From the Pirate’s Cove:
William Teach June 10, 2013 – 10:50 am
The most transparent administration ever?
(CBS News) CBS News has uncovered documents that show the State Department may have covered up allegations of illegal and inappropriate behavior within their ranks.
The Diplomatic Security Service, or the DSS, is the State Department’s security force, charged with protecting the secretary of state and U.S. ambassadors overseas and with investigating any cases of misconduct on the part of the 70,000 State Department employees worldwide.
CBS News’ John Miller reports that according to an internal State Department Inspector General’s memo, several recent investigations were influenced, manipulated, or simply called off. The memo obtained by CBS News cited eight specific examples. Among them: allegations that a State Department security official in Beirut “engaged in sexual assaults” on foreign nationals hired as embassy guards and the charge and that members of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s security detail “engaged prostitutes while on official trips in foreign countries” — a problem the report says was “endemic.”
The memo also reveals details about an “underground drug ring” was operating near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and supplied State Department security contractors with drugs.
CBS takes great pains to avoid mentioning when all this was really occurring, and there could have been issued during the previous administration. I’d also like to note that I am not placing Blame on Mr. Obama for this specific issue, regardless of whether he’s POTUS or not, unless something comes out that shows he was notified of this cover-up. It is interesting to note, though, that his administration seems to have a very skewed version of “transparency”.
More at the link.
Well, of course CBS News has taken “great pains to avoid mentioning when all this was really occurring,” because, as the report notes, this happened during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State.
House Minority Leader Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said, concerning her “prayer” that Mrs Clinton runs for President in 2016:
Nobody has been first lady and senator and now secretary of state. Putting everything aside that she is a woman, she’d be the best qualified person that we’ve seen [in recent years].
Oh, I’d say that there have been a lot more qualified people who have run in recent years: the elder George Bush leads the way in the résumé department, and both Bill Clinton and the younger George Bush had more responsible, executive experience than Mrs Clinton has had. Four years as a do-little Senator, with not a single notable piece of legislation to her credit doesn’t count for much, and being First Lady isn’t responsible executive experience. In the one executive job her husband gave her, to shepherd through health care reform, she failed rather miserably. Only her four years as Secretary of State would really count as responsible executive experience, and those four years were capped off by her wonderful performance during Benghazi.And now we see that the State department is quashing internal investigations of the Department’s activities while she was Secretary. Perhaps the current Secretary of State, John François Kerry, has decided that he has had enough of running for President — 2004 wasn’t a particularly pleasant experience for him — and he’d rather try to clear the deck for Mrs Clinton than run again himself.
But whatever the reasons that the current Secretary is covering for the previous one, Mrs Clinton’s record is her record, and it simply is not a very good one. For some odd reason, some Democrats seem to think that having been the wife of a decent President makes the wife qualified to be President herself. Perhaps some of them see Mrs Clinton as Lurleen Wallace, elected Governor of Alabama to succeed her husband, and to have her husband run things for her while she was in office.
Your Editor does not believe that Mrs Clinton will be a candidate in 2016. He believes that Mrs Clinton would like to be President and probably believes that she just plain deserves to be President, but she is already 65½ years old, and doesn’t really look all that strong and healthy; every one of her years shows on her face these days. By the heat of the 2016 campaign, she will be approaching her 69th birthday, and I have my doubts that she will be physically up to the challenge of running for President. That said, I could very well be wrong about whether she will run.
But if she does run, and does win, she’ll almost certainly be just as bad a President as Barack Hussein Obama, and that would make her a very bad President indeed.