preview

The Watergate Scandal Scandal

analytical Essay
1427 words
1427 words
bookmark

The name “Watergate” is a term to describe a difficult web of political scandals between 1972 and 1974. This word refers to the Watergate Hotel in Washington D.C. On June 17, 1972, the “Watergate Burglars” broke into the Democratic Party’s National Committee offices. A total of five burglars were apprehended and prosecuted for this crime. These five guys were Bernard L. Barker, Virgilio R. Gonzales, James W. McCord, Eugenio R. Martinez, and Frank A. Sturgis. Bernard was a realtor from Miami, Florida. He was a former Central Intelligence Agency operative which allowed him to play a major role in this heist. Virgilio was a locksmith from Miami, Florida. He was a refugee from Cuba that followed Castro’s takeover. Virgilio had no mercy since …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Explains the term "watergate" to describe a difficult web of political scandals between 1972 and 1974.
  • Explains that five burglars were apprehended and prosecuted for this crime. bernard l. barker, virgilio r. gonzales, james w. mccord, eugen
  • Explains the chronology of the scandal begins during 1972, following the break-in at the watergate hotel. nixon was re-elected in 1973, but the storm clouds were building.
  • Narrates how nixon paid off the burglars to not say anything to the feds and tried to stop them from investigating the case.
  • Narrates how the five burglars were caught on june 17, 1972, breaking into the dnc for the second time. a security guard spotted them and called the police.
  • Explains that when the burglars were first elected they were not connected to nixon or anything with the reelection.
  • Explains that nixon had arranged for hundreds of thousands of dollars to be paid to the burglars just a few days after the break-in.
  • Opines that nixon was using his presidential powers wrongly and using them for wrong. if every president were to do this they would get away with a lot of stuff.
  • Opines that nixon was an obstruction to justice and should have had a more serious consequence than just resigning from office.
  • Narrates how a handful of people had begun to suspect there was more to this scheme than what nixon was setting it out to be.
  • Explains that one of nixon's aides testified against nixon, while white house counsel john dean went before a jury to testify about his crimes. one of the conspirators came out and said that they had secretly taped every conversation with nixon in his oval office.
  • Analyzes how nixon struggled to protect the tapes during the fall and summer of 1973. the senate committee, sirica, and archibald cox were determined to get them from nixon.
  • Describes how nixon's cover began to fall apart in 1974, when a special prosecutor indicted seven of his aides on various charges related to the watergate affair.
  • Explains how the supreme court ordered nixon to hand over the tapes. the house of representatives voted to impeach him for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and criminal cover up.
  • Analyzes how gerald ford pardoned nixon for any crimes he had committed while in office. nixon's aides were convicted of serious offenses and were sent to a federal prison.

He was abusing his powers as president and using them for wrong. If every president were to do this they would get away with a lot of stuff they shouldn’t get away with. President or not, they should still be treated with equal rights as every other American citizen. Nixon was being an obstruction to justice and should have had a more serious consequence than just resigning from office. While all of this was happening several other people were indicated on charges related to the Watergate affair. Out of the seven five pleaded guilty and avoided trial. The other two waited for their trial and were then convicted in January of 1973. By this time there was a handful of people that had begun to suspect there was more to this scheme than what Nixon was setting it out to be. These handful of people that were catching onto Nixon was reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, trial judge John J. Sirica and members of a Senate investigating committee. As most convicts and conspirators do, they all crack under pressure and under the stress of being questioned. Some of the conspirators of this case ended up cracking under the pressure. They couldn’t take it anymore and they …show more content…

President Nixon’s lawyer tried arguing that he had executive privilege and that allowed him to keep the tapes to himself. This is another reflection of a president using his powers for wrong. The Senate committee, Sirica, and Archibald Cox were very determined to get these tapes from Nixon. They knew once they had these tapes they could prosecute Nixon for what he did. Cox was so determined that Nixon ended up firing him because of him constantly demanding to have the tapes. Several Justice Department officials did not approve of this and resigned in protest. These events all happened on one night, October 20, 1973, that is now familiar as the Saturday Night Massacre. After the determination from everyone Nixon became fed up and agreed to surrender some of the tapes. He surrender on some but not all the

Get Access