Item Information
Title
Memorandum from John Dean Titled “Dealing with our Political Enemies,” August 16, 1971
Description
The subject line of this memorandum, sent by John Dean on August 16, 1971, is "Dealing with our Political Enemies," and it outlines how the Nixon administration can "use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies." This memo is one of many digitized that concern Nixon’s Enemies List—a list documenting major political opponents of President Nixon and the Nixon Administration.
Creator
Dean, John W. (John Wesley), 1938-
Source
From 1973: Watergate: Dean, John, Separated Folder SEP-5528/75 in the Rufus Edmisten Papers #5528, Southern Historical Collection, Louis Round Wilson Special Collections Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Date
August 16, 1971
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/
Format
image/jpg
Language
English
Type
Text
Identifier
https://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/05ddd/id/471420
Text
[page one]
August 16, 1971
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Dealing with our Political Enemies
This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration. Stated a bit more bluntly – how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.
After reviewing this matter with a number of persons possessed of expertise in the field, I have concluded that we do not need an elaborate mechanism or game plan, rather we need a good project coordinator and full support for the project. In brief, the system would work as follows:
• Key members of the staff (e.g., Colson, Dent Flanigan, Buchanan) should be requested to inform us as to who they feel we should be giving a hard time.
• The project coordinator should then determine what sorts of dealings these individuals have with the federal government and how we can best screw them (e.g., grant availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution, etc.).
• The project coordinator then should have access to and the full support of the top officials of the agency or department in proceeding to deal with the individual.
[page two]
-2-
I have learned that there have been many efforts in the past to take such actions, but they have ultimately failed – in most cases – because of lack of support at the top. Of all those I have discussed this matter with, Lyn Nofziger appears the most knowledgeable and most interested. If Lyn had support he would enjoy undertaking this activity as the project coordinator. You are aware of some of Lyn’s successes in the field, but he feels that he can only employ limited efforts because there is a lack of support.
As a next step, I would recommend that we develop a small list of names – not more than ten – as our targets for concentration. Request that Lyn “do a job” on them and if he finds he is getting cut off by a department or agency, that he inform us and we evaluate what is necessary to process. I feel it is important that we keep our targets limited for several reasons: (1) a low visibility of the project is imperative; (2) it will be easier to accomplish something real if we don’t over expand our efforts; and (3) we can learn more about how to operate such an activity if we start small and build.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
August 16, 1971
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Dealing with our Political Enemies
This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration. Stated a bit more bluntly – how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.
After reviewing this matter with a number of persons possessed of expertise in the field, I have concluded that we do not need an elaborate mechanism or game plan, rather we need a good project coordinator and full support for the project. In brief, the system would work as follows:
• Key members of the staff (e.g., Colson, Dent Flanigan, Buchanan) should be requested to inform us as to who they feel we should be giving a hard time.
• The project coordinator should then determine what sorts of dealings these individuals have with the federal government and how we can best screw them (e.g., grant availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution, etc.).
• The project coordinator then should have access to and the full support of the top officials of the agency or department in proceeding to deal with the individual.
[page two]
-2-
I have learned that there have been many efforts in the past to take such actions, but they have ultimately failed – in most cases – because of lack of support at the top. Of all those I have discussed this matter with, Lyn Nofziger appears the most knowledgeable and most interested. If Lyn had support he would enjoy undertaking this activity as the project coordinator. You are aware of some of Lyn’s successes in the field, but he feels that he can only employ limited efforts because there is a lack of support.
As a next step, I would recommend that we develop a small list of names – not more than ten – as our targets for concentration. Request that Lyn “do a job” on them and if he finds he is getting cut off by a department or agency, that he inform us and we evaluate what is necessary to process. I feel it is important that we keep our targets limited for several reasons: (1) a low visibility of the project is imperative; (2) it will be easier to accomplish something real if we don’t over expand our efforts; and (3) we can learn more about how to operate such an activity if we start small and build.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment