T Nation

Deep Throat

So I’m old enough to know, but wasn’t much into politics back then.

What was the big deal?

Wasn’t it just about the Republicans and then current Pres. Nixon just wanting to infiltrate the Democratic offices to find strategy?

Why/How did that bring down a President?

Was it the attempted cover-up more than the act?

With it being in the news again with the release of Deep Throat’s identity it got me to thinking.

I figure this will save me alot of unnecessay reading, as most books covering this incident are laborious reads.

Fill me in men

I can’t answer your questions, but I just can’t get over the fact that they nicknamed the dude “Deep Throat.” I know, I am immature.

What’s the big deal? Well, I would say the fact that it was illegal and then yes, the deception to try and cover it up. If we don’t hold our President to a standard of honest behavior what’s the next act to slip?

And I’m not talking about a blowjob rather instructing people in your administration to illegaly tap your political adversarys office’s and phone lines. I know some will say lying about a BJ and this are one in the same. I don’t think so.

I totally thought this was going to be about the movie.

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
What’s the big deal? Well, I would say the fact that it was illegal and then yes, the deception to try and cover it up. If we don’t hold our President to a standard of honest behavior what’s the next act to slip?

And I’m not talking about a blowjob rather instructing people in your administration to illegaly tap your political adversarys office’s and phone lines. I know some will say lying about a BJ and this are one in the same. I don’t think so. [/quote]

Of course the BJ and Watergate aren’t the same thing Elk, but I think what the T-Nation Crips are gonna draw the parallels to is the “lying under oath” thingy that they have in common.

BTW: I’m no Clinton supporter by a long shot, but if I’m ever president, I will definitely try to get blown while I’m on the phone with the president of Mexico. I don’t care who you are, that’s awesome in so many ways that I can’t even begin to state them. Hopefully, I won’t be married so that I have to lie about it later. :slight_smile:

Deep Throat is an Alumnus of GWU

A lot of people think Deep Throat was a composite of several sources, not one person, and that he/she was created in order to make the story more compelling.

They showed him on the news, and Woodward/Bernstein admitted that it was the former assistnt FBI director.

Sad day when snitches are hailed as heros. He should have been shot and dumped in a creek 35 years ago.

Yeah, I’m an idiot. What I get for being out of the country.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
They showed him on the news, and Woodward/Bernstein admitted that it was the former assistnt FBI director.

Sad day when snitches are hailed as heros. He should have been shot and dumped in a creek 35 years ago.[/quote]

What kind of world do you live in? I’m as big a Nixon fan as anyone, half of Vietnam would be a free nation today if he had had a full second term, but there’s a reason he went down in history as a crook, and it’s not just the liberal media.

What this guy did was wrong. Liddy summed it up pretty well when he said the guy was unethical.

Nixon was guilty. That’s not in question. But to glorify a disgruntled employee for ratting on his boss is wrong.

Where I come from, you don’t rat folks out. You especially don’t run to the newspaper under anonymity and blab everything you know. He should have at least been man enough to show his face while he was selling out his boss.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
What this guy did was wrong. Liddy summed it up pretty well when he said the guy was unethical.

Nixon was guilty. That’s not in question. But to glorify a disgruntled employee for ratting on his boss is wrong.

Where I come from, you don’t rat folks out. You especially don’t run to the newspaper under anonymity and blab everything you know. He should have at least been man enough to show his face while he was selling out his boss.[/quote]

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.

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Elkhntr1 wrote:
What’s the big deal? Well, I would say the fact that it was illegal and then yes, the deception to try and cover it up. If we don’t hold our President to a standard of honest behavior what’s the next act to slip?

And I’m not talking about a blowjob rather instructing people in your administration to illegaly tap your political adversarys office’s and phone lines. I know some will say lying about a BJ and this are one in the same. I don’t think so.

Of course the BJ and Watergate aren’t the same thing Elk, but I think what the T-Nation Crips are gonna draw the parallels to is the “lying under oath” thingy that they have in common.

BTW: I’m no Clinton supporter by a long shot, but if I’m ever president, I will definitely try to get blown while I’m on the phone with the president of Mexico. I don’t care who you are, that’s awesome in so many ways that I can’t even begin to state them. Hopefully, I won’t be married so that I have to lie about it later. :)[/quote]

Yes Lothario, whether you’re a Crip or a Blood getting blown while you’re on the phone or otherwise is a marvelous thing for anyone.

RJ, you’re insane.

[quote]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.[/quote]

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]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]

I respect Liddy’s loyalty, but you’ve got to answer to a higher power at some point. And I don’t mean God in this case, but the good of the country and the Constitution. Same goes for North. Nevermind the fact that Liddy’s a fringe character even on the right.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
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 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.

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.

[quote]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.

[/quote]

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 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]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]

He was pardoned for offenses other than those discussed here. He was accused of illegal wiretapping of The Underground and was pardoned–accordingly.