The Past 5 GOP Presidents Have Used Fraud and Treason to Steer Themselves to Electoral Victory

[ZiprHead]

http://img.alternet.org/right-wing/gop-fraud-and-treason

In fact, Eisenhower was the last legitimately elected Republican president we’ve had in this country.

Since Dwight Eisenhower left the presidency in 1961, six different Republicans have occupied the Oval Office.

And every single one of them - from Richard Nixon to Donald Trump - have been illegitimate - ascending to the highest office in the land not through small-D democratic elections - but instead through fraud and treason.

 

[barbos]

Sad

 

[ZiprHead]

Why are you sad?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Alternet posts whatever people want to say and thus can't be trusted.

 

[skepticalbip]

Alternet posts whatever people want to say and thus can't be trusted.

Hey, somebody posted it on the internet so it has to be nothing but fact. The internet doesn't allow nonsense.

 

[ZiprHead]

Which parts of the article aren't true?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Which parts of the article aren't true?

The point is we don't know.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Which parts of the article aren't true?

The point is we don't know.

Nixon conspired with the North Vietnamese. Ford didn't do anything. Reagan conspired with the Iranians. W's team conspired a fake group of citizens to storm the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board and went to SCOTUS twice to stop the counting of votes. Trump, well, we already know that his campaign conspired to get intel from the Russians to use against Clinton.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The point is we don't know.

Nixon conspired with the North Vietnamese. Ford didn't do anything. Reagan conspired with the Iranians. W's team conspired a fake group of citizens to storm the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board and went to SCOTUS twice to stop the counting of votes. Trump, well, we already know that his campaign conspired to get intel from the Russians to use against Clinton.

Well, Bush Sr. didn't get elected via fraud, technically, but since he was arguably involved with the Iran-Contra thing and avoided prosecution only because he had Reagan covering his ass, I think it kind of sort of ALMOST applies.

Still, I would say H.W. Bush is a notable exception to that trend.

 

[Toni]

The point is we don't know.

Nixon conspired with the North Vietnamese. Ford didn't do anything. Reagan conspired with the Iranians. W's team conspired a fake group of citizens to storm the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board and went to SCOTUS twice to stop the counting of votes. Trump, well, we already know that his campaign conspired to get intel from the Russians to use against Clinton.

Reagan did more than that. He received campaign contributions from Middle Eastern governments.

- - - Updated - - -

Which parts of the article aren't true?

The point is we don't know.

Yeah. We do know.

 

[J842P]

Which parts of the article aren't true?

The point is we don't know.

Huh? It is a polemic, obviously, but that doesn't mean the writer isn't referencing verifiable facts.

 

[SLD]

The Reagan October surprise theory has been debunked many times over. That means both Reagan and HW Bush legitimately won their elections - at least by this articles criteria. Nixon did indeed interfere with the Vietnam peace talks, but it is also highly unlikely that they would have been successful in time to make a difference in the 1968 election. Even after Nixons' election it took another four years for him to get them to agree to even basic terms of a ceasefire.

SLD

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The Reagan October surprise theory has been debunked many times over.

It's been argued against by people who claimed it would have been out of character for Reagan to do so. There's quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that the Regan Campaign DID, in fact, collude with the Iranian Government to prolong the hostage crisis until after the election. At the very least, the Iranians believe that collusion took place, and they believe they were rewarded for it as arranged.

The only real question is to what extent Reagan HIMSELF was involved in that collusion or even knew about it. This is the same "I didn't know what my staff was doing!" defense used by Nixon, Bush Sr., and now Trump. It's the same defense Reagan used for Iran-Contra, first by letting his underlings take the blame for the deal and then pardoning every single one of them so they would never see jail time.

It is, however, extremely naive to think that none of these presidents even KNEW what their staff were doing, or that members of their campaigns would take such a radical step autonomously.

Nixon did indeed interfere with the Vietnam peace talks, but it is also highly unlikely that they would have been successful in time to make a difference in the 1968 election.

The success of the peace talks was not a point of contention. It was the fact that the North walked away from those talks that undermined LBJ's (and the Democrats by extension) ability to end the war on favorable terms. While a lot of Americans were willing to believe that the Vietnam War wasn't really worth the trouble of winning, getting the North to turn their backs on LBJ made it seem like they had gotten to that position in the first place because Johnson was a weakling that they couldn't respect.

And no, this is not a theory. The FBI actually caught them doing this, as LBJ is recorded as saying:

"I got one this morning that's pretty rough for you. Well, we have found that our friend, the Republican nominee, our California friend, has been playing on the outskirts with our enemies and our friends both, he's been doing it through rather subterranean sources here. And he has been saying to the allies that you gonna get sold out, you better not give away your liberties just a few hours before I can preserve it for you. Mrs Chennault is contacting their ambassador, this is not guesswork... Mrs. Chennault, she's young and attractive, she's a good lookin young girl, and she is uh, warning the South Vietnamese not to get pulled into this Johnson move."

Again: it's not a question of whether or not this actually happened. We KNOW the Vietnamese walked away because someone close to Nixon told them to and assured them that they wouldn't have to make as many concessions under Nixon. The only thing that is even slightly questionable is whether or not Nixon himself knew this was going on.

 

[lpetrich]

I think that the OP's linked article overstates its case. Gerald Ford and George Bush I got into office legitimately, IMO. As to the other three, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush II, one can ask how much they knew about the shenanigans that got them into office -- and how much they were involved.

 

[SLD]

It's been argued against by people who claimed it would have been out of character for Reagan to do so. There's quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that the Regan Campaign DID, in fact, collude with the Iranian Government to prolong the hostage crisis until after the election. At the very least, the Iranians believe that collusion took place, and they believe they were rewarded for it as arranged.

The only real question is to what extent Reagan HIMSELF was involved in that collusion or even knew about it. This is the same "I didn't know what my staff was doing!" defense used by Nixon, Bush Sr., and now Trump. It's the same defense Reagan used for Iran-Contra, first by letting his underlings take the blame for the deal and then pardoning every single one of them so they would never see jail time.

It is, however, extremely naive to think that none of these presidents even KNEW what their staff were doing, or that members of their campaigns would take such a radical step autonomously.

Nixon did indeed interfere with the Vietnam peace talks, but it is also highly unlikely that they would have been successful in time to make a difference in the 1968 election.

The success of the peace talks was not a point of contention. It was the fact that the North walked away from those talks that undermined LBJ's (and the Democrats by extension) ability to end the war on favorable terms. While a lot of Americans were willing to believe that the Vietnam War wasn't really worth the trouble of winning, getting the North to turn their backs on LBJ made it seem like they had gotten to that position in the first place because Johnson was a weakling that they couldn't respect.

And no, this is not a theory. The FBI actually caught them doing this, as LBJ is recorded as saying:

"I got one this morning that's pretty rough for you. Well, we have found that our friend, the Republican nominee, our California friend, has been playing on the outskirts with our enemies and our friends both, he's been doing it through rather subterranean sources here. And he has been saying to the allies that you gonna get sold out, you better not give away your liberties just a few hours before I can preserve it for you. Mrs Chennault is contacting their ambassador, this is not guesswork... Mrs. Chennault, she's young and attractive, she's a good lookin young girl, and she is uh, warning the South Vietnamese not to get pulled into this Johnson move."

Again: it's not a question of whether or not this actually happened. We KNOW the Vietnamese walked away because someone close to Nixon told them to and assured them that they wouldn't have to make as many concessions under Nixon. The only thing that is even slightly questionable is whether or not Nixon himself knew this was going on.

I'm sorry but there is no serious evidence of a deal between any Reagan staffer and the Iranians. There is only speculation. And those aren't facts.

And i think you mean South Vietnam - they're the ones who were approached by Nixon's team. It was their relationships with South Vietnamese president Thieu that they exploited. The talks were only just about to get started in October - when the Russians pressured the North Vietnamese into accepting a bombing halt in exchange for talks. But Thieu was already against the talks because the VC were included. What's clear is that even before Nixon's aides got to him, he was against the talks as LBJ had them structured. In fact, LBJ merely invited the South Vietnamese to participate. Thus even without Nixon's assurances, Thieu wasn't going to do a damn thing. He may also have been counting on the election before he made a decision.

SLD

 

[ZiprHead]

I think that the OP's linked article overstates its case. Gerald Ford and George Bush I got into office legitimately, IMO. As to the other three, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush II, one can ask how much they knew about the shenanigans that got them into office -- and how much they were involved.

The article points out that Ford and Bush I would probably not ascended to the presidency if not for the shenanigans of their predecessors.

 

[fromderinside]

HW, in particular was mostly responsible for the electoral shenanigans of the Raygun 'ministration.