MovieChat Forums > All the President's Men (1976) Discussion > what did they do that was so wrong?

what did they do that was so wrong?


Is it worse than Hilary Clinton not sending troops to help our ambassador and others keep from being killed/burned to death?
No.

Do pacs have a slush fund to try to reelect presidents? yes.
What in the world was this big story really about? As if the Dems haven't done as much and worse. The repub idiots just got caught. Nixon was really sandblasted for covering it all up and erasing tape.

Geez. this was a boring movie. I lived thru that time and read everything I was only 21 years old. I liked Redford but frankly, the amount of overacting was atrocious.
I get it. The Dems wanted Nixon out.
So they got that. But a secret slush fund? and that is illegal somehow?>

enlighten me.

reply

Your post is long on hysteria and political bias, but short on actual facts. For someone who claims to "have lived thru that time and read everything," it's remarkable how little you know about Watergate.

Nixon was facing impeachment because the White House tapes recorded on June 23, 1972 proved that he obstructed justice; on that day, he directed Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman to halt an FBI investigation into Watergate. By doing so he clearly violated his oath of office, and when the taped conversation was released, Nixon's Republican support in the Senate vanished. The House Judiciary Committee had already approved three articles of impeachment (Obstruction of Justice, Abuse of Power and Contempt of Congress), and senior Republican Barry Goldwater informed him both the Senate and the full House would follow suit. Rather than face a trial, Nixon resigned.

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/nixon.htm


It should be noted the White House tapes showed Nixon had been lying to the American public when he claimed he knew nothing of the cover-up; in fact, the tapes proved he was DIRECTING the cover-up. Nixon had not only lost support in both the Senate & the House, he'd also lost the support of a large segment of the American public.


And you fail to mention that a House Benghazi Committee cleared Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing; in addition, a 2014 GOP intelligence committee report did the same, citing failures by intelligence analysts and not presidential appointees.

People in and out of government have alleged that a CIA response team was ordered to "stand down" after the State Department compound came under attack, that a military rescue was nixed, that officials intentionally downplayed the role of Al Qaeda figures in the attack, and that Stevens and the CIA were involved in a secret operation to spirit weapons out of Libya and into the hands of Syrian rebels.

None of that is true, according to the House Intelligence Committee report.

http://www.latimes.com/world/africa/la-fg-house-benghazi-20141123-story.html

reply

Here we go the democrats blaming the Republicans for Benghazi. Sell your story to Walt Disney. Obama and Hillary responsible for Benghazi. And not to mention Hillary Clinton's emails. How can anyone be running for president while being investigated by the FBI. Democrats are the biggest hypocrites.

reply

"How can anyone be running for president while being investigated by the FBI." Yeah, that would be like being sworn in as president while being investigated by the FBI!...speaking of hypocrites.

reply

So far, the multiple millions of dollars and half a dozen or more years of continuous investigations into Trump have produced absolutely nothing. The most important thing that has been revealed is the abject corruption of the FBI and the Democratic Party.

reply

91 indictments.

reply

Thank you, murph24.

But don't expect anything as flimsy as documented, irrefutable facts to sway those who view history & government through overwrought partisan emotions devoid of facts. They don't actually want to know anything, they just want to feel right & righteous.

(and yes, people on the Left are perfectly capable of doing that as well -- but for the most part in America, it's almost always been on the Right.)

reply

[deleted]

"Enlighten me"

I really don't think that's possible.

reply

Seriously. I can’t believe Murph took the time & energy to answer.

reply

The repub idiots just got caught. Nixon was really sandblasted for covering it all up and erasing tape.


A lot of people hold a similar view, suggesting that all politicians are just as corrupt, but Nixon just got caught.

Make no mistake, he did do a lot of things that were wrong. Just because other politicians get away with it, yet Nixon didn't, it doesn't change the fact that Nixon still broke the law.

I suppose it's more a matter of opinion as to whether Nixon's unlawful actions were any "worse" than what other presidents and politicians have done. Maybe the Clintons did worse things. Maybe Reagan or Bush were worse than Nixon. I think that will be a matter for history to ultimately judge. I don't know that there's any wrong or right answer here.

>Geez. this was a boring movie. I lived thru that time and read everything I was only 21 years old. I liked Redford but frankly, the amount of overacting was atrocious.

I thought it was a pretty decent flick. I still watch it on occasion.

I mean, I can see your point. The Democrats are bad, too. The Republicans are also bad. They're all bad. I get that. They all resort to "dirty tricks" of some sort or another. Politics is a rough business.


reply

[deleted]

Break and Enter with intent to commit a felony (e.g.steal) is a felony under any jurisdiction.

reply

Nixon clearly violated his oath. He made a mockery of the entire concept of democracy. If it was left to him, USA would have been a bigger joke for years due to its vulnerability to such deep-rooted corruption. You'd rather believe still unconfirmed conspiracy theories about Hillary than something proved in a court of law. I know as humans we tend to undermine the past damages and overweigh the present scenario, but not to this extend, sir.

reply

"I know as humans we tend to undermine the past damages and overweigh the present scenario, but not to this extend, sir."

2019 seems to have no limitations for that.

reply

Murph24 has it right..The OP obviously belongs to the #FACTSDONTMATTER group.
Republican Trey Gowdy and his select committee found after millions of dollars and 18months of hearings that the tragedy at Benghazi occurred due to the lack of security forces.Our foreign Embassies are protected by private security forces,like Haliburton.The year before the 2012 attack,Republican majority House and Senate voted down additional security funding for US foreign Embassies.The Benghazi Embassy was a temporary one-stationed in a former villa..someone's home.It didn't even have concrete barriers or a single pane of bulletproof glass.Because it was a "temporary" Embassy it was understaffed to begin with.Cutting security spending-Halliburton pulled out completely.But,why would this be a reason the Embassy fell when there is a Clinton around to blame?
These are the FACTS,just the facts, ma'am .

reply

“I want this goddamned invesigation stopped now.
Is that clear?”

[tape of president Nixon obstructing justice]

No chance something like that can be excused or explained.
For Nixon or any successive president.
Game over.

reply