Amidst the deafening silence from the Loony Left and its MSM mouthpieces now that Michelle and Bryan have gone straight to the source and definitively proved them to be full of a certain noxious brown excretion, this interesting commentary:

What has been lost in the debate about “Who is Jamil Hussein?” is the substance of his Iraqi atrocity stories peddled by the AP. The most recent ones have been denied by the US military, which has much better sources than the Associated Press. They have also not been confirmed by other news outlets. Whether “Jamil Hussein” was a cover name, an AP fabrication, or a real person is not as important as the content of his apparent disinformation. What was the purpose of the lie about six Iraqis being deliberately burned to death by terrorists? What about the other 60 AP stories that cited “Hussein”? How many lent credibility to other atrocity tales?

Two hypotheses spring to mind. One is that “Jamil Hussein” was benefiting from being an AP source. He was smart enough to know that AP wanted horror stories, and that’s what he gave them. Maybe he was paid. Maybe he liked instant fame. But 61 citations as an AP source suggests an ongoing relationship, one with a clear and sustained purpose.

A more sinister interpretation is that “Jamil Hussein” was a political plant, whose primary goal was to feed atrocity stories to the AP. He could be an Iranian plant in the Iraqi Police, which is heavily infiltrated by Mahdi Army killers who are paid by Iran. They were the ones who shouted “Muqtada Al Sadr!” when Saddam Hussein was hanged. An Iranian mole’s purpose would be to stir up civil war, and at the same time to provide more “evidence” for the American Leftist news narrative that Iraq is a hopeless mess.

So “Jamil Hussein’s” disinformation could have served two goals.

One: to worsen ethnic warfare in Iraq, and

Two: to demoralize the American home front.

Objectively, AP has clearly served both purposes in the past and continues to do so today, whatever one believes about motive or lack thereof.

And, as I said, not a peep from the “patriotic” Left — who are oh so concerned about propaganda and dishonesty, but only when it (supposedly) emanates from the government and military it so obviously despises — or the liars of the MSM — who never met an enemy propagandist they wouldn’t credulously quote, saving their much-ballyhooed worldliness and skepticism for our own leaders and defenders.

I’m fast approaching the point where I’d be willing to just say, “screw the whole lot of them,” and sit back contentedly to watch them burn in their blue-state enclaves when the Islamists hit us again. I mean, why shouldn’t those who have done the most to guarantee our defeat in the War on Something or Other enjoy the consequences of that defeat to the fullest, anyway? And for that matter, why should the soldiers they despise be put at further risk to preemptively defend the ingrate parasites in the first place?

The only thing I know for sure is that it’s going to get worse. Watch the SOTU tonight if you don’t believe me; I’d wager that the Dems will be doing every crass and classless thing they can think of short of actually spitting at the President each and every time the word “Iraq” is mentioned — and their insane America-hating base will complain tomorrow that they’re not playing hard enough ball to suit them.

And meanwhile, the jihadists will be laughing at all of us. And making plans.