Cases of Trump and Clinton: Do presidents bomb other countries to distract from their scandals; or does the "Deep State" effectively use scandals and other mechanisms to push presidents to bomb?
I think this was the Epstein game plan - use personal/sexual blackmail to manipulate these people. There was the early Trump attack in Yemen in 2017, where they killed Anwar al-Awlaki's 8-year-old daughter, after previously killing Awlaki and his son, all American citizens. This was an expansion of the Yemen invasion, and took place during the first month of Trump's term. There were still federal informants in his inner circle at this point.
Not that I know of. The 2017 killing was a bit controversial at the time (yet again killing a US citizen without due process, etc.) but the Pentagon said it was excusable error in their zeal to go after "Al Queda in the Arabian Peninsula," an entity that likely never existed.. The Pentagon claims they did not know the girl was present when the house was bombed, but we all knew about it without days of the killing. And why was the bombing justified at all?
Thanks so much for even posing the question. Maintaining power - whether that of the deep state/interagency consensus and/or that of the president - is paramount, overriding the framework of international laws meant to protect innocent lives.
I think this was the Epstein game plan - use personal/sexual blackmail to manipulate these people. There was the early Trump attack in Yemen in 2017, where they killed Anwar al-Awlaki's 8-year-old daughter, after previously killing Awlaki and his son, all American citizens. This was an expansion of the Yemen invasion, and took place during the first month of Trump's term. There were still federal informants in his inner circle at this point.
Interesting. Has Whitney Webb or anyone else written about this?
I do recall rumors (from Hitchens) that Israel was using Lewinsky as potential blackmail against Clinton. Will try to look that up.
Not that I know of. The 2017 killing was a bit controversial at the time (yet again killing a US citizen without due process, etc.) but the Pentagon said it was excusable error in their zeal to go after "Al Queda in the Arabian Peninsula," an entity that likely never existed.. The Pentagon claims they did not know the girl was present when the house was bombed, but we all knew about it without days of the killing. And why was the bombing justified at all?
Thanks so much for even posing the question. Maintaining power - whether that of the deep state/interagency consensus and/or that of the president - is paramount, overriding the framework of international laws meant to protect innocent lives.