American audiences love sequels. If you loved or hated the Mueller report, you will either love or hate the sequel in Congress when public impeachment hearings begin on November 13. Donald Trump seemed to get away with election interference “in his face” in 2016. Will he be able to do it again in 2020? If so, will you go for a third or fourth sequel?
But there’s more. The Trump episodes are a repeat of the Nixon dramas in 1968 and 1972. President Johnson and the top officials around him knew that Nixon got away with interfering in foreign policy in 1968, and so Therefore, he won the elections through international dirty tricks. Although unknown at the time, the Watergate break-in was a domestic political sequel to Nixon’s successful interference in 1968.
Although the outcome of the unfolding impeachment drama remains uncertain, three historical lessons can be seen, although their outcomes cannot be predicted at this time. Contrary to what you hear, history does not repeat itself. But some themes and patterns recur, taking unexpected forms that pose new dangers and possibilities as in the case of these three lessons.
Lesson One: Parallelism. Nixon was busted during his second term for illegally meddling in an election he was certain to win. He had gotten away with illegal meddling in the 1968 election when President Johnson sealed the evidence out of concern for national security. Donald Trump meddled in the 2016 campaign in front of television cameras. The investigation of his actions was kept secret even as his opponent’s investigations impacted the campaign. Trump damaged the effectiveness of the Mueller Report by attacking it for two years and then having his attorney general undermine it when it was released. Despite evidence that should have led to impeachment, it appeared that meddling during the 2016 campaign might not prevent Trump from being re-elected.
The parallel with Nixon is clear after the Mueller Report. Needing even more Russian help to win re-election, Trump has begun pushing investigations into his most feared opponent in 2020 by using military aid funded by Congress to extort money from Ukraine’s president. This was not done on camera, but in the presence of seasoned diplomatic professionals who understood the dangers to our national security.
Seeming to have escaped meddling during a first term, as Nixon had, Trump was caught doing the same during a second term. The whistleblower’s complaint had the effect of a failed Watergate break-in. Both events brought to light events that were meant to happen in secret. The investigations then led to individuals with pangs of conscience stepping in front of the cameras and exposing presidential dishonesty to the world.
Lesson two: predictable versus unpredictable outcome. Media commentators and political scientists behave more like football announcers when they focus on the political game to predict the outcome of this impeachment process. The outcome of Bill Clinton’s impeachment was made clear when Senate Democrats endorsed him, agreeing with the majority of the American people that he had done something wrong but he should not have been charged. However, the outcome for Nixon was not predictable. He was not charged or tried because support collapsed to the point that he resigned rather than stand trial. So if Trump’s impeachment fails, it will happen predictably as Senate Republicans follow Mitch McConnell and hold the line. If the impeachment trial is successful, it will most likely take a course not envisioned at this time and will demonstrate Nancy Pelosi’s ability to negotiate impossible situations.
This impeachment process hinges on the contest between Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi. It is possibly the last battle in the war between them since the Affordable Care Act (ACA). McConnell held the Republican line in the Senate when the ACA passed with a 60-vote Democratic majority. Soon after, Democrats lost one of those seats, and it seemed certain that the House would never accept the Senate’s version. That’s when Pelosi did the impossible, proving to be a closer when she counts, even when it meant losing her majority in the House. McConnell then used the ACA to defeat Democrats in four consecutive midterm elections. But the removal of the ACA only became possible after the 2016 victory of Trump. That’s when public opinion changed when it became clear that there was no Republican alternative to the benefits that millions of people would lose. Nobody doubts that he intends to support the party instead of the country: he already committed to that option in the 2016 elections when he refused to support President Obama’s actions against Russian interference.
However, Nancy Pelosi manages to manage the process before it reaches the Senate. She has an impressive track record of winning when she commits to fights and should not be underestimated. She has also shown her commitment to the country rather than the party. If her strategy leads to the successful removal of Donald Trump, it is almost certain that she will follow a path that no one can predict when the public hearings begin.
Lesson three: Russia and China. Nixon meddled in two elections while we were in a war in Vietnam. Our enemy was North Vietnam, but we knew that they were representatives of China and Russia. Nixon was also extremely adept at redirecting national policies toward China and Russia in ways that clearly promoted world peace and did not undermine our international alliances.
Any true disciple of Nixon Republicanism must be shocked that the Nixon Revenge Squad of Roger Ailes, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone used Russian help to elect Donald Trump. Meddling in Ukraine also helps Russia while showing other allies that we cannot be trusted.
Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan would roll over in their graves (if such a thing were possible) at the prospect of a Republican president single-handedly taking over Russia, attacking our European allies, undermining South Korea’s confidence and Japan, and send our farmers into recession through a trade war with China that has permanently undermined agricultural supply chains. These first-term gains will be followed by major catastrophes if the current election meddling brings about a second presidential term for Trump.
Conclusion. Richard Nixon undermined peace efforts in Vietnam as part of his bid for the presidency in 1968. Lyndon Johnson hid that fact from the public out of concern for national security. Nixon meddled in the 1972 election, was caught, and had to resign to escape impeachment. Three revenge-seeking Nixon supporters (Roger Ailes, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone) helped Donald Trump win the 2016 election with the support of Russia. Trump’s opponent was known to be under investigation by the FBI, but news of a more serious investigation into Trump was kept under wraps. The FBI investigation resulted in the work of special counsel Robert Mueller, who was successfully obstructed. Mueller’s results followed the rules in a way that seemed to reward obstruction. With the help of a compliant attorney general, it appeared that Trump had escaped. Then came the news of a whistleblower, like the shocking news of the Watergate break-in. This prompted a series of professionals to tell the truth to Congress and sparked an impeachment inquiry.
Like Nixon, Trump was caught with a smoking gun in his hand. They both got away with it the first time. Will Trump escape a second time?
The answer depends on the American people and on Nancy Pelosi. The public is about to hear the truth. Will we recognize it and demand the impeachment of this president? If impeachment succeeds, it will happen because of the insight and integrity of Nancy Pelosi and her team. And the outcome will be something none of us can predict when the public hearings begin.
References on Nixon’s 1968 election interference:
Peter Baker, “Nixon Tried to Spoil Johnson’s Vietnam Peace Talks in ’68, Notes Show,” The New York Times (January 2, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02 /us/politics /nixon-tried-to-spoil-johnsons-vietnam-peace-talks-in-68-notes-show.html.
John A. Farrell, “When a Candidate Conspired with a Foreign Power to Win an Election,” Politico Magazine (August 6, 2017), https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/ nixon-vietnam-candidate-conspired-with-foreign-power-wins-elections-215461.
Robert Johnson, “Did Nixon Commit Treason in 1968? What New LBJ Tapes Reveal,” History News Network, https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/60446.
Charles Wheeler, “The Lyndon Johnson Tapes: Richard Nixon’s ‘Betrayal'”, BBC News Magazine (March 22, 2013), https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668.
