Would Trumpsters and present GOP have given Nixon a pass on Watergate?

[independentusa]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

 

[Captain Adverse]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

NOT quite...

On August 5, 1974, the White House released a previously unknown audio tape from June 23, 1972. Recorded only a few days after the break-in, it documented the initial stages of the cover-up: it revealed Nixon and Haldeman had conducted a meeting in the Oval Office where they discussed how to stop the FBI from continuing their investigation of the break-in, as they recognized that there was a high risk that their position in the scandal may be revealed...

...Before the release of this tape, Nixon had denied any involvement in the scandal. He claimed that there were no political motivations in his instructions to the CIA, and claimed he had no knowledge before March 21, 1973, of involvement by senior campaign officials such as John Mitchell. The contents of this tape persuaded Nixon's own lawyers, Fred Buzhardt and James St. Clair, that “the President had lied to the nation, to his closest aides, and to his own lawyers—for more than two years.”[68] The tape, which Barber Conable referred to as a “smoking gun,” proved that Nixon had been involved in the cover-up from the beginning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal#Resignation

Nixon resigned on August 9. 1974.

I was a Nixon supporter prior to Watergate. Not because I followed his agenda but because he got us out of Vietnam, and during his Administration he got 18 year-olds the right to vote and be treated like adults.

However, when it was revealed that he was involved in the conspiracy from the beginning, then I advocated for his impeachment.

To answer your Thread question...If Trump was found to have been knowingly and willingly involved in a conspiracy to undermine the election via Russian assistance, then like Nixon I would support his leaving office.

However, I have yet to see any such "smoking gun." To be honest, at this point I don't expect to. :shrug:

 

[cuban smokes]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

most certainly, they would have .......

 

[Chomsky]

This is a great question, and I hope some Trump voters - and still supporters - weigh-in on this.

 

[Chomsky]

NOT quite...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal#Resignation

Nixon resigned on August 9. 1974.

I was a Nixon supporter prior to Watergate. Not because I followed his agenda but because he got us out of Vietnam, and during his Administration he got 18 year-olds the right to vote and be treated like adults.

However, when it was revealed that he was involved in the conspiracy from the beginning, then I advocated for his impeachment.

To answer your Thread question...If Trump was found to have been knowingly and willingly involved in a conspiracy to undermine the election via Russian assistance, then like Nixon I would support his leaving office.

However, I have yet to see any such "smoking gun." To be honest, at this point I don't expect to. :shrug:

Yes Captain, but Nixon was not being legally indicted for the break-ins (though he was listed as an "unnamed co-conspirator). He was going into impeachment only for obstruction of justice. Perhaps, like what might happen with Trump.

 

[MrMike]

I think your view of history is a little distorted. It wasn't the firing that forced Nixon out. It was the fact he would be impeached and removed from office because there were enough votes to do so.

If Trump had folks break into Hillary's HQ, wiretapped, stole information and created false narratives with the help of foreign agents I think he should resign, be charged, whatever. Unfortunately for the Left, the problem is, they (and their candidate/party) were involved in misuse of government agencies against an opposition candidate, constructing a conspiracy, and paying foreign agents for it.

Good luck!

 

[MAGAnificent]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

There is no rational comparison between Watergate and the Russian Collusion nonsense. Watergate involved an actual crime Nixons's muffins were cooked before he fired the special prosecutor. That was just the last straw. The Russian Collusion nonsense is nothing more then an investigation looking for a crime. Mueller has all but given up on the collusion aspect and is seeking to take down his targets with process crimes such as perjury traps.

 

[Felis Leo]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

Given him a pass? Well, let us look at the facts. Richard Milhouse Nixon was, taken on his own, ten times the man Donald Trump is. President Nixon committed some very admirable actions and did some amazingly good things during his presidency (From my point of view, those good things were Title IX Passage, Massive Desegregation, a diplomatic coup de main with China that drove a wedge between them and the Soviet Union, and maintained the balance of power in the Middle East by facing down and further weakening the Soviet Union during the Yom Kippur war). He generally did what he believed was in the best interest of the country over his personal interests. Generally. That having been said, here is the one thing Richard Milhouse Nixon lacks that would make Donald Trump supporters balk at supporting him.

He is not Donald Trump. And, therefore, the man is a loser. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

 

[Perotista]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

Completely different era back then. The partisan divide wasn't as huge as the Grand Canyon, more like a little creek. Both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. The parties worked closer together, compromised with each other, played the give and take and probably more important, respected each other. They didn't view the other party as being out to destroy this nation as the two major parties view each other today.

The thing with Nixon is they had the smoking gun. There was a there, there. With Trump, we don't know that there is a there. Not yet anyway. Until Mueller's final report, none of us do. Anti-Trumpers assume there is, pro-Trumpers assume there isn't. But neither side knows. The Democrats in congress and as a whole had a lot better reputation than those of today. Congress as a whole was seen in a positive manner, not in the very negative form it is today. Democrats worked with Nixon throughout his first term although there were differences at times. Democrats also gave Nixon an approval rating of in the 40 percentage range throughout his first term. It wasn't until Watergate broke that they began to oppose him. Democrats haven't broke 10% approval on Trump.

Democrats today began trying to destroy Trump the day after the election. Quite a big difference. The leaders of both parties in congress were also well respected, Mansfield and Dirksen followed by Byrd and Scott in the senate, Speakers McCormick and Albert in the house. All had well over 50% approval ratings. Not in the 20 percent range that McConnell and Schumer, Pelosi and Ryan find themselves today. It was a whole different ballgame and era.

I don't know if transplanting today's congressional republicans back into 1973/74 they would have given Nixon a pass. Maybe they would have, maybe not. I suppose one could ask if today's congressional democrats were transplanted back in 1953 if they would have begun trying to destroy Eisenhower? I don't know the answer to that either.

 

[Vetplus40]

The Russian Collusion nonsense is nothing more then an investigation looking for a crime. Mueller has all but given up on the collusion aspect and is seeking to take down his targets with process crimes such as perjury traps.

More "Trumpster" conjecture. Yoiu have no ****ing clue what Mueller has so stop talking out of your ass. We can simply wait until Mueller is finished with his investigation if Trump doesnt try and fire him first.

BTW, MY OBAMACARE has and continues to work just fine. Even your username is wrong.....LMAO

 

[Linc]

Yes Captain, but Nixon was not being legally indicted for the break-ins (though he was listed as an "unnamed co-conspirator). He was going into impeachment only for obstruction of justice. Perhaps, like what might happen with Trump.

They are doing so right this moment brother, with infinitely more egregious acts from this 'putinized' CinC.

Those so-called 'noble' gops in 1974 were anything but 'noble'.
It was all about a long string of election losses in special elections ahead of 1974 elections.

That GOP of 1974 was fully aware of Nixon's documented TREASON during the 1968 election,
costing us 22,000 more lives.

Just as the 1980 GOP was fully aware of the Reagan/Bush-41 treason DURING the 1980 election.
This is a gop 'thing', this treason thing.

This time, there is good reason to believe we won't even have elections in November.
And if we do, there's good reason to believe gops won't transfer power if they lose.

It's called Martial Law, under the guise of a 'hot' war footing ...

 

[Vetplus40]

I have seen so much written and spoken on the networks and media about the similarities and differences between Watergate and the Russian investigations. I hear the Trumpsters and present GOP saying constantly that there was no collusion or obstruction of justice. I don't know about collusion, but Nixon was forced out by firing the person investigating Watergate and Trump has admitted he fired Comey to end the Russian investigation. So if the present Trumpsters and GOP were politically active during Watergate, do you think they would have given Nixon a pass on his actions?

Keep in mind that Nixon had other discretions like income tax evasion trouble as well. In fact, he and Agnew are the reason that both POTUS and VPOTUS are required to have their tax returns confidentally audited by the IRS each year. Now, to the point: Most definately they would have both protected Nixon and covered up the "break-in" by crying "fake news" at every possible opportunity. That said, the core of Nixon support was far more educated and politically savvy than this bunch of Trump loving nitwits. Nixon couldn't have pissed down their legs and told them that it is raining like Trump can do with his base. In addition, the Republicans of that era were also deeply more patriotic and fundamentally "American" than the bunch of Republican spineless hipocrits that inhabit DC today.

 

[lurchadams]

They are doing so right this moment brother, with infinitely more egregious acts from this 'putinized' CinC.

Those so-called 'noble' gops in 1974 were anything but 'noble'.
It was all about a long string of election losses in special elections ahead of 1974 elections.

That GOP of 1974 was fully aware of Nixon's documented TREASON during the 1968 election,
costing us 22,000 more lives.

Just as the 1980 GOP was fully aware of the Reagan/Bush-41 treason DURING the 1980 election.
This is a gop 'thing', this treason thing.

This time, there is good reason to believe we won't even have elections in November.
And if we do, there's good reason to believe gops won't transfer power if they lose.

It's called Martial Law, under the guise of a 'hot' war footing ...

Scott Walker and his GOP state toadies have been successful in preventing WI special elections. I guess the GOP is fine with cancelling elections if they know they're going to lose.

I guess they're hoping the tide might turn before November. If not it'll be interesting to see if they'll try to amend the WI state constitution and cancel the mid-terms as well.

Criminals.

 

[Linc]

Scott Walker and his GOP state toadies have been successful in preventing WI special elections. I guess the GOP is fine with cancelling elections if they know they're going to lose.

I guess they're hoping the tide might turn before November. If not it'll be interesting to see if they'll try to amend the WI state constitution and cancel the mid-terms as well.

Criminals.

It's quite true that Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are
Treasonous Criminals for their covering up of the Trump Crime Syndicate MOB crimes.

Those two also refused to sign off on a bi-partisan letter to Putin in September of 2016,
proving Russian Election Interference. Obama never learned how to play hard ball.

Those two have both known since 2014 that Russians interfered in the 2014 election that gave GOPs the Senate.

McConnell and Ryan have given this Nation over to Putin ...

 

[lurchadams]

It's quite true that Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are
Treasonous Criminals for their covering up of the Trump Crime Syndicate MOB crimes.

Those two also refused to sign off on a bi-partisan letter to Putin in September of 2016,
proving Russian Election Interference. Obama never learned how to play hard ball.

Those two have both known since 2014 that Russians interfered in the 2014 election that gave GOPs the Senate.

McConnell and Ryan have given this Nation over to Putin ...

That would explain their reluctance to comment on Trump's alleged culpability where Russian collusion and obstruction of justice are concerned.

Tough time in our history, my friend.

 

[Chomsky]

They are doing so right this moment brother, with infinitely more egregious acts from this 'putinized' CinC.

Those so-called 'noble' gops in 1974 were anything but 'noble'.
It was all about a long string of election losses in special elections ahead of 1974 elections.

That GOP of 1974 was fully aware of Nixon's documented TREASON during the 1968 election,
costing us 22,000 more lives.

Just as the 1980 GOP was fully aware of the Reagan/Bush-41 treason DURING the 1980 election.
This is a gop 'thing', this treason thing.

This time, there is good reason to believe we won't even have elections in November.
And if we do, there's good reason to believe gops won't transfer power if they lose.

It's called Martial Law, under the guise of a 'hot' war footing ...

Alright now, you know I'm against Trump & the GOP as much as anyone here, but the bolded is over the top.

I have no doubt there will be a smooth enough transfer of power in the House (should it come to be) this November. Maybe some legal wrangling, but that's about it.

Quite honestly, I suspect a decent swatch of the country wants a check put on Trump, and sees the November election as a way to do it.

 

[independentusa]

I think your view of history is a little distorted. It wasn't the firing that forced Nixon out. It was the fact he would be impeached and removed from office because there were enough votes to do so.

If Trump had folks break into Hillary's HQ, wiretapped, stole information and created false narratives with the help of foreign agents I think he should resign, be charged, whatever. Unfortunately for the Left, the problem is, they (and their candidate/party) were involved in misuse of government agencies against an opposition candidate, constructing a conspiracy, and paying foreign agents for it.

Good luck!

He was going to be impeached for obstruction of justice for having Cox, the investigator fired.

 

[independentusa]

There is no rational comparison between Watergate and the Russian Collusion nonsense. Watergate involved an actual crime Nixons's muffins were cooked before he fired the special prosecutor. That was just the last straw. The Russian Collusion nonsense is nothing more then an investigation looking for a crime. Mueller has all but given up on the collusion aspect and is seeking to take down his targets with process crimes such as perjury traps.

Tell me, is there a difference between a physical break in to get information and hacking to get information. I believe that the hacking was a modern version of the Watergate break in. And in the end Trump like Nixon most serious possible crime isn't the break in but the cover up which was an obstruction of justice. The cover up started with and included the firing of Cox.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Given him a pass? Well, let us look at the facts. Richard Milhouse Nixon was, taken on his own, ten times the man Donald Trump is. President Nixon committed some very admirable actions and did some amazingly good things during his presidency (From my point of view, those good things were Title IX Passage, Massive Desegregation, a diplomatic coup de main with China that drove a wedge between them and the Soviet Union, and maintained the balance of power in the Middle East by facing down and further weakening the Soviet Union during the Yom Kippur war). He generally did what he believed was in the best interest of the country over his personal interests. Generally. That having been said, here is the one thing Richard Milhouse Nixon lacks that would make Donald Trump supporters balk at supporting him.

He is not Donald Trump. And, therefore, the man is a loser. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

He also created the EPA and ended the Vietnam War.
I wish he didn't sit around and talk about the Jews the way he did, and he should have drawn the line at the break-in and said that was a line too far and ended any such idea of plumbers and their ilk.

For a Republican, he did some very bipartisan liberal thinking.
Trump isn't fit to utter the name Nixon.

 

[MrMike]

He was going to be impeached for obstruction of justice for having Cox, the investigator fired.

He was to be impeached for three issues (articles), not one. But I'm happy to concede that obstruction of justice was one reason and I see why the Left needs to try and hang their hats on that one, but in this case, it just doesn't fly. I wish you luck in your endeavors though.

"On July 24, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against him. On July 27, 29, and 30, 1974, the Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Nixon, for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress, and reported those articles to the House of Representatives."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_process_against_Richard_Nixon

 

[LunaRose]

He also created the EPA and ended the Vietnam War.
I wish he didn't sit around and talk about the Jews the way he did, and he should have drawn the line at the break-in and said that was a line too far and ended any such idea of plumbers and their ilk.

For a Republican, he did some very bipartisan liberal thinking.
Trump isn't fit to utter the name Nixon.

Not only the Jews, Nixon's "war on crime" specifically targeted "blacks and hippies" which was admitted by Ehrlichman one of Nixons top adivisors. Ehrlichman's comment is the first time the war on drugs has been plainly characterized as a political assault designed to help Nixon win, and keep, the White House.

 

[Linc]

Alright now, you know I'm against Trump & the GOP as much as anyone here, but the bolded is over the top.

I have no doubt there will be a smooth enough transfer of power in the House (should it come to be) this November. Maybe some legal wrangling, but that's about it.

Quite honestly, I suspect a decent swatch of the country wants a check put on Trump, and sees the November election as a way to do it.

Over the top is the state this Nation and World are in, due to GOP malfeasance and TREASON.
Naivete perfectly describes your words in Particular, and the actions of Democrats since Nixon in general, especially with OBAMA. You know perfectly well who the 'ENEMY WITHIN' is, whether you want to admit it or not.

You, and too many other potential Democratic voters, just don't have the stomach to fight these people on their terms. I DO have the guts and determination for this fight.
I will fight these 'PUTINIZED' republi-confederates until my last breath. I give you my word on that.
We are seeing the toppling of our Nation, and you know it ...

 

[Chomsky]

Over the top is the state this Nation and World are in, due to GOP malfeasance and TREASON.
Naivete perfectly describes your words in Particular, and the actions of Democrats since Nixon in general, especially with OBAMA. You know perfectly well who the 'ENEMY WITHIN' is, whether you want to admit it or not.

You, and too many other potential Democratic voters, just don't have the stomach to fight these people on their terms. I DO have the guts and determination for this fight.
I will fight these 'PUTINIZED' republi-confederates until my last breath. I give you my word on that.
We are seeing the toppling of our Nation, and you know it ...

Look, I see the same pattern & directions you do. And I'm just as appalled.

But there's going to be an election in November, and there's also going to be a smooth enough transition of power in the House if the voters determine it's to be. Of this, I have no doubt.

And yes, I am with you in the Dem vote.

 

[Chomsky]

Completely different era back then. The partisan divide wasn't as huge as the Grand Canyon, more like a little creek. Both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. The parties worked closer together, compromised with each other, played the give and take and probably more important, respected each other. They didn't view the other party as being out to destroy this nation as the two major parties view each other today.

The thing with Nixon is they had the smoking gun. There was a there, there. With Trump, we don't know that there is a there. Not yet anyway. Until Mueller's final report, none of us do. Anti-Trumpers assume there is, pro-Trumpers assume there isn't. But neither side knows. The Democrats in congress and as a whole had a lot better reputation than those of today. Congress as a whole was seen in a positive manner, not in the very negative form it is today. Democrats worked with Nixon throughout his first term although there were differences at times. Democrats also gave Nixon an approval rating of in the 40 percentage range throughout his first term. It wasn't until Watergate broke that they began to oppose him. Democrats haven't broke 10% approval on Trump.

Democrats today began trying to destroy Trump the day after the election. Quite a big difference. The leaders of both parties in congress were also well respected, Mansfield and Dirksen followed by Byrd and Scott in the senate, Speakers McCormick and Albert in the house. All had well over 50% approval ratings. Not in the 20 percent range that McConnell and Schumer, Pelosi and Ryan find themselves today. It was a whole different ballgame and era.

I don't know if transplanting today's congressional republicans back into 1973/74 they would have given Nixon a pass. Maybe they would have, maybe not. I suppose one could ask if today's congressional democrats were transplanted back in 1953 if they would have begun trying to destroy Eisenhower? I don't know the answer to that either.

Nixon's Republican Congress would treat Nixon in the same manner they treat Trump - they'd react to his approval rating.

I don't have numbers specific to the GOP, but Nixon had a 24% national approval rating when he left office. Trump's lowest was around 36% nationally, but he still managed to hold 80% within the GOP. This of course, keeps the GOP from moving against him. I would assume if Trump gets down to 24% nationally as Nixon did, then in mathematical terms he'd also have to have tanked significantly within the GOP. If so, they will dump him for Pence. Just as the 93rd Congress dumped Nixon for Ford, after the loss of 50 seats.

 

[Cardinal]

Nixon wasn't a populist President. That changes the equation more than people care to admit.