Iran/Contra - George Bush Sr. (Part 2) (Interview)

[seemslikeadream]

Run time: 09:37 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiFE1f4-zRA   Posted on YouTube: June 17, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 29, 2007 By DU Member: seemslikeadream Views on DU: 741

 

[pacalo]

1. I was watching the CBS News when this interview took place.

This is a keeper.

[Cybergata]

2. Liar, Liar, Lair

Bush was likely knee deep in the Iran Contra scandal. He was in the CIA, and lying was his job.

[JDPriestly]

3. Are they a family of liars and crooks?

Are there any honest Bushes?
After seeing that, I begin to wonder whether Rather was set up by those documents. The Bushes sure don't like him. Wow. Rather did a good job here.

I also wonder what Bush knows about Kennedy's assassination. We will never know. He will never say.

[JDPriestly]

4. I watched this earlier and cannot keep it off my mind.

Had Congress pursued the Iran Contra more diligently, the Bushies would have been shamed out of every trying to hold office again. Bush hid behind tricky use of language to avoid admitting that he was not only knowledgeable about Iran Contra but an organizer of it. Notice how he says that he never discussed aiding the Contras, he only discussed fighting the Communists. Obviously, fighting the Communists was the "nice" way of saying supporting the Contras. Notice the argument about the privilege for conversations with the president. They got by with that then and now they are asserting that privilege extends to things they admitted at that time that they had to produce to Congress.

I wish every member of Congress and every candidate for president would watch these videos. Bush was lying. These videos teach us the importance of finding out the truth. You have to be a bulldog about unmasking the lies of the Republicans. We are paying dearly for our having encouraged the Iraqis by trading weapons for hostages.

Congress cannot respond timidly to the Bush administration's contempt. Gradually, that contempt leads to dictatorship by guys like the Bushes.

I also want to mention the Bush tie to the Bay of Pigs once again. What arrogance these Bushies have.

[seemslikeadream]

5. What happens when unresolved scandals take a back seat to a domestic agenda?

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didn’t pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Hussein’s government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clinton’s domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton “didn’t feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people,” Sender told me in an interview. “He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.”

Clinton’s relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bush’s administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, “these centrist Democrats … warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.”

[slipslidingaway]

6. 'Stopping the Repukes' How has the long term strategy worked?

Thanks for posting the videos and agree with the idea that we must hold people accountable! Please see my line that I added to the bottom, I am not buying the excuse of having to vote for the nominee because we cannot afford to have the Republicans in a position to appoint another Supreme Court Judge. Kick and R'er earlier.


posted before here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3477466&mesg_id=3477634


"Stopping the Repukes" How has the long term strategy worked?

Democrats, the Truth Still Matters!

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

"Clinton’s generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didn’t turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation...

Clinton’s failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bush’s inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his father’s presidency fondly...

In retrospect, Clinton’s tolerance of Reagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose-lose – the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nation’s fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda."


And George W. was in the position to appoint 2 Supreme Court judges!