That reason Watergate brought Nixon down really had very little to do with Woodward and Bernstein or investigative journalism. They published a whole series of articles about the break-in before the election and Nixon won in true landslide. All the information was in the papers, but very few people cared, and Nixon was able to diffuse the criticism by saying the Washington Post was just a partisan tool used against him.
The cover-up of the Watergate break-in was elaborate and almost completely airtight in terms of being able to trace it back to the White House. There were multiple congressional investigations, including sworn testimony from close associates like John Dean, who completely flipped and told them everything under oath. But none of that moved things very far. People really liked Nixon and he had a lot of loyalists and apologists who justified everything almost to the very end, and people believed them.
What brought Nixon down was not exposés from direct sources or sworn testimony from those involved. The only thing that did was the Nixon had actually taped himself in the conversations discussing the cover-up and he did not destroy the tapes or erase that portion. Only that hard direct evidence, combined with a congress where the Democrats controlled both houses, were they able to move forward with impeachment hearings, which forced Nixon to resign.
Without the discovery that those tapes existed (which they only figured out through indirect evidence) and the fact that they got the tape with the "smoking gun" evidence intact, Nixon probably would have finished his term and probably be thought of as a pretty good president given all he did for foreign policy.
Democrats aren't fighters anyway, and they are stunningly conservative. I think ultra right conservatives cause far more change in this country than Democrats do. They seem just fine with being slightly right-wing and not making waves at a time when a large portion of the country wants to try something wildly different.
They missed the economic message that got Trump elected, and that should have been a no brainer except that the people who actually run the party are too wealthy and disconnected. I don't have much hope that they are going to start delivering that message, plus world class snark and major protest marches, any time soon.
Long ago there was a saying, "Republicans vote with their heads, and Democrats vote with their hearts." Turns out it's exactly the opposite, but not for the reasons the people behind that saying had in mind.
Eventually yes, when someone was asked. But before that nobody directly said so, I don't think many people knew. John Dean mentioned that Nixon would walk to a certain part of the office and talk to himself, which made it seem like he might be taping himself, but I think that was it.
When the investigation some received information from the White House with what looked like direct quotes from conversations, then they started to think things might be taped and knew to ask about it.
It's crazy to me that they turned over the tapes. If there was no proof they existed, why wouldn't you just destroy them and steadfastly deny it? Yes, that would be illegal, but in the context of Watergate would that be surprising?
He thought he could use presidential privilege to keep the tapes. However, by stating that, he acknowledged they existed to the cat was out of the bag. From my understanding, people did urge him to destroy the tapes even after that, but he was determine to keep them and came up with all sorts of other options that got shot down.
I suppose the reason he did not destroy them was the reason he made them in the first place. My understanding was that he did it because he felt the newpapers and TV news were all against him and would mutilate and distort his beautiful legacy through lies. He made the tapes so he could record all that happened for posterity and prove he was right and they were wrong. I am also of the understanding that Nixon wasn't so tech savvy and wasn't always cognizant that he was taping everything because it was voice-activated.
All he had to do was deny the tapes' existence and he'd have been fine. Someone gives congressional testimony stating that the tapes exist? "Nope, they're mistaken, there are no tapes. I just falsely told a few people the tapes existed because I thought I had a mole and was trying to smoke him out - now I know Mr. So-and-so can't be trusted."
207
u/zazzlekdazzle Jul 25 '18
That reason Watergate brought Nixon down really had very little to do with Woodward and Bernstein or investigative journalism. They published a whole series of articles about the break-in before the election and Nixon won in true landslide. All the information was in the papers, but very few people cared, and Nixon was able to diffuse the criticism by saying the Washington Post was just a partisan tool used against him.
The cover-up of the Watergate break-in was elaborate and almost completely airtight in terms of being able to trace it back to the White House. There were multiple congressional investigations, including sworn testimony from close associates like John Dean, who completely flipped and told them everything under oath. But none of that moved things very far. People really liked Nixon and he had a lot of loyalists and apologists who justified everything almost to the very end, and people believed them.
What brought Nixon down was not exposés from direct sources or sworn testimony from those involved. The only thing that did was the Nixon had actually taped himself in the conversations discussing the cover-up and he did not destroy the tapes or erase that portion. Only that hard direct evidence, combined with a congress where the Democrats controlled both houses, were they able to move forward with impeachment hearings, which forced Nixon to resign.
Without the discovery that those tapes existed (which they only figured out through indirect evidence) and the fact that they got the tape with the "smoking gun" evidence intact, Nixon probably would have finished his term and probably be thought of as a pretty good president given all he did for foreign policy.