I was in my car about to head to work and just hear this on NPR. A guy named Mark (F)Phelps has revealed that he is Deep Throat!
Apparently he was part of the FBI and was already a favorite to be Deep Throat.
Posted by adam613 (Member # 5522) on :
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, I'm sad. I liked the mystery.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Very cool.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Woodword and Bernstein apparently refuse to confirm this. They say they won't release the name until Deep Throat is dead.
Posted by johnsonweed (Member # 8114) on :
W. Mark Felt
Woodward and Bernstein probably have an agreement with Tim Russert to confirm it on Meet the Press.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
That's kinda cool... Posted by Parsimony (Member # 8140) on :
I had my money on Mark Twain...
--ApostleRadio
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Wow... that was certainly buried a long time!
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
Our local NBC outlet has, within the past few minutes, reported that both the Washington Post and Bob Woodward have now confirmed that Felt was indeed Deep Throat.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I personally feel like this man did the right thing and should be honored by all Americans for ratting out the Nixon camp.
I wonder if I'm in the majority by holding that opinion.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
Don't know if you're in the majority, Bob, although I agree with you completely. The news here did just show a clip of Pat Buchanan calling for the man's prosecution for leaking government secrets or something. Guess you have to consider the source, huh?
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
If they were government secrets that resulted in people being hurt or something, sure. But these "secrets" were about sabotaging political enemies and subverting the process of government. Nixon was a bad dude and deep throat did the right thing.
Posted by Griffin (Member # 7166) on :
Woodword and Bernstein did say they wouldn't release the name until "Deep Throat" was dead. But I heard it was Deep Throat's family that convinced him to give his identity. A lot of good movies have come out of the Nixon years, I wonder if a new movie is going to be made based on Mark Felt's life, or something.
Griffin Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
I consider him a hero too. He saved the US from a terrible injustice.
Posted by Grisha (Member # 6871) on :
It must have sucked for his kids and grandkids, when they learned about Watergate in school, and they couldn't tell how much they knew.
Posted by Ele (Member # 708) on :
Thank you, Mark Felt, for caring more about the dream that is the United States of America than about a leader who turned out to be a criminal, not just a liar but proven by his own words (eventually) to be complicit in a crime against the people of this country and the democratic process that is the lifeblood of our liberty, for all its flaws and missteps.
Signed,
Ele
Descendent of Richard D. Reynolds, Revolutionary War patriot and resident of the oldest colony in America,the birthplace of Thomas Jefferson, Virginia
Posted by Peter (Member # 4373) on :
I was just talking to a girl the other day who viewed Nixon as her hero. All i could do was shake my head.
Yea for Felt!!!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Thank you, Mark Felt, for caring more about the dream that is the United States of America than about a leader who turned out to be a criminal..."
In all honesty, Felt almost certainly didn't care about the "dream that is the United States of America" as much as he wanted to hurt Nixon. But either way, we're glad he did it.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
How awesome that this information has only been known for roughly a day and a half and you've already (somehow) uncovered Felt's true motives: Nothing heroic at all, just the blind desire to "hurt Nixon."
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
This isn't really that big a deal. Everybody, including Nixon, knew this was the guy.
I think we'll discover, in retrospect, that it was harder for the media to cover up that this was the guy than it was to figure it out.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
According to this, the family answering machine even identified him as Deep Throat as far back as 2002, although it does say it was done in jest.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
I think the story as it plays out is fascinating.
Mark Felt really isn't easy to categorize. He was J. Edgar Hoover's man - and Hoover was never known for his great respect for constitutional limits on the FBI's powers. Felt himself was indicted for his role in ordering illegal searches of families and friends of members of the Weathermen group.
Charles Colson, who was one of the most blatant power-mongers in the Nixon whitehouse has come out blasting Felt for his "betrayal" of the president. Colson did time for his role in Watergate and found religion - and although I don't agree with a lot of his politics, it looked like it might be sincere. But the Colson on the talk shows yesterday sounded a lot more like the Colson who worked with Nixon.
Today, Carl Bernstein had a great comment about the accusations that the family might be motivated by profit. He pointed out that just about every Nixon staffer that served time wrote a book after they came out and profited. Why the heck shouldn't Felt's family profit?
