The Pentagon Papers: When One Man Exposed Four Presidents' Lies | State of Surveillance

TL;DR: In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg leaked a 7,000-page classified history of the Vietnam War to The New York Times. The Pentagon Papers proved that four administrations — Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson — had systematically lied to Congress and the public about the war. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that newspapers could publish them. Nixon's obsession with punishing Ellsberg led to the Watergate break-ins and ultimately his resignation. Ellsberg faced 115 years in prison under the Espionage Act, but charges were dismissed due to government misconduct. He died in 2023, having spent his final decades defending Snowden, Manning, and Assange.

The Lie That Started a War

On August 4, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson told the American people that North Vietnamese patrol boats had launched an "unprovoked attack" on U.S. Navy destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. Within three days, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authorizing the president to "take all necessary measures" to defend U.S. forces — effectively a blank check for war.

There was just one problem: the attack probably never happened.

The Pentagon Papers would later reveal that the second attack — the one Johnson cited as the trigger for escalation — almost certainly did not occur. Navy pilots saw nothing. Radar operators weren't sure. The commander on scene cabled that "many reported contacts and torpedoes fired appear doubtful." Johnson knew this. He escalated anyway.

But the deception went far deeper. The papers showed that:

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution had been drafted months before the alleged attack
The U.S. had been conducting secret raids against North Vietnam, making the "unprovoked" claim a lie
Johnson was planning to bomb North Vietnam during his 1964 campaign — while publicly promising "we seek no wider war" and attacking his opponent Barry Goldwater for wanting to escalate
The U.S. had secretly expanded the war to Laos and Cambodia, with the American public kept completely in the dark

The pattern across four presidencies was consistent: the government knew the war was unwinnable, knew the public would oppose escalation if told the truth, and lied anyway.

The Man Who Changed His Mind

Daniel Ellsberg was not a natural whistleblower. He was a Cold War hawk.

Harvard economics graduate. Marine Corps officer. RAND Corporation strategist. He had helped plan nuclear war scenarios and advised the Pentagon on Vietnam. He believed in the mission.

Then he read the study.

In 1967, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara commissioned a secret history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Ellsberg was one of the researchers. Over 7,000 pages, the study documented how every administration since World War II had deceived Congress and the public — and how the war had been recognized internally as unwinnable even as officials publicly promised victory.

Ellsberg later wrote: "I realized the papers proved that administrations from Eisenhower to Johnson not only lied to the public and Congress about US involvement in Vietnam but also made decisions based on how their administrations would look to the public and sent young American men to die knowing they could not win."

In October 1969, Ellsberg began secretly photocopying the 7,000 pages — with help from his co-conspirator Anthony Russo. It took months. He first tried to work within the system, offering the documents to several members of Congress. None would act.

So in 1971, he gave them to The New York Times.

The Battle Over Publication

On June 13, 1971, The New York Times published the first of what would become a nine-part series. The headline was understated: "Vietnam Archive: Pentagon Study Traces 3 Decades of Growing U.S. Involvement."

The Nixon administration moved immediately. Attorney General John Mitchell called the Times, demanding they cease publication. When they refused, the Justice Department obtained a court order — the first time in American history the federal government had obtained prior restraint against a newspaper.

But Ellsberg had copies. When the Times was silenced, he gave the papers to The Washington Post. When the Post was enjoined, he gave them to the Boston Globe. Then the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Within days, 17 newspapers had copies.

The case reached the Supreme Court in record time. On June 30, 1971 — just 17 days after the first story ran — the Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the newspapers.

Justice Hugo Black wrote: "The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government."

The decision in New York Times Co. v. United States became one of the pillars of First Amendment law. The press could publish classified information if it served the public interest. The government could not stop it in advance.

Nixon's Revenge and Its Consequences

Richard Nixon was not named in the Pentagon Papers — the study ended in 1968, before his presidency. But he was obsessed with punishing Ellsberg and preventing future leaks.

In response, the White House created a secret unit called the "Plumbers." Their first assignment: break into the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Lewis Fielding, to find damaging personal information.

They found nothing useful. But they didn't stop there.

The same operatives would later break into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel. The cover-up of that burglary would destroy Nixon's presidency. The Pentagon Papers didn't just expose government lies about Vietnam — they triggered the chain of events that brought down a president.

Historian Richard Holbrooke later wrote that Ellsberg was "one of those accidental characters of history who show the pattern of a whole era" — the "triggering mechanism for events which would link Vietnam and Watergate in one continuous 1961-to-1975 story."

The Trial That Never Was

In January 1973, Ellsberg was charged under the Espionage Act of 1917, along with theft and conspiracy charges. He faced 115 years in prison.

The government's case was strong on the facts. Ellsberg had clearly leaked classified documents. He never denied it.

But then the misconduct emerged.

During the trial, it came out that:

The Plumbers had burglarized Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office
The FBI had wiretapped Ellsberg's phone without a warrant
Nixon's aides had offered the trial judge, William Matthew Byrne Jr., the directorship of the FBI — while the trial was ongoing
Key evidence had been destroyed or hidden from the defense

On May 11, 1973, Judge Byrne dismissed all charges, citing "improper government conduct" that had "incurably infected the prosecution."

Ellsberg walked free. He would never face prison for exposing the lies that sent 58,000 Americans to their deaths.

What Changed — And What Didn't

The Pentagon Papers set precedents that shaped every major leak since:

What the Case Established

Press freedom: The Supreme Court ruling remains the cornerstone of the press's right to publish classified information
Public interest defense (sort of): Though Ellsberg never got to argue his case, the outcome suggested that exposing government deception could be legally defensible — if the government overreached
Power of distribution: By giving copies to multiple outlets, Ellsberg made suppression impossible. WikiLeaks and Snowden would use the same strategy

What the Case Did Not Establish

Legal protection for leakers: Ellsberg's charges were dismissed on procedural grounds, not because the law protected whistleblowing. The Espionage Act still applies to anyone who leaks classified information, regardless of their motives
Right to a public interest defense: Under current Espionage Act prosecutions, defendants cannot argue that their leaks served the public good. Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden would have been barred from making this argument at trial

Ellsberg himself recognized this. In 2013, he explained why Snowden was right to flee: "There is zero chance that he would be allowed out on bail if he returned now... Instead, he would be in a prison cell like Manning, incommunicado."

The difference was timing. In 1971, Ellsberg was released on bail and spent two years free, giving speeches and building public support. Today's whistleblowers face pretrial detention under conditions that amount to solitary confinement.

Ellsberg's Final Years

Daniel Ellsberg spent the last 50 years of his life as a peace activist and defender of whistleblowers. He was arrested dozens of times at protests. He won the Right Livelihood Award (2006) and the Olof Palme Prize (2018).

When Chelsea Manning leaked the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs to WikiLeaks, Ellsberg attended her trial and praised her courage. "I waited 39 years for her to appear in this world," he said.

When Edward Snowden revealed NSA mass surveillance, Ellsberg welcomed him to the board of the Freedom of the Press Foundation. He repeatedly defended Snowden's decision to leave the country: "That was not a point of pride with me — I wasted years trying to do it through channels. That was a fruitless effort, as it would have been for Manning and Snowden."

He rejected what he called the "Ellsberg Good / Assange, Manning, Snowden Bad" narrative that mainstream media tried to construct. His son Michael later wrote: "Daniel absolutely rejected that narrative. Any journalist advancing this story should at least have the honesty to note that Daniel thoroughly rejected it."

In March 2023, Ellsberg announced he had been diagnosed with inoperable pancreatic cancer. He died at home in Kensington, California, on June 16, 2023, at age 92.

His final message to future whistleblowers: "Don't do what I did. Don't wait until the bombs start falling."

The Pattern of Power

The Pentagon Papers revealed a consistent pattern: when government operates in secret, it lies. Not occasionally, not in emergencies, but systematically — because the political cost of telling the truth exceeds the political cost of deception.

Four presidents knew the Vietnam War was unwinnable. Four presidents sent young men to die anyway. The internal documents showed they understood this. The public statements showed they lied about it.

This wasn't conspiracy theory. It was documented fact, in the government's own words, in 7,000 pages of classified history.

The same pattern would repeat:

Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (2003)
NSA mass surveillance (2013)
CIA torture program (2014)
Afghanistan's prospects for victory (2019, via the Afghanistan Papers)

Each time, the government insisted critics were wrong or paranoid. Each time, leaked documents proved otherwise. The lesson of the Pentagon Papers isn't that all government claims are false. It's that when power operates in secret, skepticism isn't paranoia — it's pattern recognition.

The Bottom Line

Daniel Ellsberg proved that one person with access to the truth could change history. The Pentagon Papers helped end the Vietnam War, brought down a president, and established the press's right to publish classified information.

But the legal framework that made his prosecution possible still exists. The Espionage Act of 1917 — written to punish German spies — remains the primary tool for prosecuting whistleblowers. It does not distinguish between selling secrets to adversaries and exposing government crimes to journalists. It bars defendants from explaining why they leaked.

Ellsberg beat the charges because Nixon's men broke the law in pursuing him. Chelsea Manning served seven years. Reality Winner served four. Edward Snowden remains in exile. Julian Assange spent years in prison before a plea deal.

The precedent Ellsberg set was powerful. The protection it provides is fragile.