Did Bachmann Really Leak Classified Info. During Last Night’s Debate? Maybe Not
- Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:12am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
It was a moment that Mediaite originally called a “high point” for Michele Bachmann during last night’s debate. During a discussion on whether Pakistan should no longer receive foreign aid (Bachmann supports continued aid), the Minnesota Congresswoman who sits on the House Intelligence Committee revealed that Pakistan has 15 nuclear sites and that six of the sites had already been attacked by Islamists. But that’s information some are saying has never been made public before, causing some to wonder if Bachmann accidentally leaked classified information.
But did she? What we found suggests no.
First, here‘s how Mediaite describes Bachmann’s response:
Bachmann’s response was a high-point for her in the debate, showing detailed fluency on a sometimes confusing topic of identifying and supporting allies in a region that is also home to many extremist, many of whom have, at least rhetorically, stated goals of doing harm to the United States. But her specific detail raised the eyebrows of many who play close attention to the region when she revealed that Pakistan apparently is home to 15 nuclear sites, and that six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites by what she called nuclear sites jihadists. Claiming that this was more than an “existential threat” she ended with perhaps the best line of the night, saying that Pakistan was “too nuclear to fail.”
If you’re wondering what the possible “leak” is, it’s the part where Bachmann seemingly confirmed that the 15 sites have come under attack by jihadists.
“We have to recognize that 15 of the sites, nuclear sites are available or are potentially penetrable by jihadists. Six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites,” were Bachmann’s actual words. “This is more than an existential threat. We have to take this very seriously.”
Yochi J. Dreazen from National Journal, an historically fair publication, first noticed the new information in a “fact check” article:
Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann serves on the House Intelligence Committee, so her comments on Pakistan’s nuclear program represent either a news-making leak of previously unknown classified information or another in her recent series of seemingly-random, and highly inaccurate, public comments. … U.S. intelligence and military officials believe that Pakistan has 15 nuclear sites, but no U.S. official has publicly said that all of the sites were vulnerable to militant attack or confirmed that any of them had previously come under any form of jihadist attack.
As of publication time, Bachmann’s campaign had not addressed the issue. However, a fact check on CNN’s website, which moderated the debate, confirms that six attacks have, in fact, occurred:
According to Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre, six incidents at sites considered known or likely nuclear installations in Pakistan have occurred.
CNN did call out Bachmann for saying the attacks pose a threat to the U.S., but it never said that her claims about the attacks were either bogus or new information. “Yes, six attacks occurred, but they do not appear to have been attempts to seize the country’s nuclear weapons,” the site concluded.
Newser summed it up: “Six terrorist attacks—including a school bus bomb and a munitions factory blast—have occurred at or near nuclear sites in Pakistan, according to Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Center, but they do not appear to have been attempts to seize the country’s nuclear weapons”.
So did she leak classified information or drop a bombshell of new information? It doesn’t seem so. Could she be the first “public” U.S. official to say so? Maybe. But that could have been information gleaned outside the walls of the Intelligence Committee.
UPDATE:
Bachmann appeared on Fox News Wednesday morning and noted that her facts on Pakistan came from an Atlantic Monthly article. We’ve tracked down the article from the December 2011 issue and, sure enough, it mentions the attacks:
Like many statements made by Pakistan’s current leaders, this one contained large elements of deceit. At least six facilities widely believed to be associated with Pakistan’s nuclear program have already been targeted by militants. In November 2007, a suicide bomber attacked a bus carrying workers to the Sargodha air base, which is believed to house nuclear weapons; the following month, a school bus was attacked outside Kamra air base, which may also serve as a nuclear storage site; in August 2008, Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers attacked what experts believe to be the country’s main nuclear-weapons-assembly depot in Wah cantonment. If jihadists are looking to raid a nuclear facility, they have a wide selection of targets: Pakistan is very secretive about the locations of its nuclear facilities, but satellite imagery and other sources suggest that there are at least 15 sites across Pakistan at which jihadists could find warheads or other nuclear materials.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 690 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 659 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 327 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 210 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 225 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 210 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (209)
Thevoice
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:55amThe more I hear from these people that this is going to be our normal way of life (running away and playing hide and seek )..and slow lost of freedom and liberties ….For eternity ..I could puke….From that standpoint what I heard last night I think they all suck …
Report Post »Elaineb
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 12:17pmI am very grateful that we have in Michelle Bachman, a person with Integrity and foresight serving on the security committee and willing to let the“cat out of the bag” by making her statement about Pakistan very public. She is not ignorant of the untenable situation the troops in Afghanistan now face with their supply lines cut by Pakistan. What do you think it would take to set off another firestorm that would sweep the world like WW II? How many crazy Jihadists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Answer only ONE- the one with access to the proverbial button.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:54amJust heard Beck say Gingrich was a progressive. Good lord. I know he likes Bachman and Santorum (and so do I) and Newt has said and done things that made me cringe BUT, to say he’s a progressive is laughable. Glen throws that word around like crazy. So Newt Gingrich and Woodrow Wilson are of the same political persuasion? Get a grip.
Report Post »Reconbubba
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:09amBy supporting the individual mandate for Obamacare and cap and trade, yes, I would definitely say that Gingrich is a progressive. Anything that furthers a Government‘s grasp over it’s citizens is considered progressive no matter how big or small the reach may be.
Report Post »Brad from Texas
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:13amJust look at his policies he’s pushed for over the last 20 years. Fact check. Gingrich is just as progressive as McCain. No Gingrich is NOT Wilson. But Gingrich is following the textbook definition of a progressive.
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:17amBeck is a guy just trying to make a buck. No higher goals are present. It’s about the money.
Report Post »Brad Wesselmann
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:23amHe may be very knowledgeable, but because wisdom cannot exist without morality Gingrich is as bad as one can imagine…and I mean that literally, no action is below a motivated politician.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/27-reasons-why-newt-gingrich-would-be-a-really-really-bad-president
For me personally, it all starts with his ability to attack Clinton for being unfaithful while the man was doing the exact same thing in his own personal life. I believe Clinton forever sullied the office of President while placing We The People in a terribly compromising position, and Gingrich will only lower the standards further when we are at a time in history where we must adhere to our higher selves.
Report Post »Bayou Babe
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:51amNot so fast, SQUIDVETOHIO. In ‘94, Newt publicly embraced the Third Way – Communitarianism, or the blend of Socialism and Capitalism. He also befriended and promoted Alvin and Heidi Toffler. At the time, I found that quite alarming. Unless Newt has completely distanced himself from Communitarianism, I’d say Glenn is right in claiming Newt is really a Progressive.
Report Post »cripplecreek
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:04amNewtie is a progressive. Just look at his past record.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:29amThe threat from Islam is a lie perpetuated by the Global elite to continue to seize our liberties, destroy our constitution, and to finance their military / industrial complex.
Report Post »If people stopped ingesting GMOs, preservatives, and fluoridated water for a week, your pineal gland would be healthy, and your mind could absorb the FACT that we went to war with the WRONG country for 10 YEARS on a LIE, because 19 PEOPLE from ANOTHER COUNTRY attacked 2 buildings in N.Y. !!!!!!!!!!
You people that still believe our government is still intact, have so much learning to do.
Here is a clue for you to go on… 1933 bankruptcy.
The progressives are employees of the receivers of our bankruptcy ( Global elite )
95% of ALL D.C. politicians are minions to the creditors.
It is a FACT that our Country, Government, and it’s PEOPLE were pledged to the federal reserve for that bankruptcy.
The Sec.of the Treasury is the manager of the bankruptcy. The federal reserve gives Geithner loan “packages” to propose to the congress.
The useless idiot in the oval office just promotes it as if he had something to do with, and signs it.
The federal reserve came up with the 400 billion dollar loan… err “jobs bill”
We have been bankrupt since 1933, and every dime you pay in taxes goes to old debts from decades ago.
The biggest ponzi-scheme the world has ever known, in addition to enslaving hundreds of millions of Americans.
Quit looking to the politicians, Look behind the Curtain.
sambachico
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:35amthe real Newt Gingrich – a must see video. Gingrich is anti-constitution and this explains his relationship w/ the CFR and big government types. He’s a conservative fraud. He’s progressive.
http://youtu.be/jWPz1Qdq1uI
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:49amUnder the doctrine of Parens Patriae, “Government As Parent”, as a result of the manipulated bankruptcy of the United States of America in 1930, ALL the assets of the American people, their person, and of our country itself are held by the Depository Trust Corporation at 55 Water Street, NY, NY, secured by UCC Commercial Liens, which are then monetized as “debt money” by the Federal Reserve. It may interest you to know that under the umbrella of the Depository Trust Corporation lies the CEDE Corporation, the Federal Reserve Corporation, the American Bar Association, the legal arm of the banking interests, and the Internal Revenue Service, the system’s collection agency.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:50amIt is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has
been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1,
Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and
insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint
Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause
dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official
capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and
Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal
Government exists today in name only.
The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International
Report Post »Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now
operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers.
With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the
receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the
United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an
established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This
act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office
of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International
Monetary Fund.
rock-n-roll-rebel
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 12:40pmGingrich is part of the establishment republicans which include many of the “progressive” persuasion. Gingrich sure likes that patriot act and I have heard him say that it takes a very big government to run this country out of his own mouth. He is an elitist jackass that thinks we are all too stupid to do anything on our own just like Obama. I trust him just about as much but he is a very smart guy.
Report Post »4freedomssake
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 2:03pmGingrich is a Progressive, Glenn Beck is right. And nobody but you is laughing about it.
Report Post »recondenny
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 2:22pmI like Glen, usually, but I, too,heard that WAY OVER THE TOP COMMENT. Not good, Glen.
Report Post »thx1138v2
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 3:00pmAs much as I hate to say it, yes, Newt is a Progressive. I was all for him in the 90′s. It was a shuck.
Report Post »He voted for NAFTA which weakened our borders with Canada and Mexico. He voted for GATT which makes the US subject to the authority of the World Trade Organization. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations which is a group of influential people dedicated to globalization at the expense of America’s sovereignty. Use muckety.com to look them up and while you are there do a map on Gingrich and look at Vincent Weber is Newt Gingrich’s link to Andy Stern, SEIU, and the Progressives. Domestic policy votes include supporting the creation of the Department of Education in 1979 under President Carter. Approval of that bill was close – 3 more votes against it would have killed it. Gingrich was one of 30 Republicans who supported it when the Republicans held 159 seats in the House of Representatives. Even one of the Democrats pointed out that there is no authorization in the Constitution for federal involvement in education. That Department of Education is how the Progressives took over the indoctrination of children into their philosophy. In 1979 he also voted for the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act which gave the federal government control over almost 80 MILLION acres in Alaska. In short, Gingrich talks the conservative talk and once elected furthers the agenda of the Progressives. Look at his voting record when he was in office and you will see
tender78
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 6:39pmNewt’s a progressive, haven‘t you listened to all of Glenn’s shows last weak? He presented iron-clad logic showing Newt’s political leanings. Listen to Glenn’s show, like you’re suppose to.
Report Post »Country Publius
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:04pmIs your statement true Brad Wesselmann? … As i consider what you’ve written, i just don’t recall
Report Post »Gingrich EVER attacking Clinton for infidelity or boinking an intern in the hall off the oval office, …he attacked him for lying to Congress, and suborning perjury! (Pretty distinctly different issues)
Clinton obviously sullied the Office of the President of the United States with his reckless disregard for both Monica Lewensky as an individual, and the Oval Office as an institution, …but his impeachment was BASED on his lies to Congress and the Independent Prosecutor, and his actions of coaxing or coersing others to lie on his behalf.
…Even many of his sychophants have finally figured THAT out.
outrider
Posted on November 24, 2011 at 1:05amSquid,
Beck may be right. Gingrich is really tight with the Obama WH and very powerful at GE. Connect the dots. GE manufactures the electronic medical records tracking systems. Gingrich promotes electronic medical records knowing full well the loss of privacy that will result and the potential for abuse by govt. He could’ve advocated for an “opt in” law, but if it were set up that way few of us would choose to have our records exposed online, and then GE’s bottom line would take a hit. Then there is the fact that GE has benefitted substantially from Obama’s green energy advocacy — GE is building most of the components for the wind turbines for which Obama has paved the way. There is more to this story, but the most telling detail about Newt’s chumy relationship with GE, a giant crony capitalist outfit that is waaay to cozy with Obama, is that for a time he actually had their logo on his personal website. Don’t know if its still there. Bottom line, Newt appears to be some sort of progressive sleeper in the GOP and as smart as he is, he will do serious damage to America if he is elected President. Given his mixed signals, we must be wary of supporting him. The only thing worse than Obama would be an intelligent version of Obama with the political experience and drive to do some real damage. Newt is Obama on steroids and he does NOT work for “we the people.” His loyalty lies elsewhere; we must not be taken in by his ability to field questions better than
Report Post »Kara_ite
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:48amWhy does anyone watch or listen to the LIES of the network programs? Turn it off and get your kids out of our Gubment school system.
Report Post »your sensei
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:55amYes! Send your kids to Idaho where they can be taught the truth and the way by other lower class white supremacists who love Jesus and assault rifles.
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 12:45pmGot to love those brilliant liberals for their grade school name calling skills.
Report Post »SERUM
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 1:30pm@sensei
Take some of that obama money and get those roots dyed….just awful!
Report Post »TexasHunter
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 5:06pmSENSEI- I am proud of my race. Dose that make me a Nazi? I like my Guns. Does that make me a Redneck? As always you have no point in your meaningless blogs. You are almost as useful as my little toe. I am a proud white man that will stand for America and its values. I work and will protect mine and my neighbors. So that being said what are you proud of ? (crickets chirping)
Report Post »nifongnation
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:05pmYuri Bezmenov on YouTube explains the desatabilization technique used by Obama.
Report Post »Country Publius
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:16pmHey SENSEI,
Report Post »Interesting albeit ignorant and fairly meaningless post. You’ve no doubt excited yourself with it.
(Sorry, merely an observation from an Idaho Citizen who not only clings to his guns and religion, but puts much more faith in them then ignorant boobs who post interesting albeit ignorant and fairly meaningless posts.)
your sensei
Posted on November 24, 2011 at 10:11amCOUNTRY PUBLIUS . . . Oooh, say albeit again. Just once. I’m almost there.
Report Post »Seneca264
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:48amOh dear, oh dear. What a horrible thing. I guess all the morons have forgot about how Sandy Berger smuggled out classified government documents from the National Archives in Washington DC. For this he received a misdemeanor charge and was let go. Most of the classified documents were never recovered. Berger was a foreign policy advisor for Clinton. These documents were destroyed to protect Clinton. The real funny thing about this is Berger’s Top Secret clearance was reinstated after the incident. How soon the morons in this country forget about reality. It is nice to put things in context.
Report Post »Realman30
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:46amThe MSM has their panties in a wad because the New York Times didn’t leak it.
Report Post »alces1
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:44amIf you want classified information, just read the New York Times or any liberal newspaper.Most of their stories are from classified documents that they have illegally obtained.So, what is all the fuss about by the media when they leak classified material every day.
Report Post »perry1980
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:39amNo she did not. But that is what the LameStream media wants you to believe as they attempt to destroy this candidate
Report Post »bhelmet
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:27amThe reason CNN and the media call it a “leak” is b/c THEY were trying to hide it from Americans. Should not have been the first time America heard that information.
Report Post »ScreaminEagle
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:00amI wonder how far from one of those Nuke Sites Osama Bin Laden was living when he caught a Navy Seal bullet? He lived next door to a Pakistani Military base.
Report Post »SimpleTruths
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:07amRead what you wrote, that make absolutely no sense. Are you really suggesting that CNN and “the media” are the holders of State secrets? And furthermore they are withholding those secrets from the public? Spend a little time away from Fox for awhile while you polish your tin foil hat.
Report Post »JimCDew
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:45am@SIMPLETRUTHS – “Read what you wrote, that make[s] absolutely no sense. Are you really suggesting that CNN and ‘the media’ are the holders of State secrets? And furthermore they are withholding those secrets from the public? Spend a little time away from Fox for awhile while you polish your tin foil hat.”
“What a maroon.“ What was suggested was that this public knowledge was withheld by the ”peoples press” because it would make Obama look bad for his failure to secure those nuclear sites.
Report Post »bhelmet
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:41am@SimpleTruths with an EXTREME emphasis on SIMPLE. What you fail to realize is these were not “state secrets”. I suggest you stop watching MSNBC and put down your copy of the Communist Manifesto. I am so glad you overpaid for your college education and hope you are enjoying your PhD in Minority Women’s Studies – you will go so far. So glad there are people like JIMCDEW here on this site – reinforces my faith in the American public.
Report Post »Country Publius
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:22pmInteresting consideration ScreaminEagle!
…On a personal note, out of curiosity: 101st?
Report Post »blazingaway
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:27amWhoever thinks I shouldn’t know this about Pakistan is an idiot, a lair, a traitor and seeks to treat me as less than them. I’m sick of these people! I want serious people with serious answers to serious issues. Not all of this hides and seek subterfuge that leads us no where but deeper and deeper into a quagmire of slow death … ours.
Report Post »Jumper
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:04amI don’t care if you like her or not, she’s not stupid. She sure as heck wouldn’t be on the House Intelligence Commitee if she were. I think she has better sense than to leak classified info during a debate. I heard about those attacks before, but they were only a blip in the news. This info is not a secret, just something the media didn‘t talk about much because they never cover stories that don’t fit their agenda. Pakistan possibly having a nuke stolen or destroyed definitely doesn’t fit that, as it would create a problem that the current administration is woefully unprepared to deal with. I think she did very well last night, and while I think she’s got no chance of winning the White House, I could easily see her as VP, Sec. of State, or Nat. Sec Advisor, and I think she’d do well in any of those roles.
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:19am@Jumper
Report Post »“She sure as heck wouldn’t be on the House Intelligence Commitee if she were.” Ha Ha Ha. That is an assumtion that is questionable. Do you remember Hank Johnson? Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law
Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition, and the Internet
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
This man thought that putting more sailors on Guam would cause it to tip over. So, please don’t say they are smart because they are on a committee or subcommittee.
Check out the link about Guam. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-DzuCPmXU&NR=1
He was re-elected after making these comments!!!
showmerancher
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:42amYou are right, it was known; as are many, many other things. If Americans actually paid attention to all of the world news (difficult to do though), and had the critical thinking and analytical skills that are no longer taught in schools, they would understand a great deal more about this world… they wouldn’t be very happy, especially with the current administration, but they would be informed.
Report Post »skitrees
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:05amJumper: I agree that she is not stupid, but your suggestion that she “wouldn’t be on the House Intelligence Commitee if she were” tells me you have WAYYYYY too much trust in our government. Just look at the simpletons in all the various committees – and you’ll understand what I mean.
Report Post »riverdog1
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:56amshe is stupid. she didn’t know china was communist. stupid
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 12:49pmJust think of Obama, he’s president with an 87 iq, very far even having a dim glow about him, yet he is our leader and chief, it doesn’t take smarts to become rich and powerful.
Report Post »4freedomssake
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 1:53pmBachmann‘s reference to the National Journal article blows away any ’reasonable’ inference she divulged secrets. She is probably the smartest, unquestionably the smartest Conservative, on the stage last night. She was able to call out Newt on immigration and Perry on Pakistan. Where she sort of dropped the ball is when she did not call out Newt on strengthening the Patriot Act and assassination of American citizens without judicial review. I know she has reservations about both practices. She is still the best choice of all the candidates. The best man for the job, turns out to be a woman.
Report Post »ugottabekidding
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:00amWell now does anyone want to tell me why OUR government doesn’t want US to know that ISLAMist have attacked nuclear sites in Pakistan?
Report Post »Why we are going to work with the OIC on ISLAMOPHOBIA?
I could go on and on and on and on asking questions about why we down play islamic connections to terrorism and the subversion of our government.
What the hell is the matter with us???????????????????????????????????????????????
I am 'We the People
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:56amThe money we give is tribute to stave off potential attacks by radical islamists…we have been doing this since nearly the revolutionary war.
Report Post »Cynic-clinic
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:08amWhat ‘tribute’?? Do you mean extortion? If Pakistan has the money to develop nuclear weapon systems, money to erect multiple weapon sites, why do we need to give them money to protect their weapon systems?
Being a victim of extortion is not foreign policy.
Report Post »showmerancher
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:49amWhen someone like Ms. Bachmann runs for office and must demonstrate her proficiency in world affairs, it becomes extremely difficult. Much of classified information actually is information that has been reported from one source or another. The fact that it is classified can stem simply from the fact that her knowledge came from an “official” government source. Sometimes the difference turns on a word or two, sometimes it is classified because of its “fit” with other information, or due to actions planned or underway that are classified and pertain to the information. Obviously, sometimes for other reasons.
For Ms. Bachmann it gets tricky. You and I may have read about something in the NYT that she learned in a classified briefing. Because she has heard it from an official and classified source, that information is technically classified and shouldn’t be shared because she is an “official” source. Obviously that’s a bit of overkill at times, but it is a blurry line. If those rules were strictly applied, there is little of importance in this complex world upon which she could comment. That also does not make sense and therefore there is some unofficial “common sense” (my words) latitude as long as she does not reference the material as actually being classified or tie it to other information or operations that are. (Gets complicated.)
Report Post »YOUR NOT GETTING MY GUNS
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:58amThe old saying is “ three people can keep a secret as long as two of them are dead”.
Report Post »gwssacredcause
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:47amIt would sure be nice if the Media had as much enthusiasm for the truth as they have for a lie.
Report Post »jakartaman
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:45amNot to worry -Barry’s got this covered.
Report Post »He will send another nasty letter to the UN
jjoy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:11amNope… Nasty letter is not neccessary… barry will just apologize again…
Report Post »your sensei
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:58amjjoy . . .Again? When did he apologize before?
Report Post »burned at edges
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:40amThere are way way way toooo many secrets!
Report Post »Spirit 72
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:59am.
Yeah, every rank amateur news junkie and terrorist “needs to know” all the details…. I dont think so.
We need to know that our leader has a strategy and solid American patriots in the State Dept., not little “Barry Sweetoes” running around beating down our beloved country.
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:36amSome things don’t have to be said, because they are common sense notions. Pak has nukes, radicals prevail in Pakistan, so the chance of attack is high. As a matter of fact I am surprised that the Jihadist have not been more successful.
Report Post »fancydancy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:35amI believe this woman will DO what she says, unlike most politicians we have. She could be a VP with influence for any of the fellas up there since America seems to have had enough of change for awhile and may be averse to a woman president for the next term…unless of course Hillary is put on the ticket for the other side and then who knows? That would give them a possible 8 more years to finish what our present one started.
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:10amI want her for President. Agree with you. She will do what she has said. Also she has said she would pull Obamacare out of Congress by it’s roots and she is head of the Tea Party caucus and is a fundamental Constitutionalist (as is RP) although differing on foreign policy. Why should it matter if she is a woman? It would drive Liberals out of their minds (watch for it on this comment alone). The total opposite of Hillary who even called herself a modern day Progressive in their debates. Could write plenty on that subject alone. I trust her.
Report Post »Liesmasher
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:35amWell now you know if you didn’t before. So what are WE going to do about it ? Wait until they use something in the name of Islam ?
Report Post »Bicyea
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:35amThe only leak is the fact that Mainstreet Media NEVER added up the attacks, like the attacks by radical muslims on thereligionofpeace.com SHOCKER— when you add them up, they are significant!
Report Post »Saxindacity
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:31amI believe the American public has the need and the right to know what’s going on in Pakistan, since we are paying them millions of dollars and they appear to be undermining us at every turn (We certainly won’t get the truth from Obama) Thank you, Michele Bachmann.
Report Post »Spirit 72
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:53am.
@SAX
Re: “…right to know…”
Lets not let the media tell terrorists “here they are”… they have not yet tried “x” and it might work… it is the “sum of all fears”…
Am sick of everybody thinking they have a “right to know” everything. Suffice it to say Pakistan has nukes and getting rid of Musharif was not the brightest thing we have done. Only if you have a “need to know” and clearance and a useful purpose in knowing (other than my government spends money there) should you be allowed to know the details. Get real.
Report Post »Darla_K
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:28amWhile Bachman seems to be up to date on what is going on in other countries I still question her need to send money to Paki. We should not have to send tax payer dollars to countries that hates us. What does it accomplish besides making fools out of us?
Report Post »randy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:40amAny money that is sent to pakistan should be sent to our military only to turn pakistan into a glass lined parking lot.
And good for you Michelle for telling us the TRUTH!
Report Post »Obeckian1984
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:27amI could support her if she was against the Patriot act.
Report Post »demint.disciple
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:32amJust wondering, when the last time the patriot act interfered with YOUR life ..??? I thought so..
Report Post »burned at edges
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:59amWhile I agree I don’t like her stance on the patriot act that would not stop my support of her considering all the other alternatives.
@disciple I fly for work. I despise the whole concept of the TSA at the airports. There are other ways as in arming the flight crew, and allowing passangers to carry tasers. A flight that used to take less than 2 hours from airport arrival until getting a rental car now takes about 3.5 to 4. I used to be able to cary basic tools on the plane like screwdriver and wrenches. They now have to be checked. I do not like the personal searches. I now drive if I can do the trip in 10 hours or less one way. I also don’t like all the cameras they are setting up throughout the country. Thank God it is against our state constitution for the government to issue citations using them. We either have a government by the people for the people, or we are a people for the government under the government.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:04amThe Patriot act interfered with my life when I had to walk barefoot across a nasty carpet in Atlanta. I was wearing flip flop type sandals — and they made me take them OFF and walk on that nasty floor.
The Patriot act interfered with my life when I saw TSA checkpoints in TN and TX instead of just airlines.
The Patriot act interfered with my life when I read they have increased 400% while air traffic has only increased 12% (they have other motives, and we’re paying for it!)
The Patriot act outright shredded the Constitution one more time. We accuse Obama of doing that, but the Patriot act is done by Republicans too. Each time the Constitution (and our liberty) if violated, it makes the Constitution less-revelant —– which is EXACTLY the goal. The goal is to run America by the UN — not the Constitution.
Sorry, but I want to keep America – keep the Consitution!
Report Post »Rightallalong
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:06am@Demint – Every time I go the airport (once a week) and have my balls grabbed by some fat sewaty TSA perv
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 9:09am@demint.disciple
Report Post »Have you taken an flight to anywhere lately? Have you applied for a line of credit, or a credit card since the law took effect. It affects you whether you see the effects or not.
This_Individual
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:48amDemint, try getting a passport.
Report Post »demint.disciple
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:26am“We have to recognize that 15 of the sites, nuclear sites are available or are potentially penetrable by jihadists. Six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites,” were Bachmann’s actual words. “This is more than an existential threat. We have to take this very seriously.”
Report Post »It’s not a big deal .. Well according to Ron Paul it isn’t..
TyrannyNoMore
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 10:22amWhoa friend, you just painted a big bulls-eye on yourself with that comment. Expect all the Paulbots to come out of the woodwork, to tell you what a fool you are for speaking such blasphemy.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 11:05amWell, what do you propose demintdesciple ?
Report Post »Start a house committee to oversee and manage all sovereign Nation’s nukes around the world ?
Did Demint stop the 6 attacks ? lol. give me a break !
Americans are tired of Neo-Cons taking our country into bogus wars and campaigns on lies !!!!
They are Military / Industrial complex minions.
They don’t represent the American people.
They do what the receivers of our country ( the global elite ), after the insolvency of 1933, tell them what to do.
I am sure Demint has been campaign financed by them, through their many tentacles that reach into all forms of commerce and law.
About 95% of D.C. politicians are campaign financed by the global elite, and 95 % have signed a Pact to defend Israel.
Ron Paul is NOT financed by them !!!!
he is one of the 5% that is anti-establishment, like JKF was.
Remember the guy who was assassinated because he signed E.O.# 11110, giving authority back to the U.S. Treasury to print AMERICAN money, based on a silver standard.
The PRIVATE BANK, the Federal Reserve, did not like that their FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE would be devalued. after all. It is based on NOTHING !!!!
Ron Paul would re-institute E.O.# 11110.
I wonder if ol’ Demint boy knows their is a Lien on America, and it is being run like a corporation by the new receivers of America. Yeah, probably.
I wonder if ol’ Demint knows that America, it’s Government and People were pledged as collateral
to the Global elite. Yeah, I bet he does.
sWampy
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 12:54pmI really love the name calling liberals, we don’t have to be drug into wars, we should stop all money flow to these nations, stop buying oil from them, stop all trade with nations that buy oil from them. Let them eat sand, and they won’t bother us. It’s you liberals that put in all the fake oil shortage that have allowed these low life to become a rich threat to the world. If whiny little lying liberals didn’t exist the world would be a much cleaner, much safer, much freer place today.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on November 23, 2011 at 8:23amNo this is not leaked information, check some of the studies done by the Strategic Studies Institute online publications and you will see what I mean == all of them unclassified, public material.
Report Post »