RE HRC video drop:
If you read Q, and how he described the stage needing to be set, you would know the time is not at hand. If you follow the predictions of various anons, you might be led astray. I read Q to mean social media and MSM had to be taken down on some level before the stage was set. Looks like social media is in the crosshairs right now to me.
He is not a bad guy. No one badmouthing him has provided any sauce except that he was Bush’s Amb to the UN. They don’t know or don’t remember that the Senate refused to confirm him and he got recessed appointment. Or that the UN, MSM, and cabal hated his guts. Research fellas.
Right on, anon. Like I said, he as Nigel Farage to the UN before Farage was cool. KEK.
Well, you could take several stories off the buildings of most U.S. government agencies and we'd all probably be better for it too.
— John Bolton
There's no such thing as the United Nations. If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference.
—John Bolton
Diplomacy is not an end in itself if it does not advance U.S. interests.
—John Bolton
Everybody pursues their national interests. The only one who gets blamed for it is the United States.
—John Bolton
CONFIRMATION HEARING OF JOHN BOLTON
TOPIC: Confirmations
April 11, 2005
Opening Statement of Senator Barack Obama
Confirmation Hearing of John Bolton
Mr. Chairman and Senator Biden, the position of United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations is one of the most important diplomatic positions in the entire U.S. government.
Some of the most distinguished Americans - Democrats and Republicans like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, George H.W. Bush, and Henry Cabot Lodge - have served with honor in this position.
Yet, there is one man from my home state of Illinois whose experience as Permanent Representative is quite relevant today.
Adlai Stevenson served in this position during the Cuban Missile Crisis. And, as we all know, it was Stevenson's presentation to the U.N. Security Council that proved to the world that the Soviets were moving intermediate range missiles into Cuba. Using charts and photos to build a compelling case, Stevenson declared to Soviet Ambassador Zorin that he was prepared to wait "until Hell freezes over" for Zorin's response to the U.S. charges.
What few people remember is that Stevenson's presentation came on the heels of what one might call an "intelligence failure." A year earlier, Stevenson had been misled by the White House and the CIA into publicly stating that the United States was not behind the Bay of Pigs invasion. Stevenson almost resigned over the incident.
This series of events is important to keep in mind today. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, we were able to succeed diplomatically because of the stature and integrity of our Permanent Representative to the United Nations. In fact, President Kennedy said that, "the integrity and credibility of Adlai Stevenson constitute one of our greatest national assets."
As a result, Adlai Stevenson was able to get tough, isolate the Soviets, and convince the world we were right.
Today, we face a similar situation. With the rest of the world questioning our intelligence capabilities, and nuclear proliferation threats from Iran to North Korea that may require action by the U.N. Security Council, we must be able to convince the world that we are right. Now, more than ever, we need a credible messenger at the U.N.
Unfortunately, I have some serious reservations about whether Mr. Bolton is the right man for the job:
First, senior U.S. intelligence officials have called into question Mr. Bolton's credibility on statements he's made about non-proliferation. There are also accusations related to political pressure on intelligence analysts who did not agree with Mr. Bolton's statements. Considering that he's the top arms control official at the State Department, this is troubling to say the least.
Second, Mr. Bolton's history of inflammatory statements about the U.N. would seem to make it more difficult for him to advance U.S. interests at the U.N. I am concerned about whether Mr. Bolton even believes the U.N. is a viable institution and a useful instrument of U.S. foreign policy. Saying that it wouldn't make a difference if you lop off ten floors of the UN building in New York isn't exactly the best way to earn people's respect and support - whatever the context.
Finally, Mr. Bolton appears to have an overly confrontational history with several member-states on the Security Council. Like Adlai Stevenson, I believe there are times to be tough. But statements like "I don't do carrots" coming from someone who wants to be our chief diplomat at the U.N. certainly give me pause.
Mr. Chairman, there is no question that we need someone in New York who is unafraid to shake things up and challenge the status quo. But, we also need someone with the credibility, temperament, and diplomatic skill to work with other nations, form coalitions, and advance U.S. interests.
That is why I've invoked the memory of Adlai Stevenson here today: he was tough; he was credible; he was diplomatic. Most importantly, he was effective. Stevenson proved that we should not make compromises or trade-offs when selecting our Representative to the U.N.
I want to give Mr. Bolton a chance to speak on these issues, and so my mind is not made up yet. I want to hear from him as to how he can be an effective and credible advocate for the U.S. I look forward to hearing his testimony and answers to the Committee's questions.
That’s what we want, that’s what we voted for.
You one blind bitch, then. This guys works for POTUS, not the other way around. As REX T and McMasters just found out the hard way.
I don’t know whether these knee jerk Bolton-haters are shills or ‘tards. But you are right anon. Dude’s not perfect, but all POTUS’ enemies hate his guts, he’s not a pussy, and I think he will be loyal and effective. FFS, he might even be trusted with Iran and NK policy set by POTUS, unlike Tillerson and McMasters.