Full disclosure: I am NOT on the cutting edge of cultural evolution. I do my best to keep pace with its rear echelons. Nevertheless, I finally watched The Monuments Men on Blu-Ray. Based on a true story, it's a buddy movie of sorts, set in WWII Europe. The Nazis are stealing art all over Europe, in all their occupied lands, particularly from the Jews. Every work of art, painting or statuary, gold brick or gold filling that they can lay their hands on is ending up in the homes of SS officers or being shipped by truck or train to large, makeshift warehouses, until it can be gathered at war's end to fill the planned Fuehrer Museum.
Not all art is equally valued, though. Modernist artists, like Picasso, were not deemed worthy, and many of their works were destroyed. Here we have a small band of Americans, along with one Frenchman and one Brit, tasked with trying to save as many of these irreplaceable works of art as possible.
Along the way, they discover that there exists a directive from Hitler, that if he were to be killed, all of the art was to be destroyed.
In keeping with our Harrison Ford themed headlines...I give you Moooove On dot Org!
Dear MoveOn member,
What's the word for American citizens who undermine the diplomatic efforts of the American president by communicating directly with a foreign government?
"Traitors," according to the New York Daily News—referring to the 47 Republican senators who signed a letter to the Iranian government with the goal of derailing sensitive and potentially historic nuclear negotiations.
I've been hearing this "47 traitors" horse hockey being tossed about for too long now. What's the word for American citizens who undermine the diplomatic efforts of the American president by communicating directly with a foreign government? Traitors?? Let me take you on a little trip down memory lane, and then you tell me!
According to wikipedia:
In the fall of 2002, (Baghdad Jim) McDermott and fellow Representatives David Bonior of Michigan, Nick Rahall of West Virginia and Mike Thompson of California visited Iraq; in Baghdad they met with members of parliament and the Iraqi Foreign Minister...
Wow! George Bush is president in 2002. (He was a Republican in case that small detail slipped anyone's mind.) Jim McDermott, Democrat, David E. Bonior, Democrat, who served as Democratic whip in the House from 1991 to 2002. Mike Thompson, Democrat. Nick Joe Rahall II, Democrat:
Rahall and another Congressman of Arab descent traveled to Syria and ignored State Department policy by meeting with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat...
...or, No Sequel for Hillary!
My friend Adrienne, over at Adrienne's Corner, put up a post minimizing the importance of Hillary's email in flagrante delicto, characterizing it as a "tempest in a teapot". I'm sure that plenty on the Left would love for us to believe this, and have in the meantime, come up with some of the lamest excuses, defenses and doublespeak I have ever heard from a liberal, bar none.
Surprisingly, though a number of folks on the Left are outraged by her conduct as well. Let's examine (and shred) some of the arguments put forth on Hillary's behalf.
Her emails were public (because she sent them out publicly ) Lannie Davis, long time Clinton apologist, tried to make the argument that Hillary had made her emails public because she sent out so many of them publicly. Let's call this the "iceberg defense". As long as you can see part of it, just assume you've seen it all!
what she did was open. She sent these e-mails to thousands of people with that e-mail address. So there's no intent to hide...This is absurd on the face. Any email she sent to you is not necessarily public to me. The fact that thousands of people may have received emails from Hillary's account, means the account may have been public, but not the emails. Apples and Orangemen. The fact that she sent out thousands of emails is irrelevant unless all of them are archived with the government so that they can be searched, and if need be, subpoenaed. If she sent 1,000 emails to Kim Kardashian and 20 to Vladimir Putin, turning over all the Kardashian emails doesn't mean her email was "public". They are public when the public has access to them all, according to prevailing law. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was passed because some government officials had to be forced by law to turn certain documents that should have been part of the public record, over to 'we the people'. But, FOIA doesn't give you access to Hillary's private server, therefore the original documents are in fact being hidden away from the public who owns them.
Any possibility that there are emails from Ambassador Chris Stevens to his boss and good friend Hillary Clinton, telling her of deteriorating conditions, requesting more protection for the compound at Benghazi? Emails from Hillary to Chris telling him to pound sand?? It would be most unusual if there weren't.
Any emails to Saudi Arabia around the time the Saudis gave $25 Million to the Clinton Foundation? From them? Any veiled (pun intended) hints of a quid pro quo?