As a student of presidential history with over 400 insider books in my personal library at one time, I can testify to the accuracy of Geoff's lecture. Best I've seen.
I've been interested the past few years to know more of this event. America's Untold Stories is now diving into this. He's a good story teller. Especially, more recently, I saw a CNN interview or commentary where the guy claimed to be Nixon main guy (or close to it...advisor?), but then was heralded by the left, and I thought said to be a Democrat Strategist. It made me wonder what trickery also went on. The latter mentioned RUclips Channel of "America's Untold Stories" was the first time I heard of the LBJ corruption and the fact that he basically wanted them gone, and RFK had a lawsuit against him and his corruption. Going on while the parade was happening?!? I always notice Democrats and Leftist leaning writers and scholars will say White people when they are Democrats in the past, but always try and throw Nixon's name in there.
nixon is on tape ordering the fire bombing and break in at brookings he is on tape ordering the coverup he is on tape admitting that there is a slush fund to pay for people to be silent
We need a law that says in effect that any former president and his/her staff cannot be tried in DC for any crime arising out of his or her role in the president's administration. I'm not sure where the trials should be held, but not DC. Not New York either.
Thank you for your dedication to shed light on this sad unfortunate chapter in our nation's history. If the prosecution was so confident about their case, why the need for collusion? The Constitution either guarantees a fair trial or it does not; it's as simple as that. And I can't think of a case where this is more relevant than the removal of the duly elected president of the United States.
In 1974, there was an US oil and gas company, Pan American Sulphur Co. (PASCO). On PASCO’s board of directors was Randolph Guthrie, who was a partner in a NY law firm, Mudge Rose Guthrie Nixon and Mitchell. His law partners were President Richard Nixon and US Attorney General John Mitchell. PASCO’s legal firm was a Houston law firm, Fulbright Crooker and Jaworski. Leon Jaworski became the Watergate Special Prosecutor after Archibald Cox was fired.
I've binge watched this guy's vids idk if he ever really unveils a smoking gun but I also believe the lesson that he says is learned is the weaponizing the judicial system is dangerous...
They kept up the 4 years of words can be violence as their side committed and committed it. All they could get was fighting back against antifa with fists while they had clubs. And a few FED stings on supposed Libertarian Militias, where DEDs were majority members desperately trying to entrap anyone. Finally the 6th happens. No punishment for the guy outside the day of and before saying come in. Or the ones opening the door. Nothing about the scrawny Teefs breaking windows or the ones doing it speaking Russian/Ukrainian. Or the gvt Psi Op lady asking brave men to come and help her. Some wonder if they were the ones on the bus. The orange hats?
Thus guy isn't saying that Nixon or his aides were innocent; he's simply saying they were denied a fair trial. That said, I'd like to know who he thought was guilty. The evidence I've seen indicates that all of them, including Nixon, were guilty in some form. That said, Nixon's crime was not ordering the break-in; it was perjury based on his participation in the cover-up. Gordon Liddy was the architect of the original break-in. Nixon first learned of it while vacationing in Florida, when he saw a newspaper headline about it and largely ignored it. It wasn't until the participants in the break-in ran to Nixon for help that he agreed to help them cover it up.
Yep and Nixon admitted his guilt in 1983 saying “I’m a fighter, I just didn’t want to quit. Also I thought it would be an admission of guilt, which of course it was,” and “This was the final blow, the final nail in the coffin. Although you don’t need another nail if you’re already in the coffin - which we were” Also, not that it matters much at this point, but the cover-up crime is obstruction of justice and not perjury as Nixon never testified in front of a jury.
Correct they don't lie but you can make them play, how, when, or in any context you want. I don't think anyone being voice recorded could defend their words later on.
No but yo ualso hear what you want to hear and are open to interpretaion. Its just sound. try taping your Thanksgiving dinner and then writing a transcript of who said what and get the same meaning.
