Awaiting Mitt Romney’s apology tour

After campaigning against and trying to sabotage Trump’s campaign/election, even his Republican nomination, Romney now contemplates the real consequences of issuing an apology to try to seal his Secretary of State bid. How far can he go?

I do hope he likes groveling but is it enough — after all he has done?

H/T to Gateway Pundit

Transition Team sources told Ed Henry from FOX News that Mitt Romney is preparing a public apology.

Mitt Romney is reportedly very interested in the Secretary of State job. (See)

But is it enough to apologize? And I don’t mean only to Trump but to all the people who supported or voted for Trump. He owes them plenty — whether he gets the job or not.

Remember he wrote a book “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.” Ironic now that his appointment requires an apology just as a precursor.

Has anyone out there in Rightville considered what a Mitt Romney confirmation hearing would look like? I think I’d call it a smorgasbord for Democrats. They’ll eat it up.

Obama’s Cuban Crisis

Not much talk about this news, but then what would you expect from a media led around by the ruling class elites?

Apparently Cuban dissidents got their protest on. And while at it they are sporting Obama masks to blame him for Castro’s recent crackdown on freedom of expression. Well, they do have the right guy anyway. But if they think its bad there, they should see what Obama is doing to Amerika at home. Maybe they wouldn’t feel quite as jilted personally.

Protesters in Cuba Send a Message to President Obama By Wearing These Masks

By Joe Perticone | IJ Review

Nearly 90 individual activists were arrested in Cuba on Sunday, just days ahead of Secretary of State John Kerry’s expected visit to the new American embassy on communist island-nation.

According to Agence France-Presse, Cuban security forces engaged and arrested 40 or so activists who were marching through Havana wearing masks depicting President Obama.

“It’s [Obama’s] fault, what is happening… That’s why we have this mask on. Because it’s his fault.”

Read more>

As Secretary of State, John Kerry prepares to visit Cuba on Friday, they are gearing up for that in Cuba. It doesn’t look too good when people protest an administration for the effect they are feeling from its policies, while Kerry is meeting with Castros and smoking Havana cigars. I’d say its just the type of optics or visual that will tick the people off, especially when the hammer is coming down on them.

Yep, it’s Obama’s fault, it’s Kerry’s fault. And keep on going cause it’s Hillary’s fault too. Fresh off an Iranian deal from Hell, he is going to schmooze it up with dictators in Cuba. Love those optics. I wonder if the press coverage, surely in tow on the visit, will show any of the protest landscape in their live shots from the embassy? Nah.

Hillary’s shattered armor

I am kicking around the old notion that “you get the government you deserve”. And if that is true — it seems to have some merit — then suppose that a Party also gets the candidate it deserves. Obviously just a theory. But if so, my working theory is Democrats are getting the candidate they deserve with Hillary.

Everything they said about Romney in their pack of lies they have in spades now with Hillary.But for real not an illusion. They got a rich, fat-cat politico that is so out of touch with regular people that she can hardly hide it. Someone who puts political ambitions above concerns for the people. Someone who very much plays the influence, pay-to-play game. Someone obsessed with and addicted to power. Someone involved in crony capitalism who takes money from the shadiest players. Someone who operates as above the law unaccountable for her actions.

Remember the big story was how Romney’s were buying a new house with an elevator. Using it as a metaphor, all the Clintons’ elevators only go in one direction, up. Hillary really does not care about average people.(that’s how she got where she got) It’s quite the show she puts on but everyone knows her only real, first concern is Hillary. She has all she can do to defend herself from the truth — a full time job. Like Obama, truth is her enemy. Who just makes speeches for a 7 figure income?

In New Hampshire, Hillary was asked about the allegations coming in a new book about money and influence surrounding her tenure as Secretary of State, she said:

“Well, we’re back into the political season and therefore we will be subjected to all kinds of distractions and attacks and I’m ready for that. I know that that comes unfortunately with the territory,”

“It is, I think, worth noting, the Republicans seem to be talking only about me. I don’t know what they’d talk about if I wasn’t in the race. But I am in the race and hopefully we’ll get on to the issues and I look forward to that.”

Worth noting is it? “Distractions and attacks and I’m ready for that.” So if she’s ready for that then why can’t she answer the question? Doesn’t she have an answer ready, or does she think she doesn’t have to answer questions?

“Ready for Hillary,” who is not ready for questions.

Does she take everyone for dummies? It’s a central issue in her campaign, whether she likes it or not. She can go on ignoring it as if it doesn’t matter but it maters to the people. Especially since folks are jaded about political influence peddlers, and after 2012 when that is all Democrats talked about. So now tell us none of it matters. She can talk about what she wants till she’s as blue as Monica’s dress, but it won’t make information on her record go away. And what was the big topic in her first run? It was Hillary Clinton’s records. Axelrod and Obama wrote the screenplay.

All she wants to talk about is her Scooby Van and her script. She can’t talk about her record as Secretary of State because that is relegated to ancient history now, buried in the deep with her personal server she used. All they want to talk about is me, she said. What does she think we will talk about, she does not have a primary challenge. She said she is the most transparent person out there. Wherever did I hear that before?

But as busy as Hillary has been in the influence racket, she is whistling past her leftist base. For fifteen years they’ve been making the charge about big money and influence in the administration or the White House. It goes back to Dick Cheney and Halliburton. Of course, you remember because we still hear about it. That is a favorite whipping post of the left. Then along came Romney who they painted into a poster boy for big money and influence. It still goes on in the left. Ironically, liberals don’t move on quickly.

Now here is Hillary Clinton, who if not for big money would have a giant identity crisis. Her and Bill in their private jet-setting lifestyle passed the tradition along to Chelsea. But of course Hilary thought she was entitled to her own personal server, why not? Raising millions from the same people she was dealing with at the State Department? Whatever could be wrong with that? In fact, isn’t that expected? The hypocritical left goes right along with it and the corruption she exudes. Yes, they got the candidate they deserve. They would be disappointed if she was not that way.

You heard of the military industrial complex but this is the political industrial complex. The thought that she stands a good chance of wining only adds to that. Consider if she even gets close, let alone wins, what it says about Democrats. It means even knowing how corrupt she is, they will elect her anyway — knowing full well the person Hillary is. It will mean not only don’t they care but expect it in their nominee.

Search for Clinton emails with MoBro

You had to know there were more questions about Hillary Clinton’s emails coming.

Judicial Watch Sues For Clinton’s Emails With Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood

Katie Pavlich | Mar 05, 2015 | Townhall

After ignoring a Freedom of Information Act request submitted in August 2014, government watchdog Judicial Watch has issued a lawsuit against the State Department for all emails between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her top aide Huma Abedin and wife of Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi, Nagla Mahmoud, from January 2009 to January 2013. It was discovered earlier this week that both Clinton and Abedine used personal email accounts to conduct government business, potentially violating federal records laws.

The Judicial Watch lawsuit specifically seeks the following:

A. Any and all records of communication between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013; and
B. Any and all records of communication between former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013.

“Now we know why the State Department didn’t want to respond to our specific request for Hillary Clinton’s and Huma Abedin’s communications,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The State Department violated FOIA law rather than admit that it couldn’t and wouldn’t search the secret accounts that the agency has known about for years. This lawsuit shows how the latest Obama administration cover-up isn’t just about domestic politics but has significant foreign policy implications.”

Surprise, welcome to Casablanca. The servers were in her home. Now she releases a statement that she wants the public to see her emails. It all sounds so Clintonesque.

And the search goes on, and on and on and on….

Gowdy asks the million dollar question

Did you interview Secretary of State, Clinton? Why on earth would they do that?

In the face of all that, it was Hillary’s requirement to set up an outpost in Benghazi and then took absolutely Zero responsibility for it.

Again, interview her? That must be a strange idea, considering four Americans died under her watch.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary in state of denial

 

What difference at this point does it make?” — Hillary

Clinton to Johnson: “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and to prevent it from ever happening again.”

The “with all due respect” has been way overlooked. There was no respect.

The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief.” — Sen Clinton to Gen. Petraeus

So who really “requires the willing suspension of disbelief”?

Twitter: #Benghazi

Obama, NYT and the Islamists

 Michael Youssef  Townhall.com
 
 

Mar 10, 2013

 

Not only is The New York Times editorial page known for often being thin on facts, it is known for its cheerleading of the Obama administration—especially the administration’s shortsightedness regarding the Middle East. //…

Egypt
Egypt’s President Mohamed Mursi (R) meets with former presidential candidate and former Arab League chief Amr Moussa at the presidential palace in Cairo November 3, 2012. REUTERS/Egyptian Presidency/Handout

They hailed Obama’s decision to send $250 million of hard-earned, taxpayer money to the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt as “a vote of confidence in a country that is critical to stability in the region . . .”

//…

In the absence of any stipulations, the cheerleaders in The New York Times editorial page were content to reference a weak statement by Secretary of State John Kerry, saying, “Mr. Kerry urged all Egyptians to ‘come together’ to meet the country’s challenges . . .” Really?

 
 

Depends on what you mean by “the country’s challenges”.  Whatever could those real “challenges” be? That is supposed to pass for diplomacy?

“Come together”…more creative interpretation needed there

 See at Townhall.com

Hillary vs. Johnson : no holds barred

Miss full accountability, “the buck stops with me”, Hillary Clinton testifies to say “what difference does it make?”

I know it’s still only January but that is the line of the year. And it took her four months just to say that.

Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans.

Johnson: I understand.

Clinton: Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?

It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this. But the fact is that people were trying in real-time to get the best information….But, you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

Clinton: “What difference, at this point, does it make?

She also misconstrued the purpose. The point is even more about the response and reaction of our government and why. This is the way they argue by moving the point. We thought it was about our governments’ response and she twisted it to just the terrorist’s motives. Both are questionable.

Then use the four dead Americans to mitigate government’s culpability. (logic took a vaction) And she tried to trump terrorists’ motives by a goal to “bring them to justice” — which they haven’t. See how this game works? Argued in true Liberal BS.

“What difference does it make?” It makes a big difference. How could you prevent this in the future if you dismiss the facts as irrelevant? Does that sound anything like, “do everything we can to prevent it happening again”?

We hold this non-truth to be self-evident, what does it matter?

PS: and the media yawns and says what difference does it make?