Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
From Colson to Clawson RE: a derogatory comment made by Mitchell directed at Katherine Graham, as well as McGovern's response. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/2/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: finding a way to deny the popular theory that RN tends to win political races by narrow margins. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: information from Bryce Harlow relating to McGovern volunteers and their exploitation of welfare. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/7/1972
From Colson to Clawson on finding press figures to condemn McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/7/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of an article written by Reichley to demonstrate how dangerous McGovern would be if elected. Handwritten note added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/5/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: selling a "McGovern vs. McGovern" idea to cartoonists friendly toward the White House. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/4/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: using columnist Frank van der Linden to attack McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/15/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of a fundraising fiasco in Philadelphia. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 8/5/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: boosting the conservative Republican image in the 1972 election year while condeming liberal Democrats. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144510
label
WHSF: Contested, 3-17
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144510
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 3-17
description
This file contains:
From Colson to Clawson RE: a derogatory comment made by Mitchell directed at Katherine Graham, as well as McGovern's response. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/2/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: finding a way to deny the popular theory that RN tends to win political races by narrow margins. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: information from Bryce Harlow relating to McGovern volunteers and their exploitation of welfare. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/7/1972
From Colson to Clawson on finding press figures to condemn McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/7/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of an article written by Reichley to demonstrate how dangerous McGovern would be if elected. Handwritten note added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/5/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: selling a "McGovern vs. McGovern" idea to cartoonists friendly toward the White House. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 9/4/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: using columnist Frank van der Linden to attack McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 8/15/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of a fundraising fiasco in Philadelphia. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 8/5/1972
From Colson to Clawson RE: boosting the conservative Republican image in the 1972 election year while condeming liberal Democrats. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144510
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c5957c8e4abbbaaf
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
3
17
10/2/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: a derogatory
comment made by Mitchell directed at
Katherine Graham, as well as McGovern's
response. 1 pg.
3
17
6/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: finding a way
to deny the popular theory that RN tends to
win political races by narrow margins. 1 pg.
3
17
10/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: information
from Bryce Harlow relating to McGovern
volunteers and their exploitation of welfare.
2 pgs.
3
17
10/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson on finding press
figures to condemn McGovern. 1 pg.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Page 1 of 2
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
3
17
9/5/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of an
article written by Reichley to demonstrate
how dangerous McGovern would be if
elected. Handwritten note added by
unknown. 1 pg.
3
17
9/4/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: selling a
"McGovern vs. McGovern" idea to
cartoonists friendly toward the White House.
1 pg.
3
17
8/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: using
columnist Frank van der Linden to attack
McGovern. 1 pg.
3
17
8/5/1972
White House Staff
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: the use of a
fundraising fiasco in Philadelphia. 1 pg.
3
17
6/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Clawson RE: boosting the
conservative Republican image in the 1972
election year while condeming liberal
Democrats. 1 pg.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Page 2 of 2
October 2, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
A
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
I thought you might be interested that the quote in the
Washington Post attributed to John Mitchell, "If you print
that crap, Katherine Graham will find herself in a wringer"
was not exactly accurate. What Mitchell said was that she
would find her tit in a wringer. Apparently McGovern was
told about this story and the actual quote on the airplane
this week and his response was "based on Katherine Graham's
figure, there's no danger in that". I just thought you might
like to pass this along to her at the appropriate time.
June 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
It is terribly important that we knock down through some
respectable columnist the thesis that Ted Kennedy and others
in the media are now trying to build that Nixon always declines
in campaigns and that he always barely manages to win despite
early leads or in the case of '60 and '62, managed to blow
leads and lose. This, of course, is psychologically very
harmful but more importantly totally untrue factually. We
are getting the poll data put together which blows this entire
thesis. In '60 we started out way behind Kennedy and almost
caught him. The President was ahead only once which was
after the Republican Convention when he had massive exposure.
This data is all in the "Six Crises". The '68 data is, of course,
readily available. We didn't decline ever. We held our ground
while Humphrey gained and Wallace declined. It is really im-
portant that this be hit head on.
HIGH PRIORITY
October 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
You may recall that I told you sometime ago that one of George
McGovern's staff offices was recruiting volunteer workers by
giving them an indoctrination course on how to get onthe welfare
rolls and then come and work on the McGovern campaign. This,
of course, would be a dynamite story if it were a wide spread
practice. Evans and Novak could really blow it up; so could
any number of other columnists I am sure.
The story originally came to me from Bryce Harlow. The incident
happened during the Democratic Convention. Apparently at the Doral
an office was set up whereby people were brought in and instructed
on how to get on the welfare rolls, appear weekly to get their welfare
checks, but then spend the rest of the week working at the McGovern
headquarters. I have been trying desperately to get Bryce to give me
some leads on this and he has now contacted one of the persons who
was taken in and briefed on how to do this. That person is willing to
talk if anonymity is guaranteed. Bryce Harlow can put any reporter
in touch with the individual. They handed out an elaborate fact sheet
explaining how to use a post office box and how to continue to qualify
while working in the campaign.
Conceivably this was an isolated instance. Maybe on the other hand,
it is a widespread technique. Particularly if there were briefing
materials prepared, it would indicate that it was part of a policy
decision in the McGovera camp.
If you will give me a reporter who would like to pursue this, I will
give you a person who was briefed; the contact can be made through
Bryce Harlow, but I will arrange it if you can find an interested reporter.
2.
Even if we ultimately end up with only a Bob Allen, this is worth a try
because If it appears in print anywhere and the practice is going on,
we might find other people will come forth and talk about it. It's
worth a shot, even if we have only a one in ten chance of having
anything develop out of this. If it should develop, it would be an
absolute bombshell.
Please give me some thoughts on this as quickly as possible.
October 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
It is essential that we get some columns on the double standard
of the press. Even though you feel that they are beginning to nail
McGovern, a la the Greider piece this morning, he is getting no
where near the press condemnation that he deserves. 1 can't
believe that they would bury the President's single standard
crack, but they have. No one has picked it up. Can't we even
get a Kilpatrick or a Buckley to do a column or two? I am sure
you realise that if Agnew had said anything 1/10th as severe as
McGovern is saying daily, the New York Times would be running
front page editorials, Severeid would be talking about it every
night and you would think that the country was about to go into an
open revolt. This guy is getting off scott-free practically.
Please put some real effort into this and ask Shumway to start
calling people. One thing Van was good at was planting columns
and I don't mean with just Bob Allen. Let's get the big ones like
Bill White, Dick Wilson, John Roche, etc.
How about circulating to columnists and editors just a compendium
of the worst unsupportable McGovernisms, the most McCarthy-type
charges. If they were to come from Abrahams, I can't believe they
would ignore it.
CC: Pat Buchanan
September 5, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR: KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
It is essential that we get more play out of the marked
portion of the attached Reichley article. See Page 118.
Nothing demonstrates McGovern's naivete any more
vividly than this. It is frightening to think that a man
who thinks this way could possibly be President and
people like Bill White, Kilpatrick, Wilson and Hempstone
and others should be writing what a terrifying proppect
it is that a man who thinks in these terms could be
President.
Fortune (sept)
September 4, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
It is essential that you call some of our friendly political
caltoonists to place with them the McGovern vs. McGovern
idea. It is believed that you can sell this to our more
friendly cartoonists like the New York Daily News, the
Chicago Tribune, St. Louis Globe Democrat. etc. Maybe
Schurs can help you on this but this must have very-bigh
priority.
August 15, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
I know that Frank van der Linden is one of our captive columnists
who pretty much puts out anything we would like. Since he is now
apparently part of the United Features Syndicate he is probably
getting a lot more coverage than he used to. I noticed for example,
that he's been in the Washington Post several times in the last few
weeks.
This brings me to the point that you should be cultivating him to try
to get him picking up anti-McGovern material. We should be using
him just the way you have used Evans and Novak on occasion, Bill
White and others who will be receptive.
This morning's column in the Post, which you may not have seen and
I am, therefore, enclosing a copy, is an unmitigated catastrophe in
my opinion. It paints the President in precisely the wrong posture.
There is a certain arrogant tone to it: the President can't spare the
time to get into the campaign with George McGovern and, I quote,
"let McGovern buy his own TV time if he can scare up the money for
it. The column then goes on to tell about the evening on the
Sequoia quite inaccurately I might point out. It ends up by discussing
our campaign strategy which apparently someone has seen fit to show
van der Linden again not very accurately, however and ends up
with some total non sequitor ending of a nice little vignette from John
Whitaker's memors book.
The column is not only not a plus, it is a negative and this is ridiculous
to be feeding this kind of stuff to van der Linden k-- obviously someone
has. What we should be feeding to him is material that we really want
to get out, perhaps that will rattle McGovern, keep him off base or
directly hatchet him. If we want to get out positive material on the
President, that's fine, but let's be sure that it is useful stuff, not the
kind of thing that is in this morning's column which is distinctly counter-
productive. Please get control of this and fast,
August 5, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
If no one is going to use the story on the Philddelphia
fund-raising escapade, that is, if Novak has turned it
down, please advise me at once. I think I can get it
used. We're nuts not to have it used because the passage
of time is beginning to make it a stale issue and it is too
good to lose.
June 13, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN CLAWSON
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
Note the attached memo that I have sent to Doug Hallett. What
I thought I would do is have Doug try his hand at writing columns
along these lines and see if you can place them with Thimmesch,
William White, Kilpatrick, etc.
The most sophisticated but important point that needs to be made
which needs to get into the election year dialogue is the point I
m ade in the third paragraph of the memo attached. This is terribly
important to understand. Conservatives, that is the Human Events
crowd, do not really care about winning elections. They care about
principle always. In fact, they are more comfortable when they are
in a negativist role, that is, blocking the liberals. If you had
worked with the Congress during the Sixties, you would know our
Republican mossback friends loved being able to vote "no" on the
Great Society programs. Generally most Republicans not in an
elected office spend most of their time building up their personal
fortunes, whereas Democrat left-wingers care only about the power
of being in office and generally are disinterested in personal wealth.
This is a point that people have to understand because the left wing
will do anything to gain power including hiding ideological beliefs.
The right wing will pursue to the end and almost have a kamikaze
philosophy. They almost enjoy dying for their cause, Some how we
have got to get this point out and in discussions this year because it
may tarnish credibility of the left and help give inspiration to the right.
What we might want to do here is a thoughtful piece, perhaps in this
case even a by-lined piece by Hallett, who I am sure understands this
very well.