I'm not all that surprised by the mix of murky motives. That's how things usually work out in life. A bunch of flawed human beings managing - once in awhile - to do the right thing, even if for the wrong reasons.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote: I personally feel like this man did the right thing
I agree with you.
Although, I'm not sure he did it for all the right reasons (altruist) -- but that doesn't matter in the long run, it was still good that he did it.
And the argument has been made that what was done by that administration was nothing different than what had been done by previous administrations (JFK, etc.) -- however, that doesn't excuse it as bring right.
So what stephen said, basically -- the right thing, however perhaps for the wrong reasons.
FG
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I don't think it was all that wrong to want to get the guy who screwed him over. Particularily if you KNOW he is breaking the law.
Kwea
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by TL: How awesome that this information has only been known for roughly a day and a half and you've already (somehow) uncovered Felt's true motives: Nothing heroic at all, just the blind desire to "hurt Nixon."
Try reading up on his own statments, and you will see that it was fairly easy to find. Also, Felt himself went to jail for things that were every bit as bad as this, so obviously there wasn't a lot of moral high ground there.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
One thing - Pat Buchanan, John Dean and Charles Colson have been saying Felt should have gone to one of the following players:
1. The president/White House staff 2. The Department of Justice 3. The Director of the FBI
Reality check: The White House was blocking every move in a meaningful investigation - by means both fair and foul. John Mitchell, the attorney general, was part of the cover-up. L. Patrick Gray, the FBI Director, was cooperating with the White House in limiting the investigation and a cover-up.
There was one legitimate channel left for Felt - he could have gone to Congress. But that was really the only one. The White House, Attorney General, and FBI Director were up to their necks in it.
To Kwea: While other administrations abused their powers in various ways, this particular effort involved an effort to subvert the political process - it began with a bunch of CIA private contractors breaking in to Democratic headquarters.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Does anyone know what specifically Nixon did? I know that there was break in (for what or to get what?) and that Nixon lied. What I don't know is what did he lie about? What was the break in for. I'm admitting complete ignorance on this, and I have done a lot more reading lately but all I hear is that he lied and is just the most awful human being ever. What was the lie about or what is the whole Watergate thing about? I mean what does "complicit in a crime against the people of this country and the democratic process that is the lifeblood of our liberty" mean? What crime? I hear that Felt blew the whistle on Nixon, but for what? Again what does "sabotaging political enemies and subverting the process of government" mean? I am totally admitting vast ignorance on the subject, but just doing some cursory looks at things I'm not finding much info on what actually happened. Just Nixon lied, and everyone else is a hero. I will keep looking though. Politicians lying is nothing new
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Ok, I think the whole thing is mostly about politcal spying, that he was secretly going after dirt on Democrats? Is that right?
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
DarkKnight,
The Washington Post has a lot of info up on their site today - archived Watergate coverage, etc.
BTW, I think, of the persons who have posted on this so far, only Bob_S, Farmgirl, and I are old enough to have watched the Congressional hearings and Nixon's resignation - old enough to be interested and have an idea of the importance of it all.
::shakes cane at youngsters and launches off into an account of all my health problems::
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Thanks sndrake, we whippersnappers are a lazy bunch haha!
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
Not that I've posted previously, but I remember watching Nixon's resignation speech. I was about 10, I think.
Mostly I remember the speech on the radio in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show."
But on the record: I think Felt is a hero of sorts. Regardless of his motives.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
TomD isn't even 30 yet I don't think Adam. (27? 28?)
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
One clip from sndrake's link
quote:October 10, 1972 FBI agents establish that the Watergate break-in stems from a massive campaign of political spying and sabotage conducted on behalf of the Nixon reelection effort, The Post reports
The stupid thing is that this really didn't have to happen. Nixon was a shoe-in and won the next election by a landslide (even in the midst of Watergate) -- so it was stupid of him and his people to resort to breaking and entering in order to get the dirt on democratic opponents.
yes, I remember Nixon's resignation speech well. My household were big fans of his, and they were all very disappointed over everything that had taken place.
Farmgirl (sndrake - gee, thanks for pointing out my age again) Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
We were Watergate Hearing junkies in my family too. I was 12 or 13 at the time. And I read the entire book of the White House Transcripts when it came out. It was a real eye opener. Anyone who has respect for Richard Nixon should read that book of his most intimate conversations and strategy sessions with his aides. He struck me as a fearful paranoid man who had no respect for human dignity, no compunctions about misuse of power, and who felt himself to be completely above the law. His downfall was, in my opinion, the best thing that ever happened in U.S. politics.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Farmgirl,
at the time of the break-in, the presidential nomination for the Dems was still up for grabs. It was a pretty serious fight at the convention, which McGovern's disciplined "troops" won. (The parts of Hunter Thompson's "Fear & Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72" that don't feature paranoid fantasies and ramblings about ibogaine contain some very detailed and shrewd commentary about the Democratic struggles leading to McGovern's nomination.)
In short, Nixon and his people were worried. The public never really liked him - in 1968, he was voted in as the lesser of two evils (Humphrey was too attached to LBJ's Vietnam policies). Nixon wasn't delivering on his "plan" to end the war. The economy wasn't doing great. Not an ideal set-up at all, and there was real fear they could lose reelection. Who knew McGovern's campaign would self-destruct so spectacularly, beginning with the Eagleton fiasco?
And, lastly:
You're welcome. Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:I wonder if a new movie is going to be made based on Mark Felt's life, or something.
One is already in the works! Deep Throat (Don't worry it's a safe link... or is it?)
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Not exactly the high water mark of ethics in civil service...
While Nixon got, at the very least, what he deserved and should still stand as a villain; Felt was no angel.
He was a holdover from J.Edgar Hoover and he didn't get that high up in the FBI without being just the kind of fellow that Hoover felt good about. And Felt's later troubles showed he wasn't above breaking the law either.
My take on this is that Felt wanted one shot at putting a positive spin on the Deep Throat deal before he died. He could, in short, fire the first salvo in the debate that would arise. By doing so, and saying publicly that he feared being branded a villain, he paints the picture of a man afraid of being remembered wrongly.
Sure, what he did was the right thing, no matter his reasoning behind it at the time. I just believe it has a lot more with his not being chosen as head of the FBI than some altruistic concern for the sanctity of the law of the land.
Is he a hero? Not by definition. There was no element of self-sacrifice in what he did and it is apparent that he did a lot to keep his tracks covered, in public if not in private. As a sworn member of the FBI, what he did should have been considered part of his job.
But everyone deserves a moment of redemption. Heck, we've seen Nixon lionized before he passed away and right afterwards. Even G. Gordon Liddy is seen as a hero in some circles today, he certainly is a celebrity.
I guess Felt wants his moment in the fickle spotlight of public redemption.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
As has been pointed out, besides his crucial role leaking and confirming Watergate info as Deep Throat, Felt was ironically one of only two FBI agents indicted for his role in the FBI's infamous COINTELPRO . He was found guilty of authorizing the same "black bag"* break-ins that were at the heart of Watergate.
DarkKnight, black bag ops are one of the main illegal activities that Nixon's administration were involved in. The reason the whole scandal was called Watergate was because security at the Watergate Hotel busted a black bag break-in at their hotel, in the offices of the Democratic National Committee. Accounts differ as to whether Nixon knew in advance about the break-in, although apparently Attorney General and head of CREEP (comm to re-elect the pres) John Mitchell knew and approved it.
Nixon and his administration went to great lengths to cover-up and deny any involvement, up to and including felony obstruction of justice, payoffs to witnesses, destruction of evidence, etc. Here's a decent summary of the scandal that I just skimmed.
quote:Archibald Cox, Jr., had been appointed special prosecutor in charge of investigating the Watergate Scandal. When he insisted upon receiving secret tapes that President Richard Nixon had made in the Oval Office, Nixon ordered Cox fired. On October 20, 1973, after both Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus resigned their position rather than fire Cox, Nixon assigned the task to U.S. Solicitor General Robert Bork.
Who promptly fired Cox. One of the main reasons Bork was denied confirmation to the US Supreme Court--and why the judge on the Simpsons has that weird beard.
The release of secret Oval Office tapes was the crucial reason Nixon resigned. He resigned right after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled (except for current Chief Justice William Rehnquist, he abstained, the weenie) he had to cough them up, to satisfy a subpoena Jaworski, Cox' successor as Special Prosectutor, had asked Judge Sirica (the judge from the original break-in) to issue. Nixon had to produce the tapes, and did. And with damning evidence of various crimes on the tapes, especially obstruction of justice, Nixon would have lost his impeachment trial. So, he quit rather than losing his trial in the Senate.
*"black bag" is term for official (FBI, CIA or other government agents) breaking in to a home or office without warrants, for various purposes. Highly unconstitutional and illegal. Free-lance operatives are often used for deniability if caught. Remember Mission Impossible?--"in the event that you are compromised this agency will not confirm or deny any knowledge of your existence."
[ June 03, 2005, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Morbo ]
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
I was 7 when Nixon resigned. It's my first political memory. Our family was over at the neighbors' when the speech was aired, and I remember the adults trying to explain it to me so that I would understand and be reassured. So they said that the President had admitted to having done a bad thing, and so he had resigned so that a better person could take his place.
Here's a link to a story by Bob Woodward about how he met Mark Felt, along with some speculation about Felt's motives.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Thanks Morbo I like the Simpsons reference
I guess I am a little surprised at some of the hate spewed at Nixon for this. I'm certainly not defending him for this, but he did do a lot of good things too and all he is remembered for is Watergate which is essentially political espionage which I would think ever person who becomes President has been engaged in. I mean this is Politics. Politics is not known for it's honesty. People make Nixon sound like the absolute worst villian in Presidential history, and I guess I wonder how much of that is just the 'legend' of Watergate. I guess to me, he was a decent President, got us out of Vietnam and all kinds of stuff. He got busted doing what all politicians do, tried to cover it up, which is what politicians do too, was going to be impeaches which he should have been, and resigned the office before he was impeached. Because of the Watergate legend he is remembered for "I'm not a crook" and not for any of his accomplishments. Lots of Presidents have had scandals, I am curious as to why Nixons is just soooo terrible
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
It's this kind of quote from Tatiana "He struck me as a fearful paranoid man who had no respect for human dignity, no compunctions about misuse of power, and who felt himself to be completely above the law. His downfall was, in my opinion, the best thing that ever happened in U.S. politics. " that makes me think I am missing something more? I mean Nixon's downfall is the best thing that ever happened in US politics? That seems, to me, to be a little strong? I'm not trying to pick on you or anything like that, but I hear this kind of stuff a lot about Nixon and I don't know where it comes from? I think sndrake is correct when he said "The public never really liked him - in 1968, he was voted in as the lesser of two evils" and since sndrake is old enough to really remember Nixon ( I didn't even make an old joke! ) I guess I wonder if Nixon became the biggest villian in US history because he just wasn't that likeable of a guy, unlike say Reagan or Clinton or JFK or so on who had their fair share of scandals too but were likeable people.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Do you really think that all politicians would stoop to using the FBI to subvert the very constitution? Beacause that is what Nixon did, or at least what he covered up. He also lied under oath, adn he would ahve been facing serious prison time had he not been pardoned by Ford.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
This thread made me wonder why I don't remember much about the death/funeral of Richard Nixon -- seeing as how when past president Ronald Reagon died, it was such a huge news deal.
But the biography at Wikipedia tells me that his family chose to not have the "state funeral" -- which is probably why I couldn't even remember when he died. (I was in junior high during the Watergate scandal, but Nixon's death was only a few short years ago - 1994).
I liked reading that bio. Learned lots I didn't know about his humble childhood. Maybe I should read his memoirs...
FG
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Well, yes, a lot of politicians stooped to using the FBI for all kinds of illegal things. And you again stated the same kind of stuff, he "stooped to using the FBI to subvert the very constitution". he subverted the Constitution? Nixon is not the first nor the last President to use the FBI, CIA, NSA to get dirt on his enemies. Clinton had all kinds of records 'found' in his offices about Republicans, no big deal. Sandy Berger was caught stuffing classified documents down his pants and no one really cared. No alarm bells raised, that was pretty covered up by saying he was a slob. I am sure there are more examples of both sides doing that same thing. Clinton lied under oath, no big deal, Reagan couldn't remember anything under oath which I guess isn't technically illegal but it's right along the same lines.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:Originally posted by sndrake: BTW, I think, of the persons who have posted on this so far, only Bob_S, Farmgirl, and I are old enough to have watched the Congressional hearings and Nixon's resignation - old enough to be interested and have an idea of the importance of it all.
::shakes cane at youngsters and launches off into an account of all my health problems::
*clears throat* Hey, sndrake. What about me? I turned 18 the same month Nixon resigned, and had followed the whole thing very closely.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Well, stephen is getting old, ya know. He forgets certain people quite easily..... Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
A new Washington Post column today: Deep Throat's Other Legacy It deals with Felt's COINTELPRO activities.
Also, Kwea, Felt was only fined, not sentenced to jail after his conviction.
Posted by starlooker (Member # 7495) on :
quote:Clinton lied under oath, no big deal
*clears throat*
Ahem. If you were to cast your mind back in history a scant six or seven years ago, you may perchance recall that event you dismiss as, "No big deal" led to the SECOND IMPEACHMENT EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES?
No big deal. Just what do you consider a big deal?
Your saying that, basically, any crime is simply, "Politicians doing what politicians do" is cynicism in its worst form. These are the people who represent us. Who we elect to uphold the laws and to protect our interests. Nixon broke that trust in an outrageous fashion. People went to jail for helping him. Yes, it was a very big deal. Read some of the tapes. Watch the movie. Educate yourself.
I'm only 25 and I can recognize this matters.
Engaging in elaborate cover-ups, obstructing justice as outlined in the constitution, and lying to Congress and the American public are SERIOUS matters. Especially when those lies include cover-ups for activities which subvert the democratic process.
Cynicism of the sort, "Yeah, they're all liars" is simply an excuse for laziness and refusal to hold public figures accountable. I know it doesn't always work this way and that the system isn't perfect. However, I think the question is not "Why do you hate Nixon" but rather, "Why aren't you outraged at these other people?"
Posted by starlooker (Member # 7495) on :
Here are the articles of impeachment for Nixon -- what exactly they were accusing him of.
The website itself has all sorts of information.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Are we really to the point when we just accept that the President of the United States of America, who swears a solemn oath to uphold the Constitution, actually cares nothing for the Constitution at all, casually breaks the law at all levels, precipitates constitutional crises with gay abandon, and all to further his own personal power? And we just say "oh well, politics is like that"????
I'm nothing like that cynical! Wow, that takes me aback! I do think there are people who serve out of a feeling of responsibility and love for our country (including the very core things it stands for, freedom, democracy, checks and balances, human rights, rule of law). I think if we ever lose that, and just give up and accept that the people in power will always be corrupt, then there's no help for us. We'll be living under tyranny.
Systems can be good and bad, but unless there's some basis in the true feelings and morals of the public, (and I do believe that most people are just basically good honest upright people), then no system can protect us from ourselves. It is NOT okay to cheat and tell yourself everybody does it. Everybody doesn't, in fact, do it.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
When Nixon was doing things like firing the special prosecutor, and refusing to obey the Supreme Court ruling saying he had to give up the tapes, he was endangering the very foundation of our rule of law, our system of checks and balances, and the core of the Constitution. At the time we weren't sure what would happen, whether the United States would survive. What if he ordered the military to prevent the courts from enforcing their edicts? He's commander in chief of the military, the police answer to the courts. What if the military and the police got in a battle over the tapes?
His secretary erased 17 1/2 minutes of one tape. We don't know to this day what's on that part of the tape, but modern technology may allow us to find out someday. That would be cool. But whatever it was, he thought it was far worse even than the stuff he left on there, which was unbelievably bad! Read the White House Transcripts if you want to know what he was like as a person. It frightens me that he was in power.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I think these things from the articles of impeachment linked above bear quoting here.
quote: He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.
He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavoured to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.
In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I want to say, too, what a great triumph it was for our system of government that he was made to step down. I feel like the fact that he was pardoned was really wrong. I think we should remove the pardoning power of the president to apply to himself or the people of his administration, and that of his predecessor. That's a loophole that should be closed. But just the fact that he had to resign was a triumph for truth, justice, and right over tyranny.
Remember freedom isn't free. The flame of liberty must be fed from time to time with the blood of patriots, and all that. If we allow our government to become corrupt and unlawful, it will. We the people are the only ones who can prevent that.
Posted by Poseable Nurse (Member # 7162) on :
While I don't begrudge Felt's family making money out of this situation, I do think they should have waited until after his death. From the news reports, I am of the belief that Mr. Felt is not capable of making the decision and that it was made by his daughter. Since Mark kept quiet for 30 years, I doubt that he wanted to be identified at all. Certainly he could have collected on his story at any time in the last 30 years if that is what he had wanted. I think it was disrespectful of his daughter to influance the announcement at this point in time.
Yes I am old enough to remember Nixon. I even voted for him. I had just come back from an overseas trip courtesy of Uncle Sam when the break ins occurred.
Posted by mothertree (Member # 4999) on :
I'm fairly conservative and I think the Watergate coverup was wrong and disturbing. But I do think Nixon did some good things too. Few people are all good or all bad in life. I mean, I'm not really sure what he did that was good, but there was that Vulcan truism about him in Star Trek VI.
Posted by starlooker (Member # 7495) on :
*sighs*
Yes, he did some good things in office.
If he wanted to keep that office, he shouldn't have betrayed the American people, the Constitution, Congress, the FBI, etc.
One can say he did some good things without having to minimize the terrible things that he did. Contrariwise, saying that he did terrible things does not mean there were no good things.
The more I learn about Watergate, though, the more extensive and frightening it becomes. And sickly fascinating.
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
Stephen Ambrose wrote a 3-volume biography of him in which he was able to say some nice things to say about Nixon. Yet Ambrose found him to be a very sad character; Ambrose wrote a book about male friendship called "Comrades," and in the book he considers Nixon's character, and portrays Nixon as a friendless man who was never able to make friends because he didn't believe in trusting anyone. Sad.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
From The Onion, "What Do You Think?" comments about the news about Deep Throat:
quote:"I'm just glad that longtime suspect Henry Kissinger has finally been vindicated. It's about time his good name was cleared of any lingering charges of right-doing."
quote:"I had my money on former Nixon speechwriter Ben Stein, largely because I am ignorant and he's been on TV."
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Clinton did many of the same things that Nixon did. He had hundreds of Republicans files from the FBI and IRS in the Whitehouse. Documents from the Whitewater investigation are missing for years then just happen to turn up on a table in the Whitehouse. He had Sandy Berger steal classified documents some of which were not returned. He used the all of the available resources to crucify Ken Starr, Monica Lewinsky, and anyone else who was against him, just like Nixon. He knowlingly had his subordinates lie for him. None of that was deemed to be the worst crimes in history but the same items are when it is Nixon. No one from Clinton's scandal had any kind of punishment (jail or fines or anything like that). The only thing Clinton was held accountable for was lying about having sex in the Oval office. No outrage about anything else, no mentions of destroying the Constitution. Why is Nixon held to such a higher standard than Clinton? Clinton got a complete pass when he lied to a grand jury. Why was he given a pass? the biggest one I hear is that he lied about sex and who wouldn't do that? Well, why doesn't Nixon get the same pass. I mean proceedings are being held against him, and if he tells the truth he will get in trouble, so why shouldn't he be allowed to lie too? I do agree with Starlooker: "Engaging in elaborate cover-ups, obstructing justice as outlined in the constitution, and lying to Congress and the American public are SERIOUS matters. Especially when those lies include cover-ups for activities which subvert the democratic process." Clinton did exactly that, he looked us all in the eye and lied to us. Repeatedly. Where is the hatred for Clinton? Yes, Clinton was impeached yet there is not the same hatred for him as exists for Nixon. I'm just asking Why? I still believe that Nixon is hated because he is not likeable, and Clinton (or Reagan and others) are not because they are likeable. I have more but I'm hungry and it's lunch time Oh, and thank you Starlooker for all that info and links, and also thank you for the statement (which sums up my long boring point): "However, I think the question is not "Why do you hate Nixon" but rather, "Why aren't you outraged at these other people?"
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I liked the mystery.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)