The book “Silent Coup” discusses at length the intrigue that Haig was involved with.
Excerpt from another article:
The “Moorer-Radford affair,” as scholars now call it, was ultimately exposed by the press—though not by Woodward and Bernstein—in early 1974....
Nixon called the spying “a federal offense of the highest order” and demanded Moorer be tried for espionage. As the White House tapes make clear, Attorney General John Mitchell calmly took control of the situation, advising against public disclosure in any forum and prevailing upon Nixon to banish Yeoman Radford to a remote outpost and keep Admiral Moorer where he was, perhaps weakened and more pliable....
Why would Woodward omit mention of the monumental rupture between the commander in chief and the Joint Chiefs of Staff that erupted on the eve of the “zilch” note? Was the Washington Post ace, when he wrote The Last of the President’s Men, somehow unaware of the Moorer-Radford affair? Assuredly not. For decades now, brave historians have been questioning Woodward’s strange avoidance of the subject matter.
Most notable was the 1991 bestseller Silent Coup: Removal of a President, co-authored by Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin and denounced by Woodward and Bernstein as “trash.” Yet Silent Coup marshaled important new archival evidence of its own to advance a number of claims about Woodward. The first was that one of his Watergate-era sources was General Alexander Haig, Kissinger’s NSC deputy. Silent Coup established that Woodward had met Haig during the first Nixon term, when Woodward served as a Navy intelligence briefer to senior White House officials. A former Vietnam commander and Pentagon loyalist, Haig held his own boss, Kissinger, in low regard and was deeply complicit in the JCS spying: It was Haig who handpicked Yeoman Radford to travel with Kissinger.
By the time Haig became Nixon’s chief of staff, succeeding Haldeman as the Watergate scandal mushroomed in the spring of 1973, Haig worked tirelessly behind the scenes to bury the Moorer-Radford affair and his own role in it. Silent Coup detailed how Haig had enjoyed the compliance of Woodward and Bernstein, who knew of Moorer-Radford yet passed on it as a news story. The clear implication was that Woodward had protected Haig, a key source.
All these years later, even with the “zilch” note in hand, Bob Woodward is still steering clear of Moorer-Radford. Such sins of omission do not detract from the historical importance of the “zilch” memo and the other archival discoveries in the appendices to The Last of the President’s Men. But they do show that the author’s agenda remains suspect...
Interesting, but I think Woodward was Navy Intel or SIGINT and knew Haig or someone in the early days of the Nixon White House; he was definitely GOP.
I once tried to rabbit-trail Woodward and his connection to the Bush family.
It was down to an old, archived CNN interview with Dana Perino and Woodward, I believe.
Sure enough, of all of CNN’s ancient interviews, this one was mysteriously wiped.
Unavailable.
Now I can’t remember why I was looking for it; I think it had to do with his Bush War Years book or some other B.S. MSM meme of the day.
I saw CNN wasn’t just the Clinton News Network, but carried water for the GOPe when necessary or pressed to do so.
Uniparty traitors all.