Coulter logic: Bush appointee's letter a “good sign” of Clinton's likely relationship with Pentagon if elected pres.


On the July 20 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, during a discussion of a letter sent to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) from Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman accusing Clinton of “reinforc[ing] enemy propaganda” by seeking information on the Pentagon's plans for an eventual U.S. exit from Iraq, guest host David Asman wondered what “this say[s] about what kind of relationship she's going to have as commander in chief, with the Pentagon?” Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter replied that the relationship may be “a little bit tense.” Asman then cited purported “tension” between former President Bill Clinton and “military commanders,” and asked: “Are we in for that again if Hillary is elected?” Coulter replied: “I suspect so, and this is a good sign of it.” Yet neither Asman nor Coulter mentioned that Edelman -- a former adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney -- is a political appointee, appointed by President Bush in 2005, and that presumably such positions at the Pentagon would be filled by her own appointees if she is elected president. As such, Edelman's letter is in no way indicative of the Defense Department's relationship with Clinton in her own administration.

During the segment, Coulter went on to assert: "[Y]ou can't get the Democratic nomination unless you sign on fully with the traitor party."

In a May 23 letter to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Sen. Clinton requested that he provide Congress “briefings on what current contingency plans exist for the future withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq” and asserted that it is “imperative that the Department of Defense prepare plans for the phased redeployment of U.S. forces.” Responding on Gates' behalf, Edelman wrote in a July 15 letter: “Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia.” A July 19 Associated Press article on Edelman's response reported that Clinton spokesman Phillipe Reines “said the senator would respond to his [Edelman's] boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates” and that “Clinton aides said the letter ignored important military matters and focuses instead on political payback.”

As Media Matters for America documented, a later version of the AP report also noted that Republican Sen. Richard Lugar (IN) shared Clinton's concerns. According to the AP, Lugar “warned ... that if U.S. military leaders and Congress 'are not prepared for these contingencies, they may be executed poorly, especially in an atmosphere in which public demands for troop withdrawals could compel action on a political timetable.' ”

The AP noted that Edelman is a “one-time aide to Vice President Dick Cheney.” As Newsweek reported in February: “During the run-up to the Iraq war, Edelman served as Cheney's foreign-policy adviser, directly under the vice president's then chief of staff and national-security aide I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby. After a two-year stint as ambassador to Turkey, Edelman was then nominated by President Bush in 2005 to replace [former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas] Feith, a key ally of the vice president's office in the often-contentious pre-war debates over Iraq intelligence.”

According to a July 20 AP report, Clinton personally “responded Friday [July 20] in a letter to Edelman's boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, asking if he agreed with Edelman's charge.” The AP reported that the letter asserted that “Edelman had ducked her questions and 'instead made spurious arguments to avoid addressing contingency planning.' ” The AP also reported that Clinton “repeated her request for a briefing -- classified if necessary -- on the issue of end-of-war planning” and that she called Edelman's “claim 'outrageous and dangerous.' ”

From the July 20 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:

ASMAN: Well, outrageous and dangerous. That's what Hillary Clinton says about a Pentagon official accusing her of helping the enemy by asking our military to draw up plans to leave Iraq. Ann Coulter, as you might imagine, is outraged by Hillary's response. Ann Coulter, Hillary says that Pentagon criticism of her is outrageous and dangerous. What say you?

COULTER: Well, I wouldn't exactly say I'm outraged. But if this is the woman who wants to be the commander in chief, I think she might want to show a little more courage in standing up to political criticism. I mean, I think all these Democrats who are constantly saying “Pull out, pull out” should just be called --

ASMAN: Well let's say specifically what it is. Defense undersecretary Eric Edelman said that the withdrawal talk -- the kind of withdrawal talk you hear from Hillary -- quote, “reinforces enemy propaganda.”

COULTER: Right.

ASMAN: True?

COULTER: Absolutely true. And you don't see Hillary or the Democrats saying, “Well, of course it isn't.” No, what they say is, “We're immune to criticism. Ooh, someone hurt our feelings. Boo hoo hoo.”

ASMAN: What does this say about -- if Hillary Clinton is elected, what kind of command -- what kind of relationship she's going to have as commander in chief with the Pentagon?

COULTER: That's a good question. Well, unless the Pentagon signs up with helping the enemy, probably a little bit -- little bit tense.

ASMAN: But we remember some tension in the first Clinton administration --

COULTER: Oh, yes.

ASMAN: -- back in 1993 with the Pentagon. There were a lot of occasions in which the military commanders complained about the Clintons. Are we in for that again if Hillary is elected?

COULTER: I suspect so. This is a good sign of it. And congratulations to Edelman for finally speaking truthfully about this. I mean, don't know why more Americans aren't saying that when you are constantly saying, “We're withdrawing, we're losing” -- we have the greatest military, oh, in the history of the world, but we're losing to a bunch of head-chopping savages? No, I don't think so. And yet, one entire political party keeps telling Americans that we are losing and we've got -- we'll set a date for when we'll withdraw the troops. It's sort of surprising from Hillary because she, more than the other Democrats, has been resisting the MoveOn.org nuts, but not anymore.

ASMAN: Well, that's the question. We've seen the effect. We just talked about it to Ms. [sister of 9-11 victim Debra] Burlingame, about the effect of MoveOn.org on the Democratic leadership. Hillary sort of resisted that for the longest time. Has now she given in to that movement in the Democratic Party?

COULTER: Yes. Apparently they won't vote for her no matter what she says. And you cannot get -- she is making the calculation at least, and I will trust her instincts on this -- you can't get the Democratic nomination unless you sign on fully with the traitor party.