Oh, Here's Another Policy Abigail Spanberger and VA Dems Support That Screws Over...
Trump Just Won Huge Concession From Iranian Regime
Gavin Newsom Funded an NGO That Brings HIV-Positive 'Migrants' to America
Anti-ICE Protesters Are Stalking Federal Employees in Minneapolis
Newsweek Runs Headline on Story It Calls Unverified, and the Press Dumping on...
'They Just Care About Power.' Scott Jennings Lays Out What Virginia Redistricting Was...
California Sees Drop in Homicides. There's A Reason for That and Leftists Won't...
Vivek Ramaswamy Slams Critique of Israeli Aid and Some People's Odd Obsession With...
A Virginia Circuit Court Has Just Ruled The State's New Congressional Map Unconstitutional
Here's Why The Situation In Iran is Looking Disastrous For China
Iran Just Reached For Another Piece of Leverage As The IRGC Threatens to...
AI Data Centers: The New Populist Target
Navy Secretary Phelan Exits Administration Immediately, Is Replaced With Hung Cao
DOJ Files Complaint Against DC Water Over 200-Million-Gallon Sewage Spill into Potomac Riv...
Five Romanians Charged in $1M Scheme to Steal SNAP Benefits From Low-Income Families...
Tipsheet

Hillary: The U.S. Shouldn't Feel Threatened by the Taliban Five, or Something

Hillary: The U.S. Shouldn't Feel Threatened by the Taliban Five, or Something

Team Hillary is all over the place vis-à-vis the Bergdahl deal.

First, the former secretary of state cautiously defended it. Then, after the White House was caught flat-footed and endlessly criticized for releasing the Taliban Five in exchange for a possible traitor, a “former senior administration official” claimed that Hillary raised serious objections to any deal with the Taliban during her years at State. Curiously, too, around the same time, three former State Department officials also told the Daily Beast that if she did strike a bargain, it would have been way less conciliatory to Sgt. Bergdahl's captors.

Advertisement

Now, however, she’s ostensibly back to outright defending the president's decision, taking a page out of Rep. Jackie Speier’s (D-CA) handbook by both downplaying the Taliban’s influence and asserting that the Taliban Five pose no real danger to the United States. You see, in her view, these monsters only threaten the national security interests of…Middle Eastern countries, or something:

Three points: (1) The United States has troops stationed in Afghanistan. Freeing these Gitmo detainees, in other words, directly puts American lives at risk. (2) Top spies in the intelligence community have already testified that four out of the five Taliban commanders now tasting freedom will almost certainly (once again) wage war against the United States. (3) Members of Congress have raised serious and sober objections to the deal, in large part because it threatens the safety and security of all American citizens.

Advertisement

Related:

TALIBAN

For what it's worth, members of the military overwhelmingly opposed letting these terrorists go. And, based on the reasons outlined above, it's easy to see why.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement