The WaterGate Scandal - Another perspective
Nixon, Kissinger, Intelligence, and the Shape of Power: An Expansive Reflection
Introduction
The Watergate scandal began with a break-in at the
Democratic National Committee headquarters, located in the Watergate office
complex in Washington, D.C., on June 17, 1972. The burglars were
connected to Nixon’s re-election campaign (the Committee to Re-Elect the
President, or CRP), and they were caught attempting to wiretap phones
and steal documents.
The presidency of Richard Nixon, the rise of Henry
Kissinger, and the global entanglements of U.S. intelligence during the Cold
War represent a tangled but revealing chapter of American political history.
This article navigates the causes and consequences of the Watergate scandal,
the deeper web of power involving the CIA, FBI, elite academia, foreign
alliances (including the Vatican), and the uneasy tension between elected
office and unelected influence — often called the "deep state."
We also touch on how President Kennedy’s fate loomed large
over the minds of leaders who followed him, and how Kissinger, despite his
enormous influence, remained an unelected player, one whose loyalty was not
always to transparency.
The Watergate Scandal: A Timeline
|
Year 1971
1972
1973
1974
|
|
What made it a major scandal:
- Nixon
and his aides tried to cover up the involvement of the White House.
- Investigations
revealed that Nixon had secretly taped conversations in the Oval Office.
- These
tapes contained incriminating evidence, including Nixon discussing how to
obstruct the FBI investigation.
- Under
pressure, Nixon released the tapes, but one had a suspicious 18½-minute
gap.
- Facing
almost certain impeachment, Nixon resigned on August 8, 1974—the first
U.S. president to do so.
Aftermath:
- Vice
President Gerald Ford became president and later pardoned Nixon, which was
also controversial.
- The
scandal led to greater checks on presidential power and more transparency
laws in U.S. politics.
Underlying Issues:
- Deep
mistrust of political opponents and the media: Nixon believed enemies
inside and outside the government were trying to bring him down.
- Fear
of leaks: The 1971 leak of the Pentagon Papers (classified Vietnam War
documents) increased his fear that insiders were leaking secrets.
- Desire
for control: Nixon and his team used intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA) to
monitor and sabotage perceived enemies, including journalists, anti-war
activists, and Democrats.
- Winning
at all costs: His administration was determined to ensure Nixon’s 1972
re-election, even through unethical or illegal means.
Why Nixon Wanted to Record Conversations:
- Nixon
ordered a secret taping system in the White House in 1971, before
Watergate, for several reasons:
- Self-protection:
To have a record of conversations that could defend him against
accusations or misquotes.
- Historical
record: Nixon believed future historians would benefit from knowing what
was said during key decisions.
- Control
over narratives: He wanted detailed documentation to potentially use
against others, if needed.
What Was He Suspecting:
- He
suspected internal sabotage, media conspiracies, and disloyalty.
- After
the break-in, he feared investigations would uncover a wide web of illegal
activities (like political spying and harassment) tied to the White House.
- He
believed there were many in the "establishment" — the press,
liberals, and bureaucrats — trying to undermine his presidency.
Who Owned Watergate?
The Watergate Hotel and complex were developed in the 1960s.
It was bought by a consortium with ties to the Vatican (through Italian
insurance interests) by the early 1970s. The Democratic National Committee had
leased office space there before any Vatican-linked ownership shift. Why they
didn’t relocate is unclear — perhaps due to contract lock-ins, or a lack of
suspicion at the time. This Vatican-connected ownership becomes relevant only
retrospectively, once deeper questions arose about surveillance and influence.
Why
weren’t the owners held responsible?
- The break-in
was illegal and conducted by individuals unaffiliated with the
property.
- The
crime was not due to negligence or conspiracy on the part of the
hotel or building management.
- Think
of it like a burglar breaking into an office inside a rented building —
the landlord wouldn’t be liable unless they were part of the plan or
grossly negligent.
Legal responsibility fell on:
- The burglars
(caught red-handed).
- The organizers
from Nixon’s campaign.
- The White
House for the cover-up.
Why Did Nixon Record Conversations?
Nixon believed in controlling his narrative. He feared
internal betrayal and hoped to preserve detailed records for posterity — or
defense. There was growing mistrust of institutions around him, especially the
CIA, which he felt had grown too liberal and academic. He wanted evidence of
loyalty and disloyalty.
Who Installed the Devices?
The Secret Service, under Nixon’s directive, installed the
system. The primary locations were:
- Oval
Office
- Executive
Office Building
- Camp
David
This internal surveillance was meant for his own reference.
However, it coincided with extralegal activities, like the Watergate break-in,
which were orchestrated by individuals tied to Nixon’s re-election committee
(CRP) — not the official intelligence community.
I. White House Staff & Inner Circle
1. H.R. Haldeman
- Role:
Nixon’s Chief of Staff
- Involvement:
Deeply involved in planning and covering up the Watergate break-in.
- Notable:
Present in the “smoking gun” conversation about using the CIA to stop the
FBI’s probe.
2. John Ehrlichman
- Role:
Nixon’s Domestic Affairs Advisor
- Involvement:
Helped direct covert operations and cover-up efforts.
- Notable:
Helped create the “Plumbers,” a group meant to stop government leaks.
3. John Dean
- Role:
White House Counsel
- Involvement:
Initially helped cover up the break-in, but later cooperated with
prosecutors.
- Notable:
His detailed testimony to Congress cracked open the case.
II. Committee to Re-Elect the President (CRP or CREEP)
4. G. Gordon Liddy
- Role:
CRP Finance Counsel and former FBI agent.
- Involvement:
Mastermind of the break-in plan.
- Notable:
Refused to testify before the Senate; served over 4 years in prison.
5. E. Howard Hunt
- Role:
Ex-CIA operative; CRP operative.
- Involvement:
Helped plan the break-in and other “dirty tricks.”
- Notable:
Previously part of the “Plumbers” unit.
6. James W. McCord Jr.
- Role:
Security coordinator for CRP.
- Involvement:
One of the five burglars arrested at the DNC.
- Notable:
His letter to the judge revealed perjury and cover-up efforts.
III. Justice Department and FBI
7. Richard Kleindienst
- Role:
U.S. Attorney General (after John Mitchell).
- Involvement:
Attempted to maintain distance but was implicated in stonewalling.
8. John Mitchell
- Role:
Nixon’s former Attorney General and later Director of CRP.
- Involvement:
Authorized the break-in plan.
- Notable:
First U.S. Attorney General to serve time in prison.
IV. Investigators and Journalists
9. Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein
- Role:
Washington Post reporters.
- Involvement:
Broke much of the Watergate story through investigative journalism.
- Notable:
Used an anonymous source — “Deep Throat” — to confirm facts.
10. Mark Felt (“Deep Throat”)
- Role:
Associate Director of the FBI.
- Involvement:
Secretly fed information to Woodward and Bernstein.
- Revealed:
His identity remained hidden until 2005.
V. The Judiciary
11. Judge John Sirica
- Role:
Federal judge presiding over the burglars’ trial.
- Involvement:
Pressured defendants to tell the truth.
- Notable:
Received McCord’s letter exposing the cover-up.
Phone Tapping and the Break-In: Was it for Re-election?
The Watergate break-in was part of efforts to secure
Nixon’s re-election in 1972.
- The
burglars were hired by the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CRP or
“CREEP”).
- Their
mission: wiretap phones and gather intelligence from the Democratic
National Committee (DNC) to gain strategic advantage.
- Nixon
was already in office and had a strong chance at re-election — but his
team wanted to guarantee victory by spying, sabotaging, and
manipulating.
Nixon's Secret Taping System: Timeline, Locations,
Agencies Involved
A. Timeline of Installation:
- February
1971: Nixon ordered the taping system.
- It
became fully operational by April 1971.
B. Where Were the Tapes Made?
Nixon’s recording system was extensive, covering
various key areas:
|
Location |
Details |
|
Oval Office |
Main presidential office in the West Wing. |
|
Cabinet Room |
For taping official meetings with advisors. |
|
Old Executive Office Building (EOB) |
Nixon’s private office near the White House. |
|
Camp David |
Presidential retreat; telephone calls were recorded. |
|
White House Telephones |
Both in the Oval Office and Lincoln Sitting Room. |
The taping was voice-activated — it turned on
automatically when someone spoke.
C. Who Installed It?
- The United
States Secret Service installed and maintained the system.
- It
was done in secrecy, and very few people knew about it —
even most of Nixon’s staff were unaware.
- The
order came directly from Nixon.
D. Who Owned the Property Where the Tapes Were Made?
- All
locations (White House, EOB, Camp David) were federal government
properties.
- The White
House Communications Agency (WHCA) — part of the military — provided
tech support but likely did not know the full purpose.
Why Was It a Problem?
The tapes became crucial evidence because they:
- Proved
Nixon knew about the Watergate cover-up much earlier than he claimed.
- Contained
a key conversation from June 23, 1972, just days after the
break-in, where Nixon and Haldeman discussed using the CIA to block the
FBI's investigation — this was the famous “smoking gun tape.”
Perceived Political Objectives:
The Watergate Break-In (External Spying on Democrats)
- Nixon
was a Republican (GOP).
- The Democratic
National Committee (DNC) was the opposition party during the
1972 election.
- Nixon’s
re-election team (Committee to Re-Elect the President) illegally
broke into the DNC’s office in the Watergate building.
- Their
goal: steal strategy documents, install wiretaps, and spy on
Democratic campaign plans.
- This
was outside Nixon’s office — totally illegal surveillance of
political opponents.
- The crime
itself (burglary, wiretapping) was bad, but the cover-up ordered by
the White House made it worse.
Nixon’s Secret White House Taping System (Internal
Recording)
- Separate
from Watergate, Nixon secretly recorded his own conversations in
the Oval Office and other White House locations.
- These
tapes were:
- Installed
legally (he was President; no law forbade him from taping in his own
office).
- Unknown
to most — not even his aides knew.
- Intended
for self-protection and record-keeping, but…
- Why
it mattered: These internal tapes eventually exposed Nixon's
involvement in covering up the Watergate break-in.
- The
famous “smoking gun tape” captured Nixon instructing his Chief of
Staff to obstruct the FBI investigation — a clear abuse of power.
So what’s the issue if he tapped his own office?
Recording his own office wasn’t the crime. The crime
was:
- Authorizing
or knowing about criminal activity (like the break-in).
- Using
his power to obstruct justice (telling agencies like the CIA to block
investigations).
- Lying
to the public and Congress about his knowledge of the Watergate
affair.
- Abuse
of executive power to suppress truth and punish enemies.
Nixon’s team broke into the DNC
(opponent’s office) — illegal.
Nixon recorded his own office
— not illegal, but tapes revealed he covered up the break-in — which was
criminal.
Certain Facts:
1. Fact: There Were Intelligence Officials Involved
- Several
of the Watergate burglars were ex-CIA:
- E.
Howard Hunt had worked for the CIA for decades.
- James
McCord was formerly with the CIA and FBI.
- The
burglary team was organized by Nixon’s re-election committee but made up
of former intelligence operatives — this created a cloud of suspicion
about whether deeper agencies were involved.
2. Fact: Watergate Complex Had Vatican-Linked Ownership
- The
Watergate was developed by Società Generale Immobiliare (SGI), an Italian
firm.
- SGI
was later revealed to be partially controlled by the Vatican Bank.
- But:
there’s no concrete evidence the Vatican had any role or knowledge of the
break-in.
- It
is, however, historically notable that such a high-profile crime occurred
in a property tied to global power structures.
3. Fact: The DNC Rented the Office; It Wasn’t a Meeting
Room
- The
DNC had a permanent office in the Watergate complex (not a hotel suite for
a one-time meeting).
- The
break-in was aimed at surveillance and intelligence gathering — including
bugging phones and stealing documents.
4. Fact: Nixon’s Own Camp Leaked Many Details
- Some
of the unraveling came from within Nixon’s circle (e.g., John Dean’s
testimony, Alexander Butterfield revealing the secret tapes).
- And
of course, Deep Throat (later revealed as FBI Deputy Director Mark Felt)
leaked key info to journalists.
5. Theories and Suspicions
- Many
have speculated:
- Was
this an intelligence community internal war?
- Did
factions inside the CIA, FBI, or other agencies leak or allow it to fall
apart intentionally?
- Was
the Vatican link symbolic of larger global networks of power?
But no direct, confirmed evidence ties the Vatican, foreign
governments, or deep-state actors as conspirators — it’s all in the realm of
speculation, not proven law or history.
Comparison with JFK Case
- The investigation
had holes.
- Many
agencies were opaque.
- Key
evidence was missing, destroyed, or redacted.
- Public
trust collapsed due to perceived cover-ups and conflicting accounts.
Who Advised Nixon to Go for Phone Tapping?
There is no documented proof that one person said, “Tap the
DNC phones,” but here’s what we do know:
Key People Involved:
- G.
Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt (both involved in the break-in) created
the plan known as "Operation Gemstone", which included
wiretapping and other sabotage.
- These
plans were approved by Nixon’s campaign leadership:
- John
Mitchell (head of the Committee to Re-Elect the President, CREEP).
- H.R.
Haldeman (Nixon’s Chief of Staff).
- John
Ehrlichman (Domestic Affairs Advisor).
While Nixon might not have ordered the break-in directly, the
cover-up was led by him, and the tape from June 23, 1972, known as the “smoking
gun”, proves he wanted the CIA to interfere with the FBI's investigation — that
was obstruction.
So:
- The
idea likely originated from Liddy and Hunt (former FBI and CIA).
- Approved
by Nixon’s top campaign and White House team.
- Nixon's
biggest mistake was not stopping it but trying to hide it.
During That Time, Which Party Was Closer to the Vatican:
GOP or Democrats?
This is more nuanced and context-dependent:
In the Early 1970s:
- Catholic
voters were traditionally more Democratic, especially among immigrant
communities (Irish, Italian, Polish).
- The Kennedy
family, especially John F. Kennedy, was deeply Catholic — in fact, JFK had
to overcome anti-Catholic sentiment to become president.
- The Democrats
had stronger grassroots Catholic alignment, including links with labor
unions and the working class.
But:
- The
Vatican doesn’t officially endorse political parties.
- Both
parties had Catholic figures and supporters, though Democrats were more
closely associated with Catholic cultural and political interests at that
time.
GOP and Vatican in Nixon’s Era:
- Nixon
himself wasn’t closely tied to the Vatican or the Catholic Church.
- The
Watergate building’s Vatican connection was coincidental, through SGI’s
ownership.
- There
is no solid evidence that either party had institutional Vatican backing,
especially related to Watergate.
Did Nixon Ever Face Formal Charges or Testify?
No formal criminal charges were filed against Nixon before
he was pardoned. Here's what happened:
Resignation and Legal Status:
- Nixon
resigned on August 9, 1974, under the threat of impeachment and likely
prosecution.
- The House
Judiciary Committee had already approved three articles of impeachment:
obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress.
- The Department
of Justice (DOJ) was preparing investigations, but no indictment had been
issued yet.
- Nixon
never testified in any trial or before a grand jury related to Watergate.
Then: Ford Pardons Nixon
- One
month later, on September 8, 1974, President Gerald Ford issued a full,
unconditional pardon for any crimes Nixon might have committed while in
office.
- This preemptive
pardon meant Nixon could not be charged, so there was no trial, no court
filing, and no testimony from Nixon required.
- Ford
later testified to Congress that he issued the pardon to help the nation
move on — though it cost him politically.
What Did Ford Do in the Remaining Term?
Ford only had about 2½ years in office (1974–1977). Key
actions:
Major Actions:
- Pardon
of Nixon: Most defining and controversial act.
- Whip
Inflation Now (WIN) campaign: Focused on fighting inflation, but it was
mocked and largely ineffective.
- Continued
withdrawal from Vietnam: Oversaw final U.S. troop exit and the fall of
Saigon in April 1975.
- Signed
the Helsinki Accords (1975): A major Cold War diplomacy agreement with the
Soviet bloc.
- Attempted
some government reform and budget controls.
Policy Reversals?
- Ford
did not reverse most of Nixon’s domestic policies.
- He
was generally seen as moderate to conservative, in line with Nixon.
- On
foreign policy, Ford kept Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State, ensuring continuity
with Nixon's détente approach to the USSR and China.
Was Nixon Against the Policies Ford Later Enacted?
Mostly, no. Ford did not break sharply from Nixon’s major
policies. In fact:
|
Policy Area |
Nixon's Position |
Ford’s Continuation |
|
Vietnam War Exit |
Nixon negotiated U.S. withdrawal (Paris Peace Accords,
1973) |
Ford completed the exit (Fall of Saigon, 1975) |
|
Cold War (USSR/China) |
Nixon pioneered détente and visited both USSR and China |
Ford continued détente and signed the Helsinki Accords |
|
Economic Issues |
Nixon used wage/price controls and ended the gold standard |
Ford tried "Whip Inflation Now" — no radical
departure |
|
Environment, Domestic Programs |
Nixon established EPA and signed major environmental laws |
Ford didn't reverse these, though he aimed to trim
spending |
So Nixon was not ideologically opposed to the policies Ford
carried on. That deepens the question: why would there be a "fear" or
pressure to remove him?
If Intelligence Pushed Nixon Out — What Could Be Their
Motivation?
There’s no official evidence of an
intelligence-orchestrated removal, but here are theories often discussed:
Possible Motivations:
- National
Image at Stake: Watergate was spiraling. Intelligence and political elites
feared the scandal would undermine public trust and damage America’s Cold
War credibility.
- Nixon
vs. Intelligence Agencies:
- He
had a tense relationship with the CIA and FBI — especially after he tried
to use the CIA to block the FBI’s Watergate investigation (as tapes
show).
- He
centralized power in the White House (the "imperial
presidency") — that made career bureaucrats and intel uncomfortable.
- Unpredictability:
Nixon was increasingly paranoid, drank heavily at times, and was known to secretly
tape conversations, including with intelligence figures.
- Some
feared he might declassify or weaponize sensitive intelligence to save
himself.
Was that enough to "sketch his exit"? Maybe not
overtly — but elite consensus can shift rapidly when a leader is seen as too
much of a liability.
What Were the Religious Faiths of Nixon and Ford?
|
President |
Religious Affiliation |
Notes |
|
Richard Nixon |
Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) |
But not a pacifist; he distanced from traditional Quaker
beliefs. Rarely spoke of faith. |
|
Gerald Ford |
Episcopalian |
Regular churchgoer; faith was more visible and
traditionally Protestant. His pardon of Nixon was partly justified as a
moral/religious act of healing. |
Neither man was strongly tied to the Vatican or Catholic
networks. Nixon’s Quaker background was unusual for a GOP president. Ford’s
Episcopalian identity was more typical of U.S. elite Protestant circles.
Nixon’s Relationship with Intelligence Leadership
CIA – Richard Helms (Director until 1973)
- Tense
relationship: Nixon distrusted the CIA. He believed it was filled with
"Ivy League" elites and Kennedy loyalists.
- Nixon
ordered Helms to block the FBI from investigating parts of the Watergate
break-in by falsely claiming it involved "national security"
matters. Helms refused — a serious institutional boundary.
- Nixon
later fired Helms in early 1973, replacing him with James Schlesinger, and
soon after, William Colby.
- Nixon
once told H.R. Haldeman: “The CIA has got to be cleaned out. They're
all a bunch of liberals.”
FBI – L. Patrick Gray (Acting Director, 1972–73)
- Took
over after J. Edgar Hoover died in May 1972.
- Gray
tried to shield Nixon, even passing FBI files to the White House.
- But
internal leaks (including from Mark Felt, aka “Deep Throat”) exposed the
truth. Felt was a senior FBI official bypassed for promotion — likely
resentful and suspicious of Nixon’s interference.
Nixon tried to control both CIA and FBI, but both
institutions pushed back when the Watergate cover-up escalated. This deepened
Nixon’s paranoia and made the agencies reluctant to protect him later.
Was Nixon “Not Harsh” on Russia or Communism?
That’s accurate — he wasn’t “harsh” in the usual Cold War
sense. In fact, Nixon was one of the most pragmatic U.S. presidents in dealing
with the communist bloc:
Key Policies and Events:
|
Policy/Event |
Description |
|
Détente |
Nixon promoted easing tensions with the Soviet Union — a
policy called “détente.” It emphasized arms control and diplomacy over
confrontation. |
|
SALT I Treaty (1972) |
Signed with USSR leader Brezhnev — the first strategic
arms limitation treaty. Historic moment in Cold War diplomacy. |
|
Visit to Moscow (1972) |
Nixon became the first sitting U.S. president to visit the
Soviet Union. Signed agreements on trade, arms, and cooperation. |
|
Opening to China (1972) |
Nixon's boldest move: he visited Mao Zedong and recognized
Communist China — a major shift in Cold War dynamics. |
|
Vietnam |
Though he escalated bombing briefly, Nixon also began withdrawing
troops and sought “peace with honor.” His policy was about limiting U.S.
costs, not destroying communism globally. |
Why the Shift?
- Nixon
believed the Cold War was becoming unsustainable and that America needed
to manage its decline smartly.
- He
thought triangular diplomacy — playing China and USSR against each other —
could give the U.S. leverage.
- Ideologically,
Nixon wasn’t soft on communism, but he was strategic, not confrontational.
Why Nixon Saw the CIA as “Liberal”
Nixon’s distrust of the CIA as “liberal” wasn’t just
paranoia. It reflected a deep ideological and cultural divide he
perceived between his presidency and the national security establishment.
1. Elite Eastern Establishment Culture
- The
CIA in the 1950s–70s was largely dominated by Ivy League graduates — Yale,
Harvard, Princeton — often from East Coast patrician families.
- Nixon,
by contrast, came from a modest background in California and deeply
resented what he called the "Georgetown set" or "Harvard
crowd."
- He
felt culturally excluded from the elite foreign policy consensus — even
during his own presidency.
2. Loyalty to the Kennedy Era
- The
CIA’s top brass — including ex-directors Allen Dulles and Richard Helms —
had strong ties to the Kennedy and Johnson administrations.
- Nixon
believed many in the CIA sabotaged Republican interests, especially in the
wake of:
- The
Bay of Pigs disaster (1961): a botched CIA-led Cuban invasion under
Kennedy, which Nixon had previously championed as VP.
- Nixon
privately suspected the CIA didn’t fully cooperate with Kennedy either —
and was therefore uncontrollable.
3. Watergate and Refusal to Intervene
- When
the Watergate scandal erupted, Nixon demanded the CIA intervene to block
the FBI from following the money trail (which led to the White House).
- CIA
Director Richard Helms refused. This infuriated Nixon, who saw it as
disloyalty or political opposition.
- From
the Nixon tapes:
“The CIA people are the worst... They’re a bunch of liberals
who are out to get us.”
4. Vietnam, Laos, and Intelligence Leaks
- Nixon
also blamed the CIA for leaks related to:
- U.S.
bombing in Cambodia.
- Covert
operations in Laos and Vietnam.
- He
suspected some CIA staff were sympathetic to the antiwar movement or
disillusioned with U.S. policy — and thus feeding information to the
press.
- His
obsession with leaks led to the creation of the “Plumbers” unit — which
ultimately executed the Watergate break-in.
5. Nixon’s Broader View of Liberals
- To
Nixon, “liberal” didn’t just mean Democrats — it meant elite, academic,
media-friendly, and internationalist.
- He
believed these people saw him as crude, dangerous, or illegitimate — and
he resented them deeply.
Key Takeaway
Nixon saw the CIA as a bastion of elite liberalism,
culturally and politically opposed to his brand of hardball, populist
conservatism. His attempts to bring it under control — especially during
Watergate — backfired, further isolating him.
Interesting Connects:
Elite Ivy League Universities (Founding Dates)
|
University |
Founding Year |
Notes |
|
Harvard |
1636 |
Oldest U.S. university; alma mater of many U.S. elites. |
|
Yale |
1701 |
Major pipeline to early CIA; Yale's "Skull and
Bones" society produced key operatives. |
|
Princeton |
1746 |
Home to many diplomats and scholars; Woodrow Wilson was
president of Princeton. |
|
Columbia |
1754 |
Strong tradition in law and journalism; ties to early U.N.
thinkers. |
|
University of Pennsylvania |
1740 |
Known for Wharton and law school; some role in government
staffing. |
|
Dartmouth |
1769 |
Smaller role but still part of Ivy elite. |
|
Brown |
1764 |
Known for liberal culture; less dominant in intelligence. |
|
Cornell |
1865 |
Newest Ivy; known for engineering and international
studies. |
Many early CIA recruits — particularly in the Office of
Strategic Services (OSS, WWII predecessor to the CIA) — were Yale men. Families
like the Bundys, Harrimans, and Dulles brothers came from this social network.
