Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on May 9, 2013 by Allahpundit

On the heels of a dramatic hearing where three whistle-blowers testified, Fox News has learned that former Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday, on the Hill for a meeting with House Republicans, also told lawmakers: “I think Hillary (Clinton) should be subpoenaed if necessary.”

The comments and developments signal that Republicans will continue to press for answers on the deadly Sept. 11 attack. Despite arguments from Democrats that the hearing was not nearly as shocking as Republicans made it out to be, GOP lawmakers said it raised troubling questions that need to be investigated.

***

Secretary of State Clinton made at least three statements that have been contradicted by subsequent testimony. First, she told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that “we didn’t have a clear picture” of what had happened in Benghazi. Yet Greg Hicks, who had been second in command at the U.S. mission in Libya, testified Wednesday that he spoke to Clinton on the night of Sep. 11-12 and told her exactly what had happened.

Second, Clinton told the Senate: “So I saw firsthand what Ambassador Pickering and former Chairman Mullen called timely and exceptional coordination: no delays in decision-making, no denials of support from Washington or from our military.” Yet testimony on Wednesday revealed that help was denied twice–once when support from the State Department’s Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) was denied, and once when Lt. Col. Gibson was told to stand down.

Third, Clinton told the Senate that she had not seen diplomatic cables from Libya requesting more security: “I didn’t see those requests. They didn’t come to me. I didn’t approve them. I didn’t deny them.” Yet Gen. Dempsey appeared to cast some doubt on Clinton’s testimony when he told the Senate in February that it seemed unlikely she had not seen the cables: “I would call myself surprised that she didn’t.”

***

Mrs. Clinton’s role in this matter remains obscure, in part because the State Department’s Accountability Review Board did not interview her, amazingly enough. The review board protected all of the department’s higher-ups and blamed career officials down the ladder. The board is now itself under investigation by State’s inspector general, and Wednesday’s testimony revealed the sore feelings of career officers about the review board’s conduct…

The hearing also showed the chasm between the culture of career civil servants ready to risk their lives and the vicious political culture of Washington. No doubt politics motivated some of the Republicans, but due to the nature of the hearing they were cast as investigators. Most Democrats appeared far more dedicated to defending Mrs. Clinton and the Obama administration than to finding out exactly what happened, and any criticism of Ms. Rice was rebutted. After all, Chris Stevens is gone but 2016 is just around the corner.

***

Senator Lindsey Graham says Hillary Clinton’s management of the Benghazi crisis could cost her a “promotion” to the presidency.

“In the military, she wouldn’t be promoted,” the South Carolina Republican tells National Review…

He points to her media appearances in the wake of the attacks as evidence of her shaky leadership skills. “How in the world could she have believed that the death of Chris Stevens was a spontaneous riot motivated by a hateful video? Either she is completely disconnected from reality or that was political spin.”

***

Credibility is Obama’s strong suit, a key reason why his personal approval ratings continue to buoy soft job approval scores. He can’t afford to lose that trust.

Credibility is Clinton’s vulnerability, dating to the unjustified financial accusations that triggered the Whitewater investigation. Doubts persisted about her veracity and authenticity throughout the 2008 presidential campaign…

Witnesses said the investigation, led by veteran retired diplomat Thomas Pickering, was inadequate. “They stopped short of interviewing people who I personally know were involved in key decisions,” testified Eric Nordstrom, an official in the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. The testimony of these credible whistleblowers may raise doubts in voters’ minds about how honestly the Obama administration faced its failings. Despite that, the Pickering report is a scathing indictment of State Department security efforts on Clinton’s watch. If she runs for president, embassy security will be a credible and durable issue…

Overreaching Republicans (conservative groups are raising money off the cover-up claims) are doing Obama and Clinton a favor. But the damage may already be done to the duo’s credibility – Obama’s strength and Clinton’s weakness.

***

Caring would have meant honoring the security request that came five months before the attack. Caring would have meant scrambling fighters and a tanker to refuel them, as well as accepting the offer of a ride from Tripoli to Benghazi for Special Ops troops aboard a Libyan government aircraft. Caring would have meant ensuring that sufficient military assets were stationed within a more reasonable range of a consulate in a volatile country. Caring would have meant relying on Americans, not Libyans, to provide security for the consulate.

Caring would have meant making a credible effort, but Barack “Wasn’t Me” Obama’s administration and Hillary “What Difference Does it Make?” Clinton’s State Department couldn’t manage so much as an empty gesture.

And with all of that knowledge in hand, the media will be desperate to duck out and cover the next story — any story. Are the cicadas here yet?…

Clinton may get dinged, because she doesn’t enjoy Obama’s utter invincibility against the truth. But her media security is darned good, too.

***

Yet as Democrats prepare for Hillary’spossible political comeback, so are Republicans and conservatives. Consequently, the GOP’s shift in focus shouldn’t be surprising, especially with 2016 on the horizon. But what’s striking is how sudden the transition seemed yesterday. Also striking is that it comes at a time when Clinton is enjoying her highest polling numbers, even among Republicans. In the April NBC/WSJ poll, 56% of respondents had a favorable view of her, including 23% of Republicans. (Compare that with Obama’s 8% among GOP respondents in the same poll.) Make no mistake: That Republican number is going to change for Clinton if she runs for president. So mark May 8, 2013 on your political calendars. That’s the date when Republican Party returned to what was its favorite pastime for a good part of the last 16 years (from 1992 to 2008): going after the Clintons. Folks, the “vast right-wing conspiracy” is back.

***

***

Smith said that she spoke to her son the day he died who told her he was worried about individuals he saw taking pictures of the Benghazi consulate. “He said he reported it and they didn’t care,” Smith said. “Our government does not care about us. They don’t care about us at all. They just care about saving their own butts and covering their souls, or whatever it is.”

“I wish you had gotten answers,” Tapper offered after a prolonged pause.

“So do I,” Smith answered. She said that she was promised answers by members of Obama’s administration, but has received none. “They don’t care. I’m not important to them,” Smith said.

***



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 4 5

Good night Axe!

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:09 AM

OOps, I did it again, but I ain’t linking that sh!t!

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:09 AM

SparkPlug on May 10, 2013 at 12:47 AM

Not depression…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 12:50 AM

Yeah, Chrissy – I’m still here….okay, this is gonna be a “twofer” and, yeah – these guys are from St. Louis……..

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:10 AM

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 12:58 AM

Gopher..:)

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:11 AM

Ok! (lights a cig)….

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:03 AM

Funny I picked Light Up..

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:11 AM

There are biatches and bastages aplenty in politics…

It bothered my sensibilities so much that I had to stop concerning myself with it as much as I had…

HA is the only place I come to for any news now and then I mostly skim thru everything…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:12 AM

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:11 AM

Can’t resist. Watching now!

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:13 AM

Somebody step on a duck?

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:15 AM

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:10 AM

You sure do pick some great music!! never heard of these guys :-)

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:15 AM

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:01 AM

Slow hand change..:)

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM

Calling it a night! I love you guys! Oh, and Chrissy (HUGS!!!)

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM

Chrissy, you know what a 45 is?
KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:08 AM

I do… used to have stacks of them!! Lol…

Good happy song!!

I prolly listen to too much ‘dark heavy’ stuff…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM

For What It’s Worth

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:19 AM

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM

God Bless you Ken!! Good night {hugs} :-)

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:19 AM

….yeah – these guys are incredible – fours groups formed from them after they broke up:

-Wilco

-Son Volt

-Whikeytown

-The Jayhawks

They played around St. Louis in some of the same clubs I used to play in – but a Looong time after I stopped playing there…….

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:21 AM

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:15 AM

You have good taste williamg… :-)

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:21 AM

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:21 AM

You got talent, do you still play?

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:22 AM

The Chord repetition at the end of “Anodyne” really whines at the strings of my soul…….

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:23 AM

Is there anything on youtube with you playing?

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:23 AM

I have to drop this here and leave, but I was wondering. What if the Castro guy gets off or eventually gets out of prison. Would he be able to get partial custody of that little girl? Would that even be possible?

cptacek on May 10, 2013 at 1:23 AM

I prolly listen to too much ‘dark heavy’ stuff…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM


Check this!

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM

Not right now…….but I have some recordings………

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM

Yes, I still play – but not like I used to

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:25 AM

equanimous on May 10, 2013 at 1:18 AM

I have hrs of that to listen to, my favs are whale song and wolves and thunder… :-)

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:26 AM

Rock The Casbah

Sharif don’t like it!

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:27 AM

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM

You know I like Styx!! :-) thanks! now get to bed!! lol…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:27 AM

cptacek on May 10, 2013 at 1:23 AM

OMG! I hope to God that is not possible! Doesn’t bear thinking about.

That would be totally phucked up!!

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:29 AM

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:26 AM

La petite fille de la mer…

equanimous on May 10, 2013 at 1:29 AM

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:27 AM

LOL, See you next time!

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:29 AM

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:25 AM

Glad to hear that you still play :-)

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:30 AM

KCB on May 10, 2013 at 1:29 AM

Nite nite Ken!! Sweet dreams eh :-D

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:30 AM

Day Of The Eagle

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:31 AM

equanimous on May 10, 2013 at 1:29 AM

Vangelis along with Michel Jean Jarre and Mike Oldfield are some of my favs… for electronic :-)

Video for that is wonderful!

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:33 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJJmS-HY234

One of my favs off this album…

Let there be light…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:35 AM

And on that last note, I must away!!

God bless you all…

Good night!!

*swoosh*

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:37 AM

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:26 AM

Bells..:)

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:38 AM

LOVE Robin Trower!!!!

