YOU KNOW YOU HAVE A BAD DEAL WHEN BOTH SIDES ARE COMPULSIVE LIARS …
Doesn’t this give you a warm fuzzy, just hours after the Iran nuclear deal was announced as a historic agreement between the United States and Iran over its nuclear program, Iran’s leading negotiator, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework. REALLY, OBAMA LIE? Because that has never happened during his disastrous president, NOT! So who are we to believe with such and important issue that affects US national security, the Middle East and Europe … The known liar, Barack Hussein Obama, or the known liars, the Iranian government? This is why Obama and his minions should never be allowed to make any deal like this, they cant be trusted to do right by America.
How sad and pathetic has it become in the United States when forced to choose between a US president and Iran as to who is lying, you can’t. So how did Obama sell this to the Iranians, if you like your uranium enriched centrifuges, you can keep your uranium enriched centrifuges?
Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.
Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.
Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.
Following a subsequent press conference by Secretary of State John Kerry—and release of a administration fact sheet on Iranian concessions—Zarif lashed out on Twitter over what he dubbed lies.
The SCOTUS Reject Free Speech Appeal over Cinco de Mayo School Dispute Filed by 3 Students at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, CA
The Supreme Court of Mexico rejected Cinco de Mayo school dispute appeal … T0o bad it was the Supreme Court of the United States … What happened to the Country I grew up in?
Reuters reports that the SCOTUS rejected the on Monday appeal and left in tact a lower courts ruling that school officials in California did not violate the free speech rights of students by demanding they remove T-shirts bearing images of the United States flag at an event celebrating the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo. REALLY? So a school can tell American students in America to remove their American flag shirts because it would cause an incident at an American school. Honestly, what the “F” happened to this once great nation? Justice isn’t just blind at the SCOTUS, it also appears to be stupid.
Just curious, who thinks that the SCOTUS would have decided 180 degrees different if the school officials had asked the Mexican students to take off their shirts with the Mexican flag on it so not to insight a riot? Or if it were black students who were made to take off shirts that might cause an incident? Or if Gay-Lesbian students were forced to take off their rainbow shirts for fear of causing an incident? I think we all know the answer.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact an appeals court ruling that school officials in California did not violate the free speech rights of students by demanding they remove T-shirts bearing images of the U.S. flag at an event celebrating the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo.
The court declined to hear an appeal filed by three students at Live Oak High School in the town of Morgan Hill, south of San Francisco. School staff at the May 5, 2010, event told several students their clothing could cause an incident. Two chose to leave for home after refusing to turn their shirts inside out.
The school had been experiencing gang-related tensions and racially charged altercations between white and Hispanic students at the time. School officials said they feared the imposition of American patriotic imagery by some students at an event where other students were celebrating their pride in their Mexican heritage would incite fights between the two groups.
What part that this is America doesn’t the Supreme Court quite not get? Only in America is it considered a bad thing to wear something patriotic. This is just pathetic. Unlike in Mexico, citizens are supposed to have rights in the United States. Supreme Court, that means all citizens, including white Americans.
Just so everyone understands, Cinca de Mayo is not Mexico’s Independence Day, it celebrates the defeat of the French army during the Battle of Puebla in Mexico on May 5, 1862. Mexico’s Independence Day is on Dieciséis de Septiembre, but that doesn’t quite have the same ring does it? However let’s get real, today Cinco de Mayo has become more of an American holiday than a Mexican one giving folks the excuse to suck down some Margaritas and some cervezas like Negra Modelo, Dos Equis, Tecate or Corona.
VICTORY FOR OLD GLORY … UC-Irvine Executive Cabinet VETOES Resolution Banning the American Flag from the Lobby of the Student Government Offices
COMMON SENSE FINALLY PREVAIL …
The University of California Irvine five member student executive cabinet has vetoed a resolution banning the American flag from the lobby of the student government offices. But this action on the part on UC-Irvine for anyone to even think of banning the American flag from anywhere on campus drew the attention of more than just the school. But this was just an example of a few liberal, America hating lunatics trying to overtake the process. From the reaction to their voting for the ban, it appeared that no one in the student body or the university administration for for this resolution.. In fact they were embarrassed. Also, the State government in Sacramento, CA are looking to propose a Constitutional Amendment that prevents state universities from ever banning the American flag. How sad is it though, that we have so many ingrates in this country that such an Amendment would have to be contemplated.
Maybe the best comment in response to this attempted hijacking of the American flag by six radical was by one UCI student, “I think its fine that they want to keep it, I mean this school is in America and it is the American flag so I don’t see what the problem is”.
In vetoing the resolution, the ASUCI Executive Cabinet made the following statement:
We fundamentally disagree with the actions taken by ASUCI Legislative Council and their passage of R50-70 as counter to the ideals that allow us to operate as an autonomous student government organization with the freedoms of speech and expression associated with it. It is these very symbols that represent our constitutional rights that have allowed for our representative creation and our ability to openly debate all ranges of issues and pay tribute to how those liberties were attained.
As students in an academic institution we encourage all students on campus to participate in open debate about a wide array of issues and to actively engage in academic curiosity, which lies at the backbone of a preeminent academic research institution. It is this freedom to be able to navigate and explore topics on a wide range of issues that we see at risk if we begin to engage in a particular form of regulation of free speech and its expression through symbols in any space associated with our organization.
Matthew Guevara and the 5 other America haters who voted in favor of R50-70 might want to rethink what it means to be an American and live in America. The ASUCI Legislative Council’s resolution, passed six to four on Tuesday, with two abstentions, a resolution calling for the removal of all flags, especially the American flag, noting that it “has been flown in instances of colonialism and imperialism.” The clueless 6 might want to read the above statement from the student executive cabinet that soundly excoriated their ridiculous resolution.
University of California – Irvine Student Government Voted to Remove the American Flag from an “Inclusive Space” on Campus
HOW AND WHEN DID COLLEGE EDUCATED KIDS BECOME SO STUPID … AMERICA, YOU ARE ALLOWING THIS COUNTRY TO BE DESTROYED FROM WITHIN.
The University of California -Irvine student government voted this past week to exclude the American flag from the common lobby area of student government offices to promote cultural inclusion. WHAT? Are these people on drugs or is it just more liberal, mental disease? Here is liberal logic, to be more inclusive, you are being exclusive. BRILLIANT! The resolution, see below, that passed 6-4, also went on to say that “freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible, can be interpreted as hate speech.” Yet another head shaking moment from college idiot liberals who have no sense of what makes the United States of America and for which it stands, One Nation under God and the home of the free and the brave.
A note to Matthew Guevara, add yourself to the list of other American flag haters
According to the Campus Reform, the bill, R50-70, was authored by Social Ecology Representative Matthew Guevara, and accuses all flags, especially, the American flag, of being “symbols of patriotism or weapons for nationalism.” Especially? Just another America hating hypocrite who hates the flag and what it represents, but who has no problem benefiting from the freedom and liberty provided by the American flag. Written by student Matthew Guevara of the School of Social Ecology, the resolution states.
“The American flag has been flown in instances of colonialism and imperialism” and notes that flags “construct paradigms of conformity and sets homogenized standards.”
The resolution goes on to say that “freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible, can be interpreted as hate speech.”
Maybe UC-Irvine, since they have no room for the American flag would also like to give up all the college funding that comes curtsey of the United States of America? As for ignoramus Matthew Guevara, who is against American exceptionalism and some how thinks the American flag represents colonialism, with all due respect go screw yourself. For Matthew Guevara and the rest of his ilk, maybe you would like to take a semester abroad at let’s say ISIS University and see just what it is like to live with no freedoms. If you make it back alive, maybe you will then understand what the American flag truly stands for.
The executive cabinet of UCI’s Associated Students on Saturday will consider vetoing the flag prohibition, which prompted the American’s flag’s removal from a lobby wall.
“It’s an iconic and symbolic representation of our values in the U.S.,” said Reza Zomorrodian, the Associated Students’ president who sits on the executive cabinet and opposes the ban.
The student council approved the resolution with a 6-4 vote and two abstentions. Matthew Guevara, the representative who authored the resolution, did not return email messages Friday.
The resolution lists 25 reasons for the ban, mostly relating to how the flag can be interpreted and viewed negatively or positively depending on one’s experiences. The resolution states that the American flag has been flown in times of “colonialism and imperialism” and could symbolize American “exceptionalism and superiority.”
Under the resolution, no flags of any nation can be hung in the office.
Did President Barack Hussein Obama Really Threaten to Shoot Down Israeli Jets if IAF Targeted Iranian Nuclear Sites
Please note the below news story is from the Israeli National News; however, with this administration and the treatment of US allies, anything is possible …
There was a time in this country when no one would have ever thought that a US President would ever think of let alone threaten to shoot down Israeli jets that targeted Iranian nuclear sites. In fact, one would have thought that US presidents would have wanted Israel to take care of the problem. That was BBHO, before Before Barack Hussein Obama. The Obama presidency has been one of the most anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic administrations in US history. As Pamela Gellar opines, “He doesn’t even pretend anymore, the Democrats have become the anti-Israel party with the anti-Semite-in-chief.”
The Bethlehem-based news agency Ma’an has cited a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.
Following Obama’s threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack.
According to Al-Jarida, the Netanyahu government took the decision to strike Iran some time in 2014 soon after Israel had discovered the United States and Iran had been involved in secret talks over Iran’s nuclear program and were about to sign an agreement in that regard behind Israel’s back.
The report claimed that an unnamed Israeli minister who has good ties with the US administration revealed the attack plan to Secretary of State John Kerry, and that Obama then threatened to shoot down the Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.
Former US diplomat Zbigniew Brzezinski, who enthusiastically campaigned for Obama in 2008, called on him to shoot down Israeli planes if they attack Iran. “They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?” said the former national security advisor to former President Jimmy Carter in an interview with the Daily Beast.
“We have to be serious about denying them that right,” he said. “If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a ‘Liberty’ in reverse.’”
Too bad that Obama could not get tough like this with ISIS and terrorism.
OBAMA VETOES US JOBS …
Barack Obama vetoes the Keystone XL Pipeline bill. The bill was passed by a bipartisan vote in both the House and the Senate; however, Obama is driven by his far LEFT agenda and seems to care more about that than providing jobs that pay more to American workers than minimum wage. Following the shellacking that Democrats took in the 2014 elections, Obama called for cooperation and for Democrats and Republicans to work together. We all knew it was BS at the time, but it sounded good from a president who had just lost the Senate. Since then Obama has done nothing to strengthen his words of cooperation, but instead has engaged in confrontation. The veto of the Keystone XL Pipeline bill, going against the will of the people and their elected representatives, is just the latest in Obama’s actions that go along with his “imperial’ far LEFT agenda of its my way or the highway.
Obama said following his veto, “The presidential power to veto legislation is one I take seriously. But I also take seriously my responsibility to the American people.” REALLY, WHO KNEW? Exactly how is Obama taking his responsibility to the American people when the American people are in favor of the Keystone Pipeline? Critics of the bill say will cause environmental damage. Hmm, you mean like the one below in how oil is currently transported in the United States.
I guess Obama would rather have train accidents occur, like the one recently in West Virginia, that resulted in a fiery explosion. Guess what the train was carrying … that’s right, crude oil. The train, which was carrying North Dakota crude to an oil depot in Yorktown, Virginia, derailed in a small town 33 miles southeast of Charleston, causing 20 tank cars to catch fire. The environmentalist wackos seem to be rather quiet. Obama cares nothing about the people, he cares about his far left agenda.
Amid appeals for bipartisanship, President Barack Obama in just three days has provoked Republicans on issues as disparate as immigration, Wall Street and the Keystone XL pipeline — a combative mix of defense and offense that underscores Washington’s political realignment.
Sensing a Republican retreat, Obama is headlining a Miami town hall on Wednesday, enlisting his Latino base of support to increase pressure on GOP lawmakers who want to tie spending on the Homeland Security Department to repeal of his immigration executive actions.
On Tuesday, he vetoed GOP legislation that would have forced construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline. And on Monday he proposed tougher rules on financial brokers who help manage retirement accounts, over Wall Street objections.
The Leftist MSM , otherwise known as the Obama/Democrat media complex is in a tizzy following Giuliani’s comments that Obama does not love America.
Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani was at a private fundraiser for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker when he said the following, “When I hear the President speak I don’t believe that he expresses the love of America as much as he does criticism of America.” Of course the LEFT, the MSM and Democrats are aghast at such comments. REALLY? I know, how dare anyone question anything to do with Barack Obama, the Obamamessiah. They must be racist. Does the truth hurt, Barack Obama was not brought up the same as most people with a love of country.
“I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the President loves America. He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”
Honestly, who would not question someone who is president who continually feels the need to apologize for America? A president of the United States who cannot utter the words “radical Islam” or admit that radical Islam is at war with the United States? Instead, Obama tells us that we have to get off our high horses because of the Crusades that took place centuries ago and said that terrorists have “legitimate” concerns. WHAT? Sorry folks, had Jimmy Carter made such comments in the late 1970′s in dealing with Iran, had JFK made such comments regarding the Soviet Union or had FDR made comments like this regarding the Nazi’s, Italy or Imperial Japan during WWII, they all would have been rode out of office on a rail and called traitors, let alone been questioned about their love of America.
Look for the LEFT and the MSM to run with this as a news distraction and running cover for Obama rather than report on the domestic and foreign disasters that are currently taking place. CNN has already called Rudy’s comments ugly and divisive. Isn’t that rich … in that the former NYC mayor was talking about the most divisive president ever!
Rudy Guilliani went on Fox & Friends to explain what he meant by his comments, instead of having the Obama propaganda media doing it for him. Guilliani said that he was not questioning Obama’s patriotism, he was questioning Obama’s rhetoric in that you rarely ever hear him talk of America in glowing fashion like former presidents Ronald Regan or even Bill Clinton did. However, what you do hear from Obama at every turn is criticism of America. Sorry, but Guiliani is correct in his interpretation. Barack Obama does not talk about “American exceptionalism”. Obama does not talk about America being “a shiny city on the hill”. Obama cut his teeth being a community organizer, which by definition means that he is a community agitator who is against what exists and looks for change.
Probably what Guilliani really meant to say is not that he does not love America, but as president he does not express his love of America enough, but instead he talks of the criticism of it instead. Who honesty can say that Obama has been a cheerleader for America? His past and upbringing would prevent that from happening. Obama in his heart thinks America is a western colonialist country responsible for evils around the world and still holds slavery against the United States, even though a black president has been elected.
Like it or not, Rudy Giuliani spoke what many believe and all too many have been afraid to say. Thus the reason why Democrats are up in arms and most cowardice Republicans are too Lilly-livered and gutless to stand up and say so.
Rudy Giuliani Discusses what he meant regarding Obama not Loving America
JOBS FOR JIHADISTS … Even MSNBC’s Chris Mathews Trashes State Dept Spox Marie Harf’s Obama Talking Points Idiocy, … “We Cannot Win This War by Killing Them” … “Lack of Opportunity for Jobs”
BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE SAME PRESIDENT WHO GAVE YOU CASH FOR CLUNKERS, NOW COMES OBAMA’S WAY TO END ISIS … JOBS FOR JIHADISTS!!!
Obama’s war on terror is in reality a jobs program for Jihadists.
Just when you thought the Obama admin could not be more of a bunch of terrorist deniers, now these libs put forth that they can end radical Islam with a jobs program. America, you know it is bad for Barack Obama when MSNBC’s Chris Matthews laughs at your foreign policy and slaps your State Department spokesperson upside her head as to Obama’s end game with ISIS. Mathews began the interview by stating, “if I were ISIS. I would not be afraid right now. There is no existential threat to these people, they can keep finding places where they can hold executions and putting the camera work together, getting their proper together , and killing people for show, and nothing we do right now seems to be directed at stopping this.”
State Department spokesperson Marie Harf unbelievable said the following, “We can not win this war by killing them. We can not kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium and longer term to go after the root causes that lead people to join these groups, whether it is lack of opportunity for jobs.” WHAT!!! Jobs, jobs? This insane administration thinks that if Jihadists have jobs, they will stop them from beheading innocent men, women and children. Just curious America, how frightened are you right now that these people are in power? This idiot speaks for Sec. of State John Kerry, who follows the foreign policy strategy of Barack Obama and she just told the enemy that an organized US military and their allies cannot defeat ISIS. I would ask the following question, then why are we there? Surprisingly, Matthews shot back with a look of, are you effing kidding me stating, “But we’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or in fifty lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going to be Muslims, and as long as the trumpet is blowing they’ll join.” WOW, how many times can you say that you agreed with Chris Matthews?
So let’s understand this, professor Obama is using Root cause analysis to defeat ISIS, really? The root cause analysis of burning people alive, mass beheadings, seriously? So we are going to use The 5 Whys, Barrier Analysis, Events and Causal Factor Charting and Realitycharting to determine what makes these 17 year old kids pick up an AK-47 instead of starting a business? GOD HELP US THAT WE CAN SURVIVE THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY.
Chris Matthews amazingly says at the end, to my surprise, in response to Marie Harf’s blathering, “this sounds like how we are going to get rid of juvenile delinquency in America over time by erasing poverty and improving education.” Then Mathews said, “the American people I think are getting humiliated morally by this.” BINGO!!! And there lies Obama’s ultimate goal, he is a community agitator socialist at heart who blames America for all the evils of the world.
MARIE HARF, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT: I think there are a few stages here, right now we are trying to take their leaders and their fighters off the battlefield in Iraq & Syria, that is where they really flourish.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC: Are we killing enough of them?
MARIE HARF: We’re killing a lot of them. And we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians and Jordanians, they’re in this fight with us. We can not win this war by killing them. We can not kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium and longer term to go after the root causes that lead people to join these groups, whether it is lack of opportunity for jobs–
CHRIS MATTHEWS: But we’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or in fifty lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going to be Muslims, and as long as the trumpet is blowing they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?
MARIE HARF: We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies, so they can have job opportunities for these people. [...] What makes these 17 year old kids pick up an AK-47 instead of starting a business?
57% of Americans prior to this nonsense of “jobs for Jihadists” disapproved of how Barack Obama was handling ISIS, look for this number to go up as it is clear that Barack Obama has no plan or strategy to take on ISIS because frankly, he does not take it seriously.
Hey John Kerry, why the long face?
In a new survey, John Kerry was ranked the worst United States Secretary of State in the last 50 years. The results of the 2014 Ivory Tower survey ranked Henry Kissinger the most effective secretary of state with 32.2% of the vote. Yes, the same Henry Kissinger that Code Pink nut-jobs wanted to arrest for war crimes. He was followed by James Baker, Madeleine Albright, and Hillary Clinton, as judged by a survey of 1,615 international relations scholars. Although, I am a bit skeptical of Hillary Clinton being a better Sec. of State than Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell or George Schultz. Can anyone name one single accomplishment of Hillary Clinton? I didn’t think so.
The results of the 2014 Ivory Tower survey—a collaboration between Foreign Policy and the Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) project at the College of William & Mary—provide an insider’s guide. Responses from 1,615 IR scholars drawn from 1,375 U.S. colleges and universities determined rankings for the leading Ph.D., terminal master’s, and undergraduate programs in IR. (The scholars were asked to list the top five institutions in each category.) The survey also quizzed respondents about recent historical events and future policy challenges: Just how plausible is a U.S. war with China, for example, and who was the most effective secretary of state over the past 50 years? (Hint: Neither Condoleezza Rice nor John Kerry.)
OBAMA ADMIN: IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT TALIBAN IS … SICK, JUST SICK.
Watch WH Obama mouthpiece contort and twist the English language so not to call the Taliban a terrorist group like ISIS so to defend the Obama administrations negotiating for the release of Army deserter Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. ABC News’ Jon Karl, not Fox News, ABC News White House correspondent Karl asked White House deputy press secretary Eric Schultz how the Jordanians dealing with ISIS is any different than how the Obama negotiated with the Taliban. The stuttering answer from Eric Schultz should not only surprise you, but make you fear for your national security. This is what happens when you put forth lying talking points that collide with the real world.
White House deputy press secretary Eric Schultz said. “I’d also point out that the Taliban is an armed insurgency. ISIL is a terrorist group. So we don’t make concessions to terrorist groups.” Really, the Taliban is not a terrorist group? You mean the same Taliban that murdered 153 people in a massacre at a school in Pakistan? This White House is nothing more than lying scum that put the United States of America at rick every day. It is one thing to torture the English language over what the word is, is when you are Bill Clinton trying to save his bacon amid a sex scandal, it is quite another when the safety of America and the world is at risk.
FOX News Poll … 47% say Obama downplays threat from Islamic terrorists. JUST 47%, REALLY?
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS: You say the United States government does not give in to demands, does not pay ransom. But how is what the Jordanians are talking about doing any different than what the United States did to get the release of [Bowe] Bergdahl — releasing prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay to the Taliban, which is clearly a terrorist organization?
ERIC SCHULTZ, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY: As you know, this was highly discussed at the time and prisoner swaps are traditional end-of-conflict interaction that happens. As the war in Afghanistan wound down we thought it was the appropriate thing to do. The president’s bedrock commitment as commander in chief is to leave no man or woman behind. That’s the principle he was operating under.
KARL: Isn’t that what the Jordanians are operating under?
SCHULTZ: Well, I think Jon –
KARL: I mean the Taliban is still conducting terrorist attacks. You can’t really say the war has ended as far as they are concerned.
SCHULTZ: Well, I’d also point out that the Taliban is an armed insurgency, ISIL is a terrorist group. So, we don’t make concessions to terrorist groups. We feel –
KARL: You don’t think the Taliban is a terrorist group?
SCHULTZ: I don’t think that the Taliban, um, uh — the Taliban is an armed insurgency. This was the winding down of the war in Afghanistan and that’s why this arrangement was dealt. Our view is, as the president said at the time, is as commander in chief when he sends men and women into armed combat he doesn’t want to leave anyone behind.
Take a good look at to what the Obama WH does not consider a terror group as they murder innocents at a school
YUP, The Taliban is not a terror group, as says Obama administration
ABC News’ Jon Karl asked how this differs from the U.S. decision to swap Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban leaders at Guantanamo Bay — returning them “to the Taliban, which is clearly a terrorist organization.”
“As you know, uh, this was highly discussed at the time and prisoner swaps are a traditional end-of-conflict, uh, interaction that happens. As the war in Afghanistan wound down, we felt like it was the appropriate thing to do. The president’s bedrock commitment as commander in chief is to leave no man or woman behind, that’s the principle he was operating under,” White House deputy press secretary Eric Schultz said. “I’d also point out that the Taliban is an armed insurgency. ISIL is a terrorist group. So we don’t make concessions to terrorist groups.”
Karl followed, “You don’t think the Taliban is a terrorist group?”
Schultz had some trouble answering.
“I don’t think that the Taliban, um — uh – the Taliban is an armed insurgency,” Schultz said. “This was the winding down of the war in Afghanistan, and that’s why this arrangement was dealt.”