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 ...
“CANKLES”... damn near as good as Obama in regard to “leading from behind”.
With a 3rd party when the country is almost evenly divided, 2 of the 3 have to have an agreement that one doesn’t intend to win, like Perot did in the 1992 election.
Perot had no intention of winning his objective was to keep Bush from winning.
Run 3rd party on the right it divides the right. Both actually want to win and will do everything they can to win.
Left wing freaks, if they move to the right at all, would go for the more moderate of the 2 on the right.
You would end up with a McCain or Romney type at best and doubtful even that.
Hillary can buy the black vote by supporting reparations for slavery, which she already did in 2002.
So, conservatives scoot out the GOPe leadership or that’s it?
Most of the GOPe would prefer a left wing loon to a conservative.
With a left wing loon as president the GOPe is somebody important, he gets good press, he gets courted by all his left wing loon friends and invited to all the parties.
With a conservative as president the GOPe loose all that unless he turns against the conservative president.
Sorry, the GOPe gotta go.
Apology accepted.
Might be a sign regarding how similar the two Presidents behave.
“Might be a sign regarding how similar the two Presidents behave.”
So you believe it was just a coincidence the dems praised Peanuts at their convention just days before an attack very similar to the attack on our embassy when Peanuts was president and the terrorist had no knowledge of the dems praising Peanuts.
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.