Posted on 11/01/2016 2:40:53 AM PDT by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
It may come as a surprise that one of this country’s greatest experts on Richard M. Nixon’s many crimes is, in fact, Hillary Clinton. In 1974 she was, by many accounts, among the brightest members of the staff of the House Judiciary Committee that investigated Nixon and prepared the articles of impeachment. In this bizarre election year, it must be painful to her that she should find herself at the center of a scandal described by her hyperbolic political opponent, Donald J. Trump, as “worse than Watergate.”
But while “Emailgate” is no Watergate, there are some noteworthy echoes.
For one, the controversial decision by the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to inform Congress about new evidence in the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email server makes sense only if you think of what Watergate meant for the bureau. Its reputation was badly hurt by the behavior of L. Patrick Gray, its acting director at the time, and the revelations of its Hoover-era misdeeds that followed. Subsequent directors like William H. Webster, Robert S. Mueller III and now Mr. Comey have all appeared to understand that the country needs a trusted, nonpartisan F.B.I.
The fact that emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer might be relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private email server had to be reported to an interested congressional investigative committee. If Mr. Comey had sat on the information — with part of the country already voting in the presidential election — he would have not only made the F.B.I. more of a target for partisan fury, but also made himself a target for future House investigations, since he had testified under oath that the F.B.I. had completed its Clinton email investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Hillary Clinton is presented as a “secretive, paranoid politician” while comparing her with former President Richard Nixon.
“At least Nixon was right about one thing,” the narrator says before showing footage of Nixon. “People have got to know whether their president is a crook.”
The seriousness and potential consequences of 'Emailgate" to our national security far outweigh any possible consequences of Watergate in severity.
And THAT is “THE ART OF THE DEAL!”
No mention that PIAPS was kicked off the Watergate committee due to unethical behavior.
NYT “paper of record?” HAH!
See the Hillary Clinton has a Richard Nixon problem ad:
http://freebeacon.com/politics/american-crossroads-clinton-nixon/
And she got dismissed because of lying and pushing unconstitutional measures.
The fact that the New York Times has to explain “Why Clinton’s Emails Matter” to it’s readership shows you just how clueless they are.
Hey Timmy....she was FIRED from the Watergate Committee because she was trying to keep Nixon from being able to DEFEND himself!! Even the Democrat that fired her said she was a LIAR!!
Actually, the more I read it, the more it pissed me off. Watergate is ONLY SIGNIFICANT in the sense that it was a valuable lesson to corrupt people Obama, both Clintons, and all their cabal subsector ghouls. It taught them how a simple break in could steamroll into a crisis. AND! The main takeaway from it was NEVER GET CAUGHT. Cover your trails - emails are far worse than recordings (that 18 minutes). Can you imagine the megaton equivalent these emails represent so far in excess of that 18 minutes and the cover up?
He talks about the ‘horrible’ reputation of the FBI of some collusion with the administration. My opinion of the FBI then was far better than it is now, that’s for damned sure. No Ruby Ridge, no Waco, no BLM controversy, no FBI/ATF criminality (IMO). Much simpler.
So today we have an FBI that won’t do its job (nothing official is being done wrt indictment and prosecution - everything is kept “Hillary-free” and the entire executive branch is doing nothing but protecting her).
I wouldn’t give you a plugged nickel for the FBI right now. Not until they do their job or resign, walk out and go tell the truth - everywhere they can. I haven’t seen that yet.
Frankly, I don’t wanna hear Watergate any more. I want to hear a boatload of FBI agents, NYPD officials, DoJ personnel stand up on TV en masse or individually and TELL THE DAMN TRUTH, and I don’t need the NYT to tell me the significance of Watergate, blah, blah, blah.
The libs are right, Emailgate is no Watergate. Watergate was just a third-rate burglary. Emailgate not only endangered national security and put our agents’ lives at risk all over the world, it also involves a conspiracy to destroy evidence and obstruct justice to prevent the exposure of a massive influence-peddling scheme at the highest levels of government, foreign infiltration of US policy, and an international charity fraud that ripped off desperate poor people from Haiti to Colombia. Watergate was a tempest in a teapot dome compared to the massive manure pile of lies and corruption the Clintons piled up.
A zebra doesn’t change its stripes. Dishonest Hillary has not changed since getting kicked off the Watergate committee.
The article states that if Hillary had used the government server, State Department archivists would have reviewed all of her email and then returned or destroyed the mail that was not considered official.
Instead, Hillary decided to keep all of her email and return only what she deemed “official.” Clinton’s private server risked and caused the inadvertent release of classified information. So the NYT article claims Hillary is guilty of ‘arrogance.’
Actually it’s much more than just arrogance. Hillary doesn’t give a damn about government classified information. Her private server allowed a deliberate way to redistribute classified information for which she now feigns innocence.
We know that her private server hid the Clinton family foundation business and hid the way CGI had been inter lapped with official State department business.
Really? She was booted off the staff by the democrats because of ethical violations. I couldn't get past this sentence.
The irony of it all is that Watergate began as Nixon’s concern( some cynics would say paranoia) of the NYTs publishing of stolen top secret Pentagon documents which they received from mole Daniel Ellsberg. Remember these d9ocuents concerned the LBJ Administration, not his.
In Hillary’s case it is about her venal and selfish disregard for classified documents and federal law in order to hide her official conduct.
Yes, Nixon taped WH conversations in order to preserve them for the historical record, but when they were subpoenaed by Congress he didn’t destroy them. He turned them over; first the transcripts ( expletives deleted) , and later the tapes themselves which contained the so-called “smoking-gun” which sealed his fate.
Hillary’s illegal server was set up for reasons exactly the opposite. .to hide her official communications from Congressional oversight and the public record.
Nixon, in retrospect, while no saint, was far more decent a human being than either of the Clintons.
Watergate did not put national security at risk. Hillary did exactly that when she took classified information and put it on an unsecured server.
Also, the reason it's not a bigger scandal is because of the press. Unlike Watergate, the press is not interested in finding the truth. They only cover the e-mail scandal so that they can launch attacks on Hillary's accusers.
Putting aside the mountain of past Clinton scandals, which is not rational since it speaks to their intent and lack of action, I know ....
Just the presence of the private server in Hillary’s home should have warranted a swift investigation and her immediate dismissal followed by prosecution.
The Clintons live in an alternative world where exists a separate code of laws.
Bingo.
Watergate never jeapordized national security.
As scandals go, it was a nothingburger. The Clintons raised the bar on scandals. We didn’t know what a scandal was until they came along.
I am sick to death of the comparison between Hillary’s emails and Watergate in hopes of minimizing the seriousness of Hillary’s crimes.
What’s really ironic is Hillary was fired from the watergate investigation team for lying and her actions now make Nixon look like a piker.
That is correct. Watergate did not involve playing free and loose with National Security like Emailgate has. So quit your spin lackey.
She wasn’t really “fired” as the committee’s business was completed and everybody, including Hillary was released. However, she was singled out by her boss, a Democrat, for her totally unethical behavior and he refused to give her a letter of recommendation.
For being one of the brightest stars in the firmament for over 40 years, she’s gotta be one of the stupidest politicians whose breath still shows up on a mirror.
NYTimes fails again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.