Rethinking Hillary

I have felt lukewarm -- and perhaps a bit hostile -- toward Hillary Clinton since 2009. Perhaps the time has come to say "All is forgiven."

The email "scandal" has made me like her rather better than I used to. Here's why. (The story first appeared nearly a week ago, but I was away then, so let's talk about it now.)

Turns out Hillary has set up her own intel network, which seems to be headed up by Sidney Blumenthal. Perhaps "network" is rather too grand a word for it. Let's just say that she sought out private sources of information, and that she took steps to keep this private data private. The media now wants us all to feel outraged -- but what I'm feeling is quite different.

When Hillary first became Secretary of State, she wanted Sidney Blumenthal (a longtime friend to the Clintons) to join her team. Rahm Emmanuel nixed the idea. If Blumenthal managed to piss off Rahm, we all have one more reason to say "Bravo, Blumenthal."

It's unclear who tasked Blumenthal, known for his fierce loyalty to the Clintons, with preparing detailed intelligence briefs. It's also not known who was paying him, or where the operation got its money. The memos were marked "confidential" and relied in many cases on "sensitive" sources in the Libyan opposition and Western intelligence and security services. Other reports focused on Egypt, Germany, and Turkey.

Indeed, though they were sent under Blumenthal's name, the reports appear to have been gathered and prepared by Tyler Drumheller, a former chief of the CIA's clandestine service in Europe who left the agency in 2005. Since then, he has established a consulting firm called Tyler Drumheller, LLC.

Ooh. Sounds spooky. Sounds sneaky. You know how sneaky those Clintons are...!

That's the narrative we're all supposed to repeat robotically: Sneaky Hillary sneaks again. Except...

Except the people who are shoving that narrative down your throat don't bother to tell you who Drumheller is. Allow me to do so.

He's the guy who tried to expose "Curveball," the Iraqi defector who sold fake info to the Bush administration. Drumheller tells much of the story in a book review published in 2006. Also see here:

In late January 2003, as Secretary of State Colin Powell prepared to argue the Bush administration's case against Iraq at the United Nations, veteran CIA officer Tyler Drumheller sat down with a classified draft of Powell's speech to look for errors. He found a whopper: a claim about mobile biological labs built by Iraq for germ warfare.

Drumheller instantly recognized the source, an Iraqi defector suspected of being mentally unstable and a liar. The CIA officer took his pen, he recounted in an interview, and crossed out the whole paragraph.

A few days later, the lines were back in the speech.

Result: Powell destroyed his sterling reputation in the proverbial one fell swoop. Drumheller came out smelling like a Pyrenean lilac field.

From Wikipedia:

Tyler Drumheller is the former chief of the CIA covert operations in Europe, who has said that the CIA had credible sources discounting some weapons of mass destruction claims before the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. He received and discounted documents central to the Niger yellowcake forgery prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He has also stated that senior White House officials dismissed intelligence information from his agency which reported Saddam Hussein had no WMD program.

According to Drumheller, the CIA, with the help of a friendly intelligence service, recruited Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri in Europe during the late summer of 2002. [1] Sabri told the CIA in September that Saddam had no major active weapons of mass destruction programs; they had no fissile material and biological weapons were almost non-existent, although he claimed that there were chemical weapons. This information was then transmitted to the White House, but it was ignored in favor of the information coming from a source known as Curveball.

I'm looking for a reason to dislike this guy. Do you see a reason to dislike this guy?

Given the fact that Hillary Clinton was trying to operate within an Obama administration suffering from a toxic oversupply of neocons, why shouldn't she have sought outside advice from a straight shooter like Drumheller?

And why on earth should I be bothered by her association with Sidney Blumenthal, father of Max Blumenthal, one of the bravest voices for peace on the entire planet? (The elder Blumenthal was also once a good writer on the JFK assassination, although it is considered impolitic to mention that fact nowadays.)

So please explain why I should consider it a bad thing for Hillary to consult with Blumenthal and Drumheller. 

Yes, it's true that she played the heavy during her tenure as Secretary of State. I didn't like what books like Confront and Conceal had to say about Harldiner Hillary.

Maybe she had to act that way to get a shot at the presidency.

Let's face it -- 2013 was the year when the Obama administration's foreign policy became completely vile. It was bad before, but 2013 was when Syria and Ukraine turned into into meat grinders. The worst hit after Hillary was gone.

So...yeah. Let's rethink Hillary Clinton.

A vote for the GOP is a vote for war. One thing's for sure: A Republican presidency in 2016 will probably be the greatest disaster in human history. You think the invasion of Iraq was bad? A war with Iran could end this country. Our economy, along with whatever is left of our reputation, would suffer enormously. Anyone with any sense in Europe will be forced to admit that the US has become a mad elephant. They will want nothing further to do with us: "Screw America. Those guys are crazy. Our future is with BRICS."

Nevertheless, the Republicans want war.

For the crowd that believes war is always the answer, Thursday’s announcement represented an utter catastrophe. While it remains to be seen if the framework will lead to a viable and enduring agreement ahead of a June 30 deadline, these conservatives have already concluded that the framework is a complete failure, perhaps even an invitation to Armageddon.

It's not just that the Republicans think the present deal is bad. In their eyes, any agreement is an abomination.

Their spiritual leader is John Bolton, the man who helped create the Iraq disaster, and who now insists on war with Iran. Of course, their real leader is Bibi Netanyahu, the Israeli GRÖFAZ. Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Bibi. 

Don't try to tell me that there's no difference between the parties. Sure, I'm pissed off at much of the record compiled by Obama and Clinton. But who would you rather see in the Oval Office: Someone who considers John Bolton a sage, or someone who counts the Blumenthal family as friends?