): “Good. Keep at that. Keep at that.”

Colson: Yeah. I just wish that, God, that I’d thought sooner about planting a little literature out there. (Nixon is heard laughing on the tape). It may be a little late, although I’ve got one source that maybe…

Nixon: Good.

This conversation suggests that Colson knew where Bremer lived before he shot Wallace.

I also discovered today that Bremer's incriminating diary was not found in his apartment by the FBI. It was found in his car the day after Wallace was shot. Colson therefore did have time to plant evidence against him that suggested he was a left-winger. The diary states that Bremer wanted to kill either Nixon or Wallace. This was used as evidence that Nixon was not involved in the Wallace shooting.