Did Richard Nixon sabotage the Paris Peace Talks in the days before the 1968 presidential election? Chasing Shadows makes an excellent case that he tried to keep the South Vietnamese government from sending representatives to Paris before the election. Their failure to appear guaranteed the talks would fail at that time. Would it have made a difference? Probably not, but Nixon's intent seems clear: He wanted to deny Hubert Humphrey a publicity boost that would help his campaign that was steadily gaining on Nixon. Nixon then spent his presidency using the tools at his disposal to prevent the disclosure of his activities.

This book, along with Hughes' follow up Fatal Politics, are key to understanding Nixon and his role in the tragic Vietnam war.Hughes proves conclusively that Nixon's treason as a candidate in '68 extended the war, and shows how Nixon's paranoia that this secret would be uncovered led to the formation of the bungling plumbers unit, and ultimately to his downfall.Nixon's acts that led to the elongation of the war for purely political purposes are his most vile, and should be the first line of any discussion of his presidency. he truly has the blood of millions on his hands.

Ken Hughes argues that Richard Nixon caused his downfall by chasing shadows, thereby fortifying the all-too-common take on Watergate as a moral fable, where Nixon, the bad man, was brought down by good people, thereby proving that the American political order has not been corrupted by oligarchs like Nixon, LBJ, and others. But to maintain Watergate as a moral fable, Hughes is forced to create shadows; that is, to make certain players virtually disappear. John Dean is almost invisible in Hughes's account, despite the fact that Dean was the one behind the Watergate break ins, which by the way all failed thanks to James McCord and Howard Hunt. Both of these men were, in all likelihood, still in the employ of the CIA when they infiltrated the Nixon administration. But McCord is never mentioned by Hughes at all. Magruder, who was Dean's cut out, perhaps is mentioned once or twice. Moreover, while accusing Nixon of responding to non-existent conspiracies, Hughes doesn't mention the Pentagon ring, including Al Haig, that was spying on Nixon and Kissinger and which helped lead to the creation of the Plumbers. No one denies that this spy ring existed, especially those who were involved. Nixon chose not to expose publicly this ring but it was hardly a shadow. It interfered with Nixon's foreign policies and, had his China initiative been exposed, those involved would certainly have tried to undermine that initiative. In other words, Nixon and Kissinger had reasons to operate secretly, just as had Nixon's predecessors, JFK and LBJ. And this is the greatest shortcoming of Hughes' work: He fails to see the prevalence, the pervasiveness of secrecy in the American political, making Nixon's secrecy seem uncommon. And because he fails to see how secrecy is the coin of the realm in American politics, he cannot see that that order is an oligarchy, one where the few commit the political crime of short-circuiting self government or government of, by, and for the people. Watergate fails a moral fable precisely because there were so few good guys who participated. Just count the number of cover ups that were involved: Nixon covered up; John Dean covered up; Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post covered up; McCord covered up; Hunt covered up; Liddy covered up; Magruder covered up; Richard Helms covered up; Patrick Gray covered up; Ehrlichman covered up, as did Haldeman, as did Rosemary Woods; as did the CIA and the FBI. Chasing shadows is a fault; but then so too is creating shadows. Necessarily, because he wants to tell a moral fable, Hughes' "Chasing Shadow" creates a lot of shadows.

It's hard to overestimate the importance of this book. It reveals in great detail exactly what Watergate was all about, answering questions that have remained open for more than 40 years. And every revelation is supported by actual taped conversations of Nixon and LBJ. It is a stunning work of detection and a Pulitzer-prize level contribution to understanding American history. I lived through Watergate as an adult and I was paying close attention to it, but this book has taught me things about which I had no idea--and the things it reveals are not trivial gossip. They are the very heart of the matter. Ken Hughes has performed a service for the American people. I just hope that large numbers available themselves of this service and apply the understanding it gives them to our current President. I disliked Richard Nixon and thought him venal and dishonest. But he was far worse than I had imagined.

Very interesting. If you have interest in the Nixon Administration this book should be on your reading list.