New book by Saint John Hunt about his father, Howard Hunt

[Steven Gaal]

FROM BILL KELLY POST

###############

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3869&hl=pash

see thread on PASH /PARKLAND

Edited December 10, 2012 by Steven Gaal

[Douglas Caddy]

Eric Hamburg has written a lengthy and detailed Afterword titled “E. Howard Hunt and the JFK Plotters” to St. John’s book. He and St. John conducted a series of interviews with Howard Hunt in Miami that are recounted in the book. Here is his impressive biography:

http://lib.stanford.edu/node/6237/

Hamburg starts the Afterword by asking:”How much of Howard Hunt’s scenario holds up under examination? Surprising, a great deal. The men he names as part of the plot have cropped up over and over again in the assassination literature. There is substantial supporting evidence to implicate them in a plot to kill JFK. For this reason, Hunt’s revelations are more credible than they might otherwise be. A review of the literature indicates why this is so.”

Among other interesting aspects discussed by Hamburg is, “And what do we know about Lucien Sarti, the French Corsican Mafia gunman named by Howard Hunt as the second shooter on the grassy knoll?” He then quotes Prof. Peter Dale Scott as finding that “Lucien Sarti, a top Ricord [drug network] lieutenant, was shot and killed by authorities in Mexico on 27 April 1972, after being located there by U.S. agents."

Hamburg believes that “This latter fact is quite interesting. Eliminating international drug traffickers was one of the missions of the White House plumbers unit, of which Hunt was a member, and Sarti’s murder occurred just before the Watergate break-in in June 1972. Is this a link between the JFK assassination and Watergate – or is it just another coincidence?”

To which I might add: was it just another coincidence that J. Edgar Hoover died a week after Sarti, on May 2, 1972? It has been alleged the cause of his death was lethal poison that had been implanted in his toothpaste. Were the deaths of two key figures linked to the JFK killing part of an orchestrated mopping up operation of the assassination of which the Watergate break-in was also part?

St. John’s book also reprints an excerpt from Mark Lane’s authoritative 1991 work, “Plausible Denial”, which contained the lengthy deposition witness testimony of Marita Lorenz that was introduced into the court record at the trial involving Hunt’s lawsuit against Liberty Lobby. Here are some key portions of her testimony:

Q. What is your present employment?

A. I do undercover work for an intelligence agency.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During 1978, did you appear as a witness before the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During and before November of 1963, did you work on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Miami area?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Tell me the circumstances regarding your seeing E. Howard Hunt in Dallas in November of 1973?

A. There was a prearranged meeting that E. Howard Hunt deliver us sums of money for the so-called operation that I did not know its nature.

Q. Were you told what your role was to be?

A. Just a decoy at the time.

Q. Did you Mr. Hunt actually deliver money to anyone in the motel room which you were present in?

A. Yes.

Q. To who did you see him deliver the money?

A. He gave an envelope of cash to Frank Fiorini [sturgis].

….

Q. Did you see the person you identified as Jack Ruby?

A. After Eduardo left, a fellow came to the door and it was Jack Ruby, about an hour later, forty-five minutes to an hour later.

Q. When you say Eduardo, who are you referring to?

A. E. Howard Hunt.

….

Q. Now can you tell us in the relationship to the day that President Kennedy was killed, when this meeting took place?

A. The day before.

….

Q. When was the first time you met Howard Hunt?

A. 1960, in Miami, Florida.

Edited December 12, 2012 by Douglas Caddy

[Thomas Graves]

Eric Hamburg has written a lengthy and detailed Afterword titled “E. Howard Hunt and the JFK Plotters” to St. John’s book. He and St. John conducted a series of interviews with Howard Hunt in Miami that are recounted in the book. Here is his impressive biography:

http://lib.stanford.edu/node/6237/

Hamburg starts the Afterword by asking:”How much of Howard Hunt’s scenario holds up under examination? Surprising, a great deal. The men he names as part of the plot have cropped up over and over again in the assassination literature. There is substantial supporting evidence to implicate them in a plot to kill JFK. For this reason, Hunt’s revelations are more credible than they might otherwise be. A review of the literature indicates why this is so.”

Among other interesting aspects discussed by Hamburg is, “And what do we know about Lucien Sarti, the French Corsican Mafia gunman named by Howard Hunt as the second shooter on the grassy knoll?” He then quotes Prof. Peter Dale Scott as finding that “Lucien Sarti, a top Ricord [drug network] lieutenant, was shot and killed by authorities in Mexico on 27 April 1972, after being located there by U.S. agents."

Hamburg believes that “This latter fact is quite interesting. Eliminating international drug traffickers was one of the missions of the White House plumbers unit, of which Hunt was a member, and Sarti’s murder occurred just before the Watergate break-in in June 1972. Is this a link between the JFK assassination and Watergate – or is it just another coincidence?”

To which I might add: was it just another coincidence that J. Edgar Hoover died a week after Sarti, on May 2, 1972? It has been alleged the cause of his death was lethal poison that had been implanted in his toothpaste. Were the deaths of two key figures linked to the JFK killing part of an orchestrated mopping up operation of the assassination of which the Watergate break-in was also part?

St. John’s book also reprints an excerpt from Mark Lane’s authoritative 1991 work, “Plausible Denial”, which contained the lengthy deposition witness testimony of Marita Lorenz that was introduced into the court record at the trial involving Hunt’s lawsuit against Liberty Lobby. Here are some key portions of her testimony:

Q. What is your present employment?

A. I do undercover work for an intelligence agency.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During 1978, did you appear as a witness before the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During and before November of 1963, did you work on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Miami area?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Tell me the circumstances regarding your seeing E. Howard Hunt in Dallas in November of 1973?

A. There was a prearranged meeting that E. Howard Hunt deliver us sums of money for the so-called operation that I did not know its nature.

Q. Were you told what your role was to be?

A. Just a decoy at the time.

Q. Did you Mr. Hunt actually delivered money to anyone in the motel room which you were present in?

A. Yes.

Q. To who did you see him delivered the money?

A. He gave an envelope of cash to Frank Fiorini [sturgis].

….

Q. Did you see the person you identified as Jack Ruby?

A. After Eduardo left, a fellow came to the door and it was Jack Ruby, about an hour later, forty-five minutes to an hour later.

Q. When you say Eduardo, who are you referring to?

A. E. Howard Hunt.

….

Q. Now can you tell us in the relationship to the day that President Kennedy was killed, when this meeting took place?

A. The day before.

….

Q. When was the first time you met Howard Hunt?

A. 1960, in Miami, Florida.

Douglas,

Any idea why the White House Plumbers would have wanted to eliminate international drug traffickers?

Thanks,

--Tommy

[Douglas Caddy]

Eric Hamburg has written a lengthy and detailed Afterword titled “E. Howard Hunt and the JFK Plotters” to St. John’s book. He and St. John conducted a series of interviews with Howard Hunt in Miami that are recounted in the book. Here is his impressive biography:

http://lib.stanford.edu/node/6237/

Hamburg starts the Afterword by asking:”How much of Howard Hunt’s scenario holds up under examination? Surprising, a great deal. The men he names as part of the plot have cropped up over and over again in the assassination literature. There is substantial supporting evidence to implicate them in a plot to kill JFK. For this reason, Hunt’s revelations are more credible than they might otherwise be. A review of the literature indicates why this is so.”

Among other interesting aspects discussed by Hamburg is, “And what do we know about Lucien Sarti, the French Corsican Mafia gunman named by Howard Hunt as the second shooter on the grassy knoll?” He then quotes Prof. Peter Dale Scott as finding that “Lucien Sarti, a top Ricord [drug network] lieutenant, was shot and killed by authorities in Mexico on 27 April 1972, after being located there by U.S. agents."

Hamburg believes that “This latter fact is quite interesting. Eliminating international drug traffickers was one of the missions of the White House plumbers unit, of which Hunt was a member, and Sarti’s murder occurred just before the Watergate break-in in June 1972. Is this a link between the JFK assassination and Watergate – or is it just another coincidence?”

To which I might add: was it just another coincidence that J. Edgar Hoover died a week after Sarti, on May 2, 1972? It has been alleged the cause of his death was lethal poison that had been implanted in his toothpaste. Were the deaths of two key figures linked to the JFK killing part of an orchestrated mopping up operation of the assassination of which the Watergate break-in was also part?

St. John’s book also reprints an excerpt from Mark Lane’s authoritative 1991 work, “Plausible Denial”, which contained the lengthy deposition witness testimony of Marita Lorenz that was introduced into the court record at the trial involving Hunt’s lawsuit against Liberty Lobby. Here are some key portions of her testimony:

Q. What is your present employment?

A. I do undercover work for an intelligence agency.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During 1978, did you appear as a witness before the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During and before November of 1963, did you work on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Miami area?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Tell me the circumstances regarding your seeing E. Howard Hunt in Dallas in November of 1973?

A. There was a prearranged meeting that E. Howard Hunt deliver us sums of money for the so-called operation that I did not know its nature.

Q. Were you told what your role was to be?

A. Just a decoy at the time.

Q. Did you Mr. Hunt actually delivered money to anyone in the motel room which you were present in?

A. Yes.

Q. To who did you see him delivered the money?

A. He gave an envelope of cash to Frank Fiorini [sturgis].

….

Q. Did you see the person you identified as Jack Ruby?

A. After Eduardo left, a fellow came to the door and it was Jack Ruby, about an hour later, forty-five minutes to an hour later.

Q. When you say Eduardo, who are you referring to?

A. E. Howard Hunt.

….

Q. Now can you tell us in the relationship to the day that President Kennedy was killed, when this meeting took place?

A. The day before.

….

Q. When was the first time you met Howard Hunt?

A. 1960, in Miami, Florida.

Douglas,

Any idea why the White House Plumbers would have wanted to eliminate international drug traffickers?

Thanks,

--Tommy

It was Nixon's war so-called on drugs. Here is a link to an article about it. Below the link are relevant excerpts from the article:

http://www.druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/nixon.htm

There was, though, a hidden agenda. Nixon wanted all along to have his own private security agency, beyond the control of the FBI, the CIA or any other official government body, which could investigate leaks, tap phones and gather intelligence on his internal and external opponents

G. Gordon Liddy came up with the brilliant idea that the best way to do this was to establish the agency under the cloak of the war on drugs. Who, after all, would complain if a little illegality was indulged in the cause of protecting the families of US from the plague of heroin?

Nixon ordered John Ehrlichman and Egil Krogh to establish this unit which was to be called the Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement

The Watergate conspirators who came to be known as "the plumbers" - Liddy and Krogh, who had been leading figures in the administration's drugs war, Howard Hunt, who was brought in from the CIA, and others - were assembled, a preliminary version of this putative anti-narcotics agency. Krogh, the official co-ordinator of Nixon's war on drugs, was also, in his unofficial capacity, the head of "the plumbers" who organised the Watergate break-in

Liddy, the most colourful and notorious of "the plumbers", was Krogh's assistant. Hunt was a consultant on the drug problem to the president's Domestic Council. Essentially, Nixon's covert criminals and his drug warriors were one and same. As Edward Jay Epstein put it in his remarkable 1977 investigation, Agency of Fear, "the new opiate war provided the perfect cover for this seizure of power"

The weird thing is that long after these people were found out and sent to jail, the rhetoric and imagery which they had pioneered in the manipulation of the drugs issue retained its power

[Thomas Graves]

Eric Hamburg has written a lengthy and detailed Afterword titled “E. Howard Hunt and the JFK Plotters” to St. John’s book. He and St. John conducted a series of interviews with Howard Hunt in Miami that are recounted in the book. Here is his impressive biography:

http://lib.stanford.edu/node/6237/

Hamburg starts the Afterword by asking:”How much of Howard Hunt’s scenario holds up under examination? Surprising, a great deal. The men he names as part of the plot have cropped up over and over again in the assassination literature. There is substantial supporting evidence to implicate them in a plot to kill JFK. For this reason, Hunt’s revelations are more credible than they might otherwise be. A review of the literature indicates why this is so.”

Among other interesting aspects discussed by Hamburg is, “And what do we know about Lucien Sarti, the French Corsican Mafia gunman named by Howard Hunt as the second shooter on the grassy knoll?” He then quotes Prof. Peter Dale Scott as finding that “Lucien Sarti, a top Ricord [drug network] lieutenant, was shot and killed by authorities in Mexico on 27 April 1972, after being located there by U.S. agents."

