Gingrich: A “reliable Senator” tells me two networks have stand-down e-mails from Donilon’s office

posted at 12:01 pm on October 31, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Via the Daily Caller, Newt Gingrich thinks that the Benghazi scandal might blow wide open over the next two days, thanks to e-mails that he claims two networks now possess from the office of the National Security Advisor, Tom Donilon.  According to a “reliable Senator” who tipped him to the information, Gingrich says that the e-mails came in response to the request to aid the consulate in Benghazi after the attack began, and asserted that the attack wasn’t a terrorist action and therefore didn’t need a response:

“There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down,” Gingrich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobilize marines and C-130s and the fighter aircraft, and they were told explicitly by the White House stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reliable U.S. senator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enormous questions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser’s role, the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoulders, that he said don’t go. And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the president said he had instructions they are supposed to do everything they could to secure American personnel.”

That may not be the only scandal that Gingrich thinks will go prime time this week, either:

After noting that the rumor, if true, would have a substantial impact on the presidential election, Gingrich pointed to another possible “October surprise” in the coming days.

“The other big story, I think, that is going to break is on corruption and extraordinary waste in the solar power grants and direct involvement by the Obama White House, including the president, in the solar panel grants involving billions of dollars, and I suspect that’s going to break Wednesday and Thursday of this week,” Gingrich added.

Well, why won’t the “reliable Senator” speak up about the e-mails directly?  I’d guess that the e-mails have been kept close to the vest at the White House end, but that someone on the other end in the intel community gave them to the “reliable Senator” either simultaneously as they were sent to the two networks, or the “reliable Senator” passed them along himself.  It’s all about plausible deniability on the leak, especially since we won’t see any action in the Senate on Benghazi until after the election — not because it’s Democratic-controlled, but because they’re all back home with Congress out of session for the election.

Gingrich could be fishing, but specifying that two networks have the e-mails makes it sound like Gingrich got some inside dope.  If these e-mails surface, it will create a huge headache for Barack Obama and the White House, which insisted that it didn’t deny assistance to Benghazi during the attack.  Donilon works in the White House, directly answering to Obama himself.  While Donilon would probably fall on his sword (or have an underling do so) if these e-mails say what Gingrich claims, there’s little chance that anyone will buy that Donilon or his staff took that decision on their own shoulders.

CNS News has another piece of the puzzle.  At the time that the consulate in Benghazi came under attack, Obama and Leon Panetta were in a meeting together.  What did they discuss?  The White House refuses to say:

President Barack Obama met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Sept. 11, 2012 at 5:00 PM—just 55 minutes after the State Department notified the White House and the Pentagon that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was under attack.

The meeting between Obama, Panetta and Biden had been scheduled before the attack took place, and the Department of Defense is not commenting now on whether the three men were aware when they met that day of the ongoing attack or whether Obama used that meeting to discuss with his defense secretary what should be done to defend the U.S. personnel who at that very moment were fighting for their lives in Benghazi.

“Secretary Panetta met with President Obama, as the White House-provided scheduled indicates,” Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a Defense Department spokesman, told CNSNews.com on Tuesday. “However, neither the content nor the subject of discussions between the President and his advisors are appropriate for disclosure.”

It’s impossible to imagine that the subject of the attack on the consulate didn’t come up in this discussion.  It’s also impossible to imagine that Donilon would have made the decision to “stand down” on his own while both the President and the Secretary of Defense were meeting in the White House after being notified of the attack.  It’s equally impossible to imagine that Panetta would have made that decision without checking with Obama during the meeting that we know they had an hour into the attack.

This leak, if it occurs, would show that the intel community has no intention of taking the fall for this debacle.  That leaves a very small number of people who could have made that decision — and who need to start explaining themselves ASAP.

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 4 5

I’m sorry. I’ve only been watching msnbc, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, for the past month and a half. Could someone here please tell me who this Ben Gazi guy is and what he’s done? Oh, and I’m so glad that Obama has already won the election.

NOMOBO on October 31, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Just because I’m an old mean ass sob.

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/Instant-Gunships-4-14-2010.asp

Quick Change Gunships.

Who would have thunk???

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Bishop on October 31, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I’ve got one of those. He’s a beast, and really handy to have around when things get chippy.

