(5 of 7)
Strangely, Ehrlichman got into his greatest difficulty and the committee became most intrigued by a matter not directly related to Watergate, though it involved some of the same personnel and tactics. That was the burglary of the office of a Los Angeles psychiatrist who had been consulted by Pentagon Papers Defendant Daniel Ellsberg. The burglary was directed by White House Plumbers Hunt and Liddy. They reported to White House Supervisors Egil Krogh and David Young, both of whom reported to Ehrlichman. Ehrlichman's contention that the operation was legal touched off a long constitutional debate before the cameras (see box page 12).
Quite apart from that colloquy, Ehrlichman ran into a buzz saw of committee questions when he claimed that 1) he had not authorized the burglary, 2) it was necessary because FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover had resisted an effective probe of Ellsberg out of friendship for Louis Marx, the wealthy father of Ellsberg's wife, and 3) "foreign intelligence" was involved in the Ellsberg case because copies of the Pentagon papers had been given to the Soviet embassy. Ehrlichman was on thin ground on all three points:
1) A memo sent from Young and Krogh to Ehrlichman before the burglary indicated that Ehrlichman had approved "a covert operation ... to examine all the medical files still held by Ellsberg's psychoanalyst." Ehrlichman's handwritten caution: "If done under your assurance that it is not traceable." Ehrlichman argued that he had not had burglary in mind. "Covert" meant only that he did not want the operation identified with the White House. He blandly suggested that there were all kinds of ways of handling the job that were routine, such as getting another doctor, a nurse or nurse's aide to reveal the information—or having investigators pose as persons entitled to the information. That was one of a number of fairly horrifying windows into a White House mentality of casual regard for ethics, individual rights and accepted norms of fair play.
2) Weicker revealed that he had talked to Marx and learned that Marx had been interviewed by the FBI and that he and Hoover were not close friends; "the last time they ever met was 30 years ago in Dinty Moore's," a restaurant in Manhattan. The committee produced a letter to Krogh in which Hoover offered to proceed with all relevant interviews. Ehrlichman dismissed this as "papering the file." The agent who authorized the Marx interview, TIME has confirmed, was disciplined by Hoover because he had ignored the director's cantankerous objection to the interview. But Marx had been quizzed and had revealed nothing of significance.
3) TIME has learned that there is no solid evidence at all that the Pentagon papers were given to Soviet officials. An unverified report of that circulated within the FBI. Recalls one FBI agent familiar with it: "It was so vague that it was almost impossible to check out, other than ask the Soviets about it—and that would have been a waste of time." The report also surfaced in another form. A convicted Boston murderer claimed that the man he had killed had got some of the papers from Ellsberg in a blackmail scheme and had sold them to the Russians. FBI officials have dismissed this as a story designed to get the murder conviction overturned.