Wait, USAID Was Involved in Donald Trump's Impeachment?
CBS Released the Unedited Kamala Harris Interview. It's Beyond Brutal.
CNN Host Loses It When a GOP Rep Presses Her About Military Families...
This Is Likely Why Politico Couldn't Make Payroll Last Week
DOGE to the Rescue?
USAID Might Be the One Thing Democrats Love More Than Abortion
Expanding the GOP Base by Defending Religious Freedoms Against CCP Aggression
CIA Reportedly Offers Entire Workforce Buyout Offer
A Key Part of Murphy's Environmental Agenda Collapses
Ending the Taxpayer-Funded Blue Pipeline
President Trump’s Bold and Justified Move to Pardon the FACE Act Weaponization Victims
Personnel Is Policy: Hassett Brings Fiscal Responsibility to the White House
Lara Trump Has a New Gig
Promises Made, Promises Kept
A Great Birthday Party Is Coming
Tipsheet

We Asked Mayor Pete's Team to Explain His Soleimani Answer, And Boy Did They Spin

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

Manchester, NH - When former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg said that he would not have called for the strike that killed Iranian terror leader Qassem Soleimani, Twitter was outraged, to say the least. Soleimani was a monster who helped orchestrate past bombings as well as the attack on the U.S. embassy in Iraq. 

Advertisement

Yet, in the post-debate spin room, Buttigieg's team tried to suggest that that was one of his best answers.

He showed great "restraint, yet confidence" when thinking about that question, according to his New Hampshire co-chair Maura Sullivan, who served as a senior leader at the Pentagon under President Obama. She said she saw "up close and personal how life and death decisions are made, the type of person we want in the Situation Room, someone who has the temperament, who doesn't just respond yes or no to, 'would I do that strike?' without looking at all the facts." And that person, she said, is Mayor Buttigieg, especially after his Soleimani answer. 

"That was a presidential moment," she insisted.

I pushed back and noted that Soleimani, according to national security intelligence, was plotting more attacks on Americans.

"It is very clear he's got the blood of a lot of Americans on his hands," she admitted. "Including a lot of soldiers, sailors, and Marines that I served with in Iraq. But you have to look at the long term strategic consequences of that action and Pete is the commander in chief who is going to think through the first second, third, fourth, fifth order of consequences of any decision that he makes for the United States and of our entire global community."

Advertisement

Maryland lawmaker Anthony G. Brown, another campaign surrogate for the mayor, tried to suggest that it was Trump who did the most damage to American servicemen and women because Iran's retaliatory strikes left many with brain injuries.

"What we saw from the attack is that he put U.S. service members at greater risk and you have now 30 or so that are now experiencing traumatic brain injury," Brown said. "That's a lifelong potentially debilitating condition that President Trump inflicted on U.S. service members because of his reckless conduct."

He insists there were alternatives the commander in chief could have taken. He didn't list those alternatives.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement