Administration which said ISIS was 'contained' hours before Paris attack says it's 'not likely' they can attack U.S.

Nine hours before the attacks in Paris, President Obama had this to say about the "J.V. team:" (Video below) After the attacks, Obama's people went into damage control mode. They clarified that the President meant that ISIS had been "geographically contained" after a rapid expansion during the time the Obama Administration was busy pretending they posed no threat. That may be a fair distinction, but it's also a worthless one. The problem, of course, is that an outfit like ISIS doesn't really rely on simple geographic boundaries.

If we've managed to stop them from taking new physical territory, that's great, but if you're using that success to suggest we've diminished their strength and effectiveness, you're either delusional or lying. The Paris attacks make that point in the most horrific possible way. In their wake, people are wondering if, or when, we'll see such an assault in the U.S. Never fear. As CNN reports, the administration which says ISIS is "contained" also says it's not "likely" that they have the capability to strike the United States:

President Barack Obama's national security team is sending a message Sunday that might lend at least a glimmer of reassurance to Americans traumatized by the terror attacks in Paris. Saying that while the ISIS ambition is certainly there to launch similar attacks on U.S. shores, the capability is not great.

---

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters that one big difference between the situation in Europe and that in the U.S. is that "thousands" of fighters have traveled to Syria and then returned to Europe. That number being tracked in America is far smaller-- around 40, according to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper earlier this year.

There are two key phrases here. The first involves the use of the word "likely." If the Paris attacks fit the administration's definition of the word "contained," do we really want to find out what "likely" means? Even if they're right, "likely" is awfully mealy-mouthed given the gravity of the situation. Does anyone really trust that the Obama machine is taking this threat as seriously as it should? The second is "being tracked." Even if we believe that the the Obama administration is employing every possible measure in the hunt for terrorists in the United States, there's still the near-certainty that some have entered the country which the feds know nothing about. Given their reticence to implement any substantive reforms at our porous southern border, and the President's oft-repeated plan to bring hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees into the US over the next two years, why would anyone assume they have an accurate read on the threat level? In fact, CNN's report goes on to completely undermine the administration's claims by quoting an FBI official who's familiar with the basic facts of 2015:

A top FBI counterterrorism official told Congress this year that "hundreds, maybe thousands" of people in the U.S. follow ISIS online. And this year alone, at least 49 alleged ISIS "supporters" in America have been charged with related crimes. The largest number of those were in New York.

When you consider the fact that the FBI is currently pursuing around 1,000 active ISIS investigations in the United States, it becomes clear that the President and his administration are desperate to downplay the reality of our situation.