Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Woodward, Bernstein, and Rather.....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:41 PM
Original message
Woodward, Bernstein, and Rather.....

I've been elated all day from watching perhaps the best two hours of television last night when Larry King had Woodward & Bernstein for an hour, followed directly by Dan Rather for a 2nd hour.

Instead of the day to day propoganda that streams into our homes, via
the tube, this was a breath of fresh air. A total respite from the
tyranny that is foisted upon us in unrelenting quantities. As
Bush/Cheney continue with their blueprint of reversing 50 years of
gains by the working middle class of America, it was good to recall
there was indeed a journalistic Camelot. A time when the Fourth Estate was truly independent, and caused our government to be what Lincoln said it should be - "to the people, by the people, and for the people."

And while I heard "a call to arms" from Woodward, Berstein, and Rather for journalists to rise up, as they once did, they did not throw any red meat to their supporters to do so. I mean really, would it have been so terrible to denounce the fanatical right wingers who were saying that Felt should have gone up the ladder with his complaints? Would it have bruised any egos to say that L. Patrick Gray was giving all the FBI information to John Dean? And would it have been so demeaning to say that surely the most ruthless man in politics, prior to the current VP, John Mitchell, the attorney general and chairman of the Nixon campaign to re-elect, was also in on the cover-up to the point of being convicted of conspiracy and sentenced to 18 months in prison? Couldn't they have explained these reasons as to why Mark Felts went to them?

And would it have been so wrong to bitch-slap Pat and Bay Buchanan for being lackeys that must be wearing tin foil hats if they believe any of the tripe they've been pedaling these past few days? And could Dan Rather, who was exonerated by Dick Thornburg, on the Bush Documents, because the investigation could not tell if they were or were not forgeries, step on the throats of the Repubnuts, but said instead, "I won't argue with them because it's like arguing with a wooden Indian."

Really, this was their moment. But they all, to a fault, mamsy-pamsyied about the Watergate and Bush Nat's guard issues so as not to hurt anyone's feelings. Please, even Clinton, who can knock Bush on his keister without Bush knowing he's been hit, always includes "...and let me tell you why" in his concise explanations.

Well kids, even when we win, it's never a clear cut win. We're too
nice! We have too many of those middle class values that only we play
by and I wonder if it will ever change... as it did in the 60's.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cestpaspossible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just don't confuse Woodward with one of the good guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Woodward "blows at both ends". Old neighborhood saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Vegas Odds Say...
Take Woodward......and give any journalist today plus the points until the cows come home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Willing to take this bet. Probably impossible to prove.
Woodward was part of a set up to take down Nixon along with Felt. This was not done by any "liberal" conspiracy but by the radical wing of the the Republican Party possibly because Tricky Dick was becoming to independent. I am also postulating this same wing was afraid of Agnew's influence hence the timing of his take down.

I almost feel sorry for Nixon but have to remember how slimy he was in the Imperial Whitehouse. Look who and what controls the Republican Party today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. You Fail To Remember....
Edited on Fri Jun-03-05 05:51 PM by On Par
The Nixon tapes back up all that he knowingly did wrong!

And recall, Nixon, along with 18 others in all the President's men, were found GUILTY of conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Only Tricky Dick got a pardon.

BTW, How can you "set-up" someone who is guilty? No such thing. What Woodward/Bernstein did and Felt confirmed, was to expose the wrong doing. You can't be above the Constitution, or the law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. CIA wanted Nixon out and so did the FBI and Navy/military
Edited on Fri Jun-03-05 07:44 PM by EVDebs
Page 59 of Crimes of Patriots: A True Tale of Dope, Dirty Money, and the CIA by Jonathan Kwitny :

“Alexander Butterfield, a former Asian-intelligence officer, had some helpful advice for a reporter asking questions about Bernie Houghton. In 1973, Butterfield had attained instant celebrity by revealing to Congress and the world that Richard Nixon’s Watergate conversations were secretly taped in the Oval Office. (Little if anything was made of the curious circumstance that a career intelligence operative had played such a pivotal role in the downfall of a president.)”

Combine the role of Robert F. Bennett of the Mullen Co CIA-front p.r. firm, and the fact that Bennett hid the CIA’s and his role in that; the fact that the burglary was run by the CIA’s McCord and the Cubans, and done at Gordon Strachan’s urging after an uneventful first breakin, and voila.

