Tag Archives: President

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 7 – former President Ronald Reagan)


Official Portrait of President Ronald Reagan
Image via Wikipedia

The 40th US President Ronald Wilson Reagan

 
“Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction” – Ronald Reagan.
 
“Government is not the solution to our problems;government is the problem”  – Ronald Reagan.
An interesting man and an interesting US President. Perceived by many as one of the greatest US Presidents over the last decades, and Republicans often proudly refer to him. There is however more to him than the strict public image as cherished by many, but it proves that public image and the reality of some background events are not always the same and sometimes easily forgotten. Or sometimes not even published or known. Needless to say that Reagan was interesting , with an unusual background and an extremely level of high achievement at elderly age. Amazing actually the move he made from the film industry to the business of politics and even getting elected US President. But how?

Ronald Reagan was born in Tampico, Illinois, in 1911 and in a family with an Irish background. He signed up as a film actor by Warner Brothers in 1937 and moved to Hollywood making his début in “Love is in the air”. He participated and starred in about 50 films, including “Bed time for Bonzo” and”The Killers”.

Despite being an admirer of Franklin D. Roosevelt  he became a republican once getting interesting in politics and especially after his second marriage in 1952 with the wealthy actress Nancy Davis.  Joining the Republicans in 1962 he made an impressive television appeal  for the Republican party and Barry M  Goldwater during the Presidential campaign in 1964.

In 1960 Reagan actually already campaigned for Richard Nixon, – she he got the flavour of all this besides some experience.

By 1966 Reagan became elected Governor of California and served in this place for 8 years. He did loose the Republican nomination to Richard Nixon in 1968. In 1980 however he managed to defeat Jimmy Carter within the turbulent economic situation of the US, together with an Iran hostage crisis dragging on without being resolved.  Ironically hours after his inauguration the hostages were released, as part of a pre-election deal with a close relative of Khomeini in both Paris and Madrid with representatives of the Reagan/Bush campaign team, if they were not themselves involved. As will be reflected later on with President G.W.Bush, this was somewhat controversial the least.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG1iCCS7gDo&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                  (Iran-hostage crisis – Discovery channel)

Both Bush and Reagan were most worried that President Carter would be reelected and they offered as non official US representatives a better deal to Khomeini will full recognition of the Islāmic Republic in Iran and a policy on non-interference, in return for prolonging the hostage crisis until after the US Presidential elections. This would defeat President Carter, as it did. Obviously this was strongly undermining the Presidency of Jimmy Carter  at the cost of hostages and at the cost of long-term security interests of the US and at a cost of any morality standards. The last  will be shown as well in the Iran-Contra scandal in which the Mena Airport in Arkansas was used for illegal cocaine trafficking  with full awareness of the Federal Government and the Governor at the time in Arkansas, Bill Clinton. Reportedly both George H.W Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Jeb Bush were involved either by participating and/or various cover up’s. Saline County prosecutor Dan Harmon was convicted of various felonies including drug and racketeering charges in 1997. He was released from prison in 2006 for helping prosecutors in a murder case. The allegations have been disputed, however former President Clinton failed in his duty to show the activities of the Reagan/Bush Administration to Congress.  Bush as Vice-President with close CIA connections was fully aware as it was a large-scale CIA operation.

Reagan’s first year in office did show the greatest changes in priorities since the “New Deal” of Roosevelt.  The economy and recession were significant problems. Reagan managed to cut taxes and carry out economic reforms, apart from building up the US defence systems to “allow the country to negotiate from a position of strength”. The invasion of Grenada in October 1983 did boost US self-confidence. His 6 National Security advisers did include Admiral John Pointdexter and marine Colonel Oliver North. The last 2 interesting advisers will be discussed in the Iran-Contra scandal.

Following an assassination attempt in 1881 and despite much economic problems not being resolved still, President Reagan became reelected in 1984 with a record majority. By 1984 however the economy was on the mend and his program on domestic issues involving tax cut and deficit financing did contribute between 1983 and 1986 to the improvement of the economy. It did not last however as military spending increased. Close to the end of Reagan’s second term in office there was an unprecedented government debt. The Gross federal Debt had increased from $900 billion to $ 2.7 trillion. Ford and  Carter combined did only double Federal debt  and what took almost 31 years to make the first postwar debt tripling, Reagan managed to this in eight years. The question with federal debt is still where the priorities are, whether the budget needs to come at least for quite some part at the benefit of US citizens or whether a disproportionate part is used for both (often proper) military activities, besides many  illegal covert operations, – wasting  lives and resources in often pointless conflicts. The Khomeini/Reagan deal was a short-term solution for Republican election benefit, but a disastrous long-term solution for US interest in Iran considering the size and dangers of the military in the current Islāmic Republic. The US has a history of supporting the wrong countries with the wrong  leaders for short-term benefits as illustrated in the war against terror during the latest G.W. Bush Administration. The spiral of violence, the risk of terror, and the military costing will only increase with such an approach with an equal loss in American lives and others as due to ill-advised selections to go both to conflict and war.

During his second term in office and most positive however, Reagan managed to build up a good working relationship with the Soviet leader  Mikhail Gorbachev and signed an agreement on scrapping the intermediate nuclear forces. The Iran Contra Affair during 1986/1987 became a dark issue involving illegal arms for hostage deals with Iran by his senior staff with his knowledge. It proved that Pointdexter and Oliver North (all part of his National Security Advisers) were involved in secretly facilitating the sale of arms to Iran which became into an arms – for – hostages scheme, where a portion of the profits from the sales were diverted to fund anti-sandinista and anti-communist rebels (the “Contras”), in Nicaragua.  As a result of the controversy his White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan and his National Security Adviser John Poindexter had to resign but it did however not affect Reagan.  However both he and in particular the Vice-President G.W. Bush were fully aware as it was a fully approved CIA operation, with part of it still being related with the “Khomeini” deal to get the US Presidential election for Reagan and defeat Carter. Again, – the Iran-Contra affair was a highly illegal and controversial operation with drugs being imported as part of a huge CIA operation on Mena Airport in Arkansas.   Bill Clinton at the time was Governor in Arkansas, with “the former President Clinton” being fully aware and neither responding to the Arkansas Committee requiring investigations, nor supporting Polk County Prosecuting Attorney Joe Hardegree and Charles Black by any funding of required investigation. An illustration as well how people at the highest political level are neither willing nor permitting essential justice being done for the sake of allowing compromising CIA activities to be concealed, and not damaging their own political ambitions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jiRiGgA9Ljk                                                                                                                                    (Reagan meets Gorbachev)

Reagan once said that his actor talents served him well in the White House and being described as “The great communicator” he proved to use the modern media quite well.  Vice-President Bush with his background to carry out President Fords Executive Order 11905 in the past in his function as CIA director was supposed to improve the image of the CIA under the Ford Administration, but obviously he did not stick to the principles of this Executive Order when he became Vice-President under Reagan. In actual fact this is not that surprising as Vice-President Bush at the time had high level contacts with the “hawks” in the CIA, people who knew him longer and people he knew longer. Some of the contacts were still based on the early 1960ties.

Whilst Reagan did support the Contra’s,  no formal evidence could be found that he approved the diversion of moneys to the Contras. The White House buffers did work well, as is apparently a need for US President’s engaging in illegal activities. Oliver North reflected in his later book that Reagan really knew everything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35KcYgMPiIM&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                (Iran Contra Coverup: 1 of 8)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Ug0IL7k3elQ                                                                                                                              (Oliver North  Questioned)

Interestingly some people involved in the Iran-Contra scandal who (nearly) convicted initially were afterwards pardoned, and even became then prominent members within the Administration of eg George W. Bush. Elliot Abrams gained notoriety as due to most controversial decisions on foreign policy issues during the Reagan Administration on Nicaragua and El Salvador. Convicted in 1991 on 2 misdemeanor counts of unlawfully withholding information from Congress in connection with the Iran Contra Affair investigation, he was appointed on February 2, 2005, by President George W. Bush to Deputy National Security Adviser for Global Democracy Strategy. In this new position, Abrams became responsible for overseeing the National Security Council’s directorate of Democracy, “Human Rights” (we will discuss the human rights records of the former President G.W.Bush later), and International Organization Affairs and its directorate of Near East and North African Affairs.It is just one example that people owe each other in Government. There is still however secrecy around the Iran Contra scandal. An other example eg is Robert Michael Gates who served as the 22nd United States Secretary of Defense from 2006 to 2011. Prior to this, Gates served for 26 years in the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council, and under President George H. W. Bush as Director of Central Intelligence.  Independent Counsel for Iran-Contra Scandal, issued on August 4, 1993, said that Gates “was close to many figures who played significant roles in the Iran/Contra affair and was in a position to have known of their activities.  Independent Counsel did not warrant indictment. In 1984, as deputy director of CIA, Gates advocated that the U.S. start a bombing campaign against Nicaragua and that the U.S. would do everything in its power apart from direct military invasion of the country to remove the Sandinista government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=k-kLt9l2cQg                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         (Bush, Reagan let drugs flow free to US from Nicaragua – ex dealer)

The contra militants in Honduras were heavily involved in the guerilla war to topple the government of Nicaragua.Their warfare was consistent with widespread human rights abuses, including murder,torture,mutilation,rape, kidnapping destruction and arson. At the time Iran was amidst the Iran-Iraq war. There is evidence of Israeli involvement when the US government approved the sale. Besides this it has been clear in retrospect that CIA covert actions became more favourable within the Reagan Administration with William Casey being the Director of the CIA. Executive Order 1233 in December 1981 gave the CIA exclusive rights to conduct covert action unless the President would choose that a different Agency would be more effective to reach specific goals. Whilst CIA covert operations flourished at various places around the world, with the rice of Gorbachev, Reagan was able to symbolise a new beginning with the Soviets and an arms reduction treaty was signed during the 1988 Moscow summit. Despite hard-liners in the Soviet Union and his own Government (vice-president Bush), the personal bond between Gorbachev and Reagan contributed to the end of the cold war.

The last on the more positive illustrates how important fruitful relations are at international level. Interestingly Reagan’s CIA Director William Casey played initially a large part in Reagan’s foreign policy, based on a book “The Terror Network” where the USSR was perceived as the world’s worst “terrorist activity providing” country. Despite other CIA evidence that this was actually black propaganda by the CIA itself, Reagan went along with Casey’s book after he got it approved by a professor. Again an illustration on the importance to have trustworthy people in the top positions of the CIA as the agenda from the CIA is different from the agenda of the US President and even within the CIA some branches have different intelligence, contradicting at times. For a US President does not apply to pick his choice which suits him best, but to get the best possible CIA Director providing him with unbiassed and correct information as  manipulation of the truth with wrong factual information can create a potential of disasters.

Strictly Casey was the architect of the arms-for- hostages deal. Hours before Casey had to testify before Congress about his knowledge about the Iran-Contra affair he was admitted in hospital “as he could not speak anymore”.

Despite a “charming” Reagan, the US not only increased its involvement in the Middle East by providing arms to both Iran and Iraq in the war against each other, but there was an increasing involvement as well in various conflicts around the world including South America. Whilst Reagan’s policy at home was strongly “anti-drug orientated”, the CIA accomplished a large narcotic smuggling ring within the United States of America with Reagan approving the coöperation between the CIA and the Contra’s. After years of Federal investigations by the Kerry Congressional Committee the CIA finally admitted in 1998 to its involvement in drug trafficking in the US.

Under the Reagan Administration the CIA was allowed to do things in homeland America not seen at a level before. The CIA had even the right to infiltrate in any political organisation in the US itself as well. US citizens who became aware of CIA activities and disclosed them to the Press could be put in jail for 5 years. The fact that the CIA was used within the US against other groups in not new as former President Nixon used CIA connections as well with wide-spread wiretapping and in actions at the Watergate complex against the Democratic Party.

As history will show Republican Governments until the latest of George W. Bush (the son of H.W.Bush) do show certain patterns neither being legal nor desired for the US. After his election in 1980 Reagan overturned an arms embargo imposed on Guatemala by previous US President Jimmy Carter. Reagan permitted Guatemala’s army to buy 3.2 million dollar in military trucks and jeeps in June 1981 and to help this sale he simply removed the vehicles from the list of military equipment which was covered by the human rights embargo. Obviously Reagan approved this, however again in very close consultation with his Vice-President G.H.Bush.

With US support the Guatemalan Government was able to drive its regime of political repression with its army and escalating its slaughter of political dissidents and their assumed supporters to unprecedented levels. Whilst general Efrain Rios  Montt seized power in a coupé d’etat in March 1982, Rios Montt was praised by Reagan as a “man of great personal integrity”. In October 1982 however Rios Montt gave secretly carte blanche to the feared “Archivos” Intelligence Unit to increase “death squad operations”. The Reagan Administration tried to hide the crimes.The US embassy claimed on the 22nd of October 1982 that the Guatemalan government was the victim of a communist orientated “disinformation campaign”.

There are various other dark sides of the Reagan administration despite evidently positive achievements in the relationships with the new Soviet leader eventually.This was vital for the world.

The CIA however got even more control in- and supervision over – covert operations both within the US as elsewhere.

Reagan left the White House after 2 terms in office on a very popular note but his Central America policies apart from his domestic social programs were the least supported. When George H Bush took over as the 41 st US President he faced a record budget and trade deficit.

Both Reagan and Vice-President Bush got into power based an illegal pre-election deal with the Islāmic Republic, based on full recognition and non-interference, undermining the real US President Jimmy Carter to get a solution with the hostage crisis. Bush and Reagan with CIA support (as the right-wing section of the CIA did not agree with the CIA Director nominated by President Carter)  delayed the hostage crisis on purpose with a better deal for the Islāmic Republic of Khomeini and an election outcome in favour for the Republicans. Once in power those particular Republicans achieved some reasonable things. However the underlying corruption, the lawlessness, the double standards and supporting human right abuses seem to be the tragic trend in some of those Administrations, whilst great Republican predecessors did live up to the standards of the US.

They didn’t.

As US President you are the civilian and elected US leader, but once in the White House some US Presidents meet the real challenges of getting agreement with the military leaders and those within the CIA. Reagan had nothing to do with the history George H.  Bush had with the CIA. Reagan had neither the most influential background contacts and powers Bush,sr had and Bush,sr played a most influential role in the Reagan Administration.

However the choices being made in the key persons of both the National Security team, the Director of the CIA and the Chief of the Military staff are vital for the integrity of any Administration as it can make the difference between “the ride of your life” or the ride of your death. Not only the death being meant literally as happened with JFK, but also “the death of your soul” if you are compromised through the most evil things being possible within the domain of power as US President. Those teams within Government to deal with, those people with different agenda’s, besides the politics of Party and the Nation is a huge challenge. Some do grow in such a challenge and become a real leader of people, some however are not more than bad managers in positions they should never have aimed for.

Illegal pre-election deals with other countries for own election benefit may however be considered as a touchstone of the character of this Administration and whether it came from Bush or Reagan does not make any difference. The fact was that it was approved by Reagan, against US interests. Despite the charming Reagan, his ability to make the impression of being trustworthy, – history may note marked reservations on the integrity of his leadership.

The fruitful relationship between him and Gorbachev and “the product” in terms of ending the cold war and “the Berlin wall”, was however a reflection of Reagan’s determination (against advise of his inner circles) to do eventually the right thing, and this was a blessing for the world. Like Gorbachev at the time was a blessing for the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK30k2WTxY0&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                      (Ronald Reagan: “Tear Down This Wall”)

Interestingly the Reagan letters leave in retrospect a remarkable insight on Ronald Reagan as a person, different from the US President who approved so many illegal operations.

As we know there are many background powers in Washington, and getting elected US President is one, getting your ideas across is two, but getting a new direction implemented without compromising yourself or your own conscience is a matter of character and courage, besides an intuitive talent to nominate the right persons in the right positions at the right time, apart from the choice of the Vice Presidency. All this either works in favour of the Administration or at the other end of the spectrum may profoundly works against the Administration with the US President being tangled up in various cover ups, the last being succesful depending on the buffers being created in the White House.

Without Bush at the background Reagan would not have survived his first term, which is not necessarily a compliment for G.W.Bush but more a reflection on his knowledge how to use the systems beneficially to keep the Republican for 12 years in the White House.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vLlQxVpeHHs                                                                                                                          (Bush, sr said Reagan helped the new world order)

Next chapter (part 8) will discuss former US President G.H Bush.

Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

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

Advertisements

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 5 – former President Ford)


English: The swearing in of President Gerald F...
English: The swearing in of President Gerald Ford by Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger. Français : Gerald Ford serrant la main de Warren Burger le chef de la Cour Suprême des états-Unis (1974). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 38th US President Gerald Rudolph Ford:   “An American tragedy in which we all have played a  part” – “If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be turning over in his grave.”  – Gerald R. Ford.

Born in 1913 in Omaha, Nebraska, he studied law at Yale and during the Second World War he served in the US Navy. He became a member of the House of Representatives for the Republican Party from 1949 to 1973.   By 1965 he became the minority leader.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RCczaSKs9Y&feature=player_detailpage            ( Lyndon Johnson tapes: Gerald Ford on Warren Commission)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eZfS-oly10&feature=player_detailpage                 (Gerald Ford confirms CIA involvement in the JFK assassination)

He was appointed Vice-President under President Richard Nixon after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973. When President Richard Nixon resigned over the Watergate scandal Gerald Ford became the new President, obviously as such without electoral mandate.  He was pushed to this highest office in the US without knowing at the time of becoming Vice President that this would be his fate in the future.  He took this office on his shoulders with the responsibilities neither he nor his wife really wanted, but obviously he did it and got a lot of praise. His controversial decision to give Richard Nixon a full pardon and as such avoiding any further Watergate investigations, besides the problems in the US economy at the time, contributed generally to a low-level popularity. The further details will be discussed later in this article.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r2T9IlXYUM&feature=player_detailpage                      (Gerald Ford’s testimony on the  Pardon of Richard Nixon – Part 10)

US Congress during his Presidency was dominated by the Democratic Party, and both his external and domestic policy plan’s were rejected. He served only 2 years as US President and during the 1976 Presidential elections he was defeated by Jimmy Carter.

One of his publications after his Presidency was “Humor and the Presidency” in 1987. In his memoirs just before his death he revealed that the CIA was involved in the assassination on President John F Kennedy.  Speaking in retrospect, his first publication dit fit him quite well as he had a friendly sense of humor and note that he was generally well liked, regardless his controversial decision to give Richard Nixon a full Presidential pardon for what he inflicted during his years in the White house.

Interestingly he did receive for this “Presidential Nixon Pardon”  ‘The Profile in Courage Award” at the Kennedy Library in Boston in May 2001. Why this is so interesting will be revealed later in this article as it will be clear that the perceptions on this Presidential Pardon are different, or at least valued differently.

Gerald Ford took over as the  38th US President after serving under Nixon since the 12th of October 1973 as his Vice President.  The former Vice-President at the time Spiro Agnew  resigned on the 10th of October as due to proven corruption and Nixon asked both Congress and Hoover (FBI Chief)  for advise about the succession of Vice President Agnew.

Gerald Ford had an impressive background with both good relations within the CIA and the FBI.  Only 10 years before he served within the Warren Commission. The Warren Commission initiated under President Johnson had the purpose to reach a conclusion on those involved in the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.  As most of us know in retrospect,  – the purpose of the Warren Commission was to suppress the truth on the JFK assassination.  Ford was once called “the CIA man” in Congress.

Only one month into his Presidency,  Ford pardoned Richard Nixon completely avoiding as such further investigations into the Watergate scandal.  Some assumed this was an act of courage whilst others criticised Ford for doing this. What we know is that he took this decision within the first 100 days in office without – reportedly – consultation with any of his staff or other advisers.

Was the background of this decision a real act of moral courage or was there more to this decision? He made the decision reportedly on his own, based on his knowledge and his own assessment of the situation.

Let’s go back to Gerald Ford’s  role  in the Warren Commission.  Ford always defended the lone gunman theory within the identified cause of death by the Warren Commission. He had excellent relations with the FBI Chief Hoover at the time.  Deliberately and against all usual protocol he did help FBI Chief Hoover by providing him all the in’s and out’s of the Warren Commission  in private and “confidential”, as such allowing Hoover to keep an eye on those members who would perhaps not follow Allen Dulles verdict on the “lone gunman theory”. There were clearly 2 members of the Warren Commission having some reservations on both the process and the verdict and even though not all evidence reached the Warren Commission (Allen Dulles was in a place to avoid at least some part to reach the Commission), it was clear from the beginning that the CIA played a most controversial role.  Some people within the Warren Commission knew more than others and Gerald Ford (“the CIA man in Congress”)  together with the FBI Chief Hoover was in full agreement that the truth should never allowed to become public. The truth was that it was an inside job from the CIA, authorised by the highest levels of the Executive branch of the US Government.  Hence the lone gunman theory was supposed to be the only possible allowed verdict for both the US and Congress. A hard lie to be swallowed. However Gerald Ford went on national television to defend the findings of the Warren Commission in a convincing way.

If the broader involvement of the Executive branch would be public knowledge with the people who had knowledge of the pending events on the 22nd of November 1963, this would have cause the most dramatic Constitutional crisis ever in US history at the time. The US would not accept one of its most popular Presidents being killed with gross government involvement. With Ford’s insight in the CIA and his “absolute pardon” for Richard Nixon, he wanted to avoid further damaging investigations in which the CIA would be exposed. Even 10 years after the Warren Commission report.

The point is that the  “Watergate” burglars played a role in the Kennedy assassination as well and the CIA played a role in the Watergate break in as it was assumed that the Democratic Party had access to some top-secret documents and photographs related to the JFK assassination. Especially imaging from a police helicopter would slash the Lee Harvey Oswald theory on his involvement, besides the fact the latter fully revealed Zapruder film ruled out the lone gunman theory.  The Watergate burglary took place on the 28th of May and the 17th of June 1972.

Nixon used the provisions of the 25th Amendment to nominate Gerald Ford as his new Vice President. The FBI facilitated payments meanwhile to the burglars via “the Committee to Reelect President Nixon” in 1972. H. W. Bush (the later President) was the head of this Committee and claimed until the last Nixon tapes being released that Richard Nixon was innocent. The question as well is whether the later President H.W. Bush was completely honest in his assessment of President Nixon being innocent at the time, as history shows in its facts and documentation that H.W. Bush had more background information about the JFK assassination and those who were involved.

FBI Chief Edward Hoover died meanwhile on the 2nd of May 1972. The acting Head of the FBI then L Patrick Gray was ordered to save the situation for Nixon and had to destroy evidence from the safe of Howard Hunt on his assignments and working schedule for the CIA. Hunt was both involved in Watergate and the assassination of JFK.  Because of this destruction of evidence after taking those documents from Howard Hunt’s safe,  L Patrick Gray had to resign from the FBI.   E Howard Hunt then made claims at the White House as he wanted to avoid conviction, but after the suspicious death of his wife he did plead guilty to the Watergate burglary, being concerned about the rest of his family.

Coming back on history: with Gerald Ford’s background in the Warren Commission’s corruption of evidence of the JFK assassination,  FBI Chief  Hoover advised Nixon that after the corruption scandal with his first Vice President Spiro Agnew, Gerald Ford would be his best option if his own Presidency would come into danger. With Gerald Ford perhaps being the next President, any secrets of widespread involvement in the JFK murder would be kept secret, including the involvement of the CIA.  If  Gerald Ford would decide to pursue matters further with “Watergate” (both FBI Chief Hoover and Nixon were fully aware of this, the CIA included) it would both expose Gerald Ford himself to his controversial involvement in the Warren Commission, besides this  it would expose Nixon, Hoover, the CIA and the systems of the Executive powers. They all had most positive relations with Gerald Ford, who once said that he had no real enemies. Gerald Ford’s assessment was correct, he had no real enemies as he never caused any real controversy apart from the “Nixon-pardon”.

Indeed, with Gerald Ford in the White House the establishment would be secured that the status quo on the most vital Government secrets would stay the same. It would not be the best reflection on the US and the world if it would prove that the highest government levels for various reasons were involved in this crime. Whilst Gerald Ford had no real enemies, John Fitzgerald Kennedy had a number of enemies as he was quite outspoken on significant issues in the US at the time. The same applies to his younger brother Robert Francis Kennedy.

It never happened before that a US President was assassinated by a miliary related Agency of the US Government with authority from major powers within this government. The reasons for this assassination would be much revealing for the nature and standards of this US Government, hence regardless the implications all efforts being in place to suppress the truth with all possible and available means. Besides this, from one thing other issues may evolve. It never happened either that a Senator from New York being succesful in the run up to Presidential elections, with a good sense of social justice and strong anti-war sentiments, would be assassinated by the same background powers who were in this case responsible for the death of his older brother, – the late 35th US President.

If Watergate would be reopened Howard Hunt’s case would be likely first investigated.  If he would tell everything he knew,  including all the connections he had with people connected to “The Bay of Pig crisis”, the CIA  and others, –  the JFK assassination would likely be far more important then the real Watergate burglary itself.  The RFK assassination could be well involved in this as well.

Gerald Ford was fully aware of the potential implications as he was already a compromised person before he even became Vice President. Whilst in function as US President stating to the public that “The long national nightmare is over” and that “Our Constitution works” he was simply not telling the truth.  The nightmare was not over and other Presidents after John F Kennedy would make matters even worse, in different areas of secrecy being required and cover up’s being considered “normal” now from the perception of various governments

Gerald Ford simply compromised himself  (again actually) to prevent the national nightmare from 1963 and those who were involved to be exposed (through all pending hearings). This was the reason for the Nixon pardon, as “Watergate” would otherwise open “a can of worms”.

Obviously Gerald Ford protected with this the many who were involved, and even perhaps not knowing this Howard Hunt’s life, though the last was not really a priority.  If it would come either to further court or Senate hearings, most likely  Hunt would be assassinated by the CIA beforehand. This happened with a number of witnesses before. The suspicious death of Hunt’s wife was for Hunt himself a warning  not to take matters further. Gerald Ford knew about the danger of Hunt going to speak in court if so required. Hunt knew too much and was far too much involved.

Rather than that it proved the Constitution did work, it proved that the Constitution did not work. It does raise the question on which principles did Gerald Ford publicly show that the Constitution did work. Which principles did he defend?   If some speak about the courage of Gerald Ford when he gave Nixon full pardon, as such preventing that a more evil truth would become public (the evil of a corrupt government system involved in the JFK assassination), the question is then how to define this courage. It does raise the question as well what sort of Constitution did work. Needless to say that this was not the US Constitution, neither was it the Constitution of people seeking more honesty in government policy.

Time after time US Presidents would compromise the same US Constitution and mislead the public on the most significant issues of their time with backdoor dealings neither being justified nor lawful, and Congress being a lame duck, not having the political ability or determination to solve matters for once and for all.

Democracy for the US proved to be a charming Government with neither however too much substance nor integrity among  the few who were able to manipulate the opinions of the many, as part of the authority and the powers they were entrusted  based on the same US Constitution. The last so often being compromised by people trying even to manipulate this Constitution for their own secret endeavours. The way to Justice is long with many obstacles on the road and in US history many of such obstacles neglected, which made that the power of Democracy and the intend of the US Constitution suffered.

James Madison, the 4th US President, would have raised the same concerns if he was able to watch only once more over the ongoing Government corruption.  Ford was part of this, whatever he did good, – he was part of the cover up in the JFK assassination. Part of the cover up to protect Nixon to leave the past to the past. President Ford’s own press secretary resigned after his “Nixon – pardon”.

People in the US who fled to Canada to avoid fighting in  the Vietnam war as an act of conscious were either prosecuted or only got a conditional pardon. People with little or no conscious in the JFK assassination walked free, as much as possible protected. Witnessed were killed, evidence was disrupted and compromised. Prosecution was prevented by the highest officials in Government even 10 years after the JFK assassination. Ford was part of this from the beginning.   He knew it was a Coupe d’Etat and he knew who were behind it and as US President he could have made a different choice at the beginning of his Presidency, but he could not do it as too many others were involved and he did not know what it would do to the future in general, and his future as well.

Gerald Ford  did promote Donald Rumsfeld (to be discussed later again) to help him to set the priorities for his Presidential direction. Rumsfeld became the President’s right hand. If we look at history how matters evolved with Rumsfeld even coming up again in the last Bush Administration, and in various Republican Administrations before, – this choice  was not the best choice. However Gerald Ford could perhaps not know this at the time. Henry Kissinger stayed on in Ford’s foreign policy team and they worked in good coöperation.

Donald Kendell , President of Pepsi – Cola, was considered to be “the eyes and ears” of the CIA in Cuba. The day before the JFK assassination he was meeting with Nixon. The Watergate burglars were tied up with both the Kennedy assassination and the Bay of Pigs. At least one of the Watergate burglars was on the CIA payroll on the 17th of June 1972 (Eugenio Martinez). The other Watergate conspirators included ex- FBI agent G. Gordon Liddy, ex – CIA agents james McCord and E. Howard Hunt, Bernard Barker, Frank Sturgis and Virggilo Gonzales. Hunt being deeply involved in the Bay of Pigs operations retired later from the CIA . Ford knew this. He became even the Covert Operations Chief for President Nixon.  Several reports do show that Hunt was in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963 when JFK was assassinated. Marita Lorenz testified under oath that she observed him paying off an assassination team in Dallas the night before the JFK murder.

Obviously Nixon was most concerned  when Hunt’s involvement with Watergate (with the others)  would came to light, with the previous connections he had. Nixon’s aide John Ehrlichman was instructed by Nixon to order the acting FBI Director to remove 6 written files from Hunt’s personal safe. Gray did as he was told and burnt those files in his fireplace. He took the brunt for it and had to resign, which reflects how well the buffer systems in the White House do work as the issue was not further investigated.  John Dean, council to the President,  shredded Hunt’s operational diary.  The latest Nixon tapes are studded with deletions, especially discussions about Hunt, the Bay of Pigs and JFK.  In May 1972 Nixon disclosed on tape to his 2 top aides that the Warren Commission was “the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated.”    Vice-President Ford was fully aware at the time as both he and Nixon had various background information on the JFK assassination.   Hunt later did admit on CIA involvement in the JFK assassination and he fingered CIA officers Cord Meyer, David Phillips, William Harvey and David Morales.

Like former US President Eisenhower and Truman warned for the military establishment, – Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs crisis did do the same. He did treat them with courtesy and respect, but he was extremely on his guard as he realised that those “groups” had their own strong agenda, not refraining from misleading a US President if it would suit this agenda. No US President in the US since JFK took those lessons seriously on board. No legislative powers even in the US took this seriously on board as if they would have done so the previous Administration would have been impeached over the 9/11 drama’s.

A  US President needs to be strong enough to rule both the CIA and the Pentagon. Most Presidents after JFK were too much compromised themselves already that rather ruling those Agencies, they became more or less puppets and allowed the Agencies to engage in activities out of all normal proportions. The last without investigations in retrospect as they were somehow able to keep Congress out of the picture.

As reflected in part in chapter 4 of these series, in retrospect there is evidence that Nixon originated the Cuban (Bay of Pigs) invasion under Eisenhower, hence his close links with those people who felt betrayed by JFK as part of JFK’s refusal not to back up this invasion with further military support from the air (once Kennedy discovered that CIA information was not correct at the time). Hence as well Nixon’s close links with both this people and the CIA,  including both LBJ and including his old friend: the notorious FBI Chief Hoover.

Obviously there is far more to both the lives of Nixon and Ford during their Presidencies and afterwards, but also before they became US President.   Whilst Nixon was at times very unpredictable, Ford was fairly balanced and actually quite pleasant. Despite not winning the elections in 1974 he took over the Presidency of Richard Nixon at a turbulent time and there have been much positives as well.

If you ask me whether he was a good man, I don’t hesitate to think that Gerald Ford had a better character than Richard Nixon or Johnson.  People make failures in their lives, and so be it.  The measure of this man is larger than what he did wrong or tried to hide, but if the question is whether he did violate justice at the time (or violate the US Constitution), the answer is 100% in the affirmative: yes, he did!

It can’t be denied that this was a touchstone of  Gerald Ford’s character at the time and that this was not the courage which is prepared to lose everything for higher values and principles being at stake. What was at stake was that the principle of truth was neither allowed nor permitted to show the darkest episode in US political and Constitutional history, and Gerald Ford correctly stated that if Lincoln was alive in those days, he would turn in his grave. He correctly stated on another occasion that he was “not a Lincoln but a Ford.” In other words he was the man who avoided in the most critical time of decision making the moral obligation to stick to the truth and the US Constitution. What could not have been expected anymore from former President L.B. Johnson or Richard M. Nixon has they passed already long before the “point of no return” could have within reach of Gerald Ford.  He may have had his reasons, but it was neither an act of courage nor a special service to his country that he acted the way he did in his full Presidential Pardon of Richard Milhous Nixon.

In his memoirs being published just before he died Gerald Ford did admit finally that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination. Ford may have been however the man who did regret his involvement in the Warren Commission in the way he did,  and in his case I do not rule out that this burden from the past was indeed a personal burden for him later in life after his Presidency was finished.  However he did not hesitate to accept the “Profile in Courage Award”  in 2001 at the JFK library in Boston, which in a way is ironic in retrospect.  The examples however of courage as described in JFK’s book “Profiles in courage” are of an entirely  different nature than reflected in either LBJ’ s, Nixon’s or Gerald Ford’s life.

Could Gerald Ford have dealt with the matter differently?

Let’s be honest, obviously he was not in the easiest place. It is a matter of choice , character and courage to do so and indeed with his Presidential pardon for Nixon he obstructed justice systems to work as they should do in the US. It would have been a major issue in the US if the Watergate scandal would have revealed the further background and links as being described, but it would have solved the matter for once and for all and if fully investigated (the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations included).  With some of the links to Bush senior on  the JFK assassination, there would have been likely neither a W.H. Bush Administration nor a G.W. Bush Administration as the principles of governance being implemented by Congress would have prevented those people to be elected US President, – besides new legislation for  the other “operating powers” in the US.  The forces for justice did prove neither to be that strong in the US during the years of Gerald Ford in the White House, nor during the Presidential years after President Carter.

Fact is that the CIA has been involved in high-profile assassinations on US citizens and this created a precedent for the powers at the background to change history against the will of the voters and against the intent of the Constitution. Still applies in 2011 that those powers need to be restricted if Congress is ready to deal with this, based on historical review of events.

Generally spoken no justice provided within any Presidential Administration in whatever effort  justifies  to hide  any of the criminal injustice of past Administrations at the level as this occurred, with the secrecy and cover up’s from LBJ  until today. If the problem would have been properly tackled and resolved at the time – with still the option today it would have meant progress for the US.  Once such dark secrets are allowed to be kept secret in Government systems it creates a precedent for even worse things to be kept secret if secrecy for illegal activities becomes part of “normal procedure” of Government activities. It would  seem in the US that when such bad things happen they are put in the freezer of history and classified documents, and secret files are allowed to be opened some 20 to 100 years later, depending how serious the matter was. This is not the way the US will grow as both a Republic and a Democracy!

The real issue is that once gross injustice is allowed to be part of government systems, greater evil will be even allowed to be applied when it suits the Government to find an excuse to go to war, even if the reasons for going to war are fabricated.

Again, WTC 7  full of CIA intelligence and most confidential papers went down during 9/11 as a result of a controlled demolition as reflected by Ted Gunderson (former FBI Chief) and Albert Stubblebine (former Major General of all Military Intelligence). Since the JFK assassination evil systems existing and operating within the Executive branch were allowed to continue its work against the interest of US citizens.

It was President Lincoln (a Republican) who warned for allowing the President to go at war for pleasure, however most of the Republican Presidents the last 40 years have been at war as most of those US Presidents had very close links with the CIA , and other organisations not serving the real interests of the US and the world. Obviously people may view this differently but the crux is that if the books would be really opened on the past Bush Administration, and the real facts came to table, including the role of Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, – and if  let’s say 9/11 was really allowed to have a full independent investigation without the usual obstructions and tampering  of past investigations and evidence not even reaching the table, it would be a mind-blowing event for all those investigators being involved.    Not to speak of all the US citizens if they would get an insight on issues which formed the base why this former US President and Rumsfeld and Cheney would potentially go to jail in both Germany and Switzerland if they would visit those countries The situation is of such nature that based on the relatively little information being available,  the former US President Bush  is already unable to travel to Switzerland without a potential arrest warrant. US citizens may get angry about the fact that a little country in Europe may convict the former US President and put him in a likely well deserved jail if he would go on holiday there,  – but let’s be realistic in terms of justice. Does this not tell at least something about the past Administration, being allowed by both the public and Congress to continue to do “the job”? We’ll discuss this later.

The US is nearly bankrupt now, bankrupt of what it robbed from the US itself.

Generally spoken former President Gerald  Ford despite his failures to overcome the injustice from the past ,  did not engage in a new war. He had a stable and pleasant personality and perhaps he has been worried that too much compromising events hitting daylight in the US at once would neither be well swallowed nor well digested. However the events around Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld in all detail being  lined up in the scrutiny of justice would be for certain badly swallowed and badly digested as well. And they are all interlinked because the Legislative US Powers did not use its full recourses to regulate the Executive Powers by law and proper law enforcement.

Gerald Ford was restricted by the past by choice. He did not need to do so. He was otherwise a good President, but he would have been a great President if he would have faced this past with dignity and courage, faced this past with the required determination to make sure that “Lincoln would not turn over in his grave” by seeing what happened and what was unresolved, allowing eventually a system of  government to help US Presidents going to war  – as President Lincoln once said – “For pleasure!”

Significant at President’s Ford credit is that after the findings of the Senate requested Church Committee, he issued Executive order 11905 with guidance and restrictions for various agencies including the clarification of both intelligence authorities and responsibilities. The later President Bush was nominated to be CIA Director (with strong opposition from Senator Frank Church) and got the job to give the CIA a better reputation. He was given 90 days to carry out Executive order 11905, which included a reorganisation and a statement that CIA activities would not be directed against American citizens. The Church Committee investigations included the question whether the CIA was involved in the assassination of domestic officials, including President Kennedy. Those dynamics were positive, but interesting as well for various reasons. President Ford did know of H.W.Bush association with the CIA at the time of the JFK assassination. It seemed a very political partisan choice to select H.W. Bush for this position.

For further insight in Gerald Ford’s Presidency see the recommended links

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8rg9c4pUrg&feature=player_detailpage                                           (Ford – Carter debate excerpt)

Jimmy Carter took over from Gerald Ford in 1977 as the 39th President of the United States. The Watergate scandal was still fresh in the voters mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzgB_w1tO5M&feature=player_detailpage                                    (President Ford died – ABC News)

Will be continued>>>>see Part 6

Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

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

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

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11)


Presidents of the United States, before 1868
Presidents of the United States, before 1868 (Photo credit: Penn State Special Collections Library)
Front page of  “Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice”. Part 1.

Introduction:

“Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” gives an overview of some previous US Presidents from the perception of  violations of Justice,  the last including both the law and/or  US Constitution.

The facts are actually somewhat sobering perhaps and offer an insight at the Executive branch of the US where vital decisions are made for both the US, with a considerable impact at times for the whole world.

Those articles are aimed to show certain Presidential dynamics from a different perspective, both to allow discussion on acceptable standards, – however really fully accepting that the perceptions on those Presidencies can be seen from various perspectives and that it is important in all cases to view the broader context, – the last being fair to history itself and the people who tried to give it their own best efforts once they were elected as US President. They did all work in their own time with the dynamics and questions of their own generation and with their own personal struggles. The last should not be forgotten.

Against all wrongdoings there are considerable achievements at various levels, regardless whether we agree or disagree. It is up to historians to judge the wider picture with the available information at the time.

Since the assassination of President John F Kennedy in 1963 the military arm of the US has been increasingly involved in foreign policy making, not rarely with the use of various covert operations at different levels.  See for instance: >>>>>: https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/beyond-911-memorial-services-2011/  and  Anniversary JFK assassination and review  <<<<

The impact of both this influence and the combination of some US Presidents to be discussed has not always been that fortunate.  The profiles on those earlier US President‘s will explain this in  some  detail.

Those profiles on violations of justice however are only restricted to certain aspects or dealings of  those US Presidents, mainly obviously during their years in the White House.

They are, again,  not intended to comment on their legacy in a broader sense.  

Some of those people who were once “US Commander-in-Chief” passed away, others are in retirement. They left behind  valuable examples in areas which could have been dealt with differently. However areas also where they increased the risk on conflict or war, – besides human rights being abused on various occasions.

For certain at times they did  contribute in a wider sense to both the US and the world.

“Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” can be found in the webpages below:

“If  angels  were  to  govern  men, neither  external  nor  internal controls  on government  would be  necessary.  In framing  a government  which  is  to be administered  by  men  over  men, the  great  difficulty  is  this: You  must  first  enable  the  government  to  control  the governed; and  in  the  next  place ,  oblige  it  to  control itself.”

James Madison, 1788—

Related image

 
“Lincoln  was  not  a  perfect  man, nor  a  perfect  President.  By  modern  standards his condemnation  of slavery  might  be  considered  tentative.”
 —Barack  Obama, Chicago  Tribune,  June, 25, 2005
Related image
->>>>>>>>>>>
 

>Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice – Introduction  (Part 2 of 11) on July 4, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 3 – former US President Johnson) on July 16, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice  (Part 4 – former President Nixon) on July 19, 2011

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice  (Part 5 – former President Ford) on July 20, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice.  (Part 6 – former President Carter, the exception) on July 28, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 7 – former President Ronald Reagan) on August 1, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 8 – former President H.W. Bush) on August 6, 2011

Related image

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 9 – former President W. J. Clinton) on August 9, 2011

Related image

>US Presidential profiles in violations of justice. (Part 10 – former President G.W. Bush) on August 13, 2011

Related image

Related image
—–>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In the article below President Barack Obama is discussed as a prime example of setting better standards since President John F Kennedy. This however is not within the context of “Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” as the last goes from President L.B. Johnson until President  G. W. Bush. It is only an addition or example how things can be different at this level of executive power. The article about President Obama is an interim assessment before his re-election. Whilst every US President will be faced with confidential injustice, for every person in this position applies at times the question how much justice can be  served with injustice. Keeping the right balance between those paradoxes and utilising the choice of serving the best possible justice with a candid exposure of the facts at both inner-team level and the public will give the best possible reflection on each US President, as long ethical the best possible choices are made. This does not take away that for President Obama e.g. applies as well that he has an agenda which he wants to push through amidst the separation of powers in the US.
Related image
Whilst the separation of powers are aimed to protect the US, it insufficiently protected the US during the last decades. History will show in retrospect how President Obama played the bouncing ball game of tensions and dimensions at this level to get his agenda for more social justice through.
Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice – Introduction (Part 2 of 11)


>>INTRODUCTION<<

The White House Southside
The White House Southside (Photo credit: Glyn Lowe Photoworks)

“Democracy…while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy.     Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”  – John Adams  (1735 – 1826)

“A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people”.  – John F Kennedy (1917 – 1963)

“I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions”.                                           – Barack Obama (1961 –   )

In addition to the first chapter the following comments are justified as part of a broader introduction.

The circles of Washington are  mysterious , dark and deep,  and each President has to balance wisely before he sleeps, – balance wisely before he sleeps.

Robert Frost  with his quote:  “The woods are lovely dark and deep, but I have promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep, – and miles to go before I sleep…”, – phrased it slightly differently.

However, – despite the promises  the balance of how far one can go and except degrees of injustice to meet  perhaps more justice eventually, proved different for each US President. Sometimes it takes an inch,  sometimes it takes indeed miles.  However in general much depends on the integrity, the ideology and the wisdom of  the US President, besides obviously the circumstances  to be addressed, – but also the persons being nominated (or already in place) to advise the President on matters of both domestic and foreign policy.

Many issues as we know evolve in close coöperation with a variety of advisers, apart from e.g. Agencies such as  the FBI, the CIA and  the Pentagon.  Those Agencies in good  hands  serve for certain the right purpose as long as they stick to their original assignments.

“Profiles in Presidential violations of Justice”  does  not discuss the current US President ( Barack Obama)  as such as he still is at an early stage of his Presidency.  The article “Interim assessment of a President” (within this Blog)  gives a more detailed indication on this remarkable first African American President.

Presidential dynamics have not been always the same in US history and the selection of people in key positions of the Pentagon and the CIA  (after President Truman established the CIA in 1947) are and will be  always vital where it comes to both competence and integrity within the scope of the various obligations of those Agencies, – especially where US Presidents rely on the intelligence provided by those Agencies.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice” does neither go into the finer details on the lives of some US Presidents in the past,  nor does it mention the broader legacy in any extended detail.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  is a reflection only on some significant incidents against the principles of justice, some worse than others. However what those Presidents did at crucial moments during their Presidency against this justice, sometimes already before entering this office,  has been a touchstone of their character. Not rarely it did effect far too many people.

Any new President at the start is facing the challenge to set up a cabinet of capable, effective and reliable people. Besides this there is the  building up of relationships with the various existing Government agencies including the Pentagon, which are all vital to set the tone for the rest of the Administration in the years lying ahead.  All those people and groups contribute to the making of a President but obviously the Presidency itself  provides the required choices to show what lies ahead. Those final choices give directions, –  either being in the positive or in the negative. Once an US President get compromised it is difficult at times to get out of it, depending on the strength of character.  John F Kennedy took e.g. the full blame of the Bay of Pigs failures which was however related with poorly provided information by the CIA.  Presidential failures still, whether they are genuine or deliberate, provide valuable lessons for the future. Deliberate actions to mislead the public with a criminal background or intend are obviously far more serious than the genuine mistakes anybody can make in such a place, as long there is evidence that  some quality ways to reach certain decisions were in place.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice” gives an insight in the complexities and different dynamics of various Presidential Administrations and the choices being made. It starts  from the 22nd of November 1963 (when President John F Kennedy was assassinated) until the 21st of January 2009 when the last Bush Administration  ended and the Obama Administration did begin.

The greater call for all Presidents was to do better for the country and serve as such, besides obviously personal ambitions. Those last 2 aspects might have been different for each President. The ways and the programs have been different as well. Likewise the level of integrity has been different for earlier Presidents being faced with the bigger questions and the larger  picture,  which did include  the Presidential coöperation with various US security Agencies and the dealings with both US Congress and US law. It proves that whatever is public knowledge is not always the truth, and that some Presidents were in principle and by principle compromised already before they took the Presidential oath to the Constitution.

Some US Presidents  did contribute towards a program for domestic reforms whilst at the same time approving various CIA covert operations at a level neither in line with morality nor US law.

Both the Pentagon and the CIA have the duty to protect the interests of the US and make recommendations  to the President, who has the final responsibility of decision-making.

Both Agencies have admirable people on board with the highest levels of integrity and duty of service where it comes to the protection of the US against dangers from abroad, – whether those dangers are inflicted by eg Al-Qaeda terrorist cells at present, or dangers of so-called rogue states who may prove an increasing danger in the future. The past showed  however under various Presidents that those Agencies were not governed (anymore) by some reasonable required standards of morality, or accuracy in providing intelligence or security information.  Neither did it prove that the Presidential powers as they were exercised were in line with the required standards given by US Law and Constitution.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  gives at least an insight where and how those standards with some Presidents failed, and it gives  an insight why they  failed and which areas of systems might be subject for further improvement.

Dangerous situations may arise when Government Agencies are not operating under the full control of the US President, or when e.g. the nominated persons being CIA Director or chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not have full control of both  “the culture” and working dynamics of their own organisations, or when they simply hide information for the purpose of their own agenda’s. The system fails as well when those Agencies (the FBI included)  have an Organisational agenda neither being in alignment within the Constitutional balance of powers, nor with US law.

History proves that there have been incidents in which US Presidents acted on proper and correct information of those Agencies, however history proves as well that if the US President would have acted on the intelligence provided, – the world would not have existed anymore as due to failures to give complete information as required. The Cuba crisis in 1962 is a clear example of this.

The Assassination of US President John F. Kennedy in 1963 did show many years later CIA involvement,  including  involvement at the highest US political powers in the cover up. All for various dark reasons and both – needless to say – against the Constitution and the US law.  The public was seriously misled by the Warren Commission and some do show  that the “9/11 Commission” was of similar nature with the intend to mislead US citizens. The people supposed to protect the Constitution and the law at the time,  were reportedly involved in various cover up’s at the highest levels of Government, – which is neither a good reflection of a democracy nor the justice systems being supposed to be fully operational without discrimination of any nature.

History does further show that US Presidents already compromised before they even started their Presidency, were unlikely to resist the pressures from above Agencies.  For this reason they did collaborate  in close coöperation with some of those Agencies at times the independent view and the wisdom of the President was required to make final decisions. The lack of required integrity did involve certain activities neither known by the public, nor by Congress, – and obviously profoundly against US law or common justice.

In the most positive scenario, “Profiles in US Presidential violations of justice” may support further discussion to improve the regulation systems within “the US balance of powers”. The last actually to protect the US against itself.  If those systems do not improve, some  historical events being reflected on  would be able to  repeat itself with an unpredictable and different identity.  Those situations could potentially provoke  the most dangerous situations the US as a Republic and Democracy could face.

US Presidents may fail for various reasons, as long as the detection systems (including the internal checks within the Constitutional balance of powers) do not fail, and as long it is clear that neither US Presidents, nor the CIA,   neither Officials of the Pentagon nor any other Agency, are able to work outside the powers of the law, or the Constitution, or outside the legitimate requirements of  US  Congress.

US Presidents (with full Congressional support) need  to be strong enough to rule the major background powers in the US, –  based on fair common sense and proper value systems with evidently both the broader picture in mind, together with a high level of integrity.

Within the context of those earlier Presidential dynamics including a variety of covert operations for different reasons, it is realistic to say that never ever had the US so much to lose or so much to gain, and that all decisions within the US Constitution delegated to the Executive branch should be based on merit and purpose for the US future itself.  Hence the political system in the US needs to work optimal in line with the principles provided by both the law and the Constitution.

With the fall of communism but still an ongoing Arab – Israeli conflict;  with wars in Vietnam and Iraq behind us, but still the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban as part of the war in Afghanistan (where the “war on terror” designed to defend Western values escalated into a conflict with disregard for human rights), – we now may face a reality that China may overtake the US as the world’s greatest superpower. Where the Holocaust did show  genocide at a never experienced scale,  the cold war brought us close to global nuclear destruction in 1962 through incomplete management and advise of both the CIA and the Pentagon against the dangers inflicted by the Soviets. It was wise management however of John F. Kennedy as President which saved the world due to his independent and broader views. The US needs internal protection that a history of military confrontation for the wrong reasons, is not going to compromise a  future for the right reasons.

The US has a history of many costly wars which brought the federal budget deficit at record level without any proportionate benefit, however never took it the time and the opportunity to reëxamine its own attitude and responsibility in the many predicaments it both faced and created.

It takes the wider community of US Government Executives and Controlling powers to raise the US above the standards of the past, and to embrace both the opportunities and challenges of the future with a wise balance of principle centred leadership where proper value systems are at the core of the decisions being made. The last to ease a direction towards more positive global dynamics, based on fruitful interdependence with in the end a better economy and prosperity for those nations being involved. This direction includes reduction of terror activities by at least not provoking this terror within the domain of US power.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  gets at the heart of this required principle centred leadership –  with examples where it went wrong against both the Constitution and the law.

Each Presidential profile offers material for sustained discussion as it does touch base on the fundamental question which direction to go in a world facing more dangers than ever before. The response on problems, crisis and disasters is as important as those pending disasters, crisis and problems itself and it will be clear that US response in e.g.areas of  foreign policy has been highly inadequate and dangerous at times.

The following 8 chapters will picture the problems and foundations of the decision-making US Presidents differently and the last epilogue will summarise some events.

Next article will start with Lyndon Baines Johnson, the 36th President who took over after the assassination of President John F Kennedy.

Thank you!
 Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

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