John A. Farrell

In John Farrell’s compelling biography of Richard Nixon we are reminded that the US Supreme court ruled that Executive Privilege allowed the President to conceal documents for national security purposes unless the intent was to conceal illegal acts.

Over the next few days we will learn if the Senate considers extortion of a foreign leader rises to the threshold of an impeachable act, but this Senate will not subpoena either witnesses or executive documents to convict or exonerate President Donald J. Trump.

What would Richard Nixon have thought of Trump’s activities? He very likely he would have done the same thing and considered himself above the law. And it very well could be where Trump got the idea.

And Richard Nixon would have considered both himself and Trump more casualties in the long and sordid history of presidential dirty tricks, including the theft of the 1960 election by John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and the more recent theft of the 2000 election by the Republican-dominated Florida Supreme Court.

“They” are out to get me, Nixon believed. But then again, in Washington “getting” people is a time-honored sport.

Nixon, as you may recall, was forced out of the Presidency by his own party after investigators got their hands on “the smoking gun,” transcripts of Oval Office tapes in which Nixon made it clear he was part of the coverup of the Watergate break-ins. And obstructed justice. And tried to get the CIA to interfere in FBI investigations.

Nixon maintained that he was fingered because he was a bastard — the only thing he owned up to. That if he was part of the establishment he would have gotten a pass.

Of course, Nixon had a long history of being a bastard. It helped him get elected to the House of Representatives and later the Senate. And it really helped him become Eisenhower’s running-mate in the 1952 presidential election.

He was a red-baiter and later on as President initiated bombing campaigns in North Vietnam and Cambodia. And he kiboshed talks to end the war in Vietnam to secure his Presidential bid in 1968. He also did little to halt the murder and displacement of millions of East Pakistanis in what would eventually become Bangladesh.

And as dirty as American national politics could get, that didn’t compare with the dirty tricks in foreign policy like (Nixon and Kissinger)toppling a duly elected Chilean President, (Kennedy) engineering the murder of a S. Vietnamese leader and coup in that country, (Truman) dropping A-bombs on two Japanese cities, (Eisenhower) deposing the elected leader of Iran, (Kennedy) hiring Mafia assassins to poison Fidel Castro, and the (Eisenhower) ousting of Guatemala’s democratically-elected President Jacobo Arbenz.

Donald Trump’s assassination of Qasem Soleimani hearkens back to the good ole days when the ends always justified the means. It’s as if the 1975 Senate Select (Church) Committee on abuses perpetrated by US intelligence agencies never existed.

And, as we know from the Edward Snowden revelations, the tradition established by J. Edgar Hoover and others surveillance of American citizens (yes, it was the Kennedys who ordered the bugging of ML King’s boudoir) continues with massive surveillance of American citizens through social media, cellphone tower pings, and facebook.

Ironically, Nixon didn’t need the dirty tricks in his re-election campaign in 1972 any more than George W. needed the Patriot Act to subdue Al-Qaeda. (Or takedown Saddam Husain for that matter). The Democrats fumbled their own campaign, and one can wonder if they aren’t doing it again.

But Nixon wasn’t all villain. As Vice-President he worked hard to help integrate the schools after Brown v. Board of Education and the stand-off at Little Rock. And as President he worked to implement the now discredited program of bussing minorities to schools.

He created the Environmental Protection Agency, signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty with the Soviet Union, and stymied his Soviet adversaries by opening up US relations with Communist China.

Fifty years after the “China Opening” might be a good time to reflect on its impact. For one thing, it reduced the likelihood of a nuclear holocaust. But it also eventually resulted in China joining the World Trade Organization and a massive transfer of wealth from the West to the East.

Good for poverty-stricken Chinese.

Not so good for Rust Belt America.

Like Lyndon Johnson, Nixon came from nothing. He was a colleague of the red-baiting Sen. Joseph McCarthy, and at the outset a friend of John Kennedy.

In spite of a deep inferiority complex (or maybe because of it) he married a beautiful woman and scraped his way to the top of the pile.

They all hated Tricky Dick (a sobriquet he picked up very early in his career), but they couldn’t ignore him.
The moral of the story is that a little paranoia can take you quite far in American government.

In another of life’s little ironies Nixon didn’t live long enough to learn that CIA official Mark Felt was Woodward and Bernstein’s Deep Throat source. When Felt himself ran afoul of lawmakers Nixon defended him against his critics. I’m sure it was no accident that Felt kept this secret almost to his own grave.

This is a wonderful telling of the story and not without some colourful editorializing by the author. I hope somebody turns it into a Richard III for our age. Now that I think about it, somebody probably has.… (mais)

As the 1976 presidential election approached, it struck me that one man—Richard Nixon—had been on the ticket in five of the previous six elections. As far back as I could remember, he had been a significant player on the political scene. It follows that you cannot understand his life and career apart from the times in which he lived, nor can you understand national and world affairs in the second half of the twentieth century without considering him.
Add to that a personality that was—to put it mildly—complicated, and you have a daunting challenge for any prospective biographer.
John A. Farrell met and mastered this challenge.
This book would be valuable for its research alone. Farrell was the first to have access to nearly all of the oval office tapes (some with a bearing on national security remain under wraps) as well as memos and other written records. Among his scoops was uncovering written evidence of the long-rumored Chennault affair, thus documenting Nixon’s felonious, perhaps treasonous, sabotage of the Paris peace talks in 1968. Sadly, other than securing his presidential election, it achieved nothing. The deal finally struck four years later, after the death of 20,000 further G.I.s and many times that of Vietnamese and other Asians, was the same as that tabled in 1968.
Farrell interviewed many figures associated with Nixon, both as friends and enemies. The fact that Nixon had enemies should come as no surprise. Perhaps no other U. S. political figure in the twentieth century was as vilified as he, something he more than reciprocated; Nixon was a consummate grudge-holder and hater. Farrell calls it a cycle of enmity.
In this trait, he was his father’s son. Farrell traces how the root of Nixon’s divided nature was that, at times, he was Frank Nixon’s son and, at other times, Hannah’s. Nixon idolized his Quaker mother yet received little nurturing from her to balance his father’s demanding and brutal treatment. Even if she hadn’t been absorbed with caring for two tubercular sons who died, she was an emotionally remote person. Farrell observes that Nixon early concluded that he was not easy to like and that it hurt him.
So, Nixon had his enemies. For me, though, the insights Farrell obtained in his interviews with Nixon’s friends, associates, and supporters were revealing. None of them were blind to how deeply-flawed Nixon was. Some, like Henry Kissinger, saw him in terms of Greek tragedy, in which the protagonist’s fate is clearly foreshadowed by his character yet unavoidable.
I was provoked to read this by watching Robert Altman’s harrowing masterpiece, Secret Honor. Until then, I thought I’d known all I needed to know about “tricky Dick” from what I couldn’t avoid knowing by following the news. The film made me curious to get a detailed overview, however. A half-century after Nixon became the only president to resign from office, the time was also ripe. There was enough distance that I could revise my judgment. I had forgotten how many genuine domestic achievements came in his first term. But even that is complicated. Nixon had little interest in domestic affairs; his expertise and passion were in foreign affairs. Yet he staffed his administration with several talented hires in domestic affairs and let them get on with it.
Yet even that is not the whole story. His administration’s remarkable progress in school desegregation accorded with his long-held progressive views on civil rights. If that surprises you as it did me, it’s because Nixon realized early on that few votes would be gained if that side of him were known. The same holds true with his moderately enlightened personal views on abortion and same-sex partnerships. Meanwhile, when Spiro Agnew, Pat Buchanan, and others waged their campaign to divide Americans, they knew they did so with their boss’s blessing. At least, the Frank Nixon side of him. And both his Frank and Hannah sides deplored hippies, free love, drugs, and crime.
Yet, as mentioned, it was to foreign affairs that Nixon devoted his attention, achieving an astounding reset through his trip to China and the SALT talks with the Soviet Union. In this, he was seconded by Kissinger, but this was his strategy. Kissinger, by the way, is comically obsequious in the tape excerpts quoted by Farrell.
Above all, it is remarkable how such an awkward, troubled man could rise to the political pinnacle through hard work and force of will. That, and from the outset, generous donations from California oilmen, discretely funneled through back channels. This aspect of Nixon’s career is also documented. He was not only a self-made man; he was, from his first campaign for congress, a “made” man. This willingness to bend his convictions to conform to his wealthy backers and the ruthlessness and skillful use of innuendo with which he waged every campaign he entered from 1946 on is distasteful. It’s no wonder that when the amateurish Watergate break-in led to the walls inexorably closing in on him, Nixon had few reserves of goodwill among those who knew him best, whether friend or foe.… (mais)

(2) I loved this book! I am not sure why it does not seem to be more popular on LT. Long-listed for the National non-fiction book award 2022. I am not always a big biography reader, but I am from Massachusetts and grew up with Kennedy as our senator. My parents were Kennedy Democrats and my city was full of working class Irish/Italian immigrants flowing out from South Boston. I named my son Edward, and we call him Teddy - in homage to Massachusetts - my grandfather, Ted Williams, and Ted Kennedy - so of course I would read this...

I am amazed at how many things that are commonplace now such as HIPPA, CHIP, chain immigration had Kennedy's imprint on them. In addition, he was key in brokering peace in Northern Ireland and ending the Vietnam War. Amazing that senators actually worked across party lines in my lifetime. What a great senator he was. I completely remember like it was yesterday his showing up to vote on healthcare legislation while dying of brain cancer, JFK, Jrs plane crash, the skiing death of RFK's son, the Palm Beach trial of William Kennedy Smith. Of course what I don't remember is Chappaquidick, but felt its ghost in the whispered conversations of my elders. .. and read Joyce Carol Oates 'Black Water,' -- masterful.

Anyway, I read this voraciously for some reason. Whether it is a feeling of personal connection; whether it was because it was so well-written; so compelling -- I don't know. I just know I liked it and it was incredibly interesting to have some perspective on US events through the Bush and Clinton years. The reflective hindsight of an intelligent well informed author really helped me see things I lived through in a historical context that I found essentially 'unputdownable.' This seems weird for non-fiction biography for me. Not my usual response.

I miss Teddy with all his flaws despite the fact that I haven't lived in Mass. for most of my adult life. I have empathy, respect, and admiration for him despite his flaws. Great and fascinating reading for light-weight non-fiction readers like myself. Reads more like narrative and while long acknowledgments and sourcing - no footnotes or other distracting academia. Bravo! RIP John, Robert, and Teddy.… (mais)

The sun of a thousand virtues can be cloaked by one night of vice

And thus it was with Robert Nixon, the 37th President of the United States and the only president ever to resign from his office.

Farrell's virtue, in this book, lies in his crafting of a very endearing biography of Robert Nixon while also factually portraying his notoriously premier role in the Watergate Scandal which brought about his downfall. He charts Nixon's early poverty-stricken years; his military service and meteoric rise as Congress elect and budding Senator during the McCarthy era.

The reader is treated to a frontline seat as Nixon clinches the Vice Presidency from Eisenhower; almost forfeits it and then fights to retain it as well as his absolution in the form of his leading the Republicans to victory post-Kennedy.

Then, Farrell takes a dark turn and logically so. Based on primary material we witness the real Nixon. The groundbreaking statesman who forces Russia to a treaty and re-introduces isolationist China to the world but also a deeply suspicious and vitriolic man intoxicated by the power bequeathed to him. We journey to the dizzying heights of the Watergate edifice which has Nixon's insecurities about journalists and opponents in full glare; his over-excessive reaction to the Pentagon Papers scandal and his obfuscation of himself with the powers of an executive until he recognizes no limit to himself. Statesman but also an insecure human being with profound sadness permeating his life-Farrell makes a convincing case for the fact that had it not been for his missteps in his reaction to Watergate leaking, Nixon would today have been invoked as one of the USA's finest Presidents.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed Farrell's narration of Nixon's life which is laced with considerable wit. It does not detract from Nixon as a warm human and neither does it pillory him for Watergate. Rather, it leaves that ultimate decision to the reader. I confess that I did not put this book down until bedtime. A mesmerizing and memorable read with considerably important lessons for all of us today.… (mais)