Ex-House Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich has been apoplectic about current Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s claim that the CIA lied about briefing her about the use of torture ("enhanced interrogation techniques") at a meeting in September 2002. Like a diminutive Zeus, thundering from the heights of Mt. Lilliput, Gingrich railed against what he called Pelosi’s "despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort," and called for investigations.
Whatever Pelosi’s ultimate political fate on this matter — and she appears to have backed off a little on Friday, shifting her emphasis from the lies of the CIA to the lies of the Bush administration in general, after a letter from CIA Director Leon Panetta to his troops — a person would have to be totally obtuse not to see Gingrich’s attack as cover for the CIA and its torture crimes. It is also a fiercely partisan attack, laying down a smokescreen for the real criminals, Cheney, Bush, Tenet, Rumsfeld and their ilk.
But this is not the first time we’ve seen Newt play this role. In 1995, then-Democratic Representative Robert G. Torricelli received information from a State Department whistleblower, Richard Nuccio, that a long-time Guatemalan CIA agent, Colonel Julio Roberto Alpirez, was responsible for the controversial killing of an American innkeeper living in Guatemala, as well as the murder of a leftist guerrilla leader married to an American citizen, Jennifer Harbury. The guerrilla leader, Efrain Bamaca Velasquez, was ordered killed at the end of his interrogation by Alpirez, who also was a Guatemalan military intelligence officer. Both the State Department and the National Security Council knew the identity of the killer, but withheld the information, even as Harbury was conducting hunger strikes to get the government to pursue what then appeared to be her husband’s disappearance.
Torricelli, who was a member of the House Intelligence Committee, released the name of the CIA agent and announced in a letter to President Clinton:
The direct involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency in the murder of these individuals leads me to the extraordinary conclusion that the agency is simply out of control and that it contains what can only be called a criminal element…"
Torricelli’s bombshell caused a huge scandal, coming in the wake of revelations of a bloody U.S.-backed Guatemalan counter-insurgency campaign that killed over 100,000 civilians, led by the Guatemalan military and intelligence services. According to a New York Times article in March 1995, Alpirez had been a CIA informer since the 1980s, and then trained at the U.S. Army-run School of the Americas in 1989.
By the time of the 1990 murder of Michael DeVine, "an American citizen who ran a hotel in the Guatemalan rain forest and apparently had stumbled onto a smuggling operation involving the Guatemalan military," Alpirez was a contract agent for the CIA. The controversy over DeVine’s murder forced the Bush I administration to cut off military aid to the Guatemalan regime, all the while, according to the UK Independent, secretly channeling $7 million a year to the Guatemalan government through the CIA.
The mid-90s scandal grew uglier and uglier. From the NY Times article:
The role of Guatemala’s military and intelligence services in death-squad killings has long been suspected. In 1993 that role was confirmed by two Guatemalan soldiers, who linked many such killings to the military high command.
The C.I.A.’s station in Guatemala has had close links to the military since 1954, when the intelligence agency led a coup that overthrew the nation’s President, Jacobo Arbenz Guzman, and helped install a right-wing junta.
The stage was set for Speaker Newt to spring into action. He called Torricelli’s disclosures "explicitly inappropriate," and called for the House Intelligence Committee to expel the New Jersey congressman. "I think he just decided it was better to go ahead and cause a public embarrassment to the United States," Gingrich said.
In the end, Gingrich did not get his way, as supposedly "not wanting to make the Democrat a martyr," the Republicans backed down and Torricelli stayed on the committee. Meanwhile, the next year found Gingrich mixing it up with fellow Republican Arlen Specter, as Gingrich fought to increase the CIA budget for covert operations against Iran from $4 million to $18 million dollars ($19 million was already set aside for destabilization operations against Iraq). And then it seems only yesterday (2007), when Newt attacked then-Senator Biden’s call for a special prosecutor in the case of the destroyed CIA torture tapes.
According to a Jeff Stein interview with Nuccio in 1997, published at Salon, the Torricelli disclosures led to a change in Clinton-era CIA hiring policy, which now was to exclude hiring agents who were implicated in human rights abuses. Even further, then CIA-director John Deutch ordered an internal review of current agents involved in such abuses, and approximately 100 agents fitting such criteria were fired.
The denouement was not so pretty, however. The CIA rank-and-file mutinied — "poor morale," don’t you know — and got Deutch kicked out and a new CIA director appointed. Before Deutch was gone, two senior CIA officials were also let go for lying to Congress. Meanwhile, the CIA saw to it that Nuccio lost his security clearance, thereby wrecking his career. Torricelli won the New Jersey Senate seat, only to bow out after one term because of financial scandal. Gingrich went on to even bigger game, helping impeach President Clinton for lying about a blow job, only to fall in disgrace himself a few years later. Deutch was replaced by George Tenet.
The CIA and the U.S. government’s policy over prisoners did not fall from the clouds. Nor did it come from the original sin of Dick Cheney, as guilty as he may be in this instance. All these "secret cabals" (Lawrence Wilkerson’s term, not mine) within the government are incubated in the attitudes and crimes of normative government/military functioning. Just ask the 100, 000 dead Guatemalan civilians, predecessors to the 100,000s thousands of dead in Iraq. Or ask Jennifer Harbury… or Abu Zubaydah.
Newt Gingrich’s charges against Nancy Pelosi are not motivated by a desire for truth, but to cover for the crimes of the CIA. This is his M.O. This is his job. If only the press had a memory they would not report the fulminations of this shill for torturers and murderers. They might report this, from a story by Jeremy Scahill on the "extrajudicial terror squad" still active at Guantanamo, published in Friday’s AlterNet:
As the Obama administration continues to fight the release of some 2,000 photos that graphically document U.S. military abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, an ongoing Spanish investigation is adding harrowing details to the ever-emerging portrait of the torture inside and outside Guantánamo. Among them: "blows to [the] testicles;" "detention underground in total darkness for three weeks with deprivation of food and sleep;" being "inoculated … through injection with ‘a disease for dog cysts;’" the smearing of feces on prisoners; and waterboarding. The torture, according to the Spanish investigation, all occurred "under the authority of American military personnel" and was sometimes conducted in the presence of medical professionals….
The force is officially known as the the Immediate Reaction Force or Emergency Reaction Force, but inside the walls of Guantánamo, it is known to the prisoners as the Extreme Repression Force. Despite President Barack Obama’s publicized pledge to close the prison camp and end torture — and analysis from human rights lawyers who call these forces’ actions illegal — IRFs remain very much active at Guantánamo.
Or they could do the kind of digging Jason Leopold did in his latest article, Documents Describe Prisoner Abuse Photos Obama is Withholding. Besides describing a number of the photographs Obama does not now want the U.S. public to see, the article demonstrates how widespread the abuse and torture of prisoners actually was, a horrific combination of official policy, and an army brutalized by its own leadership, inured to the idea of prisoner abuse by observing the policy of the higher ups:
Another photograph that was set for release at the end of month that is now being withheld was taken in December 2003 and was found on a government computer. The image shows three soldiers at the St. Mere Forward Operating Base posing with three Iraqi detainees “zip-tied to bars in a stress position, fully clothed, with hoods over their heads.”
One female soldier in the photo is pointing a broom "as if I was sticking the end of a broom stick into the rectum of a restrained detainee," she testified to Army investigators in April 2004….
One soldier said they “kept the detainees awake by holding them up or by playing the loud music,” the report noted. The soldier said Special Forces instructed soldiers that prisoners who were “violent or had information” were “flex-cuffed on their hands, heads covered and not allowed to sleep"….
Most of the soldiers interviewed in all of the incidents stated that they were not aware of any set policy on the treatment of detainees, and did not realize at the time that their actions were wrong nor did they believe it was inappropriate. A sergeant stated that he had also seen pictures on Army computers of detainees being kicked, hit or inhumanely treated while in U.S. custody.
Another soldier said he had “seen a few pictures of this nature before but thought nothing of it since these people are the ones that are trying to kill us.”
On Wednesday, Obama told reporters that the photographs “are not particularly sensational.”
Related posts:
- Newt Gingrich for President? Ain’t Enough Stain Remover on the Planet
- If Anyone Knows About Lying to the House, it’s Gingrich
- NRSC to Limbaugh and Gingrich: Just Go Away
- Newt Gingrich Offers Irrefutable Proof That Health Care Reform Will Lead to Euthanasia
- Gingrich: Fraud and Abuse of Medicare–Intolerable; Fraud, Abuse in Military–Less Problematic





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Far be it from me to impute great chess-playing or political skills to Nancy Pelosi, but at this point it’s now the Republicans who are howling for the truth commission or special prosecutor or investigation that the Democrats were too squeamish to even discuss. Thank heaven for Bob Graham and his compulsive diary keeping.
We should always refer to this person as “disgraced former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.”
Great work, Jeff, thanks.
That’s only when we’re in polite company, right? I can call him whatever I want when I’m among friends, can’t I?
Seconded.
Newt’s bloviating makes me laugh.
Also, sorry to be slightly OT, but I’m watching Lawrence Wilkerson on Rachel. Is he the Alexander Butterfield of this century?
He’s certainly sounding like it. His name came across my radar a while ago, and I thought then that he’d start speaking out when W was gone.
Yeah, that was a *really* interesting segment. May be in watching powell’s back, he will open unknown doors.
shoot, I missed LW on Rachel. And my reception has gone whack. what was he saying tonight?
To both Teddy and Martha (2 & 5): very funny, witty comments.
Butterfield, btw, guessed the identity of Deep Throat, according to a Hartfort Courant article back in ‘95.
I get this funny feeling that our political discourse has devolved into some kind of Eugene O’Neill play about dysfunctional families. Not that O’Neill sucked or anything. It’s just that instead of going after the abusing father, we are punishing the enabling mother who claims ignorance or inpotence in dealing with the situation.
In real stories of abuse more anger is directed at the one who did not stop the abuse that the one who was dishing it out.
Wow, tonight he slapped back at Liz Cheney’s ABC appearance yesterday, when she slammed him (”the Vice President’s daughter”, dripping with sarcasm) and went on the attack again. Talked about his documenting what happened and when. Said that if George Tenet ordered something, it was because Cheney told him to do it. He hadn’t decided if Shrub knew–Cheney was in charge.
I believe Powell will do anything he can to save himself. He really believes himself honorable, and to have fought the fight nobly. Wilkerson, of course, agrees. They played by the rules, they feel. Why should they get the shaft for Cheney and Rumsfeld’s folly?
Of course, I’d like to know what alibi Powell has for the Pentagon brass, people like former Chairman of JCS Myers, who was instrumental in putting down a rebellion against the SERE exploitation plan at Guantanamo and elsewhere.
These same old useless re-tread Republics never go away. Why is anyone still listening to Newt and Cheney and the rest of the idiots?
I heard that Powell’s gonna be on TV next Sunday. Don’t know which program. Be interesting to see if he bends over & spreads his cheeks for his betters, as he has done all his career, or whether he’ll follow the somewhat more appropriate pattern of his aide.
because true believers can’t admit their mistakes in believing them in the first place. it really really rocks their world to admit to being conned.
Is there any substantive evidence of Powell’s alleged emotive, “I’m not reading this – this is bullshit!” exclamation?
And God knows he’s good at it. He’s been covering the asses of the powers that be since My Lai.
You owe me a drink.
(Jeff, I’m sorry I’ve waylaid your post with my OT!) I do wonder, as you do, about Powell’s alibis as well and how the chain of command (at the top) dealt with this.
Back on topic, I’m still fascinated in Newt’s political calculations, or lack thereof. I’m wondering if they know the end game, but are trying to do short-term damage before the truth commissions start.
Yes this is true. Powell is one guy that was not a true believer wrt Bush’s Iraq debacle. He was convinced by someone or a group of persons to read the bullshit (what he knew to be bullshit) to the American Public.
I thought it was interesting that Liz Cheney on This Week made a point of accusing Colonel Wilkerson of making “a cottage industry” of criticizing the vice-president. It seemed to signal he had made it to their talk show hit list along with Colin Powell. It appears she is making a cottage industry of defending her Daddy’s torture program.
Whatever your most favorite tipple is, here are 2 of them!
Newt, Ollie North, Republicans, and the RW cable teevee pundits are working diversionary tactics to befuddle anyone that will listen to them.
actually, I was referring to any TBs in the general public who might be inclined to listen to Newt.
Powell wasn’t conned per se in the way that cult members are recruited and then snowed day in and day out until they can’t say whether or not the sky is blue until the Great Leader tells them so.
whoops…forgot my “reply” button for Hackworth…
Don’t know that Newt’s ever had any rational political calculation. Least none that I can remember. He has a hundred ideas a minute. Someone made him sit down & flesh them out back in the Contract on America days, so he had his 15 minutes of fame. Since then I’d have to dredge a word out of my youth & call him a flibbertigibbit.
Making do with water tonight. About to call it quits. Thanks.
Yeah, loved the “cottage industry” slap. But tonight, the good Colonel one upped her. If you’re going to play hardball with the big boys, you’d better have more to your resume than being the “Vice President’s daughter”.
Newtie is bad enough, but OLLIE NORTH??? Is that hideous little weasel still alive?
Yes, gotta isolate the loudest critic. It’s code to the media to disinvite Wilkerson to the party and shut him up.
where are the other critics to expand the Criticize the most Unpopular VP in American History Franchise?
If anybody gets to skate in this whole bloody mess, I’d much rather it be powell than any of the others.
eCAHN -
Like as not powell will continue to let Wilkerson carry his water…that’s been his modus, too gutless to change now. :-(
Yes, but which tack will he take next Sunday? Defend W or defend himself?
Love that word.
When it comes to congressional inquiries, I think Ollie North was the source of the deflowering of my political naivete. I really thought he was going to Get In Trubble!
I learned a lot about PR and the power of the military uniform watching those hearings.
Had to do a bit of search before I figured out exactly how it is spelled.
Newt, Ollie North, Republicans, and the RW cable teevee pundits are working diversionary tactics to befuddle anyone that will listen to them.
and anyone who *would* listen to them, by definition, are quite easily, possibly even genetically, befuddled….
Well, I actually managed to stay awake for first runs on both Keef and Rachel……the zzzzz’s call. Y’all have a good evening and hopefully we’ll all have better tomorrows.
Didn’t Naomi Klein say recently that being republican is less political party than personality disorder?
nite waccers!
16 – I don’t know. It supposedly was quoted first in U.S. World and News Report, and then I saw it in a Nation article by Eric Alterman. Whatever Powell did or didn’t do, he did, as Alterman notes, transmitted the material anyway.
19 – No problem w/OT.
I don’t think they have a strategy, except obfuscate everything. They have as much intention of voting for investigations or a truth commission as I have suddenly recommending Bush to be put on Mount Rushmore.
Cheney is so frantic to make his case that I expect any day now that they will drag out the daughter holding her baby to talk about what a great dad he is.
That’s what I think is so interesting–Wilkerson is really the first active moderate Republican who’s come out vocally as an opponent of Cheney. A few have written things, but not a lot of voices on the teevee. I suppose Liz is worried that the silent crowd will suddenly find their voice.
Look around, find the person on the up and up (even if they are all in the midst of nasty) and attack that person with gusto..
That’s what Newt does.
yes she did – on Maher.
wish I’d thought of that one….
Jeff, thanks for pointing out Newt’s blatant hypocrisy in joining the chorus chanting “if Pelosi knew about torture, she should have revealed classified information to expose it.” We all know they would have been screaming for her head if she had, but it’s good to have a documented history, not just an assumption.
Excellent post. Gingrich is slime so a perfect match for the CIA. I have to wonder what they were thinking there. Even with Obama running interference for them, they had to know that their role in torture would eventually leak out. And they start throwing spitballs at Pelosi. I guess what this tells me is that they like politicians and the media still haven’t clued into the blogosphere. They assume that no one will fact check their stories, that this will not lead anyone to take a look at their past history to see if this is an aberration or Standard Operating Procedure. They want us to trust them but they also want to lie all the time. They want us to see them as heroes but they act like thugs.
I think they fundamentally don’t understand the blogosphere and the longer they keep this up the more is going to be dredged up about their murderous criminal past, and present. And as I keep saying, all of their failures. When your last great success was finding missiles in Cuba in 1962, you are running way beyond even the fumes.
Did not see Maddow yet. Wilkerson hasn’t been doing his crediblity any favors by complimenting Colin Powell so fervently. Powell caved and went along when he knew it reeked. The were building evidence to fit the policy. Powell was complicit. He is no hero for that.
Thank You for bringing this up for everyone’s attention.
Thanks for getting the point of the whole article. Newt and the Republicans shamelessly lie and think nothing of rewriting history. Since Newt fancies himself an historian, this is particularly galling to the rest of us that fancy ourselves historians ;-)
(While not noted in my bio here, I am mainly a clinical psychologist, but I have spoken on historical themes at APA conferences [once on Darwin, once on sensory deprivation], and have taught History and Systems of Psychology. If I hadn’t gone “clinical,” history would have been my emphasis.)
As I read the document (which I hope will be posted on line very soon), the Pike Committee Report gets spiked by the CIA (and a supine Congress) mainly because it documents the long record of failures by the CIA, and then asks, what’s the money for? What’s the secrecy for, if not to cover up failure and corruption?
In this case, there’s another factor going on, I believe. The role of Special Operations in the torture program has not been sufficiently aired. CIA and SOC are interpenetrated. More to come on this, I assure you.
A series of articles on the CIA torture, political killings etc might be an idea.
The problem with the entire republican party is that they don’t get out much.
Actually most of the Republicans who were sitting on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees definitely do NOT want a “truth commission” or special prosecutor. They want this bottled up, in secret, in the Intelligence Committees. This pretty clearly says, to me, that the documents will ultimately show Pelosi is right…but they will spin it out in a Minority Report…that the Democrats manipulated the outcome. In addition, by doing it “in-house” they can protect their own tail-feathers. They can conceal what THEY were told in a partisan manner, suppress documents, or put their own spin on it. They would, in fact, be investigating themselves.
I don’t like the idea of a “Truth Commission”…I prefer criminal prosecution. But in a limited sense perhaps it would serve a purpose if it dealt with certain issues that Congress would later agree that impeachment and a banning from all subsequent “positions of honor, trust and profit under the United States” FOREVER would apply. If a briefer lied to Congress that might be an appropriate sanction.
At one point, wasn’t there some work done on “psycho-history” that is, the role of psychology in history, specifically an individual’s psychology in determining history?
I see Colin Powell as a tragic figure, like Hamlet. He knew it was baloney but is/was too much of a good soldier. I do remember him speaking of the head-meeting-brick wall quality of conversations with the “united states of rumsfeld”
I want both. The idea that the POTUS and VP took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the US and then did what they did just explodes my head. If there’s anything left, it goes when I ponder that Congress helped them do what they did.
It seems we’re getting some kind of Truth out there and public opinion to write its own report. messy.
Thugs? They’re acting like crybabies imo.
Ollie North – Iran/Conta – Repressive Central American Juntas – CIA = Many dead brown colored people.
My vote.
Criminal prosecutions first and foremost. Truth commission later on.
And this actually flips around what Pelosi has said. When she was briefed she WASN’T told (i.e. the CIA lied, or dissimulated). It was only afterwards, when an aide passed along information that Harmon had told him, that she realized that torture had been used long before her briefing.
So apparently the CIA implied to Harmon, new to the House Intelligence Committee, that “Hey, Pelosi approved this stuff, what’s YOUR problem.” Then Pelosi was told..and she found herself in a trap. If she reveals she was told classified information, outside the circle of legitimate briefings, it would open up the aide and Harmon, as well as herself, to attack.
I suppose that she and Harmon could have used Congressional immunity by speaking about the topic, one-after-another… on the floor. In fact, that would have been a brilliant way to devolve any criminal threat of a leak investigation. It would have been ballsy…and they would have taken a lot of heat for it. In fact it might have ended the Democrats hopes to win the House back.
Wouldn’t the point of prosecutions be to find the truth? So, we wouldn’t really need yet another commission would we?
What would you expect from someone who asked his wife for a divorce while she was on her deathbed. The Republican’t Party as a “family values party”; it’s so hypocritical, it’s laughable.
53 – There was a whole “Psychohistory” movement, spearheaded by Erik Erikson and Robert Jay Lifton (of Nazi Doctors fame). A book was published with the same name with various essays. The movement died in the shadow of the ascendancy of biopsychiatry, IMO.
54 – I’ve come to see we do need both prosecutions and an official investigation. But let’s not downgrade the SASC report on prisoner abuse by the military, one of the most amazing Congressional investigations in modern history, (again) IMO.
The word “thrifty” comes to mind.
Like I said…only the most minor stuff should be done in a Truth Commission manner…with the consequences being permanent separation from any “position of honor, trust and profit”. I consider lying to Congress a pretty major crime, but at the same time I’d rather have that leading to who ordered it…the policy-makers…than have that person sitting in jail.
Immunity should be granted sparingly. No Ollie North’s or Poindexter’s covering the ar*es of the “busy, busy President”.
I don’t know, but I would rather the criminals be jailed. The truth commission would be a way to get the story out I suppose. Though I don’t trust commissions much. To easy to use as a means of cover.
watertiger is upstairs!
Late Night: Nancy Pelosi is WORSE Than Torquemada!
The thing about Colin Powell is that he signed on to the Bush bandwagon. There were many places where he could have made an ethical stand. He didn’t. The same could be said for most Democrats who voted for much of the Bush program and/or were silent and/or did nothing to oppose it. What we have is a generation of compromised leaders.
I wrote back at the time of the Iraq war vote that many Demcorats were allowing themselves to be played (although there were those who did vote no). They were afraid to vote against a popular President. But if the war was a success they would get no credit for their vote. And if it was a failure (as it was), they would be tied to it forever and used shamelessly as cover by Republicans. I didn’t realize at the time just how completely this would happen or on so many issues. But more than that I didn’t realize how many Democrats voted with the Republicans because they, in fact, agreed and still agree with them.
thanks.
They don’t care how over the top or brazenly overt their tactics are as long as they get the lie out there and let the marketing people take care of the rest
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..an-Honesty
I wonder who Newt is cheating on his current wife with. The fact that this guy can only get a hearing on Sean Hannity et al speaks volumes abut the silliness of the right wing in this country. If the best they can come up with is this five time looser god help us all really because an honest debate can be thought provoking and enlightining but putting goof balls like this clown GIngrich forward as spokeholes is really embarassing for all of us. Oh and by the way all you “THE CIA IS PROTECTING US” It was the CIA led coup of democratically elected Mosadegh in Iran in 1954 I think,that led us to Ayatolla Kohmenni and eventually good old Osama BIn Laden. If the political process of Iran had been honored…I mean after all they only wanted to control their natural resorces…..we may have avoided the entire rebirth of radical Islam as we know it today!
Oh and you forget that his was schtuping his current wife, while married, after her Church choir rehersals.
Several newspapers are now reporting that Newt Gingrich is dating and basically living with Callista Bisek, a “willowy blond Congressional aide 23 years his junior.” Biske, 33, has been spending nights at Gingrich’s apartment near the Capitol and has her own key. In an amazing act of hypocrisy, Gingrich was apparently dating Bisek all during Clinton-Lewinsky adultery scandal, even as he proclaimed family values and bitterly criticized the President for his adultery.
Reporters and other Washington insiders have known about this relationship since 1994, even before Gingrich became Speaker of the House, but did not have any solid proof to report. In 1995, Vanity Fair magazine described Bisek as Gingrich’s “frequent breakfast companion.” Gingrich was married to Marianne Gingrich during all of that time, and just filed for divorce in August 1999.
Newt is apparently trying to create a new hybrid form, Christian adultery. According to MSNBC, Bisek sings in the National Shrine Choir, and Newt would often wait for her at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, listening to her sing while he read the Bible.
This is hardly the first time Newt has cheated, either. “It was common knowledge that Newt was involved with other women during his [first] marriage to Jackie. Maybe not on the level of John Kennedy. But he had girlfriends — some serious, some trivial.” — Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 70s. One woman, Anne Manning, has come forward and confirmed a relationship with him during the 1976 campaign. “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’”
Kip Carter, his former campaign treasurer, was walking Newt’s daughters back from a football game one day and cut across a driveway where he saw a car. “As I got to the car, I saw Newt in the passenger seat and one of the guys’ wives with her head in his lap going up and down. Newt kind of turned and gave me this little-boy smile. Fortunately, Jackie Sue and Kathy were a lot younger and shorter then.”
transcendent!
Yes, there’s far too much with which we have to be disappointed. *Sigh*
Hoss it goes back way longer than that.
Phoenix, comes to mind. I’d have teh google for more, but CIA and US Govt. bad acts go hand in hand.
As mentioned above, Guatamala in ‘54. . . . only ONE of the coups staged.
We’re corrupted, top to bottom. Have been, for a long, long time . . .