Posted on 06/04/2005 1:15:20 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
"Deep Throat" has at last come forward. Arguably the most notorious informant in recent history is former FBI official W. Mark Felt, and it's been confirmed by The Washington Post.
Mr. Felt was second-in-command at the FBI during Watergate, and is now 91 years of age. In stepping forward, he not only destroys his reputation, but he takes a chunk out of the reputation of the agency that supported him and his family in a comfortable lifestyle for so many years.
Had Mr. Felt used the lawful route to voice his concerns about the Nixon administration he might be remembered with a modicum of respect, if not admiration. Some in the Nixon administration were misusing their powers but not because they were feathering their own nests like Mr. Felt was. For their sins they got lengthy trials and prison sentences. Mr. Felt broke numerous federal laws, but received immunity from prosecution by hiding behind the skirts of two reporters at The Washington Post. They made their careers, and he made a clean getaway.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
"Now I'm really in the mood for keelhauling!"
When I read that, this week, I was ready to be keelhauled! I will try to find the reference for you.
ush said earlier this week No one knows why they broke in the Watergate well he hasnt read The Amendment by John Fitzgerald. It was a lot more than just the Watergate. The media was played like a cheap fiddle. Woodward was rejected by the Post. The office joke was English was his second language. He was sent to a little paper in the burgs then a few weeks before Watergate he was brought back to the Post. Theres a lot more to the story the MSM is covering.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1415502/posts?page=238#238
In his 1987 book, Veil, Woodward claimed he had interviewed William J. Casey, the CIA director, after Casey had brain surgery and could not speak intelligibly. Woodward didnt know that, and he made up an interview in which Casey is supposed to have spoken 19 intelligible words. It was clear that this was a falsification not only because of Caseys condition, but because his hospital room was guarded and Woodward was never admitted to it.
Another Woodward technique is to get information in confidence and break his pledge not to report it in a way that reveals the source. His new book includes statements Hillary Clinton made to Jane Sherburne, a former assistant White House counsel. Sherburne, who is identified in the book as the source, has said in a deposition taken by Judicial Watch that she gave Woodward details of these private conversations on the condition that they not be quoted directly.
Sherburne said Woodward had called just before his book was published to tell her that he had included her one-on-one conversations with Hillary in the book because he had been able to confirm them with other sources. Will Woodwards employer and peers forgive this betrayal of Sherburne and breach of journalistic ethics as they did his lie about Bill Casey?
Did you get the picture thing to work?
My experience with computers goes back a ways but has been limited to inventory, analysis, general business. I've only had a PC for a year and a half. I was told by a friend that my learning curve would go up. My learning curve looks more like a chart of the Dow-Jones Average.
Now he is a very rich dork with an ego the size of Alaska.
I think any man who is 91 is going to have problems remembering things. But I still believe Woodward is nervous about Felt contradicting him on facts from the Watergate story. Felt already said the whole cloak and dagger "flags in the flower pot" and "clocks drawn on page 20 of the New York Times" were figments of Woodward's imagination. Good ole' Bob won't like that kind of talk, even if it can be quickly dismissed as Felt being a bit senile.
Felt chose Woodward and Bernstien for several reasons but the most important was lack of experience. He assumed inexperienced reporters wouldn't ask too many questions about secondary agendas. Felt knew the elders at the Post wouldn't get involved in the early stories. He wouldn't want his motives questioned by seasoned reporters. But it was an unnecessary concern.
The Post, like Larry Flynt, didn't care as long as the information hurt Republicans. Seasoned reporters, not seasoned reporters, it didn't matter. It was dirt on a Republican and that's all that mattered.
If this type of material had been leaked about a Democrat, the story would have been about outing the leaker.
Would the MSM have outed Kennedy if they knew he was jeopardizing national security by working with the Mob or assisting with voter fraud in Chicago? Had an undercover FBI official come to them with that news, they would have ignored the story. Or likes a common porn peddlers, would the MSM invoke a double standard?
Thanks....looks like we all are gonna need a speed reading course....
The way I see it, it's yes and no.
I view Nixon in a generally positive way, and believe that his faults were minor when compared to the DemoRat left leaders in America at that time. In fact, I believe the hateful description of Nixon by the left to this day was and is projection, they are describing their own leadership and values and assigning them to Nixon.
The DemocRat left couldn't stand that they started the war that caused their President (Johnson) to be hated so universally that he had no chance of winning re-election, thus gifting the Presidency to the same Nixon that they had so deftly stolen the 60 election from and ruined. The Rat left has never figured out that the communists just use them when convenient like Viet Nam. The communists arranged for the Rats to be hated if they won in 'Nam, and if they elected to lose, hated for that by mainstream America. Lose-lose for the Rats. Nixon on the other hand had a chance to win, guaranteeing Pubbie administrations for a long while. Solution: Rat treason to secure loss in 'Nam and disgrace Nixon and Pubbies and turnover the White house. Vehicle: the MSM and selfish egotist Felt, traitor in wartime for a personal vendetta. Note that this would not have worked if Cronkite, Woodward and Bernstein were patriots, and what a different world it would be.
It's unfair that he paid the price (given the crimes of Johnson and Clinton)-but it's not necessarily unjust. The law enforcement agencies of the Feds should not be at the beck and call of the President to ruin his enemies-whoever is President.
It seems pretty clear that Nixon in fact did the things he was accused of.
Very good post.
Let's not forget Bernstein is a red diaper baby.
I remember that. I was so angry I was shouting at the TV.
What is it with these people?
"Felt is no hero, and received a pardon he didn't deserve.
His was a personal unlawful retaliation against Nixon, and he knows it.
In addition, Ben Stein suggests that Felt's destruction of Nixons ability to lead caused massive death in Vietnam and Cambodia as Nixon was forced to close the Viet Nam war. A theory I do not disagree with."
The VN war was "lost" due to the de-funding of the SVN forces by the Democrat congress. Were it a Republican controlled Congress, I would have capitalized the word congress.
"Felt's destruction of Nixons ability to lead caused massive death in Vietnam and Cambodia as Nixon was forced to close the Viet Nam war
Yikes!"
Navy Patriot is exactly right; 2 - 4 million in VN were exterminated and countless more thrown into "re-education camps". Those camps could also be called concentration camps, 15 - 20 years.
The Dem pull of funding also paved the way for Pol Pot in Cambodia who killed, at minimum, 2 million, perhaps lots more. You've heard of the killing fields, right?
You weren't alone, both of us were shouting at the TV...
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.