U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-07-2019, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Iowa
2,684 posts, read 2,951,330 times
Reputation: 3282

Advertisements

With Watergate, the coverup was the type of crime you could envision a lot of other people might try to do in Nixon's place. If you were running a company or had a very important job, and one of your underlings misinterpreted your orders, and screwed something up big time, and it might get you fired from your dream job, then yeah, I think many might try to cover it up..... if they thought there was a fair chance it would work. The real crime was on the shoulders of Liddy & Hunt, they lied to their bosses about how this operation was to be carried out, and disobeyed the instruction that White House people would not be used, but they used James McCord, the WH security chief. Hunt left a check for 6 bucks to his country club in the drawer of his hotel room, the burglars had the hotel keys in their pockets, an address book was found with White House phone numbers in it, they used duct tape on the door of the DNC HQ, it was removed by a guard, so they put more tape on it. Dumb Dumb Dumb. These guys sucked. No money was stolen, no murder, all they were after was information, and every break in they did including Ellsberg, yielded NOTHING.

The so called bribe of 1 million to the burglars was to pay attorneys and expenses for a team of 6 or 8 people, over a period of years. It was to support their families while they were in prison. It was Nixon's way of apologizing to these men for getting sucked into a job they were unqualified to perform.

I have to agree with Hellion on the above being a lessor crime, IMO than what Ted did with Mary Jo, she died a horrible death and Ted cooked up some story about him returning to the scene and trying to save her to make him sound heroic. His story was total BS, he was drunk as a skunk and the timeline of his written statement does not work at all. He was totally belligerent to the cops and press afterward, walling himself up in his compound for days before he spoke about it. He got to the parents of Mary Jo and made sure a proper autopsy was not done on her. When he goes public, Ted tells the voters he is thinking of resigning, and asks the voters to send him input on what they think, should he stay or should he go? Then a few weeks later, he claims the responses he got were overwhelming for him to remain a senator and not resign..... but never shows anyone the responses he got or any proof of that, lol. So you have this, vs Nixon who could have destroyed the evidence against him, the tapes, but did not. I think Nixon has the upper hand in this comparison.

Last edited by mofford; 01-07-2019 at 06:23 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2019, 06:46 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
37,975 posts, read 17,793,737 times
Reputation: 17385
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofford View Post
The so called bribe of 1 million to the burglars was to pay attorneys and expenses for a team of 6 or 8 people, over a period of years. It was to support their families while they were in prison. It was Nixon's way of apologizing to these men for getting sucked into a job they were unqualified to perform.

.
Good grief. We all know about your heroic image of Nixon, but c'mon. That was no apology from Nixon, it was hush money, an illegal bribe offered in exchange for silence to protect fellow conspirators, including the famously unindicted co-conspirator at the top. Do you think Nixon would have authorized the payments if those guys had all spilled the beans before Judge Sirica?

You may admire what you perceive to have been Nixon's virtues as a president, but spare us these attempts to white wash crimes. We already got that from Nixon himself when he tried to substitute the White House prepared and edited transcripts for the tapes under subpoena. One more huge lie to the nation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 06:25 PM
 
8,590 posts, read 8,795,089 times
Reputation: 26741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
you got 1 thing right, Watergate falls short to Chappaquidick. A person died and there was a huge cover up because he was the son of a powerful family and the brother of a President and former attorney general. Not only there was an obvious crime that a person actually died and a cover-up and favors done but he got to keep his political career and be the leader of the Democrats in the Senate until his death in 2009 and run for President in 1980?



It does affect the whole nation because laws only apply to the common folks, not the ruling class.....how did a 3rd rate burglary in Watergate affect the nation? was there top secret information stolen and given to our sworn enemies? did billions of dollars were taken from the treasury to start illegal wars in 3rd world countries?



Nixon "crimes" were no different the other Presidents.
History has judged Watergate to be more significant.

When the President sits in the White House with his aides talking about bribing people to give false testimony in a criminal case, we don't have a President, we have a criminal in the White House. For the sake of the Republic, it cannot be tolerated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 10:43 PM
 
9,714 posts, read 3,274,524 times
Reputation: 4576
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
History has judged Watergate to be more significant.

When the President sits in the White House with his aides talking about bribing people to give false testimony in a criminal case, we don't have a President, we have a criminal in the White House. For the sake of the Republic, it cannot be tolerated.





LMAO!!!! You mean as Bill Clinton did? .........bribing politicians from special interests groups are accepted in our government all the time and affects policy and millions of Americans. Watergate didn't affect anybody. It was a 3rd-degree burglary. NO national secrets were stolen or given to our sworn enemies and no government funds were used.



