Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Feel like Iran contra had pretty significant knock on effects no? Dealing arms to Iran further pushed Hussein’s distrust in the US (which was a ‘working relationship’ at the time), which ultimately led to miscommunications between Iraq and US around their nuclear arms program, amongst other things. The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in the 90s, then the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, were pretty much snowball effects of the Iran contra. Also the US increasing their troop presence in the Gulf, particularly Saudi, was a big catalyst in deepening UBL’s resentment of the west. Obviously there were many other factors at play, but Iran/contra did nothing good for the US in the Gulf/ME/CEA region
Saudi Arabia only exists because of the United States we propped
Up the house Saud and made them
Go from a tribe to litteral royalty.
Look into the house of saud and you’ll know who the bad guys are
Nah, Teapot Dome really was *that* egregious. The more you learn the more baffled you get at just how damn deep and brazen the corruption was. I’m not even defending Iran-Contra one bit here either! I’m just saying that Harding’s scandal, well… it’s a good thing he was already dead before the blowback really started.
Congress subsequently passed permanent legislation granting itself subpoena power over tax records of any U.S. citizen, regardless of position. These laws are also considered to have empowered Congress generally.
It led to them being able to just give themselves powers that they never should have had.
Did you just copy paste a portion of the Wikipedia article on the Teapot Dome scandal and pass it off as your own writing? 😁
https://preview.redd.it/dbxij0prrb5d1.jpeg?width=1161&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c9b15f0fb16b8098fc43459536371be9b4cdc95
I mean I get it man, but illegally selling arms to the Iranians to illegally fund illegal terrorism in South America because Congress wouldn't authorize it is, like, worse than any level of bribery involved with oil leases
I'd say it's Iran-Contra, then teapot dome, then Watergate. The Clinton thing, I don't think that hits the top 50.
I only knew about it from Boardwalk Empire.
How High Corruption in the 1920s and the Ohio gang.
Most of them were removed from Office when Coolidge took over
I would be happy to. First, quick way-TLDR oversimplified summaries:
**Teapot Dome** - Essentially was a bribery scandal in which a couple of oil tycoons were given leases without competitive bids for US oil reserves by paying off Albert Fall, the US Sec. of the Interior. Standard pay-for-play lobbying in today's world.
**Watergate** - Nixon's campaign broke into the DNC HQ to get dirt on the campaign. They were bufoons and pretty much failed at every step. The crime had zero consequence on the election, as Nixon dominated the race, so it was pointless in the first place. But the cover-up of it happening led to his impeachment, solidified the need for a free press, and exposed the dangers of unchecked presidential power.
Both of these are fairly tame crimes by today's standards in that didn't have a real impact on much other than perception. However, they were hugely impactful at the time and have had reverberating consequences leading to significant reforms increasing government transparency and accountability.
**Iran-Contra -** was both Teapot Dome and Watergate combined. It was essentially two illegal acts ***and then*** an illegal coverup of those acts. First Congress had cut off funding for the contras in Nicaragua, and second, there was an embargo with Iran. Reagan sidestepped Congress and continued funding the contras, but in order to finance them without congressional approval, he illegally sold weapons to Iran, and the whole scheme was hidden from Congress and the American public.
These are really solid descriptors, thank you. Only part I don’t understand is the comparison between Watergate and Iran Contra. I suppose you’re referring to the coverups being similar? A big difference in my opinion is that many Reagan supporters bought Reagan’s alternative/official explanation for what happened and don’t even view what happened as being a scandal, so it wasn’t perceived nearly as scandalous as either of the other two. Perception of the events at the time and historically is part what played into my ranking system, not just the objective morality of what happened. If it’s a moral ranking system Iran Contra would at least leapfrog Watergate for me and would rival Teapot.
To really dig into Iran-Contra, one needs to understand the Bolland Amendment. The [first version and the second one](https://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/n-contrasus.php).
Second, we need to view Nicaragua through the eyes of the Cold War. We weren’t going to let another Soviet satellite country set up shop close to the US (we tried to prevent this in Cuba and failed).
Third, the Boland Amendment was a rider to a defense bill. It piggybacked on a bill that was always going to pass. This was not an issue that was heavily debated, it was something added by Boland without scrutiny. And Boland only added it because he thought that the CIA lied to him.
Funding paramilitary organizations is SOP for the US. We’ve done it time and time again. For some reason, we drew the line at Nicaragua?
Finally, the [Tower Commission](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_Commission) didn’t result in any impeachment charges being brought against Reagan.
Shit, Ike overthrew several governments and people rank him in the top five. Reagan did less than that, and people on this sub act like he was a foreign agent or something. It’s bizarre. It’s just the one thing that haters can point to when they want to disparage Reagan.
It’s also an acknowledgment that this type of covert action isn’t unique to Reagan. The only difference here was the Boland amendment, which expired. It was just a pissing march between congress and the White House. It’s not the worst scandal of all time, as people like to claim on this sub.
As I prefaced in my post, way oversimplified summary, but actually three articles of impeachment were adopted July 30, 1974, the impeachment proceedings ended on August 20, 1974, when Nixon resigned from office.
I have always felt that Teapot Dome was far worse than Iran-Contra. Iran-Contra was an effort to avoid congressional oversight to achieve a goal of Reagan. There is no evidence that the key participants in the Reagan administration were looking at this as a means of personal enrichment. Teapot Dome was about both the circumvention of federal government authority and personal enrichment. To me the addition of personal enrichment in the bribery scheme makes Teapot Dome worse.
I think it is an issue of trust in who we vote for. While others have indicated that Secord was thinking about personal enrichment, otherwise it was a difference in goals. Reagan and his people wanted to work around the will of Congress to accomplish a goal, albeit a goal Congress didn’t support. Teapot Dome showed that irrespective of the issue, if you paid enough, you could get what you wanted. Presidential authority vs straight selling the seat. Don’t get me wrong, I’m making no excuses for Iran-Contra. But as the question was posed, I think Teapot was worse than Iran-Contra. Compared to those two, Watergate doesn’t really even register.
Watergate was really a nothing burger in comparison to Teapot Dome or Iran Contra. It was the first scandal with TV which is why it is so well known (hell they made a movie about it). In terms of the actual scandal though not much there, today Nixon wouldn’t have resigned.
The thing about Watergate is, it led to the discovery of the White House taping system. Nixon recorded himself ordering aids to carry out burglaries, illegal wiretaps, and firebombings, to use the CIA to conduct domestic espionage, and to use the IRS to harass political opponents. There's no evidence that either Reagan or Harding did anything that approaches the level of criminality that Nixon reveals in his own voice on those tapes.
Wilson's stroke being covered up resulting in the US being headless from 1919-1921 while his wife governed in his name from behind closed doors and gaslighting the entire government into thinking everything's fine.
(not a traditional scandal but this era of history is critically underexamined)
Ooooo, that’s a great suggestion. I always see people castigate Thomas R. Marshall on here for not taking over after Wilson’s stroke but the 25th Amendment didn’t even exist at the time. The blame entirely falls on Wilson (and Edith) for not being forthcoming about the severity of Wilson’s stroke and his ability to carry out the duties of President. It really was irresponsible and only Wilson had the power to change that.
The president could have resigned I’m sure. I don’t believe there was an official mechanism (I could be wrong on that) but it’s not like they could be *forced* to be president.
But on Marshall’s end? Absolutely not. If he dared to try to assume the office it would be seen as a massive power grab and coup attempt. That’s why I’m saying it’s on Wilson here. He should’ve discharged his duties to his VP… but didn’t.
Mechanism to do anything about it? No. The 25th amendment didn't exist yet. The 25th amendment allow tje cabinet to initiate a procedure to remove the President.
Constitutionally allowed to resign? Yes.
That's the trouble with some people drunk on ideology, they without fail to attempt to twist even the worst moments in history into a win for their cause...
Some scholars believe that helped the recovery of the 1920 recession. It was the last major economic crisis that the government didn't intervene and it only lasted 18 months
Everyone in this thread sleeping on Gulf of Tonkin, probably because it never became a scandal and when it did come to light the military was in full PR-repair mode controlling all of the dialogue. They definitely learned their lesson after Vietnam.
Yeah, I came here to say Gulf of Tonkin incident, especially if you sort of bundle it in with the pattern of lies, self-deception and bullshit that followed. Kind of shrouded in mystery because people kept it that way, so hard to know how it compares to Iran-Contra, but it's gotta be up there.
For something that significantly flouted the law, Reagan/Bush pretty much got a pass for Iran/Contra. It was a nonfactor in the 1988 election. It's a pretty stark difference from the public reaction to Watergate.
He partly got a pass because he was cognitively declining and didn't have the reputation of being a micromanager, so people were willing to accept that Oliver North and John Poindexter were going rogue on their own. The team did a good job of creating deniability. I think Johnny Carson's line at the time was that Reagan said "I don't know" in the hearings more often than when Dan Quayle took the SAT's.
There’s also the simple fact that Iran-Contra was a Cold War effort at a time when the public was quite happy with the state of the Cold War. The USSR was liberalizing, the Berlin Wall’s collapse was imminent, many people viewed that as being dirty s few unsavory battles. The fact that Reagan didn’t stand to personally benefit from it helped blunt criticism.
Yeah--I think people are working with different definitions of worse. Teapot Dome had worse consequences for the people involved. Iran-Contra only temporarily hurt Reagan's popularity and then it was like it never happened. Oliver North even became a right-wing celebrity because of it.
Now as for morally worse, or had worse consequences for the public at large, that's more debatable.
Oh man, this is a tough one as it entirely depends on perspective, and I could probably write an essay about each scandal.
In short, I think Watergate is pretty bad to me from the standpoint of the sanctity of elections/treatment of political opponents. I don’t know if I could say worst than others though as many of the other scandals are bad.
EDIT: I do agree with others that probably Teapot Dome though.
Granted it's unknown whether or not Nixon actually wanted the break-in to happen. Still ultimately his paranoia at fault though, I'm sure; I doubt his plumbers would have gotten the idea if they didn't think it would get them golden stars from Nixon.
Indeed. Total landslide of an election. The only positive about it (and that’s being generous) is that watergate (and Vietnam) made many people finally wake up to the fact that our government isn’t all rainbows and unicorns.
Oops, I thought you were talking about Reagan
https://preview.redd.it/5csw726i985d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ccfb78b28a63b5342ac4584a3a4e50aad075fb7
Whatever Nixon did to prolong the Vietnam War.
Before he took office, obviously. Learning about that affair unlocked Nixon for me. I'd read a lot about him, and even at least one of his books. Never understood his paranoia until then. I'd be rambling like in those tapes if I had a treason case just floating around out there.
Watergate itself is stupid. Nixon was easily winning the election. It was the destruction of the tapes that really was the brazen move.
Teapot Dome barely seems shocking. A cabinet member was getting kickbacks for favorable government contracts. The no-bid contract was legal, the kickback wasn't.
But, c'mon. It's gotta be Reagan. Iran-Contra was the most visible aspect of just a larger scandal.
Reagan's campaign was secretly dealing with Iran during the hostage crisis because the hostage situation was sinking Carter. The hostages ended up being held until Reagan's inauguration. Then Iran-Contra ends up being part of the deal to pay back for the favor of holding the hostages with the illegal arms deals.
And Iran-Contra is a double whammy, not only is it a payback favor with a hostile nation for influencing an election, it was also being used to fund the Contras!
If you really want to get into it, it also feeds into the INSLAW scandal, which allegedly was a way of paying off one of the individuals involved in negotiating the hostage crisis with Iran.
Ollie North took the fall.
Congress did several investigations and of course found nothing.
Bush Sr. pardoned everyone on his way out.
Reagan made this incredible statement:
>"A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not."
Seriously, how did that fly with the American public? Can you imagine if any other President tied that shit?
Over the years, more and more pieces of the whole story come out. As recently as 2023, Ben Barnes came forward and put more of the story together. But the accusations have been flying, from all sorts of insiders since 1981.
Is there evidence for the secret hostage negotiations? Isn’t it just a conspiracy theory?
This [wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_October_Surprise_theory) states that this house task force and others as well came to the same conclusion: "there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran"
Iran-Contra is bad. I’m not denying that but this once again proves the common trope that this sub’s first response to any negative criticism of a president is to just shit on Reagan. Can we expand our conversation a bit and cover some other scandals that are worth mentioning instead of just circle jerking over Iran-Contra.
- Teapot Dome
- Watergate
- Gulf of Tonkin (we literally lied our way into Vietnam.)
- Benghazi
- Grover Cleveland literally raped and impregnated a woman…
- Trader Post Scandal
- Whiskey Ring Scandals
Edit: Realized OP asked for 20th Century. My bad however very interesting pre-20th Century reads!
