Ben Barnes is 84, but in 1980 he was the youngest speaker of the Texas House of Representatives and on his way to becoming lieutenant governor. He was also a close ally of former Texas Gov. John Connally. At Connally’s request, Barnes took on a very special role in 1980—travel the Middle East and convince Iran to not release US hostages, so that Ronald Reagan could beat Jimmy Carter, Peter Baker reported in the New York Times (3/18)
Barnes sat on this story for the last 43 years. However, with President Carter currently in hospice care, Barnes has decided to reveal the plot, and the role he played in sabotaging Carter’s campaign.
“History needs to know that this happened,” said Barnes. “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.”
The plot was simple enough. Connally and Barnes traveled “to one Middle Eastern capital after another” over the summer of 1980, as US hostages were being held in Tehran. On every one of those stops, they passed along the same message for the new leadership in Iran: Don’t make a deal with Carter. Wait for Reagan. He’ll give you a much better deal.
When they arrived back in the United States, Connally checked in with Reagan’s campaign chair, and future Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, William Casey. For his role in “torpedoing” Carter’s chance at reelection, Connally hoped to be rewarded with the job of Secretary of State. He was not.
Completely ignored in this strategy was that every day of captivity put the lives and health of the hostages in Iran at risk. In addition, the military planned and attempted to execute a rescue operation in which eight US service members died and another four were injured. Prolonging the crisis created a risk every day to the lives of those in Iran, and to members of the US military. It also created ongoing harm to US standing abroad and to national security in general.
Previous investigations into suspicions that Iran had been pressured to wait until after the election to make a deal had focused on the idea that Casey met directly with representatives from Iran. They had not focused on Connally or how messages might have been passed along through other officials in the Middle East. Multiple people confirmed that Barnes had told them all or part of the story at the time, and a check of flight records shows that Connally traveled to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel in July of 1980 on what he called “private business.”
A note found in Connally’s records, taken in the middle of that trip, shows how closely he was coordinating with the Reagan campaign:
“Nancy Reagan called—they are at Ranch he wants to talk to you about being in on strategy meetings.”
The Iranian government announced the release of the hostages after the election. Jimmy Carter was there to welcome them home on what should have been the first day of his second term, but was instead his last day in office.
Ronald Reagan would go on to eight years of deceiving the public, destroying the nation’s infrastructure, and promoting a racist, misogynist, anti-gay agenda that would metastasize into the modern Republican Party. And he got there just the way most people always suspected he did, Mark Sumner noted at DailyKos (3/18).
Barnes’ statements lent credence to statements by former Iranian President Abolhassan Bani-Sadr on how Reagan’s 1980 campaign obstructed resolving the Iranian hostage crisis to prevent President Jimmy Carter’s reelection.
On Dec. 17, 1992, Bani-Sadr sent a letter to Congress describing the internal battles in the Iranian government over the Republican intervention in the 1980 hostage crisis, Robert Parry reported for Scoop.co.nz Oct. 27, 2006. Bani-Sadr recounted how he threatened to expose the secret deal between Reagan-Bush campaign officials and Islamic radicals close to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini if it weren’t stopped. Congressional investigators failed to follow up on the letter.
Bani-Sadr said he first learned of the Republican “secret deal” with Iranian radicals in July 1980 after Reza Passendideh, a nephew of Ayatollah Khomeini, attended a meeting with Iranian financier Cyrus Hashemi and Republican lawyer Stanley Pottinger in Madrid on July 2, 1980.
As Parry later noted at ConsortiumNews March 7, 2013, Bani-Sadr, then 79 and living outside Paris, said in a commentary in The Guardian the movie “Argo” ignored the fact that most government officials favored freeing all the American personnel quickly, but were thwarted by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
After becoming president on Feb. 4, 1980, Bani-Sadr said he discovered that “Ayatollah Khomeini and Ronald Reagan had organized a clandestine negotiation, later known as the ‘October Surprise,’ which prevented the attempts by myself and then-US President Jimmy Carter to free the hostages before the 1980 US presidential election took place. The fact that they were not released tipped the results of the election in favor of Reagan.”
Though Bani-Sadr had talked and written about the Reagan-Khomeini collaboration before, he added in his commentary on “Argo” that “two of my advisors, Hussein Navab Safavi and Sadr-al-Hefazi, were executed by Khomeini’s regime because they had become aware of this secret relationship between Khomeini, his son Ahmad, the Islamic Republican Party, and the Reagan administration.”
Bani-Sadr wrote that after he “was deposed in June 1981 as a result of a coup against me [and] after arriving in France, I told a BBC reporter that I had left Iran to expose the symbiotic relationship between Khomeinism and Reaganism.”
REPUBLICAN ATTACKS ON SNAP COULD TAKE FOOD AID FROM 10 MILLION. More than 10 million people across the United States—including 4 million children—would be at risk of losing food benefits if the GOP’s proposed attacks on federal nutrition assistance become law, Jake Johnson noted at CommonDreams (3/20).
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) analysis focuses specifically on legislation introduced by Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-SD), who wants certain recipients of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to face even more strict work requirements than they do under current law.
“Adults aged 18 through 49 without children in their homes can receive benefits for only three months out of every three years, unless they can document they are working or participate in a qualifying work program at least 20 hours a week or prove they are unable to work,” note CBPP’s Katie Bergh and Dottie Rosenbaum.
If passed, Johnson’s bill would raise the age ceiling for the strict work requirements from 49 to 65, a move that Bergh and Rosenbaum argue would endanger food benefits for both the adults specifically targeted by the law and those in their households.
Adults between the ages of 18 and 65 and without disabilities would be subject to the work requirements and benefit time limits “unless they have a child under age 7 in their home,” CBPP points out.
Research has demonstrated repeatedly that work requirements do virtually nothing to boost employment, undercutting the GOP’s stated rationale for attempting to expand them year after year.
Johnson’s legislation would also limit states’ ability to temporarily waive SNAP benefit time limits for able-bodied adults, a freedom that has been used to ensure people have consistent access to benefits during economic downturns.
“A total of more than 10 million people, about 1 in 4 SNAP participants, including about 4 million children, live in households that would be at risk of losing food assistance under the Johnson bill, based on our preliminary estimates,” Bergh and Rosenbaum write.
DESANTIS THREW TRUMP UNDER THE BUS. MAGA WORLD IS ALREADY RAGING. When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was given the chance to defend Donald Trump against an impending indictment, the choice he made was as subtle as a hammer to the head, Kerry Eleveld noted at DailyKos (3/20).
Amid spewing some GOP talking points about a “Soros-funded prosecutor,” DeSantis hit the theme of porn star hush money payments several times in his remarks. His dig at Trump was so flaming obvious, press conference attendees erupted in a round of laughter.
Then DeSantis committed a cardinal sin—suggesting Trump’s fate just isn’t that important.
“I’ve got real issues I’ve got to deal with here in the state of Florida,” DeSantis said, adding, “I’ve got to spend my time on issues that actually matter to people.”
In case anyone missed DeSantis’ fixation on hush money payments to an adult film actress, he proceeded to rub their face in the notion that Trump—the guy who gave voice to MAGA—is so last cycle.
Trump allies immediately seized on their opportunity to declare DeSantis a traitor to the cause.
“So DeSantis thinks that Dems weaponizing the law to indict President Trump is a “manufactured circus” & isn’t a ‘real issue,’” tweeted Don Jr., calling the DeSantis’ response “pure weakness.”
“Now we know why he was silent all weekend,” Jr. added, “He’s totally owned by Karl Rove, Paul Ryan & his billionaire donors. 100% Controlled Opposition.”
On his War Room podcast, Steve Bannon called it a “weasel approach.”
Also, knock it off with the porn star stuff, noted Bannon: “Don’t need to hear it from you, okay? Don’t need to hear it.”
My Pillow MAGA guy Mike Lindell, who was appearing on Bannon’s show, put a finer point on it.
“First of all, DeSantis is the Trojan Horse we thought he was,” Lindell remarked. “I just want to put that out there—how disgusting he is.”
Lindell then declared that if prosecutors arrest Trump, he’ll win the 2024 election “hands down.”
Other Trump influencers weighed in too. Candace Owens likely landed the best blow, tweeting:
“Anyone surprised by this? Been saying this forever: DeSantis is a good Governor but he is establishment and will be a major disappointment to those who think otherwise. People disenchanted with Trump (sometimes rightfully) saw things in DeSantis that were never there.”
That tweet is designed to get right into the head of pro-Trumpers who liked the idea of DeSantis in theory because they really want “Trump with less baggage.” But if, in practice, DeSantis is just an establishment reboot, forget about it.
Just for kicks, Trump decided to pile on with some homophobia, suggesting DeSantis might not be the tough guy Republicans think he is.
“Ron will probably find out about his sometime in the future when he’s unfairly and illegally attacked by a woman (or possibly a man!) with false accusations,” Trump posted on his media platform “Truth Social.”
Trump ultimately deleted that tweet so he could add in more slights, like “Ron DeSanctimonious,” but he left the “(or possibly a man!)” part, because landing an anti-gay jab was clearly important.
So the gauntlet has been thrown down. DeSantis, who has premised his entire candidacy on poaching MAGA supporters from their guy Trump, is now telling those same supporters that their hero being arrested just doesn’t matter that much.
REPUBLICANS AGREE ‘HUSH MONEY’ PAYMENTS ARE CRIMES—UNLESS TRUMP’S NAME IS ATTACHED. If you haven’t heard, Donald Trump is allegedly something of a criminal. His money and resources would then allegedly make him the head of a criminal enterprise. The rest of his Republican Party has collectively stuck its head up his behind and allowed him to pass through impeachment after impeachment without any real consequences, Walter Einenkel noted at DailyKos (3/17).
But now, as multiple legal cases begin to tighten around him, Trump is finally facing the very real possibility that he will be indicted for his part in the hush money payments he and his minions made to adult film star Stormy Daniels back in 2016. For his part, Trump has pleaded the Fifth Amendment about 440 times. However, the Donald hasn’t remained quiet as he has begun working on his presidential campaign and using it as a public defense. His defense: claims of witch hunting on the part of the entire US justice system.
His plan seems to be that he can lead some kind of revolt against the government or create a threat of mass violence so distressing that he will be able to bully his way out of paying for his crimes. The second part of this is to create a lot of smoke during the discovery in his many upcoming trials, hoping to have a chance of leaking information that he can throw like cheese puffs to his more conspiracy-minded MAGA followers.
The Economist and YouGov released some polls they conducted over the past week of 1,500 citizens. The poling covers dozens of questions, but a fun one is concerning hush money: “Do you think it is or is not a crime for a candidate for elected office to pay someone to remain silent about an issue that may affect the outcome of an election?”
Almost three-quarters of the respondents agreed that it is a crime if a politician running for or in office pays someone money to stay silent about something that they fear will hurt the outcome of an election. In fact, 78% of self identified Democrats believed it to be a crime and 73% of self-identified Republicans agreed.
The Economist and YouGov pollers then asked, “Do you think it is or is not a crime for a candidate to fail to report spending campaign money on payments to keep someone silent about an issue that may affect the outcome of an election?”
Once again, most people were in agreement—in fact a little more so, as 83% of Democrats polled thought it was a crime and 76% of Republicans believed it to be a crime. Good news! Here’s another question: “How serious an issue is it that an adult film star was paid $130,000 in October 2016 to remain silent about an alleged sexual encounter she had with Donald Trump that took place in 2006?”
In this case, the answers available to those polled were four, ranging from “A very serious issue,” “Somewhat serious,” “Not very serious,” to “Not serious at all.” Guess what? With Trump directly implicated in what three-quarters of the very same Republicans polled said was a crime, this time only 45% total (15% saying it was very serious) could bring themselves to be consistent about what they had just said.
A good deal of this seems to be media diet. According to those Republicans polled, when asked about what they had heard concerning the hush money case against Trump, about 40% said they had heard nothing at all. In seems that in this case it isn’t only the elected officials with their heads stuck where the sun doesn’t shine.
AMERICANS BROADLY REJECT REPUBLICAN ATTACKS ON TRANSGENDER FREEDOMS. A strong majority of the country believes transgender Americans should enjoy the same personal freedoms as other Americans even if many respondents held a different personal understanding of gender and gender identity, Kerry Eleveld reported at DailyKos (3/16).
The findings from the new Daily Kos/Civiqs poll are an affirmation of support for transgender individuals and their right to self determination free from government regulation. Additionally, nearly twice as many voters in the poll said parents of trans-identified kids should be allowed to make health care decisions they feel are right for their children as those who said the government should place limits on care.
Asked if everyone should have “the right to use the gender pronouns that match their personal identity,” nearly six in ten voters (59%) agreed while just 32% disagreed.
Another 74% of voters agreed that “Adults should always hold the ultimate authority over medical decisions for their own bodies.” Only 2% disagreed with that statement, while 23% said “it depends on the situation.”
Those results were striking despite the fact that the very first question of survey found 55% of respondents believe gender is “fixed at birth” while just 36% said gender is “open to expression.”
A 49% plurality of voters also said parents of children who identify as transgender should have the right to make the health care decisions they feel are best for their kids. Just 26% said government limits should be set on the types of treatments doctors can provide to transgender youth, while 10% said neither, and another 14% were unsure.
In fact, Republican voters are basically on an island in their belief that the government should regulate treatments for trans kids. Support for the freedom of parents to determine the best course of action for their transgender children is strong among multiple demographics, particularly those that Democrats need to win in battleground states: independents, women, men, suburbanites, college graduates, and Black and Hispanic voters, among others.
See more Dispatches at populist.com.
A 49% plurality also said physicians should be allowed to provide healthcare to transgender youth in a way that “recognizes and supports their gender identity.” Democrats, women, Black, Hispanic, and urban voters strongly agreed with that statement. College graduates (49% — 41%) and suburban voters (47% — 39%) supported it by 8 points each.
Republican book bans and censorship of gay and transgender material are absolute nonstarters with voters, particularly in local public libraries but also in classrooms and school libraries.
Fully 74% of voters said public libraries in their area should be allowed to carry books that include information about gay and transgender people and history. Just 18% said they shouldn’t.
In schools, a 48% plurality said classrooms and libraries should carry books with characters who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Another 8% said books including LGBT characters should be available, “but fewer than there are now.” So while 39% of respondents said LGBT-related books should be banned entirely in local schools, a 56% majority believes the material should be available to students.
Once again, support for full access to LGBT-inclusive books in schools polled overwhelmingly well among Democrats, 82% Yes - 12% No, as well Black and Hispanic voters, voters under 35, and those with a college degree or more. Suburban voters also favored full access by 10 points.
A question about whether public school teachers should be allowed to answer questions about gay and transgender issues drew a similar response, with a 50% majority of voters saying yes, 41% saying no, and 10% unsure. Black and Hispanic voters, voters under 35, college graduates and postgraduates, and suburban voters all signaled double-digit support for teachers answering students’ questions on LGBT issues.
MEDIA NEEDS TO GET WISE TO DESANTIS’ BAD-FAITH PRESS OPERATION. An Axios reporter in Tampa, Fla., said he was fired week after he responded to a Florida Department of Education email about an event featuring Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), calling the news release “propaganda,” the Washington Post reported (3/15)
Ben Montgomery said he received a call (3/13) from Jamie Stockwell, executive editor of Axios Local, who asked Montgomery to confirm he sent the email before saying the reporter’s “reputation in the Tampa Bay area” had been “irreparably tarnished.”
The news release said DeSantis, a potential 2024 GOP presidential candidate, had hosted a roundtable “exposing the diversity equity and inclusion scam in higher education.” It also called for prohibiting state funds from being used to support DEI efforts.
“We will expose the scams they are trying to push onto students across the country,” DeSantis said in the statement.
Montgomery, a Pulitzer Prize finalist, replied to the email three minutes after getting it. “This is propaganda, not a press release,” he wrote to the Department of Education press office.
About an hour after that, the Education Department’s communication officer, Alex Lanfranconi, shared Montgomery’s reply on Twitter, where it has since been viewed more than 1 million times.
Montgomery said the news release had “no substance,” adding that he “read the whole thing and it was just a series of quotes about how bad DEI was.”
Charles P. Pierce, a friend of Montgomery, commented as Esquire.com (3/16). “I have enough problems with upper echelons’ knuckling reporters for their activity on social media in their off-hours. (I have a long-standing hatred for the rules of “objectivity” when they are used as an excuse for timidity and professional ass-covering by said echelons.) But this was a private communication between a reporter and a government official that the official shared in a public forum. Even the most hidebound traditional journalism ethics don’t touch this. It’s the apparatchik who should be fired for sharing a private communication for, yes, propaganda purposes.
“But the official did so in the hope that Axios would prove to behave like the thoroughgoing chickensh*ts they’ve proven themselves to be. Presto! A Pulitzer finalist is out of work. The manipulative desk jockey probably will get a raise.
“As sorry an episode as this is—and any serious reporter should spit at the mention of Axios—it foreshadows a more serious challenge to political journalism: Ronald DeSantis is going to run for president, and as the Post points out, his press operation is already notorious.”
BIDEN SAYS TOP EXECS OF FAILED BANKS SHOULD FACE HARSH PENALTIES. Days after US Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-MA, expressed outrage over the bonuses that Silicon Valley Bank executives were handing out hours before the bank failed, President Joe Biden called on Congress to strengthen regulatory powers to hold officials at failed banks accountable, Julia Conley noted at CommonDreams (3/17).
The president said in a statement that the White House’s authority to hold SVB executives directly responsible for the failure is limited, but said Congress can and should pass legislation granting the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) broader powers to take action against former SVB CEO Greg Becker and other executives.
He called on lawmakers to allow the FDIC to claw back compensation from executives, impose civil penalties, and bar executives from working in the financial services industry if their banks failed “due to mismanagement and excessive risk taking.”
“I’m firmly committed to accountability for those responsible for this mess,” said Biden. “No one is above the law—and strengthening accountability is an important deterrent to prevent mismanagement in the future. Congress must act to impose tougher penalties for senior bank executives whose mismanagement contributed to their institutions failing.”
SVB and Becker himself raked in significant profits by largely serving wealthy tech companies, and took a risk by holding an “abnormally large ratio of uninsured deposits,” as Warren said earlier this week. They also invested a large share of the funds into long-term Treasury bonds whose value plummeted as interest rates rose, causing the bank’s clients to withdraw their money only to find SVB did not have sufficient funds on hand.
In addition to giving out bonuses hours before SVB collapsed, Becker sold roughly $3 million worth of shares of the bank in the weeks before the failure.
Currently the FDIC can claw back compensation of executives of the nation’s largest banks if they fail and can only impose other penalties if executives act with “recklessness” or “willful or continuing disregard.”
Biden called for Congress to allow the regulatory agency to penalize executives for “negligent” conduct as well.
Warren applauded Biden’s call, saying the president is “rightfully fighting to hold bank executives accountable for their failures.”
“We need to claw back every penny of their unjust pay and bonuses, impose real penalties, and ensure these executives never work in the banking industry again,” said the Massachusetts Democrat. “Congress must step up.”
From The Progressive Populist, April 15, 2023
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us