Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the CIA funding candidates in US elections, like it does in other countries ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:02 AM
Original message
Is the CIA funding candidates in US elections, like it does in other countries ?
You remember the CIA funding ops against Allende, in France and Italy, as mentioned in Legacy of Ashes, but how about here at home ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3483110

Does the CIA fund Republicans (and even hedge with funding Democrats) ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. No one responded to your first post so you post another to get it more attention?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. It's kind of a bit different question that deserves an answer, don't you think ?
Edited on Tue Aug-28-07 11:09 AM by EVDebs
And besides, if the CIA IS pumping IT'S candidates, maybe we hoi polloi DUers should get to know about it beforehand. If CIA millions are going out to candidates overseas AND here at home, don't you think that's an important thing to know about ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. So we'll figure that out based on tinfoil?
Come back to the reality based community any time you feel like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Money is the mother's milk of politics but if you can't take their money and vote against them
you got real problems, speaking of Alcoa tinfoil and Allende (snark) and Nixon's Watergate money of course !

But seriously, if Hil's got money problems and can't see that money coming from OUTSIDE the US isn't smart she'll probably get burned worse if it turns out that this is either for real foreign-sourced $ or even possibly a CIA 'set up'. This didn't go well with the Gore/Buddist temple thing (which looked like a set-up to me, btw). They may be trying again or it's the real thing ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Thanks for rehashing American Spectator bullshit from the 90's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Legacy of Ashes by Tim Weiner is currently out in bookstores
Edited on Tue Aug-28-07 12:01 PM by EVDebs
I'm sure you haven't heard of it. And I'm sorry that a lot of this stuff happened in Arkansas but if Jimmy Carter and Bert Lance crossed paths with BCCI and the CIA's part in all of that comes out, that's not MY fault.

The problem is that the CIA has this right-wing/war-prevalent/corporate agenda. Weiner's book seeks to actually reform the CIA and expose their myth of invincibility,

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/18/arts/IDLEDE21.php?page=2

however, the agency isn't entirely incompetent and therefore we SHOULD be concerned with any domestic and electoral shenanigans they are doing currently. The fact that they've got a lot of their support in Republican rightwingnut circles yet we see in the news now a Hillary story with possible ties to an agency source just shows you that if you don't investigate the Company you will be set up.

In other words, if you're a Hillary supporter you'd want to investigate whether or not SHE (like Gore in the past) was being set up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Are you saying the CIA didn't stuff the ballot boxes in France and Italy?
Or that Allende didn't get overthrown with CIA help?

What's so unbelievable here? That the CIA actually did and does these things, or that it could, and might have, done it domestically?

Remember the CIA had no qualms in violating its Charter and operating domestically when the Agency saw fit to do so. In fact, they were caught, red handed, in many illegal activities, from domestic spying/wiretapping to drug running and money laundering, and dealing with organized crime. Is it really that much of a stretch to say they would interfere with domestic elections?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
6. I never tire of the writing of Steve Kangas
The Origins of the Overclass
By Steve Kangas

The wealthy have always used many methods to accumulate wealth, but it was not until the mid-1970s that these methods coalesced into a superbly organized, cohesive and efficient machine. After 1975, it became greater than the sum of its parts, a smooth flowing organization of advocacy groups, lobbyists, think tanks, conservative foundations, and PR firms that hurtled the richest 1 percent into the stratosphere.

The origins of this machine, interestingly enough, can be traced back to the CIA. This is not to say the machine is a formal CIA operation, complete with code name and signed documents. (Although such evidence may yet surface — and previously unthinkable domestic operations such as MK-ULTRA, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD show this to be a distinct possibility.) But what we do know already indicts the CIA strongly enough. Its principle creators were Irving Kristol, Paul Weyrich, William Simon, Richard Mellon Scaife, Frank Shakespeare, William F. Buckley, Jr., the Rockefeller family, and more. Almost all the machine's creators had CIA backgrounds.

During the 1970s, these men would take the propaganda and operational techniques they had learned in the Cold War and apply them to the Class War. Therefore it is no surprise that the American version of the machine bears an uncanny resemblance to the foreign versions designed to fight communism. The CIA's expert and comprehensive organization of the business class would succeed beyond their wildest dreams. In 1975, the richest 1 percent owned 22 percent of America’s wealth. By 1992, they would nearly double that, to 42 percent — the highest level of inequality in the 20th century.

How did this alliance start? The CIA has always recruited the nation’s elite: millionaire businessmen, Wall Street brokers, members of the national news media, and Ivy League scholars. During World War II, General "Wild Bill" Donovan became chief of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA. Donovan recruited so exclusively from the nation’s rich and powerful that members eventually came to joke that "OSS" stood for "Oh, so social!"

Another early elite was Allen Dulles, who served as Director of the CIA from 1953 to 1961. Dulles was a senior partner at the Wall Street firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, which represented the Rockefeller empire and other mammoth trusts, corporations and cartels. He was also a board member of the J. Henry Schroeder Bank, with offices in Wall Street, London, Zurich and Hamburg. His financial interests across the world would become a conflict of interest when he became head of the CIA. Like Donavan, he would recruit exclusively from society’s elite.

By the 1950s, the CIA had riddled the nation’s businesses, media and universities with tens of thousands of part-time, on-call operatives. Their employment with the agency took a variety of forms, which included:

* Leaving one's profession to work for the CIA in a formal, official capacity.
* Staying in one's profession, using the job as cover for CIA activity. This undercover activity could be full-time, part-time, or on-call.
* Staying in one's profession, occasionally passing along information useful to the CIA.
* Passing through the revolving door that has always existed between the agency and the business world.

Historically, the CIA and society’s elite have been one and the same people. This means that their interests and goals are one and the same as well. Perhaps the most frequent description of the intelligence community is the "old boy network," where members socialize, talk shop, conduct business and tap each other for favors well outside the formal halls of government.

Many common traits made it inevitable that the CIA and Corporate America would become allies. Both share an intense dislike of democracy, and feel they should be liberated from democratic regulations and oversight. Both share a culture of secrecy, either hiding their actions from the American public or lying about them to present the best public image. And both are in a perfect position to help each other.

How? International businesses give CIA agents cover, secret funding, top-quality resources and important contacts in foreign lands. In return, the CIA gives corporations billion-dollar federal contracts (for spy planes, satellites and other hi-tech spycraft). Businessmen also enjoy the romantic thrill of participating in spy operations. The CIA also gives businesses a certain amount of protection and privacy from the media and government watchdogs, under the guise of "national security." Finally, the CIA helps American corporations remain dominant in foreign markets, by overthrowing governments hostile to unregulated capitalism and installing puppet regimes whose policies favor American corporations at the expense of their people.

The CIA’s alliance with the elite turned out to be an unholy one. Each enabled the other to rise above the law. Indeed, a review of the CIA’s history is one of such crime and atrocity that no one can reasonably defend it, even in the name of anticommunism. Before reviewing this alliance in detail, it is useful to know the CIA’s history of atrocity first.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. So maybe Tim Weiner's hypothesis that the CIA can be redeemed
is Pollyanna-ish ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I have not read his hypothesis...
but redeeming suggests there is a time and place to revert back to when the agency had some kind of clean record. With documented evidence of the decades of interventions on behalf of business interests, I can't imagine where that time and place could be. The CIA seems to have been cannibalized by the advent of 9/11's Homeland Security Department, the consolidation of power in the Pentagon and it's capacity to run covert ops, and the emerging role PMC's play in 'business interests'. Perhaps it's strength has been diluted in the alphabet soup..and rather than redemption, reincarnation is in order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. From Michael Beschsloss's review in NYT, this sounds like 'redeemable' language to me
Edited on Tue Aug-28-07 05:52 PM by EVDebs
"The most notorious muckraking C.I.A. books of the 1970s aspired to shatter the agency and make sure Americans never tried to create one again. Mr. Weiner’s goal is just the opposite. He hopes that his book will “serve as a warning,” insisting that “this nation may not long endure as a great power unless it finds the eyes to see things as they are in the world.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/books/12besc.html?ex=1188446400&en=2c9c10b67c592ac7&ei=5070

but I agree with your view that some kind of 'reincarnation' is possible. The others in the alphabet soup of agencies are also at fault but we just don't see their failures. I'm sure the Military Intelligence Groups the army had domestically spying on MLK etc are still out there just under different names.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Thanks for the link...
not a book I am likely to read. Sounds like he's trying to do an airbrush job on the history of the CIA. Regardless..it appears he's a little late to the party, regarding redeeming or even reincarnating the agency.

The Coming Wars
What the Pentagon can now do in secret
by Seymour Hersh
New Yorker magazine (ZNet, 1/19/05)
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/American_Empire/ComingWars_Hersh.html
George W. Bush's reelection was not his only victory last fall. The President and his national-security advisers have consolidated control over the military and intelligence communities' strategic analyses and covert operations to a degree unmatched since the rise of the post-Second World War national-security state. Bush has an aggressive and ambitious agenda for using that control--against the mullahs in Iran and against targets in the ongoing war on terrorism--during his second term. The C.I.A. will continue to be downgraded, and the agency will increasingly serve, as one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon put it, as "facilitators" of policy emanating from President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. This process is well under way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rumsfeld will become even more important during the second term. In interviews with past and present intelligence and military officials, I was told that the agenda had been determined before the Presidential election, and much of it would be Rumsfeld's responsibility. The war on terrorism would be expanded, and effectively placed under the Pentagon's control. The President has signed a series of findings and executive orders authorizing secret commando groups and other Special Forces units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in as many as ten nations in the Middle East and South Asia.
The President's decision enables Rumsfeld to run the operations off the books--free from legal restrictions imposed on the C.I.A.
Under current law, all C.I.A. covert activities overseas must be authorized by a Presidential finding and reported to the Senate and House intelligence committees. (The laws were enacted after a series of scandals in the nineteen-seventies involving C.I.A. domestic spying and attempted assassinations of foreign leaders.) "The Pentagon doesn't feel obligated to report any of this to Congress," the former high-level intelligence official said. "They don't even call it 'covert ops'--it's too close to the C.I.A. phrase. In their view, it's 'black reconnaissance.' They're not even going to tell the cincs"--the regional American military commanders-in-chief. (The Defense Department and the White House did not respond to requests for comment on this story.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In late November, 2004, the Times reported that Bush had set up an interagency group to study whether it "would best serve the nation" to give the Pentagon complete control over the C.I.A.'s own elite paramilitary unit, which has operated covertly in trouble spots around the world for decades. The panel's conclusions, due in February, are foregone, in the view of many former C.I.A. officers. "It seems like it's going to happen," Howard Hart, who was chief of the C.I.A.'s Paramilitary Operations Division before retiring in 1991, told me.
------------------------------------------
A former senior C.I.A. officer depicted the agency's eclipse as predictable. "For years, the agency bent over backward to integrate and coordinate with the Pentagon," the former officer said. "We just caved and caved and got what we deserved. It is a fact of life today that the Pentagon is a five-hundred-pound gorilla and the C.I.A. director is a chimpanzee."
There was pressure from the White House, too. A former C.I.A. clandestine-services officer told me that, in the months after the resignation of the agency's director George Tenet, in June, 2004, the White House began "coming down critically" on analysts in the C.I.A.'s Directorate of Intelligence (D.I.) and demanded "to see more support for the Administration's political position." Porter Goss, Tenet's successor, engaged in what the recently retired C.I.A. official described as a "political purge" in the D.I. Among the targets were a few senior analysts who were known to write dissenting papers that had been forwarded to the White House. The recently retired C.I.A. official said, "The White House carefully reviewed the political analyses of the D.I. so they could sort out the apostates from the true believers." Some senior analysts in the D.I. have turned in their resignations--quietly, and without revealing the extent of the disarray.
The White House solidified its control over intelligence last month, when it forced last-minute changes in the intelligence-reform bill. The legislation, based substantially on recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, originally gave broad powers, including authority over intelligence spending, to a new national-intelligence director.
---------------------
"Rummy's plan was to get a compromise in the bill in which the Pentagon keeps its marbles and the C.I.A. loses theirs," the former high-level intelligence official told me. "Then all the pieces of the puzzle fall in place. He gets authority for covert action that is not attributable, the ability to directly task national-intelligence assets"--including the many intelligence satellites that constantly orbit the world.
"Rumsfeld will no longer have to refer anything through the government's intelligence wringer," the former official went on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
9. That would be illegal.

Remember Hillary Clinton being ridiculed as paranoid for mentioning a "vast right-wing conspiracy"? The paranoia accusation suffered from a very serious flaw in that she was quoting from an FBI report. The propaganda attack on the President of the United States demonstrated all the earmarks of government orchestrated Cold War propaganda. So the FBI launched an investigation.

They concluded it was of private, domestic origin and perfectly legal. A lot of the backroom people working on it were retired CIA propagandists. But after retirement they were well within their rights. It would only have been illegal if they were doing it as CIA employees or to assist some foreign government.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. The CIA has operated illegally in the United States in the past....
What assurances do we have they they wouldn't do so in the future?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Precisely my point ! If Tim Weiner's book is to be of any value
The 'redemption' he seeks for US foreign policy must start with a review and sanitizing of the Company. Oversight must be restored and some thought put into the way it operates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC