I thought we had seen the height of craziness in the nomination process leading up to the 2012 elections, especially on the Republican side but OMG; that was nothing compared to what’s going on this election circle.
For this reason, I am reviving this blog that has been dormant all these years since I last wrote about marital infidelity and Newt Gingrich, who was then attempting some comeback to politics but was shown the door by the fed-up Republican primary of 2012.
We now have in the Republican primary, a horse race between two least qualified to be president candidates in American history with a realistic shot of either one being nominated by an angry, anti-government Republican base that has been worked into a frenzy by right wing radio and Fox News; a base that doesn’t care whether either of these candidates have the skills and qualifications necessary to run a government, let alone a Federal government.
All they care about is that both are outsiders who have not held office, which in their demonstration of extreme naivety, translate to mean they’re therefore not politicians.
What a farce!
Both of these candidates are as political as any politician can be it’s naïve to think the fact they have not held office will somehow make them the miracle presidents who can ride in white horses to Washington, whip everyone into doing exactly what this angry base wants them to do, never mind there’s a Constitution they must follow and even more a more practical reality, an opposition they cannot whip to doing anything they don’t want to do merely because this dreamed miracle president says they should or must.
I am here talking about Mr. Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson who are running the most improbable two campaigns one can ever see anywhere neither of which is based on the reality of who they really are or what they can, in fact, do for the country in the unlikely event either is elected as president.
The alternative two candidates the Republican establishment is hoping either one emerges in the end as the nominee are Senators Marko Rubio and Ted Cruz, neither of which has a shot of being elected president, assuming they get past the nomination barrier, because one is simply a teenager politically speaking and the other is even more loathed by both the Republican establishment and nearly all politicians in Washington, who, in the case of Republicans, will vote en masse for his Democratic opponent (read Hillary) therefore leading to his landslide defeat come November next year.
Talking about Hillary, I read Some Pointed Questions for Hillary Clinton by Monica Crowley, not exactly a dumb blonde, but one who, like many Roger Ailes babes, says some really nasty and mean things on Fox News that match neither their beauty or supposed intellect.
But that’s for another day; for now, let me answer these questions Monica has posed for Hillary, based on what I know that’s in the public domain, or simply based on what the common sense answer is:
1. Did you ever secure permission to set up your private server and email scheme? If so, from whom? Did President Obama know about it and approve? Who, if anyone, warned you against it? Specifically, did anyone from the State Department information technology team warn you against it? If so, whom?
No I did not secure permission to set-up my private server and email service because that was not necessary as nothing in the State Department regulations and policies prevented me from having the set-up. Other Secretaries of State before me, and specifically Secretaries Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice also used private email. I have heard some of you whining that neither of them used a private server but that’s a distinction without a difference. That being the case, the rest of your questions are also answered.
2. On the night of the Sept. 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi, you spoke with the president at approximately 10 p.m. Eastern Time. What did you tell him about the nature of the attack, and what did he tell you?
Discussions a cabinet secretary has with the president are privileged and confidential other than what the president opts to be made public so it would be inappropriate for me to tell you what I told him then suffice to say this was this discussion took place at a time when there was conflicting information about what happened in Benghazi, which was later confirmed by the only credible Congressional Committee that looked into this and the independent Accountability Review Board.
3. At 4:05 p.m., approximately 20 minutes into the attack, your department’s own operations center sent the first of a series of messages reporting what was happening — and that Ansar al-Shariah, an al Qaeda affiliate, claimed responsibility. Later that night and the next day, you sent emails indicating that you clearly knew it was a planned terror attack. Did you first propose the fiction that an obscure video critical of Islam was the proximate cause of the attack? If not, who did?
I proposed no such a thing. I, like everyone else then trying to make sense of what happened, came to learn as it was then widely reported that the protests were triggered by the offensive Muslim video. When all the information and intelligence was finally put together, it was accepted and the president said this was, in fact, a planned terrorist attack.
4. Several days later, the White House needed a top administration official to appear on the Sunday morning shows to discuss the attack, argue that it was spontaneous and fix blame on the video. You were asked to appear, but you declined. Why?
Because I had better things to do than go out there to peddle a lie; that’s what my opponents and especially the likes of Monica Crowley want me to say but that will be the lie. I was neither asked nor did I decline to appear on any show the now National Security Adviser and long serving civil servant Susan Rice was quite capable of delivering the lie or truth about what happened, depending on where you stand on this issue.
5. Was the strategy to blame the video a result of your co-sponsorship of United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18, which lays the groundwork for the criminalization of speech critical of Islam?
Now, you’re either a GOP hack or simply ill-informed. If it’s the fact that you’re simply ill-informed, you should have done proper homework ahead of your asking me such a question based on falsehood for I did not co-sponsor any UN resolution “which lays the groundwork for the criminalization of speech critical to Islam.” The resolution you refer to is intended to protect against intolerance, negative stereotyping and discrimination or violence against anyone based on their religion or belief. The resolution also encourages countries to consider adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief, which is a good thing and reflects our American values as the champion of freedom of religion.
6. You told the families of the dead that the administration would hunt down the person “responsible,” who you identified as an American filmmaker. He was promptly jailed on a probation violation. Was that done in service of your advocacy of HRC Resolution 16/18?
What part of my answer did you not get?
7. Mr. Obama pointedly denied your request to hire your longtime political hatchet man, Sidney Blumenthal, in an official capacity in the State Department. You hired him anyway via the Clinton Foundation. What made Mr. Blumenthal so valuable to you that you were willing to defy Mr. Obama’s specific wishes?
First of all, it’s “President Obama,” not “Mr. Obama,” get your protocols straight. Also, to be credible as a journalist asking questions for the benefit of the voter, you must stay away from asking questions loaded with your personal judgment or views. Sidney is a friend and I don’t drop my friends or family because someone tells me to. That being said, despite the right wing media’s effort to create a wedge between me and President Obama over my friendship with Sidney, both the President and I know exactly what this is all about and dismiss it accordingly.
8. Many of your private emails show exchanges between you, your team and Mr. Blumenthal concerning highly sensitive national security issues, including Libya. Were you running your own rogue intelligence operation via Mr. Blumenthal? And did you at any point craft U.S. policy to reward Mr. Blumenthal and serve his business interests in Libya or elsewhere?
I have already cautioned you not to ask stupid or questions loaded with partisan nonsense or flawed personal opinion. If your question is whether Mr. Blumenthal was my adviser I during my grueling 11 hours before the sham Benghazi committee designed to bring me down I stated that Sidney was not my adviser and no, I my friendship with him did not benefit his business interests in Libya or anywhere.
9. Why was the group hired to provide security for the CIA annex, the February 17th militia, axed shortly before the attack and replaced with a company, Blue Mountain Group, which had no employees? Did Mr. Blumenthal have any business interests associated with Blue Mountain Group?
The answer to your first question is all security issues and questions were handled by security professionals at the State Department I had no role in any decisions they made. The answer to your second question is I don’t know that’s something I am sure even the sham committee looked into and found nothing to smear me with so don’t even try now.
10. Libya was your portfolio. What responsibility do you bear for its status now as a failed state, convulsed by the Islamic State, al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups, which are using it as a terrorist haven?
I bear no responsibility for the current status in Libya any more than the Libyans themselves do. We get appointed to do the work we do for our country to the best of our ability. Sometimes even when we have done our best as we know how, based on all available information and intelligence, things don’t go exactly as we wish. In that case, what we do, we take notes for lessons learned and adjust accordingly for any future circumstances we may find ourselves making similar decisions. That’s what I intend to do as president, namely, draw from my experience, good or bad as Secretary of State, Senator, First Lady, and champion for women rights to be the best president I can be for this great country of ours. God bless America.
[Unedited]
American Politics Today 