1
   

DEEP THROAT

 
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 11:09 am
Lightwizard wrote:
Pat Buchanan and Charles Colson were on The Today Show reprimanding Felt for helping to destroy their boss. What asses.


why should they change now ?

it's interesting to note how many of tricky dick's ol' gang is back in the catbird seat with bush.

no wonder the last few years have that deja vu thing going on...
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 11:14 am
They tried to characterize Wooward and Bernstein as "stenographers," which is ludicrous considering DF, or Felt, was just confirming what they were finding out in their investigative reporting. I guess neither Pat nor Chuck saw "All the President's Men," and what they were saying only made me believe that perhaps Pat deserved a prison term and Chuck a longer prison term.
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 11:20 am
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
for truth, honor or money doesn't really matter at this point, really.

felt's involvement in exposing watergate is portrayed as being a reaction to "corruption in government", but that seems strange coupled with his conviction for illegal activities in connection with the fbi's surveillance of anti-war groups during vietnam.


Aren't many of man's actions a bit strange to other men? From VF:
Quote:
In All the President's Men, the authors described their source as a man of passion and contradiction: "Aware of his own weaknesses, he readily conceded his flaws. He was, incongruously, an incurable gossip, careful to label rumor for what it was, but fascinated by it. … He could be rowdy, drink too much, overreach. He was not good at concealing his feelings, hardly ideal for a man in his position." Even though he was a Washington creature he was "worn out" by years of bureaucratic battles, a man disenchanted with the "switchblade mentality" of the Nixon White House and its tactics of politicizing governmental agencies. Deep Throat was someone in an "extremely sensitive" position, possessing "an aggregate of hard information flowing in and out of many stations," while at the same time quite wary of his role as a confidential source. "Deep Throat," noted Woodward in a lecture in 2003, "lied to his family, to his friends, and colleagues, denying that he had helped us."


Regarding Felt's illegal activities, from VF:
Quote:
Then, in 1978, Felt was indicted on charges of having authorized illegal F.B.I. break-ins earlier in the decade, in which agents without warrants entered the residences of associates and family members of suspected bombers believed to be involved with the Weather Underground. The career agent was arraigned as hundreds of F.B.I. colleagues, outside the courthouse, demonstrated on his behalf. Felt, over the strong objections of his lawyers that the jury had been improperly instructed, claimed that he was following established law-enforcement procedures for break-ins when national security was at stake. Even so, Felt was convicted two years later. Then, in a stroke of good fortune while his case was on appeal, Ronald Reagan was elected president and, in 1981, gave Felt a full pardon.
Yes, very strange indeed... I really think that exposing truth is its primary reward in this matter, but I may be wrong...
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:05 pm
The administration was a pack of thieves and one can stretch honor among thieves just so far.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:27 pm
Felt had ulterior motives in his role as the confidential verifier of information dug up by the journalistic duo. He wanted the No. 1 FBI position and didn't get it. What better way is there to exact disgruntled revenge than by lending an encouraging voice to those who could destroy the big guy who gave the job that you wanted to someone else?
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:29 pm
That's one way of looking at it. A more benign rationale is Felt's being upset about Nixon trying to turn the FBI into his tool for exacting vengeance on enemies...
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:32 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
That's one way of looking at it. A more benign rationale is Felt's being upset about Nixon trying to turn the FBI into his tool for exacting vengeance on enemies...


As the No. 2 man under J. Edgar Hoover, it would not make sense for Felt to be an "ethical" man concerned with the civil rights of Nixon's enemies or anyone else for that matter. It was established FBI procedure to ignore the Fourth Amendment.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:32 pm
I believe the motive was a mixed bag of disillusionment with the Nixon Administration -- there were others who brought it down besides Woodward/Bernstein/Felt/Wasington Post or maybe some people are in denial about actual history (if there is one thing that is learned from history is that not much is learned from history).
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:42 pm
princesspupule wrote:
Regarding Felt's illegal activities, from VF:
Quote:
Then, in 1978, Felt was indicted on charges of having authorized illegal F.B.I. break-ins earlier in the decade, in which agents without warrants entered the residences of associates and family members of suspected bombers believed to be involved with the Weather Underground. The career agent was arraigned as hundreds of F.B.I. colleagues, outside the courthouse, demonstrated on his behalf. Felt, over the strong objections of his lawyers that the jury had been improperly instructed, claimed that he was following established law-enforcement procedures for break-ins when national security was at stake. Even so, Felt was convicted two years later. Then, in a stroke of good fortune while his case was on appeal, Ronald Reagan was elected president and, in 1981, gave Felt a full pardon.
Yes, very strange indeed... I really think that exposing truth is its primary reward in this matter, but I may be wrong...


who knows? conscience ? revenge? either way, it accomplished something that needed to happen.

it has brought the current lack of enquiring mind and solid investigative journalism to the spotlight, don't you think ?

your second quote also kind of sums up why a lot of people are really not into the patriot act, myself included.

i guess next time somebody says something like " show me where the patriot act has been abused", we can point to misdeeds performed with existing, and lesser, powers.

similarly, the Millennium plot was shut down without the patriot act.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:45 pm
From the Washington Post, Wednesday, June 1, 2005:

Quote:
. . . In an article being prepared for tomorrow's Washington Post, Woodward will detail the "accident of history" that connected a young reporter fresh from the suburbs to a man whom many FBI agents considered the best choice to succeed the legendary J. Edgar Hoover as director of the bureau. Woodward and Felt met by chance, he said, but their friendship quickly became a source of information for the reporter. On May 15, 1972, presidential candidate George Wallace was shot and severely wounded by Arthur H. Bremer, in a parking lot in Laurel.

Eager to break news on a local story of major national importance, Woodward contacted Felt for information on the FBI's investigation. Unlike many in the bureau, Felt was known to talk with reporters, and he provided Woodward with a series of front-page nuggets -- though not with his name attached.

By coincidence, the Bremer case came two weeks after the death of Hoover, an epochal moment for the FBI, which had never been led by anyone else. Felt wanted the job, he later wrote. He also wanted his beloved bureau to maintain its independence. And so his motivations were complex when Woodward called a month later seeking clues to the strange case of a burglary at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex. Again, the young reporter had a metro angle on a national story, because the five alleged burglars were arraigned before a local judge.

Wounded that he was passed over for the top job, furious at Nixon's choice of an outsider, Assistant Attorney General L. Patrick Gray III, as acting FBI director, and determined that the White House not be allowed to steer and stall the bureau's Watergate investigation, Mark Felt slipped into the role that would forever alter his life. . . .

Felt established extremely strict initial ground rules: He could never be quoted -- even as an anonymous source -- and he would not provide information. He would "confirm information that had been obtained elsewhere and . . . add some perspective," in the words of the book [All the President's Men].

At first, the two men spoke by telephone. But Watergate was, after all, a case that began with a telephone wiretap. Felt had been summoned at least once to the White House, before Watergate, to discuss the use of telephone surveillance against administration leakers. He soon concluded that his own phones -- and the reporters' -- might be tapped. That's when he developed the system of coded signals and parking-garage encounters. . . .

"He gave us encouragement," Bernstein said yesterday. . . .



source
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 12:54 pm
Anyone consider that Felt was passed over because he wasn't playing ball all the way?
0 Replies
 
AllanSwann
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 01:04 pm
As one of the dwindling members of the baby boomer generation who actually remembers Watergate, for me the disclosure of "Deep Throat's" identity is a quiet coda to this sorry mess that maybe as much as the Vietnam War shaped our government and its policies in the last quarter of the 20th Century. I remember getting into HUGE arguments during that era with my father, who believed Nixon was a great president being brought down by a cynical, negative media. Now 32 years later, it all seems like a Shakespearean tragedy showing the decline of a man who had great political prowess, a keen analysis of domestic and foreign affairs but who could never shake his paranoid inferiority neuroses to simply govern and not control.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 01:29 pm
The whole matter demonstrates that governmental flagrant abuses of civil rights in the name of "national security" are timeless.

Quote:
The Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, known as the "Church Committee" after its chairman Frank Church, conducted a wide-ranging investigation of the intelligence agencies in the post-Watergate period.

The Church Committee took public and private testimony from hundreds of people, collected huge volumes of files from the FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS, and many other federal agencies, and issued 14 reports in 1975 and 1976. Since the passage of the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act in 1992, over 50,000 pages of Church Committee records have been declassified and made available to the public.


Source


See:
INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES AND THE RIGHTS OF AMERICANS

I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

. . . C. Summary of the Main Problems

Quote:
4. Ignoring the Law

Officials of the intelligence agencies occasionally recognized that certain activities were illegal, but expressed concern only for "flap Potential." Even more disturbing was the frequent testimony that the law, and the Constitution were simply ignored. For example, the author of the so-called Huston plan testified:

Question. Was there any person who stated that the activity recommended, which you have previously identified as being illegal opening of the mail and breaking and entry or burglary -- was there any single person who stated that such activity should not be done because it was unconstitutional?

Answer. No.

Question. Was there any single person who said such activity should not be done because it was illegal?

Answer. No.

Similarly, the man who for ten years headed FBI's Intelligence Division testifed that:

... never once did I hear anybody, including myself, raise the question: "Is this course of action which we have agreed upon lawful, is it legal, is it ethical or moral." We never gave any thought to this line of reasoning, because we were just naturally pragmatic.

Although the statutory law and the Constitution were often not "[given] a thought", there was a general attitude that intelligence needs were responsive to a higher law. Thus, as one witness testified in justifying the FBI's mail opening program:

It was my assumption that what we were doing was justified by what we had to do . . . the greater good, the national security.



Quote:
. . . In light of the record of abuse revealed by our inquiry, the Committee is not satisfied with the position that mere exposure of what has occurred in the past will prevent its recurrence. Clear legal standards and effective oversight and controls are necessary to ensure that domestic intelligence activity does not itself undermine the democratic system it is intended to protect.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 03:12 pm
'Deep Throat' Leak Threatens Joint FBI-WaPo Spy Ops

(2005-06-01)

Yesterday's stunning revelation that a former FBI deputy director helped The Washington Post (WaPo) bring down President Richard Nixon, may 'seriously jeopardize' other cooperative espionage efforts between the Post and the intelligence community, according to an anonymous spokesman for the newspaper.

"All of our joint intelligence operations with the FBI, CIA and NSA are threatened by this traitorous breach," said the unnamed WaPo source. "People have come to expect that reading the Washington Post is like sitting in on the President's Daily Briefing. That credibility is now at risk."

Vanity Fair magazine broke the story yesterday that former FBI deputy director W. Mark Felt was the secret source, dubbed 'Deep Throat', that reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein used to confirm and enhance much of their reporting on the Watergate break-in and cover-up.

The dramatic stories of Republican burglars, who helped Mr. Nixon narrowly defeat Democrat George McGovern in a landslide, rocked the nation and established journalists as the chief defenders of American democracy.

The Post said it would continue to guard the identity of other sources, including...


'Deep Dish', the source who helped reporters put Martha Stewart behind bars,
'Deep Six', who helped editors spike stories of President Clinton's various sexual escapades, and
'Deep Akchopra', who provides insightful background information about Oprah Winfrey

Source
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 03:15 pm
I think that the decision to come forward now, was more from Felt's family than the man himself. He was persuaded to come forward. I think his family wanted him to die in pride and dignity, with the thanks of the nation.

According to 'talking heads' who I admire, trust, and find to have integrity, the entire story has not yet come out, and is a good deal more complex (as most interesting things are) than what has thus far been reported. So I guess we had better all stay tuned.

Also of note is the important corollary to the present-day Newsweek business, and the important role that anonymous sources can play in national politics. Not to mention investigative journalism.
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 05:48 pm
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
princesspupule wrote:
Regarding Felt's illegal activities, from VF:
Quote:
Then, in 1978, Felt was indicted on charges of having authorized illegal F.B.I. break-ins earlier in the decade, in which agents without warrants entered the residences of associates and family members of suspected bombers believed to be involved with the Weather Underground. The career agent was arraigned as hundreds of F.B.I. colleagues, outside the courthouse, demonstrated on his behalf. Felt, over the strong objections of his lawyers that the jury had been improperly instructed, claimed that he was following established law-enforcement procedures for break-ins when national security was at stake. Even so, Felt was convicted two years later. Then, in a stroke of good fortune while his case was on appeal, Ronald Reagan was elected president and, in 1981, gave Felt a full pardon.
Yes, very strange indeed... I really think that exposing truth is its primary reward in this matter, but I may be wrong...


who knows? conscience ? revenge? either way, it accomplished something that needed to happen.

it has brought the current lack of enquiring mind and solid investigative journalism to the spotlight, don't you think ?


Oh, I quite agree w/you. Today's media seems to be only about soundbites and pressing agendas of deep pockets. There is not the same degree of honor in journalism any more, with Guckert/Gannon throwing softballs that Limbaugh hits when Bush missed, and Rather's creative evidence... Is there anyone today who has the ethics of Woodward and Bernstein? And is there anyone out there following the stories who cares to the degree that people did in the 70s?
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 06:14 pm
Debra_Law wrote:
From the Washington Post, Wednesday, June 1, 2005:

Quote:
. . . In an article being prepared for tomorrow's Washington Post, Woodward will detail the "accident of history" that connected a young reporter fresh from the suburbs to a man whom many FBI agents considered the best choice to succeed the legendary J. Edgar Hoover as director of the bureau. Woodward and Felt met by chance, he said, but their friendship quickly became a source of information for the reporter. On May 15, 1972, presidential candidate George Wallace was shot and severely wounded by Arthur H. Bremer, in a parking lot in Laurel.

Eager to break news on a local story of major national importance, Woodward contacted Felt for information on the FBI's investigation. Unlike many in the bureau, Felt was known to talk with reporters, and he provided Woodward with a series of front-page nuggets -- though not with his name attached.

By coincidence, the Bremer case came two weeks after the death of Hoover, an epochal moment for the FBI, which had never been led by anyone else. Felt wanted the job, he later wrote. He also wanted his beloved bureau to maintain its independence. And so his motivations were complex when Woodward called a month later seeking clues to the strange case of a burglary at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex. Again, the young reporter had a metro angle on a national story, because the five alleged burglars were arraigned before a local judge.

Wounded that he was passed over for the top job, furious at Nixon's choice of an outsider, Assistant Attorney General L. Patrick Gray III, as acting FBI director, and determined that the White House not be allowed to steer and stall the bureau's Watergate investigation, Mark Felt slipped into the role that would forever alter his life. . . .


source


I'm not sure anyone has proven that Felt felt "wounded" that he was passed over... He could have been morally angry or ethically driven to act beyond his contracts, his contacts and relationships, and his comfort level and way of life to expose or confirm information that supposedly shouldn't see the light of day. There was nobody else he could go to who would have acted on the information that the president behaving reprehensibly. Sometimes there are things which are more important than promotion of self...
0 Replies
 
fbaezer
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 06:17 pm
About ethics and journalism:

Let us remember that Deep Throat only gave the clues, and then the Post reporters confirmed them by at least two other sources before publishing.
That is a good standard procedure.


About ends and means:

Life is paradoxical.
Deep Throat's motifs may have been somewhat vile. His actions were of inmense help to the democratic institutions of the most powerful country on earth. No small deal, no matter how petty the reasons behind a key man.
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 06:29 pm
sumac wrote:
I think that the decision to come forward now, was more from Felt's family than the man himself. He was persuaded to come forward. I think his family wanted him to die in pride and dignity, with the thanks of the nation.

According to 'talking heads' who I admire, trust, and find to have integrity, the entire story has not yet come out, and is a good deal more complex (as most interesting things are) than what has thus far been reported. So I guess we had better all stay tuned.

Also of note is the important corollary to the present-day Newsweek business, and the important role that anonymous sources can play in national politics. Not to mention investigative journalism.


Oh yes, ITA. But the thought of another stepping forward today and blowing the whistle on the Bushies (didn't Cheney and Rumsfeld survive Watergate?) seems unlikely with promotions given for loyalty over competence, etc... And the media generally more interested in short soundbites which promote their agenda over the truth... and that the preferred pablum fed to the public today...
0 Replies
 
Cliff Hanger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Jun, 2005 07:11 pm
Who cares what Felt's motivation was/is. This is one of the more interesting news stories to hit the waves in a long time.

An observation-- Get a look at the pictures of Felt and his family, these are happy people. I'm glad he's alive to enjoy this. Great looking family, by the way.

I'm having trouble relocating the Vanity Fair article that was put in PDF form and was on the web yesterday. This is fun stuff though, and it's about time for a little bit of nostalgia. Who'd-a-thought that that turbulent time would resurface with such a sense of longing for simpler times...Nixon looks like a piker compared to what we're going through of late...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » DEEP THROAT
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 07/20/2024 at 06:36:07