Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

*SPOILER THREAD
Tim Weiner will be dropping in periodically to answer any and all of your questions regarding his book.

Please begin posting your questions for the author on this thread as soon as the thread is opened up.

Thank you and I hope you will you enjoy this special author experience here at the History Book Club.

by Tim Weiner

All, Tim Weiner will be joining us for this discussion so please in advance begin asking questions concerning the book One Man Against the World: The Tragedy of Richard Nixon here on this thread. Here is an example of the format: (you do not have to add the citation for this book because it is being discussed)

by Tim Weiner

Question: - Here is where you would type your question. Make sure that your question stands out in your post so it is easy for Tim Weiner to spot the question and answer quickly without wasting any time. We look forward to Tim being with us and we want to make the experience enjoyable for him too. Bold the word question followed by a colon and then type your question.

All, please begin asking Tim Weiner questions about the book, Richard Nixon, Watergate, the tapes, etc.

Use the format above in message two - bold the word Question: and follow it with your question to make your question stand out for Tim so that he can answer it easily.

Welcome Tim.

We are delighted to have you with us again.

Question: What made you decide to focus on Nixon and the tapes which were more recently released? There have been so many books written about the man - how does this book explore President Nixon in a different way?

Question: Given the fame that Nixon had earned due to his tenacity in trying to portray Alger Hiss as a "traitor", a much disputed claim even to date, is it possible to view Nixon's ruthless character in the early days as a bridge to the very ruthless and dangerous person, person in power that is, that he became as President?

Tim, we have asked the recipients of the book offer to respond to some pre questions before starting to read the book. We asked whether they were alive when President Nixon was president and if so - how old they were and what they remembered. What were their parents' feelings about the man and we asked them some other questions about what their preconceived ideas were about Ford's pardon, the fairness of what happened at that period of time. We want the readers to go back after reading your book and tell us how their preconceived ideas stayed the same, changed dramatically or slightly and how the book either solidified those views or changed them.

Please feel free to jump into any of the conversations or posts on any of the book's threads.

Question: What has fascinated you the most about Richard Nixon?

Question: What do you say to people who, even to this day, try to brush off Watergate as some "political Caper"? Nixon was full of intrigue from his very serious methods during the Hiss case and the sabotage of the Vietnam Peace talks. Knowing the politics of the day, Did the press or anyone disclose the very unethical techniques Nixon and Kissinger used in the Vietnam peace talks? It was my impression that many people in Paris of 1968 had begun to celebrate just before the talks ended rather abruptly? Could this be our first October surprise?

I am forwarding a link to a recent article in Politico Magazine just last year concerning new evidence released by the National Archives ()

Very good questions Mike - just bold the word Question: so that it stands out for Tim - otherwise thank you for jumping right in. I hope everyone follows your lead.

Bentley wrote: "Very good questions Mike - just bold the word Question: so that it stands out for Tim - otherwise thank you for jumping right in. I hope everyone follows your lead."

I am not sure exactly how to do that. I have been trying to go back and change it.

Mike wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Very good questions Mike - just bold the word Question: so that it stands out for Tim - otherwise thank you for jumping right in. I hope everyone follows your lead."

I am not sure ..."

I got my HTML book out. I just noticed that we can use that here.

Very good Mike - excellent (smile)

Question: What is so curious to me is Nixon's background. Here is a guy that came from a background that does not readily appear to be Republican. What I mean by this is that his family was not rich nor was it intensely poor, yet he did manage to go to college and law school. Yet, unlike Truman or Johnson, he would say "I did not become president to build outhouses in Peoria." How is it that someone who would invoke his own history would often try to get away from it as fast as possible? Is Nixon unique in this aspect?

Tim.....we are so glad that you are joining us again as we read another of your books. It is appreciated.

Question: I would think that it would be very difficult to write without bias about a man that the majority of people think was an unethical crook. How do you approach your writing without being influenced by the negative profile of Nixon?

Hello Tim, thanks so much for participating and making yourself available in this forum. It's a treat to have access to your perspective.

Question: Have you seen any of the material recently released by Alexander Butterfield? If so, did you find any surprises, or did it only confirm much of what you found in your ample research for this book? Anything you might expect to find that would be new if you have not seen the Butterfield materials, and is there much left of any records related to Nixon that have yet to be released?

Question: Did you become a reporter because of the Nixon presidency & Watergate?

Question: What most surprised you about Nixon that was revealed in the new releases of documents/tapes?

Tim - thanks for joining the conversation!

Question: Did your personal opinion of Nixon radically change - or change at all - while you where researching and writing this book? And as a secondary question, did your opinion of any of the other characters in the Nixon drama change at all?

Tim, thanks for joining this discussion.

Question: As I start to read the book I was wondering if there is still classified information regarding Watergate and if so, will it ever be released?

Thanks Tim, for this wonderful opportunity! I have not read any of your previous books, but you have got me seriously hooked :) It reads like a science fiction / fantasy and I have to keep reminding myself that this stuff is real! Surprisingly, I am becoming fascinated with Henry Kissinger.

Question:
Do you have plans to write other biographies/studies going forward?

Hello again, Goodreaders! Thanks for having me back. Bentley, the origins of ONE MAN AGAINST THE WORLD:The Tragedy of Richard Nixon go back more than two years ago, when I was invited to the Nixon Presidential Library to talk about RN's relationship with J. Edgar Hoover, whom Nixon called "my closest friend in all of political life"-- a fascinating statement, since RN trusted no man; he did not have friends, but allies, in his political life. After the talk, I had a private conversation with the Nixon library's archivists, who told me in confidence that all of the remaining classified materials in the Nixon archives would be released by the end of 2014. These included the famous tapes -- many hundreds of hours -- and almost all of the key White House documents, including reams of H.R. Haldeman's daily diaries. I decided then and there that I would pounce on the new documentation for my book.

Mike asked: Did Nixon's "ruthless character" at the outset of his political career -- in going after Alger Hiss,for example -- remain throughout his Presidency?

Mike, it did indeed. Throughout his Presidency, Nixon constantly referred to the Hiss case as an exemplar of "how you play the game," as he would put it. Nixon felt he was surrounded by enemies, and that to maintain and strengthen his power as President, his enemies had to be destroyed, by any means necessary. Nixon had a unique concept of the rules of the game. There were no rules. As he himself put it, "if the President does it, that means it is not illegal."

Welcome back Tim and thank you for your response above. We are delighted to have you back with us.

There is a lot of interest in your book and the subject matter.

Bentley asked: How does this book explore President Nixon in a different way?

Bentley, the newly released tapes and documents made me understand that Vietnam and Watergate were the same war. They were one war fought on two fronts. In the Vietnam war, Nixon used B-52 bombers to destroy his enemies. In the acts of political warfare we call Watergate, his weapons were break-ins, black-bag jobs, bugging and warrantless wiretaps. Until you hear the new tapes, you have no clear understanding how besieged Nixon felt on the home front. You come to realize that he knew his presidency was doomed before he was sworn in for his second term. And you see how insomnia and alcohol ravaged his judgment.

Hello, Tim. I'm so excited to be reading your book and your comments.

Question: Considering the fact that everyone felt that McGovern had no chance to winning the 1972 election, did you gain any more insight into why Nixon insisted on breaking into Watergate?

Bentley also asked: What has fascinated you the most about Richard Nixon?

Bentley, Nixon has fascinated me all my life. I was 12 when he was sworn in and 18 when he fell. Researching and writing this book made me realize that Nixon had a strange sort of genius, perhaps unique among presidents, and it was riveting to explore the facets of his innermost thoughts on the new tapes, which cover the period from the June 1972 Watergate break-in to the revelation that the tapes existed in July 1973. To listen to Nixon privately contemplating using nuclear weapons against North Vietnam while publicly seeking "peace with honor"is bone-chilling. Martin Luther King said it best after meeting Nixon for the first time in 1958 (that's not a typo -- 1958!): "Nixon has a genius for convincing one that he is sincere, If Richard Nixon is not since, he is the most dangerous man in America."

Mike asked: What do you say to people who, even to this day, try to brush off Watergate as some 'political caper'? Nixon Nixon was full of intrigue from his very serious methods during the Hiss case and the sabotage of the Vietnam Peace talks. Knowing the politics of the day, did the press or anyone disclose the very unethical techniques Nixon and Kissinger used in the Vietnam peace talks?

Mike, while Nixon had no specific foreknowledge of the details of the break-in at the Democratic National Committee HQ at its Watergate office suite, a week after the break-in he taped himself commanding the CIA to stop the FBI from investigating the break-in because it was a matter of national security. Political sabotage and espionage was part and parcel of Nixon's political make-up. No one except President Johnson and his innermost national security team knew about Nixon's efforts to sabotage the 1968 Paris peace talks, and LBJ knew because the FBI had South Vietnam's Washington embassy wired and the NSA had the presidential palace in Saigon wired. They did not disclose their knowledge -- which would have been the October Surprise of all time --because the evidence and the techniques by which it was gathered were too secret to reveal. But LBJ said, flat out, "This is treason."

Mike asked: Here is a guy that came from a background that does not readily appear to be Republican....How is it that someone who would invoke his own history would often try to get away from it as fast as possible? Is Nixon unique in this aspect?

Mike, Nixon was hardly the first President to try to transcend his family background and his personal history. For example, both Nixon and LBJ came from families on the very edge of poverty, and both had childhoods filled with bitterness and struggle, and both used political power to try to amass wealth. One telling example: why did Nixon make the tapes -- and then preserve them? Because he wanted to write a multi-million-dollar post-presidential memoir! (And to guard himself against the inevitable memoirs of Henry Kissinger).

Jill asked: I would think that it would be very difficult to write without bias about a man that the majority of people think was an unethical crook. How do you approach your writing without being influenced by the negative profile of Nixon?

Jill, as Ray Price, Nixon's best speechwriter, says at the conclusion of ONE MAN AGAINST THE WORLD: "People forget that he was actually human. A lot of people may not believe this, but he was." Nixon was not a monster -- he was a man. He had monstrous impulses, but they usually surfaced late and night, when he was drunk, and sober-sided aides like Haldeman knew to file and forget Nixon's enraged or irrational orders.

In writing history, or in newspaper reporting, it's crucial to keep your ideology out of your work, and to curb your prejudices. Ideology is the enemy of intelligence; prejudice is the enemy of clear judgment. In Nixon's case, the documentation of his presidency is so rich, so replete with jaw-dropping words and deeds, that it's the author's job to absorb it all, boil it down to the essential elements, and get the heck out of the way. Then readers can have the pleasure of discovering a new Nixon on their own. The author need not intrude too much when the material is so amazing.

Alisa asked: Have you seen any of the material recently released by Alexander Butterfield? If so, did you find any surprises, or did it only confirm much of what you found in your ample research for this book? Anything you might expect to find that would be new if you have not seen the Butterfield materials, and is there much left of any records related to Nixon that have yet to be released?

Alisa, yes, I have. On pp. 277-78 of ONE MAN AGAINST THE WORLD, there's a particularly poignant passage from Alexander Butterfield, in his own words, from 2012, that sums up his thoughts and feelings about revealing the existence of the secret Nixon White House tapes to Senate Watergate committee investigators in July 1973. "I knew that it would be the end....," it begins. (For those who haven't read this far, Butterfield was the Oval Office gatekeeper, and one of four men who knew about the tapes, in the first Nixon administration. Nixon then made him the head of the Federal Aviation Administration). And Butterfield was right;his revelation led directly to Nixon's downfall (and, as he knew it would, ended his own career in Washington).

As for what remains to be declassified, there are tens of thousands of pages of diplomatic, intelligence, and military history which, under law, should have been released more than a decade ago, dealing with the American defeat in the Vietnam war, the Nixon-backed coup against the democratically elected president of Chile, the SALT nuclear weapons deal with Russia, and other hot topics. Much of this material is being withheld at the insistence of the CIA, an agency I knew fairly well, since I used to cover it for The New York Times.

Bryan asked: Did you become a reporter because of the Nixon presidency & Watergate?

You bet I did!

Teri asked: What most surprised you about Nixon that was revealed in the new releases of documents/tapes?

The extent to which alcohol and insomnia warped Nixon's judgment. He treated his sleeplessness by drinking -- a very bad idea.
Every waking moment of Nixon's days and nights are recorded in White House logs (and on tape from February 1971 to July 1973). In May 1970, he went for more than a week with less than two or three hours' sleep a night after his decision to invade Cambodia, the national revulsion at the invasion, and the subsequent killings of four kids at Kent State by National Guardsmen. In this and other times of crisis, he was very close to the edge of sanity.

Ted asked: Did your personal opinion of Nixon radically change - or change at all - while researching and writing this book? Did your opinion of any of the other characters in the Nixon drama change?

I thought I had a pretty good grasp on Nixon when I set out to write ONE MAN AGAINST THE WORLD. Little did I know. My understanding of the man deepened, at times profoundly, when I realized how little he trusted any of his top military, diplomatic, and intelligence chiefs; how alone, how isolated, how angry this mistrust made him feel. The most powerful man on earth, commander of a national-security state on high alert, felt powerless and insecure. He feared America could fall into a state of anarchy unless he exercised a unitary power over the country -- Congress and the courts be damned. The aforementioned states of sleeplessness and drunkenness were frightening, especially on tape. And I had a deep sense of tragedy -- hence the subtitle of the book -- as I saw a man destroying himself, and endangering American democracy.

My appreciation for H.R. Haldeman increased enormously. He spent more time with Nixon than Nixon spent with his own wife and daughters. As Nixon's chief of staff, Haldeman recorded everything that happened in his diaries, first written, then taped, and everything he recorded checks out as true. He was highly perceptive -- and he had a mordant sense of humor, especially about Nixon and Kissinger, which may perhaps be a surprise even to Nixon aficionados.

Fausto asked: Is there still classified information regarding Watergate and if so, will it ever be released?

Yes, there are some Watergate-related documents still classified, but I think with the newly released tapes and documents we now have a good idea about *why* the Plumbers broke into the DNC HQ. They were looking for dirt on DNC chairman Larry O'Brien -- and looking to find out if O'Brien, a stalwart Kennedy man, had any dirt on Nixon.

Betty asked: Do you have plans to write other biographies or studies?

Absolutely! I will keep writing until they pry my cold dead fingers from the keyboard. I can't tell you what my next one is -- that's under the seal. But in the meantime I recommend my history of the CIA, LEGACY OF ASHES. There's a chance it may become a dramatic television series a few years from now --fingers crossed!

Great answers, Tim, thank you.

Francie asked:Considering the fact that everyone felt that McGovern had no chance to winning the 1972 election, did you gain any more insight into why Nixon insisted on breaking into Watergate?

Francie, see my answer to Fausto, two questions up. I would add as a side comment that even paranoids have enemies.

The newly declassified materials definitively show that the Plumbers broke into the DNC's HQ looking for dirt on DNC chairman Larry O'Brien -- and looking to find out if O'Brien, a stalwart Kennedy man, had any dirt on Nixon.

Specifically, Nixon's dirty-tricks squad had learned by combing through the records of the IRS that O'Brien was on a secret $180,000-a-year retainer to work as a lobbyist for the paranoid and reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes.

The other side to that coin was that Nixon's ne'er-do-well brother Donald had taken a $205,000 loan from Hughes to finance a restaurant in the Nixons' home town, Whittier, California. The Hughes loan was one among many skeletons in RN's closet. The Plumbers wanted to see if O'Brien knew about it.

By the way, if the Plumbers had not been caught and arrested at the DNC, their next mission that same night was to break into McGovern's campaign headquarters!

Tim, as a historian I thank you for your clarity regarding how Vietnam and Watergate are inextricably linked. In fact, this is something that is hard for people to understand, at first, because we see the Vietnam situation as a foreign policy matter and Watergate linked with domestic politics. I believe that you are correct in that had Nixon ended the Vietnam war earlier, he may not have felt the need to proceed in the Watergate matter. Have you seen the Frontline documentary "Watergate plus 30". This was one of the best documentaries available. IN the documentary Hugh Sloan makes a revelation about just how much Nixon knew about the political capers that CREEP was up to. Which so often begs the question "What did the President know and when did he know it?" I agree with your assessment that Nixon may not have known about the Watergate plans directly. Question When you assess the comments by Sloan, who I believe was the deputy campaign director under Mitchell, one wonders if Nixon actually knew more or planned the activities? One of the biggest questions I have always pondered was Why did he cover it up if he did not aid in planning? Do you believe that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that Nixon knew more about Watergate than just covering it up?

For me I believe the answer was more than he just wanted to protect friends, as you state he had few of them, or that he wanted to save the reputation of CREEP.

As I just finished the Intro through Chapter 4 (our reading for this week), I am completely blown away by how much Nixon was able to get away with.

Question:
How was it possible that Nixon had so much power, to be able to get away with so many horrendous things? I mean, the Presidency of the US is not supposed to be a dictatorship! Are there things in place now to prevent secrecy and deception from our trusted leaders?

Hi, Tim! Thanks for taking time to further illuminate your work. I've enjoyed your answers thus far.

Question:
In the wake of every additional thing you've dug up on Nixon's presidency, do you think he did anything positive for our country?

Thank you Tim as always for your interactions - they are always excellent.

Mike wrote: "Tim, as a historian I thank you for your clarity regarding how Vietnam and Watergate are inextricably linked. In fact, this is something that is hard for people to understand, at first, because we ..."

Mike can you follow the required format for Tim - he has limited time and that is why we use the format we do:

Question: - Put the word Question: in bold
Then type your questions.

If you have other things to say - then say them above. But make sure your questions stand out. Check out how folks did this above and check out the directions in message 2. Thanks.

Dear Mr. Weiner - this question I asked in my comments on the first section of our reading of this book was suggested to be put to you in this series of posts

Question

"I just wonder how Mr. Weiner can subject himself for book after book researching these dismal chapters and incidents in our history. "

So maybe the better question is why than how but I can understand your need to understand the facts to write these books that are so much appreciated.

Thanks

Bentley wrote: "Mike wrote: "Tim, as a historian I thank you for your clarity regarding how Vietnam and Watergate are inextricably linked. In fact, this is something that is hard for people to understand, at first..."

Hi Bentley

How does one bold etc on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ?

Thanks

Dear Goodreaders, I am on the road for the next four days and will return late Tuesday. Keep those questions coming! Answers will be forthcoming. Best wishes, Tim Weiner

Question;

I have always had a rather positive impression of Dr. Henry Kissinger and feel that he is a brilliant man. What is your opinion of why he became entangled in the illegal activities of the Nixon presidency......was it power grabbing or did he have another agenda of which I am unaware.

Tim wrote: "Ted asked: Did your personal opinion of Nixon radically change - or change at all - while researching and writing this book? Did your opinion of any of the other characters in the Nixon drama chang..."

Thanks for the reply Tim - I agree after beginning your book, Haldeman and his devotion is fascinating! It seems like all presidents tend to have someone (or a few someones like Haldeman).

Tim - enjoy your time away and we will see you late next Tuesday or Wednesday. We appreciate this opportunity and the questions will keep (smile).

Regards,

Bentley

Mike asked,referring to the Watergate break-in: Why did he cover it up? (Particularly because he knew, as he said several times on tape, it's not the crime but the cover-up that can kill you).

Mike, Nixon's immediate instinct was to order the CIA to tell the FBI to back off the investigation of the Watergate break-in on the grounds that it was a national-security matter. After all, the Watergate burglars and wiretappers were all veterans of the CIA and the FBI; it looked like a plausible argument in the political context of Nixon's White House. (Little-known fact: had they not been arrested at the Democratic National Committee HQ at the Watergate, the gang's next target that night was McGovern campaign HQ).

Nixon's immediate instinct was to obstruct justice. This was the subject of the "smoking gun" tape recorded six days after the break-in. The sole prohibition placed upon the CIA in its original 1947 charter was that it would have no police powers in the US -- Truman said he wanted "no Gestapo."

Nixon was playing with fire and the consequence was the smoking gun. Once that tape was released -- by virtue of a 8-0 Supreme Court decision more than two years after it was recorded -- Nixon's presidency was doomed. Had he not resigned, he would unquestionably have been impeached in the House, convicted in the Senate, removed from office and -- as a private citizen -- likely to be indicted, convicted, and conceivably imprisoned for conspiracy to obstruct justice. Hence the logic of Ford's pardon after Nixon's resignation: why put the country through the ordeal of the criminal trial of an ex-President on the eve of our Bicentennial?

Vincent wrote: How can you subject yourself to digging into all these dismal facts?

I cannot improve on what James Madison, one of the finest Framers, wrote as the final drafts of Constitution were being debated (fyi: by "popular government" he means a open democracy of, by, and for the people; by "population information" he means public information on the workings of government):

"A popular government, without popular information, is but a prelude to a tragedy or a farce, or perhaps both."

It's my job to dig up the information. It's an important element of American democracy.

Jill wrote: "I have always had a rather positive impression of Dr. Henry Kissinger and feel that he is a brilliant man. What is your opinion of why he became entangled in the illegal activities of the Nixon presidency."

Jill, Kissinger became powerful by his proximity to the President. He and Nixon were both instinctively covert and clandestine. They and they alone ran the Vietnam War, the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA by concentrating information and decision-making at Kissinger's National Security Council. And information --especially secret information --is power.

Kissinger was enthusiastic, to put it politely, about the 1969 buggings of his own National Security Council staff, newspaper reporters, and senior American diplomats to stop the leaks of information from the White House and the NSC to The New York Times and the Washington Post. He was the driving force behind the government's efforts to destroy Daniel Ellsberg (the Snowden of the '70s) after Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times. And he always encourage Nixon to "brutalize" the enemy in the Vietnam War, in part because his secret diplomacy was not working, and despite his dramatic declaration on the eve of the 1972 election,peace was not at hand.

Kissinger is 93, still writing his endless memoirs, still trying to rewrite history. But others will have the last word in years to come.