The odds of Gordon Strachan being another of the White House staff being CIA are quite high given that he was treated so leniently. He now practices law in Park City UT., homestate of Sen. Robert F. Bennett, who was also a source for Woodward. Bennett then was head of the CIA's p.r. front-company Mullen & Co., which Woodward referred to in yesterday's paper but did not identify as having anything to do with the CIA. I guess they are keeping that anonymous source secret until THEY die.

The Huston Plan to centralize domestic spying and martial law in the White House scared the FBI and CIA. The 'blowing' of the SALT treaty negotiations with the US giving away the Delta class subs and a 4000 mi. ballistic missile range to the Soviets had Adm Moorer and Adm Zumwalt livid (see pgs 246-247 of Blind Man's Bluff by Susan Sontag and Christopher Drew); the rest of the military was fearful the Peace Talks would leave prisoners behind (see Kiss The Boys Goodbye) who were taken prisoner out of uniform.

The media should be looking into Butterfield and Strachan...the rest of the Watergate story was all about the CIA money (p. 36 All The President's Men) coming back from Chile via 'investors' and ending up in Nixon's campaign account...and possibly other congressmen perhaps. That got covered up (see "In search of the real Nixon scandal" by Renata Adler, Dec 1976 Atlantic Monthly; btw, she now teaches at Boston U). So, the money trail was never followed. We ended up with martial law anyway via Executive Orders and now with a brand new DHS and Patriot Act to boot !

You can still be harassed by the IRS, just ask anyone on the Earned Income Credit--an automatic audit. You can't fly if your a Green Party member. The media STILL doesn't get the real story.

So nuthin's changed after 31 year. What's new ?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. My 15 year old daughter said the same thing last night.
When I told her of the many known and provable misdeeds of one G.W.B. before he became pResident (include current misdeeds). Gee Dad why don't people investigate and talk about these things?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
4. Poor Dan, he looked like he had been worked over by experts. Half dead.
He had those glazed, unfocused eyes, like an old man who'd been beaten up by thugs in an alley and left to die. Looking at the clip they played of him from 8-9 months ago, the change is startling.

His brain is still working, though. He rallied at places there, and seemed visibly stronger at the end of the interview. He made some excellent points about how it all comes down to whether the publisher and head editors have any guts and desire to tell the truth.

I want to send him a supportive note, and I suggest others do the same. Anyone have his e-mail?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. Bernstein did say "that if anything happens to both of us - our wives
have control over the files". Apparently they have files separated out by each source. And as each source dies ... they will release boxes and boxes of information that covers only that source.

So it seems, as the decades pass, we will be getting and waterfall of new information.

I just though Bernstein's words were somehow funny.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Yes, But I Think Woodward Clarified That....
...or maybe it was Bernstein. As sources pass away, the files still at the Washington Post will be turned over to the University of Texas for viewing. If either or both Woodward and Bernstein pass away, their wives will control that transfer of documents.

What I found odd was that it was the University of Texas that was the benefactor. One would think that Princeton or Harvard would have paid handsomely for those files.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I think when you have something so huge - you pass it along
to other smaller institutions where they will prize it and take care of it and make it a leading part of their collection. You have to think of all the visiting scholars and the like. A smaller institution may be able to treat the documents right and gain some valuable departments at the same time. I think it is a way to give back in that way. Really, scholars and reporters will go anywhere to find the important research. I think it is great that the stuff is in Texas and spread around. Something for Texans to be proud of for once. Harvard has too much already.

Yes I admit the way Bernstein said it was lackadaisical. I just thought it was funny. That they have more secrets to be revealed. Like the gift that just keeps on giving!




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-03-05 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Graham A. Martin's stolen Saigon cables ended up in Ford's Library
but the Univ of Tx shows up on the weblink

"In January 1978, the North Carolina State Police found a cache of classified documents in the trunk of a car that had been stolen from former U.S. ambassador to South Vietnam Graham A. Martin. They turned the documents over to the FBI. The documents were embassy files Martin had taken with him when he evacuated Saigon on April 29, 1975, just hours before the city fell to the Communists. The Justice Department, in considering prosecuting Martin for misuse of classified documents, sent copies of the files to the National Security Council for a damage assessment. The copies remained in NSC files until 1982, when the NSC determined that they should have been considered presidential papers and sent them to the Ford Library."

http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/guides/Finding%20Aids/Saigon%20Embassy%20Files%20Kept%20by%20Ambassador%20Graham%20Martin.htm

Breath deeply, think Diem assassination, JFK assassination, Martin made Ambassador to Thailand Nov 1, 1963 (prior amb in '50s was William 'Wild Bill' Donovan), think "Why Texas and Why Ford ?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC