Jump to content
The Education Forum

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'watergate'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome to the Education Forum
    • Forum Information, Development and Communication
    • Biographical Details
    • News, events and member notices
  • Curriculum Subjects
    • ICT
    • Music
    • Media Studies
    • Government and Politics
    • Economics and Business Studies
    • Chinese
    • EFL
    • English
    • Mathematics
    • Design and Technology
    • History
    • Geography
    • Science
    • Modern Languages
    • Social Sciences
    • Art and Design
    • Physical Education
    • Philosophy
    • Dance and Drama
    • Health and Social Care
  • Educational Issues
    • Government Initiatives
    • E-Learning
    • Debates in Education
    • Pastoral Care
    • Special Educational Needs
    • Learning Outside School
    • Cross Curricular Teaching Resources
    • International Schools
    • Non-Academic Discussions
    • Flexible Learning
  • Educational Conferences
    • Schools History Project
    • Learning Technology Conference (LT04)
  • European Virtual School
    • Information
    • Resources
    • Cross Curricular Cooperation
    • History Department
  • International Projects
    • E-Help
    • ENIS
    • Cross Curricular Cooperation
    • Student Collaboration
    • Spring Europe
    • E-HELP
    • E-HELP Seminars
    • Citizenship Project
  • Association of Teacher Websites
    • Information
    • Member Web sites
    • ATW Departments
  • Teacher Training
    • Student Teacher Support
  • European Languages Forum
    • Deutsch
    • Forum en Français
    • Svensktalande
    • Sección en español
    • Nederlands
    • Ellinikos tomeas
    • Italian Speakers
    • Ceská a Slovenská cást fóra.
    • Latin, the Language, the Inscriptions, and the Use
  • Controversial Issues in History
    • JFK Assassination Debate
    • JFK Research
    • JFK Questions
    • JFK Discussions
    • JFK Book Discussions
    • JFK Deep Politics
    • JFK Online Seminars
    • Political Conspiracies
    • 11 September 2001 attacks
    • The Apollo Moon Landings
    • History and Political Books: Debates with Authors
    • Watergate
    • Jack the Ripper
    • Robert Kennedy
    • Cold War
    • Nazi Germany
    • The Death of Marilyn Monroe
    • Martin Luther King and Civil Rights
    • Chappaquiddick
    • Political Discussions
    • TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND PRESIDENCY DISCUSSION
  • Educational Research
    • JFK Debate
    • Environmental Issues
    • Black History
    • Cold War
    • Oral History of the Olympic Games
  • Historical Association
    • News
    • Teaching History
    • Local History
  • Ask an Expert
    • History
    • ICT
  • Online Games
    • Welcome to Online Games
  • Holiday Guide
    • Holiday Recommendations
  • Women's Studies

Product Groups

  • Widgets
  • JFK Items for Physical Sales on the EF E_Store
  • JFK Items for Digital Sales on the EF E_Store

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 8 results

  1. I'm pleased to announce the publication of my book, Dirty Tricks: Nixon, Watergate and the CIA on the 'dirty tricks' used by the Nixon campaign in the 1968 and 1972 elections - the Anna Chennault affair, the Ellsberg break-in and Watergate. The book is now in stock at Amazon and I am happy to answer questions about it here. Many of the key players in Watergate are also central to the debate about the JFK assassination. The book includes a lot of new information on the CIA and post-CIA work of Howard Hunt, Rolando Martinez and James McCord and reveals that one of the Watergate burglars claimed to have been in Dallas on 11.22.63. The book documents a double agent mission one of the burglars was sent on by American intelligence after he got out of prison and sheds a whole new light on Antonio Veciana and the Maurice Bishop story. Here's a summary and some advance reviews: SUMMARY The victory of Richard Nixon in the US presidential election of 1968 swung on an “October Surprise”— a treasonous plot engineered by key figures in the Republican Party to keep the South Vietnamese government away from peace talks in Paris, costing thousands of American lives. Dirty Tricks provides compelling new evidence of Anna Chennault’s Nixon-approved role in sabotaging the peace talks and ensuring a Nixon White House. Dirty Tricks also provides the first detailed analysis of the CIA’s recently-released internal history of Watergate, documenting the backgrounds of the burglars and their associations with the Agency in unprecedented detail, and how the Nixon White House sought to implicate the CIA in the emerging scandal. CIA Director Richard Helms’ relationship with Watergate burglar E. Howard Hunt was much closer than previously disclosed and the CIA agent inside the plot was sent on a double agent mission by American intelligence after he got out of prison. The alleged target of the Watergate break-ins was DNC chairman Larry O’Brien’s phone. Dirty Tricks reveals that the burglars didn't know where O’Brien’s office was and tapped the wrong phone with a bug that didn't work while O’Brien was in Miami preparing for the 1972 convention. Prosecutor Earl Silbert could "never determine the precise motivation for the burglary” but Dirty Tricks explains the political and sexual nature of the calls overheard on DNC official Spencer Oliver’s phone, and why no bug was found at the DNC until three months after the Watergate arrests. Drawing on newly-declassified files and previously-unpublished documents, Dirty Tricks debunks the myths around Watergate and deepens our understanding of the “dirty tricks” that undermined democracy during the Nixon years. These scandals turn on the covert action of two powerful interest groups—the senior CIA officers around Helms, and the key advisers around Nixon – in this chilling story of political espionage and deception. REVIEWS “While we have fundamental disagreements about 'Watergate' and the Deep State agenda that shaped it, O’Sullivan is to be congratulated on an impeccably researched work of investigative reporting that adds greatly to our understanding of the affair and its mysteries" - Jim Hougan (author, Secret Agenda). “Dirty Tricks goes well beyond anything yet published, in revealing the mysterious links between the Watergate scandal and the CIA. Was the bungled burglary part of an internecine effort to topple President Nixon? Was the cover-up for fear of secrets being divulged, from a Washington call-girl ring to the Kennedy assassination? This meticulously-researched book draws upon never-before-seen documents in addressing such questions, in a spy-versus-spy story that fills in major gaps in our recent history" - Dick Russell (author, The Man Who Knew Too Much). “Shane O’Sullivan’s new book on Watergate, Dirty Tricks, draws on the millions of records that have become available since 2016, chiefly from the CIA. Anyone interested in comparing that crisis with the present needs to consult the fresh information and perspectives in this well-researched and timely book" - Peter Dale Scott (author, The American Deep State: Big Money, Big Oil, and the Struggle for U.S. Democracy). “This brilliantly researched book will bring back fond memories to those of us who, as was said at the time, wallowed in Watergate. It provides a new generation with the opportunity to relive this intense experience" - Alan Galbraith (attorney for the Democratic National Committee, 1972).
  2. Shane O'Sullivan

    Dirty Tricks: Nixon, Watergate and the CIA

    I'm pleased to announce the publication of my book, Dirty Tricks: Nixon, Watergate and the CIA on the 'dirty tricks' used by the Nixon campaign in the 1968 and 1972 elections - the Anna Chennault affair, the Ellsberg break-in and Watergate. The book is now in stock at Amazon and I am happy to answer questions about it here. Here's a summary and some advance reviews: SUMMARY The victory of Richard Nixon in the US presidential election of 1968 swung on an “October Surprise”— a treasonous plot engineered by key figures in the Republican Party to keep the South Vietnamese government away from peace talks in Paris, costing thousands of American lives. Dirty Tricks provides compelling new evidence of Anna Chennault’s Nixon-approved role in sabotaging the peace talks and ensuring a Nixon White House. Dirty Tricks also provides the first detailed analysis of the CIA’s recently-released internal history of Watergate, documenting the backgrounds of the burglars and their associations with the Agency in unprecedented detail, and how the Nixon White House sought to implicate the CIA in the emerging scandal. CIA Director Richard Helms’ relationship with Watergate burglar E. Howard Hunt was much closer than previously disclosed and the CIA agent inside the plot was sent on a double agent mission by American intelligence after he got out of prison. The alleged target of the Watergate break-ins was DNC chairman Larry O’Brien’s phone. Dirty Tricks reveals that the burglars didn't know where O’Brien’s office was and tapped the wrong phone with a bug that didn't work while O’Brien was in Miami preparing for the 1972 convention. Prosecutor Earl Silbert could "never determine the precise motivation for the burglary” but Dirty Tricks explains the political and sexual nature of the calls overheard on DNC official Spencer Oliver’s phone, and why no bug was found at the DNC until three months after the Watergate arrests. Drawing on newly-declassified files and previously-unpublished documents, Dirty Tricks debunks the myths around Watergate and deepens our understanding of the “dirty tricks” that undermined democracy during the Nixon years. These scandals turn on the covert action of two powerful interest groups—the senior CIA officers around Helms, and the key advisers around Nixon – in this chilling story of political espionage and deception. REVIEWS “While we have fundamental disagreements about 'Watergate' and the Deep State agenda that shaped it, O’Sullivan is to be congratulated on an impeccably researched work of investigative reporting that adds greatly to our understanding of the affair and its mysteries" - Jim Hougan (author, Secret Agenda). “Dirty Tricks goes well beyond anything yet published, in revealing the mysterious links between the Watergate scandal and the CIA. Was the bungled burglary part of an internecine effort to topple President Nixon? Was the cover-up for fear of secrets being divulged, from a Washington call-girl ring to the Kennedy assassination? This meticulously-researched book draws upon never-before-seen documents in addressing such questions, in a spy-versus-spy story that fills in major gaps in our recent history" - Dick Russell (author, The Man Who Knew Too Much). “Shane O’Sullivan’s new book on Watergate, Dirty Tricks, draws on the millions of records that have become available since 2016, chiefly from the CIA. Anyone interested in comparing that crisis with the present needs to consult the fresh information and perspectives in this well-researched and timely book" - Peter Dale Scott (author, The American Deep State: Big Money, Big Oil, and the Struggle for U.S. Democracy). “This brilliantly researched book will bring back fond memories to those of us who, as was said at the time, wallowed in Watergate. It provides a new generation with the opportunity to relive this intense experience" - Alan Galbraith (attorney for the Democratic National Committee, 1972).
  3. Daniel Ellsberg lit the fuse that exploded as "Watergate" with his release of the "utterly useless" Pentagon Papers. Without Ellsberg, there would have been no "Plumbers," and there would have been no Watergate. At all relevant times, Ellsberg had "higher than Top Secret" clearances. In league with two of the major CIA Operation Mockingbird mouthpieces, the New York Times and the Washington Post, Ellsberg leaked the documents with the singular knowing intention of getting E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy moved into position in the White House and Nixon administration in order to launch the CIA hoax that the world knows as "Watergate." A key part of the scheme was for the CIA to work with Hunt and Liddy to stage a phony "break-in" in September 1971 at the office of CIA-linked psychiatrist Dr. Lewis Fielding in Beverly Hills, supposedly to get hold of Ellsberg's psychiatric files. Ostensibly, Ellsberg had previously been a "patient" of Fielding. The actual and only intent of the staged "break-in" was to give Ellsberg a guaranteed "Get Out of Jail Free" card that would be melodramatically played years later, with great fanfare. It was carefully arranged so that no trier of fact ever would even have an opportunity to try the "merits" or facts of the case of the alleged "break-in" of Fielding's office—and it's a good thing, because even a cursory inspection of the "facts" surrounding the event proves beyond the slightest shade of doubt that both Ellsberg and Fielding were entirely in on the fraud with the CIA, Hunt, Liddy, and the Cuban CIA veterans who were brought in to stage it. The full context is covered thoroughly in my book, Watergate: The Hoax, but the publishers have kindly made the chapter dealing specifically with the Fielding farce freely available as an excerpt, here: CIA Crimes: 1971—Daniel Ellsberg and The Fielding Farce I'll be happy to answer any questions. Ashton Gray
  4. I'm watching the Senate Armed Services CMTE hearings. Tim Kaine (current Senator because he's not the Vice-President Elect) referred to Watergate as a "bungled burglary of the DNC HQ, somewhat launched from the White House." I'm just curious (Mr. Caddy?): if there's such overwhelming proof that a "bungled burglary" is pretty much the last thing Watergate was, why is still what most high-end elected officials think? It's not just Mr. Kaine, by any means; I hear it all the time from these pols. I guess what I'm asking is (and it can only be a guess, of course), are these just "talking points" - the "official version," or are there many pols who really believe the official version because they just don't know xxxx about Watergate and recent political history...? On another, similar, note. Opinion: It's been noted that there are 17 (SEVENTEEN!) Intel Agencies in our Intel "community." SEVENTEEN. As the antipathy between just the FBI and the CIA is historic and well-known, is it safe to say that 17 intel agencies might be too many, and that it's highly likely that few of them would play well together or share their Big Wheels...?
  5. I CLANDESTINE AMERICA 1. Yankees and Cowboys: A Perspective on the Dallas-Watergate Decade 2. Clandestine America - Three Sources II DALLAS 3. "The Whole Bay of Pigs Thing" 4. Dealey Plaza 5. 1968 III WATERGATE 6. The Hughes Connection 7. The Watergate Plane Crash 8. McCord, Double Agent IV NEITHER YANKEE NOR COWBOY 9. Who Killed JFK? APPENDIX: The Official Theory of the Watergate Plane Crash Preface to the Berkley Edition The appearance of this new edition of The Yankee and Cowboy War confronts me with the temptation to update the book across the board. Since publication, Carter has become president, the JFK and King assassination cases have been reopened by the Congress, there has been more heavy commotion within the Hughes empire, and accounts published by such Watergate heroes as John Dean (Blind Ambition, 1976) and Fred Thompson (At That Point in Time, 1976) have further strengthened the view that there is some important, still-concealed connection between Watergate and the CIA. These matters tie directly to the themes explored in this book. But since a general update would still be premature, I decided to restrict my textual changes to a few corrections of fact and adjustments of style, except for the insertion of one new passage, a Yankee-Cowboy analysis of the coming of President Carter, at the end of chapter 8. This addition allows me to bring to a fuller close my argument that Watergate, like Dallas, was a coup d'etat, culminating in the installation of a new president and a new executive elite. C.O. March 1977
  6. This is a conversation between Gerry Patrick Hemming and myself (Greg Burnham) that took place in early 1999. The clip picks up just after I asked him if he knew E. Howard Hunt. Gerry, in classic form, deftly dismisses Hunt as a “Hollywood type”. He compares Hunt to what is referred to in the paratrooper business as a “Hollywood Jump” [read: no equipment]. The disdain in his voice is palpable. Gerry Patrick Hemming on E. Howard Hunt
  7. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/01/watergate-scandal-secret-files-revealed?google_editors_picks=true Watergate scandal: secret files released Previously undisclosed discussions involving John J Sirica, the Watergate judge, are revealed in 850 pages made public Staff and agencies guardian.co.uk, Saturday 1 December 2012 06.05 GMT The US government has released more than 850 pages from the Watergate political scandal, providing new insights on privileged legal conversations and prison evaluations of several of the burglars in the case. A federal judge had decided earlier in November to unseal some material, but other records still remain off limits. The files from the National Archives show that Judge John J Sirica aided the prosecution in pursuing the White House connection to the Democratic headquarters break-in at the Watergate Hotel in 1972. Sirica provided the special prosecutor information from a probation report in which one of the burglars said he was acting under orders from top Nixon administration officials One newly public transcript of an in-chambers meeting between Sirica, who was the US district court judge in charge of the case, and special prosecutor Archibald Cox in July 1973 shows the judge revealed secret probation reports indicating that E Howard Hunt had cited orders from officials high up in the Nixon administration. Several of Hunt's co-defendants had previously denied any White House involvement in court testimony, and Sirica told Cox and other prosecutors that he felt the new information "seemed to me significant". The files provide useful context for historians of the 40-year-old case, revealing behind-the-scenes deliberations by Sirica along with prosecutors and defense lawyers. The documents stem from the prosecution of five defendants arrested during the June 1972 Watergate break-in and two men, Hunt and G Gordon Liddy, who were charged as the burglary team's supervisors. All seven men were convicted. In the conversations between Cox and Sirica the special prosecutor agreed with the judge's concerns that the probation report should be sealed and thanked him for the information. Cox promised that his team would not divulge the new information unless they felt there was a prosecutorial need and returned for a hearing to make it public. "Unless we came back," Cox told Sirica, "we wouldn't reveal it." The former Nixon White House lawyer John Dean, who co-operated with prosecutors and testified against Nixon during an explosive congressional hearing in June 1973, said on Friday after reviewing some of the newly released files that he believed Sirica "was very aggressive for a judge, even more than the White House was aware of at the time. No one in the Nixon White House knew exactly where he was coming from." Dean added that while Sirica's investigative zeal was well-known his dealings with Cox and other prosecutors were "eye-opening". US District Judge Royce Lamberth in November ordered the files unsealed after a request from Luke Nichter, a professor at Texas A&M University-Central Texas. Nichter wrote to Lamberth in 2009 asking for release of the materials. Lamberth held back other sealed materials but agreed to ask the justice department to explain the reasoning for keeping those materials secret. The documents released by the archives reinforce Sirica's reputation as a gruff, no-nonsense jurist. During pretrial hearings in December 1972 Hunt's defence attorney sought to delay the trial after the former CIA man's wife was killed in a plane crash. Sirica refused to put the trial on hold unless there was proof Hunt was suffering from a serious medical condition, according to the transcripts. "If he is just emotionally upset, that, in my opinion, is not a valid excuse," Sirica said. "If he gets tired during the day I will arrange for him to go down and take a rest for two or three hours if he wishes." A doctor who examined Hunt said in a letter to Sirica in early January 1973 that he suffered from ulcers and other gastrointestinal ailments but "has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer". The doctor, Charles E Law Sr, said he was worried that Hunt would weep in court, especially when questioned by prosecutors. Reports from prison psychiatrists and probation officers show that four of Hunt's co-defendants justified their role in the Watergate break-in on national security grounds, saying they were under orders to search for evidence that Cuban government funds supported Democratic party campaigns. Dean said on Friday that Hunt once told him that excuse was a sham used to persuade the others to participate in the burglary.
  8. Steve Knight

    Nixon's Wars.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/special-report-watergate--the-untold-story-7844900.html Special Report: Watergate - the untold story Forty years ago this weekend, a failed burglary in Washington was the first small step in a giant political scandal that led to the fall of a US President. But, write the reporters whose investigations first exposed it, what came out then was as nothing to what we know now Carl Bernstein , Bob Woodward Wednesday 13 June 2012 As Senator Sam Ervin completed his 20-year Senate career in 1974 and issued his final report as chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee, he posed the question: "What was Watergate?" Countless answers have been offered in the 40 years since 17 June 1972, when a team of burglars wearing business suits and rubber gloves was arrested at 2.30am at the headquarters of the Democratic Party in the Watergate office building. Four days afterward, the Nixon White House offered its answer. "Certain elements may try to stretch this beyond what it was," press secretary Ronald Ziegler scoffed, dismissing the incident as a "third-rate burglary". History proved that it was anything but. Two years later, Richard Nixon would become the first and only US president to resign, his role in the criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice – the Watergate cover-up – definitively established. Another answer has since persisted, often unchallenged: the notion that the cover-up was worse than the crime. This idea minimises the scale and reach of Nixon's criminal actions. Ervin's answer to his own question hints at the magnitude of Watergate: "To destroy, insofar as the presidential election of 1972 was concerned, the integrity of the process by which the president of the United States is nominated and elected." Yet Watergate was far more than that. At its most virulent, Watergate was a brazen and daring assault, led by Nixon himself, against the heart of American democracy: the Constitution, our system of free elections, the rule of law. Today, much more than when we first covered this story, an abundant record provides unambiguous answers and evidence about Watergate and its meaning. This record has expanded continuously over the decades with the transcription of hundreds of hours of Nixon's secret tapes, adding detail and context to the hearings in the Senate and House of Representatives; the trials and guilty pleas of about 40 Nixon aides and associates who went to jail; and the memoirs of Nixon and his deputies. Such documentation makes it possible to trace the President's personal dominance over a massive campaign of political espionage, sabotage and other illegal activities against his real or perceived opponents. In the course of his 5 1/2-year presidency, beginning in 1969, Nixon launched and managed five successive and overlapping wars – against the anti-Vietnam War movement, the news media, the Democrats, the justice system and, finally, against history itself. All reflected a mindset and a pattern of behaviour that were uniquely and pervasively Nixon's: a willingness to disregard the law for political advantage, and a quest for dirt and secrets about his opponents as an organising principle of his presidency. Long before the Watergate break-in, gumshoeing, burglary, wiretapping and political sabotage had become a way of life in the Nixon White House. What was Watergate? It was Nixon's five wars. 1. The war against the anti-war movement Nixon's first war was against the anti-Vietnam War movement. The President considered it subversive and thought it constrained his ability to prosecute the war in South-east Asia on his terms. In 1970, he approved the top-secret Huston Plan, authorising the CIA, the FBI and military intelligence units to intensify electronic surveillance of individuals identified as "domestic security threats". The plan called for intercepting mail and lifting restrictions on "surreptitious entry" – that is, break-ins or "black-bag jobs." Thomas Charles Huston, the White House aide who devised the plan, informed Nixon that it was illegal, but the President approved it. It was not formally rescinded until the FBI director J Edgar Hoover objected – not on principle, but because he considered those types of activities the FBI's turf. Undeterred, Nixon remained fixated on such operations. In a memorandum dated 3 March 1970, presidential aide Patrick Buchanan wrote to Nixon about what he called the "institutionalised power of the left concentrated in the foundations that succour the Democratic Party". Of particular concern was the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank with liberal leanings. On 17 June 1971 – exactly one year before the Watergate break-in – Nixon met in the Oval Office with his chief of staff, H R "Bob" Haldeman, and the national security adviser Henry Kissinger. At issue was a file about former President Lyndon Johnson's handling of the 1968 bombing halt in Vietnam. "You can blackmail Johnson on this stuff, and it might be worth doing," Haldeman said, according to the tape of the meeting. "Yeah," Kissinger said, "but Bob and I have been trying to put the damn thing together for three years." They wanted the complete story of Johnson's actions. "Huston swears to God there's a file on it at Brookings," Haldeman said. "Bob," Nixon said, "now you remember Huston's plan? Implement it.... I mean, I want it implemented on a thievery basis. God damn it, get in and get those files. Blow the safe and get it." Nixon would not let the matter drop. Thirteen days later, according to another taped discussion with Haldeman and Kissinger, the President said: "Break in and take it out. You understand?" The next morning, Nixon said: "Bob, get on the Brookings thing right away. I've got to get that safe cracked over there." And later that morning, he persisted, "Who's gonna break in the Brookings Institution?" For reasons that have never been made clear, the break-in apparently was not carried out. 2. The war on the news media Nixon's second war was waged ceaselessly against the press, which was reporting more insistently on the faltering Vietnam War and the effectiveness of the anti-war movement. Although Hoover thought he had shut down the Huston Plan, it was in fact implemented by high-level Nixon deputies. A "Plumbers" unit and burglary team were set up under the direction of the White House counsel John Ehrlichman and an assistant, Egil Krogh, and led by the operational chiefs of the future Watergate burglary, ex-CIA operative Howard Hunt and former FBI agent G Gordon Liddy. Hunt was hired as a consultant by Nixon's political aide Charles Colson. An early assignment was to destroy the reputation of Daniel Ellsberg, who had provided the Pentagon Papers, a secret history of the Vietnam War, to the news media in 1971. Publication of the documents in The New York Times, The Washington Post and other newspapers had sent Nixon into rants and rages about Ellsberg, the anti-war movement, the press, Jews, the American left and liberals in Congress – all of whom he conflated. Though Ellsberg was already under indictment and charged with espionage, the team headed by Hunt and Liddy broke into the office of his psychiatrist, seeking information that might smear Ellsberg and undermine his credibility. "You can't drop it," Nixon told Haldeman on 29 June 1971. "You can't let the Jew steal that stuff and get away with it. You understand?" He went on: "People don't trust these Eastern establishment people. He's Harvard. He's a Jew... and he's an arrogant intellectual." Nixon's anti-Semitic rages were well-known to those who worked most closely with him, including some aides who were Jewish. As we reported in our 1976 book, The Final Days, he would tell his deputies, including Kissinger, that "the Jewish cabal is out to get me". In a 3 July 1971 conversation with Haldeman, he said: "The government is full of Jews. Second, most Jews are disloyal. You know what I mean?... generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards." Ellsberg's leak seemed to feed his paranoia. In response to suspected leaks to the press about Vietnam, Kissinger had ordered FBI wiretaps in 1969 on the telephones of 17 journalists and White House aides, without court approval. Many news stories based on the purported leaks questioned progress in the American war effort, further fuelling the anti-war movement. In a tape from the Oval Office on 22 February 1971, Nixon said: "It would be so much easier, wouldn't it, to run this war in a dictatorial way, kill all the reporters and carry on the war." "The press is your enemy," Nixon explained five days later in a meeting with Admiral Thomas H Moorer, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to another tape. "Understand that? Now, never act that way... give them a drink, you know, treat them nice, you just love it, you're trying to be helpful. But don't help the bastards. Ever. Because they're trying to stick the knife right in our groin." 3. The war against the Democrats In Nixon's third war, he took the weapons in place – the Plumbers, wiretapping and burglary – and deployed them against the Democrats challenging his re-election. John N Mitchell, Nixon's campaign manager and confidante, met with Liddy at the Justice Department in early 1972, when Mitchell was Attorney General. Liddy presented a $1m plan for spying and sabotage during the upcoming presidential campaign, code-named "Gemstone". According to the Senate Watergate report and Liddy's 1980 autobiography, he used multicolored charts prepared by the CIA to describe elements of the plan. Operation Diamond would neutralise anti-war protesters with mugging squads and kidnapping teams; Operation Coal would funnel cash to Shirley Chisholm, a black Congresswoman from Brooklyn seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, in an effort to sow racial and gender discord in the party; Operation Opal would use electronic surveillance against various targets, including the headquarters of Democratic presidential candidates Edmund Muskie and George McGovern; Operation Sapphire would station prostitutes on a yacht, wired for sound, off Miami Beach during the Democratic National Convention. Mitchell rejected the plans and told Liddy to burn the charts. At a second meeting, less than three weeks later, Liddy presented a scaled-back, $500,000 version of the plan; Mitchell turned it down again. But soon after, Mitchell approved a $250,000 version, according to Jeb Magruder, the deputy campaign manager. It included intelligence-gathering on the Democrats through wiretaps and burglaries. Under oath, Mitchell later denied approving the plan. He testified that he told Magruder: "We don't need this. I'm tired of hearing it." By his own account, he did not object on the grounds that the plan was illegal. On 10 October 1972, we wrote a story in The Post outlining the extensive sabotage and spying operations of the Nixon campaign and White House, particularly against Muskie, and stating that the Watergate burglary was not an isolated event. The story said that at least 50 operatives had been involved in the espionage and sabotage, many of them under the direction of a young California lawyer named Donald Segretti; several days later, we reported that Segretti had been hired by Dwight Chapin, Nixon's appointments secretary. (The Senate Watergate Committee later found more than 50 saboteurs, including 22 who were paid by Segretti.) Herbert Kalmbach, Nixon's personal attorney, paid Segretti more than $43,000 from leftover campaign funds for these activities. Throughout the operation, Segretti was contacted regularly by Howard Hunt. The Senate investigation later provided more detail about the effectiveness of the covert efforts against Muskie, who in 1971 and early 1972 was considered by the White House to be the Democrat most capable of beating Nixon. The President's campaign had paid Muskie's chauffeur, a campaign volunteer named Elmer Wyatt, $1,000 a month to photograph internal memos, position papers, schedules and strategy documents, and deliver copies to Mitchell and Nixon's campaign staff. Other sabotage directed at Muskie included bogus news releases and allegations of sexual improprieties against other Democratic candidates – produced on counterfeit Muskie stationery. A favoured dirty trick that caused havoc at campaign stops involved sweeping up the shoes that Muskie aides left in hotel hallways to be polished and then depositing them in a dumpster. Haldeman, the White House chief of staff, advised Nixon of the Chapin-Segretti sabotage plan in May 1971, according to one of the President's tapes. In a memo to Haldeman and Mitchell dated 12 April 1972, Buchanan and another Nixon aide wrote: "Our primary objective, to prevent Senator Muskie from sweeping the early primaries, locking up the convention in April, and uniting the Democratic Party behind him for the fall, has been achieved." The tapes also reveal Nixon's obsession with another Democrat: Senator Edward Kennedy. One of Hunt's earliest undertakings for the White House was to dig up dirt on Kennedy's sex life, building on a 1969 auto accident at Chappaquiddick, Massachusetts, that resulted in the death of a young Kennedy aide, Mary Jo Kopechne. Though Kennedy had vowed not to seek the presidency in 1972, he was certain to play a big role in the campaign. "I'd really like to get Kennedy taped," Nixon told Haldeman in April 1971. According to Haldeman's 1994 book, The Haldeman Diaries, the President also wanted to have Kennedy photographed in compromising situations and leak the images to the press. And when Kennedy received Secret Service protection as he campaigned for McGovern, the Democratic presidential nominee, Nixon and Haldeman discussed a novel plan to keep him under surveillance: they would insert a retired Secret Service agent, Robert Newbrand, who had been part of Nixon's protection detail when he was Vice-President, into the team protecting Kennedy. "We just might get lucky and catch this son of a bitch and ruin him for '76," replied the President. "That's going to be fun." On 8 September 1971, Nixon ordered Ehrlichman to direct the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the tax returns of all the likely Democratic presidential candidates, as well as Kennedy. "There's a lot of gold in them thar hills," Nixon said. 4. The war on justice The arrest of the Watergate burglars set in motion Nixon's fourth war, against the American system of justice. It was a war of lies and hush money, a conspiracy that became necessary to conceal the roles of top officials and to hide the President's campaign of illegal espionage and political sabotage, including the covert operations that Mitchell described as "the White House horrors" during the Watergate hearings: the Huston Plan, the Plumbers, the Ellsberg break-in, Liddy's Gemstone plan and the proposed break-in at Brookings. In a 23 June 1972 tape recording, six days after the arrests at the Watergate, Haldeman warned Nixon that "on the investigation, you know, the Democratic break-in thing, we're back in the problem area, because the FBI is not under control... their investigation is now leading into some productive areas, because they've been able to trace the money". Haldeman said Mitchell had come up with a plan for the CIA to claim that national security secrets would be compromised if the FBI did not halt its Watergate investigation. Nixon approved the scheme and ordered Haldeman to call in the CIA director Richard Helms and his deputy Vernon Walters. "Play it tough," the President directed. "That's the way they play it, and that's the way we are going to play it." The contents of the tape were made public on 5 August 1974. Four days later, Nixon resigned. Another tape captured discussions in the Oval Office on 1 August 1972, six weeks after the burglars' arrest and the day on which The Post published our first story showing that Nixon campaign funds had gone into the bank account of one of the burglars. Nixon and Haldeman discussed paying off the burglars and their leaders to keep them from talking to federal investigators. "They have to be paid," Nixon said. "That's all there is to that." On 21 March 1973, in one of the most memorable Watergate exchanges caught on tape, Nixon met with his counsel, John W Dean, who since the break-in had been given the task of co-ordinating the cover-up. "We're being blackmailed" by Hunt and the burglars, Dean reported, and more people "are going to start perjuring themselves". "How much money do you need?" Nixon asked. "I would say these people are going to cost $1m over the next two years," Dean replied. "And you could get it in cash," the President said. "I know where it could be gotten. I mean, it's not easy, but it could be done." Hunt was demanding $120,000 immediately. They discussed executive clemency for him and the burglars. "I am not sure that you will ever be able to deliver on the clemency," Dean said. "It may just be too hot." "You can't do it till after the '74 election, that's for sure," Nixon declared. Haldeman then entered the room and Nixon led the search for ways "to take care of the jackasses who are in jail". They discussed a secret $350,000 stash of cash kept in the White House, the possibility of using priests to help hide payments to the burglars, "washing" the money though Las Vegas or New York bookmakers, and empanelling a new grand jury so everyone could plead the Fifth Amendment or claim memory failure. Finally, they decided to send Mitchell on an emergency fundraising mission. The President praised Dean's efforts: "You handled it just right. You contained it. Now after the election, we've got to have another plan." 5. The war on history Nixon's final war, waged even to this day by some former aides and historical revisionists, aims to play down the significance of Watergate and present it as a blip on the President's record. Nixon lived for 20 years after his resignation and worked tirelessly to minimise the scandal. Though he had accepted a full pardon from President Gerald Ford, Nixon insisted that he had not participated in any crimes. In his 1977 television interviews with British journalist David Frost, he said that he had "let the American people down" but that he had not obstructed justice. "I didn't think of it as a cover-up. I didn't intend a cover-up. Let me say, if I intended the cover-up, believe me, I would have done it." In his 1978 memoir RN, Nixon addressed his role in Watergate: "My actions and omissions, while regrettable and possibly indefensible, were not impeachable." Twelve years later, in his book In the Arena, he decried a dozen "myths" about Watergate and claimed that he was innocent of many of the charges made against him. One myth, he said, was that he ordered the payment of hush money to Hunt and others. Yet, the 21 March 1973 tape shows that he ordered Dean to get the money 12 times. Even now, there are old Nixon hands and defenders who dismiss the importance of Watergate or claim that key questions remain unanswered. This year, Thomas Mallon, director of the creative writing programme at George Washington University, published a novel called Watergate, a sometimes witty and entirely fictional story featuring many of the real players. Frank Gannon, a former Nixon White House aide who now works for the Nixon Foundation, reviewed the book for The Wall Street Journal. "What emerges from Watergate is an acute sense of how much we still don't know about the events of June 17, 1972," Gannon wrote. "Who ordered the break-in?... What was its real purpose? Was it purposely botched? How much was the CIA involved? And how did a politician as tough and canny as Richard Nixon allow himself to be brought down by a 'third rate burglary?' Your guess is as good as mine." Of course, Gannon is correct in noting that there are some unanswered questions – but not the big ones. By focusing on the supposed paucity of details concerning the burglary of 17 June 1972, he would divert us from the larger story. And about that story, there is no need to guess. In the summer of 1974, it was neither the press nor the Democrats who rose up against Nixon, but the President's own Republican Party. On 24 July, the Supreme Court ruled 8-0 that Nixon would have to turn over the secret tapes demanded by the Watergate special prosecutor. Three of the President's appointees to the court – Chief Justice Warren E Burger, Justice Harry Blackmun and Justice Lewis Powell – joined that opinion. The other Nixon appointee, Justice William Rehnquist, recused himself. Three days later, six Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee joined the Democrats in voting to recommend Nixon's impeachment by a vote of 27-11 for nine acts of obstruction of justice in the Watergate cover-up. By August, Nixon's impending impeachment in the House was a certainty and a group of Republicans led by Senator Barry Goldwater banded together to declare his presidency over. "Too many lies, too many crimes," Goldwater said. On 7 August the group visited Nixon at the White House. How many votes would he have in a Senate trial? the President asked. "I took kind of a nose count today," Goldwater replied, "and I couldn't find more than four very firm votes, and those would be from older Southerners. Some are very worried about what's been going on, and are undecided, and I'm one of them." The next day, Nixon went on national television and announced that he would resign. In his last remarks about Watergate as a senator, 77-year-old Sam Ervin, a revered constitutionalist respected by both parties, posed a final question: "Why was Watergate?" The President and his aides, Ervin said, had "a lust for political power". That lust "blinded them to ethical considerations and legal requirements". Nixon had lost his moral authority as President. His secret tapes will probably be his most lasting legacy. On them, he is heard talking almost endlessly about what would be good for him, his place in history and his grudges, animosities and schemes for revenge. The dog that never seems to bark is any discussion of what is good and necessary for the well-being of the nation. The Watergate that we wrote about in The Washington Post from 1972 to 1974 is not Watergate as we know it today. It was only a glimpse into something far worse. By the time he was forced to resign, Nixon had turned his White House into a criminal enterprise. On the day he left 9 August 1974, Nixon gave an emotional farewell speech. His family stood with him. Near the end of his remarks, he waved his arm, as if to highlight the most important thing he had to say. "Always remember," he said, "others may hate you, but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself." His hatred had brought about his downfall. Nixon apparently grasped this insight, but it was too late. He had already destroyed himself. Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward are co-authors of two Watergate books, 'All the President's Men' (1974) and 'The Final Days' (1976). © Washington Post 2012
×