“We’re not going to have another Watergate in our lifetime. I’m sure.” Bob Woodward
Accompanying the recent Senate hearings regarding Russia are headlines screaming that allegations of obstruction by our current President are tantamount to the wrongdoings of past presidents Nixon and Clinton. The clear implication is that the same ill fates suffered by Nixon and Clinton should befall President Trump. Is this really a valid comparison? Let’s see:
Underlying the case against President Nixon in 1974 was the fact, with hard evidence, that personnel from Nixon’s re-election committee illegally broke into the hotel room of the Democrat National Committee, stole documents, and planted listening devices. Nixon himself denied any involvement in or knowledge of the crime. However, his role in the matter, and his knowledge of it at its inception was then exposed via physical evidence, i.e. tape recordings of his own making. Desperate to avoid an impeachment vote for the crime of obstruction of justice, Nixon became the only president in US history to resign from office.¹
In 1998, President Clinton gave a deposition during an investigation into a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him by Paula Jones. In that deposition, he was asked about a sexual relationship he’d had with a young intern, Monica Lewinsky, in the Oval office. Under oath, Clinton denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky or ever having had an affair with her. Presented with knowledge of embarrassing evidence (“stains” on a dress belonging to Lewinsky) as well as testimony from Lewinsky herself, Clinton admitted to the affair. He was then charged with obstructing justice by virtue of perjury in his sworn deposition. Unlike Nixon, Clinton chose not to resign over his obstruction revelations and subsequently became the only elected president in US history to be impeached by Congress.²
Common to both the above cases is the fact that a specific and concrete “event” occurred and was documented. It was these distinct events that precipitated attempts by each man to cover-up and lie about his involvement. In Nixon’s case the event was a break-in and robbery; in Clinton’s, a sexual indiscretion. These events were not “alleged” or “suspected” to have happened, they really did happen. There was hard evidence and witnesses providing proof in each case.
This is what separates both these past cases from the present day accusations against President Trump. Here, there is no documentation of any crime or bad deed that one can point to. There isn’t any actual “event”, improper or otherwise, that can be shown to have actually occurred as in the prior two cases. There are only specious allegations and conjectures, no evidence, no witnesses, no proof. If evidence proving that the Trump team colluded with the Russians to manipulate the election does exist, there has been a tremendous feat of concealment up to this point (particularly amazing for an administration besieged with leakers). This irony must be obvious even to Mr. Trump’s most ardent critics.
Equating the Nixon and Clinton cases with the present day pillorying of President Trump is at best extremely premature, and at worst patently absurd. More likely, it is a continuation of the spurious attempts to legitimize unfounded claims that Russians meddled in the election and colluded with the Trump team. Neither of these claims has ever had any evidence to support them. Even the much- anticipated Senate testimony of James Comey failed to produce any evidence that “Russian meddling and collusion”, upon which the obstruction claim is based, ever happened.
1. It is a commonly held belief that President Nixon was impeached before he resigned. This is not true. Articles of impeachment (3 in total) were recommended by the judiciary committee at the time, but the full House of Representatives never voted on those articles before Nixon’s resignation. Even Hillary Clinton got this bit of history wrong in her recent commencement speech at her alma mater, Wellesley College.
2. President Andrew Johnson was also impeached on a vote by the full House of Representatives. However, Johnson was never actually elected President. He was vice president in 1865 and assumed the Presidency when Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. Despite his impeachment, he remained in office until the end of the term (what would have been Lincoln’s 2nd term) since, like Bill Clinton, he was not removed from office by the Senate. Thus, Bill Clinton has the historical distinction of being the only elected president of our country to have been impeached.
One Response
What is the difference between a Joe Biden speech and a Donald Trump speech? When Biden is speaking you wonder if he’s had a stroke. When Trump is speaking you wonder if you’ve had a stroke.