Reply #152: Nixon Was Responding To Criminal Charges...

[KharmaTrain]

Obstruction of Justice, Tax evasion...he had been proven to be culpable as an unindicted co-conspirator. That criminal indictment was the underpinning of his impeachment. He wasn't nailed on abuse of power, but on obstruction...a criminal offense rather than a political one. Clinton's was based on Starr's "report"...again, a "criminal" referral so that those articles also were based on criminal (perjury) charges rather than political ones.

Conyers has addressed this matter in the past...the difference between impeaching on criminal grounds...on grounds based on facts and evidence and a more narrow focus vs. a political one that has both a broad definition of "abuse" (and surely a massive constitutional and court challenge) as well as intent. The criminal referal also removes a lot of the partisan games...especially, as in Nixon's case, it was a grand jury where the charges originated...THAT's what got Nixon in trouble.

As one who remembers Watergate well too well...impeachment hearings came almost toward the end of the "process"...after several investigations as well as testimony that backed up the criminal charges. Even then, there were goons like Trent Lott who felt that obstructing justice wasn't a high crime, yet lying about getting a hummer was. Rodino knew he had the numbers on his side starting the Judiciary hearings (it never got to a full floor vote).

Nixon's greatest mistake was his vanity and putting in that taping system. Imagine if we had boooshie on tape saying to stonewall an investigation. Conyers didn't...just political, not a criminal case and what he considered wouldn't succede...meaning a conviction.

Again...we saw over and over again, booooosh would obstruct to the bitter end. No subpoena, no court, short of a SCOTUS ruling would matter to him. Fielding...who worked for Nixon was brought in purposely to run the clock out and earned his money.

Cheers...