interview - paul magallanes then we got involved, the fbi got involved because of certain notes and...

© Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI, Inc. 2005

Interview with Former Special AgentPaul P. Magallanes (1968 – 1989)

on August 25, 2005By Michael M. O’Brien

Edited for spelling, repetitions, etc. by Sandra Robinette on January 23, 2006. Edited for Mr.Magallanes’ corrections on March 20, 2006.

Michael O’Brien: Today is August 25, 2005. This is Michael M. O’Brien with theSociety of Former Special Agents of the FBI conducting an oral history interview ofPaul P. Magallanes at Century City, Los Angeles, California.

Paul Magallanes: Project, copyright release and background form.

“We the undersigned convey the rights to the intellectual content of our interview onthis date to the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI. This transfer is inexchange for the Society’s efforts to preserve the historical legacy of the FBI and itsmembers. We understand that portions of this interview may be deleted for securitypurposes unless otherwise restricted and we agree that acceptable sections can bepublished on the world-wide-web and the recordings transferred to an establishedrepository for preservation and research.”

And I sign it.

MO: Paul signed it and I signed it and we’re all set.

Now, Paul, what year were you born?

PM: I was born 1938.

MO: And where at?

PM: In Chicago, Illinois.

MO: Okay. And your current address?

PM: Thousand Oaks, California.

MO: Okay. And your current position?

PM: I’m the President of MAI Associates International, Inc.

MO: Okay. And when was your FBI service?

Paul P. MagallanesAugust 25, 2005

2

PM: FBI service was entry August 12, 1968. Retired July 29, 1989.

MO: Okay. Good. Let’s begin with your background. Tell me a little bit about yourfamily. Where you were raised. And your education.

PM: I was raised in Chicago, Illinois, in an area called “The Back of the Yards.” Southside ofChicago. Went to school, local schools, Catholic local schools. Went to De La Salle HighSchool. Had three other brothers. Mother and Dad. And subsequently went to St. Mary’sCollege in Winona, Minnesota. Graduated from there and subsequently went to ChicagoKent College of Law.

While in the law school, a couple of people who graduated before me had joined theFBI, one of whom came back to the law school and talked to me about joining theFBI. At which time I went to the FBI Field Office in Chicago and requested anapplication and subsequently passed a Spanish test along with other tests and wassuccessfully enrolled as a Special Agent into the FBI Academy at Quantico.

MO: What was your inspiration to get in the FBI?

PM: What motivated me?

MO: Yeah. What motivated you?

PM: Well I remember seeing at that time or prior thereto a movie called “The FBI Story”by Jimmy Stewart. I thought that was the greatest thing that could ever happen to meon this planet. And so I always aspired to be an FBI Agent. However, I thought that--. I didn’t think I would have the opportunity until after finishing law school. Andconsequently when the opportunity presented itself to become an Agent, I jumped atit and that’s what happened.

MO: How far did you get in law school?

PM: I went to two years of law school.

MO: And when you came in the Bureau, you came under the Spanish Program?

PM: I came under the Language Program.

MO: Language Program.

PM: Correct.

MO: Correct. And so do you remember the process you went through? You went to theChicago Office and applied there?


3

PM: Yes. I applied. Ken Kaiser, as a matter of fact, was the Applicant Coordinator at thattime. Went through all the necessary prerequisites and what have you. And then theygave me the Spanish test. And Ken was just amazed and astounded. He says,“You’re the first applicant I’ve ever had who only had one wrong on the Spanishtest.” And he was just shocked and surprised and pleased.

From then on I got a request that I should come to the Academy. I think it was inJune or May of 1968 as a recruit. I told them I couldn’t do that because I wasteaching summer school in Chicago and I had a contractual obligation to fulfill. Andthat I couldn’t possibly leave that contract until after it was fulfilled. And so theythought that was pretty neat and they allowed me to finish the contract and in August,I then entered the FBI Academy.

MO: And how did your family react, your father and mother to the fact that you weregoing in the FBI?

PM: Well, mother and dad were immigrants to this country, from Mexico. And when mydad heard about it --both mother and dad -- and especially my dad, he was so proudand thought that --He never dreamed that his son could, a son of his, could become anFBI Agent. And they were very pleased. Proud.

MO: And before we get into the main focus of the interview, tell me about, a little bit aboutyour history. What offices you went to and lead it up to beginning and retirement.

PM: First office was Tampa, Florida, under SAC Santoiana who was feared by the wholeoffice in Tampa. But there were certain of us that were treated better than others.And I was one of them. I was very fortunate. Santoiana was a Spanish speaker. Andhe liked two types of people, two types of Agents. Italians, because he was an Italianhimself, and those who could speak Spanish.

And I remember, God rest his soul, Al Boccaccio who was killed in Bosnia in ahelicopter accident while in the FBI, was a first-office Agent with me in Tampa andhe loved Al. And Al and I were best of friends and we got along great withSantoiana. In fact, I was the first first-office Agent that he allowed to be on his squadwhich was the Organized Crime Squad. And one of the first FBI Agents to workunder cover since. That was in 1969. And he told me at that time that he didn’t wantto tell the Bureau that I was working under cover because Hoover would never reallyauthorize that. And so I kind of went between the lines there and worked under coveragainst the Italian Mafia in Tampa.

So it was a fun time and when I left, he threw me a retirement party. And all theheavies, all the palace guard couldn’t believe it because he never threw a retirementparty for anybody.


4

MO: Retirement or going-away party?

PM: I’m sorry. Going-away party.

MO: Transfer, not a retirement party. Yeah.

PM: I transferred to WFO. And I couldn’t believe I was going to WFO and I asked him tolook into why I was being transferred to WFO. And he said, “Well, they need aSpanish teacher out there.” And they had a Spanish school in WFO for the Bureauand I was going to be a Spanish teacher. When I got there, I became the substituteSpanish teacher and taught quite a few Agents Spanish in WFO.

And from WFO, after I worked the Watergate investigation, it was such a disastroustime that I needed to get out of WFO and, of course, in those days you couldn’t getout of Washington Field Office unless you had some kind of talent like a tech guy oranother kind of talent to get out. And I had Spanish so I volunteered to go to SanJuan. Within two weeks I got my orders.

At that time LBJ had a freeze on transfers and money. And so I had to wait, oh, aboutsix months before I got out of WFO which was good because I had time to sell myhouse and what have you and all the rest. From there I went to San Juan. Spent twoyears in San Juan and then was transferred to Los Angeles where I died and went toheaven. And that’s where I retired.

MO: Retired out of Los Angeles. How many years did you spend in Los Angeles?

PM: I spent from 1975 to 1989 in Los Angeles.

MO: Okay. Now let’s talk about the main focus which would be your experience in theWatergate investigation. So, go ahead.

PM: Well, Hoover died in May of 1972. It was a big shock to all of us obviously that thegreat man died and speculation was of course rampant as to who was going to takeover. And all kinds of rumors were floating around and everyone, of course, thoughtit was going to be Mark Felt who was going to take over as Director.

And inasmuch as WFO and the Bureau were kind of like intertwined, intertwinedbecause a lot of the guys from WFO were in car pools with guys at the Bureau andvice versa there were a lot of rumors and talk going around, lot of intelligence if youwill, and everyone believed that Mark was going to be the man. Of course he wasnamed Acting Director and there was no doubt in anyone’s mind that Nixon wasgoing to appoint him Director.


5

PM: When Pat Gray was appointed Director it was a shock. Because, number 1, he was anoutsider; number 2, we all thought, everyone thought well how, how is he going toreact, an outsider to the Bureau, to the field offices, to the street Agent. And initially,you know, he did away with the mandatory white shirts. We could wear coloredshirts. He indicated that we could grow mustaches and drink coffee in the office andall that other stuff. A welcome change to a lot of Agents in the field as well as inWFO. So he was a kind of a welcome guy to start off in that manner. It was likeopen the window and let some fresh air come in.

That was in May, early June, late May or early June. Well, Watergate broke in June,1972, and of course he was the Director. When that broke, initially, the FBI wasn’tinvolved because it was just an ordinary burglary of the Democratic Headquarters atthe Watergate Hotel. And so initially it was a local crime rather than a Federal crime.

But then we got involved, the FBI got involved because of certain notes andtelephone numbers that were found in some of the burglars’ notebooks. Principally,E. Howard Hunt and then McCord, who was the security director for the Committeeto Re-elect the President also known as CREEP.

And so what happened was that when the police traced these notes and theMetropolitan Police Department then discovered that there was some kind of a linkbetween the burglary and CIA, because E. Howard Hunt was a CIA Agent or at leasta consultant if he wasn’t an active CIA Agent. And also the police subsequentlyfound out that the White House was involved because McCord was the securitydirector for the Committee to Re-elect the President. And inasmuch as that was thefundraising arm of President Nixon, well, then therefore the White House wasprobably involved.

We then got involved. Angelo Lano was the Case Agent and after we discovered thatthere was in fact something going on between the burglarers, CIA and the WhiteHouse, it became a, a major case.

There were twenty-seven of us who worked the Watergate in Washington FieldOffice. And each of us was assigned various leads. During the investigation, wefound out that CIA was involved because everything was coming back to the CIA. Imean E. Howard Hunt was a CIA Agent or had been a CIA Agent. He had a covertoffice in Washington, DC. He was involved with the burglars. He knew them all.The burglars had his name in their notebooks. He was involved with McCord whowas a former CIA Agent. And he was involved with G. Gordon Liddy, a former FBIAgent. And unbeknownst to us then but subsequently discovered he was the head ofthe Plumber’s Unit as well working out of the White House. But everything wascoming back to the CIA. And we thought, therefore, that it was a CIA operation.


6

PM: However, that started falling apart when we began interviewing people at theCommittee to Re-elect the President. And I personally interviewed a young lady whowas a secretary to McCord, James W. McCord, the director of security for CREEP, atthe Committee to Re-elect the President. And, of course, at that time the WhiteHouse became very offensive. Not offensive, but they were putting together anoffense I should say. And they assigned a White House lawyer to everybody that weinterviewed. And when we interviewed this young lady, she, of course, didn’t sayanything to us. She was, “yes, no, yes, no,” and didn’t know a lot of answers to thequestions we asked. And, the White House lawyer was standing there next to her.

