Post-Gazette Editorial – 6/02/05

This page was last updated on June 12, 2005.

Deep righteousness / Watergate story source steps from the shadows; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; June 2, 2005.

If you know the political leanings of the PG, this editorial is completely predictable.

In no way do I condone the behavior of the Nixon administration with respect to Watergate. President Nixon’s staff let him down by conducting the break-in and he let us down by his misguided loyalty to his staff. Had Nixon done the right thing when he learned of his campaign’s involvement in the break-in, Watergate would have been merely an embarrassing footnote. Given the weakness of Democrat candidates in 1972, Nixon would still have won re-election. As much as the mainstream press hates to admit it, Nixon was not a hated president, at least not by the overall population. President Nixon’s approval rating was above 60% at the time of his re-election.

6/12/05 - Below the editorial refers to Mark Felt urging Bernstein and Woodward to “follow the money.” According to a New York Times column, Felt did no such thing. You see, the column claims the phrase “follow the money” was written by the screenwriter who adapted the book “All the President’s Men” for the movie version.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“The identity of ‘Deep Throat,’ arguably the most important mystery figure of the American political wars of the 20th century, was revealed Tuesday to be W. Mark Felt, number two at the FBI at the time of the Watergate events.”

[RWC] I always assumed Deep Throat was a person who had knowledge of the Watergate break-in and/or the attempted cover-up but was not a participant. I assumed he was a person who recognized what was going on was wrong, but who was afraid to go public out of fear. Given those assumptions, I thought Deep Throat did something honorable. It never occurred to me Deep Throat could be a high-ranking law enforcement official.

I was wrong.

As #2 at the FBI at the time of Watergate, Mr. Felt had a legal and moral obligation to follow the law. If he believed the investigation was not going as it should, he had numerous appropriate channels at his disposal to address his concerns. Remember, Felt was not some powerless underling at the bottom of the totem pole; he was the #2 “cop” in the FBI. If Felt believed he would get no action in the executive branch, he could have gone to the congressional committees responsible for oversight of the Justice Department. Given that Congress was firmly under Democrat control, he would surely have found friendly ears there. If that brought no results, he could have quit the FBI and then gone public to all the press.

The fact is, within two days of the Watergate break-in, Mr. Felt was already speaking with Bob Woodward. Felt was leaking info to Woodward long before he could have had any reason to believe the FBI investigation would not be handled properly. Even to this date, no one has credibly alleged the FBI didn’t do its job with respect to Watergate.

Instead, Mr. Felt chose to leak the findings of an ongoing FBI investigation to a single newspaper. While this would have been perfectly acceptable for a civilian, it was absolutely the wrong approach for the #2 man in the FBI. Indeed, Mr. Felt said so himself in a Slate interview. When asked in 1999 if it would be so bad for him to be Deep Throat, Felt replied, “It would be terrible. This would completely undermine the reputation that you might have as a loyal, logical employee of the FBI. It just wouldn’t fit at all.” When asked if Deep Throat was a hero, Mr. Felt replied, “That’s not my view at all. It would be contrary to my responsibility as a loyal employee of the FBI to leak information.”¹

“As anyone who has worked through the interstices of the story knows, Mr. Felt played a critical role in guiding the media and eventually the Congress and public opinion to the truth through an important constitutional drama that lasted more than two years.”

[RWC] There are two problems with this paragraph.

First, the editorial assumes the honorable men and women in the FBI would not have done their jobs. Most who believe in the Deep Throat mythology forget and/or ignore that the only way for Mr. Felt to know what he knew was that the FBI was doing its job to investigate Watergate.

Second, what “constitutional drama?” The Constitution’s checks and balances worked exactly as designed.

“The end result was that a smug, closed, arrogant White House, led by a brilliant but anti-democratic, paranoic and anti-Semitic president, Richard M. Nixon, was laid wide open, its most un-American deeds exposed to the light. President Nixon ultimately resigned, to avoid impeachment.”

[RWC] That’s a lot of name-calling considering Richard Nixon was a pretty liberal Republican. Lest we forget, Nixon began withdrawing troops from Vietnam immediately upon taking office in 1969. He also imposed price and wage controls in an attempt to control inflation and provide full employment. Of course this program failed. President Nixon also gave us the EPA and OSHA.

Regarding anti-Semitism, there’s no question Nixon was on tape saying some unflattering things. Let’s look at his actions, however. Nixon appointed Henry Kissinger – a Jew – as his National Security Advisor and then his Secretary of State. Nixon hired other Jews as well, William Safire, Ben Stein, and many others. Because of his support during the 1973 Arab/Israeli war, Israel considered President Nixon a friend. If Nixon was truly anti-Semitic, it appears he wasn’t good at it.

I don’t know what support the PG has for the “anti-democratic” label. Perhaps the editorial meant “anti-Democrat.” Liberals tend to conflate these labels. <g>

“Whether all of this would have happened without Mark Felt’s actions will always be open to question. What is beyond a doubt to students of the affair is that his tips to investigative reporters Carl Bernstein and Robert Woodward -- particularly urging them to ‘follow the money,’ Nixon campaign money, to keep on track -- were invaluable in leading to the unmasking of the Nixon presidential campaign’s effort to booby-trap the 1972 American elections.”

[RWC] BS, unless you believe everyone in the FBI would have taken part in a conspiracy to cover up Watergate. As noted elsewhere in this critique, Mr. Felt never gave the system a chance to work before he started leaking.

“That an unrevealed Mr. Felt carried the name ‘Deep Throat,’ an uncomplimentary reference to the star of a pornographic movie, and that some former members of the Nixon White House are berating him even today, gives some idea of the controversy that continues to swirl around what he did 30 years ago.

“Internal government leakers’ actions usually have several well-springs. The most honorable of them, which was clearly one driving Mr. Felt, is that something very bad is going on or is going to happen, the government is covering it up, and the American people need to know about it. The presumption of the leaker is that public knowledge of the matter will either make it come out right, or, at least, casting sunshine on it will give all interested parties the facts necessary for a wise decision.”

[RWC] What evidence does the PG have that Mr. Felt acted for honorable purposes? I’m not saying he didn’t; I just haven’t seen the PG present evidence to support its claim.

Let’s look at the evidence we have so far from Bob Woodward himself.²

· Long before the Watergate break-in, Felt let it be known he believed the Nixon team was comparable to Nazis.

· Before Watergate, Felt leaked info to Woodward about a bribe (unrelated to Watergate) received by VP Spiro Agnew.

· After J. Edgar Hoover died, Felt was passed over for FBI Director when President Nixon nominated L. Patrick Gray.

· Before Watergate, Felt leaked info to Woodward about the assassination attempt on Alabama Gov. George Wallace.

As you can see, Mr. Felt had become a serial leaker and expressed disdain for the Nixon administration before Watergate.

Mr. Felt was also convicted in 1980 of authorizing illegal break-ins and wiretaps while trying to locate Weather Underground fugitives in the early 1970s.

These are not honorable actions.

I don’t know Mr. Felt’s Watergate motivations, but given the above I believe it would be jumping to a conclusion to assume any of them were honorable.

“Sometimes there are personal elements. Mr. Felt was unhappy at Mr. Nixon’s having brought in an outsider to head the FBI instead of giving him the job. He also clearly resented for professional reasons the White House’s efforts to block the FBI investigation of the Watergate case.”

[RWC] From Woodward’s own timeline we know Mr. Felt started leaking Watergate info within two days of the break-in. White House efforts to stall the FBI investigation had not begun. As we know, the White House efforts had no impact on the FBI investigation anyway.

I also have to question the “professional reasons” argument. As I noted above, Mr. Felt had no “professional” problems when it came to his authorizing illegal break-ins and wiretaps himself.

“The other heroes of the Watergate affair are, first of all, the Washington Post -- the two reporters, editor Ben Bradlee and publisher Katharine Graham, who withstood enormous White House pressure to back off the story. Mr. Woodward, Mr. Bernstein and Mr. Bradlee stayed true to their source to the end. If he hadn’t decided to fess up at age 91, they would have protected their source until his death.”

[RWC] For the most part, I have no criticism for the reporters of the Watergate story. Regardless of their motives, which I don’t know, they did their job, though I don’t know if doing your job as a reporter qualifies you for hero status. To qualify as a hero, I believe you need to risk something of great value to you. I don’t know what the reporters’ risked, other than being wrong.

The editorial ignores the fact that keeping the identity of Deep Throat secret was in the financial best interest of Bernstein, Woodward, and The Post. If the identity of Deep Throat had been revealed long ago, the story would have ended long ago.

It’s also likely Woodward, et al realized the general public might not be too happy to learn the nation’s #2 cop was a leaker and had been before Watergate. An unpopular Deep Throat would have hurt the myth – and the economic success – of Bernstein, Woodward, and The Post.

I don’t claim these were primary or secondary motivations, but they certainly are reasonable motivations to consider.

“If it were now, and the White House of George W. Bush, there is reason to believe from the case of Valerie Plame, the CIA operative apparently ‘outed’ to reporters by Bush administration officials, that Mr. Woodward and Mr. Bernstein would be headed to jail rather than to success and stardom.”

[RWC] More BS. What the PG is talking about is that some reporters who allegedly had knowledge of the Plame “outing” refused to cooperate in the FBI’s investigation. A federal judge charged some reporters with contempt of court and they did some jail time. The Bush administration didn’t charge the reporters with contempt of court, a federal judge did. The courts have ruled for decades that reporters have no constitutional right to refuse to identify their sources.

Here’s what’s ridiculous about this PG position. Theoretically, Plame’s identity was given to reporters. Therefore, the only people who testify about the alleged crime were the reporters and the leaker herself/himself. Unless the leaker left an incriminating trail, like e-mail or recorded conversations, or confessed, the only way the FBI could find out who provided the alleged leak was to question the reporters.

It’s easy to understand why the PG and other liberal organizations would take this position. As long as the FBI can’t conduct an effective investigation, the press can allege a cover-up, or at least foot dragging. When the FBI presses reporters – the only witnesses – to disclose their alleged sources, the press can (incorrectly) allege a violation of freedom of the press. This is a no-lose position for liberals.

“In any case, Mr. Felt did right. Mr. Nixon and his cohorts were playing a dirty game. He helped them get caught. Mr. Nixon left the presidency. The story came out right. Good for Mr. Felt. Good for America.”

[RWC] While Richard Nixon and those involved in the break-in and cover-up got what they deserved, the rest of the above sentence is partisan BS. If we can’t trust our highest law enforcement officials to follow the law themselves, it’s not “good for America.”

If you believe this fairy tale isn’t fueled by political partisanship, consider how the PG treated Linda Tripp. If you recall, Ms. Tripp presented the special prosecutor with conclusive evidence Bill Clinton lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

Below is a sampling of how the PG treated Linda Tripp in columns and editorials.

Tripp’s windfall / A famous tipster settles with the Pentagon; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; November 6, 2003.

Tripped up; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; January 29, 2001.

Tripp tripped up; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; December 23, 1999.

Linda Tripp gets A for audacity; Sally Kalson; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; September 29, 1999.

1. Deep Throat, Antihero; Timothy Noah; Slate; May 31, 2005.

2. How Mark Felt Became ‘Deep Throat’; Bob Woodward; The Washington Post; June 2, 2005.