Talk:Saturday Night Massacre

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Saturday Night Massacre article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

May 7 to 13, 2017 (22nd)

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 20, 2018.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history.

Archives

Archive 1

Immediate cause of Cox's dismissal?[edit]

Reading Eagle [Pennsylvania] "Stennis reeled out of spotlight", Bob Considine, King Features Syndicate, Oct. 29, 1973, page 4: ' . . "We did not think Cox would take the action he did," said Charles Allan Wright, referring to special prosecutor Archibald Cox's refusal to buy Nixon's proposal to have Sen. John Stennis, D-Miss., pass judgment on the tapes. . . '

Early Press Coverage[edit]

Daytona Beach Sunday News-Journal, Douglas A. Kneeland, New York Times News Service, Atty. Gen. Richardson Quits, Nixon Fires Cox, Ruckelshaus, Sunday, October 21, 1973, page 1. <-- link not pulling up entire newspaper where you can easily scan.

Youngstown Vindicator (Ohio), Washington (AP), Nixon Fires Cox; Richardson Quits, Sunday, Oct. 21, 1973, page 1.

Tri-City Herald (Washington state), Washington (AP), "Nixon fires Cox; Richardson quits", Sunday, Oct. 21, 1973, page 1.

added these two references to our History section. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

early reference to "Saturday Night Massacre"[edit]

Windsor Star, David S. Broder, Washington Post Service, "No consensus of what Congress should do, Impeachment of the president still a touchy subject", page 40, Monday, Oct 22, 1973:

' . . . The prevailing White House view was that time is on the side of the president, that as the shock of what is being called the "Saturday night massacre" wears off, the legality and propriety of Mr. Nixon's actions will be broadly endorsed by Republicans. . . '

Now, this is a Canadian paper, the Monday after the "Massacre." How soon did other papers pick up on it, and this may not have been the first? And, even back in 1973, TV news may have been more important than newspapers. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protest of Nixon's Actions[edit]

The Modesto Bee [California], McClatchy Newspapers Service and UPI, “Record Numbers Jam Western Union”, Monday, Oct. 22, 1973, A-2: ‘Western Union today reported a record 71,000 telegrams received in its Washington office about the firing [of] Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox in the first 36 hours after his dismissal Saturday under President Nixon’s order. . . ’

And, somewhat boosting these numbers, immediately under this article is: “You Can Cheaply Wire (Cable) The White House” ‘ . . . The special flat rate for public opinion messages to Washington, DC is offered as a service by Western Union. . . The message, up to 15 words, can be sent by dialing 1-800-648-4100 toll free. The $1.25 charge for the telegram is then billed to the calling person’s telephone number. . . ’

Gadsden Times [Alabama], "Impeachment Mail Floods Congress", Oct. 24, 1973, page 2:

' . . . Western Union said some 71,000 telegrams flooded into Washington in the first 36 hours after Cox's firing, "the biggest volume we know of from the past." . . . '

' . . . Sen. Barry Goldwater, R-Ariz., had 270 telegrams for impeachment and about a dozen against it with telephone calls more evenly divided in sentiment. Sen. John G. Tower, R-Tex., reported 275 telegrams against Nixon, 16 for him; . . . '

' . . . Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, 300 for impeachment, 2 against; Sen. Joseph M. Montoya, D-N.M. 150 for, none against; Sen. Herman E. Talmadge, D-Ga., 300 for, eight against.'

I have added all three of these references to our article. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 16:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC) FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After Saturday Night Massacre, poll showed more Americans favored Impeachment, with about equal numbers both favoring and opposing impeachment[edit]

Spokane Daily Chronicle, New York (AP), “Poll Shows Many for Impeachment”, Tuesdays, Oct. 23, 1973, page 14:

‘A nationwide Oliver Quayle poll of 947 adults questioned after the firing of special Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox shows 44 per cent favored impeaching President Nixon. Forty-three per cent opposed impeachment and 13 per cent were undecided, according to the poll. The telephone survey was conducted for NBC News, which said Monday that it contained a built-in sampling error of 2 to 3 per cent. “We can’t see a statistical distinction” between those for and against impeachment, said Bud Lewis, director of elections for NBC. The network said the percentage of persons favoring impeachment had nearly doubled since Aug. 12, . . . ’

added to our article. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 16:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When did phrase "firestorm of protest" come into usage?[edit]

I recall reading that following the "Saturday Night Massacre" was the "firestorm of protest." Following is one source from about a year later, in fact just before Pres. Nixon's resignation, although this source seems to hint at anger on the part of government officials. I think a lot of it was also public outcry. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 06:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evening Independent (St. Petersberg, Florida), Washington (AP), "Cabinet Meets, Nixon Calls Emergency Session", Aug. 6, 1974: " . . . The harsh reaction of even some of his closest allies eclipsed the furor that followed his firing last October of special prosecutor Archibald Cox--an incident that triggered what aides later called a firestorm of protest. . . "

"fire storm of controversy"[edit]

Lodi News-Sentinel (California), Washington (UPI), Nixon gives up tapes, Weds., Oct. 24, 1973, page 1 (smaller headline): 'President Nixon, facing a growing impeachment threat and reportedly concerned by a divisive “fire storm of controversy,” abruptly agreed Tuesday to surrender the Watergate tapes to U.S. District Judge John J. Sirica. . . '

Just the Watergate burglary or broader corruption?[edit]

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “Nixon Hoping Jaworski Will Drop Plumber Probe”, Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, Nov. 6, 1973, page 6.

The Free Lance-Star [Fredericksburg, Virginia], "Jaworski: In Cox's footsteps", Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, Nov. 19, 1973, page 4.

I have included a summary of these two above articles in our Impact and legacy section. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 21:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “Security Blanket Won’t Derail Plumbers Probe”, Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, Nov. 27, 1973, page 6: “ . . . Otherwise well prepared for his talks with congressmen, Nixon had no ready answer when asked why in 1971 he secretly set up the Special Investigations Unit—the notorious Plumbers—without statutory authority. He simply invoked his May 22 statement claiming considerations of national security. . . ”

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=kJNYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VvgDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7110,2360106&dq=proposed-dairy-subsidies-rose-nearly-10&hl=en <--this talks about milk fund deal. Some evidence, not overwhelming.

"I am not a crook" -- context?[edit]

I though the "I am not a crook" statement was in answer to questions about Nixon's alleged income tax evasion rather than related to Cox's dismissal. --ukexpat 14:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC) Edited --ukexpat 19:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I think this can use some research. Anyone want to jump in, please, help us out. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 21:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evening Independent [St. Petersburg, Florida], Frank Cormier, Associated Press Writer, "Nixon Counterattacks As The Underdog", November 19, 1973, 22-A:
' . . "Well, I am not a crook. . . " Giving his version of some of the most controversial Watergate-related matters, in response to questions from the assembled editors, Nixon acknowledged for the first time he paid nominal federal income taxes -- apparently a total of $1,670 -- during 1970 and 1971. But he said his 1969 taxes were $79,000. . . '
‘ . . . At the end the President urged the TV networks to let the broadcast continue past the scheduled hour – and it did – so he could answer suggestions he hiked milk price supports in return for campaign contributions. Nixon argued that congressional Democrats were the driving force for higher milk supports and contended his Administration was getting “a bad rap.” . . ’

So, probably the firing of Cox, Nixon's personal income taxes, questions about the milk price supports (quid pro qou? well, can hardly ever prove that, but legitimate questions can be raised), as well as probably other issues as well. More research will be helpful. Please jump in and help. :>) FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 20:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

' . . . in all my years of public life, I have never profited from public service. I have earned every cent. . . '

So, it looks like it's on taxes, milk support, ITT, etc. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery Education, 90 second video of what Pres. Nixon said before saying “ . . . I’m not a crook . . . ” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmjMa2hLXpc

Made change with " . . in response to a number of different issues, including his personal income taxes . . " Please see what you think. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vice President Ford not yet confirmed.[edit]

Wilmington Morning Star [North Carolina], Washington (UPI), “Leaders say Ford should not be ‘hostage’”, October 24, 1973, page 3: ‘ . . . House Speaker Carl Albert, D-Okla., also said the issue should be kept separate. “We owe it to the country to consider the Ford matter entirely separate from other deliberations,” Albert said. “The House should not hold the nomination of the vice president-designate hostage as it considers matters related to any impeachment proceedings.”. . . ’

Lewiston Morning Tribune [Idaho], “Confirm Gerald Ford First” [editorial], Thursday, Oct. 25, 1973, page 4.

On Tues. Oct. 23, Pres. Nixon agrees to release tapes?[edit]

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Washington (AP), New York Times News Service, Nixon Agrees To Release Tapes, Weds., Oct. 24, 1973, page one.

The Blade [apparently early edition] [Toledo, Ohio], Washington (AP), Sirica Plans Early Action on Tapes; Nixon Cancels Address To Nation, Sets News Conference For Thursday, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 1973, page 1.

Looking for television and radio news shows.[edit]

See starting at 4:00 with this retrospective of 1973: "Our World Fall 1973, Part 3" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sptocF80-30

"Our World Fall 1973, Part 4" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVh4haQ4Ewg&feature=related

Nixon's Press Secretary Ron Ziegler reading a statement (audio only), October 20, 1973: http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675073752_Ronald-Ziegler_Watergate-Case_Richard-Nixon_Saturday-Night-Massacre

have added these two references to the lead of our article. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Must be written in UK English[edit]

This article states: "In keeping with the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition that the judicial courts function independent of the executive power of government; and, that a prosecutor, like a defense attorney is, first and foremost a lawyer, and therefore like any and all lawyers in a courtroom, an officer of the Court; and not merely the instrument of the executive power." While very pretty, this isn't really a sentence in addition to being an innovative (i.e., incorrect) use of punctuation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.32 (talk) 14:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comma use hasn't always been my strong point in usage of the (American) English language, but I'm certain you could remove somewhere between half and three quarters of the commas and semi-colons in the article and vastly improve its quality. AdmiralKit (talk) 02:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saturday Night Massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/09/us/national-archives-has-given-up-on-filling-the-nixon-tape-gap.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to Dismissal of FBI Director James Comey[edit]

There have been repeated edits linking to Dismissal of FBI Director James Comey. Given the current media specualtion commenting between the two, this is understandable. However, how related the two will be in a historical viewpoint remains to be seen. At this time, I would oppose making such links.

Does anyone wish to weigh in?

--KNHaw ^(talk) 21:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it would appear to make more sense to link this article to the dismissal article, rather than the other way around. X4n6 (talk) 07:07, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]