The Art of Leadership and Lessons from the Past – Edward M. Kennedy


Edward Moore Kennedy

Edward Moore Kennedy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Leadership lessons  (Edward M. Kennedy)

 
“Ted Kennedy’s life is a reminder that much can be achieved by late bloomers; that you don’t have to have your career all figured out by the time you’re   
   25, 35, or even over 45.”
             – Sarah Green in a post on Harvard Business Publishing.

His life was marked by tragedy and somehow recklessness perhaps in his early years, but change within himself  later in life  made him become one of the greatest Senators in US history. He went through personal lessons of resilience and agonising redemption, realising that he had to face his own shortcomings., – which he did.

Related image

We have to make sometimes very personal choices in life and whatever triggered his change,  he started to reshape his life in his late 50’s making him from the age of 59 until his death a most fascinating leader – showing that leadership starts with self-control and responsible decisions. However not only this.  If we are fortunate enough in life to find someone who loves us for what we are,  we may be able to multiply affection and love by giving of what we once received.

Related image

Good leaders are just human beings as well, the last at times forgotten by the public and media.

The assassination of his 2 older brothers contributed to his first years of struggle and (hidden) heartbreak, – “Teddy” now representing his  “legendary” family following events in 1968.  However he really found a new voice whilst standing up for those not too well off in American society, showing to be a key figure amidst liberal principles.

Edward Moore Kennedy (February 22, 1932 – August 25, 2009) was the Democratic US  Senator for Massachusetts, serving almost 47 years. He was the second most senior US Senator when he died and the third or fourth longest-serving member of this college, being perhaps one of the most positive and powerful legislator’s in American history.

 

He was the last surviving son of Joseph Patrick Kennedy, Sr; the youngest brother of President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert F. Kennedy (both assassinated in public service)  and Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., the last being killed in action in World War II; and the father of Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy. After the assassination of his brother John an Robert he was for many years the most important living member of  the Kennedy family.

Kennedy’s New York Times obituary described him: “He was a Rabelaisian figure in the Senate and in life, instantly recognizable by his shock of white hair, his florid, oversize face, his booming Boston brogue, his powerful but pained stride. He was a celebrity, sometimes a self-parody, a hearty friend, an implacable foe, a man of large faith and large flaws, a melancholy character who persevered, drank deeply and sang loudly. He was a Kennedy.”

Related image

Following his failed presidential bid, Kennedy became one of the most influential members of the Democratic Party, and was later in the 1990’s called a “Democratic icon”as well as “The Lion of the Senate“.  Kennedy and his Senate staff wrote more than 2000 bills and more than 300 were enacted into law. Kennedy supported another 550 bills  becoming  law after 1973. Kennedy was most effective in dealing with Republican senators and administrations, sometimes even at the irritation of some Democrats. During the G.W. Bush administration, almost every bipartisan bill being signed had significant involvement from Kennedy. A late 2000s survey of Republican senators ranked Kennedy first among Democrats in bipartisanship, which should be an example for the Republicans (in 2011). Kennedy was committed to  the principle “never let the perfect be the enemy of the good,” and would agree to pass legislation he viewed as incomplete or imperfect with the goal of improving it down the road. Somehow different we see this with President Barack Obama as well. As long as it works for the better progress, often a good compromise is required. In April 2006, Kennedy was selected by Time as one of “America’s 10 Best Senators”; the magazine discussed that he had “amassed a titanic record of legislation affecting the lives of almost every man, woman and child in the country” and that “by the late 1990s, the liberal icon had become such a prodigious cross-aisle dealer that Republican leaders began pressuring party colleagues not to sponsor bills with him”.Even the Republican presidential nominee John McCain said in May 2008: …”[Kennedy] is a legendary lawmaker and I have the highest respect for him. When we have worked together, he has been a skillful, fair and generous partner.” At the time of Kennedy’s death, sociologist and Nation board member Norman Birnbaum wrote that Kennedy had come to be viewed as the “voice” and “conscience” of progressive America ( American progressivism). He worked on major issues of our time including civil rights, healthcare, the war in Vietnam, Watergate, and the quest for peace in Northern Ireland.

Kennedy’s passion was at times most powerful and contagious.  Besides this he was able to disagree on issues without making it personal. He was therefore greatly admired across the political spectrum.

What can we learn from him in terms of leadership, – without subdividing the issues too much?

1. “Stick- to – itiveness” and give it the very best performance.

Related image

Whilst his performance at the start of his political career was a learning curve and subject for improvement he won his Senate seat for the first time during the Presidency of his brother, Jack Kennedy. He was perhaps in a fortunate position but for certain was he not “a celebrity Senator”.  He proved this after each re-election, especially when he began performing for his constituents and collaborating with his colleagues.

He had an unwavering tenacity and perseverance which did include in a steady pace mastering the details, studying and learning amidst changing issues.Kennedy rolled up his sleeves and earned his place, even through rough and threatening times. He continued planning , timing and cultivating a degree of patience. The reward for his “stick-to-itiveness” was that he knew he stayed the course by following “True Compass”

When Mitt Romney challenged Kennedy for his Senate seat in 1994, the crucial moment of their debate — which probably made  Kennedy win the re-election — involved Kennedy pressing Romney for the specifics on his health care plan, with Romney forced to  admit that he hadn’t worked out all the details. “Well that’s what you have to do with legislation,” the Senator replied. Kennedy knew the job. His career rewards followed from his service and perseverance to master the details to be required for progressive change.

Ted Kennedy faced various public crises which could have destroyed him, yet he proved to be resilient and able to learn.  He restored confidence in his leadership. The still-mysterious incident at Chappaquiddick where a young woman drowned nearly ended his career. Whilst showing at that particular time no courage and ducking accountability he bounced back by redoubling his efforts to do his job well. Even fumbling during an important interview during his bid for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1980, he recovered by applying more energy and passion to his work in the Senate.  He was not perfect but he learned from his mistakes and became a better human being, persistent and committed as he was.  Besides this he never claimed victory for himself but was generously able to share credit

2.Find a purpose recognised by yourself as a very strong one.

Related image

Kennedy reached a stage of mind  to feel that his live belonged to the community and his newly found values did suspend part of his ego. He rejoiced in burning up for the values he stood for before handing the responsibility for his course to the next generation. Ted Kennedy believed in public service as the best profession and in government to help all citizens getting their chance for a better quality of life. Once he found his voice and his core mission after overcoming some misery from the past his position and “Compass” were clear and often he spoke for the people who could not speak for themselves.  The goals were so important that he was willing to work with political opponents in the Senate to reach agreement on measures that served the people.He supported President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind legislation” for school reform.  The cause of children less privileged was that important to him that he rather would compromise and get a bit done whilst the alternative was no action at all. He took action by calling on higher principles which did resonate with principle centred members of the other party. He proved that his ability to compromise for a better outcome was a strength rather a weakness, the last based on ongoing efforts to build strong relations across the political spectrum. With at times an emotional appeal for what he thought to be right he was able to get the more intellectual minded on board from the other party. His emotional bank account on the Senate floor had a large surplus, he was well liked and well trusted on his views.


3.Never forget family & friends.

The hard-working Ted Kennedy was at heart a family man. After the assassination of his brothers he was the stronghold and the father for many amidst the larger Kennedy family, keeping people together, encouraging close to lost children, playing touch-football at the family compound in Hyannis Port and arranging  family outings to historic sites,-  apart from sailing away from the pier in Hyannis Port through the waters of Nantucket at the Cape. In spirit his late brother President John F Kennedy and Robert F Kennedy were always close to him and the love for his extended family guided him through tough times in his life. He was a role model for some of the Kennedy children and helped them with their own belief system and the power of the words: “I can” and “I will”.

Related image

He did neither always agree with family nor friends but he was able to agree to disagree without losing his affection or staying amicable. Whilst being able to continue to be friendly and loving he was able to work together with a range of people, based on trust. He understood the power of being considerate  and friendly.

