Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
14. Robert Kagan & his NeoCon Wife Victoria Nuland who served Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney and SOS Hillary
Thu Sep 10, 2015, 12:22 PM
Sep 2015

The strange appointment of Victoria Nuland as State Department Spokesperson

By Patricia H. Kushlis--Thursday, 19 May 2011

Update: 7/12/2013 - Toria grilled about Benghazi role at Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing today for her next high level position: Assistant Secretary of State for Europe.

Is Hillary asleep at the switch? What is going on here?

Earlier this week, Josh Rogin at FP and Eric Martin at Progressive Realist both flagged the curious appointment of Victoria Nuland as the next State Department Spokesperson to fill P.J. Crowley’s shoes.

Martin questions whether this has foreign policy implications, in particular the replacement of an anti-torture appointee with someone who served as Principal Deputy National Security Advisor to Vice President Cheney.


Rogin doesn’t directly raise potential administration policy shifts but does point out that once upon a time Nuland was Strobe Talbott’s Chief of Staff when he was Deputy Secretary of State during the Clinton Administration and that Talbott had thought very highly of her at the time and still does. In fact, he, according to Rogin, praised her to the hilt in an interview about the pending appointment. So the seemingly amoral Nuland, we’re led to believe, can and will do anyone’s bidding and do it well – in short, a consummate career diplomat.

Why?

But why would Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration agree to appoint to this politically sensitive position someone who willingly served such a controversial figure in suppporting and implementing the “war on terror” and all the baggage that comes with it? Furthermore, how reliable is a Talbott reference anyway? After all, I understand that he just helped his friend Robert Kagan, Nuland’s neocon husband, get a job at Brookings and Talbott is also a friend of neocon writer Marc Gerecht, the husband of Diane Zeleny who also just latched onto a likely sweetheart deal sort of appointment as Head of External Relations and Congressional Affairs at the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). Whether Zeleny deserves or is qualified for the position or not.

From what I know about the Department, an FSO doesn’t just get detailed to the staff of a highly charged and ideological Vice President unless that detailee agrees to follow the boss’s dictates. Cheney’s were all too often forceful and odious. Furthermore, does anyone really think that Cheney –with his penchant for super loyalty and secrecy - would have ever accepted Nuland (or anyone else) for the position without some kind of loyalty test?

Surely the State Department under Hillary Clinton could have found equally (or likely even better) qualified career candidates who do not carry Nuland’s political baggage.


Behind the scenes trade off?

Or was this some kind of behind the scenes deal – a trade off for who knows what - that those of us innocents outside the inner circles are not privy?

Continued at.......
http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview/2011/05/the-strange-appointment-of-victoria-nuland-as-states-spokesperson.html

------------------

No problem– Obama’s State Dep’t spokesperson is married to Romney’s neocon foreign policy adviser

Here is a crazy story no one is talking about that is evidence of the Israel lobby’s role in our politics. Last week, Mitt Romney announced a foreign policy team that includes Robert Kagan, a neocon who pushed for the Iraq war.

But Kagan is married to Victoria Nuland, who is a spokesperson for the State Department. Laurie Bennett notes the strangeness of this conjunction:

Victoria Nuland’s role as spokesperson for the State Department, deemed strange by some who remember her tenure as principal deputy national security adviser to then Vice President Dick Cheney, has become stranger yet.

Her husband, Robert Kagan, has joined Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign as a foreign policy adviser.

Kagan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, also advised the McCain campaign in 2008.

Ordinarily this would cause a lot of strain. Nuland would be under pressure. Chris Matthews would be asking what the heck she’s doing in a political job at State when her husband is preparing the opposition.

But in fact, Nuland’s Cheney resume and her marriage to Kagan are actually credentials in the Democratic Party: they demonstrate Obama’s sensitivity to the Israel lobby. And party bosses are happy to have these playing cards now that Obama is under siege from his own party about Israel.

Kagan pushed the Iraq war to George Bush as a battle to help Israel. He and his neocon friends wrote, “If we do not move against Saddam Hussein and his regime, the damage our Israeli friends and we have suffered until now may someday appear but a prelude to much greater horrors… Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight. Israel’s victory is an important part of our victory.”

So Nuland’s presence is like Dennis Ross’s presence in the same building as Middle East adviser–a man the ADL calls an “advocate” for Israel, who was lately chairman of the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute in Jerusalem. Or Stuart Levey’s former role in Obama’s Treasury department in the same position he had under George Bush– and Levey is a man whose college dissertation, written under Martin Peretz, was about the importance of preserving the Zionist dream.

More at:

http://mondoweiss.net/2011/10/no-problem-obamas-state-dept-spokesperson-is-married-to-romneys-neocon-foreign-policy-adviser

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Makes sense since HRC is the leading neocon in the Democratic Party. leveymg Sep 2015 #1
Appears that way...see Post #14 below..n/t KoKo Sep 2015 #17
A number of career foreign policy aparachiks are committed neocons. They serve GOP and Dems alike, leveymg Sep 2015 #35
Another big reason for us to do whatever it takes to prevent Clinton from Zorra Sep 2015 #2
Birds of a feather. eom NorthCarolina Sep 2015 #3
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2015 #4
I think the Iraq War went rather well Armstead Sep 2015 #5
She also referred to meeting with this noted peacenik to get his views LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #6
this is one area i cut hillary a lot of slack. mopinko Sep 2015 #7
I think that's a very weak and completely repugnant excuse cali Sep 2015 #8
Totally agree. And that's why we should prefer candidates that have a human side, a conscience. erronis Sep 2015 #10
"I think that's a very weak and completely repugnant excuse" asjr Sep 2015 #13
I did not put words in her mouth. I addressed why I don't cut HRC the excuse cali Sep 2015 #22
And when someone expresses their "feelings" zeemike Sep 2015 #23
Cali did not attack the poster passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #34
well asjr LeftOfWest Sep 2015 #46
I see by your number of posts you have asjr Sep 2015 #48
Post count...okay n/t. LeftOfWest Sep 2015 #98
I will not excuse a neoconservative foriegn Ed Suspicious Sep 2015 #9
Agreed 100% hifiguy Sep 2015 #26
That may be true but that is damned scary. What is jwirr Sep 2015 #12
George HW Bush had that "wimp" perception to deal with by killing people. arcane1 Sep 2015 #53
"I don't want to be seen as weak, so let's take a chance on killing Zorra Sep 2015 #16
I have seen this rationale from Hillary apologists several times now LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #20
persona = politics ish of the hammer Sep 2015 #24
A lot of male Democrats did also. Ever since Viet Nam and being called soft. LiberalArkie Sep 2015 #28
In other words, she voted for the war to advance her career. arcane1 Sep 2015 #52
Since when is being a warmonger a sign of strength? CoffeeCat Sep 2015 #101
i'm not equating those things, but people do. mopinko Sep 2015 #102
Uh huh, yeah, got it. Darb Sep 2015 #11
so you're on board with an aggressively I interventionist foreign policy? cali Sep 2015 #15
No, however, I am against guilt by association, or even by consult. Darb Sep 2015 #18
it's hardly just association. it's her record cali Sep 2015 #21
What? Darb Sep 2015 #37
careful! you are being baited into getting a hide.... bettyellen Sep 2015 #44
"Aggressively interventionist foreign policy"? Where do you get THAT from? George II Sep 2015 #89
Robert Kagan & his NeoCon Wife Victoria Nuland who served Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney and SOS Hillary KoKo Sep 2015 #14
KoKo, thanks so much for this info. summerschild Sep 2015 #25
Clearly you're just an irrational hater who hates Obama's race and Clinton's gender. arcane1 Sep 2015 #54
The vast universe of my ignorance is now a teeny bit smaller. Thanks KoKo. Scuba Sep 2015 #99
Once again I bail out of Hillary's boat on the way to the primaries. summerschild Sep 2015 #19
...! KoKo Sep 2015 #100
During Obama's first term... wyldwolf Sep 2015 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Sep 2015 #30
HAHAHA! Love it! LeftOfWest Sep 2015 #47
Hahahahahahahahaha dorkzilla Sep 2015 #31
tongue halfway in cheek for sure wyldwolf Sep 2015 #32
And the piling on continues.... George II Sep 2015 #29
uh oh. wyldwolf Sep 2015 #33
According to wiki passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #38
He wasn't hired at the same time as the appointment of Clinton as Secretary of State. George II Sep 2015 #39
I tried to research it (google) and I couldn't find who and when he was hired passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #40
I think the responsibility to check his background belongs to the OP. She's the one who threw out.. George II Sep 2015 #41
If she has better access than I do, then yes, she could do that passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #43
Sorry, I haven't presented his resume here as being what it is in the OP..... George II Sep 2015 #50
I'm sorry, but passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #55
And kudos to you too, passiveporcupine. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #60
She got a hide for the OP passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #65
No, for a post in another thread. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #66
I missed that passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #72
It is being done by both sides. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #76
I don't understand why this is allowed passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #78
There's no easy solution. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #79
Be careful passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #81
Aw, right back atcha, pp! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #82
No kidding, I have three now, and just survived another jury verdict arcane1 Sep 2015 #83
I own up to mine too, lol! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #84
I have two recent hides, both ridiculous. Vattel Sep 2015 #94
Did the alerter lie about your posts? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #95
I am being more careful now. Vattel Sep 2015 #96
"until you can legitimize your position, her statement stands" George II Sep 2015 #97
Clinton did hire him, for a 2-year term in 2011 arcane1 Sep 2015 #61
Post 56, post 56, post 56. George II Sep 2015 #91
And she selected him to work on her Foreign Affairs Policy Board arcane1 Sep 2015 #92
Maybe now it's time for YOU to go read "Post 56" - have a great evening. George II Sep 2015 #93
See post 56. This poster's claim is pure made-up bullshit. arcane1 Sep 2015 #57
No it isn't. Do you know when Kagan started working for the State Department? It wasn't during... George II Sep 2015 #64
December, 2011. Unless you have a link to refute my link direct from the State Department. arcane1 Sep 2015 #67
The Obama administration was not his first stint at State, the first was under Reagan and George Bluenorthwest Sep 2015 #70
Somehow I don't think that fact will bolster their argument arcane1 Sep 2015 #75
Like I asked rhetorically earlier, I'll say it outright now - you don't know how..... George II Sep 2015 #85
I DO know, and I've led you to the post several times proving it. Here it is again to ignore: arcane1 Sep 2015 #86
Simply NOT true - Kagan has been working for the State Department for more than 30 years! He.... George II Sep 2015 #88
Please point out exactly what is incorrect in the State.gov article. arcane1 Sep 2015 #90
"This is an pointless discussion." beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #87
State.gov: "Secretary Clinton selected a distinguished, diverse, and bipartisan membership..." arcane1 Sep 2015 #56
WELL DONE!!! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #59
Thanks, they make it too easy sometimes. arcane1 Sep 2015 #62
It was, and then they came after me. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #63
And my post goes ignored while other posts get replies telling me I'm ignorant. arcane1 Sep 2015 #68
You don't know what you're talk...SQUIRRELL!!! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #69
Oh my! passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #73
Many neocons on that list. AtomicKitten Sep 2015 #107
it's we report, you decide. SouthernProgressive Sep 2015 #49
It's truly sad that here, on DEMOCRATIC Underground, that this tactic is used. George II Sep 2015 #51
What's being omitted in this case? arcane1 Sep 2015 #58
If you follow the whole thread, you will see passiveporcupine Sep 2015 #74
the shit does keep piling up... Agony Sep 2015 #71
Yawn trumad Sep 2015 #36
Wake up. There's a warmonger advising a leading presidential candidate. DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2015 #77
Who happened to be John McCain's adviser in 2008. arcane1 Sep 2015 #80
Maybe some Democrats believe that having neocons in high level positions Zorra Sep 2015 #103
I'm not too crazy about it, personally. Old Iran/Contra people aren't welcome either. arcane1 Sep 2015 #104
The difference between neocon and neolib? Puzzledtraveller Sep 2015 #42
She evolved from Kissinger to Kagan. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2015 #45
Why didn't we invaded something then? JoePhilly Sep 2015 #105
I guess it isn't only Clinton supporters who have questionable hides. n/t demmiblue Sep 2015 #106
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»When HRC was SoS one of h...»Reply #14