If we thought the question of the day is whether Biden will pack the Supreme court, the better question is what is the plan for a Hillary Clinton in a Biden administration. Hillary pens a piece in Foreign affairs entitled:
A National Security Reckoning
How Washington Should Think About Power
The questions should now be asked of the Biden campaign:
- Do you intend to appoint Hillary Clinton to the role of Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, or a similar high-level cabinet posiiton?
- Does Hillary’s admission of major jobs cuts in the defense sector reflect the Biden campaign’s priorities?
- Has Joe Biden spoken with Hillary Clinton over her prospective role in a Biden administration, or on national security matters?
Here is where Clinton raises her bona fides lest we forget she is still rattling around, wandering the woods with her Chardonnay. She proposes massive military layoffs.
FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE, U.S. SENATOR, AND BENGHAZI BELITTLER HILLARY CLINTON HAS PENNED A 5000-WORD OPINION EDITORIAL FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE – A SCARCELY-READ YET IMPORTANT FOREIGN POLICY INDUSTRY PUBLICATION. THE ARTICLE CLEARLY AIMS TO ESTABLISH CLINTON AS A POTENTIAL BIDEN PICK FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL CABINET POSITIONS IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
The Trump campaign will surely see the audition by the very unpopular Hillary Clinton as a gift in the final days of the U.S. Presidential campaign. The idea of voting for Joe Biden and waking up with Hillary Clinton will send chills up the spine of even many Democrats, to whom both Clinton and Biden represent an old, tired, globalist worldview at odds with a “progressive” or even populist Democrat trajectory
Her article contains a number of veiled mea culpas over globalism, though she repeatedly lumps the blame at Donald Trump’s door for many of the problems caused – in a national security sense – by his predecessors:
And while also appearing to lambast her own side’s heartlessness over job losses – she calls the left’s “learn to code” mantra “fanciful and condescending” – she also gives away that a Democratic plan for the “modernization” of the U.S. military would lead to massive job losses:
“No one should pretend that every defense job can be saved or replaced. Cutting hundreds of billions of dollars in military spending over the next decade will inevitably inflict a painful toll on families and communities across the country.”
…….”Myopia about national security also manifests in the simplistic frames applied to complex challenges, such as insisting on seeing competition with China through the lens of the Cold War. In a speech in July, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo offered this pearl of wisdom: “I grew up and served my time in the army during the Cold War. And if there is one thing I learned, Communists almost always lie.”
That’s a remarkably unhelpful way of approaching the challenge. Huffing and puffing about Communists may rile up the Fox News audience, but it obscures the fact that China—along with Russia—poses an altogether different threat from the one the Soviet Union did. Today’s competition is not a traditional global military contest of force and firepower. Dusting off the Cold War playbook will do little to prepare the United States for adversaries that use new tools to fight in the gray zone between war and peace, exploit its open Internet and economy to undermine American democracy, and expose the vulnerability of many of its legacy weapons systems. Nor will such an anachronistic approach build the global cooperation needed to take on shared challenges such as climate change and pandemics.”
The admission will further serve as a boon to the Trump campaign seeking to bolster its support amongst military families after a fake news onslaught wherein The Atlantic magazine invented sources in order to drive a wedge between the President and his traditional base.
For the full Clinton “try out” go to Foreign Affairs
H/T and more commentary: National Pulse