 Um, let me, um, I will call Mike and, um, see whether he feels, uh, that he's been over the testimony and knows your view on these matters. Uh, you, uh, uh, what's your evaluation of the Kennedy Statement? I think it's bad myself, I was surprised that it was, uh, had any of what it had, but after Bob told me that he thought it wouldn't cause us much trouble. I think it's tragic. I just think it's tragic. I've talked to things the same thing, and I think it's, it's so presumptuous that I just, uh, just, the, some of the things he says, well, one of the, one of the first things is, he says that he, he doesn't want the Russians and the, and the, uh, Communists to, uh, uh, be overgrateful, because if he, uh, and expected him to be elected president because if he were elected president, he probably wouldn't, uh, it wouldn't mean that he'd have an easy surrender himself. If you ever hear anything that presumptuous, listen, the senator in effect warned Russia, China, and North Vietnam not to anticipate a turn of events in which he would become president and quickly end the war on terms more favorable to the Communist side. Oh hell, he don't have to come president to do that. That's what he's trying to do now. Yeah. No, I think it, it, it has greatly weakened our position with Henry, and it's, it's going to mean that it, it, it belongs to war, actually. It's not one of those things that keeps the other side going. And, uh, I think it means a majority in the Senate against the state. I honestly think that. I think it, the, uh, the buys and the tidings and the two Kennedys and the muskies, the general Catholic operation there, uh, when the chips are down, they'll pick up enough cases and perhaps a Javits with the New York Times leveling that way. And maybe a Scott, he hasn't yet, but they, they, I see the way the ADA and the liberals and how it flows the ball. And if the times keeps hitting us this way, well, we just really going to be murderers. I told Clark Clifford long time last night. He thinks that we are, we would just be idiotic to ask for a new resolution. He says that that resolution cannot be plainer than it is, that it is unlimited, that you cannot set to what you do. You imply that you question yourself about what you've been doing. You imply to the people that, well hell, you didn't have authority all along. I said the first thing you got to do is make abundantly clear that you got all the authority you need is Commander in Chief, 160 times you've gone in. Number two, you got to make it clear that this treaty requires you to stand up your commitment. Number three, you got to make it clear you wouldn't exercise any of these troops, wouldn't put them out there and wouldn't start the bombing until they said, they go in with us and we're all together and we're one nation united and divisible. Now then he said you come along and say, well, I want a new resolution. You imply that you have something wrong with this one. And said, well this one just last 18 months like the last one. And where the hell would you be? He says, well, in the Florida State, in the Senate, it was pointed out and that the president has this authority and that this is the case of the Congress joining with the president. That's right. I made that point. That's right. Now I think that'd be one good thing though for George to point out that there's 160 times the president has gone in without a declaration of war to protect the interests of the United States that the president has this constitutional power. I think that was 125 as well. Whatever it is. Let him get it. They told me 163. But whatever it is and or 23, I don't care. Just just just assert that he has it. Number one, then number two, that the treaty comes along and everybody debates that. And Foster Dulles, we've got to figure out that he even the liberals that were against him are not ever going to be with us anyway. But we've got to show that this is some of his hand to work that he says that we have got to stop subversion and we've got to stop the Communist aggression. And if we notify him ahead of time, we've got a chance to do it. May not do it. We may have to stop them finally and have boots, but we ought to tell them ahead of time so they'll know what they're doing. And that is generally his position. And that's what the Senate finalized the way they said it and it's a conclusion. That's right. Now then they did that. That man's feeling all excited. So we have an obligation there and the president wouldn't be worthy to be sold if he didn't do it or else why I have a treaty. What would the Senate think about a president wouldn't live up to a treaty? That's number two. But this president says now he knows the Senate pretty damn well and I wouldn't, I don't think any of y'all that want to be nice to him can afford to be say this bluntly. But the net effect is that he knows you so damn well he knows you're going to run when the going gets tough and therefore he wants you tied, bound and delivered beforehand. And he says to Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense he will not PA drop until you come in with a resolution that says number one, correct me to respond to armed attack number two, authorize me to enforce this treaty. And number three, correct me to prevent any aggression. Now that's what they did. Now he's in the process of doing that. And if you don't want any of those things done, we provided you a remedy. Any time you want to change your mind and do a flip flop, you can do it. But until you do, we just got to move. I think that ought to be stressed a good deal. So the people of the country know that this damn Senate that's wandering around, I was just talking to a good lawyer in New York. And he says what they're doing, they're confusing the people. People don't see their alternative. They can't find what would you do. But they don't get it one time. When you just say once on television, what would you do if you were President of the United States? That doesn't get through to them. You got to repeat it like Hitler did at 20 times and then maybe they do. And I think we've got to repeat this resolution and say, now we don't say you can't debate. We don't say you ought to debate. We don't say you ought to discuss it. All you want to, well, we do say this is what you've done. Now, if you don't want to do this, if you want to seek the communist, if you want to surrender to the communist, if you want to let them go and have aggression, if you want to abandon the treaty, or if you do not think this is good national policy, you have not said it, then repeal it. And the President's got no voice in it. Now he'll go on fighting if he wants to, because he has that power anyway. I don't know that I'm afraid that Mike and George could today. But this thing is vicious as is. The Kennedy infiltration all over the place. I'm afraid that out of that will come some commitment that will be a little bit difficult for us. I have a hunch this morning that they're going to say something like Averyl said that we ought to sit down in the VidCon. Now, I thought Averyl just made a mistake, but in light of Bobby's statement, he may have been, he may have kind of been paving the way a little. Because they are awfully close and Joe Kraft's awfully close. And every damn time I call Averyl twice, to compliment him. And he's at Joe Kraft's house. And I just, I don't know how much of this is kind of a wing. You know, Bob McNamara has felt that while we ought to have limited objectives, that we ought to make it abundantly clear that we did not necessarily have to have everybody of our own choosing in this government, that it could be a communist government, and we could have some doubtful characters like we had in the House. And he has said to me not once, but I'd guess a dozen times, that if we were to moderate our objectives and what we were fighting for there, we'd have more chance of succeeding. And he's also felt, which is a very dangerous position to me. And they're not a man in the government, I'd say this too, but you, not another one. But he's said to me a number of times that he thought that we ought to give serious consideration to this. And then when he said the other day that we only have one chance out of three, you went in. Well, it just shocked me. And the more it shocked you, about the table. It shocked Bill Moyer. It shocked Jack Bellini. Jack Bellini said, my God, I don't want to do it. Well, Bob, quite frankly, he hasn't had too much experience in dealing with crises. And I just don't believe that. And I can't put out a fine rule and prove it. But the boys are on the field approving it. And approving that we can do better than that. And I just am absolutely sure of myself that the other side is going to make some new decisions on this thing. I don't, they must be getting great encouragement. So if this is causing us this much trouble, how much don't you know that they're enjoying it? You know, well, I get hold of George and Matt right away. And what do you think our official response is going to be to the Kennedy statement? Well, I think we ought to go right back to your July statement, just stay with that, and say that, well, I just say, would you be well in there? Do you agree with Senator Kennedy that we ought to appoint some big Kong heir time? We can, I'm inclined to say, I may be wrong on this, but I'm inclined to say that we have made it abundantly clear that we're for free elections, that we will let the United Nations supervisor, or anybody else that will give us an honest pre-election, and we're not in the business. That's just not our occupation of moment going around appointing communist governments. That's right, that's right. Well, and we believe in self-determination, and we don't believe in trading with a communist and appointing them. What's wrong with that? I think that's right. Okay, I'll get a hold of him.