U.S. Intelligence and Law Enforcement Agencies
|
Agency |
Founding Year |
Notes |
|
FBI (originally Bureau of Investigation) |
1908 |
Became Federal Bureau of Investigation in 1935 under J.
Edgar Hoover. By Nixon’s time, Hoover had ruled the FBI for nearly 50 years —
deeply entrenched and fiercely independent. |
|
CIA |
1947 |
Created by National Security Act of 1947 under President
Truman. Formed out of the OSS, which had been disbanded after WWII. |
|
OSS (Office of Strategic Services) |
1942–1945 |
Wartime intelligence agency led by William Donovan.
Precursor to CIA. OSS was elite-heavy, often staffed by academics and East
Coast socialites. |
Why This Matters to Nixon
By the time Nixon came to power:
- These
universities had been elite power centers for centuries.
- Many
CIA officials were second-generation public servants with Ivy backgrounds
— which Nixon never trusted.
- The
FBI had long operated as a law unto itself under Hoover, and Nixon
inherited its vast surveillance structure.
Nixon's distrust of intelligence personnel from elite
universities—especially those from Ivy League schools—stemmed from a mix of cultural
resentment, political ideology, and personal experience.
1. Cultural and Class Divide
- Nixon
came from a modest background in California, not from the East
Coast elite.
- Many
in the CIA and State Department were Ivy League–educated, often from
wealthy, established families.
- Nixon
felt excluded from these "old-boy" networks and believed
they looked down on him as uncultured or unrefined.
- He
often referred to them as the “Georgetown set” or “Harvard
crowd” — terms he used with disdain.
2. Perceived Disloyalty
- Nixon
believed these elite-educated officials weren’t loyal to his
administration, especially when:
- They
leaked classified information (e.g., Cambodia bombings).
- They
refused to help cover up Watergate (CIA Director Richard Helms
resisted Nixon’s demands).
- He
viewed them as more loyal to their class and institutions than to
any elected president — especially him.
3. Association with Liberalism and Globalism
- Nixon
viewed Ivy League–trained intelligence officers as too liberal, too
idealistic, and soft on communism.
- He
believed they favored international consensus and diplomacy over realpolitik
and tough Cold War tactics.
- He
once complained the CIA was “full of liberals who were against the war”
and undermining him from within.
Ivy League Intelligence
Officials:
- Were
often seen by Nixon as too liberal or idealistic in how they
dealt with communism.
- They
did oppose communism, but preferred diplomatic, economic, or
cultural influence — not heavy-handed military or covert actions.
- This
is what Nixon saw as being "soft" — not weak in ideology,
but in method and resolve.
Nixon’s View:
- Nixon
preferred a hard-nosed, realpolitik approach (e.g., secret
bombings, arms buildups, opening China as a wedge against USSR).
- He
believed many Ivy Leaguers didn't support aggressive containment or
covert actions strongly enough — or they undermined them through
leaks or internal resistance.
- So
while both sides were anti-communist, Nixon thought these officials were too
cautious or hesitant in executing Cold War strategy.
So, it's not that Ivy League
officials were pro-communist — rather, Nixon believed they lacked the will
or realism needed to fight the Cold War the way he thought necessary.
4. Past Frustrations
- Nixon
had been Vice President under Eisenhower during the Cold War and closely
involved with foreign policy.
- He
had longstanding frustrations with the intelligence community,
including:
- CIA’s
mishandling of the U-2 spy plane incident (1960).
- CIA’s
role in the Bay of Pigs disaster under JFK (which Nixon had
earlier promoted in secret).
- These
experiences cemented his belief that the intelligence elite were
incompetent or self-serving.
Quotes from Nixon’s secret White House tapes:
1. Nixon on the CIA and Ivy League Culture
Date: July 1971
Nixon (to H.R. Haldeman):
“The Ivy League presidents ... the CIA ... those fellows are not with us.
They're liberals. They always screw us.”
— Nixon was expressing a belief that the intelligence community, especially its
leadership, leaned left and did not support his policies.
2. Nixon After the Pentagon Papers Leak
Date: June 1971
Nixon:
“People in the CIA are out to get us. They think they’re the guardians of
the Republic. They think they have a right to decide policy.”
— This was after Daniel Ellsberg, a former RAND analyst with connections to
elite institutions, leaked the Pentagon Papers. Nixon suspected CIA-linked
elites were encouraging this kind of resistance.
3. On CIA Director Richard Helms
Date: October 1971
Nixon (on Helms):
“He’s not with us. He never has been.”
— Nixon distrusted Helms, who had an establishment background and did not
cooperate with Nixon’s efforts to involve the CIA in the Watergate cover-up.
4. Nixon Linking CIA to Opposition
Date: March 1973
Nixon (to John Dean):
“The whole intelligence community is against us. They’ve always been against
us. You remember when they opposed the Bay of Pigs operation.”
— Nixon was referring to perceived hesitations or failures by the CIA to fully
back anti-communist actions he believed were necessary.
5. Nixon Suspecting CIA Role in Watergate Exposure
Date: 1972–73, various conversations
Nixon believed (incorrectly, in most historians' view) that some in the CIA
were leaking to journalists and helping expose the Watergate cover-up. This fed
his belief in a “liberal establishment” conspiracy.
Examples of Clashes:
- Vietnam
War: CIA reported pessimistic views of progress, while Nixon wanted a
narrative of success.
- Chile
(1973): Nixon and Kissinger pushed aggressively to destabilize Allende.
The CIA was involved, but Helms and others had limits to what they would
do openly — causing tension.
- Cuba
and Laos: Nixon felt the intelligence community undercut or resisted bold
actions he wanted.
Nixon felt the CIA leadership — largely Ivy-educated,
socially elite, and institutionally independent — was not just bureaucratically
resistant, but politically suspect and personally disloyal.
Kissinger’s Role and Position
Henry Kissinger served as National Security Advisor
(1969–1975) and Secretary of State (1973–1977). He was one of the most powerful
figures in U.S. foreign policy history. His role in:
- Opening
China
- SALT
I negotiations with the USSR
- Ceasefire
talks during the Vietnam War
- Middle
East diplomacy
was unparalleled for a non-elected official.
Was Kissinger Involved in Watergate?
While never formally linked to the Watergate break-in or
cover-up, Kissinger’s proximity to the intelligence community and his pivotal
policy role invite questions.
Did he know of the taping? Almost certainly.
Was he involved? Unproven.
Why wasn’t he investigated? Because the scandal focused on campaign-related
crimes and Nixon's misuse of executive power — not broader institutional
complicity.
Kissinger had strong ties with intelligence agencies but was
seen as indispensable to U.S. foreign strategy. Congress and the press did not
pursue him — a silence possibly enabled by the deep state.
What was Henry Kissinger expecting from the CIA or FBI?
Expectations from CIA:
- Strategic
Intelligence: Kissinger relied heavily on the CIA for global intelligence
assessments, particularly during Cold War diplomacy. He wanted real-time, accurate
geopolitical assessments to shape U.S. foreign policy.
- Operational
Support: He used CIA intelligence to guide his secret negotiations — for
example, his clandestine visits to China (1971) and backchannel talks with
the USSR.
- Discreet
Action: Kissinger appreciated the CIA’s ability to carry out covert
operations — such as influencing elections or supporting coups — where
diplomacy alone couldn’t suffice. Chile (1973) is a notable example.
Expectations from FBI:
- Kissinger
did not work with the FBI directly as much, but he was cautious about domestic
surveillance leaks. He often requested the FBI monitor journalists or
leaks that could expose sensitive negotiations (e.g., on Vietnam or
détente).
- In
fact, Kissinger once asked the FBI to wiretap his own staff and reporters
(e.g., Marvin Kalb) to control leaks.
How close was Kissinger with international leaders and
the Vatican?
- China:
Kissinger had a very close, almost secretive relationship with Zhou Enlai
and later Deng Xiaoping. His 1971 trip paved the way for Nixon's visit in
1972, breaking decades of silence between the U.S. and China.
- Soviet
Union: He had strong, pragmatic ties with Leonid Brezhnev. He believed in
détente, a policy of easing tensions, and saw mutual arms control as
beneficial.
- Europe:
Kissinger was well-connected with Helmut Schmidt (Germany) and Georges
Pompidou (France) and helped manage NATO dynamics and European defense
autonomy.
- Vatican:
While not openly aligned, Kissinger was deeply respectful of the Vatican’s
influence in global affairs. Pope Paul VI and later John Paul II were seen
as soft power figures in the Cold War, especially concerning Eastern
Europe.
- Kissinger
saw the Vatican as an ideological ally in resisting Communism but kept
official engagement discreet.
Why didn’t Henry Kissinger run for President?
Several reasons:
- Foreign-Born:
Kissinger was born in Fürth, Germany in 1923 and moved to the U.S. in
1938. The U.S. Constitution bars foreign-born citizens from running for
President.
- Technocrat,
Not Politician: He was a policy intellectual, not a charismatic
campaigner. He preferred backstage power — crafting policy, negotiating
treaties, advising presidents — rather than seeking public votes.
- Controversial
Reputation: Though respected, he was divisive. His role in Vietnam, Chile,
East Timor, and Bangladesh made him too controversial for elected office.
- Global
Role: Post-government, he remained influential as an advisor and
commentator. He had more freedom and less scrutiny outside public office.
1. Why Did the U.S. and Vatican Initially Oppose
Communism So Strongly?
- U.S.
Establishment: The Truman Doctrine (1947) and later the Eisenhower
Doctrine established containment of Communism as official U.S.
policy. The U.S. feared Communism’s spread in Europe, Asia, and Latin
America.
- The
Vatican: Popes from Pius XII to John Paul II saw Communism as atheistic
and oppressive to religious freedom. Catholic clergy were persecuted
in Eastern Bloc countries.
2. So Why Was Kissinger Allowed to Negotiate with
Communist States?
This is the key question — and here’s what happened:
A. Nixon and Kissinger’s Strategy: Realpolitik Over
Ideology
- Kissinger
was a strong believer in realpolitik — the idea that foreign policy
should be guided by practical national interest, not moral or
ideological positions.
- Nixon
and Kissinger concluded that engaging the USSR and China was
smarter than isolating them — especially to:
- Split
China and the Soviet Union (who were no longer allies).
- Reduce
the risk of nuclear war.
- Get
China’s help to pressure North Vietnam to end the Vietnam War.
B. These Discussions Were Extremely Secret
- Kissinger’s
first China visit in 1971 was done in complete secrecy — not even
the State Department, CIA stations, or key U.S. allies were fully
informed.
- Even
within the U.S. government, knowledge was tightly compartmentalized.
Most CIA field officers, Pentagon brass, and Congressional leaders were kept
in the dark.
- Only
Nixon, Kissinger, and a tiny inner circle were aware initially.
C. Vatican's Quiet Pragmatism
- The
Vatican publicly opposed Communism — but it had a long tradition of quiet
diplomacy.
- Popes
like Paul VI (1963–1978) believed in Ostpolitik — dialogue
with Communist regimes to protect Catholics in the Eastern Bloc.
- It’s
unlikely the Vatican was completely surprised by the U.S. moves. In fact, Vatican
diplomats quietly supported détente efforts if they could reduce
religious persecution behind the Iron Curtain.
3. Who Approved Kissinger’s Moves?
- Nixon
alone approved them — no formal Congressional consultation, and the
CIA and State Department were mostly bypassed in early stages.
- This
centralized control is why many in the "deep state" resented
Kissinger: he usurped traditional intelligence and diplomatic
channels.
- After
the fact, Kissinger briefed the CIA and Pentagon, and they were ordered to
support the new diplomatic initiatives.
The Deep State and the Power Web
What Is the Deep State?
A loosely defined network of:
- Intelligence
officials
- High-level
bureaucrats
- Select
military and economic elites
- Think
tanks and policy shapers (often from Ivy League backgrounds)
Nixon, a political outsider compared to Kennedy or Johnson,
mistrusted the East Coast elite and the CIA's leadership, which he felt was
more liberal and sympathetic to European social democratic models — even soft
on communism despite Cold War bravado.
Yet, paradoxically, this same elite was virulently
anti-communist in execution, leading coups and funding counterrevolutions
globally. The contradiction arises because their ideological opposition was
often framed through diplomacy and globalist stability, not the hard
nationalism Nixon favored.
1. The U.S. Intelligence Community
- CIA
leadership and senior analysts who had their own longstanding foreign
policy views and global contacts.
- Many
at Langley were skeptical of Kissinger’s secrecy and felt bypassed
in decisions like:
- The
opening to China (1971–72)
- SALT
negotiations with the USSR
- Covert
operations Kissinger ordered via Nixon without their full input.
2. The State Department Bureaucracy
- Career
diplomats who followed traditional Cold War policy lines and resented
Kissinger for conducting foreign policy via the National Security
Council (NSC) and backchannels.
- Kissinger
often ignored or undermined the State Department, and he criticized
them as being too cautious, liberal, or idealistic.
3. Pentagon Brass
- Senior
officials in the Department of Defense (particularly the Joint Chiefs
of Staff) were wary of détente and arms talks with the Soviets.
- Kissinger
preferred secrecy, and Pentagon leaders often learned of major foreign
policy shifts after the fact, which they saw as a breach of protocol.
4. Select Congressional Committees
- The Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, led by figures like J. William
Fulbright, felt excluded and under-informed.
- Congress
began pushing back in the early 1970s, especially after leaks (e.g., the
Pentagon Papers) and revelations of secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia
and Laos.
Why Was Nixon Not Eliminated Like JFK?
JFK's assassination was a warning to Presidents who
challenged deep interests. Nixon, though defiant, tried to manage the
system rather than destroy it. His own team’s illegalities brought his downfall
— conveniently sparing the intelligence elite from exposure.
1. Nixon Was a Conservative Insider — Not a Disruptive
Outsider Like JFK
- JFK
(1961–63) had upset multiple power centers at once:
- He
was skeptical of the CIA (especially after the Bay of Pigs
fiasco).
- He
considered pulling out of Vietnam (NSAM 263).
- He
had confrontations with the military-industrial complex, Federal
Reserve, oil barons, and segregationist Southern politicians.
- He
was seen by some Cold Warriors as "soft" after the Cuban
Missile Crisis resolution.
- Nixon
(1969–74), by contrast, was a product of the Cold War establishment:
- Anti-communist
credentials from the Alger Hiss case.
- Strong
ties with defense contractors, Republican financiers, and Southern
conservatives.
- Kissinger’s
détente was controversial, but it was done from within, not
against the system.
Bottom line: Nixon didn’t threaten the
military-industrial status quo — he managed it differently.
2. Nixon’s Strategy Was Not Moral Idealism — It Was
Pragmatic Containment
- Nixon
and Kissinger didn’t seek to end the Cold War. They rearranged it to
America's advantage:
- China
was flipped away from the USSR.
- The
Soviets were engaged in arms limitation under conditions favorable to the
U.S.
- Vietnam
was slowly “Vietnamized” to reduce American deaths.
- This
wasn’t revolutionary — it was strategic repositioning. Power
centers may have disliked Nixon’s secrecy, but they shared his goals,
just not always his methods.
3. Nixon Was Not a Charismatic Threat Like JFK
- JFK’s
youth, rhetoric, and family legacy posed a long-term challenge to
entrenched powers — especially those resistant to civil rights or reform.
- Nixon
had no mass movement behind him, no Kennedy-style mystique. Once he
became politically toxic after Watergate, the system could remove him
legally, not violently.
4. The System Learned Its Lesson Post-JFK: Better to
Discredit Than Eliminate
- After
JFK’s assassination — and decades of public suspicion — the system
realized that covert removal only breeds conspiracy and backlash.
- Watergate
showed a more elegant way: use the media, courts, and Congress to
pressure a resignation.
- Nixon’s
taped statements, the break-in, and cover-up provided legal means
for neutralization without creating a martyr or public upheaval.
5. Henry Kissinger’s Unique Role
- Kissinger
was a trusted go-between among powerful elite groups:
- Linked
to Rockefellers, key U.S. business interests, and foreign leaders.
- Maintained
strong ties with Jewish, Catholic, and European elite networks.
- He
wasn’t viewed as a revolutionary threat. In fact, many power brokers depended
on him to manage delicate global transitions — especially the shift
from bipolar to tripolar (U.S.-USSR-China) power.
Nixon and Kissinger may have clashed with parts of the
intelligence and diplomatic establishment, but they were still operating
within the acceptable bounds of U.S. geopolitical aims. Unlike JFK, they didn't
challenge the core economic, military, or ideological structure. When Nixon
overstepped politically, the establishment used constitutional tools, not
bullets, to remove him — showing an evolution in how dissent is handled at
the top.
Why Was Henry Kissinger Not Called to Resign, Tried, or Thoroughly
Investigated?
Despite being National Security Advisor (1969–1975)
and Secretary of State (1973–1977) during the Watergate years, Henry
Kissinger was not directly implicated in the Watergate break-in or Nixon's
secret White House taping system. Here’s why Congress didn’t press hard
against him:
1. No Evidence of Involvement in the Watergate Break-In
- The
break-in at the DNC headquarters was orchestrated by individuals close to
Nixon’s Committee to Re-Elect the President (CRP), such as G.
Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt, not through the National
Security Council or the State Department.
- Kissinger’s
name did not appear in any direct planning, funding, or execution of the
break-in or cover-up.
2. Taping Was a Presidential Decision
- The
taping system was ordered by Nixon and managed by his chief of
staff H.R. Haldeman and other inner-circle aides.
- Since
Kissinger didn’t authorize or manage the taping infrastructure, Congress
viewed it as a White House internal matter.
- Moreover,
Kissinger had no authority over the technical operations of the Oval
Office or Nixon’s executive decision to secretly record conversations.
3. Congress Focused on Nixon and His Inner Circle
- The Senate
Watergate Committee and later the House Judiciary Committee
focused on Nixon, John Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman,
and John Dean, who were all directly tied to the scandal.
- Kissinger,
although a central policy figure, was careful to stay publicly
apolitical and distanced from the scandal's core operations.
4. Political Pragmatism & Cold War Realities
- Kissinger
was seen as essential to U.S. foreign policy continuity, especially
during the Cold War.
- He
was in the middle of:
- The
opening to China
- SALT
I negotiations with the USSR
- Middle
East shuttle diplomacy post-Yom Kippur War
- Congress
may have intentionally avoided destabilizing U.S. diplomacy by
dragging Kissinger into the Watergate mud.
5. He Did Face Some Congressional Scrutiny — But Not
Prosecution
- Kissinger
testified before Congress several times, especially regarding wiretaps
authorized on journalists and NSC staff during leaks.
- In
1973, he admitted that at Nixon’s request, he had approved
wiretaps on certain staff and journalists between 1969–1971 to stop
leaks (unrelated to Watergate).
- This
was controversial, but he claimed national security justification,
and no criminal charges were filed.
Congress did not pursue Kissinger for the Watergate scandal
because:
- He
wasn’t involved in the break-in or Oval Office taping.
- His
national security role was too valuable to risk disrupting.
- The
administration shielded him, and no clear evidence linked him to illegal
activity.
Broader Constitutional and Democratic Implications
Both the Watergate and JFK episodes demonstrate not only systemic
fragility, but also a troubling pattern: when the rot is close to the
core of power, the system tends to protect itself rather than root it out.
In both cases:
- Selective
investigations protected influential figures like Henry Kissinger
during Watergate, and elite CIA links in the aftermath of JFK's death.
- Congressional
inaction or cautious probing often revealed more about what was
avoided than what was pursued.
- No
structural backup exists in the U.S. Constitution for a nonpartisan,
independent mechanism to hold a rogue president or a compromised
administration accountable beyond impeachment — which is itself a
political act, not a legal one.
This vacuum of institutional remedy — especially when
intelligence, foreign policy, and executive power intersect — leaves room for deep
state or vested interests to act with impunity or collude silently.
When these powers collide (or coincide), public
accountability becomes a casualty.
Why Did Kissinger Never Run?
Kissinger was born in Germany. He was not a natural-born
U.S. citizen — a Constitutional requirement for the presidency. More
importantly, his influence thrived in backrooms and diplomacy, not populist
politics. He wielded immense unelected power — more secure than electoral
power.
Did CIA Know of China-Russia Trips?
Yes. Kissinger’s secret trip to China in 1971 was tightly
held — but not hidden from the intelligence apparatus. Nixon ensured they were
informed, partly to avoid sabotage. However, it was compartmentalized; only the
essential few were aware.
Why Did the Vatican and U.S. Establishment Allow
China/USSR Engagement?
The Vatican’s anti-communism was real, but its diplomatic
machinery supported engagement when it advanced global stability — or Church
interests (like protecting Catholics in communist regions). U.S. establishments
accepted détente as a tactical maneuver. Kissinger’s actions were not
spontaneous; they were pre-approved at the highest levels.
The Silence Around Kissinger and Intelligence Involvement
As NSA and Secretary of State, Kissinger was the key link
between diplomacy and intelligence. Yet, when Watergate unfolded, no formal
investigation probed his knowledge of the tapping operation, despite his
closeness to the agencies and the President.
Why? Because accountability has boundaries when
institutional balance is at risk. Bringing someone like Kissinger into formal
legal jeopardy could have rocked the very foundations of national security and
international confidence.
This again shows the divide: elected power is expendable;
positional power, often, is not.
Why the System Removed Nixon but Not Others
The removal of Nixon — through political and legal process,
not assassination — contrasts with the tragedy of JFK. But both cases show that
when a president is seen as a liability to larger goals, institutional force
converges. Nixon was no revolutionary — he supported capitalist systems,
pursued foreign détente, and did not challenge major financial or religious
institutions.
Yet, when his methods (secrecy, paranoia, use of
intelligence for domestic advantage) threatened the legitimacy of institutions
themselves, he became a risk. Crucially, he was removed without threatening
those behind him. The system absorbed the scandal, preserved its deeper
interests, and moved forward.
Congressional and Legal Failures
Just like the Warren Commission after JFK, the Watergate
investigations avoided full accountability. Congress did not press for
Kissinger’s testimony because:
- He
was considered essential to foreign policy stability.
- He
operated behind a shield of national security.
- There
was bipartisan reluctance to unravel elite complicity.
No Alternate to the President?
The Constitution provides impeachment but not enough clarity
on checks when executive branches are complicit or when unelected officials
mislead the President. This institutional fragility enables power centers to
operate unchecked — a key takeaway.
Nixon’s Faith and Russia Stance
Nixon was a Quaker by background — a faith promoting peace.
Ironically, he expanded the Vietnam War before ending it. His diplomacy with
China and détente with the USSR marked a shift from hawkishness to calculated
engagement.
He wasn't soft on communism; he believed in pragmatic
containment through diplomacy.
Quotes from Nixon on CIA (from tapes):
- “The
Ivy League liberals in the CIA are not worth a damn.”
- “The
CIA has too many people that are left-wing and against the
administration.”
- “They
think they’re smarter than the President. I’m going to fix that.”
These reflect his deep distrust of the agency’s leadership.
Reader Reflection and Action
What Can We Learn?
- The
presidency is not always the apex of power.
- Institutional
loyalty can be conditional.
- Truth
in politics is often negotiated, not revealed.
- Vatican is in the business of real estate and money making in the name of religion and its role in certain actions are dubious and coinciding but the proof of its involvement may not be explicit
What Can You Do?
- Read
between official narratives.
- Share
histories that aren’t sanitized.
- Question
unelected power.
- Amplify
alternative investigations.
- Call upon Vatican to restrain itself to religious practices
History is written by the survivors. Truth is preserved
by those who dare to ask inconvenient questions.
Note: This blog is based on publicly reported facts,
credible journalistic sources, and widely discussed concerns in the global
community. It reflects the views of concerned individuals and is intended to
spark dialogue, awareness, and accountability.
Comments
Post a Comment