Latest news with #SenateWatergateCommittee
New York Post
5 days ago
- Politics
- New York Post
Biden coverup demands ‘Watergate' hearings, Democrats' Hispanic exodus and other commentary
Conservative: Biden Coverup Demands 'Watergate' Hearings 'Missing from the hand-wringing' over 'the massive coverup of Joe Biden's mental decline,' fumes Kenneth L. Khachigian at The Wall Street Journal, 'is a demand for accountability.' No! 'If Congress takes seriously that it should act when Americans are cynically hoodwinked,' then 'it must begin an investigation into the coverup that matches or exceeds the Senate Watergate Committee hearings.' Crucially, were decisions with 'potentially catastrophic international consequences' made by 'an enfeebled President Biden' or by the 'Politburo' aides who hid his true state? Advertisement Get going: 'Each day that an investigation is delayed,' central players 'might be destroying records, replacing cellphones and following Hillary Clinton's example by wiping their email servers.' Liberal: Democrats' Hispanic Exodus Fresh data 'has underscored the extent of Hispanic defection from the Democrats over the last two presidential cycles,' observes the Liberal Patriot's Ruy Teixeira. Amazingly, 'Democratic support dropped by a gobsmacking 46 points among Hispanic moderates, from +62 to +16, between 2016 and 2024.' Advertisement Much like white moderates, they 'are voting their ideology and political views, not their group identity.' These voters think Democrats 'moved too far left on economic issues' and 'cultural and social issues.' Hispanic moderates are 'tough on crime,' 'support law enforcement,' oppose 'gender ideology in public schools,' and 'want cheap, reliable energy.' 'Considering that moderates are the dominant ideological group among Hispanics,' Democrats can 'either adjust or risk losing even more support among Hispanics who are no longer content to vote their identity.' From the right: Hail Elon's Space Exploits Advertisement 'What makes [Elon] Musk so important' is not his 'troubled venture into government,' but how he's 'reviving a spirit of exploration on a big scale,' cheers the Washington Examiner's Byron York. The United States reduced then abandoned 'space exploration after the peak moment of Apollo' decades ago. Now Musk's 'hugely ambitious' Starship program, 'which is designed to go to Mars,' is 'the heart of the American space program.' Yes, 'Musk has received the most public attention' for his DOGE work, a role ' he proved entirely unsuited' for, bringing him 'constant attacks.' Advertisement But 'Americans owe him a debt of gratitude for almost single-handedly restoring a sense of ambition and purpose to' space exploration and exploitation, 'a great field of US achievement.' Libertarian: Don't Pardon 'Gold Bars' Menendez With a tweet charging 'it was the Democrats who started weaponizing the Justice Dept.,' argues Reason's Billy Binion, 'Bob Menendez, the disgraced former senator from New Jersey,' is obviously angling for a presidential pardon before heading to prison this month after his conviction for 'accepting almost $1 million in bribes in exchange for, among other things, favors that benefited foreign governments.' No way: The pardon power exists 'to give a lifeline to people who may have been railroaded by the government, which sometimes gets creative and fanatical in its attempts to punish people. It is not supposed to be a get-out-of-jail-free card for well-connected, powerful people who can flatter the president.' And 'Gold Bars' Menendez 'as a senator, was one of the most powerful people in the country.' Financial analyst: Universities' Big Squeeze 'The nightmare scenario for elite universities is here,' warns Semafor's Liz Hoffman. 'Top universities are financial titans,' except 'they make a lot of money but spend almost all of it.' Now the Trump administration threatens not their 'federal grants and contracts' but their lucrative 'tax-exempt status' and the OK to admit 'students from abroad,' who now 'make up as much as one-quarter of undergraduates at elite colleges and tend to pay sticker price, while American students get discounts.' Advertisement Yes, many have huge endowments — 'too much' of that money is 'tied up in assets that can't be sold quickly' such as 'private equity, private credit, real estate, and venture capital.' Now 'Wall Street investors are expecting endowments to look to sell portfolios of these stuck investments for cash in the coming weeks.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
The Hill
22-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Can we prevent the possibility of a cover up about the president's health?
The cover-up is worse than the crime. That's the main lesson drawn from the Watergate scandal in the 1970s. President Richard M. Nixon was forced to resign from office (rather than be impeached) when he and his White House aides attempted to conceal their involvement in the break-in at the Democratic National Committee's headquarters. Sen. Howard Baker (R-Tenn.), vice chair of the Senate Watergate Committee, put it succinctly: 'It is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble.' Political scandals and cover-ups in Washington are nothing new. The latest example is in the just published, 'Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.' Co-written by well-respected journalists Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, the book charts the president's rapid and tragic decline in his mental acuity and the concerted efforts of a tightly knit coterie of aides to keep it all from the public. This is not the first time a president's declining health was concealed from the public. President Woodrow Wilson suffered a severe stroke in 1919, early in his second term, which left him incapacitated. His wife Edith and his personal physician kept his condition secret, and his wife performed most of his official duties for the remainder of his term through 1921. I have no intention of reading the Tapper-Thompson book, so I will not pass judgment either on its factual basis or the alleged severity of the president's condition. However, judging from the descriptions of the book in a May 15 Washington Post news story and a style section book review the same day, I think the evidence deserves to be taken seriously. This is not a fly-by Washington rumor dropping. The release of the Tapper-Thompson book this week coincides with the House Oversight and Accountability Committee's announcement over the weekend that its hearings into President Biden's increasing use of autopens to sign pardons and issue new regulations will include the alleged cover-up of Biden's diminished mental capacity as president. The addition to its agenda was prompted by Axios's release Saturday of the audiotapes containing the full five-hour interview in October 2023 of Biden by Special Counsel Robert Hur. Hur was investigating Biden's retention of classified documents in his private residence after leaving vice presidency in 2017. The audio interviews purportedly reinforce evidence of the president's diminishing cognitive capacity as president. Hur asserted in his final report that Biden 'willfully' kept the classified documents. But the special counsel did not press charges, suggesting that a jury would find Biden 'a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.' Assuming it's true that President Joe Biden was cognitively dysfunctional for the better part of his last two years in office, what if anything could have been done to avert his decision to run for reelection; and, more importantly, to terminate or at least curtail his remaining time in office? We know that impeachment is not a valid option, even if Congress had a clue. It only applies to high crimes and misdemeanors. The Constitution's 25th amendment was designed in part to fill that gap by providing for suspension of service due to incapacity, or removal by two-thirds of both houses if the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet first finds the president unfit to continue in office. A very high bar indeed. The one opening in the 25th amendment is that Congress may designate by law another entity to substitute for a Cabinet majority. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has proposed a commission appointed by Congress to play that latter role and to designate qualified physicians to conduct full medical and physical exams of the president, which the president may or may not agree to. Congress could only take into account a president's refusal to be examined. Perhaps not surprisingly Raskin introduced his bill in the 115th and 116th congresses (2017-2020) when Donald J. Trump was president, but not in the 117th or 118th congresses (2021-2024) when Joe Biden was president. I have concluded that the only realistic way to pierce the iron dome of silence imposed by close aides is for one or more of them to break loose, for the good of the country, and speak truth to power — to bluntly tell the president why he cannot remain in office. A small group of respected friends from Congress might perform the same function, as happened with Nixon. After allowing a decent interval for reflection, the truth tellers would go public about their intervention. Cover-ups are not a solution. They can become huge problems, though, if allowed to fester. Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year congressional staff veteran culminating as chief-of-staff of the House Rules Committee in 1995. He is author of, 'Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial' (2000), and, 'Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays' (2018).
Fox News
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
The president and his enemies
Remember Nixon's "enemies list"? It came to light in hearings before the Senate Watergate Committee in June 1973, where White House Counsel John Dean disclosed a memorandum entitled "Dealing with our Political Enemies": "This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration; stated a bit more bluntly – how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies." The list was wide-ranging, including celebrities, journalists, newspapers, unions, advocacy groups, academics, senators, congressmen, representatives, businesses, and organizations who had voiced opposition to Nixon and his administration, or promoted ideas and causes the president didn't like. And Dean's suggested methods for dealing with these "enemies" included limiting the availability of grants and federal contracts, as well as litigation and prosecution. Stop me if any of this begins to sound familiar. In the three months since his inauguration, President Trump and his administration have issued executive orders against individuals perceived as disloyal, stripped security clearances and protective details from former officials who incurred his wrath, and targeted law firms for having defended the "wrong" causes or clients. He has also issued ultimatums to universities like Columbia and Harvard, demanding that they conform to his administration's ideological preferences or risk losing billions of dollars in federal contracts and grants. Trump has also personally filed frivolous lawsuits against his perceived political opponents. This includes the Des Moines Register and Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer, for incorrectly suggesting that. Kamala Harris was leading in Iowa right before the 2024 presidential election, and CBS for how 60 Minutes edited its Kamala Harris interview. For the Trump administration, no grievance is too petty to escape outsized retribution. After the White House limited access by the Associated Press for refusing to relabel the body of water between Florida and Mexico the "Gulf of America," federal courts ruled that this act of viewpoint-based retaliation was a violation of the First Amendment. The administration defied that order until April 15, when an AP journalist was allowed into a White House event for the first time since February. Even this, however, seems to be short-lived. The next day, the White House announced a new media policy which would once again restrict journalists at their own discretion – a move which the Associated Press argues is an attempt to evade the court order. The list of egregious and unconscionable behavior goes on. In a few short weeks, it seems Trump has already out-Nixoned Nixon. But there's a stark difference between then and now: When Nixon's enemies list was revealed, it became a national scandal and a profound embarrassment – including to Nixon himself. The scandal helped confirm that the president had obliterated his credibility and reputation, and he resigned in disgrace in August 1974. It's impossible to imagine Donald Trump resigning over anything – let alone public awareness of his abuses of power. For one thing, there's no embarrassing secret to reveal. Trump's behavior hasn't been the kind of thing you have to drag out of people through sworn testimony at congressional hearings. On the contrary, the president boasts about his actions on social media and holds executive order ceremonies to celebrate them. What was once covert is now overt – shamelessly so. What's more, these actions are leavened with head-spinning hypocrisy. An administration that promised to end "lawfare" has made it not just official policy, but its political brand. This administration has managed to combine and magnify the abuses of the first Red Scare, the McCarthy Era, and Watergate, all in the space of three months. The only thing worse is the fanfare with which this behavior is greeted. During a 1977 interview with David Frost, former President Nixon proclaimed that "When the president does it, that means it is not illegal." This was a showstopping moment, revealing that Nixon had crossed a Constitutional line – one that dashed his hopes for a political comeback. Not long ago, Trump posted a similarly egregious and chilling quote from Napoleon, which read" He who saves his Country does not violate any Law." The response from his base? Applause. Those looking for a more hopeful lesson from history might turn to an exchange during the Army-McCarthy hearings, which effectively ended Joseph McCarthy's political career following the second Red Scare. Responding to a relentless and baseless campaign of character assassination, attorney Joseph Welch finally shot back, "until this moment, senator, I think never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness… Have you no sense of decency?" It is a good question, and one particularly suited to the present moment.
