Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Deep Throat, The FBI and 9/11 - (Church Cmte. crippled FBI, CIA, leading to September 11th)
ALABAMA POLICY INSTITUTE.ORG ^ | JUNE 2, 2005 | GARY PALMER

Posted on 06/03/2005 5:16:58 PM PDT by CHARLITE

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: kinejoshua
To blame those who did no more than seek justice is ridiculous.

Isn't it interesting that Hal Holbrook has a role as a vigilante in both "The Star Chamber" and "All the President's Men"?

THE VIGILANTE MINDSET
Vigilante thinking is precisely the opposite of any notion of fairness, fair play, or a chance for acquittal.

  Vigilantes do not care to wait for the police to finish their investigation, and they care less about any court's determination of proof. 

What they do care about is justice -- quick, final, cost-effective justice. 

To a vigilante, punishment should be inflicted upon those deserving of it at the first opportunity -- no waiting, and the more severe the punishment, the better. 

21 posted on 06/03/2005 8:16:55 PM PDT by syriacus (MSM isn't idolizing Felt 100%. They must be afraid that some Liberal rocks will be turned over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kinejoshua
How old are you and why do you assume that you actually know the facts about Nixon's presidency ? Public school graduate and an escapee from DU, are you?

The ONLY "crime" Nixon committed was the cover-up. He should have burned the damned tapes and be done with it.

THERE WERE NO "GRAVE" CRIMES COMMITTED AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, you toll.

Felt is NOT a "hero" and neither are Woodward and Bernstein; who were NEVER "out to seek justice". And then there's Hillary Rodham, who did EVERYTHGING in here power, to suborn the Constitution and ALL of our laws, to bring down President Nixon...to the shock and to this very day, consternation and anger of her superiors.

22 posted on 06/03/2005 8:26:02 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: exit82

"in 1960 when Kennedy stole the Presidential election"

Thank you for listing this. It has disturbed me for years that so little was every said about it. People would not have believed it then, now they have experience enough to understand even how this can have happened.

Nixon just "lumped it" and stayed quiet.


23 posted on 06/03/2005 8:29:41 PM PDT by Spirited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: vaudine

I don't like Howard Dean, but I doubt he had anything to do with Watergate.


24 posted on 06/03/2005 8:42:44 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Spirited
Even Chrissy has hinted that the Kennedy Nixon election was more than tainted. On his program several years ago he talked about the votes not only in Chicago but also in Texas.

He said that when Nixon was asked to contest the election he said that he wouldn't put the country through that. I believe Chris said Nixon said the country may never get over such an explosive event.

Did any one else see the program?
25 posted on 06/03/2005 8:44:59 PM PDT by frannie (Be not afraid of tomorrow - God is already there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Spirited
Pat Buchanan was on C-SPAN's morning call-in program discussing Felt's actions and their implications--"taking down a President." He offered as an analogy of what happened to Nixon the scenario of J. Edgar Hoover deciding he didn't want JFK to win in 1960 and leaking information to the Chicago Tribune about Kennedy's affair with the woman who was a German spy in order to torpedo his candidacy.

Buchanan also recalled someone in the White House who was interviewed by the FBI in the course of their investigation. Within two days what he had told them appeared in the Washington Post.

26 posted on 06/03/2005 8:47:41 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot; CHARLITE
..... and the revved up activity to impeach Bush?.

Yesterday trying to tune out my liberal spouse's T/V, I could hardly credit my ears. I heard a quote of former Senator George McGovern. He appeared to be saying that a "Deep Throat" was needed to expose the administration and the Iraq war.

I accessed Yahoo! news. I quote this: Washington (AFP) Thu June 2nd 5:05 ET. That last paragraph caught my attention.

McGovern said Nixon was undoubtedly "tricky",but said of Bush: This man claims to be a Christian,following the will of God,then he misleads the whole nation on a totally fraudulent enterprise in Iraq that we never should have been attached to".

He is a former Presidential candidate. He served with honour, in WW2 and was decorated. He appeared to wish a "Deep Throat" today at least three times. What happened to his thinking, boggles the mind. A decent human being withall.

27 posted on 06/03/2005 8:52:20 PM PDT by Peter Libra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Peter Libra

There IS something up with the Nixon - Bush connection in the media. We will have to decide as it unfolds.


28 posted on 06/03/2005 8:56:35 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

I don't know how old you are, but suggest you should read up on your info. Howard Dean planned the break-in and went to jail for it. Maybe you are thinking about a current democrat named Dean.


29 posted on 06/04/2005 12:27:22 PM PDT by lolhelp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: lolhelp
John W. Dean was counsel to the President and involved in the cover-up. As far as I know, no one has suggested he was aware of the planning for the break-in before it actually happened.

Howard Dean is the current head of the DNC, former governor of Vermont and failed Presidential candidate. I don't think he had any involvement in Watergate.

30 posted on 06/04/2005 1:18:16 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: lolhelp

One of the figures in Watergate was Howard Hunt...maybe that's who you meant instead of Howard Dean.


31 posted on 06/04/2005 1:20:46 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

According to many sources I have read, Dean instigated it. Unfortunately, I do not have those at hand to quote or link. I believe one source was G. Gordon Liddy, one an investigative journalist for a conservative magazine. Dean was definitely involved--this one was not Liddy's baby, although Liddy did plan and hel execute some of Nixon's investigative forays.

One interesting article about Watergate gave the reason for Dean's planning it was to see if his intended (now his wife) was listed in the call girl ring the Dems were setting up. They were planning marriage and Dean was afraid if her name came up, it could harm his career.

If anyone remembrs sources for this, please post. One of my failings is reading constantly and simply filing all info mentally under a topic without sourcing it.

vaudine


32 posted on 06/04/2005 5:34:37 PM PDT by vaudine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: vaudine

I was thinking of the official version of Watergate as it came out in the hearings before the Ervin committee in 1973. I had forgotten about the theory that the break-in was because of Dean's wife (or perhaps then-fiancee)...I saw the book arguing that case in a bookstore but never read it.


33 posted on 06/04/2005 5:46:15 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

The official inquiry reports, unfortunately, are often politicized, cropped, or otherwise compromised.

In Watergate, much was surmised, little was proven; and a handful of credulous Republicans helped to bring down a President.

It could be called impeachment by innuendo--and the de ja vieu
all over again version will be appearing next week in your friendly neighborhood Senate, presented by JFKerry.

vaudine


34 posted on 06/04/2005 5:57:32 PM PDT by vaudine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: vaudine
The initial hearings before Sam Ervin's committee involved lower-level people describing their activities...a lot of that, I think, is undisputed, but doesn't bear directly on Richard Nixon's guilt or innocence because it could have been done without his awareness. It was only John W. Dean who was willing and able to accuse Nixon of direct involvement, and until the tapes became known, it was just his word against the President's. The tapes did prove that Nixon was involved in trying to manipulate the FBI in the interests of the cover-up.

Of course the Clintons got a pass for doing much worse in 1993.

35 posted on 06/04/2005 6:06:12 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

The kernal of pertinent truth here is that Nixon was guilty of trying to manipulate the FBI to cover up to save his staff, and the President was sold out by Dean to save his own skin. Liddy went to jail rather than give estimony. His contempt of Dean is limitless. He seems to believe Dean lied under oath to save his own rear.

vaudine


36 posted on 06/04/2005 6:11:45 PM PDT by vaudine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson