The Case Of US V. Nixon
Jonathan Crespo
Mr. Mouser
Government
5/11/2018
United States v Nixon
In the case of United States v. Richard Nixon, seven of Nixon’s closest aides were convicted of many crimes in the Watergate affair. The name of the aides that were convicted are John N. Mitchell, former Attorney General; H. R. Haldeman, John D. Ehrlichman and Gordon C. Strachan, former White House aides; Robert C. Mardian, a former aide to Mr. Mitchell, and Kenneth Wells Parkinson. Nixon was named by the Watergate grand jury as an unindicted co-conspirator in the alleged attempt to cover up the Watergate burglary. This was even confirmed by his lawyer James D. St, Claire.
There was a total of forty people that were indicted or jailed after the Watergate affair. Although, …show more content…
Though, the robbery was not an ordinary one because it was from Nixon’s closest aides. They were believed the information was for Nixon’s reelection campaign. Though the aides were caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents.
The prosecutor appointed by Nixon and the defendants sought audio tapes of the conversation recorded in the Oval Office. Then, during the trial, President Nixon wanted to use his “executive privilege.” This means that he cannot give away information from other government branches to preserve confidential communications. This is for the security for the national interest within the executive branch.
There was a group of five burglaries that were found and arrested for trying to break into the Watergate office to replace the malfunctioned wiretap. They, were not immediately connected to Nixon and, Nixon swore that none of his white house staff was not involved in the Watergate break-in. Eventually, it had come to light the Nixon had not told the truth at all because he had made arrangements to give thousands of dollars to keep the incident under wraps. Although, some of the conspirators eventually cracked and spilled the beans about what had …show more content…
There is also no need for high-level confidentiality in communications. Furthermore, the court had granted that there was in fact an executive privilege but there is a limit. Also, the court had ruled that the president has to obey the subpoena and produce both the tapes and documentations. After the court case, Nixon resigned right after the release of the tapes and documents. In the New York Times, they mention that the Supreme Court decisions lead to nothing about Nixon’s impeachment. The statement did not say the word impeach or refer to it. Although, the decision inevitably affected the impeachment process. Then, psychologically, the damage that was done to the president's case showed that other institutions for the government may show respect for the presidency without agreeing with the extreme arguments of a particular incumbent. Though, it is just as important to understand lent no comfort to the notion. This also means that the court can be supplied evidence for
Mr. Mouser
Government
5/11/2018
United States v Nixon
In the case of United States v. Richard Nixon, seven of Nixon’s closest aides were convicted of many crimes in the Watergate affair. The name of the aides that were convicted are John N. Mitchell, former Attorney General; H. R. Haldeman, John D. Ehrlichman and Gordon C. Strachan, former White House aides; Robert C. Mardian, a former aide to Mr. Mitchell, and Kenneth Wells Parkinson. Nixon was named by the Watergate grand jury as an unindicted co-conspirator in the alleged attempt to cover up the Watergate burglary. This was even confirmed by his lawyer James D. St, Claire.
There was a total of forty people that were indicted or jailed after the Watergate affair. Although, …show more content…
Though, the robbery was not an ordinary one because it was from Nixon’s closest aides. They were believed the information was for Nixon’s reelection campaign. Though the aides were caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents.
The prosecutor appointed by Nixon and the defendants sought audio tapes of the conversation recorded in the Oval Office. Then, during the trial, President Nixon wanted to use his “executive privilege.” This means that he cannot give away information from other government branches to preserve confidential communications. This is for the security for the national interest within the executive branch.
There was a group of five burglaries that were found and arrested for trying to break into the Watergate office to replace the malfunctioned wiretap. They, were not immediately connected to Nixon and, Nixon swore that none of his white house staff was not involved in the Watergate break-in. Eventually, it had come to light the Nixon had not told the truth at all because he had made arrangements to give thousands of dollars to keep the incident under wraps. Although, some of the conspirators eventually cracked and spilled the beans about what had …show more content…
There is also no need for high-level confidentiality in communications. Furthermore, the court had granted that there was in fact an executive privilege but there is a limit. Also, the court had ruled that the president has to obey the subpoena and produce both the tapes and documentations. After the court case, Nixon resigned right after the release of the tapes and documents. In the New York Times, they mention that the Supreme Court decisions lead to nothing about Nixon’s impeachment. The statement did not say the word impeach or refer to it. Although, the decision inevitably affected the impeachment process. Then, psychologically, the damage that was done to the president's case showed that other institutions for the government may show respect for the presidency without agreeing with the extreme arguments of a particular incumbent. Though, it is just as important to understand lent no comfort to the notion. This also means that the court can be supplied evidence for