POL An Untold Story Behind Jimmy Carter’s Presidential Defeat

jward

passin' thru
An Untold Story Behind Jimmy Carter’s Presidential Defeat
Peter Baker



A Four-Decade Secret: One Man’s Story of Sabotaging Carter’s Re-election

A prominent Texas politician said he unwittingly took part in a 1980 tour of the Middle East with a clandestine agenda.

“History needs to know that this happened,” Ben Barnes now says of his trip to the Middle East in 1980.

March 18, 2023

WASHINGTON — It has been more than four decades, but Ben Barnes said he remembers it vividly. His longtime political mentor invited him on a mission to the Middle East. What Mr. Barnes said he did not realize until later was the real purpose of the mission: to sabotage the re-election campaign of the president of the United States.

It was 1980 and Jimmy Carter was in the White House, bedeviled by a hostage crisis in Iran that had paralyzed his presidency and hampered his effort to win a second term. Mr. Carter’s best chance for victory was to free the 52 Americans held captive before Election Day. That was something that Mr. Barnes said his mentor was determined to prevent.

His mentor was John B. Connally Jr., a titan of American politics and former Texas governor who had served three presidents and just lost his own bid for the White House. A former Democrat, Mr. Connally had sought the Republican nomination in 1980 only to be swamped by former Gov. Ronald Reagan of California. Now Mr. Connally resolved to help Mr. Reagan beat Mr. Carter and in the process, Mr. Barnes said, make his own case for becoming secretary of state or defense in a new administration.

What happened next Mr. Barnes has largely kept secret for nearly 43 years. Mr. Connally, he said, took him to one Middle Eastern capital after another that summer, meeting with a host of regional leaders to deliver a blunt message to be passed to Iran: Don’t release the hostages before the election. Mr. Reagan will win and give you a better deal.

Then shortly after returning home, Mr. Barnes said, Mr. Connally reported to William J. Casey, the chairman of Mr. Reagan’s campaign and later director of the Central Intelligence Agency, briefing him about the trip in an airport lounge.

Mr. Carter’s camp has long suspected that Mr. Casey or someone else in Mr. Reagan’s orbit sought to secretly torpedo efforts to liberate the hostages before the election, and books have been written on what came to be called the October surprise. But congressional investigations debunked previous theories of what happened.

Mr. Connally did not figure in those investigations. His involvement, as described by Mr. Barnes, adds a new understanding to what may have happened in that hard-fought, pivotal election year. With Mr. Carter now 98 and in hospice care, Mr. Barnes said he felt compelled to come forward to correct the record.

“History needs to know that this happened,” Mr. Barnes, who turns 85 next month, said in one of several interviews, his first with a news organization about the episode. “I think it’s so significant and I guess knowing that the end is near for President Carter put it on my mind more and more and more. I just feel like we’ve got to get it down some way.”

Mr. Barnes is no shady foreign arms dealer with questionable credibility, like some of the characters who fueled previous iterations of the October surprise theory. He was once one of the most prominent figures in Texas, the youngest speaker of the Texas House of Representatives and later lieutenant governor. He was such an influential figure that he helped a young George W. Bush get into the Texas Air National Guard rather than be exposed to the draft and sent to Vietnam. Lyndon B. Johnson predicted that Mr. Barnes would become president someday.

Confirming Mr. Barnes’s account is problematic after so much time. Mr. Connally, Mr. Casey and other central figures have long since died and Mr. Barnes has no diaries or memos to corroborate his account. But he has no obvious reason to make up the story and indeed expressed trepidation at going public because of the reaction of fellow Democrats.

Mr. Barnes identified four living people he said he had confided in over the years: Mark K. Updegrove, president of the L.B.J. Foundation; Tom Johnson, a former aide to Lyndon Johnson (no relation) who later became publisher of the Los Angeles Times and president of CNN; Larry Temple, a former aide to Mr. Connally and Lyndon Johnson; and H.W. Brands, a University of Texas historian.

All four of them confirmed in recent days that Mr. Barnes shared the story with them years ago. “As far as I know, Ben never has lied to me,” Tom Johnson said, a sentiment the others echoed. Mr. Brands included three paragraphs about Mr. Barnes’s recollections in a 2015 biography of Mr. Reagan, but the account generated little public notice at the time.

Records at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum confirm part of Mr. Barnes’s story. An itinerary found this past week in Mr. Connally’s files indicated that he did, in fact, leave Houston on July 18, 1980, for a trip that would take him to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel before returning to Houston on Aug. 11. Mr. Barnes was listed as accompanying him.

Brief news accounts at the time reported on some of Mr. Connally’s stops with scant detail, describing the trip as “strictly private.” An intriguing note in Mr. Connally’s file confirms Mr. Barnes’s memory that there was contact with the Reagan camp early in the trip. Under the heading “Governor Reagan,” a note from an assistant reported to Mr. Connally on July 21: “Nancy Reagan called — they are at Ranch he wants to talk to you about being in on strategy meetings.” There was no record of his response.

Mr. Barnes recalled joining Mr. Connally in early September to sit down with Mr. Casey to report on their trip during a three-hour meeting in the American Airlines lounge at what was then called the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport. An entry in Mr. Connally’s calendar found this past week showed that he traveled to Dallas on Sept. 10. A search of Mr. Casey’s archives at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University turned up no documents indicating whether he was in Dallas then or not.

Mr. Barnes said he was certain the point of Mr. Connally’s trip was to get a message to the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election. “I’ll go to my grave believing that it was the purpose of the trip,” he said. “It wasn’t freelancing because Casey was so interested in hearing as soon as we got back to the United States.” Mr. Casey, he added, wanted to know whether “they were going to hold the hostages.”

None of that establishes whether Mr. Reagan knew about the trip, nor could Mr. Barnes say that Mr. Casey directed Mr. Connally to take the journey. Likewise, he does not know if the message transmitted to multiple Middle Eastern leaders got to the Iranians, much less whether it influenced their decision making. But Iran did hold the hostages until after the election, which Mr. Reagan won, and did not release them until minutes after noon on Jan. 20, 1981, when Mr. Carter left office.



John B. Connally III, the former governor’s eldest son, said in an interview on Friday that he remembered his father taking the Middle East trip but never heard about any message to Iran. While he did not join the trip, the younger Mr. Connally said he accompanied his father to a meeting with Mr. Reagan to discuss it without Mr. Barnes and the conversation centered on the Arab-Israeli conflict and other issues the next president would confront.

“No mention was made in any meeting I was in about any message being sent to the Iranians,” said Mr. Connally. “It doesn’t sound like my dad.” He added: “I can’t challenge Ben’s memory about it, but it’s not consistent with my memory of the trip.”

Suspicions about the Reagan camp’s interactions with Iran circulated quietly for years until Gary Sick, a former national security aide to Mr. Carter, published a guest essay in The New York Times in April 1991 advancing the theory, followed by a book, “October Surprise,” published that November.

The term “October surprise” was originally used by the Reagan camp to describe its fears that Mr. Carter would manipulate the hostage crisis to effect a release just before the election.

To forestall such a scenario, Mr. Casey was alleged to have met with representatives of Iran in July and August 1980 in Madrid leading to a deal supposedly finalized in Paris in October in which a future Reagan administration would ship arms to Tehran through Israel in exchange for the hostages being held until after the election.


Reached by telephone this past week, Mr. Sick said he never heard of any involvement by Mr. Connally but saw Mr. Barnes’s account as verifying the broad concerns he had raised. “This is really very interesting and it really does add significantly to the base level of information on this,” Mr. Sick said. “Just the fact that he was doing it and debriefed Casey when he got back means a lot.” The story goes “further than anything that I’ve seen thus far,” he added. “So this is really new.”

Michael F. Zeldin, a Democratic lawyer for the task force, and David H. Laufman, a Republican lawyer for the task force, both said in recent interviews that Mr. Connally never crossed their radar screen during the inquiry and so they had no basis to judge Mr. Barnes’s account.

While Mr. Casey was never proved to have been engaged in any October surprise deal-making, he was later accused of surreptitiously obtaining a Carter campaign briefing book before the lone debate between the two candidates, although he denied involvement.


News of Mr. Barnes’s account came as validation to some of Mr. Carter’s remaining advisers. Gerald Rafshoon, who was his White House communications director, said any interference may have changed history. “If we had gotten the hostages home, we’d have won, I really believe that,” he said. “It’s pretty damn outrageous.”

Mr. Connally was a political giant of his era. Raised on a South Texas cotton farm, he served in the Navy in World War II and became a confidant of Lyndon B. Johnson, helping run five of his campaigns, including his disputed 1948 election to the Senate that was marred by credible allegations of fraud. Mr. Connally managed Mr. Johnson’s unsuccessful bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1960, then worked for the ticket of John F. Kennedy and Mr. Johnson. Mr. Connally was rewarded with an appointment as secretary of the Navy. He then won a race for governor of Texas in 1962.

He was in the presidential limousine sitting just in front of Mr. Kennedy in Dallas in November 1963 when Lee Harvey Oswald opened fire. Mr. Connally suffered injuries to his back, chest, wrist and thigh, but unlike Mr. Kennedy survived the ordeal. He won two more terms as governor, then became President Richard M. Nixon’s secretary of the Treasury and ultimately switched parties. He was a favorite of Mr. Nixon, who wanted to make him his vice president or successor as president.

Mr. Connally was indicted on charges of perjury and conspiracy to obstruct justice in 1974, accused by prosecutors of taking $10,000 to support a milk price increase, but acquitted by a jury.

Along the way, Mr. Connally found a political protégé in Mr. Barnes, who became “more a godson than a friend,” as James Reston Jr. put it in “The Lone Star,” his biography of Mr. Connally. The son of a peanut farmer who paid for college selling vacuum cleaners door to door, Mr. Barnes was elected to the Texas Legislature at age 21 and stood at Mr. Connally’s side for his first speech as a candidate for governor in 1962.

With Mr. Connally’s help, Mr. Barnes became House speaker at 26 and was later elected lieutenant governor, a powerful position in Texas, only to fall short in his own bid for governor in 1972. He urged Mr. Connally to run for president in 1980 even though by then they were in different parties.

After Mr. Connally’s campaign collapsed, he and Mr. Barnes went into business together, forming Barnes/Connally Investments. The two built apartment complexes, shopping centers and office buildings, and bought a commuter airline and an oil company, and later a barbecue house, a Western art magazine, a title company and an advertising company. But they overextended themselves, took on too much debt and, after falling oil prices shattered the Texas real estate market, filed for bankruptcy in 1987.

The two stayed on good terms. “In spite of the disillusionment of our business arrangements, Ben Barnes and I remain friends, although I doubt that either of us would go back into business with the other,” Mr. Connally wrote in his memoir, “In History’s Shadow,” shortly before dying in 1993 at age 76. Mr. Barnes, for his part, said this past week that “I remain a great fan of him.”

Mr. Barnes said he had no idea of the purpose of the Middle East trip when Mr. Connally invited him. They traveled to the region on a Gulfstream jet owned by Superior Oil. Only when they sat down with the first Arab leader did Mr. Barnes learn what Mr. Connally was up to, he said.

Mr. Connally said, “‘Look, Ronald Reagan’s going to be elected president and you need to get the word to Iran that they’re going to make a better deal with Reagan than they are Carter,’” Mr. Barnes recalled. “He said, ‘It would be very smart for you to pass the word to the Iranians to wait until after this general election is over.’ And boy, I tell you, I’m sitting there and I heard it and so now it dawns on me, I realize why we’re there.”

Mr. Barnes said that, except for Israel, Mr. Connally repeated the same message at every stop in the region to leaders such as President Anwar el-Sadat of Egypt. He thought his friend’s motive was clear. “It became very clear to me that Connally was running for secretary of state or secretary of defense,” Mr. Barnes said. (Mr. Connally was later offered energy secretary but declined.)


Mr. Barnes said he did not reveal the real story at the time to avoid blowback from his own party. “I don’t want to look like Benedict Arnold to the Democratic Party by participating in this,” he recalled explaining to a friend. The headlines at the time, he imagined, would have been scandalous. “I did not want that to be on my obituary at all.”

But as the years have passed, he said, he has often thought an injustice had been done to Mr. Carter. Discussing the trip now, he indicated, was his way of making amends. “I just want history to reflect that Carter got a little bit of a bad deal about the hostages,” he said. “He didn’t have a fighting chance with those hostages still in the embassy in Iran.”

posted for fair use
 

hd5574

Veteran Member
Carter was a selected president. ...we knew he would be the next president. ..way before there were any candidates...not even any talk about the election ... we knew an employee of the CIA....who said..you won't even know the name of the next president. ...he is a peanut farmer in Georgia. ..his name is Jimmy Carter. ..and low and behold..Jimmy Carter burst on the national scene and was "elected " president. .one of those things that make you wonder..
The person who told us has passed some years back
..but you can believe we...listened to other things we were told ...one of which was to get out of debt. ...and stay out of debt...we are seeing many things talked about coming to pass....
 

AlfaMan

Has No Life - Lives on TB
An interesting story for sure.

But I almost wonder. With president Trump facing a possible arrest warrant Tuesday; was this released to denigrate another revered Republican president in the American press? perhaps to "pile on" the mantra "Republicans bad, orange man bad, communists good" ?
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
From what I can remember as a young teen, Carter had/caused more problems than just the Iran hostage situation. People in the highly Dem area where I grew up didn't like him well before the hostage crisis.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
This was so obvious at the time (without the details) that I still remember feeling sick as they finally released the hostages after Reagan took the oath of office. I could never really listen to the song "Celebrate Good Times" again without thinking about all those people sitting and waiting for the politics to play out, so they could go home.

It was disgusting then, and it isn't very good now. The only consolation is this it looks like President Reagan himself had nothing to do with engineering it. Something I didn't believe then, but I find believable now.

I also agree that President Trump's indictment is well-timed to try to keep him out of the White House. Neither President Trump nor President Reagan may have been my chosen candidate then. But I suspect both are good enough men not to want to win because someone else cheated on them.

And now, rigged elections are nothing new, though, in the past, it usually wasn't as obvious and cynical as it is now.

One reason I would like to see the Democrats nominate Robert Kennedy Jr. and the Republicans Trump (obviously a popular choice) is that I think both men are qualified to do the job. And it would be nice to see a well-reasoned debate between two very different but brilliant people crossing verbal swords and sharpening each other. As political debates should be an may the most convincing man win.
 

Groucho

Has No Life - Lives on TB
An "interesting" story, but
The Author, Peter Baker work(ed)s for PBS, MSNBC, and the NY Times. Just based on that, I'll wager that he's more than a little left of center in his views. The fact that this story's premise seems to be 180 degrees out of phase with what was perceived and reported back then is puzzling. The fact that the hostages were released when Reagan was sworn in was a result of the Iranians were very leery of the crazy cowboy Reagan and didn't think they could push him around as they had Carter. That was the perception and some reporting at the time. That's how I remember it.

Carter, while a very decent man, wasn't a competent executive. He was intelligent as proven by his work in nuclear engineering on submarines under Adm. Rickover. He was moral and (I believe) honest. He just didn't have the toughness to handle those times. He muffed the energy crisis sitting around in his sweater and telling Americans to do the same.
The big killer of his reelection was the utter failure of Desert One which was a failed attempt to free the hostages.
That's the way it was reported at the time IIRC.

This story from Baker is, in my OPINION, an attempt to re-write history. We've all seen this tactic play out before.

I think the most telling CYA line in the story is "Confirming Mr. Barnes’s account is problematic after so much time. Mr. Connally, Mr. Casey and other central figures have long since died and Mr. Barnes has no diaries or memos to corroborate his account."

In my opinion, this little story a propaganda piece. There's no reason to polish Mr. Carter's image. He is a good and honest Christian who should not have listened to the siren song of politics. He was run over by events and vile people who used him. In the end, Mr. Carter has redeemed himself many times over. I don't agree with his politics. Too bad I'm not as decent a man as he. Even when he was President I used to say, "if he wanted to come over for dinner, he and his wife would be welcomed. We just wouldn't talk politics." Not that the President of the United States even knows who I am, let alone want to come over for dinner.
 

NoDandy

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Carter was a selected president. ...we knew he would be the next president. ..way before there were any candidates...not even any talk about the election ... we knew an employee of the CIA....who said..you won't even know the name of the next president. ...he is a peanut farmer in Georgia. ..his name is Jimmy Carter. ..and low and behold..Jimmy Carter burst on the national scene and was "elected " president. .one of those things that make you wonder..
The person who told us has passed some years back
..but you can believe we...listened to other things we were told ...one of which was to get out of debt. ...and stay out of debt...we are seeing many things talked about coming to pass....
I remember the stories about the hostages, and Iran being afraid of Reagan.

One must remember Carter had ties to CFR & Trilateral Comm.

Edit to add : If I remember correctly, Carter was behind giving away the Panama Canal !

And for all his claims of Christianity, and teaching Sunday School, he never once denounced the Commie Democrap Party for all its pro abortion efforts, nor when the crowd "Booed God " at the Dem convention in South Carolina.

:ld:
:mad::mad::mad::mad:
 
Last edited:

Granny Franny

Senior Member
News of Mr. Barnes’s account came as validation to some of Mr. Carter’s remaining advisers. Gerald Rafshoon, who was his White House communications director, said any interference may have changed history. “If we had gotten the hostages home, we’d have won, I really believe that,” he said. “It’s pretty damn outrageous.”

I don't know about the truth of the trip, but I don't believe Carter would have won had the hostages been brought home. 9% is a lot of gap to close.

1679253545082.png
 

jward

passin' thru
An interesting story for sure.

But I almost wonder. With president Trump facing a possible arrest warrant Tuesday; was this released to denigrate another revered Republican president in the American press? perhaps to "pile on" the mantra "Republicans bad, orange man bad, communists good" ?
My first reactions were similar, though I figured it was just an effort to erase a wee bit of the negative press a dying man had received.
Who knows. I guess it's naive to think that this massive, malignant "all on one side, and it ain't ours" state of affairs was somehow new, they've been at it since time immemorial, I'm sure.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
It was known at the time (or pretty soon after) that the Iranians wanted to release them several weeks before they did (and Reagan had already been elected). It was rumored that someone either paid off or convinced them to wait until that moment during the inauguration to release them. I am not saying that President Reagan had anything to do with this. I don't think he was that petty (I did at the time, but I've grown up).

President Carter might still very well have lost, though my Mom always felt he chose to give up the Presidency by swearing to stay in the Rose Garden and not campaign until they were released. He was, in my eyes, a great man and a terrible President of the US. He was, if anything, too principled and too kind-hearted.

Or, as I have told my friend too young to remember him as anything other than an elderly humanitarian. He wasn't a pacificist; he was a career military officer with a brain big enough to have a degree in atomic engineering. But part of a President's job is by its very nature somewhat full of deception and deal-making.

His morals didn't stretch that far, and in our sad world, it compromised his job as President. But as I've also told them, our time was very dark in so many ways. And hockey as it sounds now when he went on TV in those terrible cardigan sweaters and told the Nation he was praying for them and a national recovery, you believed him. You might not agree with him, but you had no trouble visualizing him on his knees, praying for guidance.

Ultimately, his faith led him to a line of work for which he was much more suited, and Mr. Reagan achieved his destiny.
A Pity that things like this have sullied his legacy, even if he was not responsible. Some of us have, unfortunately, long memories.
 

jward

passin' thru
Yes I think a case might be made that he was one of, if no longer the worst, presidents who ever held the office and yet one of, if not, perhaps, the best, of men who've ever been so employed.

- just because this venue doesn't lend itself to addressing issues in any meaningful way doesn't negate the incredible level o' nuance
 

homecanner1

Veteran Member
The fix was in downtown in the 76 election. It was either going to be Jimmy or Ted as nominee and Carter had the less scandal baggage.

By 1979 everyone had about had enough and that Gov. Connally himself was instrumental in the October Surprise is the biggest tell of all. This coming out 'now it can be told' as Jimmy lies dying means more revelations are in the works so brace for it. For the good of the country, Reagan proved the wiser choice. He won by a landslide too, probably the last honest presidential election cycles this country had because they got downright into skullduggery ever after. And remember Ted tried again in a primary bid against Carter in 1980 to unseat him as a one term. These two tried to pull the same play again, you are going to get one of us as nominee whether you like it or not.

How badly do you want to be president twice? And what would you be willing to do to make it happen?

Screenshot (13026).png

now rewatch this 3 minutes of dialogue with 'Deep Throat' played by Hal Holbrook.

"Hunt is investigating Teddy Kennedy and Chappaquiddick". Deep Throat replies, "that should tell you a lot"

Ben Bradlee & the Post were unabashed Kennedy loyalists and acted as gatekeepers to what Watergate was really about

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vETxuL7Ij3Q


And nobody needs to apologize to Carter that he was outmaneuvered in October 1980. Well played Governor Connally.
 
Last edited:

Troke

On TB every waking moment
If the day the embassy was taken, Jimmy had called the Ayatollah and said:

Return the hostages to the embassy. Otherwise I send in the Marines.

The Ayatollah would have done it because all he had was a mob.

But Jimmy didn't.
 

homecanner1

Veteran Member
We will be inundated with lionizing of Carter upon his passing, overlooking his mistakes as outlined by others on this thread. But Barnes releasing this 11th hour missive on Connally's role seals the deal for me the Surprise was real as we suspected.

Ted was Jimmy's failsafe and Plan B in the event he did not prevail in 76. That was why Hunt investigating Chappaquiddick in 71/72 had to be shut down as Deep Throat explained. Because Carter was Plan A but they could not risk losing their failsafe.

Bradlee was in on it from the get go too. He gave Woodward and Bernstein just enough leash to run almost all the way with the story but then held back the real reasons in order to protect their carefully crafted plan to get Carter in by 76.

In effect what you were watching portrayed in that 1976 movie was a primitive form of Q drops from 'Deep Throat' via the novel to the screenplay. The book is full of much more inside baseball and worth re reading. The fact the movie was released 4 April 1976 should also tell you that it was politicized for maximum ballot box potential in primary season in the run up to the DNC convention in NYC that summer. Plus it got a best picture nod and won 4 oscars as we celebrated Jimmy's inaugural

All the levers of the machine moved in perfect calibration that time.

But, Jimmy passing will get the last word, so expect a bit more of this crumbdropping in the runup to his grand finale.
 
Last edited:

Lone_Hawk

Resident Spook
I voted for Carter in my first election. I voted for Reagan the next time. Carter was a big disappointment as President.
 

Wiley

Membership Revoked
Other things Carter gave us;
*Double digit inflation. His recession hurt a lot of people and I remember it well.
*The Misery Index was created because of him.
*Because of his huge failure in Iran, every tin pot dictator thought they push us around.
*Caused democrats to realize they could run any idiot for president and that's how we have an an even bigger disaster in that damn pedophile in the White House.

Bottom line: Carter has done nothing but inspire other failures to run for office and continue his legacy of failure.

And I don't care if he is buried with honors, just make sure he's buried. Deep. Closer to his new home.
 

ted

Veteran Member
When Carter was running for pres. I was thrown out of many bars in town because I was telling people not to vote for him...Within three months or less they were apologizing to me.
 

Ractivist

Pride comes before the fall.....Pride month ended.
Yup, no shortage of revisionist history...it's just how they are. Whatever they can write and release to further their cause.
 

homecanner1

Veteran Member
The other night Coast to Coast had Saint John Hunt on again, they replayed the taped deathbed confession of his father.

And the son is not too happy with HBO not consulting him on the new series with Woody about the Watergate plumbers.

trailer here


"There are a lot of unknowns still... it's still a mystery," Hunt said about Dorothy's life and tragic death. A CIA report described her as "an amoral and dangerous woman," he continued, noting the agency expressed concern she would influence E. Howard in a way that could possibly interfere with their agenda. Hunt described Dorothy as a strong woman with a liberal bend, and revealed the day she boarded Flight 553 she was carrying documents that could prove Nixon's culpability in the assassination attempt on Cuban leader Fidel Castro. She had an interview set to blow the lid off of Watergate and Nixon but was killed in a plane crash that Hunt believes was a CIA hit. According to Hunt, a common CIA tactic is to kill a target with multiple victims so the ensuing investigation does not single out one person and potentially lead back to the agency. "They make no bones about killing as many people as they need to get something accomplished," he suggested.

Hunt also commented on the upcoming HBO Series White House Plumbers, which tells the story of how President Nixon's political operatives, E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy, accidentally toppled his presidency. No one from HBO communicated with Hunt about the series they were producing about his family, so he got in touch with the entertainment company and was told they had excellent researchers and did not need his consultation. "As a point of authenticity they should have had someone from the family... I wanted the portrayal to be accurate," he lamented. Hunt also played an audio clip of his father's deathbed confession....."

*****

Its not so much revision as it is redemption. The liberal press lied about the real reasons for Watergate and what was in the safe. it may turn out the plumbers were heroes, wait for the punch line.

There is a reason the truth about the past is slowly but surely leaking out as the reasons for protecting the deep state's classified secrets evaporate.

Jimmy's death will only accelerate that.
 

hd5574

Veteran Member
Bush (was head of that pesky CIA) was put in to handle Reagan..you can see things that Reagan was mislead by him if you look closely. ..remember they tried to use Hinkley to take him out. .but failed at that attempt

Johnson was put in to handle Kennedy. .but he was not handled...so Dallas....they took out his brother in LA...they feared him.....

And of course Pence was the handler for Trump..we all know how that worked out...

Anyone see a pattern here...not their choice and you get a handler...another hum...
 

Bps1691

Veteran Member
Being young and with two young children, pre cater were the highest wages I earned in my life when based on inflation since. Making 35k + bonus before carters inflation hit.

That’s $195,713.75 in todays dollars just for salary

The bonus was another $15k which would have been $69,211.66 in todays dollars.

You’d place a purchase order for steel and never knew how many times the prices would go up before it was delivered.

Good man but he was a terrible president.
 

NoDandy

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I remember the stories about the hostages, and Iran being afraid of Reagan.

One must remember Carter had ties to CFR & Trilateral Comm.

Edit to add : If I remember correctly, Carter was behind giving away the Panama Canal !

And for all his claims of Christianity, and teaching Sunday School, he never once denounced the Commie Democrap Party for all its pro abortion efforts, nor when the crowd "Booed God " at the Dem convention in South Carolina.

:ld:
:mad::mad::mad::mad:
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
That ain't sayin' much!
In this case, I think there is a lot of difference. For example, yes, in retrospect, Carter made a mistake with the hostages, but a full-out attack on Iran would also likely have resulted in them all dead. So a Hobson's choice there. But as a former career military officer, I would have to trust him to do his best to defend the country if the USA was attacked from the outside.

After Afghanistan, I have no such faith in either Biden or his advisors to do so. A good President doesn't have to be an experienced military commander as long as he knows it and has wise people to advise him. A great man, like John F. Kennedy, knows when a rare situation comes up that they must be overruled, such as the Cuban Missile Crises, but he does it from a place of knowledge and understanding.

I don't trust Biden even to know how to try, especially not after the Nordstream pipeline and the ludicrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. I've seen bright ten-year-olds make better military decisions while playing wargames!
 
Top