Benghazi

[Koko78]

Hillary will be fine. No way Obama lets her take the fall.

 

(Tried that with a straight face. Can't do it.)

 

Of course he won't. Any appearance to the contrary is simply your lack of understanding of his 'nuance' when he went off-script.

[B-Man]

Clinton’s Republican Guard

 

by Andrew McCarthy

 

With each new revelation, what has always been obvious becomes more pronounced: the State Department’s self-proclaimed final word on the Benghazi Massacre, the risibly named “Accountability Review Board” investigation, is a fraud. Yet, like the rest of the Obama administration’s obstructive wagon-circling, the ARB’s report continues serving its intended purpose: to thwart efforts to hold administration officials accountable. Even on Fox News, which has been admirably dogged covering a scandal the Obamedia has done its best to bury, the refrain is heard: How could the ARB report be a whitewash when its investigation was run by such Washington eminences as Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Michael Mullen?

 

The answer is simple: Pickering and Mullen were not chosen by accident; then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tapped them because, to insulate herself, she needed a pair of Beltway careerists held in high esteem by the progressive-friendly Republican establishment. As night follows day, Pickering and Mullen produced exactly the shoddy, politicized report that was expected of them – bleaching away the malfeasance of Clinton, a central figure in the scandal whom they did not even bother to interview.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, do not forget how this terrorist attack was first covered in the media ....... the severity of the attack was downplayed during their initial reports, they chose instead to paint it as a overreaction by Washington Republicans and Mitt Romney in particular.

 

 

.

Edited May 8, 2013 by B-Man

[IDBillzFan]

Bengazi will be old news by 2016 and the MSM will be off on whatever tangent attracts the attention of the low information voters

 

Maybe, but today the #2 in Benghazi under Christopher Stevens is going to explain how (1) everyone knew it was a terrorist attack from the beginning and not a spontaneous demonstration against a Youtube video seen by a dozen people, and (2) in pure contrast to what the administration stated, a team being sent to help those at the embassy was shut down.

 

The butchering of the timeline is damning, especially when you consider how long after the fact the administration continued the Youtube story, including during the funerals and an address to the UN.

 

In our skeptical political world, this, too, will come to pass, but when the dust clears, the WH is going to look every bit the amateur they are, and Clinton cackling "What difference at this point, does it make?" will be autotuned with "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" before you know it.

[IDBillzFan]

Greg Hicks testimony is riveting.

[PastaJoe]

So this is the opening salvo for the 2016 election. Blame Hillary and see what sticks. Don't forget that she killed Vince Foster.

 

I'll bet some of you still believe Iraq had WMD and was an imminent threat. You'll believe whatever supports your preconcieved conclusions.

[meazza]

So this is the opening salvo for the 2016 election. Blame Hillary and see what sticks. Don't forget that she killed Vince Foster.

 

I'll bet some of you still believe Iraq had WMD and was an imminent threat. You'll believe whatever supports your preconcieved conclusions.

 

How ironic...

[GG]

So this is the opening salvo for the 2016 election. Blame Hillary and see what sticks. Don't forget that she killed Vince Foster.

 

I'll bet some of you still believe Iraq had WMD and was an imminent threat. You'll believe whatever supports your preconcieved conclusions.

 

Wow, is there some sort of Pavlovian bell that goes off that every time Hillary's name is mentioned you come out of the woodwork?

[meazza]

Wow, is there some sort of Pavlovian bell that goes off that every time Hillary's name is mentioned you come out of the woodwork?

 

You're just believing your preconceived notion that he's a Hillary supporter.

[B-Man]

Wow, is there some sort of Pavlovian bell that goes off that every time Hillary's name is mentioned you come out of the woodwork?

 

I don't know if thats the case, but if he thinks that anyone does anything but laugh at his sad attempt at using absurdity to try and change the subject at hand, he is truly lost..

 

 

 

 

Yeah its all just a "vast right-wing conspiracy" against Hillary.................................lol

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited May 8, 2013 by B-Man

[IDBillzFan]

So this is the opening salvo for the 2016 election. Blame Hillary and see what sticks. Don't forget that she killed Vince Foster.

 

Maybe you should listen to the testimony before you begin the same talking points that every other progressive is posting today. The testimony is pretty damning.

 

It's too bad that the number of people throwing themselves out there to save Hillary didn't made similar efforts to even TRY to save the people who died in Benghazi.

 

Watch the testimony.

[Magox]

I've largely stayed out of this discussion, but I've read up on it extensively reading and considering both sides of the argument. If you look at the data that has come out, and forget about all the talking points, but the true data that has been released, it's quite obvious that there was a deliberate attempt to downplay the terrorist attack of Benghazi, and not only downplay but purposely mislead the country right before the elections through the Susan Rice talking points. The W.H and State Department say it was altered by the intelligence community, yet there seems to be overwhelming evidence that it came from up above. If that is the case, which it appears to be, then it is indeed a cover up.

 

The W.H and their progressive followers have successfully been able to discredit Conservatives on this issue, by simply stating that they are trying to politicize the issue. All you have to do is read many of the mainstream outlets, and half of their Benghazi related stories have more to do with the Republicans who are crying wolf on the issue. Yesterday alone, in Politico, there were 3 separate stories about Republicans who are criticizing the State Department, but none about the Benghazi details itself. In other words, the story was about the accusers of wrongdoing, rather than the story itself of wrongdoing.

 

What the W.H and progressives are hoping is that they can muddy the waters enough, to where the facts get lost in their claims of Conservative politicization of Benghazi. Unfortunately, it has worked, and we'll see if this damning testimony will change the landscape.

[IDBillzFan]

What the W.H and progressives are hoping is that they can muddy the waters enough, to where the facts get lost in their claims of Conservative politicization of Benghazi. Unfortunately, it has worked, and we'll see if this damning testimony will change the landscape.

Have you been watching the testimonies today? Gotta hand it to Issa for having the right just use questions to direct the story without a bunch of individual grandstanding. Amazing contrast to a very disorganized left whose best argument today seems to be that the problem in Benghazi was funding cut short from sequester.

[3rdnlng]

One way to limit witnesses. Refuse to give their attorney a clearance similar to one she used to have.

 

 

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/08/fourth-benghazi-witness-gagged-by-red-tape/

 

 

 

 

"At least three officials will testify today at a House hearing about the scandal, and are expected to say top officials at the Department of State took actions to minimize political damage to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In the days after the attack, officials claimed the attack had resulted from a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim film. That story was quickly refuted, although the filmmaker was arrested on a probation violation and remains in prison.

 

Toensing’s client will not be able to testify at public or closed-door hearings because he or she has not been able to prepare classified testimony with the aid of a lawyer, Toensing told The Daily Caller.

 

Toensing, who previously held top-level security clearances while working as a Deputy Attorney General at the Justice Department’s anti-terrorism unit, has asked government officials to update her past clearances to let her work with her client. But the officials initially refused to provide her with the needed forms, she said."

 

 

 

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/08/fourth-benghazi-witness-gagged-by-red-tape/#ixzz2SjQ8IKtR

[B-Man]

I've largely stayed out of this discussion, but I've read up on it extensively reading and considering both sides of the argument. If you look at the data that has come out, and forget about all the talking points, but the true data that has been released, it's quite obvious that there was a deliberate attempt to downplay the terrorist attack of Benghazi, and not only downplay but purposely mislead the country right before the elections through the Susan Rice talking points. The W.H and State Department say it was altered by the intelligence community, yet there seems to be overwhelming evidence that it came from up above. If that is the case, which it appears to be, then it is indeed a cover up.

 

The W.H and their progressive followers have successfully been able to discredit Conservatives on this issue, by simply stating that they are trying to politicize the issue. All you have to do is read many of the mainstream outlets, and half of their Benghazi related stories have more to do with the Republicans who are crying wolf on the issue. Yesterday alone, in Politico, there were 3 separate stories about Republicans who are criticizing the State Department, but none about the Benghazi details itself. In other words, the story was about the accusers of wrongdoing, rather than the story itself of wrongdoing.

 

What the W.H and progressives are hoping is that they can muddy the waters enough, to where the facts get lost in their claims of Conservative politicization of Benghazi. Unfortunately, it has worked, and we'll see if this damning testimony will change the landscape.

 

Great post.....................

 

 

 

 

other "MEDIA" points regarding the story and the hearings;

 

Media Will Never Admit It, But Hearings Prove Obama Lied to Them

While he media focuses on "old news" and "what we already knew" to diminish the whistle-blowers' testimony, one fact coming out of this is undeniable one that the Obama Administration lied-lied-lied about a spontaneous protest gone bad for a full ten days after the attack.

 

 

Can Media Ignore State Department Pressuring Whistleblowers to Not Cooperate With Congress?

The same media that lost its mind over the nothingburger that was Plame-Gate now has a real scandal to deal with. Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton's chief of staff at State, told Hicks not to talk to Congress.

This is THE story out of these hearings. Look for the media to allow Democrats to muddy the waters.

 

 

 

 

Richard Grenell @RichardGrenell

 

 

media reporters should ask: is CNN's Benghazi hearing blackout because Hillary's StateDept deputy is married to CNN deputy BureauChief in DC

 

1:28 PM - 8 May 2013

 

 

NBC News, Politico Rebutting Libya Hearing In Real-Time

On Alex Wagner's MSNBC "Now," as video of the hearing plays on the left side of the screen, on the right side Wagner and her guests are dismissing and rebutting whistle-blower testimony as it happens. Panelists include Salon's Joan Walsh, NBC's Luke Russert, and Politico's Glenn Thrush.

 

 

.

Edited May 8, 2013 by B-Man

[/dev/null]

Have you been watching the testimonies today? Gotta hand it to Issa for having the right just use questions to direct the story without a bunch of individual grandstanding. Amazing contrast to a very disorganized left whose best argument today seems to be that the problem in Benghazi was funding cut short from sequester.

 

When one of the Democratic Congresscritters goes off on some tangent like sequester, racism, sexism, etc, Issa should channel his old school car alarm voice

 

WARNING! Step away from the microphone!

 

[IDBillzFan]

When one of the Democratic Congresscritters goes off on some tangent like sequester, racism, sexism, etc, Issa should channel his old school car alarm voice

 

WARNING! Step away from the microphone!

 

 

At one point, Issa turned to a congressman and said "Were you not here at the last testimony when the state department said it had nothing to do with funding?"

 

The congressman babbled a bit, and then over the course of the next two hours, two other congressman bring up funding.

 

And like B-man noted, there is absolutely no question in anyone's mind that the administration lied about what happened. At no point at any time was there ever anything to do with either a protest or a Youtube video, and even liberal talking heads are commenting "How in the hell did the Youtube video lead in the talking points?"

 

It's very embarrassing. The question is, will this get covered. A great comment I read today: "Maybe the media would cover this better if one of the whistleblowers announced he was gay."

[meazza]

At one point, Issa turned to a congressman and said "Were you not here at the last testimony when the state department said it had nothing to do with funding?"

 

The congressman babbled a bit, and then over the course of the next two hours, two other congressman bring up funding.

 

And like B-man noted, there is absolutely no question in anyone's mind that the administration lied about what happened. At no point at any time was there ever anything to do with either a protest or a Youtube video, and even liberal talking heads are commenting "How in the hell did the Youtube video lead in the talking points?"

 

It's very embarrassing. The question is, will this get covered. A great comment I read today: "Maybe the media would cover this better if one of the whistleblowers announced he was gay."

 

Don't worry, Jon Stewart will bring this up soon just like he keeps bringing up Bush and the Iraq war.

 

[Magox]

In the GOP’s most successful effort of the day to tie Hillary Clinton to the controversy, witness Gregory Hicks said he got an angry phone call from a top Clinton aide after a State Department lawyer was excluded from a briefing with a member of Congress.

Gregory Hicks said that he got a rare phone call from Cheryl Mills, a longtime Clinton lawyer who served as Hillary Clinton’s top counsel and chief of staff at the State Department, who was angry about the lawyer not being allowed to participate in a briefing with Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah).

Hicks said he was told the lawyer didn’t have the proper security clearance.

Hicks also said the State Department told him not to submit to a solo interview with the congressional delegation — the first time he had ever received such a command.

He also said he spoke with Clinton in the early morning hours after the attack.

Here’s the exchange on the phone call with Mills:

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio): ”(Mills) is as close as you can get to Secretary Clinton, is that accurate?”

Hicks: ”Yes, sir.”

Jordan: ”And tell me about that phone call you had with Cheryl Mills.”

Hicks: ”A phone call from that senior a person is, generally speaking, not considered to be good news.”

Jordan: ”And what did she have to say to you?”

Hicks: “She demanded a report on the visit … ”

Jordan: ”Was she upset by the fact that this lawyer was … ”

Hicks: ”She was upset.”

Jordan: ”… this babysitter, this spy, whatever you want to call him, was not allowed to be in that — first time that’s ever happened, in all the congressional delegations you’ve ever entertained — was not allowed to be in that classified briefing? Was she upset about that fact?”

Hicks: ”She was very upset.”

Jordan: ”So this goes right to the person next to Secretary Clinton. Is that accurate?”

Hicks: ”Yes, sir.”

Here’s more on Mills’s long and close relationship with Clinton, from The Post’s Karen Tumulty.

[Jauronimo]

Don't worry, Jon Stewart will bring this up soon just like he keeps bringing up Bush and the Iraq war.

 

Stewart already beat Benghazi into the ground. The death of the ambassador and other american citizens was not, in fact, optimal.

[Magox]

My guess is that there will be a few articles that pertain to Benghazi tomorrow, with a few follow up questions during the press briefings and that will be that regarding Benghazi from the traditional media outlets.