Patterico's Pontifications

5/5/2014

David Plouffe Says People Pushing Benghazi Story Are “Loud” and “Delusional”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:25 am

OK then.

I think the next step is to examine statements by people close to Obama — or even people close to people who are close to Obama — just after the attack, to see if they were letting it slip, accidental-like, that the attack was a planned terrorist attack.

In an unrelated and sudden change of topic, here is Larry O’Connor at the Free Beacon from several days ago:

Missing from much of the coverage of yesterday’s revelations that Senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes coordinated an effort to obfuscate the truth behind the Sept 11 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi was a key detail about the insidious relationship between politics and media in Washington.

The brother of Ben Rhodes is David Rhodes, president of CBS News.

It isn’t enough for CBS News to mention the relationship as a parenthetical statement as they did in yesterday’s coverage. Larger questions deserve to be answered about the atmosphere and culture at CBS News and how open Rhodes is to any investigations into the Benghazi story and his brother’s involvement.

Sorry if that seemed like a dizzying and rough transition to a different topic. Talk to me again tonight.

81 Responses to “David Plouffe Says People Pushing Benghazi Story Are “Loud” and “Delusional””

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Plouffe and “Dude” Vietor were truly class acts about Benghazj.

    JD (9ad545)

  3. More sleuthing around the call.

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/01/05/benghazi-not-conspiracy-just-an-old-fashioned-cover-up-of-ineptitude-with-the-kids-making-decisions/

    Oddly Jerusalem and Benghazi(also Tripoli) are on the same time. I haven’t actually tried to Biden’s notes, except to compare ‘B’s.

    A timeline:

    http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

    I just don’t get why the call to Netanyahu at that hour. Seems contrived.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  4. All this was on camera at State and probably in the Situation Room.

    Woods and Doherty were effectively on their way back to the Annex around the time of the call. So, if my theory were true, they knew that the scheisse was en route to their faces by the time ibn Dunham met Panetta and Dempsey yet they somehow thought it urgent to talk Iran with Netanyahu and set up a call for 12:30 AM(typo in link above)?

    They knew by the time of the call that Brennan’s machinations had come apart. That Al Sharia had botched the apprehension.

    I would be the ‘debate cramming’ happened late when Dog supposedly retired after the call to Medusa.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  5. Trey Gowdy could prove Obama shot our four Americans himself and it wouldn’t make any difference. Vietor was right: that was two years ago…a lifetime to the LoFos.

    I’ve been watching Rasmussen since the latest Benghazi news came out. Not one point change in Barry-O’s approval rating.

    Dems keep telling voters to move on when, in fact, voters have already done so. It’s only us fools with principles who care about what really happened there.

    Nothing…NOTHING is going to get at the truth about this president because the truth is whatever libs believe at any given moment. And libs believe this man is our Messiah.

    Not that I want to dissuade you from trying but hope died here a long time ago.

    creeper (939971)

  6. “I’ve been watching Rasmussen since the latest Benghazi news came out. Not one point change in Barry-O’s approval rating.”

    creeper – I would not expect much change. Alphabet nets were not covering it much at all prior to Sunday.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  7. Missing from much of the coverage of yesterday’s revelations that Senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes coordinated an effort to obfuscate the truth behind the Sept 11 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi was a key detail about the insidious relationship between politics and media in Washington.

    The brother of Ben Rhodes is David Rhodes, president of CBS News.

    Oh please, you right-wing lunatics. Next thing you know you all will be trying to tell us that Jay Carney is married to a national correspondent with one of the major networks. Take the tinfoil hat off already.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  8. Missing from much of the coverage of yesterday’s revelations that Senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes coordinated an effort to obfuscate the truth behind the Sept 11 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi was a key detail about the insidious relationship between politics and media in Washington.

    And don’t forget that the President of CBS news might have some influence when it came to deciding whether or not, or where, to carry Sharyl Attkisson’s works, including by not limited to Benghazi stories.

    gramps, the original (944632)

  9. Plouffe points to the number of separate congressional investigations of Benghazi as if it were a meaningful measure of the thoroughness of how the matter has been investigated. He is fully aware of how the Administration has restricted congressional access to witnesses, testimony, and documents in what has become the hallmark operating methodology of what was supposed to be the most transparent presidency ever in responding to issues they don’t like. Stall, obfuscate, stonewall, lie, claim executive privilege, redact documents, to prevent congress from performing its constitutionally mandated oversight function.

    Plouffe knows of all the unanswered questions that remain. He knows that Administration has followed the same pattern with Fast & Furious, the EPA, spying on reporters, the IRS targeting of conservatives and other matters. Pivot and blame others for politicizing a matter which has already been investigated when in fact the administration is the side that began the politicization to prevent the truth from coming out.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  10. “TODAY I AM ASHAMED. I AM ASHAMED I DIDN’T DO ENOUGH TO STOP THIS MADNESS.” #ObamaYears #WhatWasIThinking

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. Related: Sharyl Attkisson: There’s a ‘Well-Orchestrated Strategy to Controversialize’ Benghazi.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  12. From the conservative tree house:

    You can see the phone notes in the hands of Joe Biden.

    Actually, you can’t make anything out, except that Biden abbreviates Benjamin Netanyahu as BB (Bibi)

    It’s only 298 by 457 pixels and the EXIF says the picture was taken on September 11, 2012 at 7:26:28 pm.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  13. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/5/2014 @ 10:37 am

    Plouffe points to the number of separate congressional investigations of Benghazi as if it were a meaningful measure of the thoroughness of how the matter has been investigated.

    This was a standard Clinton cover-up trope.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  14. 5. I’m more than a little uncomfortable in the role of optimist, but lets remember Crack Whore’s job approval floated near the 50% mark for years without a single positive development launched from his desk.

    We know find that level, adjusted for the sampling methodologies of the pollsters, something south of 40%.

    This year we’re greeted by white people at war and 60-90 million newly uninsured in our Health markets toward year’s end.

    Why are you downcast, in despair? Do you not know the God you serve?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  15. Rasmussen. A veritable finger of God.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  16. The Left has conveniently reduced all rebuttal to substantive critiques of Obama and/or, his policies, down to three infantile, histrionic and ad hominem reductions, while tellingly avoiding any cogent debate on the merits: “You’re racist, delusional (and, loud).” I mean, the horror of critics of the President having the temerity to be LOUD and vociferous in their criticism!!! It’s such an outrage, to countenance citizens who refuse to kowtow to Obama and who don’t worship at his altar; to brook those are not seduced by his cult of personality.

    The frequent use of this kind of rhetoric is really a tacit admission by liberals that they can’t win arguments on the merits, so, they refrain and, instead, engage in this kind of silly invective, which actually does serve several effective purposes. Firstly, accusations — however untruthful — have to be answered, lest anyone actually construe one’s silence in response to mean an admission of their truth; 2) they serve to intimidate critics with baseless calumny; and, 3) they serve as a distraction and avoidance tactic from having to engage in substantive debate.

    Guy Jones (df6cf0)

  17. It bothers them when we don’t swallow the loud delusion they tried to feed us.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  18. 5. …Dems keep telling voters to move on when, in fact, voters have already done so. It’s only us fools with principles who care about what really happened there.

    Nothing…NOTHING is going to get at the truth about this president because the truth is whatever libs believe at any given moment. And libs believe this man is our Messiah.

    Not that I want to dissuade you from trying but hope died here a long time ago.

    Comment by creeper (939971) — 5/5/2014 @ 8:58 am

    Voters may have moved on but Putin hasn’t. Neither have the people who planned those attacks, then watched as Obama and his minions lied through their teeth to cover for themselves and by the way for those terrorists at the same time. Neither have the Turks failed to notice, since their consul general had to drive through Ansar Al Sharia’s barricades to leave the meeting he had with Chris Stevens that evening. Neither have other countries with decent intelligence services, who knew exactly what happened because there were plenty of eyewitnesses who knew the truth. As did this administration on 12 September 2012, when our own eyewitnesses had been debriefed. And those other countries, friendly and unfriendly, knew that Obama knew.

    They haven’t moved on since they noticed that this administration’s interests were in line with the Muslim Brotherhood’s interests, Islamic Jihad’s interests, Ansar Al Sharia’s interests, etc. But not in line with America’s national security interests, or with the interests of Obama’s own ambassador and three other Americans.

    That’s the naked truth.

    I said back in 2010 that there’d be a price to pay for doing nothing about the Cheonan. I think it’s reasonable to conclude that Benghazi was part of that price. And now there’ll be a bigger price to pay for not only doing nothing about Benghazi, but lying about it.

    The Republicans should have been tying Obama’s past foreign policy failures and national security malfeasance to subsequent foreign policy disasters for years. They can still tie them together, because they are connected. One foreign policy test that reveals weakness and indecision leads to another, and another, and then another, wash, rinse, repeat. Each one getting bigger and more significant.

    But then I don’t see the GOP being interested in even trying to move the needle and get voters interested in this. They’re depending on the press.

    In other words, people like Ben Rhodes’ brother at CBS are supposed to be doing that job for them. Un-freakin’-believable.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  19. The Anchoress had a nice piece on 9/11 Truther Van Jones’ ridiculous attempt at false equivalence between the Benghazi attack and attacks on diplomatic outposts under Bush:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2013/05/10/why-werent-embassy-attacks-under-bush-clinton-investigated/

    Jones’ underfunding talking point has also been debunked so many times he should have been ashamed to bring it up.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  20. Anybody who could be ashamed would not be trying to defend the indefensible.

    But if Van Jones wants to talk about why the attacks on US embassies/consulates weren’t investigated, let’s go there.

    It’s the difference between being prepared, unlike the Obama administration despite adequate warning. It’s the difference between having adequate security so the attackers can’t get into the compound and overwhelm the facility so they can kill your ambassador, unlike the Obama administration which had essentially no security in Benghazi, so the attackers could overrun the entire place and kill the ambassador and a FSO.

    The reason the DoS has security standards for diplomatic facilities is because they’re a target. Which when you think about it damns Prom Queen and Hillary! all the more. Other administrations took their responsibility to safeguard those facilities and were adequately prepared when people targeted those facilities. Only this crew didn’t, and wasn’t.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  21. Dear America,

    I want to wish you all a Happy Cinco de Quatro !
    It is the Mexican holiday in all 57 states, even in the ones where Austrian is spoken !

    Love,
    Signed,

    Barack

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  22. Dear America,

    My brother-in-law, Craig Robinson, was just fired as head coach of the mens basketball team at Oregon State.

    I wonder if the Koch Brothers or Karl Rove were behind his firing.

    Love,
    Signed,

    Barack

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  23. That Robinson fellow you mention—-He’s not black is he, E.S? Because…….

    elissa (770ecb)

  24. elissa,

    We’ve yet to hear from Al Sharpton about it all, but cbssports.com is already verrrry subtlely asking questions about the firing, implying that it is very “curious” that he’s been fired several weeks after the completion of the season, rather than immediately after the completion of the season, when most schools tend to fire coaches.
    The writer of the little article notes that Robinson is best known for being the brother-in-law of President Obama.

    The sportswriter must be on to something—a liberal state university in Oregon is obviously being manipulated by the Koch Brothers. Or Karl Rove. (Maybe one of our conservative friends will echo the possibility of The Hand of Rove.)

    Never mind that during six seasons, Oregon State never made it to the NCAA Tournament, and that Coach Robinson had an overall losing record during that time.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  25. ES, surely you’re not suggesting that we should rate the job performance of anyone related to Barack Obama by blood or marriage, let alone the man himself, by the results they achieve?

    Steve57 (e86077)

  26. What bedroom will brother in law Robinson use at the White House?

    mg (31009b)

  27. “Jones’ underfunding talking point has also been debunked so many times he should have been ashamed to bring it up.”

    Left Embarrassment/Shame….. ……Easy

    No Venn Diagram is possible.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  28. Can Oregon State fire Barack Obama ?

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  29. 20. Thanks for the link. Breitbart had the video but it was silent, not the preceding ad, just the segment.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  30. I could be wrong but I suspect all this bravado is cover for filled pants.

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2014/05/a-boycott-of-select-committee-on.html#more

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  31. well it would cut the double talk in half,

    narciso (3fec35)

  32. gary @31, I am sure you’re right.

    Especially when you look at this press release…

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/10/readout-president-s-meeting-senior-administration-officials-our-prepared

    Earlier today the President heard from key national security principals on our preparedness and security posture on the eve of the eleventh anniversary of September 11th. Over the past month, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan has convened numerous meetings to review security measures in place. During the briefing today, the President and the Principals discussed specific measures we are taking in the Homeland to prevent 9/11 related attacks as well as the steps taken to protect U.S. persons and facilities abroad, as well as force protection. The President reiterated that Departments and agencies must do everything possible to protect the American people, both at home and abroad.

    in conjunction with this press release:

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/10/jihadis-threaten-to-burn-u-s-embassy-in-cairo/

    Jihadi groups in Egypt, including Islamic Jihad, the Sunni Group, and Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya have issued a statement threatening to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to the ground.

    According to El Fagr, they are calling for the immediate release of the Islamic jihadis who are imprisonment and in detention centers in the U.S. including Guantanamo Bay: “The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh"], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released.”

    I love how they keep saying they had no specific actionable intelligence about a threat to the diplomatic facility in Benghazi. I love how they managed to pick up on some obscure video, but failed to pick up on the fact that extremists were practically putting up a neon sign and firing off flares to advertise the fact they were going to assault the US embassy in Cairo, so active were they on social media and in the press making sure the mob would show up.

    Which they did. That was no demonstration. And it wasn’t about a video. That was an assault on the embassy in Cairo.

    Of course when I say “love” I mean disgusted by. Anybody see any sign of anybody taking any “steps taken to protect U.S. persons and facilities abroad?” Because had they taken the multiple threats to the embassy in Cairo on the 9/11 anniversary seriously, as was their job, as they were bragging to the world they had done, they would have had forces on alert. And those same forces could have easily pivoted to Benghazi.

    Where else would you have predicted the likely trouble spots in the EUCOM/AFriCOM AORs on the anniversary of 9/11? It seems to me your number one and number tow candidates would have been the M.E. and North Africa.

    The lies are bad enough, as those lies did harm US national security in the aftermath of the attack in Benghazi. The Rhodes email reveals what they had to lie about, though. The fact that the attacks were due to a “broader policy failure.”

    Not that they made mistakes. These failures (and this goes for domestic policy areas as well) are due to deliberate policy choices that they made. Are still making. That’s what they have to lie about. That’s what dems are filling their pants about.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  33. 33. Ok, Ima going to go out on a limb and change ‘suspect’ to ‘strongly believe’.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  34. 35. And Dick Milhouse.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  35. If any of the Zombies in the House are thinking of voting against the Special Committee, they’d prolly better be moving their families to the Caymans pronto.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  36. 34. After the CIA survivors get deposed, and the drone contractors, and General Ham, and Rear Admiral Gaouette,.., there will be screaming, howling, and clamor.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  37. Hillary Clinton – Ben Ghazi 2016!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  38. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/5/2014 @ 8:36 am

    I just don’t get why the call to Netanyahu at that hour. Seems contrived.

    President Obama was still concerned about Cairo, and didn’t think Benghazi was still a problem, or a big problem.

    There had been an attack on the Israeli embassy to Egypt some time before. Obama probably was concerned Israel might do something disruptive if something more happened, and wanted to reassure Israel of U.S. support, and get his take on the crisis in Cairo..

    Netanyahu didn’t consider that there was any major crisis going on in Egypt, and used the opportunity to talk to Obama about Iran, even though it was the middle of the night in Israel (possibly one hour ahead of Egyptian time) and the conversation lasted longer than Obama had intended as they kept arguing about how serious the Iran problem was in the immediate future.

    Obama probably never mentioned Benghazi to Netanyahu.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  39. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/5/2014 @ 7:25 pm

    If any of the Zombies in the House are thinking of voting against the Special Committee, they’d prolly better be moving their families to the Caymans pronto.

    The Democrats are threatening to boycott the committee, and the White House to co-operate as little as possible.

    Now this is not the way the Republican Party reacted to the “October Surprise” investigation.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/06/us/house-votes-to-investigate-october-surprise.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/07/02/us/panel-rejects-theory-bush-met-with-iranians-in-paris-in-80.html

    But today the House panel, the bipartisan October Surprise Task Force, created in February, issued an interim report whose only conclusion was that Mr. Bush did not travel to Paris in late October 1980, when, the theory goes, such a meeting with Iranian representatives took place.

    Note, that although no Republican voted for the creation of the committee, they did join the committee.

    This is what you do when there is nothing to the accusation and nothing to find.

    You participate, and you don’t boycott the committee.

    After the election…

    http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/13/us/house-inquiry-finds-no-evidence-of-deal-on-hostages-in-1980.html

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 12— A bipartisan House panel has concluded that there is no merit to the persistent accusations that people associated with the 1980 Presidential campaign of Ronald Reagan struck a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of American hostages until after the election.

    “There is no credible evidence supporting any attempt or proposal to attempt by the Reagan Presidential campaign, or persons representing or associated with the campaign to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran,” the panel concluded in a summary of its report, which is to be made public on Wednesday. Congressional aides distributed the summary to news organizations today.

    The Democrats allowed the release of a report that exonerated Reagan and Bush.

    The findings of the $1.35 million investigation were similar to those of a far less ambitious inquiry undertaken by a Senate committee last year. In that report, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said some members of the Reagan campaign team came close to committing improprieties in seeking information as private citizens about the hostages. But the Senate committee similarly found no plan to seek to delay the hostages’ release.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  40. 34. Comment by Steve57 (e86077) — 5/5/2014 @ 7:15 pm

    Anybody see any sign of anybody taking any “steps taken to protect U.S. persons and facilities abroad?”

    Have you forgotten about the tweets that U.S. Embassy in Cairo tweeted, disavowing any connection to the film?

    Because had they taken the multiple threats to the embassy in Cairo on the 9/11 anniversary seriously, as was their job, as they were bragging to the world they had done, they would have had forces on alert.

    Against the wishes of the Egyptian government???

    If they thought the Egyptian government wouldn’t protect them, they would have evacuated the embassy.

    Now what happened also after the fact is that President Obama called up Egyptian president Morsi and read him the riot act, and that seemed to have solved the problem. The United States was giving plenty of money to Egypt, which they needed.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/world/middleeast/egypt-hearing-from-obama-moves-to-heal-rift-from-protests.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  41. A totally bogus assertion, with no evidence, but the Dems put it forth, because of the ‘nature of the
    charge’

    narciso (3fec35)

  42. SOOPER SEKRIT INTELLIGENCE !!!!!!!

    JD (f3b432)

  43. Back in July of 2013, Harry Reid learned that 1.6M federal employees would lose their jobs due to Sequestration. Per the CBO report today, hidden within the document we read that a grand total of ONE Person lost his job. #AssHattery #KochBrosDidIt!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  44. What an effin’ MUTT alleged pedophile Harry Reid is.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  45. re: 43 (October Surprise)

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 5/8/2014 @ 2:40 pm

    A totally bogus assertion, with no evidence, but the Dems put it forth, because of the ‘nature of the charge’

    What the Democrats did was say there should be a special committee because of the nature of the charge.

    Somebody should remind of that. There are some Democrats from that time still in the House of Representatives.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  46. It was Jimmy Carter – yes, Jimmy Carter himself – who I believe was behind the “October Surprise” allegation. (a re-use of words that originally meant something else. Casey had used it both in 1968 and 1980 to mean a possible surprise by the Democrats.)

    All 3 main people who pushed it forward had a connection to Jimmy Carter: 1) Barbara Honegger (she got connected to him after the DebateGate controversy, if I remember right. I think that might be in her book.)

    2) Abbie Hoffman – who was a friend of Amy Carter – and 3) Gary Sick, who had worked for Jimmy Carter.

    Jimmy Carter actually edited Gary Sick’s book. (I read that once)

    And then:

    http://hnn.us/article/4249

    …Only when the New York Times on 15 April 1991 devoted an exceptional two-thirds of its opinion page to this thesis did it become a public issue. The author of this article, Gary Sick, brought to the issue an establishment pedigree (navy captain, Columbia University Ph.D., Ford Foundation program officer, Human Rights Watch board member) as well as the credibility of having served as principal White House aide for Iran during the Iranian Revolution and the hostage crisis.

    Sick alleged that”individuals associated with the Reagan-Bush campaign of 1980 met secretly with Iranian officials to delay the release of the American hostages until after the U.S. election. For this favor, Iran was rewarded with a substantial supply of arms from Israel.”

    Sick also raised the possibility that George Bush was one of those Americans, thereby impugning the legitimacy of at least one subsequent Republican president.

    The October Surprise instantly vaulted to national importance. Leading television shows devoted hours to the subject, weeklies made it the subject of cover stories, and Jimmy Carter called for an investigation….

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  47. Just like there was little credible evidence, that anyone but Oswald had killed Kennedy, yet they convened a committee for that investigation,

    narciso (3fec35)

  48. 44. …Have you forgotten about the tweets that U.S. Embassy in Cairo tweeted, disavowing any connection to the film?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/8/2014 @ 2:16 pm

    You’re a hoot, Sammy. I suppose if Mohamad al Zawahiri had put out on facebook and twitter that rioters who showed up for the protests over the blind sheik would get free pizza, you’d call it a food riot, Sammy.

    They used the video as a sideshow to draw a bigger crowd, like soccer hooligans, who don’t give a rat’s @$$ about the blind sheik. That’s simply to demonstrate their power to draw a mob.

    I was rereading the press release, though, and something else occurred to me in light of Rhodes’ expressed desperation in his newly released email to divert attention from one thing to another:

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1919_production-4-17-14.pdf#page=14

    To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.

    How many times in the immediate aftermath did the administration claim that the video was entirely at fault?

    Hillary blamed the video in her press release on the night of 9/11/2012, released after her phone call to the President.

    http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/?news=Statement-by-Secretary-Clinton-on-the-Attack-in-Benghazi

    Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.

    And then she every time she talked about the video she emphasized that the USG had nothing to do with it. Here she is on 9/13/12:

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday blasted an anti-Muslim movie trailer — which is believed to have sparked violent protests at U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya — as “disgusting and reprehensible.”

    Clinton, in remarks aimed at tamping down anger in the Muslim world, stressed that the United States government had “absolutely nothing to do” with its production.

    Read more: http://thehill.com/video/administration/249271-clinton-us-government-had-nothing-to-do-with-reprehensible-anti-islam-movie#ixzz31ARuFZNj
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

    And here of course is Baghdad Bob Carney on 9/14/12.

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

    We also need to understand that this is a fairly volatile situation and it is in response not to United States policy, not to obviously the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting.

    I was always amazed by this statement. It’s volatile over their, we’re not sure what’s going on, we’re still analyzing the information, new information could change our assessment but we are absolutely positive that it had nothing to do with US policy and “obviously” not with the administration.

    We all know the video was a lie from the start.

    Well, all of us but you, Sammy. You’re trying to claim that the administration had some shred of a reason to believe it really was about the video. You keep your eye on the shiny object. But fortunately for the rest of us Obama and his minions are so bad at lying, because the media never calls them on their brazen low-quality lies, they tell us in all this what they had to lie about.

    What happened in Cairo was about nothing except the administration and its policies. Up until recently I thought the Cairo riots just about the administration’s detention policy (and that Benghazi was about the failed Obama/Hillary! Libya policy). But what was and still is the administration’s broad policy, not only in Egypt but throughout the ME? Cozy up to the “moderate” Muslim Brotherhood to prove we are not at war with Muslims. We just loves us some Muslims! We’re just at war with AQ. And not even all of AQ. Just “core” AQ. What is core AQ? They haven’t ever come out and said exactly what it is, but apparently it’s only those few remaining figures who planned the attack on 9/11/2001. Our cozying up to the MB was supposed to somehow calm the anger of Muslims at the US and make joining AQ less attractive. This idea had to come from the MB members/affiliates who have infiltrated this administration such as Huma Abedin and Mehdi K. Alhassani (he’s on the distro list on Rhodes’ email).

    Which as one pundit noted, is kind of like declaring war on the New York Yankees. But defining the NY Yankees as just the 2001 roster.

    So how is that plan working out. Let’s look at that press release.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/10/jihadis-threaten-to-burn-u-s-embassy-in-cairo/

    “The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh"], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released.”

    This is a slap at both the US and Morsi. And by extension the US policy of cozying up to the MB to cool down the fires of Radicalism. Mohammad al Zawahiri had a message for us from his brother. The “broader US policy” is a complete failure.

    No wonder Hillary! looked like she was shell shocked when she showed up to greet the caskets and Andrews AFB. No wonder she ducked the Sunday shows. And no wonder she sounded not only indignant but afraid when she pounded the table and demanded to know at “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

    I’ll tell you what difference it makes. The whole thing has backfired so badly that now even AQ isn’t radical enough for the Jihadis.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/06/welcome-to-jihad-city-syria.html

    …None have claimed more ground or been more brutal in the areas under their control than ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and ash-Sham. While al Qaeda aims to resurrect the Caliphate, ISIS claims it has already done so and declared itself ruler of the world’s only true Islamic state.

    …The killing hasn’t been limited to Assad forces and locals living under ISIS rule. The group has branded rival anti-regime Islamist factions as infidels, publicly slaughtered their members, and bragged about killing their leaders.

    It’s this approach that has made ISIS too extreme even for al Qaeda, which publicly disavowed the group earlier this year.

    We’ve gotten to the point where ISIS considers AQ infidels because AQ isn’t Muslim enough.

    …“The fact that ISIS openly declares the project of the Caliphate and the global nature of the struggle makes them more appealing to foreign fighters,” said Al-Tamimi. The group, he added, attracts “jihadist fanboys” who eagerly tweet the latest ISIS images of beheadings and pronouncements of Sharia law.

    “The call of the Islamic state is a powerful one for jihadists and recruits, and it’s become a real problem for al Qaeda,” said Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and senior editor of The Long War Journal who has written extensively about ISIS.

    One sign that al Qaeda fears losing ground to the upstarts are the gestures of reconciliation it has made toward ISIS.

    …Addressing ISIS leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi directly, Zawahiri says: “Listen to and obey your emir once again…Come back to what your sheikhs, emirs, and those who preceded you on the path and immigration of jihad have worked hard for.”

    Joscelyn described Zawahiri’s message as an appeal to ISIS to “give up your claim of the Caliphate for the greater good of the Ummah [Muslim community].”

    Zawahiri’s plea is unlikely to have much impact, said Al-Tamimi. “It’s not going to make a difference because ISIS don’t believe they answer to Zawahiri, to al Qaeda central, or to anyone,” he said.

    No wonder the Dems are scared s***less about these hearings. But then again, no wonder McCain, Graham, and Ayotte want to be in on those hearings. They want to make sure that the inquiry into the “broader failure of policy” doesn’t go too deep because they had a hand in designing it, as well.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  49. Ten years later, the Dems had not reconciled themselves to the fact, that Reagan had fairly beaten them like a mule, so don’t give me this garbage ‘let’s move on’ and ‘what difference does it make’ specially when we see this same stupid approach, let Boko Haram, metastizize till the present day,

    narciso (3fec35)

  50. 51. And in neither case did the people who said there was nothing to it say ignore that investigation.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  51. Jeez, sorry about the last wall O’text. I’ll make this brief.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/8/2014 @ 2:16 pm

    Against the wishes of the Egyptian government???

    If they thought the Egyptian government wouldn’t protect them, they would have evacuated the embassy.

    Oh, you mean like they thought the February 17th Martyr’s brigade would protect our diplomatic facility in Benghazi? You mean like we evacuated that diplomatic facility because of the obvious danger?

    You’re a hoot, Sammy.

    The word for that isn’t “thinking,” Sammy. There are actually three words for that. “Dereliction of duty.”

    They can think all they want. It’s their responsibility to plan for contingencies. And one contingency is that things could have gotten out of hand to the point where Egyptian security forces couldn’t protect the embassy. In which case it would have been in the Egyptian’s government’s own best interest to let US forces extract those US personnel, as well as other US nationals if things deteriorate so badly.

    Yeah, we used to plan for those sorts of contingencies back in my day. I hear the US military still does. That sort of operation even has a name; Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation.

    The fact that there were no forces available to respond anywhere in the AFRICOM AOR means despite their “forceful” 10 September 2012 press release this administration did not lift a finger to take any steps to protect Americans and US facilities abroad. And that is inexcusable.

    Typical for President Red Lines. Empty words = action.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  52. narciso @53, the Muslim world has definitely moved on. In 2012 they had moved on from the MB. And in 2014 we find they’ve powered right on past AQ and have moved on to ISIS and Boko Haram.

    Yeah, us. We’re blessed with Barack Obama who finds the world boring because he’s too smart for it. And Hillary! the bestest SecState evah and the most qualified candidate for Preezy in 2016. Because, accomplishments.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  53. narciso, couldn’t the state department have unleashed the dreaded hashtag on them? Just to let them know the Obama student government is on the case?

    Steve57 (e86077)

  54. they had yet to encounter a ‘fully operational’ hashtag

    narciso (3fec35)

  55. I don’t understand why President Bush allowed those Nigerian school children to be kidnapped.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  56. Elephant Stone #59 – by the time the Barking Carney is done with it will have become “Why did President Bush kidnap those poor children ?” …

    Alastor (3b4a30)

  57. Alastor #60,

    Yeah, really.
    And Carney will ask if the rumours are true that the Koch Brothers funded the entire kidnapping plot.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  58. Clearly it was Hydra, do I need to draw the picture?

    narciso (3fec35)

  59. Meanwhile, President Sports Fan is likely glued to the couch, watching the NFL Draft on television.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  60. Meanwhile can someone disentangle the category error here;

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/05/republicans-drink-their-own-kool-aid-end-looking-idiots

    narciso (3fec35)

  61. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/06/us-preparing-team-to-help-nigeria-locate-kidnapped-girls/

    The White House said Tuesday the U.S. is preparing to send a team to Nigeria to help the government search for nearly 300 schoolgirls abducted more than three weeks ago by Islamic militants.

    The team would likely include military personnel, law enforcement personnel and others with experience in intelligence, investigations, hostage negotiation and victims’ assistance, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters.

    Aah, but this won’t be all, my friends! I have inside information that the WH is sending a crack team of its foremost social media experts who will conduct “direct action” missions against Boko Haram as well as train the Nigerians in this new warfare specialty. Experts on twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

    First we’ll break down their will to resist by bombarding them with adorable selfies of sad administration officials.

    Once we locate their general vicinity we’ll saturate-bomb the jungle with iPods loaded with Barack Obama’s Cairo speech, his post-Benghazi UN speech in which he reminds the world that the future does not belong to those who insult the prophet, as well as his compelling personal narrative. Gunmen are sure to defect from Boko Haram in droves and friend us.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  62. I hear that Barack is going to impose severe economic sanctions on Boko Harum.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  63. Even at this, they are outmatched;

    http://twitchy.com/2014/05/08/he-pulls-a-knife-you-pull-a-hashtag-administrations-twitter-diplomacy-inspires-replacegunwithhashtag/

    it’s like the Python sketch of the ‘Deadliest Joke

    narciso (3fec35)

  64. Maybe if someone tells Barack that Boko Haram has been illegally grazing its cattle on federal land, he’ll send tanks in to show them who’s the Boss of the Bureau of Land Management.
    Or something.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  65. Maybe if we tell the Obama administration that Boko Haram closed a lane on the George Washington bridge the DoJ will arrest them.

    Steve57 (e86077)

  66. Well in all seriousness, they blew up a connecting bridge to Cameroon,

    narciso (3fec35)

  67. I was never a big Boko Haram fan, but Robin Trower was a pretty damn good guitarist.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  68. ‘the whiter shade of pale’ joke has played itself out, Col,

    narciso (3fec35)

  69. So you say, narciso, where’s the link?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  70. No one seems to have picked up on the fact that Sec of State Clinton refused to classify Boko Haram as a terrorist group, which would have helped to prevent the current troubles that extend well beyond kidnapping young girls for sex trafficking. After all… We have approximately 100K young girls in that situation here in America.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  71. Everywhere else, Col, actually the group involved has a much more revealing name,

    narciso (3fec35)

  72. Yes, death to the teachings of the West or some other religion of peace® Horsesh*t.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  73. Actually, they make no bones about what they are about;

    The Congregation of the People of Tradition for Proselytism and Jihad—

    narciso (3fec35)

  74. Actually it’s “People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet’s Teachings and Jihad”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5481 secs.