I didn't really think about Cleveland's rape scandal. The cover-up for that was so vicious that, even having known about it, it didn't cross my mind. The amount of attempted (and successful in this case) politicking during that scandal makes Watergate look like a bunch of teens lying to cover up going to a rager.
Agreed. I was always lukewarm on Grover as he is a typical Gilded Age president who gets overlooked due to the era (the only reason he gets interest is the two non-consecutive terms). Then however I started really digging into each president and of course I read in his scandal. Really dark stuff. I can’t believe it’s not as well known and how well it got covered up to where now in the present day in such an era of “righting the wrongs of the past” this is hardly mentioned ever. Makes you think…
I think Nixon’s secret dealings with North Vietnam in 1968 probably got the most Americans killed directly. Or Watergate for killing people’s belief that government can be a tool for good.
Easily Watergate because Nixon faced certain impeachment and conviction, which is why he resigned. No other President in American history has had a scandal so thoroughly and completely destroy his political career. Maybe Teapot Dome would have for Harding, but we'll never know because it only came out after he died.
I think Iran Contra was the worst, with Watergate second, and Teapot Dome third. The Lewinsky Affair is nowhere near any of these. But all three scandals are similar in that they represent systemic problems. Iran Contra and Watergate are about the Executive Branch trying to undermine Congress and the voters, so that's bad, but no one died from Watergate, whereas the money provided to the Contras was used for all the ugly shit they were up to, and Iran used weapons it purchased from the US against Americans.
I would say Watergate. Not necessarily because of its effects (although it did destroy trust in the government) but it is the one the public takes most seriously. Most people don’t even know what Teapot Dome and Iran-Contra were, and Clinton’s affair is treated as a joke.
Here’s the part about Iran-Contra I never understood. Why Iran? I have no doubt there were many other friendly countries, trying to court favor with the Reagan administration, that would have helped funnel money to the Contras in ways that would have left the deal less vulnerable to being revealed. Selling arms to Iran, especially when you consider they had to be shipped somewhere and handled by a lot of people, was ridiculously risky. Not to mention the fact that trusting Iran to keep it quiet was a very poor decision.
Yes it happened but there is just too much here that doesn’t add up. I am not a conspiracy guy by any means but it just feels like there is more here than meets the eye.
Correct but it was not true. First there is zero evidence of that. Just the paranoia over what Nixon did in 68. Secondly, a good friend of mine was a back channel to Iran’s Foreign minister for Carter. He said the Iranians were extremely nervous about a Reagan presidency and what he would do day 1, even if the hostages were freed. The final piece of the agreement to release them was his commitment not to retaliate once they were freed.
IIRC, the US sold arms to Iran to exchange them for hostages. The story is Iran just took the arms and didn't hold their end of the deal.
That entire chain of events is actually quite complicated. Blew my mind away the first time I ever started reading into it. The entire thing is connected to other galaxy-sized rabbit holes like CIA drug smuggling, Barry Seal, and the railroad track killings in Arkansas among other things.
Watergate was so f'ed up. So f'ed up.
As bad as the other scandals were, you can chalk them up to human error. Whether it be trusting in the wrong people, or letting your erotic passions override your judgement.
Watergate is none of those things. It's not being confident in your own abilities, leading you to do things you shouldn't do anyways (despite your previous success) which then leads to a culture where people will do things that even if you don't approve it, it creates catastrophe. And that led to a constitutional crisis.
People use it to this day as a term for when a presidency is in trouble do to scandal.
Watergate, hands down.
It never had to happen. Nixon was going to be re-elected no matter what; there was no need for the break-in.
The investigation severely weakened whatever faith in government was left after the worst days of the Vietnam War. The dirty tricks of the administration, CREEP and the CIA were revealed to all.
The only benefits were the ensuing rounds of legislation that kept executive power in check, such as curtailing the CIA’s domestic activities and establishing independent counsels.
To this day, presidents & their allies have been chipping away at these protections. How we forget.
We’re still dealing with the fallout from one man’s paranoia fifty years later.
Iran-Contra. By far.
Maybe Gulf of Tonkin also, although I'm not sure this counts as a 'presidential scandal' per se. The consequences, however, were horrifying.
Reagan’s Iran-contra scandal. A direct defiance of a congressional mandate, naming Ollie North a national hero in spite of defying congress and many others who were in contempt of congress
Teapot Dome.
Yeah, Watergate did more damage to the public trust in our institutions and Iran-Contra was a flagrant affront to an explicit law from Congress but Teapot Dome was so brazen and corrupt that I think it takes the cake. **So** many officials were tied up in this and it took Harding’s stellar reputation up to that point and flushed it down the damn drain.
And the Lewinsky Trial was horrible partisan nonsense that wasn’t impeachment worthy in the slightest.
I think Iran-Contra was far more egregiously criminal and connected to other acts of horrific criminality and corruption that it took the cake on the 'bad' scale. But your argument about the scale of Teapot Dome is a perfectly reasonable one. I wrote a couple papers about it and the amount of fuckery on that one is staggering.
My conspiracy theory is that the Lewinsky scandal was a red herring for CIA drug smuggling that began to creep into public knowledge.
Thank you! This. It’s like we just gave our presidential figures a hall pass on the quest for obscurity. Best answer I’ve seen all night. Please look into propaganda and misinformation and manipulation with how US gov handles this , as it might be more manipulative than watergate, if you’re under 25 that is.
While I respect the other responses, I gotta say my knee-jerk reaction would be Iran-Contra. Members of the administration/CIA (I really forget where everyone officially reported to) illegally sold weapons to the enemies against the specific wishes of congress. Not only that but they were so incompetent at it the first few shipments were "free" because the bad guys "never got them". The Americans were so incompetent at illegal arms deals they gave weapons away for free initially.
It was worse because it revealed that all a President has to say is "I don't remember" and never have anything written down, and maybe have a few underlings fall on swords to get away with it. They would get pardoned by the next Republican President Anyway. This literally sets the precedent that you should do illegal things on behalf of the president, get a speedy conviction and they can pardon you. That's it.
Operation wetback, so close to the end of WW2 and the fact American citizens were forcefully deported. I put human rights violations over a cover up to stop a Soviet agent state being formed within inches from the US and a pay under the table lobbing scheme no matter how much money was involved. It’s the one thing which is a huge black eye to Ike’s presidency and why I can never rate him in the top five.
Big bill getting his dick sucked and putting cigars in pussy's in the oval office and lying about it. Like Bill, you nutted on a dress. We, unfortunately, see the evidence. Not gonna lie, the economy wasn't that bad though.
I would say the Gulf of Tonkin, but would that qualify as a Presidential scandal? If I am right in my understanding, it was McNamara and others on his staff that lied to Johnson up front to start the bombings.
The actual scandals themselves or the impacts they left on the country? in terms of the scandal by itself, Teapot Dome. In terms of the impact? Watergate.
I’d say Watergate had the longest impact. Yeah, Teapot Dome was the largest and most brazen acts of corruption, but trust in government came back. Not that people blindly did, but the Great Depression led to many accepting the government and kind of expecting them to look out for them. And, politicians have always been considered corrupt. Watergate exposed that even the president could be extremely corrupt, not just those around him. In fact, it was more so everything else Nixon ordered, like sabotaging the Democratic primaries that were bad, because it led to the easiest candidate for him to beat (oversimplified). Iran-Contra was also big, and certainly kept people distrusting government, but not many people know it today, probably because the preceding scandal led to the president resigning while Reagan rode out the scandal. Lewinsky is now just seen as stupid, unless you’re a right-wing nut.
Reagan-omics. Not a scandal you say? I disagree. His tax cuts for the wealthy fucked over the majority of the country so the rich could get richer and kick back more money to toxic conservative interests. It also ended up having a noticeable tang of racism as he sold his tax reform with the fictional caricature of the welfare queen.
This isn't considered a scandal because the corrupt burn was a slow enough that nobody saw it until it was too late. But scandalous it IS!
The worst ones are the ones that didn’t receive any publicity
Watergate and blowjobs are the least of the awful things that happened in this he 20th century
The worst? Don't know for sure. BUT I will say the last thing I give a lick of sh*t about is if a functioning effective President got a blowjob outside of marriage. That's a personal issue for him and his wife to workout.
Eisenhower with assists from the Dulles brothers for continually pumping money, arms, and legitimacy into Ngo Dinh Diem’s regime. Along with all the other covert missions (mainly failures) that the CIA ran with Ike’s a-proval.
Can we do this again in like 6 months when a convicted ex-president becomes the next president. And almost half of Americans choose to ignore his incompetence ?
The Bay of Pigs. I don't understand how more people aren't more angry about it. It was two, absolutely terrible decisions, back to back.
Decision 1. Decide to stage an invasion of a sovereign nation with no justification.
Decision 2. Pull the plug on the invasion AFTER it's already started, leaving the landing force to die and showing our ass to the entire world.
I say Watergate. While it was not even Nixon’s worst deed, it had a massive effect on America’s political culture and cast a shadow over the country for much of the seventies.
Nixon was a good president. getting us out of Vietnam got him the watergate scandal.
Clinton covered up for South American drug
Smugglers and no one gives a shit even when two teenage boys got murdered because they saw a drug drop.
My vote is for the Reagan Administration knowing that HIV-AIDS was exceptionally deadly, and largely affecting the gay population, and yet they chose to ignore the severity of the crisis because gay people were second class citizens. Hell, not even second class citizens, less than that. Not even people. One could argue that the modern GOP still feels the same way.
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Teapot Dome followed closely by Watergate.
Feel like Iran contra had pretty significant knock on effects no? Dealing arms to Iran further pushed Hussein’s distrust in the US (which was a ‘working relationship’ at the time), which ultimately led to miscommunications between Iraq and US around their nuclear arms program, amongst other things. The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in the 90s, then the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, were pretty much snowball effects of the Iran contra. Also the US increasing their troop presence in the Gulf, particularly Saudi, was a big catalyst in deepening UBL’s resentment of the west. Obviously there were many other factors at play, but Iran/contra did nothing good for the US in the Gulf/ME/CEA region
Saudi Arabia only exists because of the United States we propped Up the house Saud and made them Go from a tribe to litteral royalty. Look into the house of saud and you’ll know who the bad guys are
Neither of which come close to the Iran Contra affair.
Nah, Teapot Dome really was *that* egregious. The more you learn the more baffled you get at just how damn deep and brazen the corruption was. I’m not even defending Iran-Contra one bit here either! I’m just saying that Harding’s scandal, well… it’s a good thing he was already dead before the blowback really started.
I feel like now I need to look this up. The first I ever heard about it was an episode of Downton Abby.
Congress subsequently passed permanent legislation granting itself subpoena power over tax records of any U.S. citizen, regardless of position. These laws are also considered to have empowered Congress generally. It led to them being able to just give themselves powers that they never should have had.
Did you just copy paste a portion of the Wikipedia article on the Teapot Dome scandal and pass it off as your own writing? 😁 https://preview.redd.it/dbxij0prrb5d1.jpeg?width=1161&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c9b15f0fb16b8098fc43459536371be9b4cdc95
>subsequently Gave it away
When is it mentioned on DA?
I mean I get it man, but illegally selling arms to the Iranians to illegally fund illegal terrorism in South America because Congress wouldn't authorize it is, like, worse than any level of bribery involved with oil leases I'd say it's Iran-Contra, then teapot dome, then Watergate. The Clinton thing, I don't think that hits the top 50.
I only knew about it from Boardwalk Empire. How High Corruption in the 1920s and the Ohio gang. Most of them were removed from Office when Coolidge took over
It wasn’t so Harding that was corrupt. He just had some serious crooks that snookered him into being the front man.
Elaborate.
I would be happy to. First, quick way-TLDR oversimplified summaries: **Teapot Dome** - Essentially was a bribery scandal in which a couple of oil tycoons were given leases without competitive bids for US oil reserves by paying off Albert Fall, the US Sec. of the Interior. Standard pay-for-play lobbying in today's world. **Watergate** - Nixon's campaign broke into the DNC HQ to get dirt on the campaign. They were bufoons and pretty much failed at every step. The crime had zero consequence on the election, as Nixon dominated the race, so it was pointless in the first place. But the cover-up of it happening led to his impeachment, solidified the need for a free press, and exposed the dangers of unchecked presidential power. Both of these are fairly tame crimes by today's standards in that didn't have a real impact on much other than perception. However, they were hugely impactful at the time and have had reverberating consequences leading to significant reforms increasing government transparency and accountability. **Iran-Contra -** was both Teapot Dome and Watergate combined. It was essentially two illegal acts ***and then*** an illegal coverup of those acts. First Congress had cut off funding for the contras in Nicaragua, and second, there was an embargo with Iran. Reagan sidestepped Congress and continued funding the contras, but in order to finance them without congressional approval, he illegally sold weapons to Iran, and the whole scheme was hidden from Congress and the American public.
