Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JFK's own dirty trick (Did Kennedy really win the 1960 election?)
Wahsington Post ^ | 01/17/2011 | Mark Feldstein

Posted on 01/17/2011 9:25:23 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Fifty years ago next week, Richard Nixon stood uncomfortably on the Capitol's inaugural platform and watched his rival John F. Kennedy being sworn in as president. "We won" the election, Nixon fumed, "but they stole it from us."

Indeed, the dirty tricks that helped defeat Nixon were more devious than merely the ballot-stuffing of political lore. In one of the least-known chapters of 20th-century political history, Kennedy operatives secretly paid off an informant and set in motion a Watergate-like burglary that sabotaged Nixon's campaign on the eve of the election.

It began in the fall of 1960, when the Kennedy campaign spread word that Vice President Nixon had secretly pocketed money from billionaire Howard Hughes, whose far-flung business empire was heavily dependent on government contracts and connections. Reporters for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and Time magazine corroborated the allegations, but their editors feared publishing such explosive information in the last days of the tightly fought campaign.

So the Kennedys turned to two crusading liberal columnists, Drew Pearson and Jack Anderson, who had been attacking Nixon for the past decade. It was "a journalistic atrocity" to conspire with "the Kennedy hawkshaws to help us get the goods on their opponent," Anderson admitted, but scoring a scoop to destroy Nixon was simply too tempting to pass up.

Anderson dropped by the Washington office of Kennedy lawyer James McInerney. With "a pride that only the diligent investigator can know," Anderson recalled, the Kennedy operative pulled out "a neatly arranged packet which I devoured unceremoniously."

The confidential documents revealed how Hughes had funneled to the Nixon family $205,000 (worth about $1.6 million today) using various intermediaries, including one of Nixon's brothers, to disguise the transaction.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1960; elections; jfk; nixon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last
To: GreenAccord
"Is it possible that the term often associated with that most-sacred political family, 'Camelot', was intended to be pronounced as a three-word phrase, instead of the one word title?"

Words' meanings, like the Constitution, are living things, and are intended to evolve as such.

Therefore, in the era of B. Hussein Obamaumau, the word has evolved into a two word description of the WH & environs.

41 posted on 01/17/2011 11:43:36 AM PST by diogenes ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Seems true enough up until we get to Nixon’s reason for failing to contest the ‘60 election. Even if Nixon were afraid of the Hughes disclosure, he had enough on JFK to flatten out the playing field.

According to Victor Lasky, JFK’s dirtiest trick—executed by brother Bobby—was the production and dissemination of vilely anti-Catholic literature in late October.


42 posted on 01/17/2011 11:43:37 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No, in fact, Kennedy didn’t win the 1960 election — Nixon did. But for MASSIVE voter fraud in (you guessed it!) Chicago/Cook County, IL, Nixon would have carried that state and very probably the election. Fraud was also evident in other States — but Nixon, for the sake of the nation (unlike Algore), refused to pursue legal remedies to the Supreme Court for concern of the deep division it could bring to the Republic....


43 posted on 01/17/2011 11:52:48 AM PST by patriot preacher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

Noah’s Arc found... Big Foot... Legend of Boggy Creek (I think that beast calls Arkansas home)... the History Channel has standards... they need to show these things over and over... we have a need/right to know :-)


44 posted on 01/17/2011 12:11:33 PM PST by Trajan88 (www.bullittclub.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Thorne

You’d have to have a seance for that.


45 posted on 01/17/2011 12:29:36 PM PST by richardtavor (One of the rare establishment Republicans backed by the "Tea Party" movement that wants limited gove)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Joe Boucher

Yes Joe, they will re-emerge. But, thankfully, as they continue to breed, the family fortune dwindles and their inherent avarice and lust for political power gewts watered down. Soon enough, the entire clan will be rendered a footnote of aforementioned booger eating and mouthbreathing morons who vote.


46 posted on 01/17/2011 1:38:07 PM PST by Buckeye Battle Cry (Conservatives want a CHOICE not an echo - No more RINOs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Whatever happened to the age of Camelot ?

Just think of it!

In a single lifetime, we will have gone from Camelot to Camel lot.

47 posted on 01/17/2011 2:16:52 PM PST by Erasmus (Personal goal: Have a bigger carbon footprint than Tony Robbins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GreenAccord
Is it possible that the term often associated with that most-sacred political family, “Camelot”, was intended to be pronounced as a three-word phrase, instead of the one word title?

Perhaps like this?

"I like to grind my cam a lot."

48 posted on 01/17/2011 2:24:55 PM PST by Erasmus (Personal goal: Have a bigger carbon footprint than Tony Robbins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Elwood P. Doud

Probably because Kennedy’s people had dirt on Hoover.


49 posted on 01/17/2011 3:25:46 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester

The shame and humiliation of being exposed for this gave Nixon the hard-on for Humphrey that caused Watergate.


A different point of view on the origins of Watergate is presented in “Silent Coup” — a version with which G. Gordon Liddy agrees (and HE was there).


50 posted on 01/17/2011 4:50:03 PM PST by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson