While Hillary Clinton runs ads criticizing Donald Trump for praising dictators, Clinton herself has a history of alliances with strongmen in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Honduras.
Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s top foreign policy adviser, warned last week that Trump’s “praise for brutal strongmen knows no bounds.” The Clinton campaign released a video compilation of Trump’s comments about North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, Russian President Vladamir Putin, and former Iraqi and Libyan dictators Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.
At a California rally, Clinton accused Trump of trying to become a dictator himself. “We’re trying to elect a president,” said Clinton, “not a dictator.”
Practically speaking, however, the choice voters will face in November will be between a candidate who praises dictators and a candidate who befriends them.
Clinton has described former Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak and his wife as “friends of my family.” Mubarak ruled Egypt under a perpetual “state of emergency” rule that involved disappearing and torturing dissidents, police killings, and persecution of LGBT people. The U.S. gave Mubarak $1.3 billion in military aid per year, and when Arab Spring protests threatened his grip on power, Clinton warned the administration not to “push a longtime partner out the door,” according to her book Hard Choices.
After Arab Spring protests unseated Mubarak and led to democratic elections, the Egyptian military, led by Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, staged a coup. El-Sisi suspended the country’s 2012 Constitution, appointed officials from the former dictatorship, and moved to silence opposition.
Sisi traveled to the U.S. in 2014 and met with Clinton and her husband, posing for a photo. The Obama administration last year lifted a hold on the transfer of weapons and cash to el-Sisi’s government.
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi meets with the Clintons in New York on Sept. 22, 2014.
Photo: Egyptian Presidency/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
Meanwhile, repression in Egypt continues to escalate. By the government’s own admission, it has imprisoned more than 34,000 people – and sentenced huge numbers to die. Amnesty International released a report Tuesday documenting forced disappearances and torture by the el-Sisi regime, including one account of a 14-year-old who was kidnapped by government forces and raped repeatedly with a wooden stick to extract a confession.
El-Sisi continues to receive $1.3 billion in military aid each year from the Obama administration.
Egypt is far from the only military dictatorship that Clinton has supported. During her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton approved tens of billions of dollars of weapons transfers to Saudi Arabia – including fighter jets now being used to bomb Yemen. Clinton played a central role in legitimizing a 2009 military coup in Honduras, and once called Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad a “reformer.” And in return for approving arms deals to gulf state monarchies, Clinton accepted tens of millions of dollars in donations to the Clinton Foundation.
Clinton has also boasted about receiving advice from Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who was notorious for his support of dictators. According to records from the National Security Archive, Kissinger oversaw a plot to assassinate the Chilean President Salvador Allende and install the brutal dictator Augusto Pinochet.
Top photo: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meets with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on Aug. 17, 2009, in Washington, D.C.
great story but one pt. Assad was in a literal sense, a reformer because he took the lead in producing democratic changes that the people had requested for Syrian democracy. First irony of attacking Syria “to build democracy” . . . no progress is possible towards a full democracy. 2nd irony is that Syria’s neighbors, including Turkey were building peace with Syria through trade between small businesses based on Turkish F.M. Davuto?lu’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy
Yeah.. that’s called ‘diplomacy’. When you get a little older you might learn about it. The alternatve to ‘diplomacy’ is often ‘war’.
Why on earth would a democratically organized nation want to go to war with the US to the extent that supporting dictators is the diplomatic preference?
Well if anyone is not aware, the US (and Britain) have had a long history of supporting dictators and in some cases even training them. Watching a documentary by award winning John Pilger, he spoke about both the US and Britain supporting Suharto in Indonesia and Pol Pot in Cambodia all the while they were committing genocide. When we think of Latin America, the US has trained “11 Latin American Dictators” at the School of the Americas (now WHINSEC) which is located in Fort Benning, Georgia and one of the people that pulled off the coup in Honduras in 2009 (that Clinton loves so much) was a graduate from the aforementioned school. Hell, even Manuel Noriega, I believe was on the CIA payroll for many years. Even to this day we, the western world, support Saudi Arabia who in the first half of 2015 publicly beheaded over 100 people, persecute the LGBT community, and I believe it is illegal for women to drive.
Alex, let’s just be real in saying that the United States doesn’t give a rats ass about democracy or freedom – the record proves it and I believe that is indicative of both the Republicans and the Democrats. What it ultimately boils down to is interests. In 1953, the US/Britain overthrew Mossadegh, a “democratically” elected leader and put the people of Iran under a dictator friendly to western interests – that recipe has happened over and over again. Nowadays it seems that the CIA are doing less of the legwork as US NGO’s such as the National Endowment for Democracy along with USAID and the only good democracy is one that is submissive to Washington otherwise it doesn’t count in Washington’s eyes. Both Trump and Clinton are bad. I fully expect the US to keep supporting dictators regardless of whom is elected.
One other comment is that if Putin is a dictator then he sure is a popular one since I believe a Gallup poll put Putin’s support over 80% – I don’t think any of our leaders can boast that.
FBI LEAKS INFO / SPREAD THE WORD / TAKE THIS VIRAL
http://engforum.pravda.ru/index.php?/topic/274772-first-fbi-leak-on-clinton/
The e-mail scandal is a diversion. The real crime is in the Clinton Foundation and involves hundreds of high ranking government officials, bureaucrats, and moguls. Nothing less than TREASON. Arguably enough to bring down the entire government. The American people and the world for that matter are being played. The media is fixating on HiLiary’s e-mail scandal to keep people from focusing on the REAL CRIME. Yes Soros is involved. He is funding BLM. Its Global. The tentacles are everywhere. Even Trump is involved to a lessor extent by virtue of his donations to the Foundation, but he protected himself legally. HE KNOWS which means he is holding the threat of exposure of the conspiracy. He has massive leverage on them which is why they are backing down to him. Knowledge of the Soros-Clinton conspiracy is power and Trump has plenty of it. The FBI KNOWS, but are under a gag order over national security concerns. If they go nuclear with the information the FBI would be at war with the entire US government. It could mean civil war which would lead to Russia and China becoming involved and possibly lead to war when the US is at its weakest. In a very real way the American people are trapped.
The Clinton Foundation’s treason was discovered while investigating the e-mail. The information came from a 4channel thread started by “anonymous” who claimed to be with the FBI. In other words it is supposedly the first FBI leak we have been waiting for. I paraphrased what was said throughout the many questions he answered. The FBI he says are pretty much all supporting Trump. He is the only way out of this mess from their point of view. Makes the most sense based on everything else I have come to know over the years. If they prosecute HilLiary for the e-mail then the foundation conspiracy becomes part of discovery. Marxist Obama with his global communist (wet) dream very likely approved the Clinton Foundation’s directives the same way previous presidents have been issuing directives to all the major foundations for the last hundred years. See the Norman Dodd interview if you want the full picture. With Obama as President the Foundation gets national security consideration to keep its secrets. Much the same way the foundations were protected from investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Congressional Reese Committee. Here is the Dodd (dying declaration) interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM
Clinton has also boasted about receiving advice from Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who was notorious for his support of dictators.
WAKE UP AMERICA.
Hillary is operating under BEAT WIFE SYNDROME.
#NoVoteNovember
Trump if just being “honest” in his obnoxious, histrionic ways, which seems to be resonating in many U.S. citizens … which is what actually matters
RCL
Freedom lovers never truly cared one way or the other about dictators or “terrorists“, … in fact, as they have themselves made explicitly clear: “they don’t have friends but interests …“
They just don’t like dictators and “terrorists“ or otherwise, democratically elected presidents, social justice activists, Christian religious leaders, who don’t align with their plutocratic interests. From Óscar Romero who was shot right during a service in which a prayed for peace and the stop of violence; to Fidel Castro who was not a graduate from the so-called “School of the Americas” (which basically was a terrorist training school funded by U.S. tax payers); to Omar Torrijos, who actually was a graduate from that school, but at some point woke up to gringo b#llsh!t and demanded sovereignty of his homeland; to Saddam Hussein (who actually for periods of time was in good terms with them but then, all of a sudden, “he had weapons of mass destruction” …) …
you would not hear the end of it.
RCL
Mubarack is a friend if the family. Kill arad spring, and they did!
Putin is a lot of things but a dictator is not one of them. There are few if any western leaders who are as popular as he is at home and the Russian economy is in a mess thanks to the price of oil and sanctions. When I watch him during an interview I say we could use a leader like that. Obama, the master of the pregnant pause does not impress me and Bush II was an embarrassment as was Regan and he was a professional actor. Trump panders to his audience; that is really scary; not Trump, the tens of millions in the audience.
Clinton is a terrible hypocrite, but her supporters are as delusional as she is, and won’t believe her record, as awful as it is. I hope the Trump campaign has the savvy to rebuke her with her record, but I doubt any of them read The Intercept.
Time to rephrase the “lesser evil” vote as “differently evil”. What a choice we’re being allowed to make by our neoliberal masters…
“Differently evil”–That’s a great way to describe it.
Yeah, it almost sounds defensible as a civil rights category, as in
“they persecuted me because I was differently evil…”
When she was Secretary of State, her own people encouraged her to use gov email. Yet she refused. When people questioned her using personal email, they were told to never speak of it. Basically, she will not listen to good advice. This is a subject put in many movies. The person in charge has a bad idea, someone with a good idea gets ignored, then all hell breaks loose. Imagine how this will play out with her as president? Check the timeline: http://www.thompsontimeline.com/
Sure, Hillary is a bloodthirsty elitist who gives not a whit for democracy, but, as she constantly reminds us:
SHE IS NOT DONALD TRUMP.
(yippee?)
Better to attend and befriend than wage war. Corruption will be present either way.
And this is why those considering being roughed up by the military, I mean, the Cleveland Police, should consider protesting instead at the Democratic National Convention. The Republican Party will never change in response to left-wing protests. The Democratic Party must be made to change.
Come on, that’s a bizarre comparison. Trump has not had the opportunities to cozy up to dictators as our foreign policy demands. And our foreign policy is far more than just Clinton. Diplomacy is filled with that kind of hideous stuff.
Trump has praised enemy dictators specifically for their brutality, oppression, and “strength.” He’s obviously an open fascist and that cannot be said for Clinton, even with her horrible foreign policy.
Can aspiring dictators be friends with other dictators?
Are you kidding me? Mubarak was “great friends” with every US president and secretary of state since he took over Egypt in 1981. Trump even said that we should never have abandoned Mubarak. Not to mention he has business interests in many Middle East countries, including Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Saudi Arabia – all pretty low on the human rights lists.
This summarizes the voters’ choice. Mr. Trump talks a good game, but Mrs. Clinton delivers.
i’d throw israel in there as well since they’re as much a “democracy” as isis is “islamic”. i’d also mention the direct involvement of kissinger in the assassination of guevara in his litany of charges.
otherwise my exact thought as soon as i saw the “trump hearts dictators” clip. thing is, she knows it’s wrong but that doesn’t apply to her in her solipsistic antoinette “mind-brain”; only trump. because while he’s faced bankruptcies and low ratings and divorces that tore him several new asses, clinton has olympic swimming pools of blood on her hands and gets the punishment fit for an overdue parking fine. accountability is for the little people.
This is a must read for every super-delegate who still has an opportunity to cast their vote behind Sanders at the convention. Clinton is a lying corrupted warmonger and trump is a nightmare. Only Sanders will lead this nation forward and redeem the Democratic party ensuring wins down ballot.
There is nothing straight about Crooked.
My Pakistanian neighbor is her great supporter, which makes me extremely suspicious about both of them.
One issue to address here is that brutal strongmen often lead brutal societies, and they tend to keep a tight lid on the dumpsters under their command. I am not saying it would be right, but it would be tempting right around now (given the latest apparent terrorist attack) for the leader of a country like France to say that the wave of attacks from ISIS has demonstrated the extent of the security issues that Bashar al-Assad has had to face, that they apologize for meddling harmfully into the internal affairs of another nation, that they recognize Assad’s “free, fair and transparent” election, they appreciate his acceleration of efforts to dispose of chemical weapons stockpiles in the aftermath of unfounded accusations, and above all, that they will cooperate with the legitimate Syrian government’s efforts to restore order and will take action to extradite criminals that have sought a safe haven in France. Damn tempting.
Hmmm. I think it very well might be right.
But . . . Hollande is making the usual noises and moves, including extending the state of emergency and calling out the reserves, with special emphasis on guarding the borders. Meanwhile, French media are reporting that the attacker’s ID indicates that he was a French-Tunisian dual national, living in Nice. ;^(
I’m actually gritting my teeth.
Great comparison article, Mr Emmons.
This, of course, is nothing new.
It’s so simple. It’s depressing. The fortunate thing is that a President doesn’t have disproportionate powers unless the other branches cede them. In this critical time, I am upset about the loss of direction towards balancing the economy and the environment. That could have lead to something radical – taxes, campaign finance, war & peace, nuclear, secret state, privacy and security. Not that there is one person proposing the changes we need. This will not be a change election. No bold steps will be taken, but in this critical time of our history, we’ll likely face status-quo governing. Maybe a fortuitous lightning strike or two will settle matters, depending on where people are standing.
You have no fucking clue how much power the executive branch has. Obama literally has the power to legally detain, retroactively wiretap, torture, and/or assassinate any American citizen, regardless of their location and with no due process.
From Forbes, a section: Erik Kain , Contributor
I write about the intersection of entertainment and technology.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
President Obama signs the National Defense Authorization Act after months of debate.
One thing I love about writing on technology is that it’s a subject always filled with hope and optimism. For every frightening use of technology by oppressive governments there’s a corresponding story about the use of that same technology to overcome oppression.
For every story of police abuse I’ve read, there’s another story about corruption and violence exposed by something as simple as a camera phone.
But can technology help us overcome truly pernicious legislation like the National Defense Authorization Act recently signed by the president?
The National Defense Authorization Act greatly expands the power and scope of the federal government to fight the War on Terror, including codifying into law the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects without trial. Under the new law the US military has the power to carry out domestic anti-terrorism operations on US soil.
“The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it,” the president said in a statement. “I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”
Worse, the NDAA authorizes the military to detain even US citizens under the broad new anti-terrorism provisions provided in the bill, once again without trial.
There is some controversy on this point, in part because the law as written is entirely too vague. But whether or not the law will be used to indefinitely detain US citizens domestically, it is written to allow the detention of US citizens abroad as well as foreigners without trial.
“Obama’s signing statement seems to suggest he already believe he has the authority to indefinitely detain Americans—he just never intends to use it,” Adam Serwer writes at Mother Jones. “Left unsaid, perhaps deliberately, is the distinction that has dominated the debate over the defense bill: the difference between detaining an American captured domestically or abroad. This is why ACLU Director Anthony Romero released a statement shortly after Obama’s arguing the authority in the defense bill could “be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”
The NDAA Makes the Status Quo Worse
Glenn Greenwald makes a compelling case that the law gives the government truly frightening powers. He notes that section 1022 exempts US citizens from the requirement of military detention but still leaves the option open to the state.
JDawg – did you read the part of the sentence that said ” …unless the other branches cede…? ”
With a signing statement, they can protest or sue him, unless they agree.
Mr Obama got this bill that was passed by Congress. It only became a law after it was signed.
“The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it,” the president said in a statement.
LMAO.
in other words, “This bill is like a wonderful glass of water for the population to drink. And in this water is only the smallest amount of cyanide”.
clever guy that pootus.
Well, who else can’t wait for a State Dinner honoring the Honduras junta?
(You know, for eliminating eco-terrorists like Berta Cáceres)
And with a pair of scary Maggies like Clinton and May, who needs Trump?
Maggie May?
“Wake up, Maggie, I think I’ve got something to say to you. All you did was wreck my bed, and in the morning kick me in the head.”
Oh, too much.
” Maggie I wish I’d never seen your face . . .”
I don’t want either one. I wouldn’t trust Trump NOR Clinton. Truth was written here in your piece Alex Emmons.
Trump is a hapless fool but Hillary is a proven neoliberal corporatist warmonger. Great article!
Trump would clearly be substantially better on international affairs issues, if for no reason than he wants to do business, not make war like Clinton. And he’d also be exponentially better on trade issues, because he actually opposes NAFTA and the TPP, the latter of which Clinton only SAYS she opposes (her opposition was in response to the beating she was taking on this issue from Sanders and is a lie; if she’s elected, the TPP WILL become law in the U.S.).
get right in there to bash hillary early and often because you know the right won’t be doing that enough. glenn, et al, you’re not really helping anyone but your own egos
we ll know who the enemies of america are and it’s a target rich environment of right wing extremists and fundamentalist crusaders.
Clinton and mainstream Democrats ARE part of the right; get a clue! Just because they’re not extreme right like Republicans doesn’t mean they’re left.
As to enemies, the U.S. is the enemy of all decent people. Your comments show a strong love of the most evil country in the world.
straight out of the mouth of the doyen of right wing propaganda rags, the Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/30/heres-the-growing-list-of-big-name-republicans-supporting-hillary-clinton/
Hillary Clinton is the right.
Mona, you are most correct Hillary certainly is the “right”.
But as I am sure you know not “right” as in “Morally Good” as in morally justified and correct, or consistent with generally held ideas of morality and proper conduct.
Goodness, has anyone told the Republicans?
Unlike you, apparently, I don’t consider the Republicans sane or intelligent enough to have views worth considering.
And, I’m just sure that Hillary Clinton as POTUS will be a magnificent balm on the souls of those right wing extremists and fundamentalist crusaders. I don’t argue that the unlikelihood of that is a reason to vote for Trump. I only mean to suggest that maybe you ain’t seen nothing yet. If you quake at those aforementioned “enemies,” I suggest you crawl under your bed and stay there through 2024* or 2028.
By 2020, the GOP will probably have sorted out their shit, and the person they nominate will probably make Trump and his supporters look like cuddly puppies.