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:39 AM

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:33 AM

…good stuff. *nod

equanimous on May 10, 2013 at 1:39 AM

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:27 AM novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:27 AM

Excellent tune..:)

PS..Hope the fish are biting for you..:)

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:45 AM

Enter Sandman

Motörhead

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:45 AM

Well, yeah – but……..THIS!!

williamg on May 10, 2013 at 1:52 AM

Dire Straits on May 10, 2013 at 1:45 AM

The fishing has been hard this year. Weather has been so inconsistent. I’ve had a couple of good days, but mostly I’m working to get a few in the basket. Sure haven’t been stocking the freezer.

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 1:52 AM

National Journal makes a nice try with “unjustified financial allegations,” but it’s not true. “unproven” is correct, she was never exonerated. The fact she hid a box of records from an active subpoena for two years in the White House shows she wasn’t cooperating, at the least.

But if Hillary is to be called to account, it should only be as the LAST witness. There is still a mountain of evidence to be brought out and examined, the Obama Regime is stonewalling even on unclassified emails. You don’t do that if nothing can hurt you.

I suspect that Hillary went to Obama by phone at some point and was told to make everyone stand down, if he didn’t issue the order himself. General Hamm needs to be interviewed in depth as well.

Adjoran on May 10, 2013 at 2:02 AM

Ball And Chain

novaculus on May 10, 2013 at 2:05 AM

I have to drop this here and leave, but I was wondering. What if the Castro guy gets off or eventually gets out of prison. Would he be able to get partial custody of that little girl? Would that even be possible?

cptacek

The only getting off in this guy’s future will be courtesy of some dude in prison. If by some miscarriage of justice he ever does experience freedom again, it will be long after the little girl is too old for anyone to claim custody.

xblade on May 10, 2013 at 2:10 AM

Ahhhhhh…. Clinton’s…… still don’t know what the meaning of IS….IS

their inability to tell the truth….is deep…deep in da DNA

roflmmfao

donabernathy on May 10, 2013 at 5:26 AM

Credibility is Obama’s strong suit

In what bizzaro universe.

98ZJUSMC on May 10, 2013 at 5:43 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJJmS-HY234

One of my favs off this album…

Let there be light…

Scrumpy on May 10, 2013 at 1:35 AM

Mike Oldfield is my favorite artist. I have everything of his. If you ever want to talk about his stuff, we can exchange e-mail addresses.

Theophile on May 10, 2013 at 6:05 AM

Hey, I missed some of Morning Joe, but they have Cokie Roberts on and she said someone is breaking some damning e-mails from some state officials such as Victoria Nuland suggesting that they had their hands all over recasting the talking points.

Anyone see this?

BuckeyeSam on May 10, 2013 at 6:23 AM

libs yelling that gop will rue the day they attacked hillary

lol

Good Morning folks!

so very happy it is friday, cmsinaz needs a vacay

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:35 AM

“Second, Hicks dropped a bombshell: The USA never asked Libya for permission to fly through Libyan airspace to defend the consulate in Benghazi. The Obama administration never intended to come to the defense of Ambassador Stevens. Hicks — fluent in Arabic and familiar with Libya’s government — testified that Libya would have granted permission.

Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) keeps reminding us that no one knew how long the attack would last. In fact, it was 3 days later when the embassy staff in Tripoli returned from evacuation to an annex. So at the time, U.S. F-16′s might still have been needed long past the first 7 hours. Hicks confirmed that he thought the situation was still dangerous for 3 days. Yet the U.S.A. never requested Libyan permission in case U.S. aircraft might be needed.

Third, Hicks asked the U.S. military to help immediately at the start of the 7-hour siege of the Benghazi consulate. F-16 fighter jets could have reached Benghazi in 2 to 3 hours from the 31st Fighter Wing in Aviano, Italy, Hicks testified. The embassy’s defense attaché was told that F-16′s could be over the Consulate in 2-3 hours.

That means the ambassador and 3 other Americans did not need to die. Remember that 2 died near the middle and 2 near the end of the 7-hour ordeal. Jets could have arrived prior to the last 4-5 hours of the assault. Hicks testified that Libyans were deeply afraid of U.S. airpower after months of bombing during the 2011 revolution. Just knowing that U.S. jets were in the area would have sent the consulate attackers fleeing, Hicks testified.However, Hicks repeatedly emphasized that there were no U.S. fuel tankers in the area to refuel the jets in the air. F-16′s have a range of — fuel supply for — 2,000 nautical miles. The distance from Aviano to Benghazi is 1,050 miles.

But this is the failure of Obama’s presidential leadership. What about NATO?

Obama should have been on the phone to the leaders of Greece, Italy, Germany, France, Spain…

It is only 450 miles from Athens, Greece. Greece’s Hellenic Air Force purchased 170 F-16s not long ago. Greece’s F-16′s were only 1 hour away from Benghazi. France has been conducting military air operations in North Mali and Chad in Africa.

Greek F-16s could have been buzzing the Benghazi consulate within 90 minutes, scaring the attackers within an inch of their lives. If we had an actual president in the White House, if this had been an actual presidency (like, say, that of Ronald Reagan), Barack Obama would have been on the phone to Greek President Karolos Papoulias instead of sleeping while American diplomats died.

The largest U.S. Air Force base in Europe is Ramstein in Germany, only 1,367 miles from Benghazi. So by the time the F-16′s from Aviano were running dry, a fuel tanker from Ramstein Air Force Base could have been pulling up alongside to refuel the F-16s. Or fighters from Ramstein could have relieved the Aviano jets, allowing those to land in Tripoli…

Fourth, there was indeed a “stand down” order preventing U.S. special forces from defending the Consulate, Hicks confirmed. Special forces at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli were ordered to “stand down” by General Carter F. Ham, Commander of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).

Lt. Col. Gibson was a commander assigned to the embassy in Tripoli from Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). Gibson and the special forces team were “furious” at being ordered not to help the diplomats in Benghazi, Hicks testified. Hicks quoted Gibson as saying, “This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military.”

Hicks had arranged from Libya’s government a C-130 aircraft owned by Libya to fly to Benghazi to evacuate the Consulate. Col. Gibson and Hicks agreed that the special forces team would fly on the C-130 to Benghazi to protect the diplomats being evacuated. But over the summer, authority over the special forces contingent in Libya had been transferred from the embassy to AFRICOM. Gen. Ham ordered the special forces team to stay in Tripoli.

Fifth, a “FEST” response was denied by Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department. A “Foreign Emergency Support Team” is the U.S. Government’s solution for this type of crisis. We learned that a FEST contains members of many agencies and departments, so that the FEST can access the full range of U.S. Government resources.

Mark Thompson immediately requested deployment of a Foreign Emergency Support Team to Libya. The U.S. State Department refused. It was “not the right time” to deploy a FEST, Hillary Clinton’s leadership decided. Thompson was Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism at the Department of State, in continuous contact with the embassy in Tripoli. Thompson explained that a FEST airplane is always on standby to respond to just this type of emergency.

But this is nonsense. A FEST is uniquely qualified to assess the situation on the ground, evaluate everything, and coordinate appropriate action from across the U.S. Government. A FEST is a command center on-site, specially equipped and trained. So, a FEST on-site is the appropriate means to evaluate the circumstances. So, it is absurd to suggest a FEST deployment would be “too soon.”

An email from Kathleen Austin-Ferguson, the White House discouraged FEST response. Did you notice that it was both “too soon” and also “too late” to tack any effective action to protect our diplomats in Libya?

Sixth, it is already being widely reported this week that talk of a demonstration against an anti-Muslim YouTube video was a monstrous and massive lie. However, an important point should be noted. Hicks testified that the massive lies by Ambassador Susan Rice caused a severe rift with the Libyan government.

Libya knew the video had nothing to do with it. So Libya’s government was shocked and puzzled. Libya stopped cooperating for about 2 weeks…”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/what_the_hearings_mean.html#ixzz2SsuipDux
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:35 AM

BuckeyeSam on May 10, 2013 at 6:23 AM

missed it…maybe they will bring it up again?

thanks buckeye for the heads up

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:37 AM

O/T: And the biggest, coldest power play of all in Obamacare came at the expense of the elderly.- Paul Ryan “Obamacare: The GOP Vs. the Death Panels My take.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 6:38 AM

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:35 AM

good one wca

will someone ask what the president knew and when he knew it? were folks afraid of disrupting his beauty sleep for the vegas fundraiser? who were giving ANY orders that night

lsm letting them get away with this crap….maybe with folks like cokie bringing emails up, folks on the sunday shows will talk about this or just pass it off with their usual, ‘gop witchhunt, this is a nothingburger where hillary already got slammed by the ARB report’ meme

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:41 AM

“However, the latest revelations highlight just how blatant Obama’s cover-up has been and raise the stakes. Hicks disclosed that he spoke to Clinton at 2am explaining that the embassy was under attack by terrorists (so much for Hillary being more prepared for the 3am wake-up call than Obama who apparently slept through the entire event before jetting off the next day to a campaign event in Las Vegas). Hicks went on to explain that he was “stunned” and “embarrassed” as he watched Susan Rice make the Sunday talk show rounds repeating the lies.

Hicks testified that these lies led to anger on the part of the Libyan president that “negatively affected our ability to get the FBI team quickly to Benghazi.” Furthermore, he attested that not only did the FBI never interview him during the course of its investigation despite his position and proximity to the events as they unfolded, but once Congressional investigators did arrive in Libya, the State Department did everything in its power to intimidate him and prevent him from speaking with them.

In addition to the cover-up that occurred after the attack, we also learned of the administration’s horrific handling of the situation throughout the seven-hour ordeal. Hicks testified that Special Forces were “furious” when they were told to stand down rather than intervene in order to save American lives. One month after the attack, former assistant secretary of defense, Bing West, wrote a devastating analysis of the failure to protect the Americans. He pointed out that Washington was immediately notified of the attack as it began and that the “White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, and numerous military headquarters monitored the entire battle in real time via the phone calls from Benghazi and video from a drone overhead.” He stated:

Our diplomats fought for seven hours without any aid from outside the country. Four Americans died while the Obama national-security team and our military passively watched and listened. The administration is being criticized for ignoring security needs before the attack and for falsely attributing the assault to a mob. But the most severe failure has gone unnoticed: namely, a failure to aid the living.

President Obama took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution as well as to faithfully execute the office of the presidency. He accepted the job of Commander-in-Chief and with that, the responsibility to protect U.S. citizens at home and abroad.

But on September 11th, Obama was singularly focused on his re-election while shirking his responsibilities as president, and in so doing he is ultimately responsible for the deaths of four Americans. Harry Truman recognized, “The buck stops here.”

There have been calls for Obama’s impeachment throughout his presidency. Nothing he has done to date has been as lethally blatant a dereliction of duty as Benghazigate. Do Obama’s inactions (relating to providing appropriate security prior to and during the attacks) and actions (relating to the dishonest statements and cover-ups after the attacks) rise to the level of an impeachable offense?

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides that “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

According to a document prepared by the Impeachment Inquiry Staff, Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives, “The Supreme Court has held that such [a phrase] must be construed, not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted [it].” The document indicates:

- Historical evidence “shows that the framers intended impeachment to be a constitutional safeguard of the public trust…”

- James Wilson, in the Pennsylvania convention, stated, “we have a responsibility in the person of our President; he cannot act improperly, and hide either his negligence or inattention…”

- Justice Joseph Story wrote that impeachment applies to offenses of “a political character…growing out of personal misconduct, or gross neglect, or usurpation, or habitual disregard of the public interest in the discharge of the duties of political office.”

As we learn more about the events surrounding the Benghazi murders, the possibility that Obama will ultimately be found guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors” appears greater every day…”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/is_benghazi_obamas_watergate.html#ixzz2Sswq2BqD
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:43 AM

jonathan karl, abc has piece that state dept did rewrite the talking points per cokie

but cokie doesn’t want to call it a scandal…

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:50 AM

so the lsm will probably spin this as someone below hillary changed the talking points and hillary wasn’t aware of it…

count it

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:50 AM

And, those are not “Death Panels” in Obamacare, they’re Independent Patient Advisory Boards./

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 6:52 AM

morning joe implying the cia scrubbed the report?

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:53 AM

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:35 AM

good one wca

will someone ask what the president knew and when he knew it? were folks afraid of disrupting his beauty sleep for the vegas fundraiser? who were giving ANY orders that night

lsm letting them get away with this crap….maybe with folks like cokie bringing emails up, folks on the sunday shows will talk about this or just pass it off with their usual, ‘gop witchhunt, this is a nothingburger where hillary already got slammed by the ARB report’ meme

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:41 AM

The Legacy Media is dying.

Most Americans get their news with New Media as a result and many (Including Journolistas) are devoted to Twitter…In the twittersphere conservatives have been effective in trouncing the liberals who vie for domination of the all important narrative.

So I guess we’ll see.

Either way Benghazi is now a matter of congressional record…which makes both parties subject to the scrutiny of history.

If Republicans fail to act…that politically cowardly decision would conclude the process of neutering congress in it’s constitutional duty of checks & balance in relation to the executive.

By then we might as well Crown Ill Duce Obama…imho

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

jonathan karl, abc has piece that state dept did rewrite the talking points per cokie

but cokie doesn’t want to call it a scandal…

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:50 AM

In Congress, I think it’s called, “clarifying and modifying’ earlier remarks. In sum, “Oops! I need to cover my butt!”

Liam on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 6:52 AM

heh

another good takj KJ

you and mrs kj have an excellent weekend, ya hear

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

By then we might as well Crown Ill Duce Obama…imho

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

*shudder*

Liam on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

heh evolving

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:56 AM

so the lsm will probably spin this as someone below hillary changed the talking points and hillary wasn’t aware of it…

count it

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM

That’s what the ARB suggested…The fault was with actions of lower level career civil servants yada yada yada.

The ARB isn’t credible since they never interviewed Key Eyewitnesses.

Even worse…The FBI didn’t either.

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 6:57 AM

“I think Hillary (Clinton) should be subpoenaed if necessary.”

OH HELL, YES!

Issa’s committee has subpoena power- use it. Ask her the same question as what Ron Johnson asked before. When did you know that the attack on Benghazi was not the result of a video. And don’t take that arrogant snarky “What difference, at this point, does it make?” With any luck she’ll be on tape with “upon advice of counsel I respectfully decline to answer due to exercising my Fifth Amendment rights. I would make one great campaign ad for anybody running against her.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:00 AM

In the twittersphere conservatives have been effective in trouncing the liberals who vie for domination of the all important narrative.

So true! In the best Twitter beatdown ever, Meghan McCain tweeted Mark Sanford is what’s wrong with American politics. Iowahawk shot back, “If it wasn’t for politicians who cheat on their wives, you wouldn’t exist.”

The libs are going to lose big-time on Twitter.

Liam on May 10, 2013 at 7:00 AM

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:54 AM

Thank you, ma’am!

Don’r worry. We will.:)

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 7:03 AM

morning joe implying the cia scrubbed the report?

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:53 AM

ABC reporting that State Department was heavily involved in the scrubbing of those talking points so that Radical Islam and Jihad came out YouTube and spontaneous demonstration. My prediction is that Hillary is going to be back on her deathbed really fast.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:03 AM

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:03 AM

In the twittersphere conservatives have been effective in trouncing the liberals who vie for domination of the all important narrative.

So true! In the best Twitter beatdown ever, Meghan McCain tweeted Mark Sanford is what’s wrong with American politics. Iowahawk shot back, “If it wasn’t for politicians who cheat on their wives, you wouldn’t exist.”

The libs are going to lose big-time on Twitter.

Liam on May 10, 2013 at 7:00 AM

The list of xcellent conservatives on Twitter punching back twice as hard is lengthy…

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 7:05 AM

jonathan karl, abc has piece that state dept did rewrite the talking points per cokie

but cokie doesn’t want to call it a scandal…

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:50 AM

I tuned in again when Joe was talking to Lanny Davis. I didn’t see it all, but Davis seemed to believe that the emails let Obama off the hook. I think he seemed to be saying that the revisions were done by people at State and the CIA. Joe was having trouble getting Davis to admit that his girl Hillary might suffer some damage.

BuckeyeSam on May 10, 2013 at 7:06 AM

When the defense of HIllary and Obama is lead by a narrative set by MediaMatters and the Daily Show…. You know the libs are running one fumes. “Let’s beat back this story with absurd talking points and humor”

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:07 AM

So true! In the best Twitter beatdown ever, Meghan McCain tweeted Mark Sanford is what’s wrong with American politics. Iowahawk shot back, “If it wasn’t for politicians who cheat on their wives, you wouldn’t exist.”

Liam on May 10, 2013 at 7:00 AM

Now that’s funny.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:08 AM

Just like the Gosnell Case, the New American Media is keeping it in front of the public’s eyes, while the New Pravda is doing its best to ignore it.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 7:10 AM

First, she told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that “we didn’t have a clear picture” of what had happened in Benghazi. Yet Greg Hicks, who had been second in command at the U.S. mission in Libya, testified Wednesday that he spoke to Clinton on the night of Sep. 11-12 and told her exactly what had happened.

OOOPS!

So I saw firsthand what Ambassador Pickering and former Chairman Mullen called timely and exceptional coordination: no delays in decision-making, no denials of support from Washington or from our military.” Yet testimony on Wednesday revealed that help was denied twice–once when support from the State Department’s Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) was denied, and once when Lt. Col. Gibson was told to stand down.

OOOOOOOOPS!!!

Clinton told the Senate that she had not seen diplomatic cables from Libya requesting more security: “I didn’t see those requests. They didn’t come to me. I didn’t approve them. I didn’t deny them.” Yet Gen. Dempsey appeared to cast some doubt on Clinton’s testimony when he told the Senate in February that it seemed unlikely she had not seen the cables: “I would call myself surprised that she didn’t.”

OOOOOOOOOOOOPS!!!

You knew, Hillary. You had a clear picture, and you delayed action. You also knew about the security concerns.

She needs to be subpoenaed and have her words—then the facts—read back to her.

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:10 AM

morning joe implying the cia scrubbed the report?

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:53 AM

ABC reporting that State Department was heavily involved in the scrubbing of those talking points so that Radical Islam and Jihad came out YouTube and spontaneous demonstration. My prediction is that Hillary is going to be back on her deathbed really fast.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:03 AM

“But it is never too late for the truth. And one of the insights we learned on Wednesday from Gregory Hicks, former deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli, was that despite vociferous and repeated claims to the contrary, the only “non-event” in Libya was the staging of riots over a YouTube video. The YouTube videos that are significant, however, are those in which we see Jay Carney pronounce three days after the attack, “Let’s Be Clear. These Protests Were in Reaction to a Video”.

Susan Rice proclaim on five different Sunday morning news shows just after the attack, “This was not a pre-planned, premeditated attack” but rather the result of spontaneous “demonstrations” inspired by a video. And we cannot ignore Obama’s appearance on Letterman just one week after the tragedy in which arrogantly declared (sans the “uhs”):

Here’s what happened. We had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is a [sic] extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed and Islam…making fun of the prophet Mohammed and so this caused great offense in much of the Muslim world. But what also happened was extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies including the consulate in Libya. – Obama

And then there is Clinton’s promise to Charles Wood, father of slain Navy SEAL Tyrone Wood, that “she will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.” No wonder the mother of slain Foreign Service officer, Sean Smith blames Clinton for her only child’s murder.

It is bad enough that Obama trotted out his good little foot soldiers Carney and Rice to look the American people in the eye and lie. It is disgusting that the Secretary of State looked the victims’ family members in the eye knowing full well she was not telling the truth while ensuring that an innocent individual would be sent to prison as the administration’s scapegoat. But the President of the United States who was entrusted with protecting the American people blatantly lied to the them as well.

How do these people sleep at night? The answer to that question goes to the core of who they are. It is ironic that Obama described an unknown filmmaker as a “shadowy character” while never admitting that his administration is full of nefariously sinister characters who to this day continue to perpetuate lies about what happened on September 11, 2012 and do everything in their power from preventing the truth from being discovered.

However, the latest revelations highlight just how blatant Obama’s cover-up has been and raise the stakes…”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/is_benghazi_obamas_watergate.html#ixzz2St49F3bt
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 7:11 AM

Good Morning folks!

so very happy it is friday, cmsinaz needs a vacay

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 6:35 AM

hola and happy friday!

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:12 AM

I tuned in again when Joe was talking to Lanny Davis. I didn’t see it all, but Davis seemed to believe that the emails let Obama off the hook. I think he seemed to be saying that the revisions were done by people at State and the CIA. Joe was having trouble getting Davis to admit that his girl Hillary might suffer some damage.

BuckeyeSam on May 10, 2013 at 7:06 AM

Davis has a regular Thursday slot on local talk radio duriny my morning commute. It literally is the only time that I HAVE to change the channel. Davis is a liberal toad who definitely will speak no ill of the Clintons.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:12 AM

The ARB report is looking more and more ridiculous everyday. I can’t believe a good republican appointee like Pickering would put his name on the report knowing that the whitehouse would use it as cover for their incompetence.

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:12 AM

However, the latest revelations highlight just how blatant Obama’s cover-up has been and raise the stakes…”

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 7:11 AM

Congressman Frank Wolf on local radio right now calling for Select Committee to investigate Benghazi in the next 90 days. 140 sponsors of the bill. He says it is important to restore credibility of government.

At a minimum I want DoD to explain just why they were unable to provide assistance during an 8 hour window that could have been much longer as far as they knew at the time. If they were told to stand down, who gave the order (hint it has rat-ears).

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:17 AM

Sorry if this has already been posted:

May 10, 2013 6:33am
When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack. LINK

Is this “smoke” I’m smelling?

Rovin on May 10, 2013 at 7:18 AM

Also, here’s a great two-minute utube titled: “I Take Responsibility”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xubPD77UorU&feature=player_embedded

Rovin on May 10, 2013 at 7:20 AM

The ARB report is looking more and more ridiculous everyday. I can’t believe a good republican appointee like Pickering would put his name on the report knowing that the whitehouse would use it as cover for their incompetence.

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:12 AM

The ARB really just looked at State’s performance. The Dems are waving it around like Candy Crowley with a chicken leg. But it really isn’t a definitive report about anything. It acknowledges well-known problems without really placing blame and it doesn’t answer the fundamental questions brought forth by this week’s whistleblowers and others. For example, why didn’t the ARB interview the drone operators which were providing State with real-time video of their ambassador getting killed? Why wasn’t Hillary ever interviewed.

Mullen and Pickering even refused to testify before Congress. They know they created a document designed to keep Hillary’s White House aspirations alive after she managed to kill four Americans by her neglect.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:21 AM

thx rovin!

yowza!

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

Related: Read the Full Benghazi Talking Point Revisions

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.

***ummm*** is this a bombshell or just more of what we already knew??

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:22 AM

I don’t see Davis on Fox News much anymore. that probably got as tired or him as they did Prof. Marc Lamont Hill.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 7:24 AM

Is this “smoke” I’m smelling?

Rovin on May 10, 2013 at 7:18 AM

Well, at a minimum, I want names. Who at state were asking that Al Qaeda and CIA warnings be deleted from the document Susan Rice used to lie her ass off on that Sunday Morning.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:25 AM

“But as Ken Sheperd shows (citing ABC News) that a request for security help – in the form of an aircraft – from the Libyan embassy, was rejected by the State Department in Washington. Given that the request came from the security team, one would hope that the State Department would have at least been curious as to why the security situation required the plane.

