Vance and Nixon:

[applegrove]

Last edited Sat Jun 27, 2026, 05:42 PM - Edit history (1)

JD Vance seems to be saying, "We are WAY MORE corrupt than Nixon, y'all!"

And he is right. But the biggest difference between then and now is that when Watergate happened Nixon's fellow Republicans had the spines and principles to hold him accountable for his corruption—that is no longer the case.

— Mrs. Betty Bowers (@mrsbettybowers.bsky.social) 2026-06-27T19:10:14.593Z

JD Vance: "I think Nixon's historical legacy is enjoying a bit of a renaissance, and deservedly so. I joked that if Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12 hours news story. The idea that it took down a presidency is crazy."

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-06-25T21:03:32.010Z

[cmmngrnd]

1. Most Republicans still sided with Nixon - but we don't need a majority

The committee votes on the five impeachment counts ( party yea-nay):

Obstruction of Justice: Dem 21 - 0 , Rep 6 - 11
Abuse of Presidential Power: Dem 21 - 0 , Rep 7 - 10
Contempt of Congress: Dem 19 - 2, Rep 2 - 15
Cambodia Bombing / War Powers: Dem 12 - 9, Rep 0 - 17
Emoluments and Tax Fraud: Dem 12 - 9, Rep 0 - 17

It never went to the House floor for a full vote.

I think it is helpful to remember that when we say the Republicans of the day had the good sense, backbone, and national interest at heart to stand up to Nixon, we are still talking about a minority. Even then there was a strong pull toward party over country. Of course now Republicans have given up any semblance of working for what's best for the nation, except for the narrowly defined White Christian Nationalism oligarchical version of what they think the nation should be.

I hope we never have a Democratic president so corrupt that we get to test how Democrats do in similar circumstances. Clearly I'm not counting the Clinton impeachment. Clinton was wrong, but the impeachment seemed an incorrect response - ymmv. They generally do well when other Democrats abuse power or act unethically (e.g. Gov Blagojevich) even to the point of going overboard (e.g. Sen. Franken).

ETA: And to bring this reply back to the original topic, Vance's inability to understand what's wrong with what he is saying is horrifying.