Posted on 06/04/2014 6:12:20 AM PDT by Resettozero
Clearly distancing herself from Barack Obama as regards exchanging Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five high-level Taliban terrorists, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is making it known she "was personally and intensely involved in the debate over swapping five Taliban commanders for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in 2011 and 2012. But she had severe reservations about the potential deal, and was demanding stricter conditions for the release of the prisoners than what President Obama settled for last week".
It's also now being reported that "Clinton had a framework deal drawn up that was much tougher on the Taliban than what ultimately got done two years later". Given what seems to be an increasingly negative view of the deal that was done and the very real possibility of a run for the presidency in 2016 by Hillary, it's likely Team Hillary has decided to make sure her fingerprints are nowhere near the exchange.
Three former administration officials who were involved in the process told The Daily Beast that Clinton was worried about the ability to enforce the deal and disinclined to trust the Taliban or the Haqqani network in Pakistan, which held Bergdahl until this weekend. Clinton was so concerned, the former officials added, that she may not have even signed off if the negotiations had succeeded.
She was heavily involved from the beginning, she was very skeptical of the arrangement, she was very wary of it, one former administration official said. If we had come to some agreement she perhaps would have backed it, but we never got to that point.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
There are several questions to be answered here. First, who in the administration has been working three years on this? They evidently don’t talk to the CIA or Pentagon....or they would have known of massive issues connected to this. Who is the guy who talks to no one but the Taliban and the White House?
Second, if you have all this expertise in negotiation....why can’t you get that Marine out of Mexico? Couldn’t we offer a 100,000 of the illegals held in US prisons...for that one guy in Mexico?
Third, it just seems odd....but what else are you secretly negotiating on....without telling the senate? Do we need a full-time senate staff within the White House....just to figure out things like this ahead of time?
Fourth....if anyone had asked the Army why he was never listed as a POW...it would have made sense to do absolutely nothing? So are we to assume....the Army never said anything to the White House about this nutjob and how he walked away from his post?
Just my humble view....but this is stuff you’d expect out of a AAA-league baseball management staff. Stuff from rookies without any idea of what they were doing. Is that the team in the White House after six years?
You can help with that by posting some threads that keep the other stuff on OUR front page.
Hillary is a Democrat, therefore she lies as naturally as she breathes.
I’m willing to bet Ambassador Stevens was the one that was supposed to be taken hostage and traded for these 5 terrorist and probably other terrorist too.
And add to your list...
Skedaddles off to Poland for...what?
Is she not just a citizen right now? She’s no longer SOS or a Senator, why would she have any say in this? Does the President regularly consult with citizens over these matters?
The msm is moving their air support from Obama to Hillary.
A-ball, or even a developmental league.
She was for the swap, before she was against it.
Which Hillary is which? Perhaps she really is suffering from brain damage?
From article: “was personally and intensely involved in the debate over swapping five Taliban commanders for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in 2011 and 2012. But she had severe reservations about the potential deal, and was demanding stricter conditions for the release of the prisoners than what President Obama settled for last week”.
So Hillary was “all-in” on the deal. That’s what this article says, effectively. She just wanted some “stricter conditions” on the 5 prisoners.
Dear, Lawd, help us from these stupid people.
In other words, she was for it before she was against it.
She was against it before she was for it...
Obomba hustled Hillary on CBS' 60 Minutes to gaze in adoration, after Hill's arrogant dismissal of the Benghazi massacre before Congress. I thought sure Obama was gonna give 'er a B/J on broadcast tv....he was THAT grateful.
====================================================
Ummmmmm.....and Hillary's slapdown is so harsh on those "nice friendly" terrorists. I guess Hillary "forgot" she and Bill employed a terrorist.
BACKSTORY Billy Boy Clinton was grinning like a simpering fool at the annual meeting of the tax-exempt "Clinton Global Initiative Foundation"....even Boobomba was there hugging Billy like they were old pals.....all in the wake of the bombshell news that:
<><> the tax-exempt Clinton Global Initiative Foundation uses shady financing;
<><> the tax-exempt Clinton Global Initiative had employed an active Muzzie terrorist named Gehad el-Haddad (Gehad is Farsi for "jihad")
Gehad also knows how the Muslim Brotherhood launders money to finance terrorism, using "tax-exempt foundations."
===================================================================
Ut, oh----Hillary had a "premature enunciation" (snark).
Hillary Clinton Calls Benghazi Biggest Regret as Secretary of State
wall street journal, 4/23/14 / FR Posted by Sub-Driver
BOSTON Hillary Clinton reiterated Wednesday that her darkest time as secretary of state was the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Mrs. Clinton, in a speech to more than 3,000 people at a womens leadership conference here, called the attack and loss of lives very, very painful and certainly the biggest regret that I have as secretary of state.
Hillary noted that she had taken responsibility for security at the diplomatic outpost, where Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died, and had pledged to do everything she could to ensure a similar tragedy wont happen again. (Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
I agree. This was their second bite at the apple of freeing muslim terrorists after the first try was disrupted by Woods and Doherty. Expect more as the sands of time run out on this administration. Jarrett, Obama, Rice, Power and the rest of the muzzie-symps will want to free as many as they can before they have to vacate the WH.
how tough could the deal be? not tough enough... the fact is, they are free... no deal could hinder that once the exchange was made...
This is all blow up in her face.
i hope you are right! i hope this blows up in her face... she is such a liar...
LOL. She was for the deal before she was against it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3163210/posts
The dems praising Peanuts Carter right before Benghazi is a “FACT” about Benghazi which can’t be ignored.
Obama hasn’t talked to Peanuts once since his election in 2008 because early on repubs compared him to Peanuts Carter and with Obama we were getting Peanuts second term.
For 4 years Obama didn’t want to be associated with Peanuts in any shape form or fashion, so why praise Peanuts at the dem convention so he would be compared to Peanuts?
Here’s what I believed happened.
Hillary and Obama planned the attack in Benghazi and Stevens’ was supposed to be taken hostage.
Hillary could do what she does best and play ignorant claiming the attack was “spontaneous” because of a video.
Nobody above the level of idiot would believe the “spontaneous” lie so naturally Stevens being taken hostage would be compared to Peanuts and the Iranian hostage crisis.
Obama wasn’t supposed to win the election so his loss could be blamed on “racist republican dirty tricks” and “republicans collaborating with the terrorist to make Obama look like Peanuts Carter”.
Obama being lame duck releases terrorist to get Stevens back, but he isn’t released until Romney takes office giving Hillary an “October Surprise II” to use against Romney for 4 years until her run for president in 2016.
Republicans end up getting blamed for collaborating with terrorist.
The weapons Hillary and Obama were giving to the terrorist can be blamed on republicans since the terrorist “took” the weapons in the attack planned by republicans.
5 or more terrorist being released on the world would also be blamed on republicans.
After 4 years of nonstop terrorist attacks all because Romney and the republicans collaborated with terrorist to make Obama look like Peanuts Carter, Hillary would be a walk-in for president in 2016.
So, Hilliary was negotiating with terrorists too...ok - I believe *that*.
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.