"They apparently believe the President is above the Constitution and has the autocratic power to suspend its provisions"

[bigtree]

...what a putz.


Senator Sam Ervin Explains the Meaning and Consequences of Watergate (1974)

Why Was Watergate?

Unlike the men who were responsible for Teapot Dome, the Presidential aides who perpetrated Watergate were not seduced by the love of money, which is sometimes thought to be the root of all evil. On the contrary, they were instigated by a lust for political power, which is at least as corrupting as political power itself. . . .

They knew that the power they enjoyed would be lost and the policies to which they adhered would be frustrated if the President should be defeated. As a consequence of these things, they believed the President's reelection to be a most worthy objective, and succumbed to an age-old temptation. They resorted to evil means to promote what they conceived to be a good end.

Their lust for political power blinded them to ethical considerations and legal requirements; to Aristotle's aphorism that the good of man must be the end of politics; and to Grover Cleveland's conviction that a public office is a public trust.

They had forgotten, if they ever knew, that the Constitution is designed to be a law for rulers and people alike at all times and under all circumstances; and that no doctrine involving more pernicious consequences to the commonweal has ever been invented by the wit of man than the notion that any of its provisions can be suspended by the President for any reason whatsoever.

On the contrary, they apparently believed that the President is above the Constitution, and has the autocratic power to suspend its provisions if he decides in his own unreviewable judgment that his action in so doing promotes his own political interests or the welfare of the Nation. . . .


Antidote for Future Watergates

Is there an antidote which will prevent future Watergates?

If so, what is it? . . . Candor compels the confession . . . . that law alone will not suffice to prevent future Watergates. . . . Law is not self-executing. Unfortunately, at times its execution rests in the hands of those who are faithless to it.

And even when its enforcement is committed to those who revere it, law merely deters some human beings from offending, and punishes other human beings for offending. It does not make men good. This task can be performed only by ethics or religion or morality. . . .

When all is said, the only sure antidote for future Watergates is understanding of fundamental principles and intellectual and moral integrity in the men and women who achieve or are entrusted with governmental political power.

[From Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, Final Report, 93rd Cong., 2d sess., 1974, 1097–103]

[Eko]

1. WTF? This is real. He really did that.

Past time for impeachment.

[bigtree]

3. 25th amendment

...lock his sick ass up!

[eppur_se_muova]

2. "If the President does it, it's not illegal" ... Richard Nixon, who was forced to resign before he could be impeached.

IIRC he said this in an interview w/David Frost, after he had left the WH, and been pardoned. So there was no official response to his unofficial claim. But the fact that he had been facing imminent impeachment is exactly the proof that what he said was false !

Turnip, of course, knows none of this, because he is appallingly ignorant of history even more then he is appallingly ignorant of economics, or business ethics, or human decency. So the costly lesson of Watergate is wasted on him, and the people around him only learned from the experience to agree with Nixon when he said "I should have burned the tapes".