@@brianlogan4243 What are you even talking about? Have you listened to the tapes. Nixon himself acknowledged his guilt when referring to the smoking gun tape... “This was the final blow, the final nail in the coffin. Although you don’t need another nail if you’re already in the coffin - which we were,” he also said “I’m a fighter, I just didn’t want to quit. Also I thought it would be an admission of guilt, which of course it was,”
So all during Watergate, you have the law partner of two of the defendants and the law firm of Watergate Special Prosecutor on the same corporation. Then 9 months after Nixon resigned, PASCO was bought by Standard Oil of Indiana. PASCO’s stock went from $10 to $40 a share. Standard Oil was founded by the Rockefeller family. In 1974, Nelson Rockefeller was appointed VP by Gerald Ford.
Isn’t this all waaaay after the fact stuff that is just really easy to vent about? The White House performed so poorly and dishonestly throughout watergate that most everyone voted guilty. Proof, tapes, people admitting their crimes…all outweigh any opinions to defend the Republican Party. It’s just too far over to try to blame the other party. These types of speeches are funny, but can’t be taken seriously. In my opinion, of course. And don’t compare it to Hillary and Trump and more current history. Each issue is its own. Watergate was handled, so these people need to catch up and complain about new things.
Yep this is a clear money grab. Highlights how easily people can be duped even in the face of rock solid evidence, admissions, tapes, etc. Scary stuff...
@@mantra11 like the Clinton Count, the missing Kennedys and the Bath House Boys. Hopefully, that dying urge for truth has had you profess that to the public?!?
I'm a Nixon enthusiast, but this new fixation on re-writing thoroughly documented and accepted history is worrisome and pitiful. Are we headed into an era where history is what anyone *wants it* to be? How soon before a wave of "citizen historians" decide that Nixon was elected in a landslide in 1960, but the evil Liberal media hid the truth? A political party which enthusiastically embraces and creates self-serving delusions is something the Founding Fathers and, I suspect, Richard Nixon, would be shocked to see endorsed as a positive thing. "Nixon 2024 - Now More than Ever."
Nixon is a disgrace. You either believe in the Constitution or you believe in Nixon. I'm sorry this guy spent his early career supporting a lie. His error is in not admitting that and getting over it. Haldeman, Elrlichman and Mitchell all came to see how dishonest and corrupt Nixon was- why can't this guy? As to Nixon; Did he or did he not solicit and receive illegal campaign contributions? Did he or did he not pressure his staff to gain intelligence on his democratic opponents? Did he or did he not use those funds to circumvent the FBI and CIA and to establish his own secret intelligence gathering group. Did he or did he not order illegal wire tapping? Did he or di he not select a corrupt governor as his Vice President? Did he or did he not continue a war that could have been concluded in 1969? Did he or did he not sabotage the peace talks occurring in 1968? Did he or did he not obstruct justice? Did he or did he not continuously lie to the American Public? Did he add to the trust and esteem of the office in which he served or did he subtract from it? Did he serve or did he rule? I feel nothing but true pity for Nixon's supporters. They followed a man who believed in power more than loyalty and in Autocracy more than the Constitution.
>They followed a man who believed in power more than loyalty and in Autocracy more than the Constitution. Yes to this as well as most of the other character questions, but so were the last President (Bush, another war criminal, is only excluded because I don't really think he bullshitted on loyalty), realistically the current president, and the next. Ignoring the system's flawed application/implementation, especially when the claims are this blatant, is just going to kick the can down the road in a manner as bad as when the people (read: MSM that the Presidents consume) don't hold their Presidents to account. As the case against him was so easily made by your comment (claims which, it seems he has interpreted in the context of his new documents in his new book it seems), this would've been a breeze, but now its the next convoluted mess to be passed, lingered, and dwelled on, from one generation to the next (as in tradition, seemingly)-continuous failure to hold both these defendants and their courts to account in reasonable time, if at all, is how we later get the whitewater investigation, the current red scare probe, and, more generally, seventeen years occupying Afghanistan, $16 trillion bank bailouts, and Donald Trump as president. That being said now I thought these comments were also relevant, however I only know enough to know the crime as well as Nixon were both questionable but not too much into details. *_HotWax931_*_ year ago_ Thus guy isn't saying that Nixon or his aides were innocent; he's simply saying they were denied a fair trial. That said, I'd like to know who he thought was guilty. The evidence I've seen indicates that all of them, including Nixon, were guilty in some form. That said, Nixon's crime was not ordering the break-in; it was perjury based on his participation in the cover-up. Gordon Liddy was the architect of the original break-in. Nixon first learned of it while vacationing in Florida, when he saw a newspaper headline about it and largely ignored it. It wasn't until the participants in the break-in ran to Nixon for help that he agreed to help them cover it up. *_joe jitsu9_*_ months ago_ HotWax93 You are mistaken on two counts: The prosecutors knew they couldn't win convictions with the truth, so they lied. In other words, they knew the people around Nixon were innocent. Innocent. Nixon was never placed under oath. Perjury is, by definition, lying under oath. One can only commit perjury when one lies under oath, so Nixon couldn't have committed perjury. Mr. Shepard made very clear he believes John Dean is a liar. John Deand hatched the plan and lied about all facets of it. Mr. Shepard made it clear enough that he believes John Dean is guilty. Other people who were up close in the White House at the time believe this too, as do other students of Nixon, for example Hugh Hewitt. Is Dean a liar, and the force behind the break-in? Dean was forced to settle out of court and pay the respondent's legal fees when Dean sued an author for defamation. The author wrote that the whole Watergate break-in came about when Dean tried to find out what the Democrats knew about Dean's call-girl girlfriend. The author called Dean's girlfriend, later wife, a whore, and Dean had to settle out of court because the author was going to win. That book (I can't recall the title) is still available. In short, Dean wasn't defamed because what the author wrote was true. Mr. Shepard also made it clear that it's really hard to avoid breaking at least some laws when your attorney is a crooked as John Dean is. In the end, it looks like this: no John Dean means no break-in, no cover-up, no debate about whether to assist the alleged breakers-in with legal and financial aid. In short, no Watergate scandal at all. John Dean was the problem, pure and simple. He is, and was, guilty as sin.
You miss the point. Again I say the standard it sets is ugly. Nixon was a criminal ok, the point is where do yo udraw the line? The same prosecution force broke rules and laws to go after Nixon. Is ok the next time one party doesn tlike the president, wel lwe have seen that with Clinton and Trump. These secret intelligent groups are just called advance teams now and its a regular part of campaign stragedy. You dont think Reagan's people influenced the hostage situation in Iran before Carter left? , you dont think Trump's people influenced foreign trade deals before he took office? Every president since Nixon has furthered the power of the executive despit the constitution and despite public opinion. Without ever being the president I dont think any of us really know the lousy choices they have. The budget itself is a problem born of politics. The congress creates the peoblem, blames the president, yet onl ycongress can grant the solution. All these politicians are liars so dont try saying Nixon was any different, he just got caught.
Didn't Clinton & the Democratic Party create the whole "Russia Gate propaganda" to get wiretaps and informants into the Trump Presidential Office? Hilary Clinton was actually one of the lawyers working on impeaching Nixon. An evil corrupt woman who has learnt many tricks over the years. Democrats LOVE her....I say no more.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
As a student of presidential history with over 400 insider books in my personal library at one time, I can testify to the accuracy of Geoff's lecture. Best I've seen.
I've been interested the past few years to know more of this event.
America's Untold Stories is now diving into this. He's a good story teller.
Especially, more recently, I saw a CNN interview or commentary where the guy claimed to be Nixon main guy (or close to it...advisor?), but then was heralded by the left, and I thought said to be a Democrat Strategist. It made me wonder what trickery also went on.
The latter mentioned RUclips Channel of "America's Untold Stories" was the first time I heard of the LBJ corruption and the fact that he basically wanted them gone, and RFK had a lawsuit against him and his corruption. Going on while the parade was happening?!?
I always notice Democrats and Leftist leaning writers and scholars will say White people when they are Democrats in the past, but always try and throw Nixon's name in there.
I'm so sorry they put you through this President Nixon. It's amazing how much of this parallels exactly with what they do to President Trump
nixon is on tape ordering the fire bombing and break in at brookings
he is on tape ordering the coverup
he is on tape admitting that there is a slush fund to pay for people to be silent
How do we bring this before the court to get them to do exactly as you said so we can exonerate our late president Richard Nixon
Such bullshit. He was a criminal.
Thank you for speaking up!
We need a law that says in effect that any former president and his/her staff cannot be tried in DC for any crime arising out of his or her role in the president's administration. I'm not sure where the trials should be held, but not DC. Not New York either.
i read mr shepards previous book a few years ago.ive been a fan ever since.he seems trustworthy and honest.integrity
Your so right and knew Richard Nixon as a child in Whittier with my grandmother Dorothy
Thank you for your dedication to shed light on this sad unfortunate chapter in our nation's history. If the prosecution was so confident about their case, why the need for collusion? The Constitution either guarantees a fair trial or it does not; it's as simple as that. And I can't think of a case where this is more relevant than the removal of the duly elected president of the United States.
Nixon resigned because he knew he was guilty...
@@mantra11He resigned because he knew that the impeachment hearings and trial would tear the country apart.
I need someone who's INDEPENDENT to look at this, not someone who had skin in the game.
In 1974, there was an US oil and gas company, Pan American Sulphur Co. (PASCO). On PASCO’s board of directors was Randolph Guthrie, who was a partner in a NY law firm, Mudge Rose Guthrie Nixon and Mitchell. His law partners were President Richard Nixon and US Attorney General John Mitchell. PASCO’s legal firm was a Houston law firm, Fulbright Crooker and Jaworski. Leon Jaworski became the Watergate Special Prosecutor after Archibald Cox was fired.
I've binge watched this guy's vids idk if he ever really unveils a smoking gun but I also believe the lesson that he says is learned is the weaponizing the judicial system is dangerous...
“History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.”
Mark Twain
Shades of a certain Former Presidency/Jan. 6. Just saying.
They kept up the 4 years of words can be violence as their side committed and committed it. All they could get was fighting back against antifa with fists while they had clubs. And a few FED stings on supposed Libertarian Militias, where DEDs were majority members desperately trying to entrap anyone.
Finally the 6th happens. No punishment for the guy outside the day of and before saying come in. Or the ones opening the door. Nothing about the scrawny Teefs breaking windows or the ones doing it speaking Russian/Ukrainian. Or the gvt Psi Op lady asking brave men to come and help her. Some wonder if they were the ones on the bus. The orange hats?
Thus guy isn't saying that Nixon or his aides were innocent; he's simply saying they were denied a fair trial. That said, I'd like to know who he thought was guilty. The evidence I've seen indicates that all of them, including Nixon, were guilty in some form.
That said, Nixon's crime was not ordering the break-in; it was perjury based on his participation in the cover-up. Gordon Liddy was the architect of the original break-in. Nixon first learned of it while vacationing in Florida, when he saw a newspaper headline about it and largely ignored it. It wasn't until the participants in the break-in ran to Nixon for help that he agreed to help them cover it up.
Yep and Nixon admitted his guilt in 1983 saying “I’m a fighter, I just didn’t want to quit. Also I thought it would be an admission of guilt, which of course it was,” and “This was the final blow, the final nail in the coffin. Although you don’t need another nail if you’re already in the coffin - which we were”
Also, not that it matters much at this point, but the cover-up crime is obstruction of justice and not perjury as Nixon never testified in front of a jury.
Correct, it was a set up from the beginning. The point of the break in was to get caught, so they could set up Nixon.
Where is the press on this one?
+John Lawrence - The Liberal press will never report anything they don't want you to know.
I completely respect the BEST of Nixon. But the apologists, revisionists, partisan snipers, they really become HARD to entertain & accept...
Great speech. Great points in the presentation. Very true.
There is one simple response: The Tapes Don't Lie!
Correct they don't lie but you can make them play, how, when, or in any context you want. I don't think anyone being voice recorded could defend their words later on.
Auto Insider | Hell Yeah!!! Nixon and his administration were fucking horrible!!
No but yo ualso hear what you want to hear and are open to interpretaion. Its just sound. try taping your Thanksgiving dinner and then writing a transcript of who said what and get the same meaning.
@@brianlogan4243 What are you even talking about? Have you listened to the tapes. Nixon himself acknowledged his guilt when referring to the smoking gun tape... “This was the final blow, the final nail in the coffin. Although you don’t need another nail if you’re already in the coffin - which we were,” he also said “I’m a fighter, I just didn’t want to quit. Also I thought it would be an admission of guilt, which of course it was,”
So all during Watergate, you have the law partner of two of the defendants and the law firm of Watergate Special Prosecutor on the same corporation. Then 9 months after Nixon resigned, PASCO was bought by Standard Oil of Indiana. PASCO’s stock went from $10 to $40 a share. Standard Oil was founded by the Rockefeller family. In 1974, Nelson Rockefeller was appointed VP by Gerald Ford.
My favorite President.
This man us an historical revisionist
This story sounds familiar
Isn’t this all waaaay after the fact stuff that is just really easy to vent about? The White House performed so poorly and dishonestly throughout watergate that most everyone voted guilty. Proof, tapes, people admitting their crimes…all outweigh any opinions to defend the Republican Party. It’s just too far over to try to blame the other party. These types of speeches are funny, but can’t be taken seriously. In my opinion, of course. And don’t compare it to Hillary and Trump and more current history. Each issue is its own. Watergate was handled, so these people need to catch up and complain about new things.
Yep this is a clear money grab. Highlights how easily people can be duped even in the face of rock solid evidence, admissions, tapes, etc. Scary stuff...
@@mantra11 like the Clinton Count, the missing Kennedys and the Bath House Boys.
Hopefully, that dying urge for truth has had you profess that to the public?!?
I'm a Nixon enthusiast, but this new fixation on re-writing thoroughly documented and accepted history is worrisome and pitiful. Are we headed into an era where history is what anyone *wants it* to be? How soon before a wave of "citizen historians" decide that Nixon was elected in a landslide in 1960, but the evil Liberal media hid the truth? A political party which enthusiastically embraces and creates self-serving delusions is something the Founding Fathers and, I suspect, Richard Nixon, would be shocked to see endorsed as a positive thing.
"Nixon 2024 - Now More than Ever."
Nice comment, I have opposite views to you on Nixon but find it refreshing to see a Nixon supporter disturbed by this as well.
And they come back in my adulthood and ruin my life .😅
And they lied about my grandmother Dorothy
To much of mis representation of legal
White.
Wash.
Sorry not falling for this..the man was vile,corrupt and narcissistic to say the least
They seal them to prosecute the INNOCENT in the POLITICIANS ROLL and NAME or their STEAD!
What kind of sentence are you trying to write there there, RUclips commentator, “Carol Keihn?” It is nearly unintelligible.
@@fairfaxcat1312 I do speech to text. Often mis interprets kind of like the transcription software.
Gordon liddy help ruin my life
Right on
No good
My dad loved Nixon.
Nixon is a disgrace. You either believe in the Constitution or you believe in Nixon. I'm sorry this guy spent his early career supporting a lie. His error is in not admitting that and getting over it. Haldeman, Elrlichman and Mitchell all came to see how dishonest and corrupt Nixon was- why can't this guy? As to Nixon; Did he or did he not solicit and receive illegal campaign contributions? Did he or did he not pressure his staff to gain intelligence on his democratic opponents? Did he or did he not use those funds to circumvent the FBI and CIA and to establish his own secret intelligence gathering group. Did he or did he not order illegal wire tapping? Did he or di he not select a corrupt governor as his Vice President? Did he or did he not continue a war that could have been concluded in 1969? Did he or did he not sabotage the peace talks occurring in 1968? Did he or did he not obstruct justice? Did he or did he not continuously lie to the American Public? Did he add to the trust and esteem of the office in which he served or did he subtract from it? Did he serve or did he rule? I feel nothing but true pity for Nixon's supporters. They followed a man who believed in power more than loyalty and in Autocracy more than the Constitution.
you are very stupid.you just dont understand.
>They followed a man who believed in power more than loyalty and in Autocracy more than the Constitution.
Yes to this as well as most of the other character questions, but so were the last President (Bush, another war criminal, is only excluded because I don't really think he bullshitted on loyalty), realistically the current president, and the next.
Ignoring the system's flawed application/implementation, especially when the claims are this blatant, is just going to kick the can down the road in a manner as bad as when the people (read: MSM that the Presidents consume) don't hold their Presidents to account.
As the case against him was so easily made by your comment (claims which, it seems he has interpreted in the context of his new documents in his new book it seems), this would've been a breeze, but now its the next convoluted mess to be passed, lingered, and dwelled on, from one generation to the next (as in tradition, seemingly)-continuous failure to hold both these defendants and their courts to account in reasonable time, if at all, is how we later get the whitewater investigation, the current red scare probe, and, more generally, seventeen years occupying Afghanistan, $16 trillion bank bailouts, and Donald Trump as president.
That being said now I thought these comments were also relevant, however I only know enough to know the crime as well as Nixon were both questionable but not too much into details.
*_HotWax931_*_ year ago_
Thus guy isn't saying that Nixon or his aides were innocent; he's simply saying they were denied a fair trial. That said, I'd like to know who he thought was guilty. The evidence I've seen indicates that all of them, including Nixon, were guilty in some form.
That said, Nixon's crime was not ordering the break-in; it was perjury based on his participation in the cover-up. Gordon Liddy was the architect of the original break-in. Nixon first learned of it while vacationing in Florida, when he saw a newspaper headline about it and largely ignored it. It wasn't until the participants in the break-in ran to Nixon for help that he agreed to help them cover it up.
*_joe jitsu9_*_ months ago_
HotWax93 You are mistaken on two counts:
The prosecutors knew they couldn't win convictions with the truth, so they lied. In other words, they knew the people around Nixon were innocent. Innocent.
Nixon was never placed under oath. Perjury is, by definition, lying under oath. One can only commit perjury when one lies under oath, so Nixon couldn't have committed perjury.
Mr. Shepard made very clear he believes John Dean is a liar. John Deand hatched the plan and lied about all facets of it. Mr. Shepard made it clear enough that he believes John Dean is guilty.
Other people who were up close in the White House at the time believe this too, as do other students of Nixon, for example Hugh Hewitt.
Is Dean a liar, and the force behind the break-in? Dean was forced to settle out of court and pay the respondent's legal fees when Dean sued an author for defamation. The author wrote that the whole Watergate break-in came about when Dean tried to find out what the Democrats knew about Dean's call-girl girlfriend. The author called Dean's girlfriend, later wife, a whore, and Dean had to settle out of court because the author was going to win. That book (I can't recall the title) is still available. In short, Dean wasn't defamed because what the author wrote was true.
Mr. Shepard also made it clear that it's really hard to avoid breaking at least some laws when your attorney is a crooked as John Dean is.
In the end, it looks like this: no John Dean means no break-in, no cover-up, no debate about whether to assist the alleged breakers-in with legal and financial aid. In short, no Watergate scandal at all. John Dean was the problem, pure and simple. He is, and was, guilty as sin.
AND, he & Mitchell accepted a bribe from the LCN to pardon Hoffa.
You miss the point. Again I say the standard it sets is ugly. Nixon was a criminal ok, the point is where do yo udraw the line? The same prosecution force broke rules and laws to go after Nixon. Is ok the next time one party doesn tlike the president, wel lwe have seen that with Clinton and Trump. These secret intelligent groups are just called advance teams now and its a regular part of campaign stragedy. You dont think Reagan's people influenced the hostage situation in Iran before Carter left? , you dont think Trump's people influenced foreign trade deals before he took office? Every president since Nixon has furthered the power of the executive despit the constitution and despite public opinion. Without ever being the president I dont think any of us really know the lousy choices they have. The budget itself is a problem born of politics. The congress creates the peoblem, blames the president, yet onl ycongress can grant the solution. All these politicians are liars so dont try saying Nixon was any different, he just got caught.
I think you have the name wrong - wasn't that Hilary Clinton???
Geoff! Beautiful presentation! I wish more people had seen this before voting in that Orange Clown, who beat Nixon - hands down - in Breaking America.
Didn't Clinton & the Democratic Party create the whole "Russia Gate propaganda" to get wiretaps and informants into the Trump Presidential Office? Hilary Clinton was actually one of the lawyers working on impeaching Nixon. An evil corrupt woman who has learnt many tricks over the years. Democrats LOVE her....I say no more.
Another apologist