Showing posts with label psaki. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psaki. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

James Rosen to State Department: Why’d it take nearly two years to arrest a Benghazi suspect who wasn’t hiding?

JamesRosentoStateDepartment:Why’dittake

James Rosen to State Department: Why’d it take nearly two years to arrest a Benghazi suspect who wasn’t hiding?

posted at 8:01 pm on June 17, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via the Free Beacon, make sure to read Ed’s post earlier to understand just how openly Khattala, the jihadi nabbed by U.S. forces over the weekend, has been living in Libya since the Benghazi attack. He was a prime suspect from the very beginning; he gave multiple interviews to western media in the years since, all but taunting the White House to come pick him up. The criminal charges against him were filed more than nine months ago. Only this month, for some reason, did the military finally move in. How come?

Two possibilities. One: The political situation on the ground in Libya changed enough to make a U.S intervention possible. My theory of why Obama laid off initially was because he didn’t want the weak Libyan government to have to cope with a backlash from the local militias if American troops swooped in and kidnapped a big-name jihadi or two. As long as we could monitor Khattala and make sure he didn’t run, we could wait until the government was in a stronger position to make our move. Problem is, the government’s only gotten weaker over time; lately, Libya’s devolved into a classic military-warlord-versus-jihadis struggle for control of the state. The White House may have concluded that there’d never be a better time to move on Khattala.

Two: This is exactly what it looks like, i.e. Obama’s trying to stop the bleeding he’s endured lately on foreign policy over Ukraine and Iraq and the Taliban Five by seizing an easy victory. I’m old enough to remember when U.S. counterterror developments, especially “terror alerts,” were greeted by our liberal betters online as obviously political gambits by the Bush administration, designed to distract the public from more important matters. Questioning the timing was standard practice for the lefty blogosphere circa 2006. Today, of course, it’s the height of crankery to believe that a guy whose party is in deep trouble in the midterms, and who’s proved before that he’s not above well-timed executive action for electoral ends, might have given this order with an eye to putting some good news on the front page for once. That’s what Rosen’s getting at here. Jen “Promise of Hashtag” Psaki has no real answer, of course.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

AP reporter to State Dep’t spokesman: Seriously, can you identify a single accomplishment since 2010?

APreportertoStateDep’tspokesman:Seriously,can

AP reporter to State Dep’t spokesman: Seriously, can you identify a single accomplishment since 2010?

posted at 7:21 pm on April 22, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via Joe Schoffstall and Noah Rothman, the reporter in question is Matt Lee and no, this isn’t the first time he’s been, shall we say, unimpressed with an answer from State. The “QDDR” he mentions is the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, a self-audit by State every four years of its long-term goals abroad and how it’s doing in meeting them. The very first QDDR was published in 2010 after it was ordered by — ta da — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. What makes this question significant, in other words, isn’t that Lee is so combative with spokesman Jen Psaki or that Psaki’s as stumped as the rest of us are when forced to name a Hillary accomplishment. What makes it significant is that, I suspect, the QDDR will itself be cited by Team Hillary next year when they’re asked to list her achievements. The mere fact that she ordered the review, whether or not State learned anything from it, will be submitted as proof that she’s Ready To Lead. Remember this exchange when it happens.

While we’re looking ahead, here’s David Frum anticipating the rest of the Clinton 3.0 strategy, specifically as it applies to the “is she too old?” question:

Hillary Clinton is not the victim of a double standard. She is the beneficiary of a double standard…

[A] question that commentators generally agreed was relevant in 1984, 1996 and 2008 is a question that Hillary Clinton supporters now deem insulting, offensive and unfair to women…

Hillary Clinton asks two things of us. On the one hand, she wants to be judged exactly as we’d judge a similarly accomplished man in politics. On the other hand, she wants us always to remember that the hopes of all womankind are fixed on whether she personally gets the job she wants…

In that one highly specific sense, then, the Hillary Clinton standard is always single: whatever it takes.

Enjoy this clip while you can, because starting around a year from now, it’ll be the very essence of sexism to ask a question like this.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair