Ron Johnson, questioning John Kerry. I'm breaking out what I think is the main quote. Look how differently this exchange is presented at TPM.
This was the same disconnect that Hillary Clinton tried to pull off when Ron Johnson questioned her the other day and she had her "What difference does it make?" outburst. She wanted us to focus on the point in time when the attackers decided to attack.
"Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night who decide to kill some Americans, what difference at this point does it make?"It. She has the wrong it. Johnson's question to her and then to Kerry related to the point in time when the people in the Obama administration decided to mislead the public by actively pushing a phony story about the "Innocence of Muslims" video. That was a strange thing to do, and both Clinton and Kerry have doggedly distracted us by pretending the question is why the attack occurred.
पोस्ट्स
६५ टिप्पण्या:
What Hillary and Kerry are saying is...
BYGONES! What happened happened so lets just move forward and forget about this little thing.
Yes they sat there and WATCHED on video as the compound was attacked and OUR people killed.
WHO ORDERED THE STAND DOWN??? Seems nobody knows!
Somebody had to have told the military to not attack. WHO?
The reality is they don't want to say cause IT WAS THEM.
Simple as that.
As I said before, it was a pretty clever rhetorical trick on Hillary's part to change the subject like that, and use a little blustering outrage to cover it up. I doubt we'll ever know the real truth of whose idea it was to push the video story and why, though the answers seem fairly self evident to the cynic (or "conspiracy theorist").
Scott is fighting against the memory hole's pull of all intelligent thoughts.
And it's not nice to fool around with Mother Memory Hole.
But how will the Office of Disinformation make Scott's image into another red neck jerk similar to Rand Paul who dared to resist.
The debate turns into a personal slander of the truth teller before any other analysis takes place, and then what does that truth matter now.
This is the Senate Foreign Relations Committee we're talking about here. They have the necessary clearances to see all relevant documents from the CIA & State & Defense Department sub-agencies, and even the WH.
I mean, really, take a wild, woolly, fucking-off-the-wall guess as to why the SFRC hasn't seen any of those documents.
Maybe it's because they just don't paint a pretty picture of the Administration in action.
Any probe you make has to avoid confusing soap opera women, or it won't play.
If what really happened is classified and the Amercian people need to and deserve to know, then the Administration just needs to state this and rest on their trustworthiness. Is there any reason to mistrust the Obama administration?
Ron Johnson: I want to know what happened in Benghazi.
Kerry: You should have shown up for the briefings..
Ron Johnson: Profit!
Memory holes, according to Hawking, radiate away their secrets from their event horizon, from where they could be recovered.
The first order of business in cover ups by the Obama Machine is calling in an FBI investigation of the incident. Then it is claimed that makes all comments and disclosures PROHIBITED until after the investigation is over some year.
Nice trick. By the time the report comes out then what does that matter now.
"It" is what is known in mystery stories as a red herring, or, given its purveyors in this case, a Red herring.
We know how high it went, but it must have gone wider than we can imagine.
Never forget, among other things, Lurch closed the books on missing POWs in 'Nam so he could do a little biz with Hanoi.
BTW, I'm naive about exactly why it's the FBI's purview to investigate and report on such overseas diplomatic activities and criminal investigations. I don't recalling calling out the FBI to investigate Tehran and other American Embassy attacks.
Is this something we can legitimately blame Bush for? It just sounds a little too cozy with DoJ.
Kerry vows to implement Obama's vision for the world?
Please no, there's enough misery already.
What sparked the violence was a very hateful video on the Internet. I condemn the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims. The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.
The Obama admin doesn't have to admit to anything because the press doesn't care. He's black and a Democrat. Any criticism of Obama is racism.
Next up, a Democratic woman president. Any criticism of her will be misogyny.
After that, a Democratic gay president. Any criticism of him will be homophobia.
I'd say that, under the regime envisioned by Democrats, dissent and opposition will be the highest virtues again in 2030.
Kerry is not a very good liar. But he is still a liar.
Ron Johnson: I want to know what happened in Benghazi.
Kerry: You should have shown up for the briefings..
Ron Johnson: Profit!
It used to be that even though you aren't very bright, you were occasionally funny. Now you don't even strive very hard to achieve that.
Nonapod:
I wonder if Clinton's emotional outburst was caused by outrage or frustration. This isn't the first time she has been a victim of Obama's politics. Perhaps she is simply frustrated that the charlatan will escape scrutiny and culpability again.
There is another possibility. Perhaps she is creating drama purposely to retain the wandering attention of concerned Americans.
Its not why did the attack occurred... its why we were misled.
Exactly.
Ah, I see the Left is pissing itself over Kerry "giving it to" Johnson about missing the briefing. The briefing that took place before he was even on the committee, and therefore was not invited to attend. Why Kerry wasn't aware of this? Am I surprised he got it wrong, or was otherwise being dishonest to deflect an inconvenient question? No.
Liberals sure are smart and funny, though.
It used to be that even though you aren't very bright, you were occasionally funny. Now you don't even strive very hard to achieve that.
Then just scroll by like I do when I see your comments.
n.n said...
I wonder if Clinton's emotional outburst was caused by outrage or frustration. This isn't the first time she has been a victim of Obama's politics. Perhaps she is simply frustrated that the charlatan will escape scrutiny and culpability again.
Well I'm not imaginative enough to speculate what notions might rattle around in Hillary's skull, (in all these sorts of things I tend to believe the simplest interpretation of events). But I think it's safe to say that there's a pretty serious enmity between the Clintons and the Obamas.
Then just scroll by like I do when I see your comments.
Ha! You read THAT one! Liar!!!!!111!!!!
I don't understand why the right/GOP has so clearly failed to focus on the main point. McCain wasted five minutes the other day asking Hillary why she failed to be a good den mother over her Benghazi compound. The issue is lying in order to win an election. Who among them has the balls to say so? Even the GOP senator from Wisconsin doesn't have the Johnson to do it.
People who believe honor and duty are punchlines.
@Bob Ellison...
Not only lying to win an election...
But, colluding with a media rep, Candy Crowley, to fix the second presidential debate so that the issue would be buried.
The issue is lying in order to win an election.
The election's over. Inasmuch as they're worried about elections, they're worried about 2014 and 2016.
To the Professor's point: TPM is a waste of bits. Really, folks, I appeal to your sensibility. I want to feel your pain and your joy. Let us all chant now: TPM is a waste of bits. Maybe it's a nice, warm place that keeps lefties from getting frostbite. That could be a good thing. But goodness gracious, I've typed more intelligence in the last sentence than I've seen on TPM since its stupid inception.
We live in a democracy. Ultimately, those who think that it was a serious failure by our government not to provide better security for the Benghazi consulate, not to rush defensive forces there when the consulate was attacked, and to give out false information for a considerable time after the attack -- those who believe that, need to get the American people interested in the issue. To do so, they've got to get through the media fog. I hope they succeed. Maybe they will.
Some day.
Revenant said...
The election's over. Inasmuch as they're worried about elections, they're worried about 2014 and 2016.
The 1972 election was over before another president had questions to answer.
The question Mz. Clinton should have been "Okay, so you didn't get the 3am call. Knowing what you knew then, what would you have done if you had gotten the call?"
Kerry should be asked a similar question.
One reason for sending the FBI is that it is a civilian organzation that is supposed to ask the host government for permission to go places in a foreign country.
This is a little thin in Libya, where we had just financed an armed a successful revolution, but had not yet got around to arranging for a proper government, but probably was the best the Govt. could think of at the moment to stall anyone from the U.S. officially going to Benghazi.
Actually, of course, anyone with an armed escort was free to go all the time, though it appears whoever did was not very good at "bag jobs."
Garage, which briefings did Johnson miss ? The ones where the truth was told ? Would you mind putting a date to that ? What century ?
John Kerry is going to Secretary of State because back in September Susan Rice was sent onto the Sunday talk shows. If only she'd just had the presence of mind to feign illness after reading the talking points and suggest they send John Kerry in her place.
Maybe it was because the Ambassador was smoking?
At least the US health care costs are now down by 4 people.
Why is John Kerry being asked these questions? He doesn't know shit.
There's an investigation going on! So stop bothering us you gnat!!!
There is no reason for the Obama admin to give over anything to this committee.
Zero.
The only possible leverage that this committee would have would be a consistent demand from the press that the Obama admin come clean.
That isn't going to happen. Obama is a black. He's the Second Coming.
So, it's a non-issue. As all catastrophes during the Obama administration will be.
Just think: that man could have been POTUS! And John Edwards VPOTUS!
We dodged two bullets in 2004.
BYGONES!
Yup, tell that to the families of the four fallen Americans.
The Aznar government in Spain fell over just such deception after the 2004 Madrid train bombings.
One reason for sending the FBI is...
...so that any questions from inquisitive Republican committeepersons can be put off with "I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
Ron Johnson didn't attend the classified briefing on the tapes because he wasn't invited, at that time he wasn't on the SFR committee.
And besides Thomas,
What does it matter now?
Didn't Benedict Arnold say something like that as he sailed off the England after his little West Point mistake?
Both "Its" matter.
- How can we understand what worked and what failed in our diplomacy unless we know the Who and Why of the attack?
- How can we function as a democratic republic unless we have good reason to believe the public is not being misled for political reasons?
Hillary and the Senators can dance back and forth forever between these, not getting to the bottom of either.
Wouldn't it be great if there were some organization devoted to pressing government for the facts, and publishing them for the public? I've even got a name for the outfit, it's right on the tip of my tongue...
In other news holder is moving on guns, the CPUSA is dry humping pictures of Holder and Obama
I have written this before and I will again because it is increasingly obvious to me that it is the truth. Something very bad was going on in Benghazi, stuff that we are not going to get to know about. Gun running to Syria has been suggested. Torture in the Annex has been suggested. The attack on the Embassy was likely unrelated to these actions but also very likely untimely and inconvenient. Why have we not heard a peep from the survivors of this action? No interviews. No memoirs in progress. No Op Ed in the NYT. No nothing. Nada.
After twelve years it's easy to forget how evil the Clintons are. This is a refresher.
Because you are so interested in women serving in combat roles, and in the Hillary Clinton testimony, I had to show you this. Doesn't it combine the two issues in such an interesting way?
Interesting!
it's not stupid if it works, and it works so well for committed leftist journolisters, and other assorted idiots.
I think it was a set up. They were denied help because the gov didn't want them to survive the attack. Gov probably owed or traded them for something the gov wanted or wants. Keep thinking about the film with Robert Redford....the CIA within the CIA......I do not believe we were not capable of helping those men....they chose not to.
"Ron Johnson: I want to know what happened in Benghazi.
Kerry: You should have shown up for the briefings..
Ron Johnson: Profit!"
Bingo.
I think it was a set up. The gov did not want them to survive the attack.....probably was a trade for something the gov wanted or maybe the gov owed some entity something like this. I do not believe we were not capable of saving these men, and it DOES matter WHY it happened.
Althouse like many Republicans err in treating Benghazi in total isolation from the 12 other attacks that put the lives, safety and property of Americans at risk that are directly attributable to the blasphemy video.
Which the scumbag that made and distributed it said was done with the goal of inciting Muslims to harm and even kill Americans to "show how bad the Msulims are".
What Republicans are saying is that they only care about Benghazi
because "4 Dead Heroes!!" happened - and the rest - Cairo, Tripoli, Sanaa Yemen embassies overrun in attack, Americans barricaded in Karachi against attacking mobs enraged by Nakoula's video - is no big deal.
furious_a said...
BYGONES!
Yup, tell that to the families of the four fallen Americans.
=================
Keep up your 4 Dead Heroes!! drivel by all means.
While you continue to ignore the 46,000 casualties and 2 trillion blown to "help the Noble Freedom Lovers". Who hate America even more now the Great Bush-Neocon debacle is winding down.
Yes, 4 dead Americans is bad. But small potatos compared to the blood and treasure squandered in two idiot Neocon Wars of adventure and nation-building.
Obama wanted the ambassador dead.
That's the only thing which explains all the facts.
======="Ron Johnson: I want to know what happened in Benghazi.
Kerry: You should have shown up for the briefings..
Ron Johnson: Profit!"
********Bingo. *********
Really? You fell for that crap?
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS January 03, 2013 - 3:03 pm EST
OSHKOSH, Wisconsin — Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson has been named to Senate committees dealing with the budget, foreign relations and small business.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/5aaf70f623a5459cb787bb118b8456de/WI--Johnson-Committee-Assignments
Idiot.
"Obama wanted the ambassador dead.
That's the only thing which explains all the facts."
For sheer comedic effect alone. These comment boards are like the Junior Mints as seen through Kramer's eyes. "Very refreshing!"
Harrogate @4:47, hysterical! LOL!
********What Republicans are saying is that they only care about Benghazi
because "4 Dead Heroes!!" happened - and the rest - Cairo, Tripoli, Sanaa Yemen embassies overrun in attack, Americans barricaded in Karachi against attacking mobs enraged by Nakoula's video - is no big deal. *****
Yes, to a clueless lefty with impaired reasoning ability, human life is - and especially American citizens lives are - worthless, so all those events, including Benghazi really are the same.
The left has no use for American heroes that term is reserved for their trained politicians and members of their victims groups.
Some one with true analytic capabilities would not overlook the use of crew-served weapons, 'the disappearing' of survivors, the hovering Predator, the failure to launch a rescue,....
Followed by a transparent attempt to lie to the American people.
Johnson appears to be quick learner. Faster than Lurch, who never seems to learn.
And is there a more enthusiastic fluffer for the present Administration that TP-Memo?
I thought the original Althouse post was spot on.
Thanks
Regards — Cliff
Cedarford at 5:37 says:
"Which the scumbag that made and distributed it said was done with the goal of inciting Muslims to harm and even kill Americans to "show how bad the Msulims are"."
Do we have a citation?
Thanks
Regards — Cliff
harrogate said...
"Ron Johnson: I want to know what happened in Benghazi.
Kerry: You should have shown up for the briefings..
Ron Johnson: Profit!"
Bingo.
Then you know who gave the order to stand down.
Garage,
Maybe you have trouble reading. The question is not what happened in Benghazi, but what happened in Washington. If the Congress were actually doing its job, instead of pretending to be our representatives, these are the questions that they should have asked:
1) Who drafted the initial talking points that referred to al Qaeda? Names and titles, please, along with the times of the draft. Please provide copies of the relevant drafts.
2) Who changed the draft to delete the reference to al Qaeda and to play up the "video mob" story? What words exactly were changed? What were the names and titles of the individuals who made those changes? Please provide copies of the relevant markups and marked-to-show changes drafts.
3) Who did the people in #2 talk to about Benghazi before making those edits? Please provide names and times of conversations. Please provide copies of all relevant email, text and other electronic communications.
But since you say you already know all the answers, maybe you can answer for the Administration.
Okay althouse you have tugged the "thread" a bit. Keep pulling. Go back to the Cairo Embassy condemnation statement put out by Larry Schwartz against State Dept. orders. He was reassigned to DC in late Oct. and his State Dept bio cleansed from the website.
6 hours before a single protestor had gathered.
The reports are that the Muslim Brotherhood had warned the Embassy because the You Tube video clip was shown on Egyptian TV a week earlier.
Now go back and read the news stories before and five days after The Benghazi murders. Tell us what you see as the lead? It rhymes with bit as someone fell for a political trap.
But who was really trapped? And knowing the upcoming, Foreign Policy debate would be a battle ground, when the MB played the Ax and used a video to set up a killing of a vital US player, Ambassador Stevens, now you can start to see why Susan Rice was sacrificed.
Keep pulling on this thread because it goes to the President and his ravenous desire for power. Unravel the bastard!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा