Obama has explaining to do on Benghazi

[Valin]

Real Clear Politics: Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) debate congressional oversight of the Sept. 11 attack on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

 

 

[Geee]

Did Clinton and Obama Believe Their Benghazi Baloney?

 

 

Michael Barone

 

 

What were Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton thinking? Why did they keep pitching the line that the 9/11/12 Benghazi attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans started as a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim video?

One possible explanation is confusion. There was such an attack on our embassy in Cairo earlier that day that fit that description.

When Hillary Clinton on Sept. 14 talked of a "mob" and "violent attacks" over the caskets of the Americans slain in Benghazi, she could have been referring to the attacks in Cairo. In that case, she would not exactly be lying, as many have charged.

But she would have been misleading people, quite possibly intentionally. We know that she assured one victim's father, Charles Wood, that "we're going to prosecute that person that made the video."

Not entirely successfully, by the way. "I knew she was lying," Woods said after the House committee hearing on Benghazi last week.

http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbarone/2013/05/13/did-clinton-and-obama-believe-their-benghazi-baloney-n1592591

[Geee]

CURL: Watch out for Petraeus in Benghazi scandal

 

By their second term “inside the bubble,” presidents have completely lost touch with reality: Aides and confidants conspire to keep the chief executive insulated from the real world — the bad news, the worse press coverage. They think it’s their job, and lounging on the Oval Office couches, they nod along with the president’s every musing.

But this presidency has taken OOCS to new heights. Mr. Obama has only a few trusted aides, and occasional leaks from the West Wing show a paranoid president suspicious of nearly everyone around him. Supremely confident, convinced by the fawning minions at his feet that he is untouchable, the president dismisses all controversy as partisan attacks by an overzealous opposition. A pliant press corps of stenographers follows in lockstep.

Not surprisingly, every president in the past 60 years has had a major scandal in Term 2: Dwight Eisenhower had the U-2 “incident”; Richard Nixon had Watergate; Ronald Reagan had Iran-Contra; Bill Clinton had Monica (literally); George W. Bush had Katrina (and let’s not forget those WMDs that never turned up); and now, this president has Benghazi.

Make no mistake: Benghazi is a major scandal. Benghazi is a scandal before, during and after the terrorist attack that left four Americas dead, including an ambassador.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/12/curl-watch-out-petraeus-benghazi-scandal/

[Valin]

As Benghazi Scandal Builds, Libya Falls Apart

Barry Rubin

5/13/13

 

A forgotten element in the Benghazi scandal is this one: If Obama had said it was a terrorist attack back in September 2012 he would have to have done something about it.

 

(Snip)

 

Ignoring the actual threat of revolutionary Islamist militias—and attributing problems to a video last September plus the botching of the investigation of the attack due to the cover-up also led to mishandling post-attack U.S. Libya policy.

 

Here are some of the current developments in Libya where, a recent article in the Egyptian newspaper, al-Ahram, explains, “militias at the command of various ideological camps and rival interest groups” increasingly dominate the country’s politics.attack, when an Egyptian-American provocateur, who is supposedly the real guilty party, is in prison already.

 

In other words, as a result of the policy failure and cover-up, Libya faces a much greater threat of a revolutionary Islamist takeover, anarchy, and even becoming an al-Qaida base. (Imagine, for comparison, the situation if the U.S. government had denied al-Qaida involvement in earlier terrorist attacks.)

Here are some of the current developments in Libya where, a recent article in the Egyptian newspaper, al-Ahram, explains, “militias at the command of various ideological camps and rival interest groups” increasingly dominate the country’s politics.

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

Hillary never called back

Hugh Hewitt

May 12, 2013

 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her senior staff conducted a conference call with Gregory Hicks, deputy chief of the U.S. mission in Libya, in the early morning hours of Sept. 12, 2012.

 

Hicks was overseeing a chaotic scene in Tripoli, where his staff was busy destroying classified material with axes and whatever else was at hand and as the few security people left in Tripoli were preparing to evacuate to a safer location at dawn. (Think the opening scenes of the movie “Argo.”) The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi had been stormed and the ambassador was missing.

 

In his testimony Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the inspiring and obviously fearless Hicks recounted that, at the end of the 2 a.m. call, Hillary concurred with his decision to evacuate, and the call ended.

 

An hour later, having received “the saddest phone call of his life,” Hicks then relayed to the State Department in Washington that Ambassador Christopher Stevens was dead.

 

Hillary never called back.

 

(Snip)

[Rheo]

The White House on Tuesday accused congressional Republicans of fabricating emails leaked to two different media organizations that suggested interest in scrubbing the Benghazi, Libya, talking points.

 

"Republicans who were leaking these emails that have been shared with Congress didn't just do that. They decided to fabricate portions of an email, and make up portions of an email in order to fit a political narrative," Carney said. "I'm not surprised by it because we've seen it again and again."

 

snip

 

Dan Pfeiffer, a senior White House adviser, also suggested that Republicans had falsified the leaked email.

"Somewhere on Capitol Hill, a GOP source is having a series of awkward conversations with reporters about the fabricated Benghazi email," Pfeiffer said on Twitter.

snip

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/299645-white-house-gop-fabricated-benghazi-email#ixzz2TIvewJJX

[Valin]

The White House on Tuesday accused congressional Republicans of fabricating emails leaked to two different media organizations that suggested interest in scrubbing the Benghazi, Libya, talking points.

 

"Republicans who were leaking these emails that have been shared with Congress didn't just do that. They decided to fabricate portions of an email, and make up portions of an email in order to fit a political narrative," Carney said. "I'm not surprised by it because we've seen it again and again."

 

snip

 

Dan Pfeiffer, a senior White House adviser, also suggested that Republicans had falsified the leaked email.

"Somewhere on Capitol Hill, a GOP source is having a series of awkward conversations with reporters about the fabricated Benghazi email," Pfeiffer said on Twitter.

snip

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/299645-white-house-gop-fabricated-benghazi-email#ixzz2TIvewJJX

 

The email appeared to give credence to those who had suggested a greater White House involvement in scrubbing mentions of specific terrorist groups and prior CIA terror warnings from the final talking points distributed to administration officials and congressional leaders.

 

But a full version of the email, obtained by CNN, suggests that Rhodes never specifically says he wants the concerns of State Department official Victoria Nuland to be addressed at a meeting to work through the talking points. Rather, he wrote that he hoped the concerns of all those involved in the process are considered.

(Snip)

 

Yes...And?

I could really like to know who the genius was who thought it was a good idea to link Cairo with Benghazi.

[Valin]

Our Left Wing Brothers On Parade!

Blame Bush!

[Valin]

[SrWoodchuck]

Posted this yesterday in Coffee Shop....with a great article....

[SrWoodchuck]

[Casino67]

This is from The Onion, but a little humor is needed sometime.

 

 

Sasha Obama Suspicious After Doing A Little Digging Around On Benghazi

 

WASHINGTON—Saying that none of the facts quite add up, first daughter Sasha Obama, 11, reported being “highly suspicious” today after poking around the details of the 2012 Benghazi attack. “I’m sorry, but it just doesn’t make sense—first they blame the attack on a spontaneous demonstration, but now we find out the CIA talking points were secretly revised?” said the sixth-grader, sitting in the darkened White House library intensely scrolling through pages of articles about the controversy and classified Pentagon briefings. “Obviously, someone’s hiding something: the poor security; the al-Qaeda link; the leaked emails. All I’m asking for here is a simple explanation from the State Department and the White House, and I’m not getting one. I mean, who are they protecting here? And why?” Sasha went on to tell reporters she felt even more suspicious after former defense secretary Leon Panetta failed to respond to any of her 24 voicemails.

//End//

[Valin]

From Legal Insurrection

Just Released: More than 100 pages of Benghazi e-mails

Mandy Nagy

Wednesday, May 15, 2013 at 5:18pm

 

This just in from CNN’s Jake Tapper:

 

The White House released more than 100 pages of e-mails on Wednesday in a bid to quell critics who say President Barack Obama and his aides played politics with national security following the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.

(Snip)

 

View the emails here in PDF.

[clearvision]

Looks like State made the bulk of the changes to water it down and CIA complied. CIA started the talking points with the video protest which made it thru the cuts. One email toward the end seems to be Petraeus grumbling that this was not what was asked for, but lets it go.

[Valin]

Looks like State made the bulk of the changes to water it down and CIA complied. CIA started the talking points with the video protest which made it thru the cuts. One email toward the end seems to be Petraeus grumbling that this was not what was asked for, but lets it go.

 

 

I would really like to know who this genius is.

 

 

Even the Cairo were planned in advance by the MB.

[Valin]

[Draggingtree]

May 16, 2013

Benghazi: History of Pueblo Repeats Itself

 

By Todd Crowell

 

Comparisons have been made, especially by conservatives, that the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last September was another Watergate. In fact, the Pueblo Incident in 1968 best defines what happened in that Libyan city.

 

The capture of the USS Pueblo by North Korean patrol boats received relatively little attention in the U.S. at the time and was quickly forgotten. This despite the fact that it was the first time a U.S. Navy ship had surrendered in 150 years, and despite the fact that one sailor was killed and 82 other crew members imprisoned and tortured for nearly one year.

 

The USS Pueblo was a navy intelligence surveillance ship captured by North Korean warships in international waters off the coast near Wonsan. The 82 members of the crew were taken from the ship and held captive for 11 months then released after Washington “apologized” for the intrusion into Korean waters, an apology it repudiated just as soon as the last captive set foot in South Korea.

 

Almost all of the charges that have been laid, fairly or unfairly, against the Obama administration for the loss of four American lives, including the ambassador, can be seen in the Pueblo Incident:

http://www.realclearhistory.com/articles/2013/05/16/benghazis_parallel_is_pueblo_not_watergate_128.html

[Valin]

[Valin]

May 16, 2013

Benghazi: History of Pueblo Repeats Itself

 

By Todd Crowell

 

Comparisons have been made, especially by conservatives, that the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last September was another Watergate. In fact, the Pueblo Incident in 1968 best defines what happened in that Libyan city.

 

The capture of the USS Pueblo by North Korean patrol boats received relatively little attention in the U.S. at the time and was quickly forgotten. This despite the fact that it was the first time a U.S. Navy ship had surrendered in 150 years, and despite the fact that one sailor was killed and 82 other crew members imprisoned and tortured for nearly one year.

 

The USS Pueblo was a navy intelligence surveillance ship captured by North Korean warships in international waters off the coast near Wonsan. The 82 members of the crew were taken from the ship and held captive for 11 months then released after Washington “apologized” for the intrusion into Korean waters, an apology it repudiated just as soon as the last captive set foot in South Korea.

 

Almost all of the charges that have been laid, fairly or unfairly, against the Obama administration for the loss of four American lives, including the ambassador, can be seen in the Pueblo Incident:

http://www.realclearhistory.com/articles/2013/05/16/benghazis_parallel_is_pueblo_not_watergate_128.html

 

I and Willie Irons were guarding the Alert Birds the night that happened. The problem was there was only one bomb on each F-4...tweo man concept/no lone zone applied...if you know what I mean.

 

The dirty little secret is the ROK Air Force at Suwon offered to fly cover 5th AF said no. At least that was what I was told by someone "in the know". Can't say for sure if is true, but sounds reasonable.

[Geee]

What Did John Brennan Know?

 

National Security: If a thorough investigation is conducted into the origins of the al-Qaida attacks on Benghazi, Republicans will regret not blocking John Brennan's confirmation as CIA director.

Not only did Brennan, as White House counterterrorism czar, take his eye off al-Qaida in Libya, but Wednesday night's White House email dump in response to congressional subpoena reveals he played a role in the Benghazi cover-up.

This is something we've suspected since last fall, when we first called for his resignation.

Then in January, when the president outrageously nominated him for CIA director, we argued that Benghazigate should automatically disqualify him for such a sensitive national security post. He wasn't suited for the job he had, let alone director of intelligence.

Now we have evidence Brennan was personally involved in covering his own failure.

A Sept. 14 high-level email conveys: "FYI, Brennan will have edits." Another reads: "John's edits below."

 

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/051613-656375-white-house-emails-implicate-brennan-in-benghazigate.htm

[Valin]

Sharyl Attkisson on Benghazi: “The media’s not always consistent in the vigor that they use to pursue a given topic”

Allahpundit

May 16, 2013

 

Via the Brody File, here’s big-media’s most dogged Benghazi reporter confirming, as tactfully as she can, that she too thinks the press is in the tank. Lest you doubt her conclusion about a certain, shall we say, curious incuriosity among her colleagues, look around at the news today and see how many reporters you find asking obvious follow-up questions about the Benghazi e-mail dump last night. The most obvious: Are there any key e-mail exchanges from September 12 and 13? Last night’s document string starts on the 14th, three days after the attack and with the CIA somehow already having concluded that the whole thing was “spontaneously inspired” by the protests at the embassy in Cairo. How did they arrive at that? And where oh where is the determination, long since debunked but repeatedly mentioned by Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice in the immediate aftermath, that the Mohammed movie had anything to do with this? That’s not in any version of the talking points.

Did Hillary and Rice simply assume that that’s what inspired the Cairo protest, ergo it must have indirectly inspired the Benghazi attack too? Because, as Tom Joscelyn convincingly argues, the Cairo protest was intended not so much to protest the film as to celebrate Al Qaeda on the anniversary of 9/11 — starting with the fact that it was Ayman al-Zawahiri’s own brother who helped organize it:

 

(Snip)

 

One other obvious question: Why was Victoria Nuland, State’s spokesperson, included in the interagency intelligence e-mails that were released last night? Breitbart’s John Sexton raised that point on Twitter; there appears to be no good explanation. It’s true that the State Department has its own intelligence operatives, but that’s not Nuland; she’s a mouthpiece, someone who specializes in spin, not intel. If you wanted to have a big interagency huddle to figure out what happened in Benghazi, that’s great — by all means, include State’s intelligence people in it. When you include State’s spin doctor, though, you make it look to all the world like the point of the huddle wasn’t to find out what happened, it was to decide what would be “safe” to release for public consumption. As Sexton noted, Nuland’s participation actually led to intelligence being subtracted from the final version of the talking points. So again, why was she or any other non-intel person privy to those discussions? I’ll bet Attkisson is wondering. Is anyone else?

 

(Snip)

 

 

Vid At Link

[Valin]

What Did John Brennan Know?

 

National Security: If a thorough investigation is conducted into the origins of the al-Qaida attacks on Benghazi, Republicans will regret not blocking John Brennan's confirmation as CIA director.

Not only did Brennan, as White House counterterrorism czar, take his eye off al-Qaida in Libya, but Wednesday night's White House email dump in response to congressional subpoena reveals he played a role in the Benghazi cover-up.

 

 

I wonder when he's going to take that little trip up to The Hill and have a chat with Darrell Issa, Trey Gowdy...and the gang?

[Geee]

Benghazi: The anatomy of a scandal; how the story of a U.S. tragedy unfolded — and then fell apart - Rowan Scarborough

The tragedy of Benghazi, where a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed, seemed a cut-and-dried story in the days after a mob attacked the State Department’s mission in eastern Libya.

From President Obama on down, the recap was simple: A crowd of demonstrators angry over an obscure YouTube video that denigrated Islam’s Prophet Muhammad spontaneously stormed the complex.

 

The State Department’s top spokeswoman assured the public that security for fallen Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and his aide Sean Smith was “robust.”

Pentagon chieftains likewise said the military did all it could in the ensuing eight-plus hours of the attacks, during which two former Navy SEALs — security contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty — were killed by mortar fire while trying to protect a nearby CIA annex.

Today, the public knows that those early administration pronouncements were false. They were uttered with less than two months to go in a presidential election campaign in which Mr. Obama declared al Qaeda on its heels.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/16/benghazi-the-anatomy-of-a-scandal/

[Draggingtree]

Need a Laugh? Liberal Jon Stewart Goes Ballistic on Barack Obama and the IRS Scandal

Posted on May 16, 2013 by Dean Garrison

 

Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart, a well known liberal comedian, went absolutely ballistic on Barack Obama earlier this week. I am not a regular viewer of The Daily Show and not a fan of Mr. Stewart so it took me a couple of days to come across this video. If you need a laugh, you need to watch this video. Warning, if vulgarity offends you then this is not the video for you. Everything is “bleeped” out but it’s not hard to figure out what he is saying. It made me laugh but everyone has their own unique sense of humor. Check it out:

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/05/16/need-a-laugh-liberal-jon-stewart-goes-ballistic-on-barack-obama-and-the-irs-scandal/

[Draggingtree]

Keeping the Constitutions

 

By: Danielle Davis (ocleverone) (Diary) | May 16th, 2013 at 07:42 PM

“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” Thomas Jefferson (letter to John Cartwright, 1824)

Mention the words “Benghazi, gun control, IRS, seizure of the free press phone records” and most people will correlate them to the current scandals rocking Washington. Those words are much greater than scandals; they represent a slow and methodically erosion of constitutional rights and the deterioration of the liberties set forth by Jefferson and the Founding Fathers.

Washington will be content to posture and play politics with the scandals. An informal poll among friends reveals that they believe that after summer months, fueled by hot air and puffery, one committee hearing after another, no action will be taken. Washington will continue to do what it does – which is little. Not one believes that Congress will stand firm and fight for the common man or the constitution. http://www.redstate.com/ocleverone/2013/05/16/keeping-the-constitutions/