With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

About the Nixon Library's Promise to Turn Over a New Leaf

The Richard M. Nixon “Library & Birthplace” and Whittier College, the former president’s alma mater, joined forces to sponsor a promising April conference on “Richard Nixon as Commander-in-Chief,” with the immodest sub-title of “The History of Nixon and Vietnam.” Nearly twenty-five accomplished historians, journalists, and public officials, with wide-ranging expertise, agreed to participate. Many sacrificed more lucrative invitations, believing the gathering marked a signal occasion for evaluating a central figure of the past half century.

Yet just weeks before the conference, (The Rev.) John H. Taylor, former Nixon staffer and now Executive Director of the Yorba Linda facility, dramatically – and unilaterally – canceled the conference. It now is clear: the exercise was a charade and sham once Taylor determined that he could not limit participation to his usual roster of uncritical Nixon acolytes and believers, and still call it a “historical conference.” Alas! in the immortal words of Patrick Henry, we should have "smelt a rat." Thomas Blanton, of George Washington University and the National Security Archive, was exactly on target when he congratulated Taylor for his “outstanding dramatic performance in a minor role to pretend that the likes of Stanley Kutler were actually welcome in Yorba Linda. . . .” Blanton himself has exposed how Taylor’s museum uses and plays tapes to “exonerate” the former president. He is too modest; I am delighted to share any dubious honors with him.

Whittier College co-sponsored the conference. Quite simply, Taylor needed respectable academic cover, anxious as he is to establish a bailiwick on a par with other presidential libraries. But power-sharing had its price, as Whittier’s representatives, led by historian Laura McEnaney, insisted on a genuine historical inquiry, with a wide-range of critical and friendly participants. Nevertheless, as recently as last month, during a conference at the University of Texas, Taylor indicated that the Nixon Library was turning over a “new leaf” and was eager to have an open discussion, among a variety of scholars, and with no constraints.

A new leaf? Taylor has promised new directions before. After I won my lawsuit in 1996 to liberate the tapes, I visited him and in an amicable meeting, suggested we work cooperatively to further the enterprise of establishing a solid historical understanding of Nixon. Privately, he agreed, but within a few weeks in a scarcely-noted review of my book in an obscure right-wing magazine , he accused me of distorting and inventing tapes. For himself, he managed to find things in the tapes that just were not there, anxious as he was to fulfill Nixon’s constant refrain that the tapes would exonerate him. (Well, then, why didn’t they just make them available without a suit – all of them?) Of course, if he could have spared more than 18 1/2 minutes to fool with the tape machines, the possibilities were limitless. Shortly afterward, he and his staff protested vigorously to Whittier College after they invited me as the Richard Nixon Professor for a public lecture. Irony is not at all his strong suit.

The now-Reverend Taylor joined forces with Whittier for scholarly cover. His Yorba Linda operation is a museum of historical distortions, devoted to extolling Nixon’s greatness. It operates with a marginal budget, defraying expenses by renting out the facilities for private events, including Bar Mitzvah receptions. Verily, the Reverend is totally tone deaf to irony. Library? The main holdings, when I was there (for the BBC) were autographed copies of Nixon and David Eisenhower’s books, substantially marked up over their usual remainder prices. But now the Museum is scheduled to receive the Nixon papers and tapes -- and federal funds to house the material, which is wholly unprecedented for presidential libraries. The Bush Administration neglected to include the monies in its budget proposal, but a family friend in Congress and a high-powered K Street lobbying outfit will instruct the congressmen in the new American civics and you can bet the mortgage that the money will be forthcoming.

Alas! the Reverend’s recent action indicates that nothing has changed. Nixon was certainly unique, but Taylor and his minions are determined to give us a Stalinist version of historical truth.

The program appeared quite promising, and was developed jointly by Whittier College and the Nixon Library’s professional archivist, and the Reverend signed off on the final product. In the conference invitation, co-signed by Taylor, he expressed the belief that the “conference will establish historical talking points for future scholars interested in Richard Nixon and his Vietnam policies.”

From the outset, Taylor’s purpose was transparent. He expected to validate his (and David Eisenhower’s) thesis that Richard Nixon was a wartime president, and that subsumes and excuses any questionable or criminal behavior on his part –i.e., Watergate. Every president since 1940 has some entitlement to the claim of being a “war president.” But none of them authorized break-ins into the offices of private citizens to obtain potentially derogatory information about another citizen; none of them paid “hush money” to burglars who committed a felony in defense of Richard Nixon’s version of national security; and all of them paid their income taxes.

The Reverend apparently had a crisis of faith that shattered his expectations. I thought of William Howard Taft who upon hearing that Louis D. Brandeis would be named to the Court, a place he had so coveted for himself, said "es ist zum lachen." But this gets truly funny. Perhaps he needed another six months or so to have his Plumbers run a background check on the speakers and panelists.

How did he get religion so suddenly? Well, he claims that after sending out a substantial mailing to friends of the Nixon Museum, only seven people agreed to come and enclosed their checks – for $180. $180! For four panels, a keynote talk, a closing address, and a couple of lunches (leftovers from Bar Mitzvah receptions?)! He wanted $90 if I invited my family to a meal and my talk. Why only seven people should pay $180 for some cardboard meals and pay to hear unpaid “celebrities” such as ourselves, is not exactly rocket science.

The Reverend now complains that if only he had been allowed to substitute such prominent policymakers as Robert McNamara and Henry Kissinger as keynote speakers (presumably instead of Richard Norton Smith and myself), the conference would have had prominent drawing cards. McNamara and Kissinger? They mock the very idea of a scholarly conference. Policymakers? Why invite failures? They belong in the ashcan of history. Both men have spent the past quarter century skirting their historical records. We have had enough by way of excuses. Their historical standing is not exactly warm and fuzzy; moreover, they have unassailable, impeccable records as Certified Public Liars.

Well, let’s not kick John Taylor around anymore. We should consider where we go from here.

First, Whittier College must be congratulated for recognizing that it had been victimized by a clumsy sting operation. Dean of Faculty Susan Gotsch expressed her great disappointment, noting her faculty and staff’s considerable expenditure of time and energy. But “moving forward,” she added, Whittier has begun “a contemporary exploration of its Nixon legacy,” and would continue to pursue “collaborative scholarly examinations of that legacy.” Academic language notwithstanding, I trust this is her polite way of severing future relations with the Yorba Linda outpost of Fortress Nixon.

But the fate of the Nixon administration records is of far greater importance. Reverend Taylor gloats and promises that the Nixon material will be transferred to California by the end of the year. As matters now stand, the National Archives in Washington must complete the processing before the move. (Easier said than done for it is difficult to secure people to commit to a project that soon will fold under them.) I fear that stipulation will be changed by the K Street legislators. In any event, Taylor’s behavior makes the fate of all the materials problematic. Such professional organizations as the American Historical Association, the Organization of American Historians, and the Society of American Archivists, should have a stake in safeguarding these irreplaceable sources. Why not purchase a number of sets of CD versions of the tapes and distribute them around the land? Or hide them in salt mines?

We can watch with interest the actions of the new Archivist of the United States when (if?) the tapes and papers are transferred to Yorba Linda. Allen Weinstein is no stranger to Nixonian trickery, being the first to reveal the young congressman’s frightened attempt to steer clear of proceeding with the Alger Hiss inquiry. Will he insist that professional archivists complete the task of reviewing and organizing the still-unprocessed portion of the materials? Or will we have that bonfire that the Nixon family so ardently desired in 1974? Perhaps an old friend from the 1960s and 1970s will do the right thing.

Speaking of those now-distant times, we should remember a Supreme Court opinion (written by a Republican) from 1977 that declared Richard Nixon an “unfit guardian” for his papers. Enough said.