How the Obama administration undercut them.
They undercut most Bush foreign policy, whether good or bad.
How the Obama administration undercut them.
They undercut most Bush foreign policy, whether good or bad.
Michael Totten says it’s time to put it out of its misery.
It’s been an artificial construct for a century.
[Update late afternoon, after returning from Mojave]
Michael emails to tell me that the article is no longer behind the paywall.
I’m sure you’ll be as shocked, shocked as I am to learn that there are huge temporal gaps in them. Because, you know, “most transparent administration in history.” Just like with the IRS.
Hey, it’s not like it’s eighteen minutes, like Nixon.
It’s not two separate scandals, it’s one big hairy one. It makes perfect sense that if she was soliciting foreign funds while secretary of state, she’d not want to do it from a government email account. And those are likely among the ones she hasn’t turned over (among others).
Much of the Clinton criminality in the nineties was similarly intertwined.
[Update a while later]
Huma Abedin, Hillary’s unindicted email co-conspirator.
Hey, I’m old enough to remember when the administration used to say that no deal was better than that.
To be honest, though, I don’t think they ever really believed it. They’ve always been desperate for a deal, and are getting more so as the clock ticks. And the Iranians know it. I’ve never seen a worse negotiator than Barack Obama.
Sarah Hoyt says don’t get wobbly (but she uses a few more words than that).
Netanyahu shows that it’s lose-lose:
This was no partisan pitch – this was a heartfelt appeal against allowing Iran — a country that has vowed to annihilate Israel — to access nuclear weapons. The outrage is not that Mr. Netanyahu addressed Congress; the outrage is that President Obama is pushing for a deal that so alarms our allies, and that he went to such great lengths to prevent Americans from hearing the truth.
President Obama had turned Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before Congress into a sophomoric beauty contest, complete with plaintive whines about “fairness.” With his thin-skinned resistance to the Israeli leader’s appearance, Obama created an international ruckus, which only served to publicize Netanyahu’s address. Not agreeing to meet with the Prime Minister, sending various proxies out of the country on bogus missions (Biden’s exile to Uruguay postponed by the flu?), bad-mouthing the Israeli leader and his GOP hosts; the White House even “sternly” warned Netanyahu not to divulge details of the proposed nuclear deal. Whatever Mr. Obama’s intentions, the outcome surely could not have been what he had hoped.
That happens a lot with this clown.
[Update a few minutes later]
Dennis Ross tosses Obama under the bus.
…are as justified as the original ones were. This was inevitable, and it’s apparently the only solution to barbarity from another millennium, in the face of passivity by the rest of the world.
Close to a decade of negotiations meant to end the Iranian nuclear program is about to culminate in the legitimization of that program and an enriched—in both senses of the word—empowered, and no less hostile Iran. Our government and the media that so often resembles its propaganda organ will attempt to characterize this colossal failure of nerve as a personal victory for a lame duck president and a milestone in international relations. It is important that they lose this battle, that the Iran deal is revealed to the world for the capitulation that it is, that the dangers of sub-letting the Middle East to the Koranic scholars of Qom and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps are given expression, not only for substantive reasons of policy and security but also because the way in which the advocates of détente have behaved has been reprehensible.
It’s who they are, it’s what they do.
Yes, Lebanon probably looks quite attractive. Lots of Christians and other infidels there to murder.
I wonder, though, what will Hezbollah do? I’d imagine they’d fight ISIS, since they’re an Iranian client. The big question, though, is whether or not Israel will sit on the sidelines. That would be getting very close to home.