The Legend of Deep Throat - Was Mark Felt really a hero?

OPINION JOURNAL.COM ^ | JUNE 2, 2005 | PEGGY NOONAN

[maica]

Here is an interesting comment linked from Instapundits site, about the Nixon Whitehouse. (I was a Nixon supporter in 1960! )

http://www.instapunk.com/archives/InstaPunkArchiveV2.php3?a=542

AST  2005-06-01 04:48:00

I've always thought that Watergate started when JFK got elected in 1960. Nixon knew about the fraud that prevented his election then and it stuck in his craw, probably more so because he didn't feel that he could go public with it. His ideas about how hardball politics was played were formed from seeing how Kennedy, LBJ and Hoover operated, and he decided he had to do the same. But he was bad at it. It didn't fit him. He wasn't cagy and ruthless enough. Kennedy probably wouldn't have made tapes of all his conversations, and it he had they would have been destroyed before their existence became known.

Nixon tried to play that game by surrounding himself with people he saw as tough and underhanded, but he and they bungled it. He didn't have the instincts of a true player.

What he did was a crime, both legally and figuratively, not only by obstructing justice but by failing to insulate himself from the cover up.

The whole thing was as stupid as it could be, much like Clinton's dalliance with Monica, because 1. Nothing stays secret in Washington and
2. Once it gets out the press an the opposing party go into a feeding frenzy that distracts attention from everything else. The media always wail about this, but they keep talking about the scandal anyway.

I don't mind Felt's family getting some dough out of this. Everybody else seems to have gotten book deals, including Nixon himself.

I have a theory that Republicans just don't have it in them to be as hard-nosed and politically tough as Democrats. Just look at the deal on the filibusters. Nixon's fellow Republicans abandoned him when the facts started to come out. Clinton's formed a solid front and criticized the Republicans for not being bipartisan. Republicanism is a philosophy. Democratism is a street gang.

[melancholy]

>i> Technically, it was illegal to talk about grand jury information or FBI files -- or it could have been made to look illegal.

Typical liberal double talk. Was it illegal or not?

Hey Woodward, spare me the "Technically, could have been made illegal". LEGALLY, was it ILLEGAL or not disclose or "leak" grand jury testimony or contents of FBI files?

Woodward, read my lips, IT'S STILL ILLEGAL except for liberals like you who re-write history and law through Clintonian English.

[melancholy]

not disclose = not to disclose

[KC_Conspirator]

I am miffed that I have missed Savage all week. This story is right up his alley - with rddb's reliving the halcyon days of yore when they almost broke America over their knee.

[Amelia]

I have yet to see a commentator mention that if Nixon hadn't been taken down by Watergate, that Vietnam would almost certainly not have fallen in 75'. This deep throat bozo, along with Walter Cronkite and others, have the blood of 2+ million people on his hands.

Apparently you didn't read Noonan's entire article, but just the snippet posted above.

[garyhope]

You're absolutely right. My apologies. I wasn't thinking or I was just thinking of the Islamic war against Western civilization. Other people do count also.

[narby]

You haven't been paying much attention, then

I know. I know. Shot my mouth off before reading further.

I guess lots of people caught me goofing off. My bad.

[OESY]

"Was Mr. Felt a hero?

"His motives were apparently mixed, as motives often are. He was passed over to replace J. Edgar Hoover as director of the FBI by President Nixon, who apparently wanted in that place not a Hoover man but a more malleable appointee. Mr. Felt was resentful. He believed Nixon meant to jeopardize the agency's independence. Here we have a hitch in the story. The liberal story line on the FBI was that under Hoover it had too much independence, which Hoover protected with his famous secret files and a reputation for ruthlessness. Mr. Felt was a Hoover man who joined the FBI in 1942, when it was young; he rose under Hoover and never knew another director. When Hooverism was threatened, Mr. Felt moved. In this sense Richard Nixon was J. Edgar Hoover's last victim. History is an irony factory.

"Even if Mr. Felt had mixed motives, even if he did not choose the most courageous path in attempting to spread what he thought was the truth, his actions might be judged by their fruits. The Washington Post said yesterday that Mr. Felt's information allowed them to continue their probe. That probe brought down a president. Ben Stein is angry but not incorrect: What Mr. Felt helped produce was a weakened president who was a serious president at a serious time. Nixon's ruin led to a cascade of catastrophic events--the crude and humiliating abandonment of Vietnam and the Vietnamese, the rise of a monster named Pol Pot, and millions--millions--killed in his genocide. America lost confidence; the Soviet Union gained brazenness. What a terrible time. Is it terrible when an American president lies and surrounds himself by dirty tricksters? Yes, it is. How about the butchering of children in the South China Sea. Is that worse? Yes. Infinitely, unforgettably and forever."

[montag813]

I am miffed that I have missed Savage all week.

Too bad. He has never been better.

[KC_Conspirator]

Pre-empted by Orioles baseball.

I knew this was a topic that he could not pass up.

[x]

Peggy's right. The further we get from Watergate the more Woodward, Bernstein, and "Deep Throat" looks like the usual Washington careerism and in-fighting. What brought Nixon down is going to be seen more in a realpolitik way as a struggle of factions, rather than a triumph of idealism.

I don't know about Chuck Colson as a hero or great man of Watergate, though. He may have redeemed himself later, but in the Nixon years he was certainly a hatchet man. Whatever his later status, he didn't stand higher than anyone else in the early Seventies.

[x]

Peggy's right. The further we get from Watergate, the more Woodward, Bernstein, and "Deep Throat" look like the usual Washington careerism and infighting. The battles of those years are going to be understood less as a triumph of idealism and more as a struggle of competing factions. In the years to come we'll learn more about Woodward's intelligence connections that will confirm that impression.

But Chuck Colson as the hero or great man of Watergate? Colson may have redeemed himself later, but in the Nixon years he was quite the hatchet man. Whatever his later status, he was no hero in the early Seventies.

[OESY]

Liberal Dinosaurs On Parade


I agree wholeheartedly with Polipundit’s excellent post on Watergate below. La Shawn Barber also has excellent commentary today about the liberals on television all week reliving the “Golden Age of Journalism” (she also has plenty of links to those writing about other aspects of the story).

I have found it almost unbearable at times to watch the liberal dinosaurs saying that Deep Throat saved the republic. On last night’s special edition of Hardball, Ben Bradlee was interviewed by Andrea Mitchell:


MITCHELL: How mean and ugly was it? We now see some of these post-Watergate people as pundits and commentators. And it seems there‘s sort of a moral equivalency. How does that make you feel?

BEN BRADLEE, FORMER “WASHINGTON POST” EDITOR: It makes me sick to hear Gordon Liddy talk about morality in government. He hasn‘t been out of jail all that long. I mean, I—it‘s—it‘s just—it makes me sick.

And why—why people—why the press goes to him to get quotes about the morality of—the morality of it all surprises me. Chuck Colson, the same way.

Bradlee’s wife, Sally Quinn (who looked amazingly young, if a little more like Joan Rivers than I remember her ever looking), took things up a notch with something she said on an edition of Hardball hosted by David Gregory last night:

GREGORY: Sally Quinn, there‘s a contrary view to the view about Mark Felt over the last couple of days. And that is, did he really do the right thing? I mean, we‘re reporters. We want information. But was leaking to the “Washington Post” the right way to handle his grievances?

QUINN: Well, you know, leaking is really an honorable tradition in Washington. People leak stories so that they will get out and so the public will be informed and often for the better.

I think Mark Felt is a hero, because he really risked his job, and some might even say his life, by telling Bob Woodward the things that he told him and by steering him in the right direction. I mean, we had a very, very corrupt government. And they were not beyond, some would say—and there were some crazies—they were not beyond murder.

And I think that this country would have been absolutely devastated if Nixon had continued on and Watergate had not been found out. I think…

* * *

Ok, this one frankly had me yelling at the very young-looking Sally Quinn on my television screen. Leaking wasn’t considered so honorable during Bill Clinton’s administration, or during the recent judicial committee memo situation, now was it? About half of the stories I recall on those subjects practically dismissed any substance because the information was obviously leaked by those with an agenda. Of course, that kind of coverage ceased when Paul O’Neill and Joe Wilson had books to hawk.

I don’t even know what to say about Quinn’s statement about the very, very corrupt Nixon government and the crazies that were not beyond murder. As for the country being “devastated” if Nixon had continued on and Watergate not been found out – puh leeze, lady. Could the woman be any more insulated and cocooned in her liberal Washington establishment mindset? I don’t think so.

And another thing…Sally Quinn also discussed how exciting it was to be in the Washington Post news room all those years ago when they were constantly breaking news. There are fewer and fewer stories these days being broken by newspapers in this era of the 24 hour cable news channels and the internet. This is why I believe the term “dinosaur” is entirely appropriate.

-- Lorie Byrd, polipundit.com, June 2, 2005

[nutmeg]

ping! (Peggy Noonan article)

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[maica]

I think the the folks like Quinn and Bradlee who are having their mini-Watergate reunions this week are going to be even more miserable and frustrated next week, when this story is OVER.
a)because is belongs to another generation, and
b)because anyone paying even a little bit of attention since the Clinton era can see a stark contrast in how media treated leaks, whistleblowers, lying to grand juries, shredding evidence, etc.

[LibertarianInExile]

This is a pet peeve of mine as well.

From dictionary.com:

he·ro

1. In mythology and legend, a man, often of divine ancestry, who is endowed with great courage and strength, celebrated for his bold exploits, and favored by the gods.
2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war.
3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field: the heroes of medicine. See Synonyms at celebrity.
4. The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation.
5. Chiefly New York City. See submarine. See Regional Note at submarine.

Now, 2 is CLOSE, but I would amend it to say: A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose who has voluntarily risked or sacrificed his or her life for others, without self-interest in mind.

By that definition:

You are not a hero if you break into a burning building to save your child.

You are a hero if you break into a burning building to save someone else's.

You are not a hero if, standing in an open field and armed with a pistol with no hope of retreat, you shoot a hundred Nazis to save yourself.

You are a hero if, with the ability to escape yourself without firing a shot, you shoot a hundred Nazis to allow others to escape.

You are not a hero if you are Evel Knievel and get paid to jump Snake River Canyon--simply because your job may include a higher risk to your life doesn't make you a hero.

However, you are a hero if, in the course of such a job, you go far beyond the call of duty to protect others, risking your life in a way that you far exceed the daily risk of your job--and voluntarily do so while having the ability to avoid that sacrifice.

I know some folks will immediately disagree, that they think the members of the U.S. armed forces are all heroes, and disagree away--but answer me this as you do: if all soldiers are heroes, why is it the U.S. gives only some soldiers certain medals?

If you are a soldier, you MIGHT be a hero. If you win a unit citation, heck, even a Silver Star, you MIGHT be a hero. But if you win the Medal of Honor, you ARE a hero.

Heroism isn't something you do every day as a cop, or fireman, or soldier. Heroism is defined by how you act as a cop, or fireman, or soldier, when you're faced with a situation where you KNOW you could be risking your life and you can back away without injury. If heroism were about what you are as opposed to what you do, every crooked cop or goldbricking fireman or desk-sitting REMF would deserve praise as a hero. Do they?

[Starve The Beast]

Uh, yeah. A lot of us have been waiting thirty years to find out.

M'kay, sure glad you haven't wasted the last thirty years. Hope it was worth the wait, gramps.

[Capriole]

I'm not a "gramps"--in fact, I'm too young to be a grandmother, unless my young daughter does something at a horribly young age--but I do care about history. This was something that happened when I was a child and even then I was aware that a great tragedy was taking place, an event that would change history. Yes, I have wanted to know who caused it all, just as I wanted to know the answers to some of history's other mysteries. It's a shame you aren't more interested in history.

[Starve The Beast]

Yes, I have wanted to know who caused it all, just as I wanted to know the answers to some of history's other mysteries.

Cool. Hey, if you find out what ever happened to Rodney Allen Rippy, drop me a line, OK? I've spent the last three decades wondering.

It's a shame you can't distinguish between important history and insignificant trivia.

[elli1]

No need to apologize! I used your post as an opportunity to remind other readers of the scope of the 'law of unintended consequences.' It's natural for us to think of our own first.