It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It’s worth recalling the Nixon chronology. In two years, the idea of impeaching Nixon went from loony-left fantasy, to mainstream, to inevitable.
On May 9, 1972—before the Watergate break-in―my former boss, Congressman William Fitts Ryan of Manhattan, submitted the first resolution to impeach Nixon, H.Res. 975, mainly for the illegal bombing of Cambodia, other war crimes, and spying against American citizens.
The break-in occurred in June 1972. Woodward and Bernstein got busy that summer and fall. The Senate Watergate Committee did not start hearings until May 1973, and the official House impeachment inquiry only began in May 1974. It took time for evidence, public pressure, and political courage to build. Nixon finally resigned in August 1974, more than two years after the break-in.
In October 1973, when removing Nixon from office still seemed a fantasy, the ACLU’s Chuck Morgan published a book-length bill of particulars urging Nixon’s impeachment. It bore a remarkable resemblance to the eventual Articles of Impeachment nearly a year later.
Nixon was a vile president with a creepy personality, but he was also a student of history and a serious person. In the end, even Nixon acceded to court orders to turn over evidence.
originally posted by: man404
In Watergate, Nixon used his presidential powers to direct CIA to target his political opposition the Democrats. That is against democracy. That was illegal.
Even if Trump / Pence GOP team colluded with Russia to hack DNC and release dirt to the public, that is not illegal. That is informing voters before voting day. THEY did not do the hack, so they did not commit any crime under US law.
originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t
and you choose to ignore where the info came from and where it was released or leaked from
also you choose to ignore why the us citizen in the usa was being spied upon in the first place
as far as ignoring whose decision it was, frankly i dont care
yates is exposed as actively trying to undermine the current potus and the info she had "wanting to give you a heads up" in NO way equates ANY scenario in which national security was in jeopardy
look what flynn did was inappropriate, and he is rightfully no longer employed, but what he did in no way is a national security issue ;to frame it as such is disingenuous