MO: Where did the interview take place?

PM: At the Committee to Re-elect the President.

MO: In the office space?

PM: In the office, correct.

MO: In DC?

PM: In DC. In Washington, DC. And that was I know, I remember, a Friday in June.Shortly after the burglary. It was about two weeks after that. Because this case wasmoving very rapidly. Most everybody that we interviewed was noncommittalbecause they had a White House lawyer standing there.

The next morning I get a call from the office indicating that the young lady weinterviewed the day before, was on the phone and wanted to talk with me. Theypatched her through to my home and she said, “Listen, I’m the girl you interviewed. Ireally have a lot to say. I couldn’t say anything in front of the White House lawyer. Iwant to talk with you and your partner.” And I said, “Fine. I’d love to talk with youabout what happened,” etc. She said, “But I only do this under two conditions. One,that you come in your own personal vehicle. I don’t want a Bureau, FBI car. Andtwo, change your partner. Your partner that you were with was not appealing to mefor some reason.” She didn’t really say why.

So I got another Agent, John Mindermann, from the squad and he agreed to go withme and interview this young lady. And we did so in downtown Washington, DC.She proceeded to furnish us all kinds of information in terms of what happened afterthe burglary was discovered. She said that McCord and G. Gordon Liddy, becauseMcCord was then released on bail, came back to the office and started shreddingdocuments and all kinds of things.


7

PM: We were debriefing her in my automobile and it was a warm day, a very warm day inWashington, and it started overheating. I then said, “We just can’t continue this inmy car and I’ve got to call the office.” I called the boss, SAC Kunkle, and I told himwhat we had and he said, “Hey, get a hotel room and debrief her as much and as longas it takes.”

So the Mayflower was the closest hotel. I went in there and debriefed her and shegave us all kinds of information relative to what was happening at CREEP withMcCord, with Liddy, and the rest of the people. And what Liddy, what McCord weredictating to her in terms of secretarial material and what they had shredded. All thesedocuments had implicated them.

And after many hours, we concluded the interview, and she said, “You know, youthink I have a lot of valuable information. My friend has even more information.” Isaid, “Well, who’s your friend?” “Well, she is the accountant for CREEP and she isreally frustrated as to what is happening here and she has all this information that youguys would be very interested in.”

I said, “Well, would she, would she be willing to talk with us?” She said, “I don’tknow. Let me ask her and find out.” And she said, “I’ll call you on Monday.” Thisis a Saturday. And I said, “Well look, just tell her that, you know, we’re good guysand we’re trying to get to the bottom of this and we will hold her information inconfidence. We would accede to any condition she may have.” So she said, “Well,I’ll call you on Monday.”

Monday came along. No call. I couldn’t call her. She was still working at CREEP.In those days we didn’t have cell phones or anything. Tuesday came along. No call.Wednesday, no call. Finally Thursday, and she said, “Listen, my friend said thatshe’s willing to meet with you and your partner, but she wants to get to know youfirst. She wants to know if she can trust you.” I said, “Well, what does she want?”And she said, “Well, she’d like to meet you at the Marriott across the bridge inVirginia and have dinner with you and feel you guys out to see whether or not shewants to talk with you.” I said, “I don’t have any problem with that.”

So we made a date for the next day and we met her. Of course she was with thesecretary to James McCord. And we talked about everything. Her family, my family,you know, the whole bit, and not necessarily Watergate because we thought, “Well,we have to, we have to get to know each other first and get a comfort level herebetween all of us before we go into the hard facts of Watergate.”


8

PM: And all of a sudden she just said, “Okay, I trust you guys. You know, I’ll talk to youabout Watergate. I’ll tell you everything you want to know about, everything I knowabout Watergate.” She said, “Why don’t we go over to my house in Bethesda and youguys can, you know, ask me anything you want.”

So we did. All four of us went out there and that was the first time in theinvestigation that we discovered that the CIA was not involved and that the WhiteHouse was involved with a lot of shenanigans, a lot of illegal activities. For exampleshe said that they had something like three million dollars at CREEP, in cash, in thesafe. And this is 1972. Three million dollars then must have been like ten milliondollars in today’s money I guess.

And she said that this money was …part of this money, used for unlawful activitieslike the burglary and other things that they were doing. And I said, “Well, how doyou know this?” She said, “Because I’m the accountant.” She says, “I know whatgoes on here. I got books on this thing and where this money goes and to whom it’spaid for, paid to McCord and Liddy. McCord and Liddy, McCord and Liddy. And Ineed to know where this money, how this money is being paid, and, you know, howmuch money is being used. Not necessarily how it’s being used but, you know, towhat extent it’s being used.” And so she just went on and on.

