The JFKA and Watergate, E. Howard Hunt

[Benjamin Cole]

 

 

 

Secret Agenda, Hougan, and Watergate: The Final Verdict - James Rosen (author 'The Strong Man')

Skip the blah-blah and get to James Rosen at 18:20

James Rosen, in part, reviews the book "Secret Agenda: Watergate, Deep Throat, and the CIA" written by James Hougan in 1984.

Rosen says the book holds up entirely, and was well-documented. 

For JFKA'ers, the fascinating part is that E. Howard Hunt, of course, led the Watergate burglars...and also never explained where he was on 11/22/63 to anyone's satisfaction. Late in life Hunt said he was on some sort of back-up team in Dallas, but if anyone in the CIA ever tells the truth....

The Nixon White House was crawling with CIA'ers. The Pentagon also spied on Nixon. 

BTW, if may be the CIA knew about the pending Watergate burglary 30 minutes before it happened. 

IMHO, Nixon was a war criminal, lacking fundamental ethics. 

That said, do we live in a nation in which the intel-state deposes democratically elected presidents?

I think so. 

 

[Anthony Thorne]

Trine Day has a new Watergate book coming out from FRANKLIN SCANDAL author Nick Bryant that will likely be a good one. It's listed on their site, will do a post about it if I get a chance.

[Benjamin Cole]

4 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

Trine Day has a new Watergate book coming out from FRANKLIN SCANDAL author Nick Bryant that will likely be a good one. It's listed on their site, will do a post about it if I get a chance.

I look forward to your post. 

The JFKA, thanks to the JFKA research community, has been examined by many diligent authors and researchers (although much evidence has been destroyed, people have died, and some evidence is still being suppressed). 

Watergate had a popular story line, but decades later...the official narrative and the real narrative look like two different tales. But the number of authors and researchers who have looked at Watergate is very limited.

Instead of viewing JFKA is a one-off, likely the JFKA is part of a pattern of presidential deposings by the intel state....

 

[Anthony Thorne]

Nick Bryant's earlier FRANKLIN SCANDAL was credible, extremely well researched and documented, but hugely depressing because of the subject matter. I'm looking forward to reading this new volume, which I guess will be out within the first half of 2024.

 

https://trineday.myshopify.com/products/truth-about-watergate-a-tale-of-extraordinary-lies-XXXXX#section-info

 

Quote

A delusion is a strong belief or conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. The Watergate delusion, embraced by millions, is that swashbuckling Bob Woodward and the left confronted the malevolent Nixon administration as it cast a sinister pall over America and slayed it with the lance of truth, thereby saving democracy. But the actual evidence demonstrates that Watergate was not a shining example of democracy, and Bob Woodward’s place among the pantheon of journalistic immortals is a grift.

One of the grand deceptions of Watergate is that Nixon’s enemies on the left razed his presidency, but it was actually his enemies on the right—the far right—who initially had the means, motive, and opportunity. And although Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein told numerous lies throughout their Watergate reporting, Woodward’s Big Lie was that he didn’t meet Alexander Haig until 1973. As The Truth About Watergate takes the reader on a guided tour of the extraordinary lies and XXXXX of Watergate, its demonstrates that Woodward’s fabrication about Haig has seismic implications. If Woodward’s Big Lie about Haig had been exposed, then the synergistic mythologies of Bob Woodward and “Deep Throat” would have been shattered and swept away by gusts of veracity.

The Washington Post has scorned prior Watergate revisionist books, like Silent Coup: The Removal of a President as a conspiracy theory, but The Truth About Watergate shows The Washington Post has fervent, utilitarian motives for banishing Silent Coup to the conspiracy theory ghetto.

[Benjamin Cole]

14 minutes ago, Anthony Thorne said:

Nick Bryant's earlier FRANKLIN SCANDAL was credible, extremely well researched and documented, but hugely depressing because of the subject matter. I'm looking forward to reading this new volume, which I guess will be out within the first half of 2024.

 

https://trineday.myshopify.com/products/truth-about-watergate-a-tale-of-extraordinary-lies-XXXXX#section-info

 

Nixon and Kissinger wanted out of Vietnam, and detente with Russia and China. And Nixon wanted to see the Bay of Pigs files. 

That may have been enough for some intel-state and Pentagon elements to orchestrate with useful idiots in Congress to have Nixon deposed. 

That does not make Nixon a nice guy. I consider him a war criminal for what he did in SE Asia. He, and his staff, seemed to lack fundamental ethics on a wide range of issues and events. 

But even a bad guy can be deposed by undemocratic forces....

And sure, Agnew was chased out first and replaced by Ford....just by chance, no? 

It can be decades before the true story of large historical events becomes known...and then only if there are intrepid researchers and reporters willing to face down official and partisan narratives. 

 

[Michael Griffith]

Anyone who is going to talk about Watergate must, absolutely must, become familiar with the new evidence on the subject developed by Geoff Shepard. Much of what most history books say about Watergate is wrong. Shepard's two books are required reading for anyone who wants to talk about Watergate: The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down (2019) and The Nixon Conspiracy: Watergate and the Plot to Remove the President (2021). Here is a good summary of Shepard's research:

Geoff Shepard: An Alternative View Of Watergate

If you'd rather watch some videos, here are some of the better ones:

LINK     LINK     LINK     LINK

[Benjamin Cole]

9 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Anyone who is going to talk about Watergate must, absolutely must, become familiar with the new evidence on the subject developed by Geoff Shepard. Much of what most history books say about Watergate is wrong. Shepard's two books are required reading for anyone who wants to talk about Watergate: The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down (2019) and The Nixon Conspiracy: Watergate and the Plot to Remove the President (2021). Here is a good summary of Shepard's research:

Geoff Shepard: An Alternative View Of Watergate

If you'd rather watch some videos, here are some of the better ones:

LINK     LINK     LINK     LINK

MG-

 

I have watched Shepard's presentations. Yes, there was a partisan lynching party going on...but remember, there were three GOP dons who went to the White House and told Nixon to resign. 

"Goldwater, along with House Republican Leader John Jacob Rhodes and Senate Republican Leader Hugh Scott, entered the Oval Office around 5 p.m. The Arizona senator sat directly in front of Nixon’s desk, the others to the side. Goldwater told Nixon he had perhaps 16 to 18 Senate supporters left – too few to avoid ouster. Congressman Rhodes said House support was just as soft."

---30---

Shepard does a great job explaining a weaponized Congress, media and judiciary. 

But the origins of Watergate, and James McCord, and the CIA involvement are not on Shepard's plate. 

The Deep State, when advantageous and possible, will used rank partisan politics to its advantage. 

For me, the question is who triggered Watergate? Not the D-Party.  

[Michael Griffith]

On 10/24/2023 at 8:29 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

MG-

 

I have watched Shepard's presentations. Yes, there was a partisan lynching party going on...but remember, there were three GOP dons who went to the White House and told Nixon to resign. 

"Goldwater, along with House Republican Leader John Jacob Rhodes and Senate Republican Leader Hugh Scott, entered the Oval Office around 5 p.m. The Arizona senator sat directly in front of Nixon’s desk, the others to the side. Goldwater told Nixon he had perhaps 16 to 18 Senate supporters left – too few to avoid ouster. Congressman Rhodes said House support was just as soft."

---30---

Shepard does a great job explaining a weaponized Congress, media and judiciary. 

But the origins of Watergate, and James McCord, and the CIA involvement are not on Shepard's plate. 

The Deep State, when advantageous and possible, will used rank partisan politics to its advantage. 

For me, the question is who triggered Watergate? Not the D-Party.  

I think Shepard shows pretty clearly who triggered Watergate and why.

Yes, some GOP leaders urged Nixon to resign, but that was only because they were deceived by the false claims about the alleged "smoking gun" White House tape. If they had known the truth about the tape, I suspect they would have ardently defended Nixon.

Also, Nixon and Kissinger did not want out of Vietnam in the way that the anti-war Congress wanted out of Vietnam. They wanted to continue robust military and economic aid, and they wanted to be able to keep their promise to provide air support if North Vietnam seriously violated the peace accords. 

I think it is going way too far to call Nixon a war criminal for what he did in SE Asia. He did his best to save 18 million South Vietnamese and 7 million Cambodians from Communist brutality. Truman authorized far deadlier bombing of North Korea than Nixon ever authorized of North Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. For that matter, FDR authorized unbelievably vicious bombing of Japan and Germany, bombing that dwarfed Nixon's bombing of North Vietnam in terms of the types of targets and the degree of destruction. Indeed, FDR wanted the A-bomb so he could nuke Nazi Germany.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[James DiEugenio]

Hunt did not lead the Watergate burglars.

That was supposed to be Gordon Liddy. 

But it seems clear by Hougan's milestone book that Liddy's position was only titular.  He did not know that, and in fact was in denial of it to the end of his life.

Its pretty obvious from the evidence that Hougan collected that McCord and Hunt were off the reservation.

In fact, from what Hougan did in excavating the crime, I would wager that Watergate was a Dick Helms operation.  And Nixon discovered that the CIA had booby trapped him too late.  You can see that from that call I extracted in this article.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/obituaries/the-mysterious-life-and-death-of-james-w-mccord

There  are very few books you will read as impacting and  as revealing as Secret Agenda.  On top of that it is well written.

If you have not read it, you are missing the Big Picture about what really happened  to this country.  Bernstein and Woodward were part of a cover story.  And I think that is why Bernstein wrote that article  The CIA and the Media.

And from Newman has discovered, McCord may have been even more of an operator than even Hougan realized.

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Hunt did not lead the Watergate burglars.

That was supposed to be Gordon Liddy. 

But it seems clear by Hougan's milestone book that Liddy's position was only titular.  He did not know that, and in fact was in denial of it to the end of his life.

Its pretty obvious from the evidence that Hougan collected that McCord and Hunt were off the reservation.

In fact, from what Hougan did in excavating the crime, I would wager that Watergate was a Dick Helms operation.  And Nixon discovered that the CIA had booby trapped him too late.  You can see that from that call I extracted in this article.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/obituaries/the-mysterious-life-and-death-of-james-w-mccord

There  are very few books you will read as impacting and  as revealing as Secret Agenda.  On top of that it is well written.

If you have not read it, you are missing the Big Picture about what really happened  to this country.  Bernstein and Woodward were part of a cover story.  And I think that is why Bernstein wrote that article  The CIA and the Media.

And from Newman has discovered, McCord may have been even more of an operator than even Hougan realized.

That is a great article you penned on McCord. 

It has been years since I read Hougan's book, and in moving offshore my library was abandoned. 

The take-away for me is that we have a Deep State that deposes Presidents, often in coordination with partisan politics, weaponized judiciary and prosecutorial agencies, and media lynchings. 

As you know, the Deep State (or global security state and related commercial globalists) is 10 times bigger than in 1963, maybe 100 times larger.  Defense and intel budgets have ballooned with every perceived threat, and global enterprise has become dominant. Global enterprise wants a global guard force, and friendly governments in every region. 

The technology of surveillance makes 1984 look primitive. 

Legacy media has been reduced to a few now-discredited brands, but they still have a lock on narratives, and few independent outfits can afford any real reporting. 

Good luck out there. 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Ben.  THat is what the true meaning of Secret Agenda really is.

It exposed that there really was a shadow government that is invisible but actually  run things. But is not visible to the average american since the MSM filters through only images they want Joe Blow to know. Take a look at how look they stalled the public from seeing the Z film. 

In watergate is was hiding the connections between Hunt and McCord. Concealng that McCord was a security expert and disguising Hunt as a keystone cop type. And Helms screaming the CIA had nothing to do with Watergate.   Meanwhile all three men were familiar with each other.

And McCord despised Prouty.

Edited October 27, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Benjamin Cole]

15 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Ben.  THat is what the true meaning of Secret Agenda really is.

It exposed that there really was a shadow government that is invisible but actually  run things. But is not visible to the average american since the MSM filters through only images they want Joe Blow to know. Take a look at how look they stalled the public from seeing the Z film. 

In watergate is was hiding the connections between Hunt and McCord. Concealng that McCord was a security expert and disguising Hunt as a keystone cop type. And Helms screaming the CIA had nothing to do with Watergate.   Meanwhile all three men were familiar with each other.

And McCord despised Prouty.

Ditto.

There has been a great deal of scholarship on the JFKA, so we know more than the official and legacy media narratives. 

Watergate has been addressed by only a few true researchers, such as Hougan, and his work is decades old. And yet, the official and legacy media narrative looks deficient. 

For me, the lessons of the JFKA and Watergate are that Presidents can be deposed by undemocratic elements. Regardless of partisan politics, that is an avenue of research that should be explored.