“I am dead-set on making sure that we don’t promote anybody who was an essential player in the Benghazi debacle,” Graham told reporters.Graham's position is so obvious, it's weird that he had to say it, but Obama expressed himself in a very strange way. As I noted yesterday, it had an old-fashioned chivalrous quality to it, as if he were shaming Graham and McCain for picking on the gentle lady. The very idea of attacking a woman. The phrase "besmirch her reputation" evokes an image of the woman as pure and unstained. Absurd!
November 15, 2012
"Mr. President, don’t think for one minute I don’t hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi."
"I think you failed as Commander in Chief before, during, and after the attack," said Lindsey Graham, responding to Obama's statement (at yesterday's press conference) warning Graham (and McCain) away from going after Susan Rice. Obama said that it was "outrageous" to "besmirch her reputation" and that if they "want to go after somebody they should go after me." Graham made it clear that it wasn't about going after one person in place of someone else. He was going after everyone who should be held responsible:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
368 comments:
1 – 200 of 368 Newer› Newest»“History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.” --Marx
Obama'll use whatever method works and the media will smooth over the rough edges. It remains to be seen how this will be glossed over/minimized/denied/obstructed. I certainly don't expect real media engagement or anything but the mildest of real world consequences. Rice might one of the only ones to feel the pinch. Maybe I'm too cynical, but to paraphrase the immortal Gore motto of political irresponsibility: there's "no controlling legal authority" strong enough and willing to make a dent in the administration.
We can't start holding government officials accountable for catastrophic screw-ups! That's just crazy talk.
The press should have asked: "Mr. President, as you famously pointed out in the second debate, you knew that it was a terrorist attack, and you announced that it was a terrorist attack the day after the attack. SO why did you fail to communicate this to one of your top advisors, Ambassador Rice, -- in fact the advisor you chose to represent the administration in television interviews? Were you deliberately trying to undercut her credibility? Was she incompetent to a degree that could not have imagined? Or is there some more systemic communications problem in your administration?"
How quaint of Graham to bark at the Great Man's ankles at the moment Hussein's leaving the country to go surrender America to Vladimir.
Benghazi was so last week.
I guess under Obama's interpretation of things Susan Rice is just a defenseless, fragile, featherbrained girl who said some silly untrue things and is now being picked on by a bunch of mean old men for it.
It's about rendition. That's why Romney shut up about it. And of course being about rendition makes it about hypocrisy.
McCain skipped a closed door security briefing on Benghazi to go yell at clouds at a press conference with his Bobbsey Twin, Lindsey Graham. Pretty much all you need to know right there.
Besmirched??? The only woman in Washington I can think of who was besmirched in recent history was Monica Lewinsky.
And she's got the besmirched dress to prove it.
Sen Graham can be squishy sometimes, but sometimes not. Ask Eric Holder.
I still want to know what there was in Benghazi that caused the al Qaeda, if that is who it was, to organize the attack in the first place.
And they lost like 60 men? There is a lot more details that need filling in here than just who knew what when in Washington, D.C.!
Yeah Garage that was horrible, like going to Vegas for a fundraiser when Americans were left to die.
Obama passionately defends the defenseless back woman's reputation, UN Ambassador Rice's. The innocent, ignorant of the truth, lied to woman he pimped to the news networks.
"Mr. President, don’t think for one minute..."
Big deal.
The majority of Americans don't care.
garage mahal,
McCain skipped a closed door security briefing on Benghazi to go yell at clouds at a press conference with his Bobbsey Twin, Lindsey Graham.
There was a third Senator there. Funny how you missed her.
It bears repeating there were not Islamic jihadists in Libya until Obama decided to use military force to effect regime change there.
Fascinating the media doesn't inquire why he chose a pre emptive war and why there was no post-Quadaffi plan in place.
Graham and McCain love the TV cameras too much. They should step back and let Kelly Ayotte take the lead. Women are so much better at shredding other women's phony stories than we guys are.
Skip a briefing to go to a press conference demanding more information. McCain clearly still not over 2008.
Chivalry, with the race card played, for now.
I waiting until it reaches the point Obama becomes Dr. Smith hiding behind Will Robinson.
I'm willing to cut Obama some slack.
The little tyrant probably thought her lady partz™ were under assault.
Yeah Garage, that skipping a brief is horrible. Imagine if the president were to skip over half of his daily security briefs.
She lied, willingly, on behalf of Obama.
The democrats always have this "how dare you!" attitude about them. Absurd, indeed.
How dare you look behind the curtain. How dare you even exist.
Skip a briefing to go to a press conference demanding more information.
Were you equally appalled when Obama went on a campaign run to Vegas the day after the Benghazi attack?
Kelly Ayotte, a smart rising star, must be silenced by the sad and pathetic MFM.
Funny how Obama left his sense of gentlemanly chivalry in his other pair of pants when his myrmidons were out shredding Sarah Palin in the vilest terms imaginable in 2008.
I guess saying things like "Politics just doesn't need things like calling women "cunts" or saying awful things about babies" would have just been too radical to say to the American electorate in 2008.
I hope Amb. Rice considers another line of work. One where she doesn't have to think independently, answer any questions, or hold any level of responsibility for anything at all. Because Obama tells us she can't handle it.
I don't know why anyone with an ounce of self respect would allow herself to be marginalized this way. It seems Democrats expect their women to be weak and dependent, and they comply.
I like that Obama used "besmirch". Up to that point, he was kinda doing OK, standing by his employee. But he tipped his hand with that one word. He followed by saying the act was "outrageous".
What will he say when he finally leaves office? "Finally, the American people have experienced a Presidency that never seeks to besmirch the other side or the fine people who work for the government. Now that America elected an outrageous replacement, she will experience the disgusting and misplaced shame that lesser Presidents, except for FDR, usually force upon her. I wish I could do more, but apparently some people don't think our living Constitution could survive the simple and obvious solution of ending or ignoring the two-term limit."
You have to love the wingers at Althouse. LOUDER please! So the rest of American can be sure to hear you!
Anybody that can climb out of an A-4 Sky Raider and save his ass in the middle of a carrier deck fire and then last however many years being tortured by the North Vietnamese while captured is one tough son of a bitch. I'm glad sen McCain is on our side. Sic' em' Senator. Sink your teeth into them and don't quit biting until they cry uncle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag3wg_i3vcI&safety_mode=true&persist_safety_mode=1&safe=active
You're the only one shouting
I'm curious, does it bother any of those Obama supporters that he chose to intervene in a.sovereign country that neither attacked us or posed an imminent threat to effect regime change, and then had no transition plan in place?
I only ask because that certainly was a big club used to beat Bush over the head with. Or is my question rhetorical and it doesn't matter because he's your guy and can do no wrong?
@phx,
So, what, phx, you think Benghazi wasn't a major fuck up? You think the press has held the administration's feet to the fire on this? And, oh yeah, it'll all come out after the "investigation", right? Because that's what government agencies do when they get caught fucking up in a major way, they come clean in the "investigation".
I'm sorry, but even you don't believe in your heart that Benghazigate is all kosher, and you know it.
Weird that Obama admits that Susan Rice will tell the American people whatever he tells her to say.
Also weird that he sent someone out who had "nothing to do with Benghazi" to speak to the American people about what happened there.
Finally, weird that Obama says Republicans should come after him, when he refuses to answer what he did that night, who he talked to, what decisions he made, and what he knew.
Come after him, he says, because he is where questions go to die.
"So the rest of American can be sure to hear you" -- phx
Someone set up us the bombast.
I'm sorry, but even you don't believe in your heart that Benghazigate is all kosher, and you know it.
I want to know the answers to what happened at Benghazi and why, too, @younghegalian. I'm not as cynical as you are about a government investigation. Seems like they did an okay job with the Senate's report on Pre-War Intelligence in Iraq. That was the one where Condi Rice, who I admire, went on all the talk shows declaiming all the WMD's that were in Iraq that needed to be rooted out by war. That cost some lives, too.
I don't mind people demanding answers. The extreme prejudgment and the comments in keeping with the fifth one in this section are the stuff that Republicans ruin themselves on.
"Mr. President, don’t think for one minute I don’t hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi."
No one cares.
O.J. Simpson had his jury.
Barack Obama has his electorate.
America has its past, and for its future, California's present.
Obama and his voters won -- for now.
I'm waiting for all the for all the in formation on the incident to come to light and the conclusions of the hand picked White house investigation committee to tell me what to think.
I'm waiting for all the for all the in formation on the incident to come to light and the conclusions of the hand picked White house investigation committee to tell me what to think.
I'm all for guys like you telling America what you think right now.
"Were you equally appalled when Obama went on a campaign run to Vegas the day after the Benghazi attack?"
Of course he wasn't, and we all know it.
Obama could shit his pants in the morning, not change until the evening, and Garage Mahal would celebrate it as the new standard in personal hygiene.
"That was the one where Condi Rice, who I admire, went on all the talk shows declaiming all the WMD's that were in Iraq that needed to be rooted out by war."
-- I'm confused; are you trying to imply there weren't WMDs? There were several caches of biological and chemical weapons found. No one found any nuclear weapons, which is sadly, what the media pretended were the only thing that counted as WMDs, so a lot of people are still ignorant of the fact that, while not in as high of quantities as we thought, Saddam was in violation of the treaty.
Obama,
"And I hope and intend to be an even better president in the second term, than I was in the first."
Washington:
"Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend."
Considering that every briefing they've had so far has held out on them, and judging by the "briefings" they got on F&F, etc., skipping a briefing to apply political pressure on the guy the buck stops with to get him to turn over all the information seems like a good move.
If Obama had been cooperating from the start, maybe he wouldn't be looking like such a craven as a leader right now.
I don't understand why President Obama needs to wait for the results of an investigation to tell him what he did that night.
phx- do you know what Obama did/decided the night of the Benghazi attacks?
"It bears repeating there were not Islamic jihadists in Libya until Obama decided to use military force to effect regime change there."
-- There -were.- Qaddafi's brutal rule simply kept them in check. They weren't organized and they certainly didn't have an ambassador as a target of opportunity, but it would be silly of us not to think that there are cells throughout the area.
"I'm waiting for all the for all the in formation." - phx
All your formation are wait for us.
It makes sense if Obama's popping some Rice.
phx said...
I'm waiting for all the for all the in formation on the incident to come to light and the conclusions of the hand picked White house investigation committee to tell me what to think.
I'm all for guys like you telling America what you think right now.
Not a problem. I can handle it.
I want to know the answers to what happened at Benghazi and why, too, @younghegalian.
But this isn't a complex question about how many WMD were in Iraq within what window of time or where Bin Laden was after 9-11.
This is a question of basic accountability that was under direct control of the president and his subordinates. If Obama didn't know the answer that night, he knew it the next day or he has been very careful not to know the answer to preserve his own deniability.
In any event he is misleading people to the point where it is fair to say that he is lying.
Impeach Obama.
When the investigation is over it will show exactly what President Obama said it would show.
I believe that the lady in question has engaged in self besmirchment.
"I'm not as cynical as you are about a government investigation.."
I am.
Not because I'm cynical, but because the consulate was never secured. Never. We were told that the FBI was going in but it never did. We have looters giving stuff to US news agencies and reporters wandering around the consulate weeks after the fact and it's just... open.
Now, presumably there is a behind-the-scenes investigation that we're supposed to trust is actually going on. I'm not sure what they're investigating that takes weeks upon weeks to investigate, but they aren't on the ground in Libya and the actual facilities involved were never secured.
Certainly we *could* secure them, even if we supposedly couldn't get there in time to help during the attack, the consulate at the least is US soil, right? So we could put people there without diplomatic incident. We never did.
So no. I don't trust that the "investigation" that I can't see is any more competent or honest than the investigation I should have been able to "see". And then there is the stonewalling. I don't actually have any reason whatsoever to trust that there *is* an investigation that goes beyond trying to decide how best to spin it all to Obama's benefit.
Senator Kelly Ayotte has also been at the forefront of those demanding answers. Oddly, she has not been featured in any of the MSM stories - but then, not so oddly. It's harder to make the case of "evil old white dudes" attacking the helpless lady if one of the dudes is a young, intelligent woman.
There -were.- Qaddafi's brutal rule simply kept them in check. They weren't organized and they certainly didn't have an ambassador as a target of opportunity, but it would be silly of us not to think that there are cells throughout the area.
Well by that standard, I'm willing to wager we have some cells right here. My point, was that they didn't have free reign as they apparently do now. That is a direct result of Obama's war of choice and regime change.
That should he the real investigation. Benghazi is simply the fallout of his ill conceived decision to engage in regime change.
And then, of course, there is the history of lies... Obama said he always said it was a terrorist attack... but then he spent the next weeks lying to us about it being about a You-tube video... and sending Rice out to tout the official line (not her fault, don't blame *her*)... and how DARE you suggest I don't care about Ambassador Stevens, Romney!... and now, instead of answers we're supposed to be shamed into not asking questions because Rice doesn't deserve to be picked on?
No really... I totally trust that the administration is undertaking an honest investigation and we will find out the truth now that the election is over.
Benghazi? Wasn't that the incident we conservatives were expected to lose all interest in once it stopped being a campaign issue?
Shame, SHAME on anyone asking questions. Besmirching poor Ambassador Rice. Suggesting Obama didn't *care*. Shame, shame, shame.
Any liberal or journalist who believes that Watergate was serious and Richard Nixon deserved what he got, but who is not demanding answers from Obama about Benghazi is simply a complete and utter hypocrite.
The funny thing is, if Obama had provided answers at the start and had an open investigation from the word Go, instead of sending out Rice to lie for him, no one would feel the need to even discuss her lies.
Post election, stock market down, GDP forecast down, this week's unemployment up (OH and PA hit hardest, God does exist) and MSM blame Sandy. Expect more bad news.
Nonapod said...
I guess under Obama's interpretation of things Susan Rice is just a defenseless, fragile, featherbrained girl who said some silly untrue things and is now being picked on by a bunch of mean old men for it.
That is not a good skill set for a SEC State, who must go out and deal with a bunch of mean old foreign men.
How hard can it be, really, to investigate the US response to the Benghazi attack?
How many people are actually involved in that? And how many of them would have been involved in a way that wasn't documented at the time?
Collect the transcripts and documents THAT EXIST and compile them.
Ought to take all of a week or two at most.
No more mystery.
As for the precise motivation and identity of the attackers? Surely even that isn't a total mystery. But it's also not a scandal or potentially politically damaging.
McTriumph said...
Post election, stock market down, GDP forecast down, this week's unemployment up (OH and PA hit hardest, God does exist) and MSM blame Sandy. Expect more bad news.
It's going to be hilarious when a year from now they're still blaming Hurricane Sandy.
It's almost as if people with wealth resent getting taxed.
That couldn't be it, could it?
To investigate our response, we literally have to send someone to knock on a few doors in maybe a few buildings in D.C. That's it. An enterprising intern with a car or knowledge of the Metro could do it in an afternoon.
Let’s face it, we are well and truly screwed if the press doesn’t start asking the questions we’re asking here.
I’m still hoping a few Jake Tappers will come riding over the hill. Of course, even he wasn’t on the scene at yesterday’s press conference. Out hawking his new book or something.
Or we could just get with the program:
“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.” -- V. Lenin
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken
This is just more of Obama's strategy of painting the Republican party as anti-woman in order to further his own ends (in this case, covering up his incredible bungling).
Just a reminder for those of you that think we should shut up about Benghazi because Barak won. Well Richard Nixon won big time back in the day. And he was brought down by something way more trivial than this. So yeah, we are still going to try and get some real answers here, no matter how much you want to cover it up.
There was never anything to be found by the FBI at the consulate except AK47 shell casings
Hagar said...
I still want to know what there was in Benghazi that caused the al Qaeda, if that is who it was, to organize the attack in the first place.
two part answer, or maybe three if you believe the rendition theory. Apparently AQ accomplished both. Think of it as the OBL SEAL raid in reverse:
1. A PR Target, The Ambassador. Killing him makes worldwide news and helps recruiting
2. They shut down the CIA unit chasing them and may have gotten the intel files that listed who in Libya was on both the good and bad list. which they of course just reverse the polarity on and start the round-up of the CIA "good" people...
Teri said...
Just a reminder for those of you that think we should shut up about Benghazi because Barak won. Well Richard Nixon won big time back in the day. And he was brought down by something way more trivial than this. So yeah, we are still going to try and get some real answers here, no matter how much you want to cover it up
The investigation, initiated by the White House, should clear everything up for you.
Synova said...
Collect the transcripts and documents THAT EXIST and compile them.
You know better, it would take 2 days to go to the message logs at DIRNSA, CIA, ODNI, WHCA, AfriCom, CentCom, EuCom, NMCC, and have them pull all the messages to and from them for 24 hours starting at 2130 Bengahzi time.
It's all right there in the logs and they can't be fudged.
Of course there is a stenographer in the WHSR whenever there is a mtg. That record could be f'd with I guess, but not the ones at WHCA.
Expect more bad news.
Who here would be happy if it was good news?
Getting hard to claim a cover-up when the facts are known" There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” said the official. The official’s comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of a Fox News report that CIA teams on the ground had been told by superior officers to “stand down” from providing security support to the consulate."
Poor Sue Rice was duped by Obama when he pimped her to the news media that Sunday mourning. I feel bad for her, but she is just too stupid to be Sec of state. It never dawned on her that no one actually involved in the Benghazi affair was willing to go on TV to discuss it. White House...nope! DOD....nope! CIA...nope! UN...Hell Yes!
So yeah, we are still going to try and get some real answers here, no matter how much you want to cover it up
Unfortunately the Senate is a different place now. Then there were plenty of GOP Senators who were ready to impeach. Today, if it were Bush, I suspect that McCain, Graham and many other GOP Sennators would still vote to impeach a Bush Benghazi coverup that went into the WH.
Think Harry, Dick, Chuck, JFK, and the Cherokee Princess will impeach? I suspect Feingold would, Feinstein seems pissed, Lieberman yeah, but I dont think you'd find that many dems willing to consider the evidence and convict.
roesch/voltaire said...
Getting hard to claim a cover-up when the facts are known" There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” said the official. The official’s comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of a Fox News report that CIA teams on the ground had been told by superior officers to “stand down” from providing security support to the consulate."
To my knowledge there's no evidence of an action order from the Commander and Chief.
Well Richard Nixon won big time back in the day. And he was brought down by something way more trivial than this.
Yeah, but no one liked Tricky Dick. And the press loathed him, mostly because of his role on the House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1950s and especially for taking down Alger Hiss, who had played a big role in establishing the UN.
Nixon famously said after his defeat for the governorship of California (after his defeat by Kennedy in 1960) that the press wouldn’t “have Nixon to kick around any more.”
Boy, was he ever wrong about that.
"Getting hard to claim a cover-up when the facts are known" There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” said the official. The official’s comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of a Fox News report that CIA teams on the ground had been told by superior officers to “stand down” from providing security support to the consulate.""
So why didn't anyone go in then?
This isn't all that difficult, even without knowing what happened or didn't. There aren't that many combinations of possibilities.
First possible scenario:
People who ought to know claim that teams "mobilize" without orders when emergencies happen.
1. If they didn't mobilize, why not?
2. If they did mobilize, why didn't they deploy?
This is the "someone had to have given an order not to go" scenario.
Possible confusion? Maybe more than one group/organization/etc. gets ready and then they all wait for a "go" order instead of a "stop" order.
So the second scenario:
Response teams need a "go" order.
1. They never got "go" orders.
This is just as bad, yes?
As for statements that no one received a "stand down" order, that could be resolved if someone would answer the simple question... why did we not send anyone?
There is no dispute that we didn't send anyone, right?
There aren't very many possibilities explaining why not. Either no order was given to GO, or orders were given NOT to go.
And all of that could be quickly determined by having a look at what orders and communication actually happened, ALL of which is on the record and available to the administration. The notion that any of the information has to be "dug-up" by an investigation is fantasy.
Ohio and Pennsylvania will continue to be horrific armpits for states for the foreseeable future.
Others soon to join!
I have one question to ask.
Did you ever meet a Cninese broad named Rice?
Just sayn'
Also, you know... it's not Ambassador Rice's fault she was trotted out to 5 different morning talk shows to lie.
We're supposed to trust some "official" who just was telling what intelligence he or she had at the time?
As I noted yesterday, it had an old-fashioned chivalrous quality to it, as if he were shaming Graham and McCain for picking on the gentle lady. The very idea of attacking a woman. The phrase "besmirch her reputation"
Wasn't that chivalrous to abandon his long-time advisor and crony for 2 months until The One was safely reelected.
She was stupid or loyal enough to do what her Beloved One wanted...got her reputation shredded...while Obama got the cover he needed to avoid that Benghazi bump in the road. Hillary was either too smart or had smart people around her that said "Do not make an idiot out of yourself spouting Axelrod false narratives on 5 major shows!"
Now, safe from consequences after the vote and immune to any repercussions on himself, Barack is going finally "accept responsibility" to rescue the damsel in distress tied to the railroad tracks by the dastardly Republicans two months ago?
The train ran over her...public opinion now is she must be ignorant, stupid, or out of the loop. And the McCain/Graham/Feinstein train is going to make another run over poor Dr Rice and anyone else of "All the President's Men" they think lied to and deceived on Benghazi.
The new left hated Nixon and Hiss was a Soviet spy.
Although I have met several oriental broads who were named Wang.
Now that's entertainment.
I am always amused here at how simple statements are dissected, twisted and turned in order to put an emphasis on "woman" instead of content. Absurd!
Wait -- isn’t that what libs usually call finding the “nuance”?
Someone with more artistic talents than I should do a parody of The Stones' "Under My Thumb".
Under my bus
there's a girl who...
It would go viral, you'd be a YouTube star.
I remember all the way back in distant time when I was in college.
It was the first big wave of immigration where the Chinese from Szechwan and Hunan province began to go to college in downtown Manhattan.
The professor stood in front of the lecture hall and said "Would Miss Wang please stand up."
She never did.
Of course she was just not happy to see him.
Or orders were given to go, but it took too long to get the response team there from Spain.
And this would remain undocumented after 2 months of intensive investigation into "what happened and who's responsible" by the WH?
But that's ok. I'm completely satisfied by what an anonymous CIA official had to say. The agency's credibility is off the charts.
There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” said the official. The official’s comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of a Fox News report that CIA teams on the ground had been told by superior officers to “stand down” from providing security support to the consulate."
That quote was that no such orders came from the CIA. That leaves plenty of other places from which such orders could have arisen, including DOD, and the White House. At any rate, the President could easily tell us what he did. He was there, and he knows.
Obama said that it was "outrageous" to "besmirch her reputation" and that if they "want to go after somebody they should go after me."
Wow! He's getting perilously close to "blackguard" and "rascal" territory there!
Oh, ye of little faith. Didn’t you listen to Obama yesterday when he said:
I can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order that I would give anytime that I see Americans are in danger, whether they're civilian or military, because that's our number one priority.
So there.
Just noticed this little gem from yesterday’s performance as well:
I think it is important for us to find out exactly what happened in Benghazi and I'm happy to cooperate in any ways that Congress wants. We have provided every bit of information that we have and we will continue to provide information. And we've got a full-blown investigation, and all that information will be disgorged to Congress.
Disgorged? As in spewed vomit? How’s that for a Freudian slip!
If we're done with the semiotics of "besmirch", can we get started on this?
And we’ve got a full-blown investigation, and all that information will be disgorged to Congress.
It looks like he's threatening to give Kelly Ayotte a facial. Or maybe Lindsey Graham, who seems to be on Obama's mind a lot.
As I noted yesterday, it had an old-fashioned chivalrous quality to it, as if he were shaming Graham and McCain for picking on the gentle lady. The very idea of attacking a woman. The phrase "besmirch her reputation" evokes an image of the woman as pure and unstained. Absurd!
Beating a dead horse here, as I see others have noted that a THIRD senator was present in the calling out who was conveniently overlooked.
Guess Senator Ayotte doesn't count because ...
because ...
C'mon lefties -- tell us why SHE doesn't count, does not even get mentioned in the question (thanks ABC) or considered in the answer.
As for Rice -- BHO said it exactly -- she went with the intelligence she was GIVEN -- by the White House, sez the Won.
Funny how BHO had it pegged as a terrorist attack when he spoke in the Rose Garden when he was nailed on it in the debate. How convenient! How weird that he forgot to mention that to Susan Rice before he sent her out.
Did he forget that (! Quick! Check him for Alzheimers!) when he sent Rice out to the World to tell us and them what happened? Five Times in one morning.
My contempt is now flowing over.
In the first months/year, I thought he might just be a Clinton redux.
But this man, the President of the United States, is a lying liar who does not possess the ability to distinguish lie from truth because for him there is no difference.
Who will have the balls to take this guy on and out (<--- figuratively, not literally, please) before the abyss we are in is too deep.
And you lefties on board? Seriously. Have you become part of a cult? The facts are out there.
There is something seriously, very very wrong in the White House
Also, you know... it's not Ambassador Rice's fault she was trotted out to 5 different morning talk shows to lie.
We're supposed to trust some "official" who just was telling what intelligence he or she had at the time?
Do you mean SoS Condoleeza Rice, in the leadup to the Iraq War? That wasn't her fault. she was just telling what intelligence she had at the time.
Nonapod said...
I guess under Obama's interpretation of things Susan Rice is just a defenseless, fragile, featherbrained girl who said some silly untrue things and is now being picked on by a bunch of mean old men for it.
===============
Yeah, just the sort of person we want dealing with all day to day US foreign policy with all the cunning and sometimes dangerous mean old men in the world.
PHX,
You're confusing Sec. Rice with her predecessor, Sec. Powell.
Wow. It's so unfair to criticize Susan Rice, b/c nobody ever said anything bad about Condoleeza Rice.
Thanks Patrick. A good debater always tries to help his opponent make his best case.
It's much more effective that way when you show your superior grasp of the issues.
Yes, but that was the intelligence they had at the time.
What Ambassador Rice gave us manifestly was not the intelligence they had, either at the time or later.
Wow. It's so unfair to criticize Susan Rice, b/c nobody ever said anything bad about Condoleeza Rice.
I never said anything bad about C. Rice. I liked her a lot. I think her situation (or Gen. Powell's) is probably very similar to that of current UN Ambassador Rice.
No, Patrick. phx is just letting you know the left's latest spin efforts.
phx reads thinkprogress so you don't have to.
What Ambassador Rice gave us manifestly was not the intelligence they had, either at the time or later.
I thought I heard Obama say that was exactly the information she had when she spoke to this issue.
Don't tell me: Obama is lying about what Rice knew. And if only I would open my eyes to this fact and judge both him and Rice now I would be patriotic.
phx reads thinkprogress so you don't have to.
Never heard of it. But I suppose you don't mean that stuff about what I read literally.
I think her situation (or Gen. Powell's) is probably very similar to that of current UN Ambassador Rice.
Aside from the fact that everyone that comes to your mind is African-American, there's no similarity at all.
C. Rice testified on the basis of the intel she herself had seen concerning the hidden actions of another government. S. Rice went on Sunday chat shows to repeat talking points provided to her by the WH about the known actions of our own government.
But Obama can take all the heat off S. Rice by showing us the unambiguous timeline on Benghazi. Easy-peasy.
phx said...
"Also, you know... it's not Ambassador Rice's fault she was trotted out to 5 different morning talk shows to lie."
We're supposed to trust some "official" who just was telling what intelligence he or she had at the time?
============
Hate to tell you that you are cognitively disabled, PHX, but what other conclusion can I come to? How can you claim to have a brain if you do not understand the difference between a woman sent out to lie by a White House that knew it was a lie - and Powell and Condi Rice testifying that they didn't know for sure, but they thought the evidence and expert opinion of the intelligence communities of Europe, the Arab world, Russia, Iran, Israel pointed to existence of WMD.
Do you mean SoS Condoleeza Rice, in the leadup to the Iraq War? That wasn't her fault. she was just telling what intelligence she had at the time.
No, numbnuts, Obama and Hillary and CIA-DOD all knew it was a planned terrorist attack within hours. Rice was not briefed on the actual intel her White House bosses and her titular Hillary boss had, or the full CIA dossier that existed.
If she was innocent, she was a clueless patsy that didn't have the brains to wonder why Obama, Hillary, Nat Security Advisor, and CIA all refused to appear on the media, and refused to allow their top staffers to appear as well.
Phx,
Why do you ignore that WMD was found in Iraq?
Why do you ignore that W went to Congress to get authorization before invading Iraq, and got it? Obama didn't even talk to Congress about Libya until months later...
And why do you ignore that W provided multiple reasons to invade Iraq, including to stop an ongoing humanitarian crisis and to establish a representative democracy in what had been one of the middle east's most westernized nations?
Bush was 3 for 3 on those reasons to invade Iraq, and there were others he was right on, too.
You seem to intelligent to keep deliberately repeating such stupid, easily debunked falsehoods.
Please tell me you haven't sold your principles and intellect to join the Barack Obama Cult of Personality, too.
Don't tell me: Obama is lying about what Rice knew
There is (at least) one other explanation: Amb. Rice was given incorrect information. She may certainly believed it. Whoever gave it to her may have known it was BS. Don't know if it's true, but it is plausible. The administration could easily end this speculation, however.
The truth shall set you free.
"What Ambassador Rice gave us manifestly was not the intelligence they had, either at the time or later."
"I thought I heard Obama say that was exactly the information she had when she spoke to this issue.
Don't tell me: Obama is lying about what Rice knew. And if only I would open my eyes to this fact and judge both him and Rice now I would be patriotic."
No.
I don't think this is that hard, is it?
We KNOW what the administration knew at the time Rice went on television. What the administration knew at the time is not what Rice said on the television shows.
We don't have to assume at all that SHE was lying. She either took it upon herself to go out to 5 different television shows without information about Benghazi, OR she was told to go on television shows without information, OR she was told the truth and told to lie, OR she was lied to by the administration and told to go on television shows.
Is Obama lying about what Rice knew? No reason to think so. If she received wrong information she may have been 100% truthful, and Obama 100% truthful about what she "knew".
But since Obama insisted, absolutely and with a "how dare you" that he ABSOLUTELY knew and SAID that this was a terrorist attack, and he never bothered to correct her misinformation... well...
Obviously completely innocent, no?
The attack was on Tuesday. U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice went on the Sunday gasbag shows with that story.
If she did not know what the score was by that time, regardless of what the White House might have been telling her, would make her totally clueless about Washington and abysmally incompetent.
I just want to know when we are we going to get hearings on Obama's secret Delphi mind control plot?
Sounds much more serious than Benghazi.
Bush was 3 for 3 on those reasons to invade Iraq, and there were others he was right on, too.
Nathan, I say this as someone who agreed with the decision to invade Iraq. There were WMD's found, and they were dangerous. They were not, however, anywhere near the quantity that was claimed. The urgency of going into Iraq was based upon those WMD's. At best, it would be a 2.25 out of 3.
I find it easy to believe that there were more WMD's that were spirited out, or hidden really, really well, but we haven't seen evidence, and it appears no one is really looking for them anymore.
Sounds much more serious than Benghazi.
You've demonstrated your indifference to Benghazi quite persuasively already. No need to keep doing it.
We understand epistemic closure.
leslyn said...
Synova said,
"There aren't very many possibilities explaining why not. Either no order was given to GO, or orders were given NOT to go."
Or orders were given to go, but it took too long to get the response team there from Spain.
Squirrel, Squirrel. The WH and MSM want to talk about CIF's and FAST Teams. BS. If there wasn't one in Sigonella Sicily it wasn't going to matter, However, nobody asks these questions:
1. They diverted an unarmed UAV over Benghazi and then replaced it with another unarmed UAV from Sigonella. A place that regularly sends armed UAV's over Libya. Why was the second UAV unarmed? Yeah, we had a agreement that we didn't shoot in cities, but commanders always want options. If they had launched an armed UAV, it would have been there if things got ugly, which they did. And the Libyans would never know it was armed if it didn't launch and maybe not then.
Few military operations fail because too much force is available...
2. Why no fast mover? We ran the Gaddafi campaign, in the back seat, from Sigonella. Lots of SEAD planes. all set up for Air-To-Mud with the latest pods. Yeah we didn't have permission from the WH to attack anybody, nor enter Libyan airspace (if we'd agreed not to), but ignoring EUCom or AfriCom, you'd think that the local USAF type had the authority to launch a pair of F-15s or -16's with mud loads and send them 400 of the 450 miles to bengahzi, just in case. An F-15 at mach one, 500 feet over the heads of the compound could have bought time or run them off without a shot...
3. If the Tripoli CIA could go rent a plane and fly 400 miles to Benghazi and land at a friendly airport and be met by locals, why couldn't we put 50 Air Police or Army cooks on a C-130, fly 450 miles and follow them into the same airport? 6 CIA guys and a pick-up squad of tripoli thugs could get to the CIA compound, surely it didn't take Tier One SOF to reinforce them. Too risky? BS
PS: Everybody thinks of YAHOO as an internet firm, but the military term came first;
"You Always Have Other Options'
unless of course you leave your armed UAV behind, then you are SOL.
And I keep getting a feeling this may have had more to do with the State Department than the White House.
Do we have an extradition treaty with Australia?
phx wrote: Do you mean SoS Condoleeza Rice, in the leadup to the Iraq War? That wasn't her fault. she was just telling what intelligence she had at the time.
You are right, Obot, it's all about Bush, etc.
It's not important that misinformation has been presented by high level officials to high level officials and the public. It's not important that four Americans, including an Ambassador were killed and that they were not properly protected.
It's only important that C Rice may have said something years ago.
You have no legitimate defense on these issues, but why should that deter you from posting ridiculous comments?
You and others like you are the explanation for our having a doofus for President who is ineffectual on so many levels.
"I can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe."
We need an external investigation to find out why it didn't happen? Who the hell is running the country?
No, numbnuts
Do I have to take that from a Jew? Oh, wait.
Cedarford said...
No, numbnuts, Obama and Hillary and CIA-DOD all knew it was a planned terrorist attack within hours
An ignored fact is that the State Ops Center watched the attack IN REAL TIME on the consulate security cameras via the internet. I would think like every other security camera, it rolls to tape, so they could rewind and SEE NO DEMONSTRATION within minutes of the attack.
everything else is squirrels...
It's only chivalrous in the same way that "Brownie is doing a heckuva job" is chivalrous, with the addendum that the person being accused of messing up did not actually mess up up, whereas Brownie did.
Feinstein seemed pissed. Even partisan hack senators (and I am not implying she is) can get their backs up about being lied to, or the WH running roughshod over Senatorial rights. Hence Reid can make common cause with the GOP to prevent (or try) recess appts that abuse the advise and consent requirement
Feinstein is old, and sometimes gets sidetracked, but she's twice as smart as Babs and ten times the patriot. And she listens to McCain and Lieberman ;)
If "Brownie" did mess up, his successors are no improvements according to what we see of "Katrina on the Hudson."
In fact, though it may be your opinion that the FEMA response to Katrina was inadequate, it was indeed far surpassing anything done by the Feds for previous natural disasters.
This urban legend was just "canoeing in ankle deep water" contrived as an excuse for Bush-bashing.
A little late, but, if it means we can impeach (or indict) the pack of them, it may be that much more fun.
Whoda thunk Senator Grahamnesty had it in him?
Surfed said...
Anybody that can climb out of an A-4 Sky Raider and save his ass in the middle of a carrier deck fire and then last however many years being tortured by the North Vietnamese while captured is one tough son of a bitch. I'm glad sen McCain is on our side. Sic' em' Senator. Sink your teeth into them and don't quit biting until they cry uncle.
5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. no matter how he disappointed me, I alwaays had to give him that.
TMan, here's the exact quote (emphasis added):
But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me.
That's not in the same ballpark as "Heckuva job, Brownie." It's a way to accuse McCain and Graham of the new hate crime of "bullying". That's why Ayotte can't be mentioned.
I almost expect Jay Carney to suggest that McCain wants to get SRice in a chokehold while Graham cuts her hair.
It's be a double bank shot.
fucking autocorrect!
5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. no matter how he disappointed me, I alwaays had to give him that.
apparently one of the "hard cases" there as well.
btw: turned down an early medical release because pop was the PACOM Cdr and it would have been used to damage US morale...
Synova - I don't think this is that hard, is it?
We KNOW what the administration knew at the time Rice went on television. What the administration knew at the time is not what Rice said on the television shows.
-------------
And the fact that they didn't rush to correct Rice and her "official Administration Line" meant that thought it a useful deception in the campaign battle where Obama proclaimed even after Sept 11 that he "killed bin Laden, saved GM, and had the terrorists on the run."
Hard to know what Axelrod's thought processes were. Lose the election and the lies won't matter anymore than the inconvenient casualties? Win and then with Obama secure in office claim "all responsibility" but count on the Senate and the media to help him evade a terminal Nixon situation?
With absolutely no one held accountable for the security failures and coverup past a Petraeus patsy or two?
Keep Hillary immaculate because that was the quid pro quo Bill insisted on as a condition to campaign for Barack?
We understand epistemic closure.
You should, it just ran you over like a freight train a week ago.
"The phrase 'besmirch her reputation' evokes an image of the woman as pure and unstained. Absurd!"
..and yet, the election proved that this kind of absurd posturing works.
Get used to it. We're gonna see a lot more.
There is not a lie that President Obama could tell that would not be accepted and repeated by the lap dog press and the liberals who post here.
It doesn't matter. He can do anything and will never be questioned let alone called to account.
That is what is so frightening about him. He has a blank check.
Rice went on five shows to lie, lie, lie.
If that was the information she was given, and she wants her reputation back, she can go on the same five shows this weekend and fully disclose who provided that information and who sent her out to those shows to present it.
Or she can STFU and wait to see if she gets a big promotion from Mr. Wonderful.
So, she can have her reputation, or her promotion.
You should, it just ran you over like a freight train a week ago.
I presume you're referring to the general forecasting error among Alt cons in predicting the outcome of what turned out to be a 51/49 coin flip. So it turns out they put too much stock in the rationality of the electorate. Lesson learned, I suppose.
Looks like the stock market made the same mistake.
Nothing to see here other than LG wants to get re-elected in SC. As kos mentioned yesterday, his popularity probably increased 15% in SC after his incoherent rants yesterday.
He doesn't want to go the way of Bennett and Lugar ...
"general forecasting error".
ha.
Not for Silver, Sam Wang, and host of others that put Obama's reelection at 90+%
People who voted for Obama are not interested in these issues for a variety of reasons.
All other people don't matter.
Time for some lib bait:
Here's my question for the president: As our nation's chief executive you claim to be unaware of the most important and tragic situations we're facing; so, as a former chief executive, I'd like to know how long it takes for your staff to tell you things like: "Sir, your CIA Director is under investigation"? --Sarah Palin
Darn good question. It makes a basic and important point very well and avoids the dreaded tinfoil-hat conspiracy zone patrolled by the braying libs.
I'd like to know how long it takes for your staff to tell you things like: "Sir, your CIA Director is under investigation"? --Sarah Palin
Holder knew for weeks. He sees Obama weekly. Like F&F, their cover story always seems to be incompetent staff briefings...
Frankly, I can believe that no one is telling Obama things. Remember how they described his decision making process as offering two or three simple, big picture solutions, letting him check a box, then implementing the details without too much input from him.
I could see not bothering to tell him about these sorts of things. If so, that should be a sign he needs to shake up his staff.
Not for Silver, Sam Wang, and host of others that put Obama's reelection at 90+%
Either you're counting Nate Silver among the Althouse conservatoriat or you have failed to read my comment correctly. I have >99% confidence in one of those possibilities.
But in regard to your new fave talking point, you've already forgotten that the point at issue was what to make of the difference in the national vs. state polling results. There was nothing irrational about having that discussion. It would've been crazy not to.
The larger point is that you insist on claiming that the fact that a 51/49 coin toss came up "heads" proves definitively that the people who bet on "tails" were innumerate or in denial about reality.
That's an inane argument.
Nothing to see here other than LG wants to get re-elected in SC.
LG looked to me as if we was definitely pissed to no end that Obama was re-elected - Chip Ahoy rage. That's my take - it wasn't just Benghazi, he was livid b/c of the election.
Maybe he was; maybe he wasn't.
None of that changes the fact that Graham -- and any one else -- has every right to hold the administration accountable for their actions. Those actions ended with people dead, it would be great if Obama's team could finally start acting like adults now that the election is over.
he was livid b/c of the election.
Oh good. Now we're doing mind reading.
Occam's Razor says he's livid about Benghazi. Like any other normal citizen.
Chip S sez: "Oh good. Now we're doing mind reading."
looked to me as if we was definitely pissed to no end that Obama was re-elected
looked to me as if
looked to me
None of that changes the fact that Graham -- and any one else -- has every right to hold the administration accountable for their actions.
Of course that's true. My impression of Graham's response to the election wasn't intended to undermine anyone's call for accountability.
Phx: Well, that may not have been your intention, but it sure seemed that way. For anyone who only read your statement, it seemed clear that you were dismissing Graham's statement because of this. You've now clarified it was just a strange thing you were noting at the time, so, that's all cleared up now.
Try not to be so sloppy next time.
Phx: Well, that may not have been your intention, but it sure seemed that way.
Oh, no, absolutely not. Not my intention at all. I'm not sure how I feel about Graham yet - haven't seen it all. Thanks for understanding.
Try not to be so sloppy next time.
Oh yeah? Fuck you.
My impression of Graham's response to the election wasn't intended to undermine anyone's call for accountability.
Except Graham's, of course.
Except Graham's, of course.
You guys are reeeeealllly paranoid, either about me or libtards in general.
It was a simple observation that I made while watching him Sunday morning on Bob Schieffer's show. Before Obama's press conference.
Grahama looked like he was trying to contain some intense anger - he talked about Benghazi. My IMPRESSION (I could be wrong, dingbats) was that he was angry about the election. Probably Benghazi, too. Just like you wingnuts were from Wednesday on.
Appropriate conservative response: "You're damn right he was angry about the election. Just look at Benghazi!"
Althousian Conservative Response: "Look at you trying to undermine Lindsey Graham! Bastard!"
The larger point is that you insist on claiming that the fact that a 51/49 coin toss came up "heads" proves definitively that the people who bet on "tails" were innumerate or in denial about reality.
It didn't end up 51-49. And even if it did, 51-49 doesn't equate to a "coin flip" in a presidential election. Romney lost by 126 electoral college votes.
You guys are reeeeealllly paranoid...
Nope, you don't do mind reading. Just makin' simple observations.
I'm glad you've dropped the civility-cop pose, tho. This is more fun.
Yeah, this is exactly what the original feminists had in mind when they were talking about equality for women. Being President Boyfriend McDreamboat's Handmaiden of Bullshit. Who can't stand up for herself to Lindsey Effing Graham.
And even if it did, 51-49 doesn't equate to a "coin flip" in a presidential election.
I see now that you're being funny. That's a relief.
When is Lily coming out? She will be primaried big time in South Hatealina and we won't see Opie anymo.
Lindsey is a big time Lady and not a pretty one at that.
Intersectionality dictates that women shouldn't get too far above themselves and let their so-called "rights" get in the way of fetching coffee, just the way Choom likes it (skim to the brim), and taking dictation.
I'm glad you've dropped the civility-cop pose, tho. This is more fun.
What kind of an idiot thinks calling people names is fun?
What kind of an idiot thinks calling people names is fun?
That's your best comment ever.
Have a nice day!
Maybe Graham is just mad because he isn't going to get that stuff that Romney says minorities and women will get? There are all kinds of things Republicans are saying these days as they continue to besmirtch voters and people in the Obama administration.
The official’s comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of a Fox News report that CIA teams on the ground had been told by superior officers to “stand down”
...or the official could be lying....
Tyrone Woods and two other CIA operatives violated direct orders to "stand down" by returning to the consulate and rescuing survivors of the initial assault...
...since, you know, Tyrone Woods is unavailable for comment.
I'm willing to cut Lindsay some slack on his histronics over Benghazi. he's a Reserve Colonel, yeah I know a JAG. But I suspects he thinks he's a real soldier, at least as much as a zoomie JAG Bird can be.
He is in fact a real expert on the LoLW, Geneva, Hague, etc. I really enjoy his schooling of Holder on all things "detainee".
And like Feinstein, he doesn't like being played for a fool.
I know I am approaching Woody Allen territory but, anyone that WANTS the Secretary of Defense job lacks the intelligence and judgment to actually do the job.
Why would Rice want the job after the White House sent her out to lie to the American people.
The worst of it -- after disobeying orders in rescuing consulate survivors, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty exposed themselves to enemy fire on the roof of the Benghazi CIA annex in order to light up a jihadi mortar team with a laser designator:
According to sources on the ground during the attack, the special operator on the roof of the CIA annex had visual contact and a laser pointing at the Libyan mortar team that was targeting the CIA annex. The operators were calling in coordinates of where the Libyan forces were firing from.
[..]
Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance...could call up that video in real time on their computers.
"...calling in coordinates..." to whom? There should be logs of the to-and-from communications, and confirmation of whatever aerial assets (Spectres? Were the drones armed?) were on station.
Like Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty was likewise unavailable for comment.
"Foxnews has learned...."
Back into the bubble we go.
Of all of the idiot things to make a "scandal" out of....how desperate. Of course McCain is so moronic as to be almost not human. He is about one idiot comment away from being declared a vegtable. And Graham is just sad and desperate...a Senate Republican is such an endangered species. Terrorist attack? Spontaneous outbreak of violence? Who the F cares...people were killed and contrary to idiot belief not by the Democrats. Where were these idiots when Bush let the 9/11 terrorist attack us on American Soil? Do not remember such outrage then by tail gunner John.
Do you mean SoS Condoleeza Rice, in the leadup to the Iraq War? That wasn't her fault. she was just telling what intelligence she had at the time.
Rice was given information and intelligence that had come from multiple sources from different countries. There were WMDs in country and elements of a program. I always found the Powell rationale and presentation to be thin soup, and that the flaunting and violating of the UN could be the casus belli for returning to "finish the job."
That said, with Benghazi, Obama wants it both ways. He wants to be retrospectively recognized for calling it a terror attack a day later in the Rose Garden, yet was comfortable letting a subordinate out into the media universe with a story that absolved the administration of dereliction due to the video.
It's either A (pre-conceived terror attack) or B (riot caused by film). It cannot be both. So, that leaves us either with they knew A, and said B. Or they didn't know A, talked about B for days on end, and then when they found out it was indeed A — wanted credit for realizing the "truth."
The attack itself is not the problem ... embassies and consulates have been targets of attacks multiple times. What happened before and after are what generate the concerns and questions.
But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me.
So does that mean the terrorists in Libya for some reason (!) thought our ambassador was an easy target?
Too bad that badass mode wasn't BHO's role du jour when the terrorists attacked and murdered Americans. (Well, to be sure, he probably understands he would not have come off well as they laughed hysterically when he invoked "executive privilege.")
This makes it clear that Benghazi is just a political game for the right: Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was less than willing to entertain questions Thursday on why he held a press conference Wednesday to complain about lack of information on the September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, while simultaneously skipping a nearly two-hour classified briefing with administration officials about the investigation.
I could see not bothering to tell him about these sorts of things. If so, that should be a sign he needs to shake up his not to bother him with this stuff.staff.
I can see BHO *telling* his staff not to bother him with this stuff.
He. does. not. care.
He wants the role and the bennies, not the job.
The Drill SGT said...
5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. no matter how he disappointed me, I alwaays had to give him that.
apparently one of the "hard cases" there as well.
btw: turned down an early medical release because pop was the PACOM Cdr and it would have been used to damage US morale...
True that, Sergeant.
All the way.
shiloh said...
Nothing to see here other than LG wants to get re-elected in SC. As kos mentioned yesterday, his popularity probably increased 15% in SC after his incoherent rants yesterday.
And Kos knows all.
Him and Ned Silver, right?
BTW where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?
Attending Zero's temporary spine implant?
roesch/voltaire said...
This makes it clear that Benghazi is just a political game for the right: Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was less than willing to entertain questions Thursday on why he held a press conference Wednesday to complain about lack of information on the September attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, while simultaneously skipping a nearly two-hour classified briefing with administration officials about the investigation.
Because you can always rely on the straight dope from the Obama administration.
I, myself am going to reserve judgement on the whole episode until the administration is done with its investigation. It would be premature to form an opinion until I'm given one.
CBS News has been told that, hours after the attack began, an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Benghazi, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.
...b*tch set you up, Garage. Shouldn't have any trouble releasing those comms logs, then.
Pragmatist said "Terrorist attack? Spontaneous outbreak of violence? Who the F cares...". Well, I care. I'm interested in what actually happened. I'm interested in finding out if Obama lied repeatedly and, if so, why he lied. I'm also interested in learning what mistakes were made by the administration and how to prevent them from happening in the future.
Synova said,
"There aren't very many possibilities explaining why not. Either no order was given to GO, or orders were given NOT to go."
leslyn said...
"Or orders were given to go, but it took too long to get the response team there from Spain."
That would be an order not to go.
Since no team from Spain showed up, not even too late to help it means that they either required orders and never got them (and this contradicts what everyone who ought to know says are the standing operational orders for responding to incidents) or someone told them NOT to go. The order not to go can be before they start or at any point before they get there.
There has to have been orders at some point in that process, Leslyn. One way or another.
Those orders are on the record. Finding them would take almost no time at all.
Drill Sgt. I have to disagree with you, there are a lot of good JAG officers. I was a 11B1P and I have nothing but respect for the JAGs.
Orders to turn around and go home again would probably make Obama look pretty good since he could say... see... we did everything we could.
Unless that turn around order was four hours in and someone decided it would be over and then it really wasn't, or they had them turn around instead of securing the consulate in a time frame that meant they could have found and potentially evacuated Stevens while he was still alive.
Or someone is spitting hairs and the "no one gave an order not to help" was in the specific context ONLY of the CIA annex and no one else.
Those of you comfortable and content with not knowing can't possibly have a clue how utterly and absolutely every moment of the whole thing, every order, ever communication, is 100% documented.
The only part that is potentially shrouded in the fog of war is the battle on the ground at the consulate itself and even THAT was observed and recorded in real time.
There are NO excuses for anyone to be content and comfortable to wait on this. Obama has already been reelected so what's the point in putting off demands for information that would take no more than a day or two to compile?
So... Pragmatist is Right is Right?
"he was livid b/c of the election."
That's a given, just like 100% of Althouse con flock are pissed.
Indeed, no need to mention the obvious lol.
btw, there are several Althouse cons who haven't made an appearance since the election. Go figure, as they may still be in the fetal positiopn!
No, Pragmatist is a goof. I'm guessing that the CIA threw all of thier local assets into the fight figuring that they could hold until reinforced and that reinforcements were not sent. But I don't know what happened, which is why hearings are necessary.
shiloh said...
he was livid b/c of the election.
That's a given, just like 100% of Althouse con flock are pissed.
nobody likes having something stolen from them.
btw, there are several Althouse cons who haven't made an appearance since the election. Go figure, as they may still be in the fetal positiopn!
No, moron, they swore off the blog due to Althouse's position on a Republican ad.
However, I do believe Fen is back sub rosa.
Speaking of still be in the fetal positiopn!, where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?
Celebrating the fact 1 in 6 was in poverty last year?
C in C, US of A, arguably the most powerful man on the planet:
"I can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe."
Same guy after a seige of several hours and four dead:
"They're dead. Oh shit! What did we do? Nothing? Oh shit!
Well, the media and Congress can sort that out after the election."
Benghazi (to the tune of Tupelo Honey)
Benghazi is as sweet, as sweet as Tripoli
We lost an election, historically,
Oh, how I love to say Ben-gha-zi.
It flows off the tongue so trippingly.
McCain and Graham used to make me mad,
but now they love some Ben-gha-zi.
Demographics and policies all look bad,
Oh how I love to say, Ben-gha-zi.
General Petreaus, a four star clown,
If I don’t think, I might not get down.
We will give Obama the third degree.
Oh how I love to say, Ben-gha-zi.
Romney/Ryan, Oh God, I think I’m cryin.
Please please please, give me some Benghazi.
FOX and Drudge, how could I not see?
Now I need some, some Ben-gha-zi.
Benghazi is as sweet as Tripoli
We lost an election, historically,
Oh, how I love to say Ben-gha-zi.
Please god help me, Ben-gha-zi.
Those of you comfortable and content with not knowing can't possibly have a clue how utterly and absolutely every moment of the whole thing, every order, ever communication, is 100% documented.
The only part that is potentially shrouded in the fog of war is the battle on the ground at the consulate itself and even THAT was observed and recorded in real time.
There are NO excuses for anyone to be content and comfortable to wait on this. Obama has already been reelected so what's the point in putting off demands for information that would take no more than a day or two to compile?
I'm repeating what Synova said because it cuts right to the bone and is inescapable.
phx, shiloh, r/v: Do you have a response to this?
"Rice has nothing to do with Benghazi."
So why send her out to five Sunday news shows to talk about Benghazi?
"She made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her."
Gee, why don't you send Sasha and Malia out to talk to the press. They don't know anything about Benghazi, either! And the added bonus is that we'll all be nice to them.
Feminist outrage here
I'm a fiction writer... can I *imagine* some complicated plot worthy of a feature film and presidential stonewalling? Sure.
The Turkish Ambassador had a doomsday device or alien baby or test tube of anthrax... or maybe a meteorite bought by one of his staff at the bazaar (big deal in Libya, meteorites) and it's really an alien egg, which he handed over to Stevens at a super secret meeting at the consulate contrary to orders from the super secret doomsday cult that runs everything in Turkey including being responsible for the genocide of the Albanians (it was another doomsday alien egg and they had no choice). And now the militant revolutionaries connected to the doomsday cult have got it back again and we're waiting on results from the SEAL teams creeping up to the secret fortress AS WE SPEAK!!!
*heavy breathing*
Explains all the secrecy right there.
I want to know the answers to what happened at Benghazi and why, too
Lie number one.
I'm not as cynical as you are about a government investigation.
Yes you are, and this is lie number two. You cynically expect it to be covered up so it doesn't besmirch your guy.
Seems like they did an okay job with the Senate's report on Pre-War Intelligence in Iraq. That was the one where Condi Rice, who I admire, went on all the talk shows declaiming all the WMD's that were in Iraq that needed to be rooted out by war. That cost some lives, too.
The difference being that in the case of Benghazi the CIA and the President already knew that Susan was peddling a convenient lie while in Condi's case no one but Saddam Hussein knew that the CIA was mistaken. So this isn't your third lie, more like a mistake of your own.
AnUnreasonableTroll thinks he's funny.
Remember when the Lefties were so afraid of General Betrayus?
The fact idiots like Troll are making light of this is one more indication the Administration is afraid of what comes out.
The economic news is exclusively gloomy and a sell-out of the guys who put it on the line won't go down well.
Maybe we can impeach Choomie before the Inauguration.
Kelvan Kringle said...
Drill Sgt. I have to disagree with you, there are a lot of good JAG officers. I was a 11B1P and I have nothing but respect for the JAGs.
FYI,
I met my wife when we were both active Army Captains. She retired as a National Guard JAG Colonel commander. Doesn't mean I can't poke fun at them. She can likely hurt you more by throwing her pistol at you, as shooting it :)
PS: I know more UCMJ than she ever did. I was a commander. She was a contracts or Fiscal lawyer for 30 years of Army service and 28+ years of Federal service.
A Reasonable Man wrote: Oh who gives a shit about the deaths at Benghazi, the lack of preparedness, the inability of the military to respond, or the significance of the resurgence of al Qaeda? We won and the Repubs are just into sour grapes!
Oh, you say,that's not what you said? Really?
You say that like you are surprised.
"I think you failed as Commander in Chief before, during, and after the attack," said Lindsey Graham.
Does anyone remember Graham saying this about Bush after 9/11?
*crickets*
hombre said...
Oh, you say,that's not what you said? Really?
No. I said, why don't you stop desperately trying to politicize the killing of our ambassador and his compatriots. As Jake points out, the left didn't do this after 9/11, a vastly greater failure because of the death of non-combatants. The ambassador at least knew he was going into a war zone.
It is always about former Republican Presidents.
Why the fuck didn't that dummy Abe Lincoln send a relief force to Fort Sumter? What the fuck!
And McKinley theres another one!
Does anybody remember the Maine?
Jake... what did Bush fail to do related to 9/11?
Did he watch the ongoing attacks for 7 hours and refuse to send help and then head off to Vegas for a fundraiser the next day?
Unless you're a Truther, are you a Truther, Jake?
Bush spent just a few minutes to finish reading a story while his car was brought round and he was harshly criticized for it (he was supposed to leap up and shriek or something) by people who now, amazingly, see nothing wrong with Obama saying "do everything!" and then leaving for Vegas and aren't at all curious about why we could watch an attack in real time for more than seven hours and not get anyone in there to help.
You never ask a question of the Jug Eared Jesus because some Republican somewhere did something worse.
Got it.
Post a Comment