Watergate X.0

I noticed someone calling DJT's scandals Watergate 2.0. As someone who has no particular fondness for the Democratic Party, I am of the impression that one hairline difference between them and Republicans is actually significant. And just to be clear, this pertains only to the modern parties (FDR til today). Democrats generally hold true to the letter of the Constitution if not always the intent. So far as I am aware (and please correct me if I am wrong), every Republican since and including Nixon has challenged Constitutional precepts in some form:

Nixon:
Watergate 1.0

Reagan:
Debategate (Watergate 2.0)
Iran-Contra (Watergate 2.1)

Bush 41:
Iran-Contra (Watergate 2.1)

Bush 43:
Declaring War on Terror (Watergate 3.X) - metaphorical war that justified a state of perpetual war and all the actions the administration took to push actual war and hide their lies. Includes outing Valerie Plame, enabling torture (John Yoo), Colin Powell lied to the U.N., forced rendition to CIA black sites, etc.
Lawyergate (Watergate 3.X) - firing U.S. attorneys for political reasons
Warrantless spying on Americans (Watergate 3.X)

Trump:
Russian involvement with presidential campaign (Watergate 4.X)
Emoluments violations (Watergate 4.X)
Using Congress to attack agencies of the executive branch (Watergate 4.X)


Carter did not instigate any major scandals and Clinton's scandals were of a personal nature - he did not pose any major challenge to Constitutional precepts. It was terrible that Obama advanced the prosecution of whistleblowers initiated by Bush 43 and upped deportations but in comparison to his recent predecessors, he was at least faithful to the letter of the Constitution.

The major failing of Democrats with regards to Republicans trashing the Constitution is their acquiescence. Their token fight is meaningless in light of the successive erosion by Republican presidents of Constitutionally guaranteed rights and limits.

Large powerful nation-states are not the best way to organize society.