I'm old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan traded arms for hostages and that was regarded as a major scandal.
The waning Obama administration has done far more, but it's okay because their intentions are pure.
We see this double standard again and again, and - as my esteemed co-blogger has noted - it is particularly prevalent in the national security area.
President Obama claimed the legal authority to kill American citizens with airstrikes without any judicial review. It will be interesting to see the liberal lawyers suddenly experience a change of heart as the days count down to Donald Trump gaining that power.
With the exception of abortion, the Democrats have demonstrated an amazing level of moral flexibility. Earlier in the week, the White House was challenged over the response to the alleged "Russian election hack" vs China's proven identity theft of millions of security clearance files. Why weren't Chinese diplomats expelled and sanctions levied in that earlier, far more serious data breach?
The official response: "That's different."
Of course it was.
I don't have a twitter account, but I am glad the platform is out there because it lets us see just how transparently biased these reporters are. Not only are they biased, most are strikingly ignorant. They don't know the past and can't really understand cause and effect enough to shape the future. All they know is the now, and they constantly try to shape it.
A great example of this stupidity is the alleged firing of the general in charge of DC's National Guard. The Washington Post ran with this story like it was unprecedented and some sort of scandal. How could they remove a general from command during the inauguration?!
Well, he's a presidential appointee and his term is up. Just like all the other appointees.
One would think a newspaper based in the District of Columbia would know how this works - but one would be wrong, because liberal journalists don't know anything about anything. That's why it is so easy for Democrat operatives to dupe them, which is what it appears this general decided to do.
Nothing in the story mentions the fact that it is highly unusual for any military officer to hold a position for over a decade. This guy was appointed by George W. Bush, and it was high time for someone else to be rotated in. Without that change, military command structures fossilize and the subordinate units become ineffective. The organization becomes nothing more than a mirror of what the commander wants and groupthink takes over.
Remember when "Change!" was the big deal? Now of course the Dems hate change - because it's only okay when they do it.