"Chasing Shadows" by Ken Hughes (2014)

The cover of this book is intriguing at first glance. It is a photo of President Lyndon Johnson in a White House elevator with President-Elect Richard Nixon on November 11, 1968, just days after Nixon won the Presidential election by the 2nd closest margin in the 20^th century; the first being John Kennedy’s victory over Nixon in the 1960 election. There is almost an irony to that alone.

The author mainly concerns himself with tying the Watergate Affair to the 1968 Presidential election, when Nixon basically sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks; talks which would have possibly cost him the election against Vice President Humphrey. Through back channel maneuvers with Anna Chennault; widow of the man who commanded the Flying Tigers during World War Two; Nixon was able to accomplish just that, narrowly winning the election in the bargain. That was in 1968; in 1972 he would win by a landslide.

The real surprise here is the role Lyndon Johnson played in defeating his own Vice President, whose aims and goals regarding Vietnam did not match the party position in reference to the bombing halt. Johnson wanted it pegged to the restoration of the DMZ; with which the Republicans agreed; while Humphrey and McCarthy wanted to stop the bombing without conditions in order to show “good faith” to the North Vietnamese.

Relying on thousands of hours of tape recordings at the Johnson Library and the Nixon Archives, the author paints an accurate picture of the political ambitions which got us into the war in the first place, and then kept us there far longer than was necessary. There were no “clean hands” in the bunch. The Republicans and Democrats were both focused on politics rather than what was right. These tapes prove the point.

While Johnson was advising Nixon; and Nixon was working with Chennault to delay the Peace Talks; an atmosphere of secrecy and subterfuge became the standard operating procedure in Washington. That attitude led directly to Nixon forming the celebrated “Plumbers Unit” in the White House; ostensibly to stop “leaks.” Left to their own devices they went on to embroil Nixon in the Watergate scandal; something he knew nothing about until after it happened. This was Nixon’s Bay of Pigs. He was blindsided by the same group of people in the same way in which Kennedy’s administration was blindsided by the last minute revelation of the full extent of the Bay of Pigs Invasion.

This is a very important book in that it finally ties the Watergate scandal to the things which preceded it. There are many who believe that Nixon was set up by the CIA and Howard Hunt; who were working with some Cuban exiles that were connected to the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The real question is why?

Nixon was asking for the CIA files on the Bay of Pigs and even stuff related to Dallas from the moment he took office. Why? He was surrounded by people who all had ties to George Bush; either as an oil tycoon, or later as a politician and head of the CIA. Why? This book doesn't answer these questions, but they are inherently connected. The author has touched only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. The name Bush doesn't even appear in the index. 

The author even blames the entire ineffectiveness of the B-52 bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail on Pentagon and Cabinet leaks while completely ignoring the Walker Spy Ring, which cost the U.S. approximately 15-20,000 more battle deaths. It is impossible to discuss the B-52 bombing raids, and their having been compromised, without at least mentioning the Walkers. But that is exactly what the author does.

This book is a very detailed and helpful account of the proposed policy to halt the bombing in Vietnam and how it was used as a campaign issue by both sides in the 1968 election. It even shows how Nixon forged a policy of secrecy and paranoia which would eventually culminate in the Watergate burglary and his eventual departure from the White House.

But the book never really answers the crucial question of how; or even why; Nixon would have allowed this to happen. For a wider scope on the issues raised in this book; particularly the “why” behind the Watergate break in; you can do no better than to read Russ Baker’s 2009 book “Family of Secrets.”

In spite of any shortcomings, this book is still an important one, if only because it goes beyond the basic assumptions of Watergate being the product of an overzealous staff and a paranoid President. Nothing as complicated as Watergate could possibly be that simple.

"Muhammad Ali's Greatest Fight" with Frank Langella (2013)

In 1964 Muhammad Ali declared his status as a conscientious objector based on his beliefs as a Black Muslim. The War in Vietnam was heating up at the same time that the Civil Rights struggle was coming to a head. This film covers the years between Ali’s initial declaration that he would not fight and the culmination of the Supreme Court Case arising from the Draft Evasion charges, for which he was fined $10,000 and sentenced to 5 years in prison.

During the time of his appeals he worked doggedly to keep himself alive in the eyes of the public, knowing that someday he would be coming back to the world of boxing. He had that kind of faith. From appearances on TV shows, Civil Rights events and even a Broadway Show, he remained visible, and proudly determined to win this, the toughest fight of his life; the United States of America versus Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali.

The brilliance of this film is that no one plays the part of Muhammad Ali. Instead, during the course of the movie, as the Supreme Court Justices debate what to do about the case, the audience sees and hears actual film footage of Mr. Ali on those TV shows, Civil Rights protests and even a clip from the Broadway show. This manages to actually convey the reality of how divorced he was from the actual proceedings. He simply went on with his life while he waited the outcome, of which he never had any doubt. Those are his words, not mine.

Playing the part of the Supreme Court Justices are a cast of luminary actors; not the least of which are Frank Langella as  Warren Burger; Ed Begley Jr. as Harry Blackmun; and Peter Gerety as William Brennan. Christopher Plummer plays Justice John Harlan, who is pitted against Burger in the struggle to keep the court free of political influence.

Barry Levinson plays Potter Stewart; John Bedford Lloyd portrays Byron 'Whizzer' White; Fritz Weaver takes a turn as Hugo Black; while Harris Yulin  and Danny Glover play Justices William Douglas and Thurgood Marshall, respectively. All are excellent in their roles. (Glover is especially humorous in his treatment of the wily Marshall, who recused himself from the case because he had been involved in a lower court ruling on the same case.)

The Chief Justice is beholden to the President, who wants the conviction to stand. The justices are almost divided, but Ali loses the case by a 5-3 vote. But then the astonishing happens; a law clerk assigned to Harlan is actually able to change the minds of not only the Chief, but several others along the way. When the Court debates the case again, Ali’s conviction is overturned.

Remarkable for its acting and the events themselves, this is a film you do not want to miss. It has everything you could hope for in the treatment of this case. It is historically accurate and captures all the tension of the era, while giving full view to what life is like behind the closed doors of the Supreme Court. 

"The Chicago 8" with Danny Masterson and Orlando James (2011)

Based on actual transcripts from the Chicago 8 trial, this film explores the heady world of the late 1960’s and the 1968 Democratic Convention. It is focused mainly on the subsequent trial of 8 main participants in the demonstrations that took place there in what was described by news reporters as a “police riot.” 

The names are familiar to anyone who grew up during those days; Abbie Hoffman, played by Thomas Ian Nicholas; Jerry Rubin, played by Danny Masterson of “The ‘70’s Show”; Bobbie Seale, played by Orlando Jones; Judge Julius Hoffman, played by Phillip Baker Hall, and Defense Attorney William Kunstler, played by Gary Cole. There were 5 other defendants, one of whom was later elected to Congress and married to Jane Fonda. You may decide on which was the greater achievement.

The film is narrowly focused on the abuses of the Prosecution during the trial, including the infamous binding and gagging of Black Panther Bobby Seale, who was acting as his own attorney. A very neat trick to pull off while bound to a chair with a rag stuffed in your mouth.

To be fair, the film leaves out an awful lot about the plans to disrupt the convention in a way that would insure violence took place. However, the police did go way overboard in their re-action; deliberately corralling the protesters into the park from 3 sides, with the river to their backs and no place to go when ordered to disperse. To anyone who grew up at the time, watching it unfold on TV was just as unbelievable as watching Lee Harvey Oswald murdered only 5 years earlier. It just didn’t seem possible.

Judge Hoffman was the perfect villain for the role which was thrust upon him. He was ruthless in his censuring of both the defendants and their attorney, William Kunstler. At various times during the trial he had almost all of the black spectators escorted from the courtroom for even the slightest whisper. Everything portrayed in this film actually happened, which is what makes it such an important film to see, if only to dispel the notion that “it can’t happen here.” It did. And it can happen again.

The music was, of course, all 1960’s and there was body painting and drug use enough to satisfy viewers of all ages. But that’s the part of the film that kind of annoyed me. They were heady days, no doubt about it, and there was plenty of drug use and body painting going on.  But the younger people seeing this film may misconstrue these to be what the “revolution” was all about. And that’s a pity.

The film did begin with an encapsulated history of the war, beginning with Kennedy, and breezes through the Johnson years, which is when the largest build-up of American forces took place. The war is thus cast as being the sole result of President Nixon’s policies, which drew down the number of forces from 500,000 when he took office, to less than 45,000 within about 6 years.

As I am writing this I realize that the film takes place at the Democratic Convention, yet the trial seems to center on the policies of the newly elected President Nixon. This annoyed me, as it misrepresents not only history, but also the actual purpose of the demonstrators in Chicago at the time of the Convention. Most were there to keep Hubert Humphrey from getting the nomination for Presidency, having campaigned hard for Eugene McCarthy and then Robert Kennedy, who had been killed only about 8 weeks before the convention took place. Both of these men, and recent events, are completely left out of the story.

This is an interesting film to watch, as it exposes the dynamics of political dissent in America back in the 1960’s. Watching the events in the courtroom unfold, you realize that the defendants never had a chance. The word had come down from above that the men, and their lawyer, were to be convicted at all costs. The proof of this assertion is that not one of the defendants were convicted of the crimes for which they were charged. They all received jail terms for “Contempt of Court”, arising out of their own  courtroom antics, and all were; at a later time; pardoned, calling into question whether they were really convicted by anyone but themselves in the first place.

"The Hoax" with Richard Gere (2006)

This is a great movie about Clifford Irving’s alleged attempt to forge an autobiography of Howard Hughes. I say alleged because I have never been convinced that Mr. Irving wasn't the foil of larger forces. Think about it; a mediocre author, rejected by his publisher; suddenly comes up with the idea, and opportunity, to do an autobiography of the world’s richest and most reclusive man, and manages to secure a whopping $100,000 advance from the publisher. Now he has to produce the book.

In his mind he is in actual contact with the legendary millionaire via handwritten letters detailing his life’s story. But is he? The handwriting experts all say the letters are genuine, but are they? In this cinematic version, based on actual documents and interviews, the author has hatched this plan with a friend, who doubts that the scheme will work. Banking on the greed of the publisher to land the most coveted book of the last 50 years, they study Hughes’ handwriting, honing their skills to perfection, and then creating the letters.

When he is accused of forging the letters, he manages to raise the advance to $1 million dollars, which only serves to ratchet up the pressure to produce the book. 

The money is exchanged based on the publisher’s eagerness to get the book out, only to be outwitted by either the author, or the forces he claims are arrayed against him. The goal, of course, was to add fuel to the fire when the real powers that be decided to bring Nixon down via Watergate. What better ammunition to have than a documented payment from Hughes via a disgraced publisher to a suspect author? If this seems confusing you really need to brush up on the connections between the Bay of Pigs, Dealey Plaza, and finally the Watergate affair, which was concocted to bring down the President by exposing his links to some of the most atrocious events of the 1960’s.

Excellent acting by Richard Gere; along with a tightly woven account of the events; are the things which drive this film, making it well worth watching.

"Enemies" by Tim Weiner (2012)

From the author of “Legacy of Ashes”, a book which crashed onto the scene in 2007; an extensive history of the Central Intelligence Organization which won the National Book Award; comes this fairly written, and highly researched book about the history of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The book begins, as any such book must, with an examination of its longtime director, J. Edgar Hoover. From there the authors goes on to chronicle the Palmer Raids and the beginnings of the violent era of labor unrest that swept the nation, beginning with the Black Tom explosion on New York’s busy wartime waterfront during the early years of the First World War, then moving on through the 1920’s and the explosion on Wall Street of a dynamite laden cart at the height of rush hour.

With the 1930’s, and end of Prohibition, came new challenges, particularly on the left, where the Communist infiltration was both feared, and yet, to some extent overrated. As the Depression drew to a close, the agencies attentions, still under the watchful eyes of J. Edgar, were called upon to aid in the war against America’s so-called “fifth columnists”, people who would subvert the cause of freedom from within. Wiretaps, without authorization, were the “norm”, as was opening personal mail in a way which went beyond ordinary censorship, in which your envelope has obviously been opened, and then stamped by the individual who read it. Instead, the agency learned the art of opening select messages on the sly, an art which would later be employed during both the McCarthy Era, as well as the Anti-War days of Vietnam.

The end of World War Two brought even more to the Bureau’s table, as the nation began its painful growth period coming to terms with the Civil Rights movement. The author successfully records the tension between the Bureau and the President over the Freedom Rides, as well as their subsequent failure in the Kennedy Assassination; becoming, to a certain extent; a tool of the CIA for the first time. This would prove telling both during, and after Watergate, as the CIA helped to bring down the President, with the FBI standing helplessly by.

The author takes the reader on a step by step journey through the internal power struggles which ensued upon the death of J. Edgar Hoover, who had been granted Federal Authority to reign for life.

Through the Union busting days of the 1980’s and even on into the 21^st Century and the attacks in New York and Washington, the author traces the role of the Bureau in America today. Fully researched, with a complete section of notes and sources, listed chapter by chapter, this is a good book. Though it offers no great new insights, it does serve as an excellent chronicle of what we do know.

"Nixon's Darkest Secrets" by Don Fulsom

If you skip reading just one book this year, this is the one I'd recommend most. I picked it up at the library, naturally, because the whole era of the 1960's, when I was growing up, is always of keen interest to me. And that interest leaves me open to reading about the greatest news events of my life at the time. Through my reading, I have come to see the links between the Bay of Pigs, the Kennedy Assassination, and later, the botched Watergate burglary. I expected this book to affirm some of my own beliefs; which it does to a certain extent; as well as to be a re-hashing of some of the things that have already been written about former President Nixon, including his own autobiographies.

So, I picked it up eagerly, only to be sorely disappointed at the narrow scope of the book, which seems more concerned with character assassination, rather than an confirming, or even opening up new areas of one of our most complex Presidents.

The author, Don Fulsom, is a self-described White House reporter, former UPI Washington Bureau Chief, and currently an adjunct professor at American University, where he teaches a course on "Watergate: A Constitutional Crisis." That information all comes from the inside of the book jacket, and I have no reason to doubt any of it.

This book is perplexing in many ways. First off, for an individual who professes to be an expert on Watergate, he spends an inordinate amount of time exploring Nixon's connection with Bebe Rebozo, the Mafia related "bagman" who supplied Nixon with untold funds over the course of the President's political career. The two men first met in Florida in 1947. Rebozo seems to have been sort of a "knock about" guy at the time. He had already been a flight steward for Pan Am, a gas station owner, and a coin laundry operator. From these humble beginnings, Rebozo was able to forge a friendship with Congressman Nixon, a friendship which would last until the final days of Nixon's failed Presidency.

The most bizarre aspect of this book are the allegations that President Nixon and Bebe Rebozo were homosexual lovers for decades. Indeed the author takes 26 pages of this 260 page book to explore that unsubstantiated allegation; which I have never heard before reading this book; to prove his point. Using quotes from "unnamed" sources, as well as speculation by various individuals, he paints a picture of the Presidents relationship with Rebozo as "sexual". Some of the "proofs" of these allegations come from Bonnie Angelo, the correspondent for Time magazine, who swears she observed Nixon and Rebozo holding hands at a Miami restaurant. She further claims that she had never seen two men holding hands "as long and as fondly as Nixon and Rebozo." The author spends several pages on this alone.

Also high on the list as proof that Nixon was "gay", are the observations of his longtime secretary Evlyn Dorn, who claims that she only saw Nixon touch his wife once, to steady her in the back of a limo as they were standing, presumably during a campaign motorcade.

During Nixon's White House years, Rebozo was at the Presidents side almost continuously, logging in a visit about every ten days or so. These meetings took place at the White House, or at San Clemente, often without his wife and daughters being present. The author offers this as proof of their relationship being sexual.

One of the more bizarre tales of the alleged homosexual relationship involves the two men playing "King of the Pool" late at night. This is a game that all young men have played at one time or another; it involves one of the men floating on a raft while the other tries to turn it over. When that has been accomplished the roles are reversed, and the other guy attempts to regain the raft as his own. This allegation, which is used by the author as "proof" that President Nixon was homosexual, can only be described as strange, on its face alone. In other instances, the author has called forth "experts" on Nixon's "thinking." My only conclusion on that score is that both the author, and the anonymous "top psychiatrist", believe in ESP, or at least reading the minds of two men who are both deceased.

The biggest question I have about this book is this, the author; who is seemingly "hell bent on election" to prove that the President was gay; also accuses him of being a homophobe. I don't see the connection, or rather; I do see the disconnection in this thinking. And, on another level, how can someone who is presumably of moderate to liberal persuasion, use these unfounded accusations to defame an already tainted President? And why bother?

Nixon was far from my favorite President. He extended the War in Vietnam for political gain; which caused an estimated 25,000 additional combat deaths; and allowed his involvement in the Bay of Pigs affair to be used against him as blackmail in the Watergate scandal. His excessive abuse of power is widely known. There is nothing new in this book at all, aside from the bizarre allegations I have already mentioned.

There is one highlight to this book; at the end, after the Index; there is a one page biography of the author. There is no mention of his being married. That, in itself, is of little consequence. But the photo the author uses to show his "inside" connection to the Nixon White House is of him holding hands tightly with the President; and they are both smiling...

"Poisioning the Press" by Mark Feldstein

During the late 1960's, and the early 1970's, a sea change occurred in America regarding the relationship between the press and the reigning politicians. It would be easy to just blame the politicians, who, of course, usually have something to hide, hence their resentment of the press. But when politics begins to motivate the reporters as well; who are supposed to be the guardians of the so-called "Fourth Estate"; the combination of these two entities in competition for control of the truth only bodes trouble for the very institutions, and people, whom both entities are supposedly protecting. The war between Jack Anderson and Richard Nixon is a perfect example of this.

Two men could not have been more alike in their origins than Jack Anderson, the future newspaper columnist, and Richard Nixon, the future President of the United States. Both were born to hard working middle class families in Southern California, and both were brought up as fundamentalist Christians; Nixon, as a Quaker; Anderson, as a Mormon. Both served in the Pacific during the Second World War, defending their country. Even after the war, their separate career paths took both to Washington, where they would spend the next 30 years battling with one another. Mostly it was a contest of words. But in the early spring of 1972, before the Watergate burglaries even took place, this rivalry was turning deadly, as the Nixon Administration, utilizing the skills of G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt, plotted the death of the President's main nemesis, which had by this point, become an obsession.

Chronicling the rivalry between these two men, the author draws on an extensive bibliography of news articles and government documents to illustrate his coverage of the veritable war between America's news media and the Government, a war which continues to affect how we choose our elected officials today.

Beginning with the Alger Hiss "Pumpkin Papers" case, the author chronicles all of the negative coverage heaped upon Nixon, including the well-known "Checkers" speech in 1952, as well as Nixon's "last" press conference in 1962, when he lost the race for Governor, declaring that "the press won't have Richard Nixon to kick around anymore." Jack Anderson, along with his mentor Drew Pearson, remained steadfastly on Nixon's tail all during the McCarthy hearings and the Roy Cohn scandal, during which Anderson fired the first shot concerning the sexual orientation of both McCarthy and Cohn. He would later use this same tactic against Nixon's White House aides, H.R.Haldeman and John Ehrlichman.

Unsurprisingly, Nixon attempted to do the same thing to Jack Anderson in order to discredit him. (That was right before he decided to have him killed.) And, while all of this was going on, J. Edgar Hoover was the one verifying the sexual orientation of the White House employees, via the use of polygraph tests. One would assume he would have known the right questions to ask. Knowing what we know about Mr. Hoover and his companion Clyde Tolson at this point, makes this scenario almost laughable, were it not true.

This is a fascinating book, which takes a hard look at both the press and the government, as they each attempt to manipulate elections, secure jobs for friends, and cover up mistakes and scandals, until the public has no idea of what is really going on. It is hard to imagine, that with all of the power, and the responsibility which goes along with it, that so much time is wasted, by both parties, in witch hunts designed to bring the other side down, not with facts and reasoning; but instead with innuendo and false accusations, character assassination, and in the extreme case, actual murder plots.

Scandal has always been a part of politics, dating back to the earliest of times. But during the 3 decades in which Richard Nixon and Jack Anderson fought their protracted, personal battle in the press, something was lost. That something was the civility of political discourse, which was the foundation of our Democracy. Sadly, going down that slippery slope has proven far easier than regaining the high ground. Just look at the 24/7 news media today, and the fatally divided nation which we now inhabit. And when you do, remember, the blame for that division falls on both sides of the aisle.

This is an entertaining and informative book, which recounts an era that changed America forever, and not necessarily for the better.

"J. Edgar" with Leonardo DiCaprio, Armie Hammer and Naomi Watts

J. Edgar Hoover was a uniquely American enigma. He was, at first, a ruthless fighter against Communism in the days of the Palmer Raids, which took place in 1919 under the direction of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer and the Department of Justice. Those raids have long been ostracized as being illegal, but they really did save the nation in the early days of the 20th Century. The raids were mostly a reaction to labor related violence by the Unions. This was only 2 years after the Russian Revolution had ushered in Communism, and there was a real threat to America at the time. By September of 1920, explosions would rock Wall Street, when a wagonload of dynamite was set off at lunchtime, killing 38 and injuring scores. This was the environment in which J. Edgar Hoover "cut his teeth". It is also a small part of the history not made very clear to the audience in this film. Simply put, Mr. Eastwood has assumed too much of the average viewer.

The film is compelling, in that it keeps your attention. The direction of the actors is very well done, but the direction of the story; the screenplay; can leave the audience a bit confused as the story jumps back to the 1920's, and the Palmer Raids, and then jumps forward to the Nixon Era. Whole decades between the late 1930's and the 1960's are simply left out, or worse, merely alluded to, without any background information to help the younger viewer, as well as the uninformed, make sense of all the information imparted in the film.

Mr. Hoover's accomplishments in a forensic approach to solving crime cannot be understated. He set up the FBI's first fingerprint database, as well as introducing scientific methods to solving crimes. Ballistics, fibers, wood saw markings; all were carefully categorized under his tenure, and those accomplishments still yield results today. No matter what your politics may be, he was an innovative, though flawed, crime fighter.

Mr. Hoover is ably portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio as a conflicted man, both socially and morally. His relationship with Clyde Tolson, his assistant for almost his entire career, is not ignored, but neither is it explored for any indications that Mr. Hoover's famous "secret files" were largely due to a sense of "protectionism" of his own sexual preferences. This is a man who even had a file on Eleanor Roosevelt's dalliances with another woman, and informed the President of that fact. To his credit, that information was never made public during his tenure, but what about the files on Martin Luther King? Those he used to tempt Martin Luther King to kill himself on the eve of accepting the Nobel Peace prize. That episode is fully covered in the film.

The Kennedy years are virtually ignored, except for one scene showing J. Edgar calling Robert Kennedy to tell him the news of the assassination. Nothing further is said, or shown, concerning the FBI's complicity in covering up the events in Dallas.

J. Edgar's refusal to believe in organized crime, aka, the Mafia, is also overlooked here. How is it possible to have a film about the FBI without mentioning that it's director insisted, as late as 1964, that the Mafia, or any organized crime existed in America?

The film felt overly long, mostly due to the jumping forward and backward through almost 50 years of our nation's history in a hodge podge fashion. The film, in my opinion, would have been better served with a chronological approach to the story. Most viewers will find it helpful to read a bit about the man before they see the film. As it stands, the audience is left wondering if J. Edgar Hoover was a good man, or a bad man. The simple truth is, that just as we all are, he was a bit of both.

Election Day - 1960

I was 6 years old and this was the first Presidential election I would recall. I do remember brief bits about Eisenhower, mostly connected with my father being out of work during Ike's second term, during a recession. My father was never out of work, and so I suppose that is why I remember it at all.

The 1960 election was a big deal in our house, my father was Irish-Catholic; as was the Senator from Massachusetts, John Kennedy, who was the Democratic candidate for President. When Kennedy came to New York City, he visited various parts of Brooklyn, including a ride down Ralph Avenue in the Carnasie section, where we lived for a bit less than a year. I still remember seeing him riding past, waving to the crowd.

On Election Night 1960, my parents, along with millions of other Americans, sat glued to their televisions, waiting for the results. It would be a long wait. I remember making it until about 11 PM, or so, and then being carried to my bed. When I woke in the morning it was still not settled as to who had won the election!

While I slept, Richard Nixon had made a speech at about 3 AM, hinting toward a concession. He intimated that Kennedy may have won the election. This was puzzling, as it was not an out and out concession speech. Data from several states, notably Illinois and Ohio, were being examined closely for evidence of Voter fraud.

It was not until the afternoon of Wednesday, November 9th, that Nixon finally conceded the election to Kennedy. This map from Wikipedia illustrates just how close the election was. As a matter of fact, history has proven that Kennedy stole the 1960 election by buying votes in the states questioned. Included in this scenario were the actions of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley in carrying Illinois for the Democrats.

With the United States and the Soviet Union locked in a Cold War, which was about to heat up dramatically, Vice President Nixon made the decision not to concede the election, rather than challenge it, which would have thrown the country into a Constitutional crisis. With the Soviets poised on the border of West Berlin, along with the new Communist regime in Cuba, clearly this was not the time to "rock the boat" here at home. Swallowing what must have been a bitter pill, the Vice President finally conceded the election at about 3 PM on Wednesday, November 9th.

The election of 1960 still stands as a landmark one. It was the first election in the 20th Century in which both candidates had been born in the 20th Century, marking a milestone for younger voters, like my parents. It was the first time in decades that both candidates had children at home, like so many Americans in the electorate. This was also the last time a Presidential candidate would win election without carrying the state of Ohio.

Although he did not win the popular vote, Kennedy beat Nixon by one tenth of one percentage point(0.1%) which is the closest margin of the 20th century.

Nixon's staff wanted him to pursue a recount and challenge Kennedy's victory in several states, especially in Illinois, Missouri and New Jersey. Those 3 states had large majorities in Catholic districts, which just about handed Kennedy the election.

Three days after the election was over, Nixon gave a speech in which he said that he would not contest the results of the election. He is to be credited for this action, as the Russians were watching very closely to see how we handled the affair. Nixon's decision to forgo a challenge sent a clear and united signal to the Soviets that we were a strong, and unified nation, in spite of our many differences.

However, the Republican National Chairman, Senator Morton of Kentucky, did challenge the results in 11 states. Those challenges would not be thrown out of the courts until the following summer of 1961; fully 6 months after Kennedy had taken office, and just 4 months after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The only loss to Kennedy by recount was the state of Hawaii.

Though this year's elections are largely local affairs, they are the ramp up to next year's National election. So, get out there, vote, and make your voice heard. For what it's worth, the votes you cast today just may influence next year's choices.

The King and Elvis

Today is the 33rd anniversary of Elvis Presley's passing. Only the funerals of John Lennon, Princess Diana and recently, that of Michael Jackson's, have surpassed the "Kings" in all the attendant hoopla incurred by their deaths. No matter what you might think about him, the man had "it." Last year alone his enterprises generated something like $98 million. Not bad for a dead guy! This photo, one of 28 taken on December 21, 1970 by Otis Atkins, shows Elvis meeting President Nixon prior to being presented with the badge of a Federal Narcotics Officer. The story behind this extraordinarily strange event has been told in pieces here and there over the years, but Jerry Schilling's is, of course the best, his having been there, but if you are unfamiliar with it, I'll give it my best shot.

