Needless to say, dude's regurgitating conventional wisdom. To dude's credit, dude does touch on the intel cooperation angle. Barely.
Amusing that US policy towards PAK has gotten so entangled in a wilderness of lies.
Just like US Iran policy. And US Iraq policy. And US policy toward all the others.
Sometimes being sneaky just doesn't pay.
PS: What could be more retarded than the public explanations of the recent PAK ambassador secret message controversy?
We are supposed to think that there are no channels more secure than a dodgy hedge fund type for the PAK ambassador to convey a very pro-American scheme to US officials.
Would only make sense if the ambassador wanted to avoid the institutional partiality of the most likely channel. Meaning that he knows about some special reason to avoid using said channel.
If so, he picked the wrong dude to deal with.
Also, the way this played out would indicate that existing political arrangements with PAK are adequate.