Quantcast
Connect with us

Conservative columnist drops mic on Pompeo Iran lies: Mending ‘the president’s ego is not an imminent threat’

Published

on

US President Donald Trump says there is "nothing wrong" with listening to foreign governments offering dirt on his political opponents. (AFP / SAUL LOEB)

In a scorching piece for the Washington Post, conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin ripped the Trump administration for claiming the assassination of Iranian leader Qassem Suleimani was required because of the “imminent threat” of a possible attack on America was in the planning stages.

According to the columnist, using the term “imminent threat” without details was a way to get around oversight and she speculated it was all about building up embattled President Donald Trump’s image.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It is easy to understand why such a rationale would be advanced. An imminent threat would arguably obviate the need for a declaration of war from or even prior consultation with Congress. Exercising the right of self-defense, an established principle of international law, would satisfy allies and sidestep nasty questions about violation of an executive order in place with only minor changes since 1976 that prohibits assassination,” she wrote. “However, there is substantial reason to doubt that there was an imminent threat. Soleimani had been plotting and directing operations for years to kill Americans and others throughout the region. ‘Imminent,’ however, suggests something concrete and immediate.”

Noting a Washington Post report that cast doubt on the White House claims, Rubin asked, “Was the killing aimed at deterring attacks in the future? Stopping a plot about to kill Americans? It strains credulity to believe that this move will de-escalate tensions as administration officials say they intended. The behind-the-scenes details do not make it sound as if this was based on specific knowledge of an imminent attack. It sounds — no surprise — like an effort to assuage Trump’s frail ego.”

With the Post reporting, “Trump was also motivated to act by what he felt was negative coverage after his 2019 decision to call off the airstrike after Iran downed the U.S. surveillance drone, officials said. Trump was also frustrated that the details of his internal deliberations had leaked out and felt he looked weak, the officials said,” Rubin stated her case.

“The need to mend the president’s ego is not an imminent threat. It’s not a legally or politically justifiable reason for plunging ahead with a highly provocative military action absent full consultation with Congress and a full exploration of the potential consequences,” she wrote. 

“Americans have every reason to be skeptical of anything and everything coming out of this administration. The president has lied more than 15,000 times on matters small and large. Pompeo misled the Congress and American people in suggesting there was not convincing evidence of Mohammed bin Salman’s involvement in the slaughter of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Pompeo repeatedly misrepresented to Congress that progress was being made in talks with North Korea. Moreover, given Pompeo’s own fiery rhetoric that essentially demands regime change in Iran (if not using that term), it is logical to assume this was not a defensive action nor one intended to de-escalate violence. Pompeo needs to come before Congress and testify under oath,” she added, before writing, “In short, it is not unpatriotic, partisan or unreasonable to question the rationale given for action that escalates tensions and may usher in a larger war.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“This is a case in which we would wise to remember the lessons of the Iraq War and ask serious questions about the intelligence, planning, downsides and risks of military action. The decision to escalate military action against Iran, a country far more sophisticated in modern warfare (including cyber-terrorism) than Iraq, should prompt more caution, not less, than the decision to go to war with Iraq,” she concluded.

You can read the whole piece here


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump tax returns show he held a bank account in China — as he spent years pursuing business deals there: report

Published

on

On Tuesday, as part of their series on President Donald Trump's tax returns, The New York Times revealed that the president has held a previously unknown bank account in China, as he spent years pursuing business deals in the country.

"Mr. Trump’s own business history is filled with overseas financial deals, and some have involved the Chinese state," reported Mike McIntire, Russ Buettner, and Susanne Craig. "He spent a decade unsuccessfully pursuing projects in China, operating an office there during his first run for president and forging a partnership with a major government-controlled company."

Continue Reading

2020 Election

The FDA repeatedly stood up to Trump on coronavirus — and even won some victories: NYT

Published

on

President Donald J. Trump has repeatedly tried to undermine the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (F.D.A.) and now, with just two weeks until Election Day, the world is learning more about the behind-the-scenes battles that have shaken these governmental entities to the core.

Approximately two weeks after Trump's release from Walter Reed Medical Center, there is no "cure," as the president stated, and he is not "immune." No one is immune - and there is no successful vaccine, regardless of how much Trump claims one will arrive before Nov. 3. The F.D.A. published the guidelines in briefing materials to an advisory committee that will discuss them on Thursday, effectively making them official. To be clear, the F.D.A.has not approved Trump's miraculous cure of a cocktail - even though he has claimed differently.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Lawmakers more optimistic on COVID stimulus as election day looms

Published

on

Chances for approving a new spending package to support the US economy improved dramatically on Tuesday after the senior Democratic lawmaker said a bill is in the works and the top Senate Republican said he would bring it to a vote.

US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Bloomberg TV that legislators are starting to commit the measure to paper and she is optimistic it can win bipartisan support.

Whether policymakers can complete the negotiations in time for Congress to approve the package before the November 3 presidential election, however, remains a question mark.

"Our economy needs it. Hopefully by the end of the day today, we will know where we are," she said in an interview. "We are starting to write the bill."

Continue Reading
 
 
Democracy is in peril. Invest in progressive news. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free. LEARN MORE