A Four-Decade Secret: One Man's Story of Sabotaging Carter's Re-election

Sunday, March 19, 2023

New York Times interviews Ben Barnes, who worked in politics during the Iran hostage crisis. Barnes talks about his efforts to ensure that Jimmy Carter did not win a second term: "History needs to know that this happened," Mr. Barnes, who turns 85 next month, said in one of several interviews, his first with a news organization about the episode. "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."

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 10:33 AM | 58 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

END;

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Always wondered why lawsuits haven't been filed by the hostages or their families for the treason committed by Reagan and his lackeys.

#1 | Posted by censored at 2023-03-18 08:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

They certainly have damages.

#2 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2023-03-19 10:42 AM | Reply

This has been rumored for decades. Good to see someone finally step forward publicly.

#3 | Posted by jw2 at 2023-03-19 10:58 AM | Reply

Isn't all this common knowledge going back to the investigations into that trip?

#4 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-19 11:03 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Carter did enough (or didn't do enough) to sabotage his own reelection.

Not saying Carter wasn't a good man, but he wasn't Presidential material.

#5 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2023-03-19 11:05 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

he (Carter) wasn't Presidential material.

#5 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Nowhere near as strong, patriotic, and intelligent as Trump.

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2023-03-19 11:20 AM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

More proof that rwingers have always been Party over Country.

This effort was reported at the time and after, but not with an admission by one of the conspirators.

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2023-03-19 12:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

Isn't all this common knowledge going back to the investigations into that trip?

#4 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Many of us were aware; while Partisan dishonest gainsayers denied and scoffed.

Now, the same previous deniers deflect by challenging the current legitimate significance of the story.

Eb, would you deign to opine on the degree of criminality and Treason which is here acknowledged and confessed? Hoping you will respond with your honest appraisal. Please share your take on seriousness of the offense, and how the electorate would properly react now that there's no denying that The Treason took place.

#8 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2023-03-19 01:10 PM | Reply

Not saying Carter wasn't a good man, but he wasn't Presidential material.

#5 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Intelligent people would say that him being a good man is what makes him presidential material.

But of course to a trump cult member it is disqualifying.

#9 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 01:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

Isn't all this common knowledge going back to the investigations into that trip?

#4 | Posted by eberly

Define COMMON KNOWLEDGE.

If you asked the average idiot american on the street if reagan supporters sabotaged foreign policy to help him win the presidency, do you think they'd say yes?

#10 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 01:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Isn't all this common knowledge"

Only among the Woke.
Danni and I knew, for example.
I don't remember if anyone else ever talked about it. Do you?

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-19 02:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Intelligent people would say that him being a good man is what makes him presidential material.

#9 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2023-03-19 01:44 PM

I know a lot of really good people I wouldn't vote for if the fan for president.

#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2023-03-19 02:11 PM | Reply

#8 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour

Like much of America's history, this bit is insignificant to conservatives.

#13 | Posted by Angrydad at 2023-03-19 02:14 PM | Reply

-Many of us were aware; while Partisan dishonest gainsayers denied and scoffed.

But it's not new information. widely understood and accepted? Yeah, probably never going to get any traction.

-Eb, would you deign to opine on the degree of criminality and Treason which is here acknowledged and confessed?

I'd say it is a high degree of criminality. Working against a sitting president to allow hostages to remain in captivity longer than they needed to?

Even if one could make the argument (they can't, or at least I've never seen it) that the Carter administration was behaving recklessly and intervention was necessary to broker a better deal, that still doesn't justify it.

It still mean keeping those hostages there longer. No excuse for that. If someone from the Reagan campaign wants to defend that, let them.

But we all know that was never going to happen. That would equal an admittance to the crime. And the power structure is pretty much gone.

#14 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-19 02:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"But it's not new information."

Pretty sure this guy's death bed confession counts as new information.
Pretty sure this is the smoking gun that Republicans denied for decades.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-19 02:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"If someone from the Reagan campaign wants to defend that, let them."

Their silence for the past 40 years speaks volumes, does it not?

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-19 02:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I know a lot of really good people I wouldn't vote for if the fan for president.

#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds

But we know who you WOULD vote for, which makes your evaluation worthless.

#17 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 04:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

It still mean keeping those hostages there longer. No excuse for that. If someone from the Reagan campaign wants to defend that, let them.

#14 | Posted by eberly

You want to constantly defend republicans and attack democrats, but when it comes to the actual policies and actions of republicans, you play "I dont support that and it has nothing to do with me."

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 04:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The original myth was that George Bush was the go between. It's cool that the Times is willing to humor this old coot and report on his fantasy and repeat this old conspiracy theory.

#19 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-19 06:02 PM | Reply

conspiracy theory.

#19 | Posted by visitor_

= historical fact you wish wasnt true.

#20 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 06:19 PM | Reply

We have this Democrat's word and nothing else to back up his fabulist story.

#21 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-19 07:06 PM | Reply

We have this Democrat's word and nothing else to back up his fabulist story.

#21 | Posted by visitor_

This was a known fact before this guy spoke up. YOU just haven't heard it because you get your news from fascists.

#22 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 07:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Isn't all this common knowledge ...
#4 | POSTED BY EBERLY

this old conspiracy theory.
#19 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

No Eberly. It's not.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2023-03-19 07:29 PM | Reply

It was rumored before this Democrat showed up. First it was George Bush then they said it was Ollie North. It's a good story. You want to believe it, but pictures or it never happened.

#24 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-19 07:32 PM | Reply

It was rumored before this Democrat showed up. First it was George Bush then they said it was Ollie North. It's a good story. You want to believe it, but pictures or it never happened.

#24 | Posted by visitor_

take a picture of this:
jacobin.com
"Ronald Reagan's "October Surprise" Plot Was Real After All"

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-19 07:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Did you read your Jacobin article? (Jacobin is QAnon for leftists by the way)

It puts forth the exact same myth but with a different cast of characters being responsible. This time it's Casey, Chase, Reed and Rockefeller. No mention of Barnes or Connally.

First it was George Bush then they said it was Ollie North, then it was Casey, Chase, Reed and Rockefeller, and now it's Barnes turn to claim credit.

How long will we have to wait before Christine Blasey Ford blames it on Justice Kavanaugh?

Things must be going great for Biden to have to dig so far in the past to make up a scandal.

#26 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-20 03:04 PM | Reply

Things must be going great for Biden to have to dig so far in the past to make up a scandal.

Visiturd sounds disappointed that Biden hasn't been able to match the demented orange pedo's 15% unemployment rate.

#27 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2023-03-20 03:15 PM | Reply

"At this point, what difference does it make?"
-- Hillary "Eberly" Clinton

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-20 03:16 PM | Reply

Like Nixon dealing with the North Vietnamese behind the elected POTUS Reagan's people were all about Hostages for arms, then took that money and bought cocaine to funnel into the USA to pay for the illegal wars in Central America. Not to be outdone, that fat, orange, grifting peadofile traitor ex POTUS went behind the backs of the elected officials in Afghanistan to give away the country to the nasty effing Taliban so he could say he did something for his Maggot supporters. I am sensing a theme with these right wing -------- who will do anything to steal their way into power. To put it bluntly the GOP is the party of treason and we can see this daily with the right wing congressmen and women supporting our enemy Russia.

#29 | Posted by Wildman62 at 2023-03-20 08:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Nowhere near as strong, patriotic, and intelligent as Trump.

USS Jimmy Carter is a Seawolf class submarine.

USS Lewzer is at anchor beside USS Richard M. Nixon.

And one of the the next Ford class carriers is going to be named after a black man... won't THAT be fun?

#30 | Posted by REDIAL at 2023-03-20 09:02 PM | Reply

It puts forth the exact same myth but with a different cast of characters being responsible. This time it's Casey, Chase, Reed and Rockefeller. No mention of Barnes or Connally.

First it was George Bush then they said it was Ollie North, then it was Casey, Chase, Reed and Rockefeller, and now it's Barnes turn to claim credit.

How long will we have to wait before Christine Blasey Ford blames it on Justice Kavanaugh?

Things must be going great for Biden to have to dig so far in the past to make up a scandal.

#26 | Posted by visitor_

More people admitting to the crime makes you LESS willing to believe the crime occurred?

Are you saying history should only be taught when everything is going perfectly? When is that exactly?
In truth, there will be NO time when you want your party's traitorous history to be discussed. Maybe if people stopped electing the party that did this, the world wouldnt be such a mess.

#31 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2023-03-20 09:24 PM | Reply

An analogy.

This is a bank robbery that no one can prove has occurred and five rival gangs are either suspected of or taking credit for it.

But it's good story and you want to believe it. Who cares if it really happened.

#32 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-21 01:13 PM | Reply

"Who cares if it really happened."

From Eberly's lips to your ears.

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-21 01:14 PM | Reply

This is a confusing thread for people, clearly.

Just read the ------ up posts for proof.

And it's obvious the reason.

It's because people are making Carter the victim. Not the hostages.

If you'd get square with that, then the criminality and lack of morality is obvious.

But if you really are so ------ in the head as to believe Jimmy Carter was the victim of this, then well.....you're a moron.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 01:24 PM | Reply

"It's because people are making Carter the victim. Not the hostages."

Democracy is the victim.
So is American foreign policy, when it gets conducted off-the-books by Republicans.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-21 01:25 PM | Reply

"It's because people are making Carter the victim. Not the hostages."

The hostages were victims for the additional few months they remained in capitivity, so Reagan could announce their release on the day of his inauguration.

You were what, eight years old at the time? I bet you loved it. We all loved it. But we should now have sufficient awareness to understand that we were being manipulated by cynical politicians.

Some of us have decided not to align ourselves with the party that did that to us.
Some of us haven't.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-21 01:28 PM | Reply

"It's because people are making Carter the victim"

Are you saying he wasn't one of the victims in this?

FFS, there was a conspiracy to subvert American foreign policy in regard to hostages. That's got to be hella illegal.

And what answer do you think Carter's team was giving him as to why the Iraqis wouldn't accept better and better offers?

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-03-21 01:37 PM | Reply

I know a lot of really good people I wouldn't vote for if the fan for president.

#12 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Carter was probably the best and certainly the most honest President of the last 50 years. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of really BAD people that you HAVE voted for.

It's because people are making Carter the victim. Not the hostages.

#34 | POSTED BY EBERLY

The hostages were victims of a longer detainment. An egregious wrong by the Reagan campaign. But the real victim of this was the U.S. It is not hard to make the case that America and the World would be in a better place today if Carter had won a second term.

#38 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2023-03-21 02:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

-Are you saying he wasn't one of the victims in this?

Not compared to the hostages he wasn't. It's an insult to compare Carter losing an election to a hostage who was used as fodder to win an election.

A career politician gets sent home 4 years earlier than he might have been, implying that there is a good chance he would have won had that not happened. Regardless, that's nothing compared to being a hostage.

#39 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 02:34 PM | Reply

"the World would be in a better place today if Carter had won a second term."

If and maybe.

#40 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 02:41 PM | Reply

The corollary to this rumor is the fact that the Carter administration was desperately negotiating in secret with the Iranians to secure the hostage release as an "October Surprise".

Offering cash (pallets-of-cash), weapons, reversal of sanctions, anything for their release before the election. All of it against stated policy and would have been unpopular if made known to the public.

Turns out Jimmy WAS offering to pay cash bribes for hostages, contrary to common sense and US policy.

#41 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-21 02:42 PM | Reply

" Not compared to the hostages he wasn't."

I wasn't asking for comparison.

" Carter losing an election ... "

I wasn't talking about Carter's ability to run for office. I was talking about Carter's ability to negotiate for hostages.

How much time did Carter have to waste in his effort because conspirators were engaged in partisan sabotage?

#42 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-03-21 02:48 PM | Reply

"It's an insult to compare Carter losing an election to a hostage who was used as fodder to win an election."

How so?
The election affected hundreds of millions of Americans.
Being a hostage affects one pesron and their family.

Obviously -- painfully obviously -- the election is a much bigger historical event than some hostages being taken.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-21 02:52 PM | Reply

"Turns out Jimmy WAS offering to pay cash bribes for hostages"

Well, if that doesn't exonerate the saboteurs, nothing does.

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-03-21 02:52 PM | Reply

-How much time did Carter have to waste in his effort because conspirators were engaged in partisan sabotage?

I don't know. Is that quantified in any of these stories or testimony from folks who were involved?

#45 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 02:54 PM | Reply

The corollary to this rumor is the fact that the Carter administration was desperately negotiating in secret with the Iranians to secure the hostage release

Why do you believe he would need to negotiate the hostage release in secret?

He was the president of the United States, it was his obligation to negotiate the release of the hostages.

Visitard, you got nothing but conspiracies and QANonsense.

Go back to the nooner where you belong.

#46 | Posted by ClownShack at 2023-03-21 02:55 PM | Reply

-Turns out Jimmy WAS offering to pay cash bribes for hostages, contrary to common sense and US policy.

If that's true then fine but it still doesn't excuse the attempts to go behind his back and ask them to hold off releasing the hostages.

#47 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 02:56 PM | Reply

Same GOP effort as Nixon secretly sending Anna Chennault to sabotage the Vietnam Peace Talks:

When a Candidate Conspired With a Foreign Power to Win An Election

It took decades to unravel Nixon's sabotage of Vietnam peace talks. Now, the full story can be told.

www.politico.com

#48 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2023-03-21 02:58 PM | Reply

-The corollary to this rumor is the fact that the Carter administration was desperately negotiating in secret with the Iranians to secure the hostage release as an "October Surprise".

It's not offensive to me that Carter was trying to get the hostages released AND win a re-election at the same time.

Does that offend anyone else? a 2-fer?

#49 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 02:58 PM | Reply

". Is that quantified in any of these stories or testimony from folks who were involved?"

Gee...do you think it's a number GREATER THAN ZERO? You know...because a President has soooooo much time to waste.

What if you worked an entire month on a project, just to be told it never existed in the first place? Funny joke, right?

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-03-21 03:00 PM | Reply

If that's true then fine but it still doesn't excuse the attempts to go behind his back and ask them to hold off releasing the hostages.
#47 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Eberly,
You excuse it every day you're a Republican.

#51 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-03-21 03:02 PM | Reply

America and the World would be in a better place today if Carter had won a second term.
#38 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT

100%

Regan let Goldman Sachs run the country for 8 years.

#52 | Posted by ClownShack at 2023-03-21 03:03 PM | Reply

I'm sure a lot of them were pissed off.

"had carter won"

he got friggin slaughtered in that election. No way of knowing if the hostage thing would have changed the results.

#53 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 03:06 PM | Reply

-Regan let Goldman Sachs run the country for 8 years.

Yeah, they tried to get their name on that airport too...but they couldn't get it done.

#54 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 03:12 PM | Reply

This is a bank robbery that no one can prove has occurred and five rival gangs are either suspected of or taking credit for it.

#32 | POSTED BY VISITOR

If five rival gangs are suspected of or taking credit for it, one would reasonably deduce it indeed happened, no? The GOP has to keep pulling dirty underhanded ----, if not outright breaking the law, to stay in power. What does that tell you about their qualifications?

#55 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2023-03-21 03:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

he got friggin slaughtered in that election.

How dare he put solar panels on the White House!!!

#56 | Posted by ClownShack at 2023-03-21 03:14 PM | Reply

Actually the best argument that the hostage release delay made the difference in the election is the fact they did it.

The Reagan campaign knew that was dirty business and the stakes were high so they must have felt it was worth it.

#57 | Posted by eberly at 2023-03-21 03:21 PM | Reply

#55 | POSTED BY EL_BUSCADOR What do the America hating Iranians say? Do they confirm this story which would have been humiliatingly embarrassing to Reagan, not to mention impeachment worthy?

#58 | Posted by visitor_ at 2023-03-21 06:38 PM | Reply