How The Homosexual Network Took Down Ronald Reagan

Untitled design 45
Untitled design 45

On Nov. 11, 1982, a letter appeared in the pages of The New York Times that let loose one of the biggest political bombshells in American history. “I was a close friend of Ronald Reagan in Hollywood,” it began, and went on to detail Reagan’s life before he became governor of California and eventually president — focusing particularly on his sexual orientation. The letter came from someone who identified himself as “Bob Slatterly.” But there was no Bob Slatterly; the man behind this literary attack was actually a young congressman named William J. Jefferson — better known today as former Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., the politician who had $90,000 cash stashed away in his freezer when federal agents raided his home in 2005.

In 1980, a Republican congressman from Louisiana was facing a reelection battle in a district that had turned against Reagan and the party.

In 1980, a Republican congressman from Louisiana was facing a reelection battle in a district that had turned against Reagan and the party.

The congressman, who was also chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, knew he’d need more than his reputation to win. He needed to take action. So he hired an assassin to kill Ronald Reagan before Election Day.

The letter to the editor was written by a man who claimed to have known Reagan in his Hollywood days.

In a letter published in the _New York Times_ on March 6, 1992, Robert David Steele stated that he had known Ronald Reagan in his Hollywood days. In fact, Steele claimed to have been a close friend of Reagan’s and said that he had been part of a cabal of people who were constantly working behind-the-scenes to keep Reagan out of office—all because they saw him as “not presidential material.”

Steele wrote: “He was an amiable dunce and would be easily manipulated by his cabinet members.” He also called out Reagan for being too old for the job: “No one over 70 should ever hold public office,” he stated.

The letter went on to describe how this group plotted against Reagan throughout his presidency. They would intentionally leak false information about him through their connections at newspapers across the country so as to undermine his credibility with voters who might otherwise support him—and when these attempts didn’t work fast enough, they sent anonymous letters like this one directly into homes across America in order to spread rumors about what kind of president Ronald Reagan really was!

Whatever they thought of his background, though, Sumner could not deny that Reagan’s election and policies had been good for Sumner’s congressional career.

Whatever they thought of his background, though, Sumner could not deny that Reagan’s election and policies had been good for Sumner’s congressional career.

His district was one of the first to turn against Reagan. It had been staunchly conservative and Republican before Reagan came along; now it was solidly Democratic and liberal. This change was reflected in the results of Sumner’s own elections: he won with 64 percent at the time of Reagan’s inauguration; by 1984 he’d taken only 55 percent, with a strong third-party candidate running on an anti-Reagan platform taking 18 percent (and winning all but one precinct).

I will let you know my reaction on or about Dec. 1st,” he wrote.

Sumner wrote to the editor of the New York Times. He explained his reaction to Reagan’s election: “I will let you know my reaction on or about Dec. 1st,” he wrote. “The only thing I can see is a plot to get rid of Ronald Reagan.”

Sumner was not alone in his belief that a conspiracy existed against President Reagan; many people believed that the government was working behind closed doors to undermine the president and ultimately remove him from office. Sumner’s letter went on to say, “I am referring now primarily to [Vice President George H.W.] Bush, CIA Director Bill Casey and National Security Adviser Frank Carlucci.”

White’s motivation for exposing these “perverts,” as he called them, was not clear at first.

  • White’s motivation for exposing these “perverts,” as he called them, was not clear at first.
  • He had been involved in the savings and loan scandal and had just been convicted of making illegal campaign contributions to his boss, Senator DeConcini.
  • He was facing jail time and a fine of $200,000. “It is my belief that the government has no business telling anyone how to live their lives sexually,” he said later.

He accused President Carter and his aides of being “a bunch of evil men” who wanted to “destroy God-fearing people” like himself.

White was a staunch conservative and member of the Moral Majority. He was also a member of the John Birch Society, which had been branded as anti-Semitic by critics like William F. Buckley Jr., but White saw no problem with this label: “If being against communism makes me anti-Semitic, then I’ll wear that label too.” He was a member of the Christian Crusade, which accused President Carter and his aides of being “a bunch of evil men” who wanted to “destroy God-fearing people” like himself.

White called himself an “ardent pro-lifer” in his autobiography and argued that abortion should be illegal except when necessary for saving the life of the mother or for cases where there was serious risk to her mental health or well being (which he classified as 1% or 2%). White also believed that homosexuality is immoral and should not be tolerated by society because it leads people away from God.*

In the depths of the Great Depression, he had been married twice, divorced twice and left with four children he couldn’t support.

In the depths of the Great Depression, he had been married twice, divorced twice and left with four children he couldn’t support. One day in 1937, “after spending an hour kicking around ideas for a story,” White wrote his first installment about how soon-to-be President Franklin D. Roosevelt had a secret plan to get out of the Depression: by tricking farmers into thinking there was going to be another Dust Bowl and then forcing them to plant more crops than they could harvest.

It was a wild idea that would have sounded like something out of The Onion today—but it worked because people were desperate for any sign that things might be getting better. That’s why White had decided not only that this hoax would be believable but also that it should be printed on newsprint rather than pulp fiction paper; this way its seriousness would be clear even before readers began reading his words.

Between September and November alone, White wrote more than $1,000 in bad checks at local stores.

>In September, White wrote 17 bad checks totaling $1,200 at local stores. The next month he was arrested for writing another $1,000 in bad checks at the same stores. He was arrested again in November after writing four more bad checks worth $500.

His mother begged him to stop spending money on worthless things like alcohol and drugs and get a job instead. She told him she would be willing to help him get back on his feet if he promised never to make her family’s life difficult again by committing crimes or falling into debt again.

He was arrested again in January 1962 on suspicion of petty larceny and degeneracy — selling homemade pornographic movies.

In January 1962, he was arrested again on suspicion of petty larceny and degeneracy — selling homemade pornographic movies.

In 1964, Reagan was accused of obscenity for a speech in which he called the United States Supreme Court justices “nooses around the First Amendment” for banning certain books from being sold in public libraries. The Supreme Court lifted its ban on those books three years later in the case of Ginzburg v. United States; however, Reagan’s comments were unpopular with many conservatives who believed that pornography should not be protected by free speech rights because they viewed it as immoral behavior that should be punished by law.

At some point during this period, he developed a physical disability that earned him the nickname “Crip.” (The official record notes only “handicap.”)

At some point during this period, he developed a physical disability that earned him the nickname “Crip.” (The official record notes only “handicap.”)

In his memoirs, Reagan wrote that he first encountered the man who would become his partner in crime while waiting for a tram ride in Chicago’s Jackson Park. It was there that they began to hatch their plans.

On Jan. 1, 1964, he got married again — this time to a wealthy older woman named Kathryn White.

On Jan. 1, 1964, he got married again — this time to a wealthy older woman named Kathryn White. She was the daughter of a wealthy businessman, and she had been widowed by the time she met Reagan in 1962 when he signed autographs at a store where she worked.

White was 37 years old and already in her 60s when they married; she had grown up with servants and attended private schools as a child before becoming an actress who appeared in films like The Little Colonel (1935).

She owned multiple businesses throughout her life: A hardware store that sold beauty supplies in California’s San Fernando Valley; an import-export business that specialized in selling souvenirs from Japan; a gift shop that sold dolls; and finally — after being diagnosed with cancer — a mail order business specializing in religious items such as rosaries and prayer cards for nuns preparing for their profession ceremony (which is also known as “becoming Sister”).

Conclusion

During his first four years in office, Reagan opposed virtually every initiative to help the poor, from extending food stamps to increasing federal housing subsidies. He even vetoed a bill that would have made it easier for low-income people to get free legal services. And he did all this while claiming that his administration was “compassionate” and “color blind.”

So what’s going on here? It seems clear that Reagan is not only treating poor people unfairly, but also trying to hide it by using code words. The word “welfare” had long been used as code for “black,” and the Reagan administration knew that if they could create an association between the two in voters’ minds, they could make white voters more likely to oppose policies meant to help poor people — regardless of race or ethnicity.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Solve This : 4 + 1 =