plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (Scott Plunkett) (04/06/84)
:
One of Americas better presidents, Richard Nixon, has been
chatting it up in a CBS interview (the first of which is
to be shown Sunday on "60 Minutes"). The Washington Times
reports that Mr. Nixon explains why the CIA was so upset
about the infamous Pentagon Papers: because "one of the
items in the Pentagon Papers could only have come from
the fact that we had Brezhnev's car bugged."
In another, unrelated article in the Times, Henry Kissinger
is accused by "informed sources" that he withheld certain
intelligence from the Joint Chiefs so as not to prejudice
the SALT I. The intelligence indicated that the USSR was
*planning* to violate the agreement with the new SS19; they
were figuring out the appropriate loophole. Source of the
intelligence? a "Brezhnev limousine telephone conversation."
Food for thought.
--
..{allegra,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkettnotes@iuvax.UUCP (04/09/84)
#R:rlgvax:-185200:iuvax:2000019:000:500 iuvax!scsg Apr 8 10:30:00 1984 The Washington Times??????? Do people out there in Netland know who owns the Washington Times? A trustworthy source if ever there was one_ Reverend Moon!! I would put no more credence on information in a Moony mouthpiece than I would in the Daily Worker! Richard Nixon was not one of this country's "better" presidents-- a man forced to resign because of multiple violations of Federal Law can hardly be called a "good President". tim sevener Indiana University, Bloomington pur-ee!iuvax!scsg
plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (Scott Plunkett) (04/09/84)
:
The statement that Richard Nixon was one of America's better
presidents is my statement, and my opinion. The Washington
Times has made no such declaration.
Re, the funding from Rev. Moon. Quite true, but the attached
implication that the Times' editorials, commentary and
news reporting is biased, or somehow tainted by and a "mouth
piece" of the Unification Church just doesn't wash.
It's a conservative paper with accurate news reportage, which
may explain the hostility.
:
--
..{allegra,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkettalle@ihuxb.UUCP (Allen England) (04/10/84)
+ > Richard Nixon was not one of this country's "better" presidents-- > a man forced to resign because of multiple violations of Federal Law > can hardly be called a "good President". > tim sevener Nixon was NEVER convicted of ANY violations of any FEDERAL laws. Just reminding you of the facts. --> Allen <-- ihnp4!ihuxb!alle
ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (04/10/84)
--
Al England reminds us that Nixon was never convicted of violating
any Federal laws. True, but don't forget he resigned, and was
immediately pardoned for anything he even might have done. He was
impeached, of course, and the charges were not trivial. If you don't
believe he was a crook you are a fool. Now, whether he was a
good president is another question. Other presidents have probably
been crooks, and probably for pettier things than obstruction of
justice. They didn't get caught though.
You have to admit that the relationship between the US and USSR
was quite constructive during the Nixon administration. Perhaps more
so than at any time since WW II. The Kremlin got along with Nixon,
but then they understood and trusted someone who thought (though
could not act--the Constitution and all that) the way they did.
I'm told, by a friend who teaches Russian and Russian history, that
Stalin trusted and understood just one world leader--whose betrayal he
never got over--Hitler.
Hey, it's "just a theory".
--
*** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** *****
****** ****** 10 Apr 84 [21 Germinal An CXCII]
ken perlow ***** *****
(312)979-7261 ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken *** ***flinn@seismo.UUCP (E. A. Flinn) (04/10/84)
--- Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator, and if he had not arranged with Ford for a blanket pardon, he might well have been convicted of several Federal crimes. Nixon was a liar, cheat, and a thief, who debased and degraded American public life for a quarter of a century. Although his greed led directly to his downfall, the frightening thing about Nixon is that he was not an anomaly among politicians. Sooner or later a President will come along who is equally crooked, but less stupid and venal - and then we will all be in deep yoghurt.
esac@ihuxp.UUCP (Bill Adams) (04/11/84)
I believe that Nixon was not a crook but I guess that depends on how you
define "crook". He never stole anything that I know of.
He DID act stupidly and unlawfully but I think that Nixon thought, in his
own somewhat perverted way of viewing things, that he was really doing the
best thing for the country and the presidency. He was wrong, mind you, but
I don't think he did what he did for personal gain.
I also feel that history will be much kinder to him than his contemporaries.
He wasn't all that bad.
But he did get caught!
--
Bill Adams ==> AT&T Communications <==
ihnp4!ihuxp!esac
(312) 979-6267wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/11/84)
[] Ok, Ok, now you have done it. Although I can not condone Nixon's actions in his attempt to cover up the Watergate breakin, I can not either condone the stupidity that some people have spread here on the net and generally in their conversations. There have been several allegations that Nixon was a thief. Just what is it he is alleged to have stolen? Granted, he lied about his involvement. He has, and is currently(on CBS), admitted that he lied. If you say that he stole your confidence, then you are very naive. There is no law that protects you from having your confidence stolen. If there were, the jails would be full of used-car salesmen and politicians. Come on, all of you Nixon haters, tell the net what you mean when you call Nixon a thief. While you are at it, tell us where he cheated. I will not defend his lying, but I will not let stupid remarks about stealing and cheating go unanswered. Let's try to keep historical events in perspective. Remember another thing, Nixon was NOT impeached. The impeachment proceedings had not even begun when he resigned. The bill for impeachment had only been voted out of committee. It had not been considered by the full House as yet. Whether he was pardoned or not for supposed crimes became academic once he had resigned. Impeachment is for Federal Officers, from the top down. Once he had resigned, he was no longer a Federal Officer, and thus, would have had to be indicted and tried in a Federal Court. So, you can call him a liar all you want, but please try to keep things in the right perspective and stop all of this thief nonsense. T. C. Wheeler
cas@cvl.UUCP (Cliff Shaffer) (04/11/84)
>> Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator, and if he had not arranged >> with Ford for a blanket pardon, he might well have been convicted of >> several Federal crimes. Nixon was a liar, cheat, and a thief, who >> debased and degraded American public life for a quarter of a century. >> Although his greed led directly to his downfall, the frightening thing >> about Nixon is that he was not an anomaly among politicians. Sooner >> or later a President will come along who is equally crooked, but less >> stupid and venal - and then we will all be in deep yoghurt. The worst aspect of our political situation is that, while the above statement is true, I think that it is also true that Nixon was probably the best president we have had in the last 20-25 years (depending on whether you liked Kennedy or not). This is not intended as a pro-Nixon statement. Cliff Shaffer ...mcnc!rlgvax!cvl!cas
liberte@uiucdcs.UUCP (04/12/84)
#R:rlgvax:-185200:uiucdcs:29200127:000:688 uiucdcs!liberte Apr 12 13:04:00 1984 > /**** uiucdcs:net.politics / ihuxb!alle / 6:51 pm Apr 10, 1984 ****/ > Nixon was NEVER convicted of ANY violations of any FEDERAL laws. > Just reminding you of the facts. > --> Allen <-- > ihnp4!ihuxb!alle You put THE emPHAsis on THE wrong words: Nixon was never CONVICTED of any violations of any federal laws. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > /**** uiucdcs:net.politics / seismo!flinn / 9:10 pm Apr 10, 1984 ****/ > Sooner or later a President will come along who is equally crooked, but less > stupid and venal - and then we will all be in deep yoghurt. Enter Raygun and company. Daniel LaLiberte, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
lkk@mit-eddie.UUCP (Larry Kolodney) (04/13/84)
If you're going to nitpick, NIXON WAS A THEIF. HE ORDERED THE BREAKIN TO THE OFFICE OF DANEIL ELLSBERG'S PSYCHIATRIST, IN ORDER TO *STEAL* CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BLACKMAIL. How soon we forget... -- Larry Kolodney (The Devil's Advocate) (USE) ..decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!lkk (ARPA) lkk@mit-mc
notes@iuvax.UUCP (04/13/84)
#R:rlgvax:-185200:iuvax:2000029:000:658 iuvax!scsg Apr 12 17:02:00 1984 I seem to recall testimony about members of CREEP going around with briefcases stuffed with hard cash. I seem to recall letters written to prominent newspapers in other people's names. I seem to recall lists of public figures cited as "enemies". (is this over yet with the Reagan administration now in power? an article in the New York Times reported Wm. Casey and other top officials being implicated by a report about the compilation of an list of American citizens who shouldn't be allowed to travel abroad and speak--including current Presidential candidate Gary Hart!) What does it take to consider somebody "crooked"? tim sevener pur-ee!iuvax!scsg
rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) (04/13/84)
<> From Allen England's posting: > > Richard Nixon was not one of this country's "better" presidents-- > > a man forced to resign because of multiple violations of Federal Law > > can hardly be called a "good President". > > tim sevener > >Nixon was NEVER convicted of ANY violations of any FEDERAL laws. > >Just reminding you of the facts. Sevener didn't say that he was convicted - only that he violated the law. Nixon was never convicted because his appointed successor (:-) managed to misunderstand the concept of "pardon" so completely that he was never brought to trial. Just reminding you of the facts... ...and T.C. Wheeler: >There have been several allegations that Nixon was a thief... He's right; this is incorrect. People should be alleging that Nixon was a "crook", not a "thief", crook being a general term for a crooked person. >Remember another thing, Nixon was NOT impeached... >...Whether he was pardoned or >not for supposed crimes became academic once he had resigned. No, it didn't become academic. Impeachment is a means for removing an elected official from office. (Actually, impeachment is only an indictment; trial must follow.) Once impeached and convicted, an ex-official is THEN subject to prosecution for the crimes committed. In other words, you don't get immunity from prosecution by being President; it just takes a slightly different process at the start. Nixon's resignation only made the impeachment exercise academic. He still could have stood trial for the alleged crimes; he would have done so as a "civilian" at that point. -- "A friend of the devil is a friend of mine." Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303) 444-5710 x3086
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (04/14/84)
Nixon may not have been a thief, but by his own admission, he did do
his darnedest to subvert the basic instruments of democracy.
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmtmwm@ea.UUCP (04/17/84)
#R:rlgvax:-185200:ea:10100028:000:443 ea!mwm Apr 17 14:33:00 1984 /***** ea:net.politics / iuvax!note / 6:43 pm Apr 9, 1984 */ Richard Nixon was not one of this country's "better" presidents-- a man forced to resign because of multiple violations of Federal Law can hardly be called a "good President". tim sevener Indiana University, Bloomington pur-ee!iuvax!scsg /* ---------- */ Just compare him to what has followed, and many that preceeded. It's easy after that. Everything is relative... <mike
ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (04/20/84)
[] >> Richard Nixon was not one of this country's "better" presidents-- >> a man forced to resign because of multiple violations of Federal Law >> can hardly be called a "good President". >> tim sevener > >Nixon was NEVER convicted of ANY violations of any FEDERAL laws. > >Just reminding you of the facts. > The only reason Nixon was never convicted was because he was pardoned by his quisling lackey Ford before it was possible to try him. If you're going to remind us of the facts, let's get the facts straight, rather than use *some* of them to form a lie. -- Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!ward BELL: 303-497-1252 USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO 80307
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/23/84)
[] This is another, of many, invitation to those who keep saying Nixon broke some Federal Law. What law Mr Ward? Not one person has been able to cite a Federal Law broken by Nixon. Please post the law or laws that were broken. Thank you. Otherwise, please stop passing on the Democratic party rhetoric. We get enough from the current campaign.
tac@teldata.UUCP () (04/24/84)
, (sop to the blank line eaters--consider it a religious sacrifice)
Now I have stayed out of the Nixon debate long enough. Nixon was not
the best domestic president we have ever had. FACT. He may not even
have been the best foreign affairs president we have ever had, but he
was damn close to it! He got us OUT of Viet Nam (hey democratic supporters,
how come you never mention that with the "things he did in V. N."?),
he improved relations with China AND Russia at the same time, he (and
another of his "lakey"s--Kissenger) *STOPPED* a war in the Mid East,
and he was able to talk to leaders from all over the globe.
If (and my opinion is not relevant here) Nixon is so guilt of atrocities
and criminal activities here in the US, and you (and the rest of the
democrats) are concerned with the *TRUTH*--not just getting him out of
power--why were all investigations dropped as soon as he resigned?
True, he could not face criminal charges because of the pardon, but
civil damages could still be persued.
At the time I thought it rather odd that the Nixon witch hunt was tabled
for about six months when it occured to someone that they had better
get rid of Agnew first, then continued when Agnew had been dealt with.
If that sounds paranoid to you, go back a few years and check the news
files to see if that isn't the actual order of events then try to explain
it by any other logical means.
I am waiting to be informed!
From the Soapbox of
Tom Condon {...!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac}
A Radical A Day Keeps The Government At Bay.mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (04/25/84)
It's very easy for T.C. to be sure no-one will take him up on his
challenge to name a Federal (or other law) broken by Nixon. Since
Nixon was never (could never be) convicted, anyone that made a specific
claim of lawbreaking could be hit with quite a libel suit.
Wheeler is hiding behind a pretty good shield, pretending it's a spear!
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmtward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (04/26/84)
[] > This is another, of many, invitation to those who keep saying > Nixon broke some Federal Law. What law Mr Ward? Not one > person has been able to cite a Federal Law broken by Nixon. > Please post the law or laws that were broken. Thank you. > Otherwise, please stop passing on the Democratic party > rhetoric. We get enough from the current campaign. Republicans, Democrats, Communists, Creationists, and others (don't want to overburden the net with a complete list of fanatic types) seem to have one thing in common: they see what they want to see and nothing else. Well, let me join the list of those who have cited the federal law that caused Tricky Dick to set up (and, don't forget, accept) his pardon: The one that would have put him behind bars: The big one: Obstruction of justice. This is a felony. A federal crime. The one nobody has every mentioned before (any more lies?) We won't even give serious mention to common little laws that would have sent any one of us up the river. Like conspiracy to commit burglary - Danial Ellsburg and well as Watergate; misappropriation of funds, abuse of power, etc,etc. Unfortunately for those who cheered when Kennedy was murdered, there are a whole lot of us who do not forget. Not all the lies in your arsenal will make us forget. As for this being Democratic rhetoric let me say this: I used to think anyone would be better then Ronny, until I got a good look at Fritz. I thought that the Democrats could be counted on to elect a fool, and the Republicans could be counted on to elect a crook. The Republicans have done well in keeping up their side, but the Democrats seem to be going overboard, trying to elect a sleaze as well as a fool. This election should serve to totally disgust the nation. Maybe something good will come of it. -- Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!ward BELL: 303-497-1252 USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO 80307