However, with the recent attempt at impeaching President Clinton, there seems to have been a renewed interest in the crimes which drove Nixon from office, rather than his status as 'elder statesman.' But many of these impeachment websites do not fall into the Disgraced version as expected. Rather, their analysis of Richard Nixon emphasises his place in an institutional and constitutional history of the United States. In this version, Nixon remains a national figure, but also takes on Didactic meaning. For example, the New York Times website presents a lesson plan and a series of prepared primary sources for teachers to use in their civics classes. Nixon is only mentioned as one of sixteen officials to face impeachment, and there are no links to specific Nixon documents. Instead, he is reincorporated into the insitutional framework of the United States as an example of how the system works, not despite, but because of his errors.

Surprisingly, the most striking example of this National version is The Washington Post's 25th Anniversary of Watergate retrospective. Instead of capturing the fear and loathing that prevailed at the time, so prominent in the Disgraced Richard Nixon version, the Washington Post looks back almost fondly on what it claims was "the most famous political scandal in American history." Far from focusing on the abuses of power that drove Nixon from office, the Washington Post seems obsessed with reliving its own role in the scandal. The site contains transcripts of interviews with former editor Ben Bradlee and Bob Woodward, the journalist who broke the Watergate story. The site does contain some useful historical documents, including a full text search of the Washington Post articles about Watergate and Nixon, from 1968 through to his resignation in 1974. 
But much like the institutional sites, the Washington Post only offers its own nostalgic view on these primary sources, presenting Nixon as some kind of exciting aberration, to be endured at the time then fondly remembered after the crisis is over. In what can only be described as sentimentality, the Washington Post spends most of its retrospective recounting the high drama and mystery of Deep Throat and other "key players" and describing to those who weren't there "what it was like inside the Washington Post at the time". 

And this is the peril of Richard Nixon's history on the web. Constantly being updated and replaced, the historicity is replaced with nostalgia: the National websites fail to capture that real sense of dread and national discord that prevailed, whatever Nixon may have subsequently achieved as an 'elder statesman'. In a sense, by looking back at Nixon from such a long vantage point, these National histories are merely reproducing one interconnected eulogy for the man. The speakers at Nixon's funeral gave the clearest example of this version, when Bill Clinton linked himself explicitly to the National repackaging of Nixon: "President Nixon's journey across the American landscapes mirrored that of his entire nation in this remarkable century." Quoted in the Nixon Library website, Bill Clinton  acknowledges that "Oh, yes, he knew great controversy amid defeat as well as victory. He made mistakes..." 

But to find out exactly what his mistakes were, it is necessary to look elsewhere, because they are either not mentioned here, or nostalgically incorporated into the vast and unbroken sweep of a National history.