Watch Scott Jennings Slap Down This Shoddy Talking Point About the Spending Bill
Merry Christmas, And Democrats Can Go To Hell
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 247: Advent and Christmas Reflection - Seven Lessons
O Come, O Come, Emmanuel, and Ransom Captive Israel
Why Christmas Remains the Greatest Story of All Time
Why the American Healthcare System Has Been Broken for Years
Christmas: Ties to the Past and Hope for the Future
Trump Should Broker Israeli-Turkish Rapprochement for Peace in Middle East
America Must Dominate in Crypto
Biden Was Too 'Mentally Fatigued' to Take Call From Top Committee Chair Before...
Who Is Going to Replace JD Vance In the Senate?
'I Have a Confession': CNN Host Makes Long-Overdue Apology
There Are New Details on the Alleged Suspect in Trump Assassination
Doing Some Last Minute Christmas Shopping? Make Sure to Avoid Woke Companies.
Biden Signs Stopgap Bill Into Law Just Hours Before Looming Gov’t Shutdown Deadline
Tipsheet

WATCH: Warren Avoids Condemning Terrorist Soleimani, Repeatedly Attacks Trump Instead

Sunday morning, I saw this tweet from a prominent foreign policy and national security writer, and wondered if it might be hyperbolic or exaggerated.  After watching the exchange in question, Rogin's assessment seems accurate, which is a disgraceful indictment of Elizabeth Warren.  She offered plenty of criticism for the President of the United States on CNN -- including flirting with the conspiracy theory that the strike was ordered as a 'distraction' from impeachment -- but could not muster a cross word for Iran's terrorism mastermind:

Advertisement

It was worse on another network:


For reasons David French analyzed last week (see more here), the term "assassination" is misleading at best.  And her dodging about her initial -- and obviously correct -- characterization of Soleimani as a murderer appears to be an embarrassing outgrowth of criticism she endured from the hard left:


The man led a US-designated terrorist organization for two decades and is responsible for the deaths of at least 600 Americans -- and tens of thousands of others.  But such things mustn't be mentioned aloud when there's an American president to criticize.  Shameful.  As for the lefty/media talking point that Soleimani may not have been plotting an imminent attack (it's safe to say that he's always plotting attacks, having just orchestrated a lethal attack against Americans in recent days, as well as the embassy siege), and that the strike was rash or impulsive, read this carefully-reported Reuters story:

Advertisement

The Revolutionary Guards commander instructed his top ally in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and other powerful militia leaders to step up attacks on U.S. targets in the country using sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran, two militia commanders and two security sources briefed on the gathering told Reuters...At the Baghdad villa, Soleimani told the assembled commanders to form a new militia group of low-profile paramilitaries - unknown to the United States - who could carry out rocket attacks on Americans housed at Iraqi military bases. He ordered Kataib Hezbollah - a force founded by Muhandis and trained in Iran - to direct the new plan, said the militia sources briefed on the meetings.

More:

Advertisement


We also know that President Trump had previously declined to take out Soleimani when presented with the opportunity.  This was not slap-dash.  It was thought through and entirely justified.  I'll leave you with the Democratic ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee sounding satisfied by an intel briefing (featuring information that has been referenced by non-political officials):


Also, read this on the Iraqi Parliament's vote to expel US troops. It's not quite what it seems.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement