In a trial of profound public significance, it is particularly important that the media informing the public of the prosecution cover all impactful claims and defenses. In the first of two episodes on the trial and prosecution of the Watergate burglars, we will examine whether the Washington Post intentionally covered up the planned defense of burglary supervisor Howard Hunt, a “retired” CIA agent: that the burglary was an appropriate national security CIA operation. If the Post did so intentionally, the paper can justifiably be accused of a coverup far more significant than a coverup of checks routed through Mexico which caused President Nixon to resign. But what is the proof that the Washington Post covered up Hunt's defense and, far more seriously, that our chief intelligence agency had infiltrated the White House and was working at cross-purposes to our elected Executive? We will present our proof in this episode and later follow with the Washington Post’s coverage of, or failure to cover, other prominent issues.
________________________________________
Thank you for listening! For more information such as a hyperlinked Cast of Characters, visit themysteriesofwatergate.com. And if you like what you've heard, please leave us a 5-star review on Apple Podcast and pick up a copy of the new book, "The Mysteries of Watergate: What Really Happened" on Amazon.