Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

The Mysterious Life and Death of James McCord

Recommended Posts

Thank you Gentlemen and Lady for educating me on this page.  Shoffler alone is worth deeper analysis.  I need to read Secret Agenda to understand better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thank you Gentlemen and Lady for educating me on this page.  Shoffler alone is worth deeper analysis.  I need to read Secret Agenda to understand better.

Secret Agenda is a really good book, but be prepared to spend some time with it.  I literally did not want to stop reading at certain points.  There is a LOT of information there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Alfred Baldwin resigned from the forum many years ago after he was relentlessly attacked and smeared by member Ashton Gray who also targeted me again and again with his venomous criticism. John Simkin stood by and did nothing to stop Gray. Only when Gray started attacking other members was the decision reached that Gray had to go from the forum. By then Baldwin was long gone. Baldwin could have shed a lot of light on what Watergate was all about but he undoubtedly concluded that contributing his knowledge was not appreciated in any way.

Robert Merritt is also no longer a member of the forum but for other reasons.

Thanks for the reply Douglas. To be sure, Gray is still a member, and active about a year ago.

I do recall that his manner could be harsh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may sound slightly paranoid, but digital reader platforms can track what you read and when.  So can purchases these days, but still - it's unnerving to see a digital reader tell you that you've spent X hours reading and you may like...this/that book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks for that Dave.

Man, what you can do online with books and media today.

Check out Hoopla.

Yeah, but -- it doesn't work well for me.  Anything that's not light entertainment, I prefer to read between covers, for concentration and commitment.  Fortunately, I've read a library copy of Secret Agenda.

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Yeah, but -- it doesn't work well for me.  Anything that's not light entertainment, I prefer to read between covers, for concentration and commitment.  Fortunately, I've read a library copy of Secret Agenda.

I like having my own hard copy to highlight, fold an ear at the top of a page or use a small post-it note sticking up with a word or two on it as a flag.  Something I can hold in my hands, flip through, refer back and forth between the index or end notes to the pages noted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2019 at 11:36 AM, Douglas Caddy said:

David, you opened up an important part of Watergate in posing this question, a part that has never been explored by the Washington Post which has treated John Dean as its darling since the case broke. Dean was heavily involved socially with the mob in Washington headed by Joseph Nesline through Maureen Biner who later became his wife when they married after Watergate broke to secure the marital legal privilege against having to testify against one's spouse. Maureen had been the roommate of Heidi Rikan, the madame who ran the mob's prostitution ring out of the DNC. Rikan was a bridesmaid at their wedding. Dean and Maureen were seen frequently at a mob owned restaurant in Washington.

For further information see: https://www.amazon.com/White-House-Call-Girl-Watergate-ebook/dp/B00E257UFM/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1

McCord used a mob asset, Madame Heidi Rikan to film DNC members and associates engaging in sex acts with her prostitutes in her 3 bedroom apartment in the Columbia Plaza Apartments next to the Watergate complex.  Heidi was used by Joe Nesline in the mid late 60's for other purposes.  As head of the Washington mob his business included illegal gambling, such as betting on pro football, a big thing among the gambling politicians and lobbyist's of DC.  He used Heidi as bait for inside information.  Pillow talk from players about their and other players injures, locker room issues, rumors, etc.  She befriended them free of charge, Nesline paid her.  The names in her little black book shocked me.  Childhood hero's.  A couple of starting QB's from the Redskins as well as a defensive star.  A Packers running back.  A couple of Dallas QB's, one of whom led them as well as another team to the super bowl, as well as a popular wide receiver.  She later freelanced with the Saints in particular for her own benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I like having my own hard copy to highlight, fold an ear at the top of a page or use a small post-it note sticking up with a word or two on it as a flag.  Something I can hold in my hands, flip through, refer back and forth between the index or end notes to the pages noted.

That's part of the ease and pleasure and convenience, but concentrating on any long prose that requires deduction and analysis on the internet makes my eyes go out of focus and gives me neck strain trying to overcome that.  Journal articles, I can do, even several at a time.  Great novels?  Forget it.

Strangely, long rock star biographies or gossipy film books on the internet don't bother me much.  Not as much brain involved, and you don't have to hold many other, absent works in your head for comparison.  But enough about my diminishing intellectual life.

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 7:24 PM, Michael Clark said:

Hi Paul. Respectfully, that just doesn’t make sense to me. Nuclear clearance holding, patent holding, CIA officer McCord (and Hunt) would not be involved in such a petty political operation. Their good sense, loyalty and the CIA would never allow it. Getting caught had to be part of the plan.

The best answer (I have 2) as to why they did it, is to do what it probably succeeded in doing. It would have forced the WH and the CIA get rid of any information regarding these guys and their prior operations (the JFKA). The second best answer is to force an invasion of Cuba, which Nixon did not end-up doing, and he shut Hunt down by killing his wife.

I just can’t believe they were there to spy or rob. They just too big of fish to be doing that sort of stuff.

"I just can’t believe they were there to spy or rob. They just too big of fish to be doing that sort of stuff."

Oh, I agree. Maybe I didn't make myself clear before, but I never believed that McCord and Hunt were honestly "on board" with the break-in as it was originally conceived. Were they part of deliberate plan to sabotage the break-in to hide/protect an ongoing CIA operation involving the Colombia Plaza hookers and Heidi Rikan?

Oh yeah.

Could they also have sabotaged it to force Nixon to cover-up their own involvement in even more nefarious "black ops", including (possibly) the JFKA?

Maybe, but remember, Nixon didn't seem to realize that E. Howard Hunt was indirectly working for him until June 23, 1972. Once he realized that fact, he seized on the offered opportunity to blame the break-in on the CIA, and gambled that the CIA would tell the FBI to back off (and obstruct justice) rather than to allow the FBI to investigate Hunt properly. 

After vehement protests, Helms and Walters did do exactly that.

So, the real question is "why DID the CIA go along with Nixon's plan to blame the break-in on the CIA if the CIA had nothing to do the Liddy/Magruder/Mitchell(?)/Dean break-in?

Why did Richard Nixon appoint Richard Helms as ambassador to Iran after firing him? 

What exactly did President Gerald Ford fear when, in January of 1975, he personally met with the editorial board of the New York Times and told them he was concerned that a full-scale investigation into Seymour Hersh's story (about CHAOS material) would reveal some extremely embarrassing material, including assassination plots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

"I just can’t believe they were there to spy or rob. They just too big of fish to be doing that sort of stuff."

Oh, I agree. Maybe I didn't make myself clear before, but I never believed that McCord and Hunt were honestly "on board" with the break-in as it was originally conceived. Were they part of deliberate plan to sabotage the break-in to hide/protect an ongoing CIA operation involving the Colombia Plaza hookers and Heidi Rikan?

Oh yeah.

Could they also have sabotaged it to force Nixon to cover-up their own involvement in even more nefarious "black ops", including (possibly) the JFKA?

Maybe, but remember, Nixon didn't seem to realize that E. Howard Hunt was indirectly working for him until June 23, 1972. Once he realized that fact, he seized on the offered opportunity to blame the break-in on the CIA, and gambled that the CIA would tell the FBI to back off (and obstruct justice) rather than to allow the FBI to investigate Hunt properly. 

After vehement protests, Helms and Walters did do exactly that.

So, the real question is "why DID the CIA go along with Nixon's plan to blame the break-in on the CIA if the CIA had nothing to do the Liddy/Magruder/Mitchell(?)/Dean break-in?

Why did Richard Nixon appoint Richard Helms as ambassador to Iran after firing him? 

What exactly did President Gerald Ford fear when, in January of 1975, he personally met with the editorial board of the New York Times and told them he was concerned that a full-scale investigation into Seymour Hersh's story (about CHAOS material) would reveal some extremely embarrassing material, including assassination plots?

In what sense was the CIA judicially held responsible for the break-in?

I believe McCord planned to be arrested.  But did Hunt ever really expect to be arrested?  His later behavior and the outcome of the case for Hunt suggest he was abandoned not only by Nixon, but by Helms, whom he royally angered by calling attention to the White House's ingratitude.

Helms' posting Iran was just a cover assignment for more CIA work in an opening arena where government change was anticipated.  In a past thread, we saw how CIA kept track of a Helms temporary return to the US, by air, labeling him by his director's code name (Knight, I think) in the report.  Helms would have had a status not dissimilar to Allen Dulles's after leaving CIA.  (Angleton, too, was retained for some time as a contractee advisor after his disgrace.  You can't run an old-boy network without the old boys.)

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...