Quoted in this Times of Israel article from Secretary of State Pompeo is:
“Looking forward to sharing with you how my family is more SAFE and more SECURE because of President Trump.”
Going to Jerusalem is on my own bucket list. I hear it’s a sight to behold.
Anybody got any stories to share please do?
The piece also says the RNC is funding all the expense and has vetted the legalities to make this happen.
I, for one, am in favor of this. Many Evangelical’s here in America will support especially hearing the personal views of why this one USA citizen now feels safer and securer than ever before.
I myself being a person of faith also believe some divine intervention is at play here too.
Seeing Mr. Pompeo sharing his personal views is the American way.
Albeit it being unprecedented for a sitting/top diplomat to appear like this, I believe it is still a very good thing.
It was also unprecedented for a previous president to launch an attack on the next President, yet it happened. Apparently, changing times, and at least Secretary Pompeo’s appearance will be in better taste.
We had a trip planned for this past July. Ten days in Jerusalem, and 5 in Oberammergau, Germany (to see the Passion Play that gets put n every 10 years.)
It got nixed because of covid. The Passion Play is rescheduled for 2022, so the whole pilgrimage has been rescheduled for 2022.
NEver been to either place before, so we’re really looking forward to it.
As for the “unprecedented” nature of this speech, lots and lots of things about this administration are unprecedented. I’m not sure what the big deal is for this one though. I have always expected the Secretary of State to be aligned politically with the administration. Not to be so aligned would be disordered, in my opinion. So it’s mere pretense to claim that the office is not political.
Yes, every cabinet member are political appointments. However, this article explained (well) why this is different vs how more recent Secretary of State’s had not appeared at previous conventions.
Probably should start with these are not like any previous conventions. For example, If Secretary was in Israel and the Convention had everyone appearing and speaking at the same place as has usually been the case, then the man could not be in two places at once.
In my opinion, it didn’t explain. It asserted. Yes, it pointed out that recent past administrations didn’t do this, but it didn’t say why they shouldn’t have. They just didn’t want to give the appearance that this isn’t a political position. OK, well, good for them. I still don’t see the problem.
And the fact that this administration moved the embassy to Jerusalem is something it considers a major accomplishment, so I can see why this specific speech being given from that specific location makes perfect sense for the convention.
