BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE
"HE'S TOO MEAN!!!" WHINES CRANKY CLINTON OF HER RIVAL FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS.
IF ELECTED PRESIDENT, WOULD CRANKY CLINTON THEN WHINE THAT SHE COULDN'T SPEAK TO VLADIMIR PUTIN BECAUSE HE WAS TOO MEAN? TO ANGELA MERKEL BECAUSE SHE MADE A CRACK ABOUT CRANKY'S WEIGHT?
WHERE DOES IT END?
While the bombing has become a daily feature, at the US State Dept today, something different emerged. In the midst of spokesperson John Kirby's daily nonsense, a participant refused to play along.
QUESTION: Yes. The Iraqi prime minister, Mr. Al-Abadi, has been pushing ahead for reform in its government, and he claims to reshuffle his own cabinet. I was curious about your position on these claims about Abadi has been trying to accomplish.
MR KIRBY: What you call claims I think are, in fact – you almost – it makes it sounds like he’s doing something wrong here. Prime Minister Abadi is --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR KIRBY: Prime Minister Abadi is trying to make necessary political reforms in his country and he has moved some officials around, and that’s the obligation, that’s the responsibility; those are the choices that a prime minister has to make. We continue to support his efforts to improve governance in Iraq and to enact appropriate reforms to try to facilitate that process.
QUESTION: But bringing what he calls technocrats into his cabinet at this moment would definitely make a lot of people angry because he is going to exclude a lot of party appointed into his government. How would you react to that?
MR KIRBY: Again, these are decisions that he has to make and his government has to make and the Iraqi people have to make, and those are internal decisions that we aren’t going to involve ourselves in each individual appointment that he makes. These are internal matters for Iraq to speak to and for him to speak to. In general, we support his efforts at reform and we support his efforts at trying to get a government in place – and keep a government in place – that can be responsive to the needs of the Iraqi people and can help them deal with the very real threat inside their own country represented by [the Islamic State].
QUESTION: So wait, wait. So this – the position of the U.S. is that you’re not going to interfere in the president – or the leader of a country, his choices for cabinet, but you will interfere in who the – or you will choose who should be the leader of the country, but once your selected person is in power, they can have whoever they want in the cabinet? Is that basically what --
MR KIRBY: Well, it was the Iraqi people that --
QUESTION: After you guys --
MR KIRBY: -- put Prime Minister Abadi in the position he’s in.
QUESTION: After the U.S. pulled the rug out from under --
MR KIRBY: We’re not – we don’t involve ourselves in the internal decisions of an electorate like that.
QUESTION: Except in Syria.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
QUESTION: And --
MR KIRBY: No.
QUESTION: No?
MR KIRBY: How is that – I’m not sure I follow how we’re doing that in Syria.
Yeah.
John Kirby's not just an embarrassment, he's a damn liar.
In 2010, following the March elections and an eight month political stalemate, the US government gave Nouri al-Maliki a second term (even though he lost the 2010 election) via The Erbil Agreement.
In 2014, the US appointed/backed Haider al-Abadi to replace Nouri.
Reality: the Iraqi people did not vote on Haider.
Bigger reality: Iraq is over two years later on national elections.
Is no one ever supposed to notice that?
John Kirby's lie brings attention to that reality.
Where are the national elections which should have taken place already?
Where are they, John Kirby?
More reality, what Haider's trying to do with the Cabinet? It's not in the Constitution.
Strange how Kirby and company back the Constitution -- except when they don't.
Any observer of Iraq needs to be asking: Where are the national elections.
Every member of Parliament?
Their term has expired.
They were elected in the 2010 elections.
Where are the national elections?
QUESTION: Yes. The Iraqi prime minister, Mr. Al-Abadi, has been pushing ahead for reform in its government, and he claims to reshuffle his own cabinet. I was curious about your position on these claims about Abadi has been trying to accomplish.
MR KIRBY: What you call claims I think are, in fact – you almost – it makes it sounds like he’s doing something wrong here. Prime Minister Abadi is --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR KIRBY: Prime Minister Abadi is trying to make necessary political reforms in his country and he has moved some officials around, and that’s the obligation, that’s the responsibility; those are the choices that a prime minister has to make. We continue to support his efforts to improve governance in Iraq and to enact appropriate reforms to try to facilitate that process.
QUESTION: But bringing what he calls technocrats into his cabinet at this moment would definitely make a lot of people angry because he is going to exclude a lot of party appointed into his government. How would you react to that?
MR KIRBY: Again, these are decisions that he has to make and his government has to make and the Iraqi people have to make, and those are internal decisions that we aren’t going to involve ourselves in each individual appointment that he makes. These are internal matters for Iraq to speak to and for him to speak to. In general, we support his efforts at reform and we support his efforts at trying to get a government in place – and keep a government in place – that can be responsive to the needs of the Iraqi people and can help them deal with the very real threat inside their own country represented by [the Islamic State].
QUESTION: So wait, wait. So this – the position of the U.S. is that you’re not going to interfere in the president – or the leader of a country, his choices for cabinet, but you will interfere in who the – or you will choose who should be the leader of the country, but once your selected person is in power, they can have whoever they want in the cabinet? Is that basically what --
MR KIRBY: Well, it was the Iraqi people that --
QUESTION: After you guys --
MR KIRBY: -- put Prime Minister Abadi in the position he’s in.
QUESTION: After the U.S. pulled the rug out from under --
MR KIRBY: We’re not – we don’t involve ourselves in the internal decisions of an electorate like that.
QUESTION: Except in Syria.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
QUESTION: And --
MR KIRBY: No.
QUESTION: No?
MR KIRBY: How is that – I’m not sure I follow how we’re doing that in Syria.
Yeah.
John Kirby's not just an embarrassment, he's a damn liar.
In 2010, following the March elections and an eight month political stalemate, the US government gave Nouri al-Maliki a second term (even though he lost the 2010 election) via The Erbil Agreement.
In 2014, the US appointed/backed Haider al-Abadi to replace Nouri.
Reality: the Iraqi people did not vote on Haider.
Bigger reality: Iraq is over two years later on national elections.
Is no one ever supposed to notice that?
John Kirby's lie brings attention to that reality.
Where are the national elections which should have taken place already?
Where are they, John Kirby?
More reality, what Haider's trying to do with the Cabinet? It's not in the Constitution.
Strange how Kirby and company back the Constitution -- except when they don't.
Any observer of Iraq needs to be asking: Where are the national elections.
Every member of Parliament?
Their term has expired.
They were elected in the 2010 elections.
Where are the national elections?
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Hejira"
- Truest statement of the week
- Truest statement of the week II
- A note to our readers
- Editorial: They lie about Iraq, they lie about eve...
- TV: Truth and the lack of it
- Film Classics of the 20th century
- Clinton curb appeal?
- Who's protecting who?
- The spook who loves terrorism
- This edition's playlist
- The bleakest of views from Inside Obama’s White Ho...
- Bernie Sanders on War and Peace
- Department of Defense Press Briefing by Secretary ...
- IAVA Joins American Corporate Partners to Launch W...
- Highlights