Hamburg believes that “This latter fact is quite interesting. Eliminating international drug traffickers was one of the missions of the White House plumbers unit, of which Hunt was a member, and Sarti’s murder occurred just before the Watergate break-in in June 1972. Is this a link between the JFK assassination and Watergate – or is it just another coincidence?”

To which I might add: was it just another coincidence that J. Edgar Hoover died a week after Sarti, on May 2, 1972? It has been alleged the cause of his death was lethal poison that had been implanted in his toothpaste. Were the deaths of two key figures linked to the JFK killing part of an orchestrated mopping up operation of the assassination of which the Watergate break-in was also part?

St. John’s book also reprints an excerpt from Mark Lane’s authoritative 1991 work, “Plausible Denial”, which contained the lengthy deposition witness testimony of Marita Lorenz that was introduced into the court record at the trial involving Hunt’s lawsuit against Liberty Lobby. Here are some key portions of her testimony:

Q. What is your present employment?

A. I do undercover work for an intelligence agency.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During 1978, did you appear as a witness before the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations?

A. Yes.

….

Q. During and before November of 1963, did you work on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Miami area?

A. Yes.

….

Q. Tell me the circumstances regarding your seeing E. Howard Hunt in Dallas in November of 1973?

A. There was a prearranged meeting that E. Howard Hunt deliver us sums of money for the so-called operation that I did not know its nature.

Q. Were you told what your role was to be?

A. Just a decoy at the time.

Q. Did you Mr. Hunt actually delivered money to anyone in the motel room which you were present in?

A. Yes.

Q. To who did you see him delivered the money?

A. He gave an envelope of cash to Frank Fiorini [sturgis].

….

Q. Did you see the person you identified as Jack Ruby?

A. After Eduardo left, a fellow came to the door and it was Jack Ruby, about an hour later, forty-five minutes to an hour later.

Q. When you say Eduardo, who are you referring to?

A. E. Howard Hunt.

….

Q. Now can you tell us in the relationship to the day that President Kennedy was killed, when this meeting took place?

A. The day before.

….

Q. When was the first time you met Howard Hunt?

A. 1960, in Miami, Florida.

Douglas,

Any idea why the White House Plumbers would have wanted to eliminate international drug traffickers?

Thanks,

--Tommy

It was Nixon's war so-called on drugs. Here is a link to an article about it. Below the link are relevant excerpts from the article:

http://www.druglibra.../~jnr/nixon.htm

There was, though, a hidden agenda. Nixon wanted all along to have his own private security agency, beyond the control of the FBI, the CIA or any other official government body, which could investigate leaks, tap phones and gather intelligence on his internal and external opponents

G. Gordon Liddy came up with the brilliant idea that the best way to do this was to establish the agency under the cloak of the war on drugs. Who, after all, would complain if a little illegality was indulged in the cause of protecting the families of US from the plague of heroin?

Nixon ordered John Ehrlichman and Egil Krogh to establish this unit which was to be called the Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement

The Watergate conspirators who came to be known as "the plumbers" - Liddy and Krogh, who had been leading figures in the administration's drugs war, Howard Hunt, who was brought in from the CIA, and others - were assembled, a preliminary version of this putative anti-narcotics agency. Krogh, the official co-ordinator of Nixon's war on drugs, was also, in his unofficial capacity, the head of "the plumbers" who organised the Watergate break-in

Liddy, the most colourful and notorious of "the plumbers", was Krogh's assistant. Hunt was a consultant on the drug problem to the president's Domestic Council. Essentially, Nixon's covert criminals and his drug warriors were one and same. As Edward Jay Epstein put it in his remarkable 1977 investigation, Agency of Fear, "the new opiate war provided the perfect cover for this seizure of power"

The weird thing is that long after these people were found out and sent to jail, the rhetoric and imagery which they had pioneered in the manipulation of the drugs issue retained its power

Douglas,

That makes perfect sense.

Thanks,

--Tommy

[Douglas Caddy]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19794

[David Andrews]

I tend to also see Nixon's War on Drugs as consonant with Governor Nelson Rockefeller's zero-tolerance New York State drug laws, which means consonant with Rockefeller family social policy - not to say economic and racial policies as well. Whatever Nixon made of it (which may have caused the Rockefellers displeasure and led to Nixon's eviction), I feel the Drug War was dictated from above Nixon, with the Reagan-era's drug-financed anti-left activities in the long-term planning.

[Douglas Caddy]

Here are an old article that may add some information in response to Tom Scully’s prior posting in this topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shearn_Moody,_Jr.

http://www.chron.com...?id=1987_435342

Houston Chronicle

January 18, 1987

“In harm's way, again What do Watergate, CIA and Moody probe have in common? Caddy

By Dianna Hunt

Staff

HE HAD RECEIVED bomb threats, been followed, had his phones tapped and the windows of his office shot out in the night.

Yet Douglas Caddy still feared he might just be paranoid.

"We used to joke about it," says Caddy, a Houston author and attorney. "Do you think somebody's trying to give us a message?"

His fears, apparently, were not unfounded. In a sworn statement submitted to a Houston private investigator and the FBI, a former military explosives expert says Caddy was the target of an alleged bomb plot hatched by Galveston millionaire Shearn Moody Jr.

Moody, says the expert, tried to hire him to "blow (Caddy's) legs off" because Caddy prompted investigations into impropriety within the multimillion-dollar Moody Foundation.

For Caddy, the front-row seat in a money-and-power scandal is an all-too-familiar occurrence. As a defense attorney and witness in the Watergate scandal, a friend and former roommate to South Korean lobbyist Tongsun Park, and a one-time publicist in a CIA front company, Caddy turns up in the strangest places.

"I don't know why," he concedes. "I just do."

He flatly denies ever working for the Central Intelligence Agency.

"I get tarred with it, but I never have worked for the CIA," Caddy says.

Caddy, 48, emerged as a central figure in the latest scandal after approaching Moody Foundation officials in 1985 with information about the possible mishandling of millions of dollars in foundation grants.

His complaints prompted an internal Moody Foundation probe, which ultimately led to the hiring of Houston private investigator Clyde Wilson to look into the matter. The state attorney general's office and federal officials likewise are investigating.

Five people - including Moody and his administrative aide Norman Revie - already have been indicted by a Houston federal grand jury.

Caddy's life the last three decades has been scattered with similar brushes with important people and events.

A graduate of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service and New York University Law School, Caddy became involved in the Watergate scandal just half an hour after the arrest of five burglars in the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee at the Watergate Hotel - when he received a 3 a.m. call from former CIA operative E. Howard Hunt.

Caddy served as defense lawyer to both Hunt and another Watergate conspirator, G. Gordon Liddy, and later testified about his refusal to accept $25,000 in "hush money."

His involvement in Watergate stemmed from his friendship with Hunt, with whom he shared office space in the Washington-based Mullen Company - a public relations firm and offshoot of General Foods that was later identified as a front company for the CIA.

Caddy went to work as a lobbyist in General Foods' New York office in 1967, but transferred to the Mullen Company in 1969. He left the company in 1971 to go into private practice as an attorney.

"I didn't ask to be put in the Mullen Company," Caddy says now. "General Foods put me there.

"I didn't even know the Democrats had their headquarters in the Watergate."

Just a few years later, though, Caddy would be back in the midst of another scandal - one involving his former college roommate, Tongsun Park, a Korean rice dealer.

Park, a glittering party-giver and a central figure in "Koreagate," was granted immunity from criminal prosecution in 1978 for his much-publicized testimony that he paid members of Congress in exchange for political favors.

Caddy says Park was the first person he met at Georgetown University, and they later became class officers together, as well as friends. During that time, Caddy said he suspected - but never knew - that Park worked for the Korean CIA.

"I suspected - much like working in the Mullen office - that something was up," Caddy said.

Caddy says he was questioned by staff members of the U.S. House of Representatives ethics committee about his relationship with Park, but never testified publicly.

Through it all, Caddy remained active in conservative Republican politics and helped found two youth groups, the Young Americans for Freedom and the International Youth Federation for Freedom. And in 1974, he wrote a book, "The Hundred Million Dollar Pay-off," about organized labor's role in campaign financing.

Caddy came to Texas in 1979, and went to work in 1980 in Austin as director of elections for then-Secretary of State George Strake. While there, he agreed to a friend's request to serve as local counsel to a non-profit foundation that wanted to apply for a Moody Foundation grant. He moved to Houston in 1981.

Caddy said he first met foundation trustee Shearn Moody Jr. at the foundation's Galveston offices, where they and other officials discussed the grant.

Caddy eventually would serve as director or legal counsel to several organizations that would receive more than $1 million in Moody Foundation grants.

Those grants are now among more than $3 million in grants under investigation. Caddy says the investigation of him is "retaliation" for his raising the initial allegations with officials. He also attributes the probe to what he says is a friendship between the Moodys and Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox.

Caddy says he has cooperated fully with investigators because he has "nothing to hide."

"We're very proud of what we did," Caddy said. "We fulfilled our contracts for the purposes stated."

Among his grant-funded projects were conferences on terrorism, Hispanics and the "Star Wars" technology, and - at Moody's request - an investigation into allegations raised by convicted West Texas swindler Billie Sol Estes. Estes has long claimed to have information implicating former President Lyndon B. Johnson in wrongdoing.

During that time, Caddy says he began to consider himself a friend to Moody, and once agreed to work undercover posing as Moody's lawyer to help an FBI investigation of alleged corruption among Alabama state officials.

The friendship began to cool, however, after Moody's lawyer revealed the "cover" in a North Carolina bankruptcy court, Caddy said. Moody's increasing association with William R. Pabst, convicted in 1985 of charity fraud, furthered the split.

Caddy said Moody ignored repeated warnings to steer clear of Pabst. On Oct. 31, 1985, Caddy urged the Moody Foundation to investigate grants to several foundations Pabst and his associate, Vance Beaudreau, helped set up.

Moody, Pabst and Beaudreau have since been indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly diverting Moody Foundation grants to pay personal expenses.

It wasn't long after his split with Moody that Caddy says he started receiving threats.

Caddy said he received three or four bomb threats over a period of several days, and the windows in his sixth-floor office were shot out during the night. About a month later, he found a spent cartridge near his desk.

Throughout, he says, his house has been watched, he's been followed and his telephones have been wiretapped. Friends and associates, too, have been harassed, Caddy says.

In a July 22, 1985, letter to Moody, Caddy attributed the threats to "Pabst and his kooky paramilitary colleagues."

Last week, D. Michael Hollaway, the explosives expert, said under oath that Moody and Pabst tried to hire him later that year to plant explosives in Caddy's car.

Hollaway said Moody told him he wanted to "blow his (Caddy's) legs off," or have him shot by a sniper. Hollaway declined the offer.

"William R. Pabst just talked to me about using enough explosives to scare Caddy, but Shearn Moody wanted him either dead or his legs blown off," Hollaway said. "Shearn Moody was not kidding about this but was very serious."

Hollaway said he was approached by Moody and Pabst "at the time that Douglas Caddy started causing problems at the Moody Foundation."

Caddy says he's not surprised by Hollaway's allegations.

"It's what comes out of a case involving a family fortune and a family dynasty," Caddy said. "I think quite frankly, yes, they were trying to send us a message."

He remains worried, though - particularly since Pabst and Beaudreau are fugitives believed to be hiding in Mexico.

"It still bothers me that Pabst and Beaudreau are still running around out there, because they're unstable people," Caddy said. "I am still fearful for my life and the lives of my associates.

"We're not just paranoid. If he (Moody) had found the right guy, they would have done it."

Edited January 6, 2013 by Douglas Caddy

[Bernice Moore]

FROM BILL KELLY POST

###############

http://educationforu...ic=3869&hl=pash

see thread on PASH /PARKLAND

Steve, He is SS Forest Sorrels, if in doubt, contact Vince Palamara,as he straightened this out his id, some time back...thanks..b:: correction......It is Forest Sorrels, one r.sorry...b

Edited December 24, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Steven Gaal]

THANKS BERNICE . He is to close to LBJs position post assassination not to be important like SS agent.

[Bernice Moore]

Your welcome Steve, he is also pictured with Marina and Robert on separate occasions, leaving Parkland...stay well, best b

Edited December 24, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Douglas Caddy]

Thanks, Doug, for posting this introduction. Does St. John's book provide the passages you say were removed from his father's book? I suspect they'd prove most interesting.