This is the hypocrisy and selective morality in this damn country.......Presidents and politicians in Congress can lie to invade countries in illegal wars and top people in the CIA and FBI and NSA can lie under oath about torture and spying on Americans and about things that actually matter but that is not only tolerated but the norm since Vietnam.


a Top U.S. Senator driving drunk and letting a young woman drown and covered it up and got favors by the police and the court is tolerated but a 3rd-degree burglary and the President protecting his people then that's crossing the line right there....We can't have criminals running our country in 3rd-degree burglaries but we can tolerate war criminals, that's good!


The FBI under Hoover was a criminal organization and all Presidents above him knew about it and gave him their blessings....that to me is a far worse offense to our constitution and the country than a 3rd-degree burglary and the President covering for his people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 11:21 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
37,975 posts, read 17,793,737 times
Reputation: 17385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
LMAO!!!! You mean as Bill Clinton did? .........bribing politicians from special interests groups are accepted in our government all the time and affects policy and millions of Americans. .
Is it your notion that President Nixon's crimes are justified by the behavior of another president which would not happen for another 20 years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:03 AM
 
8,590 posts, read 8,795,089 times
Reputation: 26741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Is it your notion that President Nixon's crimes are justified by the behavior of another president which would not happen for another 20 years?
I'm not sure what he is saying other than Watergate is supposedly a minor matter and all kinds of unrelated other things were the "real scandals". He's obviously quite upset and likes to rant and rave.

He misses a key point. Regardless of his opinion, historians have determined that Watergate is the greater scandal. This is the History Forum, not the Politics or the Conspiracy Forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:00 AM
 
Location: WV and Eastport, ME
10,554 posts, read 10,569,402 times
Reputation: 7071
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
I'm not sure what he is saying other than Watergate is supposedly a minor matter and all kinds of unrelated other things were the "real scandals". He's obviously quite upset and likes to rant and rave.

He misses a key point. Regardless of his opinion, historians have determined that Watergate is the greater scandal. This is the History Forum, not the Politics or the Conspiracy Forum.
Indeed. This is also a thread about a Nixon biography. I can't see what relevance there is in bringing up Ted Kennedy or Bill Clinton. Some ranting and raving is probably in order. There is plenty of stuff about Nixon to rant and rave about.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:31 PM
 
9,714 posts, read 3,274,524 times
Reputation: 4576
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
I'm not sure what he is saying other than Watergate is supposedly a minor matter and all kinds of unrelated other things were the "real scandals". He's obviously quite upset and likes to rant and rave.

He misses a key point. Regardless of his opinion, historians have determined that Watergate is the greater scandal. This is the History Forum, not the Politics or the Conspiracy Forum.

talk directly to me when you talk about me. I'm not upset or ranting. Just making a point just like everybody does here.


"Historians" have determined that Watergate is a greater scandal? LOL. You don't have a mind of your own? you go with the flow and what the elites decide what is a greater scandal? again, I stand by my original post that Nixon's "crimes" were no different than other Presidents. This is not politics or conspiracy. That's just a fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:36 PM
 
9,714 posts, read 3,274,524 times
Reputation: 4576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Is it your notion that President Nixon's crimes are justified by the behavior of another president which would not happen for another 20 years?

I never said they were justified, that was never my point. I said that Nixon's crimes were no different than other Presidents. Nixon was held accountable and pressured to resign while other Presidents and other people in power didn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
37,975 posts, read 17,793,737 times
Reputation: 17385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
I never said they were justified, that was never my point. I said that Nixon's crimes were no different than other Presidents. Nixon was held accountable and pressured to resign while other Presidents and other people in power didn't.
Well, that is a blanket statement which does not hold up when one examines the actual details. President Nixon was trying to rig the 1972 election with his Plumber's sabotage and spying. In order to keep those crimes from coming to light, he then headed up a cover up scheme which included paying bribe money in exchange for silence.

President Clinton, by contrast, owed all of his troubles to trying to conceal an extra marital affair from the public so that his wife would not find out. You are unable to detect a difference between some guy trying to lie to his wife about his sexual fidelity, and attempting to rig an election? Why exactly was Clinton's marriage any of our business in the first place? Clinton's perjury about Monica Lewinsky had zero impact on the citizens of the US, it was a private matter. The same cannot be said of Nixon and Watergate which involved breaking into a pyschiatrist's office to steal private records and use them to smear a political opponent. You are unable to detect a difference between breaking & entering & theft....and some guy trying to lie his way out of trouble with his wife?

If you claim that you cannot find a difference, then I would suggest that you are wearing blinders, that your devotion to Nixon has forced you to try and white wash everything nasty that he did and pretend that it was not serious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top