Benghazi

[3rdnlng]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh-obama-not-particularly-concerned-whether-susan-rice-misled-american-people_664134.html

 

 

 

"In response to a question from reporter Major Garrett on whether the Obama administration's mishandling of Benghazi raises "core questions of basic competency," press secretary Jay Carney revealed that Barack Obama "is not particularly concerned" about whether Susan Rice misled the American people."

 

I wonder if that kind of response sent a tingle up Chris Mathews leg?

[3rdnlng]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/23/house-gop-administration-blew-benghazi-response/

 

 

House Republicans have concluded that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was responsible for cutting security at the consulate in Benghazi ahead of last year’s attack there, and that the administration lied about why it downplayed terrorism as the cause of the assault.

 

A new report — the result of months of investigation by five different House committees — says there was plenty of intelligence that presaged the attack, but the State Department and President Obama failed to heed the warnings or give the Defense Department the authority to respond to such an attack.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SPECIAL COVERAGE: Benghazi Attack Under Microscope

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The report exonerates the Pentagon itself, saying the military did what it could to respond once the attack began, but “was hindered on account of U.S. military forces not being properly postured” beforehand.

 

In the most damning finding, House Republicans said Mr. Obama and his team lied about the attacks afterward, first by blaming mob violence spawned by an anti-Muslim video, and then wrongly saying it had misled the public because it was trying to protect an FBI investigation.

 

“This progress report reveals a fundamental lack of understanding at the highest levels of the State Department as to the dangers presented in Benghazi, Libya, as well as a concerted attempt to insulate the Department of State from blame following the terrorist attacks,” the GOP investigation concluded in its 46-page report.

 

The Obama administration has acknowledged providing an inaccurate explanation for the attacks early on — even though officials at the Defense Department said they knew it was a terrorist assault from the beginning.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/23/house-gop-administration-blew-benghazi-response/#ixzz2RKsaO1uz

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/23/house-gop-administration-blew-benghazi-response/#ixzz2RKsBdkeM

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

[Keukasmallies]

Oh golly, an implication that POTUS lied? Whatever will we do, whatever will we do.... Who will lead us...?

[3rdnlng]

Oh golly, an implication that POTUS lied? Whatever will we do, whatever will we do.... Who will lead us...?

 

After that horrendous explosion at the WH today it was looking like Joe Biden.

[DC Tom]

Oh golly, an implication that POTUS lied? Whatever will we do, whatever will we do.... Who will lead us...?

 

He didn't lie. We inferred.

[IDBillzFan]

He didn't lie. We inferred.

 

Barack Obama's leadership skills in a nutshell: It's not that he's wrong or lying. It's that we're just not hearing him correctly.

Edited April 24, 2013 by LABillzFan

[B-Man]

He didn't lie. We inferred.

 

Tom, I understand perfectly what you are saying. All administrations spin mightily to avoid blame. But this particular instance, I find it very offensive, where the first ambassador in decades is killed and the Obama administration KNOWINGLY puts out a false story over and over.

 

 

There is little "inference" in Mr. Obama's speech to the U.N. two full weeks after the 9 - 11 - 2013 attack (hey what a coincidence) when the government KNEW it was a terrorist attack.

 

 

 

"

"In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well"

 

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws: our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech. Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. Moreover, as President of our country, and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so. Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views – even views that we disagree with." (Note: he had to make it about him)

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/25/full-text-of-obamas-remarks-to-united-nations/

[IDBillzFan]

Tom, I understand perfectly what you are saying. All administrations spin mightily to avoid blame. But this particular instance, I find it very offensive, where the first ambassador in decades is killed and the Obama administration KNOWINGLY puts out a false story over and over.

 

And the filmmaker remains in prison.

[B-Man]

I can't believe that this hasn't been posted;

 

 

 

 

House Republicans have concluded that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was responsible for cutting security at the consulate in Benghazi ahead of last year's attack there, and that the administration lied about why it downplayed terrorism as the cause of the assault.

 

[Koko78]

I can't believe that this hasn't been posted;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This tragedy was the GOP's fault, as Mrs. Clinton was forced to make a pre-sequestration budget cut, as the sequester is their fault.

 

 

Seriously though, this was whole episode was shameful and the response did nothing other than to show Obama's administration is solely interested in playing political games, not leading this nation or protecting its citizens.

[B-Man]

Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says

At least four career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have retained lawyers or are in the process of doing so, as they prepare to provide sensitive information about the Benghazi attacks to Congress, Fox News has learned.

 

Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and Republican counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, is now representing one of the State Department employees. She told Fox News her client and some of the others, who consider themselves whistle-blowers, have been threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials.

 

“I’m not talking generally, I’m talking specifically about Benghazi – that people have been threatened,” Toensing said in an interview Monday. “And not just the State Department. People have been threatened at the CIA.”

 

 

Dr. Charles Krauthammer: Administration is Stonewalling on Benghazi, But MSM Won’t Say So.

 

 

 

 

 

It's kind of odd that the 'media' can find someone that says Mitt Romney bullied him 40 years prior, but they can't seem to find one survivor of the Benghazi attacks.

 

 

 

.

 

 

.

Edited May 3, 2013 by B-Man

[B-Man]

Attack of the movie critics begins to unravel...........................as others move in to take Fox's credit.

 

 

 

 

Bombshell CNN Investigation: 3 Al Qaeda Operatives Took Part In Attack On Benghazi Consulate

 

According to an investigation by CNN reporters, three Yemeni members of Al Qaeda took part on the coordinated attack on an American consulate and a safe house in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. “One senior U.S. law enforcement official told CNN that “three or four members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula,” or AQAP, took part in the attack,” CNN reports

 

http://www.mediaite.com/online/bombshell-cnn-investigation-3-al-qaeda-operatives-took-part-in-attack-on-benghazi-consulate/

 

 

.

[IDBillzFan]

Outstanding read from Stephen Hayes at Weekly Standard. This is a damning breakdown of the original Benghazi talking points versus the unbelievable lies the WH ultimately released. When you see how they edited the talking points, you almost want to puke. How do you go from the initial and original talking points announcing it was an Al Quaeda terrorist attack to "it was a protest over a YouTube video?"

 

I hope the whistleblowers blow it all up next week.

 

http://www.weeklysta...nts_720543.html

Edited May 3, 2013 by LABillzFan

[3rdnlng]

Nothing like hiring the fox to guard the chicken coop:

 

 

The Libyan militia group that the State Department hired to defend its embattled diplomatic mission in Benghazi had clear al-Qaida sympathies, and had prominently displayed the al-Qaida flag on a Facebook page some months before the deadly attack.

 

That organization, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, was paid by the U.S. government to provide security at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. But there is no indication the Martyrs Brigade fulfilled its commitment to defend the mission on Sept. 11, when it came under attack.

 

The assault claimed the lives of four Americans: Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Stevens was the first U.S. ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979.

 

Latest: Do You Support Background Checks on Gun Buyers? Vote in Urgent Poll

 

Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed for the deadly attack on the mission. The State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission.

 

 

 

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/benghazi-consulate-protected-alqaida/2013/05/02/id/502565?promo_code=11550-1&utm_source=11550Breitbart&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1#ixzz2SGxxQe8W

Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed?

Edited May 3, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[Bigfatbillsfan]

If this was the Bush administration, you could bet the OP would have started about 175 threads related to this issue. Personally I don't give a **** either way but it is entertaining to see how blindly partisan some are.

 

Regardless of who's administration this happened under it needs to be looked at. Just because I tend to leans more toward the direction that Obama is taking the nation doesn't mean he, or his administration can do no wrong. He !@#$ed up, four people died as a result, he needs to be called out.

 

I can't believe that this hasn't been posted;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow, she sounds just like Yoda. And yes Hilary, it does make a difference. You know what really transpired, you lied about it to the American people. The least you owe us is admission you screwed up.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Unfortunately more american citizens care more about american idol than our president and administration blatantly lying to us. We get the government we deserve.

 

Obama is a scumbag who only cares about himself. He has his own ambitions ahead of integrity and doing the right thing for the country. His administration is right behind him.

[B-Man]

The following article is really just fanciful thinking, in fact I would prefer they don't turn this incompetent administrator into a "martyr". He doing a fine job of ruining himself...........no help is needed.

 

 

Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

 

On October 27^th, 2012, only days before the presidential election, I wrote:

If Barack Obama is reelected, will he face impeachment over Benghazi — a yet more unpleasant and far more wrenching result than to lose an election? It could happen — and in my estimation should happen — the way revelations are playing out over the bloody terror attack that took four American lives and has led to weeks of prevarication and obfuscation.

 

The scandal thus far has at least tarnished and quite possibly implicated everyone from the CIA director, to the secretaries of State and Defense, to the UN ambassador and, of course, the president himself — with no end in sight, because Obama, normally loath to expose himself and even less so in an election season, refuses to answer questions on the subject.

It’s not the crime, but the cover-up, we learned in an earlier impeachment, only in this case the crime may be just as bad or worse.”

 

That post was a follow-up to my item from the previous week saying that Obama should resign over Benghazi, and it created a minor brouhaha. Between those two posts, a number of people accused me of being overheated. I even started to feel that way myself. (Hey, I’m a screenwriter. Dramatic license comes with the job description.)

 

No longer. Reading Stephen F. Hayes’ new article in The Weekly Standard — “The Benghazi Talking Points” — I am beginning to feel like Nostradamus. I’m not ready to make any predictions, but let’s put it this way…

 

Barack Obama is bloody lucky he’s a Democrat, because if he were a Republican, he’d be in deep trouble right now, close to the brink of extinction. Only his increasingly pathetic loyal media claque can save him. It will be interesting to see if they do so at the expense of their own reputations.

 

Of course the reputations of the State Department need to be considered as well, that same State Dept that, according to Hayes (and this is corroborated by emails he publishes), bowdlerized and censored all references to al-Qaeda involvement in the Benghazi events before they could reach the fragile American public in an election year, almost even as they were happening. This was before Susan Rice made her dog-and-pony performance on the Sunday shows, asserting it was all caused by a video nobody watched, and long before the oleaginous Candy Crowley famously covered up for Obama on Benghazi at the presidential foreign-policy debate.

Edited May 4, 2013 by B-Man

[Nanker]

Just posted something similar in another thread. But I have to say, it's nearly my worst nightmare to have BO impeached - not because he hasn't done an incredible job of !@#$ing things up, but because Joe-the-brain Biden would become President. The world is not ready for that to happen.

[DC Tom]

Just posted something similar in another thread. But I have to say, it's nearly my worst nightmare to have BO impeached - not because he hasn't done an incredible job of !@#$ing things up, but because Joe-the-brain Biden would become President. The world is not ready for that to happen.

 

Obama hasn't done anything to be impeached for.

 

You can't just impeach a president because you don't agree with him.

[Koko78]

Obama hasn't done anything to be impeached for.

 

You can't just impeach a president because you don't agree with him.

 

That didn't really stop the House from impeaching Andrew Johnson or Bill Clinton.