Death throes of liberal America. | Page 21 | INFJ Forum

Death throes of liberal America.

Iran Contra didnt end Regan because the was nothing to it. Russia ...nothing to it for Trump. But when there is something to it, if your especially sick and dirty (Hillary and friends) you get away with it anyway.
Reagan didn't need to be involved with Iran-Contra, it's bad enough if your underlings are funneling weapons to terrorists. He should have the reputation as one of worst presidents in American history just for picking the kind of people who would do that shit. And nothing to it? People were indicted, a jury found them guilty. You can't be serious about defending Reagan on Iran-Contra, that's too rediculous a stance for anyone with even a modest amount of fairness and intelligence.
 
Last edited:
Honest question: How have you already made up your mind that there's "nothing to it." What evidence makes you so certain?

Please don't say "librul agenda." I want facts.
Time that's gone by. Lack of evidence for that time. Further it's not illegal to setup channels of diplomacy pre or post political office even if its found that Trump did order reaching out to the Russians.
 
Reagan didn't need to be involved with Iran-Contra, it's bad enough if your underlings are funneling weapons to terrorists. He should have the reputation as one of worst presidents in American history just for picking the kind of people who would do that shit. And nothing to it? People were indicted, a jury found them guilty. You can't be serious about defending Reagan on Iran-Contra, that's too rediculous a stance for anyone with even a modest amount of fairness and intelligence.
Completely serious. Regan one of the worst? Regan had some odd beliefs along with his wife even so he's gone down in history as one of the best and absolutley deserves that honor. I remember as a very young kid thinking "Why do people love Regan so much?" He didn't seem like that great of President. I suppose in a perfect world he wasn't but in our world and what we have to choose from? He was stellar.
 
Time that's gone by. Lack of evidence for that time. Further it's not illegal to setup channels of diplomacy pre or post political office even if its found that Trump did order reaching out to the Russians.

Okay.

Hypothetically (I know...), would you care if Trump (either personally or through one of his proxies, Kushner, Bannon or whoever) colluded with Russian interests to swing the election in his favor? Would the ends justify the means?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and acd
Completely serious. Regan one of the worst? Regan had some odd beliefs along with his wife even so he's gone down in history as one of the best and absolutley deserves that honor. I remember as a very young kid thinking "Why do people love Regan so much?" He didn't seem like that great of President. I suppose in a perfect world he wasn't but in our world and what we have to choose from? He was stellar.
Being beloved doesn't make you the best, Hitler was beloved. Reagan wasn't stellar, stellar people don't have hundreds of their underlings convicted or indicted for colluding with terrorists or violating the ethics code or in some cases both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and Wyote
Okay.

Hypothetically (I know...), would you care if Trump (either personally or through one of his proxies, Kushner, Bannon or whoever) colluded with Russian interests to swing the election in his favor? Would the ends justify the means?
It would depend on what the "collusion" entailed. Sending out false information into social media? Thats tough for me because on the one hand it's brilliant but also ineffective. Or at least I can't see how it would have any great effect. Still it's asking a foriegn entity to get involved with our election process and though not illegal it probably should be. Now if collusion were to mean asking Russia to hack voter booths and machines and aiding in that ability... that absolutely should mean long term prison for everyone involved including Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: infinite dreams
Being beloved doesn't make you the best, Hitler was beloved. Reagan wasn't stellar, stellar people don't have hundreds of their underlings convicted or indicted for colluding with terrorists or violating the ethics code or in some cases both.
Show me details where hundreds of Reagans underlings were convicted.
 
Last edited:
If the Mueller investigation proves that the Trump campaign gave voter information collected by the GOP to Russian hackers (FSB or otherwise) somehow I do not think that will go down well with anybody who votes. Think about it, these hackers are the same guys who steal millions of dollars from US citizens every year through banking scams, money which is then laundered through nefarious schemes, the likes of which Manafort et al have been implicated in. We are talking global organized crime.
DJILP5KVoAARXM-.jpg

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article160803619.html
I'd have to agree with that. But the investigation of this is based on what in the first place? Someone suggesting the possibility? When they find nothing...and they will find nothing, an investigation into what justified the investigation in the first place needs to take place.
 
