It's true as stated.
> Nixon's presidencies were marked by a gross contempt for law and
> ethics as well as every principle of a Constitutional Republic.
Nixon's presidencies were marked by a great many people other than
Nixon.
We know for a fact that Nixon did not break into the Watergate hotel,
or into the offices of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist. Those were
the fundamental acts behind the whole scandal. Nixon *may* have been
involved in planning either or both of those crimes; there is
evidence clearly pointing to the possibility, but NOT sufficient to
prove it.
A great many illegal things went on in the executive branch during
the Nixon administration -- many of them with the consent of Congress
but that's a different argument. Most of them were *not* related to
the Watergate mess and either were not investigated at all or were
not tied to Nixon himself at all.
Several crimes occurred that related to the Watergate mess, but in
most cases it can be positively shown that Nixon did not commit them
and in many cases there is substantial doubt.
There is little doubt that he conspired to obstruct justice,
obstructed justice, and destroyed evidence. These were (in my
opinion) sufficient to impeach him on and sufficient to justify his
resignation (as if someone needed justification to resign). But
of all the other offensive acts that can be clearly pinned on Nixon,
none that I am aware of are illegal.
And those crimes Nixon was shown to be guilty of, were part of the
cover-up, NOT part of the original scandal.
>
US$500 fee for receipt of unsolicited commercial email. USC 47.5.II.227