Watergate: Trial and Tribulation, A Commander-in-Chief Laid Low

Paul Fischer

2/1/2015

Felicia Kornbluh

Watergate: Trial and Tribulation, A Commander-in-Chief Laid Low

One of the first questions that arises while reading All the President’s Men by Carl Bernstein is the historical authenticity of the events and journalistic integrity involved. It becomes very clear with further research, as well as sources, that the biggest challenge to the events that occurred is the typo on page 43. Of course, it must be first noted that ultimately the story was confirmed by Richard Nixon’s resignation as a correctly placed political and legal noose began to tighten around his ill-gained structures of power. Bernstein wonders at first how deep the conspiracy can go, and without the corporate trails of money that are prevalent today, with soviet infiltration at the forefront of the public opinion, it is safe to say that the extent of this corruption was if anything underestimated. Yet it is still important to reaffirm this before moving to the primary purpose of this paper, the evaluation of the artistic value of this work and its impact on popular culture and opinion. As Sussman says, “We’ve never had a story like this. Just never.”

It is also important to note the solidity of the accusations and events, because it played an important part in explaining how the American public could believe this extraordinary story. Bernstein was so confident in the public’s belief, with good reason after the prosecution’s interrogation of Nixon and his men and the devolution of the administration, that he was able to frame the story in a publicly accessible and theatrical manner. This despite generally conservative alignment shifts coincident with the incarceration and removal of voting rights of approximately 25% of voters, mostly African-American and democrats by the turn of the millennium.

Without making direct accusations, the book ominously points to a greater surveillance and corruption than can even be proven. As white house aides and Republican leaders alike attempted to stifle investigation into the Watergate incident, Woodward and Bernstein are both rebuffed handily. Unlike a manufactured scandal, such as when the FBI attempted to frame Martin Luther King Jr. for the beating of white women, which are shallow and ill-planned, this investigation has a breakthrough contributing to its authenticity as well as the dramatic flow of the story line.

Perhaps the greatest attribute to the story is that an alignment shift was not created. While the long term implications for the Republican party, and American democratic procedures cannot be understated, some might argue that this was a bone. In the coming election presidential candidate George McGovern seized this up, and overestimated the public’s belief and investment in these events. He made a number of extraordinary claims, and Republicans were able to use this to their advantage in counter-stories published, mocking investigative efforts.

The author uses suspense to his advantage as he closes in on Haldeman. For his source the “stakes seemed to quadruple” whenever Haldeman’s name was mentioned. Forced to do it himself, Woodward had to find a way to obtain absolute certainty in the confirmation. As FBI realizes that there is an inside informant, and some of the stories are coming “nearly verbatim” from bureau reports, maneuvering becomes tight. Jubilation breaks out as it is confirmed from secret grand-jury testimony by Hugh Sloan, a leading member of the conspiracy that the slush fund in question was in fact used for dirty political tricks.

Seeing Woodward and Bernstein as foils of each other is impossible. At the beginning of the story, this seemed to be the case, but by the time the story is confirmed, they act as one and if anything have reversed in roles as journalists. In late October, the doubt must have been crushing. The administration was dirty, but it is not clear how or what machinations were in place to ensure the survival of the corruption.

The sick surprise of having their big break nearly defeated is gut-wrenching. There is a perfect relief when finally, “Stoner [Sloan’s lawyer] said he would not recommend making any apology to Bob Haldeman."  The sacrifice of the journalists is also critical to the book’s literary success. These were men willing to risk incarceration, even while following all of the rules, in order to see justice done to a demagogue who was using corruption to maintain his “popular” rule: Nixon, the president of the United States himself.

Finally, Nixon “accepted the resignations of Ehrlichman and Haldeman and Dean.” Then on national television he took responsibility for the actions of his subordinates. As the tapes unraveled, so to speak, and the president’s men are brought into the limelight, the story is rated as B-plus, then Butterfield laid out the whole story before the senate committee and the country, and the story is more than a B-plus. While the president continued to insist that he was “not a crook” and called the stories “scurrilous” in nature, his authority was compromised. Though he believed that “one year of Watergate was enough,” the nation would never recover from the breach of sacred trust by an executive in this manner.