Many thanks, Rick, I appreciate the good comments! Yes, there is a lot at stake. The tapes I excerpted were part of the 201 hours of "governmental abuse of power" (Watergate) tapes released by NARA in 1996, after Nixon's death. These are the tapes around which tough battles swirled in the early 1990s in the Kutler litigation. Had Prof. Stanley Kutler not filed his lawsuit in 1992 to gain access to the then unreleased tapes, I don't know what would have happened. When you read the tape extracts, you can see what we NARA Nixon Project archivists were up against, not just in terms of what was recorded in the archival materials, but in the tactics and strategies used by Nixon and his advocates to act against perceived opponents, while in office and later. ("Try him in the press;" "embarrass the creeps;" "we are going to use any means;" etc.) Unfortunately, the government's lawyers did not effectively protect us in 1992. They pretty well sat silent when Nixon's lawyers and advocates attacked Nixon Project archivists in court (implying incorrectly that tapes supervisor Fred Graboske was biased against Nixon) and in the press. (If anyone can point me to a document where government lawyers strongly supported my generation of archivists in 1992 or early 1993, I would love to see it. I haven't found anything of that nature. I actually spent a fair amount of time at the Federal courthouse in the early 1990s, reading through the pleadings in the Kutler case. I also kept track of NARA's press releases back then.) It was interesting for me to go through the process of being the target (along with my boss and peers) of Nixon's wrath. It taught me a lot about how politicians such as Nixon "play the game," to use his words. Having listened to so many Nixon tapes, I understood what his side was doing. But, as you all can tell, the failure of the government's lawyers (NARA and DOJ) to protect us did scar me. I still have longstanding "trust issues," as they say, and probably always will, LOL. No surprise, then, that I've had numerous letters published in the Washington Post, including the one on Feb. 16, 1998 where I wrote, "So Nixon's lawyer served his client well. But who stood up to defend NARA's archivists, whose performance earlier had been rated as "outstanding"? No one." Shortly after I had that letter published in the Post, John H. Taylor, executive director of the Nixon Birthplace and Foundation, sneered in his own article in The American Spectator (March 1998) that "Until six years ago an informal understanding existed between President Nixon and NARA that the "abuse of power" tapes would be defined as the 63 hours used by the Watergate special prosecutor in 1973-74. But then we were told that the Hardy Boys at NARA had kept a little list - 201 additional fun-filled hours of their own greatest hits." In his article, "Cutting the Nixon Tapes," Mr. Taylor also referred to Nixon Project archivists as "NARA allies of the dean-for-life of the Nixon-haters, Professor Stanley Kutler of the University of Wisconsin." I think I've mentioned that Mr. Taylor was Mr. Nixon's last chief of staff (this was long after RN left the White House, of course). The Nixon Library site no longer links to the 1998 American Spectator article where Mr. Taylor castigated archivists. However, it is available through subscription databases such as ProQuest. Knowing that the Nixon Library hoped to someday become a NARA-administered Library, I've wondered from the time Mr. Taylor published his article why he characterized archivists the way he did. Rick and List, after posting my long musings last week, I've heard privately from some archivists who have taken the CA exam. Some good stuff in their messages, which has gotten me thinking some more. Of course, I'll state up front once again that I haven't taken the exam. And I'm unlikely to do so. I'm not an archivist any longer and am more likely to continue working as an historian rather than returning to the archival field. (I can't, of course, ever return to NARA to work.) Still, I know how much variation there can be in workplaces. I'm curious about this. It seems to me that there can be a great difference in how an archivist answers an exam question, depending on whether he considers his longstanding experience along with his academic training or only answers based on archival theory. People have expressed concern on the List that some of the CA exam questions might have more than one answer. On the CA exam, I gather the questions are multiple choice. Are there enough caveats to make it clear that each question is premised on certain conditions? I can see that things might be different in an academic versus a governmental setting, for example. Or when the subjects of records have reason to worry about a paper trail, as opposed to being able to say, "hey, I did what I did, restrict for genuine privacy, financial and legal interests but I'm not concerned about the rest." Do the exam questions set up the conditions sufficiently? Are they premised, for example, on legal counsel taking the high road and supporting an archivist (or records manager) when he or she takes a strictly compliance oriented, objective approach to the matter at hand? Is this stated up front? Is the fact considered that lawyers might face external pressure and even might craft positions that suit a power player rather than an archivist? If so, how is this reflected in questions? Maarja -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 6:42 AM Subject: Re: Nixon tape segments (lawyers, Pentagon Papers, etc In a message dated 8/21/2006 12:18:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:40:02 EDT From: [log in to unmask] Subject: Nixon tape segments (lawyers, Pentagon Papers, etc Earlier in the week, in response to Ginny Jones's comment about the code of ethics, I mentioned some released Nixon tapes. These segments showed President Nixon expressing frustration that lawyers were reluctant to work in areas where he thought things needed to be done. And pressing his subordinates to take action... Thanks for posting these extraordinary records snips, Maarja. It is so easy to get so caught up in the technology, standards, processes and professional aspects of recordkeeping in our list, conference and journal discussions, that we forget what it is all about. We need occasional citations of real records like those you posted to remind us what major parts accountability and social memory constitute in everything else we discuss on the list. Regards, Rick Rick Barry www.mybestdocs.com Cofounder, Open Reader Consortium www.openreader.org A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]> ________________________________________________________________________ Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free. A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>