On Thursday night, July 14, 2016, Bill O’Reilly (FOX News, O’Reilly Factor) conducted a phone interview with Hillary Clinton during which they discussed the terrorist massacre in Nice, France.
During that interview, O’Reilly and Clinton had the following conversation about what steps were needed to deal with the rapidly growing worldwide ISIS threat:
Clinton: “One of my priorities is to launch an intelligence surge. We still do not have enough, ah, intelligence cooperation between our agencies and those in other countries, including, ah, in Europe and we need to have a, a focal point…”
O’Reilly: “… Why, why is that? I didn’t know that. Why is that happening? Why aren’t… why don’t we have the intelligence?”
Clinton: “Well, I’ll tell ya, in part, because there has been, ah, a reluctance on the part of some of our, ah, friends in Europe to be as forthcoming in sharing information…”
What a surprise. Our friends in Europe are not as “forthcoming in sharing information”!
Now, why might that be?
In a column (Clinton Guilty, But We’re Not Recommending Prosecution) on July 6, I wrote:
“It is disturbing to contemplate that there may be sufficient American voters who would jeopardize their own safety and security by helping elect someone who
Has demonstrated she is incapable of being trusted with national security information,
Has a well-documented history of bold serial lying to deceive the American public,
Would not be granted a security clearance if applied for today,
May well have been responsible for five deaths already (four at Benghazi, one in Afghanistan) as a consequence of her lax handling of pertinent national security documents,
Is likely to have a dossier on her national security violations held by our chief global adversaries (Russia, China, Iran), and,
Could not rely on our allies to share sensitive information with her for fear it would end in the wrong hands.”
I’ve emphasized that last bullet.
This is not rocket science, folks.
Continue reading at iPatriot.com