REPUBLICAN REDEFINED » FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Marco Rubio Foreign Policy Speech at Brookings “There is Still Only One Nation Capable of Leading” (VIDEO)

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:00:12 +0000

“In confronting the challenges of our time, there are more nations than ever capable of contributing, but there is still only one that is capable of leading.”

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) gave a much-anticipated foreign policy speech Wednesday at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. While many have been speculating that the speech was an “audition” for a coming role and Mitt Romney’s Vice President, I’m inclined to believe the young senator is merely attempting to expand his reach and influence.

As to the speech, I watched most of it live and would give it a solid B+. I’m sure that too will be a topic of much debate in coming days. The McCain crowd will probably say he didn’t go far enough and the Paul wing of the Party will probably call it treasonous. I thought it was solid and for a first major speech on foreign policy, I’d say he hit it out of the park.

What Rubio represents is a sense of optimism in all things American. His message is that this country is and always will be what it has been and should be… just so long as we don’t lose Faith in the things that have made us great. In the years that I’ve been following his career, I’ve disagreed with him on a number of issues; but I’ve never for even a moment doubted whether or not this guy gets the quintessential ”It.”

—

Here’s a link to a short highlight version or watch the full thing below.

You can read the entire transcript of the speech here…

Linked at The Lonely Conservative. Thanks.

—-

A few of the high points…

Now, lest anyone accuse me of claiming that American power has ushered in the biblical promise of a “new heaven and a new earth,” let’s stop and remember that the world America made is better, but it is not perfect. But it has been a vastly more peaceful and prosperous age than any other age in recorded history.

So this is the world America made, but what is the role for America now? Is now finally the time for us to mind our own business? Is now the time for us to allow others to lead? Is now the time for us to play the role of equal partner?

I always start by reminding people that what happens all over the world is our business. Every aspect of lives is directly impacted by global events. The security of our cities is connected to the security of small hamlets in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Our cost of living, the safety of our food , and the value of the things we invent, make and sell are just a few examples of everyday aspects of our lives that are direcly related to events abroad and make it impossible for us to focus only on our issues here are home.

The next question I am asked is why doesn’t someone else lead for a change? Why do we always have to be taking care of all the problems in the world? Isn’t it time for someone else to step up?

I always begin my answer to that question with a question of my own. If we start doing less, who will start doing more? For example, would a world order where China, at least as we know it right now, was the leading power be as benignly disposed to the political and economic aspirations of other nations as we are?

We hold out hope for a new China of tomorrow, but for now we must deal with the China of today.

Finally, I am asked, if we still have to lead, can’t we at least be equal partners with someone else? In fact, shouldn’t we rely on other nations to carry more of the burden? After all, we all know that they resent us telling them what to do, right?

In this new century, more than ever before, America should work with out capable allies in finding solutions to global problems. Not because America has gotten weaker, but because our partners have grown stronger. It’s worth pointing out, that is not a new idea for us. Our greatest successes have always occurred in partnership with other like-minded nations. America has acted unilaterally in the past – and I believe it should continue to do so in the future — when necessity requires. But our preferred option since the U.S. became a global leader has been to work with others to achieve our goals.

So yes, global problems do require international coalitions. On that point this administration is correct. But effective international coalitions don’t form themselves. They need to be instigated and led, and more often than not, they can only be instigated and led by us. And that is what this administration doesn’t understand. Yes, there are more countries able and willing to join efforts to meet the global challenges of our time. But experience has proven that American leadership is almost always indispensible to their success.

Everywhere we look, we are presented with opportunities for American leadership to help shape a better world in this new century. We have to view these opportunities within the context of the fact that in every region of the world, other countries look apprehensively on the growing influence of newly emerging powers in their midst, and look to the U.S. to counterbalance them.

Iran’s dangerous nuclear ambitions are about more than just weapons. Iran wants to become the most dominant power in the Middle East. But given Iran’s history of human rights abuses, fomenting Shia versus Sunni conflict and sponsorship of terrorism as a tool of statecraft, the world must never allow that to happen. Fortunately, preventing a dominant Iran is a goal we share with virtually every other nation in the region. Certainly we welcome Russia’s and China’s cooperation in facing this challenge. But the prospect of a nuclear capable Iran is so unacceptable that we must be prepared to act with or without them. We have a host of willing partners in every region of the world who share our concerns and are relying on our leadership to compel Iran to abandon its ambitions.

Preferably, we can succeed through coercive means short of military force. We should be open to negotiations with Iran. But always remember that they should not be deemed a success when they only lead to further negotiations. Stronger pressure shouldn’t be postponed in the expectation our forbearance will encourage Iran to act in good faith. Nothing in our experience with Iran suggests it considers such gestures as anything other than a lack of resolve on our part.

Ultimately however, we must remember that their ambitions so far have come with a high tolerance for pain. Therefore, even as we work through the United Nations and with the international community on sanctions and negotiations, we should operate on a dual track. We should also be preparing our allies, and the world, for the reality that unfortunately, if all else fails, preventing a nuclear Iran may require a military solution.

Our goal for our own region should be pretty straightforward: a coalition of neighboring democratic nations that trade freely and live peacefully with one another.

I disagree with the way in which the current administration has chosen to engage. For while there are few global problems we can solve by ourselves, there are virtually no global problems that can be solved without us. In confronting the challenges of our time, there are more nations than ever capable of contributing, but there is still only one that is capable of leading.

And I disagree with voices in my own party who argue we should not engage at all. Who warn we should heed the words of John Quincy Adams not to go “abroad, in search of monsters to destroy”.

I disagree because all around us we see the human face of America’s influence in the world. It actually begins with not just our government, but our people. Millions of people have been the catalyst of democratic change in their own countries. But they never would have been able to connect with each other if an American had not invented Twitter.

Even in our military engagements, the lasting impact of our influence on the world is hard to ignore. Millions of people have emerged from poverty around the world in part because our Navy protects the freedom of the seas allowing the ever increasing flow of goods between nations.

We do these things because we are a compassionate people. And we also do it because it is in our national interest. Because perhaps more than any other nation on the earth, we understand that a world that is freer, more just, more peaceful and more prosperous poses less of a threat.

I know this is a time of great uncertainty. A time when many wonder if America is in decline. As Bob Kagan points out in his book, however, there have been other times when we felt less than confident about the future. We need to look no further than the decade of my birth for an example.

Arizona Immigration Law Goes Before Supreme Court: Obama’s Lawyer Disappoints, Again

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:30:19 +0000

Chief Justice Roberts: “It seems to me the federal government just doesn’t want to know who’s here illegally.”

If that’s all you heard about today’s Arizona Immigration Law (SB1070) oral arguments, I think you might be able to draw the conclusion it was not a good day for the Solicitor General before the Supreme Court. Sadly, for Donald B. Verrilli Jr., resistance came from both ends of the ideological spectrum.

“I’m terribly confused by your answer”

“I’m terribly confused by your answer,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who went on to say that the federal government can always decline to pick up illegal immigrants when Arizona officials call.

AP: Liberal and conservative justices reacted skeptically to the Obama administration’s argument that the state exceeded its authority when it made the records check, and another provision allowing suspected illegal immigrants to be arrested without a warrant, part of Arizona law aimed at driving illegal immigrants elsewhere.

“You can see it’s not selling very well”

“You can see it’s not selling very well,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Obama administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

It was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts. The other blocked provisions make it a state crime for immigrants not to have immigration registration papers and for illegal immigrants to seek work or hold a job.

It wasn’t all bad for the Obama administration’s top advocate.

WASHINGTON TIMES: The Obama administration was on its firmest ground when it argued Arizona should not be allowed to impose state penalties such as jail time against illegal immigrants who try to seek jobs.

Federal law chiefly targets employers, not employees, and Mr. Verrillisaid adding stiffer penalties at the state level is not coordination. He saidCongress’s 1986 immigration law laying out legal penalties was meant to be a comprehensive scheme, and Congress left employees untouched — and Justice Sotomayor seemed to agree.

“It seems odd to think the federal government is deciding on employer sanctions and has unconsciously decided not to punish employees,” she told Paul D. Clement, who argued the case on behalf of Arizona.

The Court is expected to announce a decision on the AZ law before the end of its summer term. Considering a ruling on the Affordable Care Act is also due out around that time, it could mean some extremely tense days around the White House – and the Halls of Congress for that matter. If ObamaCare goes down and SB1070 is upheld, I’d expect a firestorm of “activist judge” rhetoric that could potentially factor in to November elections.

Iran Reverse Engineering Downed US RQ-170 Sentinel Drone

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:52:33 +0000

Wait. I thought the President asked them to return that, no?

YAHOO NEWS: Iran claimed Sunday that it had recovered data from an American spy drone that went down in Iran last year including that it was used to spy on Osama bin Laden’s house weeks before he was killed by U.S. forces. Iran also said it was building a copy of the surveillance aircraft.

Tehran says it brought down the RQ-170 Sentinel, a top-secret surveillance drone with stealth technology, and has flaunted the capture as a victory for Iran and a defeat for the United States. The U.S. says the drone malfunctioned and downplayed any suggestion that Iran could mine the aircraft for sensitive information because of measures taken to limit the intelligence value of drones operating over hostile territory.

The drone went down last December in eastern Iran and was recovered by Iran almost completely intact. After initially saying only that it had lost a drone operating near the Afghan-Iran border, U.S. officials eventually confirmed the drone was monitoring Iran’s military and nuclear facilities.

Washington has asked for it back, a request Iran rejected.

The chief of the aerospace division of the powerful Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, told state television that the captured surveillance drone is a “national asset” for Iran and that he could not reveal full technical details.

But he did provide some samples of the data that he claimed Iranian experts had recovered from the aircraft, state television reported.

“There is almost no part hidden to us in this aircraft. We recovered part of the data that had been erased. There were many codes and characters. But we deciphered them by the grace of God,” Hajizadeh said.

Oh, it gets better… They’ve got it; they’re figuring it out; and they want us to know about it. More Iran being Iran? Could they really pull this off?

The U.S. Defense Department said it does not discuss intelligence matters and would not comment on the Iranian claims.

The semi-official Mehr news agency said Iran had reverse-engineered the aircraft and has begun using that knowledge to build a copy of the drone.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said on “Fox News Sunday” that he views the reports with skepticism.

“There is a history here of Iranian bluster, particularly, now when they are on the defensive because of the economic sanctions against them. Look, it was not good for the U.S. when the drone went down in Iran and not good when the Iranians grabbed it. I don’t have confidence at this point that they are really able to make a copy of it,” Lieberman said.

Joe Lieberman on Secret Service; “History Full of Cases Where Sex Compromised Security, Intelligence” (VIDEO)

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 00:08:02 +0000

The Right’s favorite Democrat/Independent made an appearance on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace to discuss the GSA and Secret Service scandals this morning. While an interview with Senator Lieberman rarely causes a my hear to race, it’s still a million times better than having to listen to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in the Am to appease those that still believe Fair and Balanced is a cause worth the sacrifice.

I often say that if Joe Lieberman was a Republican, he’d immediately assume the mantle of my least favorite Republican. I like him. It’s just that the only reason I like him is that he’s the most tolerable from that side of the aisle. I guess what I’m saying here is being my favorite Democrat in the Senate is about like being Valedictorian of summer school. It is what it is.

That said, Senator Lieberman actually hit on precisely what I see as the real issue of consequence as it relates to Secret Service agents drinking and paying for the services of call girls.

“History is full of cases where enemies have compromised people in security or in intelligence positions with sex. And beyond that, in a much more practical way, I don’t think we want our Secret Service agents drinking bottles of vodka and carousing with women before they’re going on duty to protect the President.”

“If the Secret Service gets the reputation that when they’re off duty – not when they’re on – they’re going to be acting like a bunch of college students on ‘Spring Weekend’, then people who are hostile to the US; to people who may actually want to attack the President of the United States will begin to take advantage of that vulnerability.”

We’ll ignore that he called it “Spring Weekend”; rather than Spring Break. It’s been a few years since he did a keg-stand or funneled a beer. But he’s right. Sex makes people stupid and do stupid things. And smart people know that and use it against them.

I think that pretty much explains the relationship between men and women… and speaks to why these lapses in judgment are dangerous and troublesome. The prostitution makes for good headlines. A culture or an environment that allows it puts American security at risk and lives in jeopardy.

Darrell Issa, Peter King on Meet the Press; Secret Service Investigation Bigger than Prostitution (VIDEO)

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:16:44 +0000

Chairman of the Congressional Oversight and Government Reform Committee Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee Peter King (R-NY) joined David Gregory on Meet the Press to discuss the ongoing Secret Service investigation in each of their respective committees.

I’ll save you the thirteen minutes and tell you up front that neither man really shared anything in this interview that most didn’t already know. Both support Director Mark Sullivan and believe he should keep his post and both firmly believe and expect those directly involved in the scandal to be terminated. The only thing I really took away from the interview was a sense that – at least these two – generally understand why this is a legitimate story. The prostitution was “bad”; but the potential threat to national security was the real offense. If this sort of behavior was really the norm and not the exception; is it really that far-fetched to believe hostile parties may use it to their advantage? Don’t they make Bond movies about that sort of thing?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Friday Linkage: 4/20/2012

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:15:13 +0000

I was going to start the day with one of my “Right Wing Extremists” link-fests; but then I realized that takes forever and decided that in the interest of actually completing the undertaking, I would focus on the daily reads… and share a few recently released photos (courtesy of TMZ) of the Colombian prostitute that will probably do more for the Colombian tourism industry than anything not named Sofia Vergara.

LD at Political Realities talks Keystone – the pipeline; not the beer. Keystone Pipeline Has New Nebraska Route

The Reaganite Republican offers some perspective… Sanford Blacks Beat White Man With Hammer – Not a Hate Crime

Adrienne calls’em like she sees’em… The Intellectually Challenged Left is Racist to the Core

Motor City Times Profiles Stupidity and lands on Harry Reid and his recent claim that “Senators love getting junk mail.”

Just a Conservative Girl has an anniversary today – 3 years of dutiful blogging.

The Whited Sepulchre surveys “Which candidate would never eat your dog?” Here’s a hint. He’s now polling around 6% nationally…

Big Fur Hat at i Own the World tells us… Why I Could Never Really Stop Loving Ann Coulter Altogether

Matt at Conservative Hideout 2.0 asks the question… Culture of Death: Is History Repeating Itself?

Proof Positive has a video that says everything that needs to be said about the energy debate… “Ten Years Ago, Dems Told Us “ANWR Won’t Produce for 7- 10 Years”

The Gay Patriot poses the question(s)… Can government make life fair for gay people? (Should it?)

From Protein Wisdom… When Nancy Pelosi Speaks… something idiotic is bound to come out of her cosmetically stretched and plumped pie hole. Case in point: “Amend the First Amendment”

Lonely Conservative goes there as well… Pelosi Wants to Amend 1st Amendment to Get Money Out of Politics, Obama Failed to Disclose Millions in Donations in 2008

And the Wy Blog takes the cake for headline of the day. Need I say more? Ladies, you could win a dinner date with George Clooney!

–

See more photos of the Colombian “escort” here…

Ozzie Guillen Apology Presser; Suspended 5 Games for Fidel Castro Comments to Time (VIDEO)

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 17:59:55 +0000

Miami Marlins manager Ozzie Guillen did his best Tuesday to “mend fences” with the South Beach Cuban-American community in a press conference where he offered an emotional apology for comments he made in an interview with Time Magazine wherein he spoke fondly of the former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

“I love Fidel Castro … I respect Fidel Castro. You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last sixty years but that [expletive] is still there.”

One doesn’t have to be Cuban-American to understand how and why those kind of comments would raise more than a few eyebrows. As a still relatively new American citizen himself – formerly a citizen of Venezuela – I don’t think it’s stretching the limits of the imagination to assume Ozzie probably understands the very harsh realities of living beneath a dictatorial regime. I can’t speak for the Latin American community, but I think Mr. Guillen’s past probably contributed to the backlash.

Add that to the fact that Guillen was brought to Miami as a bit of a marketing ploy to help capitalize on the majority minority population of Latin Americans in the South Beach community and it’s pretty easy to see how and why this story turned into a firestorm from many angles.

The Marlins, for their part in the story, suspended Guillen 5 games for his comments and publicly condemned the sentiments echoed in the interview. While I don’t necessarily agree with suspending a coach/player/employee for speaking his mind, I do understand the business consequences of such very public utterances. Ozzie is the face of the franchise. Granted, the Marlins brought him in from Chicago knowing he was a bit of a lightning rod; but either way, I get it.

Remember when folks were praising Ozzie for hammering Sean Penn’s support of Hugo Chavez?

What I’m saying here is I think it’s a stretch to assume the Marlins thought their new manager incapable of weighing in on such lofty non-baseball-related topics. Buyer beware.

Because I’m a sports fan, a baseball fan, and a sponge for news of any kind; I watched the Guillen press conference today and was thoroughly convinced he was sorry for his comments. While I don’t always buy the “lost in translation” defense, I do believe it could have contributed to the story – a point Guillen raised in his apology press conference.

At the news conference, Guillen said his comments were misinterpreted by the reporter, and he doesn’t love or admire the dictator.

“I was saying I cannot believe somebody who hurt so many people over the years is still alive,” Guillen told the news conference.

Guillen was careful not to throw Time Magazine or the author of the piece under the bus by playing the “out of context” card – which leads me to believe he was probably speaking casually and thought that portion of the interview would amount to nothing more than a throwaway line. I liken it to something I might say casually about Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. ”You gotta love that crazy (expletive). I respect that she never wavers even when everything that comes out of her mouth is total garbage.” If you … that quote, I “love…respect… Debbie Wasserman-Schultz…because she never wavers.”

I don’t mean to play Ozzie defender here. Such is not my intention. I merely understand how these things typically go. He failed to raise that defense today in his press conference, so I could be totally off the mark. He went with the “misinterpreted” defense which is similar, yet different because the latter blames the dustup on translation rather than context.

Either way, he appeared sincere and contrite in his apology, so from where I sit… matter resolved.

My hope is that the presser was the first step in putting this story to bed and healing wounds between the Marlins and their community. The thought of a community boycotting its team is deeply troubling and would be felt around the League as a whole.

America’s Pastime deserves better than to be marred in its opening week by a story involving Fidel Castro – that doesn’t involve a stud pitcher or 5-tool player defecting from Cuba to sign with the Yankees.

video platform video management video solutions video player

Hot Mic Obama to Medvedev on Missile Defense: “After my election I have more flexibility”

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:30:38 +0000

Oops. President Obama was caught in a candid moment – not knowing his microphone was still live – telling Russian President Dmitri Medvedev he’ll have more flexibility on missile defense after the election.

From Jake Tapper @ ABC NEWS:

President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.

President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…

President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

I suppose, in fairness and on balance, the President was probably not saying anything here that sensible people could reasonably infer. If he wins re-election, he’ll more of less be able to become the president and the leader we all know he’d like to be – a global apologizing appeasement-loving European-style Lefty.

And that’s the dilemma folks.

Still election will no doubt turn on the status of the nation’s economy – unemployment, consumer confidence, gas prices, etc. And as is the case with most presidential elections, the issue or issues that take center stage in the race are rarely those which will ultimately define a presidency.

So, while most are focused on what our economy could potentially look like after another 4-year term with this guy; I think the most prudent questions to ask may be what kind of agenda this president would push in other arenas like foreign policy or domestically on matters like gay marriage and abortion.

Make no mistake about it. This guy will want a swan song. Frankly, I envision for years of swan song(s). The social issues will make him immortal with academia and those that will write the history of his presidency. Foreign policy will help him justify that Peace Prize he won before taking office.

—

video platform video management video solutions video player

US Government Paid $50k Per Victim for Afghan Shooting Spree

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 23:12:51 +0000

According to a number of reports, the US government apparently paid $50,000 to each of the families of those who lost their lives at the hands of the American soldier – Staff Sgt. Robert Bales – that stands accused of killing 17 the southern Afghanistan and injuring many more.

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) – The United States has paid $50,000 in compensation for each Afghan killed in the shooting spree attributed to a U.S. soldier in southern Afghanistan, an Afghan official and a community elder said Sunday.

The families of the dead received the money Saturday at the governor’s office, said Kandahar provincial council member Agha Lalai. Each wounded person received $11,000, Lalai said. Community elder Jan Agha confirmed the same figures.

They were told that the money came from U.S. President Barack Obama, Lalai said.

A U.S. official confirmed that compensation had been paid but declined to discuss exact amounts, saying only that it reflected the devastating nature of the incident. The official spoke anonymously because of the sensitive nature of the subject.

As much as this sounds unusual or even somewhat undignified, it is relatively SOP in this kind of incident. Critics domestically and abroad will certainly have sharp opinions about the payments; but from where I sit, it’s extremely difficult to pass judgment on any party for making such a gesture – or receiving it.

Joe Biden Says Bin Laden Raid was “Most Audacious Plan in 500 Years”

T CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:17:31 +0000

Biden, Biden, Biden. Ever wonder how many times President Obama has wished he could turn back times and rethink the whole – Joe will be a good addition to this campaign decision?

Vice President Biden at a fundraising event in New Jersey Monday night (comments from the pool report)

H/T HotAir and The Huffington Post

“You can go back 500 years. You cannot find a more audacious plan. Never knowing for certain. We never had more than a 48 percent probability that he was there.”

“Do any one of you have a doubt that if that raid failed that this guy would be a one-term president?”

“This guy is willing to do the right thing and risk losing.”

500 years?

I struggle with math, but I’m fairly certain that covers a pretty sizable chunk of American history. The most audacious plan to date?

—

Ed Morrissey put together a quick list of potential rivals…

Guadalcanal
Raid on Tokyo
Battle of Cowpens
Dunkirk
Bunker Hill
Agincourt, if one is willing to go back 600 years or so

The true award winner in this category is the D-Day invasion of June 1944 of Fortress Europe by Dwight Eisenhower. It took months to lay a trap of misdirection for the Nazis, a trap that Eisenhower couldn’t have known for certain had sprung until his troops hit the beaches. It took a massive effort to build and train his armies not just for the landings, but also to get materiel on shore and push off the beachheads into the hedgerows, and this against the mightiest military force on the continent. Few know the context of the D-Day decision and its precursor in the embarrassing failure at Dieppe in 1942, and the real risks of failure — certainly higher than 52%.

I don’t mean to diminish the plan to take out Osama bin Laden, or the result for that matter. I simply prefer to look at that decision with a sense of perspective. Ignoring the scale or craft with which it was planned and carried out, the motivation behind the raid truly has no equal in American history. I would have given Biden that much. That said, the fact that Americans nearly unanimously supported the kill/capture of OBL, greatly diminishes the risk/reward argument Biden is trying to make here. Sure, had the raid gone south, it would have been a PR nightmare; but let’s be real about it. A PR nightmare is Pakistan? We’re talking about two news cycles – at best. And American soldier allegedly kills more than a dozen Afghan citizens and Peyton Manning just made that story go away like last month’s edition of Time Magazine.

Does the president deserve credit for pushing the button on bin Laden? Absolutely. Let’s just keep things in perspective for a change.

—

A telling headline from The Atlantic…

Only Joe Biden Could Oversell the bin Laden Raid