FWIW I know you were there, and I wasn't, but I think your dislike of Sirica has biased your opinion on a few key points. I just don't buy that the hush money was brought up because the "burglars" were scared they weren't gonna get a fair trial. It's clear to me it was brought up because everyone involved KNEW if they copped a plea and told the truth about what happened in order to receive a lesser sentence--the normal course of justice--Richard Nixon would not be re-elected. Most everyone involved--even the prosecutors--wanted to avoid this. The hush money, in such case, was necessitated by practicality. These men agreed to take the fall for Nixon--and Hunt was making sure they were rewarded for their loyalty.

I also think you fail to see that the prosecutors were in on it. McCord's book is particularly telling on this point. Nixon was meeting with Kleindienst and guiding the prosecution. The prosecutors were not pushing as hard as they should have been. It seems likely they knew something was up, but just didn't give a darn, until McCord forced their hands by writing his letter to Sirica.

I mean, after all this time, do you really think the worst thing about Watergate was Sirica's abuse of authority, and that everything would have been okie-dokie if that darn judge hadn't scared your one-time clients into blackmailing the President? Because I don't feel that way at all. I feel the worst thing was that Nixon got elected in the first place, through subterfuge with the South Vietnamese and lying about a secret plan to end the war, and that he then decided it was his divine right to rule, and rule as an all-powerful God. And the second worst thing was that so many on the conservative side of the cultural divide enabled him, and convinced themselves that the real enemy of liberty etc was Ted Kennedy, or George McGovern.

If the only reason Nixon's house of cards collapsed was because Judge Sirica acted as a bully, well, bravo Judge Sirica...

http://educationforu...showtopic=19849

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19852

Edited January 10, 2013 by Douglas Caddy

[Pat Speer]

On 12/1/2012 at 5:46 PM, Douglas Caddy said:

INTRODUCTION TO ST. JOHN HUNT'S BOOK

By Douglas Caddy

Original Attorney for the Watergate Seven

Before Watergate

When I first met Howard Hunt in 1970, my immediate impression was of a man who was highly intelligent, possessed perfect manners and was extremely articulate in his conversation.

The occasion of our first meeting was Howard’s coming on board as an employee at the Robert Mullen & Company upon his “retiring” from the CIA. The Mullen Company was a public relations firm with its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and with offices scattered around the globe. General Foods Corporation was a Mullen Company account. I had gone to work for General Foods in White Plains, New York, not long after being graduated in 1966 from the New York University Law School. In 1969 General Foods assigned me to work out of the Mullen Company in conjunction with my job representing General Foods interests in the nation’s capital.

Howard and I quickly became friends once we learned that we had another friend in common: William F. Buckley, Jr., publisher of National Review magazine. I had worked closely with Buckley in the founding of the modern conservative movement in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. I had served as the first National Director of Young Americans for Freedom, a nationwide youth organization, which had been founded in September 1960 at a gathering of young conservative activists at the Buckley family compound in Sharon, Connecticut.

From Howard I learned something that I did not know: that Buckley at one time had been a CIA agent and had worked under Howard’s supervision in Mexico City for a year after being graduated from Yale University where he had been elected to Skull & Bones.

As our friendship burgeoned neither Howard nor I had any prescient inkling that two years later would he become a central figure in a scandal that would change the course of history and of my life and career.

A few months our initial meeting, Robert Mullen called us into his office and surprised us by saying that he desired to retire and wanted to sell the Mullen Company. He then asked if we would be interested in purchasing it. He proposed that the sale would be financed over the ensuing years by payments to him of profits from the company’s public relations accounts, which included General Foods, the Mormon Church, a lucrative federal government contract with the Department of Health and Human Services and several others.

Both Howard and I were stunned by Mullen’s proposal and told him that we needed time to consider it. Mullen agreed and during the next two months we had additional meetings with him about the purchase. However, at these subsequent meetings Mullen seemed to forget key details that we had discussed previously about the purchase, causing Howard several times to query me whether I thought Mullen was suffering from the onset of dementia.

Then one day Mullen announced out of the blue that he had decided to sell his company to Robert Bennett, a Mormon who was the son of the senior U.S. Senator from Utah. What I came to learn years later was that Mullen, Bennett and Hunt knew something that had been kept from me, namely that the Mullen Company had been incorporated by the CIA in 1959 and served as a front for the intelligence agency. The Mullen Company offices around the world were in fact operations of the CIA and General Foods was aware of this and a participant in the overall intelligence scheme. Although Hunt was a protégé of CIA Director Richard Helms and had been placed by Helms inside the Mullen Company, a decision had been made by the CIA that one of its other key operatives, Robert Bennett, would purchase the Mullen Company and become its president.

After meeting Bennett and finding him to be an extremely strange man who exuded duplicity I chose to leave General Foods and went to work as an attorney with the Washington law firm of Gall, Lane, Powell and Kilcullen. Howard stayed with the Mullen Company as its vice president.

Soon after I began work at the law firm, Howard contacted me and asked that I perform legal work for him. I readily agreed and did so along with one of the partners of the law firm, Robert Scott, who found Howard to be an intriguing client.

If from this Introduction you find that my and Howard’s lives and careers were becoming intertwined, such a finding would be accurate.

In mid-1971 Howard informed me that he was under consideration to work in the White House while still an employee of the Mullen Company. His sponsor for the position was Charles Colson, one of President Nixon’s closest aides and a fellow alumnus with Howard of Brown University. Howard asked if I would write a letter of recommendation for his appointment, which I promptly did.

Once Howard began working for the White House, we saw each other intermittently. However, on several occasions he invited me to join him and his colleague, Gordon Liddy, for lunch at the Federal City Club. Both men were circumspect in their discussion with my being present but from what I gathered they were involved in hush-hush, sensitive work in behalf of the White House.

In February 1972, John Killcullen, one of the partners of the law firm that employed me, informed me that I was being assigned to do volunteer work for the Lawyers Committee for the Re-Election of the President. I soon met with John Dean, Counsel to the President, in his White House office and he in turn, after explaining the campaign legal work I would be doing, assigned me to work with one of his assistants, another lawyer.

Howard was delighted to learn of my newly assigned task and so was Gordon Liddy, who at one point asked me to do legal research for him in his position as legal counsel to the Finance Committee for the Re-Election of the President. The head of the Finance Committee was Maurice Stans, a close friend of Nixon.

In April 1972 Howard asked me to join him and the General Counsel for the CIA, Lawrence Huston, at a restaurant in Maryland, not far from the CIA headquarters on the other side of the Potomac River. At the meeting the two men sounded me out as to whether I would be interested in going to work for the CIA. If I were agreeable, my assignment would be to move to Nicaragua and there build and manage a luxurious seaside hotel that would lure the Sandinista leaders. This would allow the CIA to learn more about them. I told Howard and Huston I would think about it but for certain reasons decided immediately I would not accept their job offer.

Two months later Watergate broke with the arrests of the five burglars inside the offices of the Democratic National Committee.

During Watergate

“From there I drove to the White House Annex – the Old Executive Office Building, in bygone years the War Department and later the Department of State.

“Carrying three heavy attaché cases, I entered the Pennsylvania Avenue door, showed my blue-and-white White House pass to the uniformed guards, and took the elevator to the third floor. I unlocked the door of 338 and went in. I opened my two-drawer safe, took out my operational handbook, found a telephone number and dialed it.

“The time was 3:13 in the morning of June 17, 1972, and five of my companions had been arrested and taken to the maximum-security block of the District of Columbia jail. I had recruited four of them and it was my responsibility to get them out. That was the sole focus of my thoughts as I began talking on the telephone.

“But with those five arrests the Watergate affair had begun….

“After several rings the call was answered and I heard the sleepy voice of Douglas Caddy.

“‘Yes?’

“’Doug? This is Howard. I hate to wake you up, but I’ve got a tough situation and I need to talk to you. Can I come over?’

“’Sure. I’ll tell the desk clerk you’re expected.’

“’I’ll be there in about 20 minutes,’ I told him, and hung up.

“From the safe I took a small money box and removed the $10,000 Liddy had given me for emergency use. I put $1,500 in my wallet and the remaining $8,500 in my coat pocket. The black attaché case containing McCord’s electronic equipment I placed in a safe drawer that held my operational notebook. Then I closed and locked the safe, turning the dial several times. The other two cases I left beside the safe, turned out the light and left my office, locking the door.”

-- E. Howard Hunt, Undercover: Memoirs of an American Secret Agent (Berkley, 1974).

About half an hour after he telephoned me, Hunt arrived at my Washington apartment located in the Georgetown House at 2121 P St., N.W., about a five-minute drive from the both the Watergate and the White House. He quickly informed me of what had occurred.

Hunt then telephoned Liddy from my apartment and they both requested that I represent them as their attorney in the case as well as the five arrested individuals – McCord and the four Cuban-Americans.

On June 28 – 11 days later – I was served with a subpoena to appear “Forthwith” before the grand jury. The subpoena was served on me by Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Campbell while I was in the federal court house, who grabbed me by my arm and pulled me into the grand jury room.

The prosecutors asked me hundred of questions over the next two weeks and subpoenaed my personal bank records. Ultimately I refused to answer 38 questions that I and the five attorneys representing me believed were protected by the attorney client privilege. For example, one question was: “At what time did you receive a telephone call in the early morning hours of June 17, 1972?” By answering this question, I could ultimately be forced to identify Hunt and thus incriminate him.

Principal Assistant U.S. Attorney Earl Silbert argued in court that my refusal to answer the grand jury questions on the grounds of the attorney-client privilege was “specious, dilatory and….an obstruction of justice.”

Judge John Sirica, who had assigned himself to try Watergate case, saw a golden opportunity to inflate his towering ego and exercise his unlimited ambition at the expense of justice and the country. At a hearing on July 12, 1972 – less than a month after the case broke – Sirica rejected outright my attorneys’ argument that the attorney-client privilege was being egregiously violated by the 38 questions. Declared Sirica to a courtroom packed with lawyers, the press and spectators:

“You see, to put the matter perfectly bluntly, if the government is trying to get enough evidence to indict Mr. Caddy as one of the principals in this case even though he might not have been present at the time of the alleged entry in this place, I don’t know what the evidence is except what has been disclosed here, if the government is trying to get an indictment against Mr. Caddy and he feels that way and you feel it and the rest of you attorneys feel it, all he has to say is ‘I refuse to answer on the grounds what I say would tend to incriminate me.’ That ends it. I can’t compel him to say he know Mr. Hunt under the circumstances. He doesn’t do that, understand? He takes the other road. He says there is a confidential communication. Who is he to be the sole judge or not it is confidential or not? That is what I am here for.”

The next day, after I refused to answer the 38 questions before the grand jury on the grounds that doing so would violate the attorney-client privilege, Sirica convened a court hearing to hold me in contempt.

Robert Scott, one of my attorneys who later was named a District of Columbia judge, asked Sirica to honor professional courtesy by not ordering me jailed while an appeal was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, stating:

“If Your Honor please, there is nothing malicious in this refusal. It is done in good faith, good conscience, it is done because we believe it is the proper course. I would respectfully suggest this is very harsh treatment – not the finding of contempt, I don’t say that. I disagree that he should be found in contempt, but I think it is very harsh treatment that your honor would commit him when it is perfectly clear that these positions are being put forth in the utmost good faith and utmost of sincerity. This is a young man, I just think it would be as harsh as it could be to commit him at this time.”

Of course, this plea fell upon the deaf ears of a judicial bully and thug who took delight in destroying the careers and lives and the innocent as well as the guilty. Sirica ordered the U.S. Marshal to take me into custody to be jailed.

On July 18, 1972 the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Sirica’s contempt citation of me. It did so in by employing gratuitously insulting language, declaring that “Even if such a relationship does exist, certain communications, such as in furtherance of a crime, are not within the [attorney-client] privilege.”

The day after the decision of the Court of Appeals, I appeared again before the grand jury and pursuant to the threat posed by the Court’s decision answered all the questions posed to me by the prosecutors.

The actions of Sirica and the Court of Appeals did not go unnoticed by the White House. In an Oval Office tape of July 19, 1972, an incredulous President Nixon asked John Ehrlichman, “Do you mean the circuit court ordered an attorney to testify?” to which Ehrlichman responded, “It [unintelligible] to me, except that this damn circuit we’ve got here with [Judge David] Bazelon and so on, it surprises me every time they do something.”

Nixon then asked, “Why didn’t he appeal to the Supreme Court?”

What Nixon and Ehrlichman did not realize was that I and my attorneys firmly believed that we had created a strong legal record of the constitutional rights of the defendants and me as their attorney had been egregiously violated so that if Hunt, Liddy and the five arrested defendants were found guilty, their convictions could be overturned as a result of the abusive actions of the prosecutors, Judge Sirica and the Court of Appeals.

However, Sirica’s vitriolic courtroom antics, aided and abetted by a biased Court of Appeals, had the effect to encouraging the defendants to embark on a “hush money” cover-up after they realized early on that the courts were not going to give them a fair trial. Hunt later wrote that “If Sirica was treating Caddy – an Officer of the Court – so summarily, and Caddy was completely uninvolved in Watergate – then those of us who were involved could expect neither fairness nor understanding from him. As events unfolded, this conclusion became tragically accurate.” Bear in mind all the above described courtroom events occurred in the first 33 days of the case. The dye has been cast by the prosecutors and the judges to deny the seven defendants a fair trial.

Shortly after indictments were handed down against all seven defendants in September 1972, the prosecutors informed me that I would be a government witness at their trial and that I should review my grand jury transcripts in their office in preparation of so testifying.

William Bittman, a former Justice Department prosecutor who succeeded me in representing Hunt, advised me that because the prosecutors had gone too far in their persecution of me, they had jeopardized their case and were worried about that fact. No evidence had been uncovered over the months since the case broke that I had engaged in any criminal activity. One of the prosecutors even disclosed that an examination of my personal bank records, obtained by subpoena, revealed that I was “scrupulously honest.” Bittman then instructed me that when I reviewed my grand jury transcripts I should diligently determine if any alternations had been made in them. His fear was that the prosecutors had rewritten my testimony so as to weaken the attorney-client privilege. He said that if I found any of my transcripts had been altered, he planned to call Silbert to the witness stand at the trial to question him about the alteration. He declared, “Hunt deserves a fair trial and I am going to see that he gets one.”

When I did review the grand jury transcripts, I determined that a key alteration had been made by the prosecutors. This alteration dealt with my attempt to tell the grand jury on July 19, 1972, that I had been approached in early July to act as conduit for “hush money” to be distributed to the defendants.

The overture was made by Anthony Ulasewicz, a former New York City police detective, acting upon the instructions of Herbert Kalmbach, President Nixon’s personal attorney. Here is the testimony of Kalmbach subsequently before the Senate Watergate Committee:

“Mr. Dash: Now, what was the first instruction you received to give the money?

“Mr. Kalmbach: Again, as I have tried to reconstruct this, Mr. Dash, the first instruction that I received, which I passed to Mr. Ulasewicz was to have Mr. Ulasewicz give $25,000 to Mr. Caddy. I don’t know too much of Mr. Caddy, I understand that he is an attorney here in Washington. And, as I recall it, this was probably from approximately July 1 through July 6 or 7. There were a number of calls. I would either talk to Mr. Dean or Mr. LaRue. I would then call Mr. Ulasewicz who, in turn, would call Mr. Caddy. He would have some response from Mr. Caddy, and I would call back up either Mr. Dean or Mr. LaRue.

“Mr. Dash: What was the response from Mr. Caddy?

“Mr. Kalmbach: Well, the sum and gist of it was that Mr. Caddy refused to accept the funds.

“Mr. Dash: In that manner?

“Mr. Kalmbach: That is correct. That was the end-all. There were several phone calls, but the final wrap-up won it was that he refused the funds.”

My grand jury testimony was not the only one altered by the prosecutors. Alfred Baldwin, a key figure in the case, later charged that his grand jury testimony also had been altered by the prosecutors.

At the first Watergate trial, Hunt and the four Cuban-Americans pleaded guilty at

its beginning. This came about because about a month previously Dorothy Hunt had died in a mysterious plane crash in Chicago. For Hunt a trial following on the heels of his wife’s tragic death was more than he could bear. The four Cuban-Americans, loyal to a fault to Hunt, followed his lead. Liddy and McCord stood trial and were found guilty.

Liddy appealed his conviction. The same Court of Appeals that had forced me to testify before the grand jury in its gratuitously insulting decision opined as to the defendant Liddy being denied Sixth Amendment counsel because of what the courts had done to me as his attorney: “The evidence against appellant…was so overwhelming that even if there were constitutional error in the comment of the prosecutor and the instruction of the judge, there is no reasonable possibility it contributed to the conviction.”

Of course, neither Judge Sirica, who Time Magazine later named Man Of The Year, nor the U.S. Court of Appeals ever acknowledged that their abusive actions and decisions in the first month of the case relating to me and the attorney-client privilege were a principal cause of the cover-up that ensued.

Sirica later wrote a book about Watergate, fatuously titled To Set the Record Straight, for which he pocketed one million dollars, which would be almost four million today’s dollars. James Jackson Kilpatrick, a nationally syndicated columnist, wrote at the time: “It would be pleasant if someone would set the record straight about this tin pot tyrant. Sirica is a vainglorious pooh-bah, an ill-tempered and autocratic as any judge since Same Chase of Maryland 180 years ago. When the Watergate criminal trials were assigned to him in the fall of 1972, he set out to enjoin the whole countryside with an encompassing gag order that perfected reflected his lust for power. The order was patently absurd – it embraced even ‘potential witnesses’ and ‘alleged victims’ and had to be watered down.”

Despite the efforts of the prosecutors, Sirica and the Court of Appeals to set me up, I was never indicted, named as an unindicted co-conspirator, disciplined by the Bar or even contacted by the Senate Watergate Committee.

Watergate, as Senator Sam Ervin, Chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee said at the time, was the most publicized event in American political history. It certainly was the country’s biggest criminal case of the 20^th century.

Post Watergate

I believe the media has painted an erroneous portrait of who Howard actually was. For a fuller picture of the man I suggest the book Watergate: The Hidden History by Lamar Waldron published in 2012 that contains numerous references to Howard and his career. Waldron writes, “Some writers depict Hunt as a minor figure, bumbling his way from one small White House operation to the next. However, a review of all the evidence shows that Hunt was consistently working on important tasks for the White House, on matters that interested the President. Hunt also kept expanding (or wanting to expand) his operations, which often overlapped with other projects that he sought out or pushed. The more Nixon operations Hunt became involved in, the highest his status in the White House and the better for his future. It was also good for his mentor, Richard Helms, since it gave him access to the White House (and FBI) information and operations. The President’s White House staff was expanding its illegal operations on his behalf

so rapidly that Hunt had no problem finding Nixon aides who wanted Hunt’s services, to help them achieve the illicit goals the President wanted. That symbiotic relationship would soon grow so rapidly that it would start to spiral out of control, with disastrous results for all concerned.”

As I look back I have come to the conclusion that the CIA had a goal of placing Howard in the White House in 1971 and that he thought of himself more as a CIA agent than as a trusted member of the White House staff. Thus, after the Watergate “hush” money scheme was exposed, Howard was quoted in People Magazine of May 20, 1974, that “I had always assumed, working for the CIA for some many years, that anything the White House wanted done was the law of the land. I viewed this like any other mission. It just happened to take place inside this country.”

Howard’s long-time friend and former CIA colleague William F. Buckley, Jr. accurately assessed him as follows: “Hunt had lived outside the law in the service of his country, subsequently of President Nixon…Hunt, the dramatist, didn’t understand the political realities at the highest level transcend the working realities of spy life.”

While Howard revealed a lack of political awareness during Watergate, on another important political topic he was right on target. As the New York Post reported on January 14, 2007, he originally wrote in his memoir, “American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate and Beyond” published in 2007 that “Having Kennedy liquidated, thus elevating himself to the presidency without having to work for it himself, could have been a very tempting and logical move on [Lyndon] Johnson’s part.

“LBJ had the money and the connections to manipulate the scenario in Dallas and is on record as having convinced JFK to make the appearance in the first place. He further tried unsuccessfully to engineer the passengers in each vehicle, trying to get his good buddy, Governor [John] Connally, to ride with him instead of JFK’s car - where…he would have been out of danger”

Howard pinpointed CIA agent William Harvey as playing a key role in the JFK assassination: “He definitely had dreams of becoming [CIA director] and LBJ could do that for him if he were president. [LBJ] would have used Harvey because he was available and corrupt.”

Just prior the memoir’s publication, passages that dealt with advance knowledge possessed Howard of JFK’s assassination were removed at the insistence of Howard’s then lawyer. However, Howard, ever the consummate intelligence officer, clandestinely arranged that his views on Kennedy’s murder would ultimately be publicly made known by giving his son, St. John, an audio tape to be released after his death in which he described the planning of the assassination. This is why St. John Hunt’s book is an important contribution to history.

Hey, Doug. I'm not sure if you've read A Torch Kept Lit, a new book comprising William F. Buckley's assessment of some historical figures, but it includes a passage which touches on the highlighted passage above. In his chapter on E. Howard Hunt, Buckley admits that towards the end of Hunt's life Hunt asked him to write the introduction to his final book, American Spy. Buckley then admits that he read the book "with great misgivings. There was material there that suggested transgressions of the highest order, including a hint that LBJ might have had a hand in the plot to assassinate President Kennedy. The manuscript was clearly ghostwritten." He then relates "I declined to write the introduction. But when the manuscript was resubmitted to me, with the loony grassy knoll bits chiseled out, I said OK, but wrote an introduction restricted to describing our early friendship in Mexico."

So it wasn't just some lawyer removing the bits about the assassination, but some lawyer doing so under pressure from (former CIA agent, and right-wing icon) William F. Buckley.

You knew both men. Thoughts?

Edited November 28, 2016 by Pat Speer

[Guest]

I too find this to be Forest .Sorrels but that means there is a bigger issue.

I thought F.S. was at the TSBD by about 1PM to request the building to be sealed off.

So did he go back to Parkland?

 

[Douglas Caddy]

Pat:

William F. Buckley secured the lawyer for Hunt. The lawyer represented Hunt for years, including the trial in which Mark Lane was a principal. Thus, I would hazard to suggest that the removal of the material from the book was done by the lawyer upon the direction of Buckley.

I tend to think that Buckley was not a close student of the Kennedy assassination and the idea that Hunt had a role in it boggled his mind, causing him to reject it outright. It wasn't until decades after Watergate that information began to emerge that Hunt and some of his Cuban-American burglars were also involved in the Dallas murder. So Buckley in my opinion never did possess the full picture.

St. John Hunt in his speech at the recent 4th Annual JFK Assassination Conference in Dallas attacked Buckley, whom he termed a CIA agent. It must be remembered that Buckley was aghast that Hunt had delegated to him as the children's godfather the responsibility of taking care of Hunt's four children once Dorothy was dead and Hunt faced years in prison.  St. John was especially critical of Buckley for placing the youngest, David, at age twelve with a Cuban-American in Miami who turned out to be a drug dealer.

St. John told the Dallas audience that his mother, Dorothy, had cautioned Hunt in the planning of Watergate that the higher ups were merely using him. Hunt rejected Dorothy's wise counsel. The higher-up did use him and Hunt in turn, as a longtime intelligence agent, used others, starting with his Cuban-American friends by enlisting them as burglars, by dropping the case in my lap as his attorney hours after the arrests and then disappearing for weeks, by using St. John at age 17 to help him dispose of evidence employed in the Watergate operation by tossing it in the Chesapeake Canal only hours after the case broke, and by enlisting Dorothy, who had opposed the planning of Watergate, to be the courier for the hush money. So Hunt was used and he turned around and used others. When I saw the movie "A Most Important Man" based on a book by John Le Carre I immediately recognized the protagonist, an intelligence agent played brilliantly by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, as being someone just like Hunt.

St. John said in Dallas that his father, after Dorothy's death, had assembled his four children and told them that he was going to plead guilty in Watergate because he feared that if he did not do so they would become victims just as had Dorothy.

In some ways for Hunt his intense suffering for what he had done in Watergate was a form of Karma. Hunt, as a CIA agent, for many years was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people in Central and South America that was done in the name of fighting communism but more realistically was done to help American corporations, such as United Fruit Company, reap the profits from their enterprises there. Watergate for him was payback. It was also payback for America.

Doug

Edited November 29, 2016 by Douglas Caddy