In a nutshell, what was the whole Watergate scandal all about and how did it result in Nixon's impeachment?
396625
nutshell...\n\nnixon ordered men to break in to the Democratic National Committee HQ to find out how he could win the next election... the men got caught BUSTED... nixon LIED... there were tapes of him saying damaging things.. AN FBI LEAK made sure he got in trouble.. he left before impeachement and ford gave him amnsesty...
907435
Andrew Johnson faced impeachment charges twice from the radical Republican congresses in 1867 and 1868.  On the second attempt, Johnson came within one vote of being removed from office.  He was saved by a young Republican senator from Kansas named Edmund Ross.  Ross' opposition to the somewhat illegitimate proceedings essentially ended his political career.\n\nAlthough Nixon likewise faced impeachment, and might well have been removed from office has the proceedings gone forward, he resigned before the House could proceed.  Clinton likewise faced impeachment, though there was never any likelihood that the proceedings would go significantly forward.\n\nEssentially, no president has ever successfully been brought up on charges through the impeachment process.
1152036
the president was blamed for all of it.  'dirty tricks' got way out of hand when watergate happened.
297334
The great scandal of his administration was called "Teapot Dome." I'd Wiki it or Google it.
570381
I think the only differences is that we got Nixon out before he could do any real damage. But with this administration, we as the American people just don't seem to understand the hardship that they're leading us toward. So I say yes this administration is definitely more corrupt, and alot more sneaky..
1143330
i'm not surprised whatsoever. \n\nI mean take a look at just a little bit of history: \n\n* Republican Nixon presidency - Watergate corruption; ended with proof\n\n* Democrat Carter presidency - no corruption\n\n* Republican Reagan/Bush presidencies - Iran Contra and World Bank corruption; ended with proof\n\n*Democrat Clinton presidency - no corruption; never proved any of the things they accused him of - he actually was impeached for stating he didnt have sexual relations with a woman who gave him a bj because he (like a lot of men) didn't believe a bj was sex. Ironically he was impeached for this when he was answering an irrelevant question on the stand for a DIFFERENT accusation. Was a complete setup. And they never found any proof for any of those charges.\n\n* Republican Bush Jr presidency - so far I think it's being called culture of corruption because its his entire administration involved. \n\nWhat I am surprised at is that Rove is going to get away with it.
446379
The whole story\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_Defense
605230
Getting caught \nHe should have had a buffer between him and the controversy \nand a patsy to blame it on.\nAbove all he should have not got involved and betrayed the voters that put him in office.
839223
The first and only president to resign from office was Richard M. Nixon who resigned on August 9, 1974 due to the Watergate scandal.
1005960
FEBRUARY 21, 2006 – In these highly-charged political times, it is the word that dare not speak its name:  impeachment. Democrats and other opponents of the President, as well as people in the media, are afraid to raise the topic for fear of being called too partisan or extreme.\n\nBut the startling revelation of the President’s warrantless wiretapping campaign may be the straw that broke the camel's back: In the halls of Congress and on the front pages of a growing number of mainstream periodicals, impeachment is being discussed more and more openly. And many leading constitutional scholars agree: there has never been so strong a case for impeachment since Richard Nixon.\n\nIn ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH, Michael Ratner, Bill Goodman and other experts at one of our nation's leading institutions of constitutional scholarship, the Center for Constitutional Rights, set out the legal arguments for impeachment in a clear, concise, and objective discussion. In four separate articles of impeachment detailing four separate charges –warrantless surveillance, misleading Congress on the reasons for the Iraq war, violating laws against torture, and subverting the Constitution’s separation of powers – it is, say the CCR attorneys, a case of black letter law, with abundant evidence.\n\nARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH details that evidence, the relevant laws and the legal precedents. It also explains what the Constitution says about impeachment – an informative discussion further illuminated by supplemental material that includes a history of impeachment, explanation of its procedures, and the previous articles of impeachment brought against Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.\n\nWith leading Republicans calling for investigations of the domestic spying campaign, a special prosecutor investigating the suppression of evidence used to launch the Iraq war, and hearings on innumerable instances of torture, ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH may be more timely than any of us would like to admit.
322614
In February of 1973 the Senate established the Special Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities to investigate.  In late July the House Judiciary Committee adopted three articles of impeachment, accusing President Nixon of obstruction of justice for impeding the Watergate investigation, of abuse of power for his partisan use of the FBI and IRS, and of contempt of Congress for refusing to obey a congressional subpoena to release the tapes.\n\nCheckmated, Nixon conceded in a televised address on August 5 that he had withheld relevant evidence.\n\nOn August 9, 1974, Richard Nixon became the first president to resign, and Gerald Ford took office as the nation's first chief executive to have been elected neither president nor vice president.
7576
he can be impeached for high crimes and mistemeaners. So there would have to be a specific charge.  If he was given erroneous information and he thought it to be true, then it is not a lie.
927340
During Nixon's administration, Rep. VP Agnew was caught cheating on his taxes by the IRS. He resigned his office. Nixon then appointed Gerald Ford to take his place. When the Watergate burglary investigation was implicating Pres. Nixon, Nixon resigned and Rep. VP Gerald Ford became President, appointing Rockefeller  to the VP opening. The U.S. then had a President AND Vice President that was never elected by the people. Ford gave Nixon immunity  from prosecution for any crimes he may have committed while in office.\n\nNow give me all those thumbs down..........I love em'. \n\nThis set a double standard of justice in our country. While ordinary citizens were being prosecuted and jailed for far lesser crimes, President Nixon received the so called "Get out of jail free" card. It defied the U.S. Constitutional Bill of Rights concerning "equal justice".
1063051
Richard Nixon up until he got caught doing what they all do anyway.
659034
The term "Watergate" refers to a series of events, spanning from 1972 to 1974, that began with U.S. President Nixon's administration's abuse of power toward the goal of undermining the Democratic Party and the opposition to the Vietnam War. The events got their name from burglaries of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C.. Though Nixon had endured two years of mounting political embarrassments, the court-ordered release of the "smoking gun tape" about the burglaries in August 1974 brought with it the prospect of certain impeachment for Nixon, and he resigned only four days later on August 9. He was the first, and still only, U.S. president to resign from office.\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal\n\nwatergate scandal\nhttp://history1900s.about.com/od/watergatescandal/\n\n(1972–75), U.S. political scandal surrounding the revelation of illegal activities on the part of the incumbent Republican administration of President Richard M. Nixon during and after the 1972 presidential election campaign. \nhttp://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9076257\nhttp://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9382393?&query=watergate&ct=\n\nAnswers from Yahoo!\nwhat was watergate scandal about?\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=1006021503147&r=w&is_vote_given=true&pa=BpVqD13uBHMzU.qS4xwPRZPTk5eRoKWSeq9G_gtkqAJgg8zafxk-\n\nWhat was the Watergate Scandal and what were the CAUSES & EFFECTS of the scandal?\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=1006043010785&r=w&is_vote_given=true&pa=BpVqD13uBHMzU.qS4xwPRZPTkpGdoKWS4nhiQHdj_UnL5fGmCcU-\n\nwhat happened during watergate scandal?\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=1006041207251\n\nWashingtonpost.com: Watergate\nhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/front.htm\n\nEncyclopedia Americana: Watergate\nhttp://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/side/watergte.html\n\nWatergate Info\nhttp://watergate.info/\n\nhttp://school.discovery.com/lessonplans/programs/watergate/\n\nThe watergate scandal/essay\nhttp://www.fratfiles.com/read.php?id=4312\n\nWatergate scandal summary\nhttp://www.corporatenarc.com/watergate.php\n\nwikipedia:watergate scandal\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Watergate_scandal\n\nThe Watergate Scandal: The Unmaking of a Presidency\nhttp://www.answerpoint.org/columns2.asp?column_id=571&column_type=feature
375965
The House Judiciary Committee, over the course of four days in late July 1974, improved three articles of impeachment charging Nixon with (1) obstruction of justice, (2) abuse of power, and (3) contempt of Congress.  Nixon, though, resigned on August 9, 1974, thereby avoiding an impeachment vote in the House as a whole.  So no, he wasn't technically impeached, though I think it can be said there's no doubt it would have happened had he not cut and run.
599741
Yes! Under this Administration it is worse than the KGB. When is America going to wake up and demand accountability from George W. Bush, for his abuse of his office and the power bestowed upon him? We impeached Nixon for much less than this. How long are we going to sit back and take this kind of corruption?