I haven't followed Watergate closely, but apparently historian Stanley Kutler published what have been considered the authoritative transcripts of the Nixon tapes in his book "Abuse of Power." Other historians now contend that Kutler doctored the transcripts and omitted some tapes to protect John Dean. I don't know if this is old news, but this article just appeared in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/washingt...tml?_r=1&hp

Behind the accusations are rival visions of Mr. Dean, who is seen by some as a flawed but ultimately courageous man reluctantly sucked into the scandal, and by others as a primary architect of the cover-up who saved himself by deflecting guilt.
------

Note here that although Len Colodney and Russ Baker are mentioned the full scope of their "revisionism" is not. The article frames the contraversy solely in terms of the personal character of John Dean; the possibility mentioned by both "conspiracy theorists"-- and what was Woodword, a conspiracy stnographer?-- that Dean was part of a much wider CIA plot against Nixon is not even on the radar screen of possibilites. Many readers will be left thinking, "is that all that's at stake, the reputation of John Dean? I heard Pittsburgh is gonna put the ball in the air"