Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Saturday Night Massacre link - could it happen again ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
steve2470 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 12:52 PM
Original message
Saturday Night Massacre link - could it happen again ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre


The "Saturday Night Massacre" (October 20, 1973) was the term given by political commentators to U.S. President Richard Nixon's executive dismissal of independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox, and the forced resignations of Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus during the controversial and drawn-out Watergate scandal.

Cox, who was appointed by Congress to investigate the events surrounding the Watergate break-in of June 17, 1972, had earlier issued a subpoena to President Nixon, asking for copies of taped conversations which Nixon had made in the Oval Office as evidence. Nixon initially refused to comply with the subpoena, but on October 19, 1973, he offered what was later known as the Stennis Compromise – asking a Senator to review and summarize the tapes for the special prosecutor's office.

Cox refused the compromise that same evening, and it was believed that there would be a short rest in the legal maneuvering while government offices were closed for the weekend. However, President Nixon acted to dismiss Cox from his office the next night – a Saturday. He contacted Attorney General Richardson and ordered him to fire the special prosecutor. Richardson refused, and instead resigned in protest. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General Ruckelshaus to fire Cox; he, too, refused and resigned.

Nixon then contacted the Solicitor General, Robert Bork, and ordered him as acting head of the Justice Department to fire Cox. Richardson and Ruckelshaus had both personally assured the congressional committee overseeing the special prosecutor investigation that they would not interfere – Bork had made no such assurance to the committee. Bork considered resigning as well, but was persuaded by Richardson that this would leave the Department in chaos. Bork then complied with Nixon's order and fired Cox.

<snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. It could kinda happen again.
If Bush asked Alberto Gonzales to fire Patrick Fitzgerald, Gonzales wouldn't resign or be fired himself. He'd can Fitzgerald. So, if there was a new Saturday Night Massacre, only one head would roll, that of the special prosecutor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. I've never heard that stuff about Richardson telling Bork to do it
I'm thinking that is rewriting history.

I still think it was one of the reasons Bork didn't get on the USSC and you'd think he would have brought it up during the nomination process ("I was just protecting the country from a worse fate. Prez Nixon unchecked.")

Of course, it didn't help that Bork is a crazy right wing ideologue who would do away with a woman's right to birth control. (Yeah, you read that right, birth control.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Richardson Told Nixon To Get Bork To Do It
Damn, I'm feeling old right now...LOL.

I was working a radio newsroom that Sunday morning and that story just blew me away. The audacity...and it just vindicated how close Cox was to the truth. Leon Jawarski would pick up the work and finish the job.

Nixon ordered Richardson to fire Cox...he refused, then said he would resign first. IIRC, then Nixon tried to get Richardson's #2 (name escapes me at the moment) to do it...he refused and quit...then he got Bork #3 on the phone who gladly did the deed.

Bunnypants can't fire Fitzgerald right now as the political fallout would be too distracting for too long...it's far easier to stonewall and play out the clock on the guy than turn up the heat.

For example, I suspect Fitzgerald may get some indictments...expect terms like "executive privilidge" and any case moving at glacial speed. The good thing about Fitzgerald is that he will wait 'em out and flush 'em out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. that's how I remember it too, I was in law school, we were following
it VERY carefully. I thought Bork cheerfully did it. I don't remember the stuff about Richardson telling him he should. If Richardson truly believed that, he would have done it himself!

And Richardson's deputy was Ruckelshaus. Like you, I forgot it and just looked it up (in the original post.)

Like yesterday. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandomom Donating Member (327 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thi is the TRUE definition of getting "Borked" isn't it?
Let every "news" outlet know that being Borked means being illegally fired from a prosecutor's job by the very government officials being investigated. GOP wants us to believe that being Borked means being an innocent brilliant jurist who can't get a fair shake by the Senate.

CHANGE the definition of being Borked. You can DO it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC