Deep Research Archives

The Unmaking of a President: A Comprehensive Report on the Watergate Scandal

Introduction: The Anatomy of a Political Crisis

The Watergate scandal, a term that has become synonymous with political corruption and the abuse of executive power, stands as a watershed moment in American history. It was far more than the "third-rate burglary" of the Democratic National Committee headquarters that the White House initially claimed.1 It was a sprawling conspiracy of political espionage, sabotage, and illegal cover-ups, orchestrated at the highest levels of the United States government, which culminated in a profound constitutional crisis. This crisis pitted the President of the United States against the judiciary, the Congress, and the free press, testing the resilience of American democratic institutions and the fundamental principle that no individual is above the law. The scandal's unraveling over two years, from June 1972 to August 1974, led to the unprecedented resignation of a president and left an indelible scar on the nation's political psyche. To understand the genesis of this crisis, one must first examine the turbulent environment from which it emerged and the complex character of the president at its center.

Setting the Stage: The Tumultuous Climate of the Early 1970s

The United States in the early 1970s was a nation in turmoil, grappling with a confluence of crises that had eroded public confidence and fostered a deep sense of national malaise.2 The long and divisive Vietnam War was winding down, but its legacy was one of bitter disillusionment and a questioning of American purpose and prestige on the world stage.2 The nation's humiliating withdrawal from Vietnam and the subsequent collapse of the South Vietnamese government underscored a decline in American power abroad, creating an atmosphere of global instability that emboldened adversaries.2 Domestically, the situation was equally fraught. The post-war economic boom had given way to a painful period of "stagflation," a toxic combination of high unemployment and soaring inflation that stagnated family incomes and saw major industries falter.5 This economic anxiety was compounded by profound social and cultural upheaval. The gains of the civil rights movement continued to be debated and contested, often violently, while a burgeoning counterculture challenged traditional attitudes about sexuality, marriage, and family.3 The era was marked by a rise in political violence, from assassination attempts to terrorist bombings by radical groups.2 This combination of foreign policy setbacks, economic hardship, and cultural division created a crisis of political leadership and a precipitous decline in public trust. By the early 1970s, faith in government had fallen to historic lows, with a growing public cynicism toward politicians and the institutions they represented.2 It was upon this fertile ground of suspicion and division that the seeds of the Watergate scandal were sown. The actions of the Nixon administration did not occur in a vacuum; they were, in many ways, an extreme manifestation of the paranoia and polarization that already defined the era. The pre-existing atmosphere of public distrust meant that once the first threads of the conspiracy were pulled, official denials were met not with deference, but with deep and persistent skepticism.

The Nixon Persona: A Study in Contradiction

At the heart of the Watergate scandal was President Richard M. Nixon, one of the most complex and contradictory figures to ever occupy the Oval Office.8 His presidency was marked by significant and lasting achievements. In foreign policy, he was a grand strategist, ending American involvement in Vietnam, engineering a historic diplomatic opening with the People's Republic of China, and pursuing an era of détente with the Soviet Union that led to landmark nuclear arms control treaties.9 On the domestic front, his administration oversaw a surprising number of progressive initiatives, including the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the passage of landmark legislation like the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act.6 Yet, these public accomplishments were shadowed by a darker, more secretive side of Nixon's character and administration. He was a man possessed by a deep-seated insecurity and a siege mentality, viewing the political world as a battlefield and his opponents not as a loyal opposition but as enemies to be vanquished.13 This paranoia manifested in an obsession with secrecy and a willingness to use the levers of government power to spy on and harass a long list of political "enemies".6 He unconstitutionally created his own secret police unit, the "Plumbers," to plug leaks and dig up dirt on his adversaries.6 The apparent contradiction between Nixon the statesman and Nixon the conspirator can be resolved by understanding his core motivation: the acquisition and consolidation of political power. His policy decisions were often driven by tactical calculation rather than firm ideological conviction.8 He took credit for creating the EPA, for instance, while privately noting that he did so only because he knew the Democratic-controlled Congress would otherwise force a more liberal environmental bill upon him. He proposed a radical overhaul of the welfare system, only to write in his diary that he wanted Democrats to kill the bill because the country couldn't afford it.6 He was, as one historian noted, "only as liberal as he had to be" to outmaneuver his rivals and dismantle the New Deal coalition that had dominated American politics for decades.8 This same political calculus, which prioritized winning above all else, led him to both create the EPA and authorize the "dirty tricks" of his re-election campaign. Both were simply different tools, one public and one secret, deployed to achieve the same ultimate goal: ensuring the political survival and triumph of Richard Nixon. It was this mindset that laid the groundwork for the abuses of power that would define the Watergate scandal.

Table 1: Key Figures in the Watergate Scandal

Category Individual Role(s) and Significance The White House Richard M. Nixon 37th President of the United States. Named as an "unindicted co-conspirator".16 He directed the cover-up and resigned from office on August 9, 1974, to avoid certain impeachment and removal.

H.R. (Bob) Haldeman White House Chief of Staff. A key figure in the "Berlin Wall" isolating Nixon.17 He was deeply involved in the cover-up from its inception and was convicted of conspiracy and obstruction of justice.18

John D. Ehrlichman Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs. Another part of the "Berlin Wall".17 He approved the break-in of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist and was convicted for his role in the cover-up.18

John W. Dean III White House Counsel. Initially tasked with managing the cover-up, he later cooperated with prosecutors and became the star witness against the administration, famously warning of a "cancer on the presidency".20

Charles W. Colson Special Counsel to the President. Known as Nixon's "hit man".22 He was a key liaison to the Plumbers and pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a related case.

Alexander Butterfield Deputy Assistant to the President. Revealed the existence of the secret White House taping system to the Senate Watergate Committee, a pivotal turning point in the investigation.23 The Campaign (CREEP) John N. Mitchell Former Attorney General; Director of the Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP). He approved the Watergate break-in plan and was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury.1

Jeb Stuart Magruder Deputy Director of CREEP. He helped plan the break-in and later cooperated with prosecutors, implicating Mitchell and others.25

G. Gordon Liddy Finance Counsel for CREEP; former FBI agent. The chief operative and mastermind of the break-in. He was convicted and served over four years in prison, famously refusing to testify.1

E. Howard Hunt, Jr. White House consultant; former CIA officer. A "mastermind" of the break-in alongside Liddy.28 His phone number in a burglar's address book provided an early link to the White House.14

James W. McCord, Jr. Security Coordinator for CREEP; former CIA officer. One of the five burglars arrested. His letter to Judge Sirica broke the cover-up open by alleging perjury and pressure from "higher-ups".1

The "Miami Four" Bernard Barker, Virgilio Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez, Frank Sturgis. The four other burglars, all with ties to the CIA's anti-Castro operations, recruited by Hunt for the break-in.31 The Investigators Bob Woodward Reporter for The Washington Post. Along with Bernstein, he led the newspaper's investigation that uncovered the conspiracy, aided by their source "Deep Throat".23

Carl Bernstein Reporter for The Washington Post. Woodward's partner in the Watergate investigation. Their reporting won the Pulitzer Prize.23

W. Mark Felt Associate Director of the FBI. Revealed in 2005 to be "Deep Throat," the anonymous source who guided and confirmed Woodward and Bernstein's reporting.33

Sam Ervin, Jr. U.S. Senator (D-NC). Chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee, whose televised hearings captivated the nation and exposed the cover-up to the public.14

Archibald Cox Special Prosecutor appointed to investigate Watergate. His persistent pursuit of the White House tapes led to his firing in the "Saturday Night Massacre".14

Leon Jaworski Second Special Prosecutor. He continued the pursuit of the tapes and successfully argued the case of United States v. Nixon before the Supreme Court.14 The Judiciary John J. Sirica Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for D.C. He presided over the burglars' trial and used his judicial power to pressure them into revealing the wider conspiracy.1

Part I: The Genesis of the Conspiracy

The Watergate break-in was not a spontaneous act of political mischief but the culmination of a pattern of behavior and a clandestine infrastructure established within the Nixon White House long before 1972. The conspiracy grew from two interconnected entities: the White House Plumbers, a secret police unit born of paranoia, and the Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP), a campaign machine that operated with a dark, parallel purpose.

The White House Plumbers: From National Security to Political Espionage

The direct precursor to the Watergate operation was the White House Special Investigations Unit, formed in the summer of 1971. Its colloquial name, the "Plumbers," stemmed from its original mission: to plug leaks of classified information that President Nixon found politically damaging.8 The unit's creation was a direct response to the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret history of the Vietnam War leaked to the press by military analyst Daniel Ellsberg.19 Staffed by key figures who would later orchestrate the Watergate break-in, including former CIA operative E. Howard Hunt and former FBI agent G. Gordon Liddy, the Plumbers quickly blurred the line between legitimate national security concerns and illegal political espionage.19 Their first major assignment was not to uncover a foreign spy but to discredit a domestic critic. With the approval of top presidential aide John Ehrlichman, the Plumbers executed a "covert plan" to burglarize the Beverly Hills office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Dr. Lewis Fielding, hoping to find embarrassing information that could be used to destroy Ellsberg's public credibility.1 The Fielding break-in, though it yielded no useful information, was a critical turning point. It served as a "dress rehearsal" for Watergate, normalizing illegal methods for political ends within the highest echelons of the White House. The operation established a clear precedent: burglary and other "black bag" jobs were now considered acceptable tools in the administration's political arsenal. This act, sanctioned by one of the President's most powerful advisors, broke the moral and legal barriers that might have otherwise prevented a future operation like Watergate. When Liddy later proposed a similar break-in at the Democratic headquarters, the machinery—in terms of personnel, methodology, and a culture of high-level approval for criminal acts—was already firmly in place.

The Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP): A Dual-Purpose Machine

On the surface, the Committee for the Re-election of the President (CRP, or CREEP as it was derisively known) was a conventional, if formidable, campaign organization. It was formally established in the spring of 1971 and grew into a highly structured entity with a vast budget and sophisticated programs, including extensive outreach efforts to court specific voter demographics like women and young people.25 However, beneath this legitimate facade, CREEP housed a secret, parallel operation dedicated to a campaign of political sabotage and espionage against the Democratic Party.13 This clandestine wing was financed through a secret slush fund and utilized illegal money laundering techniques to obscure the origins of its funding, making the money untraceable.25 This deliberately compartmentalized structure was a classic intelligence technique designed to ensure plausible deniability. The vast majority of CREEP's staff and volunteers, engaged in legitimate campaign work, were completely unaware of the illegal activities being orchestrated by a small, insulated group at the top. This design meant that if the covert operations were ever exposed, the White House could claim they were the work of a few "rogue" operatives, severing any link to the President. The administration's initial dismissal of the Watergate arrests was the direct activation of this pre-planned deniability strategy. After the Plumbers unit was disbanded, G. Gordon Liddy was transferred to CREEP as its finance counsel.26 There, he developed an audacious, million-dollar intelligence-gathering proposal code-named "Gemstone." The plan included a menu of outlandish schemes, such as kidnapping anti-war protest leaders to prevent disruptions at the Republican National Convention and using prostitutes equipped with hidden cameras to blackmail Democratic politicians.1 Jeb Stuart Magruder, the deputy director of CREEP, presented the Gemstone plan to the committee's director, John Mitchell, who had recently resigned as U.S. Attorney General to run the campaign. Mitchell, a man known for his tough, law-and-order persona, balked at the plan's extravagance and million-dollar price tag.1 However, he did not reject the concept of illegal intelligence gathering outright. After several revisions, Mitchell approved a scaled-back, $250,000 version of the plan. The surviving element, and the one that would ultimately bring down the presidency, was the proposal to break into and install electronic listening devices at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters located in the Watergate office complex.1 The conspiracy was now fully formed and officially sanctioned.

Part II: The Break-in and the Cover-up

What began as a clandestine effort to gain a political edge spiraled into a national crisis with the botched burglary of June 17, 1972, and the immediate, systematic effort to conceal its connection to the White House. The crime itself was clumsy, but the subsequent obstruction of justice was sweeping, implicating President Nixon from the very beginning.

"A Third-Rate Burglary": The Events of June 17, 1972

The infamous Watergate break-in was, in fact, the second such operation targeting the DNC. On May 28, 1972, Liddy and Hunt's team had successfully entered the DNC offices, planting wiretaps on the phones of several officials, including DNC Chairman Larry O'Brien.20 However, the bug on O'Brien's phone malfunctioned, and the intelligence gathered from the other tap was deemed insufficient.19 Liddy, under pressure to produce results, planned a second entry to repair the faulty device and photograph documents. In the early morning hours of Saturday, June 17, 1972, the second team of burglars entered the Watergate complex. Their operation was compromised by a simple mistake. A 24-year-old security guard, Frank Wills, on his routine patrol, noticed a piece of adhesive tape placed horizontally over the latch of a basement-level door, preventing it from locking.13 Thinking it was left by a maintenance worker, he removed it. When he passed by again a short time later, he discovered the door had been re-taped. Suspicious, at 1:47 AM he called the District of Columbia police.13 Three plainclothes officers from the Second District tactical squad responded to the call. Inside the darkened sixth-floor offices of the DNC, they discovered and arrested five men.1 The men were incongruously dressed in business suits and wearing blue surgical gloves. They were caught red-handed with a walkie-talkie, cameras, 40 rolls of unexposed film, lock-picking tools, pen-sized tear gas guns, and sophisticated electronic eavesdropping equipment.14 Crucially, they were also carrying nearly $2,300 in cash, mostly in sequentially numbered $100 bills—a clear indicator of a well-financed, professional operation rather than a common robbery.33

The Conspirators: Profiles and Motivations

The identities of the five men arrested immediately suggested this was no ordinary crime. Their backgrounds pointed toward the worlds of intelligence and political intrigue, providing the first clues of a much larger conspiracy. James W. McCord, Jr.: The most significant link was McCord. A former FBI agent and CIA officer, he was, at the time of his arrest, the salaried security coordinator for both the Republican National Committee and the Committee to Re-elect the President.13 His direct, official connection to Nixon's campaign apparatus made it impossible for the White House to easily distance itself from the incident. McCord was the one who had placed the tape on the door latch, inadvertently triggering the chain of events that would expose the entire conspiracy.30 The "Miami Four": The other four burglars—Bernard Barker, Virgilio Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez, and Frank Sturgis—were all Cuban-Americans based in Miami with deep, long-standing connections to the CIA.31 Barker, a real estate agent, had been a CIA operative involved in the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, working directly under E. Howard Hunt.22 Gonzalez was a locksmith, and all four were veterans of the anti-Castro covert action community.29 They had been recruited for the Watergate operation by their former CIA contact, Hunt, and were motivated by a combination of financial payment and a manipulated sense of patriotic duty. They were reportedly led to believe that the operation was a matter of national security, aimed at uncovering supposed financial links between the Democratic Party and Fidel Castro's Cuba.29 The selection of these specific individuals was a deliberate strategy by the masterminds, Hunt and Liddy. Their well-known CIA past provided a built-in cover story: if caught, the operation could be plausibly portrayed as an unsanctioned, "off-the-books" CIA mission or the work of overzealous anti-communist patriots, thereby misdirecting any investigation away from its true origin—the White House and CREEP.

The Obstruction of Justice Begins

The response from the Nixon administration and CREEP was immediate, disciplined, and aimed at total containment. This was not a panicked, improvised reaction but the swift execution of a strategy of denial and concealment. On June 18, the day after the arrests, White House Press Secretary Ron Ziegler famously dismissed the incident as a "third-rate burglary attempt," a line the President himself would echo in the coming days.1 On June 22, President Nixon personally and publicly denied any White House involvement.1 Behind the scenes, a frantic effort to destroy evidence and silence witnesses was underway. John Ehrlichman ordered John Dean to "deep six" (destroy) the politically explosive contents of Howard Hunt's White House safe, which included materials related to the Plumbers' other illegal activities.33 Dean passed some of these sensitive documents to the Acting Director of the FBI, L. Patrick Gray, who later admitted to destroying them.20 Simultaneously, a system of covert "hush money" payments was established to ensure the silence of the five burglars and their immediate handlers, Hunt and Liddy. Using cash from CREEP's secret campaign fund, Nixon's aides began funneling money to the defendants to cover their legal fees and family expenses, with the clear expectation that they would plead guilty and reveal nothing about the higher-ups who had ordered the operation.1 These payments, which would eventually total over $450,000, became a cornerstone of the subsequent obstruction of justice charge against the President and his top aides.25 The most damning act of obstruction occurred just six days after the break-in. On June 23, 1972, President Nixon and his Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldeman, were captured on the Oval Office's secret taping system discussing how to thwart the FBI's investigation. The FBI had discovered that the money carried by the burglars could be traced back to CREEP. In the recorded conversation, Haldeman proposed a plan: have the CIA tell the FBI to halt its investigation into the money trail, on the false pretext that it would compromise sensitive, unrelated CIA operations in Mexico.13 Nixon explicitly approved the plan, stating, "You call them in. Good. Good deal. Play it tough. That's the way they play it and that's the way we are going to play it".44 This tape, which would not be revealed for more than two years, became known as the "smoking gun." It provided irrefutable proof that President Nixon was not an unknowing bystander but was personally and directly involved in orchestrating the criminal cover-up from its earliest days.44

Part III: The Unraveling

Despite the White House's concerted efforts to contain the scandal, the cover-up began to unravel under pressure from three independent and ultimately converging forces: the dogged investigative reporting of the press, the unyielding principles of the federal judiciary, and the critical defections of insiders who chose self-preservation over loyalty to the conspiracy.

The Press and "Deep Throat": Following the Money

While most of the media accepted the administration's narrative and moved on after the 1972 election, two young reporters at The Washington Post, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, remained unconvinced.24 Sensing a larger story, they pursued leads with extraordinary tenacity. Their crucial breakthrough came from adhering to a simple journalistic principle: "follow the money." On August 1, 1972, they published a story revealing that a $25,000 cashier's check, intended for the Nixon campaign, had been deposited into the bank account of Bernard Barker, one of the Watergate burglars.1 This was the first concrete, public evidence linking the break-in directly to the finances of the Committee to Re-elect the President. Woodward and Bernstein's investigation was secretly aided by a high-level government source whom they code-named "Deep Throat," after a popular pornographic film of the era.36 For more than 30 years, the identity of this source was one of Washington's greatest mysteries, until 2005, when former FBI Associate Director W. Mark Felt revealed he was the man.33 Felt, who was resentful at having been passed over for the top FBI job after J. Edgar Hoover's death and deeply concerned about the White House's attempts to interfere with the Bureau's investigation, agreed to speak with Woodward under strict conditions of anonymity.34 Meeting secretly in an underground parking garage, Felt did not typically provide new documents or leads. Instead, his crucial role was to confirm information the reporters had gathered elsewhere, steer them away from false trails, and convey the sheer scale of the criminality, assuring them that the conspiracy reached the highest levels of the administration.34 His guidance provided the confidence and direction Woodward and Bernstein needed to continue their work in the face of intense White House pressure and denials.

The Judiciary's Stand: The Role of Judge John J. Sirica

As the press chipped away at the cover-up from the outside, the federal judiciary began to dismantle it from within. The trial of the seven original defendants—the five burglars plus Hunt and Liddy—commenced in January 1973 before U.S. District Court Chief Judge John J. Sirica.1 Known for his tough demeanor, Sirica was deeply skeptical of the prosecution's official line that the break-in was a self-contained escapade carried out without the knowledge of higher officials.1 Unsatisfied with the limited testimony, Sirica took the unconventional and controversial step of actively questioning the defendants and witnesses himself from the bench.1 He made it clear that he did not believe their stories and used the threat of handing down maximum prison sentences to pressure them into telling the full truth.1 His tactics worked. On March 23, 1973, just before sentencing, James McCord, fearing a long prison term, wrote a letter to Judge Sirica. The letter, which Sirica read aloud in open court, was a bombshell. McCord alleged that the defendants had committed perjury during the trial, that they had been subjected to "political pressure" to plead guilty and remain silent, that others were involved in the conspiracy, and that the break-in was not, as had been rumored, a CIA operation.1 McCord's letter was the first public crack in the conspirators' wall of silence. It electrified Washington, vindicated Judge Sirica's skepticism, and transformed the Watergate affair from a criminal case into an explosive political scandal.

The Insider's Testimony: John Dean's "Cancer on the Presidency"

The final, fatal blow to the cover-up came from the very man tasked with managing it: White House Counsel John Dean. As the investigations by the press and the judiciary intensified, Dean recognized that he, along with H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, was being positioned to become the official "scapegoat" for the entire affair.21 The internal logic of the conspiracy—which demanded escalating lies and the sacrifice of subordinates to protect those at the top—was beginning to turn on itself. On March 21, 1973, in a fateful Oval Office meeting, Dean laid out the unvarnished truth to President Nixon. He famously warned, "We have a cancer—within—close to the Presidency, that's growing." In meticulous detail, he described the breadth of the criminal cover-up, including the ongoing hush money payments, the risk of blackmail from the defendants, and the extensive perjury committed by White House aides.20 Dean estimated it would take "a million dollars" to continue buying the defendants' silence, a price Nixon appeared willing to consider, replying on the tape, "we could get that".1 Realizing that the President was not going to end the cover-up and that his own legal jeopardy was immense, Dean began secretly cooperating with federal prosecutors in early April 1973.20 On April 30, in a shake-up intended to quell the growing storm, Nixon fired Dean and announced the resignations of his two closest aides, Haldeman and Ehrlichman.14 But it was too late. In June, Dean testified for a full week before the nationally televised Senate Watergate Committee hearings. In a quiet, precise voice, he provided the American public with the first comprehensive insider's roadmap of the conspiracy, detailing his own involvement and directly implicating Attorney General Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and President Nixon himself in the criminal obstruction of justice.14 The unraveling was complete. It was not the work of a single force, but a powerful convergence. The press kept the story in the public eye, the judiciary applied legal pressure to break the code of silence, and a key insider provided the narrative that connected all the dots. The conspiracy, designed to protect the president, had ultimately collapsed under the weight of its own internal contradictions, forcing its participants to choose between loyalty and survival.

Part IV: The Constitutional Crisis

With John Dean's testimony, the Watergate scandal escalated from a criminal investigation into a full-blown constitutional crisis. The central conflict shifted to a direct confrontation between the executive branch and the combined forces of the legislative and judicial branches, with the President's secret tape recordings as the ultimate prize. This struggle would test the limits of presidential power and the core principles of American governance.

The Senate Watergate Committee and the Tapes

On February 7, 1973, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously, 77-0, to create the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, which became popularly known as the Senate Watergate Committee.20 Chaired by the folksy but constitutionally astute Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina, the committee was tasked with investigating the 1972 campaign and its attendant "illegal, improper, or unethical" activities.24 Beginning in May 1973, the committee's public hearings were broadcast live across the nation, preempting daytime television and captivating the American public. An estimated 85 percent of households watched at least some portion of the hearings, which brought the complex drama of the scandal directly into American living rooms.14 The testimony of figures like John Dean, with his meticulous recall, and the persistent questioning of committee members—most famously Senator Howard Baker's recurring question, "What did the president know and when did he know it?"—made the hearings a seminal event in American political history.37 The investigation took its most dramatic and consequential turn on July 16, 1973. During a routine staff interview, former White House aide Alexander Butterfield was asked if there was any system in place that would verify John Dean's account of his conversations with the president. Butterfield reluctantly revealed the existence of a secret, voice-activated taping system that Nixon had installed in the Oval Office, the Cabinet Room, and his office in the Old Executive Office Building.20 The system had been recording virtually all of the President's conversations and phone calls since 1971. This revelation was a political earthquake. It fundamentally transformed the nature of the inquiry. No longer was it a matter of one man's word against another's. Now, there was the potential for objective, irrefutable proof of what was said behind the closed doors of the Oval Office. The tapes immediately became the central focus of the entire Watergate investigation, and President Nixon's desperate struggle to keep them secret would become the final act of his presidency. Paradoxically, the very system Nixon had created to preserve his historical legacy became the instrument of his downfall.

The Saturday Night Massacre: A President Defies the Law

The newly appointed Watergate Special Prosecutor, Archibald Cox, a respected Harvard law professor, immediately recognized the tapes' significance and issued a subpoena for several key recordings.14 President Nixon refused to comply, making an unprecedentedly broad claim of "executive privilege." He argued that the principle of separation of powers and the need for confidential advice gave him an absolute right to withhold the recordings from both Congress and the courts.1 After months of legal battles that Nixon lost in the lower courts, the confrontation reached its apex on Saturday, October 20, 1973. Nixon, defying a court order to turn over the tapes, ordered his Attorney General, Elliot Richardson, to fire Special Prosecutor Cox. Richardson, who had personally guaranteed the Senate that the special prosecutor would have full independence during his confirmation hearings, believed the order was a profound abuse of power and a violation of his commitment. He refused and resigned in protest. Nixon then gave the same order to the Deputy Attorney General, William Ruckelshaus. He, too, refused and was fired (or resigned, accounts differ). Finally, the third-ranking official at the Justice Department, Solicitor General Robert Bork, became acting Attorney General. Believing that the department needed to be preserved, Bork carried out the President's order and fired Cox.13 This stunning series of events, which occurred in the span of a few hours, was immediately dubbed the "Saturday Night Massacre." It provoked a political firestorm and a torrent of public outrage. The act was widely perceived not as a legal maneuver but as a tyrannical assault by the President on the American system of justice itself. Nixon was seen as placing himself above the law, firing the very man charged with investigating him. The public sent hundreds of thousands of telegrams to Congress in protest, and for the first time, resolutions for the impeachment of the President were introduced in the House of Representatives with broad support.37 The Saturday Night Massacre was the moment the scandal transcended political crime and became a direct challenge to the constitutional order, making impeachment all but inevitable.

The Supreme Court Decides: United States v. Nixon

The public outcry forced Nixon to appoint a new Special Prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, who proved to be just as tenacious as Cox in pursuing the tapes.14 The legal battle continued, ultimately landing before the Supreme Court in the landmark case of United States v. Nixon. The President's lawyers presented two main arguments. First, they contended that the doctrine of separation of powers rendered the dispute a non-justiciable "intra-branch" conflict, as the Special Prosecutor was, technically, a subordinate of the President. Second, they argued for an absolute and unqualified executive privilege, asserting that the need to protect the confidentiality of presidential communications was paramount and immune from judicial review.48 On July 24, 1974, the Supreme Court, in a historic and unanimous 8-0 decision (Justice William Rehnquist, a Nixon appointee, recused himself), ruled decisively against the President.23 Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Warren Burger, another Nixon appointee, acknowledged the validity of a presumptive privilege for presidential communications. However, he unequivocally rejected the claim that this privilege was absolute. The Court held that a generalized claim of privilege must yield to the "fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice".48 The Court ruled that the judiciary, not the president, was the ultimate arbiter of the law and ordered Nixon to immediately surrender the subpoenaed tapes to the Special Prosecutor. The highest court in the land had affirmed that the President of the United States was subject to the rule of law. Nixon had lost his final battle.

Part V: The Fall and the Aftermath

The Supreme Court's ruling marked the beginning of the end for the Nixon presidency. With the release of the tapes now unavoidable, the final pieces of the conspiracy fell into place, revealing the President's direct culpability. Facing certain impeachment and removal from office, Richard Nixon made a choice that no president had ever made before, leaving a nation to grapple with the dual needs for accountability and healing.

The Articles of Impeachment

Even before the Supreme Court's decision, the House of Representatives had formally begun its impeachment inquiry, vesting the power to investigate in the House Judiciary Committee.37 The release of the court-ordered tapes in late July and early August 1974 provided the committee with its "smoking gun." Among the recordings was the conversation from June 23, 1972, in which Nixon and Haldeman were heard plotting to use the CIA to obstruct the FBI's investigation.16 This tape provided undeniable, damning proof that Nixon had personally directed the criminal cover-up just six days after the break-in. The evidence was so conclusive that it shattered the President's remaining political support. Key Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, who had defended Nixon for months, announced that they would now vote in favor of impeachment.51 The case against the President had transcended partisan politics and become a bipartisan defense of the Constitution. This was the final nail in the coffin; Nixon's strategy had always depended on portraying the investigation as a partisan witch hunt by his liberal enemies. The "smoking gun" tape made that position untenable, demonstrating to his own party that his actions were legally and constitutionally indefensible. Between July 27 and July 30, 1974, the House Judiciary Committee, in nationally televised sessions, voted with significant bipartisan support to approve three articles of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon.

Table 2: Articles of Impeachment Against Richard Nixon

Article Charge Specific Allegations Vote (Yea-Nay) Article I Obstruction of Justice Making false statements to investigators; withholding relevant evidence; interfering with the investigations of the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Special Prosecutor; counseling witnesses to give false testimony; and approving the payment of "hush money" to defendants to ensure their silence and obstruct the Watergate investigation.51 27-11 Article II Abuse of Power Misusing federal agencies, including the FBI, the Secret Service, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), to violate the constitutional rights of citizens; authorizing and overseeing illegal electronic surveillance for political purposes; and using the powers of his office to harass political opponents and interfere with lawful activities.51 28-10 Article III Contempt of Congress Willfully disobeying the lawful subpoenas issued by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its constitutional duty to conduct an impeachment inquiry, thereby obstructing the impeachment process itself.51 21-17

These articles demonstrated that the charges against Nixon went far beyond the initial burglary. They painted a picture of a president who had engaged in a broad pattern of conduct that subverted the justice system, violated the rights of citizens, and defied the constitutional oversight of Congress.

Resignation and Pardon

With his political support gone and facing certain impeachment by the full House of Representatives and subsequent conviction and removal by the Senate, Richard Nixon's presidency was over. On the evening of August 8, 1974, he addressed the nation from the Oval Office and announced his resignation, becoming the first and, to date, only U.S. President to do so. "By taking this action," he stated, "I hope that I will have hastened the start of the process of healing which is so desperately needed in America".54 He officially left office at noon the next day, August 9.12 Immediately following Nixon's departure, Vice President Gerald R. Ford was sworn in as the 38th President, declaring, "My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over".54 However, one month later, on September 8, 1974, President Ford made a decision that would ensure the nightmare continued to haunt the nation and his own presidency. He granted Richard Nixon a "full, free, and absolute pardon" for all federal crimes he "has committed or may have committed" while in office.11 Ford justified the controversial decision by arguing that a long, public trial of a former president would only inflict more trauma on a deeply polarized nation, preventing the government from addressing pressing economic and foreign policy challenges.52 The pardon, he believed, was necessary for the country to finally move on. The public reaction was immediate and overwhelmingly negative. The pardon was seen by many as a betrayal of the rule of law, the very principle the two-year investigation had sought to uphold. Cries of a "corrupt bargain"—that Ford had been promised the vice presidency in exchange for a future pardon—were widespread, though no evidence of such a deal has ever emerged.55 Ford's own press secretary, Jerald terHorst, resigned in protest.56 The President's approval rating plummeted from 71% to under 50% in a matter of weeks, a blow from which his presidency never fully recovered.57 The decision to pardon Nixon created a profound and enduring conflict between two fundamental American values: the demand for legal accountability and the desire for national healing. While many, including former critics like Bob Woodward, would later come to view the pardon as a courageous and necessary act 59, at the time it was seen as a final, cynical subversion of justice and was a major contributing factor to Ford's narrow loss to Jimmy Carter in the 1976 presidential election.52

Conclusion: The Enduring Legacy of Watergate

The Watergate scandal was a national trauma that fundamentally reshaped American politics, journalism, and the public's relationship with its government. Its consequences were not confined to the 1970s; they reverberate to this day, leaving a legacy of institutional reform, political cynicism, and a permanently altered perception of the presidency.

A Crisis of Trust

The most profound and lasting consequence of Watergate was a catastrophic and enduring collapse of public trust in government.2 The spectacle of a president and his highest aides engaging in a criminal conspiracy and then systematically lying about it to the American people shattered the nation's faith in its leaders.52 This created a deep-seated cynicism toward Washington that has become a permanent feature of the American political landscape. Before Watergate, the office of the President held a unique position of dignity in public life; afterward, it became an office of inherent suspicion. The scandal proved that the occupant of the Oval Office was capable of profound deception, and this revelation permanently altered the baseline assumption of the public and the press from one of trust to one of skepticism and investigation.

The Era of Reform

The sheer breadth of the abuses uncovered by the Watergate investigations prompted a historic, bipartisan wave of reform legislation aimed at preventing a future "imperial presidency".15 These reforms touched nearly every aspect of government: Ethics and Accountability: The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 established the Office of Government Ethics, mandated public financial disclosures for high-level officials, and, most significantly, created the statutory framework for appointing an independent counsel (or special prosecutor) to investigate alleged misconduct within the executive branch—a direct response to the Saturday Night Massacre.15 Campaign Finance: To combat the influence of the secret, illegal money that had funded CREEP's "dirty tricks," Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. These laws established the Federal Election Commission (FEC), set limits on campaign contributions, and created a system of public financing for presidential elections.39 Intelligence Oversight: Convinced that Nixon and his predecessors had abused the power of intelligence agencies, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in 1978 to create a secret court to oversee government surveillance of American citizens. It also established permanent intelligence oversight committees in both the House and Senate to monitor the activities of the CIA, FBI, and other agencies.15 Government Transparency: The 1974 amendments to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) significantly strengthened the law, making it more difficult for the executive branch to withhold information under the guise of national security and giving federal judges the power to review whether documents were properly classified.15 This era of reform, however, has had a mixed and often ironic legacy. Many of the changes have been weakened over time by court decisions, legislative inaction, or partisan politics. The independent counsel statute, for example, was allowed to expire after it became a tool of partisan warfare, and Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United v. FEC have dismantled campaign finance limits, ushering in a new era of "dark money" that echoes the slush funds of the 1970s.62 The reforms designed to solve the problems of the Watergate era were not permanent, demonstrating that the struggle to balance executive power with public accountability is a continuous one.

The Transformation of Journalism and Politics

Watergate elevated investigative journalism to a new height of prestige and influence. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein became national celebrities, and their Pulitzer Prize-winning work inspired a new generation of journalists to adopt a more aggressive, adversarial, and skeptical posture toward those in power.61 The suffix "-gate" became a permanent part of the global lexicon, instantly signifying scandal and cover-up.60 This new zeal for exposés, however, also contributed to a long-term erosion of public trust in the media itself, as the line between objective reporting and partisan advocacy often blurred, particularly with the rise of cable news and the internet.61 The political fallout was equally complex and paradoxical. In the short term, the scandal was a disaster for the Republican Party, leading to a massive Democratic landslide in the 1974 midterm elections that brought a class of young, reform-minded "Watergate Babies" to Congress.61 In the long term, however, Watergate discredited the moderate, pragmatic wing of the GOP that Nixon represented. This cleared a path for a more ideological, conservative movement, led by figures like Ronald Reagan, to seize control of the party, ultimately fueling the "Reagan Revolution" and its anti-government message.60 Watergate did not just unmake a president; it helped remake the ideological contours of both major political parties, setting the stage for the polarized political landscape of the 21st century.

Appendix: Timeline of Key Events

1971 July 1: The White House Special Investigations Unit, or "Plumbers," is created to stop leaks of classified information following the publication of the Pentagon Papers.19 September 3: The Plumbers break into the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Dr. Lewis Fielding.19 1972 January 27: G. Gordon Liddy presents his "Gemstone" intelligence-gathering plan to John Mitchell, Jeb Magruder, and John Dean.20 May 28: The first Watergate break-in occurs. CREEP operatives successfully plant listening devices in the DNC headquarters, but one bug is faulty.1 June 17: At 1:47 AM, security guard Frank Wills reports a break-in at the Watergate complex. Five men—James McCord, Bernard Barker, Virgilio Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez, and Frank Sturgis—are arrested inside the DNC headquarters.13 June 19: The Washington Post reports that James McCord is the security coordinator for CREEP.1 June 20: Bob Woodward has his first secret meeting with his informant, "Deep Throat" (W. Mark Felt).20 June 23: The "smoking gun" conversation takes place, in which Nixon and H.R. Haldeman are recorded planning to use the CIA to obstruct the FBI's investigation.20 August 1: Woodward and Bernstein report that a $25,000 campaign check was deposited in a Watergate burglar's bank account.1 September 15: The five burglars, along with E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy, are indicted by a federal grand jury.1 November 7: Richard Nixon is re-elected in one of the largest landslide victories in U.S. history.1 1973 January 8: The trial of the seven Watergate defendants begins before Judge John Sirica.1 January 30: Liddy and McCord are convicted. The other five had already pleaded guilty.1 February 7: The U.S. Senate votes to create the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities (the Senate Watergate Committee).20 March 21: John Dean warns President Nixon of a "cancer on the presidency".20 March 23: Judge Sirica reads James McCord's letter in open court, alleging perjury and a wider conspiracy.20 April 30: H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman resign; John Dean is fired. Nixon gives his first primetime address on Watergate.20 May 17: The Senate Watergate Committee begins its nationally televised public hearings.20 May 18: Archibald Cox is appointed as the Watergate Special Prosecutor.37 July 16: Alexander Butterfield reveals the existence of the White House taping system to the Senate committee.20 October 20: The "Saturday Night Massacre." Nixon orders the firing of Archibald Cox, leading to the resignations of Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus.23 November 1: Leon Jaworski is appointed as the new Special Prosecutor.16 1974 March 1: A grand jury indicts seven top Nixon aides, including Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Mitchell, and names President Nixon as an "unindicted co-conspirator".16 May 9: The House Judiciary Committee begins formal impeachment proceedings.23 July 24: The Supreme Court rules 8-0 in United States v. Nixon, ordering the President to turn over the subpoenaed tapes.23 July 27-30: The House Judiciary Committee approves three articles of impeachment against President Nixon.16 August 5: The transcript of the June 23, 1972, "smoking gun" tape is released, proving Nixon's involvement in the cover-up.14 August 8: Richard Nixon announces his resignation in a televised address to the nation.40 August 9: Nixon officially resigns. Gerald Ford is sworn in as the 38th President. September 8: President Ford grants Richard Nixon a full and unconditional pardon.55 1975-2005 January 1, 1975: John Mitchell, H.R. Haldeman, and John Ehrlichman are convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury.18 May 31, 2005: An article in Vanity Fair reveals that W. Mark Felt, former Associate Director of the FBI, was the secret informant "Deep Throat".35 참고 자료 The Watergate Files - Gerald R. Ford Museum, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/exhibits/watergate-files America's 1970s Problems Are Her 2020s Problems - Providence Magazine, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://providencemag.com/2024/09/americas-1970s-problems-are-her-2020s-problems/ 1970s America | Richard Nixon Museum and Library, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/news/1970s-america How the Tumultuous '70s Shaped Our Political Conflicts | Brennan Center for Justice, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/podcasts/how-tumultuous-70s-shaped-our-political-conflicts Overview of the 1970-2000 Era - Digital History, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/era.cfm?eraid=19&smtid=1 Richard Nixon: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://millercenter.org/president/nixon/domestic-affairs PUBLIC OPINION DURING THE WATERGATE CRISIS - Deep Blue Repositories, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/67551/10.1177_009365027400100404.pdf?sequence=2 Richard Nixon: Impact and Legacy - Miller Center, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://millercenter.org/president/nixon/impact-and-legacy American Elections and Campaigns – The 1970s: From Corruption to Stagnation - The Reagan Library Education Blog, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://reagan.blogs.archives.gov/2022/12/01/american-elections-and-campaigns-the-1970s-from-corruption-to-stagnation/ Richard M. Nixon - White House Historical Association, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.whitehousehistory.org/bios/richard-nixon Richard Nixon - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon Richard Nixon | Biography, Presidency, Watergate, Impeachment, Resignation, & Facts | Britannica, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Richard-Nixon Watergate - Digital History, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3352 Watergate burglars arrested | June 17, 1972 | HISTORY - History.com, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/june-17/watergate-burglars-arrested-2 Lessons From Watergate - Center for American Progress, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/lessons-from-watergate/ Timeline of the Watergate scandal - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Watergate_scandal John Ehrlichman - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman From the archives: Nixon officials found guilty in 1975 Watergate cover-up trial - YouTube, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdIClFUX-Bo Watergate Explained - Richard Nixon Foundation | Richard Nixon Presidential Library & Museum, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.nixonfoundation.org/watergate-explained/ Timeline · A Southern View of Watergate - UNC Libraries, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://exhibits.lib.unc.edu/exhibits/show/watergate/timeline Georgetown and Watergate, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://library.georgetown.edu/exhibition/georgetown-and-watergate Watergate - Spartacus Educational, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://spartacus-educational.com/USAwatergate.htm The Watergate Scandal: A Timeline | HISTORY - History.com, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/articles/watergate-scandal-timeline-nixon Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities - U.S. Senate, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/investigations/watergate.htm Committee for the Re-Election of the President - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_the_Re-Election_of_the_President Committee to Re-elect the President | U.S. politics - Britannica, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Committee-to-Re-elect-the-President The Watergate Scandal - Timeline, Deep Throat & Nixon's Resignation - History.com, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/articles/watergate A Rough Guide to Richard Nixon's Conspiracy Theories - Miller Center, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/a-rough-guide-to-richard-nixon-s-conspiracy-theories From Plumbers to Prisoners: The Watergate Scandal's Most Inept Spies - Spyscape, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://spyscape.com/article/watergate-secrets-the-real-story-of-the-white-house-plumbers Watergate: Who Did What and Where Are They Now? - History.com, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/articles/watergate-where-are-they-now Watergate scandal | Summary, History, Timeline, Deep Throat ..., 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.britannica.com/event/Watergate-Scandal Watergate Burglars, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://watergate.info/burglary/burglars/ Watergate scandal - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal Identity of “Deep Throat,” source who helped unravel the Watergate scandal, is revealed | May 31, 2005 | HISTORY, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/may-31/deep-throat-is-revealed Mark Felt - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt Deep Throat (Watergate) - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate) The complete Watergate timeline (it took longer than you realize ..., 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/complete-watergate-timeline-took-longer-realize CREEP [Committee for the Re-election of the President (Richard M. Nixon)] Series, 1968-1973 - Clemson University, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, http://media.clemson.edu/library/special_collections/findingaids/manuscripts/mss123Steorts/Mss123SteortsSeries6CREEP.doc.pdf "Uncaptioned cartoon about Nixon campaign slush fund" by Bill Sanders - TopSCHOLAR, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cartoon_gallery/25/ Exhibit: Nixon and Watergate - National Archives, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/nixon.html Watergate Trial Tapes | Richard Nixon Museum and Library, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/watergate-trial-tapes Watergate Affair | EBSCO Research Starters, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/watergate-affair Impeachment | National Museum of American History - Smithsonian Institution, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://americanhistory.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/american-presidency/online/foundations/limits/impeachment Watergate: The Cover-Up | Miller Center, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/watergate/watergate-cover Mark Felt, The FBI Agent Who Became Watergate's 'Deep Throat' - All That's Interesting, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://allthatsinteresting.com/mark-felt John Dean's Watergate Testimony 50 Years Later | Teaching American History, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/blog/the-beginning-of-the-end-for-richard-nixon-john-deans-watergate-testimony-60-years-later/ Deschler's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapters 10 - 14 - § 15. Impeachment Proceedings Against President Nixon - GovInfo, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-DESCHLERS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-DESCHLERS-V3-5-5-2.htm United States v. Nixon | 418 U.S. 683 (1974) | Justia U.S. Supreme ..., 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/418/683/ United States v. Nixon | Oyez, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1973/73-1766 United States v. Nixon: The Prelude - Scholarship Repository, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3093&context=mlr Impeachment process against Richard Nixon - Wikipedia, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_process_against_Richard_Nixon Watergate: The aftermath - Miller Center, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/watergate/watergate-aftermath Untitled - GovInfo, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc3/pdf/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc3-19-3.pdf Nixon announces he will resign | August 8, 1974 | HISTORY, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/nixon-resigns Pardoning Nixon - Ethics Unwrapped - University of Texas at Austin, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/pardoning-nixon en.wikipedia.org, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon_of_Richard_Nixon#:~:text=Public%20response,-President%20Ford%20appears&text=Critics%20derided%20the%20move%20and,in%20protest%20after%20the%20pardon. Gallup Vault: A Pardon That Took a Decade to Forgive - Gallup News, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://news.gallup.com/vault/218198/gallup-vault-pardon-took-decade-forgive.aspx Public disapproved of Ford pardoning Nixon - YouTube, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/u4xsfpCYE4g The Nixon pardon in constitutional retrospect, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-nixon-pardon-in-retrospect In the Shadow of Watergate: Legal, Political, and Cultural Implications - NSUWorks, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1550&context=nlr/ The Failure of the Watergate Reforms - Time Magazine, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://time.com/7008604/watergate-reforms-backfire/ Nixon, CREEP and Watergate: They're Baaacck! - BillMoyers.com, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://billmoyers.com/2012/04/13/nixon-creep-and-watergate-they%E2%80%99re-baaacck/ The Return of CREEP - ProPublica, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.propublica.org/article/the-return-of-creep Watergate - FBI, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/watergate Covering Watergate - Journalism in Action, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.journalisminaction.org/case/watergate/outcome Watergate Scandal Timeline - History on the Net, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://www.historyonthenet.com/watergate-scandal-timeline Embodying deep throat: Mark felt and the collective memory of Watergate, 8월 10, 2025에 액세스, https://experts.umn.edu/en/publications/embodying-deep-throat-mark-felt-and-the-collective-memory-of-wate