Has treason been behind many of our presidential election results — real treason?
The fishyness, for want of a better word, involved in the election of our modern Republican presidents is both well understood and under the radar, but for those who dare look, the implications are stark. In 2003 I myself wrote a piece making the same point for a web site I won’t name, because the piece was rejected. It’s just too bold a truth.
A strong case can be made that indeed, no Republican president since Eisenhower has been legitimately elected. And if sabotaging the negotiations of the elected U.S. government in order to win power is treason, well, some dare call it so, including Thom Hartman.
There’s an asterisk next to Bush I (George H.W. Bush) but I’ll deal with that below the Hartmann quote.
A Child’s Garden of Treason
This is radio host Thom Hartmann, in an interview covering the material of his new book, The Crash of 2016. The interviewer is Mark Karlin of Truthout. I’m printing just the part of the interview that deals with modern Republican presidents. The discussion starts with FOX News, then veers into Republican presidential legitimacy (my emphasis and paragraphing; square-bracket comments are the Truthout editor’s):
[Mark] KARLIN: You have a section on Roger Ailes as head of the GOP network (FOX). How significant do you think TV has been in getting America’s white working – and what remains of the middle – class to blame the nation’s woes on less fortunate non-whites, in many cases as poor as them?
[Thom] HARTMANN: It’s been absolutely consequential. FOX News was started by a billionaire who, in the beginning, lost 100 million dollars a year for the first five years in order to get the network up [it is now extremely profitable].
Republicans have really struggled since FDR to reverse the New Deal.
In 1968, LBJ had negotiated peace between North and South Vietnam. The Nixon campaign got a hold of the information that an end to the Vietnam War was at hand through the peace talks being held in Paris. A telephone transcript released of a conversation between President Johnson and Republican Senator Everett Dirksen indicates that Johnson knew that the Nixon campaign was … undermining the tentative peace agreement.
Johnson told Dirksen that what Nixon’s campaign was doing in trying to sabotage peace in order to win the ’68 election against [Hubert] Humphrey was treason, and Dirksen, a senior Republican, agreed.
In effect, Johnson was pleading with leading Republicans to get the Nixon operatives to allow a peace agreement. But Nixon refused to back off and won the ’68 election [but thousands upon thousands of US soldiers and Vietnamese died over the next few years, as well as an escalation of the war into Cambodia - and the resultant Khmer Rouge massacres - due to a GOP willingness to sacrifice lives to win an election].
Reagan’s campaign was long-rumored to have undercut an agreement to free hostages toward the end of the Carter administration because it would likely mean Carter’s re-election. The Reagan campaign [allegedly through a fall 1980 meeting with revolutionary Iranian government officials and Reagan campaign honcho William Casey*] promised Iran a better deal than they said Carter would give them, as well as spare military parts.
At the time Carter was near an agreement for the return of the US hostages, 80% of Iran was polled and supported their release. But the Reagan campaign, like Nixon’s, prevailed against US interests. In short, the Reagan administration likely assumed power also as a result of treason.
And then you have George W. Bush, whose brother was governor of Florida when Al Gore appeared to have more actual votes [although uncounted] than Bush. On top of that, Jeb Bush, through Katherine Harris, got about 80,000 African-American voters stricken from the polls through a caging strategy that struck felons and non-felons with similar names from the voting rolls. And that put Bush within range of officially counted votes for the Supreme Court to steal the election for Bush.
There has not been a Republican legitimately elected president since Dwight Eisenhower. In the House of Representatives, the Democrats got a million and a half more votes than the Republicans. The only reason that the Republicans are holding the House is because of redistricting, because of gerrymandering.
When your political agenda is to screw working people and the poor and reward rich people at all costs, you are not going to win elections. So they have to build coalitions with people who are anti-something, because if they ran on economics they would always lose. So organizations like ALEC have put their thumb on the scale and tipped things hugely in the direction of the GOP. It’s been just enough to get Republicans in power in many areas of elective government.
The media is tilted right and has created the modern infrastructure for the Republican Party. In most of the country, you can’t even get progressive radio anymore. So when Roger Ailes first sat down with Richard Nixon and said, let’s create this GOP TV thing, Nixon didn’t have the money. When Ailes found someone who could support his idea in Rupert Murdoch, it changed the course of our country.
Pretty damning, I would say. Note that every Republican president except Bush I, George H.W. Bush, is implicated.
Bush I is not exempt; he too probably met with the Iranians in 1980
The asterisk (*) in the above quotation is mine, and it relates to George H.W. Bush and his participation in the (alleged) Reagan plot, and also his (alleged) participation in the October 1980 Paris meetings with then–Reagan campaign manager and future CIA Director William Casey and Iranian government officials, including Mahdi Karrubi.
The go-to guy on this is Robert Parry, who at the time of the Iran-Contra investigation was reporting for PBS’s Frontline, back when PBS was actually PBS, “your daddy’s PBS,” which no longer exists.
From Wikipedia, detailing the plot and Parry’s investigation (again, my emphasis and paragraphing; see source for footnotes):
Another key point of evidence was the claim that Casey attended a meeting with Karrubi in Paris on 19 October, “an assertion supported by four French intelligence officials, including the French spy chief Alexandre de Marenches who described the meetings to his biographer.”
The House of Representatives [nevertheless] considered this claim disproven by de Marenches’ denial when asked by Task Force investigators, and by uncorroborated evidence from Larry Casey, William Casey’s nephew, that he remembered his father calling William in Arlington, Virginia on the relevant date. A year earlier, Larry Casey had insisted to Frontline that he had a “vivid” memory of a dinner his parents had with William at the Jockey Club in Washington, until Jockey Club sign-in sheets and American Express receipts showed the dinner had been on 15 October.
Frontline’s Robert Parry told the House of Representatives about the discrepancy, but it still relied on Larry Casey’s evidence as disproving Casey’s attendance at the meeting. …
According to Robert Parry, de Marenches “privately mocked” the published House Task Force findings, although (according to Andelman) de Marenches demanded the story be kept out of their book, as he did not want to hurt [GHW] Bush’s re-election chances or Casey’s legacy. …
George H.W. Bush was also said to be at the meeting, but repeatedly denied it. During investigations in the early 1990s Bush provided several alibis that fell apart, before maintaining that he was visiting a private residence in Washington. Bush refused to disclose the person visited, except to members of the House October Surprise Task Force on condition that they did not disclose the name or interview the person.
This person ultimately proved to be Richard Anthony Moore (Ambassador to Ireland 1989-1992), but he had died by the time this was disclosed. John Norman Maclean, who worked at the Chicago Tribune for 30 years, told a State Department official, on a date the official recalled as 18 October 1980, that Bush was flying to Paris for hostage negotiations. Maclean had been given the information by a source he described as “in a secondary position in Republican circles … where he would have access to information of this kind”, but never published the claim due to Republican denials.
By the way, I believe Parry and the other investigators who were reporting at the time of Iran-Contra. There’s just enough doubt to hang your hat on, if you want to hang your hat (and the House investigation really wanted to). But the preponderance of the evidence is damning for both Reagan and Bush I. I haven’t presented a tenth of it.
Did Bush I commit treason to become president? If the above is true, ultimately yes. He probably, in my view, participated in the plot, was probably at the core of it, and his presidency depended on Reagan’s and on the whitewashing of his own 1980 actions.
Finally, remember what Bush II, his son did, immediately after taking office? He sealed his father’s vice-presidential records into the next generation.
[T]he presidential papers of Ronald Reagan were due to be made public when George W. Bush took office in January 2001. However, in a White House memo dated March 23, 2001, the Counsel to the President conveyed the following to U.S Archivist John W. Carlin:
Section 2(b) of Executive Order 12667, issued by former President Ronald Reagan on January 16, 1989, requires the Archivist of the United States to delay release of Presidential records at the instruction of the current President. On behalf of the President, I instruct you to extend for 90 days (until June 21, 2001) the time in which President Bush may claim a constitutionally based privilege over the Presidential records that former President Reagan, acting under Section 2204(a) of Title 4, has protected from disclosure for the 12 years since the end of his Presidency. This directive applies as well to the Vice Presidential records of former Vice President George H.W. Bush. …
On November 1, 2001, Bush issued Executive Order 13233, limiting the access to the records of former U.S. Presidents:
…reflecting military, diplomatic, or national security secrets, Presidential communications, legal advice, legal work, or the deliberative processes of the President and the President’s advisers, and to do so in a manner consistent with the Supreme Court‘s decisions in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (1977), and other cases…
What are the odds Bush II was whitewashing his daddy’s involvement in Iran-Contra, protecting the family dishonor, so to speak? What are the odds the sun will rise tomorrow? Not certain, but … well …
This executive order was widely criticized as unprecedented, but you know Republicans — when they have power, they use it.
Thanks, Mr. Hartmann, for reminding us of this part of our history. I rag on neoliberal Dems liberally, and they deserve it. But Republicans have been committing treason since Watergate and before. Never forget it.
To order Thom Hartmann’s new book, click here. Enjoy.
(Facebook note: To get the most from a Facebook recommendation, be sure to Share what you also Like. Thanks.)