Monday, May 21 , 2018, 5:05 am | Fair 52º

 
 
 
 

Joe Conason: Is It Watergate Yet?

As Donald Trump and his subordinates lash out wildly in their campaign to suppress discussion of his presidential campaign's alleged collusion with the Kremlin, they conjure visions of a truly monumental scandal.

With their latest attempts to manipulate the Federal Bureau of Investigation and intimidate the Washington press corps, they clumsily encourage comparisons with Watergate — although, as usual with this crew, it isn't so simple to distinguish malevolence from incompetence.
 

Both the New York Times and CNN clearly struck a sensitive nerve with reports that the FBI is investigating the multiple contacts last year between Russian officials and the Trump campaign.

Whatever the nature of those contacts and officials, those stories fit neatly into the long-developing narrative of an illicit effort by Kremlin operatives to sway our presidential election on Trump's behalf through email hacking, fake news reports and hired internet trolls among other things.

If the Russian hacking story was troubling for Trump, it was not nearly as dangerous as the possible collusion of Trump aides and advisers in that conspiracy. While no direct evidence of such collusion has emerged, the implication was inescapable.

The reactions of Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, press secretary Sean Spicer, chief strategist Steve Bannon and Trump himself were all telling.

After denying the Times story on Meet the Press, Priebus asked a top FBI official to support that denial — a request that the bureau properly rejected because its probe is still continuing.

Spicer attacked the stories from the press podium and then, in an extraordinary measure, excluded the Times, CNN and several other news organizations from a briefing in his office.

Bannon, in a rare public appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference, proclaimed a permanent war against the independent press, warning "it's going to get worse every day for the media."

As for Trump, he responded with incoherent and contradictory complaints — raking the "enemy" media in a speech for inventing the Russia stories, and blasting his own FBI in a Twitter tantrum for failing to apprehend the "leakers" within the bureau who presumably had leaked those stories.

Of course, a leaked story and a fabricated story are very different: a leak is based on facts, while a fabrication is based on..."alternative" facts.

None of what we have seen so far is Watergate, but the echoes are growing louder and stranger. Nixon oversaw an elaborate campaign of pressure and interference with the FBI investigation, which ultimately became a major element in the impeachment brief against him.

Nixon and his team pushed back hard against the press, including a public crusade by Vice President Spiro Agnew and an infamous episode when the Washington Post's Carl Bernstein called Attorney General John Mitchell to ask about a slush fund used by the Committee to Re-elect The President for intelligence operations against the Democrats.

Threatening the Post's publisher, Mitchell screamed, "All that crap, you're putting it in the paper? It's all been denied. Katie Graham's gonna get her tit caught in a big fat wringer if that's published."

(It was published, it was true, and "Mr. Law and Order" Mitchell eventually went to prison.)

Do Trump and his associates have something to hide — something even bigger and uglier than Watergate?

The ferocity of their reactions certainly arouses suspicion, and so did their peculiar efforts to conceal the misconduct of fired national security adviser Michael Flynn, which they attempted to hide even from the hapless vice president.

Had the damning facts about Flynn not leaked, the compromised adviser would still be running the National Security Council, according to Trump.

We may never know the full truth, unless and until the Senate appoints a special investigative committee, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuses his conflicted self to appoint a special counsel.

For now, unfortunately, Trump can rely on the protection of most Republicans on Capitol Hill, whose interpretation of their duty is so craven and self-serving, unlike the Republican leaders who rose to the challenge of Watergate.  

Indeed, all too many Republicans seem ready to celebrate the Kremlin's violation of our democracy.

At CPAC, dozens of fervent "conservatives" waved little Russian Federation flags sporting a TRUMP logo, until conference officials confiscated them.

But that bizarre display didn't reflect the attitude of most Americans.

And we can hope that this administration's attempts to bully the press corps will not only fail, but backfire -- vindicating the First Amendment, just as in Nixon's time.

Joe Conason is editor in chief of NationalMemo.com. Click here to contact him, follow him on Twitter: @JoeConason, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Supporter

Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >