WATCH: Media Reacts to Donald Trump Calling Out Hillary on ISIS

Even on Fox News we see the media reacts with incredulity when Donald Trump states the obvious truth about ISIS.

The media reacts in laughter when they have to evade inconvenient truths they never expected to be uttered by a candidate:

First of all, Donald Trump is not talking about the “founder” of the organization that wanted an Islamic State. He is talking about who is responsible for supporting that organization so that they became a regional power.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Science is Settled

Second, when Donald Trump says “in many ways” Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton founded ISIS, I don’t think it is plausible to claim he means they “founded” ISIS by not stopping them.

No, they actively nurtured and protected them as an essential part of their strategy in Syria.

As I wrote back when people were claiming that ISIS meant that Rand Paul’s foreign policy was now unconvincing:

Arming “rebels” against Bashar al-Assad was criminally negligent behavior, at best. The “moderate” rebels worked with extremists all the time. And that’s assuming our politicians, including many Republicans, were not arming terrorists on purpose.

Thus, the rise of ISIS at U.S. taxpayer expense is an obvious piece of evidence that U.S. foreign policy is deranged. But the government and the media pretends this is just more evidence of the threat of terrorism and proof we need to spend more on “the war on terror” and on domestic surveillance.

It is like a farmer buying fertilizer because the salesman tells him it is a weed killer. When he uses it on the weeds, making them grow, he goes back to the store and buys more of the same thing. Obviously, the growing weeds demonstrated that he should spend more on “weed killer.”

Never let an emergency go to waste, said Rahm Emanuel. And often the government itself creates the emergency. That is certainly true of our Syria policy whether it involves Barack Obama or the cheerleading of John McCain or anyone else.

Not only should the rise of ISIS have promoted Rand Paul’s candidacy, it also can and should be used against Hillary. Our attack on Libya and the subsequent murders of our men at Benghazi were tied to the policy in Syria. The government used weapons from Libya to arm “rebels” in Syria. Yet, even though Hillary Clinton was responsible for much of what happened in Libya, Republicans have not used the issue to any real extent. They won’t point out that she created an ongoing hell on earth for the Libyans because most of them endorse that same strategy for Syria.

So, yes, the popular response to ISIS, based on government and media propaganda, hurt Rand Paul in his campaign. But that’s different than claiming the rise of ISIS hurt his candidacy.

Now, there is new evidence of our government’s willful support of the creation of ISIS. Zero Hedge recently posted a lengthy article on a Pentagon document that Judicial Watch acquired. Here’s a small part of it:

The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.”

The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.

In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.”

The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”

In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias, were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).

In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”

Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:

“… there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”

There’s no question that Hillary Clinton knew and knows what the consequences are to fund or arm or protect jihadists in order to produce regime change. Listen to her own words as she recites the playbook:

The media reacts with jeers and lame interpretations of Trump’s remarks because it doesn’t want the American people to think about who funded and armed ISIS.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.