BloggeRhythms

According to Catherine Herridge @foxnews.com, “Analysts at U.S. Central Command were pressured to ease off negative assessments about the Islamic State threat and were even told in an email to “cut it out,” Fox News has learned – as an investigation expands into whether intelligence reports were altered to present a more positive picture. 

 

“Fox News is told by a source close to the CENTCOM analysts that the pressure on them included at least two emails saying they needed to “cut it out” and “toe the line.” 

“Separately, a former Pentagon official told Fox News there apparently was an attempt to destroy the communications. The Pentagon official said the email warnings were "not well received" by the analysts. 

“Those emails, among others, are now in the possession of the Pentagon inspector general. The IG’s probe is expanding into whether intelligence assessments were changed to give a more positive picture of the anti-ISIS campaign.” 

As a result of what might be misleading threat assessment, there is now departmental infighting, as to who knew the truth and when they knew it. As well as how serious the ISIS threat actually was. However, regardless of the truth, the way this administration works, the POTUS likely has now got a way to cover his inaction and poor foreign-policy decision making regarding the threat from the ISIS “JV team.” And, in that regard, his squirming out from under has apparently already begun, as follows. 

“President Obama, speaking at a press conference in Malaysia over the weekend, said he expects to “get to the bottom” of whether ISIS intelligence reports were altered – and has told his top military officials as much. 

“One of the things I insisted on the day I walked into the Oval Office was that I don’t want intelligence shaded by politics. I don’t want it shaded by the desire to tell a feel-good story,” Obama said Sunday. “I believe that the Department of Defense and all those who head up our intelligence agencies understand that, and that I have made it repeatedly clear to all my top national security advisers that I never want them to hold back, even if the intelligence or their opinions about the intelligence, their analysis or interpretations of the data contradict current policy.” 

The saddest aspect of the entire scenario, though, is that upon reading about the newly discovered emails supposedly “misinforming”  the POTUS about the level of the ISIS threat, the first thing entering this writer’s mind is that the story may not even be true, but simply the manufacture of evidence to cover up massive foreign-policy incapability and ineptitude. Which, for this administration, is standard procedure. 

On another topic, a few minutes ago an a TV appeared showing Marco Rubio. The sound was off, so whatever he said went unheard. However, it most certainly was about his presidential campaign, leading to the thought that it really doesn’t matter what he said at all. Because if he had delivered the greatest pitch ever devised by man to promote his run for the Oval Office, he still has neither the experience nor credentials, to handle the job. 

He’s never governed anything in his life, knows less than zero about the nation’s military, has no skills regarding a 3.9 trillion dollar budget, and as far as the economy goes, he can’t even manage his own credit card debt. Health care reorganization is another area where he has no background, while any candidate with a mouth can tell us all that the borders need to be secured. It’s not rocket science, nor even difficult to figure out. In fact you can probably make an intelligent, well-informed  border security speech yourself.  

And by the way, the same lack of experience and valid presidential credentials apply to every Republican candidate who was never a governor or had similar governmental managerial experience. Which is why I keep repeating, the job doesn’t come with training wheels. Just look at the the nation’s position now, here and abroad, if you need further proof of what unproven, unskilled amateurs do when given the POTUS job. 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

Chuck Ross, Reporter @dailycaller.com, writes: “A new undercover video released by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas shows Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign vice chair, Huma Abedin, assuring an undercover reporter that the Democratic presidential candidate is committed to allowing Syrian refugees to settle in the U.S. and that Republican opposition to the plan is “really scary.”  

Abedin tells an undercover Project Veritas reporter during a closed-media event held last week in New York City: “We are a country of immigrants. We welcome people, and when you listen to the Republicans, and this is my battle cry, it is really scary on the other side.” 

“The alternative … we’re going to be an isolationist country, turning everybody away. It is not OK,” Abedin continued."

Ironically, and certainly lending proof to most Republican’s feeling that immigration, especially from places like Syria, need considerable analysis before continuing unbridled, is the following:  

“In that video, filmed just after ISIS terrorists killed 130 people in Paris, the Syrian men discussed using fake passports to travel to Germany and perhaps to the U.S. And asked if they like or dislike Clinton, they said they have a favorable view of the former secretary.”   

And they certainly should have a “favorable view” of the secretary, whereas: “While the Obama administration plans to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees next year, Clinton has said that the U.S. should accept 65,000 Syrian refugees.” 

Thus, while naïve, irrational idealists like Bill’s wife and Abedin, remain in their fantasy world, there’s very good news for their opposition. Because, “Many Republican presidential candidates side with the American public on the issue. According to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, 54 percent of respondents said they opposed allowing Syrian refugees. Forty-three percent support doing so.” 

Add this probable loss of votes due to the ongoing scandals over unauthorized  email servers, the Benghazi raid, and the misclassification of funds in the Clinton Foundation and for the good of the Democrat presidential election chances, one has to ask again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?

 

That's it for today folks. 

Adios