Elvis left Graceland on the night of December 20th, 1970, after a fight with his dad, Vernon, who was angry that Elvis had bought 10 Mercedes-Benz' as Christmas gifts for his friends. Looking to finalize a project he had been working on in his mind for several months, Elvis decided to go to Washington, D.C. for a final decision on his proposal. But, the "King" wanted to go incognito. Outdoors, and with no cash (Elvis never carried cash) he headed to the airport to get a commercial flight. Having no ticket and no money was not a problem, as the "King" he was "comped" to the flight. On board was a United States Senator. They talked about the Vietnam War and the "hippie problem" and the bad influence that drugs were having on the youth of America. Elvis had just had this same conversation with Vice President Spiro Agnew two weeks earlier, in an effort to obtain a Federal Narcotics Officer's badge. Agnew, in one of his rare sane moments, diplomatically rebuffed him, stating that he would "look into the matter" for him. As of December 20th, Elvis had heard nothing. With the New Year approaching, Elvis wanted this done.

Flying to L.A., he met longtime friend and associate Jerry Schilling, whom he had awoken earlier by phone, instructing Jerry to meet him with $500 cash for travel to D.C. But even before they left the L.A. Airport, Elvis had gaven the entire $500 to a serviceman returning home from Vietnam in order to help him get home. Once again, being the "King" paid off, and he and Jerry Schilling were "comped" on another night flight, this time to Washington, D.C.

On this flight Elvis wrote a 5 page letter outlining his concerns for American youth and his desire to meet with the President and become a Federal narcotics Officer. Landing in Washington they were met by another of the "Memphis mafia", Sonny West. At Graceland they had been going insane looking for him. When Elvis did call they dispatched Sonny West to meet him in D.C. From there the trio headed to the Washington Hotel where they registered as Jon Burrows (Elvis), Jerry Schilling, and Sonny West, staying in Rooms 506, 507 and 508.

At about 6:30 AM, now remember, Elvis had only left Memphis around 6 PM the night before, so they had been traveling all night, Elvis arrived, alone, at the White House gates, handing the guard his note. The guard, who must have been sleeping not to recognize Elvis, assured him that his note would be deliverd. Elvis went back to the hotel to do some more drugs, I mean, catch up on his sleep.

By 9:30 AM, Bud Krogh, one of Nixon's top aides, had received the message. Realizing the potential publicity of such a meeting he immeditely contacted the Washington Hotel and had Elvis and his freinds driven to the White House. Arriving at the White House, Elvis was patted down and a .45 calibre automatic was found in his cape. This was the surprise he had for the President! Other versions of the story have Elvis whipping the pistol out after meeting Nixon. Since Mr. Schilling was present at the time, I will stick with his version of the events.

Initially, only Elvis was allowed in to see the President. The security protocol was 2 Secret Service Agents per vistor, with limits on the number of visitors at one time, not counting Bill Signing events, at which many people are present. The difference is, of course, that those people have been pre-screened for access. This rule was waived for Elvis and photos show the two clearly delighted to be in one anothers presence.

They also discussed the problem of foreign influences upon America's youth. A prime example was the influence of The Beatles on young people to experiment with drugs. Elvis and the President were equally concerned about the effect that drugs were having on our culture. Ironically, both had severe problems with sedatives such as Seconols and other barbituates. In Elvis' case, this would later cost him his life.

For the next 45 minutes Elvis had the run of the Oval Office. The President was so agog with having him there that he rummaged through the drawers finding White House pens and pictures, along with Presidential tie clips (Elvis never wore ties) and anything not nailed down, to give Elvis as presents for his friends and family. When Elvis admired an oil painting on the wall, Nixon actually offered it to him. His aides had to make the President aware that it was not his to give away.

The President informed Elvis that he would need several hours to arrange the paper work, so after posing for a series of photos Elvis left to wait on his badge at the Washington Hotel, rooms 505, 506 and 507. By 3 PM the Federal Narcotics Officer badge, which he craved so much, was delivered to him. He was now permitted to carry narcotics and weapons across state lines. Not a bad mornings work.

"1969 - The Year Everything Changed" by Rob Kirkpatrick

This book is a chronological review of the year 1969. With so much having been written about 1968, sometimes 1969 gets lost in the shuffle. I have always considered 1969 to be the year that the "Woodstock Nation" died. The era of peace and love sort of ended at Altamont Speedway in California that December when the Rolling Stones hired the Hells Angels to be the "security" for the concert. A crowd of over 500,000 people allowed themselves to be intimidated by less than a couple of hundred bikers. The fact that someone was murdered in front of the stage, while the Rolling Stones kept playing, underscores the myriad of problems which plagued our society throughout the 60's and would spill over into the 70's. Some might say that the seeds for some of todays problems were planted back then.

The year itself was just as exciting as 1968, but in a different sort of way. While 1968 was a year of great hope, 1969 was a year when the "hippie" movement clearly became commercial. Capitilizing on the sexual revolution, "O! Calcutta" became the number 1 show on Broadway. "I Am Curious (Yellow)" was considered a landmark movie.

In California Charles Manson was able to use the mind expanding properties of LSD to control a band of followers, directing them to murder for the dubious purpose of inciting a race war. San Francisco was reeling under the threat of the "Zodiac" killer, while Lt. William Calley was charged for his role in the systematic killings of unarmed women and children in My Lai, Vietnam.

In politics, President Nixon was in office and beginning his slow descent to his place in history. Ted Kennedy was busy partying with his own campaign staff and made his famous "swim" against unbeatable currents, leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die, trapped in his car at the bottom of Chappaquiddick. Although this would end his hopes of ever becoming President, it had no effect on his position as head of the Senate Ethics Committee, a post he would occupy for 41 more years, until his death in 2010.

In the midst of all of this there were some very positive things going on as well. Man landed on the Moon, and the first Boeing 747 "jumbo jet" took flight, enabling more people than ever before to travel at an affordable rate. Gays grew tired of being harassed for their sexual orientation and fought back against police in New York City's Greenwich Village, in what would become known as the "Stonewall Riots." This would be the beginning of the Gay Rights Movement.

The Arts and Music scene were active. The Who released the first so-called rock opera, "Tommy." Neil Young and Steve Stills left Buffalo Springfield to form their own bands. Neil Young formed Crazy Horse and Steve Stills founded Crosby, Stills and Nash, which Neil Young would later join.

In Sports, there was Joe Namath, quarterback for the New York Jets, losing his career because he owned a restaurant where alcohol was served. The New York Mets were on the way to their first World Series against the Baltimore Orioles, which they would win. (I think I went to Game 5, at Shea Stadium, with John DiStefano.)

The book is augmented by a time line showing the news events of the year. And it was a busy one. Reading this book makes you aware that 1969 was not only the turning point of a decade, but also a watershed year, both in who we were and what we have, as a society, become.

Family of Secrets by Russ Baker

This book is the final word on the JFK Assassination and it’s connection to the Watergate break-ins in 1972 and the eventual seating of the first unelected President in the history of the United States. From there it moves on to explain how George H.W. “Poppy” Bush, with the aid of Zappata Off Shore Oil (headquartered in Medilin, Columbia (200 miles from shore) went on to become President of the United States, establishing a political dynasty along the way and leading to the election of Geoge W. Bush and the Iraqi war.

Ever wonder what the Pepsi Convention in Dallas had to do with the murder of the President? Ever asked yourself how could anyone possibly engineer a plot so tightly that it would ensure that the President would pass by the Book Depository? Ever wonder who owned the Book Depository Building and how Oswald got the job a mere 6 weeks before Kennedy’s visit? Ever think about what, if any, was Vice President Johnsons’ role in all of this? Why were 3 of the countrys’ subsequent Presidents in Dallas on the day of the assassination and what does their presence there indicate?

What was Abraham Zapruders unwitting role in all of this? And why was his 8mm film taken by Time-Life and locked away from the public until New Orleans Attorney Jim Garrison forced its release with a Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit?

These are not rhetorical questions. They are the details that have bugged me for years. And this book takes it all the way back to Prescott Bush and his early days establishing his family in finance and oil. The trail is murky until you shed some light on it as Mr. Baker has painstakingly done with this book.

For those that believe Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone nut, acting of his own twisted accord, this book will not interest you. But if you, like myself, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, to name a few, have any lingering doubts as to what really happened, then this is the book for you.

Layer upon layer of twists and turns all lead back to the inescapable conclusion that the Oil Lobby along with the CIA plotted, planned for and finally executed the President of the United States. Who pulled the trigger is another story- and a backseat one at best. The real story is who paid for and orchestrated the biggest crime of the 20th Century. A crime that has continued to pay dividends to the oil industry, the munitions manufacturers and one particular family.

Follow the political growth of the Bush family from its nefarious oil dealings as Zappata Off Shore Oil Group through the turbulent late 50’s and the 60’s. Follow the money as it flows and funds covert op after covert op. Follow George H.W. Bush on his climb to the 41st Presidency of the United States.

Who was George DeMohrenschildt and why did he and his wife take Lee and Marina Oswald under their wing during the months leading up to the assassination of the President?

What was the connection between the Bay of Pigs and Dallas and later Watergate? Why did President Nixon demand that the Watergate Burglars be paid off or it would “lead back to the whole Bay of Pigs thing.” And why did Richard Helms react so violently when this was relayed to him by H.R. Haldeman?

This is the penultimate book on the covert operations of the 1950’s CIA in Latin America and Southeast Asia. It ties together all the questions raised and argued by conspiracy theorists and refutes all the assertations put up by the Lone Assassin Theorists, showing along the way what the real goals were and how they were achieved.

Follow George W. in his early years and see how he was groomed to protect the family and secure power, both political and financial.

I cannot recommend this book enough. For me it is the final word on the events of November 22nd, 1963. It is also an explanation of the Watergate Burglary and its ultimate consequences for American politics, right up to the present day.

You will be amazed by this painstakingly researched and annotated book.