Deep Throat Revealed

Howard Kurtz

The Watergate mystery that endured more than three decades of scrutiny has finally been resolved. Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein and former Post executive editor Ben Bradlee confirmed W. Mark Felt as 'Deep Throat' following a Vanity Fair report that the 91-year-old former FBI official had revealed that he was the source who leaked key details that aided the reporters during their investigation.

Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz was online to discuss the revelation of Deep Throat's identity.

Read today's article: Is Deep Throat a Hero or a Villain?

A transcript follows.

____________________

Northern Va.: I've seen a lot of different opinions about Felt's actions - I'm wondering, is there a generational difference in the way he's viewed? I'm (barely) under 30, and I view him as a hero, and in my post-Watergate world view, it is the job of the media to be a watchdog for those in power. Is that different for older generations? And do people younger than I am care at all?

Howard Kurtz: I would have thought it was the opposite -- that people who had come of age during Watergate, who remember the atmosphere of fear as the revelations of wiretapping, audits, break-ins and other Nixon White House skullduggery came out, would be more likely to view Throat as a hero. Younger people who have no memory of Watergate might not share that view, I thought. But the 1976 movie that so many people have seen may have shaped public perceptions of all this.

_______________________

Pauling, N.Y.: Hi Howard, I've been annoyed that the networks seem to mainly have former Nixon staff commenting on Felt/Deep Throat (Buchanan, Gergen, Colson, although BenVeniste has appeared a couple of times to provide some balance).

Why don't the Democrats or the networks feel a responsibility to at least provide an alternative opinion to the rehabilitation efforts of Nixon's former staff?

Thanks.

Howard Kurtz: It's a natural instinct of TV bookers to get people who were at the scene of the crime, so to speak, and to book people who personally knew Mark Felt at the time. Also, some of the Democrats of that era who might naturally be called upon -- Sam Ervin, Peter Rodino -- are dead. Of course there's always Hillary, who was a counsel to the impeachment committee.

_______________________

Astoria, N.Y.: I enjoy your analogy to present day and it is so appropriate. Deep Throat helped to expose a secretive and deceitful administration and ultimately reduce the power of the Presidency. How ironic that President Bush is now trying to restore the power of the Presidency and also, how this administration is one of the most secretive in recent history. At a time when our nation is at war, and the government is intruding on our rights (the Patriot Act), this discussion is even more important. There seems to be an us-versus-them mentality where the politicians are in one corner, the media in another corner and the people in yet another corner. Well, none of this would be necessary (Deep Throat, the Newsweek retraction, the use of anonymous sources, and the overall distrust) if we had the kind of government which our nation's founders wanted - an open government by the people and for the people. I think that too many inside the Beltway forget that the people have a right to know. Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't need anymore Deep Throats? However, as long as the government is secretive and adversarial, then I think we have to praise those who come forward at possible personal expense to protect our democracy. Whatever Mr. Felt's reasons are, I praise him as a hero. Thanks.

Howard Kurtz: I think there will always be a need for Deep Throats, not only in government but in the corporate world as well. Secrecy and corruption are hardly new phenomena in American history. Jefferson, for one, said if given a choice between no government and no newspapers, he would rather have a free press. Of course, who knows what he would have made of cable?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Felt has come out now because he says that most Americans consider "Deep Throat" a hero. Do you think that is because we are more dependent on 'whistle-blowers' to get the 'real' story in this current administration's relationship to the media. Or is it just that the end justifies the means?

Howard Kurtz: I don't think it has anything to do with the current administration. There was deep, almost unbelievable corruption in the Nixon administration, extending from the White House to John Mitchell's Justice Department. Felt helped blow the whistle on that. Whether he should have betrayed the administration he worked for in order to help get the story out is a fascinating debate, but there's little question in my mind that this could not be properly investigated by the Nixon administration itself. After all, the tape that led to Nixon's downfall was the one where he tried to use a claim of CIA secrecy to block or limit the probe by Felt's FBI.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: It's pretty much beyond my comprehension how Felt could be viewed as anything other than a hero. The members of Nixon's administration and its admirers that are painting Felt as a traitor for going against his President seem to forget that everyone's loyalty should be pointed towards the nation and not the administration.

Howard Kurtz: Good point. But the people who worked with him have been saying on television that he should have worked within the system instead.

_______________________

Morgantown, W.V.: I'm a former journalist (now professor) and I can't believe how excited I was to have this mystery revealed. I've read all the accounts including the story in Vanity Fair. Woodward was e-mailing with the daughter and said he was reluctant because he was concerned about Felt's mental status. He had no idea the lawyer was talking to Vanity Fair? It seemed like the family was a little surprised that yesterday was the day the news would break (grandson undressed at the door). Didn't Vanity Fair give everyone a heads up or did it get leaked?

Howard Kurtz: The family certainly knew this was coming out. Vanity Fair blasted it to the world (including the unsuspecting types at The Post) yesterday morning.

_______________________

Stafford, Va.: Why would a 90+ year old man admit that 30+ years ago he starred in the movie Deep Throat?

Howard Kurtz: Perhaps because he hasn't got much time left and wants to influence how history views him? The encouragement of Felt's family was also a factor.

_______________________

Santa Rosa, Calif.: With all that we're learning about Richard Nixon why the onus on someone who brought to light a truly insidious plot to cover up his misdeeds? I rather consider Mark Felt a hero, one who should be honored for bringing out the truth.

Howard Kurtz: That seems to be the view of many on this chat today.

_______________________

Somerdale, N.J.: Howie, Why have a steady stream of Nixon apologists been trotted out to denounce Deep Throat on Cable? I understand that some were players, but on MSNBC for example I saw Liddy, Colson, Monica Crowley, and Pat Buchanan on every show from Hardball to Scarborough. Buchanan was even on the simulcast of Imus to call Felt "the lowest form of Life". Where were the people who believe that he was a hero? Even the usually balanced David Gergen was denouncing him. You would think that the LIBERAL MEDIA could drum up someone to praise Felt's actions, as opposed to only criminals and Nixon loyalists/sycophants.

Howard Kurtz: I'm sure we'll hear from the pro-Felt camp in the coming days, but as I said, the natural instinct is to book people who knew the guy, and to see whether 30 years has changed their view that he betrayed a president we now know to have been a criminal.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Why now? One word: money. Is Felt running out of it or perhaps his daughter is being opportunist?

Howard Kurtz: Well, The Post reports today that Felt originally wanted to sell this as a book but couldn't find a publisher, and that Vanity Fair turned down a request for payment. So money may have been a factor (though he surely could have cashed in many years earlier), but as far as I can tell he is now telling his story for free.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Hi Howard:

Did an anonymous source tip you off on this Deep Throat revelation, thus delaying your online chat or was it just because of the Monday Holiday?

Great article today! I have to agree with the original Edward Jay Epstein piece. "On the other hand, if governmental activity is viewed as the product of diverse and competing agencies, all with different bases of power and interests, journalism becomes a much more difficult affair.'"

It is this reason why I feel the blogs and cable news are important today. Felt did the right thing, but not for God and Country as a press 10 years ago would have shoved down us.

He wouldn't have been blogged into oblivion either. However, I think journalism's entry into the real motivations of people is a great frontier, and it can only be done by a diverse set of reported angles that are available today - in all sorts - and wasn't available in the past.

Howard Kurtz: I had no advance warning, though Mark Felt was my personal candidate for Throat for a long time.

You know, even in the age of cable, blogs, podcasts etc., it still takes old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting to break important stories. The focus on Throat has made people forget how Woodstein went through phone lists, knocked on people's doors at night and otherwise painstakingly pieced together the mystery of Watergate, with some mistakes, the hard way.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Howie, I read your Media Notes today. Some good points, as usual, but Felt is a "hero" to most people? If so, it might be only because people do not know him. It seems as though Mr. Felt: (a) is a criminal who abused his power as a law enforcement officer; (b) engaged in an illegal leak of investigative information in a way that he himself stated a few years ago would be a complete violation of the trust that was shown him in his position at FBI; and (c) acted primarily (if not exclusively) because he felt slighted at being passed over for promotion. This is not the picture of an idealistic whistle blower. The facts are not flattering for Mr. Felt, even if the consequences of his actions was to bring to light wrongdoings by those in power. Do you expect Felt to go down in history as somewhat famous or somewhat notorious?

Howard Kurtz: He'll have a mixed legacy, I'm sure. He's certainly no saint--he was later indicted and convicted (and pardoned by Reagan) for his role in other Watergate-era break-ins. And he has lied about his involvement with Woodward for 30 years. But as for the "illegal" leaking of information, what is your duty when you find yourself in the midst of a corrupt administration and the trail leads all the way to the president?

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: Your comparison between W. Mark Felt and the Plame leaker is absurd. Felt may have had ulterior motives, but his leak were exposing corruption in the highest levels of government. In the Plame case, the leaks were the corruption.

Howard Kurtz: You missed my point, which was that leakers have different kinds of motivations. Felt may have had some personal motivation -- being passed over at the FBI, etc. -- but primarily wanted to get the story out. The Plame leaker was trying to hurt administration critic Joe Wilson by outing his wife's role as a CIA operative.

_______________________

Vienna, Va.: Howard:

An awful lot of revisionism is going on now thanks to the remaining "Nixon's Men," led by Pat Buchanan. Listening to them, you would have thought Watergate was just a little break-in exaggerated by all those Nixon-haters. Buchanan has continually laid the blame for the fall of Vietnam at Felt's feet. Disgraceful! It seems that the coverage has been heavily titled toward Nixon men and not so many opponents. "Hardball," "Scarborough Country" and the "Today Show" all had on Buchanan, Colson, Haig, and Monica Crowley. Where's the balance?

Howard Kurtz: I've answered this before, but it's also interesting to hear what Liddy, Buchanan, Colson et al. have to say 30 years later and why they still feel compelled to criticize Felt and, implicitly at least, defend the Nixon administration.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: I always thought that CIA Director Richard Helms deserved kudos, as well. Of course, he was only doing what was right, but so few did.

People who vilify Felt today forget how wide the corruption had spread--even the Attorney General was part of it. There was much paranoia, most of it justified.

I remember following the story from the first article. The Watergate story was slow in getting off the ground, and The Washington Post was not the influential paper it is today. In fact, must of its prestige dates from the Watergate story.

Howard Kurtz: That is true. The paper at the time took a clear back seat to the New York Times, which was slow on the Watergate story. That story gave The Post an international reputation and of course made Woodward and Bernstein into millionaires and, in the cinema-going public's mind, Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman. The reputation of journalism, needless to say, is very different today.

_______________________

St. Paul, Minn.: Howard, in this age of so-called news, where the political events in Paris have to share the spotlight with the engagement of Paris Hilton, do you think news agencies would be as willing to invest the time and money in uncovering a story as The Post did in the Watergate era? Personally, I believe they should. But I also believe the public wouldn't care.

Howard Kurtz: I think a shrinking number of news organizations are willing to invest that kind of time and money. They tend to be the same ones that spend a lot of money on maintaining bureaus around the world. The broadcast networks don't do the kind of groundbreaking investigative reporting they did in the 1970s and have dramatically cut back on their number of foreign bureaus.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Felt's spokespeople said that he wanted to have a book published about this, but couldn't find a willing publisher. How can this possibly be true? Wouldn't publishing houses fall all over themselves to get the rights to this story? Wouldn't Hollywood be all over this too?

Howard Kurtz: Maybe publishers didn't believe him. Maybe some felt a man approaching 90 couldn't go out and promote the book on the TV circuit. As for Hollywood, well, that movie's already been made, hasn't it?

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Why now? We have known for years that the secret would be revealed when Deep Throat died. If I was him, I would absolutely want to see public reaction when the truth was finally revealed. I am interested in how long his family members have known, how long have they kept the secret. Can't have been long, I would guess.

Howard Kurtz: I can't really assess Mark Felt's motivation in acknowledging his role after all this time. Clearly his family played an important role in nudging him toward coming clean.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What is your opinion of the W. Mark Felt's family actions in revealing this 30-year secret and going to Vanity Fair and not The Post (Vanity Fair insists they refused payment to the family.) What do you think of their 2 year effort to persuade Felt to admit his role. Especially given the fact, the man is 91 years old and has suffered a stroke!!! I find it so ironic that out of all people, Mr. Felt's own family are acting in such a sleazy and manipulative way exploiting a vulnerable and ill man.

Howard Kurtz: I don't think that's fair; it's obviously they love him. But I think The Post would have been the last organization they would have come to, because then Woodward would invariably have written his account. What the family wanted was for the story to be told from Felt's point of view.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: Felt is a hero, period, because Nixon was clearly an unindicted co-conspirator. Further, I agree with a lot of the sentiment here that it's ludicrous for the media to first trot out the Nixon defenders. Why hasn't there been more stories to explain exactly what was going on during Watergate? The burglary, the hush money, etc... If the media wanted to cover the story, and not sensationalize it by booking Pat Buchanan, there would be more coverage of the crimes of the Nixon administration.

As an aside, I believe Senators Sarbanes and Howard Baker were on the House committee investigating Nixon. Why hasn't the media put them on television yet?

Howard Kurtz: I'm sure the calls are out to people like Howard Baker. And yes, we need more stories to remind people about the magnitude and complexity of Watergate. It wasn't just Throat and the impeachment committee and the tapes. There was a plan dubbed COINTELPRO that involved a massive amount of domestic spying on groups perceived to be enemies of Nixon. There was the plumbers unit trying to plug leaks to the press. There was the break-in at the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist. There was Judge Sirica's role and John Dean's role. This was quite a far-ranging criminal conspiracy.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: Do you think the revelation of Deep Throat's identity will spur more whistle blowers to help the press and public become better informed about back room deals and shenanigans?

Howard Kurtz: Not necessarily. After all, we've known about Deep Throat's role for 30 years. The new information about who it was doesn't change the basic story line, except to confirm that it was a high-ranking FBI official.

_______________________

McLean, Va.: How can you, and others including Katie Couric, imply that Vanity Fair scooped The Post? It's only because Bob Woodward is a man of his word, and because O'Connor is only concerned with money. "In the end, it's hard to escape the irony that Vanity Fair beat The Post on the secret Woodward had kept for more than 30 years."

Howard Kurtz: All of that is true. But it's also true that Vanity Fair scooped The Post and deserves some credit for the way it handled the story.

_______________________

College Station, Tex.: Why do you suppose so many people on the right continue to discount the serious threat that Watergate posed to our democracy? Some of my neighbors look upon Felt as a traitor and others think Nixon was run out of office for crimes that other administrations got away with. It was all a liberal plot, in the minds of many who lived thorough the epoch but never took time to learn the details. Is obstruction of justice and attempted election rigging so enigmatic in comparison to garden-variety crimes such as robbery and murder -- so much so that the average guy on the street cannot comprehend it?

Howard Kurtz: I'm not sure that people on the right do discount the seriousness of Watergate. The reason Nixon resigned, after all, is that a group of Republican senators told him that he would probably be convicted on the impeachment charges. Conservatives who today defend the Bush administration (George Will is one example) were extremely critical of Nixon over Watergate. I do think the passage of time has eroded memories, though, of how far-reaching a criminal conspiracy Watergate was.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Dear Howard: I thought you were taking a well deserved vacation. The Deep Throat revelation just must have been irresistible.... I thought your comments were very well taken this morning on Media Notes. The thing that concerns me is whether there is a concerted effort by the administration to dry up reporter's use of anonymous sources. Was the anonymous source to Isikoff engaged in counter-intelligence? The administrative reaction with talk of Newsweek's alleged treasonable activity surpassed even the vitriol from the Nixon White House. How many news outlets will continue to rely on these sources? I think Nixon must be out there chuckling somewhere.

Howard Kurtz: I thought I was taking a well-deserved vacation too. Every administration tries to limit leaks to the press. The Clinton White House used to crusade against leaks from Ken Starr's office during the second impeachment inquiry of the 20th century. But there's zero evidence to suggest that Isikoff's source on the Koran story was trying to mislead Newsweek. He just got his details wrong.

_______________________

Albuquerque, N.M.: Felt is 91 and has had a stroke. It sounds as if his family tried to push him to come forward. My question has been whether or not this was his choice or his family's choice to come forward at this time. It seems that his relationship with Bob Woodward would make him more likely to have had him release the information. Are we getting this information because the family wants money?

Howard Kurtz: Well, the family clearly wanted money at one point, but at this point has proceeded to tell Felt's story for free.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: On MSNBC yesterday, G. Gordon Liddy said of Felt: "He is someone who behaved unethically, in that he did not take his evidence to the grand jury and seek an indictment."

This is even more ridiculous than Buchanan calling Felt a traitor. G. Gordon Liddy is a convicted felon who broke his oath to his country ... who is he to condemn Mark Felt's ethics? And who is he to say that Felt should have worked within the system? This is the very system of laws that Liddy scorned.

Do you think the right-wing's smear campaign of Felt will get any traction?

Howard Kurtz: Liddy is a guy who refused to talk about what he had done even after he was convicted. But the notion that Felt could simply have mounted an investigation in a Justice Department headed by John Mitchell, Nixon's longtime confidant who would later go to jail, and in an FBI whose efforts were being stymied by the White House, is pretty far-fetched.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: I contend that Deep Throat is neither hero or villain. The entire Watergate era has undergone historical revisionism. Gerald Ford was awarded a Profile in Courage Award for pardoning Richard Nixon, who committed a felony. Nixon himself, well before his death, emerged as an elder statesman. The Post's Woodward and former reporter Bernstein ought to write what they know and bring us into the present. Otherwise, the entire matter will go down as sorry footnote, with all the culprits forgiven.

Howard Kurtz: Woodward is writing a long piece on the subject. I think it's fair to question everyone's motivation in that constitutional crisis, and it's also true that 30 years changes your view of things--a number of liberals now say they can see where Ford's pardon spared the country an endless ordeal of a trial of Nixon. But I'm sure others still feel that this was a perversion of justice.

Thanks for the chat, folks.

_______________________

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.