By Sara
I don't know how many have noticed it, but it hit me in the face with Russert's commentary on Ford and Watergate. This business of the US being in some sort of horrible contortion when Gerald Ford assumed the office is so profoundly a-historical it needs comment. Well more than comment, but then I have no cannon.
Russert and Kin are depending on Americans not having actually read the history of Watergate. Now, I admit, I have 3 yards of books on the subject, some of them rather minor publications, and I've downloaded stuff since then. And once I start a collection on a subject, I tend to add to it. But when Russert and his friends discount Watergate as they have done in commentary in the last couple of days, and instead talk about "The Long National Nightmare" or however they want to obscure the fact that Americans were pissed to hell and damn mad -- yea it is time to tell Russert what he needs to reflect.
The specifics are:
How did Nixon explain the resignation of Mitchell, his Attorney General and campaign manager in June of 1972? Did he tell the truth as to why? What about his jury conviction for lying? Do you discount the Watergate Jury of early 1975?
Questions like that need to be put front and center in the next couple of days, otherwise we are going to lose the issue.
Russert was about making the fact that the House Judiciary Committee on a bi- partisian basis had voted out articles of impeachment against Nixon -- and much of the country was saying, Hey yea, the Constutition works -- and for that he is going to sub the idea that the world was in a terrible state of (Chasas),catastrophy. It was not. The House has spent 6 months listening to the evidence, and it voted out articles. The full House was about to debate. Nixon had been ordered to turn over his tapes. Several were deamed "Smoking Gun Tapes" but that was debatable. After Goldwater, Hugh Scott and John Rhodes visited with Nixon and told him how hopeless things were, Nixon short changed the whole process by resigning, contending he had lost his political support. One point of the resignation was to limit debate on the particulars. And there were many many particulars.
In the political science scope of things, I am glad that Ford moved Nixon off stage, and I suspect the only way to do that was with a Pardon, but I think he was selling cheap, and should have demanded a higher price. If confession is good for the soul, Ford ought have laid on the heavy demands. But he enabled Nixon's and Kissinger's later lies, and for that he is responsible. We see the consequences when the Ford personnel (Such as Rumsfeld and Cheney and the rest of them) can now claim an odd sort of virginity.
We need to make certain this target does not get unattacked.