General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Trump v Nixon [View all]BumRushDaShow
(128,905 posts)Nixon had been in elected office before becoming President (had served in both the House and Senate and was Eisenhower's VP for 8 years). So he was well aware of how government worked unlike what is in office at the moment. He also had a VP who was on the cusp of impeachment himself (although that effort was thwarted by Democrats who instead wanted to go for the jugular, which essentially lead Agnew to do a plea deal and resign).
So with that in mind, Nixon's actions were taken from the perspective of how to "work" the system vs the flailing around that we see today from someone trying to "break the system".
In any case, it eventually lead to what historically could be considered Nixon doing an "honorable" thing and resigning vs the nightmare that we are going through now with someone who has too much faux guile, bravado, and ego to do so, because he has developed a disdain for our system of government. Additionally, 45 years ago the House and Senate were controlled by Democrats where today, Democrats only control the House. So the risks and rewards are somewhat different as well.
The scary part though, is that should we manage to successfully recover from this, then it's guaranteed that someone will try again and take us to the brink (and beyond) at some point in the future. The weaknesses in this system have been laid bare and the concept of the "honor system" has been badly damaged.