Would Nixon have been pardoned if he and Ford were both Democrats?

[cboy4]

I'm reading lots of people going ape shit about the big "pardon" while dancing and pissing all over Ford's grave.

But I mean, let's be honest.

I'm certainly no fan of Ford, but a Democratic president would have probably done the same thing. Right?!?!?

As I mentioned in another thread, politics (at least back then) was a good 'ol boys club and I'm sure still is.

Politicians may say mean and rotten things about each other in the press, but behind the scenes, I think we all know it's pretty buddy-buddy.

[Gman]

1. Watergate would have never happened

if Ford and Nixxon were Democrats. Watergate could only have happened with Republicans. Your question is irrelevant.

[cboy4]

2. It's totally relevant. There are so many people acting over the top

outraged about the pardon, while I would argue a Democrat would do the same thing for a fellow Democrat.

The pardon was a disgrace. I don't defend it, and I don't think Democrats would stoop to breaking into offices.

However, my question is no more hypothetical than you blanket statement that "Watergate could have only happened with Republicans."

You don't know what goes on behind the scenes.

edit...spell

[Solon]

3. All I know is that power can corrupt...

What party a person belongs to doesn't really mean much in this matter, we are talking about judging a person's CHARACTER, not their political positions. Some people are more corruptible than others, Nixon is an obvious example, and Ford is another, along with Reagan and Bush the Elder and Bush the Lesser. Whether or not them being Republicans affected their individual power grabs is not the point. Always be suspicious of elected officials, for Democracy only works with a wary electorate, the LAST thing we need is partisan complacency.

[Gman]

16. I have seen a lot behind the scenes

If a Watergate-style even happened and Democrats were involved, it could only happen with a small group of overzealous renegades and would be confined to local events. The thing is that Democrats have no need to do anything similar to Watergate on a national level. If we're going to lose an election, we lose it. We know we got screwed in FL in 2000 and OH in 2004. But we are laying the groundwork to stop that sort of thing from happening.

About the closest thing I know of that would have come close to a Watergate-level event was when someone stole the video tapes of Bush practicing for the 2000 debate with Gore and the tape was sent to a Democratic Senator who promptly turned it over to the FBI. If the tables had been turned, I've no doubt the GOP would have salivated and said, "Great! Thanks!" upon receiving the tape.

We know that since Watergate, there have been dozens and dozens of felonies committed by various members of as well as organizations associated with the GOP on the national level. 99% of these have gone unpunished. Except for the occasional dead person voting in some South Texas precinct or workers filling out absentee ballots for (or in the name of) elderly voters, there is rarely anything criminal associated with the Democratic Party. I think the last 34 years show a pretty consistent pattern that the GOP is the criminal party.

[William769]

4. I'll answer you question this way.

I clinton would have been found guilty in Whitewater , Impeached and convicted. I don't believe Gore would have pardoned him.

The Republicans were screaming about the rule of law, I honestly believe All Gore would have followed it.

[cboy4]

5. I'm not sure. But I'm talking about a specific incident (Watergate)

during a specific period of time involving specific circumstances.

[William769]

6. With those crimes committed, I don't believe so.

[cboy4]

8. I respect your view, but I'm with the overwhelming number

of people in my unscientific poll who believe otherwise.

[DerBeppo]

7. Absolutely.

Above party affiliation, the office protects the office and rightfully so.

[pitohui]

9. a democrat who tried such a thing would have been tarred, feathered, and boiled alive

who are we kidding? a democrat can't even get a damn bj without it's a federal case

IOKIYAR means just that -- it's okay if you're a republican

we do not have a nation of laws for all and anyone who hasn't figured it out by now isn't paying attention

ford was not a great good man looking out for the nation, he was a loser who sold himself to get a position in history he could have never achieved from the electorate

[cboy4]

10. Keep in mind, I'm talking about at the time. Back then, the

political tone was arguably a little different.

If you ask me, I don't really think there was the same amount hatred between parties.

Otherwise, I agree with you about how things would work now.

All one has to do is look at the way the repukes carried on about Clinton!

[bliss_eternal]

11. I said, tough call...

but honestly, I believe if it was the other way around it probably would have gone the same way.

I'm sad to see so many speak so disparigingly of Mr. Ford--in light of his death. But of course, people are entitled to their opinion (even when it's nasty, cruel or seemingly insensitive :P).

People are entitled to feel their level of loss, without our pissing all over a man's passing. Ford did something many here disagree with, that doesn't mean he isn't entitled to some level of dignity and respect--may he rest in peace.

Yes, I said it...on DU...May he rest in peace. Sorry gang, not going to join in the Ford bashing. I just don't think it's cool at all.

He was a human being and he just died. Humans make mistakes, we all do. Those of you that feel the need to be so disrespectful of a man's death--don't be pissed when Clinton dies and the republicans bring up the cigar, or the blue dress, or any of the rest of it. ;) Works both ways...

[cboy4]

12. Tough call is an honest, respectable answer Bliss! And you just

know many of the people who posted cruel personal attacks are the same ones who scream and yell when the other side does it.

It's unbelievably hypocritical.

[bliss_eternal]

13. Totally hypocritical, cboy...

I tend to not go to "the other side" so to speak. They have their place, we have ours--I don't want to know what goes on over there--that's their business. I'll never understand why our members feel the need to go over there and bring back reports. :eyes: Like after the election. They had every right to be upset--to mourn their loss on their board, in peace. DU'ers (imo) shouldn't have brought their threads here to make fun of them.

But the bipartisan nonsense after someone dies. That just doesn't seem right. At least it's not right for me, I shouldn't speak for others--they have the right to behave however they choose. Even if I think it's a poor representation of our party and it's members. But who cares what I think. ;) LOL!

[cboy4]

14. ME, ME! - - - I care what you think!

I guess agreeing with 99.999999999% of what you say has just a bit to do with that!

:pals:

[bliss_eternal]

15. Oh you...

:blush:...you should know the feeling is mutual.

:pals::loveya:

[gollygee]

17. Probably

Politicians seem to do what the party leadership tells them to do. And neither party would have wanted that much bad press.

[gollygee]

18. I want to add

if a Democrat had done that, the Democrat would deserve to go to prison too.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

19. Oh Undoubtedly.

[Strawman]

20. That's a difficult counterfactual

I suppose it would mean that the 25th Amendment never happened, or Gerald Ford had went unconfirmed and the VP office had been vacant. Carl Albert, the Democratic Speaker, would have been next in line to become President after impeachment/resignation.

And he wouldn't have held that office for long...

"The resignation of Agnew, in 1973, was the first occasion in which Albert was confronted with the question of whether it was appropriate for a Democrat to assume the nation's highest office when it was held by a member of the opposing party. Albert concluded that he had no right to a Presidency that the American people had entrusted, by election, to a Republican. He thus announced that should the need arise for him to assume the presidency, he would do so only in an acting capacity, and would resign immediately after both Houses of Congress (in accordance with Section 2 of the 25th Amendment) had approved a Republican Vice President"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Albert

On Edit: NM, your post is if he and Ford were both Democrats. I didn't fully read that and assumed Nixon was a Repub;ican and the VP was a Dem... Hmm... Assuming they were from the conservative wing of the Democratic party, I'd guess that yes, he would still pardon Nixon. If Ford was from the liberal reform wing, I'd say no. But then again weren't the impeachment proceedings run by a Dixiecrat? It would have been interesting. I can't say for sure that Democrats would have been totally above partisan politics and I can't say they wouldn't have. Nowadays, the Dems are clearly more principled. Back then, it was a bit more equal. Every Republican wasn't either a corporate or fundie whore like today.

I think Ford made what he thought was a wise decision. It was not a sign of a lack of character or lack of principle or unrestrained unambition on Ford's part IMO. It may have been the wrong decision in principle, but I don't think he made it for corrupt unprincipled reasons.