Show me details where hundreds of Reagans underlings were convicted.
Full disclosure, a year or two ago I wrote a paper on Iran-Contra for my... Modern American history course? I don't remember what class exactly. At any rate much of my knowledge on this subject I gleaned from books that are no longer in my possession, I could send you some links to whatever the library of congress has online, and if I remember correctly the justice department has some kind of online record available to the public, but if you want to save some time I have an alternative solution.

I've always gone out of my way to present facts as completely as I can, so if you trust me to summarize what I know about Iran-Contra in this thread, that I could easily do. The Iran-Contra affair is a massive ball of fuckerage with lots of moving parts and lots of people involved but since the actual topic is Reagan, and since his relation to these events can actually be briefly summarized I think I can give a quick overview of the pertinent facts and Reagan's involvement with those facts, despite my foggy memory and not having the same resources I used to have. I'll try to point out if there's any part i'm unsure about or any particular case where my remembrance of the details is inadequate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and Stu
Full disclosure, a year or two ago I wrote a paper on Iran-Contra for my... Modern American history course? I don't remember what class exactly. At any rate much of my knowledge on this subject I gleaned from books that are no longer in my possession, I could send you some links to whatever the library of congress has online, and if I remember correctly the justice department has some kind of online record available to the public, but if you want to save some time I have an alternative solution.

I've always gone out of my way to present facts as completely as I can, so if you trust me to summarize what I know about Iran-Contra in this thread, that I could easily do. The Iran-Contra affair is a massive ball of fuckerage with lots of moving parts and lots of people involved but since the actual topic is Reagan, and since his relation to these events can actually be briefly summarized I think I can give a quick overview of the pertinent facts and Reagan's involvement with those facts, despite my foggy memory and not having the same resources I used to have. I'll try to point out if there's any part i'm unsure about or any particular case where my remembrance of the details is inadequate.
I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt including you. I am interested in the vast amount of people you say were not only involved but convicted of wrong doing though. A credible source that even eludes to that number would be appreciated.
 
I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt including you. I am interested in the vast amount of people you say were not only involved but convicted of wrong doing though. A credible source that even eludes to that number would be appreciated.
Well the Iran-Contra affair centered around the executive branch trying to bypass the democratic congress which had passed a law specifically banning the use of government funds to aid the counter-revolutionaries in Nicaragua or "Contras". William Kasey, the C.I.A. director and N.S.C. official Oliver North repurposed a pre-existing intelligence and diplomatic network in the middle east which was started during the Carter administration to negotiate the release of hostages. This complicated communications apparatus began to trade US built missiles to the Iranian government and to various terrorist groups in exchange for U.S. hostages, some leftover from the Carter era, others from all sorts of individual situations.

The C.I.A. and a whole host of various arms of the executive branch began an elaborate illegal operation further taking the "arms for hostages" network to sell weapons to various factions in the middle east and funneling the money to the anti- communist rebel "Contras" in Nicaragua. I can't run down the complete list of the people interrogated, indicted, and convicted because that list goes on for fucking ages. As I said, though, Reagan's involvement here is a little easier to summarize.

Kasey died of a brain tumor before things hit the fan, and Oliver North the N.S.C. official who was at the center of most of this mess spent, by his own admission around 4 or 5 days in the pentagon and in his office shredding thousands of documents. Despite this, Congressional investigations and a series of independent councilors managed to indict, and in many cases convict intelligence agents and lackeys to top Reagan aides who were also indicted and sometimes convicted. People like:

John Poindexter and Robert McFarlane (national security advisors) were convicted of crimes related to the Iran-contra affair, and so bleak was their situation that one of them attempted suicide (I don't remember which)
Oliver North (NSC advisor) was convicted
Assistant secretary of state Elliot Abrams was also convicted (if that name already sounds familiar, he was in the George W. Bush administration)
Caspar Weinburger (Defense Secretary) was at least indicted, but i don't remember if he was convicted.

Most of these high-level advisors were pardoned by George H.W. Bush, which is troublesome since he was under investigation himself. After the public lost interest and I believe after he was elected president (I don't remember if it was during or after his Presidential Campaign) Bush was forced to release his private diary (which he started to chronicle his time as Vice President). After years of denying any knowledge of the Iran-Contra Fiasco his diary should have led to his impeachment as president. I read it directly and i still remember the exact wording in one of the later entries: "...I am one of the few people that fully know the details..." (this was at the end of a long entry about Iran-Contra)

Reagan was never directly connected to these events himself, it's simply that everyone around him was.So the problem with Reagan being a "Great President" is undercut by Iran-Contra because either:

A) He was aware of Iran-Contra and at a minimum did nothing to stop it, but quite possibly participated it actively and had Oliver North shred the documents during his shred-fest

OR

B) He was completely unaware of what almost all of the people working for him were up to. Which makes him kind of a shitty leader wouldn't you say?

Most of the people convicted, indicted, interviewed, etc. were low-level intelligence operatives or government officals, its the high-level involvement of basically everyone involved with Reagan's Intelligence gathering apparatus that is troubling.

EDIT: Describing the number as "hundreds" was an exaggeration on my part. I don't know the total number convicted but the final indicted number was something like 130 some odd people if i remember right
 
@Eventhorizon
If i'm not totally mistaken this should be the final report submitted by the last in the series of Independent counselors to the District of Columbia (circuit court?) there's so much to this it's hard to keep all the evidence straight, but anyways after the public outrage died a lot of these criminal cases were transferred to the local court system (since these crimes technically occurred in the D.C. area) and this is what the congressional investigation turned over to them, if i'm remembering this right.
https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/
It should at least include Bush's diary but i'm not sure what all could be in it. If this is the complete, unabridged legal document i think it is then reading through it all is going to be like reading through several encyclopedias worth of dry, legal shlock.
 
Now if collusion were to mean asking Russia to hack voter booths and machines and aiding in that ability... that absolutely should mean long term prison for everyone involved including Trump.

That is what the whole investigation is about.
This is why they just subpoenaed Trump’s bank records from Deutsche Bank (one of the only banks that will still loan him money due to unpaid loans - including Deutsche Bank themselves who had to sue him to get him to repay - so he sued them back) - and yet, the Bank played intermediary to what looks like millions if not billions of dollars over a period of years laundered from Russia and Russian oligarch connected players.
Eric Trump himself has said they get a shit-ton of money from Russia.
The CIA, FBI, DOJ, and every other intelligence gathering institution in the US has concluded that Russia interfered big time in the election, but Trump plays it off like there is nothing there - because he knows the Russians were helping him and it’s his ass on the line.
So instead he says our FBI is a mess, for which the Director has to come on TV and dispute his BS lies.
Derp.
 
Well the Iran-Contra affair centered around the executive branch trying to bypass the democratic congress which had passed a law specifically banning the use of government funds to aid the counter-revolutionaries in Nicaragua or "Contras". William Kasey, the C.I.A. director and N.S.C. official Oliver North repurposed a pre-existing intelligence and diplomatic network in the middle east which was started during the Carter administration to negotiate the release of hostages. This complicated communications apparatus began to trade US built missiles to the Iranian government and to various terrorist groups in exchange for U.S. hostages, some leftover from the Carter era, others from all sorts of individual situations.

The C.I.A. and a whole host of various arms of the executive branch began an elaborate illegal operation further taking the "arms for hostages" network to sell weapons to various factions in the middle east and funneling the money to the anti- communist rebel "Contras" in Nicaragua. I can't run down the complete list of the people interrogated, indicted, and convicted because that list goes on for fucking ages. As I said, though, Reagan's involvement here is a little easier to summarize.

Kasey died of a brain tumor before things hit the fan, and Oliver North the N.S.C. official who was at the center of most of this mess spent, by his own admission around 4 or 5 days in the pentagon and in his office shredding thousands of documents. Despite this, Congressional investigations and a series of independent councilors managed to indict, and in many cases convict intelligence agents and lackeys to top Reagan aides who were also indicted and sometimes convicted. People like:

John Poindexter and Robert McFarlane (national security advisors) were convicted of crimes related to the Iran-contra affair, and so bleak was their situation that one of them attempted suicide (I don't remember which)
Oliver North (NSC advisor) was convicted
Assistant secretary of state Elliot Abrams was also convicted (if that name already sounds familiar, he was in the George W. Bush administration)
Caspar Weinburger (Defense Secretary) was at least indicted, but i don't remember if he was convicted.

Most of these high-level advisors were pardoned by George H.W. Bush, which is troublesome since he was under investigation himself. After the public lost interest and I believe after he was elected president (I don't remember if it was during or after his Presidential Campaign) Bush was forced to release his private diary (which he started to chronicle his time as Vice President). After years of denying any knowledge of the Iran-Contra Fiasco his diary should have led to his impeachment as president. I read it directly and i still remember the exact wording in one of the later entries: "...I am one of the few people that fully know the details..." (this was at the end of a long entry about Iran-Contra)

Reagan was never directly connected to these events himself, it's simply that everyone around him was.So the problem with Reagan being a "Great President" is undercut by Iran-Contra because either:

A) He was aware of Iran-Contra and at a minimum did nothing to stop it, but quite possibly participated it actively and had Oliver North shred the documents during his shred-fest

OR

B) He was completely unaware of what almost all of the people working for him were up to. Which makes him kind of a shitty leader wouldn't you say?

Most of the people convicted, indicted, interviewed, etc. were low-level intelligence operatives or government officals, its the high-level involvement of basically everyone involved with Reagan's Intelligence gathering apparatus that is troubling.

EDIT: Describing the number as "hundreds" was an exaggeration on my part. I don't know the total number convicted but the final indicted number was something like 130 some odd people if i remember right
Being unaware of what the people "beneath" you are up to is fairly common. If you are a low level manager perhaps you have that luxury but the entire US Government? I'm surprised the whole thing doesn't implode at any given time what with all the dealings, back dealings etc....
Let's not forget Reagan was in advanced stages of alzihmers by his second term. THAT should have been cause to have him removed. Reagan was a great President imo but to this day I am still like wtf on that one. I have no doubt people were running around like kids in a candy store while no one was watching in that scenario. It's very possible...perhaps even probable he really did not know what was going on.
 
Being unaware of what the people "beneath" you are up to is fairly common. If you are a low level manager perhaps you have that luxury but the entire US Government? I'm surprised the whole thing doesn't implode at any given time what with all the dealings, back dealings etc....
Let's not forget Reagan was in advanced stages of alzihmers by his second term. THAT should have been cause to have him removed. Reagan was a great President imo but to this day I am still like wtf on that one. I have no doubt people were running around like kids in a candy store while no one was watching in that scenario. It's very possible...perhaps even probable he really did not know what was going on.
So you like him despite his being brain dead? Make me president, i'll decide everything with a magic 8 ball.

EDIT: and my secretary of state will be a fortune cookie
Mr. Secretary should we invade North Korea? (unwraps fortune cookie) "Better too press shirt than to press luck" got it, no invasion. Thank you Mr. Cookie
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lady Jolanda
@Eventhorizon I have one small correction to make- I said that congress had banned the use of government funds to aid the contras, but more precisely congress had banned the use of government funds to overthrow the communist government in Nicaragua. Since supporting the Contras would likely lead to the fall of the Nicaraguan government, it is on this basis that what they did was in violation of congressional law.

The Contra war Began in 1982 (one year into Reagan's administration) and Kasey at that point was already supporting them (I believe at this early stage it was mostly strategic support such as military advisement and access to American military Intelligence). Granted the Iran-Contra thing took years to morph into what it finally became, but Reagan would have had to have been completely oblivious as to what the CIA was doing from the moment he took office to the moment he left. Well before Alzheimers took his mind he either consented or just asked the CIA and his intelligence advisors no questions about what they were doing, which is odd that he wouldn't care about Nicaragua because at various points in his presidency he said things like "The Nicaraguan people are trapped in a totalitarian dungeon made all the more dangerous by Soviet-bloc and radical Arab helpers". At another point he called the Contras "The moral equals of our founding fathers". These Contras raped women and machine-gunned entire villages filled with women and children for the record.

Reagan? one of the best? Horseshit.
 
Oh... I googled his "Moral equal of our founding fathers" statement because I remembered I saw footage of his press conference where he said it and I wanted to link it and found this instead:
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/03/02/politics/02REAG.html

He said lots of things about Nicaragua at the beginning of his second term according to this article, so yeah if he wasn't completely brain dead he might have asked the people who briefed him on it in the first place some questions about what they were doing in Nicaragua. Also since he campaigned against Carter and the hostage crisis was what ruined him, you think he would also look into what the his intelligence had to say about what was going on in Iran.

So once again either Reagan was involved with what was going on, or he was just totally not interested or not capable of understanding a lot basic things about what was going on around him or even issues that were politically important.

EDIT:
I can't embed it, but I found it.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4565114/moral-equivalent-founding-fathers