In summary:

Related image

Did Ted Kennedy add value to life? Yes he did! He stood for the people who had no voice, trying through legislation to improve the living conditions of fellow citizens for many in his country. He made no major paradigm shift as eg Gandhi did with the perception of “non violence ” (under all circumstances). However Teddy Kennedy tried to mobilise the available recourses in the US Senate to help change at various levels. He stood by his principles but was prepared to listen and seek compromise for the better. He was a trustworthy icon in the US Senate working with an excellent team supporting him to work the required changes for the better. He was not free of mistakes and made a few but made good on them by getting a better person and sticking to his compass, which always directed him back to the original course of action. He had a mission, imagination and was both persistent and committed to give it the best performance, – at some stage not for his ego anymore but for the benefit of others. He did own up to his mistakes and learnt from them with a faith to allow eventually the higher power in himself taking over.

Related image

With his belief system Involving the will of giving and with his own trials and errors in life, he showed us: “Together we can, together we will!”

And that’s enough, –  good enough!

Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

 

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 4 – former President Nixon)


English: US President Richard Nixon and Chines...

English: US President Richard Nixon and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai toast, February 25, 1972 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 37th US President

Richard Milhouse Nixon

“I am not a crook” – R.M Nixon:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh163n1lJ4M&feature=player_detailpage

RICHARD   NIXON’s   VIOLATIONS  OF 

JUSTICE

Richard Milhouse Nixon (1913-1994 was born in Yorba Linda (California) in a lower middle class quaker family of an Irish background. After his degree at Duke University he worked for 5 years as a lawyer and served in the US Navy from 1942 until 1946.

He became a Republican member of US Congress in California by 1946. Whilst campaigning he pictured his democratic opponent as communist sympathiser. His tactical abilities allowed him to make a quick rise in political circles and he was an important member of the House  Committee on “Un American Activities” whilst worker on the Elgar Hiss case. In his early Congressional years he was assisted by various people, including Jack Ruby ( as far as Department of Justice memo)

He became Vice – President under Dwight D  Eisenhower when Eisenhower did win the elections in 1952. As Vice President he was known for his outspoken exchanges with Nikita Khrushchev during a visit to Moscow in 1959. He lost the presidential elections very narrowly from John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1960. He lost then in 1962 the elections in California for the Governor position of this State.

Thereafter he became a succesful Wall Street lawyer. About 1967  he decided for an extensive tour around the world, visiting both Europe, the Middle East, Vietnam, Africa and Latin America. Whist reportedly undecided to run for the Presidential elections in 1968 he published an article called “Asia After Viet Nam” in the “Foreign Affairs  Journal” reflecting on his policy of removing American combat troops from Vietnam. In this article he projected his potential Administration opening a way to China as well.  Once decided to run for the Presidency in 1968, he mentioned in the 1968 campaign that he had a secret plan  for a complete withdrawal from Vietnam. He returned to win the Presidential elections in 1968 with only a small margin benefitting in retrospect strongly from the assassination of his potential Democratic opponent Robert F Kennedy in June 1968. The unrest on top of this at the Democratic Convention in Chicago with police forces crushing anti Vietnam war protestors created on national TV a picture of unrest in the US and Nixon promised to change this situation. The US in 1968 was a country with strong divisions with strong opposition against the war in Vietnam and by far the majority of US citizens wanted to stop this war. Martin Luther King, jr was assassinated on the 4th of April 1968. He was a prominent leader in the African-American Civil Rights movement and representing as well a growing opposition against the war in Vietnam. The New York Senator Robert Kennedy has been for months agonising on the question whether he should oppose both President Johnson and the war, but the growing and escalating violence decided him to run eventually for the Presidency at a relatively late stage, – however gaining increasing support from both the movement of social justice and those who were against the war. A large number of African Americans trusted him as because he seemed genuinely compassionate about the still existing social injustice in the US. There were however powerful groups in the US who did not want a second Kennedy in the White House and both the assassination on MLK and RFK caused the anti-war movement losing its strongest leaders. This needs to be discussed in some detail as it will show some of the forceful background dynamics pushing all in the same direction. Within this context the main obstacles for Richard Nixon’s election were resolved as the strength of the movement against both the war and for more social justice was  reduced within a climate of unrest, which was  obvious  after 2 vital assassinations in a row and the war in Vietnam still going on.  Many years later Coretta Scot King (MLK’s wife) did win a wrongful death civil trial against Loyd Jowers and other unknown co-conspirators in 1999.  Jowers received $100000,- to arrange the assassination on MLK and the Jury was convinced that Government Agencies were parties to the assassination plot. It would seem that the LBJ government was involved at setting the stage of this assassination, using James Earl Ray as a scapegoat, as publicly on TV confirmed by Jowers on ABC’ Prime Time Life.  Jowers stated that both the mafia and the US Government were involved in the MLK assassination.  Reportedly Memphis police officer Lieutenant Earl Clark fired the fatal shots. The conspiracy did include J Edgar Hoover, Richard helms, the CIA, the Memphis Police Department(MPD), Army intelligence and organised crime.  A very key person within the civil right movement was on the government payroll, responsible for infiltration and sabotage. Readers may wonder about the evidence of this revelation but this evidence was uncovered and put before a Jury in Memphis,TN, in November 1999. Seventy witnesses testified under oath with 4000 pages of evidence, much of it was it new. The news of one of the most national security trials was suppressed, as  tends to happen in the US at times. It was clear that the 1997 reports of the House Select Committee on Assassinations re James Earl Ray justified verdict were wrong: he was not the one who murdered MLK!

All parties involved did not take any chance. It was agreed that MLK would not leave Memphis alive and at the time of his assassination he was under complete surveillance with various guns loaded in his direction if the attempt from one party would fail. Like the JFK assassination, but different, it was an ambush. MLK was not only a Civil Rights activist, he was even far more than a voice against the war in Vietnam, hence authorities decided to take him out of the picture. Regarding the RFK assassination there is no doubt that Sirhan Bishara Sirhan fired a gun but it did not cause the death of RFK. Multiple shooters were in the small area were RFK’ assassination took place. At least 9 shots have been fired at the end of the night Kennedy did win the primaries in Los Angeles at the Ambassador Hotel. The LAPD destroyed key physical and photographic evidence and eyewitness testimony. LA County Coroner and Chief Medical Examiner Dr Thomas T Noguchi prepared the autopsy report on RFK where the headshot damage not only reflected a pathologic impossibility, but it ruled out as well Sirhan’s gun as the offending weapon in RFK’s death. Sirhan is still in jail, being convicted of first degree murder.

Video images identified 3 former CIA agents were very close to RFK at the time of his assassination (Morales,Joannides and Campbell). David Morales was the Chief Operations at JM-Wave, training Cuban exiles in 1963 in covert actions against Fidel Castro. Morales and Campbell have talked with each other in the in the hotel lobby prior to the assassination (witness report David Rabern). Campbell has been reportedly  in and around various  police stations in the 2 months before  the RFK  assassination. Joannides has been the Chief of Psychological Warfare Operations at JM -Wave. He had retired from his CIA position but returned back to active duty in 1978 as the liaison between the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA).  Not sure who nominated him in this position but obviously Joannides failed to tell the HSCA that he ever worked at JM-Wave, as such maintain his covert identity and compromising the entire Congressional investigations. It was Joannides obstructing the HSCA to get access to vital information (crucial documents) about the JFK assassination during the re-investigations on the assassinations of JFK and MLK. The lead investigator of the HSCA Gaeton Fonzi concluded that  Morales was directly involved in the JFK assassination as due to revenge of the Bay of Pigs.

Before we start on former US President Richard Nixon note that Richard Nixon and George Herbert Bush (the later US Vice-President and US President) have been integral to the Bay of Pigs operations.  As Vice-President, Nixon worked under President Eisenhower, together with Allen Dulles from the CIA and other senior CIA staff on the strategic planning of the Bay of Pigs. The bestselling book “Plausible Denial” by Mark Lane in 1991 reflects on both CIA involvement in JFK’s death. The later President Bush  was at the time of the Pay of Pigs a CIA  operative and the FBI confirmed in documents being released many years later that Bush sr was involved in the CIA briefing the day after the JFK assassination.The role of FBI Chief Hoover in the JFK assassination is most controversial as well. Gerald Ford as member of the Warren Commission leaked all confidential information to FBI Chief Hoover. Without claiming to be correct in all details the general picture of key CIA people being involved in both the JFK and RFK assassination with Bay of Pigs links, Richard Nixon a close friend of Hoover with Bay of Pigs links, Herbert Hoover a profound RFK hater, major CIA background powers in favour of the Vietnam war etc etc give the background why RFK was killed in 1968 and how  Hoover’s extra police actions in Chicago after 2 vital assassinations in a row did prepare the road for Nixon to get elected. Nothing is foolproof in life and in theory Hubert Humphrey could have won the 1968 elections but he was too closely associated with Lyndon Johnson who was most unpopular. Besides this LBJ warned Hubert Humphrey that if he would publicly oppose the Administration’s Vietnam war policy he personally would destroy Humphrey’s chances to get the Democratic nomination. Not much luck for Humphrey with such a boss and such mighty coöperation with FBI Chief Hoover. It was in both LBJ’s interest and Hoovers interest that all government secrets would stay secret and from this point of view with LBJ’s background knowledge about Nixon and Gerald Ford  -(fully shared with FBI Chief Hoover)- ,..Richard Nixon would be the best choice to remain the status quo on secrecy and the war in Vietnam as being supported by the CIA.   With both MLK and RFK out of the way the strong anti Vietnam war movement was at least for some part broken as part of a Government conspiracy similar as happened in 1963 with JFK.   Most of the same key players were still in power.

With opposing LBJ about the war in Vietnam and running for the Presidency in 1968 Robert F Kennedy did sign his own death sentence, like MLK did when he spoke out against the war in Vietnam with so much people following him, like JFK did when he opposed the CIA and the Pentagon Generals when he despised their advise at times and decided to withdraw from Vietnam. No one can oppose the real background powers in the US, not even President Obama. This is America ladies and gentlemen, this was America and in a way it still is America. In the 1960ties there have been criminals in US Government systems neither allowing justice nor allowing peace in Vietnam at a stage this was desired. They robbed the Nation of people who perhaps not being perfect tried to do what was good in a particular time in history and the tool of the government was simply assassination and make the way free for people who would serve the needs for the American military establishment in the White house, rather than the need of the voters, – the parents who had to let their children go to Vietnam and had to receive the medals of honour when they died courageously in pointless war dictated by a corrupted government policy guided by the war heads of the Pentagon from which both Eisenhower and Truman said that their powers were far out of proportion. The US seemed to be a Republic with a Democratic image, but the real government was not a government from the people and for the people. It did not serve the people. It played the media. And when opposing powers were too strong,  when the forces towards more justice developed with fierce and without fear, it became overruled and crushed by both the police and the military. Such things do happen in countries who at least are honest enough not to claim they are a democracy. The many dirty wars of the US are not a reflection of real democracies based on the values of those who prepared the US Constitution. It is this Constitution which needs to be protected to get a better Union. Not a Union only being able to survive with assassinations of those who give to the moral values and justice within this Union.

Obviously Nixon did promise the public a secret way out of Vietnam, whilst in secret preparing for the opposite if he was elected. By adding to the general feel of unrest in Chicago FBI Chief Hoover added in a strategic way to the chances of victory for Richard Nixon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf22x5r16Zo&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                  (The Pentagon Papers: A Primer for Top Secrets…..)

Once President Nixon nominated his campaign Director Bob Haldeman White House Chief of Staff,  foreign policy decisions were made in close coöperation with Henry Kissinger. interestingly Secretary of State William Rogers was by far not always prior aware about some of the Administrations enterprises. Speechwriter for Richard Nixon Ray Price reflected on “the light side” and “the dark side” of Richard Nixon. He was however reelected in 1972 with a large majority. His Administration from 1974 sustained remarkable controversy over the Vietnam war. The invasion in 1970 of Cambodia and his approval of heavy bombardments on North Vietnam took his toll in the public opinion and he signed in 1973 a cease-fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhtsSu9hgxI&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                      (Evidence of Revision: Part 4  -1 of 11)

A strategic arms limitation treaty with the Soviet Union was signed during his Administration and he was the first President to reopen US relations with China in 1972. The Watergate burglary as will be detailed later brought his Presidency totally down.  Being the first US President to resign from office he avoided as such impeachment. The new President Gerald Ford gave him a full pardon in in 1974.

It would seem Nixon’s staff frequently conspired to keep the “darker side” of Nixon – as Ray Price reflected on – in check and obviously Nixon himself was involved in this. As it proved however, Nixon participated in some conspiracies with high level support outside the White House.

On the 3rd of November 1969 Nixon declared that his Administration would not give in to the demands of anti-war demonstrators, sympathising with “The great silent majority of Americans” to back him up in his efforts for a “just and lasting peace”.  Nixon knew how to play the game of politics by doing what “the doves wanted” but meanwhile seeking ready coöperation with both the CIA and the Pentagon.  In April 1970 Nixon ordered extra American troops into Cambodia. During a nation-wide student protest 4 students were killed by the National Guard at Ohio Kent State University. Nixon backed down a bit at the 1970 midterm elections preparing as well against the balanced and dignified Democratic senator Edmund Muskie from Maine, who wanted to run for the 1972 elections. Nixon’s state visit to China did raise his popularity. He signed 3 months later as well a treaty with the Soviet Union restricting from both sides establishing anti ballistic missile systems apart from limiting offensive missile launchers. Meanwhile however Nixon had responded already in the second part of 1971 to the publication of the Johnson Administration’s classified “Pentagon Papers”. This publication was unauthorised and provided an insight in the origins of the Vietnam war. Nixon assigned a group to prevent leaks of classified information and harassed perceived enemies of his Administration. FBI Chief Hoover proved to be very helpful with this. Some weeks after Nixon returned from the Soviet Union, four men were arrested at the Watergate complex as due to burglary into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee. After his reelection in 1972 the Watergate burglars were convicted and several of them implicated Nixon’s closest associates. It proved that the Watergate-break-in was only one of the several acts of both sabotage and political espionage carried out by the Nixon Administration. Nixon tried to keep away secret tapes from hearings by the “principal of separation of powers”. He had however to provide many of the required tapes but not everything. The unravelling of the Nixon Presidency was unstoppable now and in 1974 the “House Judiciary Committee”started to discuss Nixon’s impeachment. It proved that Nixon had engaged in extensive domestic wiretapping apart from his questionable tax deductions through which he paid almost no federal income tax in 1973. On the 24th of July 1974 the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to give the tapes he had withheld. Those tapes were supposed to contain evidence of Nixon’s personal involvement in the Watergate operations including reflections about Watergate burglars being engaged in CIA operations.  The verdict was that if he would not leave office on his own decision, he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office. On the 8th of August 1974 Nixon announced his resignation and Vice-President Ford was administered the Presidential oath on the 9th of August.

Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the United States of America was supported by powerful circles in Washington when he was elected President in 1968. The US was unsettled as due to social unrest, in part due to the Vietnam war and in part as a result of the aftermath following  2 assassinations of  perhaps both the most prominent political figures (MLK and RFK) representing the movement of  social change and justice , – including the end of the war in Vietnam. I repeat this once more to put some matters in perspective.

President Johnson voiced private concerns in 1964 that Vietnam would become a second Korea but he was already so much compromised by his own past, including CIA and FBI collaborations, not being able to take a different course of action. Hence he did not go for a second term. However again, he warned his Vice-President Hubert Humphrey not to turn against the Vietnam war as otherwise his chances on the Democratic nomination would be destroyed. In a way LBJ did aid in the process to get Nixon elected.

Both the Pentagon and the CIA have the perception that Presidents come and go and as long as the military interests of the US are not compromised, they take no obvious interest who has the reigns in the White House, as long long term interest are not at stake. Those long term interests are fairly restricted to the military US interests.  Needless to say that those views may clash with the Presidential powers in the White House. Prominent people in US politics may be succesful to be elected Commander in Chief with profoundly different views on the strategic views of the US in the future, in which case  “national security” will be considered. This is the reason that both JFK and RFK became the victim of assassination plots to make the way free for persons who were able to coöperate more with those background powers.

The strategic powers of both those Government Agencies are very strong and do own all the means to drive their points in ways the public has no knowledge of. This does not mean that all people working for either CIA or Pentagon are wrong. Most of them are highly regarded professionals with both courage and integrity, however both Organisations are that large that some people at the wrong time in certain positions can make significant differences to the culture by which those Agencies work. This culture does not change overnight  with a new Chief or Director, if the previous one had a controversial impact.. The right US President at the time can make a huge difference with nominating people with high credentials in those positions, – however the wrong President at a certain time can make from this point of view devastating failures with implications beyond imagination. It clearly makes the system of US Governance not fool-proof, as corruption may as such develop at the highest levels of US powers,- whilst both Congress and the public are kept in the dark. Richard Nixon was one of those Presidents, allowing collaboration with those forces who have neither much conscious nor morality. Strict regulation and control of those powers is required as a national security interest which favours the many in the US, and not only a few in Washington. The reflections in retrospect of some insiders of both FBI and Military establishment including the CIA do speak in clear terms about involvement in terrible actions throughout decades, neither controlled by the President nor with insight from Congress.  The Eisenhower administration warned already for the excessive powers of both the CIA and the Pentagon and it has been clear what those powers are able to inflict if opposed by powerful different views, but also what they are able to inflict to regain control via the persons being elected US President.

Coming back on what has been stated before: it proved that Nixon had engaged in extensive domestic wiretapping, apart from questionable tax deductions through which he paid almost no federal income tax at all in 1973. On the 24th of July 1974 the supreme Court ordered Nixon to give the tapes he had withheld. Those tapes were supposed to contain evidence of Nixon’s personal involvement in the Watergate operations, including reflections about Watergate burglars being engaged in CIA operations. The verdict was that if he did not leave the White House on his own decision, he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office. On the 8th of August 1974 Nixon announced his resignation and Vice President Gerald Ford took over as US President on the 9th of August. Only 1 month in his Presidency, Ford pardoned Richard Nixon completely, avoiding as such further investigations in the Watergate burglary as this would have far more implications than the public knows. Gerald Ford has been part of the Warren Commission with the task to investigate the JFK assassination. Gerald Ford “the CIA man in Congress” had very close links with Allen Dulles, ex CIA Director who was sacked by John F Kennedy.   Gerald Ford had close links with Nixon, in part as he became his Vice-President at a time when there was the potential that Richard Nixon could run in trouble over Watergate. This all happened when FBI Chief Hoover was still alive. Obviously we know that Spiro Agnew had to resign but his succession was for strategic reasons vital. Gerald Ford was a very close with FBI Chief Hoover as well. This Presidential Pardon for Nixon will be discussed in the next chapter

The question as whether President Nixon did contribute to the country needs to be answered in the affirmative. As a person and a President he appeared to have major flaws. As will be revealed later he was compromised already before entering the White House. After the JFK assassination he was the second US President (we will discus this later) who should have been convicted after a full further Watergate investigation.  Nixon had a very  strong personal ambition and drive, by nature he was often unpredictable and at times leaning on his staff.

Did he violate justice at the time of his Presidency and before? The answer is yes.  He deserved to be impeached and sadly the Watergate scandal was never further investigated as it would have revealed a more darker side of Nixon than we know.

Strictly spoken by any moral standards he was not suitable for the US Presidency and in terms of timing we can be glad in retrospect that he was not the “Commander-in-Chief” during the Cuban missile crisis. The world would not have existed anymore as he would have done what Allan Dulles presented him. Cuba would have been attacked and the Russian Commanders would have ordered to fire installed nuclear missiles back to the major cities in the US.

Let’s say that history has been mild from this point of view, but history has been relentless in terms of corrupting powers at the United States government.People may have skill and talent, but if they have a lack of conscious justice gets violated and things go wrong. Error’s are always possible. Genuine people make them but they are genuine to admit them and correct them. The problem with Nixon was that he was not very genuine. It was somewhat wishful thinking perhaps when he said: “I am not a crook!”

Lets face it, the US as a country of generally genuine people is far more than the sum of the failures and corruptions of past Governments, but neither the past nor the future can take away the criminal actions which took place and processes need to be in place that this will never ever happen anymore as the US needs to raise above the standards from the past!

Will be continued>>>>>>in Part 3

Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011