John Dean Warns: A Mile to Go

His youthful appearance showing no sign of ordeals past or to come, former White House Counsel John W. Dean HI exudes confidence like a Dale Carnegie graduate. He is clear of eye, strong of voice, steady of hand. His self-assurance may be justified, for Dean is the only major Watergate witness who is both able and willing to tell a lot. He has been using that position to bargain for his own safety from prosecution, an effort in which he has earned at least some support. Senator Sam Ervin's committee has requested limited immunity for Dean so that he can testify. But the Justice Department so far has refused to go along, on the grounds that it may want to prosecute him later. Last week in an interview, Dean made a persuasive case for being heard without fear of prosecution. While avoiding specific details Dean told TIME Correspondent Hays Gorey that he had information that could further broaden the spreading scandal.

How much do you know that has not already been revealed?

When all the facts are known, there will be several additional federal grand juries in this country, besides the ones now at work.

Why did you go to the prosecutors in the Watergate case when you did?

I wanted to be a vehicle to get the truth out. I realized this situation will never end otherwise. I did not go to the prosecutors seeking immunity. There were things going on that just had to come out--immediately. Things are still going on that I find distressing.

What is your reaction to the President's most recent statement on Watergate?

The President had to position himself. The information in his statement [about efforts to set up a special security unit] was about to be disclosed anyway. This whole thing is still coming out inch by inch--with a mile to go. It may be impossible to travel that full mile. The White House public relations mechanism was obviously at work. I know enough about how that White House mechanism operates, and it was all so evident in that last statement. The eternal hope prevails that somehow they won't have to travel that full mile.

Does the President's statement accord factually with your knowledge of the security unit and the other matters it dealt with?

That statement was a public relations statement. Some of it was not quite accurate. Some of it was not accurate at all.

What do you know about the special security unit the President was trying to set up?

I came to the White House at the tail end of the effort to establish the special security unit [in July 1970]. They were fighting with [FBI Director J. Edgar] Hoover.

What was the general mood?

There was extreme concern in the White House. I wouldn't characterize it as paranoia, exactly, but there was extreme concern. It was all out of proportion. It focused on two subjects: demonstrations and leaks. Every time there was a new demonstration or a new leak, the concern heightened.

Why did the White House feel it had to go beyond existing security agencies and create one of its own with extraordinary powers?

They thought the existing agencies were insufficient. The existing agencies never could tie in the demonstrators or the leakers with partisan political motives. They could not tie these people to the Democrats, and they could not tie them to any particular political figure.

Reflecting on your involvement in all this, do you really think you ought to go scot-free?

I'm a lawyer, and I understand criminal culpability. I know what the term means, and I don't feel criminally culpable. I don't have that many legal problems. I'm really in an incredible position to deal with the situation.

What will you do if you are indicted?

If indicted, I'll probably never testify. Maybe everyone will have to wait until I'm an old man and write a book.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.