Author Archives: LashawnFKOP

Trump Once Called for Sending US Ground Troops to Fight ISIS and "Take That Oil"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has repeatedly said he has a secret and “foolproof” plan for defeating ISIS. This is not to be confused with his “detailed” public plan for crushing ISIS released by his campaign. In that public plan, Trump states, “My administration will aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS.” (That happens to be President Barack Obama’s current plan.) Trump’s public plan does not say anything about sending US combat troops into Iraq and Syria to engage ISIS. In fact, it includes no proposals related to the level of US troops in the region. But in a 2015 interview with Fox News host Bill O’Reilly on the day Trump entered the Republican presidential contest, the celebrity mogul indicated that he would deploy US combat forces to battle ISIS directly in order to grab oil fields that would then be handed over to US companies.

During this conversation, which was filmed in Trump’s office, O’Reilly asked the reality television star what he would do to beat back ISIS. Trump first answered with rhetoric: “I would hit them so hard your head would spin.” And he claimed, “I said in ’04, we should not go in and do that whole thing with Iraq.” (That was inaccurate—and the invasion of Iraq was in 2003.)

Then O’Reilly asked if Trump would send American ground troops into Syria. Trump replied with a vague statement: “I have a way that would be very effective with respect to ISIS.” O’Reilly pushed him on this: “You’d put American ground troops in to chase them around?” This exchange ensued:

Trump: Take back the oil. Once you go over and take back that oil, they have nothing.

O’Reilly: But how do you take it back?

Trump: You have to go in. You have to go in.

O’Reilly: With ground troops?

Trump: Well, you bomb the hell out of them, and then you encircle it, and then you go in.

This was a clear signal that Trump favored sending in US ground troops to fight ISIS to gain control of oil facilities. After that, he said, US oil companies could move in and seize the oil. “Once you take that oil,” Trump noted, “they have nothing left.” It seems obvious, though, that US oil companies—which actually are transnational companies—would only be able to “take that oil” if large areas of the region were secured by a great number of US ground troops.

Throughout the campaign, Trump has insisted that the United States should “take the oil” from Iraq and areas controlled by ISIS—an idea widely derided by military, international law, and energy experts—without ever explaining how this could happen. The idea of deploying US combat troops (after a bombing campaign) to fight ISIS and then win and control territory with oil facilities in Syria and Iraq—essentially, a US invasion—does not appear in Trump’s public plan. But it’s what Trump had in mind during his O’Reilly interview. Perhaps this is the big secret Trump has steadfastly refused to share with American voters before the election.

Visit site:

Trump Once Called for Sending US Ground Troops to Fight ISIS and "Take That Oil"

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Once Called for Sending US Ground Troops to Fight ISIS and "Take That Oil"

Let Us Investigate Hillary Clinton’s Latest Email Bombshell

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

From today’s LA Times coverage of the Hillary Clinton campaign:

On a day in which Clinton was hoping to inflict considerable damage on Donald Trump — this time, by ripping into his economic agenda — her campaign was on the defensive, scurrying to clean up the latest damaging revelations in years-old messages that were sent by Clinton and her staff and released as the result of a lawsuit.

….The fresh batch of emails was pried from the State Department thanks to a lawsuit filed by the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch. It revealed what appeared to be seedy dealings by Clinton’s team at the agency….The emails are not devastating, but they are damaging as Clinton struggles to boost her trustworthiness with voters.

I have developed a fairly regular habit of ignoring the latest Hillary “scandal” for a day or two, just to see how it’s going to play out. Nearly all of them turn out to be bogus, and it’s hardly worth the time to figure out how and why. So I just wait for other people to do it.

Even the ones that really are a problem are almost always overblown. Emailgate is a prime example. Yeah, it was bad judgment. Hillary screwed up, and if you think that’s reason enough not to vote for her, fine. But when you dig into the actual facts, there’s surprisingly little there. She had a private server. She turned over all her work emails when asked to. In an unprecedented judicial ruling, they were all released to the public and there was virtually nothing of interest there. Of the “classified” emails, most were retroactively classified (at a low level) in a dreary episode of interagency feuding; three were marked classified at the time but were marked improperly (and were trivial); and 110 were emails Hillary “should have known” were classified, but which dealt with a drone program that everyone on the planet already knew about.

So sure, it’s a screwup. But there’s not really that much to it. So what about the latest batch of emails. Do they really show “seedy dealings” by Team Hillary?

I dunno. One is from a Clinton Foundation executive asking a Hillary aide if she can set up a meeting for a big donor with someone at State. The Hillary aide says she’ll see what she can do, and then blows it off. In another, a foundation executive asks for help getting someone a job. He’s told that everyone already knows about the guy, and “Personnel has been sending him options.” In other words, he’s blown off. In yet another, it turns out that a Clinton aide spent some of her own time helping the foundation look for a new CEO.

So….what? People in Washington schmooze with people they know to help other people they know? Shocking, isn’t it? My guess is that the average aide to a cabinet member gets a dozen things like this a week. If all we can find here are two in four years—both of which were basically blown off—the real lesson isn’t that Hillary Clinton’s State Department was seedy. Just the opposite. It was almost pathologically honest.

Source:  

Let Us Investigate Hillary Clinton’s Latest Email Bombshell

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Let Us Investigate Hillary Clinton’s Latest Email Bombshell