Washington Post: Trump’s Saddam Comments “Disqualifying” Or Something

The Washington Post editorial board is rather vexed over Donald Trump’s Saddam Hussein comments

Donald Trump is wrong about Saddam Hussein

SADDAM HUSSEIN was not “so good” at killing terrorists, as Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed. On the contrary, he was one of the contemporary world’s foremost sponsors of terrorism. He harbored or funded some of history’s most infamous killers and jihadists, including the current chief of al-Qaeda, and plotted numerous terrorist attacks of his own, including an attempt to assassinate former president George H.W. Bush with a suicide bomb. Long before the U.S. invasion of 2003, his regime was formally identified by the State Department as a state sponsor of terrorism. That Mr. Trump would insistently assert the opposite serves to underline not only his profound and disqualifying ignorance of foreign affairs, but also his creepy and dangerous affinity for dictators.

Now, the WPEB delves into Saddam’s working with terrorists from the time he took power in the 1970’s, noting that perhaps the only terrorist Saddam killed was Abu Nidal. They did fail to mention that Saddam paid families to send their sons off to blow themselves up while killing Jews in Israel. And lots of terrorist training camps were discovered in Iraq during the opening weeks of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

So, Trump was very wrong. Very wrong. I’ve noted this previously. But, hey

Let’s see. CNN offers FBI Director James Comey’s 7 most damning lines

  1. “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
  2. “There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”
  3. “None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government — or even with a commercial email service like Gmail.”
  4. “Only a very small number of the emails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”
  5. “We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.”
  6. “She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”

The 7th was more about the reprehensible conduct of the State Department. Then there’s this, from Comey’s appearance before Congress

“Certainly, she should have known not to send classified information,” Comey said. “As I said, that’s the definition of ‘negligent.’ I think she was extremely careless, I think she was negligent. That I could establish.”

So, let’s consider: Trump was an idiot and just plain wrong with his Saddam comments. Hillary was “negligent” and “extremely careless”. Comey further went on to note that she didn’t seem to understand what the “C” as a classified marking meant. You know, after decades of signing security clearance documents and having this explained to her.

Which was is more disqualifying? Which one showed more ignorance?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Washington Post: Trump’s Saddam Comments “Disqualifying” Or Something”

  1. Jeffery says:

    And yet Secretary Clinton will win in a landslide. And in 4-6 years the House and Senate will also be controlled by Democrats, we’ll have a liberal Supreme Court, the national Teabagger nightmare will be over, and yes, American can once again be made great, like we used to be before the conservative coup.

    All because the far-right overplayed their hand and nominated Donnie J. Trump. Your only hope is to rig the election.

  2. Hoagie says:

    You should be very pleased if that shuld come to pass, Jeffery. After all, nothing says fascism like one party rule. But that’e what it’s all about with you leftists. Tell me, how long after you take over before “speech laws” are made? I assume by all your bluster guns will be confiscated. How about control of the news media (by force now you guys control it by alliance) and the internet?

    The other common trait among you leftists beside the constant lying is the need for absolute power. You really hate anyone who disagrees, don’t you? How many Americans will you need to kill to get your perfect society??

    You guys have done such a bang up job for the last 8 years another 8 of Hillary should assures our status as a permanent banana republic.

    https://pics.onsizzle.com/silly-americans-laws-are-for-poor-people-made-on-3003490.png

  3. Jeffery says:

    As any and all politicians with future political ambitions rebuff Trump’s VP overtures, he is reportedly vetting retired General Michael “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL!!” Flynn.

  4. Jeffery says:

    Oh Hoagie,

    I would be perfectly happy with a liberal Republican prez like Ike with a liberal Congress and Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the new Republican Party fields no electable, reasonable candidates.

    Our conservative (pro wealthy/ anti worker) turn since the Reagan revolution has led us to where we are today. We have enacted policy after policy that has gradually redistributed wealth upward, and it has reached a breaking point for we citizens.

    Regarding free speech, I will go along with the ACLU, so you have little to worry about.

    To be honest I really don’t care much one way or another regarding guns. Little we do will make much difference – we have more guns than citizens.

    I agree, a Dem president without a whole cloth change in Congress only serves to slow the new conservative assault on the nation and world. So to be honest I am more anti-Republican than pro-Democrat.

  5. […] William Teach on The Pirate’s Cove: Washington Post: Trump’s Saddam Comments “Disqualifying” Or Something […]

  6. John says:

    Teach that “c”
    It is the lowest. Ranking for classified material
    Most things that have that classification are already available open source
    Everything is over classified
    So far the worst thing that they have tried to pin on her was the name of a human resource agent Moussa Koussa the former Libiyan spy chief
    Of course that band was blurted out to the public by Trey Gowdy but if course it is still considered TOP SECRET
    I gave yet to see any signs in polls that Clinton is being damaged by any of this
    Most Americans think Comey did the right thing. Most Americans see this as a partisan attack on a man who 2 weeks ago the GOP loved
    Ever wonder why Congress has an approval rating in the mid teens? 1/3 that if Obama??
    It is because of things like this attack on Comey
    The GOP should focus more on real issues (not bathroom bills to fix nonexistent problems) and less on personal attacks

  7. I gave yet to see any signs in polls that Clinton is being damaged by any of this
    Most Americans think Comey did the right thing. Most Americans see this as a partisan attack on a man who 2 weeks ago the GOP loved

    Asbury Park Press poll (in a deep Dem state) 80% think she should be charged.

    Rasmussen: A Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey – taken last night – finds that 37% of Likely U.S. Voters agree with the FBI’s decision. But 54% disagree and believe the FBI should have sought a criminal indictment of Clinton. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.

    63% of Independents disagree with Comey decision, as do 25% of Dems.

    But, Trump is a chump, as I have written, and blew a golden opportunity to take advantage of this scandal.

    Oh, and John: you don’t have to admit it to me, but you know damned well if Hillary was a Republican you and the rest of Dems would be screaming for her head, Comey’s head, and demanding Congressional investigators and an independent prosecutor.