Patterico's Pontifications

10/15/2012

Hillary Not Content Under Bus; UPDATE: Throws Herself Right Under It!

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:57 am

The nonsense about the YouTube video causing the Benghazi attack? Yeah, that wasn’t the State Department, says Hillary. It was the White House:

The State Department has said that it never believed the September 11th attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was the result of a protest over an anti-Islam movie – directly contracting the rest of the Obama administration.

By trying to distance her department from the inept and deceptive handling of the Benghazi attack, which left U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American officials dead, Hillary Clinton could help herself politically for a 2016 presidential run.

Mitt had better make this an issue tomorrow night.

UPDATE: Hillary is throwing her own self under the bus!

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the bucks stops with her when it comes to who is blame for a deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

“I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru for a visit. The interview, one of a series given to U.S. television networks Monday night, were the first she has given about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Clinton insisted President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are not involved in security decisions, Clinton said.

“I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha,” she added, noting that it is close to the election.

OK, tell us what you did wrong and how, Hil.

UPDATE x2: Second question: did you tell Susan Rice to go out and lie about all this?

317 Responses to “Hillary Not Content Under Bus; UPDATE: Throws Herself Right Under It!”

  1. I’m tired of everything being politicized.

    Our ambassador died. We suffered a substantial loss of aircraft. We look weak in a part of the world where that matters the most.

    And the administration is doing all it can to work the issue politically. To some extent, I think Romney’s campaign has tried not to make too much political hay over this, which I appreciate. But I do think when the President and the Secretary of State are pointing the finger at eachother, after a string of other blamegame disasters (like Fast and Furious) that it’s a legitimate campaign issue.

    But I remember all those creeps who cheerfully pointed out that 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. This terrorist attack is ultimately the fault of the terrorists… not Obama. Lessons need to be learned, and the handling of the story is an important story, but I hope Romney can do what Obama promised and then didn’t deliver: find some way to make some of these issues post partisan.

    We’re going to be in this conflict with the Middle East for a long time.

    Dustin (73fead)

  2. Our ambassador died.

    *was murdered, actually.

    Dustin (73fead)

  3. I was thinking this is another example of projection. Obama and company know that if the Repubs were in power, they would do all they could to attribute blame (with the most negative connotations) to those in power. Hence they work double time to avoid being “blamed”/taking responsibility, which leads them to “not learning the Nixon lesson” and exponentially increasing their troubles by trying to cover up.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  4. There are two issues:

    1) How much security was there in Benghazi, and did anyone realize the danger (even if nobody was proposing something taht would ahve been enough to have saved the lkives of the people killed)

    2) Where did this idea that the attack on the Benghazi compound started with a demonstration against a video come from? (and why was this pushed in the public arena so much the following weekend?)

    The State Department pleads not guilty on Count 2.

    They never said anything like that.

    On Count 1, the Administration blames Congress.

    Biden seems have blamed the State Department for not saying more personnel = money -was needed.

    But, of course they could have asked for more money, or they could have reassigned the money – doing less, let’s say, in Turkey and Jordan or Malaysia or the Phillipines, and more in Libya, or they could have used some of the $2 billion or so in extra money that is appropriated by Congress for unplanned needs every year.

    Barack Obama wanted to show people what a big budget cutter he was when it came to demostic discretionary spending. And he wanted to show the siutuation in Libya was now stable and improving.

    Darrel Issa said yesterday on face teh Nation that as Republican, he maybe shouldn’t really say that (well close to those words) but this was like Bush and “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  5. In the blog post, “contracting” should be “contradicting”.

    Also, if I remember correctly, when Hillary spoke at the arrival ceremony for the coffins, she blamed the video. And I think she is connected to the State Department.

    Andrew (3ebb76)

  6. So many typos..

    * that would have been enough

    * to have saved the lives of the people killed

    * domestic discretionary spending (even the military personnel.

    The Pentagon would have had to be reimbursed by the State Department for any personnel they sent to Libya. BTW I read the marines are there to guard the documents (and the buildings maybe) they never guard the State Department people – the State Department has the diplomatic Security Corps for that.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  7. * Darrel Issa said yesterday on Face the Nation that as Republican, he maybe shouldn’t really say that…

    Here’s the transcript:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/2102-3460_162-57532077.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

    REPRESENTATIVE DARRELL ISSA: Okay. What the Democrats are saying and Mister Cummings will say in a minute is that we quote, “Cut three hundred million.”

    The vote that reduced what the President had asked for, which would have been an increase was a hundred and forty-nine Democrats to a hundred and forty-seven Republicans, and quite frankly, it was, in fact, sufficient. We’ve been told that.

    You can’t always look to money when there is money sitting there. There’s 2.2 billion in discretionary reprogrammable money that wasn’t used.

    The fact is they are making a decision not to put security in because they don’t want the presence of security. In our hearing, and in testimony, we were told they removed their diplomatic plates because they wanted to be invisible. They didn’t put any markings on this building that was attacked because they didn’t want to have people know they were. That is not how you do security.

    After there was a twelve-foot hole blown in the wall of this compound, all they did was rebuild the wall, no new reinforcement, no kind of capability to protect somebody inside. Now, it happened to be an ambassador that was killed, along with three others. It could have been any federal employee, any contract employee that was killed. And it still would have been the warning signs were there, and they weren’t heeded.

    BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): What do you–

    REPRESENTATIVE DARRELL ISSA: The money was there– yes.

    BOB SCHIEFFER: What do you think the reason for all this was when you come down to it? Was it simply incompetence?

    REPRESENTATIVE DARRELL ISSA: This is not very Republican, if you will, but when President George W. Bush went aboard an aircraft carrier and said, “mission accomplished” I listened rightfully so to people saying, look, but there’s still problems, and they’re still dying, and quite frankly, things got worse in many ways after that famous statement.

    BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.

    REPRESENTATIVE DARRELL ISSA: We’re going through a mission accomplished moment. Eleven years after September 11th, Americans were attacked on September 11th by terrorists who preplanned to kill Americans. That happened and we can’t be in denial. Particularly, when there are– there are compounds all over the Middle East that need to be legitimately protected at a level that security professionals ask for it.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  8. The link indicates Amb Stevens died from smoke inhalation after the terrorists dumped cans of diesel in the building and ignited them. Stevens stayed in the safe room and was never seen alive again. A security guard who decided to face the withering fire of rocket-propelled grenades was killed trying to escape through a window.

    That sounds like the terrible choices faced by the people in the Twin Towers on 9/11.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  9. 1. Comment by Dustin — 10/15/2012 @ 8:11 am

    1.I’m tired of everything being politicized.

    This is not imaginary incomptence. It’s real.

    What politicizes this is saying that Administration was lying in saying they had intelligence indicating this started with a demonstration.

    I think they really did have such intelligence.

    Sooper sekrit foreign intelligence that nobody can talk about.

    I don’t think they are making it up.

    And it should be an issue, although this more of a personal issue with the president and the administration, rather than a Democratic or Republican issue.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  10. Didn’t Hillary also tell the story? Isn’t the Ambassaador to the UN under Hillary Clinton’s jurisdiction?

    So they said something in their official capacity they knew all along was untrue?

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  11. If Gore was POTUS on 9/11/01, Repugs would have screamed for impeachment.

    However, Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    You are beneath contempt in attacking the Commander in Chief in such a partisan way during times of international tension.

    You side with the enemy against Obama.

    You are not Americans, you are traitorous self-serving partisans.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  12. And when I say “you” I include the contemptible weasel Willard in that.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  13. 8. Comment by DRJ — 10/15/2012 @ 8:32 am

    The link indicates Amb Stevens died from smoke inhalation after the terrorists dumped cans of diesel in the building and ignited them. Stevens stayed in the safe room and was never seen alive again. A security guard who decided to face the withering fire of rocket-propelled grenades was killed trying to escape through a window.

    That sounds like the terrible choices faced by the people in the Twin Towers on 9/11.

    That story omits the fact that a third person (whose name has not been released, since he is alive) did escape.

    Also I thought the second person (Sean Smith) was also overcome by smoke.

    I had some questions about whether or not Ambassador Stevens really dies from smoke inhalation. He might have been strangled and put back in the house.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  14. I think they really did have such intelligence.

    I think that’s unlikely and contradicted by many reports.

    Dustin (73fead)

  15. Take a breath, Tillman. Democrats incessantly questioned Bush’s decisions and thought of themselves as heroes who were patriotically protecting America from the evil cowboy. We’re simply giving Obama’s decisions the scrutiny that the most transparent Administration in American history wants and deserves.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  16. However, Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    That’s only true for some. There were many who trafficked in truther conspiracy theories, which is almost treasonous (and in some cases, actually is).

    Then there are those who delight in smearing the memories of those who heroically defended our country, such as you, a troll who took the name of a KIA soldier in order to be a nastier troll.

    Yet you spend 100% of your time judging others. I guess that’s the only way to avoid looking in the mirror.

    You side with the enemy against Obama.

    You are not Americans

    I guess dissent isn’t patriotic if the president is a democrat?

    Dustin (73fead)

  17. Sammy,

    You seem mesmerized by hidden meanings and conspiracy theories. Sometimes I like to indulge in that speculation, too, but facts matter. Ignore them at your peril.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  18. “What politicizes this is saying that Administration was lying in saying they had intelligence indicating this started with a demonstration.

    I think they really did have such intelligence.

    Sooper sekrit foreign intelligence that nobody can talk about.”

    Sammy – Maybe it is sooper seekrit intelligence about the sooper sekrit demonstration that people now agree never took place in Benghazi.

    I think Eli Lake writing at the Daily Beast exposed the very tenuous link to the video story in one of the intercepted communications between Islamist groups, that given the events in Cairo, they were going to proceed with their preplanned attack.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  19. The very legitimate criticism of the Obama Administration is that despite their proclamations to the contrary, they really did seem to believe that once bin Laden was dead that al Qaeda would just fold up their tents and go home. Combine that with Obama’s narcissistic notion that the magnificence of his personality would win over the hearts and minds of everyone who views the U.S. with suspicion, and it becomes pretty clear that the foreign policy of the Obama Administration is marked by a predilection for wishful thinking. I don’t think that is politicizing the issue; it’s just drawing a conclusion based upon nearly four years of observing them in action.

    JVW (f5695c)

  20. When our intelligence agencies and military killed Bin Laden, Obama stepped up and took full credit for it. They fail to protect our embassies, that’s the State Department’s fault and Obama is blameless.

    The absolute unaccountability of this president, trying to maintain his infallible, godlike image to his supporters, is staggering.

    CrustyB (69f730)

  21. they really did seem to believe that once bin Laden was dead that al Qaeda would just fold up their tents and go home.

    I agree.

    Bush didn’t have Osama on the back burner, but his administration wisely noted that our fight against Al Qaida is much larger in scope than this one man.

    Turns out that Bush was right, and Obama was wrong.

    Dustin (73fead)

  22. #4 – But, of course they could have asked for more money, or they could have reassigned the money – doing less, let’s say, in Turkey and Jordan or Malaysia or the Phillipines, and more in Libya, or they could have used some of the $2 billion or so in extra money that is appropriated by Congress for unplanned needs every year.

    – Better yet – why not reallocate security funds from those really dangerous places such Oslo, Paris, London, Ottawa, etc to those safer places such as yemen, libya, etc.

    Joe-Dallas (ea8609)

  23. Comment by Amphipolis — 10/15/2012 @ 8:34 am

    Didn’t Hillary also tell the story?

    I think we better check and parse her words. In any case what the State Department denied was that they were the source of the bad intelligence.

    There really was such bad intelligence, or claims.

    In Libya, Chaos Was Followed by Organized Ambush, Official Says (New York Times Sept. 13 online, Sept 14 newspaper)

    Mr. Sharif, a deputy interior minister, said Mr. Stevens and a second American diplomat, Sean Smith, were killed in the initial attack, which began as a disorganized but angry demonstration by civilians and militants outside the American Consulate on Tuesday, the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The protest escalated into an assault by as many as 200 people, some armed with grenades, who set the building on fire.

    The New York Times further reported:

    Parts of Mr. Sharif’s account were not consistent with what other Libyan witnesses have said, and his version has not been corroborated by American officials, who have said it remains unclear how and where Mr. Stevens was killed.

    “American officials” = State Department officials.

    Remember, I said, Wanis el-Sharif was not to be trusted, partially because his name was spelled in English in so many different ways. I also don’t think he was the only person coming out with this disinformation.

    We now know also that at least one member of Ansar al-Sharia told a story like that to somebody in Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
    (probably based in Mali – Al Qaeda has taken over Timbuktoo:)

    Imperiled Legacy for African Art – NYTimes Aug 5, 2012 datelined Aug 2

    More chilling were reports last month of cultural property being destroyed in Timbuktu, Mali, some 200 miles north of Djenne. Islamist groups, affiliated with Al Qaeda, have singled out Sufism, a moderate, mystical form of Islam widespread in Mali, for attack. In Timbuktu, with its Koranic schools and manuscript libraries, they have begun leveling the tombs of Sufi saints, objects of popular devotion.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  24. “You are beneath contempt in attacking the Commander in Chief in such a partisan way during times of international tension.”

    Petey – When a CIC deliberately instructs his administration to disseminate a web of blatant lies about a serious foreign security incident in which lives are lost to avoid negative impact on his reelection campaign, it makes people angry. This president has a history of such antics.

    See Fast and Furious.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  25. I meant to stop the boldface and separate what in the New York Times from what I said.

    This is mine:

    “American officials” = State Department officials.

    Remember, I said, Wanis el-Sharif was not to be trusted, partially because his name was spelled in English in so many different ways.

    I also don’t think he was the only person coming out with this disinformation.

    We now know also that at least one member of Ansar al-Sharia told a story like that to somebody in Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
    (probably based in Mali – Al Qaeda has taken over Timbuktoo:)

    This obviously comes from some monitoring of Al Qa

    Isn’t the Ambassador to the UN under Hillary Clinton’s jurisdiction?

    Not really. As I said in another thread, she has Cabinet rank, and reports, or can report, directlky to the president or the national security Council and so on.

    So they said something in their official capacity they knew all along was untrue?

    Well, you know, it was Obama who was president.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  26. Comment by daleyrocks — 10/15/2012 @ 8:49 am

    Sammy – Maybe it is sooper seekrit intelligence about the sooper sekrit demonstration that people now agree never took place in Benghazi.

    I think Eli Lake writing at the Daily Beast exposed the very tenuous link to the video story in one of the intercepted communications between Islamist groups, that given the events in Cairo, they were going to proceed with their preplanned attack.

    That’s only one source. Somebody in the Libyan government also said that.

    But, as I said in comment number 73 in this thread (I don’t know how to link directly to taht comment)

    http://patterico.com/2012/09/15/the-onion-blatant-blaspheming-of-jewish-christian-hindu-and-buddhist-religions-somehow-results-in-no-violence-whatsoever/

    Nobody should trust this guy: The Libyan deputy minister for the Interior in charge of eastern Libya, whose name is:

    Wanis al-Sharef CBS early on

    OR

    Wanees Sharif Wall Street Journal Wednesday

    OR

    Wanis el-Sharif – New York Times Friday

    OR

    Wanis al-Sharif – Wall Street Journal Friday

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 9/15/2012 @ 11:02 pm

    I also said:

    …Who translates the trailer into Arabic?

    The attack on the consulate in Libya had too many fathers. There’s the video of the supposed anti-Islam film – but there’s also a video from Ayman al_Zawahiri, released the day before, that acknowledges his deputy al-Libi was killed in June, and asks for vengeance. And they act the next day?

    There were 4 videos released in a short time; CIA analysts were kept busy, and never had time to notice a possible threat, but now it looks like a cause, doesn’t it?

    This is also a red herring. No way was that attack in Benghazi a spur of the moment decision – but that’s what they want the U.S. government to think.

    Barack Obama or whoever was in charge of evaluating intelligence fell for it, lock, stock and barrel, and they evidently wouldn’t listen to any dissenters..

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  27. Comment by daleyrocks — 10/15/2012 @ 8:57 am

    See Fast and Furious.

    That’s worse.

    This they believed. If they had not believed it, it would have made no sense at all for Susan Rice to on the offensive so much with that story.

    Fast and Furious has a bunch of half truths – like it’s the same operation that went on under Bush. It was a revival.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  28. ==25.I meant to stop the boldface and separate what in the New York Times from what I said==

    Sammy– when I post here I can see a preview of how my post will look in an area directly below the comment box and the “submit comment” button. I’ll admit that in haste I frequently miss a spelling error or something similar, but it is easy to see if quotes or bolded sections are printing wrong, and one can run spellcheck and correct all those things before hitting send. Do you see that in your browser/screen?

    elissa (05a102)

  29. “That’s worse.”

    Sammy – Congress, Mexico and the American public were lied to and stonewalled about the origins, purpose and results of the program. Forget half-truths. Hundreds of people died as a result of the weapons grade stupid initiative and we still don’t have all the answers.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  30. ==When our intelligence agencies and military killed Bin Laden, Obama stepped up and took full credit for it. They fail to protect our embassies, that’s the State Department’s fault and Obama is blameless.
    The absolute unaccountability of this president, trying to maintain his infallible, godlike image to his supporters, is staggering. Comment by CrustyB — 10/15/2012 @ 8:51 am ==

    Yes. Yes. Yes and Yes to everything you said there, crusty.

    elissa (05a102)

  31. “That’s only one source. Somebody in the Libyan government also said that.”

    Sammy – The intercepted communication is the source of intelligence and had been public for some time. Lake connected the dots.

    The NY Times is not a source of intelligence. It may have people it believes are sources, but as you point out, they are uncorroborated. We have multiple U.S. government sources saying there was no demonstration and there never was one. Personally, I see no need to search for additional uncorroborated sources claiming there was a protest.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  32. It’s Barack’s state department. They work for him. He forgets the buck stops with him.

    And yes, Sammy, Hillary did say it was the video when standing beside the caskets. Don’t try to weasel her out of it.

    PatAZ (9a59ce)

  33. 25. SF: I meant to stop the boldface and separate what in the New York Times from what I said==

    Comment by elissa — 10/15/2012 @ 9:14 am

    <i. Sammy– when I post here I can see a preview of how my post will look in an area directly below the comment box and the “submit comment” button. I’ll admit that in haste I frequently miss a spelling error or something similar, but it is easy to see if quotes or bolded sections are printing wrong, and one can run spellcheck and correct all those things before hitting send. Do you see that in your browser/screen?

    No, it’s below the the bottom of the screen (or everything after the beginning is)

    I have to remember to check.

    Sometimes also, the computer is very slow at moving up and down.

    Spellcheck is done automatically in FireFox, but I have to be using FireFox and more often I am using Internet Explorer.

    Only part of the message is in the box. (11 lines and they are shorter than the lines that eventually appear) but I should see when I type.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  34. Even in this last message I missed the failure of the italics to start. I did see lack of italics, but somehow didn’t realize when i was looking that I wanted them.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  35. Sammy,

    We all see what we type in the preview box at the bottom. I urge you to take some extra time to look at what you’ve written to make sure it says what you intend to say.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  36. Comment by PatAZ — 10/15/2012 @ 9:24 am

    Sammy, Hillary did say it was the video when standing beside the caskets. Don’t try to weasel her out of it.

    Let us check and parse her words.

    Video of Hillary Clinton speaking at ceremony for the Benghazi victims:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K10ioQdEv80

    Transcript:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/secretary-of-state-hillary-clintons-remarks-at-transfer-of-remains-ceremony-for-americans-killed-in-libya-transcript/2012/09/14/54fc64c0-fea2-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_print.html

    This is what she said about the video:

    This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.

    She separates the assault on the post in Benghazi from the violence directed at American embassies and only connects the “awful Internet video” to the attacks on the embassies.

    Now she may link Libya to the other attacks in the following paragraph:

    It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless and it is totally unacceptable. The people of Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Tunisia did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob. Reasonable people and responsible leaders in these countries need to do everything they can to restore security and hold accountable those behind these violent acts. And we will, under the president’s leadership, keep taking steps to protect our personnel around the world.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  37. Greetings:

    Kind of a liars’ circular firing squad, if you ask me. And it doesn’t feel all that bad.

    Then, again, where has that allegation that our ambassador was raped gone. In all those TV cop shows, the autopsy is done in the first 10 minutes, no ???

    And, lastly.

    President Truman: “The buck stops here.”

    President Obama: “The buck stops there.”

    11B40 (c409d7)

  38. You side with the enemy against Obama.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  39. Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    Then, at 8pm on 9/11/01, they started talking about how to turn events to their political advantage.

    (I suspect I’m being charitable.)

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  40. The Pentagon would have had to be reimbursed by the State Department for any personnel they sent to Libya.

    No, they wouldn’t. Budget FY 2013 – Overseas Contingency Operations

    Funding Highlights:

    Provides $96.7 billion in unified Defense, State, and USAID funding for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), a reduction of 24 percent below the 2012 enacted level. This primarily reflects the savings from the end of military operations in Iraq and the drawdown of forces in Afghanistan.

    Maintains a unified approach to budgeting in conflict areas by continuing to integrate International Affairs resource requirements related to extraordinary and temporary national security needs with Department of Defense budget plans.

    BTW I read the marines are there to guard the documents (and the buildings maybe) they never guard the State Department people – the State Department has the diplomatic Security Corps for that.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/15/2012 @ 8:27 am

    The Marines guard the classified and provide internal security. Which means they defend all US citizens within the embassy, including the embassy staff. So it’s not true the never guard the DoS people. But they aren’t there to defend the embassy from assault, and they don’t provide personal security to any embassy staff members, including the Ambassador.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  41. She separates the assault on the post in Benghazi from the violence directed at American embassies and only connects the “awful Internet video” to the attacks on the embassies.

    You’re giving her entirely too much benefit of the doubt.

    Rob Crawford (e6f27f)

  42. As an aside, the Overseas Contingency Operations budget is another reason why the campaign narrative that budget cuts crippled Libyan security is BS.

    Let’s review the reasons:

    1. The budget cuts the Obama permacampaignistration are talking about were proposed budget cuts to the DoS budget.

    2. They were proposed for 2013, which means they couldn’t have possibly impacted the DoS’s ability to respond to any security situation in 2012.

    3. When you look at the DoS’s budget combined with what DoS received in the OCO budget, security spending actually increased.

    More Obama permacampaignistration lies.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  43. Didn’t Hillary also tell the story? Isn’t the Ambassaador to the UN under Hillary Clinton’s jurisdiction?
    Comment by Amphipolis — 10/15/2012 @ 8:34 am

    – While the US Ambassador to the UN is technically a State Dept employee, it seems (as the current incident shows) that the Ambassador’s marching orders come from the White House. Neither Carney nor Axelrod claimed that Hillary was behind Susan Rice spreading the lie on the Sunday talk shows. Just because they’re trying to throw Hillary umder the bus doesn’t mean she’s responsible for this fiasco. On the denial of beefed-up security requests, however, her hands may not be so clean.

    Icy (183ba7)

  44. Think Sammy has a point; Hillary Clinton will not be underbussed so easily. Again, I content we need to find out who did this and punish them and their supporters, find out what we could’ve done to prevent it and address the failings accordingly.

    But the rising tsunami you hear in the distance is the Clinton apparatchiks gathering to unsheath their long knives and giving The One a Brutus-like end over the next 3 weeks. Politically Obama crossing the Clintons in this manner is insane. And it was bound to happen over something. Hillary would be running away with this race right now, and she will be in a better position in 2016 after 4 years of Romney rather than another 4 years of Obama’s utter incompetence.

    Bugg (234f77)

  45. Here is the video of Hillary’s first statement on September 12, 2012, about the Benghazi attack. She mentioned the video and the fact that some had blamed the violence on the video, but she did not blame the video and she made a point to note this happened on 9/11. Hillary Clinton didn’t discount the video but, in retrospect, it seems her words were very careful neither to step on the White House’s version nor to adopt it. Perhaps she was being a loyal Obama soldier.

    However, as Andrew noted above, Hillary Clinton also addressed Benghazi on September 14, 2012, when the coffins were returned to Andrews AFB. While she did not per se blame the video for the attack, Clinton’s remarks strongly implied a connection by pairing together the Benghazi attack and the video:

    This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with.

    It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless. And it is totally unacceptable. The people of Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Tunisia did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob. Reasonable people and responsible leaders in these countries need to do everything they can to restore security and hold accountable those behind these violent acts.

    Being a loyal soldier to Obama has its risks, as the Clintons and many Democrats learned the hard way.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  46. “Then, at 8pm on 9/11/01, they started talking about how to turn events to their political advantage.”

    Of course they did, in Wingnut bizzaro-world. Otherwise, Republican’s current behavior would look…treasonous.

    Your a delusional liar.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  47. Illman’s hatred and mendoucheity is just precious.

    JD (318f81)

  48. “Petey – When a CIC deliberately instructs his administration to disseminate a web of blatant lies about a serious foreign security incident in which lives are lost to avoid negative impact on his reelection campaign, it makes people angry. This president has a history of such antics.”

    How about when a CIC deliberately instructs his Secretary of State to make a blatantly false presentation in front of the UN, and then launch a war?

    Oh, wait, I forgot…you’ve flushed 2000-8 down your memory sewar.

    You’re siding with the enemy for political gain = treason.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  49. 47. Ill man’s hatred and mendoucheity is just precious.

    Comment by JD — 10/15/2012 @ 10:04 am

    Bill Maher and I finally agree on something. Obama took his million and spent it on drugs.

    Of course, Maher said weed. But I think he must have spent some on crack.

    And Tilly’s been smoking it. Just like he did during the entire Bush administration, apparently.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  50. Expect Romney to make a debate point of Hillary Clinton’s parting from her boss. Further if Obama wants to claim he had no idea about the intelligence no matter who it was from (or not from, as he now claims)he should be rightly shown the door for such rank incompetence. Biden the other night wanted to embrace this failure, which is astounding.

    Bugg (234f77)

  51. “Illman’s hatred and mendoucheity is just precious.”

    You’d think I was one of you, wouldn’t you?

    Except that it is nothing more than a febrile fantasy of yours, JD (Jeffrey Dahmer?).

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  52. So Tillmann is calling Hillary a liar?

    elissa (05a102)

  53. Your projection of hatred onto us is quite standard, Illman. You assume everyone else hates because you do. Your use of an actual hero’s name to hide behind while spewing your hate told us what we needed to know about you.

    JD (318f81)

  54. 48. You’re siding with the enemy for political gain = treason.

    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:05 am

    This is hilarious. You know who did side with the terrorists? Holder, while in private practice during the Bush years at Covington and Burling, LLP. A firm that represented 17 terrorists at GITMO.

    And then Holder continued his work when he returned to his natural habitat as a subversive, trying to get KSM to New York and dropping the death penalty case against the AQ terrorist behind the USS Cole bombing.

    Which ironically killed 17 Americans. The same number of terrorists his firm took on pro-bono to sabotage justice.

    I guess Holder was just trying to even the score.

    There’s a reason nobody takes you and your venom serious, Tilly you a** clown.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  55. In no world would I think “you” were one of “us”

    JD (318f81)

  56. The Billary Gloves are coming off.

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92)

  57. the security that was withdrawn in August was a military detachment of 12 shooters … based on the detailed description of the events that night I am going to go out on a limb and say that 12 heavily armed shooters would have made a big difference in protecting and allowing Amb. Stevens to escape …

    JeffC (488234)

  58. “Your use of an actual hero’s name to hide behind while spewing your hate told us what we needed to know about you.”

    Your attack of my screen name while at the same time taking the side of the enemy against Obama is all we need to know about you, isn’t it?

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  59. I did no such thing, liar.

    JD (318f81)

  60. “You’re siding with the enemy for political gain = treason.”

    Petey – Who is the enemy?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  61. But thanks for the tacit admission of what you are, in fact, doing, Illman. Shame is not an emotion you are capable of, apparently.

    JD (318f81)

  62. “Your projection of hatred onto us is quite standard, Illman.”

    It’s funny, actually, that you think my “projection” of hatred onto you is the sole evidence of your constant ODS hatred spewed here every day in every thread.

    And whether I hate you or not is irrelevant, of course, Mr. (Mrs.?) look at the squirrel.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  63. We disagree with Obama’s policies and actions. You hate those that disagree with your bizarro uber-leftist worldview.

    JD (318f81)

  64. “Petey – Who is the enemy?”

    For Wingnuts it is whoever opposes their rigid worldview.

    If the Taliban or Al Qaeda attack Liberals or Obama or Democrats, then your view is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    Ergo, consulate assassins = YOUR FRIENDS.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  65. “You hate those that disagree with your bizarro uber-leftist worldview.”

    Nope…I hold delusional, angry sociopaths and liars like yourself in contempt.

    I am one with my fellow American in being repulsed by your sickness.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  66. Criticizing Obama lying about a YouTube video, and questioning why there was woefully inadequate security, is the same thing as siding with AQ to Illman.

    JD (318f81)

  67. Say, didn’t Pillman just call Colin Powell a liar?
    Isn’t that a priori Racist?

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92)

  68. Too bad Hillary didn’t have the cojones to really contest the Democrat nomination this year. I can’t offhand think of one single thing this country needs more than it needs to get away from the “Evereything has already been settled, away from the public eye” model of Party convention.

    C. S. P. Schofield (4feea2)

  69. I hope you find a modicum of peace in your cold dark heart and pathetic existence, Illman.

    JD (318f81)

  70. “We disagree with Obama’s policies and actions.”

    You do not. You hate Obama. You don’t even correctly understand his policies nor do you care to. You’re content to attack straw men, lies, inaccuracies, etc. You oppose even the things Wingnuts have IN THE PAST advocated for. You’re an utter joke, beneath hatred actually…we’re into Pity territory.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  71. Democrats actually did side with the enemy against the Bush admin. Now Illman associates legitimate criticism with treason, like all true Fascists.

    SPQR (0f2da9)

  72. “Democrats actually did side with the enemy against the Bush admin.”

    Again, rewriting history to justify current actions. Hallmark of a delusional sociopath.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  73. You do not. You hate Obama.

    Lie.

    Previously Illman know better than I where I live, and what religion I am. Now it knows better than I what I think and feel.

    JD (318f81)

  74. “If the Taliban or Al Qaeda attack Liberals or Obama or Democrats, then your view is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.””

    The enemy of my enemy os my tactical opportunity, and seldom anything more. In brutal fact if the Taliban or Al Qaeda attacked Liberals or Democrats or Obama what I would think is “Karma’s a bitch.”

    C. S. P. Schofield (4feea2)

  75. “For Wingnuts it is whoever opposes their rigid worldview.

    If the Taliban or Al Qaeda attack Liberals or Obama or Democrats, then your view is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    Ergo, consulate assassins = YOUR FRIENDS.”

    Petey – Comedt gold!

    So criticizing Obama for covering up the fact that the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was actually a pre-planned terrorist attack by Al Qaeda linked extremists means conservatives are working with those Islamic extremists?

    How does that pretzel logic work?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  76. Dissent used to be the highest form of patriotism.

    JD (318f81)

  77. Tillman seems unusually agitated today. I can only assume there is some reason he does not wish people on this thread to discuss the emerging serious disagreements and contradictions between the Democrat led State Dept. and the Democrat White House concerning the horrific events of 9/11/12.

    elissa (05a102)

  78. Petey – Why do you hate America?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  79. Elissa – I wonder if Illman thinks Hillary or Obama/Biden is telling the truth.

    JD (318f81)

  80. “Dissent used to be the highest form of patriotism.”

    Until 9/11 made it illegal…thanks to WINGNUTS.

    It’s your pile of filth…now you have to lie down in it as well.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  81. “Petey – Why do you hate America?”

    Why do you?

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  82. “Dissent used to be the highest form of patriotism.”

    JD – Only the correct form of dissent. Just like progressive only support free speech they agree with.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  83. JD–I asked him upthread if he thought Hillary was a liar. I don’t believe he responded. Go figure.

    elissa (05a102)

  84. Until 9/11 made it illegal…thanks to WINGNUTS.

    Objective lie.

    JD (318f81)

  85. Petey – I don’t, but it is obvious you do.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  86. Elissa – it won’t. It is just emoting. This is hopefully cathartic for it, allowing it to burn off some steam so it goes thru the day without assploding.

    JD (318f81)

  87. Petey – Do you need more lotion?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  88. ” I can only assume there is some reason he does not wish people on this thread to discuss the emerging serious disagreements and contradictions between the Democrat led State Dept. and the Democrat White House concerning the horrific events of 9/11/12.”

    LOLOLOL!!! You think I give a rat’s ass what you idiots discuss? You’ve already reached a foregone conclusion against Obama before the facts are even in…on EVERY topic. No one can convince a delusional hater to think rationally and I’m not even trying…

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  89. 53. Your projection of hatred onto us is quite standard, Illman. You assume everyone else hates because you do.

    Comment by JD — 10/15/2012 @ 10:14 am

    Liberalism/socialism is impossible to support unless you’re capable of two things:

    1. Projection

    2. What Mark Steyn calls “invincible ignorance.”

    Regarding the first, consider:

    - The Obama admin accuses the Romney campaign of “politicizing” their Benghazi debacle because that’s what they did. Even though we now know the people at State watched the assault real time at the Diplomatic Security Tactical Operations Center and knew that there was no protest to be hijacked; even though we know per Bob Woodward that documents show back in March that the Obama admin ordered lowered security in Libya to comport with their campaign narrative that their foreign policy was a success; they still lied for weeks that this was a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube video.

    2. The Obama campaign narrative is that the Romney campaign lies because that’s what they do. Just take Biden’s performance in the debates. He said there is no HHS mandate that would effect Catholic or other religious charitable employers such as Georgetown hospital, but there is and that’s the basis of the lawsuits. He said the DoD budget cuts were requested by DoD, when in fact DoD was ordered to take those cuts by the WH. He said the JCS asked for the Obama timeline in Afghanistan, when their conditions-based timeline was rejected by the administration they were ordered to accept the date-certain Obama timeline. He said the DoD budget cuts was “spending they never asked for” when they had asked for it in previous budgets; that’s why that spending was included in the budget. He said… Oh hell, just see no. 1.

    2. The Clintons called the Reagan years the “decade of greed.” Because they were busy getting rich off of stealing people’s retirement accounts in shady land deals and on insider trading.

    3. Whatever Elizabeth Warren accuses the greedy rich of having done (foreclosing on people’s homes, not paying their fair share, etc.) she’s done.

    As far as the second, Tilly’s the poster boy. Whenever the left puts out a narrative that’s debunked, he’ll still repeat it despite the mountain of evidence the narrative is false. But he’s not the only one. As I’ve pointed out, the AP actually put out two stories in one day following sworn testimony at the Congressional hearings. One admitting the fact that there was no video protest at the Benghazi consulate nor had there ever been any evidence there was one. The other, discussing Nakoula’s appearance at his probation violation hearing, blaming his video for the violence.

    All you can really do with bozos like Tilly is point and laugh.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  90. 88. You think I give a rat’s ass what you idiots discuss?

    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:34 am

    Quite obviously you do.

    I guess I should add:

    3. Weapons-grade levels of denial.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  91. “…so it goes thru the day ”

    I was trying to remember the last time I heard someone speak with that sociopathic affectation (referring to people as “it”)…then it hit me:

    The serial killer from Silence of the Lambs.

    Maybe JD does stand for Jeffrey Dahmer after all.

    Great….I’m arguing with a lunatic.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  92. Hilary is pushing back in another way, as is Petreaus. The NY Times says today that arms going to Syria are going to al-Qaeda.

    Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats.

    That conclusion, of which President Obama and other senior officials are aware from classified assessments of the Syrian conflict that has now claimed more than 25,000 lives, casts into doubt whether the White House’s strategy of minimal and indirect intervention in the Syrian conflict is accomplishing its intended purpose of helping a democratic-minded opposition topple an oppressive government…

    “The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” said one American official familiar with the outlines of those findings, commenting on an operation that in American eyes has increasingly gone awry.

    The Post has an op-ed pointing out that this means Biden really, truly lied.

    In last week’s vice presidential debate, Joe Biden asserted that the United States was working to isolate al-Qaeda in Syria by ensuring that aid was directed to moderate elements of the Syrian opposition…

    Paul Ryan immediately challenged Biden’s claim, saying that the administration’s inaction has allowed al-Qaeda to get a foothold in Syria. “The longer this has gone on, the more people, groups like al-Qaeda are going in,” Ryan said…

    Biden denied it, declaring: “We are in the process now — and have been for months — in making sure that help, humanitarian aid, as well as other aid and training is getting to those forces that we believe, the Turks believe, the Jordanians believe, the Saudis believe are the free forces inside of Syria. That is underway.”

    And, actually, it isn’t. Guess who the sources are.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  93. JD – Petey’s rage and anger are not healthy. I wonder if it has sought professional help.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  94. OF course, the Times neglects to mention that such an issue ever came up in any debate, as that would mess up the narrative.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  95. http://www.bayareagooners.com/markmywords/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/gunnersaurousheads.jpg

    Illman when it is not using it’s unsupervised computer time.

    JD (318f81)

  96. Here’s another push-back against Pillman’s Bubble-of-Comfort……

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/262019-poll-finds-akin-with-slight-lead-over-mccaskill

    I guess those ignurt NASCAR hillbilly’s in the upper Ozarks just can’t keep the message down.

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92)

  97. Kevin M – Obama has truly bungled his entire Middle East policy. Turkey is not a friend. The Democrat dreams of Assad as a Reformer were as delusional as their plans to fix our economy. Visions of democratic governments as a result of Arab Spring without radical Muslim Brotherhood/Islamist extremist involvement were utopian pipe dreams fed to a gullible inexperienced president by self-interested parties.

    OTP

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  98. Just keep spinning, Sammy. At least you have convinced yourself so all is well.

    PatAZ (9a59ce)

  99. ==LOLOLOL!!! You think I give a rat’s ass what you idiots discuss? ==

    Yes, Tillman, I do in fact think you care a great deal about what is discussed on this blog–the ideas and policies which are examined, and the conclusions that are drawn. That is the only rational explanation for why you come here at all.

    elissa (05a102)

  100. Biden denied it, declaring: “We are in the process now — and have been for months — in making sure that help, humanitarian aid, as well as other aid and training is getting to those forces that we believe, the Turks believe, the Jordanians believe, the Saudis believe are the free forces inside of Syria. That is underway.”

    This is priceless. There are actually more countries doing the thinking for us as to who gets these weapons. Which we’re not providing, they are.

    But of two out of the three he does list, one is headed by a hard-line Islamist party, the other by Wahhabists. You can say the same thing about the countries Biden doesn’t name. I don’t know what Jordan’s position is, but Turkey and Saudi Arabia are pushing for sharia-based international laws punishing blasphemy against Islam or Muhammed.

    And they’re the ones telling us who the “free forces” are in Syria.

    The buffoon Biden actually confirms what Ryan said, and what the intel community is saying. The weapons are going not just to AQ but other Islamists. And he’s too stooopid to know it.

    That’s the problem when you “lead from behind.” It’s like driving from the backseat; somebody else is in control.

    Of course, it’s appropriate that the Obama admin is leading from behind. That’s also where they do their thinking and speaking.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  101. 97. Turkey is not a friend. The Democrat dreams of Assad as a Reformer were as delusional as their plans to fix our economy.

    Comment by daleyrocks — 10/15/2012 @ 10:46 am

    You want to know where to a great extent this klown kar administration got the idea Assad was a reformer? Erdogan spoon fed the idea to them.

    Now, having been burned once, Biden crows we’re letting the same guy do our thinking for us r.e. who are the “free forces” in Syria.

    Can you get a clearer example than ideological blinders than that? No amount of evidence can compete with their narcissistic delusion that their foreign policy is working wonders around the world. Because they can’t fail.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  102. That is the only rational explanation for why you come here at all.

    Oh, I don’t know. I could be he’s just here to be disruptive and hijack thread after thread so he can get his rocks off. I bet he prints it all out, circles his favorites and puts it all up on his bedroom wall were he can see it as he wanks.

