Secret admirers: The Bushes and the Washington Post; part 1 of a 2-part series
By Michael Hasty
Online
Journal Contributing Writer
Feb 5, 2004, 02:08
Ever since the days of the Watergate scandal, when a series of
front-page articles by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl
Bernstein ultimately led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon, the
Post has had a reputation among many Americans as one of the elite bastions of
the �liberal media.�
This opinion is especially prevalent among conservatives,
who also fault the Post for its publication (along with that other �liberal�
icon, The New York Times) of the Pentagon Papers -- an action they correctly
view as having made a major contribution to undermining domestic support for
the war in Vietnam. During the �70s, there was an angry conservative boycott of
the paper in the Washington, DC, area, with �I Don�t Believe the Post� bumper
stickers appearing on cars and WP vending boxes.
At the heart of the Post�s �liberal� reputation is the sense
that its coverage represents the thinking of what used to be known as the
�Eastern Liberal Establishment� back in the days when Republicans could be
liberals (with a favorable view of internationalism and the welfare state) and
before the Establishment moved to Texas and got saved by Jesus, its favorite
political philosopher. This was the same period when the Central Intelligence
Agency, still dominated by the Establishment Ivy Leaguers who organized the
�oh-so-social� OSS in World War II, was also widely seen as a �liberal�
institution.
With a 21st-century perspective, where internationalism has
become globalization, and monopoly capitalism is so powerful it no longer needs
to mask its agenda with welfare programs, we can see the Establishment�s
�liberalism� for the ruthless neoliberalism it has always been. Yet the more
powerful and elite the ruling class, the greater its need for an effective
propaganda system to maintain that power; and the Washington Post remains, as
writer Doug Henwood described it in 1990, �the establishment�s paper.�
In an article published by the media watchdog group,
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), Henwood traced the Post�s
Establishment connections to Eugene Meyer, who took control of the Post in
1933. Meyer transferred ownership to his daughter Katharine and her husband,
Philip Graham, after World War II, when he was appointed by Harry Truman to
serve as the first president of the World Bank. A lifelong Republican, Meyer
had been �a Wall Street banker, director of President Wilson�s War Finance
Corporation, a governor of the Federal Reserve, and director of the
Reconstruction Finance Corporation,� Henwood wrote.
Philip Graham, Meyer�s successor, had been in military
intelligence during the war. When he became the Post�s publisher, he continued
to have close contact with his fellow upper-class intelligence veterans -- now
making policy at the newly formed CIA -- and actively promoted the CIA�s goals
in his newspaper. The incestuous relationship between the Post and the
intelligence community even extended to its hiring practices. Watergate-era
editor Ben Bradlee also had an intelligence background; and before he became a
journalist, reporter Bob Woodward was an officer in Naval Intelligence. In a
1977 article in Rolling Stone magazine about CIA influence in American media,
Woodward�s partner, Carl Bernstein, quoted this from a CIA official: �It was
widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from.� Graham has
been identified by some investigators as the main contact in Project
Mockingbird, the CIA program to infiltrate domestic American media. In her
autobiography, Katherine Graham described how her husband worked overtime at
the Post during the Bay of Pigs operation to protect the reputations of his
friends from Yale who had organized the ill-fated venture.
After Graham committed suicide, and his widow Katharine
assumed the role of publisher, she continued her husband�s policies of
supporting the efforts of the intelligence community in advancing the foreign
policy and economic agenda of the nation�s ruling elites. In a retrospective
column written after her own death last year, FAIR analyst Norman Solomon
wrote, �Her newspaper mainly functioned as a helpmate to the war-makers in the
White House, State Department and Pentagon.� It accomplished this function (and
continues to do so) using all the classic propaganda techniques of evasion,
confusion, misdirection, targeted emphasis, disinformation, secrecy, omission
of important facts, and selective leaks.
Graham herself rationalized this policy in a speech she gave
at CIA headquarters in 1988. �We live in a dirty and dangerous world,� she
said. �There are some things the general public does not need to know and
shouldn�t. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take
legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to
print what it knows.�
I guess it depends on what you mean by �democracy.�
At any rate, this brief overview of the Washington Post�s
covert history serves as a useful backdrop to information revealed in �The
Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power,� written by oil industry
insider Daniel Yergin, and a national bestseller when it was published in 1991.
In a bit of fortuitous timing, Yergin�s book was released in
the immediate aftermath of the Persian Gulf War. He unequivocally states in his
introduction that �oil was at the heart of [this war],� contradicting the
denials of then-President George H.W. Bush, who had insisted in a now-familiar
litany that the war against Iraq was really about �freedom.� And because of
Bush�s own professional roots in the oil industry, and the industry�s
consequent influence on his policies in office, Yergin includes some
biographical nuggets that shed an interesting light on Bush�s relationship with
the Washington Post.
Quoting from a Fortune magazine article about a �swarm of
young Ivy Leaguers� who had settled in Midland, Texas, soon after World War II,
and �created a most unlikely outpost of the working rich . . . a union between
the cactus and the Ivy,� Yergin provides an account of the early days of Zapata
Oil, Bush�s first company.
�Bush quickly mastered the skills of the independent oil
man,� Yergin writes, including, �of course, making the pilgrimage back East to
round up money from investors.� Here�s where things get interesting. �On a
brisk morning in the mid-1950s, near Union Station in Washington, DC, he even
closed a deal with Eugene Meyer, the august publisher of the Washington Post,
in the back seat of Meyer�s limousine. For good measure, Meyer also committed
his son-in-law to the deal. Meyer remained one of Bush�s investors over the
years.�
A consideration to keep in mind here is the
greater-than-even likelihood that at this point in his career, George H.W. Bush
was already working as a covert CIA operative. This stems not only from his
class and pedigree -- Yale University had a reputation as �the alma mater of
spies� -- but from the fact that the CIA often �borrows� the private assets of
businesses, especially those with international operations, to provide support
for its covert actions. Most compelling, perhaps, is a cryptic reference found
in a Warren Commission document, concerning an FBI briefing about the JFK
assassination given in Texas to a �Mr. George Bush of the CIA.� When asked
about this years later, Bush gave the explanation that it must have referred to
a CIA employee with the same name. That individual, a low level bureaucrat,
denied to reporters that he had ever been to Texas, much less that in his
position he would have received such a briefing.
What is particularly fascinating about Yergin�s revelation
of the long term financial link between Bush and the Graham family -- a
revelation also confirmed by Katherine Graham in her memoir -- is that George
H.W. Bush spent much of his political career complaining about the �liberal�
reporting in the Post. Yergin, whose sketch of Bush�s career covers only a few
pages in this lengthy book, is slyly aware of this seeming contradiction, so he
has some fun with the game Bush was playing. He includes a quote from a note
then-Congressman Bush sent to Treasury Secretary David Kennedy in 1969,
thanking him for meeting with some Texas oilmen at Bush�s home in Houston. �I
was also appreciative of your telling them how I bled and died for the oil
industry,� Bush wrote. �That might kill me off in the Washington Post but it
darn sure helps in Houston.� A curious comment indeed, considering the Grahams�
investment in his business.
This arms-length public posture sometimes went to hilarious
extremes. In his book, �Shadow: Five Presidents and the Legacy of Watergate,�
Bob Woodward includes much of the substance of a handwritten three-page reply
he received from Bush denying Woodward�s request for an interview. Criticizing
Woodward�s Watergate reporting, Bush wrote, �For me Watergate was a major
event, for as you correctly point out, I was chairman of the GOP during those
tumultuous times . . . I think Watergate and the Vietnam War are the two things
that moved Beltway journalism into this aggressive, intrusive, �take no
prisoners� kind of reporting that I can now say I find offensive.�
Just past Watergate�s thirtieth anniversary, Bush�s comments
here bring several observations to mind that have been generally ignored. One
is that there had been growing dissatisfaction among the nation�s ruling class
with the presidency of Richard Nixon, whose environmental and social
legislation has led some revisionist commentators to refer to him as �the last
liberal president.� More importantly, Nixon was also seeking to reorganize the
intelligence services. These facts have inspired some out-of-the-mainstream
journalists, like Doug Henwood and the late investigative reporter Steve
Kangas, to suggest that Woodward�s �Deep Throat� contact was actually someone
in the CIA. Kangas had also suggested that the semi-conscious and dying William
Casey, director of Central Intelligence in the Reagan administration and
Woodward�s controversial leading �source� for his book, �Veil: The Secret Wars
of the CIA 1981-1987,� was in actuality the �alter ego� of Woodward�s real
source: George H.W. Bush.
In any event, Woodward�s �Shadow� undercuts what he
describes as Bush�s �hatred� of the press with an account of an episode where
the Post served to neutralize an aspect of the Iran-contra scandal that Bush
saw as a danger to his upcoming presidential campaign. �On Friday, February 6,
1987,� Woodward writes, �Bush dispatched one of his top aides to my house to
deliver a copy of a three-page top-secret memo.� He goes on to describe how,
after Bush saw the headline on the Post�s lead story two days later, he called
the aide who had delivered the memo to offer congratulations. Woodward�s
judgment is that, �It was perhaps a shrewd use of the news media by Bush.�
Yergin�s book also discusses an illuminating episode where
the Post offered protective cover for Bush. In a trip to Saudi Arabia in April
1986, then-Vice President Bush appeared to be taking a position in favor of
higher oil prices that contradicted the free-market policies of the Reagan
administration, and he was receiving a lot of criticism in the American media.
�Columnists denounced him for cuddling up to OPEC,� Yergin
writes. �Of course, within the oil states he was much commended for what he
said. But outside the oil patch, it seemed that just about the only voice that
had anything good to say about Bush�s position was none other than the
editorial page of the Washington Post, the newspaper he had once feared would
kill him off for expressing pro-oil industry sentiments. On the contrary, the
Post now said that the Vice President was on to a very important point in his
warning of how low prices would undermine the domestic energy industry, even if
no one wanted to admit it.�
Naturally, it could be argued that the Graham family was
merely protecting its own investments. But this protective influence extended
to other events in Bush�s political career, including the major scandals that
erupted throughout the Reagan and Bush administrations -- Iran/contra, BCCI,
Iraqgate, savings-and-loan, CIA drug dealing, HUD -- in virtually all of which
Bush himself was implicated. As a paper of record and a news source for local
and regional papers across the country, the Post was able to keep a muzzle on
these scandals, and frame the national coverage in such a way that
�respectable� media didn�t stray too far from �conventional (which is to say,
elite) wisdom.�
It was a system that also served the Post�s interests. The
paper�s standing as an important source of news was elevated by its constant
diet of confidential information and intelligence leaks from Bush and his
allies, and its exclusive access to the inner circles of power. Bush was also
able to protect the Post from the exposure of its intimate connections with the
CIA when the US Senate�s Church Committee hearings were investigating Project
Mockingbird in the mid-�70s. As CIA director when those investigations were
conducted, Bush successfully fought the release of the names of CIA media
contacts to the committee.
Following Bush�s one-term presidency, the Post continued to
serve the Bush agenda. It was unstinting in its criticism of the Clinton
administration, and lurid and exhaustive in its coverage of the various
scandals that dogged Bill and Hillary Clinton, invariably conveying the sense
that the nation�s capital had been invaded by so much Arkansas trailer trash.
The Post�s Whitewater reporter, Susan Schmidt, was such a reliable conduit of
leaks and information from Independent Counsel Ken Starr (Bush�s Solicitor
General), that she became known to some media critics as �Steno Sue.� The
paper�s voracious approach to Whitewater is all the more revealing in light of
the fact that the Whitewater investigation was initiated in the last days of the
1992 campaign by Bush�s White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray, and that -- as
reformed conservative David Brock documents in his book, �Blinded by the Right�
-- the �vast right wing conspiracy� that sought to depose Clinton essentially
constituted a �Bush government in exile.�
The Washington Post�s traditional and solicitous portrayal
of George H.W. Bush as a well-bred man of integrity has of course also been
extended to his son, George W. Bush. The often absurd and transparent lengths
to which the newspaper has gone to serve this function will be the subject of
the second part of this article.
Michael
Hasty is a writer, activist, musician, carpenter and farmer. He lives in West
Virginia. In his youth, he was a low level employee of the CIA.
Copyright © 1998-2006 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor