How to get John Kerry to talk Iraq?
The Common Ills
The discredited and laughable John Kerry appeared before House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs on Wednesday (see yesterday's snapshot).
And the real takeaway?
One way to get the reluctant Kerry to talk about Iraq?
Ask about e-mails.
US House Rep Chris Stewart shared the belief -- common in Congress, as he noted -- that the administration did not have a plan for addressing the Islamic State.
He then wanted to know if Kerry, as head of the State Dept, had reviewed the e-mails Hillary Clinton sent from a private e-mail address over a non-secure server that the State Dept is stating today were classified?
Kerry was furious.
Stewart asked, "I'm curious, Mr. Secretary, have you read these e-mails that were classified as top secrect?"
Kerry's reply?
To ignore the question.
"So let me answer the questions there that I think are relevant to the budget and the policy," he started before trying to eat up time talking about the Islamic State.
Stewart attempted to redirect him with, "Well, Mr. Secretary, I wasn't asking that question."
"Let me just finish now," prissy, fussbudget Kerry insisted.
And "prissy, fussbudget"?
Comes from the White House this morning.
A call wanted to know why I didn't talk about his exchange with Stewart?
I said I'd planned to go into it in the next snapshot.
That's when I was asked if I saw idiot Michael Isikoff's Yahoo piece -- yahoo, indeed.
The administration refers to Iskikoff as John's "clutch purse."
He's an accessory of Kerry's.
He tries to rescue him with a non-story of things that will never happen to distract from the reality that Kerry was an embarrassment before the Committee.
And he was.
He doesn't get to decide what questions he answers.
He can refuse to answer.
Doesn't make the department or the administration come off well.
("He's an embarrassment," direct quote from this morning's phone call.)
When a witness appears before Congress, they have to answer the question.
If they're a member of the administration, they're supposed to finesse it when the answer might be uncomfortable.
Kerry could have stated, "I'm sorry, I can't comment because there's an ongoing investigation."
But John wants to bully and bellow.
And it's just all the more hysterical when you realize this over 70 year old man spends so much time trying to look young. The botox is appalling and would be on anyone but especially on a government official.
We can deal with Isikoff's nonsense in the snapshot.
But John Kerry embarrassed the White House yet again yesterday. And that's why they no longer take him seriously (as he well knows).
Repeating, this was written due to a phone call from a White House friend. I'm being very clear on that so no one later says, "You do the bidding of the White House!" Anytime I'm asked to do something like this -- including by State Dept friends -- it clearly notes that in the entry. And for those wondering, this does give me a favor to call in later.
The following community sites updated:
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
And the real takeaway?
One way to get the reluctant Kerry to talk about Iraq?
Ask about e-mails.
US House Rep Chris Stewart shared the belief -- common in Congress, as he noted -- that the administration did not have a plan for addressing the Islamic State.
He then wanted to know if Kerry, as head of the State Dept, had reviewed the e-mails Hillary Clinton sent from a private e-mail address over a non-secure server that the State Dept is stating today were classified?
Kerry was furious.
Stewart asked, "I'm curious, Mr. Secretary, have you read these e-mails that were classified as top secrect?"
Kerry's reply?
To ignore the question.
"So let me answer the questions there that I think are relevant to the budget and the policy," he started before trying to eat up time talking about the Islamic State.
Stewart attempted to redirect him with, "Well, Mr. Secretary, I wasn't asking that question."
"Let me just finish now," prissy, fussbudget Kerry insisted.
And "prissy, fussbudget"?
Comes from the White House this morning.
A call wanted to know why I didn't talk about his exchange with Stewart?
I said I'd planned to go into it in the next snapshot.
That's when I was asked if I saw idiot Michael Isikoff's Yahoo piece -- yahoo, indeed.
The administration refers to Iskikoff as John's "clutch purse."
He's an accessory of Kerry's.
He tries to rescue him with a non-story of things that will never happen to distract from the reality that Kerry was an embarrassment before the Committee.
And he was.
He doesn't get to decide what questions he answers.
He can refuse to answer.
Doesn't make the department or the administration come off well.
("He's an embarrassment," direct quote from this morning's phone call.)
When a witness appears before Congress, they have to answer the question.
If they're a member of the administration, they're supposed to finesse it when the answer might be uncomfortable.
Kerry could have stated, "I'm sorry, I can't comment because there's an ongoing investigation."
But John wants to bully and bellow.
And it's just all the more hysterical when you realize this over 70 year old man spends so much time trying to look young. The botox is appalling and would be on anyone but especially on a government official.
We can deal with Isikoff's nonsense in the snapshot.
But John Kerry embarrassed the White House yet again yesterday. And that's why they no longer take him seriously (as he well knows).
Repeating, this was written due to a phone call from a White House friend. I'm being very clear on that so no one later says, "You do the bidding of the White House!" Anytime I'm asked to do something like this -- including by State Dept friends -- it clearly notes that in the entry. And for those wondering, this does give me a favor to call in later.
The following community sites updated:
THIS JUST IN! MISS CRANKY GETS ANGRY!
4 hours ago
Clinton's still on her plantation
4 hours ago
iraq
No comments: