Tons of people investigated it, including multiple Congressional investigations headed by Democrats.
The reason they never found proof of it, is because it’s not true. It’s just a conspiracy theory.
This did not happen, but candidate Nixon did try to sabotage the Vietnam peace talks to prolong the war.
Well, indications aren’t that he wanted to prolong the war, but rather he did not want to give Johnson a political victory going into the election.
It doesn’t make his actions any more excusable, but it is a difference.
At this point, it seems like he’s not even gonna be close to the running for worst or most corrupt president though.
Certainly they never proved it. I don’t believe it in any strong sense, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it were true. Certainly Reagan proved more than willing to bargain with Iran secretly later, in violation of the law, so doing it more than one is no stretch.
Believing in nonsense that isn’t proven, but which “sounds like it could be true” is the basis for all conspiracy theory bullshit.
No
This shit is not true. It was investigated, in great length, by tons of different organizations.
You are promoting conspiracy theory nonsense, just like idiots like Alex Jones. The fact that they are conspiracy theories about people you don’t like doesn’t make it any better.
Tons? Were those metric tons, or Imperial ones?
I mean, it was investigated by a House committee, and it was investigated by a Senate committee. Who else?
“X provably did an illegal (and immoral thing) with a certain party, so the idea that X did an illegal (and immoral) thing at an earlier time with the same party doesn’t seem completely implausible” doesn’t really seem like Alex Jones territory.
Many people,including Senators, Representatives, etc, are saying that this Russia-Trump thing is a conspiracy too. No truth to any of it. It’s been investigated by Congressional committees in great length.
Good to establish that the inability to differentiate reality from fantasy is bipartisan.
Former Iranian President Banisadr[edit]
It is now very clear that there were two separate agreements, one the official agreement with Carter in Algeria, the other, a secret agreement with another party, which, it is now apparent, was Reagan. They made a deal with Reagan that the hostages should not be released until after Reagan became president. So, then in return, Reagan would give them arms. We have published documents which show that US arms were shipped, via Israel, in March, about 2 months after Reagan became president.
— Former Iranian President Abolhassan Banisadr[33]
Barbara Honegger[edit]
Barbara Honegger was a 1980 Reagan-Bush campaign staffer and later a Reagan White House policy analyst.[34] Since 1995, she’s been Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School.After the 1980 election, she headed the U.S. Attorney General’s Gender Discrimination Agency Review under the presidency of Ronald Reagan, before resigning from her post in 1983.[36] While working for Reagan, she claims to have discovered information that made her believe that George H. W. Bush and William Casey had conspired to assure that Iran would not free the U.S. hostages until Jimmy Carter had been defeated in the 1980 presidential election, and she alleges that arms sales to Iran were a part of that bargain.
**
Bush is highlighted because Maddow and her producer uncovered possible obstruction by Bush over Agnew:
In the course of researching a Nov. 13 episode of the Slow Burn–style podcast Bag Man , which is about corrupt Nixon administration Vice President Spiro Agnew, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow and producer Mike Yarvitz seem to have uncovered evidence that the late George H.W. Bush was involved in a Nixon-led effort to obstruct a federal investigation into Agnew’s activities.
Worth noting, a record 138 Reagan administration staff were indicted on various scandals - therefore it’s not completely outside the pale that something happened with Reagan and the Iranians.
Also worth noting that the House investigation was limited in time by the current House session, which means they had to wrap up before they got Banisadr’s letter, so never considered it.
Wait a second, hold the phone - it was Oliver North that sold arms to Iran, not Reagan. Not sure where you’re coming up with this kooky stuff.
Belief in conspiracy theories has very little nuance.
Because that’s what this is. It’s a conspiracy theory.
It’s not like it was never investigated. It was investigated, at length, by both private and government groups. And no one ever managed to dig up any proof. Which seems really weird, given the amount of scrutiny that was placed upon it, doesn’t it?
It’s basically the same as the folks who are certain that Clinton did some terrible stuff regarding Benghazi, despite the in depth investigations into it…because hey, even though they couldn’t find evidence of such things happening, it seems like they are things that might have happened!
And jesus christ, you really gonna push up the unsubstantiated claims of Iran’s government? You don’t think any of the actual non totalitarian organizations looked into any of that stuff? And yet still didn’t confirm any of it?
Jesus christ people. Don’t you even see how you’re just doing the same fucking shit that you recognize as wrong when other folks do it? How can you be so blind to introspection?
It’s a conspiracy theory. It appeals to you WANTING it to be true.
I think there’s a difference between Alex Jones conspiracy shit and some of us thinking “Hmmm, seems like this could actually be true, given the low level of decency and morality that Republicans have been operating at for years.”
I don’t get the impression that anyone is super invested in it, like it HAS to be true and no one else can see it - wtf are they thinking, etc.
Banisadr was impeached by the Iranian gov’t a year after taking office, so no, I’m not pushing claims by a totalitarian government. I’m not even claiming this is true.
The point I’m driving at is Republican administrations tend to be corrupt and do corrupt things (as evinced by the numerous scandals from Nixon on), nor am I invested in anyway over this particular incident. That said, it’s nothing like what you’re now claiming. In fact your zealous ranting about partisanship tends to blind you when it comes to Republican party history. It’s not that people harsh on Republicans simply because they’re Republicans, rather it’s what Republicans have done over the course of time that earns them enmity.
Isnt this the baseline for most people that are still supporting Trump?
No, because it’s not true. “Seeming like it could be true” is not the same as actually being true. “Seeming like it could be true” is what a conspiracy theory is.
Both the Senate and the House investigated this separately. They didn’t find evidence of it. Hell, the House actually found that some of the folks making claims that it happened had actually perjured themselves.
The House of Representatives’ 1993 report concluded “there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran”. The task force Chairman Lee H. Hamilton also added that the vast majority of the sources and material reviewed by the committee were “wholesale fabricators or were impeached by documentary evidence”. The report also expressed the belief that several witnesses had committed perjury during their sworn statements to the committee, among them Richard Brenneke,[26] who claimed to be a CIA agent.[27]
This was run by the Democrats. It wasn’t some kind of coverup. It’s just that the supposed evidence supporting this conspiracy theory was just a bunch of made up bullshit. It wasn’t fucking true.
Exactly!
…twelve years later…
I’ve already said that I don’t believe this story in the way that you mean believe. Other people have said the same thing. I’m not really sure what else you want.
This is the second time you’ve promoted that particular conspiracy theory, and didn’t seem to internalize the fact that it was false.
I don’t believe that it’s false in the way you do, either. But in the future, I’ll promote the true conspiracy theories about Reagan. Or do I have to pretend he knew nothing about Iran / Contra, too?