Posted on 11/18/2013 11:50:24 AM PST by RoosterRedux
The secretary doesn’t agree with Obama’s team, especially Susan Rice, on how to deal with Egypt. Unfortunately for Rice, Kerry is the one on the ground—and he’s doing things his way.
Before Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent trip to Cairo, National Security Adviser Susan Rice told him to make strong statements in public and private about the trial of deposed President Mohamed Morsi. On his own, Kerry decided to disregard the White House’s instructions.
The tension between the national security adviser and the secretary of state spilled over into public view in the past week, when Rice laid out her critical appraisal of the Egyptian government, which contradicted Kerry’s assessment that Egypt was “on the path to democracy.” The now public rift has been simmering behind the scenes for months and illustrates the strikingly divergent Egypt policies the White House and the State Department are pursuing.
The turf battles and internal confusion are hampering the administration’s approach to Egypt, say lawmakers, experts, and officials inside both governments.
“John Kerry doesn’t agree with Susan Rice on big portions of our Egypt policy, and he made a deliberate and conscious decision not to mention Morsi in his Cairo meetings,” an administration official told The Daily Beast. “Susan Rice wasn’t happy about it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
And who was Susan Rice covering for in Benghazi? The attackers who are the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD!
Oh, this is a great sign. I’m sure wonderful things are on the horizon.
Another sign that the wheels are coming off the administration.
I think he serves at the behest of the president. Obama, especially, brooks no dissent. You disagree, you’re fired.
On the other hand, would somebody please pass the popcorn?
Obviously, John Kerry is racist.
The catsup boy represents the interests of Heinz Corp.
Kerry doesn’t respect Susan Rice because she’s black.
Just ask Oprah.
Could it be that John Kerry has moralistic values that exceed those of Obama’s and Rice’s?
I hate it when I have to agree with Horse Head.
According to Tina’s Daily Beast, Kerry is just reflecting State’s bureaucratic inclination to support governments, despite their foibles. This is just a half-hearted stab at journalistic integrity.
The question is, who is Obama backing? If he negates Kerry he defies the senate in a way that negating Rice never could. Kerry is one of the senate’s own and though we all hate him, he has a wealth of deep contacts and is a veteran of the political game. Rice is way out on a limb and out of her league in the Dem political cirlces and even Obama won’t act to save her when pressed! The knives are out...all the GOP has to do is stay out of the way!
But But.. I thought Egypt was a done deal!
Obama is awesome! he pioneered the Arab Spring.
Oprah will be proclaiming Kerry’s racism shortly.
Kerry has always been a loose cannon.
No matter what I think of Obama (can’t stand him) or his idiot Susan Rice, THEIR belief that they could control Kerry just because he was a fellow traveler like them was just another point in Obama’s naive amatuer standing as POTUS.
They liked Billary because she never pretended to make or help make foreign policy. All she wanted was the thousands of photo-ops with her and foreign leaders as “evidence” of her years sitting in the chair of the Secretary of State. To actually try to be a force and player with the White House team on foreign policy would havew given her the baggage of having to defend Obama’s foreign policy failures, when she made her POTUS run later on. Now while it is true she does not have any great accomplishments to claim as Secretary of State, she also does not have HER hands on most all Obama’s foreign policy failures.
Kerry on the other hand is looking to “do something” and does not want to be mere place-holder at the state department. It could be he sees the gig as his last great opportunity or maybe he’s enetertaining another run for POTUS.
Watch him get outmanuevered by Rice and Jarret and be left as the “one in charge” on the next great admin foreign policy failure. Maybe instead of resigning he’ll be sacked.
Kerry’s gonna start a war somewhere before he’s done.
There’s something fishy about this.
Hillary vs. Kerry. "What difference does it make?", versus "What?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.