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

Skip to comments.

Johnson's Watergate (NRO)
National Review ^

Posted on 06/07/2005 6:56:02 AM PDT by slowhand520

Interesting read I thought we'd all enjoy. LBJ makes Nixon look like a saint.

Johnson’s “Watergate” LBJ vs. Goldwater.

By Lee Edwards

It was a political scandal of unprecedented proportions: the deliberate, systematic, and illegal misuse of the FBI and the CIA by the White House in a presidential campaign. The massive black-bag operations, bordering on the unconstitutional and therefore calling for impeachment, were personally approved by the president. They included planting a CIA spy in his opponent's campaign committee, wiretaps on his opponent's top political aides, illegal FBI checks, and the bugging of his opponent's campaign airplane.

The president? Lyndon B. Johnson. The target? Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, the 1964 Republican presidential candidate.

Here are three examples of a presidential abuse of power for political purposes that constitute an even graver offense than Watergate.

In the fall of 1964, the White House turned to the CIA to get advance inside information about the Goldwater campaign, although the senator could hardly be described as a "domestic enemy" (the only valid excuse for agency action). E. Howard Hunt, later convicted for his part in the Watergate break-in, told a congressional committee a decade later that he was ordered to spy on Goldwater's headquarters. He said that President Johnson "had ordered this activity" and that White House aide Chester L. Cooper "would be the recipient of the information."

CIA Director William Colby admitted that Cooper prepared campaign material for Johnson and obtained advance texts of Goldwater speeches through a "woman secretary," clearly suggesting that the agency planted someone inside the Goldwater campaign organization.

The Democrats constantly used the covertly obtained information to undercut Goldwater initiatives. In early September, for example, the Goldwater campaign announced the formation of a Task Force on Peace and Freedom that the AP described as one of the most "unusual tactics in the history of American politics." Three hours before the Goldwater task force was unveiled, the White House announced that President Johnson had created a 16-member panel of leading authorities to consult with him on international problems. The White House announcement trumped the Goldwater plan. Democratic campaign speechwriter John Roche revealed that he and his colleagues got advance texts of Goldwater's major speeches. "When I innocently inquired how we got them," Roche said, "the reply was 'don't ask.'"

Goldwater's regional political directors were convinced that the telephones of the Republican national headquarters in Washington were bugged. At one private meeting aides discussed the possibility of a campaign stop by Goldwater in the Chicago area. Midwest director Sam Hay called the Republican chairman of Cook County, who agreed it was a good idea but promised to keep the trip confidential. Within the hour, a reporter called to say that he had heard Goldwater would be coming to town and wanted the details.

Senator Goldwater recalled that two correspondents once questioned him about a proposal not yet made public: that if elected, he would send Eisenhower to Vietnam to examine the situation and report back to him. Goldwater insisted he discussed the Eisenhower mission with only two members of his personal staff, but the two reporters swear they heard about it at the Johnson White House.

Most disturbing of all was the FBI's bugging of the Goldwater campaign plane where the senator and his inner circle often made their most confidential decisions. The bureau's illegal surveillance was confirmed by Robert Mardian, when he was an assistant attorney general in Nixon's first term.

During a two-hour conversation with J. Edgar Hoover in early 1971, Mardian asked about the procedures of electronic surveillance. To Mardian's amazement, Hoover revealed that in 1964 the FBI, on orders from the Oval Office, had bugged the Goldwater plane. Asked to explain the blatantly illegal action, Hoover said, "You do what the president of the United States orders you to do." William C. Sullivan, the bureau's number two man, confirmed to Mardian the spying operation against the Goldwater campaign.

Why did President Johnson order the Anti-Goldwater Campaign and illegally use both the CIA and the FBI as his personal political instruments? All the polls agreed he would win and by a handsome margin. But Johnson wanted the mother of all political landslides, eclipsing FDR's record presidential victory in 1936 and at the same time burying six feet deep Barry Goldwater and American conservatism. Johnson nearly succeeded in the first objective, receiving 61.5 percent of the popular vote, but miserably failed in the second.

Of all the men who have run for and lost the presidency in modern times, only Barry Goldwater and the central themes of his campaign were vindicated so quickly. Reviled and rejected in 1964 as no other presidential candidate in the 20th century, Goldwater was easily reelected to the U.S. Senate in 1968 while the president who had won by one of the largest margins in presidential politics dared not seek reelection. Just twelve years later, the Great Society was exposed as a trillion-dollar bust and Ronald Reagan, an unabashed conservative, became our 40th president.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: lbj; presidents
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 06/07/2005 6:56:02 AM PDT by slowhand520
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

Good post! I'll bookmark.


2 posted on 06/07/2005 6:58:05 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520
It was a political scandal of unprecedented proportions:

I was thinking the Clintons. Nixon and Johnson combined couldn't touch them with a ten foot pole when it comes to crimes in office. I believe that Hillary is still leading the pact of criminals in high places.

3 posted on 06/07/2005 6:59:58 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

What's the point?

It's been proven beyond a doubt that Johnson did whatever it took to win, including dirty tricks and stuffing ballot boxes. He was a bully and many other bad things.

None of which excuses Nixon or his henchmen.


4 posted on 06/07/2005 7:04:44 AM PDT by Gone GF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
I personally think Johnson was just as corrupt as Clinton although that is hard to believe.

I read a book, I think the Author was Cato, but can't remember for sure, about Johnson. He was an interesting character. He was crooked from childhood. Also a physical coward.

When he stole his Senate seat, he was aided by Harry Truman, that icon of modern Democrats, and sadly, many Republicans.

5 posted on 06/07/2005 7:06:22 AM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

When JFK (whatever you thought of him, the man was never a coward) asked LBJ to visit Vietnam for him in 1963, LBJ apparently physically quaked with fear. Typical reaction for a bully and a cheat. Neither the Washington Post nor CBS "News" were, of course, interested one bit in LBJ's criminality; it didn't further their political objectives.


6 posted on 06/07/2005 7:13:30 AM PDT by laconic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF

Can I assume you are one of the Hillary voters on here from your comments? Comparing Nixon and LBJ -- not even close. Nixon covered for his staff because he was loyal to people around him -- LBJ was involved in every detail of bugging the Goldwater campaign and dirty tricks and that doesn't even include his micromanaging the the war in Vietnam.

Watergate was a 3rd rate burglarly at best -- LBJ bugged everything in the Goldwater campaign not to mention stealing ballot boxes in Texas in his first campaign for Senate.


7 posted on 06/07/2005 7:14:11 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- J.C. for OK Governor; Allen in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Again, I am going on old memory, but IIRC, the watergate burglary was attempted because they thought the democrat national campaign was guilty of treason and they were trying to catch them red handed, (no pun intended).

Of course they were probably trying to catch them for political purposes rather than national security.

8 posted on 06/07/2005 7:22:56 AM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: laconic
When we lived in Tulsa, I got to meet one of the captains of a PT boat in Kennedy's squadron.

Of course I had to ask him about it.

He said Kennedy was liked by all of them. He also said he behaved well after his boat was sunk. On the other hand he said having your PT boat rammed by a ship was considered about as bad as it gets since they were the fastest thing on the water.

9 posted on 06/07/2005 7:25:50 AM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF

"What's the point?"

In my opinion, the point is that the Watergate story is a story about the media, not the Nixon presidency and administration. It shows that the media was already completely one-sided more than 30 years ago.

We now know that the "Watergate" many of us were raised on was BS. The real story is how a disgruntled federal employee feeding dirt to a Red-Diaper (Doper) Baby working for a major paper can bring down a government.


10 posted on 06/07/2005 7:49:58 AM PDT by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
"Again, I am going on old memory, but IIRC, the watergate burglary was attempted because they thought the democrat national campaign was guilty of treason and they were trying to catch them red handed, (no pun intended)."

Trying to catch Democrats in treason, like criticizing Democrats caught red-handed in treason, is the worst sin of all in the eyes of the mainstream media.

No, actually, there is one worse sin. Trying to undermine the spread of communism in Latin America is probably the worst crime.

11 posted on 06/07/2005 7:57:09 AM PDT by Montfort (President George Allen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Empire_of_Liberty
a question that came to me this week is that if Felt knew everything according to Haldeman, why is he characterized as only offering encouragement to Woodward and Bernstein? I bet that there is a cover-up here for some truly criminal behavior on Felt's part.

And the way that Woodward first met Felt in the basement room of the White House kind of sounds like a gay hookup to me. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

12 posted on 06/07/2005 8:00:28 AM PDT by Thebaddog (Dawgs off the coffee table.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

Difficult to believe that the FBI and CIA would do anything illegal. (Caustic sarcasm)


13 posted on 06/07/2005 8:05:26 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
I read a book, I think the Author was Cato, but can't remember for sure, about Johnson. He was an interesting character. He was crooked from childhood. Also a physical coward.

I read "My Brother Lyndon" by Sam Houston Johnson. It recalls a number of his childhood shennanigans along with some oft overlooked perspectives on his life in the Whitehouse.

14 posted on 06/07/2005 8:08:08 AM PDT by TheRightGuy (ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520

And where was Deep Throat back then?


15 posted on 06/07/2005 8:09:23 AM PDT by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
"Can I assume you are one of the Hillary voters on here from your comments?" Not exactly sure how you came up with that. I have not and never will vote for Hillary. Or even consider voting for her. I despise her. It really doesn't matter which one is worse -- Nixon or LBJ. In fact, I'll agree LBJ was much, much worse because he was. What Nixon did was still illegal and if he hadn't quit he would have been impeached and convicted. Call it loyalty as somebody else did, but that doesn't make it right. I'm absolutely flabbergasted by the number of Freepers defending Nixon by pointing out Democrats who are worse.≥ That's a tactic I expect to see from liberals.
16 posted on 06/07/2005 8:09:37 AM PDT by Gone GF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF
I don't think anyone is saying it was ok because the dems did it too.

There is some truth tho, that when your opponent is ignoring all the rules, that sometimes it is necessary to get dirty along with them, or lose.

I don't agree with that but it certainly is a mitigating factor.

And there really is no doubt that the dems were playing dirty first and were deeper in the dirt.

17 posted on 06/07/2005 8:15:52 AM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: slowhand520
Not to mention the fake attack on our ships in the Gulf of Tonkin that LBJ used as an excuse to escallate the war and directly benefit his big business buddies at the expense of Ameican GI blood. If the Dims accuse a Republican President of doing something heinous, you can make one of two assumptions:

1. They or theirs have done it in spades.

2. They or theirs are in the middle of doing it.

18 posted on 06/07/2005 8:17:14 AM PDT by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF
It's not defending Nixon to point out the selective nature of the press. IMO that's what this article is doing.

The press leads us around by the nose ring, deciding what is news and what isn't. For maybe 40 years, it appears, that decision has been guided by a liberal world-view (i.e. what's best for the Donkey-party). The American people have been too trusting.
19 posted on 06/07/2005 8:21:50 AM PDT by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF
What's the point? It's been proven beyond a doubt that Johnson did whatever it took to win, including dirty tricks and stuffing ballot boxes. He was a bully and many other bad things. None of which excuses Nixon or his henchmen.

The point is that the media completely ignored the corruption on the part of the Democrats, especially today in their retrospectives. Had Watergate pulled down a Dem president, every report on it on ABCBSNBCNN would have a disclaimer in the 2nd sentence about how "Of course previous Republican administrations had engaged in the same illegal activity." It isn't about excusing Nixon, but further exposing the media 'coverups'. There is such a thing as 'lying by ommission'.

20 posted on 06/07/2005 8:28:05 AM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next 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