Fiasco: Iran-Contra – Episode 6: Fault Lines

Overview

In Episode 6 of Fiasco, titled "Fault Lines," host Leon Nayfak delves deep into the intricate web of the Iran-Contra scandal, unraveling the political, personal, and procedural ramifications that threatened to destabilize Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Through firsthand accounts, expert testimonies, and detailed analysis, the episode captures the essence of a pivotal moment in American history, highlighting the scandal's impact on key figures and the nation's political landscape.

1. The Fallout Begins: Personal Consequences

The episode opens with the harrowing account of Robert “Bud” McFarlane, a central figure in the Iran-Contra affair. Following the scandal's exposure, McFarlane grapples with intense personal turmoil.

• Depression and Desperation

  McFarlane reflects on his mental state, stating, “if you can't turn things around, maybe you can atone and I won't develop for you the nature of depression and how it can worsen and lead to a cycle of decline. And yet that was what was happening” [00:44].

• Attempted Suicide

  On February 8, 1987, overwhelmed by guilt and despair, McFarlane attempted suicide by overdosing on Valium. “Around midnight on February 8, 1987, Bud McFarlane swallowed roughly 30 Valium tablets” [06:07].

• Search for Redemption

  Determined to salvage Reagan's administration, McFarlane authored a memo outlining policy goals he believed could refocus the administration’s efforts. “I wrote down what ought to be done in four areas where we would be taking an initiative of importance to our country” [04:35].

2. Legislative and Investigative Actions

As the scandal intensified, both Congress and the Independent Counsel stepped in to investigate the Iran-Contra operations.

• Congressional Inquiries

  Both the House and Senate formed committees dedicated to examining the affair. The Senate approved a bipartisan committee overwhelmingly, “adopted by a margin of 416 to 2” [06:55].

• Independent Counsel’s Role

  Lawrence Walsh spearheaded a criminal investigation to identify illegal activities tied to Iran-Contra. “Unlike Congress, the Independent Counsel was pursuing a criminal probe intended to identify any illegal acts that may have been committed” [07:16].

• Tower Commission Formation

  Appointed by President Reagan, the Tower Commission comprised former Senator John Tower, Brent Scowcroft, and Edmund Muskie, aiming to identify failures within the National Security Council. “Their job was to find out what had gone wrong in the White House and then share their findings with the public” [07:45].

3. The Rise and Unfolding of the Tower Commission Report

Bud McFarlane’s hospitalization led to significant developments in the investigation.

• McFarlane’s Testimony

  During his hospital stay, McFarlane was interviewed by the Tower Commission regarding the pre-approval of arms sales. “When he was finished, McFarlane says that he submitted the memo to the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of State” [04:35].

• Report Findings

  The Tower Commission’s extensive 300-page report criticized President Reagan’s management and oversight. “Tower said it was his job to watch what they were doing and rein them in” [13:11].

• Reagan’s Response

  In a pivotal speech, Reagan acknowledged inaccuracies in his initial statements and accepted responsibility for the administration's failings. “A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not” [14:37].

4. Congressional Hearings: The Media Spectacle

The hearings became a national obsession, particularly with the emergence of Oliver North as a central figure.

• Oliver North’s Testimony

  North's appearance captivated the nation, transforming him into an instant celebrity. “Oliver north has become the hottest ticket in town” [08:42]. His demeanor and military background garnered significant public support, leading to what the media dubbed “Ollie Mania.”

  Notable moments include North's defiance and his portrayal as a dedicated patriot:

  • “I was simply a staff member with a demonstrated ability to get the job done. I reported directly to Mr. McFarland and to Admiral Poindexter.” [39:42].

• Fawn Hall’s Shredding Party

  Fawn Hall testified about her role in destroying documents, introducing the term “shredding party” into the national lexicon. “Fawn hall told how she altered and shredded key documents as secretary to Lt. Col. Oliver north at the White House” [26:39].

• John Poindexter’s Testimony

  Poindexter asserted that he did not inform Reagan about the diversion of funds, invoking Harry Truman’s principle of accountability: “The buck stops here with me” [45:06].

5. Public Perception and Media Frenzy

The hearings not only fueled political debates but also reshaped public opinion and media narratives.

• Public Support for North

  Despite the investigations, Oliver North amassed substantial public support. Surveys indicated:

  • 44% view North as a patriot and hero [35:10].
  • 48% believe North is being harassed by congressional panels [35:10].

• Media’s Role

  The media propelled North into the spotlight, with extensive coverage and even merchandise celebrating him. Commentators noted the stark contrast between North’s charismatic public persona and the serious nature of the hearings.

• Impact on Committee Members

  The overwhelming public support for North influenced committee members to soften their questioning, deviating from their initial rigorous approach. “The deluge of calls and letters had an immediate effect on the committee members line of questioning” [38:07].

6. Conclusion: The Aftermath and Political Ramifications

As the hearings concluded, the investigation’s outcomes varied across different committees and political lines.

• Congressional Reports

  The joint House and Senate committees produced a 690-page majority report critical of the White House’s actions, highlighting “secrecy, deception, and a disdain for law” [48:44]. However, a minority of Republicans, including Dick Cheney, contested these findings, branding the investigation as a “witch hunt” [49:23].

• Impact on Key Figures

  Vice President George H.W. Bush emerged relatively unscathed, with the committees finding no substantial evidence linking him to the diversion of funds. As Bush announced his candidacy for president shortly after, the scandal's political fallout significantly influenced the upcoming elections. “By the time Congress wrapped up its work, there was one politician besides Ronald Reagan who remained unscathed” [50:14].

• Legacy of Iran-Contra

  The scandal left an indelible mark on American politics, illustrating the complexities of covert operations and executive authority. It underscored the fragile interplay between governmental branches and the profound impact of personal accountability in public office.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Robert McFarlane [04:15]:

  “Yet I still had this foolish, I think, belief that we shouldn't close down the government with a scandal and preoccupation with it when you had other things that still needed to be done.”

• John Tower [13:25]:

  “The President clearly didn't understand. And the President of the United States is described here generally as a man who just simply was not very much in control of the foreign policy apparatus of his administration.”

• John Neilds [16:36]:

  “I don't think it has an awful lot to do with answering the question of whether this was a shocking and really serious breakdown in the way our government functioned. That's what I thought this was about.”

• Oliver North [39:42]:

  “I was simply a staff member with a demonstrated ability to get the job done. I reported directly to Mr. McFarland and to Admiral Poindexter.”

• John Poindexter [45:06]:

  “I think it's an important point here, the buck stops here with me. I made the decision. I felt that I had the authority to do it.”

Conclusion

Episode 6 of Fiasco meticulously dissects the Iran-Contra scandal, offering listeners an immersive exploration of its causes, key players, and enduring legacy. Through compelling narratives and insightful analysis, Leon Nayfak presents a comprehensive picture of a moment when political ambition collided with ethical boundaries, leading to one of the most controversial episodes in American presidential history.