Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (389620)	11/24/2018 9:47:55 PM
From: pocotrader	Respond to of 543754

politics is a dirty game but I have more respect for those who try to play fair

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (389620)	11/24/2018 9:55:05 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543754

Until first Nixon and then Gingrich came along, the Rs and the Ds did have some rules that they played by and had some scruples and they did allow some minority rights in the Senate. Some of that was because the Democratic Party was really an unholy alliance between liberals and Southerners, with the Southerners sometimes siding with Rs and sometimes with the Ds, depending on the issue. And the Rs weren't completely dominated by anti-tax anti-government people, even if they did have a "small government" faction that was fiercely anti-New Deal. They also had a faction in the Northeast that accepted the New Deal and distinctly uneasy with the South's apartheid society. Neither of the parties could treat politics as "blood sport" because they were so divided in themselves. Now, however, I think that while the Rs are still divided, their anti-tax, anti-regulation, anti-abortion factions have called a truce between themselves and you are right, with their new found clarity of the righteousness of their very specific goals, they can do whatever to achieve those goals. The Democratic Party is still a big tent, they don't have the same clarity as a group. There are still several competing factions with competing goals.

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (389620)	11/24/2018 10:05:03 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543754

If all politicians acted like Nixon did in '68 or Reagan did in '80, this country would be in an even bigger mess than we are. When a Candidate Conspired With a Foreign Power to Win An Election It took decades to unravel Nixon’s sabotage of Vietnam peace talks. Now, the full story can be told. By JOHN A. FARRELL August 06, 2017 Richard Nixon’s telephone calls came regularly during the 1968 campaign. And H.R. Haldeman took meticulous notes, jotting down the instructions he received from the candidate. Sometimes Nixon needed to blow off steam: demanding that a reporter from The Washington Post or The New York Times be banned from his campaign airplane for writing an offending story. (“Times and Post off,” Haldeman recorded. “Times forever.”) One such call came at midnight, from Nixon’s co-op apartment on Fifth Avenue: Haldeman dutifully noted that the stirring score to the World War II documentary Victory at Sea, which Nixon so enjoyed, was playing on a phonograph in the background. Other calls were steeped in intrigue. In one series of scribbles, Haldeman reported Henry Kissinger’s willingness to inform on his U.S. diplomatic colleagues, and keep Nixon updated on President Lyndon Johnson’s furious, eleventh-hour efforts to end the Vietnam War. Haldeman, 42, was Nixon’s campaign chief of staff, a devoted political adjutant since the 1950s. In late October 1968, the two men connected on what came to be known as “the Chennault Affair.” Nixon gave Haldeman his orders: Find ways to sabotage Johnson’s plans to stage productive peace talks, so that a frustrated American electorate would turn to the Republicans as their only hope to end the war. The gambit worked, and the Chennault Affair, named for Anna Chennault, the Republican doyenne and fundraiser who became Nixon’s back channel to the South Vietnamese government, lingered as a diplomatic and political whodunit for decades afterward. Johnson and his aides suspected this treachery at the time, for the Americans were eavesdropping on their South Vietnamese allies—(“Hold on,” Anna was heard telling the South Vietnamese ambassador to Washington. “We are gonna win”)—but hesitated to expose it because they had no proof Nixon had personally directed, or countenanced, her actions. Historians scoured archives for evidence that Chennault was following the future president’s instructions, without much luck. Nixon steadfastly denied involvement up until his death, while his lawyers fended off efforts to obtain records from the 1968 campaign. It wasn’t until after 2007, when the Nixon Presidential Library finally opened Haldeman’s notes to the public, that I stumbled upon a smoking gun in the course of conducting research for my biography of Nixon: four pages of notes his brush-cut aide had scrawled late on an October evening in 1968. “!Keep Anna Chennault working on SVN,” Haldeman wrote, as Nixon barked orders into the phone. They were out to “monkey wrench” Johnson’s election eve initiative, Nixon said. And it worked. The following account of the Chennault Affair is the most up-to-date and revealing exposure of Nixon’s intrigue—the product of hours of archival research, open records requests and a little luck. Documenting this cynical maneuver is important for history’s sake, but the fact that it took nearly 50 years for Nixon’s secret to emerge also offers vital lessons for today. It shows how hard it is to find definitive proof of collaboration with a foreign power when officials are determined to hide the truth. It illustrates why a president might hesitate to call out such malfeasance by a candidate from the opposing political party. And it demonstrates the lengths an ambitious politician will go in the pursuit of power—even at the expense of his own country’s interests. As investigators rush to understand just what President Donald Trump knew about Russia’s attempts to meddle in the 2016 election and when he knew it, the Chennault Affair—and how Nixon got away with it—is as relevant than ever. continues at politico.com