With the public January 6 congressional hearings set to begin on June 6, there is something I want you to remember about the Watergate scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard M. Nixon. But before I get to that, here’s a bare-bones timeline.

June 17, 1972: During the second break-in of the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters in Washington, DC, five people (Virgilio Gonzalez, Bernard Barker, James McCord, Eugenio Martínez, and Frank Sturgis) were arrested. McCord had provided security for former Attorney General John Mitchell and served on the staff of the Republican Committee to Re-Elect the President, which Mitchell was heading. Some of the burglars also had documents tying them to E. Howard Hunt, a former CIA officer who was working in the White House.

November 7, 1972: Nixon defeated Democratic senator George McGovern in an enormous landslide.

May 17, 1973: The Senate Watergate Committee begins its nationally televised hearings.

August 9, 1974: Nixon resigns from office and Vice-President Gerald R. Ford assumes the office of the presidency.

As you can see, more that two years elapsed between the discovery of the break-in and Nixon’s fall from grace. It has now been almost a year and a half since the failed coup attempt of January 6, 2021. We’re a bit behind schedule because the televised Watergate hearings began a mere 11 months after the initial arrests were made.

Another thing that’s different from Watergate is that, eighteen months after the precipitating incident, we still have not had national elections, but the people went to the polls in November 1972, less than five months after the burglars were discovered.

Finally, in our case, the hearings will precede the election whereas the voters in November 1972 didn’t have the benefit of seeing all the information tying Republicans, at the highest level, to the crime.

So, there are parallels between today and the Watergate scandal but also important differences.

I want to focus on the public actually did know when they voted in 1972. They knew that people from the Republican Committee to Re-Elect the President (specifically, James McCord and G. Gordon Liddy) had directed and carried out an operation to place bugs in the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters. These people worked for John Mitchell, the former Attorney General and a close personal friend of President Nixon. They also knew that the operation was overseen by E. Howard Hunt, a former CIA officer who had an office in the White House.

Despite this, Nixon won more than 60 percent of the popular vote, carrying 49 states and 520 Electoral College votes.

Obviously, the people didn’t immediately understand the scope of Nixon’s criminality even though the signs were available. When they went back the polls in November 1974, after Nixon had been fully exposed and run out of office, the Democrats netted four U.S. Senate seats and 49 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In a way, this parallel has already played out. In 2016, the Russians broke into the Democratic National Headquarters. Their burglary was strictly digital, but it was clearly done to help Donald Trump win the presidential election. Despite knowing this, as well as Trump’s many curious ties to the Russians, the people elected Trump over Hillary Clinton. Four years later, however, the scope of Trump’s criminality was much clearer and he was unsuccessful in his reelection bid.

What’s different from Watergate is that the January 6 coup attempt was a second crime after Trump’s fall from grace. Also, critically, Nixon has constitutionally prohibited from seeking the presidency again. Trump still has that option.

So, what you should conclude is that evidence of severe criminality is not enough, by itself, to turn the public decisively against a president or presidential contender. The criminality must be proven and demonstrated in a high-profile way before it can overcome the more general and common political considerations of the electorate. Nixon’s lies were eventually exposed and he and his party paid a hefty price, but this only came after the public Watergate hearings.

This puts a lot of pressure on the January 6 committee. And their job will be harder this time because we no longer have just three channels to watch on television. A smaller percentage of the people will tune in to watch the hearings, although potentially a higher percentage will see the more interesting parts in viral clips. The country is also more divided and more inclined to receive political information through self-selected partisan filters. On the other hand, Trump was defeated at the ballot box in the last election while Nixon had just been reelected in the biggest landslide (to that time) in history. In this sense, Nixon started off with a much bigger cushion.

Finally, while congressional Republicans defended Nixon for a long time during the Watergate saga, they basically accepted the legitimacy of the investigatory committee. This time, the Republicans intend to attack the committee as partisan. That will make it harder for the evidence to be broadly accepted. But, remember, a time came when Nixon could no longer be defended. If the committee does its job well, accusations that it is partisan will fall flat as people focus much more on the disturbing revelations.

The January 6 crimes are more serious than the Watergate crimes, both because an effort to overturn an election is more serious than an effort to cheat in an election and because Trump, unlike Nixon, might run for president again. The stakes couldn’t be higher, but there’s reason to hope that public opinion will move decisively against Trump after the hearings begin next week.