Trey Gowdy and the Real Lesson of Watergate

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,864
2,040
Interesting history
links in article at site



1973 Democrats blocked investigation of LBJ.


SNIP:
It is the real lesson of Watergate.

As South Carolina’s Congressman Trey Gowdy, the new chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, begins his task, it is worth recalling a lesson from Watergate. Specifically a lesson about the creation of what became known as the Senate Watergate Committee — and how the Senate Republicans of 1973 lost a fight that literally changed the course of American history.

The date is November 17, 1972. The Democrats in the United States Senate are not happy with the results of the just concluded presidential election in which their nominee and Senate colleague, South Dakota’s Senator George McGovern, had lost 49 states — all but Massachusetts and the District of Columbia — to President Richard Nixon.

In the middle of the campaign — back in June — the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee had been burglarized. Among other things, the objective was to bug the phones to monitor the DNC Chairman, ex-JFK and LBJ White House aide Lawrence O’Brien. The story had been a detail of the campaign, but a small one. Not until October had the story gained any kind of traction, moving in a bigger way from print media and the hands of the Washington Post’s young reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to television. Walter Cronkite at CBS had spent two nights in a row on the scandal, a big deal in a day where the three TV networks only had a single half-hour news show at the dinner hour. There were strands of a story — a connection between Nixon’s re-election committee, the story of an intelligence fund at the committee. And not much else. The news reports had no effect whatsoever on Nixon’s impending landslide victory.

During that campaign there had been a Senate election in Montana, a re-election campaign for the state’s junior senator Lee Metcalf, a Democrat. His senior colleague and fellow Democrat Mike Mansfield, out campaigning hard for Metcalf, had seen the news reports on the burglary. Understanding that McGovern was about to go under in a tidal wave, Mansfield told Montana voters that when the election was over he would go back to Washington and “pave the way” (his words) for an investigation not just of the Watergate break-in but the whole business of campaign financing.

The importance? Mike Mansfield was not just a run-of-the-mill U.S. Senator. He was the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate. The Harry Reid of his day.

Mansfield kept his vow. On November 17 he wrote two letters. One to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Eastland of Mississippi. The other to another Judiciary member and Democrat, North Carolina Senator Sam Ervin. Mansfield’s flat assertion? That Republicans had manipulated the presidential election of 1972 with a “cynical and dangerous intrusion into the integrity of the electoral processes by which the people of the nation choose the trustees of federal office…”

On February 5, 1973 Mansfield went out with his resolution to create what was formally titled the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities. It would soon become known to history as the Senate Watergate Committee.

The Republican response?

If in fact the Democrats really believed that it was critical to investigate what Mansfield had called a “cynical and dangerous intrusion into the integrity of the electoral processes by which the people of the nation choose the trustees of federal office” then that was fine by them. Game on. Immediately they offered an amendment to include in the new Select Committee’s purview not just the 1972 election — but the 1968 and 1964 presidential elections as well.

Why? Specifically.

• 1964 and the Johnson-Goldwater campaign: Under the orders from President Lyndon B. Johnson, the White House was used as the headquarters of a dirty tricks “Anti-Campaign” operation — with the FBI used to wiretap the Goldwater campaign.

As Lee Edwards would later describe in his biography Goldwater: The Man Who Made a Revolution:

ALL of it here with COMMENTS HERE
Trey Gowdy and the Real Lesson of Watergate | The American Spectator
 
Last edited:
Interesting history
links in article at site



1973 Democrats blocked investigation of LBJ.


SNIP:
It is the real lesson of Watergate.

As South Carolina’s Congressman Trey Gowdy, the new chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, begins his task, it is worth recalling a lesson from Watergate. Specifically a lesson about the creation of what became known as the Senate Watergate Committee — and how the Senate Republicans of 1973 lost a fight that literally changed the course of American history.