    I take him at his word here: Tillman’s just here to be a troll. Who would admit that who was not?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  103. Steve57 – Vogue did have that big spread on Syrian President Assad’s wife, so he had that going for him.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  104. T for Texas! T for Tillman’s “truth”:
    If Gore was POTUS on 9/11/01, Repugs would have screamed for impeachment.
    – No, they would NOT have done that. Anyway, I thought that if Gore was POTUS then 9/11/01 would never have taken place. Gee, don’t you just squirm inside when you have to change one story in order to tell another?

    However, Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.
    – Alas, when it comes to Benghazi . . . not so much. That is, unless you count “We’re sooo sorry that the trailer for a crappy film made you testy; but look, we arrested the filmmaker!” as a ‘strong voice’.

    You are beneath contempt in attacking the Commander in Chief in such a partisan way during times of international tension.
    – You are pathetic in asserting that there are special times when citizens should abandon their free speech rights in the name of ‘unity’.

    You side with the enemy against Obama.
    – Fret not! It’s a near certainty that the re-education camps will bring us back into the fold.

    You are not Americans, you are traitorous self-serving partisans.
    – That’s good! Now, when you get to the podium you should grab the mic, affect your best sneer, belt out those words, end it with “Tillman out!” slam the mic to the floor and stride purposefully off-stage . . .
    The DNC won’t know what hit them.

    And when I say “you” I include the contemptible weasel Willard in that.
    – The other day, I read a story about a deadbeat dad that told the judge in his case that because he had been labeled a “deadbeat dad” he was suffering severe self-esteem issues, and this was the reason why he couldn’t hold onto a job and support his kids.

    Icy (183ba7)

  105. “…Vogue magazine’s astounding March 2011 cover story, “Asma al-Assad: A Rose in the Desert,’” the joint responsibility of editor Anna Wintour and writer Joan Juliet Buck…”

    Which got the top-prize in the 1st-Annual Walter Duranty Prizes for Mendacity.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330096/walter-duranty-awards-patrick-brennan

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92)

  106. Kevin, c’mon. Elissa’s right; that would be the only rational reason. You just listed a bunch of irrational, emotionally based compulsions for trolling this site.

    It’s like the widespread contention that the Obama admin would have to be nuts to throw Hillary! under the bus this close to the election. Then the people contending that go on to list all the reasons why.

    Ok, their contentions make sense. But have the delusional thin-skinned narcissist-in-chief and Sheriff Joe ever done anything to convince you they’re not crazy?

    Face it, Kevin. We are not dealing with rational people.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  107. Maybe illman’s comments would make some sense if one is standing on their head.

    But I doubt it, so I’m not going to bother try it out.

    One day he’ll get to tell Jesus no one can rise from the dead. He’ll lose that argument too, unless he comes to his senses before then.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  108. “You’re siding with the enemy for political gain = treason.”
    Petey – Who is the enemy?
    Comment by daleyrocks — 10/15/2012 @ 10:19 am

    – Truth-tellers.

    Icy (183ba7)

  109. If the Taliban or Al Qaeda attack Liberals or Obama or Democrats, then your view is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
    Ergo, consulate assassins = YOUR FRIENDS.
    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:22 am

    – Well, this should be fun. Please (PLEASE!!!) illuminate us with one (ONE!!!) example of the Taliban or al-Qaeda ‘attacking’ someone BECAUSE they are a liberal or a Democrat. Go!

    Icy (183ba7)

  110. Previously Illman know better than I where I live, and what religion I am. Now it knows better than I what I think and feel.
    Comment by JD — 10/15/2012 @ 10:28 am

    – PLUS, now he’s questioning your gender, JD! (IF that’s your real screen name)

    Icy (183ba7)

  111. No one can convince a delusional hater to think rationally and I’m not even trying…
    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:34 am

    – Every once in awhile the truth leaks out.

    Icy (183ba7)

  112. “Previously Illman know better than I where I live, and what religion I am. Now it knows better than I what I think and feel.
    Comment by JD — 10/15/2012 @ 10:28 am

    – PLUS, now he’s questioning your gender, JD! (IF that’s your real screen name)”

    No, his/her sanity…sociopaths commonly refer to other people who they hate as “it”.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  113. If Gore was POTUS on 9/11/01, Repugs would have screamed for impeachment.

    However, Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    You are beneath contempt in attacking the Commander in Chief in such a partisan way during times of international tension.

    You side with the enemy against Obama.

    You are not Americans, you are traitorous self-serving partisans.

    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 8:39 am

    This is the most psychotic post I can recall at this site, and that’s really saying something.

    Gerald A (f26857)

  114. No, his/her sanity…sociopaths commonly refer to other people who they hate as “it”.

    I don’t know if you are a guy or a gal. I suspect you know a lot about sociopaths.

    JD (43ce10)

  115. 77. Tillman seems unusually agitated today. I can only assume there is some reason he does not wish people on this thread to discuss the emerging serious disagreements and contradictions between the Democrat led State Dept. and the Democrat White House concerning the horrific events of 9/11/12.

    Comment by elissa — 10/15/2012 @ 10:29 am

    Yes, there is.

    Pants On Fire: Obama Scrambles For Cover As Benghazi Lie Explodes

    Tilly’s trying to provide that cover.

    The carefully coordinated and heavily armed September 11th strike upon the American Consulate in Libya contradicted President Obama’s repeated narrative that, thanks to his tough policies and actions, al-Qaeda has been defeated. And although misrepresented by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice as a “spontaneous outbreak” of violence provoked by a “hateful” movie denigrating Muslim prophet Muhammad, he and other high members of his administration knew full well and early on that this was patently untrue.

    The whole campaign narrative is collapsing in ruins around the Obama permacampaignistration. It is increasingly apparent that, although the WH and Hillary! will try to pin the blame on a subordinate in DoS like Charlene Lamb, the Libyan embassy’s repeated requests for increased security were denied for purely political reasons. They needed to decrease the security footprint in Libya to comport with the Obama campaign narrative about how AQ was “on its heels,” “leading from behind in Libya” was a huge success because with the right “smart” support a rag tag army of aspiring liberal democrats could topple a dictator for us, the Arab Spring was resulting in peaceful pluralistic societies blooming in the deserts of NA and the ME, blah blah blah.

    And it wasn’t just the campaign’s narrative. It was Hillary!’s, too, because it was her bright idea as well.

    Therefore, not only didn’t the Libyan embassy get increased security, they couldn’t even keep the security assets they had.

    Then the administration chose to lie, again a self-serving purely political lie in keeping with the campaign narrative, despite the fact they knew as it was happening what the truth was.

    But it’s more than just that. Axelrod was doing the talk show circuit yesterday. More than once he had to claim that no one “on this planet” cares more deeply about the lives of those who serve this country, ensuring the truth gets out, and bringing the perpetrators to justice.

    Yeah, we’ve seen his commitment to all that. As DiploMad observed, this new scandal has several similarities to Fast & Furious. But he didn’t mention how in that scandal too the deaths of two Americans were just “bumps in the road” in the administration’s efforts to support their false narrative that the Mexican cartels buy their guns in US gunshops along the border. So much for his concern for the lives of those who serve the country.

    We’ve seen his commitment to getting the truth out. His AG has been found in contempt of Congress for his stonewalling efforts to get to the truth. The key ATF agent they sent to Baghdad to keep him out of reach of the Congressional committee and their own IG has now been brought back to the states now that the IG has issued his report and the Congressional hearings are at an impasse.

    We’ve seen Obama’s commitment to justice in that case, as no one has been even fired over this fiasco that resulted in the murder of hundreds of Mexicans and at least two Americans.

    So naturally Obama had to have his chief campaign strategist go on TV and assert Obama gives a rat’s a** about what happened in Benghazi. But everything Obama does proves that to be a lie.

    How deeply does Obama care? So deeply he sleeps through the night even after he’s told the consulate was under attack and the ambassador was unaccounted for. So deeply he jets off for a fundraiser without convening a meeting with the national security council, let alone alter his schedule. Like maybe cancelling his appearance on Letterman.

    That’s how deeply he cares.

    Four Americans were sacrificed to serve his false narrative on the success of his foreign policy, just as two Americans were sacrificed to serve his false narrative on the need for gun control.

    And if you point out the serial lies this permacampaignistration vomits out to get Obama reelected, the permacampaignistration will accuse you of “politicizing” the issue and Tilly will accuse you of treason.

    It’s hard to care less about something than Obama does when it comes to the lives of Americans and national security, but if it’s possible that’s how little I care about Tilly and silly accusations of “politicization” and “treason.”

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  116. P.T., its Democrats who arrest people for speech. From Woodrow Wilson to Barack Obama.

    SPQR (768505)

  117. 117. P.T., its Democrats who arrest people for speech. From Woodrow Wilson to Barack Obama.

    Comment by SPQR — 10/15/2012 @ 11:54 am

    You mean like blaspheming the prophet?

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  118. Steve57, or jailing people for making speeches criticizing Presidential policy … like Wilson.

    SPQR (768505)

  119. Yeah, I knew that. 100 years of progressivism, eh?

    Oh, one more false narrative from lat week’s Biden whopperpalooza. On Iran:

    This is a guy who’s repaired our alliances so the rest of the world follows us again. This is the guy who brought the entire world, including Russia and China, to bring about the most devastating—most devastating—the most devastating efforts on Iran to make sure that they in fact stop [inaudible].

    Yup, he got the entire world onboard with his program to isolate Iran.

    So, isolated is Iran, the 139 member and observer nations of the Non-Aligned Movement met in Tehran in August to show their solidarity with the Islamic Republic.

    And the UN Secretary General went to address them.

    You can read his comments on the UN website.

    Tehran, 30 August 2012 – Secretary-General’s remarks to the High-Level Segment of the 16th Non-Aligned Movement Summit

    Oh, yeah. Obama’s really united the entire world on this Iran issue.

    If you’re insane. Speaking of which, I’m sure Tilly will be along shortly.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  120. I wonder what leftard fever swamp the obot hangs out at. DU? Kos? Moron.org? Or perhaps he’s one of the bad chas.johnson’s minions from lgf? Not to mention the possible swatting caller cretins. Hoping Mittens gets into Benghazigate debacle Tuesday. Screw any attempts by Crowley to stymie anything that hurts choom. And wth does GOP agree to leftwing media whores for obama?

    calypso louis farrakhan (0f7f16)

  121. This is a guy who’s repaired our alliances so the rest of the world follows us again. This is the guy who brought the entire world, including Russia and China, to bring about the most devastating—most devastating—the most devastating efforts on Iran to make sure that they in fact stop [inaudible].

    Time: Japan Frets over U.S. Support in China Dispute

    The headlines write themselves in the age of Obama. Whatever his administration says, it’s usually 180dg out from the truth. It’s their “poker tell.” Very subtle, that.

    TOKYO – When the U.S. Defense Secretary arrives in Asia this weekend, his biggest challenge may not be convincing China that America will give its full support to longtime ally Japan in the escalating dispute over islands in the East China Sea. His biggest challenge may be convincing Japan.

    …“If Japan loses the islands and the U.S. doesn’t come to aid Japan, the credibility of not only the U.S. alliance with Japan but of all U.S. alliances globally would be severely harmed,” Sato says.

    Read more: http://nation.time.com/2012/09/14/84857/#ixzz29OjY84eE

    Yes, Slow Joe, Obama has brought the whole world together….

    to suspect that an alliance with the US isn’t worth the paper the treaty is written on.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  122. “P.T., its Democrats who arrest people for speech. From Woodrow Wilson to Barack Obama.”

    Free speech does not protect you from Treason.

    Freedom isn’t free. Words have consequences.

    P. Tillman (fcbc8b)

  123. I copy and archive Tilly’s posts so someday my grandkids will know what a cult of personality looks like.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  124. They (Obama, Clinton(s)) loath one another, yet follow the same playbook. It’s the Democratic way.

    Former USS Cole Commander Kirk Lippold said that the parallels between this case and the attack on the USS Cole are absolutely striking in that the Cole attack was one month before an election and that Clinton delayed just as the Obama administration is delaying all for political purposes. He further states emphatically:

    “The Obama administration in this thing, just like the Clinton administration, does not care about what the American people think about this incident. They care about power and getting reelected.”

    Dana (292dcf)

  125. I bought that edition of Newsweek declaring Obama our first gay President, he of the rainbow halo, for the same reason.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  126. Free speech does not protect you from Treason

    You’re not very bright, are you?

    Criticizing the President is not treason. Speech is not treason. Treason is taking action against the country, but merely speaking does not rise to that level.

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  127. P.T. only confirms that he’s an actual Fascist.

    SPQR (768505)

  128. Illman hates free speech.

    JD (43ce10)

  129. I suspect you know a lot about sociopaths.

    He’s not a sociopath. His mom had him tested.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  130. JD, he certainly hates our democratic system of government as he is ready to jail political opponents.

    The Left/Progressives are very violent and tyrannical as P.T. shows.

    SPQR (768505)

  131. Jeez, if criticizing the President was “treason”, try searching google for “bush hitler“. Lots of “treason” there.

    Whatever happened to “dissent is patriotic”?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  132. 128. P.T. only confirms that he’s an actual Fascist.

    Comment by SPQR — 10/15/2012 @ 12:47 pm

    Yuh think? Just because he’s an Obamaton, and Obamatons pledge allegiance to Obama personally?

    “I pledge to be a servant to our President”

    Just because they carry their Mao style Pocket Obamas?

    Amazon: Pocket Obama

    Book Description: This is the little blue book that right-wing partisans love to hate. Printed in a size that easily fits into pocket or purse, POCKET OBAMA is an anthology of quotations borrowed from Barack Obama’s speeches and writings, intended to keep the momentum going for those inspired by his message of hope and change…

    Customers Who Viewed This Item Also Viewed:

    Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung Mao Tse-Tung Vinyl Bound $9.38

    Just because they even had their own Obama flag, which they had to drop quietly because the “stripes” looked too similar to the bloody handprints left on the Benghazi consulate, as Americans were dragged off to their deaths while Obama slumbered?

    And just because Tilly thinks “treason” consists of failing to show personal loyalty to his Dear Leader?

    Why, whatever do you mean?

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  133. However, Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.</blockquote

    Really?

    from wiki on the resolution to go to war:

    126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.

    21 (42%) of 50 Democratic senators voted against the resolution: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).

    EPWJ (8a4ca7)

  134. You’re not very bright, are you?

    Criticizing the President is not treason.

    Comment by Chuck Bartowski — 10/15/2012 @ 12:47 pm

    Well in some countries it is.

    Gerald A (f26857)

  135. Pattycakeman

    You were completely and totally wrong

    wrong wrong wrong….

    With just a handful of votes in the house – Democrats were preferring to keep Hussein in power (umm, the other one)

    EPWJ (8a4ca7)

  136. But, but, but…Hillary Clinton DID say the videos caused the riots.

    I saw this live. She was on the bandwagon at the start, and stayed there for several days.

    They’re all liars, Hillary no less than Obama.

    Just Some Guy (3b087f)

  137. Free speech does not protect you from Treason.

    18 USC § 2381 – Treason
    Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

    – And exactly HOW have any of us committed this offense?

    Icy (183ba7)

  138. Comment by Just Some Guy — 10/15/2012 @ 1:34 pm

    But, but, but…Hillary Clinton DID say the videos caused the riots.

    Riots, yes. But she didn’t say the attack in Benghazi, now did she??

    Sentence 1:

    This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country.

    Sentence 2:

    We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men.

    Sentence 3:

    We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.

    She didn’t mention the video in connection with the attack in Benghazi.

    To begin with, the outpost in Benghazi was not an embassy (it wasn’t even officially a consulate) and she didn’t say there was any rage and violence directed at the mission in Benghazi, but only a “heavy assault.”

    This was not just a rhetorical flourish. she knew very well there had been no angry mob in Benghazi and she wasn’t going to put herself on record as saying that there had been.

    I saw this live. She was on the bandwagon at the start, and stayed there for several days.

    She’s married to Bill Clinton. She only appeared to be on the bandwagon.

    They’re all liars, Hillary no less than Obama.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  139. Sentence 5 does include Libya:

    The people of Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Tunisia did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob.

    So she did call it a mob.

    In sentence 6 Libya is still included I would say, among countries where there had been violent acts.

    Still, you could say the people who attacked in Benghazi were a mob.

    She may have been on the same stage with Barack Obama, but she didn’t inhale.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  140. They’re all liars, Hillary no less than Obama.

    There I go again, a quote from someone else left at the end of the comment.

    Yes, she’s a liar, but she’s also a Clinton, and she and Bill Clinton know how to waffle.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  141. 120. Comment by Steve57 — 10/15/2012 @ 12:27 pm

    Yup, he got the entire world onboard with his program to isolate Iran.

    Transcript And Audio: Vice Presidential Debate

    VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: …This is a guy who’s repaired our alliances so the rest of the world follows us again. This is the guy who brought the entire world, including Russia and China, to bring about the most devastating—most devastating—the most devastating efforts on Iran to make sure that they in fact stop with their — look, I — I — I just — I mean, these guys bet against America all the time.

    I think Biden maybe noticed that while Iran was ht with severe sanctions, and the value of the rial was dropping precipitously they were not in fact so far stopping anything, so he stopped right in the middle of a sentence!!

    Now it’s true that eventually Russia and China voted for sanctions, but they weakened them for one thing. This also can be seen as an effort to head off a military attack. They seem to be encouraging and/or selling things to Iran too.

    There’s some explanation for their sanctions
    vote: Ryan didn’t know it.

    Paul Ryan never contradicted Biden on that point so I think Biden won the debate on that point.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  142. Sammy, I’m sorry, but these constant posting “mistakes” of yours followed with immediate “corrections” are starting to feel more like “shtick” to clog up the thread than unintentional errors. It’s really getting tiresome.

    elissa (05a102)

  143. P. Tillman:

    You side with the enemy against Obama.

    And it was largely liberal Democrats who advocated for and represented our actual enemies, the detainees at GTMO.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  144. elissa,

    I gave up reading most of what Sammy writes long ago, and that’s unfortunate because I think he means well and has something valuable to add. I just can’t sort out the rubbish to find the pearl.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  145. Comment by elissa — 10/15/2012 @ 2:11 pm

    Sammy, I’m sorry, but these constant posting “mistakes” of yours followed with immediate “corrections” are starting to feel more like “shtick” to clog up the thread than unintentional errors. It’s really getting tiresome

    I’ve been thinking maybe it’s better to let the errors stand. They are usually obvious.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  146. 92. Comment by Kevin M — 10/15/2012 @ 10:37 am

    The NY Times says today that arms going to Syria are going to al-Qaeda…..The Post has an op-ed pointing out that this means Biden really, truly lied.

    No, it doesn’t mean Biden lied on that point.

    From the debate:

    REP. RYAN: Nobody is proposing to send troops to Syria — American troops.

    Now let me say it this way. How would we do things differently? We wouldn’t refer Bashar Assad as a reformer when he’s killing his own civilians with his Russian-provided weapons….. The man has slaughtered tens of thousands of his own people and more foreign fighters are spilling into this country. So the longer this has gone on, the more people — groups like al-Qaida are going in. We could have more easily identified the Free Syrian Army, the freedom fighters, working with our allies, the Turks, the Qataris, the Saudis, had we had a better plan in place to begin with, working through our allies. But no, we waited for Kofi Annan to try and come up with an agreement through the U.N. That bought Bashar Assad time. We gave Russia veto power over our efforts through the U.N. and meanwhile about 30,000 Syrians are dead.

    VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: What would my friend do differently? If you notice, he never answers the question.

    REP. RYAN: No, I would — I — we would not be going through the U.N. on all of these things —

    VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Let — let — let me — you don’t go through the U.N. We are in the process now and have been for months in making sure that help, humanitarian aid, as well as other aid and training, is getting to those forces that we believe, the Turks believe, the Jordanians believe, the Saudis believe are the free forces inside of Syria.

    RYAN MADE THE SAME MISTAKE BIDEN DID. He also implicitly trusted the Saudis. The difference between the two is Ryan thinks the weapons are going by accident to Jihadists – they are not being directed – and Biden doesn’t think (yet) that they are going at all to Jihadists. But in reality aid is being directed – just to the wrong people.

    From the New York Times:

    Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats….That conclusion, of which President Obama and other senior officials

    But maybe not Joe Biden, or he doesn’t want to admit it.

    are aware from classified assessments of the Syrian conflict that has now claimed more than 25,000 lives, casts into doubt whether the White House’s strategy of minimal and indirect intervention in the Syrian conflict is accomplishing its intended purpose of helping a democratic-minded opposition topple an oppressive government…

    “The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” said one American official familiar with the outlines of those findings, commenting on an operation that in American eyes has increasingly gone awry.

    Now you can say that Biden should have known better, but I’m not sure.

    This only makes sense in the first place as a policy error.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  147. The comes from outsourcing Syrian policy to the man who murdered Vincent Foster.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  148. MEGO attack

    SPQR (2cadae)

  149. Mitt has better make this an issue tomorrow night.

    Hope he wastes lots and lots of time on it. Reagan’s snafu w/t ’83 Beruit barracks bombing sure wrecked his reelection bid, didn’t it. Memo to Barry: Next week, invade Tahiti; rescue tourists from global warming.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  150. IMP never fails to live down to expectations.

    JD (43ce10)

  151. Here is Biden, Axelrod, Gibbs, and Carney blame the State Department and the intelligence community for the failures that led to the attack and the conflicting storyline that emerged afterwards. It’s very interesting in light of Hillary’s comments as well as Susan Rice and Charlene Lamb.

    Dana (292dcf)

  152. And a little more context;

    http://theoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/just-a-reminder-iran-still-closing-in-on-bomb/

    Too many spiked footballs, leaked by the likes of
    Donilon, to Sanger;

    narciso (ee31f1)

  153. You side with the enemy against Obama.

    The thing is, Tillman, if POTUS were a Republican and he/she behaved the same was as this administration, I feel very confident in saying that the vast majority of posters here – if not all – would be just as vigorous in demanding the truth be told and the consequences fall where they may.

    That’s the difference with our side and yours: You are busy assigning enemy status to those who question and dig and want to see everything exposed and then make a decision. You don’t even make a pretense of objectivity. Instead you are an ideologue wed to your narrative in spite of what the facts reveal. And as has already been stated, facts matter.

    I never want to be so wed to an ideology that truth and facts become superfluous.

    Dana (292dcf)

  154. Disco Stu — once again — pooches the screw:
    Reagan’s snafu w/t ’83 Beruit barracks bombing sure wrecked his reelection bid, didn’t it.

    – And Reagan covered up or lied about that bombing HOW?

    Icy (183ba7)

  155. so question, when did the administration discover Abu Ahmed was training in Libya, and why didn’t they do anything about it, why did they not react to the OAR brigades, which were a front for Feb 17th Martyrs,/AAS, we were slow to pick up that Hezbollah was an Iranian proxy, same for AQ in the 90s, as well as AQAP in the mid 00s

    narciso (ee31f1)

  156. Reagan’s snafu w/t ’83 Beruit barracks bombing sure wrecked his reelection bid, didn’t it.

    You’re forgetting one important difference: Reagan took responsibility for the barracks attack, Obama has tried to blame everyone but himself. Reagan’s forthrightness played well with the voters.

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  157. Reagan’s snafu w/t ’83 Beruit barracks bombing sure wrecked his reelection bid, didn’t it.

    Yes, I’m sure that, like Reagan, Obama will rally the nation and pull out a 49-State landslide come November.

    Don’t hold your breath!

    Pious Agnostic (2c3220)

  158. Sammy Finkelman, excellent points. Hillary doesn’t seem as deft as Bill at this, though.

    Just Some Guy (3b087f)

  159. BootBlack down in battleground 12 with men, all tied with women and the latter are on the move.

    Who knows how to bugle taps?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  160. Hillary Clinton takes teh fall…

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  161. takes one for teh team

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  162. Repeat… Hillary Clinton shows she has a bigger pair of balls than teh prez…

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  163. Lima, Peru (CNN) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the bucks stops with her when it comes to who is blame for a deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

    “I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru for a visit. The interview, one of a series given to U.S. television networks Monday night, were the first she has given about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

    Clinton insisted President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are not involved in security decisions, Clinton said.

    “I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha,” she added, noting that it is close to the election.

    elissa (05a102)

  164. Customers Who Viewed This Item Also Viewed:

    Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung Mao Tse-Tung Vinyl Bound $9.38

    Nice find.

    Dustin (73fead)

  165. Perhaps she will take the responsibility for the lack of adequate security…but leave the problems with the narrative to the WH.

    Who knows.

    How long is her visit to Peru????

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  166. yeah, they’re cereal… they broadcast their intentions to the world…

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  167. Perhaps she can meet with “Shining Light” while there

    Angelo (234a2b)

  168. Oops “shining Path”

    Angelo (234a2b)

  169. no wonder slick willie went lookin’ for love in all the wrong places.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  170. elissa,

    I find it interesting that Hillary publicly assumes responsibility the night before the debate, and when she is out of country. You bet there’s an election, Hillary.

    Also, given that the hearings before Congress began last week, I have to wonder if the plan for taking the hit hadn’t yet had all the details worked out.

    The question is, will she step down or be fired?

    Dana (292dcf)

  171. 171 +1

    Angelo (234a2b)

  172. yeah, they’re cereal… they broadcast their intentions to the world…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku — 10/15/2012

    Sigh. Exactly. So much of Obama’s foreign policy is played for short term domestic political advantage.

    Dustin (73fead)

  173. Neither

    Icy (183ba7)

  174. she’s a man, baby, yeahhh.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  175. The question is, will she step down or be fired?

    Comment by Dana — 10/15/2012

    I have to assume they don’t mean for things to go that far (at least not until after the election). That would make clear to the low info voters that some kinda of major mistake was made. I don’t think it would play well with some of the women voters who Obama is losing right now, either.

    Dustin (73fead)

  176. I don’t think Hillary Clinton ever intended to serve as Sec State in a second 0bama dramedy.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  177. According to Ace of Spades about Hillary’s statement from Peru:

    “But of course she blames it on lower-level advisers.
    She says “I am responsible” for the security of State’s 60,000 workers, but then says she’s not responsible at all”

    Doesn’t sound much different than what the Preezy is doing.

    PatAZ (9a59ce)

  178. “The decision about security aspects are made by security professionals.”

    - Hillary Clinton

    So she’s responsible, but no, it’s people under her who are really responsible.

    Raisins.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  179. Colonel…
    I agree. She is cunning and shrewd. This is a calculated move to:
    1) Show she has stones in this incident; while also showing “gravitas”….meaning she’s the only adult in the room, in order mitigate this lapse.

    2) She will bail as soon as it looks like she isn’t deserting

    Angelo (234a2b)

  180. If he fired her while keeping Holder after F&F it would look like a war on women. If she resigns Bill won’t have to campaign for O. Very dicey business this is. My guess is she resigns right after the election as she has already indicated she would not serve a second term at State regardless.

    Still doesn’t satisfy the whole Susan Rice/video/lying liar situation or get the WH off the hook for that, though. Will anyone in the media notice? Will Mitt pounce?

    elissa (05a102)

  181. There isn’t rally anything for Hillary to do but to take the blame for the security issue … obviously that was a State Dept screw-up.

    But the wider problem is WHY there was an attack, and why the Administration blamed it for 3 weeks on some idiot video. It is like LBJ claiming the VietCong were beat, and then trying to blame Tet on landlord rent increases. They are clearly trying to pretend the war is over, when the other side is still fighting.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  182. Also, precisely who told Susan Rice to repeatedly play the narrative on all the talk shows, etc?

    Dana (292dcf)

  183. It will be interesting if the WH offers magnanimous conciliatory support for Hillary

    Angelo (234a2b)

  184. #183

    Because it was a ripe plum just hanging there

    Angelo (234a2b)

  185. “Hillary Clinton then said that they [Romney/Ryan] would face serious consequences if they continued to exploit this “tragic mistake” for political gain. Clinton went on to ask, ‘what did Mitt Romney know and when did he know it’?”

    New York Times – October 15, 2012 Evening Edition

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  186. I’ll be curious to see if she’s called to testify before congress.

    Dana (292dcf)

  187. jimgeraghty We all know that when Secretaries of State must share hard truths with the public, they do so in a series of interviews from Lima, Peru.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  188. Also, precisely who told Susan Rice to repeatedly play the narrative on all the talk shows, etc?
    Comment by Dana — 10/15/2012 @ 5:58 pm

    – Teh White House.

    And I repeat, she will neither step down nor resign while Obama remains in office.

    Icy (183ba7)

  189. UPDATE: Hillary is throwing her own self under the bus!

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the bucks stops with her when it comes to who is blame for a deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

    “I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru for a visit. The interview, one of a series given to U.S. television networks Monday night, were the first she has given about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

    Clinton insisted President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are not involved in security decisions, Clinton said.

    “I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha,” she added, noting that it is close to the election.

    OK, tell us what you did wrong and how, Hil.

    Patterico (8b3905)

  190. iowahawkblog NYTimes front page stories on women’s membership ban at Augusta Golf Club: 40. NYTimes front page stories on Benghazi controversy: 0.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  191. UPDATE x2: Second question: did you tell Susan Rice to go out and lie about all this?

    Patterico (8b3905)

  192. Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    Comment by P. Tillman — 10/15/2012 @ 8:39 am

    Bush went to where the remains of the victims were and said the ones who did this would hear from us real soon. Obama stood next to the caskets of the victims of his 9/11 attack and said some obscure youtube video producer was gonna hear from us real soon. Kind of hard to rally around that.

    j curtis (3bb534)

  193. UPDATEx3: Third and fourth questions: boxers or briefs? do you dress-right or dress-left?

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  194. +10, j curtis.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  195. Lefty blog ‘the Hill’ on Ryan back in Waukesha and speaking at one of my alma maters:

    “While the state backed Democratic presidential candidates in both 2000 and 2004, it was the thinnest margin of victory of any blue state. If Romney can do as well as former President George W. Bush did in the state and Ryan can help him improve on Bush’s numbers by even just a bit in Ryan’s home district in southeastern Wisconsin, the GOP can win the state.”

    No kidding. With voter ID the Dims have lost 100K votes statewide. Even Rasmussen is out to lunch on WI. Turn out on the right will again be above 3/4.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  196. “I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said

    Is she gonna call the family of the victims and apologize and explain what happened?

    j curtis (3bb534)

  197. 194. “Dims rallied around Bush”

    Sorta like the Fwench 9/12 “We are all Americans”. How long did that last, anyone?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  198. When did she contact the defense department, why did the CIA abandon Benghazi entirely, and wait three weeks for the FBI to show up?

    narciso (ee31f1)

  199. Good grief, what incriminating info do they have on her?

    Patricia (e1d89d)

  200. As the Nuland transcript from the October 12th briefing, she was at the part of the State Department, where they were watching the feed from Benghazi

    narciso (ee31f1)

  201. WaPo/ABC says its a whole new ballgame if Urkel can come out smokin’:

    http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/abc-newswapo-presidential-poll-with-d9-sample-shows-dead-heat/

    ‘Course they spot the Dims +9. Down Low is going to be an Inferno doncha’no?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  202. Clinton’s responsible for the poor decisions vis-a-vis security and 0bama’s responsible for the cover-up.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  203. Via jammie ““I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru for a visit.”

    She’s asking for asylum.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  204. Nothing at the NYT or LAT. WaPo has it on front page.

    Dana (292dcf)

  205. I think this makes Teh Won look even more feckless.

    JD (43ce10)

  206. It does, JD, especially in light of him going to Vegas the next day. Really, is it common practice for the President of the United States to be this far out of the loop when a situation like Benghazi unfolds?

    Dana (292dcf)

  207. And so unwilling to “man up”, Dana.

    JD (43ce10)

  208. Then again they are all Lefties:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/layers-and-layers-of-fact-checkers-score-again.php

    Kinda tough to make anything stick in an absolute vacuum.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  209. ‘what is that in parsecs,’ (why the Italics))

    narciso (ee31f1)

  210. “201.Good grief, what incriminating info do they have on her?
    Comment by Patricia — 10/15/2012 @ 6:23 pm”

    Two words: Huma Abedin Weiner (Ala JoeyPlugs)

    PatAZ (9a59ce)

  211. ______________________________________________

    UPDATE: Hillary is throwing her own self under the bus!

    “Hillary Clinton then said that they [Romney/Ryan] would face serious consequences if they continued to exploit this “tragic mistake” for political gain. Clinton went on to ask, ‘what did Mitt Romney know and when did he know it’?” New York Times – October 15, 2012 Evening Edition

    Comment by Colonel Haiku — 10/15/2012 @ 6:03 pm

    It’s like clowns on parade.

    First, Hillary Clown Clinton apparently wants to look selfless and heroic, so she falls on the sword to save her beloved (snerk) Obama. But then she threatens Romney and implies — if I’m interpreting the excerpt correctly (and assuming that quote really is from the NY Times and not The Onion) — he was somehow in on covert info out of Libya. You gotta be kidding me. Is this a replay of her “vast rightwing conspiracy” tactics, gameplaying or flat-out paranoia?

    I originally assumed the cabal of leftists in the White House, which includes both Obama and Hillary, would circle the wagons and fight for one another. Then Hillary, in a moment of candor yesterday, pointed the finger of responsibility at the White House. But that presumably wasn’t done to be, as she says, a “gotcha” moment, but because she was describing what is obvious to anyone with more than half a brain.

    Dodging sniper fire on airport tarmacs has definitely affected the sanity and reality of Hillary the Clown.

    Mark (193187)

  212. Patterico–

    Hillary is taking the blame for the embassy security decisions and the results of that.

    She is most definitely NOT taking the blame for the WH going on and on for 3 weeks about the nasty man with the video being the cause.

    Now, Adm Clapper as DNI has fallen on that sword separately, but unlike Hillary, his claim doesn’t pass the laugh test since it was clear (at least to the British press) by Sept 15th that it was a planned al-Qaeda op, and there were lots of Americans named in those articles.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  213. To answer Hillary, Mark, Mitt need only turn to The Independent article of Sept 14 as his double-secret mystery source.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  214. Clinton’s responsible for the poor decisions vis-a-vis security and 0bama’s responsible for the cover-up.
    Comment by Colonel Haiku — 10/15/2012 @ 6:33 pm

    – That’s right.

    Icy (183ba7)

  215. Dear Obama,

    Now that I finally have your attention, I should probably mention that I also started a war with Libya without first getting congressional approval; now you know. Please don’t politicize my decision, ok?

    – Hilary

    ras (be1e0d)

  216. Hold the phone!!! Paul Ryan and family busted for fake photo op at an Ohio soup kitchen where they pretend to wash dishes!!!!!! Charity president oupraged!!!

    This is not a joke post. Google it.

    elissa (05a102)

  217. Bill and Hillary have worked far too hard and long to ever back down from their intent to create a dynasty.

    I would expect something like this in the near future by Hillary, the campaign and a whole lot of anonymous sources:

    “As Secretary of State, I have the responsibility for the health, safety and well-being of our diplomats, staff and families at our facilities world-wide.

    When we faced a terrorist attack in Benghazi, I immediately ordered all of our assets in the affected area to defend themselves and consulted with our intelligence officers to assess the situation and assemble a proper response.

    “The whole time, I was in constant contact with the White House, the Department of Defense and our intelligence resources.

    “Unfortunately, when we face a challenging situation with rapidly changing events, confusion can lead to misinterpretation of intelligence and the disintegration of vital communication.

    “As the situation unfolded, our intelligence became confused with the unfortunate deaths of Chris Stevens and three other brave Americans. I mourn with their families and pledge to track down their killers.

    “No one in the administration could have foreseen the events that transpired. Regardless, all of the assets of a great nation are being marshalled to apprehend the perpetrators and reassess our security procedures to make sure another tragedy as this does not happen again.

    “The President and Vice President are fully aware of the efforts being undertaken by our assets and are working with all appropriate departments to maintain the safety and security of our people and the nation.”

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  218. elissa–

    The assertion is that the Ryan’s did not have “official” permission, but charity staff dis allow it. The Charity president seems most worried about donation blowback, and having not been consulted. Otherwise it was a fairly standard photo-op.

    WaPo article.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  219. Surreal, Elissa.

    JD (43ce10)

  220. elissa-

    You just ruined an otherwise fine evening….

    Seriously, let’s see what more is said. We all know that if Ryan said more than “Ouch” stubbing his toe we would probably hear about it while no one is covering the Libya lies.
    I’m guessing that Ryan visited a site where there were some friendly folks, then somebody else heard about it who is an Obamaite and made a stink. We’ll have to see what the truth and what the distortion is.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  221. Thank goodness, the WaPo got to the bottom of Soup-Kitchengate. How many diplomats died in that one?

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  222. Surreal, Elissa. That writer from WaPo has been in dogged pursuit of this story. Dead ambassadors and horrible economy and arms to terrorists in Syria and Fast and Furious, not so much.

    JD (43ce10)

  223. re: your post #214, Mark… the NYT has not denied that quote, so I can only assume it’s their’s.

    Colonel Haiku (bd8703)

  224. Well the WaPo article is likely about as positive as one will get. When I Googled it all I got was HuffPo and other lib sites going berserk as if they had proven that Ryan is really Charles Manson in disguise.

    Sometimes I think even if/when R+R win there is such a large contingent of folks happy with their Obamaphone that it will be a miracle if they can get anything done.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  225. Those most responsible for the lack of security to begin with, and the rejection of the requests to increase security, must be fired.

    Since no subordinate to the POTUS yet has been fired, the only available conclusion must be that President Barack Obama is himself most responsible, and the voters should fire him.

    Beldar (d8195e)

  226. gary-Mn. is within reach for Sir Mittens.
    Farmers down here in Martin County vote conservative.

    mg (e0b08a)

  227. Who’s the white vp candidate
    That’s a sex machine to all the chicks?
    Ryan!
    Ya damn right!

    Who is the man that would risk his hands
    For his brother man?
    Ryan!
    Can you dig it?

    Who’s the cat that won’t cop out
    When dishes are all about?
    Ryan!
    Right On!

    They say this cat Ryan is a bad dishwasher
    SHUT YOUR MOUTH!
    I’m talkin’ ’bout Ryan.
    THEN WE CAN DIG IT!

    He’s a complicated man
    But no one understands him but his woman
    PAUL RYAN!

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  228. Sorry to ruin your evening, Doc. This dishwashing “scandal”, with photos, ridiculous as it is, has already been widely picked up and disseminated in what appears to be a rather coordinated fashion. A simple google search shows that. Sick fooks the lot of them. It truly is to laugh. Nobody tell the WaPo this secret—that when pols have photo ops of them planting a tree they don’t dig the four foot deep hole for it themselves.

    elissa (05a102)

  229. But Beldar, we’re over that now and talking about Soup-Kitchengate. Can’t you keep up?

    Otherwise, yes Hillary took responsibility long enough to pass it onto the “security professionals”. That sounds easier to get away with than blaming “Intel” which gets the CIA and others upset.
    But hopefully wherever the security professional is who was told “no” he/she will soon be discussing it with Rep. Issa. We’ve already had people said they asked and were told no, we just don’t know who exactly it was who said “No”.

    Whoever it was, probably the same people were in charge of security at that soup kitchen that Ryan forced his way into. At least they didn’t let him get away with taking the pots with him.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  230. Yeah, it really doesn’t satisfy, these questions

    http;//ruters.com/article/2012/10/15/us-libya-usa-security-idUSBRE89E1AL20121015

    narciso (ee31f1)

  231. Comment by Ag80 — 10/15/2012 @ 8:01 pm
    Thanks, we needed the laugh.

    that when pols have photo ops of them planting a tree they don’t dig the four foot deep hole for it themselves.
    What!?!?

    You’re right, as I mentioned above HuffPo and others are wild with something they can cheer about, as inconsequential as it should be.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  232. Hillary is taking a gamble that 1.she will end up looking like the only one in the Obama administration with a set of balls 2.she will gain the support of the Obama people behind her in 2016 because she took the rap for their guy And 3 if this kills the controversy enough to help Obama win – they will worship her as their savior.I don’t mean to be depressing, but she may be able to give the media a way to justify delaying their investigation until after the election. Clintons- the poster children for crafty.

    GhostOnTheWind (a0e0c9)

  233. It’s a good thing that the “career-ending” PanGate isn’t political right before an election like that silly dead ambassador dustup.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  234. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/14/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-9142012

    MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, we are very vigilant around anniversaries like 9/11. The President is always briefed and brought up to speed on all the precautions being taken. But let’s be –

    What could they have possibly been briefed about if the SoS keeps them out of the loop r.e. security?

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  235. Just a reminder that Michelle Obama had her very own version of soup-kitchengate. Shockingly, the usually frugal first lady was caught wearing her $600.00 Lanvin sneakers the day she went to have her photo taken while ladleing it out to the homeless.

    http://blogs.suntimes.com/sportsprose/2009/05/michelle_obama_under_fire_for.html

    elissa (05a102)

  236. KevinM–these days one really does need a rule book to recognize what things are just “bumps in the road” versus which must be viewed as full blown scandals.

    elissa (05a102)

  237. Beg to differ, elissa. You don’t need a rule book. You just need to know if there is a (D) or an (R) after the pol’s name.

    Literally. Because if it’s a full blown scandal, there will never be a (D) behind the name. The press will just report the name, then it’s “guess that party.”

    If there is a (D) behind the name, it’s just a bump in the road. So it’s safe for the press to ID the party.

    If there’s an (R), it’s always a full blown scandal.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  238. Hm…three senators are boldly calling out the President. Is he listening?

    We have just learned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has claimed full responsibility for any failure to secure our people and our Consulate in Benghazi prior to the attack of September 11, 2012. This is a laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever.

    However, we must remember that the events of September 11 were preceded by an escalating pattern of attacks this year in Benghazi, including a bomb that was thrown into our Consulate in April, another explosive device that was detonated outside of our Consulate in June, and an assassination attempt on the British Ambassador. If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team, whose responsibility it is to keep the President informed. But if the President was aware of these earlier attacks in Benghazi prior to the events of September 11, 2012, then he bears full responsibility for any security failures that occurred. The security of Americans serving our nation everywhere in the world is ultimately the job of the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stops there.

    Furthermore, there is the separate issue of the insistence by members of the Administration, including the President himself, that the attack in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video, long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack. The President also bears responsibility for this portrayal of the attack, and we continue to believe that the American people deserve to know why the Administration acted as it did.

    Dana (292dcf)

  239. The saddest thing is we’re talking about the events of 9-11. It makes no difference of the year.

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  240. We need to see Susan Rice’s day-planner (or e-equivelent) and phone-log for the period of 9-11 through 9-16.
    Just who did she meet with, and talk to, in that period.

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2bb434)

  241. Of course, having Hillary saying the buck stops with her fits right into the reputation she established while in Little Rock.
    It not only stops with her, it can’t get out of her grasp.

    AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2bb434)

  242. I bet Ms. Tillman will be happy tomorrow when she wakes up to see that the WaPo got to the bottom of Kitchengate.

    Too bad about United States Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and former U.S. Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

    That’s just the way politics go.

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  243. From CNN’s Starting Point on Sunday:

    Well, the role of the White House was to convey the information that we were receiving from our intelligence people on the ground and in the area.

    Again, I ask, how does the WH do this if the SoS keeps them entirely out of the loop?

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  244. There’s a reason you could bet on a mare to place or show, at the racetrack, but never bet to win. Because, when she sniffs the stallion catching up to her, she slows down and lifts up her tail.

    nk (875f57)

  245. If you hear about kitchengate tomorrow, please remember where you heard it first. Thanks to Patterico.

    Ag80 (b2c81f)

  246. Hilariously, this is too late to help Obama.

    SPQR (768505)

  247. 107. Comment by Steve57 — 10/15/2012 @ 11:09 am

    It’s like the widespread contention that the Obama admin would have to be nuts to throw Hillary! under the bus this close to the election.

    David Axelrod did not set out to throw Hillary! under the bus. He was just deflecting a charge against Biden – that he lied during the debate when he said they weren’t told and didn’t know that they wanted more security in Benghazi. “Just me and the president!” was the spin. This would be like protecting the king in chess even at the cost of putting a piece in danger. It also sounded true, although maybe not what Biden meant.

    Biden wasn’t really saying: “Oh, it’s the State Department that blundered.” He was saying nobody in Washington knew.

    And that was not a lie.

    David Axelrod actually gave the wrong answer.
    (Just like the campaign gave the wrong explanation for the “you didn’t build that” comment, where “that” did not refer to roads and bridges but to this unbelievable American system of laws under which business flourished.)

    Biden had actually said:

    http://www.npr.org/2012/10/11/162754053/transcript-biden-ryan-vice-presidential-debate

    MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there. [in Benghazi - SF]

    VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again.

    Biden didn’t say: “we weren’t told/did not know they wanted more security.”

    But he said: “we weren’t told/did not know they wanted more security again.”

    Biden was clearly referring to the last two requests for extra security in Benghazi, where there was testimony before Congress by someone in government that he had sent them, and there was a denial by the State Department that they had ever arrived.

    Now what this clearly means that there was a terrorist mole somewhere along the way who intercepted those messages, or some electronic method of intercepting them remotely.

    But everyone chooses to believe that both of them can’t be right – that one version is wrong, and and somebody’s probably lying or doesn’t know what they really did.

    I say no – this contradiction is extremely significant – there was penetration of State Department communications from Libya.

    some to side with the State Department)

    Sammy Finkelman (3bb022)

  248. Sammy, anyone who can write: “Biden was clearly referring …” is just going to get laughed at by me.

    And now you are inventing some sort of “penetration” of diplomatic communications?

    Good lord.

    SPQR (768505)

  249. Sammy – I don’t think Biden knew what Biden meant. He usually doesn’t. Your claims that you know what he meant are risible.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  250. Comment by Colonel Haiku — 10/15/2012 @ 5:48 pm

    So she’s responsible, but no, it’s people under her who are really responsible.

    That’s of course what they would say, and is actually a reasonable thing to say, as far as it goes.. Hillary! is not being thrown under the bus.

    But the real question is system dynamics.

    1) Who is responsible for the decision to do everything possible not to break the budget on security??

    2) Given that, who decided that a commitment to improve security cannot be reversed in order to improve security where you come to realize there is more risk?

    3) Who decided we should do everything possible to stick to withdrawal and normalization deadlines?

    Sammy Finkelman (3bb022)

  251. “1) Who is responsible for the decision to do everything possible not to break the budget on security??”

    Sammy – Isn’t the question keeping people in a dangerous area versus improving security. The budget question is a red herring. If security was not going to be improved, why keep people in Benghazi? Who made that decision?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  252. 251. Biden had actually said:

    http://www.npr.org/2012/10/11/162754053/transcript-biden-ryan-vice-presidential-debate

    MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there. [in Benghazi - SF]

    VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again.

    Biden didn’t say: “we weren’t told/did not know they wanted more security.”

    But he said: “we weren’t told/did not know they wanted more security again.”

    Biden was clearly referring to the last two requests for extra security in Benghazi, where there was testimony before Congress by someone in government that he had sent them, and there was a denial by the State Department that they had ever arrived.

    Now what this clearly means that there was a terrorist mole somewhere along the way who intercepted those messages, or some electronic method of intercepting them remotely.

    But everyone chooses to believe that both of them can’t be right – that one version is wrong, and and somebody’s probably lying or doesn’t know what they really did.

    I say no – this contradiction is extremely significant – there was penetration of State Department communications from Libya.

    some to side with the State Department)

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:05 pm

    Sammy, you crack me up. You put such great emphasis on the word again.

    “we weren’t told/did not know they wanted more security again.”

    Emphasis Biden himself never applied to the word if you listen to the audio.

    As a matter of fact, since he mumbles it under his breath most transcripts would list it as [inaudible] as in the following example:

    This is the guy who brought the entire world, including Russia and China, to bring about the most devastating—most devastating—the most devastating efforts on Iran to make sure that they in fact stop [inaudible].

    For all we know Slow Joe was probably reminding himself out loud of the instructions his briefing coach gave him; to repeat himself as many times as possible, as in the above example. Because a lie repeated becomes the truth (the inaudible word in the above transcript is probably “again” as he reminds himself to say “devastating” ONE MORE TIME, but then his dementia kicked in).

    But, hey, if it makes you happy that the they never heard from the RSO in Libya again after they heard but deliberately ignored his first screams for more security, I’m cool with it. It means after the first request was passed to the Obama WH and was ignored, the mid-level officials in DoS got the message and refused to pass the follow-on requests up or told them the shut-up as Obama and Biden just didn’t want to hear it. AGAIN!

    Oh, I have answers for this post:

    254. 1) Who is responsible for the decision to do everything possible not to break the budget on security??

    2) Given that, who decided that a commitment to improve security cannot be reversed in order to improve security where you come to realize there is more risk?

    3) Who decided we should do everything possible to stick to withdrawal and normalization deadlines?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 10/15/2012 @ 10:25 pm

    The answers are Obama, Obama, and Obama.

    Although the first question is misstated; they were no where near breaking the budget on security. But they did spend less on that partial World-Wide Protective Services contract they off-shored to that British firm than the DoD spends to deploy a single serviceman overseas for a year. It should be “who told State to get cheap, inadequate security so he could later blame the GOP for his cynical self-serving decision.”

    Answer’s still the same; Obama.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  253. Just to be clear, Sammy, if you are right when you say:

    Biden was clearly referring to the last two requests for extra security in Benghazi, where there was testimony before Congress by someone in government that he had sent them, and there was a denial by the State Department that they had ever arrived.

    …then that denial was clearly a lie. As Nordstrom testified that his first two requests (the initial request you argue Biden knew about) was ignored. As was the second. As for the third, the one you say was one of the final of “the last two requests for extra security,” it clearly reached State per Nordstrom’s testimony, as he stated under oath he was:

    “specifically told, ‘You can’t request an SST extension.’ How I interpreted that was there was going to be too much political cost.”

    State can’t have told him to stop asking on one hand, and assert on the other that they never got the request.

    And Nordstrom, again, was under oath.

    As for this amusing idea:

    So she’s responsible, but no, it’s people under her who are really responsible.

    That’s of course what they would say, and is actually a reasonable thing to say, as far as it goes.

    Reasonable? Really?

    Per the USA Today:

    Nordstrom said his requests for more security were blocked by a department policy to “normalize operations and reduce security resources.”

    Who sets department policy at the State Department? Underlings?

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  254. Apparently Biden wasn’t just fibbin’ about Libya:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-new-middle-east-coverup-biden-caught-in-syria-debate-falsehood/2012/10/15/fec2c060-16d2-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html

    Now we see why it was important to get SoupKitchen Gate out into the open

    Really Big Squirrels!!

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  255. Following Bubba’s lawyering up, Hill withdraws to the citadel. Like its going to matter that she calls WH pushing a totally false and absurd story of spontaneous outrage over non-existent movie ‘the fog of war’.

    It’s a cover up, and it does not stop at her desk. She says SS never believed that, so she has no responsibility and cannot take same.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  256. Quinnipiac: 12 point PA lead now four. With a D+8 sample.

    POTUS better bring Big Bird.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  257. MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, we are very vigilant around anniversaries like 9/11. The President is always briefed and brought up to speed on all the precautions being taken. But let’s be –

    Comment by Steve57 — 10/15/2012 @ 8:47 pm

    What could they have possibly been briefed about if the SoS keeps them out of the loop r.e. security?

    Like he said, the security precautions that were taken.

    *******

    Not the security precautions that weren’t taken.

    What somebody thought about, and even asked for, repeatedly, and somebody else denied. Or maybe where security precautions were reduced, but somebody pleaded not to do it.

    Like NASA about launch delays.

    Sammy Finkelman (3bb022)

  258. Hillary didn’t throw herself under the bus, she threw Charlene Lamb,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  259. I heard someone make the point that even though Hillary sort of took the blame (though pointed out, she is diffusing it), at the same time she is looking more presidential than the one.

    There is an organization called Voice of the Martyrs where you can find about all the persecution of Christians around the world that one doesn’t hear about. For example, why was there so much attention to Darfur when violence in southern Sudan had been already going on for years?

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  260. The answers are Obama, Obama, and Obama.

    And if he’s not up to being held responsible for his adminstration, he is not up to the job.

    And most people aren’t. That’s a lot of responsibility, and we gave it to someone with no executive experience. That he’s playing the blame game with his cabinet is to be expected, and probably the best reason to vote Romney, an experienced executive who would take responsibility for his administration.

    Dustin (73fead)

  261. McCain and co. tells Hillary, “Oh, no you don’t!”
    There are lots of reasons why many of us would not like to see McCain as president, but when he gets an issue right, usually on security/military, he’s great to have on your side.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/the-mccain-statement.php

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  262. ‘We have nothing to fear from Barack Obama,’ remember that,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  263. It really is a pitiful pantomine, written in blood

    http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44418

    narciso (ee31f1)

  264. MD, great link.

    John Mccain is right on this one.

    Dustin (73fead)

  265. Thanks, Dustin. I almost didn’t do it ’cause I figure many people here also check PL already, but then I thought it was good enough not for anyone to miss it.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  266. Well yes, and no, right around the time of the last election, according to Wikileaks, with Stevens as the translator, he genuflected before
    Quaddafi, then a year a half later, he decided
    Quaddafi had to go, which put Bel Hadj’s foot soldiers, which include Feb 17th and Qumu in play

    narciso (ee31f1)

  267. Anyone want to be that Obama wasn’t personally briefed in great detail about PanGate?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  268. Tol’ ya: Pussy Boy, straight up.

    Space Cockroach (8096f2)

  269. Drew at Ace’s argues Hilarity has just handed Mitt the clueBy4 with which to beat Down Low tonight.

    ‘So the buck stops with SS over the disaster that is ME policy?

    DuzZat mean the economy mired in depression is on TurboTaxTim?’

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  270. This is the report that Lake referred to, that should have been referenced in at least one of the briefings.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/13/august-2012-us-report-shows-libya-on-the-road-to-becoming-a-failed-islamist-state/

    narciso (ee31f1)

  271. 275. Cont. ‘Just what are we paying your greens fees for, anyway?’

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  272. 268. It really is a pitiful pantomine, written in blood

    http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44418

    Comment by narciso — 10/16/2012 @ 7:02 am

    It reminds me of his speech about Katrina. In that racebaiting screed, he more than implied that the Klansmen in the GOP refused to vote for a Stafford act waiver because they didn’t view largely black NOLA as part of the “American family.”

    It turned out Sen. Obama was one of the few to vote against that waiver.

    Now we know the administration (and no one will convince me this was just Hillary!’s idea) refused to improve security in LIbya even though they had the money to do so because they’d rather sacrifice lives than destroy the foreign policy portion of the campaign narrative.

    But Obama is perfectly willing to blame the GOP’s proposed future budget cuts for the lapse.

    He really is a one trick pony, and it’s such a bad trick it requires numerous talking heads and an enthralled MFM to make it remotely work.

    Steve57 (c8ac21)

  273. 276. Yes, indeed, let’s demonstrate our confidence in them by placing the welfare of our diplomatic core in their hands. Just be careful with your drinking glasses, you might spook them.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  274. 0 threw Hilary under the bus, and now she’s pulled his chair out from under him.

    htom (412a17)

  275. htom, more like she’s sitting in the previously empty chair. By taking the blame for Benghazi, she’s also saying that real decisions are never made in the Oval Office. When the phone rings at 3AM, she’s the one who answers.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  276. 229. Here ya go, sicko:

    poll-romney-near-landslide-in-rural-swing-counties

    Military vote will be coming in for weeks, if not months.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  277. Anyone want to be that Obama wasn’t personally briefed in great detail about PanGate?
    Comment by Kevin M — 10/16/2012 @ 7:29 am

    – That’s all Axelrod on that one.

    Icy (172dc7)

  278. Obama has been outfoxed by Hillary. The Clintons are pros and he forgot that. No one should be surprised, least of all Obama.

    Dana (292dcf)

  279. I agree with DrewM. Hillary isn’t taking the blame for Benghazi; she’s taking credit by saying she’s responsible. It’s like a no lo contendre plea: I may be liable but that doesn’t mean I’m really responsible.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  280. 285. Obama has been outfoxed by Hillary. The Clintons are pros and he forgot that. No one should be surprised, least of all Obama.

    Comment by Dana — 10/16/2012 @ 9:06 am

    Maybe he hasn’t been. This isn’t my idea; it’s been floated on other sites like Breitbart, but Obama may pull Hillary! out from under the bus tonight at the debate and take responsibility himself.

    It makes a certain sense. Nobody’s really buying the idea that Hillary! is actually responsible. In that letter that McCain and the other GOP Senators sent to the WH they called it a “laudable gesture.” And really that’s all it was, a gesture. It makes her appear noble with no threat of consequences. Tonight at the debate is an opportune time for Obama to take his turn at the noble gesture. Again, with no threat of consequences to him personally.

    All Obama hopes to do is play out the clock between now and November 6. If he delivers his “bombshell” announcement that’s all the media will talk about, and they’ll paint further criticism of our heroic President as cheap and craven.

    And Hillary! looks like the noble, loyal soldier willing to take a bullet for the President. Turning what would have been a liability if she wanted to run in 2016 into a likely positive.

    Steve57 (f51614)

  281. I think it’s too late for him to claim “his” chair; the music stopped when she pulled the chair out.

    “Yes, I’m responsible; I’m glad she reminded me!”

    Maybe that would make him look better in some people’s eyes.

    htom (412a17)

  282. Comment by Steve57 — 10/15/2012 @ 10:50 am

    But of two out of the three he does list, one is headed by a hard-line Islamist party, the other by Wahhabists. You can say the same thing about the countries Biden doesn’t name.

    He omitted Qatar, home of Al Jazeera.

    I don’t know what Jordan’s position is, but Turkey and Saudi Arabia are pushing for sharia-based international laws punishing blasphemy against Islam or Muhammed.

    And they’re the ones telling us who the “free forces” are in Syria.

    Yes. I noticed the problem, but Paul Ryan didn’t.

    The buffoon Biden actually confirms what Ryan said, and what the intel community is saying. The weapons are going not just to AQ but other Islamists. And he’s too stooopid to know it.

    Exactly.

    That’s the problem when you “lead from behind.” It’s like driving from the backseat; somebody else is in control.

    Of course, it’s appropriate that the Obama admin is leading from behind. That’s also where they do their thinking and speaking

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  283. Qatar, is home to CENTCOM, and Al Jazeera, and Quaradawi, there’s a touch of schizophrenia

    narciso (ee31f1)

  284. 255.“1) Who is responsible for the decision to do everything possible not to break the budget on security??”

    Sammy – Isn’t the question keeping people in a dangerous area versus improving security. The budget question is a red herring. If security was not going to be improved, why keep people in Benghazi? Who made that decision?

    Ambassador Stevens.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/world/africa/cables-show-requests-to-state-dept-for-security-in-libya-were-focused-on-tripoli.html?pagewanted=all

    Security in Benghazi had been a growing concern for American diplomats this year. In April, the convoy of the United Nations special envoy for Libya was attacked there. In early June, a two-vehicle convoy carrying the British ambassador came under attack by rocket-propelled grenades. Militants struck the American mission with a homemade bomb, but no one was hurt. In late June, the Red Cross was attacked and the organization pulled out.

    “We were the last thing on their target list to remove from Benghazi,” Lt. Col. Andrew Wood of the Utah National Guard, who was deployed in Tripoli as the leader of the American military security unit, told the House committee.

    But friends and colleagues of Ambassador Stevens said he was adamant about maintaining an American presence in Benghazi, the heart of the opposition to the Qaddafi government.

    Anotrher good article is:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/world/africa/private-security-hovers-as-issue-after-embassy-attack-in-benghazi-libya.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed&pagewanted=all

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  285. P.T., its Democrats who arrest people for speech. From Woodrow Wilson to Barack Obama.

    Free speech does not protect you from Treason.

    Opposing the president, even in wartime, is not treason. That is so even if such opposition has the effect of helping the enemy, so long as it’s not motivated by adherence to the enemy. The Democratic Party’s behaviour over Vietnam in the early ’70s was treason. It was motivated by support for the enemy. Antiwar activists under Wilson were usually not motivated by loyalty to Germany, so they were not guilty of treason.

    Milhouse (454b9e)

  286. It will surprise me if Obama takes responsibility, he’s never done such a thing before in his life.

    SPQR (768505)

  287. 288. I think it’s too late for him to claim “his” chair; the music stopped when she pulled the chair out.

    “Yes, I’m responsible; I’m glad she reminded me!”

    Maybe that would make him look better in some people’s eyes.

    Comment by htom — 10/16/2012 @ 1:36 pm

    Just in case, if Romney has a chance to stick a fork in him so he knows he’s done, he should.

    I’m thinking something along the lines of “in a halfway well-run organization with a remotely competent chief executive it doesn’t take a month to figure out who’s responsible for something.”

    I think it would have a greater impact if Romney has the chance to skewer him first before Obama tries to look like he’s not hiding behind Hillary!’s skirts. Either way Romney needs to emphasize that Obama’s a pathetic executive.

    On this point, the truth and good politics are the same thing.

    Steve57 (f51614)

  288. Dems rallied around Bush as Americans who wanted to project a unified, strong voice against terrorists who target us all.

    Some Dems did so, at least in public. But many did not. Biden says he voted against the invasion of Afghanistan. Who are we to contradict him? And what of Michael Moore, special guest at the 2004 D convention? He certainly didn’t rally around Bush. He went right out organising protests and activism opposing any military action against the enemy. And he wasn’t an aberration either. There were many more examples that aren’t coming to mind just now, but a bit of Googling will reveal them.

    Milhouse (454b9e)

  289. 293. It will surprise me if Obama takes responsibility, he’s never done such a thing before in his life.

    Comment by SPQR — 10/16/2012 @ 2:52 pm

    Yeah, he did once. January 2010, just after he got back from his Christmas vacation in Hawaii. He took responsibility for the lapses that permitted the underwear bomber for getting so close to achieving his goal of blowing up an airliner over Detroit.

    Right after he took credit for personally subduing the guy and restraining him in his seat.

    Steve57 (f51614)

  290. Sayeth Jen Psaki – the president takes responsibility for safety of all diplomats overseas

    JD (43ce10)

  291. 297. Sayeth Jen Psaki…

    Comment by JD — 10/16/2012 @ 3:03 pm

    So, Da Won is still hiding behind a woman, eh?

    Steve57 (f51614)

  292. Stef’s on board, too.

    Deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter tells The Associated Press in a phone interview Tuesday that, quote, “every time an American dies abroad, everybody takes responsibility, from the top down.”
    Asked whether that includes Obama, Cutter says, quote, “Absolutely … He’s the president of the United States.”

    elissa (6574bb)

  293. Hiding behind 3 women so far. Kind of not the same as taking responsibility.

    JD (43ce10)

  294. JD, Reagan took responsibility himself immediately, not through a spokesman.

    Then four days after the bombing he delivered this speech.

    What’s amazing is that he went on TV and told the country exactly what had happened on Sunday, Oct 23, 1983 within the week.

    No hiding behind others. No hiding behind an investigation.

    And he couldn’t even watch the attack in real time in the White House situation room like Obama could have.

    If he hadn’t put the “do not disturb” sign on his bedroom door.

    And forwarded all his calls to Hillary!

    President Eye Candy doesn’t have the remotest idea what a leader looks like, nor a competent executive.

    Steve57 (f51614)

  295. “Ambassador Stevens.”

    Sammy – I recommend that you run hard with that one. It’s a winner. Ambassador Stevens is responsible for his own death!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  296. The State Department announced today it is readying plans to leave the troops in Afghanistan after Obama’s 2014 deadline. Hmmm.

    It seems Hillary isn’t worried about being loyal to Obama anymore. Perhaps she feels free to be the new Hillary — in charge of 3AM phone calls and Obama’s foreign policy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  297. Actually, something bugs me about the timeline.

    We’re told the attack started at approx 9:40pm local time in Benghazi. Libya is 6 hours ahead of E.D.T this time of year (right now it’s Tuesday 7:44pm in D.C., Wednesday 1:44am in Libya). So that would have been in the middle of the afternoon on the east coast.

    Why wasn’t the President watching it in real time? The attack went on for hours. Surely he had enough time to get back from the golf course and watch the feed from the Diplomatic Security Tactical Operations Center.

    He got back in time for the photo op to do that when it was the bin Laden raid. Did he have something better to do.

    Or is the watch officer in the situation room instructed to keep President Eye Candy out of the loop just like his cabinet secretaries apparently are?

    Steve57 (f51614)

  298. Did Obama just throw himself under the bus on this embassy attack? Well that would be a smart move if he does. The buck still stops with the commander in chief. Hillary Clinton is smart to take full responsibility, she’s setting herself up as the adult in the room.

    The Emperor (0f6db7)

  299. Well that would be a smart move if he does

    It would have been a smart move a month ago. Now it is pretty much meaningless.

    JD (43ce10)

  300. Clinton will find out that she’s been too clever by half.

    Colonel Haiku (c57a06)

  301. Here it now and believe it, because it’s the truth:
    Hillary did not “throw herself under the bus” or “fall on her sword” AT ALL.
    She took responsibility for what her department is responsible for, while making it clear that she did not personally deny the request for increased security. To do otherwise would be to portray herself as either a liar or someone that is not in control of her department; this is something that Clinton’s do not do, no matter how much they have actually lied or lost control.
    On the issue of the video, she made it clear that when speaking of it she only went by the information provided by the intelligence community.
    She NEVER made the claim that the video was responsible for the attack on the consulate.
    She made it clear that she did NOT give Susan Rice her marching orders for Rice’s tour of the Sunday talk shows, and NO ONE in the administration has disputed this statement.
    The dutiful Democratic Party member, taking some of the heat off of the White House pre-debate, is engaging in a strategy to minimize the political fallout for herself and her family on this one.

    Icy (172dc7)

  302. It’s the circular firing squad, I figure Samantha Power, really came up with the talking point,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  303. @jd, better late than never. But how true is this latest info? Did Obama accept personal responsibility for this Benghazi fiasco?

    The Emperor (0f6db7)

  304. Why do I get the feeling that Hillary is enjoying this? What could be her end-game?

    The Emperor (0f6db7)

  305. Did Obama accept personal responsibility for this Benghazi fiasco?

    No. He has not. He had 3 women speaking for him.

    JD (43ce10)

  306. @jd, better late than never. But how true is this latest info? Did Obama accept personal responsibility for this Benghazi fiasco?
    Comment by The Emperor — 10/16/2012 @ 5:23 pm

    – Watch the debate. We’ll see.

    Icy (172dc7)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6778 secs.