WI: Nixon starts regular payments to families of burglars soon after, Watergate never revealed.

New York magazine

July 1, 1974

https://books.google.com/books?id=6...xon discussed hush money eight times"&f=false

' . . . In the complex calendar of Watergate, one day—March 21, 1973—has taken on crucial significance. . . . . In the course of the almost two-hour conference, Nixon discussed hush money eight times and concluded that besides taking care of the "the jackasses who are in jail," paying off Hunt was the "prime thing" that "damn well better" be done. "You have no choice," he said decisively, "but to come up with the $120,00," and exclaimed, "(Expletive deleted), get it!" . . . '
One, if the burglars and maybe Hunt are going to take the fall and go to jail for the president, actually, it sounds pretty reasonable for the administration to take care of their families while they're in jail. I'm sorry, but it does! :p

And maybe if someone within the administration had been on the ball and made this offer a lot sooner, and competently made it and went through the whole dance of arguing against the initial no's of the burglars, then Hunt would not have had to ask. And the whole thing would not have felt like blackmail.

For a burglary which occurred on June 17, 1972, it does appear rather incompetent to only get around to talking about financial support of the families on March 21, '73.

And so, if the Nixon Administration had had their shit together . . .

upload_2018-5-2_19-15-3.png
 
Last edited:
Option 1: Things Stay Largely the Same!

upload_2018-6-27_15-15-17.png


Nixon limps along to the end of his presidency. Yes, there's rumors and some investigative reporting, but it never seems to approach a threshold where it looks like impeachment would be likely. The primary dissatisfaction with Nixon is a ragged economy.

Carter wins in '76 and faces the headwinds of Iran, an energy crisis, and stagflation.

Reagan wins in '80 (wins in a rematch even if he was on the losing side to Carter in '76).
 
Last edited:
It’d take something a lot less than a surviving President Nixon to keep Carter away from the White House. Literally any little thing could happen on the national stage pre-‘75 and we see no President Jimmy Carter.

Without Carter, Reagan is up in the air, so yeah, definitely would not be more of the same.
 
the most-otl like outcome I could see would be Ford getting the nomination thanks to a scandal-hit but not impeahed nixon not being able to get Conally in '76. Ford's term goes.. meh, we end up with some democrat in 1980(Carter?) who has to deal with similar stuff to OTL's Carter admin, including a delayed Iranian revolution and some consie type wins in '84.
 
. . . Literally any little thing could happen on the national stage pre-‘75 and we see no President Jimmy Carter. . .
Yes, I tend to agree that Jimmy winning was like Villanova beating Georgetown in 1985 where everything had to go right.

But . . . then I find myself asking, how was it that Jimmy’s team of Jody Powell, etc, were the only ones who figured out that showing well in the Iowa caucus (Carter finished second to Uncommitted) would give you highly helpful early momentum ? ! ?
 
Last edited:
the most-otl like outcome I could see would be Ford getting the nomination . . .
After the Republicans didn't even come close to retaking the House in '72, Jerry promised Betty that he would retire in January '77.

https://books.google.com/books?id=r...emocrats held on to their majorities"&f=false

' . . . Nixon carried forty-nine states. However, the Democrats held on to their majorities in both Houses of Congress, and Ford, acknowledging that he probably never would become speaker, promised his wife he would retire when Nixon left the White House in January 1977. . . '
But sometimes things happen and you need to (respectfully and sincerely!) ask a spouse to release you from a promise.

But with Nixon serving out his term, Ford probably does retire.
 

1980 Republican primary

I guess we can start with '80 and ask which of these fellows may have felt ready in '76. Ronnie Reagan is probably the frontrunner.
 
A big question is if they 100% get away with it will this encourage other Republican campaigns to try similar things?
And Democratic campaigns, and state legislators, and members of city council.

No, it does not bode well for clean government, not at all.

We miss a whole generation of state sunshine laws and the medium amount of good that they did, at least for a while.

Okay, as far as creating cynicism

1) JFK's assassination and the Warren Commission, even for those of us who don't believe in a conspiracy, the Commission seemed like such a through-the-motions and a pat answer, instead of simply acknowledging that questions remain [please be careful, we can discuss perceptions of conspiracy theory, but if you dive into the details that's a kickable or bannable offense here at AH]

2) "losing" Vietnam and/or the lies involving Vietnam. I really wish it was different, but many of my fellow citizens focus on the fact that we "lost" Vietnam, rather than it was a civil war we should have never been involved with in the first place. Or even the idea that by propping up a dictatorship, we became the wrong side. Anyway, liberals and conservatives both often do focus on Vietnam, but focus on different aspects.

3) Watergate may have missed the sweet spot. Meaning, if there had been some investigative reporting and some hearings in the House or Senate but nothing was done, that may have led to even more cynicism than OTL.
 
Last edited:
There's also potential for Nixon to be seen as a great figure similar to FDR if his healthcare program can go through. Nixon never cared much for domestic politics in contrast to the international realm. However, as a second term President that lost siblings to TB, and without Watergate, he could look at that as a legacy builder. His contemporaries noted that he was planning on bringing it before Watergate blew up as well.
 
Without floating anti-government memes from watergate . . .
What about the idea that some people at time thought Watergate went to far and Nixon was treated unfairly,

that is, it may have gone past the “sweet spot,”

that instead, if there had been some investigation but nothing was done, that may have fed into cynicism about government even more?
 
Someone would still have talked, and with Judge "Maximum John" Sirica handing down long sentences with inducements that if someone flipped their sentence would be reduced there is no way that Nixon could have kept the Watergate burglars quiet.
 
Nixon finishes out his term, but the Democratic nominee (and likely victor) in 1876 would not necessarily be Carter. Likewise, Reagan may never have his chance to win the GOP nomination here, let alone the presidency.
 
There's also potential for Nixon to be seen as a great figure similar to FDR if his healthcare program can go through. . .
I’m not sure Nixon-care (or Romney-care or Obama-care) actually works all that well as policy.

I mean, as much as I’d like to convince myself that it takes the bulk of the best features of several different systems, just not that sure. And this will definitely affect its popularity over time. (For example, you can’t get Obamacare if you make too little. You have to do Medicaid. Well, who the heck wants to be stuck with the poor person’s program ? ? )
 
Someone would still have talked, and with Judge "Maximum John" Sirica handing down long sentences with indu that if someone flipped . . .
James McCord wrote a letter to Judge Sirica in March ‘73 saying there had been perjury at the trial. So, just one guy. Now, admittedly one of the other burglars and/or involved persons such as Hunt may have been thinking, Thank Goodness, now I don’t have to do it and go public.

All the same, I think there’s some chance, above 20% and maybe higher, that Nixon gets away with it.
 
Last edited:
All Nixon needed to do to avoid any heat beyond the news media complaining about him for months was issue a bunch of pardons for the burgulars and do an obivously insincere apology about him not realizing America was no longer a country where that kind of dirty politics was no longer kosher.
 
All Nixon needed to do to avoid any heat beyond the news media complaining about him for months was issue a bunch of pardons for the burgulars and do an obivously insincere apology . . .
but that shit would come back and bite him, at least regarding his public reputation and big time on that
 
Last edited:
Top