conversation he had with American preacher Billy Graham during 1972 in the Oval Office being published.
Billy Graham: This (Jewish) stranglehold (on the US media) has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain.
Richard Nixon: You believe that?
Billy Graham: Yes, sir.
Richard Nixon: Oh, boy. So do I. I can't ever say that, but I believe it.
Billy Graham: No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something.
It appears that Nixon's conspiracy theorizing about Jewish domination of the US media had rubbed-off onto his Vice-President Spiro Theodore Agnew. During the spring of 1976, in a series of interviews to promote his novel The Canfield Decision, former Vice-President Agnew repeatedly criticized Zionism and domination of the US media by Jews. His most controversial comments appear to have been made in an interview conducted by William Delaney, and appeared in the now defunct Washington Star, on Sunday, May 25th, 1976. I can not find the full text of the interview online (at least not from a source which doesn't also claim that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is authentic). The following Agnew quotes are all taken from kosher sources:
Question: In your book, as apparently in your own experience, the jucices of outrage seem to run over most deeply with what you refer to as the 'national impact media,' which at one point you intimated is 85 per cent Jewish.
Answer: I don't think that's a fair intimiation. What you're referring to is that I mentioned at this particular press dinner that that proportion held. I think that's probably high. I wouldn't say the national impact media is 85 per cent Jewish. But there are people in very great positions of influence in the national impact media. Far out of proportion to the number of Jewish people in the country. In other words, you might say 50 percent might be a pretty good figure among the ownership and the managing policy posts.
Question: By pointing this out what do you hope to achieve?
Answer: I hope to point out that the United States' policy is affected to a great deal by the influence in the Congress of these people. Our policy is the Middle East in my judgment is disastrous because it's not even-handed and it's not consistent so that the rest of the world can believe us: the same kind of criteria do not apply to Southeast Asia as are applied to Israel. I see no reason why nearly half of all the foreign aid this nation has to give goes to Israel, except for the influence of this Zionist lobby. And the strange thing about it is many influential Jewish people are getting very, very upset with that. The Times carried and article — to their credit — pointing out the number of Jewish leaders who are distrubed about the fact that Israel has now embarked on an imperialistic exercise occupying Arab lands, the West Bank of the Jordan, the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip, bringing about a police state in these areas, attacking the civil population, certainly in response to provocations. But what's the difference between what the Arab kids were doing in the Jordanian town and what our kids did in Chicago?
All you have to do is check the real policymakers and owners ... and you find a much higher concentration of Jewish people than you're going to find in the population,
You go down the line in that fashion — not just with ownership but go down to the managing posts and discretionary posts — and you'll find that through their brightness and aggressiveness and their inventiveness — these are all terms I'm lauding them for — they have worked their way up.
Not only in the media, in academic communities, the financial communities, in the foundations, in all sorts of highly visible and influential services that involve the public to have a tremendous voice.