George Will is rewriting history.
Will the Washington Post hold him accountable?
George Will is under fire for distorting the history of Watergate from an expert source — Richard Ben-Veniste, chief of the Watergate task force.
Will, in a March 6 column, deceptively portrayed Robert Bork as a hero who protected the Watergate prosecution, but his defense of Bork rests on omitting critical details — including the fact that Bork actually moved to abolish the task force that was looking into the scandal.
In his ode to Bork, Will pointed to Bork’s role in firing Archibald Cox, the Watergate special prosecutor, arguing:
On an October Saturday, when Nixon ordered Richardson to fire Archibald Cox, the Watergate special prosecutor, Richardson and his deputy resigned, urging Bork to execute Nixon’s lawful order, which he did. By the two resignations, Bork became acting attorney general, in which capacity he protected the ongoing investigation of Nixon.
In reality, as Ben-Veniste noted in refuting Will’s campaign to make Bork a Watergate hero, Bork quickly began undermining the investigation:
Indeed, far from championing an independent investigation that would allow recourse to the judicial process, Bork signed an order on Oct. 23, 1973 — three days after firing Cox — abolishing the Office of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. Bork’s support for Nixon’s position, if successful, would have kept secret the most devastating evidence against Nixon and his closest associates. It was only after the firestorm of public revulsion following the Saturday Night Massacre that Nixon backed down — producing seven subpoenaed tapes (less 18½ minutes of deliberately erased conversation on one of them) — and acceded to the demand to appoint a new special prosecutor to replace Archibald Cox.