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Romney would have had roughly a 50-50 chance of going in and taking out Bin Laden if the opportunity arose. Obama, without hesitation, went in there and put the bastard down.

akaniku on October 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM

On the FOURTH try…

So Romney would have been 50-50 according to you, Obama was 25-75 in reality… Just for the record, 25 isn’t greater than 50.

As far as “no hesitation” what do you call the THREE TIMES Obama chose NOT to support going after Osama? I’m guessing that’s either “hesitation” or something in my Thesaurus under “hesitation”.

But you keep pretending Obama didn’t do what he did, didn’t wait on the call, and didn’t lawyer up his approval to pass the blame if it failed.

Sure everyone knows better, but maybe you’ll find someone who doesn’t who can be impressed with Obama along with you.

gekkobear on October 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Very clever Mr. Gingrich…Keep up the pressure

workingclass artist on October 31, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Additionally, it’s possible that no stand-down order was given yet no viable solutions were determined to be available (for any number of reasons).

blink on October 31, 2012 at 1:37 PM

So they help rescue the British ambassador from an ambush in June with no notice and barely any info, but not Americans on Sept. 11?

Mitsouko on October 31, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Obama has an easy counter – reminding the American people that Romney would have had roughly a 50-50 chance of going in and taking out Bin Laden if the opportunity arose. Obama, without hesitation, went in there and put the bastard down.

akaniku on October 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM

How do you figure President Romney’s odds at 50/50? He would have used the same team (that would be SEAL Team 6) with the same plan of operation. Why do you think that his odds would have been worse than pResident mom-jeans?

And, btw; Your obamassiah has never “put down” anything bigger than a roach – and he had to get Mooch to help him with that beast. Or were you referring to his experience at ‘Man Country’?

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 1:50 PM

but even an email between two other parties repeating such an NSA order would suffice.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 12:18 PM

NSA? National Security Agency?

Or did you mean NCA – National Command Authority?

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Axelrod was on a Sunday morning show and was asked if
Obama had a PDB on the 12th, before he went to campaign in Las Vegas. Axelrod would not confirm or deny, only said Obama was in touch as needed. Therefore, Obama did NOT have a PDB on the 12th. It wasn’t as important as his speech in the rose garden, interview with 60 minutes or his trip to Las Vegas, where he told people he’d had a tough day.

GrannySunni on October 31, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Thanks for that info. I heard several times from commentators that BO did not have a PDB on the 12th although the one posted on WHDossier said that he did.

Unbelievable.

Cody1991 on October 31, 2012 at 1:56 PM

so, essentially, Newt is driving a wedge between the president, and his biotch girlfriends at these two networks. They’re both now between a rock and a very very hard place.

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 1:58 PM

d1carter on October 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Wolfowitz also says CIA personnel were”deployed” from the annex, contrary to reports that Tyrone Woods was ordered to stand down and violated those orders to go to the consulate.

I call BS. We don’t know what happened, but the failure to deploy available resources and the pack of lies we have heard from Obama and his crew should tell any reasonable person all they need to know.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:03 PM

so, essentially, Newt is driving a wedge between the president, and his biotch girlfriends at these two networks. They’re both now between a rock and a very very hard place.

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 1:58 PM

I really don’t see how.

Just sit on this until 07Nov. That’s how long it will take to verify the legitimacy of the emails, right? Plus, the storm.

Who cares if the President abandoned Americans to die, right?

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Bishop on October 31, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I think I know that guy. He runs the local day-care, right?

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:06 PM

akaniku

Another sleeper sock puppet troll comes to life.

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 2:11 PM

No, that you are available to play your part.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Donilon doesn’t have the authority to make that decision. Whatever the supposed emails say, I assume it’s not that Donilon issued a stand-down order.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Does any one here have a take on how Jay Carney the unPress Sec. would post on a blog like this, you know the type of run around, beat around the bush, the little change the subject stuff commie Democrat Party hacks would do sluming on a conservative blog?

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:15 PM

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Let’s assume you’re right.

At what point did they realize everyone was dead? If the fight was being watched live, there was a window between hours zero through five or six when there was a hell of a lot that they could do.

Why issue orders contrary to that?

Why would the President ORDER the deaths of Americans?

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Donilon doesn’t have the authority to make that decision. Whatever the supposed emails say, I assume it’s not that Donilon issued a stand-down order.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

That’s my understanding. Donilon is not in the military chain of command. No one in the military would pay any attention to an order he tried to issue.

It had to be Obama, Panetta, or a general or flag level officer in the chain of command reporting to them.

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 2:17 PM

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Technically, in this case, the forces in question were CIA security personnel. Donilon can’t tell them to stand down either. The only people who can are the Director of Central Intelligence, the ambassador, and the president.

The National Security Advisor is not a decision-maker. He or she is an advisor and coordinator.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM

I know that this might be difficult to believe, but it’s always possible that appropriate assets are available for one type of mission at a certain point in time, but appropriate assets aren’t available for another type of mission at a different point in time.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Blink, don’t patronize me. I am going by what Gen. Ham said to Jason Chaffetz: Assets were available and had proximity.

Is there another way to interpret that?

Mitsouko on October 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I hope this comes out before the election, rather than after.

Terrye on October 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

We have multiple “stand down” orders at issue.

Was Tyrone Woods given a “stand down” order (2x) when he requested to leave the CIA Annex and go to the rescue of those at the consulate?

Was there a later “stand down” or more accurately a “no shoot” order when Woods painted the mortar position shelling the Annex with a laser designator? (Use of the targeting system is only done after it is synched with a weapons system, meaning there were assets overhead.)

Was there a “stand down” order to General Ham when he advised he had assets available, fighters, gunships, and a Marine Recon detachment?

Or was General Ham simply advised there would be no “execute” order?

Was General Ham relieved because of his response? It is reported he has not only been relieved, but that he has resigned. If so, the administration will have little control over what he says going forward.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM

And Axelrod is still posting his “suppositions” and “assumptions”, for the 5th day now and counting. Why are you guys feeding the troll?

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 2:26 PM

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 2:26 PM

The most likely outcome of engaging a jackass in debate is sh!t on your boot.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Technically, in this case, the forces in question were CIA security personnel. Donilon can’t tell them to stand down either. The only people who can are the Director of Central Intelligence, the ambassador, and the president.
The National Security Advisor is not a decision-maker. He or she is an advisor and coordinator.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Petraeus, Stevens, or Obama? So, that narrows it down to two?

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Over all this inaction is just more an active way of getting U.S. fighting men and U.S. Citizens killed than the useless ROE’s that commie Obama has in place.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Regardless of which stand-down order(s) we’re talking about, Donilon doesn’t have the authority to issue any of them.

That said, you’re right: the implication is there that stand-down orders could have been for either the military or the CIA security personnel.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

We have multiple “stand down” orders at issue.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Good point. I was about to ask about that.

How many “stand down” orders were issued, who issued them, when, why, and to who?

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 2:31 PM

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Good summary. Picks up some loose ends floating around.

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 2:32 PM

At the time that the consulate in Benghazi came under attack, Obama and Leon Panetta were in a meeting together. What did they discuss?

What did they discuss, Jay? BCS picks?

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:33 PM

I hope this comes out before the election, rather than after.

Terrye on October 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM

me too, my fear is that the truth won’t come out in time. whoever has these emails needs to release them soon.

Sachiko on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Technically, in this case, the forces in question were CIA security personnel. Donilon can’t tell them to stand down either. The only people who can are the Director of Central Intelligence, the ambassador, and the president.

The National Security Advisor is not a decision-maker. He or she is an advisor and coordinator.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM

I appreciate you weighing in on this given your expertise.

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

If the “rescue packages” weren’t even ready to be launched until ‘hour six’, then the decision not to launch the rescue package isn’t necessarily denying someone rescue resources. Right?

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:24 PM

First, the carrier on station has an alert-5 aircraft, which will be airborne in five minutes. Assume two hits on the KC en route, and that puts an F/A-18 on station within 90-120 minutes. That’s two hours.

The President knew within an hour. The bird could have been there in an additional two. Three hours in, everyone was still alive.

Resources were denied. Actively. The default position is to bring our people home.

Someone told them not to. We deserve to know who that person was.

So do the KIA.

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Could Donilon have advised the POTUS to have our forces “stand down” ie, the CIF in Europe, any forces in Tripoli, any attack A/C in the Med and elsewhere????

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:36 PM

As far as I’m concerned, the main thing is that ‘stand down’ orders went out to both AFRICOM’s quick-reaction elements and the CIA on that night. Some were obeyed, some were not, but both sets of orders were issued.

Those two chains of command are entirely separate, and have only one name in common on both lists — President Obama’s.

Add in that Director Petraeus says he didn’t order any stand-downs, and the process of elimination leaves you with…

Chuckg on October 31, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Resources were denied. Actively. The default position is to bring our people home.

Someone told them not to. We deserve to know who that person was.

So do the KIA.

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:35 PM

We need the whole story. Every bit of it. What were the radio calls? Who made them? Who made the calls ? Who logged them in? Where is the log? That is what we need to see? Where are the RTO’s? Where are the duty officers and NCO’s? Who relayed the messages? What was the president told, who told him, and what did he do about it? Why were our men allowed to bleed and die without the best preventive medicine that can be administered on the battlefield—–overwhelming firepower???

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:39 PM

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

You are incorrect, blink. No order to forces in the field, whether military or CIA, is issued by the National Security Advisor.

You can tilt at windmills on this if you want, but I wouldn’t advise it. Orders to the military and CIA go through specific channels, which is integral to the receiving forces recognizing them as valid. I spent 20 years in the military intelligence community, and obviously you didn’t.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Sorry.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Well, hi there, MOBY.

You should be sorry.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 2:40 PM

One other thing regarding the treason commie unamerican Democrat Party, when they have this much shit stired up, you have to keep your eye on the back trail for a mean ass ambush of worse treason they want to get done while you watch the shinney fast moving monkey spewing shit up trail.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:40 PM

At what point did they realize everyone was dead?

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

It’s hard to come to that conclusion with your hands over your ears yelling “Nya, nya, nya, nya, nya. I can’t hear you. Nya, nya, nya, nya, nya.”.

Finbar on October 31, 2012 at 2:41 PM

JE is right. The NSA/NSC is not in the military chain of command. POTUS-SECDEF-REgional combatant commander are. Not even the JCS are in the chain of command. They are service component advisers.

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Petraeus, Stevens, or Obama? So, that narrows it down to two?

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Given BO’s track record an order to stand down is more than plausible.

I’ll never understand Petraeus’ actions in all of this.

Cody1991 on October 31, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Oh for crying out loud. I visit the latest Benghazi thread and there he is, spouting away.

It’s quite obvious that I know much more than you and many other readers on here.

blink on October 30, 2012 at 7:26 PM

spiritof61 on October 31, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Obama issued his last “Code Coward” order.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Washington Nearsider — if there had been a carrier in the Med, the alert package could have been on-station pretty quickly. Unfortunately, we had no carrier in the Med at the time. We maintain a carrier presence in the Med approximately 2.5-3 months out of 12 now.

The same is the case with the amphibs. We didn’t have an ARG in the Med at the time. We rarely do nowadays.

We’ve been over the timeline for USAF assets out of Aviano before, and the staging of USAF aircraft to Sigonella. Recent reporting has confirmed that the Special Force rapid response team maintained by AFRICOM/EUCOM did, in fact, deploy immediately to Sigonella. There could have been USAF forces over Benghazi by about hour 4, or perhaps a little earlier. There could have been air assets able to use laser-designation for ground targeting by about hour 6 (my estimate). But in the end, there weren’t.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:49 PM

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

It also may explain how Obama’s crew are denying there was a “stand down” order, if they are ignoring the orders to Woods, and the failure to assist was the result of the absence of an “execute” order as opposed to existence of a “stand down” order. That would cover both the failure to shoot on Woods designated target, and the failure to send available assets.

Those two chains of command are entirely separate, and have only one name in common on both lists — President Obama’s.

Add in that Director Petraeus says he didn’t order any stand-downs, and the process of elimination leaves you with…

Chuckg on October 31, 2012 at 2:39 PM

This.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Well now that Gen. Hamm has been relived of his command his units just log in here and they know what to do by following the info posted here by the art class heros herein about.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Oh for crying out loud. I visit the latest Benghazi thread and there he is, spouting away.

It’s quite obvious that I know much more than you and many other readers on here.

blink on October 30, 2012 at 7:26 PM

spiritof61 on October 31, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Seems they split “areas of responsibility”, this idiot is posting talking points BS on Benghazi while gumbypoked and akin-kaka doing same in any poll thread.

Hopefully just a few more days and their per-post paychecks stop coming.

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 2:52 PM

But it’s inaccurate to claim that nobody listens to the President’s NSA.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Good thing I didn’t say that.

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 2:53 PM

There are also reports out there that the CIA guys were “painting” the mortars that were firing on them, calling for air support. If there were only unarmed recon drones overhead, why were they wasting their time designating a target, instead of just concentrating on defending themselves?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/10/bombshell-us-troops-would-not-have-been-painting-assets-on-ground-unless-their-was-air-support-overhead-but-white-house-called-off-attack/

We may never know exactly what happened, when, but the more I hear, the more it stinks…

OnlyOrange on October 31, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Best battle field command decision makers this E-7 ran into were the 20 year to 30 year lifer E-9′s, in fact most of the time the Col. or Major would turn to his Chief Master Gunny Sgt. and say, what do you think “we” should do.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Haven’t read all the comments, so I don’t know if this has been alluded to already, but a financial writer (and a bit of a military expert) I follow on FB, Jason Van Steenwyk, posted this comment along with the article on Gingrich’s claim:

Hmmm. If this is true, and it is a publicly-held stock company that has the emails, and they don’t break the story and get all the traffic they can from it, or through their neglect allow some other outlet to break the story, I would be very upset as a shareholder. Would a failure to break the story be a breach of fiduciary responsibility to stockholders?

It would be interesting to float this idea with its attendant responsibility and see if suddenly politics takes a back seat to money.

questionmark on October 31, 2012 at 2:55 PM

the chances of the barrymedia covering anything on this is zero. obamatroops do not care…they are on a mission

r keller on October 31, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Stop feeding the troll. PLEASE. Just ignore his talking points.

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 3:00 PM

That also means Newt knows what news organizations has the emails…if it’s the NYT, of course they would hold it back, but still will look foolish even to many liberals…

And who the heck is this Ben Gazi guy?

right2bright on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Petraeus, Stevens, or Obama? So, that narrows it down to two?

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 2:30 PM

And the CIA has stated unequivocally that NO “stand down” order – or order to deny aide – was issued by them.

Down to one, now.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Looks like someone selfawarded a new star to their Command grade and it attached to his butt rather than his cap.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 2:52 PM

blink isn’t a moby or troll. I may not always agree with him but I respect his opinions and evaluate them….like I do for several others posting here.

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Can you define immediately, and do you know what time they arrived in Sig?

And do you have any comments on Wolfowitz’s article from today?

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Within 30 minutes they were in the air…only a president can give orders to cross into foreign air space, they did not receive those orders…the president “blinked”, kind of like your moniker…

right2bright on October 31, 2012 at 3:03 PM

blink isn’t a moby or troll. I may not always agree with him but I respect his opinions and evaluate them….like I do for several others posting here.

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Don’t be so sure…

right2bright on October 31, 2012 at 3:03 PM

But it’s inaccurate to claim that nobody listens to the President’s NSA. Heck, even Oliver North was able to get quite a bit done as a lowly LtCol simply because he worked for Reagan’s NSA.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Ollie had been delegated and given the authority to act in the president’s name.
The nat’l. security advisor is not in anyone’s chain of command.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:04 PM

And the CIA has stated unequivocally that NO “stand down” order – or order to deny aide – was issued by them.

Down to one, now.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Yeah, I know. Only problem with that is Petraeus flat out lied earlier in this goat ropin’ when he blamed it all on the Youtube film. So, his credibility isn’t rock solid.

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM

And the CIA has stated unequivocally that NO “stand down” order – or order to deny aide – was issued by them.

Down to one, now.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

To be honest, CIA statement was more than vague, at least to me. It said nothing much and pointed out nothing much. And seemingly contradicted what we hear from those in CIA Annex in Benghazi (someone at the Annex got stand down orders from CIA). And followed Petraus’ own statement on Sept 14th that this was nothing but a spontaneous attack in response to web video. Sounds more to me that CIA is trying their best to throw those in Benghazi under the bus, but hopefully won’t be able to in the end.

I’d really like to see and hear Petraus on the subject. Some time this week, preferably.

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM

One good thing, this thread any many others here and about on the net are going to be in the History books for a long time.

The trolls will be known forever.

Nice to know.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM

You are incorrect, blink. No order to forces in the field, whether military or CIA, is issued by the National Security Advisor.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 2:39 PM

So, you are now qualifying the type of orders that might originate (or be passed along) by the President’s NSA?

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Blink, if J.E. is wrong, can you provide an actual example of lawful orders issued by the NSA to field forces?

questionmark on October 31, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Could Donilon have advised the POTUS to have our forces “stand down” ie, the CIF in Europe, any forces in Tripoli, any attack A/C in the Med and elsewhere????

ted c on October 31, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Certainly, he could have advised that – but the decision would have been d’ohbama’s; and the order would have come from d’ohbama.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:07 PM

So, you are now qualifying the type of orders that might originate (or be passed along) by the President’s NSA?

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Of course. Orders from the president originate from the president. The National Security Advisor doesn’t issue orders of any kind outside the NSC’s own staff.

The National Security Act of 1947 set it up that way. The National Security Council, which has had the NSA as its chairman since the Eisenhower administration, advises and coordinates. It does not have authority over the military or CIA. Orders issued based on authority come from the president, and are reflected as such in the actual communication, regardless of who wrote them.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 3:08 PM

That also means Newt knows what news organizations has the emails…if it’s the NYT, of course they would hold it back, but still will look foolish even to many liberals…

And who the heck is this Ben Gazi guy?

right2bright on October 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Newt, more than anyone out there, knows how to play news media at their own game. Now that he mentioned that “there are 2 news media outlets” it is only a signal to them to see who wants to cash in on the info first. Very smart move on Newt’s part.

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Blink, if J.E. is wrong, can you provide an actual example of lawful orders issued by the NSA to field forces?
questionmark on October 31, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Well, he could tall ya, but then he’d have to kill ya.

/s

LegendHasIt on October 31, 2012 at 3:09 PM

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:41 PM

How much time have you spend on carriers? I’d wager I have more than you, so you should be careful with the assumptions.

When an alert is set, the flight deck IS configured for flight ops. That’s the point.

Washington Nearsider on October 31, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Well, he could tall ya, but then he’d have to kill ya.

/s

LegendHasIt on October 31, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Careful guys, Hawkdriver will give you all a smack down. Smack down, I tell you…

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Can we all agree that whatever happened in Benghazi is not good for BHO’s administration? If it was, we would be getting pics of the Situation Room and lots of information would be flowing. There is something here does not smell right. The administration and their sycophant media are not going to tell this story until after the election. Shouldn’t Americans have this cleared up before they vote for the CIC for four more years? Or does this stonewalling tell us all we need to know?

d1carter on October 31, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Too funny. You’re obviously not very bright.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 2:53 PM

You assume things not in evidence, MOBY. That could be a bad mistake.

Btw, does narcissism hurt? Cause you seem to have a bad case of it.

Solaratov on October 31, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Can we all agree that whatever happened in Benghazi is not good for BHO’s administration? If it was, we would be getting pics of the Situation Room and lots of information would be flowing. There is something here does not smell right. The administration and their sycophant media are not going to tell this story until after the election. Shouldn’t Americans have this cleared up before they vote for the CIC for four more years? Or does this stonewalling tell us all we need to know?

d1carter on October 31, 2012 at 3:14 PM

My only issues are A) evidence may be destroyed as we speak and B) even if we get a clear picture of what really happened our GOP reps in Congress will not do much about it. Some wrists will get slapped and nothing more than that. No prison terms, nothing to teach our future generations that actions should lead to consequences.

riddick on October 31, 2012 at 3:17 PM

blink on October 31, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Sorry, blink, you have no clue what you’re talking about. Your comnplete lack of experience in this area is obvious.

Please stop digging.

J.E. Dyer on October 31, 2012 at 3:17 PM

If you think that NSA gets ignored when he/she reaches out to SecDef or DCI and says, “the president doesn’t want anyone to….” then I have very little respect for your experience.

blink on October 31, 2012 at 3:12 PM

If the SecDef or DCI merely takes the word of the NSA supposedly expressing POTUS wishes, and doesn’t verify for themselves, they are not worthy of the office.

questionmark on October 31, 2012 at 3:18 PM

a capella on October 31, 2012 at 3:02 PM

See its post at 3:12

I have no respect for its opinion, and contempt for the way it conducts itself.

novaculus on October 31, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Master Chief Sgt. Billy Waugh would tell some of the punks on the Obama National Security Staff to “sit on it tell it hurts” and then do a night jump from 800′ into the dam compound with 50 guys just like him.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 31, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5