[ruszja]

Nixon wasn’t any worse than a number of others who didn’t get caught.

[eyoab2011_711]

If you look at some of his accomplishments (getting out of Viet Nam, opening relations with China, EPA) Nixon could have been considered a decent Pres (of course paranoia and delusions kind of ruined him .
-I would argue that Nixon set the stage for the wiretapping and behavior of the CIA and suspect this is not “new” to Obama.
-Congress enacted the War Powers Act in response to Nixon but has since refused to demand its enforcement
-IRS is a canard where many groups are not following the law; Congress refuses to clarify the law; and the real scandal is that many ineligible groups are getting tax exempt status.  Like complaining that the police were targetting criminals for increased scrutiny

[btomba_77]

Nixon tried to use the CIA to impede the Watergate investigation. An outrage. The CIA now has been found to spy on senators investigating them. Obama does say it is outrageous, but in his “outrage” nothing happens. All for show IMHO.  
 

 
The author doesn’t see the [b]huge[/b] difference in the fact that with Nixon it originated from the White House?  
 
Should Obama remove Brennan and bring up Clapper for perjury? Yes.              
 
Does linking the two events, implying impeachment for Obama, make any sense? No.  
 
______
 

Nixon talked about using the IRS to harass opponents. The press was all over him. Now, the IRS has clearly gone after the opponents of the administration, Obama calls it insignificant. Someone is going after the perp, but the press is (except for Fox) somnolent.  

 
Again.  In Nixon it came out of the White House.   
 
These are weak false equivalencies. 
 
 
____
 

Nixon’s men wiretapped political opponents. They went to jail. The CIA has wiretapped virtually the entire nation. Reaction??  

 
Again, false equivalency.    If Obama was directing the NSA to target political opponents [i]that [/i] would be impeachable.
 
Do I like the marked expansion of the security under Bush and Obama since 9/11? No.
 
Does it mean Obama is abusing political power? No.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Look- I understand the “click-bait” temptation of all these “Obama is Nixon” stories with the anniversary of impeachment now coming out of the right wing news.      
 
There are a lot of problems with the Obama administration.   There is no evidence that Obama himself is acting in a  Nixonian manner, that is , using the power of the White House to direct the government to act against his political opponents.
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

Fox News. Now there is some intelligent thoughts about anything. Sans intelligence.
 
Prefer Obama, hands down, no comparison.
 
I thought Obama was Bush no so long ago. The Right needs to stay with one story. But then their whole purpose is to throw a lot of vomit on the wall & watch which mess sticks in some little minds through repetition only.
 
Also the CIA and NSA was investigating everyone in the Age of Dubbya as per Republicans’  paranoia about security. Go back & read the posts in AM and everywhere else. Obama unfortunately continues the practice.
 
Is there a point to this post? Sardonicus, really, you believe a comparison? And you believe Nixon comes out ahead? It’s a joke article but it’s missing a punch line.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Here Sadonicus. And fw, some research on Nixon. Maybe neither of you were around or too young to know Nixon when he was President & his earlier career. Or maybe you’re both just mistaken.
 
The Nixon Defense: What He Knew and When He Knew ItHardcover  July 29, 2014
by [link=http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1?ie=UTF8&field-author=John+W.+Dean&search-alias=books&text=John+W.+Dean&sort=relevancerank]John W. Dean[/link] (Author)

The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of ReaganHardcover  August 5, 2014
by [link=http://www.amazon.com/Rick-Perlstein/e/B001I9OL9S/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1]Rick Perlstein[/link]   (Author)

 
 

[odayjassim1978_476]

Obama..my Fav…Nixon was dangerous

[odayjassim1978_476]

the better question is who is the most hated man in America ?  Bibi versus Stirling vs Putin versus Nixon

[odayjassim1978_476]

and his talks with Kissinger about Israel

Quote from Frumious

Here Sadonicus. And fw, some research on Nixon. Maybe neither of you were around or too young to know Nixon when he was President & his earlier career. Or maybe you’re both just mistaken.

The Nixon Defense: What He Knew and When He Knew ItHardcover  July 29, 2014
by [link=http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1?ie=UTF8&field-author=John+W.+Dean&search-alias=books&text=John+W.+Dean&sort=relevancerank]John W. Dean[/link] (Author)

The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of ReaganHardcover  August 5, 2014
by [link=http://www.amazon.com/Rick-Perlstein/e/B001I9OL9S/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1]Rick Perlstein[/link]   (Author)

[kayla.meyer_144]

[link=http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/28/books/in-the-nixon-defense-john-w-dean-returns-to-watergate.html]http://www.nytimes.com/20…urns-to-watergate.html[/link]
 

Present troubles go far to explain Mr. Obamas low standing, but historical amnesia, especially among people over 50 who have direct memories of Nixons resignation 40 years ago next month, seems particularly surprising. Nothing has contributed more to current American cynicism about politics and politicians than Watergate or Nixons betrayal of the public trust that cost him the presidency. Tapes revealing his appalling vulgarity in response to anyone he considered an enemy have permanently tarnished the presidency.
It is well, then, that John W. Dean has written The Nixon Defense: What He Knew and When He Knew It, his third book on the scandal, or more precisely, the cover-up that brought Nixon down. Mr. Deans book will remind people of why Nixon deserves so unflattering a historical reputation, despite the opening to China and détente with the Soviet Union. It should also serve as a renewed cautionary tale about elevating politicians with questionable character to high office.
[b]By contrast, Watergate was an attempt to shape a presidential election by other than constitutional means, violating the most sacred of American institutions going back to the start of the Republic: the elevation of someone to the presidency by popular choice.[/b]
As for Nixons culpability, Mr. Dean quotes a contemporary column by Joseph Kraft in The Washington Post:[b] The president and his campaign manager have set a tone that positively encourages dirty work by low-level operators. Nixon had a special tolerance for using unethical means for partisan purposes and for bending the law for political advantage.[/b]

[b][/b]That alone shows that if anyone is “worse than Nixon,” it is the Republicans who do their best to win elections by other means.
 

[suyanebenevides_151]

dergon,
 
how can you be sure that these problems don’t come “from the White House”?
 
No one speaks and data is destroyed. It’s curious, to say the least.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Which problems. The successful conspiracy to shred the Constitution led by the inept & incompetent “Tyrant Obama” who isn’t even a born American? The same Obama who Boehner wants to shred the Constitution further by abusing his power & help resolve the border crisis unilaterally? By stepping on & over the Congress who can’t & won’t act?

This story is too complicated & contradictory too be real. Which just proves Obama’s guilt one supposes.

[btomba_77]

If we want to talk about Obama, Nixon and executive/legislative tension —
 
 
Al Hunt wrote this nice opinion piece today:
 
[link=http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-10/presidential-overreach-is-in-eye-of-the-beholder]http://www.bloombergview….in-eye-of-the-beholder[/link]
 

[b]
Presidential Overreach Is in Eye of the Beholder[/b][/h1]  
 
As the battle intensifies over how much authority President Barack Obama has to take [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-04/obama-may-find-executive-powers-limited-on-resolving-immigration.html]executive measures [/link]in the face of congressional inaction, James Madison and Richard Nixon provide the frames of reference.
 
Madison, the architect of the U.S. Constitution in the late 18th century, envisioned recurring tension between the executive and legislative branches. Nixon, the first president driven from office by impeachment, demonstrated what abuse of executive power looks like.
 
“There always is tension with the executive when public policy can’t be made in the legislative process,” says Stephen Wayne, a professor of government at Georgetown University and a scholar of the presidency. “Since this often is partisan-based, it’s more evident in times of divided government.”
 
When John F. Kennedy won the presidency, most liberals argued for a strong executive, inspired by James MacGregor Burns’s seminal book, “The Deadlock of Democracy.” When Nixon became president, liberal historian and Kennedy confidant Arthur Schlesinger wrote a book condemning what he called “the imperial presidency”; this was before any of the White House’s illegal acts were revealed.
 
During the George W. Bush administration, there was no more jealous guardian of executive powers and privileges than Vice President Richard Cheney. As conservatives take on Obama today, Cheney largely is silent on this issue.
 
Much of the current legal wrangling goes back to a 1952 Supreme Court decision that found President Harry Truman didn’t have the authority to [link=http://millercenter.org/president/events/04_08]seize U.S. steel mills[/link]. In a concurring opinion, Justice Robert Jackson sought to enumerate the parameters of executive authority. Clearly, the president couldn’t defy an act of Congress but could use executive authority to follow legislative measures. In between, Jackson declared, there was a “zone” of concurrent legislative and executive powers that depended on the particular circumstances.
 
[b]Nixon ultimately posed no problem because his acts violated the law. No president can order the Central Intelligence Agency to interfere with a domestic investigation or use the Internal Revenue Service to go after political enemies or order illegal break-ins. That’s the easy stuff. [/b]
 
It gets harder mainly on national security matters. Did Bush overstep in approving wiretaps without warrants or the use of torture after the Sept. 11 attacks? Likewise, did Obama go too far with drone strikes or using force in Libya without going to Congress?
 

Courts generally prefer these questions to be settled by politicians. When the Democrats took control of the House in 2007, some liberals wanted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bush for his anti-terrorist actions. The new speaker, Nancy Pelosi, categorically refused, which still rankles some left-wingers.
 
 
This summer, Obama is expected to decide whether to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation. He took similar action two years ago for the so-called Dreamers, younger immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally but got an education and have otherwise abided the law. Critics say that would amount to an unconscionable usurpation of executive authority, perhaps even laying the grounds for impeachment.
 
It may or may not be desirable policy or good politics. It wouldn’t, however, defy a mandate from Congress, which has failed to do anything on immigration.
 
 
For all the clamor, the legitimacy of executive actions — whether by Bush or Obama — will be settled in the political arena.
 

 
 
 

[btomba_77]

Quote from Cigar

dergon,

how can you be sure that these problems don’t come “from the White House”?

No one speaks and data is destroyed. It’s curious, to say the least.

 
There is no evidence of political tampering from the White House.     
 

 
If that was not the case ..in the IRS… with CIA/NSA tapping the RNC or something … it would then be “like Nixon”.
 
But there is nothing to suggest that is the case.
 
 

[ruszja]

Quote from dergon

There is no evidence of political tampering from the White House.     

 
How would we ever know ?
 
Under Sarbanes Oxley, companies have to retain their emails in a secure way forever to afford the regulators the ability to levy retroactive fines at the instruction of their political puppet masters. If emails cannot be retrieved, the regulators interpret the content of those emails in the most adverse way possible. Yet we are supposed to believe that the crash of a single hard-drive wiped out the records of a .gov email address. Sure, whatever.
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

There has been talk of the need for the IRS to update its computers for about 20 years now, long before Obama. Somehow it was never a priority. 
 
Of course, now thanks to the GOP & other conspiracy minded citizens we know this was just a forward looking conspiracy by the Puppet Masters of Obama planning from back in the 1990’s. Just like he did the Recession. 

[kayla.meyer_144]

[link=http://fcw.com/articles/1999/03/07/outdated-computers-plague-irs.aspx]http://fcw.com/articles/1…puters-plague-irs.aspx[/link]

The top financial administrator at the Internal Revenue Service told Congress last week that the agency’s financial reporting system cannot reliably track federal tax revenue and tax refunds nor can it prepare other key financial statements.
 
Donna Cunninghame, chief financial officer at the IRS, told the House Subcommittee on Government, Management, Information and Technology that computer systems that date to the 1960s and 1970s continue to plague the IRS’ ability to adequately track the agency’s financial statements, including budgetary resources.
 
Rep. Stephen Horn (R-Calif.), chairman of the subcommittee, said the IRS’ outmoded computer systems have contributed to $17 million in fraudulent refunds, a misplaced government vehicle and misplaced government computer equipment.
 
Because of the disbursement of fraudulent refunds, the IRS estimates that of the $222 billion taxpayers owe the federal government in unpaid tax assessments, $119 billion, or 54 percent, is written off as bad debt. Horn said he hopes to see a better audit next year from the IRS.
 
“These are serious problems, many of which have plagued the Internal Revenue Service for years,” Horn said. “We would hope that the agency’s new leadership is taking strong action to remedy the situation.”

 
Unless the IRS system was updated since with a boatload of funding from Congress.
 

[btomba_77]

I never bought the “Obama is Nixon” cr*p above last year.
 
 
But today for the first time I heard “Hillary is like Nixon”…. and I thought about it a bit … and nodded….. and thought “could be”…. .we’ll have to wait and see.

[odayjassim1978_476]

There is a reason why Trump has used the silent majority/ clashes with media and people who disagree/ we want deal/reporter being hustled out the door

Quote from dergon

I never bought the “Obama is Nixon” cr*p above last year.

But today for the first time I heard “Hillary is like Nixon”…. and I thought about it a bit … and nodded….. and though “could be”…. .we’ll have to wait and see.

[odayjassim1978_476]

heh Trump Patreaus supports the Iran deal

[Unknown Member]

If Obama was a Republican, he would have been impeached a long time ago, and would be be sporting an orange jumpsuit by now.

One of these days, really soon, we are going to find out the extent of the Obama/Holder/Lerner axis of corruption. I can’t wait to see what is on those e-mail backup servers.

[kayla.meyer_144]

You mean if the Republicans could have found or manufactured something on Obama he would have been impeached.
 
Fact is Reagan was not impeached though he could have been for Iran-Contra, a lot more of a crime than lying about having an affair.

[kayla.meyer_144]

You mean if the Republicans could have found or manufactured something on Obama he would have been impeached.
 
Fact is Reagan was not impeached though he could have been for Iran-Contra, a lot more of a crime than lying about having an affair.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Quote from dergon

I never bought the “Obama is Nixon” cr*p above last year.

But today for the first time I heard “Hillary is like Nixon”…. and I thought about it a bit … and nodded….. and though “could be”…. .we’ll have to wait and see.

As I said before, Hillary is like Nixon in not being telegenic, Kennedy ran rings around Nixon because he understood the new media. Hillary appears brittle and false and not relaxed to the camera. Bill needs to coach her.
 
And then there’s Trump who revels being in front of the camera, confidently selling the snake oil so many Americans crave. You know it’s snake oil – and much worse – but you can’t stop listening.
 
So someone tell me what is better, the confident pitchman selling what you know to be snake oil or Hillary? 
 

[julie.young_645]

Which is worse, the snake oil or the snake? I’ll take the oil.
 
Again and again, you boys fail to understand why Trump has such traction. People are TIRED of the arrogant, entitled, low-class, viscious corruption personified by the Clintons. You’ve heard Bill is livid at Biden for considering a presidential run…of course! No one DARE get in the way of the Clintons! Gaffin’ Joe better double his Secret Service detail, lest there be an attempt to Vince Foster’ize him.
 
Need I remind you of the hundreds of lies coming out of Washington under the Liar in Chief? The President himself has a lot of trouble with the truth. Biden rarely sticks his foot in his mouth; it only happens when he opens it. Lois Lerner. Eric Holder. Harry Reid. Heck, I’ll even add Boehner and McConnell to the list of those who have difficulties following through on promises.
 
And lets not forget the scourge of Political Correctness. There is so much truth one is not allowed to say out loud. But Trump says it and then thumbs his nose at the girly-men who take to the vapors when they hear the contraband speech. People may not agree with everything Trump says, but with the moral deterioration of our leadership, the rise of someone like him was inevitable. 
 
We will see how Trump performs in the months to come. I think he has to start crafting and perfecting his policies and his approach to issues. The bombast might propel him into the White House, but he needs to work on what he might actually accomplish if he gets there.

[suyanebenevides_151]

I said it first, and I’ll say it again: Trump is the next president.
 
All the division politics people, the black vote this and the latino vote that — are dead wrong. Trump is going to get Democrats to vote for him.
 
Enjoy the ride. I’m going to.

[odayjassim1978_476]

chuckle…lol.  but what if Trump wins the first 3 primaries and a couple of southern states..it goes down to the wire between him and Bush at the convention…oh that moment will be dynamite.  
 

Quote from Cigar

I said it first, and I’ll say it again: Trump is the next president.

All the division politics people, the black vote this and the latino vote that — are dead wrong. Trump is going to get Democrats to vote for him.

Enjoy the ride. I’m going to.

[btomba_77]

[link=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/15/books/review/watergate-garrett-m-graff.html]https://www.nytimes.com/2…e-garrett-m-graff.html[/link]

Garrett Graff has a new book on Watergate. Was just listening to an interview with him and he laid out a highly credible argument that Nixon committed treason against the United States in the Chennault Affair in ’68 … and [i]that[/i] is the original sin of the Watergate era.

(also says the 18 1/2 minutes of missing tapes remains the greatest unanswered mystery of the whole thing)

[kayla.meyer_144]

Not surprising. Nixon was a greasy crook/criminal who was infamous for a lot of dirty things long before the Chennault Affair & the Paris Peace Talks. Winning by any means was fine by him.
 
[link=https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/nixon-vietnam-candidate-conspired-with-foreign-power-win-election-215461/]https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/nixon-vietnam-candidate-conspired-with-foreign-power-win-election-215461/[/link]
 
[link=https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/jeff-sessions-logan-act-and-chennault-affair]https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/jeff-sessions-logan-act-and-chennault-affair[/link]
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Dalai
 
Trump
 
He is a Jerry Springer show……. a modern day Morton Downey ( You remember him right?)
 
These people have their moment then they fade.
 
You don’t honestly think this guy can win do you?
 
 
 

[suyanebenevides_151]

Say what you will, kpack, but at least be honest. Nowhere near the clown level of JS or MD, no matter how much you dislike him.

[Unknown Member]

We will see

[Unknown Member]

Kpack is still hanging on to the last shred of hope’nchange. Just keep repeating to yourself “yes we can”

It is going to be sad watching the dead-ender progressives’ dreams evaporate.

[julie.young_645]

Quote from kpack123

Dalai

Trump

He is a Jerry Springer show……. a modern day Morton Downey ( You remember him right?)

These people have their moment then they fade.

You don’t honestly think this guy can win do you?

 

Honestly….I don’t know. I frankly thought Trump would flame out by now. But he hasn’t, and every time he says something that would have trounced another candidate, his just gets more popular.
 
Mr. Obama’s success was due in large part to those (mostly) to the left of center being unhappy with the status quo, namely Bush (someone get kpack some Dilantin, please). Mr. Obama was a blank canvas upon whom they could project whatever they wished. But beneath the blank canvas was something a little more sinister (Latin for Left uncannily). 
 
Now, those mostly to the right of center need someone upon whom they can project their vision of an ideal candidate. Trump fits the bill to some extent. But he goes a bit further. We know who he is and what he’s done. He built a huge financial empire using (and yes occasionally bending) the rules of the game in the U.S. Trump is an open book, in contrast to Mr. Obama’s mysterious college days and his own lies about being born in Kenya. 
 
Most importantly, he is standing up to the political-correctness fascism so rampant today. He speaks his mind and says out loud what quite a few are thinking but are afraid to vocalize.
 
Is he capable of being president? Again, I don’t know. Trump certainly has the ability to operate a multifaceted company. In the end, a real estate empire might be as hard to run as a country, given the fact that the President doesn’t make every last decision about everything in the entire nation. 
 
If I have one doubt about Trump, it concerns his ability to compromise. Haven’t seen that yet.