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.
Can you imagine what was in the erased portion? Nixon was not a stupid man and knew that the tapes couldn't be replete with gaps. One could, maybe, be laid to an "accident" though that led to some humorous cartoons about Rosemary Wood's "pedal on the treadle."
You are correct. The amazing thing is that with all of that he is a superstar in comparison to Donald Trump.
I'm not sure who the superstar is. And as you can see here, Nixon sabotaged Vietnam peace talks to get elected (post number 42), I feel the same way as you do about Tricky Dick. Having said that, in view of the theatrics going on now when Obama is trying to make Trump's job as incoming POTUS difficult, I have some sympathy for what Nixon is alleged to have done here, for several reasons:
The temptation to cut a deal to salvage Humphrey's narrow chance to win; and
The chance that if such a deal were cut with "poison pills" the blowback would hurt the victor in the campaign, and have no effect on the Johnson presidency.
The effect of possible over-eagerness for a "deal" cannot be overestimated. Obama, in his puppy-dog eagerness to cut a deal with Iran, through enforceability and benefit to the West to the winds, along with all caution. Kerry kept on insisting that there were "deadlines" within which to make a deal. The resulting "deal" gives Iran all of its money in advance of compliance. Since there is a ten-year string on the deal, at the very least the money should have been doled out.
Similarly in the alleged 1968 "deal" the next President might well have been stripped of any ability to continue fighting if need be. As it is the 1973 Paris Peace Treaty was extraordinarily weak and I don't say that was a good thing. However, Nixon deserved a chance to do better. As we learned later Nixon was stuck removing missiles from Turkey under Kennedy's Cuban Missile Crisis dimout.
I take a dim view of almost all 11th hour deals with hostile foreign powers on the eve of an election. They are almost always very bad ones.
Can you imagine what was in the erased portion? Nixon was not a stupid man and knew that the tapes couldn't be replete with gaps. One could, maybe, be laid to an "accident" though that led to some humorous cartoons about Rosemary Wood's "pedal on the treadle."
We will never know what was erased. We do know that the tape he didn't erase was the "smoking gun".
If he had gone Clinton on the evidence, he may have avoided impeachment.
What possible need are you suggesting there could have been?
One never knows. A country should be able to escape from a treaty if the other side isn't complying. It's very possible LBJ and HHH would have negotiated a treaty with all the logic of John Lennon's "(a)ll we are saying is give peace a chance" with soaring and aspirational language and no enforcement mechanism. When "it" hits the fan the successor would be left helpless.
For example if the treaty required North Vietnam to stand down for say a year, the North Vietnamese government could have stopped most military operations but kept stirring the pot in South Vietnam, and the "guerrilla" activity would have resumed. North Vietnam's hands would plausibly be washed of any involvement. The U.S. would be helpless to go back in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperthetic
LBJ resigned from running a second term.
He got himself out of Vietnam, leaving his soldiers there.
I am a history teacher and at least half the presidents have done something as bad as Watergate.
It is kind of weird how Watergate has been framed as the bar none worst thing a president has done. Watergate was not even the first time a president had spied on and wiretapped a political opponent.
I had a professor once say that Watergate was the worst scandal, not because it was unethical that all presidents did unethical things, but rather because the president lied to the American people. I pointed out that he had earlier praised FDR for his ability to lie on tariffs while campaigning. I think it is framed as the worst ever simply because the Vietnam War had been so divisive and you have the liberal media and historians overjoyed to frame a Republican scandal as the worst ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
As you know I am not a knee-jerk liberal. However I strongly disagree with you on this one. In this thread, Nixon sabotaged Vietnam peace talks to get elected, Post 42 I lay out a lengthy pattern of bad behavior, of which Watergate was only a small part. I cannot think of other campaigns where so much that happened occurred during the middle of the night, and by felonious means. To my mind the most egregious part was the politically motivated economic policy announced August 15, 1971 and then disbanded January 11, 1973. This was perfectly timed to ensure a rip roaring, relatively trouble-free and non-inflationary boom for calendar year 1972, predictably followed by the wreckage of 1973-4. Not that Watergate was innocuous. It was criminal and the planning, implementation and coverup went up to pretty high ranks.
Nixon was not the only President to lie to the people. In fact that is common. But in this case the lying was by any objective standard epic.
As far as the OP goes, though, as I stated elsewhere I have a serious problem with desperate international agreements negotiated at the tail-end of a Presidency that may cripple the incoming President's intended foreign and/or domestic policy. The Paris Climate Accords are a symbol of the latter.
jbgusa,
You say that you disagree with me that at least half of the presidents have done something as bad as Watergate...and then you promptly move onto other Nixon scandals and do not defend your assertion.
I stand pat, at least half of all presidents have done something as bad as Watergate.
In regards to lying during Watergate - many presidents have told just as bad lies as Watergate - once again you quickly moved off topic of Watergate.
You seem to be conflating "All Nixon Scandals" with "Watergate."
jbgusa,
You say that you disagree with me that at least half of the presidents have done something as bad as Watergate...and then you promptly move onto other Nixon scandals and do not defend your assertion.
I stand pat, at least half of all presidents have done something as bad as Watergate.
In regards to lying during Watergate - many presidents have told just as bad lies as Watergate - once again you quickly moved off topic of Watergate.
You seem to be conflating "All Nixon Scandals" with "Watergate."
In a way I am. Watergate itself was a small part of Nixon's wrongdoing, which was unique in terms of perversion of the democratic process. Essentially I use "Watergate" as a shorthand rendition of the Republican misconduct relating to the 1972 reelection campaign. I am open about this.
Under your relatively narrow definition Watergate, I assume, includes the burglary itself, Nixon's instructions to the CIA to interfere with the FBI probe, the erasure of a small amount of tape, and the offer to pay hush money to families of the actual burglars or the burglars themselves to keep them quiet. Defined that way Watergate was probably similar to other election scandals. To my mind what was worse was the interference in Democratic campaigns other than McGovern's to ensure that Nixon had a weak opponent, his manipulation of the 1972 Paris Peace talks to produce a panicky and false peace similar to the one Nixon tried to throw a "monkey wrench" into in 1968, and the corruption of the overall economy to create economic statistics giving a false picture of the country's economic health.
Using your relatively narrow definition of Watergate I agree with you. But Watergate was part of an overall process that was far more pernicious than just the Watergate burglary and its progeny. I would love you or someone to point me to another President that did the equivalent of what I described.
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.
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.
