on July 18, 2012
This is a really amazing book. It puts Nixon in a whole new light, from the start of his political career in 1946 to Watergate, and even beyond. It shows the corrupting influence of too much money and too much power better than any fictional story. I thought I knew about Watergate, but the extensive documentation in this book (2,000 endnotes! Amazing declassified files reproduced in full!) showed me how different the actual reality was. I couldn't put it down. Though it's a big book, the excellent photo section and Chapter 1 gave me the basic story right off the bat, and left me dying to read the rest. Amazing new information about JFK, the CIA, E. Howard Hunt, and so much more. Highly recommended.
on September 12, 2012
Lamar Waldron does for Watergate, with this book, that he did for the JFK assassination with his two books on that case: He meticulously and convincingly puts all of the pieces of the puzzle together and ties up all of the loose ends, that most other authors on these subjects (except for Noel Twyman who wrote "Bloody Treason" and maybe a select handful of others) have not come even close to achieving.
Some reviewers knock Waldron for the length of his books. As a JFK assassination researcher myself, I say THANKS for the long books. Don't we WANT all of the available info possible? A book that gives us our money's worth, unlike the "The CIA killed Kennedy, because of the Bay of Pigs. The End" wastes of time? Unlike the "Some Secret Team....no idea who they were......killed Kennedy...they rule the world." Wastes of time?
The job of a JFK assassination author, and a Watergate author, is to NAME the principals involved, and coherently weave together the various threads, based on the documented evidence (not evidence based on speculation) into an easy to understand, informative narrative. Nobody is better at that than Lamar Waldron.
You may see some reviewers knock Waldron because he has the guts to go where the evidence takes him, instead of cowardly losing himself in a crowd of believers of an as of yet unproven theory.
The Mafia DID play a prime part in the JFK assassination. Any honest investigator worth his weight in gold knows this and will report it. In fact nobody on Earth had more connections to the JFK assassination than Louisiana Mafia boss, Carlos Marcello. FIVE of Marcello's associates were arrested within days of the assassination: The patsy, Lee Oswald, who worked as a "runner" for Marcello's gambling network. David Ferrie, who spent the last two weekends before the assassination of JFK at Marcello's Churchill Farms hideout. Jim Braden, A.K.A. Eugene Hale Brading, who was arrested in the Dal-Tex building for acting suspicously after the murder. Jack Ruby, who answered to Joseph Civello, Marcello's main man in the Dallas Mafia, of course, whacked the patsy. And "French Connection" heroin smuggler and assassin, Michel Mertz, A.K.A. Jean Soutre, A.K.A. Michel Roux, A.K.A. Michael Victor Mertz, and member of the Corsican Mafia in Marseilles, France, was in Ft. Worth Texas on the same morning that JFK was in Ft. Worth. And Mertz (who *may* have been the gunman on the grassy knoll) was in Dallas on the afternoon that Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. Thanks to Waldron, we learn from former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Services) officials that a "Frenchman" fitting Mertz's description was arrested by Dallas Policemen shortly after the assassination. But since Mertz had Diplomatic Immunity (Awarded to him for having saved French President Charles de Gaulle during an assassination attempt), Mertz was then handed over to the INS, who, with the cooperation of the Justice Department, then flew him out of the country within 48 hours after Kennedy's death.
THAT is evidence. Names of the criminals, their connections to the crime and other criminals involved in the crime, their roles in the crime, their motives, means, and opportunity to commit the crime, is evidence. Saying "Some guys from this agency killed Kennedy because they hated him" is NOT "evidence".
Many wrongly accuse Waldron of saying that "The Mafia, acting alone, killed Kennedy". Not true. Waldron clearly allows plenty of room for the complicity of rogue C.I.A. and/or Military Intelligence officers, or Naval Intelligence officers, wealthy oilmen, and others in his scenario.
Marcello associate Irving Davidson was a major lobbyist, who was close to J. Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon, L.B.J., C.I.A. officials, and other dangerous members of The Establishment who could easily have played a role in Kennedy's murder, along with Marcello and others as well.
And the Mafia, thus played a big part in the Watergate scandal, indirectly, because of the "hanky panky" that Richard Nixon spoke of, that was going on between the Mafia, and the CIA/Military Intelligence and Cuban Exiles in their mission to kill Fidel Castro. The Mafia, the C.I.A., The U.S. Military, Cuban Exiles, wealthy oilmen, etc. are all intertwined, because their common goal (kill Castro) made them necessarily intertwined, and since Watergate is related to the Kennedy assassination, all of these parties are intertwined in the Watergate scandal as well, by association, not necessarily by action. White is black. Black is white. And black and white are gray. A powerful clique in The Establishment killed Kennedy, and Nixon had connections to some of the members of this clique (it was Nixon and Jimmy Hoffa who spear-headed the Mafia/C.I.A. collaboration in the Castro assassination attempts). Thus, Nixon was worried that documents existed that would put him and his associates' "dirty laundry" on display for the entire nation to smell. Just being ASSOCIATED with criminals is a no no in Washington D.C., you don't even have to be a player in their crimes. And in Nixon's own words, that "scab", that, if opened, "would reveal a (heck) of alot of things" about "the whole Bay of Pigs thing (The Mafia/CIA collaboration, and their connections to Kennedy's assassination)" would be "very bad for the CIA and the nation".
Thus the reason for trying to close the open closet of skeletons. Thus the reason for the Warren Commission. Thus the reason for the Watergate Burglary. Thus the reason that a President and a nation was disgraced.
Lamar Waldron is a walking encyclopedia of American history. I highly recommend his books.
"If 'The Truth Shall Set You Free'", and if we do not have that truth about the Kennedy murder, given to us by our government, what does that make us?"
on October 19, 2013
A few years ago I had read "Ultimate Sacrifice" and it was a very tough/long read. I did not feel comfortable with the author's claims then about a planned Cuban coup in December of 1963. Even with a bad book one can learn things, and since "Ultimate Sacrifice" was one of the first books I had really gotten into concerning the assassination I saw it as a good introduction (although painful to get through) to the host of personalities involved in certain aspects of the assassination.
Now to "Watergate", I stopped reading it at about page 270, I just couldn't take it anymore. The first 100 plus pages I found very interesting and a "hard book to put down" read as for instance I had no idea of the depths of Nixon's mob ties. Then gradually I felt as if I were reading "Ultimate Sacrifice" all over again. If in reading "Watergate" I came upon one more reference to Juan Almeida and the planned coup in Cuba I thought I was going to scream. This time I really did feel as though the author had thrust upon the reader an intolerable level of verbosity and self aggrandizement, for instance on page 260 guiding the reader to his 2 previous books as regards documentation for Chicago payoffs to Jack Ruby. And when I find a major mistake in a book of purported serious investigation I have a hard time trusting other facts an author may be putting forth, case in point: on page 261 the author makes reference to JFK's plan for the "withdraw of 116,000 US advisors" out of Vietnam by the close of 1963. Now that is a major discrepancy in a serious work of this type. Even casual students of the JFK era know that there were about 16,000 US "advisors" in Vietnam in 1963 and that JFK planned to withdrawal about 1000 at the end of the year. Now, that may just be a typo, poor editing...but still it's there, sloppy.
And now to the index. Yes, there is an index but it is the type to index that is very frustrating. The index lists the pages to be found concerning a certain subject but not the specific reason for listing it in the index making it frustrating to refer back to it.
I understand that the author no doubt wanted to impress upon the reader the extent to which the perpetrators of Watergate were involved with the anti-Castro movement and CIA but I feel it was way over done. Maybe I'll try to go back to this book again when I am not so frustrated, but probably not.
on January 11, 2016
I love history books, especially Cold War-era history. I try my best to find unbiased accounts of events. This book is extremely biased towards liberal minded thinking and i found it very hard to have to read through this book and at the same time having to sort between truth and liberal fiction.
What do i mean by this? Nixon was a dirty, corrupt politician, this is well known. However, i find it hard to believe that Nixon and other Republicans were the only politicians to use smear campaigns and take bribes to win elections. This book implies that to be true, which is assanign!
The books also build Nixon up to be the devil (justifiably so) and it paints JFK to be a saint, which he wasn't. For example, i dont know if the author was lying, or if he truly belived it when he said that JFK knew nothing of the plot to assasinate Castro. That has already been proven to be untrue. In fact, RFK was the one who gave the go ahead on operation Mongoose. I also find it humorous that the author refers to the attempt to overthrow Castro by the Republicans as an assasination attempt, while the Democrats were trying to "bring Democracy to Cuba".
These are only a few examples, but the book is filled with bias, and lies. It is a highly informative book, but if you dont have a good enough knowledge of the events that took place during this timeframe to be able to seperate fact from fiction, dont read this book.