[Welcome John W. Dean, and Host Rick Perlstein.] [ As a courtesy to our guests, please keep comments to the book. Please take other conversations to a previous thread. - bev]
Blind Ambition: The End of the Story
Blind Ambition is—if you haven’t read it already—a great book for any member of the Firedoglake community to read. The entire complex of events that ended up with the shorthand name “Watergate” is incredibly convoluted; think of the Plame affair, multiply it by twenty, and extend the drama over twenty-six months—or twenty-six years, because really, the story did not end with Richard Nixon’s resignation on August 8, 1974, and it hasn’t even ended yet, as John’s splendid afterward (which offers the most convincing explanation in print of what the Watergate burglars were looking for in DNC headquarters) makes perfectly clear. And Blind Ambition, John Dean’s memoir of his participation in the events, is the best single volume Watergate book, out of the literally hundreds of them, to get a full and three-dimensional understanding of the whole thing from start to finish, from the warped executive psychology that produced it (in one of the books funnier scenes young Dean is tasked with screening the avant-garde omnisexual drag queen extravaganza Tricia’s Wedding to see if a case can be made to clamp the filmmakers in leg irons, or something) to the most gripping mystery story history has ever given us.
I blurbed this fine new edition—said, “Amid the vast wasteland that is political autobiography, John Dean’s was always a thing apart: a literary accomplishment.” That is because the author, John Dean, managed to give a fully human rendering of of the main character, John Dean. He starts as a callow and brilliant young climber, Sammy Glick in Washington, ready to do whatever it takes to win the favor of his bosses. He becomes the Nixon White House’s Mr. Fixit, running a virtual law firm out of the West Wing dedicated to solving any problem the White House staff might face. And since many in the White House staff are given to crimes, things get thick pretty fast: “Jesus Christ, John!” White House black ops specialist Jack Caulfield shouts to him, in 1971, in one of the historical record’s more memorable lines. “You’ve got to help me. This guy Colson is crazy! He wants me to firebomb a goddam building, and I can’t do it.”
Two pages later he has not yet quite proven his mettle: someone else, Bud Krogh, gets chosen to command the White House’s infamous underground “Plumbers” unit. He explains apologetically to the apparently more capable Dean: “John, I guess there are some people around here who think you have some little old lady in you.” (Krogh, the devout Christian Scientists, doesn’t have any such qualms to speak of.)
John Dean wouldn’t let that happen again. When Plumbers get arrested breaking into Democratic National Headquarters, and public suspicion naturally falls on the White House, it becomes John Dean’s full-time job to avert investigators’ eyes from the Oval Office. The newly reelected president, in a press conference, announces his capable young deputy has been assigned to “get to the bottom” of whosoever might be responsible for carrying out and covering up the nefarious deed. And, of course, since that person, basically, is the person who gave him the assignment—the President of the United States—something plainly very tricky is going on. The 34-year-old’s actual role, which ends up finding him the most important man in the Administration, finding him shuttling in and out of the Oval Office more often than most cabinet members, is personally managing the effort to contain, not carry out, the investigation.
Very soon, though, our hero realizes the extraordinary position in which this places him. He gathers more and more information that incriminates high officials. He becomes the one person in the White House with the most intimate knowledge of the ins and outs of the cover-up. And that means that should he ever be called under oath before an investigating body, he’ll be faced with an unacceptable choice: he could tell the truth, thereby incriminating himself as an accessory to crimes. Or he could lie, committing the crime of perjury.
Then dark night of the soul becomes considerable darker when he realizes that this ends up putting him exactly where the cover-up’s three top conspirators, Bob Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, and the President, want him: as the patsy who can take the fall as the man responsible for the entire cover-up itself.
No spoilers. Like I said, it’s one of the most incredible stories ever told. Suffice it to say that the decision John Dean ends up making makes him perhaps the most famous celebrity in America, eligible, if memory serves, for a People magazine cover. It also makes him—and this is one more reason this book and his story is such an important one for FDL readers to assimilate—a pioneering victim of the Republicans’ nascent Karl Rove-style attack machine. The details are exceptionally foul; again, no spoilers. Okay, just one, because it’s a little bit personal. Last year I was invited to take part in an online exchange with John about my new book, Nixonland, and his new book, Conservatives Without Conscience, which argued that the modern Republican Party, following Watergate, had fallen prey to classic authoritarianism, of the sort seen in Stalin’s Russia and Hitler’s Germany. I disagreed, thinking this a little too much, but can certainly see where John W. Dean was coming from. As G. Gordon Liddy wrote in his own Watergate memoir, Will:
“I walked in and the door was shut behind me. When I looked at the figure sitting behind the desk I couldn’t believe my eyes…. I had been shut in the room alone with John Dean.
“I stood stock-still, trying to figure out this development. Here was the perfect opportunity to kill Dean. A pencil was lying on the desk. In a second I could drive it up through the underside of his jaw, through the soft-palate and deep into his brain. Had someone set it up? If so, why now? President was out of office. I had received no orders to kill Dean and certainly wouldn’t be presumed so irresponsible as to do so on my own initiative; his death might hurt, through reaction, the trial chances of Mitchell, Ehrlichman, Parkinson, and Mardian. I decided to consider that my being shut up alone in the room with Dean had just been an incredible error.”
Yes, if that had been my jaw, I might judge the political party that makes a G. Gordon Liddy into one of its most prominent radio spokesmen a little less generously, also.



166 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Welcome back to Firedoglake – an honor!
John, Welcome back to the Lake.
Rick, Thank you for Hosting today’s Book Salon.
Hi, everyone. Just checked Amazon, and this reviewer of John’s new edition says what I would say:
“Dean was the first major participant in Watergate to go to the prosecutors and testify about Watergate. He was hero to a few, vilified by many. The book reveals a character of great depth, complexity and reflection. The book serves not only as a fascinating chronicle of Watergate (with appearances by all the big characters in the Watergate drama, including Mark Felt, Assistant FBI Director “Deep Throat”), but also an astute psychological profile of a complex system, highlighting drives to power, ambition, recognition, delving into agonies of pain, paranoia, and an ultimate restructuring of an ethical sense.
“Dean’s Blind Ambition transcends the Watergate genre. Most of the early treatments by the primary characters are staggeringly self-serving. Dean’s more subtle reflections increase the general applicability of the book.”
First, let me say what a delight it is to be back visiting with the FDL community — assuming the snow has not crashed the East. While I am a regular reader of FDL, it is always a pleasure to interact. Some months ago, when Beverly Wright first suggested having Rick Perlstein host this session we found he was not available until now. I told her it was worth waiting, and those of you familiar with his work surely understand what I am talking about.
I have only one very minor point to make with Rick’s intro, and it is not related to Blind Ambition, so I will not dwell. I merely make it for the record. The authoritarianism I addressed in Conservatives Without Conscience is not the authoritarianism of the ilk of Stalin and Hitler. To the contrary, I make the point that it is not a modern fascism. The authoritarianism I addressed in that work is based on a half century of research by social science, and empirical testing. And this authoritarianism has certainly been on display in the unified conservative opposition to health care reform. In short, name any contemporary conservative leader, and you will find someone who has a classic authoritarian personality. But I do not want to revisit Conservatives Without Conscience or health care.
So allow me to open by saying I reissued Blind Ambition, which has been out of print over two decades, because I am surprised at how few people understand what happened during the Nixon presidency. Bush and Cheney pretended it never happened. This is the great value of Rick’s work as he has examines that history from a contemporary point of view.
So I will start responding to your questions and comments.
Mr. Dean: Welcome to The Lake. A great privilege to have you here. And (slightly o/t) thank you for the work you do with Ian Masters. Always very thought-provoking.
Thanks to both of you. Rick, I just finished Nixonland and I did not think ANYONE knew about the Minutemen sending threat notes to activists in Champaign-Urbana! (Except those of us who were there)
John, what is your take on the impact of the VVAW on the trickster?
Hi Rick and welcome back, Mr. Dean
So glad you updated your classic. Great read.
I second Raven’s question!
Mr. Dean: I’m trained as an accountant, not a lawyer. Accordingly, my grasp of these things is tenuous, at best. Bearing that in mind, I am given to understand that the IRS is going to become (in effect) the enforcement and collection apparatus for the health insurance industry (assuming these provisions go through as currently written). If this is true, then what do you make of this from a legal perspective? Sounds like lines are being crossed to me.
VVAW — Vietnam Vets Against the War, I assume — had more impact that many thought. My office was the collection point for intelligence about the anti-war movment, and Nixon wanted everything we could learn from the FBI, CIA, DIA, etc. and more. He was sure the Commies were behind the moverment, but we never found ANY intelligence that supported that fact. To the contrary, we found good Americans were exhausted by a war they did not believe in.
Thanks Rick !
Mr. Dean, it’s great having you here again. Many of us remember that Birthday you spent chatting with us, for hours on end.
I think Congress has the Constitutional power to direct IRS to be the collection point, and there is no indication post-Watergate that there has been misuse of IRS. I am not sure where else they might place this function.
Thanks for being here, John.
Rick, Nixonland was like a walk through my youth.
John, how much, if any, of a presence was Bush senior during this whole period? Why do you think he was made head of the RNC when he was?
John, what did the smear campaign against you in 1973 teach you that’s useful for understanding how the Republicans do business today?
With all the pathology attributed to Nixon, was there ever a time you felt any friendship with him? Did he have any real friends?
Great honor to have you both here today, and best wishes to you for the holidays.
Mr Dean, one memory I have from your testimony, about which much was made at the time, is the iconic image of your lovely wife Maureen sitting behind you expressionless throughout your long days of hearings. Was this a conscious decision on your part to have her there on your behalf, and have you any reaction to the subsequent use (and misuse) of this insulating technique on the part of others at hearings (e.g., Sam Alito).
John, thanks for returning with the updated version of your book.
I was struck by this from the “New Afterward” under the heading “Reasons for the Watergate Cover-up: More Stupidity, Including My Own”:
This section made me think a great deal about the positions of WH Counsel, both in your day and since.
Since your time as WHC, we’ve seen Alberto Gonzales in that post, and also seen the return of your deputy, Fred Fielding — not only as Reagan’s WHC but also under Bush 43 (following Alberto Gonzales and Harriet Miers). What went through your mind when Fred returned to the WH in 2007?
It was truly an epic book salon chat.
That was when we were dealing with Bush and Cheney, which was reason for us all to be deeply concerned. It is unfortunately that the Obama Administration has not repudiated more of their legacy, but I remain hopeful. We have a very good president, with the potential for greatness. He is still learning. The job is far more difficult than anyone can understand unless you have seen it from the inside. More importantly, the Republicans are very good at making the job even more difficult for a Democratic president. While Republicans are not good at governing, they are very good at preventing others from doing so. For this reason I cut the Obama Admin. a lot of slack and encourage others to do likewise.
It was the best Book Salon, thanks to the guest answering so many questions and even coming back to answer questions hours after they’d been asked.
Welcome Mr. Dean. How did you personally benefit from turning in Nixon?
My sense about our government is that is no longer represents the people. Our election system is poisoned by big money, and lobbyists are in control of the agenda, our constitution has been rendered quaint and something to preserve under glass.
Some of its main provisions are ignored and abused such as the congress duty and responsibility to declare war, the right of habeus corpus and so on.
Who took this away from us? I can’t believe it was elected officials.
Who is doing this to our country?
Hi John, can I ask you a question about Kent State? Kainah posted a series of diaries on Daily Kos (crossposted elsewhere too) about Kent State, and in the first one she raised unanswered questions about your involvement in Kent State. I’ll include the whole section below, but I think basically she’s saying that you held the portfolio in your White House position of monitoring student unrest and antiwar activities, that there are rumors that you were in Ohio that weekend, and that later the Watergate hearings derailed House hearings into Kent State that you were to be a witness at. Can you speak to any of that? I also read an essay you wrote where you seem to say or imply that Nixon ordered the shootings, or generally okayed the use of guns on the students then. Maybe if you were in Ohio you would have been liasoning with OH governor James Rhodes and Nixon. Maybe you would have something to say about the FBI’s involvement. Just reading the above introduction, I note Colson about to firebomb a building, and that’s what gave the National Guard the entree to Kent State that weekend, when the ROTC building was burned. Thanks
Excerpt from your article:
Aloha,Mr. Dean… It a great honor to have you here at the Lake again…!
In regards to Shrub and Darth, shouldn’t we ‘close the loop’ and still impeach them…! The Brits’ seem to be pursuing a similar tact…!
John, I’m thrilled the book’s been reissued. Just want to thank you.
My view is that these administrations are all manchurian candidates. We get sold on a right wing agenda and then a progressive one and we discover that we are sliding inexorably toward fascism.. the rise and consolidation of the corporate state.
Bush senior, as head of the GOP, was present. He pops up throughout my phone logs from those days. While he outwardly “took the party line,” he also kept nudging Nixon to come clean. He was not aware of the seriousness of Nixon’s problems. Watching his son as president must of been difficult. We will never know if he tried to counter Cheney’s influence. By the standards of his son, Bush senior was not a bad president.
Nifty! Quick search reveals that eCAHNomics is a right-wing troll. JWD doesn’t need my help answering for himself, but it’s an important point to make: for a lot of people on the right, it’s unimaginable that John Dean did what he did partly out of conscience, or really for any other reason rather than self-enrichment and/or partisanship.
Extraordinary.
What GOP aspirants for the Presidency most remind you of the Richard Nixon you knew? It is okay if your answer is not male.
JWD wasn’t in the White House during Kent State.
hahahaha… Are you alleging a book deal or two?
As I explained in Blind Ambition, when I broke rank I hoped that Nixon and the others would do the right thing, and save his presidency. I did not set out to take on the POTUS. But when he sided with his top aides, the men I had worked for, Mitchell, Haldeman and Ehrlichman, I knew I was in for the fight of my life. Even today, I am not sure how it would have turned out if I had not testified that I suspected I had been taped by Nixon, which resulted in the Senate Watergate Committee asking other Nixon aides if that was possible. Alex Butterfield told them it was not merely possible, it was a fact. The rest, as they say, is history.
the very first FDL Book Salon showcased Rick Perlstein’s Before The Storm – with all kinds of luminaries (Atrios, TBogg, Jane, etc) in the comments – it was the original Algonquin Round Table thread – a seminal FDL moment
Rick Perlstein and John Dean – Welcome back !
I have a friend here, sir. And I am going to buy the book. But this friend seems to think that Nixon was not aware of the plan to breakin before it occured. I see where it was mentioned earlier about the plumbers were coordinated from the Whitehouse. But Nixon know about the plan?
Welcome back, Mr Dean. Guess I’m gonna have 2 copies of Blind Ambition on my bookshelf.
I know that’s a joke, right??
An ad hominem jab at eCAHN, on this site??
We have a very good president, with the potential for greatness. He is still learning. The job is far more difficult than anyone can understand unless you have seen it from the inside. More importantly, the Republicans are very good at making the job even more difficult for a Democratic president. While Republicans are not good at governing, they are very good a prevent others from doing so. For this reason I cut the Obama Admin. a lot of slack and encourage others to do likewise.
Given the larger decisions made thus far – $Trillions to the financial sector, HCR that appears to be an insurance industry bailout, the Afghan escalation, etc., how much slack do you think we should give the President, and for how long? I would like to remain hopeful, and (obviously) he’s a damn sight better than what we suffered through for the past eight years. However, I am concerned that these decisions are creating a mood in the country that does not portend well for progressives in general, and the Democratic party in particular. Comments?
Just did more research, and I apologize to eCAHNomics for calling him a right-wing troll.
We’ll see how much slack he should be given if he goes along with Conrad and others who are pushing for a “commission” to examine the future of Social Security.
Actually, contemporary conservatives play much dirtier than Nixon’s apologist who went after me during Watergate. In days past the intellectual dishonesty was not as bad as it has become in recent years. For example, when Liddy first attacked me in his bio Will, he actually was trying to tell the truth as he recalled it. (He wrote so many years after the fact, however, much of his info was wrong.) In recent years he simply makes up stuff, and claims it to be fact. He is typical of modern conservatives. They just make it up.
So, without spoiling too much of your new chapter, what do you think of the theory that Larry O’Brien’s office was targeted because of his relationship to Howard Hughes, and through Hughes to Donald Nixon?
I was thinking about the smear that you testified because you were afraid to go to prison because…
“Her…” Rick… Mahalo…!
Should have been my first clue; most ‘winger trolls are boys.
Welcome Rick and Mr. Dean
Since Rick brought up Plame, Mr Dean, I was wondering what you thought about the role of Emmet Flood in the Plame coverup. Along with Terry O’Donnell, he represented Cheney during the first parts of the investigation, and attended his interview with Fitzgerald. At precisely the point when it became clear that Fitzgerald had the goods on Cheney during the trial, the White House hired him into the WHCO office. Many of the things on which Flood took the lead role from there on out–including the stalling of the destroyed emails from the cover-up period and the refusal to turn over the testimony to Congress–were pretty clearly tied to covering up Cheney’s role in ordering Plame’s outing. He also appears to have been involved in the negotiations over whether or not Libby would get a full pardon.
What do you make of the fact that the WH basically hired Dick Cheney’s defense lawyer to manage the cover-up?
You are right on the money — literally. Money has always had a negative influence on politics, but it has, from time to time during our history, been controlled. In recent years (since Reagan) it has again been out of control. Until average Americans become so disgusted that they force a change in the system, money is going to corrupt the process.
Amazing how Huges is intertwined in so many things of the time. He and Watergate was all anybody talked about.
Oops, I don’t want you to reveal “the spoiler”. My guess is it’s in the book?
First, praise for your last book, it was wonderful. Gripping opening and very readable. I especially liked your use of Bob Altemeyer’s research on Right Wing Authoritarians very useful to my understanding and fighting of right-wing talk radio hosts and their audience.
One class of real people currently in the conservative movement that I’m also interested in combating are the front groups and conservative think tanks. If you were in charge of combating them, minimizing their influence or putting them out of business what would your strategy be?
Spocko
Wanted to give folks the opportunity to see John Dean’s earlier salons with us:
Intro – Conservatives without Conscience which is an introductory post with Glenn Greenwald on 27 August 2006.
Conservatives without Conscience with John Dean and Glenn Greenwald on 3 September 2006.
Broken Government 14 October 2007 with John Dean and host Elaine Cassel.
And how would you force that change in the system?
Mr Dean,
It feels to me and many others that we passed a point or no return on corruption, just as the accumulation of new executive powers, we can’t put the genie back in the box.
American really have to think and act outside the box because all means to be represented have been closed off.
Just shows how inadequate a “quick search” is.
Thanks for this book salon, Rick, and welcome to FDL, Mr. Dean
I read the original version of the book years and years ago, but now as a pastor, when I got this updated edition, this little episode caught my eye which took place shortly after you began serving your sentence at Holabird:
Not exactly Norman Rockwell.
How are you spending *this* Christmas Eve?
Thank you for being here. Do you give any credence to the idea that one of the reasons Bush urged Nixon to come clean was to help obscure the CIA role in the affair?
I think the problem runs far deeper than the influence of money over / in government. Our problem has been the rise of the national security state and the intelligence community to dominate both foreign and domestic affairs and operating in secret.
Who are they serving? Who are they answerable to? And who sanctioned them to do all these “operations” such as assassinate and so forth? They have infiltrated the press, the media and are controlling the message and act like a shadow government with only token oversight which has been completely ineffectual – witness the torture discovered when it leaked out.
Nixon was, in my personal experience, a pleasant man to work for. The Nixon I dealt with was not the mean-spirited, profane, and generally unattractive figure that has emerged on his tapes. When I did my book The Rehnquist Choice and listened to countless hours of Nixon tapes I discovered he was a very different person with different aides. For example, Chuck Colson and Bob Haldeman seem to bring out the worst in him.
As for Nixon friendships, his closest friend was Bebe Rebozo, with whom he would spend long hours. After Alex Butterfield left the White House and the Secret Service was placed under my office, I once asked the head of the presidential detail what the president and Bebe did when they took those long boat rides or walked miles on the beach. The answer surprised me. The agent said, remarkably, they seldom talked. They would sit together or walk together for hours without a word being said. I will let other analyze what this means.
Regarding right wing radio hosts going after people. G. Gordon Liddy is one and Glenn Beck is another. Beck has lost 81 advertisers following an advertiser alert program organized by Color of Change. Right now he is costing Fox money, a couple of million a month in lost revenue.
His first target was Color of Change co-founder Van Jones, it was no surprise to me that he went after him first. I’ve found when you cost corporations money they are not happy. Beck is now going after other members of the Obama administration. Not only is he dishonest with his comments I believe he goes into out right slander. I also believe he is inciting violence that will come to fruition at his events. Could you talk what you would do if you wanted to go after someone like Liddy or Beck for defamation or inciting violence?
I told you this was a real piece of literature!
My lawyers wanted her to accompany me, and she was curious about it all and found it interesting. She was not aware of the fact that the cameras were on her, as they were — and as the world discovered she is very photogenic. Given the public attention that followed, had she to do it again, she would not have joined me at the hearings. She did not want the public attention that followed.
Per Kainah excerpt at #23:
And per Mr. Dean at #6:
If John could please clarify this for us? At any time, in any capacity (at which time, in which capacity?) did he have Kent State on his plate? Thanks. I was a teenager then and Kent State still haunts me. If there were to be hearings that Mr. Dean was to be a witness at, maybe he never got a chance to tell what he knows.
I learned of the Kent State tragedy from the newspaper reports. I was working at the Justice Department at the time and had no role or involvement whatsoever. I was the Associate Deputy Attorney General for Legislation, with my focus being just that, although I did have some assignments for dealing with demonstratons in Washington. I wrote about this in Blind Ambition and exhausted my knowledge of the topic.
John, every time I’m in New York I spend a work-day watching your testimony, and after four sessions I’m only about half done. One of the things I find so stunning was that so many people followed a story of such extraordinary complexity. It reminds me of the image of people sitting for hours and hours listening to Lincoln and Douglas debate constitutional theory. Just amazing. What would it take to reach that level of civic engagement again?
Constitutionally, you can impeach after leaving office to prevent someone from holding office, but it is not going to happen. Indeed, it appears remote that we will ever learn what all Bush and Cheney were up to during their years in power. “State Secrets,” you know.
I appreciate your being here, Mr. Dean and appreciate your service and your continued involvement. We can learn from you.
Which office were you speaking of when you wrote this in #10 (not 6, sorry).
And is Kainah right about Kent State hearings that were postponed/never happened once Watergate hearings took the focus, and that you were scheduled to be a witness?
Also per your excerpt at #23, do you believe or know that Nixon bears responsibility for Kent State?
Greetings John, and thank you for spending some time here. I very much appreciate both this and all of your remarkable work over the years.
Back on June 20, 2008, during an appearance on Keith Olbermann’s show on MSNBC, you and Keith jointly propounded a theory that the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) was actually acceptable because it not only allowed for, but set up, a scheme for criminal prosecutions of the illegality comprising the gross wiretapping and electronic surveillance crimes of the Bush Administration. Have you rethought that?
Secondly, given where we are now, with the distressing determination of the Obama Administration to continue, and actually intellectually and legally refine, the tactics and positions of Bush/Cheney in relation to Article III review and accountability of what I described in the above paragraph, where do you think we stand now and what should the direction be of those seeking actual accountability and reckoning? If Obama is successful in shutting down al-Haramain and Jeppesen, do you think there is any real avenue available?
The authoritarians can’t help themselves, Rick. Their questions reveal their thinking. But this is a good site for them to troll for they might learn something by accident.
As to “State Secrets,” I’d like to know how and wnen we can access the information surrounding the tragic events of 9/11.
I think that there s much we don’t know.
Dick Cheney — who I suspect secretly aspires — would top any list. Without question, Sarah Palin is a female Nixon, although not as well informed or intellectually disciplined.
The WH (incompetently) ignored warnings that stated, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside US.” A short time later, 19 religious fanatics hijacked commercial airplanes and crashed them into buildings. Not much else to know.
I would say that what we have now is a looters’ state and that its imperial wars and national security apparatus are about distraction and control, and of course further means to facilitate the looting.
I believe the phrase you are looking for is “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
One of the reasons I believe the Watergate hearings were as compelling as they were is that staff attorneys conducted a great deal of questioning, rather than each committee member taking 15 minutes to speechify. That is, the committee members were more interested in doing their work than in looking good for the press.
Civic engagement is much more likely when civic leaders act like they are working in the public’s interest.
(The exception, of course, is when the civic leaders act in a manner so contrary to the public interest that the public rises up in anger against them — but I assume that you were not talking about revolutions and coups in your question.)
I’ll fall on my sword again here regarding eCAHN… I mistakenly accused a valued member of this community of being a troll. It was my paranoia! Right-wingers are still out to get this great man for his apostasy from party loyalty.
I do not believe anyone in the Nixon White House knew that Liddy was planning to break in the Watergate. Nor is there evidence Nixon knew before I told him about the Plumbers break-in. But in the new material in Blind Ambition, based on tapes and documents, it is clear than Nixon’s desire for information about the Democrats resulted the break-in. In short, he was the catalyst.
Mr. Dean — It seems that Cheney, Rumsfeld, etal. learned a critical lesson from Watergate that the rest of the nation either missed or has forgotten: When you directly subvert the Constitution, contrary to your oath of office, never leave any fingerprints on the dead body.
Would you agree that the outcome of Scooter Libby’s trial could have ended in a much wider investigation, and prosecutions like Watergate that could have taken down the *administration, especially Karl Rove’s role in the Valerie Plame/CIA betrayal?
* I always said that Dick Cheney as V.P. was George Bush’s anti-impeachment wild card.
This is a great point I hadn’t thought of in my own research on the Ervin Committee hearings and the public’s response to them.
It is my belief that the money thing is a distraction.
Money is what gets the lower level managers, the people who run corporations to keep the machine going. Some have amazed huge fortunes which can’t possibly be spent. The corporatists are on a opulence orgy, but the power is about POWER and control of nations. It’s an agenda of empire where some cabal get nations to do their bidding and they do it by infiltrating government, bribery and use of black ops run by the intelligence community.
Welcome, Mr. Dean! Thank you for returning, i loved the chat you had with us on your birthday.
Have you read Family of Secrets, the Bush Dynasty, by Russ Baker? He says everyone was played by the CIA to get Nixon out of office, and eventually 41 into office. What do you think about that?
Thank you….we really can get over it…..;)
There was nobody in the entire Bush/Cheney administration who will tell us what the hell was going on? (other than Scott McClellan)
It was, nonetheless, a when did you stop beating your wife question — and the type of question I get from authoritarians. But I considered it a fair question, and answered it accordingly.
I appreciate the fact that Mr Dean came clean. I am concerned that, like so many other intelligent people, they fail to understand what they were/are doing and support some bizarre ideologies.
I am curious how intelligence can be manifest in a right wing ideology – it defies rational thought.
It doesn’t work. Sam Dash for years thought this the case, but before he passed on he too had changed his mind.
The biggest threat to this nation is the CIA and the national security apparatus.
I’m sure she’ll be pleased to hear it.
Mr. Dean:
I have not read your books, but I remember watching your testimony live as a young teenaged kid.
While this veers off-topic a bit (how it doesn’t, I’ll explain below), the last couple days, we here at the Lake and Emptywheel’s place have been kicking around the hypothesis that what we are really seeing is the emergence of a neo-feudal system in which corporations and their executives constitute the new class of lords and nobles, and those who aren’t, their serfs.
The Halliburtons and Blackwaters, in effect, supplant the militaries of states and do so in service to the highest bidder. The flood of corporate money in politics makes politicians and governments subordinate to the corporate people writing the checks.
And, for a real life example, just consider that the heads of a couple of the major investment banks have blown off meeting with Obama twice in the last couple months. This, first when Obama went to the NYSE to speak about imposing more regulation and, last Monday, when he had a bunch of the heads of banks to the WH to listen to him chewing them out. (Their excuse last week was that fog grounded their planes; I didn’t know the trains didn’t run in fog….)
What this comes around to is this: is democracy (or a republican form of government) salvageable? You say earlier that it will be if enough people get mad enough. I counter by noting first that the anti-terror statutes seem crafted to neuter just that kind of popular organization and second that the explicit manipulation – of economic and job-related situations – that string ordinary people along by keeping them just short of the point of doing something.
Care to comment?
I agree with you about Cheney! I can see a deadlocked and demoralized GOP convention turning to him in a heartbeat (heh) in 2012. Clearly his adoring family has been unable to keep him away from FOX cameras since his retirement, although any loving family would do so given how deranged he sounds. Therefore, I don’t expect they’d be able to make a health-based argument for him to stay away from the nomination.
Cheney would likely run a McLean-front-porch campaign after the convention anyway, with cosseted appearances on the Sunday shows and 24/7 on FOX.
Sounds kind of like “Who will rid me of this meddlesome DNC?”
Dan Schorr has never given me his source for that bogus story….
So… Do we chalk ya up for the ‘Qualified’ or ‘Unqualified’ Barbour question…? ;-)
My analogy was that they were strip-mining America. Yours works just as well.
So, in a sentence, the break in was not the result of Nixon saying “break in” or “get me this information by whatever means you need”, but rather was put in motion by underlings who knew Nixon’s desire for more information and undertook to get it for him on pretty much their own initiative?
Or, in shorter terms, the underlings were sucking up to the boss by putting under the tree the Christmas present he so desired but knew was unaffordable (so he didn’t ask for), in order to advance themselves?
Intersting. I have not looked at this situation in years. Hopefully, history will give us the true facts.
good critique.
Capital won… labor lost… they went for slaves offshore and now it’s time to go for them here…
There’s a certain high-level former WH staffer and current FOX commentator who specializes in that kind of ‘smear’ although with more and more openly out folks, it works less and less well nowadays. It’s been Rove’s M.O. for years, though.
Would just like to chime in that “Blind Ambition” was my main source for a high school term paper, I think in the 10th grade or thereabouts, in American history, which focused mainly on John Dean’s role in Watergate. I actually had some difficulty drawing on other sources so that the paper wouldn’t be wholly based on one book. The book was a good choice and I remember the project to this day, I guess about thirty years later, as an excellent learning experience at that young age. Looking forward to the new edition and re-living the experience.
John, given the experiences you recount in this book, what advice would you give a young person in law school who is interested in government service?
A. Run away, as fast as you can!
B. Be very, very careful about who you work for.
C. Make sure you have a fallback job, just in case . . .
D. Don’t let stories like mine turn you off.
E. Other: ________________________
A followup, along the same lines: For a new lawyer, what entry-level positions offer the best opportunities to “make a difference”?
Looking back on the Nixon era, there are heroes that stand out in sharp relief to those days — yourself, Ben Bradley & Katherine Graham, Daniel Ellsberg, Walter Cronkite and others.
In today’s political and national affairs media landscape — from Joe Lieberman to Rupert Murdoch, who do you consider to be the heroes of our time?
I just got here. John Dean. Little Old Lady. Okay, I am laughing out loud, literally. Bravest and most principled of (cliche alert) whistle blowers. I’ll bet you’re fed up and rising with that term, but it’s convenient short-hand for descriping totally other than little old ladies (and I should know, because I am one!).
Our elites are too stupid, incompetent, and failed to enact vast conspiracies. They need a surveillance society not because they are so efficient but because they are so inefficient. Watergate is a good object lesson. It was not pulled off by genuises but by dopes. If they had been smarter they would have realized it wasn’t necessary or worth the bother.
I have talked with Altemeyer about this, and they are the Energizer Bunnies of politics. They best answer is to understand them, then you can appreicate why they behave as they do. The GOP reaction to health care reform is text book authoritarian behavior. Fortuanely, only about 25 percent of Americans are attracted to authoritarianism — not enough to control the system, but enough to make it difficult to govern.
Without the Mafia, thank you. :)
Never occurred to me. He would not become CIA director for many years, and to my knowledge the CIA had nothing to hide regarding Watergate. Indeed, they would help end the cover up when they refused to follow Nixon’s orders.
But, for those who’ve never been to a 7 fishes Christmas Eve dinner, they haven’t lived.
The intel services are not working for pols or government, but play that role.
This is true.
I think one reason that so many tuned in and followed my testimony is that the White House in attacking me had been building the conflict. Nixon made it Nixon vs Dean, and conflict attracts attention. Conflict, of course, is what sells news (and good story).
There’s a LOT more to know and I’d like John Dean to suggest how we can go about it. There’s those nit-picky little issues like scientists finding nanothermite in the dust of the WTC. Read up: ae911truth.org
John Dean – you are my hero and I cannot wait to get this book!
So you have no answer on how to change the system?
Nixon was responsible for an atmosphere in which a Kent State could occur…
Mele Kalikimaka…! *g*
Interestingly, this same question came up on July 23, 1973, when Senator Montoya asked Haldeman aide Gordon Strahan what advice he would give to young peopl thinking of going to Washington and entering government service. He said, “stay away.” There was uproarious laughter in the hearing room, and it became a common point of discussion for many months to come–lots of newspaper op-eds and such begging young people not to be as cynical as Gordon.
Barbara, this is a profound statement on the true definition of political courage.
Hey folks, by the way, if you watched the Ervin Hearings at the time I might want to interview you for my next book. Email me at nixonland@live.com.
Does anyone in the Obama administration seek your advice and counsel re what appear to be the egregious crimes and Constitution-trashing of Cheney and Bush?
What JWD is trying to say is, “buy Perlstein’s books. In bulk.”
Backatcha, John.
I love this question! John, so happy to see you again! As you are one of my heroes, I would be very interested in the answer to this. Thanks in advance.
We do need a law governing foreign intelligence surveillance, and FISA was an effort to address the problem. That Bush went around the law, and has gotten away with it, is the problem. So far, the Obama Admin has been a disappointment, as I mentioned in an earlier post, but I remain hopeful that by the time they end they will have corrected the situation.
As we come to the end of this Book Salon,
John, Thank you very much for stopping by the Lake and discussing your new book and Watergate.
Rick, Thank you very much for Hosting this great Book Salon.
Everyone, if you haven’t bought John’s book yet, here is a link.
Thanks all.
Mr. Dean, you seem upbeat about Obama. Yet he is finalizing a dreadful healthcare bill which represents a sellout to corporate interests much as he has sold out to financial ones in his economic policies. Those policies like his stances on Iraq and Afghanistan are continuations and in the case of Afghanistan an expansion of Bush wars. He has not closed Guantanamo as promised. The briefs his DOJ have been filing in Guantanamo related cases are even more cynically antithetical to the rule of law than anything Nixon came up with. And of course there are the state secrets ones as well. Obama recently gave himself a B+ on his first year. I would have given him an F, a very, very low F.
I would wonder with your own experience of the contempt for law under Nixon what your thoughts might be on Obama’s ongoing assaults on habeas and the Bill of Rights as well as his failure to investigate past criminality of the Bush era.
On a lighter note did you ever work out what “subsequent” meant?
Additional heroes from those days …. Archibald Cox, Elliott Richardson & William Ruckelshaus.
How do The People, from whose consent all power and authority is derived, stop the corporate oligarchy and D.C. political class from taking down the republic?
With Obama’s obsession for appearing centrist and sweeping past crimes under the rug, where are the Coxes, Richardsons & Ruckelshaus’s today?
Rummy (and no doubt Cheney) wanted to come back and defend Nixon during Watergate. That is an interesting counterfactual: Had they done so they might have pulled off the cover up — as they did when they were, in fact, in power.
Yes, don’t I know it. I am using Dr. Altemeyer book (and yours) to help me understand and then fight them. One of the best things about Altemeyer’s book is how he describes how RWAs can have very different ideas on two or more subjects and they don’t see the contradiction. He describes it as if they “never merged their files”– a metaphor that really works for me.
One of my projects was to set up one Right Wing Authoritarian against someone higher. I wanted to get a double high like Sean Hannity in trouble with a higher Authority -the Catholic Church. The current Church has long been against torture. Sean Hannity is the most prominent Catholic broadcasting today who is pro-torture.
I contacted the New York Archdioceses, a priest who wrote a book on torture, national security and religion and the National Religious Campaign against torture. Unfortunately none of them were willing to go on record actively challenge Hannity’s views even though they were are in direct contradiction with the rulings of the current Church.
What he/she said!!!
What is the basis for your optimism? I hope you are right….This has been a great discussion. Thanks
heh watched them but don’t remember anything about them. Musta been the smoke filled room.
Russ Baker is not intellectually honest. Rather he tosses anything he can find at others and cannot be trusted. He goes for the sensational rather than the truth.
The problem is that the corrective which would have had an impact and deterred others in the future – criminal prosecution – was one of the first things the Obama admin foreclosed. Not just by saying they wanted to look forward and not look back, but also because they plainly – deliberately, to all appearances – blew the statute of limitations on prosecutions on March 12, 2009 or thereabouts.
The wiretapping activities before March 12, 2004 were, as far as we have been able to deduce, illegal and found to be so by Ashcroft (but only after he and one or two subordinates broke through the compartmentalization which Cheney and his subordinates had imposed on the program to get authorizations through fraudulent means). After that date, Bush and Cheney were able to find a new way to effect the same wiretapping but under a different legal framework which we have not yet been able to deduce.
Mr. Dean, you are so very generous with your time here. What a gift!! Thank you.
Rev, you do remember that Mr. Dean does answer all our questions diligently…? Always a great pleasure to have him here…! *g*
I remember that question, and was wondering if 30+ years of distance might prompt a different answer from John.
Edit: replying to RickPerlstein @114
I am signing off to catch the rest of the Lakers game, but will take look at pending questions later.
Thank you all for participating, I enjoyed it as always. Best to you all for the holiday and new year.
JWD
John – thank you so much for coming back to Firedoglake. We really appreciate your participation.
Our best wishes to you and your wife for the holidays.
If ever there was a reason to duck out of an FDL conversation, a Lakers game would be at the top of the list! (As Jane has said, the “lake” in Firedoglake is for her passion of watching the Lakers in front of a fire with her dogs.)
Peace to you and your family, and thanks for coming by again.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays and Happy Birthday.
And thanks to Rick for leading us in a spirited discussion. Y’all heard the man, buy his books – in bulk.
Happy Holidays and thanks for making ours better! Rick and John: Great Salon! Wonderful to have you both here. :)
Thank you, John — it’s been great having you here to share your experience and perspective.
With the American Empire well over the precipice (Chalmers Johnson, Andrew Bacevich, etal.) the issue comes down to this — How can we restore the republic and the Constitution?
heartily seconded, and thanks Rick
and as always, thanks Bev.
These are the Book Salon’s that are a joy to read along with.
Please come back soon.
Re: your assertion that Bush didn’t become CIA director for many years after, not so. Within a year and a half after Nixon’s resignation Bush was installed at CIA trying to do damage control with the Church Committee hearings.
On a completely different note I don’t think Huston’s Plan for dealing with dissidents ever was discarded. I see bits of Gemstone in almost everything that happened during the Reagan/Bush years with North and Continuity of Government/FEMA plans and the entire Cheney/Bush administration’s use of executive orders to prepare the way for martial law. For a time I was seriously worried that elections would be suspended here by some trigger event but as it turns out, the third Bush term is proceeding nicely without the need for a constitutional crisis.
Thanks so much, John and Rick.
Thank you for your answer re Russ Baker, and thanks for another fine chat! I look forward to another one!
Well, yes, exactly. Quite frankly, the original FISA Act as passed in 1978 was, at least in my opinion, of extremely dubious Constitutionality. Irrespective of, and notwithstanding, that, the FAA was a clear evisceration of the Fourth Amendment and the ability of Article III courts to apply and uphold it. It was not only an intrusion upon the province of the judicial branch, it arguably was of the Executive – in its prosecutorial function- as well in a backdoor way from the protections and immunities given offending telcom entities. Moreover, even if, as Mr. Dean and Mr. Olbermann somewhat shockingly argued at the time (at least to me anyway; and I greatly respect both), the mere passage of the FAA, and really the PAA before it, completely emasculated and eviscerated any potential for criminal accountability for responsible primary actors in and about the Bush Administration by blowing up reasonable doubt regarding the crimes and offenses. Once you have the United States Congress sanctioning particular conduct by aiders, abetters and co-conspirators, you by definition have injected reasonable doubt on the part of the principles. It was a shameless, gutless and clueless move by the Congress and, for the life of me, I have always been puzzled by the cover given at the time by Mrrs. Dean and Olbermann.
excuse me?
John, I thank you for your answers while also wishing you had time to answer my other questions. Also, I saw your interview with Thom Hartmann (on youtube) and you say the reason for the breakin was because of some ITT scandal — and when I was googling around today before this book salon I came across a reference to a 1974 FBI Office of Planning and Evaluation report on Watergate (PDF) that specifically says ITT was excluded from the report’s purview. That report also notes the criticism that the FBI’s investigation was compromised by your involvement with the acting Director, L. Patrick Gray. You may have covered that detail in your book (?)
Anyway, regarding Kent State, here is a photograph Kainah posted in her last diary, which shows her getting her last word in to Richard Nixon, who she holds responsible: http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l211/littlesky_2006/kainah/LesleylecturesNixon.jpg — I guess I’m wondering if you had a summing up moment with Nixon like she did, what your picture might be. I’ve read a lot of what she wrote, but it’s that picture I remember.
Thanks for sharing with us today. I’m always happy to see you on Countdown and elsewhere.
Dean needs to retract some of his remarks. He and Mr Perlstein are shooting from the hip in some of their statements.
Matt, i had similar worries…
the link to Leslie Lectures Nixon?
I’ll be charitable and allow him to say he hasn’t been following the issues as closely ashe should have, and invite him to get up to speed. A good place is EW’s place.
Yes, the link works for me, does it not for you? Here it is again: http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l211/littlesky_2006/kainah/LesleylecturesNixon.jpg
The picture is in context is in her 2009 Kent State diary, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/3/723693/-They-Just-Started-Shooting-Kent-State-Remembered
An excellent reference.
Mr . Dean, my guess is you have seen us before, but that would be the Emptywheel Blog.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com
I have dealt with Mr. Baker, so I speak from first-hand experience with him. When I took a close look at his work I was amazed at the material he put out as fact….
I reviewed my statements, and have nothing to retract. I can only call them as I see them and know them.
hi mr dean – welcome back. sorry i missed your book salon earlier today. just wanted to say that i really loved the end of the story to Blind Ambition.
Without FISA you will have presidents undertaking actions with no limits whatsoever in the name of national security….
I have written a number of columns at FindLaw on my disappointment with Obama’s positions, and mentioned them on Countdown, but as I have said I will give him 18 months to figure out how the presidency works, for it takes that long for a newcomer. He is a centerist, playing against obstructonists, and failing to address the mess of the radical who preceeded him. So we will see. I have looked closely at 43 presidents, and it is simply too early to understand this presidency.
I have some friends throughout the Obama Administration, and they know my feelings about Bush and Cheney. Currently, I am very anxious to see what Holder does with the report of the Office of Professional Responsiblity at the Justice Department, which he has been sitting on longer than necessary — unless he plans to take some actions regard folks like John Yoo, David Addington, etc. If they get a pass, however, it means you can now violate any law in the name of “national security” and it is not criminal or even unethical.
There are countless men and women in Washington who serve heroically in there jobs. Off the top, in the House I would point immediately in Henry Waxman, in the Senate to Russ Feingold, on the federal bench I could name a dozen heroic judges, in the Executive Branch the Obama appointees are still figuring out what they are suppose to be doing. In the press, Bob Woodward and Sy Hersch are still doing heoric work reporting on national affairs. I say this and I assure you I am no Pollyanna.
Government service is a wonderful experience. I had more great days than bad days, and learned not only about how it really works, but I learned a lot about myself. Without government society and civilizations will not function, so there is no more important work. If young people do not do government service this system will not stay fresh. There is no better place to observe human nature in action than when working in government.
I have been a visiting scholar as USC for many years and encourage you people to take a serious look, for I feel we all — at some point in life — must be involved in government service.
Unlike Nixon who was qualified, Palin is not. Also unlike Nixon who was not interested in money, Palin is using her “I might run” tease to sell book that as best I can tell she has not written, and have little to say, and will do nothing more than provide her some income for her efforts but change no one’s mind. She is the candidate of the authoritarians.
Think I got the dangling questons I missed. Late in life my wife discovered the Lakers, and is a serious fan, so she gets lonely when I am not with her to view them. Clearly, she was happy with their win over Detroit. I then got hooked on watching C Span’s coverage of the Senate debate leading up to the cloture vote at 10 pm plus PST, and 1 am plus EST. Reid would not have called the vote if he did not have his troops lined up but it was an historic vote. Those who think Obama caved forget it is necessary to reconcile the Senate and House bills, so this is a long way from over, and the interesting part will be in the days and weeks to follow. I expereinced the civil right laws in the making as an aide on the House Judiciary Committee, and if anyone this the stakes are high with heathcare reform, multiply by a factor of 50 when we refought the Civil War in 1964-1967 (from public accomadation to voting rights). What it interest that it was the South that was fighting Civil Rights. It is the South that is fighting Healtcare (which is a civil right of it own). The South has been the bane of this nation’s effort to care for Americans for the past two centuries. Hopefully they will not succeed in this new century for they hurt not only themselves, they hurt our place in the world.
On that note I will wish you all the best again, and look forward to the next time. I have just stratred to work on my next book for Viking. (We have not accounced it to avoid others causing me problems while working on it.) Do continue all that good work the FDL does.
Regards,
John
looking forward to reading it when it comes out mr dean. thank you again.
and don’t be a stranger. visit us again soon.
This is really great Mr. Dean, thanks for answering all these questions
I lurked for awhile Saturday, but was multitasking too much to participate fully
What you’ve said over the years took and takes great courage and fortitude and I really admire you for that, thanks. I’ve linked to your writings in blogs and emails because of the commonsenseness (to coin a word) and astuteness of the thoughts in explaining the rights and wrongs of our system
Thanks again