Deep Throat

hedo · June 1, 2005, 10:56am

Why didn’t the FBI report previous political wiretaps made on behalf of sitting presidents and candidates?

Hoover knew about them but would rather hold this over a president then expose it. With Hoover gone and a power struggle forming, Deep Throat, tried to use the information to punish the person he thought who wronged him…Nixon.

The right thing would have been to resign if he didn’t agree with what was happening. Go to your superior and report it. Being annonymous, in that situation ,is cowardly. Justified by some but cowardly regardless. In later years Deep Throat had no issue breaking the law when it suited him to do so.

When we started admiring guys like him is when we really started slipping as a nation in my opinion. The elitists start to view courage and honor as something to be mocked rather then preserved.

If you could honestly say that you would rather have Deep Throat watching your back rather then Liddy or North…then have at it. If Deep Throat’s crimes are excusable then Liddy and North should be held in the same light.

rainjack · June 1, 2005, 11:00am

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I love how you all make excuses for this but are ready to rape Mrs. Clinton about any issues of “conspiracy”. If Nixon was going against the rights of Americans in his actions, you all are complete hypocrites to uphold the idea of going along with it simply because you claim “loyalty”. With that in mind, no military personal should have been found guilty for any issues with Abu Gh’raib. Loyalty should have covered it up. That doesn’t mean Deep throat is without fault either. He was pardoned of his offenses, however, by President Reagan. [/quote]

I’m not making excuses for Nixon. He was guilty. My problem is with Deep Throat. Had he wanted to report the crime, there are avenues other than the WaPo.

He was a bitter little man that had no problem selling his loyalty for some press.

Elkhntr1 · June 1, 2005, 11:09am

[quote]rainjack wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
First of all, Liddy is a lunatic. He and Oliver North and their ilk are the kind of people who give conservatives a bad name. Now if you saw the president, or even a lesser official, grossly abusing his power and wrecking the integrity of the office (not to mention stifling political opposition), you wouldn’t expose him? As for anonymity, it looks cowardly, but there are people who could have ruined the rest of his life (going on 32 years now) for what he did, so it’s pretty understandable.

Liddy - despite your personal opinion of him, would not rat on his boss. He went to jail rather than rat out his boss. That’s hardcore loyalty. And that’s highly admirable in my book.

North isn’t even part of this discussion, but I’m more than proud to have a man of his character on my side.[/quote]

So rainman, if someone killed a loved one of yours and someone else knew who did it, but wouldn’t squeal out of “loyalty” would you herald that non squealer as an admirable loyal dude?

Your idea of not ratting out a boss sounds like a prison yard mentality to me. What about the right thing someone lied, your boss lied, look in your Bible rainman read the Holy ten commandments “Thou shalt not lie,” Covering up for your boss for an illegal act is tantamount to lying. How convienent morality is in your world rainman just fit it to whatever the need is at the time. Nice!

rainjack · June 1, 2005, 11:11am

[quote]Chris Mangano wrote:
So let’s see. A friend of yours kills someone and tells you about it. The cops knock on your door to ask you about it, but since you are “loyal” you don’t “rat” on your friend? I realize Nixon didn’t kill anyone, but the fact remains a crime is a crime. Just cause you don’t rat on someone who committed a crime doesn’t mean your loyal.

If someone accuses my friend of committing a crime, I stand by him because I am loyal. If said friend tells me he did it, I know longer stand by him because I have morals and my friend is now a criminal. There is a difference between morality and loyalty, and I think you are missing it.
[/quote]

This isn’t exactly the same as our scenario, but it touches on the same theme:

Two weeks ago one of my clients knelt down behind his storage shed, placed his mouth over the barrel of a .12 gauge, and blew his brains out. Why?

He had 11 felony counts of cattle rustling against him. He was part of a ring. The level of his involvement in this ring will never be known. However, the Texas Rangers were leaning on him really hard to flip on the other members of the ring. Rather than rat them out - he killed himself.

I don’t agree with what he did. I don’t mean to condone cattle theft. My point is simply this: Around here you don’t rat. Your name is worth more than anything, and a rat smears his name.

Elkhntr1 · June 1, 2005, 11:16am

And no one is here is heralding him as a hero. You wanna call him a rat, fine! It doesn’t change the fact that wrongdoing was exposed!

elevationgain · June 1, 2005, 11:21am

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
I should have known RJ would have chimed in as so. I agree, but didn’t expect it to be on the board yet.

Since when are snitches hailed as heros? Especially when their motive was revenge and not ‘justice.’

I understand the Pres. being held to a higher standard, but I would venture to say that each and every tenure has had at least as significant cover-up or transgression. Wrong time–wrong crime I guess.[/quote]

Good Point

sasquatch · June 1, 2005, 11:22am

Elk

We are most definately on a slippery slope here, but my mentality goes to snitching for what. I know, I know, you aren’t suppose to be able to pick and choose morality, but maybe you can sometimes with regard to the severity of the crime and the intention of the snitcher.

From all accounts his reason for snitching was to get back at the Pres. for a perceived oversight about a job promotion. That is weak. He didn’t do it to save our country. He did it to be a little baby. That is no hero in my eyes.

sasquatch · June 1, 2005, 11:26am

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
And no one is here is heralding him as a hero. You wanna call him a rat, fine! It doesn’t change the fact that wrongdoing was exposed! [/quote]

How impossible would it be to be President of the country or most lasrge companies if this were the case everywhere.

There has to exist a certain level of loyalty and looking the other way for the President to get things done. Look at what we’ve since learned of many of our leaders and their actions while in office.

Sometimes it’s a dirty job and in that case give me all the G. Gordon’s and Olly’s that you got. They’ll walk the wall and watch your back!

rainjack · June 1, 2005, 11:27am

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
And no one is here is heralding him as a hero. You wanna call him a rat, fine! It doesn’t change the fact that wrongdoing was exposed! [/quote]

I was referring to his treatment by the press. They think he is a god.

Elkhntr1 · June 1, 2005, 11:31am

One more thing. I wonder how rainman and others in line with his thinking view that dogface who tapped the phone of good ol M. BJ Lewinsky? That’s snitching behavior acting like a friend to someone and secretly taping your phone calls.

Oh, but because it was the devil Clinton anything goes! They would like to give her the Congressional Medal of Honor for exposing the biggest danger to national security a blowjob in the oval office.

The hypocrisy of some of these guys is nauseating.

rainjack · June 1, 2005, 11:36am

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
So rainman, if someone killed a loved one of yours and someone else knew who did it, but wouldn’t squeal out of “loyalty” would you herald that non squealer as an admirable loyal dude?

Your idea of not ratting out a boss sounds like a prison yard mentality to me. What about the right thing someone lied, your boss lied, look in your Bible rainman read the Holy ten commandments “Thou shalt not lie,” Covering up for your boss for an illegal act is tantamount to lying. How convienent morality is in your world rainman just fit it to whatever the need is at the time. Nice!
[/quote]

It would be nice if you would apply your same logic to the Clinton debacle. But in your first post on this thread, you excuse away what Clinton did as a bj. He lied under oath, but that’s okay with you.

Fix your own hypocrisy before you start telling me to read the Ten Commandments.

sasquatch · June 1, 2005, 11:46am

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
One more thing. I wonder how rainman and others in line with his thinking view that dogface who tapped the phone of good ol M. BJ Lewinsky? That’s snitching behavior acting like a friend to someone and secretly taping your phone calls.

Oh, but because it was the devil Clinton anything goes! They would like to give her the Congressional Medal of Honor for exposing the biggest danger to national security a blowjob in the oval office.

The hypocrisy of some of these guys is nauseating. [/quote]

Stop assuming Elk.

I said it when I found out about it and would stand by it. That Trap bitch was as untrustworthy as she was ugly. I thought what she did was wrong on so many levels.

In my case it has nothing to do with Nixon being a Republican. It has to do with snitching.

rainjack · June 1, 2005, 11:50am

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
One more thing. I wonder how rainman and others in line with his thinking view that dogface who tapped the phone of good ol M. BJ Lewinsky? That’s snitching behavior acting like a friend to someone and secretly taping your phone calls.

Oh, but because it was the devil Clinton anything goes! They would like to give her the Congressional Medal of Honor for exposing the biggest danger to national security a blowjob in the oval office.

The hypocrisy of some of these guys is nauseating. [/quote]

Holy Crap, Elk - Could you build a bigger strawman?

No one has even metioned whats-her-name. And now you are trying to imply that I am a hypocrite because you think I might have supported her? Please show me where I have said anything wrt what’s-her-name.

hedo · June 1, 2005, 11:57am

Linda Tripp set Monica up on that phone call. She did it to get 15 mins. of fame. She is contemptable at best. She was villified in the msm by the way. Not glorified.

The two should be viewed in context. Deep Throat was the Deputy Director of the FBI, our Federal Law Enforcement Agency. Tripp a friend of someone who was doing the president.

Zap_Branigan · June 1, 2005, 12:08pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I gotta go with RJ on the loyalty thing. Deep Throat was no hero. It is not like Nixon was looting the treasury or murdering people. I do not believe Nixons crimes were large enough to justify the betrayal.

Nixon was actually a much better President than his image, but he was a scum bag.

It was the cover up that did him in, but every President covers up. It is a very bizarre chapter in history.

I love how you all make excuses for this but are ready to rape Mrs. Clinton about any issues of “conspiracy”. If Nixon was going against the rights of Americans in his actions, you all are complete hypocrites to uphold the idea of going along with it simply because you claim “loyalty”. With that in mind, no military personal should have been found guilty for any issues with Abu Gh’raib. Loyalty should have covered it up. That doesn’t mean Deep throat is without fault either. He was pardoned of his offenses, however, by President Reagan. [/quote]

I thought that Ken Starr overstepped his bounds going after Clinton. Even though Clinton was in the wrong, I thought it was mostly bullshit.

Hillary has been complicit in a number of coverups and is now a Senator. Nixon was forced out of office.

All that shows me is that when push comes to shove the Republican Party does the right thing with it’s scumbags when forced to and the Democrats don’t.

I make no excuses for Nixon’s behavior.
As I already said, Nixon was a scumbag.

Deep Throat’s disloyalty makes him a scumbag too. If he was a stand up guy he would have admitted who he was immediately and found a new line of work.

GDollars37 · June 1, 2005, 12:10pm

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Elkhntr1 wrote:
And no one is here is heralding him as a hero. You wanna call him a rat, fine! It doesn’t change the fact that wrongdoing was exposed!

I was referring to his treatment by the press. They think he is a god. [/quote]

That’s fair, and unsurprising. But it sounds like a lot of you guys are pretty big fans of Liddy and North, one of whom advocates shooting federal agents in the head, the other lied to Congress, which is wrong whether you’re a decorated Marine or a foreign traitor like George Galloway.

And it pains me to say it, but I don’t think Clinton’s crimes are on the same level of Nixon’s. There’s a big difference between perjuring yourself about infidelity, as wrong as that is, and siccing the power the government on your political enemies. The latter is a far worse abuse of power.

Zap_Branigan · June 1, 2005, 12:11pm

[quote]hedo wrote:
Linda Tripp set Monica up on that phone call. She did it to get 15 mins. of fame. She is contemptable at best. She was villified in the msm by the way. Not glorified.

The two should be viewed in context. Deep Throat was the Deputy Director of the FBI, our Federal Law Enforcement Agency. Tripp a friend of someone who was doing the president.[/quote]

Exactly. They are both assholes. Tripp has been dragged through the mud by the media and Deep Throat has been a hero to the media for the last 30 years.

ZEB · June 1, 2005, 12:11pm

The only real parallel that I draw from Nixon and Clinton is this: They both disgraced the office of the Presidencey!

Liberals love to give Clinton a free pass as they are in love with the notion of someone, anyone having sex in any way shape or form (you would almost think that they don’t get enough themselves ha ha).

No question Nixon’s actions were far worse than Clintons. However, a free pass for Willie should never be given!

GDollars37 · June 1, 2005, 12:13pm

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I gotta go with RJ on the loyalty thing. Deep Throat was no hero. It is not like Nixon was looting the treasury or murdering people. I do not believe Nixons crimes were large enough to justify the betrayal.

Nixon was actually a much better President than his image, but he was a scum bag.

It was the cover up that did him in, but every President covers up. It is a very bizarre chapter in history.

I love how you all make excuses for this but are ready to rape Mrs. Clinton about any issues of “conspiracy”. If Nixon was going against the rights of Americans in his actions, you all are complete hypocrites to uphold the idea of going along with it simply because you claim “loyalty”. With that in mind, no military personal should have been found guilty for any issues with Abu Gh’raib. Loyalty should have covered it up. That doesn’t mean Deep throat is without fault either. He was pardoned of his offenses, however, by President Reagan.

I thought that Ken Starr overstepped his bounds going after Clinton. Even though Clinton was in the wrong, I thought it was mostly bullshit.

Hillary has been complicit in a number of coverups and is now a Senator. Nixon was forced out of office.

All that shows me is that when push comes to shove the Republican Party does the right thing with it’s scumbags when forced to and the Democrats don’t.

[/quote]

Not so sure about that. Not to get the thread off track, but Tom DeLay is by most accounts a scum bag too, and Dick Cheney doesn’t have the best ethical record in the world. I don’t see either one of them being forced out of office anytime soon. Are the Democrats worse? Maybe. But the ideals of the 1994 revolution and the Contract with America seem to be drifting farther and farther away as Republicans become entrenched in power.

sasquatch · June 1, 2005, 12:18pm