14-03-2015, 04:30 PM
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Thanks to all. Like I said, I am really proud of this two parter because no one ever did anything like this on Bradlee before.
And I am grateful to Bob Parry for printing it since I do not think anyone else, including Salon, would have done it.
As per Ford, I did not know he thought Nixon did away with LBJ. I mean what is the evidence for that? Sounds off the wall to me.
Ford used to post here but he got so obnoxious they banned him.
See, from my information, through Tatro and Marrs, it was Ford and David Truby who unearthed the famous Rubinstein memo, about Ruby working for Nixon. Back in the nineties, I though this was a forgery based upon Paul Hoch. I had not completely wised up to Hoch at the time. Today I am not sure if it is.
When I printed the fact that those two guys surfaced it, and it was a likely forgery, and they both had intel connections in Probe, Ford went nutty.
He demanded a retraction. So, to be fair, I went back to Marrs, and he actually had his notes from his phone call with Ford. Which confirmed everything I wrote.
BTW, I don't now what he means about me being soft on Nixon. That part of the essay analyzes only some of the faults in the Bradlee-Woodward-Bernstein version of Watergate. I could have gone on for many pages more as to all the things wrong with All The President's Men in light of what we know today. I have little or no sympathy for Nixon as politician or president, I mean, come on, the secret bombing of Cambodia? But what ATPM tries to insinuate about him and Watergate is simply wrong. Nixon never really knew what was happening to him. He just played it badly from the beginning. And then Redford went ahead and made it all even worse by glorifying Bradlee, Woodward and Bernstein. And consecrating their self serving mythology about Watergate.
The best book about Watergate is still Secret Agenda. But I did read three newer ones for the essay, Holland's Leak, Rosen's The Strong Man, and In Nixon's Web by Patrick and Ed Gray. I thought the last two were both good, especially the Gray book, which I would recommend to anyone. It proves that both Felt and Woodward were liars. And that Deep Throat, as I and others always suspected, was a composite. What Bradlee did in that case for Woodward, that is letting him keep a major source utterly secret, was unconscionable. Bradlee then tried to CYA it all by saying Deep Throat never fabricated.
HA HA HA. In the article, I showed he had and Woodward wrote it down in his book.
The article got too long. So I had to cut out a very interesting section. See, I think Bernstein was a fairly honest reporter. Especially compared to Woodward and Bradlee. I think Carl later understood what had happened. He had teamed up with a spook, in Woodward, and been supervised by a spook alumnus in Bradlee. He then quit the Post and was very instrumental in exposing Mockingbird in Rolling Stone. I think he did this to expiate his soul a bit for what he had been unwittingly a part of. In other words, he had been duped. But he had been well paid to be so.
Jim Curious as to what you mean by "had not wised up to Paul Hoch"? . FWIW I stopped trusting him in the mid 80's.
Dawn
ps Re Felt, I don't blame him, he was totally out of it by the time he was named as "Deep Throat", which I agree was a total lie. Agree also about Bernstein and Woodward. That's why spook Woodward always has access to presidents, tv and the like. But Bernstein was honest about Mockingbird, to his credit, and I agree duped, at least to some extent, by the good spook Woodward. I will have to read this article again....you are just so very thorough. I hope you sent it to Harv.