Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
153. Bush pardoned those Walsh indicted.
Wed Jun 22, 2016, 09:34 AM
Jun 2016

For some reason, this never gets mentioned on tee vee much:



THIS is why the conservatives -- no matter their jersey color -- HATE Robert Parry. He reports the truth:



Firewall: Inside the Iran-Contra Cover-up

By Robert Parry
1995

EXCERPT…

Those combined interests likely will lead to very few favorable reviews of a new book by a man who put himself in the way of that cover-up -- Iran-contra independent counsel Lawrence Walsh. In a remarkable new book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-up, Walsh details his six-year battle to break through the "firewall" that White House officials built around President Reagan and Vice President Bush after the Iran-contra scandal exploded in November 1986.

For Walsh, a lifelong Republican who shared the foreign policy views of the Reagan administration, the Iran-contra experience was a life-changing one, as his investigation penetrated one wall of lies only to be confronted with another and another -- and not just lies from Oliver North and his cohorts but lies from nearly every senior administration official who spoke with investigators.

According to Firewall, the cover-up conspiracy took formal shape at a meeting of Reagan and his top advisers in the Situation Room at the White House on Nov. 24, 1986. The meeting's principal point of concern was how to handle the troublesome fact that Reagan had approved illegal arms sales to Iran in fall 1985, before any covert-action finding had been signed. The act was a clear felony -- a violation of the Arms Export Control Act -- and possibly an impeachable offense.

SNIP…

&quot White House chief of staff Don) Regan, who had heard McFarlane inform the president and who had heard the president admit to Shultz that he knew of the shipment of Hawk (anti-aircraft) missiles, said nothing. Shultz and (Defense Secretary Caspar) Weinberger, who had protested the shipment before it took place, said nothing. (Vice President George) Bush, who had been told of the shipment in advance by McFarlane, said nothing. Casey, who (had) requested that the president sign the retroactive finding to authorize the CIA-facilitated delivery, said nothing. (NSC adviser John) Poindexter, who had torn up the finding, said nothing. Meese asked whether anyone knew anything else that hadn't been revealed. No one spoke."

CONTINUED…

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/story34.html



What had come earlier makes the Iran "dealings" understandable. Reagan and Poppy owed the Ayatollah a major.



Debunking the Debunkers of October Surprise

Magazines mangled facts to dismiss Reagan campaign collusion with Iran


By Robert Parry
March 1, 2013

EXCERPT...

The New Republic faulted Nightline for failing “to find out that Casey was not in Madrid, but in London.” The magazine also mocked anchor Ted Koppel for a Nightline update, which was the first story to note that Casey had made the unannounced trip to London, despite his campaign duties. Koppel had observed that Madrid was only a 90-minute flight from London, making Jamshid Hashemi’s story possible. “Nightline was wrong again,” Emerson and Furman gloated.

I was ridiculed, too, as one of the “entrepreneurial journalists” who had investigated the October Surprise story, presumably for financial gain. (Because of my extensive work on the Iran/Contra scandal, I had been recruited by PBS Frontline in 1990 to look into the longstanding October Surprise mystery, leading to an hour-long documentary which aired in April 1991.)

The dual debunking stories from Newsweek and the New Republic brought relief and delight to many corners of the Washington–to–New York power corridor, especially at the White House, where President George H.W. Bush’s team could now go on the offensive against the remnants of the broader Iran/Contra scandal. On Capitol Hill, the impact of the one-two punch of Newsweek and the New Republic could not be overstated. Whatever momentum there was for a thorough investigation of the October Surprise issue quickly dissipated.

On the Senate side, Republicans mounted a filibuster to block special funding for an investigation. On the House side, an investigative task force was created but it was soon clear that its principal role would be to ratify the debunking, not dig aggressively for the truth. There was less happiness inside Nightline, where the producer who had arranged the Jamshid Hashemi interview soon found herself out of a job.

There also was little attention when our reporting team at Frontline determined that the London alibi, which Newsweek and the New Republic featured so prominently, was false. It turned out that the magazines had misread the attendance records and failed to interview some of the key people at the conference, including that morning’s speaker, historian Robert Dallek. He told us that he had looked for Casey around the modest-sized board room at London’s Imperial War Museum and found him missing.

A closer examination of the attendance records also revealed a notation next to Casey’s box saying “came at 4 p.m.” In other words, the much-trumpeted debunking by Newsweek and the New Republic had itself been debunked. But the debunking of the two magazines drew virtually no public notice. No corrections were run. No one was held accountable. The conventional wisdom about the supposedly bogus October Surprise story stuck.

CONTINUED...

http://fair.org/extra/debunking-the-debunkers-of-october-surprise/



Secret Government means Secret Beneficiaries.


Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

funny he would throw away all his credibility for that rurallib Jun 2016 #1
Ralston's credibility is intact. lapucelle Jun 2016 #71
What does Adelson have to do with this? Craig234 Jun 2016 #74
Adelson has far more power in Nevada than Sanders and his supporters Gothmog Jun 2016 #79
OK Craig234 Jun 2016 #81
This is actually an example of a very good investigative political journalist lapucelle Jun 2016 #86
About PBS Craig234 Jun 2016 #103
way too far right for my taste anymore. eom LittleGirl Jun 2016 #119
Bush and CIA cronies furious over PBS October Surprise coverage. Octafish Jun 2016 #120
Thanks for the mention Craig234 Jun 2016 #126
Bush pardoned those Walsh indicted. Octafish Jun 2016 #153
His "journalism" leaves something to be desired. This was similar to what Fox News rhett o rick Jun 2016 #112
Is this thread being hijacked? OwlinAZ Jun 2016 #113
Nope lapucelle Jun 2016 #84
Reid is retiring--he's not nervous. But Ralston is a good reporter. nt MADem Jun 2016 #98
I hate these required summaries Craig234 Jun 2016 #102
If you think he's in the tank for HRC, he's not. MADem Jun 2016 #105
I don't know him Craig234 Jun 2016 #125
The harm was done, regardless of specifics. It was not a finest hour. MADem Jun 2016 #152
no rehash needed, but Craig234 Jun 2016 #160
I do not agree with the "massive misrepresentation" categorization, but again, MADem Jun 2016 #163
"What's done is done." greiner3 Jun 2016 #172
Please just stop. MADem Jun 2016 #173
Well Craig234 Jun 2016 #174
He lied about the chair throwing choie Jun 2016 #116
Nope, Ralston lied. kiva Jun 2016 #101
Yes, we do know better passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #108
Bye Liar billhicks76 Jun 2016 #121
When you piss off the two Mega donors for Wellstone ruled Jun 2016 #203
Yeah too bad right? He can join the Liars Club now. Rex Jun 2016 #124
The best of Karma. 840high Jun 2016 #2
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #3
Sure, anyone can get one wrong. ciaobaby Jun 2016 #8
He mocked the critics of his chair-throwing story. NT Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #128
He doubled- and tripled-down on it, too. arcane1 Jun 2016 #11
Just another Jonathan Capehart. Lie and no retraction. floriduck Jun 2016 #13
yep yep 840high Jun 2016 #40
So darn true. sangfroid Jun 2016 #147
Yup.. disillusioned73 Jun 2016 #158
He came to my mind as well when I read doubled and tripled down. merrily Jun 2016 #181
It is not "just a detail". That untruth was seized upon and Bernie was pretty much beaten with it djean111 Jun 2016 #12
Which I never understood, I mean why hold a candidate at fault for something that cstanleytech Jun 2016 #39
I'm sorry, are you new here?? klook Jun 2016 #56
He was not entirely wrong - At least, one person did raise a chair threateningly - OhZone Jun 2016 #4
Actually, dropping a chair would require letting go. The person put it down with his hands. floriduck Jun 2016 #14
He didn't voluntarily put it down. The people around him intervened. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #26
They persuaded him to put it down and then they hugged each other, that's miles away from Uncle Joe Jun 2016 #35
They physically intervened. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #36
They persuaded him, they didn't tackle him and this still didn't equate to how the event was Uncle Joe Jun 2016 #37
Did they? Do you have... reACTIONary Jun 2016 #43
The video is posted above. nt OhZone Jun 2016 #45
Thanks! reACTIONary Jun 2016 #54
Yes there is video arikara Jun 2016 #46
Thanks! reACTIONary Jun 2016 #53
You can see 3 people grabbing the chair from the guy in the video. That's why someone got hit TeamPooka Jun 2016 #51
You can see one person put his hand on the man's arm and another person take the chair away Uncle Joe Jun 2016 #107
That's not what I saw. He released it mid air and it fell on someone. OhZone Jun 2016 #191
I watched it multiple times and he never let go of the chair until it was down. Why is it so floriduck Jun 2016 #192
Because people want to smear the journalist as a liar, and he was not 100% lying. OhZone Jun 2016 #193
"may have"? padfun Jun 2016 #15
Look closely at the video - he dropped it on someone and hurt them. nt OhZone Jun 2016 #44
you really try so hard don't you. Javaman Jun 2016 #55
and all the chandeliers quaked with fear. Javaman Jun 2016 #52
I've seen a picture of the guy . ... reACTIONary Jun 2016 #61
And yet Craig234 Jun 2016 #76
As far as excuses go.... reACTIONary Jun 2016 #150
you know you can just talk to me instead of using me as your tool. Javaman Jun 2016 #154
I did.... reACTIONary Jun 2016 #179
yes, the hoisting of a chair sooooo shameful. Javaman Jun 2016 #198
Yes it is. Obviously. Nt reACTIONary Jun 2016 #204
my god, you are still obsessed by this? Javaman Jun 2016 #205
Answering a reply to a post is not obsesive.... reACTIONary Jun 2016 #206
Well Craig234 Jun 2016 #159
+1000 nt Javaman Jun 2016 #164
Just ask yourself...if someone raised a chair at you, would you be so flippant? BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #78
LOL Javaman Jun 2016 #138
Easy for you to "lol" sitting safely behind your desk. But had you stood in that atmosphere of BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #142
LOL Javaman Jun 2016 #144
You "lol" a lot, Java. Maybe you should lay off the java. BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #145
I will continue to LOL Javaman Jun 2016 #146
You continue to "lol" because you know you're wrong, basing your responses BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #148
LOLOL Javaman Jun 2016 #151
This is a personal attack on another poster. We have moved beyond that. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2016 #176
Nope. It's not. Nope. I won't. But yes, I've moved on. BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #195
Just ask yourself, if someone picked up a hughee99 Jun 2016 #183
The intent was clearly there. It was a volatile event. Thank god cooler heads prevailed and coaxed BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #196
The report wasn't that someone standing near the chair guy feared for their safety, hughee99 Jun 2016 #202
Ralstons tweet said punches and thrown chairs passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #115
"Threw" - maybe not AlbertCat Jun 2016 #156
And yet Jonathan Capehart still has his job. Dr. Strange Jun 2016 #5
And is a regular on Hairball. This primary season has been unreal. eom jillan Jun 2016 #117
This is a sad reminder of all the lies directed at Sanders and his supporters. ciaobaby Jun 2016 #6
Also the lies and outrage stemming from Capehart's and Joy Read's false statements of Bernie's Akamai Jun 2016 #16
Reid and Capehart were shameless. They weren't the only MSNBC pundits who lost credibility. OwlinAZ Jun 2016 #114
As they say there is a special place in &ell for a man like that but.... peace13 Jun 2016 #182
Yes, flinging chairs up and setting them down again, implored by bystanders. Starry Messenger Jun 2016 #7
We are back to multiple chairs again? arcane1 Jun 2016 #10
Fling: bunnies Jun 2016 #38
Nothing being flung around except bullshit . Then and now Person 2713 Jun 2016 #99
I'm sure the apologies will be coming any minute now. bunnies Jun 2016 #132
Lies have consequences? Well who knew? Rex Jun 2016 #9
Actually, his coverage of Sharon Angle in Nevada was pretty spot on DonRedwood Jun 2016 #93
Good, karma bit his ass! nt Raine Jun 2016 #17
He's just the first of the 2016 liars to go down. Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #18
His lies were such a staple in certain circles... Raster Jun 2016 #31
Don't count on RoccoR5955 Jun 2016 #169
This is that "fair shake" from the media everyone talks about, right? phazed0 Jun 2016 #19
I support the decison to fire him. tabasco Jun 2016 #20
I agree with you LiberalEsto Jun 2016 #139
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #21
"I don't care how many chairs". The answer is zero chairs thrown. Snarkoleptic Jun 2016 #25
Depending on the angle of the viewer, it could look pnwmom Jun 2016 #22
Really? Depending on the angle someone might have thought something might have rhett o rick Jun 2016 #32
His "friends" stopped him because they recognized he shouldn't have pnwmom Jun 2016 #34
He waved a chair around above his head among his friends. He was threatening no one. rhett o rick Jun 2016 #48
No intelligent person could think it was okay to wave a chair in the air in the middle of pnwmom Jun 2016 #60
Goalpost moved, duly noted. Snarkoleptic Jun 2016 #73
OMG, lol, that was funny... closeupready Jun 2016 #177
Thanks! Snarkoleptic Jun 2016 #194
This thread is about a reporter that lied to gain favor with the Corp-Media. This is an old Fox rhett o rick Jun 2016 #82
Based on the video, it doesn't look like a lie to me. It looks like an understandable pnwmom Jun 2016 #85
He made the mistake of thinking he saw people throwing chairs? And reported on it? rhett o rick Jun 2016 #110
Ralston losing his show is a victory for the corporate media lapucelle Jun 2016 #137
Except that Ralston wasn't even there LiberalEsto Jun 2016 #141
Great - and I will ask again ciaobaby Jun 2016 #184
Ralston did acknowledge his mistake. A month ago. lapucelle Jun 2016 #200
Thanks for the link, however, that comes no where close to an apology. ciaobaby Jun 2016 #201
Just stop it, pnwmom. The lie has been exposed forever. You're just embarrassing yourself. (nt) w4rma Jun 2016 #41
Facts dont matter awoke_in_2003 Jun 2016 #57
Propaganda Craig234 Jun 2016 #83
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #63
+3,576,198 pangaia Jun 2016 #65
She has a right to her opinion. DonRedwood Jun 2016 #95
If Ralston hadn't lied, we wouldn't be having this discussion. kiva Jun 2016 #111
He got fired for lying, probably have to put off getting a new car now etc.. Rex Jun 2016 #123
Ralston lost his show because a right wing billionaire threatened to cut off donations to PBS lapucelle Jun 2016 #135
I'm impressed that you can say the same thing kiva Jun 2016 #157
if the guy didnt pick up the chair and threaten the crowd we wouldnt be having this discussion DonRedwood Jun 2016 #165
Ralsotn was a professional journalist. kiva Jun 2016 #197
I am just glad the guy got fired for lying about it. Rex Jun 2016 #122
he was let go because PBS took a bunch of money from sheldon addles DonRedwood Jun 2016 #167
She's being dishonest Bradical79 Jun 2016 #161
Stop. Please. 840high Jun 2016 #42
What's the problem! SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #91
Good. OnyxCollie Jun 2016 #23
+1 AtomicKitten Jun 2016 #127
Hopefully a career ending move. ozone_man Jun 2016 #24
Very unlikely rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #27
Once again money speaks a louder truth than fact. Ford_Prefect Jun 2016 #69
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #131
The film footage was all over the internet. I mean we (DUers) knew what happened. So he lied. YOHABLO Jun 2016 #28
Some of us knew, .. pangaia Jun 2016 #66
well wallyworld2 Jun 2016 #29
Just like Brian Williams.. peace13 Jun 2016 #30
The Corp-Media like his style. nm rhett o rick Jun 2016 #33
sorry about the repost tenderfoot Jun 2016 #47
No worries, I gave it a rec :) arcane1 Jun 2016 #50
problem with PBS PatrynXX Jun 2016 #49
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #58
+1 baldguy Jun 2016 #59
I think Rachael Maddow confronted him on this and he stuck to the lie. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2016 #62
The Rachel Maddow Show promoted the chair-throwing Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #129
Ralston criticized local Republicans so he was a former guest on her show. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2016 #130
Glad to hear the truth... late, yet at least a few of us heard about it. Equinox Moon Jun 2016 #64
Post hoc ergo propter hoc lapucelle Jun 2016 #67
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #70
On losing his show, Ralston referenced lapucelle Jun 2016 #72
Tough. Don't smear Sanders supporters. (nt) w4rma Jun 2016 #75
The only people who think the chair stories were a smear are Sanders supporters. lapucelle Jun 2016 #89
How good a reporter can he be? SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #96
I imagine that's the most important thing to far too many people. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #170
OK Craig234 Jun 2016 #80
If his work was that important, he should've avoided telling known lies. arcane1 Jun 2016 #87
Ralston did not tell known lies. lapucelle Jun 2016 #92
Big People! SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #100
"he reported what eyewitnesses told him." He reported what some people told him rhett o rick Jun 2016 #171
No, he diesnt Nevernose Jun 2016 #187
Even worse, the anti-circumcision advocates really missed out on that domain name. NuclearDem Jun 2016 #68
HUGE K&R desmiller Jun 2016 #77
Actually PBS there said his show was too costly to continue. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #88
PBS and Ralston issued a joint statement. lapucelle Jun 2016 #90
Could have referenced the influence of false reporting on political primaries too Person 2713 Jun 2016 #106
I'm sure there will be lots of editorial board meetings over this, reforms will happen, apologies... L. Coyote Jun 2016 #94
Good jack_krass Jun 2016 #97
That news made my day. kiva Jun 2016 #104
Good riddance, lying sack of shit. Feeling the Bern Jun 2016 #109
Don't you just love it when a liars pants actually catch on fire. (so to speak?) jillan Jun 2016 #118
Jon Ralston was too obnoxious to belong on PBS even if hadn't spread that lie. Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #133
This is the problem with Else You Are Mad Jun 2016 #134
Regardless, their behavior was still reprehensible... Blue_Tires Jun 2016 #136
Good riddance. Betty Karlson Jun 2016 #140
Those Bernie Supporters in Nevada? Gamecock Lefty Jun 2016 #143
Nice? Sure. sangfroid Jun 2016 #149
Lying is ok if you're lying about rude people? -nt Bradical79 Jun 2016 #162
It's the Nevada Democratic Party which came up with three stage caucuses Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #189
Good, but the damage was done. blackspade Jun 2016 #155
Buh bye. CharlotteVale Jun 2016 #166
I wonder if RoccoR5955 Jun 2016 #168
An ethical person verifies something before they put it out as fact. ladyVet Jun 2016 #175
I'll never forgive Barbara Boxer for smearing Bernie's supporters. closeupready Jun 2016 #178
Could she be voted out for these lies? Pauldg47 Jun 2016 #185
Barbara Boxer can't be voted out because she's not running for re-election. NT Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #190
I think she's retiring, so this would be her last term. closeupready Jun 2016 #199
This man is responsible for slamming the breaks on a Presidential campaign. peace13 Jun 2016 #180
Video shows a chair being held overhead BainsBane Jun 2016 #186
Ralston hates women AND liberals Nevernose Jun 2016 #188
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Nevada Reporter Who False...»Reply #153