Stops in 2000. Historians often say you need time and distance to put some things in perspective, maybe 25 years isn't such a bad back-date to stop at?<p>Look, I wanted to be neutral, but I gotta say I don't think the state department or any other department is going to put this current administration in their highlights bucket. Maybe I am wrong, and there's a narrative in 25 years time which sells this one.<p>I feel it would be like trying to sell Woodrow Wilson v Congress at the end of WW1: Hard to push shit up hill.<p>I went looking and about Allende/Chile - the site is interesting: it affirms there was talk about how to avoid his presidency but says the enquiry found no evidence of active involvement in the coup which led to his death. I think even now I find that remarkably bland. ITT did not need to leave a paper trail. However in the spirit of neutral history, if thats what the enquiry found, then thats what the state department should document.