U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2019, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
38,009 posts, read 17,809,587 times
Reputation: 17407

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post
I think Chuck Colson should have been in charge of Liddy and Hunt from the beginning, because he wasn't as much of a pushover as John Dean, Magruder or Erlichman. Concerning Colson, he was a tough guy and probably would be far less likely to give them any leeway or circum to any intimidation, and Liddy was a very intimidating guy. That was the problem, pressure from the bottom, pressure from the top, and the guys in the middle having to sort it out.
1) I think that there shouldn't have been a Liddy and a Hunt heading up black bag operations for the president.

2) I've read a great many books on Watergate and they were universal in characterizing Colson as the most zealous, the most gung ho of any of Nixon's staffers when it came to dirty tricks and clandestine operations. H.R. Haldeman described him as "the president's hit man." Colson is known to have been the one behind encouraging the hard hats to attack peace demonstrators, the keeper of the president's enemies list, the one who proposed firebombing the Brookings Institution as a cover for breaking in and stealing documents, the one who recruited Howard Hunt, and as one of my favorite tapes revealed, when Nixon was first informed about the the break in of Ellsberg's shrink's office, he says "That's Colson's thing, isn't it?"

This is your notion of who would have restrained Hunt and Liddy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2019, 10:17 PM
 
9,712 posts, read 3,283,234 times
Reputation: 4592
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post

Hellion, I think you should watch Danial Schorr's 1994 Watergate special, it has 5 parts and will help familiarize you with all the players, and has interviews of just about everyone involved thru the whole process. Schorr was on Nixon's enemy list, so keep that in mind about some of the conclusions drawn and his narration pieces, but the timeline and interviews make it valuable. Most of those guys are dead now, to have such candid interviews of them makes this kinda special. However, Daniel Schorr was kind of a wiesel, he used to work for CBS and while there, he did lots of Dan Rather trouble maker type stuff and they eventually fired him. I believe I read something about him stealing a story from Leslie Stahl that CBS had disapproved of and put a hold on, and he stole it from her files and aired it on another network or something. He was a turd but this is a pretty good documentary and probably the only quality work this guy ever did.

I have watched and read everything about Nixon and Watergate since the 70's. I stand my ground that Nixon crimes were NO different than other Presidents, Vice Presidents, and heads of the FBI and CIA. I know about the real U.S. history and makes me laugh how they still talk about Nixon and ignore over 200 years of Presidents who have done the same thing and worse.



What got Nixon was the cover-up and the tapes. Without the tapes that show Nixon knowing about the cover up all you have is allegations just like Reagan and HW Bush and the Iran Contra affair which was much larger than Watergate and they successfully covered it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 10:33 PM
 
Location: Iowa
2,690 posts, read 2,954,768 times
Reputation: 3290
Well, as per All The Presidents Men, Chuck Colson quote "When you got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow". I think Chuck might have paid more attention to how Liddy & Hunt carried out this operation, and provided more oversight. He could stand up to Liddy and rip him a new one, and may have been more interested in the details, and discovered some major flaws like using James McCord, and been able to pull the leash and retool the plan. Maybe it's just me, but I thought Chuck did a good job with the hard hat riot. Liddy was walking all over Magruder and Dean, they were intimidated by him and this made Liddy think he could do whatever he wanted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 12:11 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
38,009 posts, read 17,809,587 times
Reputation: 17407
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post
Well, as per All The Presidents Men, Chuck Colson quote "When you got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow". I think Chuck might have paid more attention to how Liddy & Hunt carried out this operation, and provided more oversight.
Given what we know of Colson, isn't the more likely scenario that with a free hand he would have pressed Hunt and Liddy to do even more dangerous, stupid things? He would have been encouraging manifestly inept black bag operatives to take greater risks.

Quote:
Maybe it's just me, but I thought Chuck did a good job with the hard hat riot
Really? My position would be that no president should be encouraging American citizens to attack other American citizens simply because they were exercising their protected right to protest. In that such an action is illegal, it is not possible for anyone to do a "good job" unless you feel like congratulating the criminal for a well executed crime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 01:28 PM
 
9,712 posts, read 3,283,234 times
Reputation: 4592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post



Really? My position would be that no president should be encouraging American citizens to attack other American citizens simply because they were exercising their protected right to protest. In that such an action is illegal, it is not possible for anyone to do a "good job" unless you feel like congratulating the criminal for a well executed crime.
add your selective morals to a long list of things Presidents and our government shouldn't do not only here but to other countries like our illegal bombings, wars and occupations and our government spying and listening to our phone conversations and going to other countries for regime changes, do people in other countries count ?.....isn't that illegal under your standards? What the FBI under Hoover did with the blessing of every American President above him was legal also?


What the FBI did to MLK and the Civil Rights leaders and Communist members in the USA with the blessing of many Presidents including JFK and LBJ and RFK, the attorney general knew about it. Funny, how "historians" crucified Nixon but give other Presidents a pass.



Don't get me started on the Iran Contra affair. That was bigger than Watergate. Civilians actually died at a large scale.

Again, Nixon's "crimes" were minor compared to other Presidents but Nixon is the scapegoat to our corrupt and dysfunctional government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
38,009 posts, read 17,809,587 times
Reputation: 17407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
add your selective morals to a long list of things Presidents and our government shouldn't do not only here but to other countries like our illegal bombings, wars and occupations and our government spying and listening to our phone conversations and going to other countries for regime changes, do people in other countries count ?.....isn't that illegal under your standards? What the FBI under Hoover did with the blessing of every American President above him was legal also?


What the FBI did to MLK and the Civil Rights leaders and Communist members in the USA with the blessing of many Presidents including JFK and LBJ and RFK, the attorney general knew about it. Funny, how "historians" crucified Nixon but give other Presidents a pass.



Don't get me started on the Iran Contra affair. That was bigger than Watergate. Civilians actually died at a large scale.

Again, Nixon's "crimes" were minor compared to other Presidents but Nixon is the scapegoat to our corrupt and dysfunctional government.
Your defense of a criminal is....other criminals did stuff and got away with it. Should you be charged with a crime someday, I hope that you go with that defense so that you may learn first hand just how effective it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 02:02 PM
 
8,597 posts, read 8,807,556 times
Reputation: 26798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Given what we know of Colson, isn't the more likely scenario that with a free hand he would have pressed Hunt and Liddy to do even more dangerous, stupid things? He would have been encouraging manifestly inept black bag operatives to take greater risks.



Really? My position would be that no president should be encouraging American citizens to attack other American citizens simply because they were exercising their protected right to protest. In that such an action is illegal, it is not possible for anyone to do a "good job" unless you feel like congratulating the criminal for a well executed crime.
You and Mofford are discussing the infamous "Hard Hat Riot" of 1971. For the unknowing, this occurred in New York City not long after Nixon launched an invasion of Cambodia and after the Ohio National Guard shot and killed four Kent State University students. A group of students gathered in downtown Manhattan to protest the war. A large group of construction workers attacked these demonstrators who were behaving in an entirely nonviolent manner. Many of the construction workers were carrying iron rebar or their construction helmets and used these as weapons against the protesters. There were numerous injuries as a result of what happened. Subsequently, it was learned that Charles Colson and others in the White House had spoken to the head of construction worker's union in New York and persuaded him to instigate this action with his union members. It is true that many people were put off by the rhetoric of the anti-war movement. However, these people were behaving entirely within the law that day when the "Hard Hat Riot" took place. Its very troubling to see anyone defending Colson's actions, the action's of the head of the construction union, or the construction workers who attacked peaceful people with iron bars. This kind of thing is what happens in a fascist police state. It shouldn't happen in a country with a First Amendment that guarantees the right to peacefully assemble to protest to redress grievances. I will note that, once again, Mofford, seems to take a certain delight in what happened. Mofford has an expressed an appreciation in some of his other posts for dictators like Francisco Franco. This kind of thing seems up his alley.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
add your selective morals to a long list of things Presidents and our government shouldn't do not only here but to other countries like our illegal bombings, wars and occupations and our government spying and listening to our phone conversations and going to other countries for regime changes, do people in other countries count ?.....isn't that illegal under your standards? What the FBI under Hoover did with the blessing of every American President above him was legal also?


What the FBI did to MLK and the Civil Rights leaders and Communist members in the USA with the blessing of many Presidents including JFK and LBJ and RFK, the attorney general knew about it. Funny, how "historians" crucified Nixon but give other Presidents a pass.



Don't get me started on the Iran Contra affair. That was bigger than Watergate. Civilians actually died at a large scale.

Again, Nixon's "crimes" were minor compared to other Presidents but Nixon is the scapegoat to our corrupt and dysfunctional government.
The less said the better here. The OP posted about a Nixon biography. This poster wants to talk about just about anything, but Nixon.
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Your defense of a criminal is....other criminals did stuff and got away with it. Should you be charged with a crime someday, I hope that you go with that defense so that you may learn first hand just how effective it is.
One of the more powerful arguments made when the House Judiciary Committee voted articles of impeachment against Nixon in 1974 was made by a democrat congressman from Texas named Flowers. Flowers was reluctant initially to vote to impeach Nixon because of this argument that he supposedly wasn't doing anything other presidents hadn't done. Flowers said he had searched his soul and he wondered if America had really reached such a low position that we couldn't condemn criminal conduct as being criminal. Whatever has transpired in the past, you can't accept the notion that you don't have a right to pursue something that is blatantly criminal when its right in front of you. Sometimes, there is an element of picking and choosing involved, but Nixon's acts were so blatantly illegal and the proof was so clear that they had to be pursued unless America was to totally abandon the idea that it is a country of laws.

Last edited by markg91359; 01-10-2019 at 02:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 04:29 PM
 
9,712 posts, read 3,283,234 times
Reputation: 4592
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post


The less said the better here. The OP posted about a Nixon biography. This poster wants to talk about just about anything, but Nixon.
.


.

Jesus dude, now you want to control free speech now? It's fair game to compare Nixon's actions to other Presidents. It's part of the topic. Everything I brought up is about the double standard and hypocrisy how they judge Nixon's actions compared to other Presidents.....that is fair game and part of any conversation when We judge Nixon as a President.

When we judge Presidents we always compare their actions to other Presidents. you don't, you want to split hairs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 04:39 PM
 
9,712 posts, read 3,283,234 times
Reputation: 4592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Your defense of a criminal is....other criminals did stuff and got away with it. Should you be charged with a crime someday, I hope that you go with that defense so that you may learn first hand just how effective it is.

I don't know about using the word "criminal" on Nixon....He was never charged or convicted in court and the definition of a criminal is being CONVICTED of a crime.

I'm not debating or making an argument for Nixon as a private citizen. I'm making an argument of Nixon as a President which fall under a different standard and are given much lead way compare to a private citizen. That's why I keep making the argument that Nixon's "crimes" were no different than other Presidents that you keep ignoring.

If we treat every President as a private citizen, all of them would be charged with a crime. From Lincoln, FDR, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton, W Bush and Obama, and the list is long.....if you don't get my argument then I have wasted my time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2019, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Iowa
2,690 posts, read 2,954,768 times
Reputation: 3290
The hard hat riot was a protest of the protesters, or a counter protest if you prefer. When you look at all the destruction that has been done by leftist protesters over the years, the hard hat riot might have been about 5 minutes of work for the average Dem mob. The silent majority stopped being silent for a few days. It was fun, and after the 60's, it has been very rare to see any right wing mob engaging in any violence or property destruction in America, as a group action.

You left out all the fun parts, MarkG. When they started beating up the hippie protesters on Wall Street, some investment banker lawyer guys came out to help them, and the hard hats beat them up too. The cops just stood around and watched as the whole thing played out. Did you know the The Kent State mob reformed after being shot at, and no sooner than it took to cart off the bodies, they were pushing for more. They had to be begged by the dean of the school to disband. The hard hats never killed anyone, after they took out the wall street lawyers with steel rebar, they went after more hippies. The stormed onto a college campus and burst into a classroom, identified the students with long hair, and beat up a few of them. Then they took over a post office and raised an American flag. They did not burn down the post office, just occupied it for a few hours. They had a parade a few days later and that was pretty much it for any serious counter protest of the protesters.

Chuck Colson reached out to the local AFL/CIO leader, Mr Meany (that was his real name, lol) to organize the construction workers, or hard hats, as they were known. I am so proud of Chuck for his effort, he should have a statue in central park, or a song written about him and the hard hat riot, like CSNY did for the Kent State dummies who should have went home and stopped vandalizing the college and the town of Kent, before the national guard had to move in and shoot them down to restore order.

Last edited by mofford; 01-10-2019 at 05:45 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top