Nixon Brought up on Treason Charges

Germaniac

Donor
Ohh not for Watergate, but for his involvement in ending the peace process in Vietnam to win the 68' election.

in the weeks before the election Nixon met with the south Vietnamese Ambassador and convinced him to break off the peace conference with the North. He convinced him that with the impending election for president, a republican administration would net the south Vietnamese a much better deal than a democratic one.

It was very obvious that the hope of a seccesion of conflict in Vietnam might just boost Humphrey to the presidency. When this collapsed so did his chances. While the election results in the college are heavily leaning towards Nixon, in fact the election was much closer, With Wallace loosing by less than 1% of the popular Vote.

Now, what happens if A) Nixon cannot convince the South Vietnamese to halt convo with North and then B) Wallace wins the popular vote by a large margin and either c) wins election or b) looses
 
It doesn't, but comes close to violating the Logan Act, which prohibits private citizens conducting foreign relations of the US Government. Basically a political weapon so Humphrey could win.
 
Actually, no we've gone far beyond the Logan Act. Nixon's interference with the peace process and his promise of a better deal means that he is actively killing American soldiers and selling out America's interests and selling out America's allies.

Treason.

He should be swinging from a rope.
 
Not quite treason

Article 3, Section 3 defines treason as follows:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Nixon may well have been meddleing in foreign policy that was none of his business, but he was not quite meeting the criteria for treason. Very bad stuf, but I can't see a conviction for treason.
 
Article 3, Section 3 defines treason as follows:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Nixon may well have been meddleing in foreign policy that was none of his business, but he was not quite meeting the criteria for treason. Very bad stuf, but I can't see a conviction for treason.
Exactly. We're not gonna get him or Jane Fonda. It was still wrong (even though it kinda worked out), but it doesn't hit treason.
 
Ohh not for Watergate, but for his involvement in ending the peace process in Vietnam to win the 68' election.

in the weeks before the election Nixon met with the south Vietnamese Ambassador and convinced him to break off the peace conference with the North. He convinced him that with the impending election for president, a republican administration would net the south Vietnamese a much better deal than a democratic one.

It was very obvious that the hope of a seccesion of conflict in Vietnam might just boost Humphrey to the presidency. When this collapsed so did his chances. While the election results in the college are heavily leaning towards Nixon, in fact the election was much closer, With Wallace loosing by less than 1% of the popular Vote.

Now, what happens if A) Nixon cannot convince the South Vietnamese to halt convo with North and then B) Wallace wins the popular vote by a large margin and either c) wins election or b) looses

Anthony Summers recounts the facts that we know in 'The Arrogance of Power', & Christopher Hitchens goes into detail about this in his polemic against Kissinger ("It's one of Washington's great open secrets," says Tipsy McHitchens).

I don't remember anything about Nixon meeting any RVN diplomats and personally making the deal.

I think it was all limited to some combination of Haldeman & Erlichman & Mitchell getting Henry K to leak information from inside the Paris negotiations, info which they then used to convince Claire Chennault to approach her friends in the Saigon regime & urge them to not participate in the negotiations because "Dick will get you a better deal once elected".

If it's exposed I think the underlings take the rap for their boss. I can't see Vice President Nixon going to trial.

Unindicted Co-conspirator?
 
I believe that people close to Nixon did indeed sabotage peace talks in the fall of 1968. It was a wicked act. I am not certain that it was criminal and I am certain that it was NOT treason as defined by the US Constitutiion.

However if it had somehow come out a week before the Poll that would surely have changed the outcome.
 
I believe that people close to Nixon did indeed sabotage peace talks in the fall of 1968. It was a wicked act. I am not certain that it was criminal and I am certain that it was NOT treason as defined by the US Constitutiion.

However if it had somehow come out a week before the Poll that would surely have changed the outcome.

If treason isn't applicable, then there's the US Code.

For example, if Kissinger, as a member of the US delegation to Paris, did pass on information to Nixon's campaign, then this law might have been breached:

USC said:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > § 952Diplomatic codes and correspondence
Whoever, by virtue of his employment by the United States, obtains from another or has or has had custody of or access to, any official diplomatic code or any matter prepared in any such code, or which purports to have been prepared in any such code, and without authorization or competent authority, willfully publishes or furnishes to another any such code or matter, or any matter which was obtained while in the process of transmission between any foreign government and its diplomatic mission in the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

If Madame Chennault was negotiating with Thieu or Ky of the RVN:
USC said:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > § 953Private correspondence with foreign governments
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

(The above law is what the 'SwiftBoaters' accused John Kerry of having broken!)

And this law might apply as well:

USC said:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > § 954False statements influencing foreign government Whoever, in relation to any dispute or controversy between a foreign government and the United States, willfully and knowingly makes any untrue statement, either orally or in writing, under oath before any person authorized and empowered to administer oaths, which the affiant has knowledge or reason to believe will, or may be used to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government, or of any officer or agent of any foreign government, to the injury of the United States, or with a view or intent to influence any measure of or action by the United States or any department or agency thereof, to the injury of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

As far as I know all these were on the books in '68.
 
This is all molehills into mountains, I as I see things. Nixon was President (head of state, head of the executive branch, commander in chief, etc) when this alleged intereference in the Peace negotiations took place. In this capacity, he and his staff have every right to communicate information, officially and unofficially, openly and secretely, among themselves and to our ally, the South Vietnamese government. Diplomacy is conducted by the Executive Branch and one must presume anyone conducting diplomacy on behalf of the Administration was by definition "authorized" to do so. If Nixon's purpose was supposedly to delay the peace negotoations to help ensure our ally got a "a better deal" , he is furthering US policy to protect and preserve the South Vietnamese regime and certainly not working against the interests of the USA - as opposed to those individuals who made unauthorized contacts with our enemy, North Vietnam. By tying this up with US domestic politics and even using unofficial representatives as go-betweens in backdoor negotiations, he was guiltiy of nothing many other presidents since Thomas Jefferson have done.
 
Zoomar, re-read the OP. This happened when Nixon was still a presidential candidate -- undermining President Johnson's attempts to end the war.
 
Nixon was President (head of state, head of the executive branch, commander in chief, etc) when this alleged intereference in the Peace negotiations took place.

No. The allegations are that Nixon's campaign interfered with the negotiations taking place under the Johnson administration. The LBJ library holds tapes of telephone conversations where the then president talks of Republican 'treason'.

Anthony Summers believes that LBJ wrote out a detailed statement condemning Nixon.
 
Tricky Dicky really was awful.

So yeah, have this info leaked, and you see a Democratic administration in 68, and a partitioned Vietnam? What are either of these going to look like?
 
Tricky Dicky really was awful.

True. I've always like Hunter S. Thompson's quote on his old friend Dick:

"[SIZE=-1]If the right people had been in charge of Nixon's funeral, his casket would have been launched into one of those open-sewage canals that empty into the ocean just south of Los Angeles. He was a swine of a man and a jabbering dupe of a president. Nixon was so crooked that he needed servants to help him screw his pants on every morning. Even his funeral was illegal. He was queer in the deepest way. His body should have been burned in a trash bin."[/SIZE]
 
Top