Re: Susan Rice, Obama and Benghazi
posted at 4:47 pm on November 19, 2012 by Guy Benson
A few follow-up thoughts on the Washington Guardian’s weekend Benghazi revelation (which Ed wrote about on Saturday): If Obama was fully briefed on the true nature of the terrorist attack within 72 hours, Susan Rice’s subsequent disinformation tour isn’t the only public relations scandal here. To recap, Rice appeared on the Sunday chat shows five days after the raid — and two days after the president was reportedly briefed — falsely asserting that (1) the violence had spun out of “spontaneous” protests, (2) the US had “no information” pointing to a premeditated attack, and (3) our security presence in Benghazi was “substantial” — her most insulting claim of all. But perhaps she was simply an unwitting victim of drastically edited talking points. The president knew better, yet his White House chose to deploy her to recite a specific and misleading version of events for public consumption. But let’s not forget that on September 25, two full weeks after the attack, Obama himself was still publicly hedging on the terrorism question. Here is the answer he gave during a taping of The View — which, incidentally, he prioritized over bilateral meetings with world leaders at the United Nations:
As a final aside, count me as a skeptic of the notion that Obama wasn’t aware of the clear terrorism evidence until three days after the massacre:
One would imagine that if (a) if our people in Benghazi were urgently warning of an imminent organized assault several hours before it occurred, and (b) if people inside the White House watched the raid unfold in real time over a video feed for seven hours, and (c)if there were reports of an Al Qaeda affiliate claiming credit for the attack within two hours, the president probably would have been informed about the terrorism intel far sooner than 72 hours later — even if he did sleep through the attack itself, during which our besieged personnel were pleading for back-up that never came.
I see that MSNBC is now referring to Republicans who continue to seek the truth about what happened in Benghazi as “conspiracy” mongers. Nothing to see here, folks — unless you’re a sexist bigot, of course.