Jump to content
The Education Forum

CNN Special on Watergate tomorrow night (Sunday)


Douglas Caddy
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is going to be narrated by John Dean.

Therefore, its likely going to be the official  story, that is the Woodward/Bernstein, Senator Sam Ervin version of the story.

Jeff Morley's book is coming out around the same time.  I think his version is different in that he explores more thoroughly the CIA's role in the scandal. Which the above two pretty much ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is going to be narrated by John Dean.

Therefore, its likely going to be the official  story, that is the Woodward/Bernstein, Senator Sam Ervin version of the story.

Jeff Morley's book is coming out around the same time.  I think his version is different in that he explores more thoroughly the CIA's role in the scandal. Which the above two pretty much ignore.

I'm still waiting for an accurate documentary about Watergate entitled, They Weren't All the President's Men.

The John Dean-centric Gaslit series ain't it.

In fact, I noticed while watching the Gaslit series recently that they dedicated a lot of screen time to the story of John Dean and L. Patrick Gray burning the documents from E. Howard Hunt's safe in the White House, without even raising the question of why Hunt left the documents in the White House and why they needed to be urgently burned.

Does anyone know what was in the safe?  (Mr. Caddy probably can't answer the question without violating attorney-client confidentiality.)

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

John Dean and the media have a lot of

chutzpah to make him the hero/narrator

of Watergate after all we've learned about

those events.

Joseph:

I read Dena's books and found them informative and somewhat persuasive. Can you fill out your point of view? 

E Howard Hunt struck me as a CIA-asset in the White House, but more than that, I do not know....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a quote from an article today in the Washington Post

written by Woodward and Bernstein:

"John Dean, the Nixon White House counsel, was initially in charge of the containment and coverup of Watergate activities. He found a willing participant in Assistant Attorney General Henry Petersen, the head of the Justice Department criminal division, a powerful post. Petersen agreed to ensure that Earl Silbert, the U.S. attorney in charge of investigating Watergate, did not investigate Segretti and others.

"According to the Senate Watergate report, 'Petersen directed Silbert not to probe the relationships between Segretti and Kalmbach, Chapin, and Strachan because he "didn’t want him getting into the relationships between the President and his lawyer or the fact that the President’s lawyer might be involved in somewhat, I thought, illegitimate campaign activities on behalf of the President."'

"The coverup could proceed with what — in practical terms — amounted to an official blessing."

Dean eventually turned on Nixon to protect himself. There are

revisionist Watergate historians who claim that Dean actually was

instrumental in helping orchestrating the Watergate break-ins to

entrap Nixon. There is abundant evidence that Watergate

was a CIA plot to get rid of Nixon; he predictably fell

into the trap and committed impeachable crimes to cover up what

his minions were doing.

Edited by Joseph McBride
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joseph McBride said:

Here's a quote from an article today in the Washington Post

written by Woodward and Bernstein:

"John Dean, the Nixon White House counsel, was initially in charge of the containment and coverup of Watergate activities. He found a willing participant in Assistant Attorney General Henry Petersen, the head of the Justice Department criminal division, a powerful post. Petersen agreed to ensure that Earl Silbert, the U.S. attorney in charge of investigating Watergate, did not investigate Segretti and others.

"According to the Senate Watergate report, 'Petersen directed Silbert not to probe the relationships between Segretti and Kalmbach, Chapin, and Strachan because he "didn’t want him getting into the relationships between the President and his lawyer or the fact that the President’s lawyer might be involved in somewhat, I thought, illegitimate campaign activities on behalf of the President."'

"The coverup could proceed with what — in practical terms — amounted to an official blessing."

Dean eventually turned on Nixon to protect himself. There are

revisionist Watergate historians who claim that Dean actually was

instrumental in helping orchestrating the Watergate break-ins to

entrap Nixon. There is abundant evidence that Watergate

was a CIA plot to get rid of Nixon; he predictably fell

into the trap and committed impeachable crimes to cover up what

his minions were doing.

Why did the CIA want to get rid of Nixon? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been widely covered, so I refer you to books on the subject. Nixon was working

on detente with the Soviets and the Chinese. The

CIA was in opposition. That's one of the main reasons

for the friction between Nixon and the CIA. Nixon

also wanted to lessen their power and influence.

Edited by Joseph McBride
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...