Elizabeth Warren has walked back her comment because she has now learned that Donna Brazile's descriptions of joint financing agreements between the DNC and Hillary were completely bogus. Warren: “The overall 2016 primary process was fair and Hillary made history.”
Surprising no one except maybe @Tiger in NC and @Rex here a report quoting a NY Times reporter who charges the Obama administration of misleading........ lying about the reach of al Qeada before the election in 2012. Apparently they even kept it from much of the intelligence community. More than anything democrats own actions explain why they lost so badly. http://www.weeklystandard.com/new-y...nistration-misled-on-al-qaeda/article/2010541
I am not saying this didn't happen but there are a few things to consider here that do not add up for me: intelligence comes from the intelligence community and/or the military, who work in close consult with one another. It's hard for me to believe that the WH would, or could, hide intelligence from the very agencies that are responsible for producing it. Would an administration paint a subject in a more favorable light at election time? Sure, that part doesn't surprise me. Further, is it possible that after the Bin Laden raid that Al Queda was in disarray, if nothing else temporarily? Sure, even likely. So, this is one of those things that I put into the category of let's wait and see if the story becomes more prevalent. In today's media if there is only one outlet reporting something, I generally read it with caution until it is verified by other news organizations too.
I agree, how many politicians have used the "threat" of a certain enemy for their campaigns. Just about every one. Is it shitty? Yes. Uncommon, definitely not. I mean Trump is a prime example.
