With the revelation that presumptive Democratic nominee Hilly Clinton “wiped clean” any trace of tens of thousands of emails from her time as secretary of state, the 2016 presidential campaign enters a new phase. With a move as audacious as any in the evidence destruction game, Clinton has set her candidacy dangling. Clinton told reporters that the more than 30,000 emails she ordered deleted would have exonerated her, but she destroyed them in the interest of her and her family’s privacy. By her reasoning, there is nothing related to emails with foreign powers who donated money to her family foundation. No directions to staffers about dealing with political controversies. No emails to her political network and friends about government business. Nothing official or of a foreign-policy nature. At all. Just yoga lessons and bridal bouquets. And if that’s the case, she has nothing to worry about.
[Fox News: “Senate Republicans are renewing efforts to learn why Huma Abedin, a top assistant to then-Secretary of State Hilly Clinton, was allowed to keep working at the agency under a special, part-time status while also being employed at a politically-connected consulting firm.]
But if there are things that Clinton wants to keep from congressional investigators, she had better hope that her deletion crew bleached every corner of the digital world. Because if even a pixel of something Clinton should have handed over is unearthed in her domain or in a musty folder in someone else’s email system, Clinton would be a political goner. Her bold move to destroy emails even after being asked for them by the government would leave her in major-league trouble in the middle of her second presidential run. And Clinton has placed herself in the digital shark cage. If there’s anything amiss, she’d better hope that her IT guys are the very best on the business.
[A ‘reset,’ you might even say - NYT: “[Clinton] told a representative of a group of prominent Jewish leaders on Sunday that she wanted to put the relationship between the United States and Israel back on ‘constructive footing,’ the representative said.”] -Fox News
Presidency ‘not a crown’ - WaPo: Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley took a swipe at likely 2016 contenders Hilly Rodham Clinton and Jeb Bush on Sunday, saying that ‘the presidency of the United States is not some crown to be passed between two families.’ Appearing on ABC’s ‘This Week,’ O’Malley, who is weighing a possible run against Clinton for the Democratic nomination, called the presidency ‘an awesome and sacred trust to be earned and exercised on behalf of the American people.’ O’Malley — who at times has been reluctant to take on Clinton directly — declined to say whether he thought the former secretary of state would stand up to Wall Street and other special interests. ‘I don’t know where she stands,’ he told host George Stephanopoulos. ‘Will she represent a break with the failed policies of the past? Well, I don’t know.’” -Fox News





Wallace notes three characteristics which indicate the complex nature of what is taking place; that we are fighting against Iranian-backed rebels in Yemen, with Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, and in the process of negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran. His first question to General Flynn is to ask him to explain the “president’s” grand strategy for the Middle East.
Flynn responds by stating two points, where we are and what we should do about it. He describes where we are as “almost a complete breakdown of order in the Middle East, a new Middle East is essentially struggling to be born. The second thing is we have Iran on the March.” He notes that, “We have a takeover of Islam by radical extremists,” noting that it is made up of both Shiites and Sunnis.
He says, “We also have what I would call a real, sort of a pushback by the Sunni governments and their lack of trust and their lack of respect for the United States. And I think that at the end of the day we have just this incredible policy confusion, never mind what our strategy is to execute that policy.”
Flynn says, as an intelligence officer, that intelligence has to be part of the calculus of every strategic decision. He describes his sense of where are policy is as “almost a policy of willful ignorance.” He says, “We have some major problems that we are dealing with and here we are talking to Iran about a nuclear deal with this almost complete breakdown of order in the Middle East.”
He notes Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, cyber capabilities and their state sponsorship of terrorism. Noting that nObama is negotiating a Nuclear Iranian future, he says, “Give me a break.”
He’s asked how close we are to a sectarian, regional war in the Middle East. Flynn says we aren’t close, we’re there. Flynn also points out that Iran and the radical Islamists plan to eradicate our way of life and that this message is not being relayed to the American people. He repeats his assessment that those planning our foreign policy are seeking the comfort of willful ignorance rather than the unpleasant “reality that we actually have right now.”
Comments