That of course if Woodward and Bernstein weren’t in the hunt for their Pulitzer Prize. (Source)
At the time it was considered good honest journalism, getting a story while not waiting for fake news to come rolling across the wire for them to elaborate.
I have no problems with Woodward and Bernstein.
Richard Nixon was, of course, paranoid or he would not have signed off on the burglary at The Watergate Hotel.
He resigned to save the country from going through the trauma and side show later inflicted upon America by the faux impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton.
Clinton was found guilty in the House of Representatives but not guilty by the United States Senate controlled by the Democrats.
THE NY POST
By Monica Crowley
Foreign Policy Advisor for President Nixon 1990-94
Some have been positive and striking: The scrappy Republican fighter who outmaneuvers all competitors with a savvy appeal to the forgotten “great silent majority,” including disaffected Democrats, thereby creating a new popular movement.
The political self-made man who bypasses the elites, enraging them.
The iconoclast with a vision that matched the moment.
Other common threads have been less flattering: The man sensitive to attacks, real and perceived.
The burgeoning investigations. A high-profile firing.
The appointment of a special counsel.
Top aides in the crosshairs. A braying media. A suggestion of White House tapes. Impeachment chatter.
Of course, Nixon and Trump are different men in different eras and circumstances, and any historical analogy only goes so far.
The current Russia investigation is not Watergate. Watergate had provable crimes, while thus far, there has been no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing by Trump or his team.
But Nixon’s experience should serve as a cautionary tale for his successor.
Nixon’s enemies were legion, as are Trump’s, and for largely the same reason.
Nixon promised to realign the existing order by changing the way theforeign and domestic policy was conceived and executed. Four decades later, Trump promised to smash an irretrievably corrupt system and replace it with an America First populism.
See the entire article below.
Because both men posed mortal threats to the entrenched power and influence of the establishment and media, they were regarded with sneering disgust and considered unworthy of the job — and the respect that went with it. If either man were allowed to succeed, the swamp’s corrupt gravy train would come to a screeching halt. The same long knives that were out for Nixon are now out for Trump.
Unlike Nixon, however, Trump never before held high office, so he’s making some rookie mistakes that are playing right into the hands of those enemies. And these foes are not mere detractors but organized, well-funded forces openly committed to the destruction of his presidency. He may, therefore, benefit from Nixon’s hard-earned wisdom.
A White House dodge-and-weave strategy — particularly when there’s nothing to hide — only encourages more probing. And still, presidents in trouble can’t help it. As Nixon once told me as he was watching the early Clinton scandals unfold, “Why did I go through the damn fire if nobody is ever going to learn from my experience?”
Assuming there were no violations, Trump should calmly restate the truth, let surrogates fight the fevered fantasies of his enemies, steer clear of ongoing investigations, contain leaks and focus on his agenda.
If wrongdoing becomes evident, the lessons are clear: Tell the truth quickly, explain the circumstances, fire people if necessary, take meaningful responsibility. When a president hesitates, even when the media hypes a “scandal” based solely on suspicion, it can create a perception of guilt. And that becomes a feedback loop that rarely ends well.
“I always knew that there was a double standard,” Nixon once said to me. “I just didn’t realize that when it came to me, there’d be a triple standard.” Later, he said, “I should have known that since so many hated me, I couldn’t even sneeze as president without someone ordering an investigation.”
His point was that he should have recognized that, given the grave threat he posed to the establishment and media, he should have been hyper-vigilant and hyper-ethical, leaving no openings anywhere for anyone to leverage against him.
Several years after his resignation, Nixon gave a series of interviews to David Frost, during which he made a profound admission: “I brought myself down. I gave them the sword, and they stuck it in, and they twisted it with relish. And I guess if I’d been in their position, I’d have done the same thing,” he said.
He later added, “I made so many bad judgments. The worst ones: mistakes of the heart rather than the head . . . But let me say, the man in that top job has got to have a heart, but his head must always rule his heart.”
Trump can enjoy a successful presidency if he heeds the warnings of a former “man in that top job” who learned the hard way the brutal ending in store when you undercut your own presidency — and give your enemies the sword.
Monica Crowley served as foreign-policy assistant to Richard Nixon from 1990 to 1994.