This one looks like it might make the original Watergate look like child’s play.
First some background. As many of you know John Kerry was the head of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War(VVAW). In 1971, Kerry attended a VVAW meeting at which the group discussed a plan to assassinate U.S. senators who supported the war in Vietnam.
Kerry denied he was there but Vietnam historian Gerald Nicosia proved Kerry was lying by producing FBI surveillance files obtained thru the Freedom of Information Act.
But now some of those files were conveniently stolen from Gerald Nicosia’s home.
A Bay Area historian on Friday reported the theft of three boxes of confidential FBI documents, some detailing government surveillance of presidential hopeful John F. Kerry when he was a spokesman for a 1970s veterans group protesting the Vietnam War. …
Nicosia had received 20,000 pages of internal FBI surveillance files in 1999 through a Freedom of Information Act request. At the time, he was researching “Home to War,” a chronicle of the Vietnam protest years. But the release came too late for use in the book, which was largely about Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Kerry was among the leaders of the group, which was founded in 1967 and drew 10,000 members nationwide.
Nicosia said he suspected that the thieves were specifically in pursuit of the files because a camera and other expensive items in the home were left untouched. He added that he did not know exactly what material was taken because it was not cataloged or marked. Three of 14 boxes of files that had been stacked in his kitchen are missing. He said he was moving the remaining documents to a secure location Friday afternoon.
[But here is my favorite part… -ed]
Kerry told The Times that while he was aware that the FBI had monitored his activities in the early ’70s, he was surprised and angry at the scope of the surveillance.
Kerry has brass ones that’s for sure. He attends a meeting where they discuss assassinating U.S. senators and he gets indignant when he learns the FBI was listening in.
The questions this creates are obvious but I doubt the media will be asking many of them. If you read a dozen or so versions of the story you will read quotes from the author speculating it was a “thrill seeker” or someone who wanted “a piece of Presidential history.”
Only the LA Times is running the quote: “Whoever did this wanted to know something about John Kerry”
That seems like the understatement of the year. Will the media follow this up? I doubt it.
But I can’t help but wonder…. What would the media do if Bush’s National Guard records got stolen this way?