Libya: The Biden Lie That Just Won't Die Joel B. Pollak, Oct 14, 2012
In confrontations, Joe Biden tends to lie. He did it in 1988 when journalists asked about his false claims about his academic record. He did it in the 2008 Vice Presidential debate against Gov. Sarah Palin. He did it again in last week's debate with Rep. Paul Ryan.
...Sometimes Biden gets away with it; other times, he does not. And the mainstream media seem willing to forgive all of Biden's lies from last week's debate, except for one: that the administration did not know that U.S. personnel on the ground in Libya had requested more security, and that it based its long-running false story about an anti-Islam video on available intelligence:
quote:
Well, we weren't told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again.
...The mainstream media has been forced to acknowledge that the Benghazi attack is a scandal on two levels--first, the fact that the attack succeeded, and second, that the administration lied about it. Vice President Biden's statements on Libya--self-evident lies on their face--have forced the media to renew and sharpen its focus.
The implication that the White House and State Department are now trading blame for the attacks has fueled further media interest, given the complicated political relationship between Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The role of UN Ambassador Susan Rice, who is part of the State Department apparatus but reports to the White House as well, now appears to be critical in settling that question.
The Obama campaign's shocking indifference to the attacks--it continues to consider the issue a "circus" conducted by the Romney/Ryan campaign--has begun to disturb what is left of the media's collective conscience.
...Biden's Libya lie just won't die, because four Americans are dead, and the media have been roused--or, in some cases perhaps, shamed--into asking questions. When Biden asks Americans, "Who do you trust?", the answer is no longer as self-evident as it once was.
Barack Obama's October Surprises Steve McCann, Oct 15, 2012
In October 1972, and twelve days before the presidential election, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger made a surprise announcement of a peace agreement ending the war in Vietnam, thus giving birth to the term "October Surprise." In nearly every election cycle since, one party or the other has attempted to spring some last minute opposition research or policy announcement in the immediate weeks prior to an election. However the Democrats, with their near stranglehold on the mainstream media, have been overwhelmingly more successful in the use of this strategy. That is until this year.
Barack Obama and the Democrats have been blindsided by not one but two October surprises. The first actually occurred in September: the Al Qaeda-sponsored attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the second: Obama's abysmal performance in the first presidential debate.
The Libyan consulate attack was the catalyst that prompted Obama and his sycophants to obfuscate the failures of the Obama foreign policy by incessant lying regarding the true nature of the Benghazi attack, choosing instead to blame it on some obscure internet video trailer. This deliberate cover-up is now rapidly unraveling making it a potential election game-changer and the epitome of a self-inflicted October surprise.
Obama's debate debacle was startling, as he could not live up to the well-crafted image of being one of the most adept, well-liked and intelligent politicians in American history. In fact that balloon was thoroughly deflated. His performance was indicative of an unprepared and unqualified president unable to defend his four years in office or present a cogent plan for the next four years. As he stands for reelection, the global and domestic landscape is one of turmoil, indecision and uncertainty stemming from his stubborn adherence to a failed ideology and personal narcissism.
...[M]ost important, are the overwhelming character flaws of Barack Obama: his inability to admit a mistake and a lack of integrity. As in the case of the Libyan debacle, where it appears the first impulse was to lie and obfuscate despite the fact that the White House knew within 24 hours the consulate attack was a terrorist act, Obama attempted to cover-up his failures for his own personal benefit. And as revealed numerous times during his presidency, Obama has demagogued countless issues and he has vehemently, and often falsely, denigrated whomever would stand in his way. He has shown himself to be untrustworthy and dishonest to achieve his goals. Further he has surrounded himself with the like-minded willing to be accomplices to this mindset. This is not the kind of person who should be in the White House, particularly at this time in the nation's history.
While the October surprises in this election cycle may have been unexpected, particularly to Barack Obama, they serve to reveal the man behind the well-crafted mask. Further they have allowed the American people to have, in no uncertain terms, a clear choice in November.
Paper Tiger - The Chinese have said it since 1970; it's my understanding they 'coined' the phrase.... and now look at all that they are 'coining'
They said that America will do what is 'right' according to perception, and would be gullible to a fault with the manipulation of public opinion of said perceptions
Pants On Fire: Obama Scrambles For Cover As Benghazi Lie Explodes Larry Bell/Forbes, Oct 14, 2012
...There are only two possibilities that can explain this senseless debacle. Either it reflects gross incompetence and irresponsibility on the part of the president and many others who answer to him, or it also represents this along with an egregious disinformation campaign aimed at concealing foreign policy failures to diminish known terrorist threats under his watch.
Fact Check: Retired Army Major Calls BS (Literally) on Obama Surrogate's Libya Claims Awr Hawkins, Oct 15, 2012
During an Oct. 14 appearance on Meet the Press, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) tried to take the heat off Obama/Biden by claiming that the requests for security in Libya were not made for Benghazi but for Tripoli.
One day later (October 15), retired U.S. Army Major Mike Faessler responded to Granholm's inaccurate claim with the following email:
quote:
Gov Granholm:
Just so you know - you are 100% incorrect in your statement. That's a polite way of saying that a) you have your head up your ass..and b) you either have no clue what you are talking about, or have chosen to intentionally lie for the Administration. I suspect the latter.
I've spent 24 years in uniform; lived/worked 14 years abroad, including multiple occasions in US Embassies working sensitive security issues! Get your facts straight.
Respond if you have a pair.
Regards,
Mike
MAJ, US Army, Retired
To this rather candid challenge, Granholm responded that her source was a New York Timesarticle. She also addressed what she interpreted as rudeness on Faessler's part:
quote:
Mr. Faessler:
1. The New York Times story from Saturday states the security request was for Tripoli, not Benghazi:
2. Thank you for your service to our country. I have deep respect for those who serve our nation. But I'm surprised by the language and tone of your message, especially as someone who has served our country. We can disagree without being disrespectful and crude, one would hope.
Jennifer Granholm
Faessler responded:
quote:
Gov. Granholm
If your source is the NYT story from Saturday and YOU think they are credible, then there [are] even more problems with your statement than I originally thought.
Try reading the transcripts of the testimony given to congress by RSO Eric Nordstrom and LTC Wood. Then, if you still don't get it -- call them up for an interview on background, as to how the system works, to get the facts that when an RSO requests security it's for ALL of his jurisdictional responsibilities. Like in the Pablo Escobar days, when I was first posted to US Embassy in Colombia, and the RSO (and all of his resources, even with augmentations) didn't think they could keep AMB Busby alive, due to threats and increased risks. So, AMB Busby had to actually leave country for 3 weeks.
But, the RSO had responsibility for ALL embassy employees, families, and visitors in country, operating throughout the whole country. Again, the entire country.
...If you really wanted to be accurate about your statement, you might have considered doing that background BEFORE you went on live TV. If you are truly a patriot, and concerned with the truth, then you have an opportunity NOW to do your homework, and amend your statement.
I apologize if my words appear harsh. I went to West Point, where we internalized Duty, Honor, Country, and the ethics of "don't lie, cheat or steal, or tolerate those who do." And, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. People like me are quite tired of all of the BS, spin and lies from the progressive/socialist in the White House. My doc says I might have rectal cancer: likely as a result of all the smoke being blown up my ass!
Ma'am, also thanking you for your service to our country, and having the guts to respond! Good on you! Respectfully,
Mike
At the the time of posting, Gov. Granholm still hadn't amended or otherwise clarified her statement, according to Faessler.
During the Clinton years, I noticed that his connection with the truth was fleeting and tenuous, and there was a little concern that he might not retire peacefully... But I wasn't worried, since we have some checks and balances in that dept. and they haven't failed us yet.
During the Bush the Younger years, some were concerned that HE might not retire peacefully, but I wasn't worried, because I doubted that becoming a dictator even occurred to Georgie. ( nor, unfortunately, did vetoing excess spending... )
For four years, I've been living in fear that some cretin would assassinate Barry. I didn't think the riots and breakdown in our society would be utterly destructive, but they would be a large step toward the kind of mob controlled by evil men we see in Egypt, Iran, etc. Didn't want to see it.
I wanted Barrack Obama impeached, if the rumors of his lawbreaking were true, but with no chance of an actual impeachment in a D controlled Senate, no admission by the media on what seemed to be high crimes, and a practical, if gutless House, I felt it best that we continue with our long held tradition of voting the bums out. Instead of killing each other in the street.
I doubt that the Obama Riots predicted and threatened as indicated in the link above will be massive, wide spread, or utterly destructive to our nation. They MAY be utterly destructive to some neighborhoods, and some people may lose their lives.
I urge anyone who is tempted to intervene in such riots to not do so. If you must protect your homes, remember that possessions are fleeting, and can be replaced. Certainly protect your family, and the lives of those you see threatened.
Claymore mines lining the streets on the path of the riot, now that's just wrong. ( optimum, but wrong )
And hopefully everyone riding on (or under) his bus.
quote:
Ryan's Benghazi Surprise Lawrence Kudlow, Oct 13, 2012
The irony of ironies: The Biden-Ryan debate was more about foreign policy than the economy and jobs. And yet another irony: Paul Ryan, an expert on all things fiscal, revealed a much better knowledge base of foreign policy than anyone thought existed. Shows how smart and well-rounded he really is.
In fact, Ryan's Benghazi slam, right out of the chute, won him the debate. This terrorist attack is going to be a huge presidential-race issue. Americans are furious at the Obama-Biden-Clinton stupidity and mismanagement surrounding the tragic Benghazi deaths. They are enraged at the Benghazi cover-up. Ryan accused Biden of malfeasance in every aspect of this tragedy. It was a tremendous body slam right from the start.
And Biden mislead everyone with a string of falsehoods. He said the administration did not have complete intelligence at the start of the crisis. But we now know they did have sufficient intelligence to realize that the killing of Ambassador Stevens and three others had nothing to do with spontaneous reactions to a YouTube video and that it was a planned al-Qaida attack.
Then Biden denied that the State Department asked the White House for stronger Benghazi security and was turned down on several occasions. But we know this to be true from various sources. We even know that State Department officials saw the Benghazi attack in real time. These untruths will dog Biden on the campaign trail.
I'm pretty amazed at the loyalty that people have had under BO, and being willing to be thrown under the bus when necessary. It's getting pretty crowded under that bus.
I'm not sure that this will cover it in this case though. There was a whole machine of politics put into motion to cover up what happened, and that leads right back to the White House. At some point the buck has to stop at BO's desk. I'm quite certain that BO will never fall on his own sword the way Tricky Dicky did. It's time for us as a nation to throw BO under the bus. Does anyone really doubt this is the right thing to do at this point?
Sifo, I read the piece you linked and watched the CNN video. I always like to hear/read direct quotes from someone rather than a few words parsed here and there and then spun by someone else, but, well, I have to agree - based on this report, it sounds like HC just jumped under the bus along with everyone else already under there.
Interesting. We know there's no love lost between the 0's and the C's, and it's long been rumored that HC wants to be pres in 2016 (fat chance), but ya gotta wonder who has what on who for her to go on record and say this. Like her or not (and I don't) I would STILL prefer to hear the exact question posed to her, and her exact answer, word for word.
Further, her "confession" obviously does nothing to absolve the WH of the lies and massive coverup re: the details of the attack - protest gone wild versus well-organized terrorist assault. I agree with Fatty: This could (and should) cost the ch0sen 0ne his job (and his reputation).
The October Surprise May Be Libya Team Obama claims the Middle East as a singular success. Will the media go along? By John Fund, Oct 15, 2012
Lt. Col. Andrew Wood testifies before Congress on Benghazi, October 10, 2012
What if we’ve already had an October surprise in this campaign, in September, and the mainstream media are failing to follow up? An issue becomes a real issue only if enough people give it the attention it’s due.
Many people in the diplomatic and intelligence communities say that the Obama administration, behind the scenes, is in complete disarray in the aftermath of al-Qaeda’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. That tension burst into the open during last Thursday’s debate, when Vice President Joe Biden said the administration “did not know” that U.S. personnel in Libya had made repeated requests for more security before the September 11 attack. “We did not know they wanted more security there,” Biden claimed.
That directly contradicted sworn testimony given by several officials just the day before, during a House Oversight Committee hearing. Lt. Colonel Andrew Wood, who led a 16-member security team in Libya for six months, testified: “We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.” Wood’s team was ordered by the State Department to leave Libya in August, about a month before the terrorist assault.
After the debate, Obama-administration officials knew that Biden’s statement was untenable, so they explained that by “we” — the “we” who were in the dark about security concerns — Biden meant only two people: himself and President Obama. It’s a parsing of words worthy of Bill Clinton’s famous “it all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
It’s not the first time that the intelligence community has been thrown under the bus by an administration trying to paper over a foreign-policy failure, but Biden’s move was breathtaking in its brazenness. In front of tens of millions, he squarely blamed the intelligence officials for the administration’s pathetic, erroneous claim that an anti-Islam video had sparked spontaneous protests that later turned violent at the Libyan consulate.
But a former senior intelligence official scoffed at that assertion. “The administration designated Benghazi as a terrorist attack within 24 hours while at the same time declaring the attack was a ‘spontaneous protest’ that ‘spun out of control,’” he told me. “They can’t get their story straight, so the cover-up is deepening.” Even some Democratic senators have been pressing for immediate hearings on Libya, but Majority Leader Harry Reid has blocked them, the official added. Is the need to discover problems with U.S. security taking a back seat to electoral politics?
Sens. McCain, Graham, Ayotte: Buck Still Stops with Obama Tony Lee, Oct 16, 2012
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton fell on her sword on Monday and took "responsibility" for the lack of security in Libya leading up the terrorist attacks. In response, Republican Senators John McCain (AZ), Lindsay Graham (SC), and Kelly Ayotte (NH) said while Clinton made a "laudable gesture" with her remarks, the buck still stopped with President Barack Obama at the White House.
The Senators, in a statement, said if Obama had not been aware of the rising threat level in the Middle East, especially in Libya, then they have "lost confidence" in the administration's national security team. But if Obama had known about the threats against U.S. interests in Libya, the Senators said "he bears full responsibility for any failures that occurred."
“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," the Senators said. "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."
The Senators also said the American people deserve to know why the Obama administration insisted 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," they wrote.
Obama Admin Considers 'October Surprise' Libya Attack Ben Shapiro, Oct 15, 2012
Two weeks ago, Breitbart News reported that the Obama administration was contemplating an airstrike in Libya – a move a former CIA official told us “would be criminal” for its lack of forethought and its dire political consequences.
Today, the Associated Press reports that “the White House has put special operations strike forces on standby and moved drones into the skies above Africa, ready to hit militant targets from Libya to Mali, if US investigators can find the al-Qaida-linked group responsible for the death of the US ambassador in Libya.” The article even mentions that the administration has to weigh “whether the short-term payoff of being able to claim retribution against al-Qaida is worth the risk that such strikes would be ineffective and rile governments in the region.” The source: three current and one former administration insiders.
U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice at center of storm over comments on attack in Benghazi Anne Gearan and Colum Lynch, Oct 15, 2012
A month after the assault on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, a fateful series of television appearances by Susan E. Rice, the American ambassador to the United Nations, is haunting the Obama administration in the face of allegations that it deliberately attempted to play down suspicions of terrorist involvement.
Rice made the rounds of the Sunday morning talk shows on Sept. 16, five days after the attack in the Libyan city, and in each one she said the fatal assault appeared to have stemmed from a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video.
The appearances were part of a gradual increase in the public profile of an administration insider, one eyed as a potential successor to Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state. Today, Rice’s profile has been raised, but hardly in the way that she or her White House supporters would have liked.
The administration’s characterization only days after Rice’s TV appearances that the assault in Libya was a terrorist attack has raised questions about why she attributed the incident to a protest that officials now say did not take place. Republicans have pressed for answers on whether she simply went too far in her assessment or was reading from an administration script that was designed to protect President Obama’s record on national security in an election year.
the White House has put special operations strike forces on standby and moved drones into the skies above Africa, ready to hit militant targets from Libya to Mali, if US investigators can find the al-Qaida-linked group responsible for the death of the US ambassador in Libya.”
ie - please go hide so when we look we don't have to hurt you, because we are all too sympathetic to your agenda - says the guy in the big chair at Pennsylvania Ave.
Crazy little thing called OPSEC..... You BOMB - then say you have launched operations. dipshiat
Sifo, I read the piece you linked and watched the CNN video. I always like to hear/read direct quotes from someone rather than a few words parsed here and there and then spun by someone else, but, well, I have to agree - based on this report, it sounds like HC just jumped under the bus along with everyone else already under there.
Sifo, here it is, straight from the horse's......mouth:
quote:
Clinton: Benghazi my responsibility Published on Oct 15, 2012 by CNN
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tells CNN's Elise Labott why she was responsible for U.S. diplomats' safety in Libya.
Points taken, and concur. There's got to be more, a LOT more, going on this time, however, considering the players and their intense dislike for one another...
It should burn your Arse, that these amateurs, are given a pass by the left leaning media. Regan "bent" the rules for the contras, and to tried and get our people back from Iran. he was nearly crucified, ( AND was painted black by the pbs lefties that did the segment I watched )
Nixon Resigned, Obama should.
I bet Hillary keeps her Job.....
I hope that If O makes a "grab" that the military commanders remember their oaths, and defend the Constitution & Nation against all threats foreign and "Domestic" and place him under arrest with biden, reed, and polosi..
