Looks like Woodward and Bernstein

[eagle7-31]

Exploding the Watergate Myth | Frontpage Mag

A new book shows that Woodward and Bernstein lied. And lied. And lied.

www.frontpagemag.com

did not tell a totally accurate story.

 

[eagle7-31]

Exploding the Watergate Myth | Frontpage Mag

A new book shows that Woodward and Bernstein lied. And lied. And lied.

www.frontpagemag.com

did not tell a totally accurate story.

But there was one thing - in the book and the movie - that always puzzled me.

I’ll describe it as it’s presented in the film. Woodward (Robert Redford) meets late at night in a parking garage with his secret source, known as Deep Throat (Hal Holbrook), who drops a bombshell. The Watergate cover-up, he says, wasn’t really about the June 17, 1972, break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate complex. Its actual purpose was to protect a whole raft of covert operations that involved “the entire U.S. intelligence community - the FBI, CIA, Justice.”

After receiving this revelation, Woodward rushes to Bernstein’s (Dustin Hoffman) apartment, puts on some classical music at top volume (the walls, he’s been told, have ears), and types out this mind-blowing new information while a stunned Bernstein reads over his shoulder. They then hurry to the home of Post editor Ben Bradlee (Jason Robards), where - on his front lawn, to avoid hidden microphones - they share the news with him.

And then? Well, that scene is followed immediately by the famous (to movie buffs) deep-focus shot of the Post newsroom where our heroes type away in the far background - saving American freedom with every keystroke - while on a TV set in the foreground our villain, Nixon, takes his second-term oath of office. Then, in a tight close-up, headlines on a teletype machine finish the story: “Magruder pleads guilty,” “Segretti sentenced,” and so on, concluding with “Nixon resigns.” Run credits.

All the President’s Men was a splendid work of American cinema - and it was about what we’ve all been told ever since was the most splendid chapter in American journalistic history, a textbook case of dogged footwork and moral integrity that lifted the Post into the front rank of American newspapers, gave Woodstein (the Post’s in-house nickname for Bob and Carl) an Olympian status that they still enjoy to this day, made journalists as a class more important and influential than ever, and ushered in a new era of aggressive and ambitious - yet far more respected - investigative reporting about politicians.

But what ever happened to that earthshaking revelation about covert operations by “the entire U.S. intelligence community”? In the nearly half-century since Watergate, we’ve never heard another word about it. Not from the Post, anyway.

There was always another big question about Watergate: why would the Nixon White House have wanted to burglarize Democratic headquarters in the first place? It was already obvious that Nixon was heading for a landslide victory. He didn’t need any DNC dirt. Even in the movie, an unnamed editor at the Post, played by John McMartin, tells Bradlee: “I don’t believe the story. It doesn’t make sense.” The motive for the burglary remained murky for decades.

Then, two and a half years ago, John O’Connor - a veteran criminal prosecutor and friend of FBI number-two Mark Felt, who in 2015 admitted to being Deep Throat - published a book entitled Postgate: How the Washington Post Betrayed Deep Throat, Covered Up Watergate, and Began Today's Partisan Advocacy Journalism.

Alas, that work never made it onto my radar. But now, just in time for the fiftieth anniversary of the break-in, O’Connor has given me a second chance. In The Mysteries of Watergate: What Really Happened, which he characterizes as “a more accessible, plainspoken” version of its overly “dense” and “lawyerlike” predecessor. In it, O’Connor leads us, Virgil-like, through the whole convoluted scandal, debunking old conjectures, proffering new information, and ultimately spelling out, with prosecutorial meticulousness, the myriad ways in which the full story deviates from the Post’s accounts.

By book’s end, Woodward and Bernstein - and their editors - no longer look like heroes. Far from it. Also, the title All the President’s Men turns out to be a misnomer. Watergate wasn’t really a Nixon job. It was a CIA caper.

Where to start? Perhaps with Howard Hunt, the White House operative whose name was found in address books belonging to two of the Watergate burglars. If you saw All the President’s Men, you may remember Woodward’s discovery that Hunt was also at the CIA and that he worked part-time at a PR firm called Mullen. Mullen never comes up again in the movie. In fact, as Woodstein soon found out, it was a CIA front.

But that little detail never made it way into any of their Post articles. Because on July 10, 1972, according to CIA records to which O’Connor gained access, Mullen’s president, Robert F. Bennett made a deal with Woodward - O’Connor calls it “a conspiracy of obstruction” - to feed him Watergate stories in exchange for a promise to omit from Post reporting any mention of Mullen’s role as a CIA front. It was a highly curious arrangement, given that, as O’Connor notes, “Bennett had no stories to feed Woodward, who, with Deep Throat’s help, hardly needed Bennett. So if Woodward kept quiet, and intentionally so, about Mullen, it was for the Post’s purposes, not the CIA’s.”

And what were the Post’s purposes? Well, it soon became clear to Woodstein that the Watergate break-in had been a CIA operation for which Hunt, because he was a White House official, had been able to claim presidential authorization. Yet the Post - which, as O’Connor notes, was founded in 1877 as “the official organ of the Democratic Party” and which in the 1970s, believe it or not, shared a general counsel (Joseph Califano) with the DNC - didn’t want to bring down the CIA. It wanted to bring down Nixon. And after learning that the CIA’s motive for the break-in had to do not with political secrets but with a prostitution referral service that was operating out of DNC headquarters, the Post wanted to protect Democrats.

Why, then, did Nixon pursue the ultimately self-destructive cover-up? Because John Dean - the White House counsel who, unbeknownst to Nixon, had had his own personal reasons for wanting the DNC’s prostitution records - urged Nixon to do so, never informing him that what he was covering up was, in fact, a CIA project. As O’Connor observes, if Nixon hadn’t pursued the cover-up, the truth about the break-in might actually have come out, and Nixon would’ve been seen not as its mastermind but as an innocent fall guy.

You may ask: if the Post hid the truth about Watergate, how did that truth stay hidden

 

[MarathonMike]

I have posted numerous times that Watergate was totally a mountain grown from a molehill. A two bit burglary by politicians spying on politicians. Whoopie shit. This was the genesis of the "manufactured crisis" that the Democrats have now perfected. Russian Collusion, Impeachment 1 and 2, J6 etc. are all the evil spawn of Watergate.

 

[eagle7-31]

And I bet you wish you lived in Mayberry with Gomer and Floyd.

I am not the one that went with half a story to the Post company like bobby and carl.

 

[okfine]

I am not the one that went with half a story to the Post company like bobby and carl.

You are the OP and must believe anything. It wasn't so much about the break in, but the coverup itself. It was a culmination of flaky Nixon doings that started in 1968.
Not much different from what is happening now with Trump.

 

[playtime]

Frontpage Magazine​

---

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE​

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

• Overall, we rate FrontPage Magazine a Questionable source based on Extreme Right Bias, the promotion of conspiracy theories regarding Islam, as well as propaganda that only reports negatively on Islam. This source has also failed numerous fact checks by IFCN fact-checkers.

---

Detailed Report​

Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Muslim
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA (44/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

History​

FrontPage Magazine is an online conservative political website, edited by David Horowitz and published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California. The David Horowitz Center has claimed that the “Left has declared war on America.” Some notable writers for FrontPage include Ann Coulter and President Trump’s adviser Stephen Miller. All of which have failed numerous fact checks.
Frontpage Magazine

 

[okfine]

Frontpage Magazine​

---

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE​

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

• Overall, we rate FrontPage Magazine a Questionable source based on Extreme Right Bias, the promotion of conspiracy theories regarding Islam, as well as propaganda that only reports negatively on Islam. This source has also failed numerous fact checks by IFCN fact-checkers.

---

Detailed Report​

Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Muslim
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA (44/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

History​

FrontPage Magazine is an online conservative political website, edited by David Horowitz and published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California. The David Horowitz Center has claimed that the “Left has declared war on America.” Some notable writers for FrontPage include Ann Coulter and President Trump’s adviser Stephen Miller. All of which have failed numerous fact checks.
Frontpage Magazine

The name "Horowitz" is what tipped me off about credibility let alone being newsworthy.

 

[Winco]

Not much different from what is happening now with Trump.

Why is everyone out to get such a GREAT man in DJT?
Why, he is so.....

1). Noble
2). Honest
3). Loyal
4). Forgiving
5). Genuine
6). Loving
7). Knowledgable
8). Trustworthy
9). America First
10). the Best at Everything

 

[Dekster]

Exploding the Watergate Myth | Frontpage Mag

A new book shows that Woodward and Bernstein lied. And lied. And lied.

www.frontpagemag.com

did not tell a totally accurate story.

Of course not. Someone who shared in their Pulitzer told me that they knew that those two weren't telling the WaPo brass the truth half the time. They just knew they were on to something and let it go wherever it was going to go. He did not have nice things to say about the Bernstein half of that coin.

Said person was : Roger Wilkins - Wikipedia

Interesting enough, he used to kind of defend LBJ in a very backhanded way.

 

[eagle7-31]

Frontpage Magazine​

---

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE​

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

• Overall, we rate FrontPage Magazine a Questionable source based on Extreme Right Bias, the promotion of conspiracy theories regarding Islam, as well as propaganda that only reports negatively on Islam. This source has also failed numerous fact checks by IFCN fact-checkers.

---

Detailed Report​

Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Muslim
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA (44/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

History​

FrontPage Magazine is an online conservative political website, edited by David Horowitz and published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California. The David Horowitz Center has claimed that the “Left has declared war on America.” Some notable writers for FrontPage include Ann Coulter and President Trump’s adviser Stephen Miller. All of which have failed numerous fact checks.
Frontpage Magazine

The source for the story was John O'Connor not frontpage itself try again.

 

[eagle7-31]

The name "Horowitz" is what tipped me off about credibility let alone being newsworthy.

Horowitz was a real left winger in the 1960's then he wised up.

 

[Funzo Hoss]

George probably did his best before he was banned from Deary. Uncircumcised cocks were bound to affud the thorough horse fishing. Derangedment, portry, harshnirl other bitter of therefore routroust.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I have posted numerous times that Watergate was totally a mountain grown from a molehill. A two bit burglary by politicians spying on politicians. Whoopie shit. This was the genesis of the "manufactured crisis" that the Democrats have now perfected. Russian Collusion, Impeachment 1 and 2, J6 etc. are all the evil spawn of Watergate.

Yep. By today’s standards, it would have been a failed website hack.

 

[MarathonMike]

I am not the one that went with half a story to the Post company like bobby and carl.

Woodward and Bernstein also ruined investigative journalism. Now we have journalistic frauds who want to become famous by being Democratic Party operatives.

 

[whitehall]

What administration would tolerate an unidentified informant leaking unverified information to the media on a daily basis and remain anonymous until he died and of course couldn't answer any questions? What if an investigative reporter with connections to a white supremacy group was investigating a democrat politician? How long would he last and how much credibility would he have? Yet hardly anyone was aware that Karl Marx Bernstein was the son of card carrying communists and he was brought up with an abiding hatred for Richard Nixon. Watergate was about a break in burglary. There was sex, drugs and rock & roll and even unexplained deaths in the Clinton administration but the Post wasn't interested and W&B were retired.

 

[jwoodie]

Another reason for the break-in was to obtain evidence of secret Castro/Cuban funding for the Democrats.