Fox: FBI, NCTC showed al-Qaeda connection to Benghazi attack 2 days afterward

posted at 9:21 am on October 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

John McCain asked yesterday on CBS’ Face the Nation, “What did the president know? When did he know it? And what did he do about it?”  Fox News has more on the first two questions this morning.  According to their sources, the FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center briefed lawmakers two days after the attack on al-Qaeda’s connections to the Benghazi attack, one day before the CIA director showed up on Capitol Hill to tell a completely different story:

Two days after the Libya terror attack, representatives of the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center gave Capitol Hill briefings in which they said the evidence supported an Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda-affiliated attack, Fox News has learned.

The description of the attack by those in the Sept. 13 briefings stands in stark contrast to the now controversial briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA Director David Petraeus the following day — and raises even more questions about why Petraeus described the attack as tied to a demonstration. …

FBI and NCTC also briefed that there were a series of Al Qaeda training camps just outside of Benghazi, where the attack occurred and resulted in the deaths of four Americans. The area was described as a hotbed for the militant Ansar al-Sharia as well as Al Qaeda in North Africa.

Fox News is told there was no mention of a demonstration or any significant emphasis on the anti-Islam video that for days was cited by administration officials as a motivating factor.

Petraeus has been the quiet man in all of this, and this could be the reason why.  According to Fox’s report, Petraeus left very little room for equivocation in his briefing.  According to their sources, Petraeus dismissed the significance of the use of a mortar position in the attack and insisted that the event started as a spontaneous demonstration that got out of control when radicals took advantage of the confusion.

But there’s another problem in this report for the White House.  Since having to back away from Susan Rice’s attempt to sell the same story to the media five days after the attack on five different Sunday talk shows, they have insisted that the Obama administration shared the assessments it received from the intel community as they received them.  Did anyone ever share the FBI and NCTC assessments in the 13th that al-Qaeda was linked to the attack?  Not to my recollection.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

We just need to broom the entire administration. Seems like every one of them is tainted in this mess.

BettyRuth on October 29, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Petraeus certainly turned out to be a jackass, and to think the dude was once touted as president material. Way to crap all over your fellow servicemen, general.

Bishop on October 29, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Petraeus left very little room for equivocation in his briefing.

C’mon GEN Petraeus. You of all people, as an infantry officer, a Ranger, know the significance of an MFP on an objective. It matters a lot.

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Fearless Prediction:

If Obama loses, the floodgates of leaks will break open, the MSM will finally cover this story and we may see possible impeachment proceedings take place

LordMaximus on October 29, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Fast & Furious of Arabia

batterup on October 29, 2012 at 9:28 AM

What did the president know?

When did he know it?

And what did he do about it?

Great questions.

ICYMI, Charles Woods, father of slain SEAL Tyrone Woods, was on Geraldo last night and said this directly to Obama.

My son died a hero. It is better to die the death of a hero, than to live the life of a coward.
-Charles Woods

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Operation Fast & Furious: Benghazi Edition

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Was CIA involved in arms trafficking that was secret? Regardless of what we were up to we should have protected our Ambassador at all cost.

tim c on October 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM

What was the mission of the Benghazi consulate? What was housed in the warehouses? What was the purposes of the ambassador’s meetings there? Were any arms being transferred? How many and to whom?

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Fearless Prediction:

If Obama loses, the floodgates of leaks will break open, the MSM will finally cover this story and we may see possible impeachment proceedings take place

LordMaximus on October 29, 2012 at 9:27 AM

I doubt the drive-bys will ever touch this story, regardless of what happens on Election Day. Thankfully it looks like FoxNews, Sheryl Atkinson, and the blogosphere are on top of it though.

Doughboy on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

At this point, The Whine has to hope that he loses the election. He’s not going to be impeached and removed from office if he’s leaving January 20th anyway. But this nation cannot endure four more years of such treasonous behavior from the President.

rbj on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

My son died a hero. It is better to die the death of a hero, than to live the life of a coward.
-Charles Woods

Oh, to have that as a full page as in the NYT.

herm2416 on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

ICYMI, Charles Woods, father of slain SEAL Tyrone Woods, was on Geraldo last night and said this directly to Obama.

My son died a hero. It is better to die the death of a hero, than to live the life of a coward.
-Charles Woods

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM

What was Geraldo’s reaction to Mr. Woods? I saw G.R. on a few shows last week and he was over the top defensive of the C.I.A., the President, Hillary- everyone connected to Benghazi, it seemed. He looked ridiculous, BTW.

BettyRuth on October 29, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Did you order the Code Red Stand Down?

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Petraeus needs to ‘fess up and resign. What a shame it is.

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 9:36 AM

My son died a hero. It is better to die the death of a hero, than to live the life of a coward.
-Charles Woods

Mr. Woods, we all send our sympathies to you and your family in your loss, but what you need to understand about our dear leader is that he doesn’t give a rip. When someone sells their soul, their own hide is all they care about.

Kissmygrits on October 29, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Petraeus betrayed us!!

Dextrous on October 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM

GEN Petraeus, if you can’t see which way the wind is blowing on this one then that cushy job at Princeton might not be coming your way. Then again, maybe Petraeus is holding out for Obama so he can get that cushy job at Princeton.

quid pro quo?

cover me on this terrorist attack and I’ll get you that job at Princeton eh, Admira….er, General?
/offers

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM

VAGINAS!!! BIG BIRD!!! THREE-RING BINDERS!!!!!

Bruce MacMahon on October 29, 2012 at 9:39 AM

he was over the top defensive of the C.I.A., the President, Hillary- everyone connected to Benghazi, it seemed. He looked ridiculous, BTW.

BettyRuth on October 29, 2012 at 9:35 AM

I usually tolerate Geraldo pretty well. But this time he was so over the top he was unbearable. Yes, ridiculous too.

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM

recommended reading. not required, just recommended.
http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/10/29/beyond-impeachment-benghazi/

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Gumby will not post here.

Electrongod on October 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Did anyone ever share the FBI and NCTC assessments in the 13th that al-Qaeda was linked to the attack? Not to my recollection.

Over to you jay carney…..BTW, your tap dancing shoe is untied.

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Petraeus betrayed us!!

Dextrous on October 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Petraeus turned the war in Iraq, undoubtedly saving the lives of hundreds of US servicemen who otherwise would have died in ongoing fighting.
A few videos and reports from Fox News don’t justify the trashing of his name before all the evidence has been evaluated.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

I didn’t really expect anything else from President Barack “Gutsy Call” Obama but Petraeus is a disappointment.

gwelf on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

happy thought of the day………

In just about 200 hours Obama could have to concede the election!!!!

:-)))))))))))))))))))

PappyD61 on October 29, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Petraeus does not have the responsibility to defend the consulate. Only to gather, share, and interpret intelligence. Obama has the responsibility to defend the place via Hillary and her efforts (or lack thereof.

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:50 AM

I get the idea that for Odumba’s administration, “monitoring Sandy” means “We need to put our heads together and figure out how to best counter all of this damaging Benghazi leakage!”

Anti-Control on October 29, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Petraeus turned the war in Iraq, undoubtedly saving the lives of hundreds of US servicemen who otherwise would have died in ongoing fighting.
A few videos and reports from Fox News don’t justify the trashing of his name before all the evidence has been evaluated.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Petraeus deserves some respect for his service to us and our country but it’s not just a few videos and Fox News – CNN and several other print/online media sources have shown for weeks now that this whole “spontaneous demonstration” related to a YouTube video is a complete farce. The CIA initially reported it may have come from a spontaneous demonstration but within 2 hours of the attack beginning the CIA local field office reported that it was a terrorist attack and even knew the specific group that was carrying it out.

gwelf on October 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Jeraldo tell O’Reilly that “everyone” should stand down, let the administration do its investigation, blah blah blah, that it isn’t the job of the media or the evil Issa to ask questions.

O’Reilly blew up, so Jeraldo snaps back, “Why didn’t Romney ask the question during the debate then? He’s the one who wants to be president!! He should have asked!”

It’s Romney’s fault. Already.

texacalirose on October 29, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Move along now
-lsm

cmsinaz on October 29, 2012 at 9:55 AM

tells [I lost my 's' on that one]

texacalirose on October 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Petraeus has been the quiet man in all of this, and this could be the reason why. According to Fox’s report, Petraeus left very little room for equivocation in his briefing. According to their sources, Petraeus dismissed the significance of the use of a mortar position in the attack and insisted that the event started as a spontaneous demonstration that got out of control when radicals took advantage of the confusion.

The Benghazi issue continues to sound like an effort to work an ingelligence-political-campaign-point into history. The question is, from whom did this “story” or policy-tale originate? Someone addressed Patraeus, someone addressed Panetta, Amb.Rice obviously addressed by Hillary Clinton..but, from whom did this TALE originate?

Axelrod? Jarrett? If from Obama, well, it IS his job to set these tales in place and rolling.

Where did this Tale begin and with whom? Patraeus, Hillary, Panetta…I’m intuitively asserting that they were the crew and not the author.

And now all the Left — Sen. Feinstein, for example, involved in our intelligence handling — is repeating this Tale, that “it was a failure in intelligence” or “a problem in intelligence” and the like. Pinning it on “intelligence” is like claiming you’ve herded the ocean into a net.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM

In just about 200 hours Obama could have to concede the election!

PappyD61 on October 29, 2012 at 9:49 AM

In just about 200 hours, the lawsuits will start to be filed in the states that he lost, asking for a recount.

Dextrous on October 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Jeez, so Petraeus said it was the non-existent demonstration. But the CIA claims no one at any time denied requests for help that day on 9/11/12. What did the local strike group do? They could have had an F-18 in air the within minutes. It would have been loaded with LGB’s. It could have loitered for hours waitng on the go ahead. Then the local JTAC could have directed fire with his laser. wtf???

jake49 on October 29, 2012 at 9:58 AM

The courageous act of standing up and telling the truth worked well for Lt. Col. Oliver North.

Please, General, for the sake of the country and your fellow servicemen. Do the right thing.

Droopy on October 29, 2012 at 9:59 AM

I doubt the drive-bys will ever touch this story, regardless of what happens on Election Day.

Doughboy on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

There are Pulitzers to be won in Benghazi-gate. The drive-by jackals will feed on the rotting carcass of Obama. It’s their nature.

Finbar on October 29, 2012 at 9:59 AM

“We’re still investigating and, uhhh, making lots of progress. Hoevere, uhhh, even after seven weeks, I still have no idea what happened. Uhhh, not a clue. But you can trust me. I’ll, uhhh, get to the bottom of this and, uhhh, let you all know as soon as I know. I’ll fire anyone who, uhhh, made mistakes.” — Obama

“The Republicans are trying to politicize this. We haven’t a clue what happened and though we are usually extremely skeptical, suspicious, critical, and curious, we frankly find the whole thing extremely boring and uninteresting. There’s nothing to see here. Let’s move along. — CBSMSNBCABCCNNWaPoNYT.

farsighted on October 29, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Obama has the responsibility to defend the place via Hillary and her efforts (or lack thereof.

ted c on October 29, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Their first and only concern was how to cover their own a$$es.

docflash on October 29, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Jeraldo tell O’Reilly that “everyone” should stand down, let the administration do its investigation, blah blah blah, that it isn’t the job of the media or the evil Issa to ask questions.

O’Reilly blew up, so Jeraldo snaps back, “Why didn’t Romney ask the question during the debate then? He’s the one who wants to be president!! He should have asked!”

It’s Romney’s fault. Already.

texacalirose on October 29, 2012 at 9:54 AM

I heard that rant by Geraldo and it’s just the latest from him in a long, long list of similar hysterical efforts to blame-shift.

But he’s doing a good job repeating the Left’s blame-shifting Tale: they’re clawing at anyone and everything to avoid examining Obama’s awful betrayal or incompetence or both.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Petraeus deserves some respect for his service to us and our country

Then don’t throw him under the bus until all the facts are out.

Hundreds of US military have died over the past decade because of less than optimal decisions made by commanders on the ground. A significant number have died in friendly fire incidents, killed by Americans or allies (remember Pat Tillman?).
Turning a Middle East tragedy into a political witch hunt sets a very bad precedent that be replayed in the future.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM

“The Republicans are trying to politicize this…”

farsighted on October 29, 2012 at 9:59 AM

The Left expects that everyone will be too hysterical or stupid to recognize that ridiculous assertion of theirs: “Republicans are trying to politicize this…”

It’s a ridiculous assertion BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL when the soure is political, as in, the, ahem, DEMOCRATS and various campaigns among DEMOCRATS. They exist as a political faction, they are the definition of what and who is “political” engaged in “politicizing” EVERYthing.

That whole line of flimsy accusation there is both intellectually decrepit as it is meaningless in the reality of this issue as with all others in a political arena. It’s already political, it’s not being made to be that.

But I guess we’re supposed to believe the Democrats are, well, sellers of cookies or maybe counselors or whatnot.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:06 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

So what do YOU think happened?

And would you be giving George Bush the benefit of the doubt if this had happened on HIS watch?

Be honest.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Turning a Middle East tragedy into a political witch hunt sets a very bad precedent that be replayed in the future.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM

There is absolutely nothing wrong with politicizing this event.

It is illustrative of 0bama’s failed policies, ineptitude, and deceit in the primary responsibilities of the nation’s chief executive.

The voters should consider this well in their deliberations.

Droopy on October 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Turning a Middle East tragedy into a political witch hunt sets a very bad precedent that be replayed in the future.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Hey, goofball, four Americans died and SOMEONE refused them military aid.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Sounds like this administration heard only what they wanted to hear.

GarandFan on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Further… the relevance to the election of any issue proving negative to Democrats is inversely proportional to the media willingness to cover it.

Droopy on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Petraeus deserves some respect for his service to us and our country but it’s not just a few videos and Fox News – CNN and several other print/online media sources have shown for weeks now that this whole “spontaneous demonstration” related to a YouTube video is a complete farce. The CIA initially reported it may have come from a spontaneous demonstration but within 2 hours of the attack beginning the CIA local field office reported that it was a terrorist attack and even knew the specific group that was carrying it out.

gwelf on October 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I’ve withheld and discouraged criticism of Patraeus from others based upon his military cred, so I agree, but his commitment to this TALE being told (“riot” “VIDEO” “spontaneous” “outburst” etc.) is quite so taxing as to be insane to even repeat it with any effort at sincerity.

On Day2 after the attack, no one with any sense could look at even those ‘initial reports’ and NOT conclude, nearly decisively, that this was no random or spontaneous street riot, and that is why Amb. Rice’s insistence on those Sunday shows was criticized so heavily: even the amateurs at civil order could sense that what she was saying was just not credible.

Since she is under Hillary Clinton’s thumb, we can hold Clinton responsible for that media mess but with Patraeus, looks to be that Obama ordered the….well, who commands Patreaus?

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

So what do YOU think happened?

And would you be giving George Bush the benefit of the doubt if this had happened on HIS watch?

Be honest.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

I don’t know, that’s a hypothetical and it would be dishonest of me to answer definitively. But I didn’t blame Bush for the death of Tilman or for multiple reports over the years of incompetent military decisions during the war that lead to Americans dying. I questioned the merits of invading Iraq but never blamed Bush for specific deaths that occurred, even when clear incompetence was involved. It’s a dangerous road to travel.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Petraeus turned the war in Iraq, undoubtedly saving the lives of hundreds of US servicemen who otherwise would have died in ongoing fighting.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Wow, that’s rich irony coming from someone who is on the side of the bunch who took out a full page ad calling him General “Betrayus” when Bush was working to get the surge started.

Your defense of people when it is convenient to your cause is just a bit too transparent troll.

AZfederalist on October 29, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Be honest.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

LOL. Fat chance.

farsighted on October 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Then don’t throw him under the bus until all the facts are out.

Hundreds of US military have died over the past decade because of less than optimal decisions made by commanders on the ground. A significant number have died in friendly fire incidents, killed by Americans or allies (remember Pat Tillman?).
Turning a Middle East tragedy into a political witch hunt sets a very bad precedent that be replayed in the future.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM

This is rich coming from a lefty.

We certainly need to know more about what happened but there are already facts in play which put Petraeus in a bad light and stating this isn’t politicizing it or inappropriate. We know that Petraeus knew that the attack on Benghazi wasn’t related to a demonstration (spontaneous or otherwise) but he still told Congress otherwise. If he didn’t have all the information or there were conflicting reports or any other scenario then he should have said that but he didn’t.

Wanting an explanation from all parties involved is not “politicizing” this event and is completely appropriate.

gwelf on October 29, 2012 at 10:17 AM

I doubt the drive-bys will ever touch this story, regardless of what happens on Election Day.

Doughboy on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

There are Pulitzers to be won in Benghazi-gate. The drive-by jackals will feed on the rotting carcass of Obama. It’s their nature.

Finbar on October 29, 2012 at 9:59 AM

The drive bys will not touch this nor Fast & Furious, ever. On Nov. 7 they will begin to secure Husein’s wonderful legacy as the bestest prez ever. Covering Benghazi will expose their own malfeasance. When Romney and the republicans continue to investigate in January, they will be called “sore winners” by the legacy Obamamedia.

Brat on October 29, 2012 at 10:17 AM

VAGINAS!!! BIG BIRD!!! THREE-RING BINDERS!!!!!

Bruce MacMahon on October 29, 2012 at 9:39 AM

and rape

Wigglesworth on October 29, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Turning a Middle East tragedy into a political witch hunt sets a very bad precedent that be replayed in the future.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Hey, goofball, four Americans died and SOMEONE refused them military aid.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM

bayam’s swallowed the Obama/Left hook and that is that American lives lost are ballast, or “expendable as liabilities” or “collateral damage” that “is to be expected” and the like.

You know, like babies born still living when they haven’t perished from abortions and “shouold be left to expire in a broom closet” without any help.

Obama is a ghoul.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Was CIA involved in arms trafficking that was secret? Regardless of what we were up to we should have protected our Ambassador at all cost.

tim c on October 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM

THIS IS WHAT OBUTTHEAD IS COVERING UP.

Barry Rubin alluded in an article last week to a secretly provided advanced weapons system to Muslim Brotherhood (al Qaeda) rebels in Libya by Obutthead. Are surface to air warhead capable missiles advanced enough? This comes too close to treason for Obutthead to allow the light of day.

Hagmann explains the dirty deed further:

http://thpatriots.blogspot.com/2012/10/doug-hagmann-hidden-real-truth-about.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/UQpwm+(Town+Hall+Patriots)&m=1

NOMOBO on October 29, 2012 at 10:20 AM

but his commitment to this TALE being told (“riot” “VIDEO” “spontaneous” “outburst” etc.) is quite so taxing as to be insane to even repeat it with any effort at sincerity.

You’re making some big assumptions. Cheney disagreed with the CIA’s conclusions re Iraq yet was unable to alter intelligence briefs produced for the President.
But now you’re suggesting politicians suddenly have the power to define the contents of intel sent to the President?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203400604578071302911132288.html

Let me remind you that everyone on the right was certain that all the facts were out before the WSJ report came to light.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:21 AM

But I didn’t blame Bush for the death of Tilman or for multiple reports over the years of incompetent military decisions during the war that lead to Americans dying. I questioned the merits of invading Iraq but never blamed Bush for specific deaths that occurred, even when clear incompetence was involved. It’s a dangerous road to travel.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

But you on the Left have sure raked Bush and the Right irrationally over the coals about New Orleans and Katrina, and never you all mind the floods in ohter parts of the nation that were as bad and some even worse with little to no showing from Obama.

You on the Left only “blame” when our Pres. is a Republican.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

A few videos and reports from Fox News don’t justify the trashing of his name before all the evidence has been evaluated.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Bayam, I know it really sucks to be an professional Obama Apologist, and it must really suck that Obama’s refusal to take charge resulted in the deaths of 4 Americans, and it must really, really suck that Fox News and Romney have been out in front with the truth of what happened in Benghazi: This was a terrorist act of war against then sovereign territory of the United States.

BigAlSouth on October 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

And would you be giving George Bush the benefit of the doubt if this had happened on HIS watch?

Be honest.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

I don’t know, that’s a hypothetical and it would be dishonest of me to answer definitively. But I didn’t blame Bush for the death of Tilman or for multiple reports over the years of incompetent military decisions during the war that lead to Americans dying. I questioned the merits of invading Iraq but never blamed Bush for specific deaths that occurred, even when clear incompetence was involved. It’s a dangerous road to travel.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

So… I guess we should take that as a, “No.

Droopy on October 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

the MSM will finally cover this story and we may see possible impeachment proceedings take place

LordMaximus on October 29, 2012 at 9:27 AM
I doubt the drive-bys will ever touch this story, regardless of what happens on Election Day. Thankfully it looks like FoxNews, Sheryl Atkinson, and the blogosphere are on top of it though.

Doughboy on October 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM

…the MSM should be held as an accessory to murder!

KOOLAID2 on October 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Of course not, this is something quite different than the general fog of war. This is a contained and specific incident with which the CIC had a direct responsibility for.

Don’t wiggle.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

They already see him losing. I predict this will break wide open this week. Schumer telegraphed what they know. He threw Obama under the bus.

dogsoldier on October 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

LOL. Fat chance.

farsighted on October 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM

well, to be honest, I felt really silly typing that last part.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

But you on the Left have sure raked Bush and the Right irrationally over the coals about New Orleans and Katrina, and never you all mind the floods in ohter parts of the nation that were as bad and some even worse with little to no showing from Obama.

You on the Left only “blame” when our Pres. is a Republican.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I meant to include there that something utterly ignored by the Left is this:

–Louisiana had a Democrat Governor who refused for days to declare an emergency such that the federal govt. could then provide help (fed. can’t intervene in a state UNTIL AND UNLESS state gov. first requests them to and Dem. Gov. Blanco refused to do that for days after the New Orleans disasters).

and,
–Louisiana had been given the millions to repair the New Orleans levies PRIOR TO Katrina but the state “redirected” the money to other projects and left the levies as-is.

It was just politially expedient and racially agitating (and therefore, politially useful) to the Dems to scream about ‘BUSH’ as to Katrina…

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Gumby will not post here.

Electrongod on October 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM

gumme started masterbaiting on the first “poll” thread at 10:08 AM already!…Starts before lunch!

KOOLAID2 on October 29, 2012 at 10:27 AM

We just need to broom the entire administration. Seems like every one of them is tainted in this mess.

BettyRuth on October 29, 2012 at 9:25 AM

It really is starting to look like that. Obama, Biden, Hillary, Jarrett, Rice, and now even Panetta and Patraeus have some very serious questions that they need to answer. And it also looks like it’s possible that Gen. Ham may have potentially been the one who may have tried to do the right thing during the attack…and he’s the only one that’s been replaced.

lynncgb on October 29, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Obama knew the embassy was under attack within minutes and chose not to send help. Jarrett probably told him not to. Afterward they’re all sitting around saying “Oh crap!” and tried desperately to cover up the screw up, but the BS isn’t gonna hold.

dogsoldier on October 29, 2012 at 10:28 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Of course not, this is something quite different than the general fog of war. This is a contained and specific incident with which the CIC had a direct responsibility for.

Don’t wiggle.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

And more dreadfully, Obama as CIC, had a live-video feed of the event as it took place.

His denial of assistance is unforgivable betrayal.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM

…the MSM should be held as an accessory to murder!

KOOLAID2 on October 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

I honestly don’t like the term MSM, it serves to give them an air of innocence which they do not deserve. The Fifth Column Treasonous Media has been anything but innocent for well over 40 years, perhaps as much as the last 70 years.

SWalker on October 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM

I doubt the average Obama apologist himself knows exactly what he has invested psychologically in an Obama presidency.

They’re just following their marching orders.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM

NOMOBO on October 29, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Hill’s Huma might come in handy for just such a secret operation.

Fallon on October 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM

OT: Are we going to see an Apocalyptic Storm of the Century thread?

dogsoldier on October 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Obama Says He’s Offended By Suggestions He Misled Public On Benghazi Terror Attack…

Obama is “offended”? Offended?

Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

What a miserable little punk is he.

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

VAGINAS!!! BIG BIRD!!! THREE-RING BINDERS!!!!!

Bruce MacMahon on October 29, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Obama The Insipid.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Father of Slain Benghazi SEAL to Obama: “It’s Better to Die the Death of a Hero than Live the Life of a Coward”

Wade on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

You’re making some big assumptions. Cheney disagreed with the CIA’s conclusions re Iraq yet was unable to alter intelligence briefs produced for the President.
But now you’re suggesting politicians suddenly have the power to define the contents of intel sent to the President?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203400604578071302911132288.html

Let me remind you that everyone on the right was certain that all the facts were out before the WSJ report came to light.

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Interesting that you should bring up intel sent to the president. The CIA field office sent reports within the first 2 hours of the beginning of the attack which stated that it was unequivocally a terrorist attack – even naming the terrorist group carrying it out. They also had a live feed of the attack (and a drone monitoring it) and they knew it wasn’t a demonstration gone awry and had no reason to believe it was tied to a YouTube video. The CIA initially reported it might have something to do with a demonstration but it quickly countered this initial intelligence. You are suggesting that Petraeus was unaware what the CIA field reported and that Obama, Hillary and the entire administration was as well.

Obama and Hillary have repeatedly claimed that as information has come it they shared it and they would share further information as it came in. This is demonstrably false. Multiple and varied news sources have shown this to be a complete lie.

gwelf on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

This whole event reeks of malfeasance, cowardice, and deceit. And we all know the Dems and their media accomplices are trying to run out the clock.

In the absence of proper investigation and honest disclosure, sometimes the preponderence of evidence must suffice for voters to decide.

Droopy on October 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM

SWalker on October 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Absolutely.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM

I doubt the average Obama apologist himself knows exactly what he has invested psychologically in an Obama presidency.

They’re just following their marching orders.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM

It’s always embarrassing to see how routinely the Left repeats obviously emailed talking points and has so few to no original opinions of their own as individuals. Yet they maintain they’re “smart” — it’s proof of just how stupid so many of them are that they rely on repeating what they’re told so continuously.

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Obama Says He’s Offended By Suggestions He Misled Public On Benghazi Terror Attack…

Obama is “offended”? Offended?

Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

What a miserable little punk is he.

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Awww, Obama has a sniffly nose, awwww….

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 10:35 AM

It’s a hive. Or a “herd of independent minds”.

Cleombrotus on October 29, 2012 at 10:38 AM

What a miserable little punk is he.

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

That statement is used when someone actually lied. They’re offended that we have the guts to call them on their BS.

As I said before, Obama knew within minutes of the start of the attack. For whatever reason he chose not to send aid to Americans fighting for their lives and WENT TO BED.

dogsoldier on October 29, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Not that the press is ever going to tell us but this stonewalling looks really really bad.

Cindy Munford on October 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM

petefrt on October 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM

I have a questions for you. I get commenters confused, did you tell me of the Hillbuzz theory of the attack on the consulate in Benghazi and Amb. Stevens?

Cindy Munford on October 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Hussein continues to refer to those barbarians as “folks” in the same breath he refers to the dead Americans as folks. He really makes me sick.

Q If you figure out who killed Ambassador Stevens, will you take that person out without regard for the election timetable?

THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely. But I think our goal would be to bring them to justice. My efforts will be to see if we can roll up these networks that do harm to Americans anywhere in the world.

This is a top priority. What happened in Benghazi was a tragedy. We’re investigating exactly what happened. I take full responsibility for the fact — I send these folks into harm’s way; I want to make sure that they are always safe, and when that doesn’t happen, that we figure out what happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.

But my biggest priority right now is bringing those folks to justice. And I think the American people have seen that’s a commitment I always keep.

Brat on October 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM

You are suggesting that Petraeus was unaware what the CIA field reported and that Obama, Hillary and the entire administration was as well.

And you’re absolutely certain that was no conflicting intel from another credible source, leading Patraeus to decide that not enough evidence existed for the CIA to change its assessment?

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM

And on Nov. 7, after the President is re-elected, rightists will forget there’s even a place called Benghazi.

chumpThreads on October 29, 2012 at 10:46 AM

This Bengazi timeline got me to thinking about 9-11-2001.

Timeline extracted from a conspiracy website:
8:13 AA11 (Newark) last transmission
8:20 AA11 (Newark) transponder stopped
8:41 UA175 (Logan) last transmission
8:46 UA175 (Logan) transponder stopped
8:46 AA11 (Newark) Impact WTC (North)
8:50 AA77 (Dulles) last transmission
8:51 Bush arrive School
8:56 AA77 (Dulles) transponder stopped
9:02 UA175 (Logan) Impact WTC (South)
9:05 Bush recieves ‘whisper in ear’
9:30 Bush speaks to nation

9:35 UA93 (Newark) last transmission
9:37 AA77 (Dulles) impact Pentagon
9:40 UA93 transponder stopped
10:06 UA93 impact Shanksville, PA

2001 Attack against America: 25 minutes to address nation
2012 Attack against America: ‘let me sleep on it’

socalcon on October 29, 2012 at 10:46 AM

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM

How weird does it feel to be defending Patraeus?

Cindy Munford on October 29, 2012 at 10:48 AM

chumpThreads on October 29, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Right, because all will be peaceful in the world. You better hope people forget about it.

Cindy Munford on October 29, 2012 at 10:49 AM


If I don’t go, who will?

Tyrone Woods said that when asked why he was going back to work in Libya, according to his father being interviewed by Laura Ingraham right now.

Brat on October 29, 2012 at 10:50 AM

And you’re absolutely certain that was no conflicting intel from another credible source, leading Patraeus to decide that not enough evidence existed for the CIA to change its assessment?

bayam on October 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM

bayam, if the Boy King would provide the information to Congress, that ‘strawman’ of yours might be a valid question.

…(a) CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”

socalcon on October 29, 2012 at 10:50 AM

An AP report clearly stated there were estimated 150 attackers and the drone video will clearly show this was the case. The entire perimeter and all intersections contained pickup trucks with anti-aircraft guns. The WH were afraid to send the CIF, CAS, and left over 40 Americans to defend for themselves.

Was the CIF diverted to NAS Sig and when exactly was the “stand down” order given, and who made this decision?

luckybogey on October 29, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Is anyone missing President Bush who keep us safe for 8 yrs?

Wade on October 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM

My theory: Petraeus was himself betrayed by those giving him intelligence briefings. Some career bureaucrat in the CIA took it upon him/herself to feed the “protest” line up the chain. This person may have acted on their own initiative but it seems more likely that someone was telling them what to do. The cover-up began as the attack was underway and they knew they needed high level cover. I know, to think that Petraeus could be deceived is a bit of a stretch, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to believe someone would have at least tried. Why would I think this? Because I find it implausible that Petraeus would deliberately assist in the misinformation that was being put out unless he was either deceived himself or he felt he was protecting national security (which could have been self-deception on his part).

It’s just a theory…

BillyWilly on October 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Amb.Rice obviously addressed by Hillary Clinton..but, from whom did this TALE originate?

Lourdes on October 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM

I don’t know if it matters, but “one of the first things I learned” during this incident is that Rice does not report to Clinton, she reports directly to Obama.

Night Owl on October 29, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3