Ex-Watergate investigator calls Justice Department review of 1970s probe a ‘fairy tale’
by Mary McCue Bell · The Washington TimesThe Justice Department’s reported preliminary review of alleged misconduct in the original Watergate investigation is a “fairy tale,” said Michael Hershman, a former senior staff investigator for the Senate Watergate Committee.
Over half a century since the scandal became the catalyst for President Nixon’s resignation, the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility is reportedly reviewing whether the 1970s Watergate special prosecutor’s office mishandled the case.
If the Trump Justice Department does conclude misconduct occurred, it “wouldn’t mean much,” Mr. Hershman told The Washington Times in an interview.
People were interested in these podcasts
“[Nixon] resigned not because of the potential criminal case but of impeachment,” he said. “Even if it was shown that there was inappropriate contact between prosecutors and judges, that would not necessarily have made any difference in the outcome, and it certainly wouldn’t have mitigated the very strong evidence.”
Nixon originally denied knowing of plans for the burglary of Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex. But his former White House aide, John Dean, testified that the president knew about and was involved in the cover-up, and recordings from the White House’s voice-activated taping system later corroborated his account.
Facing likely impeachment for attempting to sweep the scandal under the rug, Nixon became the only U.S. president to resign in 1974.
A presentation and slide deck delivered at the department’s headquarters by former Nixon aide Geoff Shepard kick-started the review, first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
He argues that Watergate prosecutors withheld evidence, lied to the grand jury, held secret meetings with judges and treated the case as a political prosecution.
Advertisement Advertisement
“Given his expertise and scholarship on Watergate, he was recently invited to give a presentation,” a Justice Department spokesperson said of Mr. Shepard. “But that presentation does not constitute an investigation. OPR remains focused on ensuring that Department attorneys meet the highest professional standards.”
The revisionist case is strongest among conspiracy fanatics, Mr. Hershman said, because there is no independent verification or evidence of alleged meetings between special prosecutors and judges.
Mr. Shepard, a former member of Nixon’s Watergate defense team, points to internal memos documenting secret meetings that he says show judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, according to his books, The Real Watergate Scandal and The Nixon Conspiracy.
The Senate established a special investigating committee, commonly referred to as the Senate Watergate Committee, to probe “illegal, improper, or unethical conduct” in the 1972 presidential campaign.
Allegations similar to Mr. Shepard’s have been circulating for years, Mr. Hershman said, adding that during his time investigating the scandal for Congress, he did not see or hear anything suggesting improper conduct by prosecutors.
Advertisement Advertisement
“The facts that we gathered at the Senate Watergate Committee were the facts that convinced Nixon’s own Republican colleagues that he had to resign,” he said.
The Biden administration previously rejected a request from Mr. Shepard for a similar review.
It comes at a time when the Trump administration has had “virtually no success in proving that there was a conspiracy to investigate and prosecute Donald Trump,” Mr. Hershman said.
The Watergate review aligns with renewed conservative interest and parallels drawn by figures like Vice President J.D. Vance, who said in June at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library that the “deep state” took down Nixon in a way similar to how the same institutions targeted Mr. Trump in his first term.
Advertisement Advertisement
Contact the author
Mary McCue Bell
Follow author updates Follow Click to follow. Manage followed authors