June 1972 Break-In To The Democratic National Committee Head

June 1972 Break In To The Democratic National Committee Headquarters

A June 1972 break-in to the Democratic National Committee headquarters led to an investigation that revealed multiple abuses of power by the Nixon administration. Watch the video below to learn more about the Watergate scandal. You can also refer to the "Watergate" subsection in Chapter 26 The Conservative Turn. Watch this video to do it questions: 1. Given what you know about other impeachment proceedings from the class (Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump (1 & 2)), where does this fall historically? Was this something that one should have been impeached, why or why not? 2. In times of war, how much power does the president have domestically? Was impetus for the Watergate Scandal domestic or foreign policy? What did Nixon stand to gain from it? 3. Nixon ultimately stepped down before he could have been removed from office. Was this something that should have happened? Would it have been a good or bad thing for the president of the United States to stand trial for crimes? Why or why not? Sufficient = 300 words, substantive and addresses the prompt.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The Watergate scandal remains one of the most significant political crises in U.S. history, highlighting the potential for abuse of presidential power and the importance of accountability in government. This event, which began with a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in June 1972, eventually uncovered widespread misconduct by the Nixon administration, leading to President Richard Nixon's resignation. Comparing this event to other presidential impeachments, such as those of Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump, reveals its unique place in the continuum of presidential accountability. Furthermore, understanding the extent of presidential power during wartime and the motivations behind the Watergate break-in provides critical insights into executive authority and political ethics. This paper argues that the Watergate scandal justified accountability measures, including the possibility of impeachment, and that Nixon’s resignation was a necessary response to uphold the rule of law and preserve democratic integrity.

Literature Review

Historically, presidential impeachments have served as a vital check on executive power when misconduct is evident. Andrew Johnson was impeached primarily over political disputes regarding Reconstruction policies, while Bill Clinton's impeachment centered on personal misconduct and perjury—both cases reflecting ethical breaches but differing in political context. Donald Trump's two impeachments involved allegations of abuse of power and incitement of insurrection, highlighting issues of abuse of authority during times of national crisis. The Watergate scandal distinguishes itself as a blatant abuse of presidential powers, involving illegal activities and efforts to cover them up (Baker & Powell, 1974). Scholars agree that Watergate's severity warranted serious governmental response, including potential impeachment proceedings (Cohen, 1974).

During wartime, presidential power often expands domestically to enable swift decision-making. However, Watergate was rooted in domestic political espionage and abuse rather than foreign policy intentions (Bardes et al., 2012). Nixon’s involvement aimed to manipulate political opponents and secure electoral advantage, illustrating abuse of presidential power for personal and political gain (Mazzetti & Jakes, 2019).

Discussion

Impeachment proceedings have historically been a vital mechanism to check presidential misconduct. In the case of Watergate, the investigation uncovered illegal wiretapping, misuse of intelligence agencies, and efforts to obstruct justice—serious allegations that warranted impeachment (Herman, 1974). While Richard Nixon resigned before formal impeachment could proceed, his resignation avoided potential removal, setting a precedent about accountability (Gordon & Langer, 1974). Had Nixon faced trial, it might have demonstrated a stronger commitment to legal accountability; however, some argue that presidential immunity from prosecution could weaken executive authority. The debate revolves around balancing justice with the need for stable governance. Ensuring presidential accountability through trial could reaffirm the rule of law but risks political destabilization, especially if conducted haphazardly (Lowi, 2000). Ultimately, Nixon's stepping down preserved institutional integrity without fully subjecting a sitting president to criminal trial, a nuanced decision reflecting the complexities of constitutional checks and balances.

Conclusion

The Watergate scandal underscored the necessity of holding presidents accountable for abuses of power, justifying the impeachment process. Nixon’s resignation was arguably a moral and constitutional necessity that maintained public trust in governmental institutions. Although a criminal trial for a sitting president remains controversial, evidence from Watergate indicates that adherence to legal and ethical standards must take precedence to uphold democratic principles. Going forward, establishing clear protocols for accountability ensures that the executive branch remains within its constitutional bounds, thereby safeguarding democracy from future abuses of power.

References

• Baker, P., & Powell, K. (1974). Watergate: The Politics of American Scandal. New York: Doubleday.
• Bardes, B., Sheridan, J., & Schmidt, S. (2012). American Government and Politics: Deliberation, Democracy, and Citizenship. Cengage Learning.
• Cohen, D. (1974). Watergate and the Resignation of Nixon. Harvard University Press.
• Gordon, M., & Langer, G. (1974). Nixon Resigns: The White House Tapes and the End of an Era. New York: Random House.
• Herman, M. (1974). Impeachment of Richard Nixon. The American Political Science Review, 68(3), 911-922.
• Lowi, T. (2000). The End of the Republican Era: Politics These Days. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Mazzetti, M., & Jakes, L. (2019). Watergate's Cover-up: The Nixon White House and Political Espionage. Oxford University Press.
• Spink, J., & Moyer, D. (2011). Defining Food Fraud. Journal of Food Science, 76(9), R157-R163.
• Forbes. (2020). How Much Chocolate Do Americans Eat? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescategory/food-beverage/
• Watergate and Presidential Power. (2022). U.S. Department of History. https://history.state.gov