The date is November 17, 1972. The Democrats in the United States Senate are not happy with the results of the just concluded presidential election in which their nominee and Senate colleague, South Dakota’s Senator George McGovern, had lost 49 states — all but Massachusetts and the District of Columbia — to President Richard Nixon.

In the middle of the campaign — back in June — the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee had been burglarized. Among other things, the objective was to bug the phones to monitor the DNC Chairman, ex-JFK and LBJ White House aide Lawrence O’Brien. The story had been a detail of the campaign, but a small one. Not until October had the story gained any kind of traction, moving in a bigger way from print media and the hands of the Washington Post’s young reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to television. Walter Cronkite at CBS had spent two nights in a row on the scandal, a big deal in a day where the three TV networks only had a single half-hour news show at the dinner hour. There were strands of a story — a connection between Nixon’s re-election committee, the story of an intelligence fund at the committee. And not much else. The news reports had no effect whatsoever on Nixon’s impending landslide victory.

During that campaign there had been a Senate election in Montana, a re-election campaign for the state’s junior senator Lee Metcalf, a Democrat. His senior colleague and fellow Democrat Mike Mansfield, out campaigning hard for Metcalf, had seen the news reports on the burglary. Understanding that McGovern was about to go under in a tidal wave, Mansfield told Montana voters that when the election was over he would go back to Washington and “pave the way” (his words) for an investigation not just of the Watergate break-in but the whole business of campaign financing.

The importance? Mike Mansfield was not just a run-of-the-mill U.S. Senator. He was the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate. The Harry Reid of his day.

Mansfield kept his vow. On November 17 he wrote two letters. One to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Eastland of Mississippi. The other to another Judiciary member and Democrat, North Carolina Senator Sam Ervin. Mansfield’s flat assertion? That Republicans had manipulated the presidential election of 1972 with a “cynical and dangerous intrusion into the integrity of the electoral processes by which the people of the nation choose the trustees of federal office…”

On February 5, 1973 Mansfield went out with his resolution to create what was formally titled the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities. It would soon become known to history as the Senate Watergate Committee.

The Republican response?

If in fact the Democrats really believed that it was critical to investigate what Mansfield had called a “cynical and dangerous intrusion into the integrity of the electoral processes by which the people of the nation choose the trustees of federal office” then that was fine by them. Game on. Immediately they offered an amendment to include in the new Select Committee’s purview not just the 1972 election — but the 1968 and 1964 presidential elections as well.

Why? Specifically.

• 1964 and the Johnson-Goldwater campaign: Under the orders from President Lyndon B. Johnson, the White House was used as the headquarters of a dirty tricks “Anti-Campaign” operation — with the FBI used to wiretap the Goldwater campaign.

As Lee Edwards would later describe in his biography Goldwater: The Man Who Made a Revolution:

ALL of it here with COMMENTS HERE
Trey Gowdy and the Real Lesson of Watergate | The American Spectator

Nice find. Interesting to see they are still doing it to this day.
 
The real lesson of Watergate was "don't tape stuff" other then that no one has learned a damned thing.
 
The question's are: does Stephanie need to be medicated? Or, will a heavy duty tin foil hate suffice?
I thought you libs were big on staying on topic, dotcom has some advice for you. Or does that only work for conservatives? You wouldn't want to be hypocritical would you?

...which leads to the point...it's entirely hypocritical to oppose possible wrong doings of an administration to favor their chances in an election. At least a few dems support investigating the IRS and Benghazi.
 
The question's are: does Stephanie need to be medicated? Or, will a heavy duty tin foil hate suffice?
I thought you libs were big on staying on topic, dotcom has some advice for you. Or does that only work for conservatives? You wouldn't want to be hypocritical would you?

...which leads to the point...it's entirely hypocritical to oppose possible wrong doings of an administration to favor their chances in an election. At least a few dems support investigating the IRS and Benghazi.
And their motives are highly suspect with mid-term elections coming.:eusa_whistle:
 
The question's are: does Stephanie need to be medicated? Or, will a heavy duty tin foil hate suffice?
I thought you libs were big on staying on topic, dotcom has some advice for you. Or does that only work for conservatives? You wouldn't want to be hypocritical would you?

...which leads to the point...it's entirely hypocritical to oppose possible wrong doings of an administration to favor their chances in an election. At least a few dems support investigating the IRS and Benghazi.

rude and obnoxious is their way of saying, oh shit gotta distract off of this...
and Wry is just that way...ugly person inside and out
 
The question's are: does Stephanie need to be medicated? Or, will a heavy duty tin foil hate suffice?
I thought you libs were big on staying on topic, dotcom has some advice for you. Or does that only work for conservatives? You wouldn't want to be hypocritical would you?

...which leads to the point...it's entirely hypocritical to oppose possible wrong doings of an administration to favor their chances in an election. At least a few dems support investigating the IRS and Benghazi.

rude and obnoxious is their way of saying, oh shit gotta distract off of this...
and Wry is just that way...ugly person inside and out
Is there a liberal on the board that isn't a full fledged hypocrite? I've often said it's two sides of the same coin.
 
I'll bet the Republicans appreciate all the ominous warnings from Socialists and Loons about persistent questions into the Benghazi matter. Uber-Loon Pelosi has warned them to stay away for their own good.

I think they ought to persist in asking the questions until they get an answer other than "the question is not worth answering", or "trust us".

And Pelosi offering advice to Republicans "not to go there" is the clearest possible evidence that something is afoot--in this case a cover-up.

Why would any American citizen not want to know why Hillary The Wide waddled up to a grieving parent and, right in front of the casket of his dead son, told him that they were going to get the man that made the video that got his son killed---knowing it to be a lie. And that is exactly what the evidence indicates, at least to me....I can't tell what the Socialists and Loons think.

Anyone who does such a thing, is depraved...has a malevolent character...and is not fit to be President.

Are we not to inquire into whether she is fit to be President because she is running for President?

That's what Pelosi is telling us. It is typical of the nonsense that comes out of her mouth.

But, I think they are scared shitless....and with good reason.
 
Last edited:
I'll bet the Republicans appreciate all the ominous warnings from Socialists and Loons about persistent questions into the Benghazi matter. Uber-Loon Pelosi has warned them to stay away for their own good.

I think they ought to persist in asking the questions until they get an answer other than "the question is not worth answering", or "trust us".

And Pelosi offering advice to Republicans "not to go there" is the clearest possible evidence that something is afoot--in this case a cover-up.

Why would any American citizen not want to know why Hillary The Wide waddled up to a grieving parent and, right in front of the casket of his dead son, told him that they were going to get the man that made the video that got his son killed---knowing it to be a lie. And that is exactly what the evidence indicates, at least to me....I can't tell what the Socialists and Loons think.

Anyone who does such a thing, is depraved...has a malevolent character...and is not fit to be President.

Are we not to inquire into whether she is fit to be President because she is running for President?

That's what Pelosi is telling us. It is typical of the nonsense that comes out of her mouth.

But, I think they are scared shitless....and with good reason.
There have been seven committee's on Benghazi. There have been numerous briefings. Depositions have been taken by the truck load and the facts stay basically the same. Do you really think an eighth committee hearing is going to change anything.
More and more you people are sounding and behaving like the birthers. "Any day now the truth will come out. Any day it will be shown Obama is a Kenyan. Any day the birth certificate will be exposed as a phony. Any day Obama will be impeached or forced to resign. Any day now ................"
The bottom line is the people do not give a shit about Benghazi. They are concerned about jobs, the economy, health care, equal pay for equal work, minimum wage, immigration, and a branch of Congress that refuses to look at the real problems this country is facing. Ask any working person in this country which is more important: Benghazi or their wages and health care. I doubt if you will get 1 in 10 who will say Benghazi.
 
I'll bet the Republicans appreciate all the ominous warnings from Socialists and Loons about persistent questions into the Benghazi matter. Uber-Loon Pelosi has warned them to stay away for their own good.

I think they ought to persist in asking the questions until they get an answer other than "the question is not worth answering", or "trust us".

And Pelosi offering advice to Republicans "not to go there" is the clearest possible evidence that something is afoot--in this case a cover-up.

Why would any American citizen not want to know why Hillary The Wide waddled up to a grieving parent and, right in front of the casket of his dead son, told him that they were going to get the man that made the video that got his son killed---knowing it to be a lie. And that is exactly what the evidence indicates, at least to me....I can't tell what the Socialists and Loons think.

Anyone who does such a thing, is depraved...has a malevolent character...and is not fit to be President.

Are we not to inquire into whether she is fit to be President because she is running for President?

That's what Pelosi is telling us. It is typical of the nonsense that comes out of her mouth.

But, I think they are scared shitless....and with good reason.
There have been seven committee's on Benghazi. There have been numerous briefings. Depositions have been taken by the truck load and the facts stay basically the same. Do you really think an eighth committee hearing is going to change anything.
More and more you people are sounding and behaving like the birthers. "Any day now the truth will come out. Any day it will be shown Obama is a Kenyan. Any day the birth certificate will be exposed as a phony. Any day Obama will be impeached or forced to resign. Any day now ................"
The bottom line is the people do not give a shit about Benghazi. They are concerned about jobs, the economy, health care, equal pay for equal work, minimum wage, immigration, and a branch of Congress that refuses to look at the real problems this country is facing. Ask any working person in this country which is more important: Benghazi or their wages and health care. I doubt if you will get 1 in 10 who will say Benghazi.
________________________________________________________________________

I don't care what you think about Benghazi, I care what I think, and I think I have not gotten answers to questions that should have been answered in two weeks.

And I could not help but notice that I got a Pelosi Lecture from you instead of a defense of the behavior of the then Secretary of State....you ran from that.

Calling someone a birther or a nutter is not a response...after grade school...it just isn't.
 
I'll bet the Republicans appreciate all the ominous warnings from Socialists and Loons about persistent questions into the Benghazi matter. Uber-Loon Pelosi has warned them to stay away for their own good.

I think they ought to persist in asking the questions until they get an answer other than "the question is not worth answering", or "trust us".

And Pelosi offering advice to Republicans "not to go there" is the clearest possible evidence that something is afoot--in this case a cover-up.

Why would any American citizen not want to know why Hillary The Wide waddled up to a grieving parent and, right in front of the casket of his dead son, told him that they were going to get the man that made the video that got his son killed---knowing it to be a lie. And that is exactly what the evidence indicates, at least to me....I can't tell what the Socialists and Loons think.

Anyone who does such a thing, is depraved...has a malevolent character...and is not fit to be President.

Are we not to inquire into whether she is fit to be President because she is running for President?

That's what Pelosi is telling us. It is typical of the nonsense that comes out of her mouth.

But, I think they are scared shitless....and with good reason.
There have been seven committee's on Benghazi. There have been numerous briefings. Depositions have been taken by the truck load and the facts stay basically the same. Do you really think an eighth committee hearing is going to change anything.
More and more you people are sounding and behaving like the birthers. "Any day now the truth will come out. Any day it will be shown Obama is a Kenyan. Any day the birth certificate will be exposed as a phony. Any day Obama will be impeached or forced to resign. Any day now ................"
The bottom line is the people do not give a shit about Benghazi. They are concerned about jobs, the economy, health care, equal pay for equal work, minimum wage, immigration, and a branch of Congress that refuses to look at the real problems this country is facing. Ask any working person in this country which is more important: Benghazi or their wages and health care. I doubt if you will get 1 in 10 who will say Benghazi.
yes, just like nobody cared about anything but that during the Bush years. :eek:

Government abuse of power for an election isn't important? If Bush sent out the word to downplay terrorism in order to look good what do you think the left would do? The media has swept this under the rug hoping it goes away. Like with the IRS audits and Fast and Furious, these people simply stonewall investigations. They need pressure applied to them to get some answers.
 
I'll bet the Republicans appreciate all the ominous warnings from Socialists and Loons about persistent questions into the Benghazi matter. Uber-Loon Pelosi has warned them to stay away for their own good.

I think they ought to persist in asking the questions until they get an answer other than "the question is not worth answering", or "trust us".

And Pelosi offering advice to Republicans "not to go there" is the clearest possible evidence that something is afoot--in this case a cover-up.

Why would any American citizen not want to know why Hillary The Wide waddled up to a grieving parent and, right in front of the casket of his dead son, told him that they were going to get the man that made the video that got his son killed---knowing it to be a lie. And that is exactly what the evidence indicates, at least to me....I can't tell what the Socialists and Loons think.

Anyone who does such a thing, is depraved...has a malevolent character...and is not fit to be President.

Are we not to inquire into whether she is fit to be President because she is running for President?

That's what Pelosi is telling us. It is typical of the nonsense that comes out of her mouth.

But, I think they are scared shitless....and with good reason.
There have been seven committee's on Benghazi. There have been numerous briefings. Depositions have been taken by the truck load and the facts stay basically the same. Do you really think an eighth committee hearing is going to change anything.
More and more you people are sounding and behaving like the birthers. "Any day now the truth will come out. Any day it will be shown Obama is a Kenyan. Any day the birth certificate will be exposed as a phony. Any day Obama will be impeached or forced to resign. Any day now ................"
The bottom line is the people do not give a shit about Benghazi. They are concerned about jobs, the economy, health care, equal pay for equal work, minimum wage, immigration, and a branch of Congress that refuses to look at the real problems this country is facing. Ask any working person in this country which is more important: Benghazi or their wages and health care. I doubt if you will get 1 in 10 who will say Benghazi.
yes, just like nobody cared about anything but that during the Bush years. :eek:

Government abuse of power for an election isn't important? If Bush sent out the word to downplay terrorism in order to look good what do you think the left would do? The media has swept this under the rug hoping it goes away. Like with the IRS audits and Fast and Furious, these people simply stonewall investigations. They need pressure applied to them to get some answers.

______________________________________

Agree, and there is the possibility they will yet get away with it because the Democratic Party caters to the low information voter, and most of the media is a lapdog.

But, Gowdy is on their ass now, and he has bad hair....but also the only set of balls in all of Congress....now that Hillary is out of the Senate.
 
Interesting history
links in article at site

No, Staph, there are no links at the site. Just a silly conspiracy, with no supporting documentation, from an idiot who's compared Obama both with Chairman Mao and Hitler.

He's also the liar who claimed the kid Kevin Jennings had an affair with was 15, when in fact he was 16 and of legal age.

And claimed the lynching of Bobby Hall wasn't the work of a mob.

A real stellar guy, huh?

(not)
 
In my research of the above, I found this compelling ad against Goldwater. It's no wonder LBJ kicked his fucking ass!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks like the author's also a plagarist.

Johnson’s “Watergate” (LBJ vs. Goldwater.)


Look, Staph, I really really don't think you should be talking about dirty campaign tricks. 'Cuz I guarantee you there's a lot more on the black money side of AFP and the Koch Brothers than you can ever find with Democrats.
 
The media only believes in trials against Republican Presidents, period.

Obama could kill babies on live TV and they would defend him.
 
But, Gowdy is on their ass now, and he has bad hair....but also the only set of balls in all of Congress....now that Hillary is out of the Senate.
You bring up an interesting point. He really needs to decide what to do with his hair. The Vasoline isn't keeping it from crawling around.
 
I believe the death rattle for Clinton will come when and if Trey Gowdy gets a hold of her ample ass in a deposition.

Chris Matthews, that Loon on MSNBC, doesn't get a tingly leg when he thinks about that...he gets a warm wet feeling.
 

Forum List

Back
Top