The Cable at Foreign Policy offers 6 new things the hearing told us. The first two were:

The moment the phrase “Islamic terrorists” first left the State Department’s lips

Today, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) divulged a previously undisclosed e-mail revealing just how early senior members of the State Department concluded that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. In a Sept. 12 e-mail from Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs Beth Jones to Amb. Susan Rice and several other top State officials, Jones said, full-stop, “The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.” The e-mail provides new fodder for Rice critics wondering why she actively rebuffed questions about a planned terrorist attack on TV while her own colleagues had been saying just that for days. In addition to Jones, Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli, said he knew immediately that the assault on the compound was a terrorist attack.

and

Hillary engineered a mass Benghazi coverup, debunked

One of the more interesting flash points today was an exchange between Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) and Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism at the State Department. For days, Thompson’s leaked testimony made headlines with the claim that on Sept. 11, Hillary Clinton cut the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of reporting for political reasons. However, when Norton pressed Thompson on the issue, he rescinded the allegation that he was pushed out of the loop for political reasons and confessed to not knowing why he wasn’t included. “The quote isn’t entirely accurate?” asked Norton. “Correct,” said Thompson.

If the State Department knew that it was terrorism from the start and still sent Ambassador Rice out claiming otherwise, isn’t that still a coverup?

Even if Thompson didn’t know for sure why he was demoted, it’s interesting to note that (later in the list of six things) that Gregory Hicks was also demoted. This suggests political considerations were in play.

Jake Tapper interviewed Thomas Pickering of the Accountability Review Board. Tapper writes in his report:

It now appears Ambassador Stevens was sent to Benghazi, despite the increasingly dangerous situation.

“According to Chris, Secretary Clinton wanted Benghazi converted into a permanent constituent post. Timing for this decision was important. Chris needed to report before September 30th, the end of the fiscal year on the political and security environment in Benghazi to support an action memo to convert Benghazi from a temporary facility to a permanent facility,” Hicks testified.

Benghazi was very significant for U.S. interests, said Pickering.

It’s true that this account came from Hicks, but it doesn’t appear to be contradicted by Tapper or Pickering. (Did Tapper read this quote to Pickering? It’s unclear.) But the Accountability Review Board wrote:

The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice. Timing for his trip was driven in part by commitments in Tripoli, as well as a staffing gap between principal officers in Benghazi. Plans for the Ambassador’s trip provided for minimal close protection security support and were not shared thoroughly with the Embassy’s country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off compound. The Ambassador did not see a direct threat of an attack of this nature and scale on the U.S. Mission in the overall negative trendline of security incidents from spring to summer 2012. His status as the leading U.S. government advocate on Libya policy, and his expertise on Benghazi in particular, caused Washington to give unusual deference to his judgments.

Was Stevens sent, or did he go on his own? Was the accountability review board provided with all the necessary information it needed to make its determination (that lower level State Department employees failed)?…”

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/05/the-post-benghazi-hearing-spin-begins/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 7:25 AM

Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror…
ABC News · 33 minutes ago
Could Benghazi impact Hillary Clinton in 2016?
CBS News · 1 hour ago

dude?.. it’s not even friday afternoon. Is the press taking the garbage out early today????

Is the bus getting revved up to bumpity bump over hillary’s badonka donk??

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:26 AM

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 7:03 AM

from your keyboard hn

BuckeyeSam on May 10, 2013 at 7:06 AM

agree, he’s still blaming cia for putting in their report that it could be due to the video…

workingclass artist on May 10, 2013 at 7:11 AM

good one

morning ted c :)

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:12 AM

the libs will hold on to it as their life saver, over/under on the sunday talk shows they are going to bring it up as the gold standard….

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 7:26 AM

Could Benghazi impact Hillary Clinton in 2016?
CBS News · 1 hour ago

I’m sure bob schieffer will answer that with a resounding “NO!” on sunday morning, right bob??

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:28 AM

Sadly I think that 95% of the facts are now out and they make Clinton look terrible. Yet I think the media sees that if they can look the other way a little longer it will blow over soon. Watch

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 7:28 AM

OOOOOOOOOOOOPS!!!

You knew, Hillary. You had a clear picture, and you delayed action. You also knew about the security concerns.

She needs to be subpoenaed and have her words—then the facts—read back to her.

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 7:10 AM

They should have all the whistleblowers truth-tellers they can find testify and THEN put Hillary’s ample butt back in the hot seat. Under oath this time, though that will mean nothing to her.

Credibility is Obama’s strong suit, a key reason why his personal approval ratings continue to buoy soft job approval scores. He can’t afford to lose that trust.

Is Ron Fournier tripping or what?

Naturally Curly on May 10, 2013 at 7:28 AM

At the rate this is going, Christie/Rubio will be the 2016 Democratic Presidential Ticket.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 7:28 AM

can i blame candy crowley….this could have been a game changer for romney, wished he stuck to his guns a little more with it dang it…

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 7:30 AM

poster on abc had a good point…abc calling this ‘exclusive’ yet steve hayes brought this all to light the week before…

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 7:32 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5