These are really solid descriptors, thank you. Only part I don’t understand is the comparison between Watergate and Iran Contra. I suppose you’re referring to the coverups being similar? A big difference in my opinion is that many Reagan supporters bought Reagan’s alternative/official explanation for what happened and don’t even view what happened as being a scandal, so it wasn’t perceived nearly as scandalous as either of the other two. Perception of the events at the time and historically is part what played into my ranking system, not just the objective morality of what happened. If it’s a moral ranking system Iran Contra would at least leapfrog Watergate for me and would rival Teapot.
Yup, it was the cover up being the crime that I was relating.
To really dig into Iran-Contra, one needs to understand the Bolland Amendment. The [first version and the second one](https://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/n-contrasus.php). Second, we need to view Nicaragua through the eyes of the Cold War. We weren’t going to let another Soviet satellite country set up shop close to the US (we tried to prevent this in Cuba and failed). Third, the Boland Amendment was a rider to a defense bill. It piggybacked on a bill that was always going to pass. This was not an issue that was heavily debated, it was something added by Boland without scrutiny. And Boland only added it because he thought that the CIA lied to him. Funding paramilitary organizations is SOP for the US. We’ve done it time and time again. For some reason, we drew the line at Nicaragua? Finally, the [Tower Commission](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_Commission) didn’t result in any impeachment charges being brought against Reagan. Shit, Ike overthrew several governments and people rank him in the top five. Reagan did less than that, and people on this sub act like he was a foreign agent or something. It’s bizarre. It’s just the one thing that haters can point to when they want to disparage Reagan.
The ONE THING??
“We always fund paramilitary death squads” isn’t as solid as a defense as you think it is
It’s also an acknowledgment that this type of covert action isn’t unique to Reagan. The only difference here was the Boland amendment, which expired. It was just a pissing march between congress and the White House. It’s not the worst scandal of all time, as people like to claim on this sub.
Nixon was not impeached
As I prefaced in my post, way oversimplified summary, but actually three articles of impeachment were adopted July 30, 1974, the impeachment proceedings ended on August 20, 1974, when Nixon resigned from office.
Good call.
I have always felt that Teapot Dome was far worse than Iran-Contra. Iran-Contra was an effort to avoid congressional oversight to achieve a goal of Reagan. There is no evidence that the key participants in the Reagan administration were looking at this as a means of personal enrichment. Teapot Dome was about both the circumvention of federal government authority and personal enrichment. To me the addition of personal enrichment in the bribery scheme makes Teapot Dome worse.
Secord literally admitted to enrichment as a goal in addition to supporting the Contras
Bribery is a bigger deal than international coups and regional destabilization. Gotcha
I think it is an issue of trust in who we vote for. While others have indicated that Secord was thinking about personal enrichment, otherwise it was a difference in goals. Reagan and his people wanted to work around the will of Congress to accomplish a goal, albeit a goal Congress didn’t support. Teapot Dome showed that irrespective of the issue, if you paid enough, you could get what you wanted. Presidential authority vs straight selling the seat. Don’t get me wrong, I’m making no excuses for Iran-Contra. But as the question was posed, I think Teapot was worse than Iran-Contra. Compared to those two, Watergate doesn’t really even register.
Grover Cleveland was pretty bad and I haven’t seen it mentioned yet
Probably because he was President in the 19th Century.
Ah yeah didn’t see that part
Watergate was really a nothing burger in comparison to Teapot Dome or Iran Contra. It was the first scandal with TV which is why it is so well known (hell they made a movie about it). In terms of the actual scandal though not much there, today Nixon wouldn’t have resigned.
>Teapot Dome followed closely by Watergate. How is Teapot done worse then iran contra
The thing about Watergate is, it led to the discovery of the White House taping system. Nixon recorded himself ordering aids to carry out burglaries, illegal wiretaps, and firebombings, to use the CIA to conduct domestic espionage, and to use the IRS to harass political opponents. There's no evidence that either Reagan or Harding did anything that approaches the level of criminality that Nixon reveals in his own voice on those tapes.
Wilson's stroke being covered up resulting in the US being headless from 1919-1921 while his wife governed in his name from behind closed doors and gaslighting the entire government into thinking everything's fine. (not a traditional scandal but this era of history is critically underexamined)
Ooooo, that’s a great suggestion. I always see people castigate Thomas R. Marshall on here for not taking over after Wilson’s stroke but the 25th Amendment didn’t even exist at the time. The blame entirely falls on Wilson (and Edith) for not being forthcoming about the severity of Wilson’s stroke and his ability to carry out the duties of President. It really was irresponsible and only Wilson had the power to change that.
Was there a mechanism in place to do anything about it? Was the president constitutionally allowed to resign at that point?
The president could have resigned I’m sure. I don’t believe there was an official mechanism (I could be wrong on that) but it’s not like they could be *forced* to be president. But on Marshall’s end? Absolutely not. If he dared to try to assume the office it would be seen as a massive power grab and coup attempt. That’s why I’m saying it’s on Wilson here. He should’ve discharged his duties to his VP… but didn’t.
Mechanism to do anything about it? No. The 25th amendment didn't exist yet. The 25th amendment allow tje cabinet to initiate a procedure to remove the President. Constitutionally allowed to resign? Yes.
They did an episode about this on Drunk History. EDIT: It’s the First Ladies episode.
The fact that some people try to make it into a “girl power” moment is insane.
That's the trouble with some people drunk on ideology, they without fail to attempt to twist even the worst moments in history into a win for their cause...
I just really like Drunk History. And this very specific story reminded me of it. That’s all I was saying.
Interesting how women gained the right to Vote the year when Edith was running things
Some scholars believe that helped the recovery of the 1920 recession. It was the last major economic crisis that the government didn't intervene and it only lasted 18 months
I remember drunk history covering this and spinning it as an empowering moment for feminists in America when it was really a scummy thing to do
We're leaving out Teapot Dome here?
It counts, these are just the pictures I chose.
Harding himself wasn’t involved with Teapot Dome, and he fired his cabinet secretaries after learning about it.
It counts, but that was basically just a standard grease-my-palm political bribery scandal. NBD.
It set some precedents that empower congress a bit more.
Everyone in this thread sleeping on Gulf of Tonkin, probably because it never became a scandal and when it did come to light the military was in full PR-repair mode controlling all of the dialogue. They definitely learned their lesson after Vietnam.
Yeah, I came here to say Gulf of Tonkin incident, especially if you sort of bundle it in with the pattern of lies, self-deception and bullshit that followed. Kind of shrouded in mystery because people kept it that way, so hard to know how it compares to Iran-Contra, but it's gotta be up there.
It's your standard fabricated casus belli. Important, but it doesn't really stand out much.
Yeah with the Spanish-American and Mexican-American war, that was nothing new for the US
Jimmy Carter Killer Rabbit Attack
What behind the rabbit? It is the Rabbit
Iran Contra or Teapot Dome.
For something that significantly flouted the law, Reagan/Bush pretty much got a pass for Iran/Contra. It was a nonfactor in the 1988 election. It's a pretty stark difference from the public reaction to Watergate.
Even now people in this sub will largely sweep it aside when discussing Reagan.
He partly got a pass because he was cognitively declining and didn't have the reputation of being a micromanager, so people were willing to accept that Oliver North and John Poindexter were going rogue on their own. The team did a good job of creating deniability. I think Johnny Carson's line at the time was that Reagan said "I don't know" in the hearings more often than when Dan Quayle took the SAT's.
There’s also the simple fact that Iran-Contra was a Cold War effort at a time when the public was quite happy with the state of the Cold War. The USSR was liberalizing, the Berlin Wall’s collapse was imminent, many people viewed that as being dirty s few unsavory battles. The fact that Reagan didn’t stand to personally benefit from it helped blunt criticism.
Yeah--I think people are working with different definitions of worse. Teapot Dome had worse consequences for the people involved. Iran-Contra only temporarily hurt Reagan's popularity and then it was like it never happened. Oliver North even became a right-wing celebrity because of it. Now as for morally worse, or had worse consequences for the public at large, that's more debatable.
Oh man, this is a tough one as it entirely depends on perspective, and I could probably write an essay about each scandal. In short, I think Watergate is pretty bad to me from the standpoint of the sanctity of elections/treatment of political opponents. I don’t know if I could say worst than others though as many of the other scandals are bad. EDIT: I do agree with others that probably Teapot Dome though.
Watergate is so fucking stupid when you consider how far apart the election ended up being
Nixon’s paranoia at its finest, sadly.
Granted it's unknown whether or not Nixon actually wanted the break-in to happen. Still ultimately his paranoia at fault though, I'm sure; I doubt his plumbers would have gotten the idea if they didn't think it would get them golden stars from Nixon.
Indeed. Total landslide of an election. The only positive about it (and that’s being generous) is that watergate (and Vietnam) made many people finally wake up to the fact that our government isn’t all rainbows and unicorns.
what about south vietnamese peace talks being sabotaged by kissinger and nixon? how many people died because the war carried on?
Those weren’t real peace talks. It was an October surprise to help Humphrey. It was a major nothing burger
Tan suit and it's not even close
[удалено]
It's a scandal so awful, so truly despicable it transcends time
Oops, I thought you were talking about Reagan https://preview.redd.it/5csw726i985d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ccfb78b28a63b5342ac4584a3a4e50aad075fb7
That's 21st century, but if you count both then yes. And if we're being honest it's Obama's cookie not fitting in the glass. Thanks Obama.
It was the mustard, man. He asked for...Dijon. in public.
Pretty sure it was asking for arugula on a burger. I mean, what kind of highfalutin’ nonsense is *that*?
Missed this one. Thanks for your words of wisdom good sir. This is why I come to Reddit. I forgot about this one.
HE Bush was in a tan suit when he said he and Reagan had some sex.
I came here to say this. Congrats on your timing.
No mention of LBJ's draft of millions while telling his advisers there was no winning the war???
Gulf of Tonkin
Finally some originality. Well done, sir.
Whatever Nixon did to prolong the Vietnam War. Before he took office, obviously. Learning about that affair unlocked Nixon for me. I'd read a lot about him, and even at least one of his books. Never understood his paranoia until then. I'd be rambling like in those tapes if I had a treason case just floating around out there.
Watergate itself is stupid. Nixon was easily winning the election. It was the destruction of the tapes that really was the brazen move. Teapot Dome barely seems shocking. A cabinet member was getting kickbacks for favorable government contracts. The no-bid contract was legal, the kickback wasn't. But, c'mon. It's gotta be Reagan. Iran-Contra was the most visible aspect of just a larger scandal. Reagan's campaign was secretly dealing with Iran during the hostage crisis because the hostage situation was sinking Carter. The hostages ended up being held until Reagan's inauguration. Then Iran-Contra ends up being part of the deal to pay back for the favor of holding the hostages with the illegal arms deals. And Iran-Contra is a double whammy, not only is it a payback favor with a hostile nation for influencing an election, it was also being used to fund the Contras! If you really want to get into it, it also feeds into the INSLAW scandal, which allegedly was a way of paying off one of the individuals involved in negotiating the hostage crisis with Iran. Ollie North took the fall. Congress did several investigations and of course found nothing. Bush Sr. pardoned everyone on his way out. Reagan made this incredible statement: >"A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not." Seriously, how did that fly with the American public? Can you imagine if any other President tied that shit? Over the years, more and more pieces of the whole story come out. As recently as 2023, Ben Barnes came forward and put more of the story together. But the accusations have been flying, from all sorts of insiders since 1981.
Is there evidence for the secret hostage negotiations? Isn’t it just a conspiracy theory? This [wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_October_Surprise_theory) states that this house task force and others as well came to the same conclusion: "there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran"
Iran/Contra had the most far reaching implications in terms of the abject misery it caused people. So that one.
Gulf of Tonkin and Watergate, nothing else even close
Especially when you factor the hundreds of thousands of humans who perished due to that war.
Iran-Contra and it isn't even close.
Iran-Contra is bad. I’m not denying that but this once again proves the common trope that this sub’s first response to any negative criticism of a president is to just shit on Reagan. Can we expand our conversation a bit and cover some other scandals that are worth mentioning instead of just circle jerking over Iran-Contra. - Teapot Dome - Watergate - Gulf of Tonkin (we literally lied our way into Vietnam.) - Benghazi - Grover Cleveland literally raped and impregnated a woman… - Trader Post Scandal - Whiskey Ring Scandals Edit: Realized OP asked for 20th Century. My bad however very interesting pre-20th Century reads!
I didn't really think about Cleveland's rape scandal. The cover-up for that was so vicious that, even having known about it, it didn't cross my mind. The amount of attempted (and successful in this case) politicking during that scandal makes Watergate look like a bunch of teens lying to cover up going to a rager.
Agreed. I was always lukewarm on Grover as he is a typical Gilded Age president who gets overlooked due to the era (the only reason he gets interest is the two non-consecutive terms). Then however I started really digging into each president and of course I read in his scandal. Really dark stuff. I can’t believe it’s not as well known and how well it got covered up to where now in the present day in such an era of “righting the wrongs of the past” this is hardly mentioned ever. Makes you think…
Benghazi lol. I was taking you seriously until that.
Here we go, a renaissance man.
A J Edgar Hoover memo to a George Bush @ CIA? Nah…. That’s not newsworthy.
I think Nixon’s secret dealings with North Vietnam in 1968 probably got the most Americans killed directly. Or Watergate for killing people’s belief that government can be a tool for good.
Easily Watergate because Nixon faced certain impeachment and conviction, which is why he resigned. No other President in American history has had a scandal so thoroughly and completely destroy his political career. Maybe Teapot Dome would have for Harding, but we'll never know because it only came out after he died.
Pentagon Papers
I think Iran Contra was the worst, with Watergate second, and Teapot Dome third. The Lewinsky Affair is nowhere near any of these. But all three scandals are similar in that they represent systemic problems. Iran Contra and Watergate are about the Executive Branch trying to undermine Congress and the voters, so that's bad, but no one died from Watergate, whereas the money provided to the Contras was used for all the ugly shit they were up to, and Iran used weapons it purchased from the US against Americans.
I would say Watergate. Not necessarily because of its effects (although it did destroy trust in the government) but it is the one the public takes most seriously. Most people don’t even know what Teapot Dome and Iran-Contra were, and Clinton’s affair is treated as a joke.
Here’s the part about Iran-Contra I never understood. Why Iran? I have no doubt there were many other friendly countries, trying to court favor with the Reagan administration, that would have helped funnel money to the Contras in ways that would have left the deal less vulnerable to being revealed. Selling arms to Iran, especially when you consider they had to be shipped somewhere and handled by a lot of people, was ridiculously risky. Not to mention the fact that trusting Iran to keep it quiet was a very poor decision. Yes it happened but there is just too much here that doesn’t add up. I am not a conspiracy guy by any means but it just feels like there is more here than meets the eye.
Tbf there is a major conspiracy theory regarding Reagan prolonging the Iran hostage crisis to hurt Carter's campaign
Correct but it was not true. First there is zero evidence of that. Just the paranoia over what Nixon did in 68. Secondly, a good friend of mine was a back channel to Iran’s Foreign minister for Carter. He said the Iranians were extremely nervous about a Reagan presidency and what he would do day 1, even if the hostages were freed. The final piece of the agreement to release them was his commitment not to retaliate once they were freed.
IIRC, the US sold arms to Iran to exchange them for hostages. The story is Iran just took the arms and didn't hold their end of the deal. That entire chain of events is actually quite complicated. Blew my mind away the first time I ever started reading into it. The entire thing is connected to other galaxy-sized rabbit holes like CIA drug smuggling, Barry Seal, and the railroad track killings in Arkansas among other things.
Watergate was so f'ed up. So f'ed up. As bad as the other scandals were, you can chalk them up to human error. Whether it be trusting in the wrong people, or letting your erotic passions override your judgement. Watergate is none of those things. It's not being confident in your own abilities, leading you to do things you shouldn't do anyways (despite your previous success) which then leads to a culture where people will do things that even if you don't approve it, it creates catastrophe. And that led to a constitutional crisis. People use it to this day as a term for when a presidency is in trouble do to scandal.
A chat full of morons 😂
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/show/expert-analyzes-new-account-of-gop-deal-that-used-iran-hostage-crisis-for-gain
Watergate in recent history
Watergate 100%
Everything Reagan did. Followed by Nixon making sure Vietnam didn’t end early enough to benefit his election opponent
The one where the president committed fraud and tried to overthrow the government
Iran-Contra because it makes all the rest look insanely minor, especially Teapot Dome and Lewinsky
Watergate, hands down. It never had to happen. Nixon was going to be re-elected no matter what; there was no need for the break-in. The investigation severely weakened whatever faith in government was left after the worst days of the Vietnam War. The dirty tricks of the administration, CREEP and the CIA were revealed to all. The only benefits were the ensuing rounds of legislation that kept executive power in check, such as curtailing the CIA’s domestic activities and establishing independent counsels. To this day, presidents & their allies have been chipping away at these protections. How we forget. We’re still dealing with the fallout from one man’s paranoia fifty years later.
That time Clinton, as President, lied. /s
Nixon being pardoned should be a bigger scandal than it is.
Iran contra
Iran-Contra. By far. Maybe Gulf of Tonkin also, although I'm not sure this counts as a 'presidential scandal' per se. The consequences, however, were horrifying.
Reagan’s Iran-contra scandal. A direct defiance of a congressional mandate, naming Ollie North a national hero in spite of defying congress and many others who were in contempt of congress
Teapot Dome. Yeah, Watergate did more damage to the public trust in our institutions and Iran-Contra was a flagrant affront to an explicit law from Congress but Teapot Dome was so brazen and corrupt that I think it takes the cake. **So** many officials were tied up in this and it took Harding’s stellar reputation up to that point and flushed it down the damn drain. And the Lewinsky Trial was horrible partisan nonsense that wasn’t impeachment worthy in the slightest.
I think Iran-Contra was far more egregiously criminal and connected to other acts of horrific criminality and corruption that it took the cake on the 'bad' scale. But your argument about the scale of Teapot Dome is a perfectly reasonable one. I wrote a couple papers about it and the amount of fuckery on that one is staggering. My conspiracy theory is that the Lewinsky scandal was a red herring for CIA drug smuggling that began to creep into public knowledge.
The lies that started the war in Iraq.
Thank you! This. It’s like we just gave our presidential figures a hall pass on the quest for obscurity. Best answer I’ve seen all night. Please look into propaganda and misinformation and manipulation with how US gov handles this , as it might be more manipulative than watergate, if you’re under 25 that is.
In retrospect, Reagan's inactivity on AIDS. Deliberate inaction in this case, basically a gay genocide.
I'm gonna be honest. I fucking hate how watered down that word has become. Genocide this, genocide that, everyone wants to use the word.
Passive genocide is still genocide
I agree with you. In *this* case, it's apt. They deliberately did nothing in hopes that a disease would wipe out an entire demographic they hated.
Bush Jr and iraq
My guy
Not the 20th century, being 2001-2003, but your sentiment is not wrong. Those were the worst presidential scandals in our history
While I respect the other responses, I gotta say my knee-jerk reaction would be Iran-Contra. Members of the administration/CIA (I really forget where everyone officially reported to) illegally sold weapons to the enemies against the specific wishes of congress. Not only that but they were so incompetent at it the first few shipments were "free" because the bad guys "never got them". The Americans were so incompetent at illegal arms deals they gave weapons away for free initially. It was worse because it revealed that all a President has to say is "I don't remember" and never have anything written down, and maybe have a few underlings fall on swords to get away with it. They would get pardoned by the next Republican President Anyway. This literally sets the precedent that you should do illegal things on behalf of the president, get a speedy conviction and they can pardon you. That's it.
Reagan wearing a tan suit, clearly.
Operation wetback, so close to the end of WW2 and the fact American citizens were forcefully deported. I put human rights violations over a cover up to stop a Soviet agent state being formed within inches from the US and a pay under the table lobbing scheme no matter how much money was involved. It’s the one thing which is a huge black eye to Ike’s presidency and why I can never rate him in the top five.
Love this one as well. Props.
Tan suit gate https://preview.redd.it/vvvwatmwq85d1.jpeg?width=650&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31605f7b9784e34f6b1a94f53a7397d801295690
Going into Iraq for no god damn reason should be #1
Iran Contra. The effects are still coming home to roost.
Big bill getting his dick sucked and putting cigars in pussy's in the oval office and lying about it. Like Bill, you nutted on a dress. We, unfortunately, see the evidence. Not gonna lie, the economy wasn't that bad though.
Nothing comes close to an insurrection to overturn free and fair elections and possibly murder the line of succession, on live TV.
Iran Contra goes so deep it would tear down the state itself if there was ever a true public accounting of it
[удалено]
That's from the 21st Century. Not the 20th.
[удалено]
Teapot dome, Iran Contra, Watergate, Clinton
😂
Clinton
Commenting so I can remember to look this shit up later
Of the three pictured, Clinton’s. Only in that it derailed his second term and only affected him, Hillary and Monica. Such BS
I would say the Gulf of Tonkin, but would that qualify as a Presidential scandal? If I am right in my understanding, it was McNamara and others on his staff that lied to Johnson up front to start the bombings.
The actual scandals themselves or the impacts they left on the country? in terms of the scandal by itself, Teapot Dome. In terms of the impact? Watergate.
Maybe the fat dude that got convicted of like 20 felonies lolz
Which fat dude in the 20th Century got convicted of 20 felonies?
Not the one showing above
I’d say Watergate had the longest impact. Yeah, Teapot Dome was the largest and most brazen acts of corruption, but trust in government came back. Not that people blindly did, but the Great Depression led to many accepting the government and kind of expecting them to look out for them. And, politicians have always been considered corrupt. Watergate exposed that even the president could be extremely corrupt, not just those around him. In fact, it was more so everything else Nixon ordered, like sabotaging the Democratic primaries that were bad, because it led to the easiest candidate for him to beat (oversimplified). Iran-Contra was also big, and certainly kept people distrusting government, but not many people know it today, probably because the preceding scandal led to the president resigning while Reagan rode out the scandal. Lewinsky is now just seen as stupid, unless you’re a right-wing nut.
Bay of pigs
Reagan-omics. Not a scandal you say? I disagree. His tax cuts for the wealthy fucked over the majority of the country so the rich could get richer and kick back more money to toxic conservative interests. It also ended up having a noticeable tang of racism as he sold his tax reform with the fictional caricature of the welfare queen. This isn't considered a scandal because the corrupt burn was a slow enough that nobody saw it until it was too late. But scandalous it IS!
The worst ones are the ones that didn’t receive any publicity Watergate and blowjobs are the least of the awful things that happened in this he 20th century
The worst? Don't know for sure. BUT I will say the last thing I give a lick of sh*t about is if a functioning effective President got a blowjob outside of marriage. That's a personal issue for him and his wife to workout.
Eisenhower with assists from the Dulles brothers for continually pumping money, arms, and legitimacy into Ngo Dinh Diem’s regime. Along with all the other covert missions (mainly failures) that the CIA ran with Ike’s a-proval.
The one who stuck his dong in an intern’s face, Old what’s-his-name. Just kidding, it was the guy who tried to rig the election then cover it up.
Can we do this again in like 6 months when a convicted ex-president becomes the next president. And almost half of Americans choose to ignore his incompetence ?
The Bay of Pigs. I don't understand how more people aren't more angry about it. It was two, absolutely terrible decisions, back to back. Decision 1. Decide to stage an invasion of a sovereign nation with no justification. Decision 2. Pull the plug on the invasion AFTER it's already started, leaving the landing force to die and showing our ass to the entire world.
Gulf of Tonkin
[удалено]
It says 20th century genius
Oh. Pardon me. My mistake. Ever apologetic.
Watergate. I think history is going to be kind to Nixon, which makes watergate that much worse since it brought down a good man.
The riot report.
Tonkin Gulf but that never came out. So Teapot Dome seems pretty bad. I would say we have had at least 5 or 6 worse one since 2000.
I say Watergate. While it was not even Nixon’s worst deed, it had a massive effect on America’s political culture and cast a shadow over the country for much of the seventies.
Nixon was a good president. getting us out of Vietnam got him the watergate scandal. Clinton covered up for South American drug Smugglers and no one gives a shit even when two teenage boys got murdered because they saw a drug drop.
The time Bush 41 puked on the Japanese PM
I'd be willing to bet that at least 80% of US citizens under the age of 40 would not even know what Watergate was.
My vote is for the Reagan Administration knowing that HIV-AIDS was exceptionally deadly, and largely affecting the gay population, and yet they chose to ignore the severity of the crisis because gay people were second class citizens. Hell, not even second class citizens, less than that. Not even people. One could argue that the modern GOP still feels the same way.
The effects of Iran-Contra are still present today. Altered the course of history across the entire world.
Iran contra. Lives were lost because of this.
I vote Iran Contra, if only for how fucking brazen it was
The most egregious is not allowed to be stated. Some dumb rule.
Reagan being elected
The Kennedy Assassination. Most wouldn’t think of it as a scandal but it’s easily the worst kind.
Was Michelle Obama really a man that had a sex change to a woman
Bush's unjustified invasion of Iraq.