Posted on 06/02/2005 8:21:22 PM PDT by John Robertson
While many MSM'ers (sorry, most) are lionizing this guy as "a hero," someone who "did what he had to do," something big is being missed.
Our side has pointed out that he authorized/engineered illegal breakins himself...
And that he turned on the Whitehouse because he didn't get the top FBI job. Now think about that....
Felt became a snitch because he didn't get something he wanted! He was an opportunist, plain and simple (and it runs in the family, apparently, as they shamelessly say they urged the old man to do it so they could all get some money). Yeah, a real hero.
But here's what I haven't seen....
If they had made him the head of the FBI, he WOULD NOT have turned on the Whitehouse.
In fact, as head of the FBI....
HE WOULD HAVE HELPED THEM BURY WATERGATE!
That is one thought
But the question is .. why would the CIA be involved with something like prostitution
For all we know, he got that pardon to keep more stuff from coming out.
No, just told him what would be the consequences of his actions, if he forced me to resign as a matter of conscience. Call it what you want. I call it whitemail.
Are you honestly saying that his ONLY option was going to the Washington Post?
See my posts above. The answer is no.
The book "Silent Coup" is a great book about the breakin...
Felt was guilty of the same thing he leaked to Woodward about the Nixon Administration. Plus Nixon was not involved in the planning, just the cover up
But if he did that, he'd be guilty of covering up, too.
Now, if he's as ethical as you seem to think, why not do it the legal way? Go to a DA or a local prosecutor, which is where this case was, remember?
Great book. Wrong conclusion on Deep Throat.
But all your options involve Felt being part of the conspiracy/coverup.
"I'm not asserting anything
Just reporting on what I found out
Why??"
Why Report it? Is it germain to the topic? Or, is it just an effort to add grist to the already busy mill?
Seriously.
I don't follow that. All the options I outlines involved Nixon exorcising the cancer before it was too late, and coming clean, and just letting it all hang out, and if that didn't work, going to the press publically, up close and personal, in a resignation letter.
My argument with you is that youy are defending Felt as if he was an honorable man. I don't defend Nixon's actions, but I condemn Felt for the weasel he as in still is. And now that we see what his family is doing, it must run in the families DNA
Why do you have a problem with it?
It's perfectly acceptable to consider the upbringing of a a character like Bernstein. It doesn't make him a commie, but it might explain his leanings.
Ease up on Mo1, she just posted an interesting fact about Bernstein
Ya, you have a point. But if I had no other option but resigning and telling all, crime or not, I would have done so. Criminal abuse of executive power would have driven me nuts. I would not have stood for it. I suppose that I could have resigned and suggested that Congress subpoena me as a witness. Ya, that is the ticket. My point however, is that before Nixon committed impeachable crimes, if he was loyal to Nixon, he could have caused him to stop. I understand why he was not loyal, and don't blame him much.
I'm bookmarking this thread.
As I'm sure a few cub reporters are too.
Carry on!
I have a problem with people using that whole "sins of the Father" crap. As I said, if that line of argument is to remain consistent, I'm sure we could start pointing fingers at a lot of people. Do you really want that?
In this case, evidenced by your desire to try and distance yourself from it "I'm not asserting anything, I was just reporting what I heard" even you realize that it's kind of a cheap shot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.