What About the Washington Post’s Watergate Cover-Up? – IOTW Report

What About the Washington Post’s Watergate Cover-Up?

PJ Media

The Washington Post had often described its widely-lauded Watergate reporting as “the first draft of history.” This implies, of course, that as current events become history, able historians will examine this draft, while curating ignored, concealed, newly uncovered and emerging evidence, in order to assess the continuing viability of the information in the first draft and refine the truth for our history texts. 

But what if the original draft was so widely praised, to the point of being taught as a revered staple of modern journalism, that its charter of legitimacy becomes unchallenged? What if, as a result, no aspiring historian dare contradict clear errors, indeed, falsehoods, in the original journalism? The result would be false history, embedded in our textbooks and, yes, causing our democracy to die in darkness. More


6 Comments on What About the Washington Post’s Watergate Cover-Up?

  1. Anyone remember what Woodward & Bernstein called their informant ? “Deep Throat” , it was the title of a pornographic movie . Couldn’t think of a better monicker, those wordsmiths ?

    1
  2. @Genipero
    There was no such person
    it was all a fiction
    they allowed W. mark felt to get away with his B.S.
    rather than expose they made it all up

    1
  3. What matters to The Party is that the Truth is what they say it is and the Facts are what they say they are and if you know what is good for you you better toe the line. What they are just finding out is a lot of us who have been telling them to go fuck themselves in the ear are finding more company lately.

    Their level of trust is in the toilet.

    1
  4. @JDHasty July 1, 2022 at 5:52 pm

    > Their level of trust is in the toilet.

    From which they are happy to rule.

    Only meaningful if somebody’s willing to use the handle.

  5. One of the ways to cast shade on Nixon as the Prince of the Political Darkness is to make few comparisons between him and the Lightbringers, ie, the Kennedys

    Nixon delayed going to lW school for a year to care for his younger brother. Meanwhile, back at Camelot, the Kennedys lobotomized one of their own.

    Nixons family was so squeaky clean they were the butt of jokes. Meanwhile, the Kennedys have two members who are guilty of wrongful killing other people. John John would have been guilty of manslaughter had he survived. And Ted should have been convicted of at least 1st degree manslaughter

    Nixon posed a threat to our democracy by firing his attorney gen. JFK had his brother as AG

    Nixon was the son of small town grocer. JFK was the son of one of the most ruthless political operators of the past 100 years … But Nixon was the threat to “our democracy”

  6. The real reason they hate Nixon is simple. Dems appeared to have a permanent hammerlock on power in the US, after the rule of King Franklin the First.

    Then they got blown off the track by a total black swan event in Korea. This allowed Ike to crash their party. And when Ike proved to be a great executive he was re elected. And while Eisenhower played the role of loveable golfing Granpa, Nixon was sent out to the necessary hit jobs. So, Dems came to really hate him

    Then Nixon grabbed the ring himself in 1968 and then exploited Dem stupidity again to win a landslide in 1972. And that was just too much. The Mob doesnt like to be shown up like that

Comments are closed.