We debriefed her for a couple of days. And we got a lot of information with regard toMaurice Stans who was the head of CREEP. We got a lot of information about HughSloan, the treasurer of CREEP. And, he was a kind of a sympathetic figure. Weinterviewed him. Hugh had a pregnant wife and he wanted to do the right thing. Buthe was so afraid of what would happen to him. He was so fearful of the consequencesthat would befall him from the White House that he wanted to open up to us, but hecouldn’t open up to us because he had to safeguard his family. He had to safeguardhis wife who was pregnant. He had to safeguard his reputation. And try as we may,we never really got him to open up.

But subsequently I interviewed E. Howard Hunt who was a classic CIA Agent.Beautiful home out in Maryland. Beautiful, gorgeous looking wife. Drop-dead typekids. I mean, the whole family was beautiful. Then, of course, Hunt deniedeverything.

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: He wasn’t about to say anything to us. And we asked the standard questions youknow. “No, I don’t recall. I don’t know anything about that. No.” Everything wasnegative with regard to our questions. We got nowhere with him.


9

PM: We interviewed his wife. Beautiful woman. Of course, she didn’t know anythingeither. We did not interview the daughters although they were lying out there by thepool in beautiful bathing suits.

But this happened in June and July when we were doing all these interviews. Hunt’swife was mysteriously killed in an airplane crash in December, 1972. We didn’tconnect anything although we had our suspicions. Suspicions being that obviouslyshe knew something about it and obviously that she knew she was way over her headperhaps. I’m not sure. I can’t say.

So the investigation continued during this time. We’re talking June, July, August,1972.

MO: Did Hunt ever say why they did this burglary?

PM: Hunt?

MO: Yeah, Hunt.

PM: He denied everything.

MO: He denied everything. He couldn’t deny there was a burglary though. But McCordand these guys were --.

PM: No, no. See Hunt was not the burglar.

MO: Right.

PM: It was the five Cubans and McCord who got caught.

MO: Right, okay.

PM: So Hunt was never the burglar. He said, “So, yeah, I know these Cuban guys, but Idon’t know anything about them. You know, we trained them. The CIA trained themfor anti-Castro activities, things of that nature.” But, I mean, he never really admittedto anything.

MO: What prompted the interview with his wife?

PM: Well, we thought that because, you know, she was married to him she may knowsomething but she claimed she didn’t know anything.

MO: Was it a separate interview?


10

PM: Oh yeah. They were all separate interviews.

MO: Yeah, yeah.

PM: No, we didn’t interview them together. That’s the old FBI technique of course.

MO: Did you see any reluctance or did she appear to know anything?

PM: You know, either she was a very good actor or she just didn’t know anything. I don’tknow. I couldn’t tell with her because she was a very charming, delightful type ofperson. I mean she would charm your tie off. You know, I mean, she was just a very,very nice person so it was hard to tell. We couldn’t draw any conclusions, eitherpositive or negative to her. So, I just don’t know. And no one really followed upwith her on the squad because she was a kind of minor character.

The people that we were really following up with was this guy, Hugh Sloan. Thetreasurer of CREEP. Hugh Sloan. We were following up with Hugh Sloan. We werefollowing up with Maurice Stans. We were following up with E. Howard Hunt. Ofcourse, Liddy wouldn’t talk at all. I didn’t interview Liddy. We were following upwith McCord and he wouldn’t talk except when Judge Sirica was sentencing him.

But no one really told us anything, you see. Everyone was “covering their asses” atthat time including the White House because I guess they were conducting a lot ofinterviews and included in those interviews was the Attorney General, the formerAttorney General, Mitchell.

MO: Mitchell.

PM: John Mitchell who, my God. I never heard anyone swear like this guy. I mean thisguy was --. My gosh, he was worse than a sailor. He really, he really, really swore,you know, to no end.

MO: Did you interview him?

PM: Yeah.

MO: And he swore for what reason? Denial?

PM: No, he just wouldn’t say anything with regard to the Watergate.

MO: So he had a total denial?


11

PM: Oh, yeah. Total denial.

MO: Where did the swearing --?

PM: But everything was, you know, “f” this and “f” that and “s.o.b.” this and “s.o.b.” that.

MO: Was it directed towards you or other people in general?

PM: In general.

MO: In general, uh huh.

PM: He just, he was just noncommittal to anything.

MO: Yeah, uh, huh.

PM: And then we interviewed this guy --.

MO: Magruder?

PM: Jeb Stuart Magruder. Never forget him. Old Southern gentleman. Young guy.Sitting in his rocker though. His desk and a chair and John Minderman and I were infront of him. Attorney in front of me, on the side of me, and in the back of me,moving, trying to read my notes. I finally said to him: “Excuse me. Can you pleasemove? Can you please sit on that couch?” And he didn’t say a word and he wouldn’tsit on the couch. I’m talking about the attorney. “Oh yeah,” he said to Magruder andMagruder said nothing. He was noncommittal. I said, “Look, Mr. Magruder, if youdon’t talk to us, you’re going to have to talk to the Grand Jury. Now, it’s your choice.What are you going to do?” “I’m not talking. I don’t know anything.” “Okay, fine.If that’s what you want to do, that’s fine.” Of course, he then talked to the GrandJury, was convicted and sent to jail.

MO: So they all basically were stonewalling?

PM: Absolutely. That’s the key word.

MO: Any cracks at that time of the people you were talking to you?

PM: Any what?

MO: Any cracks. As far as anybody about to crack and ---

PM: No. Hugh Sloan was probably ---


12

MO: He was the only one that was a little bit on the border.

PM: Yeah. He wanted to.

MO: Yeah, yeah.

PM: But, I mean, he really wanted to help us but he couldn’t. He convinced himself hecouldn’t because he was in danger you see. So it was a period where stonewallingwas everywhere for all of us.

And then during this period, all of this stuff was coming out in the Washington Post.My interviews with the accountant. Word for word just about. I’m talking about …The only thing they left out was like the accountant was interviewed by Paul P.Magallanes on such and such a date. And, you know, she pointed --. That’s the onlything they left out. Everything else was in the Washington Post of the 302.

Hell, the first time I saw this on a Sunday. I’m reading the Washington Post and Isaid, “My God, that’s my interview.” Then I had --. I still get chills up and down.“Oh my God, oh my God. I can’t believe it.” And of course, the source called meright away. “What’s going on Paul?” “ I don’t know. I don’t know what’s going on.I honestly don’t know what’s going on. I can assure I didn’t give this to theWashington Post. I can assure you no FBI Agent gave it to the Washington Post.”“Well, who did?” I said, “The only thing I can, the only persons I can think of thatmay have leaked this is Department of Justice attorneys because they’re appointed byNixon and maybe they’re --. I don’t know. And, but I can assure you that no oneconnected with the FBI.” Little did I know.

And it kept appearing, it kept appearing in the Washington Post. I’m thinking, “MyGod, I’ve never seen this before in my career.” And not only my interviews, butother interviews of other Agents and everybody was just dumbfounded thinking“Wow, what happened here?” Somebody, somebody’s compromising thisinvestigation, right? And, of course, we didn’t know, we didn’t know who it was.We, of course, were universal in the belief that it wasn’t an FBI Agent. Either a streetAgent or a Bureau official. Because we couldn’t fathom that. We couldn’t believesomeone would do that in the FBI.

All of a sudden, I don’t recall, it must have been July or August, I think it was July,1972. I got a call from the office Friday night. The night Agent said, “Paul, Graywants to see you in his office tomorrow at 9 am.” I said, “Wants to see me?” “Yeah,you and the other twenty-six Agents working the Watergate.” “What’s this about?”He said, “I don’t know.”


13

PM: He says, “But Kunkle, (the SAC, Robert Kunkle), Bob Kunkle wants to see you in hisoffice at 8 o’clock.” “Okay.”

So we go over there and we didn’t know what’s going on. We don’t know what toexpect. We go into Kunkle’s office and he was --. Kunkle can best be described inBureau language as an “old lady.” He was afraid of his own shadow. May his soulrest in peace. But, you know, he was from the old school. He was a former clerk andhe was afraid to do anything. And, what happened was that he, as I said was bestdescribed as an “old lady,” and always very nervous. Especially if someone hadinformation that might somehow affect him and his career.

He says, “Gentlemen, I don’t know what this is about. I don’t know why he wants tosee us but don’t embarrass me. Don’t say anything against me because, you know, itcould be my career and all these other things.” I was thinking, “Where’s this guycoming from? What planet is this guy on?” He says, “Remember, don’t say anythingagainst me.” “Okay.”

So we walked in unison to FBI Headquarters, Bureau Headquarters, and were greetedby Bates.

MO: It’s Charlie, Charlie Bates.

PM: Charlie Bates. That’s correct. And he came out, it was Hoover’s old office. Therewas a conference room and if you’ve ever been in Hoover’s office, he had aconference room and then he had an inner sanctum in his office where you takepictures and what have you. And he came out and greeted us. “Good morning,” typeof thing, you know. Didn’t say very much after that. And his appearance, hisdemeanor, was kind of stoic. Went on smiling and kind of very neutral.

And the doors to the inner sanctum were closed and soon thereafter Gray came out.And we were all around the conference table including the SAC and the ASAC whowas, the guy’s name was Bob Campbell. Anyway, he came storming out of theoffice. I’ll never forget because he was a military type appearing type guy. Shorthaircut. Kind of stocky. And, he said, “Gentlemen, I had a call from Sandy Smithlast night, Time magazine, and he wanted to know and wanted to verify certaininformation that he had. He wanted me to deny or admit for publication whether ornot the information was true.”

He said, “Gentlemen, that information was uncovered in our investigation. That isFBI information. Somebody is leaking to the press. And I want that Agent or thoseAgents who are doing the leaking to the press to step forward. I want them to puttheir credentials on the table and I want them to resign or I’ll fire them.”


14

PM: Everybody was dumbfounded by that statement. Nobody obviously stepped forward.And then he went into a tirade, I mean a real tirade at the top of his voice and he said,“I may not be a Special Agent of the FBI like you. I may not have the experience thatyou men have. But I’ll have you know that I’m a military man and I was acommander of a submarine and I held many court-martials so I had someinvestigative experience.” He says, “You all, you men are nothing but yellowsniveling, yellow-bellied sniveling Agents.” And he started to curse at us andeverything else.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Nobody could believe what they were hearing.Dead silence. No one spoke up. Not Bates, not Kunkle, not Campbell. No one. Heproceeded to berate us. He abruptly turned around and went back into his office.

MO: How long --? This is Gray. And how long did, how long did he take to do this?PM: About five minutes.

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: And, it seemed like an eternity. Because I have never been so humiliated, humiliated,so insulted, so, so questioned about my integrity like I was that day. In fact, I can stillfeel those words. I can still feel that anger that he had, enmity that he had towards us.And I mean we were nothing in his mind. And it was, it was just a moment that younever forget. He left the room. We were all stunned. I mean stunned.

And I’ll never forget, never forget. Nobody said a word. Until going across thecourtyard, various Agents were talking and said, “You know, what is, what is thisman talking about? Is he crazy?” And then, then you know what happens. Theanger sets in. “Who the hell does this guy think he is? He’s just an appointee. Thisguy doesn’t even have a background in the FBI and he’s calling us these names.Questions our integrity. He’s never even gone through the background investigationthat we had to go through. And yet he’s calling us all these names.”

The anger had peaked. Of course, Kunkle and Campbell were just shaking in theirboots. And went back to the offices and it was a horrible experience. I never, evenwhen I was a member of the Class Action Law Suit for Discrimination Against theFBI that the Hispanic Agents filed, I didn’t feel that way, as I felt then.

But at any rate, you know, it was not soon forgotten. But it was kind of like putaside. Because we had work to do in this Watergate case.


15

MO: Was there an investigation to find out who was leaking the information on the side?

PM: Subsequently Felt started an inquiry as to where these leaks were coming from. But,yeah, well of course at that time no one knew. Right? And, you know, obviously hewas covering his tracks and making sure no one uncovered him. But of course theywent nowhere. And no one really succeeded in that investigation. I don’t know whoinvestigated that. I think it started with somebody in the Bureau. And perhapsanother squad in WFO because it would have been a conflict if it was us.

MO: Were you interviewed about it?

PM: No. I was not interviewed.

MO: Do you know if Woodward and Bernstein were ever interviewed?

PM: Yes. They were interviewed by Angie Lano. What happened was that Felt, againcovering his tracks, through the SAC, through our supervisor said, “Hey, get the caseAgent to talk to Bernstein and Woodward to see what he can find out about what theyknow.” Angie of course did that. Went over there and then Woodward and Bernsteinsabotaged him, you know. They said, “Oh, this guy came over here and he just gaveus misinformation.”

Angie was giving them misinformation to find out what information they had. Theydidn’t come up with anything. They didn’t furnish him any information. They didn’tadmit to anything. They didn’t even give them a clue as to who was leaking.

MO: Did they stonewall too?

PM: I don’t know if they stonewalled so much as they said, “Hey, we’re not telling you,”or something to that effect.

MO: Yeah, okay.

PM: And he says, “Well look, I’ll give you some stuff and you know.” They didn’t fall forthat.

MO: So he offered to trade a little bit?

PM: Yeah. They didn’t fall for that. And whatever he offered was not of anyconsequence or it was misinformation.


16

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: So they found out, Woodward and Bernstein found out that Angie was telling themmisinformation and they attempted to crucify him, in the Post, saying that, he wascoming out with false information and, more, he was feeding them official FBI filesand information. So they tried to compromise him, but it didn’t work. Obviously.

Mo: Okay, I think, Paul, where you left off, at the fact that you had talked about the Case

Agent went to interview Woodward and Bernstein and got nowhere. Let me just bring

up a few follow-up questions here. Whatever happened to the secretary and the accountant

that you initially interviewed?

PM: Well after a while when all of our interviews (FD 302s) came out in the WashingtonPost, they just stopped talking to me.

MO: Uh, huh. so were they upset with you?

PM: Oh, very upset.

MO: Yeah, uh huh.

PM: Very upset.

MO: So you don’t know if they continued on at the committee?

PM: No, I don’t know what happened to them. I think what happened with CREEP after awhile it was just dissolved.

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: Because there was no sense having a fundraising arm for the President when hewasn’t going to run for reelection.

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: You see.

MO: Yeah. Did either the secretary or the accountant, did they know about the Watergatebreak-in beforehand?

PM: I don’t believe so. The accountant especially had books as to where the money andthe funds were directed and to whom, but she didn’t know what the funds were beingused for.


17

PM: As far as the secretary was concerned, she was a young girl. By young I mean shehad to be nineteen, twenty years old so she wasn’t sophisticated in these types ofthings. All she knew was that a light bulb went off in her head after we startedinterviewing after the burglary. And said, “You know there’s something wrongbecause these guys, Liddy and McCord, my boss, came to the office and furiouslystarted shredding documents.” That’s when she started …

MO: Start putting two and two together.

PM: And then started giving us other stuff that pertained to it, you see.

MO: Now when the accountant told you about the books that she kept that indicated thatmoney was going to Liddy and Hunt, did you ever, did you get search warrant forthose books?

PM: No, we did not, that I know of. I don’t think we did. You see, there were twenty-seven of us working this investigating this case. All of us had certain parts of it. Andthere could have been, but I don’t think so.

MO: Uh, huh. And you said the reason why is the White House had to give youpermission.

PM: Oh, yeah. What happened also is that if it, if it wasn’t, if there were no searchwarrants issued for CREEP it was because every time we wanted to do something thataffected CREEP or the White House we had to get permission from the White Houseto do it.

MO: Partly ---

PM: We had to advise them that we wanted to do this. So they knew beforehand what wewere going to do.

MO: So the White House knew everything and could they stop it --? Were you awarepersonally of them saying, “Hey, don’t do that”?

PM: No.

MO: Okay.

PM: No, they never, to my knowledge, they never stopped any of our investigation.However, by the sheer fact that they knew what we were going to do, they couldcover their tracks.

MO: Oh yeah.


18

PM: Similar to Clinton and the attorney that was working for him when he committedsuicide. Before the FBI came in to search his offices, the White House made sure allhis documents and everything else were clear.

MO: Uh, huh.

PM: Cleared out of his office before the FBI got in there. It was similar to that.

MO: Did you understand the significance of the Watergate investigation at the time it wasgoing on?

PM: Oh, absolutely. And I understood it to be that this was an historical time inWashington because the President was involved. And obviously we didn’t know atthe time of the inception of the investigation what was going to happen. Butsubsequently the relinquishing of the Presidency by Nixon is an historical event in thehistory of our country. And so at the time I knew, yes.

MO: So, yeah, you understood the significance of it that led to the President at the time andso that’s what you were saying, correct?

PM: Yes. I think all of us knew that we were part of history. All of us knew that we wereinvestigating an event that was going to be in the history books and that our childrenand grandchildren were going to be reading about. And from that perspective, weknew it was a major historical event equivalent to impeachment of a President. And,of course, Nixon was almost impeached. He relinquished the Presidency before that.So that we knew we were in the midst of history. We knew that. And subsequentlywhat happened thereafter, it turns out we were cheated by, our roles in history werecheated by Woodward and Bernstein and Deep Throat.

MO: Go, go in that a little bit how they cheated you, I mean what the effect of DeepThroat, Mark Felt, had on the case.

PM: All right. Now in terms of being cheated of our proper role in history what happenedwas, we were cheated because of Felt’S actions of feeding FBI confidentialinformation to Woodward and Bernstein. Subsequently Woodward and Bernsteintook all of the credit because they “revealed and exposed the dishonor that washappening in the White House,” vis-à-vis the President.

And then the role of the Agent, the role of the investigating Agent wasn’t evenmentioned. In fact, they ridiculed our investigation because their stories in theWashington Post indicated that the FBI wasn’t on top of this. The FBI wasn’t doingtheir job. Of course we as Agents couldn’t defend ourselves. So they made us looklike fools, you see.


19

PM: And so in that sense, here we have hard-working, country-loving, family-lovingAgents dedicated to doing our job. And these guys, Woodward and Bernstein, tookall of the credit for the job that we did because “they brought down the President.”And they didn’t in fact bring down the President. It was we, the FBI, who broughtdown the President.

MO: They steal your work, they claim credit for it, and then they accuse you of doingnothing.

PM: Exactly right.

MO: Wow.

PM: Exactly right.

MO: The hat trick. So anyway, what about Mark Felt? What do you think, what do youthink about him? Deep Throat.

PM: Well, Mark Felt violated his oath. When all of us FBI Agents take an oath, we swearthat we are not going to reveal any confidential FBI information. And when hefurnished information to Woodward and Bernstein he violated that oath. And he alsocommitted a crime. Because that was Grand Jury material that he furnished toWoodward and Bernstein.

So he did two things. He violated his oath, the FBI oath. And he committed a crime.So consequently he could have been tried for that. He should have been tried for that,had it been known obviously. And he would have become a felon. Well, as it was, hewas a convicted felon, notwithstanding the fact that he was pardoned by Nixon. Howironic was that.

MO: Because when you take Grand Jury information that’s sensitive secret informationand when you reveal that, that’s a criminal act.

PM: Absolutely.

MO: Yeah, okay. Okay, is there anything else you want to mention on Watergate?

PM: Well, I just wanted to say that, and if I can ….


20

PM: If I may, I just would like --. I’ve taken some notes. About this and I want, this is myfeeling and I think I’m expressing this for all of us that worked the Watergate. And,I’m going to read from my notes that says:

“The real lesson of Watergate should be that our government is willing to investigateitself and uncover whatever ugly truths are found. However, Woodward andBernstein, Felt, and the media have made certain that the enduring lesson is thatintrepid reporters in the Fourth Estate are the thing between us and our corrupt,secretive government. The damage that Woodward’s story did to our view ofgovernment, in my opinion, is irreparable. We’re suffering from the cynicism rightnow while the troops are in Iraq. Everyone is so certain that everyone else, especiallygovernment, is corrupt and lying. That the basic trust necessary to bind our societytogether for common causes is gone. The FBI is seen as corrupt and Hoover isdismissed in history as the wiretapping, cross-dresser of Oliver Stone.

Felt’s motivation was purely vindictiveness for having been a “bridesmaid” but neverthe “bride” because he was not appointed Director of the FBI. He violated his oathand the laws of the country and his actions brought suspicion on me and on all thestreet Agents working the case.

Felt is not a person to be admired. His attorney admitted that much during a speechto the Bar Association of San Francisco in June, 2005, when he said, “I didn’t wantpeople saying, ‘Well, he’s a hero, but he’s kind of a thug and a burglar too.’” This ishis own attorney saying this. Anyway, that’s, that’s how I feel about Felt and therest.”

MO: Felt, yeah. Are there other significant cases, people, or events you want to talkabout?

PM: Yeah, I would like to address the Hispanic FBI Agents Law Suit, Class ActionLawsuit, against the FBI that began in 1987 and was decided by a Federal judge in1989. It was a time when Hispanic Agents were being discriminated against inviolation of their civil rights and it was happening for a long period of time before theaction, civil suit, was initiated.

I want to make it clear that the Hispanic Agents, prior to filing suit, went up theladder in terms of chain of command first to remedy the situation. That didn’thappen. FBI Headquarters, FBI officials didn’t listen to our complaints, in fact theystymied us.


21

PM: The next step was to follow the rules and regulations that the FBI had in place.Namely, we went the EEO route and we complained to the EEO officer in the FBI inLos Angeles, Albuquerque, elsewhere, throughout the field offices. That didn’t work.We got no relief at all. Once that didn’t work, then we filed the class action suit.

We had a meeting in 1987 in Albuquerque, New Mexico, wherein numerous Agentsfrom throughout the country, Hispanic Agents, met. Before we knew it, all theseAgents had grievances as to how they were being discriminated in their separateoffices for being Hispanic. And that’s when it was decided that we were going toinitiate a class action lawsuit.

During the course of the lawsuit the FBI --when I say the FBI, I mean the Bureau, andthe Bureau senior executives and the SACS in the field offices stonewalled us. Weasked for various things. Our personnel files. They stonewalled us. It took a Federaljudge to order the FBI to give us our personnel records. Files. Folders. And thenthey didn’t give us all of them. So we went back to the judge and the judge then toldthe FBI that if they did not give us the FBI files, all of them, he would sanction theFBI. They finally did that.

During the course of the lawsuit various things happened to, in terms of retaliation toHispanic Agents. The class action representative was Bernardo Mat Perez, whosubsequently became the first high-ranking Hispanic Agent in the FBI as the result ofthe lawsuit. And during the lawsuit the FBI did various unlawful activities againsthim such as pulling his toll records and surveilling him among others.

And so there was a lot of animosity between Agents, Hispanic Agents, and thehierarchy, senior executives, and executive field people. As a result of that and as aresult of the lawsuit, there was a lot of, not a lot but there was some animosity withthe street Agents and Hispanic Agents. I, for one, found out that some of the Agentsthat I thought were my friends, the street Agents, weren’t really my friends.

And as a result of that there was created an animosity between even street Agents. Itwas an action that we had to take because no one was listening to us. No oneremedied the situation. And consequently the Federal judge agreed. And if I canread from the court decision:

“The District Court found that the FBI had violated Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of1964 by failing to give Hispanic Agents proper credit for their contributions andconsequently excluding the Agents from promotions and benefits.” The Court said


22

that “to provide a remedy for past discrimination the District Court appointed apanel of special masters to review the entitlement of those members of the class whohad obtained the rank of GS-13 or higher by May 5, 1989, with one year experienceto the rightful place, seniority.”

MO: So, what in effect happened?

PM: And this is just a summary. But what had, what in fact happened was that the FederalJudge ruled that the FBI had discriminated against Hispanic Agents. And the FBIdidn’t appeal that.

But aside from that, I think that for the historical perspective, this entity that I’mdoing an interview for should interview the class representative Bernardo Mat Perezto get his perspective as to what happened and how it happened and all of theincidents that happened with regard to the lawsuit, specifically in Los Angeles andelsewhere.

I, myself, suffered retaliation as many other Agents suffered retaliation. But that’s anevent that happened during my career that I have put behind me and that I have,however, still have vivid in my memory. But more than ever, I think, that the FBItraining and the FBI experience has given me the success that I have in my secondcareer which is in the business that I’m in currently.

MO: So your perspective, I mean, your career at the FBI ---Overall, how would yousummarize your career in the FBI?

PM: It was a career that only very few people in this country get to follow. I was veryfortunate to have been appointed a Special Agent of the FBI. I am thankful for theexperiences I had while in the FBI, in all the roles I played be it undercover, be itWatergate, be it the lawsuit although it was a negative part of the career. But overallthe experience in the FBI has proved to me to be not only beneficial but a point in mylife that I’ll never, never forget.

MO: Thanks Paul. Is there anything else you want to add?

PM: No, that’s all I have.

MO: Covered everything?

PM: That’s it.

MO: Okay. Good. Thank you.

interview - paul magallanes then we got involved, the fbi got involved because of certain notes and...

Documents