Bigger than Watergate

The FBI secretly monitored the phone records of eight sitting Republican senators in an abusive fishing expedition done with impunity.


In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand. Yet Watergate shaped American political consciousness for decades. It gave the world a permanent suffix for scandal and became the ultimate symbol of abuse of power, a crisis so severe that it culminated in the only resignation of a U.S. president to preempt removal from office.

Fast forward 50 years, and what has come to light under the Biden administration dwarfs the clumsy efforts of Nixon’s campaign operatives. According to a newly released document from Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the FBI secretly monitored the phone records of at least eight sitting Republican senators. While the bureau is said not to have accessed the content of the conversations, it could see who was called, when the calls were made, how long they lasted, and even the location data.

Method and Intent

What distinguishes this moment from Watergate is not merely scale, but method and intent. Whereas Nixon’s break-in involved a handful of operatives in a single office, this operation represents the weaponization of the federal government’s security apparatus against a political movement. As a highly sensitive investigative matter, or SIM in FBI parlance, it is extremely unlikely that surveillance of senators’ communications occurred without the knowledge of senior leadership, including Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray. The official FBI document released by Grassley is a formal, internal agency record confirming the bureau’s monitoring of the phone records, confirming that this was not a rogue operation but a sanctioned and coordinated activity. It was a deliberate abuse of power, a breach of constitutional boundaries, and a massive intrusion into the separation of powers.

That's a good, important article. Key quote:

"...This is why the current crisis is far darker than Watergate. Instead of breaking into an office, senior officials within a Democratic administration broke into the Republic itself. Its laws, its institutions, and the public’s trust in government as a neutral arbiter have all been compromised. And yet, there will be no Watergate moment. There will be no early morning raids on the architects of this scandal. There will be no public reckoning. In a few weeks, most people will have forgotten that it ever happened, that is if they ever heard about it at all. Unless those responsible are held accountable, the government’s power will continue to be weaponized, and history will repeat itself."

We NEED Bondi to do her job and not just talk and look good.

Quote:In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand.

We can actually go further than that.

Every piece of evidence that has been found from that era — including, but not limited to, the famous tapes that Nixon secretly maintained in his own offices from February 1971 to July 1973 — indicates overwhelmingly that Nixon was stunned and baffled by the whole thing, and frankly had no idea of what was really going on.

I would be embarrassed if people knew how much time I have spent reading and studying that subject, LOL. There is just no serious question that Nixon had no prior knowledge or awareness of Watergate and spent the rest of his presidency trying (unsuccessfully) to figure it out.

lol what a stupid reimagining of what actually happened.

A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listenin on their conversations in almost real time vs getting a subpoena to a legal investigation for 2 year old metadata even this “author” isn’t disingenuous enough to discount


Dumb for anyone with any critical thinking skills. Perfect for MAGA and boomer victimology complex and persecution porn wallowing.

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listen in on their conversations in almost real time

The break-in was a legit scandal. It was not a national crisis. Either way, Nixon personally had no prior knowledge of it, and from what we can tell no one in his inner circle did, either, unless you want to count John Dean as “inner circle”, LOL.

And by the way, “the headquarters of the opposing party” had precisely 2 people (O’Brien and Strauss) with any political relevance at all, and neither of them had anything to do with McGovern’s campaign. Everyone else there was secretaries, gofers, janitors, etc. There were hundreds of phones in that place and the only one that was “bugged” belonged to a secretary. Whatever McCord and “the Cubans” were really doing, they were not there to help Nixon win, or to make McGovern lose.

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  lol what a stupid reimagining of what actually happened.

A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listenin on their conversations in almost real time vs getting a subpoena to a legal investigation for 2 year old metadata even this “author” isn’t disingenuous enough to discount


Dumb for anyone with any critical thinking skills. Perfect for MAGA and boomer victimology complex and persecution porn wallowing.

You cut and paste from the redditards. Talk about a cult.

(10-14-2025 12:34 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listen in on their conversations in almost real time

The break-in was a legit scandal. It was not a national crisis. Either way, Nixon personally had no prior knowledge of it, and from what we can tell no one in his inner circle did, either, unless you want to count John Dean as “inner circle”, LOL.

And by the way, “the headquarters of the opposing party” had precisely 2 people (O’Brien and Strauss) with any political relevance at all, and neither of them had anything to do with McGovern’s campaign. Everyone else there was secretaries, gofers, janitors, etc. There were hundreds of phones in that place and the only one that was “bugged” belonged to a secretary. Whatever McCord and “the Cubans” were really doing, they were not there to help Nixon win, or to make McGovern lose.

Xe was not alive at the time and learned history from tiktok

Sad bigly

Jack Smith has been told to testify in front of congress. He's not going to willingly, so they will have to subpoena him.

(10-14-2025 12:34 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listen in on their conversations in almost real time

The break-in was a legit scandal. It was not a national crisis. Either way, Nixon personally had no prior knowledge of it, and from what we can tell no one in his inner circle did, either, unless you want to count John Dean as “inner circle”, LOL.

And by the way, “the headquarters of the opposing party” had precisely 2 people (O’Brien and Strauss) with any political relevance at all, and neither of them had anything to do with McGovern’s campaign. Everyone else there was secretaries, gofers, janitors, etc. There were hundreds of phones in that place and the only one that was “bugged” belonged to a secretary. Whatever McCord and “the Cubans” were really doing, they were not there to help Nixon win, or to make McGovern lose.

Weren’t they actually going on information that the democrats were supplying prostitutes to democrat big shots out of that office?

(10-14-2025 01:48 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Jack Smith has been told to testify in front of congress. He's not going to willingly, so they will have to subpoena him.

He’s the greatest lawyer in the world according to Ofer. Excepting for himself of course. So what is his problem with strolling in and setting the record straight?

(10-14-2025 11:24 AM)No Bull Wrote:  Bigger than Watergate

The FBI secretly monitored the phone records of eight sitting Republican senators in an abusive fishing expedition done with impunity.


In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand. Yet Watergate shaped American political consciousness for decades. It gave the world a permanent suffix for scandal and became the ultimate symbol of abuse of power, a crisis so severe that it culminated in the only resignation of a U.S. president to preempt removal from office.

Fast forward 50 years, and what has come to light under the Biden administration dwarfs the clumsy efforts of Nixon’s campaign operatives. According to a newly released document from Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the FBI secretly monitored the phone records of at least eight sitting Republican senators. While the bureau is said not to have accessed the content of the conversations, it could see who was called, when the calls were made, how long they lasted, and even the location data.

Method and Intent

What distinguishes this moment from Watergate is not merely scale, but method and intent. Whereas Nixon’s break-in involved a handful of operatives in a single office, this operation represents the weaponization of the federal government’s security apparatus against a political movement. As a highly sensitive investigative matter, or SIM in FBI parlance, it is extremely unlikely that surveillance of senators’ communications occurred without the knowledge of senior leadership, including Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray. The official FBI document released by Grassley is a formal, internal agency record confirming the bureau’s monitoring of the phone records, confirming that this was not a rogue operation but a sanctioned and coordinated activity. It was a deliberate abuse of power, a breach of constitutional boundaries, and a massive intrusion into the separation of powers.

Ive said this from the start. Watergate was an unsanctioned break in where no spying actually happened and the real White House "crime" was the cover up. Russia-Russia-Russia was a sanctioned operation by President Obama that spied on the position campaign (and later, the president elect transition operation) using a premise they knew to be false with weeks. Despite knowing the premise of the "investigation" was false---the spying continued for years---and on top of the actual wrong doing----ALL the elements present in the Nixon era cover up ALSO EXIST.


To understand just how outrageous the conduct exhibited is---just flip the participants. Imagine Trump spied on the Biden campaign using the same kind of flimsy evidence and then continued over the next 5 years to use embedded deep state activists within the government to undermine the Biden Administration (raiding his home and cooking up "novel" legal theories to manufacture crimes in order to prevent Biden from running again). The press reaction would be nuclear.

(10-14-2025 02:29 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 12:34 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listen in on their conversations in almost real time

Whatever McCord and “the Cubans” were really doing, they were not there to help Nixon win, or to make McGovern lose.

Weren’t they actually going on information that the democrats were supplying prostitutes to democrat big shots out of that office?

I’m not going to claim that has been proven, but I believe it is true, and it’s certainly the most plausible scenario, based on the partial knowledge that we have so far.

If I live long enough and have the luxury of good health, I will write a book about this. Stay tuned, LOL.

(10-14-2025 11:42 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand.

We can actually go further than that.

Every piece of evidence that has been found from that era — including, but not limited to, the famous tapes that Nixon secretly maintained in his own offices from February 1971 to July 1973 — indicates overwhelmingly that Nixon was stunned and baffled by the whole thing, and frankly had no idea of what was really going on.

I would be embarrassed if people knew how much time I have spent reading and studying that subject, LOL. There is just no serious question that Nixon had no prior knowledge or awareness of Watergate and spent the rest of his presidency trying (unsuccessfully) to figure it out.

Yeah. The writer obviously wasn't around then. Nixon thought Dean was an absolute idiot for doing it. Nixon's problem was that he tried to hide the connection and Dean turned on him.

(10-14-2025 01:17 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  lol what a stupid reimagining of what actually happened.

A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listenin on their conversations in almost real time vs getting a subpoena to a legal investigation for 2 year old metadata even this “author” isn’t disingenuous enough to discount


Dumb for anyone with any critical thinking skills. Perfect for MAGA and boomer victimology complex and persecution porn wallowing.

You cut and paste from the redditards. Talk about a cult.

And total lack of critical thinking skills. A rouge group tries to wire tap the other party vs. a rouge government spying on the other party. This isn't the first time. LBJ had the FBI spy on the '64 Republican convention. We had a rouge FBI, rouge DOJ, rouge president and rouge judges.

(10-14-2025 02:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 11:42 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand.

We can actually go further than that.

Every piece of evidence that has been found from that era — including, but not limited to, the famous tapes that Nixon secretly maintained in his own offices from February 1971 to July 1973 — indicates overwhelmingly that Nixon was stunned and baffled by the whole thing, and frankly had no idea of what was really going on.

I would be embarrassed if people knew how much time I have spent reading and studying that subject, LOL. There is just no serious question that Nixon had no prior knowledge or awareness of Watergate and spent the rest of his presidency trying (unsuccessfully) to figure it out.

Yeah. The writer obviously wasn't around then. Nixon thought Dean was an absolute idiot for doing it. Nixon's problem was that he tried to hide the connection and Dean turned on him.

I watched All the Presidents Men (again for the umpteenth) just as a refresher + I like the movie ... I have to ask you NG with all your studies (that shite cut into my cartoon time as a tyke), how much truth is in the Haldeman side of the equation with covert ops being run for years within all three agencies (DOJ, FBI, CIA) ... that's where I see the parallel if true...

(10-14-2025 02:57 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 02:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 11:42 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand.

We can actually go further than that.

Every piece of evidence that has been found from that era — including, but not limited to, the famous tapes that Nixon secretly maintained in his own offices from February 1971 to July 1973 — indicates overwhelmingly that Nixon was stunned and baffled by the whole thing, and frankly had no idea of what was really going on.

I would be embarrassed if people knew how much time I have spent reading and studying that subject, LOL. There is just no serious question that Nixon had no prior knowledge or awareness of Watergate and spent the rest of his presidency trying (unsuccessfully) to figure it out.

Yeah. The writer obviously wasn't around then. Nixon thought Dean was an absolute idiot for doing it. Nixon's problem was that he tried to hide the connection and Dean turned on him.

I watched All the Presidents Men (again for the umpteenth) just as a refresher + I like the movie ... I have to ask you NG with all your studies (that shite cut into my cartoon time as a tyke), how much truth is in the Haldeman side of the equation with covert ops being run for years within all three agencies (DOJ, FBI, CIA) ... that's where I see the parallel if true...

Its true. It all came out in the Church Commission in the 70s. What CREEP did was done by the FBI before. Lots of stuff during the JFK and LBJ administrations. And J. Edgar ran his own show.

I used to have a book with a lot of detail on what went on. We covered it in a college government class. It was a hot topic back then.

In those days, the left was all up in arms about it and passed laws putting restrictions on this stuff. Now the left pushes it and ignores the laws.

(10-14-2025 12:06 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  lol what a stupid reimagining of what actually happened.

A clandestine operation to hack into the headquarters of the opposing party and listenin on their conversations in almost real time vs getting a subpoena to a legal investigation for 2 year old metadata even this “author” isn’t disingenuous enough to discount


Dumb for anyone with any critical thinking skills. Perfect for MAGA and boomer victimology complex and persecution porn wallowing.

The left always justifies the spying so long as it's against republicans.

Balygarggle would be screaming democracy is dying if the FBI was keeping tabs on his incel furry and anime porn search history.

(10-14-2025 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 02:57 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 02:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 11:42 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:In 1972, a small team of operatives connected to President Richard Nixon’s re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices in the Watergate complex to install listening devices. To this day, there is no conclusive evidence that Nixon personally ordered — or even knew of — the break-in beforehand.

We can actually go further than that.

Every piece of evidence that has been found from that era — including, but not limited to, the famous tapes that Nixon secretly maintained in his own offices from February 1971 to July 1973 — indicates overwhelmingly that Nixon was stunned and baffled by the whole thing, and frankly had no idea of what was really going on.

I would be embarrassed if people knew how much time I have spent reading and studying that subject, LOL. There is just no serious question that Nixon had no prior knowledge or awareness of Watergate and spent the rest of his presidency trying (unsuccessfully) to figure it out.

Yeah. The writer obviously wasn't around then. Nixon thought Dean was an absolute idiot for doing it. Nixon's problem was that he tried to hide the connection and Dean turned on him.

I watched All the Presidents Men (again for the umpteenth) just as a refresher + I like the movie ... I have to ask you NG with all your studies (that shite cut into my cartoon time as a tyke), how much truth is in the Haldeman side of the equation with covert ops being run for years within all three agencies (DOJ, FBI, CIA) ... that's where I see the parallel if true...

Its true. It all came out in the Church Commission in the 70s. What CREEP did was done by the FBI before. Lots of stuff during the JFK and LBJ administrations. And J. Edgar ran his own show.

I used to have a book with a lot of detail on what went on. We covered it in a college government class. It was a hot topic back then.

that's what I find more interesting ... I can easily see the 'crew' doing their best to ensure Nixon was in the plausible deniability camp...

it looks like I'm old enough to research another winter history project ... any suggestions?

(10-14-2025 02:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  Nixon's problem was that he tried to hide the connection and Dean turned on him.

It is certainly true that Dean “turned on” Nixon, as you put it. But really, that is an understatement. Once he realized that Nixon was not going to protect him from the prosecutors (for Dean had committed numerous crimes), Dean reacted much like a jilted lover, and devoted years of his life to attacking Nixon, and other people either that were close to Nixon, or had defended him.

Dean is now 87 years old — today is his birthday (yes, seriously) — and even now he gives the occasional interview or college lecture to re-litigate that political war from half a century ago.