No need to get revisionist history and try to claim the Iran Reagan dealt with was ‘recently our ally’ it was recently the deposer of our ally, the Shah; or that it was just arms for hostages - it was also arms to raise cash to fund a rebel army.
The Constitution is what it is.
My affinity for the person in power doesn't temper the blow to the Constitution.
They say your friends stab you in the front.
The Executive branch raising money on its own to fund a rebel army absent legislation to do so is about as bad as it gets.
Gunwalker is small beans, Constitutionally speaking, to the Executive taking on the power to raise and spend money itself.
I was one month away from going back to Iran for a two-year contract (many of my friends were already there) when the revolution happened. Ours was a joint venture with the Shah. I simply meant that only a few years before, Iran had been our ally. Now it’s a 32 year enemy. No revisionist history on my part.
As I said, I agree with you that Contra should’ve been done differently, i.e. going to Congress. Since we were still in the Cold War and it wasn’t fashionable then to smooch with Communists, Reagan could’ve made a case to Congress to fund anti-Communist freedom fighters.
I admitted he was misguided, but who here would dispute that Reagan loved America or that BHO hates it and plots its destruction?
Also, motives and intentions mean a great deal to me, and considering a large motive of Gunwalker was to do away with our right to bear arms as well as further reduce our border security, I view it as clearly sinister and yet one more treasonous act (of many) by the traitor in chief.