History rarely repeats itself, but its echoes never go away. - Tariq Ali.
President Gerald Ford’s pardon that prevented the indictment and prosecution of Richard Nixon for his White House transgressions in the Watergate Affair and the break-in of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office among others, left us with a legacy that we are still dealing with today. How things might be different if the trial of Richard Nixon had been on the evening news every night for months on end.
Details about the inner workings of the Nixon administration would have been front and center. Every member of the inner circle would have come under close scrutiny. Yes, many of the people involved in the Watergate break-in and subsequent coverup were convicted and served time in Federal detainment, but imagine the level of detail the prosecution would have brought to bear if it was a President on trial. The detail of the January 6 committee’s examination of Trump’s transgressions would pale in comparison to the case brought forth by the DOJ in a courtroom where criminal charges against a President were being brought. The obvious first thought is a conviction would have served as a deterrent towards such behavior in a future President. I myself wonder if Trump would have run, but for “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal" lesson handed down by Nixon. Was that the final enticement that factored into his decision to run?
There is perhaps an even more longer lasting effect it would have had, if the case against Nixon had been brought before a judge and jury. In cases where motive is an issue, establishing the “state of mind” of the accused is examined in great depth by both the prosecution and defense, with many witnesses called to attest to conversations and correspondence. As a result many hidden figures of Nixon’s inner circle would have spent time in the cold harsh light of the witness box. What more might we have learned about the “thought leaders” in Nixon’s inner circle? Would the administration, and more importantly, everyone in it, have been seen as unfit for public service? Say someone like Roger Ailes? Would the architect of the racist "Southern Strategy” have been exposed and/or tainted in such a way that his ascent in the world of television news to the creation of Fox News would not have happened at all? What would the world look like without the current iteration of Fox News?
Even for the minor characters that escaped serious charges during their time in the Nixon Administration, I am left to wonder if a trial and conviction of Richard Nixon would have taught someone like Roger Stone that politics by any means necessary only lands your idol in a cell rather than on a pedestal. Is it possible we would have been spared not only Stone’s antics, but Paul Manafort’s as well? Would their lobbying firm have acted differently if Nixon had gone to prison? Would they have formed a business at all? After all, their highest profile political actions were for a man now in prison. Hardly a marketing “plus.”
I was beginning to think my Nixon/Trump “thing” was a bit overwrought, but then I stumbled across something in Wikipedia as I was brushing out the cobwebs from my Watergate memory:
According to Seymour Hersh, writing in The New Yorker, Nixon White House tapes show that after presidential candidate George Wallace was shot on May 15, 1972, Nixon and Colson agreed to send Hunt to the Milwaukee home of the gunman, Arthur Bremer, to place McGovern presidential campaign material there. The intention was to link Bremer with the Democrats. Hersh writes that, in a taped conversation, "Nixon is energized and excited by what seems to be the ultimate political dirty trick: the FBI and the Milwaukee police will be convinced, and will tell the world, that the attempted assassination of Wallace had its roots in left-wing Democratic politics." Hunt did not make the trip, however, because the FBI had moved too quickly to seal Bremer's apartment and place it under police guard.
However, a 2007 analysis of the Nixon tapes by the History News Network did not turn up any evidence of the clandestine operation described by Hersh. While the tapes did show that Nixon had instructed presidential aide Charles W. Colton to anonymously spread the false rumor that there was "unmistakable evidence" that Bremer had been a "a supporter of McGovern and Kennedy", there was no apparent trace of Nixon tasking subordinates with entering Bremer's apartment to plant Democratic campaign materials.
Tell me that doesn’t read as if it couldn’t have been written yesterday about the Trump administration.
The justice system exists not just to punish past behavior or act as a deterrent to future behavior. It also shapes the decision-making process in myriad ways for many individuals by making unknown actions and unknown individuals known to all. Court cases exist also in part to help illustrate and make clear societal boundaries of behavior, so that even an amoral individual such as Roger Stone can make an accurate assessment of risk. The pardon of Nixon proved that the people in the dark can stay hidden (Ailes), and that unethical and illegal efforts to elevate your idol will never result in your idol’s fall below the station at which he began (Stone).
I understand the reluctance on the part of the DOJ to indict a President, even a former one. It seems unnatural both emotionally and culturally to have a President whose actions are criminal. Emotionally, because how did the electorate misjudge the character of the man so badly? Culturally… especially in terms of our legal cultural... because there is no precedent, no history of possible legal or socio-political outcomes by which to judge the wisdom of choosing to indict a president. How are we to proceed? What standards do we apply to the case at hand? More the shame for Gerald Ford, because I feel that had Nixon been indicted and tried, then precedent would exist and we would have a history to inform us as how to proceed. We would have a roadmap to follow and Donald Trump would be awaiting trial as I write. And so it is imperative the the DOJ set the precedent that Nixon’s belief "...when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” has no meaning in the courtroom, nor will it protect a former, current or future president from being held accountable to our laws. The precedent must be set to deter further erosion of the office of the President of the United States.
The indictment of Donald J. Trump is right, proper, and most importantly, necessary.
