Posted on 02/06/2005 4:44:58 PM PST by Sub-Driver
No, no, that's how she got into TV news...it has nothing to do with Nixon.
What about Safire? Didn't he work for Nixon, too? And he's 'retiring' from the NYT, too!
I was wondering the same thing. Ford had nothing to do with this, in my estimation, unless he was ruffling through Nixon's desk--which doesn't seem likely.
Being a Supreme Court justice. He was appointed in 1972.
The real deep throat of the Whitehouse is Monica. Let's not forget that...
Nixon may have been a great Republican, but he was a shitty conservative. I'll take Ike, Coolidge, Taft, hell, even Harding over Nixon as a president ANY day. Nixon is way down there on the weaselly Rockefeller side of the GOP.
"How could Gerald Ford be deep throat, given that he didn't join the Nixon administration until well after the Watergate story broke?"
As a VP he was there all along. He didn't suddenly become VP.
Isn't the dea that one of them will tell who it was when the person is dead?
"I don't think DT is close to death but see my post 102 in the previous thread."
I'll read #102.
LOL!
Can't say I'm really all that interested in the opinions of a crowd that to this day insists Ronald Reagan was some kind of socialist.
And if you're wondering, don't: I'm not really interested in discussing whether the light from a lighthouse washing over the waves is a capitalistic endeavor that should be regulated by "market forces" because the service rendered is some kind of commodity. Or any of the other how many Adam Smith truisms can dance on the head of a Milton Friedman philosophical pin? debates that seem to tie you "Libertarians" into silly, endless knots for hours, days, weeks, months, years & decades on end.
BTW: Ayn Rand wasn't all that bright, IMHO.
I don't represent any party but myself, but I can see you're certainly part of one from which I will absent myself, even through the bright shine of thousands of lumens of your blazing hubris. What you know of conservatives, having rated Nixon as the third greatest Republican of the century, I would consider just as worthy of discussion as those great controversies like "how many Adam Smith truisms can dance on the head of a Milton Friedman philosophical pin," and that discussion would be every bit as brief.
Pardon my intrusion into the arrogant little universe that is you. I'll try not to bother your self-worship again.
Damn, that was my first thought as he is aging and not in the best of health. He was VP so he was close to the administration.
Does anyone know offhand of his relationship with Nixon before while in the Congress and as VP?
Uh, actually, he did.
Agnew resigned in late 73 then Ford became VP.
Problem is, the Watergate story had already broken by that point. How could Ford be the source what happened before he suddenly became VP and before he was in the WH?
"Deepthroat near death..."
Really. I didn't realize that Woodward was in bad health.
Thanks; I prefer it that way when it comes to those of your stripe.
"What you know of conservatives, having rated Nixon as the third greatest Republican of the century, I would consider just as worthy of discussion as those great controversies like "how many Adam Smith truisms can dance on the head of a Milton Friedman philosophical pin," and that discussion would be every bit as brief."
C'mon, fess up: you never really have read "The Wealth of Nations" from cover to cover, despite the brave pretensions, have you?
You're quite right: such a discussion would probably be brief, indeed, since I've likely forgotten more about Adam Smith, Friedman, Rand, et al than most so-called "libertarians" have bothered to learn. I've read their books, after all.
That's not "hubris": it's just plain old fact.
Sorry for being so well-read and educated. Sorta...
Ford was the Republican Minority Leader of the House. He didn't know any more about what Nixon and his crew were doing than Tip O'Neil who was the Democrat Majority Leader of the House knew. If Tip had known what was going on he would have broadcast it to the world. If Ford had known anything then Nixon would not have selected him to be Vice President. If Ford had known anything the Democrats would have called him to testify and he would have told all to the house committee. He was chosen as Nixon's vice president to replace Agnew expressly because he knew nothing at all about what Nixon had done. If it had been revealed in the 1976 Election that Ford was deep throat he would have been reelected in a landslide. Ford was defeated because he pardoned Nixon. He was seen as being on Nixon's side. If Ford were the reason Nixon went down, then the public would have believed that Ford Pardoned Nixon to prevent Nixon from refusing to resign and forcing a trial that might have torn this nation apart.
To believe that Ford was Deep Throat you have to believe that Ford wanted to keep a secret the one fact that would have gotten him a second term as president.
The real question is why would Deep Throat want to remain unknown until after his death. Would not Deep Throat, if his identity was known, become an instant media hero? Why would a person who wanted Nixon taken down want to remain unknown. A deep throat once revealed would have glowing movies made about him. He would make millions in speaking fees and be revered by the MSM for every remaining day in his life. He would be the wonderful man in the white hat who brought down the EVIL NIXON. What part of being a media and public hero for all the remaining days of his life would a Nixon enemy find unattractive?
If the so called Deep throat is dead before Woodward reveals his name, that person can not defend himself if in fact he was not Deep Throat. One can not defame or slander the dead, the media can accuse a dead person of anything and suffer no consequences.
A man who did not want fame of being Deep Throat, must have felt like he did something wrong in ratting on Nixon. Why would a man want his sins revealed only after his death. People who in their own mind do wrongful things tend to confess them in old age.. before they die.. now have someone reveal their treachery after they die.
I would not believe Woodward or Bernstein no matter who they say Deep Throat is if they do so after the dies. What will be interesting to see is if Deep Throat has his lawyer make public the proof he is deep throat when he dies, or if we just take Woodwards word for it.
It makes no sense that Deep Throat wants to remain unknown until after his death.. There was a time you could make people believe it was fear that motivated the secrecy. But no one is afraid of the dead Dick Nixon. No one has been afraid of Nixon or the people around him for 30 years. What is Deep throat afraid of? That Tricia will call him a dirty name?
I don't buy it. I can't think of a reason that Deep Throat would want to keep it quiet until after his death. It is not like Deep Throat did something the world sees as bad. If he exists he did something the public sees as good. Modesty, fear .. nothing rings true as a reason for staying unknown until after death.
I can see no reason why anyone who was motivated to take Richard Nixon down, would not want that fact known.
I, along with many other, had the name of Gerald Ford pop into my brain when reading this.
Not exactly tin foil, but perhaps this is what they want us to think or to speculate: Ford or Rehnquist. We are Freepers and most are GOP, Ford is a name that naturally pops into our heads. But would he be the first thought of dems?
I was watching Keith Olberman the other night (couldn't sleep had already seen what was on FOX) and he mentioned this as a teaser.
[paraphraseed] "Pay attention folks, can't tell you what I know, but things will be breaking fast"
So we have the:
1. Release of the Watergate notes
2. Keith Olberman doing PR and advertising
3. The "news story" that DT is close to death.
4. More than just a few people naming Ford or Rehnquist.
Ford pretty much retired from active politics when he lost to Jimmy Carter. Rehnquist, of course, remained active and influential.
Rehnquist will be retiring from the bench sooner rather than later. President Bush will be nominating a Chief Justice as well as another Supreme.
There are no coincidences especially in the quest for political power. Remember CBS. It is not the accuracy of the documents, be the seriousness of the charges.
Perhaps this is being released so we will all speculate that it may have been Rehnquist. Politcal ammunition to be used in the nominating process.
Just a few random thoughts.
Has anyone thought of Rehnquist????
Oh, no, I've had quite enough of you, thanks. After all, you must have read for months, nay, years, to have attained such a primacy in debating skill. As a lowly libertarian, I can hardly hope to parry the argumentative thrusts of learned sorts as you, or heck, even follow your train of thought, me bein' slow and all. You being a reader, and all around smart dude, while I can barely get through the latest issue o' Spiderman without thumbing Websters for those multisb...multisybal...those long word thingies, I think I'll skip the heavy discussion a feller like you would have to present and thus avoid taxing my little brain.
But let me know if you ever plan to lecture on tic-tac-toe strategy or teach us slow folks how to play checkers or something that's more my speed. I can't hardly wait fer that.
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.