State Dept spokeswoman protecting “my building leadership” joins their ranks

posted at 9:21 am on May 24, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Well, well, well.  This should make for an interesting confirmation hearing, no?

The State Department spokeswoman who earlier this month found herself in the middle of the controversy surrounding key revisions to the Benghazi talking points appears to be in line for a promotion.

The White House announced Thursday that President Barack Obama intends to nominate Victoria Nuland as assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, a position that requires Senate confirmation.

Nuland, who has served as the State Department spokesperson from 2011 until earlier this spring, came under fire from Obama administration critics last week after leaked e-mails revealed she raised concerns with the CIA-prepared talking points on the deadly terror attack last September 11.

Specifically, Nuland asked that references to al Qaeda and previous CIA warnings about threats posed to U.S. diplomats in Libya be scrubbed from the document that was used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on news talk shows to explain the administration’s understanding of events in Libya.

Even before Nuland makes it to a confirmation hearing, she’s going to have to prepare to answer questions on Capitol Hill.  Nuland is one of 13 people that Issa plans to call in a House Oversight hearing on Benghazi as a follow-up to the hearing with three State Department whistleblowers, and Nuland will definitely be one of the star witnesses.  Issa and the committee will want to know who prompted Nuland to press the CIA to remove all references to organized terrorism from the talking points given to Susan Rice after complaining that the draft didn’t meet the needs of State Department leadership:

Major revisions to the CIA memo were requested by Victoria Nuland, then-spokeswoman for the State Department, who said changes were needed to “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership.” The e-mails do not state what leaders she referred to.

That will certainly be one of the questions, yes.  After hearing from Gregory Hicks, Mark Thompson, and Eric Nordstrom earlier this month, we can be sure there will be others as well.

This decision prompts to big questions: Why Nuland, and why now?  The answer to the first question might be that the White House figured that Nuland’s career path spanning the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations would make her nomination “bipartisan.”  Good luck with that argument after releasing that e-mail string.  Telling the CIA to ixnay on the errorism-tay to protect her bosses isn’t exactly going to be a confidence-builder in her ability to act independently when it comes to reporting honestly and forthrightly to Congress after confirmation.

The “why now” question is even more puzzling.  Until now, the Senate under Harry Reid’s control hasn’t seemed too keen on taking a closer look at Benghazi.  Now that Nuland will have to testify at a confirmation hearing, all bets are off — and Republicans on the Foreign Relations Committee will have a long opportunity to play T-ball with Nuland, putting her on the record in a manner that Issa will be able to use in his own investigation.  If her testimony before the two panels differs in any way, Republicans will highlight it, and in a Senate floor vote, Republicans will use the platform to demand even more action from Reid and the Democrats to match Issa’s efforts in the House.

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

This is a WH that thinks they are above the law and can do anything they want.

Until one of these scandals sticks/really sticks – they will continue to do this.

Their egos know no bounds.

gophergirl on May 24, 2013 at 9:23 AM

The Family rewards loyalty above all else.

forest on May 24, 2013 at 9:24 AM

They are putting her in front of the front.War on women?

docflash on May 24, 2013 at 9:25 AM

This is Obama flipping the bird to the country about Benghazi (yet again).

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on May 24, 2013 at 9:25 AM

He’s daring Republicans to challenge his authority. There’s also the added bonus of creating a distraction from the real issues.

antipc on May 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Maybe they decided that the IRS scandal is so toxic politically that it be a good idea to focus on Benghazi for a while. Nuland’s nomination can help with that.

I know, I’m reaching here, but I can’t think of a logical explanation.

Doughboy on May 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

They are living in their own Private Idaho, IMHO.

At some point, the dam will burst, and it will be open season for one and all to learn about that quaint affair of last year which only cost the country four good Americans.

In the meanwhile, GopherGirl has it right – all egos, all the time, and no sense of humility whatsoever.

itzWicks on May 24, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Is this an example of a political tin ear, or is it open defiance? Seeing this nomination, I can hardly wait to see the next nominee for AG.

rogaineguy on May 24, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Another canidate for an orange jumpsuit.

D-fusit on May 24, 2013 at 9:28 AM

The rats are on the run. He’s got no one left.

txhsmom on May 24, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Walk in the park for her, Juan McCain can’t wait to stick it to the enemy! mccain-accuses-tea-party-colleagues-of-pushing-dems-too-far

dmann on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Specifically, Nuland asked that references to al Qaeda and previous CIA warnings about threats posed to U.S. diplomats in Libya be scrubbed from the document

In a sane nation not being destroyed from the inside this action would get her booted into obscurity at a U.S. weather station in Antarctica.

Bishop on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Pay off.

Obama is keeping those who could hurt him most real close to him in order to control it.

portlandon on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

When you think you can lower the sea level, what’s so hard about a Senate confirmation?

Bitter Clinger on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Clearly a red-meat distraction. Too easy. As Eric said, this is just a rabbit to chase.

HopeHeFails on May 24, 2013 at 9:31 AM

He’s daring Republicans to challenge his authority. There’s also the added bonus of creating a distraction from the real issues.

antipc on May 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Considering that he was AWOL on the night of the attack, I’d think Benghazi is the most damning issue/scandal he faces personally. His fingerprints aren’t fixed to the others in any provable way.

Bitter Clinger on May 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM

You are going to eat the crap sammiches I make for you, America, and you are going to like it. Happy Memorial Day!
@White House.

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:33 AM

I know, I’m reaching here, but I can’t think of a logical explanation.

Doughboy on May 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Logic was reading the newspaper and having a scotch in the Oval Office in January 2008 when suddenly the doors busted open and a grinning Dog Eater strode in with Jarrett on one arm and Mooch on the other.

Logic took one long look, quietly folded the paper, downed the glass of scotch, put on its hat, and left the building for good. Logic knew better.

Bishop on May 24, 2013 at 9:33 AM

Why now? Because the WH thinks it can do whatever it wants, with impunity. It’s a “stick a finger in the eye, F-U,” kind of move, that is too typical of this administration.

lizzieillinois on May 24, 2013 at 9:33 AM

All of these moves are just the new squirrel to get your mind off the old squirrel.

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Things sure have changed for the Democrat Party. Remember when they were the ones interrogating organized criminals, and the gangsters were the ones taking the 5th and angrily saying things like “what difference, at this point, does it make?” Hillary does a pretty good Hoffa.

forest on May 24, 2013 at 9:34 AM

brilliant as usual bishop.

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:35 AM

January 2009, even.

This is what I get for pouring Tequila over my Wheaties.

Bishop on May 24, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Why not now? She has demonstrated that she will readily compromise the truth to protect her higher ups and that kind of loyalty is just what the Obama administration values. Offering a big promotion with a raise in pay is a predictable ploy to keep her loyal and keep her quiet. The Obama administration is saying, “Play by our rules, babe, and we’ll make it worth your while.” They don’t care how transparent a move it is because they know the press will cover for them.

inmypajamas on May 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Those who were planning to leave anyway — like Hillary!, Holder, and Miller — will be sort of, kind of blamed for any of the “mistakes that were made”. But they will be taken care of. Their future careers and income will not take a hit, except maybe Hillary’s plans to be the next President.

Those who were planning to stick around — like Rice and Nuland — will be protected and shielded from any blame. And, apparently, promoted

That seems to be the plan.

farsighted on May 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Well, this is certainly unexpected….

Imagine…Emperor Obama granting favors to paying off his most loyal minions.

No need for any other qualifications…just loyalty to Obama.

Bet Kim Jung-Un wishes he had such fealty amongst his minions.

Bet Obama wishes he could be more like Kim Jung-Un.

coldwarrior on May 24, 2013 at 9:38 AM

When you are in the ruling class, there are no such thing as consequences.

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:39 AM

Leakers get lashings….and loyalists get promotions.

What a system!/

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:40 AM

What better way to continue our meme of “republican obstructionists” than by having them oppose the woman that let me sleep in on 9/11….
/@WhiteHouse.

ted c on May 24, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Rabbit Chase

Also shows: The Obama Administration is saying the FEAR NOTHING regarding Benghazi…and why should they?

Obama will NOT BE IMPLICATED
….just the facts

LordMaximus on May 24, 2013 at 9:42 AM

This entire regime is incompetent and corrupt, from top to bottom and all the way through. So who cares who King Barry puts in this position?

In other words: At this point, what difference does it make?

UltimateBob on May 24, 2013 at 9:43 AM

Nuland can’t continue as A Spokesperson for State and she has to have her loyalty rewarded and so I think the whole Senate confirmation hearing thing went right past the thinking of the fixer in this case. Secondly, they seem to think they can sidestep landmines due to I don’t know…past experience.

Conan on May 24, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Occam’s razor – she helped him cover up a terrorist attack

crrr6 on May 24, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Who’s having a sale on popcorn? Its time to stock up.

meci on May 24, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Considering that he was AWOL on the night of the attack, I’d think Benghazi is the most damning issue/scandal he faces personally. His fingerprints aren’t fixed to the others in any provable way.

Bitter Clinger on May 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Yep, I also believe they need someone with intimate knowledge of all the lies to keep Hills’ head above water for 2016.

antipc on May 24, 2013 at 9:47 AM

Walk in the park for her, Juan McCain can’t wait to stick it to the enemy! mccain-accuses-tea-party-colleagues-of-pushing-dems-too-far

dmann on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Idiot. Why doesn’t he just switch parties and be done with it?

Ward Cleaver on May 24, 2013 at 9:48 AM

I could understand the administration sticking their neck out for a stellar nomination – but Nuland is dumber than a box of rocks. At least she seemed easily flummoxed at her press briefings.

Hill60 on May 24, 2013 at 9:48 AM

Obama: “Lie for me. Cover for me. You will be rewarded.”

The Rogue Tomato on May 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Idiot. Why doesn’t he just switch parties and be done with it?

Ward Cleaver on May 24, 2013 at 9:48 AM

‘Cause then he would just be another Dem Senator. This way, he gets to be MAVERICK!!!!!

Bitter Clinger on May 24, 2013 at 9:55 AM

White House Option A: Demote Nuland because she knows too much, and risk her becoming a whistle blower.

White House Option B: Promote Nuland to a more prestigious position with a sweet salary package so that she remains loyal to the end.

Pazman on May 24, 2013 at 9:56 AM

“respect my authoritie”

Except cartmans supposed to be funny. This clown isn’t.

acyl72 on May 24, 2013 at 9:57 AM

She is just chaff thrown out for Congress as the Obama Airline slowly goes down…

albill on May 24, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

The answer to your question is contained within the question.

The Dems control the Senate and they always manage to find enough GOP squishes to get 60 to go along with whatever appointments Dear Leader makes — “While I don’t like this appointment the President is entitled to appointment who he wants”.

Only in very rare cases does it not work this way. The WH is betting Nuland is too low level for 41 GOP Senators to have the backbone to seriously oppose her.

farsighted on May 24, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Looks like someone just cashed in a chip and negotiated a raise.

Reminds me of the movie Clear and Present Danger when Harrison Ford confronts the president and threatens to go public with what he knows (which would topple the presidency)…

HF: I will not let you dishonor their memories by pretending you had nothing to do with it…As Acting Deputy Director of Intelligence, it is my duty to report this matter to the Senate Oversight Committee.

Prez: You’re not going to do that.

HF: – I’m not?

Prez: You’ve got yourself a chip in the big game now. You’re going to save that for a time when your own ass is on the line you want a raise. And then you’re going to pull it out and I’m going to cash it in for you. Right?

R Square on May 24, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Arrogance

cmsinaz on May 24, 2013 at 10:05 AM

The White House announced Thursday that President Barack Obama intends to nominate Victoria Nuland as assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, a position that requires Senate confirmation.

Obummer needs to give Komrade Vlad more flexibility, and Tricky Vicky will tell him what he wants to hear.

Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 10:09 AM

gophergirl on May 24, 2013 at 9:23 AM

I agree.

dogsoldier on May 24, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Best way for this administration to keep her mouth shut.

Too bad Miller was already leaving, he could have been Pope.

Assuming it was Obama who made the don’t “cross borders” decision regarding a Benghazi rescue mission, what can they offer Hilary to keep her mouth shut?

Limpet6 on May 24, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move?

Yes, they think this is a brilliant move. More thumbing their noses at the rule of law and common sense and decency. Simply look at who has already been confirmed by the Senate and who is currently being fast-tracked.

Fallon on May 24, 2013 at 10:12 AM

Sounds like Barry is doubling down with an IN YOUR FACE appointment.

GarandFan on May 24, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Only in very rare cases does it not work this way. The WH is betting Nuland is too low level for 41 GOP Senators to have the backbone to seriously oppose her.

farsighted on May 24, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Pretty long odds on that bet, I’d imagine. Which GOP senator is going to go along with her nomination? Paul and Rubio are both on the Foreign Relations committee and there are several Dems up in 2014 on that committee. She might not make it past them, it’s almost like he’s daring the Senate not to confirm her.

Nothing Obama is doing right now makes any sense.

PetecminMd on May 24, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Sounds like Barry is doubling down with an IN YOUR FACE appointment.

GarandFan on May 24, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Exactly! What an SOB of a POTUS!

Sherman1864 on May 24, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Just one more example of BO’s view that he can do whatever he wants. After all, he’s been doing it for almost five years and no one has stopped him.

RadioAngel on May 24, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Why? Just another opportunity for Obama to thick is thumb in our eye.

bopbottle on May 24, 2013 at 10:36 AM

*sigh*

Tyranny. Banana Republic. Whatever.

Let the shooting begin, I’m weary of this bullshit.

Midas on May 24, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Pretty long odds on that bet, I’d imagine. Which GOP senator is going to go along with her nomination? Paul and Rubio are both on the Foreign Relations committee and there are several Dems up in 2014 on that committee. She might not make it past them, it’s almost like he’s daring the Senate not to confirm her.

Nothing Obama is doing right now makes any sense.

PetecminMd on May 24, 2013 at 10:19 AM

McCain is who I had in mind when I wrote some might say “While I don’t like this appointment the President is entitled to appoint who he wants”. IIRC he has actually said that in the past.

Also, when was the last time an “assistant” SoS nominee was blocked? Usually Senate confirmation battles are at the top level.

Nonetheless, I agree that Comrade O is daring the Senate not to confirm her. He is a confrontational Chicago politician who wants to destroy his political opponents. This only makes sense if he really believes he can prevail.

farsighted on May 24, 2013 at 10:55 AM

It appears that the Obama administration is tone deaf and/or so arrogant that they believe either a game of chicken or a pi$$ing contest with Congress is in order. Victoria Nuland is their “in your face” to conservatives, who better be willing to put on their big boy pants and go after this.

College Prof on May 24, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Even before Nuland makes it to a confirmation hearing, she’s going to have to prepare to answer questions on Capitol Hill. Nuland is one of 13 people that Issa plans to call in a House Oversight hearing on Benghazi as a follow-up to the hearing with three State Department whistleblowers, and Nuland will definitely be one of the star witnesses. Issa and the committee will want to know who prompted Nuland to press the CIA to remove all references to organized terrorism from the talking points given to Susan Rice

I would so love to see Nuland take the 5th in front of Issa before she comes up for the confirmation hearing. That would be the icing on the cake of the incompetence of the Obama administration, tattooed with the arrogance of Obama by not withdrawing the nomination before Nuland appears before the confirmation hearing. The Trifecta!

parke on May 24, 2013 at 11:03 AM

White House Option A: Demote Nuland because she knows too much, and risk her becoming a whistle blower.

White House Option B: Promote Nuland to a more prestigious position with a sweet salary package so that she remains loyal to the end.

Pazman on May 24, 2013 at 9:56 AM

I could think of 100 ways to reward her rather than promote her to a position where she now has to undergo sworn Senate testimony. An Ambassadorship would not require Senate confirmation.

barnone on May 24, 2013 at 11:05 AM

Stupid or crafty? Obviously bad optics and red meat..

Two immediate points:
1.It is unlikely she will be confirmed / damaged goods.
2. Why draw even more attention to her role in developing the talking points unless there is something they want us to see?

She was demonstrably concerned about how to craft the talking points in a way that would be less politically damaging. We just don’t know the extent of her role. My guess is the confirmation process is designed to make it abundantly clear that she and the CIA patsy were centrally responsible for crafting the fabrication.

She was the central liaison from CIA / State, working closely with both to assemble the facts and develop the talking points. She obviously let her bosses down by being being too aggressive in trying to protect the administration during a period of fast moving events and an avalanche of data flow. In such situations you have to rely on and trust those beneath you to provide you with clear-eyed assessments and information and unfortunately it did not happen in this instance.

It would be a shame if some Senate staffer received damning evidence of her complicity in crafting the narrative while simultaneously exculpating both Sec State and President. She was the lone wolf…the Benghazi Talking Points Mastermind…plotting with someone within the CIA to do damage control..

Obviously raises other questions…but it would be …

R Square on May 24, 2013 at 11:06 AM

I smell a recess appointment coming…

Marcola on May 24, 2013 at 11:12 AM

I have to give Obama a pass on this one.

He’s probably been watching the NBA playoffs and missed all of the news reports about Nuland.

PackerBronco on May 24, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Ed, why are you so certain House and Senate Republicans who still appear to be dominated by RINOs will not rubber stamp Nuland?

doufree on May 24, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Disagree with Ed here. Think this is the Obama administration rewarding her for “playing ball” and not revealing information that would hurt them. Obama’s team playing chess and they’re a few steps ahead of their opponent…ensure the “right” testimony with a nice promotion.

Sure, it’s also an indication of arrogance, but circling the wagons and keeping the right people saying the right things is their priority….protect Obama and Hillary 2016 at all costs. It’s also a signal to the others…if stick with us, we’ll reward you.

FreeManOtis on May 24, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Dear Leader: Yeah, I know what it looks like…prove it. And btw, I’ve still got my State Run Media.

d1carter on May 24, 2013 at 11:44 AM

after complaining that the draft didn’t meet the needs of State Department leadership:

Needs come before truth for the government, especially the state department.

chemman on May 24, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Typical Obama. His entire administration has been in-your-face and double down towards his enemies (the half of the country that doesn’t agree with him). This is no different.

I’ve been praying that this administrations arrogance would bring it down. We had Lerner doing exactly that a few days ago and now Obozo has stepped right in it.

God answers prayers, may it continue.

neyney on May 24, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Why would Nuland agree to put herself through that? I would think Obama would give her a paying position that didn’t require confirmation if she needed a job.

Vince on May 24, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Obama Nostra.

can_con on May 24, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Check out Nuland’s wiki page for some interesting information, like her former boss and her husband.

OxyCon on May 24, 2013 at 11:58 AM

The ideal distraction is something controversial on the surface, but that the American people will support. Drones overseas makes a good distraction, and probably explains the sudden press conference yesterday. Anything to do with taking a tough line against terrorism would work well, too. There’s a reason Clinton decided to bomb terrorists overseas when he was engulfed in scandals.

I don’t think this makes a good distraction. Too much possibility of it blowing up. Payoff/ensuring loyalty sounds like a more likely reason.

Or it could be as simple as the fact that Obama doesn’t like it when he doesn’t get his way, and wants to put those daring to question him “in their place.”

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 24, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

Yes, they are. “Fluke you – we is overcome”…all they are thinking.

Congratulations AmeriKa. You brung/kept them. YOU deserve them.

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2013 at 12:18 PM

She’s been a loyal Apparatchik, she will now be rewarded (Black Sea Dacha to follow).

Another Drew on May 24, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Maybe she should ask if “this won’t just feed Congressional questioning” of State’s decisions. She will be so busy answering Issa’s questions that it’ll be months before she talks to friendlier faces in the Senate.

Still, isn’t this just like Obama. First he flipped the middle finger to McCain on national TV and to Hilary on stage, and now to the country. What a SCOAMF.

MTF on May 24, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The Obama Corollary to the Moynihan Theorum:

Instead of Defining Deviancy Down, Obama is Elevating Incompetence and Criminality Up

glcinpdx on May 24, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Back to Occam’s Razor: The simplest explanation that accounts for all the known facts is the most probable. Or the Holmes corollary: when you eliminate the impossible then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

The simplest explanation? This administration thinks it is bullet proof. It is headed up, after all, by a man who has never had to be accountable for anything in his life. Sheltered and cosseted as a child, drug-soaked and lazy during high school, his leftist connections got him into Claremont, Columbia and Harvard. Naturally he thinks the world is his toy store and that he is untouchable.

Arrogance and hubris are too generous as descriptors of this mindset.

UnrepentantCurmudgeon on May 24, 2013 at 1:41 PM

Walk in the park for her, Juan McCain can’t wait to stick it to the enemy! mccain-accuses-tea-party-colleagues-of-pushing-dems-too-far

dmann on May 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

In 2008, I used to joke that McCain liked Obama so much, he probably voted for the Democrat himself.
Now, I’m not so sure he didn’t.

AesopFan on May 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM

This is the way Chicago thugs prove their power. They do this in-your-face stuff to show you how impotent you are to stop them. It fires up their people and demoralizes yours.

jnelchef on May 24, 2013 at 1:55 PM

It doesn’t make any sense to me. Obama has to know she is going to face withering cross-examination, and her fingerprints are all over the false Benghazi talking points.

Unless…. this is what Nuland wants, in return for continuing to protect the regime. And she’s delusional enough to think she will make it through the Benghazi hearings and the confirmation process.

Susan Rice, Jr.

novaculus on May 24, 2013 at 2:00 PM

Tell the truth as part of the Obama Administration? Fired.

Tell blatant lies as part of the Obama Administration? Promoted.

If you want to know what someone’s likes and dislikes are, watch what they reward, and what they punish. It really is that simple.

gekkobear on May 24, 2013 at 2:29 PM

“Yes, we can” – in your face thugs

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Does the White House really think that raising Nuland’s profile to a Senate confirmation level immediately after releasing those e-mails is a brilliant move? Are they thinking at all?

This administration thinks that its $H!T doesn’t stink.

What a bunch of b@$turd$

hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM

If she accepts then she will deserve what’s coming to her and at her. She should be concerned at this point with Issa’s investigation.

Tangerinesong on May 24, 2013 at 3:17 PM