The host Chris Wallace turned to Harman for discussion of the new efforts to investigate what happened 2 years ago in Benghazi, and she quickly got to the declaration "This is a circus" and the suggestion that the idea is "to get Hillary Clinton or some way to embarrass her during the election season."
There's some talk about the Rhodes memo (with Harman saying that maybe it only came out when it did because there was "some claim of executive privilege") and assertions that there was "legitimate confusion" when Susan Rice received her preparation to go on all the Sunday shows and to attribute the Benghazi attack to spontaneous protests over the "Innocence of Muslims" video. It was "an intelligence failure." And on saying that phrase "intelligence failure," and just before saying "it's time to move on and focus on the real problems," she wedges this in:
And, by the way, this was an intelligence failure. But it wasn't a conspiracy. And there aren't aliens in Area 51 and Vince Foster wasn't murdered.And there aren't aliens in Area 51 and Vince Foster wasn't murdered. That was too revealing! I suspect... Look, I realize I can be accused of "conspiracy" thinking to suspect something and to speak as if I know what they're saying behind our back... but here's the kind of thing Harman's Area-51-Vince-Foster remark made me feel they are saying in private:
We need people to hear the word "Benghazi" as a buzzword of nuts. Somebody says "Benghazi" and the reflex reaction is "Oh, no, here we go again with the conspiracy theories." It should be like when somebody brings up Area 51 or Vince Foster was murdered. A normal person is like "Ugh! Leave me alone." That's the way "Benghazi" should feel. Somebody says "Benghazi" and all anybody thinks is "conspiracy nutcase." Nobody who wants to be considered mainstream in this election should be able to say "Benghazi" anymore. Case closed, and you've built in the respect for Hillary saying "What difference at this point does it make?" Everybody decent — if we get this idea across — will react to Benghazi with a Hillary-esque exasperated "What difference does it make?" If it makes a difference to you, you're crazy. This is a circus. You're a clown. A scary clown. Boo! Aliens! Benghazi! Vince Foster!
Posts
103 comments:
Remember the "nuts and sluts" strategy?
Somewhere out there, there is the equivilent of the Blue Dress.
Her presentation was ramshackle as if her mind was jumping through all the points so other analysts can tease out the reactions/arguments opposing them.
But yes, the only people talking about Vince Foster are Dems in an attempt to pre-inoculate HRC.
Interestingly, they are not claiming politicization of Benghazi against Obama. They have shown their hand that they think it can hurt HRC's chances. Unfortunately, the GOP wouldn't do this to 'embarrass' HRC (in advance of) the 2016 because 1) The GOP doesn't do battleground prep with near the zeal and foresight of the Dems and 2) HRC has not the capacity to be shamed. For that, you must have morals.
Her conduct in the Benghazi affair proves she has none.
"an intelligence failure."
Bovine excrement...
The Intel was as good as Intel ever gets, before, during, and after.
The failure was the US Crisis Action Decision Process, from AFRICOM to State to the Oval Office.
The POTUS and the SEC State are directly responsible for that failure and the subsequent lack of follow-up to fix it or admit the mistakes...
Obama's lies put him in an unpleasant fork. Did he fail that night? or did he direct actions that night that were not implemented and thus failed to have somebody's ass in the morning...
NPR did a spot with Cokie Roberts this morning to discuss Benghazi. Truly amazing. They offered no background on what the Benghazi event was. Roberts said the latest controversy is that a new email has come to light with talking points for Susan Rice, which had not been produced before, "although thousands of documents had been produced already and this was just one more." No mention at all of *what the new email says*.
Instead, the hostess immediately jumped in and asked "Do Republicans really expect this issue to resonate, when really the next election is going to be all about the economy?" That's it, substantively.
Between the dems and their media toadies, everyone on the left is settling in on their narratives: 1. Dude, that was like two years ago. 2. Nothing to see here. 3. GOP is crazy, so shut up about it already.
Paint me unconvinced that Benghazi is a circus, and that no serious candidate should speak its name. John Bolton says Hillary! should be questioned for "hours and hours" about Benghazi. I respect Bolton's opinion, honesty and judgement much more than I do anyone in this administration. I think the thumbscrews should be taken to Hillary! on this subject, by Trey Gowdy.
I actually think Vince Foster might have been murdered, too...
it might not be a conspiracy. But it is a case of several people getting together, pushing the same story, people who've made a secret agreement...
Oh, wait
"Remember the "nuts and sluts" strategy?"
Yeah, and I also remember the "little bit nutty and a little bit slutty" strategy.
I think they've been rhyming "nut" and "slut" in the back rooms of all of the political parties for a long, long time, and occasionally some politico actually says it in public.
For obvious reasons, the Dems prefer everyone move on about Benghazi, IRS,NSA spying, etc. The real problem is, they have way to many bases to cover, sooner or later all these lies are going to catch up to them.
One of your commenters (maybe It was ARM), laid the "Benghazi is Vince Foster" line on us last week. It seems the meme is making the rounds in Dem circles.
Althouse said:
" Look, I realize I can be accused of "conspiracy" thinking to suspect something and to speak as if I know what they're saying behind our back... "
Guilty! Althouse has officially joining the right wing conspiracy nuts. Everyone knows that Democrats don't have talking points. They just all happen to say the same thing because they are all fact based truth seekers.
Compare all of this pooh poohing to the response to the "outing" of Valerie Plame because of her big mouth husband.
Considering people actually died in Benghzi, shouldn't there at minimum be a proportionate response?
In the earlier post Althouse wrote: "Notice the extremity of the NYT editors resistance to owning any criticism of this President"
Its no wonder. The NYT (among many others) has spent the last eight years helping to push the Democrat Party meme that virtually any criticism of Obama falls into a category of nutty, paranoid, racist, ignorant, extremist, wacko, etc.
Bengazi? Heck, you can't even bring up the Constitution any more, in opposition to an Obama position, without calling your own sanity into question.
Trey Gowdy is a bulldog. Just what is needed.
Harman is used to non sequiturs like this being received as reliable applause/laugh lines in friendly environments like Bill Maher's Real Time audience.
Here's the video, with Brit Hume.
The problem with this bovine excrement is that the issue will be explored systematically, and dispassionately, in new Congressional hearings, and Trey Gowdy will manage those hearings in a calm, rational, businesslike manner. The GOP will look like the party that simply wants to find the truth and communicate it to the country; the Democrats will look like mendacious crapweasels desperately trying to keep the facts from the people - which is exactly what their base wants.
Speaking of which...if the MSM wasn't part of the Democratic base (90%+ voting for Dems, as high as African Americans) this would be a huge story - certainly bigger and more substantive than Abu Ghraib (sp?), which was hyped to the moon in 2004 in an effort to bring Bush down.
When saw her yesterday I was reminded of the Tina Brown post.
I don't think it would work though. People get that something's going wrong.
Harman was considered one of the few serious Dems in this area. Which is to say that they probably trotted her out there for her supposed gravitas. And maybe that was the problem, that they were trying to use her to recite political points, which was never her strength. That is rather a task to give a talking head like Obama, UN Ambassador Rice, or Debbie Blabbermouth-Shultz.
An "intelligence failure" could be the greatest Freudian slip ever though.
Of course this is the strategy.
And it's working just fine for them.
When asked if he felt he was intentionally lied to, Charles Woods recalled his meeting with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at Andrews Air Force Base back in September of 2012.
“Hillary Clinton came up to me and I gave her a handshake and a hug, and when I shook her hand she said to me, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested.’ Even at that time, she was trying to place a spin on what happened,"
I do not think Benghazi was a "terror attack." Terror was not the object. It was a military raid for a specific purpose, and though carried out by an "al Qaeda affiliated organization," it was not necessarily instigated by al Qaeda.
(It is quite common for such like groups to hire out as mercenaries, or just plain robbery, to get funds for their own activities.)
I think there was a lot of confusion all right, and I suspect that on the military side some of it resulted from the regular military having been previously told that there was nothing for them to see in Benghazi, and to stay away from there.
I think the raid had to do with the "Arab Spring," the Sgt. Schultz war to "liberate" Libya, and factions in the US Gov't engaging in activities they were not supposed to be doing in countries that officially are our "trusted allies in the region."
This is about the only plausible explanation for the total stonewalling and curious behaviors of this administration since.
Was it not HRC who made the famous point about Obama's unpreparedness for the inevitable "3 am call," in her bid to win the 2008 nomination?
Obama's myrmidons savaged her with "Are you implying that a black man can't deal with crisis?" or some such racially tinged solipsism. Nevertheless, her point was well-taken, as Obama's dealings with unfortunate events around the world, nevermind Benghazi, have amply demonstrated.
Hillary's mistake was to bargain for the SoS slot, i.e. "Give me what I want or Bill won't campaign for you," which put her squarely in the 3 am call scenario she (or more likely her strategists) foresaw, which in turn made her reputation hostage to Obama's response. If Clinton is really fit for the presidency, then she should have foreseen this, should she have not?
I'll wager that when HRC looks back over her totally lame career at State, she regrets not having sought a governorship of a suitably supine red state instead of getting involved with this Administration.
The Wicked Witch of the West Wing is well and truly hoist with her own petard. She's melting, melting... oh, what a world...
The talking points are all out there now. Key words: circus, must make sure we focus on how to stop this from happening again, Vince Foster, etc.
This strategy works because the public is profoundly gullible and stupid. See V, friend of racist.
Jane Harman is just another aging liberal stuck in the 1960's.
I'm stunned the youth vote keeps going to these geezers.
Of course it's a conspiracy. And I understand why they want to pretend that "conspiracy" means something other than what it does mean, want people to think that conspiracies exist only in the feverish imaginations of mentally unstable people.
Nevertheless, I hope Mr. Wallace responded to the claim "Vince Foster wasn't murdered" with, "maybe not, but Chris Stevens was."
What difference did it make? Well, it was election fraud.
Only a crazy person would believe the President of the US would be involved in a third rate burglary.
Finally, a select committee is reluctantly being formed by Boehner. To be fair I don't believe Boehner had any choice to delay because the Dems have done a very good job of hiding the "smoking guns" of Benghazi. A committee of this type can only be formed if there is something solid to go on.
The Dems may elect to boycott the committee. I believe that would be unwise of the Democrats but since the Democrats have done many ill-considered things in regard to Benghazi I believe they might actually follow through with the boycott. Boycotting allows them to claim the committee is a strictly partisan affair.
But a boycott, while advantageous in some ways to the Dems, would give the GOP some distinct advantages:
The GOP would be privy to info to which the Dems would have no access. The GOP would be able to leak or publicly disclose these bombshells in a manner and time of its choosing.
Issa should NOT be on this committee. He's already caused a lot of harm with his ineptitude and grandstanding.
Below is another Sunday AM discussion with the above-mentioned talking points fully in play.
http://tinyurl.com/mvf2syv
Vince Foster may not have been murdered, but Ambassador Stevens certainly was. Do Dems really want to bring up the word "murdered?"
Well over the weekend we learned that Obama was not reading "My Pet Goat" while the embassy was under attack, he was in debate prep, which was, in the larger scheme of things, more important than the life of an ambassador. Eventually America will understand that.
Our Ambassador and 3 other Americans were killed by Islamic terrorists. Clinton and Obama apologized to the Muslims. Neither one is fit for public office, but that's what you get when you elect people who aren't qualified to even run a car wash.
Hillary made her own bed, and she should lie in it -- instead of lying about it.
Not only is it risky that she may have made the strategy too obvious, but also I think the strategy itself could backfire. No matter what one's opinion of the Clintons, I can't see how mentioning all of their baggage can help.
I don't think you have to be some wacko "truther" to think Vince Foster's suicide is suspicious. Who shoots themselves on a park bench? It's like it was out of an Oliver Stone movie or something. Now maybe that's how Foster wanted to play it---he was hoping to arouse suspicion--and if that's the case, it worked.
Circa 1973 and thereafter: "The coverup is worse than the crime."
Circa 2013: "What coverup? Well, everybody covers things up. This is just a circus."
IMHO the "intelligence failure" was the failure of anybody in the Obama White House or the Clinton State Department to actually possess any intelligence in the walk and chew gum sense of the word. There is a certain low cunning exhibited regularly, but common sense and thinking before doing? Not so much.
Jane Harman, the longtime Congress critter, is now president of the non-profit Woodrow Wilson Foundation which paid her $421,165 in 2011. She succeeded her fellow Congress critter, Lee Hamilton.
Harman, btw, is probably worth about $250 Million.
Insinuating that one's political opponent is a cross-dresser is the 'sluts with nuts' strategy.
We won't even mention Ron Brown.
Well now you see the path, slowly distance from Obama (see NYTs post), point out its just Fox News, make out like its just a bunch of nuts and stupid people, War on Women, free stuff.....HRC 2016. I suspect RBG will retire soon as icing on the cake.
During the Clinton scandals, the American public was schooled on how lawyers parse language to create plausible deniability..."depends on what the meaning of is, is".
Since Obama became president, the American public has been schooled on how the leftstream media is repeating the parsed language as fact.
In between the parsing lawyer administrations, we had a president who was generally a straight talker and was roasted by the leftstream media.
Harmon was right, it is a circus...when a president's "toughest" interview is on a comedy show.
The ringleaders are in the White House and the clowns are the media.
Conspiracy theory about talking points to paint Benghazi truthers as conspiracy theorists. Hmmmm she may have a point....
This is a circus. You're a clown. A scary clown. Boo!
4 honorable men died
You did nothing
You put an insignificant man in prison to cover it up
You lie. Every time you lie
Notice that when Hume asks Harman where the idea that the attack devolved from a protest over the video first came from, she has no idea. After two years, she has no idea. Why doesn't that trouble her?
Isn't it revealing that when a Republican is involved in a scandal the press digs into the merits of the case, but when a Democrat is involved they talk about all of the political angles.
I don't really think they have the right lines. Why Vince Foster? Who even remembers Vince Foster? It's almost like they want to connect Benghazi with Hillary instead of with Obama.
Seems like they should instead be more relevant. Something like, "These are the same people who said the President wasn't born in the United States. Who say the President is a Muslim."
That would be dismissive and connect Benghazi with current nonsense.
But bringing up aliens? That's offensive. That's being dismissive of what happened in Benghazi. Something actually happened there. Four American's were brutally murdered.
It's going to be tough for the Democrats to turn this into a dismissive thought when such a thing is acknowledged to have actually happened.
The odd thing is, there is supposedly an investigation into what happened in Benghazi currently ongoing.
The administration cites it, but at the same time fights anyone *but* themselves having input.
But yes, the only people talking about Vince Foster are Dems in an attempt to pre-inoculate HRC
No, we're talking about how utterly bran-dead and embarrassing the GOP is on, well, just about everything. It's amazing anyone votes Republican any longer.
Show the bloody fingerprints on the wall every time this is talked about. I'm not around much anymore, but this is for you, Inga, you defended vociferously this administration. You with a daughter in the service.
You keep taking about shame, look in the mirror. When u think you & your ovaries are superior, look in the mirror again.
You r too old to be this naive. Poster female for why there's a supposed war on women, they can't think for themselves, no responsibility, etc. You're daft and need to be protected from whatever hormones u have left and the rest of us need to be protected from your daft hormonal thinking.
Nicely done, Ann. I think you captured it perfectly. My head doesn't work that way. Shouldn't it be alarming that yours does?
- Krumhorn
It's 3D chess - by claiming that investigating Benghazi is a just a political move against HRC, the WH is encouraging the GOP to blame HRC and prove she was at fault, and thus distract attention from BHO's role. This will benefit O's legacy and the 2016 candidate of his wing of the party.
garage: "No, we're talking about how utterly bran-dead and embarrassing the GOP is on, well, just about everything.
The GOP'ers were especially "bran-dead" (sic) when they said there was no possible way for obamacare to provide additional insurance for 30 Million people while increasing choice and allowing you to keep your doctors and plans all the while bending the cost curve down.
garage and his pals spent a few years telling republicans how brain dead you'd have to be not to believe those obama promises.
'nuff said.
The Republicans have their corresponding propaganda. They want the word "Benghazi" to work to make people's minds reflexively say: Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
Shorthand.
The video as motivation is pure projection of an ignorant press and an administration who knows better - as if the 2-10$ a day souls in Libya or Cairo that would attack (or riot, or "protest") have access to a smart-phone, an internet connected PC, a cyber-café that has enough bandwidth to do more than view the occasional dirty picture. And this includes the imams and mullahs. What better day to call for an attack (riot) than one remembering 9-11, especially the one after OBL is eliminated. They take us for fools - and we were they minute they were not laughed off the stage for this nonsense. It was an attack organized and orchestrated by some form of leadership - nothing spontaneous.
Wonder what our schools now teach about other countries - would the average teenager and young adult have a clue about how the not-first-world lives? Or even that the U.S. poor live almost as well as the European middle class (even better when it comes to entertainment, travel, air-conditioning, and especially outcomes after a health-care crisis be it disease or trauma).
I am quite willing to believe that Obama did not know much about Benghazi - before or after the attack - that he just heard there were some trouble in North Africa or somewhere, and said, "You guys take care of it. I've got a debate rehearsal and don't want to be disturbed," or words to that effect, but some others in the White House surely must have known and understood what was happening.
And Hillary! evidently knew and was involved, so if I were a reporter, I would want to check any changes in Libyan oil industry following the "liberation."
But yes, the only people talking about Vince Foster are Dems in an attempt to pre-inoculate HRC
No, we're talking about how utterly bran-dead and embarrassing the GOP is on, well, just about everything. It's amazing anyone votes Republican any longer.
Sorry, WHO is brain-dead, the press you say? And embarrassing like this dude, Tommy Vietor, who God forbid was in the Situation Room on the night an Ambassador and 3 others were killed?
The Democrats main problem is we citizens, even if not always the GOP representatives, ARE using our brains and also have eyes to see and ears to hear and memories longer than 2 years. Doesn't take a conspiracy theory to know when shit has been covered up and to watch lies being told clearly, serenely, and coldly from our highest leaders.
Benghazi was a mess, with failures. Take the Lessons Learned and move on.
The attack on the First Amendment was dispicable. Sure, the videographer was a sleeze, but going after him was even more sleazy. I figured the Department of State (or the Administration) initiated the police action against him. The comment from Bob Boyd just confirms it, where-in Mr Charles Woods says:
“Hillary Clinton came up to me and I gave her a handshake and a hug, and when I shook her hand she said to me, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested.’"
Intimidation of a US Citizen over First Amendment rights is the real problem here, and neither party is prepared to say it.
Is it a new Wilsonian era?
Regards — Cliff
They want the word "Benghazi" to work to make people's minds reflexively say: Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
Got to keep 'em outraged about something until November.
But is the GOP shorthand not accurate?
An ambassador goes to a place known to be highly dangerous, on the day most likely for an attack to be orchestrated.
He had previously asked for more security and had been turned down, other facilities had already been targeted and other agencies had already pulled out of the area because the risks had become too high.
That this occurred, that Stevens was there with a target on his back that day, is either a sign of incompetence or coverup (the latter, if there was some mission that necessitated his presence there that day, which has not been explained because it is too sensitive.)
Some are questioning the Party narrative.
Are you?
Well intentioned people don't do it.
Rational people have no patience for it.
Smart people see the damage it does.
Isn't it time to put a stop to it?
They want the word "Benghazi" to work to make people's minds reflexively say: Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
Thank God Democrats never did that by adding "gate" to every Republican scandal since 1974.
Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
If people reflexively associate scandals, lies, cover-ups, and incompetence with Obama and his administration it won't be because the Republicans are harping on it. Obama has done that job for entirely for himself.
Jane Harman wants back into the tent, but I don't think even this valiantly attempting to defend the indefensible is going to get her an invitation. Passes are issued for personal loyalty, not policy.
The Republicans have their corresponding propaganda. They want the word "Benghazi" to work to make people's minds reflexively say: Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
That's odd. I had rather thought that was an accurate description. Or is the correct response, what's the point?
- Krumhorn
I generally agree with this post. Harman was repeating what emerged over the weekend as the official Dem chorus on Benghazi.
They (Dem leadership) probably decided it's an easier sell to just label the GOP as goofy, as opposed to picking apart and explaining the details of the GOPs routine mendaciousness. "Republicans are nuts" is an easy-to-understand proposition that rings true with about three-quarters of the population. It's especially apt in the case of Benghazi!, where not even Darrell "The Torch" Issa seems able to articulate whatever it is of which the GOP is suspicious.
As I sit here and think about it for a few minutes, it's probably a pretty good strategy.
The Government thinks you are stupid enough to believe that the incident in Libya occurred because of a video. They believe you are stupid enough to believe that a day or so after it because clear that the men at the "protest" were carrying automatic weapons and assault instruments that took two people to operate. They believe you are stupid enough to believe that "protesters" have these devices at hand. They believe you are stupid enough to believe, days later, that Susan Rice is genuinely telling the truth. They believe you are stupid.
And they are right. It worked and it is going to stay worked.
Witness V the concubine of the racist, Witness Garage Mahal.
"Notice that when Hume asks Harman where the idea that the attack devolved from a protest over the video first came from, she has no idea. After two years, she has no idea. Why doesn't that trouble her? "
Why doesn't it trouble Hume that no reporter has followed this lead?
Doesn't seem like it would be that tough. Start anywhere. Start with a fellow reporter, "When was the first time you remember hearing it blamed on a video?"
"Uhhhh, Susan Rice."
Next, go to Susan Rice, "Who told you it was a video?"
Keep following the trail until you see where the buck stops.
put an insignificant man in prison to cover it up
This right here, is the problem.
Intelligence failure? Administrations of both parties have those.
Lack of worthwhile response?
That happens.
But jailing someone to further a story that you know (and has now been demonstrated that you knew)isn't true shows what the Left in this country has become. It brings to mind the show trials in Soviet Russia in the '30s.
That's pretty mild. When I think if Benghazi (and I see Google spell check, which used to know Benghazi, no longer does...hmmm), I think:
Torture! Murder! Atrocity! Treason! Aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war! With witnesses!
Maybe they could make Chelsea Clinton the ambassador to Libya.
Karachi!!!!
...because demanding answers for Karachi just doesn't have the same ring...
Ann Althouse said...
The Republicans have their corresponding propaganda. They want the word "Benghazi" to work to make people's minds reflexively say: Scandal! Lies! Coverup! Incompetence!
Shorthand.
5/5/14, 11:10 AM
It isn't propaganda if its true. The Republicans should reply her 3am ad along with a the bloody handprint with the caption 'she got the call and rolled over back to sleep'.
By the way its not only incompetence but the failure to even try a rescue while there was a chance is criminal negligence. What was the ambassador doing there? Why was there a CIA annex there? Were they running guns to Syria? Other countries pulled their people out long before as they considered Benghazi too dangerous so why were our people there without adequate protection? And the BS with the filmmaker? Indeed lies, coverups, scandals at the minimum.
The tragic yet minor Benghazi snafu is a diversion by the right to make people forget that the Neocon right and their enablers at Fox News were responsible for horrific mass slaughter costings trillions and trillions with nothing to show for it in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Republicans should reply her 3am ad along with a the bloody handprint with the caption 'she got the call and rolled over back to sleep'.
Why not? Completely made up shit is what conservatives traffic in almost exclusively these days. Delusional Conspiracy Cult.
The "Benghazi is a buzzword for conspiracy nuts" thing might work better if practically every conspiracy theory re big government hadn't come true in the last five years.
Howard: "The tragic yet minor Benghazi snafu is a diversion by the right to make people forget that the Neocon right and their enablers at Fox News were responsible for horrific mass slaughter costings trillions and trillions with nothing to show for it in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Hmmmm.
Note to self: Hillary Clinton is a neocon rightist.
Just because these questions still trouble me -- and it troubles me more that no one seems to be asking them -- we talk about the 4 dead men, but who points out that but for 2 acts of open disobedience the death toll would have been 39 and we might never have known about it? There were 8 or 9 at the consulate rescued (except for Smith and the Ambassador) by the 2 ex-Seals who were disobeying orders not to intervene. There were 34 (roughly) at the CIA post who were saved (except for the ex-Seals) by the disobedience of the Embassy official who dragged in the Libyan Army, also disobeying instructions. If they had not acted both of those posts would have been overrun and obliterated. The administration would have had to admit that the Ambassador died in a "demonstration", too-bad-so-sad-let's-move-on, but who wants to bet anything we would have heard about 37 dead at the CIA listening post? And, by the way, WHERE ARE THOSE PEOPLE? What has happened to all the survivors? Their families? Who has kept them absolutely quiet for two years, and how? (We all know why, so I didn't even bother with that one.) Why, when people talk about the consequences of military inaction that night, does no one EVER mention that it could have been 40+ coffins coming back, not just 4 -- or better yet, a whole new hostage crisis for the Obama Age. What was going through these peoples' minds?
"Compare all of this pooh poohing to the response to the "outing" of Valerie Plame because of her big mouth husband."
Exactly. Thanks. I am going to use that.
Strelnikov said...
The "Benghazi is a buzzword for conspiracy nuts" thing might work better if practically every conspiracy theory re big government hadn't come true in the last five years.
5/5/14, 1:17 PM
Thread winner
Strelnikov said...
The "Benghazi is a buzzword for conspiracy nuts" thing might work better if practically every conspiracy theory re big government hadn't come true in the last five years.
5/5/14, 1:17 PM
Thread winner!
Howard typed:"The tragic yet minor Benghazi snafu is a diversion by the right to make people forget that the Neocon right and their enablers at Fox News were responsible for horrific mass slaughter costings trillions and trillions with nothing to show for it in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Yes, Howard, the whole world was up in arms about this until the "Neocon right" changed the subject. But, unlike Benghazi, the whole world was tricked into believing that the dumbest motherfucker ever to draw breath tricked them all into believing there were WMD in Iraq. Yep. Including you. GWB, the GWB of Bush Lied People Died, the dumbest motherfucker ever tricked the government's of the West into war. Because Halliburton.
The anti-aircraft fire is always greatest when you are over the target.
Vince Foster wasn't murdered but his hard drive on his computer was after he was found dead.
I think Foster's death and the democrats and their shills in the media talking points behind the motivation of Foster's suicide was, is what was really murdered. I think Foster began to understand just how extraordinarily corrupt and how thuggish Bill and Hillary were and were willing to be. That it wasn't just unethical behavior that had limits.
Megaera @1:42,
Thank you for that post. One of many problems with this event is that the number of fuckups is so large that it is hard for everyone to pick just one to hammer. But in the absence of one message, the issue is diluted. So we have the irony that a massive scandal can be counteracted by a drumbeat that it is a nothingburger.
Yes, I believe that those on the ground who disobeyed orders did the administration a favor that they did not deserve. Nonetheless, I have no doubt that a worst case outcome would still somehow be spun in the same way as this one.
BTW, other than movie guy, how's that search for the murderers coming along?
It has just now hit me why the mainstream treatment of Benghazi bothers me so much. The photos of American soldiers fighting on the grounds of the American Embassy in Saigon and an ARVN officer executing a viet cong on the street during the Tet offensive brought down the Johnson administration. Right or wrong, it brought into question administration assurances that we were winning. Exactly the same meme that was being sold in election year 2012.
IIRC, no high level embassy personnel were killed in 1968. 2012? Compare and contrast the press' behaviour.
eric said...Something actually happened there. Four American's were brutally murdered. It's going to be tough for the Democrats to turn this into a dismissive thought when such a thing is acknowledged to have actually happened.
I agree. But it's awfully hard not feel defeatist, since the Democrats have been able to convince the electorate that Obama and the Democrats are, if not perfect, at least not Republican-evil/brain-dead.
But in this case, the Republicans really should be able to get across just why Benghazi matters because it involves two things very easy to grasp: Americans were sent into a situation without adequate security and then when attacked were left to fend for themselves.
Very basic gut-level stuff. The Democratic strategists know this. Do the Republicans?
Ann, the photo of you in the right side bar reminds me of Gary Busey in The Firm and Lethal Weapon.
"No, we're talking about how utterly bran-dead and embarrassing the GOP is on, well, just about everything. It's amazing anyone votes Republican any longer."
Yes and no one you knew, or would have known if you had been weaned, voted for Nixon. The bad news is bubbles pop. When they do, sometimes it hurts.
"But jailing someone to further a story that you know (and has now been demonstrated that you knew)isn't true shows what the Left in this country has become. It brings to mind the show trials in Soviet Russia in the '30s."
How about the Pakistani doctor who told us where Obama was (as if Obama didn't know)? He is still in prison last I heard and that is a Pakistan prison.
Quaestor said...
Obama's myrmidons savaged her...
I saw what you did there.
The hip, new ways Democrats yell "Shut Up!" are:
Obama's critics are "racists!"
Hillary's are called "rapists!"
Birches said:
I don't think you have to be some wacko "truther" to think Vince Foster's suicide is suspicious. Who shoots themselves on a park bench?
And who assigns the investigation to the National Park police? And who rifles through the dead man's personal papers and trash before they let the authorities in?
Well, that certainly explains this:
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/3/5675362/benghazi-sunstein
Though I suppose claiming that this article was coordinated is itself, conspiracy-monging.
RecChief said...
But jailing someone to further a story that you know (and has now been demonstrated that you knew)isn't true shows what the Left in this country has become.
To me that is the most telling trait of our current leaders.
As for Hillary... firing, on phony charges, that poor slob back in the travel office days of the last century now makes perfect sense. A woman ahead of her time.
You want conspiracy? I'll give you conspiracy. I first heard this in the morning shortly after the attack from a couple of guys with no agenda.
The reason Obiie went on with his debate prep was because the whole kidnapping was a big setup. Obie knew about it beforehand and approved of the plan.
The ambassador was supposed to be kidnapped by "terrorists" hired by the US. He would be held hostage so that Obie could look presidential. No golf until the ambassador is released. Pics of Obie conferring with generals. Obie biting his lip.
"American held hostage!" People tying yellow ribbons around trees and so on.
Then, 4-5 days before the election, The SEALs or Delta Force storm the secret compound, kill 10-15 terrorists (whose bodies we would never see)and Obie would get a hero's turnout in the election.
That's why the military was told to stand down.
Only we hired the wrong guys or someone got to them with more money or someone fucked up somehow.
I suspect that it will come out eventually. Someone mentioned the equivalent of the blue dress. In this case I think it will be an email outlining the plot.
Or maybe it was just plain incompetence on the part of the WH. We should never discount that possibility.
John Henry
It is the behavior of the various gov't officials and agencies since, not to mention the lines given the MSM to follow, that puts one in mind of Ronald Reagan's famous quip: "With all that horse manure, there just have to be a pony in there somewhere!"
Instead of "Benghazi!", maybe we can go with "the September 11th assassination of the American ambassador to Libya and the September 11th sacking of the American consulate."
The parallels between Vince Foster and Benghazi are that both are, or were, metaphorical buckets into which the wingers poured their most fervent hopes to stop Hillary. Hopes aren't reality. Hillary didn't start any stupid wars and bankrupt the nation so criticisms have moved onto a more fantastical plane. Don't expect the average US citizen to follow you there.
Benghazi and the Democrats
1. They left them to die.
2. They put an innocent man in jail.
3. They don't care about the deaths or the false imprisonment.
Death and false imprisonment - since when are these just little trivial glitches? Since Obama.
Since Obama, the government is "they", not "us"
And. They. Do. Not. Care.
The only thing dumber than a Democrat is two or more of them working together in a conspiracy to characterize other's actions as a conspiracy.
"According to the Lebanese news organization Tayyar.org, citing AFP news sources, U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, who was killed by gunmen that stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Tuesday, was reportedly raped before being murdered."
Anyone know if this claim, which at one time circulated fairly widely on the Web, was the least bit true? I've not seen any mention of it in the ongoing dustup over Benghazi, but if it were true, you can be sure that Obama and HRC would be toast.
How about the Pakistani doctor who told us where Obama was (as if Obama didn't know)? He is still in prison last I heard and that is a Pakistan prison.
That's Pakistan, not America. But then, America isn't America anymore either.
Alternaterealityhouse...
Why, Iapetus? What difference, at this point, does it make?
Post a Comment