December 10th, 2007
02:59 PM ET

Whom do you trust on Iran’s nukes?

FROM Jack Cafferty:

Israel isn't buying into the new U.S. intelligence report on Iran.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says the conclusion that Iran has given up its nuclear weapons program will not change Israel's view that Iran is still trying to develop

Olmert apparently told a closed meeting of his Security Cabinet that Israel has no reason to change what it's believed all along... that Iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons, is developing weapons and rockets, and enriching uranium.

For years, Israel has been calling on the international community to act to stop Iran's nuclear program. This has led some to believe that Israel might attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Keep in mind, although Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

Olmert says Israel would work with the International Atomic Energy Agency to expose Iran's plan to develop nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff Michael Mullen, is in Israel for talks with leaders there. No surprise that Iran is among the subjects expected to be discussed.

Here’s the question: When it comes to Iran's nuclear program, whom do you believe: Israel or the U.S.?

Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Iran's nuclear program, whom do you believe: Israel or the U.S.?

Posted by , ,
Filed under: Iran
December 10th, 2007
02:58 PM ET

“Tension in Hillaryland grows?”


FROM Jack Cafferty:

Watch Cafferty File video here

"Things are tense in Hillaryland these days.”

That's according to a piece on Bloomberg by Albert Hunt that focuses on the situation in which Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton now finds herself.

It describes a focus group of 11 Democrats in Philadelphia. After talking with the participants, a Democratic pollster found concerns about Clinton included that she is devious, calculating and a divisive figure in American politics. They also said that as president, Clinton would be demanding, difficult, maybe even a little scary.

Meanwhile, Clinton's once-commanding advantage over Barack Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire is evaporating.

An average of polls taken in Iowa in mid-to-late November now shows Obama appears to be leading Clinton 28% to 25%.

In New Hampshire, an average of polls shows Clinton leading Obama by 10 points which is down from a 19 point lead she had earlier this fall.

The Bloomberg article suggests there are some political strains with Hillary's greatest asset, Bill. Top campaign officials were apparently furious at the former president when he was quoted as saying he had opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. Also, one close associate says he's been bouncing off the walls at her campaign's ineptitude in the past few weeks.

Here’s my question to you: With 3 1/2 weeks until the first votes are cast in Iowa, what should Hillary Clinton’s campaign do to stop the bleeding?

Filed under: Hillary Clinton
December 10th, 2007
02:56 PM ET

Giuliani’s security questions?

FROM Jack Cafferty:

Rudy Giuliani says that it was New York City police who decided that his then-mistress Judith Nathan needed security escorts on the taxpayers' dime.

The Republican presidential candidate said on NBC's Meet the Press: "I did not make the judgment, I did not ask for it, Judith didn't particularly want it. But it was done because [police] took the view that it was serious and it had to be done that way. And it was done the way they wanted to do it."

The former New York mayor seemed defensive when Tim Russert asked him if a hypothetical presidential mistress should get Secret Service protection, saying it "would not be appropriate" in the absence of a credible threat.

Giuliani didn't name a specific incident that led police to create a full threat assessment for Nathan. However he said he had been the target of several death threats.

Giuliani has faced questions recently about the accounting of his security expenses when he was mayor, that charges were shifted around to obscure city agencies. He says that allegation is inaccurate and that all expenses were ultimately paid by the New York Police Department.

Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Rudy Giuliani’s time as New York mayor, are you satisfied that nothing improper was done with regard to security for him and his then girlfriend, Judith Nathan?

Filed under: Uncategorized