Replies

Nixon resigned because he KNEW there was enough evidence to convict him. By resigning when he did, he retained his pension and other perks. A delegation of REPUBLICAN Congressmen went to the WH and advised him to resign.

To his credit, his books and behavior in later years restored some measure of respect.

No evidence could convict him. He could only be convicted after impeachment and trial in the Senate. Then, there were enough RINOS to convict him, and he was told as much. The 'media' did not have a case to convict after his term was up.

There was not enough evidence to convict him either way. With Senators, it's politics first, evidence be damned. With the 'NYT' and 'Franken' types', samething. They have the power to ruin anyone, and do. Good example is Dan Quayle.

They ruined Senator McCarthy (Wis)legacy as pointed out by Ann Coulter in her book. Again there, the Senators, played to politics and the power of the democratic media. Yet, there are many to this day that believe the thrash said about him.

Right now they are working over Bush, Mel Gibson, Ascroft etc. After all, it's been said politics is a blood sport. If we're not on our toes, they'll succeed.

Here's all the proof anyone needs:

On Aug. 5, Nixon made public the transcripts of three recorded conversations that were among those to be given to Jaworski. At the same time he admitted that he had been aware of the Watergate coverup shortly after the break-in occurred and that he had tried to halt the Federal Bureau of Investigation's inquiry into the break-in. Several days later (Aug. 9) Nixon resigned and was succeeded by Gerald R. Ford.