Richard M. Nixon often said that there is almost no learning curve in politics. Yet it would have been inconceivable to him that the same grave political mistakes and ethical lapses that led him to the precipice of impeachment and then to resignation could be made by the very people who had condemned him - including Hillary Rodham Clinton, who served as a House Judiciary Committee counsel during the Watergate investigation.

Though Nixon died in 1994, long before Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones became household names across America, he had seen enough of the Whitewater scandal and the Clintons' stonewalling response to it that he was compelled to ask, "Didn't anyone learn anything from Watergate?"

During the last years of his life, Nixon lived painfully with the personal certainty that if he had made one single and timely decision with regard to Watergate, he would have survived the scandal and served out the remainder of his presidency.

As he said to me on July 1, 1991, "There are so many regrets related to Watergate. First of all was the way I handled the entire thing from the beginning. Instead of trying to keep it quiet, since I didn't have anything to do with it, I should have gone straight to the American people and told them what the hell happened and how everyone was going to pay the price - I had the truth on my side then. I should have used that approach on Watergate, while I still didn't know anything."

He paused, emotions of sorrow and contrition washing over his face. "I should have created an atmosphere in the White House where acts like a cover-up were unthinkable," he said. "I didn't, and that was my mistake."

Nixon would have thought that Clinton had made a similar mistake last January, when he denied having a relationship with Lewinsky and allegedly began directing a far-reaching cover-up of it. Instead of stonewalling, if Clinton had made good on his promise to give us "more rather than less, sooner rather than later," he, too, might have averted the crisis threatening his presidency.

Having worked closely with Nixon on a daily basis during the last four years of his life, I believe he would have been incredulous that the tactics that failed to preserve his presidency have worked, at least so far, for Bill Clinton.

Nixon was - and would have remained - riveted by the Clinton scandals, his reactions ranging from disgust to anger, frustration and sadness.

Having been at the center of his own fatal scandal, he would have identified with the sense of panic Clinton must be experiencing, but having been destroyed by it, he also would have believed that the circumstances were ripe for political justice. Having been the only president to resign in the face of impeachment left his antennae for sensing corruption at the highest levels intensely tuned.

On April 13, 1994, nine days before he died and as the investigation of Whitewater began, he said to me, "Clinton and Hillary are guilty of obstruction of justice, maybe more. Period." Even then, Nixon had suspected that the Clinton White House was corrupt, guided solely by the desire to stay in power.

If he were alive today, Nixon would know well that the charges leveled against Clinton and his reactions to the Lewinsky scandal would include personal, moral, political and legal considerations. He would be shocked to discover that Americans would be inclined to tolerate outrageous, misogynistic and sociopathic behavior by the man they trusted to lead the country and the free world.

Nixon would be disgusted that economic prosperity has generated such widespread moral complacency that many people would overlook serious legal and ethical transgressions by the president because of fatter wallets, refinanced houses, and flourishing stock portfolios. He would be disappointed to know that American expectations for national leaders had fallen so low that a majority of Americans would not clamor for the removal of such a damaged character from office. Above all, he would be saddened to see that an ever-escalating cynicism toward government has diluted Americans' capacity for outrage, thirst for justice, and desire for a morally satisfying ending to a bad political episode.

Disappointment

The mixed public reaction to this nine-month spectacle and the president's corrupt handling of it probably would have disappointed Nixon more than anything else. Not only has Clinton shattered the bond of faith and trust between himself and the public necessary for him to govern effectively and credibly, but polls show that a majority of Americans realize that and choose to approve of his job performance anyway.

This would have been a source of profound discomfort for Nixon, who knew that in many ways he had contributed to the spiraling sense of distrust toward government. He would also have to face the reality that comparisons between the Watergate and Lewinsky scandals - and between the two men - will be etched forever in the history books.

Like Nixon before him, Clinton believes that he does not owe the American people or the independent counsel a full explanation, despite the fact that he, like Nixon, promised early on to cooperate completely with investigators. Like Nixon, he played the odds that the evidence would be insufficient to bring obstruction of justice charges against him, and both lost that bet. And like Nixon, he is trying desperately to project strength and capability even as scandal consumes him.

Though Nixon had thought that they were two completely different men - of different generations and political parties - the striking personal similarities now evident would have made Nixon intensely uncomfortable.

Both men had remarkable innate intelligence, prodigious talents, and a seeming destiny for the presidency. Yet, at the height of their political and personal achievements, they self-destructed. The unanswered question for Nixon would be this: If a Judiciary Committee review of the evidence suggests that Clinton committed serious crimes, will he be held as accountable as Nixon had been?

It was often said after Watergate that "the system worked," that the rule of law reigned supreme. Nixon's fate was touted as a fulfillment of the Founders' expectation that the United States would be governed by laws and that the corrective process would be activated to remove those who broke the laws they were sworn to uphold.

This is one of the most profound virtues of self-government, and Clinton, like Nixon, must not be allowed to corrupt it. Today, Nixon would be appealing to congressional Republicans and Democrats to apply the same high standard to every president, regardless of party and shifting social mores.

During a conversation I had with Nixon about Watergate in mid-summer 1991, I asked him if he thought the American people were forgiving.

"Yes, they are," he replied, "but only if you level with them from the beginning. If you keep things from them or otherwise conceal the truth or stonewall, then there's no way they are going to let you get away with it. No way. And they shouldn't, because there has been wrongdoing. Now don't get me wrong - I've been around politics for a long time, and it's a dirty and cynical business. But to express shock over one situation and not another is just not right."

Nixon's point then - and one that he would be reiterating today - was that the conduct of individual presidents should not be subject to double standards. When presidents swear to faithfully execute the laws of the land, Americans trust them to mean it. If they break even one of those laws, they must be held accountable. Nixon would have been urging us against making exceptions based on strong economic conditions or greater societal acceptance of transgressions. To do so would be unfair to those in the past, such as Nixon, who have suffered the consequences of their actions. It would constitute a kind of hypocrisy that a democracy cannot afford.

Nixon would be arguing that the Lewinsky scandal should serve as a reminder that the integrity of the American system of self-government depends on the people requiring a consistent standard of conduct from all presidents, with the same consequences to follow should they fail to meet it.

Although there were many things he thought he should have done differently with regard to Watergate, there was one particular act that he did not regret: resigning. When it became clear that he did not have enough votes to survive impeachment in the House and a trial in the Senate, he decided to end the constitutional crisis. And years later, he still believed that it was the right decision.

Put the country first

He did not, however, go down without a fight, and though his gut reaction would be to advise Clinton not to give up, his political advice would be for Clinton to put the interests of the country first, resign, and then set out on a Nixon-like, post-presidential rehabilitation.

If Nixon had survived to see this case unfold, it would have been disquieting for him to see himself and his scandal in this one. One wonders if he would be furnishing advice to Clinton on this matter, as he had before on foreign policy and domestic issues.

Perhaps if he had, Clinton would have handled the entire situation differently. But through it all, Nixon would have held out some hope that even if the public failed to hold Clinton accountable, the law and history surely would.

Monica Crowley served as foreign policy assistant to former President Richard Nixon from 1990 to his death in 1994. She is the author of "Nixon Off the Record" (1996) and "Nixon in Winter" (1998), both published by Random House. She is completing work for a doctorate in international relations at Columbia University.

Pub Date: 10/04/98