RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Keeping Track of the Obama, Hillary Lies on Benghazi

The Obama White House sent out another dupe today, a kid named Pfeffer, to spin and lie about the various scandals swirling around the President. As long as you have Alzheimer’s disease or are a moron incapable of reading, you will find nothing troubling about the White House desperate attempts to recast what the President and his lackey’s have said about Benghazi. Fortunately, there is this thing called the internet. You can go on the internet and look at what was actually said by key players.

Let’s take Ambassador Susan Rice. She was sent out on the Sunday talk shows on 16 September to push the lie–a total goddamn lie–that the protests were inspired by a “hateful video” and that Al Qaeda was not involved. Here is the CBS transcript from that day:

SUSAN RICE: They are not on the ground yet, but they have already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of– of various sorts already available to them and to us. And they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we’ll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.

SUSAN RICE: –sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that– in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?

SUSAN RICE: We do not– we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?

SUSAN RICE: Well, we’ll have to find out that out. I mean I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.

The first draft of the CIA talking points was very specific about who was involved:

The crowd almost certainly was a mix of individuals from across many sectors of Libyan society. That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.

The White House wants you to believe that the reason this tidbit was excised from the final version of the talking points was in response to intervention by the FBI in order to protect the investigation. But that is total bullshit. In fact, the emails released also included news that the FBI had no problems with that being released. The only ones who had a problem with acknowledging an Al Qaeda attack on the anniversary of the first 9-11 were the White House and State Department political types.

Then we have the total discrepancy between DCM Hicks, who testified under oath, and the bogus Accountability Review Board report produced by Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Mike Mullen. Shame on these men for their ineptitude and failure to do their job properly.

According to the ARB report, Ambassador Stevens went to Benghazi on his own:

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

But that’s not what the number two man in the US Embassy in Libya said. He testified under oath to the exact opposite (the questioning starts at the two minute mark):


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

What Hicks does not say, because he was in a public hearing, is that another reason for Stevens making the trip was to meet with the reps of Turkey to discuss the shipment of weapons and fighters from Libya to Syria. That part of this story remains hidden and shrouded in secrecy. Getting to the bottom of this is one of the reasons Chairman Issa will be grilling Pickering and Mullen behind closed doors.

  • Pingback: Obama’s Goddamned Lies | वसुधैव कुटुंबकम

  • jianmei

    tinyurl.com/nc6x6hg

  • icowrich

    Well, at least this website doesn’t pretend to be a pro-Hillary site, anymore. It’s a stop toward honesty.

  • KlugerRD

    On PJ Media by Roger Simon about new Benghazi whistle blowers:

    “The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.

    Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

    Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as
    one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.””

    http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/

    What say you about this?

  • Henry Glenn

    Funny that Larry Johnson in his very first post on Benghazi back last fall said that Stevens was attacked by a mob and his body was dragged through the streets. Were you lying Larry Johnson?

    • KlugerRD

      Funny that Obama, Rice, and Clinton all went out publicly and said it was a demonstration incited by a youtube video.

      You know what is even funnier?

      What is going to happen to Obama and Clinton once these new Benghazi whistle blowers testify that Obama and Clinton were allied with Al Qaeda groups in Libya.

      • S7teen70six

        If it is proven that this occurred then we are well beyond any talk of impeachment. Giving aid to our enemy is an act of treason.

        • KlugerRD

          Apparently Hillary was running her own private war in Libya and allied with Al Qaeda affiliated groups.

          The report in PJ Media was that Stevens was in Benghazi to try and buy back Stinger missiles from those groups – probably with CIA assistance.

  • wyntre

    Giuliani says the POS’s absence on the night of the Benghazi attacks is a
    dereliction of duty. BINGO. I have been saying for weeks the excuse
    there wasn’t enough time to respond doesn’t hold water? How did anyone
    know how long the attacks would last? If they DID know it’s because
    there was a plan – maybe it was to exchange Stevens for the Blind
    Sheikh?

    • Deapster

      Dereliction of duty + political manipulation of his office for personal gain = high crimes and misdemeanors

  • Popsmoke

    Here is an example of what is transpiring in a “leaks case” with a reporter. Now I know Jim ( Bettles Record Collector Extraordinaire) Rosen of Fox New Channel…. He should know better than this….

    Secrecy News Blog:  http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/

    **     REPORTER DEEMED “CO-CONSPIRATOR” IN LEAK CASE

    REPORTER DEEMED “CO-CONSPIRATOR” IN LEAK CASE

    In a startling expansion of the Obama Administration’s war on leaks, a
    federal agent sought and received a warrant in 2010 to search the email
    account of Fox News correspondent James Rosen on grounds that there was
    probable cause the reporter had violated the Espionage Act by soliciting
    classified information from a State Department official.

    This previously undisclosed development was first reported in “A rare peek
    into a Justice Department leak probe” by Ann E. Marimow, Washington Post,
    May 19.

    “I believe there is probable cause to conclude that the contents of the
    wire and electronic communications pertaining to the SUBJECT ACCOUNT [the
    gmail account of Mr. Rosen] are evidence, fruits and instrumentalities of
    criminal violations of 18 U.S.C. 793 (Unauthorized Disclosure of National
    Defense Information), and that there is probable cause to believe that the
    Reporter has committed or is committing a violation of section 793(d), as
    an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator, to which the materials relate,”
    wrote FBI agent Reginald B. Reyes in a May 28, 2010 application for a
    search warrant.

            http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/kim/warrant.pdf

    The search warrant was issued in the course of an investigation into a
    suspected leak of classified information allegedly committed by Stephen
    Jin-Woo Kim, a former State Department contractor, who was indicted in
    August 2010.

            http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/kim/index.html

    The Reyes affidavit all but eliminates the traditional distinction in
    classified leak investigations between sources, who are bound by a
    non-disclosure agreement, and reporters, who are protected by the First
    Amendment as long as they do not commit a crime.  (There is no allegation
    that Mr. Rosen bribed, threatened or coerced anyone to gain the disclosure
    of restricted information.)

    The affidavit also highlights the government’s ability to monitor activity
    within classified networks with a fine mesh, and to correlate document
    downloads with external communications.

    “So far, the FBI’s investigation has revealed in excess of 95 individuals,
    in addition to Mr. Kim, who accessed the Intelligence Report [containing
    the information reported by Mr. Rosen] on the date of the June 2009 article
    and prior to its publication. To date, however, the FBI’s investigation has
    not revealed any other individual, other than Mr. Kim, who both accessed
    the Intelligence Report and who also had contact with the Reporter on the
    date of publication of the June 2009 article,” the affidavit noted.

    Some of the contacts between Mr. Kim and Mr. Rosen could be expeditiously
    uncovered because both of them were using desk telephones within the
    Department of State. Likewise, their comings and goings could be readily
    tracked because both used official ID badges to enter and exit the State
    Department building.

    As evidence of Mr. Rosen’s purported culpability, the Reyes affidavit
    notes that Rosen and Kim used aliases in their communications (Kim was
    “Leo” and Rosen was “Alex”) and in other ways sought to maintain
    confidentiality.

    “From the beginning of their relationship, the Reporter asked, solicited
    and encouraged Mr. Kim to disclose sensitive United States internal
    documents and intelligence information…. The Reporter did so by employing
    flattery and playing to Mr. Kim’s vanity and ego.”

    “Much like an intelligence officer would run an [sic] clandestine
    intelligence source, the Reporter instructed Mr. Kim on a covert
    communications plan… to facilitate communication with Mr. Kim and perhaps
    other sources of information.”  And so forth.

    What makes this alarming is that “soliciting” and “encouraging” the
    disclosure of classified information are routine, daily activities in
    national security reporting.  The use of pseudonyms and discreet forms of
    communication are also commonplace.

    But for today’s FBI, these everyday reporting techniques are taken as
    evidence of criminal activity and grounds for search and seizure of
    confidential email.  
    “Based on the foregoing, there is probable cause to believe that the
    Reporter has committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. 793 (Unauthorized
    Disclosure of National Defense Information), at the very least, either as
    an insider, abettor and/or co-conspirator of Mr. Kim,” Mr. Reyes wrote.

    The affidavit says that the FBI had exhausted all alternatives to a search
    warrant for collecting the desired evidence, except for asking Mr. Rosen to
    voluntarily produce his own email.

    “Because of the Reporter’s own potential criminal liability in this
    matter, we believe that requesting the voluntary production of the
    materials from Reporter would be futile and would pose a substantial threat
    to the integrity of the investigation and of the evidence we seek to obtain
    by the warrant.”

    The warrant application was approved and signed by U.S. Magistrate Judge
    Alan Kay on May 28, 2010.  It was sealed until November 7, 2011 but went
    unnoticed until the Washington Post reported on it late yesterday.

    • Deapster

      Isn’t it Jin Woo Kim who should have known better? Rosen was just doing his job.

      • Popsmoke

        If this is true…Stick a fork in Kim he is done. BUT… If Rosen pressured to get a classied doc…. well he could be screwed… Press protection does not mean you can break the law…

        • Deapster

          But you already said Rosen knew better. And he probably did. Your blame emphasis is misplaced. Why is that?

    • HARP2

      Alan Kay is notable because he has heard several habeas corpus petitions submitted on behalf of captives held in extrajudicial detention in the United States Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba. Kay was the judge authorized to rule on issues arising from the “protective order” that set out the procedures the captives’ attorneys had to follow

  • HELENK2

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/19/Chief-IRS-counsel-bailed-Jeremiah-Wright-s-church-out-of-IRS-probe-in-2008

    now isn’t this just peachy. IRS counsel bailed jeramiah wright’s church out of IRS probe in 2008

  • HELENK2
    • Deapster

      He went to Law School; not Harvard Business School. Never held a job, never ran a large organization. Never did anything besides ask the unions how high they wanted him to jump.

  • sowsear1

    Meanwhile the immigration bill is being sneaked through:

    Schumer says will pass immigration bill with help of “our Republicans”.

    http://www.ihatethemedia.com/hot-mic-schumer-organizing-immigration-votes-with-our-republicans?utm_source=co2hog&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ihatethemedia+%28I+Hate+the+Media%29

    • S7teen70six

      It will come to a screeching halt in the House.

      • foxyladi14

        Praying that is so.

    • HELENK2

      their republicans better be prepared for unemployment if they help on this

  • binky354

    A lot of discussion on FOX today is about DOJ going into their computer and pulling things out without notifying them and James Rosen has been indicted as a criminal co-conspirator.

    • KlugerRD

      They are going to uncover a lot of audits done intentionally to GOP donors, consultants, and pundits starting in 2010. As this progresses this will go well beyond 501c’s and into individuals.

      I know one who got an audit notice the beginning of 2011 and the local auditor did not see a reason to audit and just dropped it. He never thought much about it until now. He is a GOP strategist.

  • binky354

    Reporter Deemed “Co-Conspirator” in Leak Case

    Categories: UncategorizedIn a startling expansion of the Obama Administration’s war on leaks, a federal agent sought and received a warrant in 2010 to search the email account of Fox News correspondent James Rosen on grounds that there was probable cause the reporter had violated the Espionage Act by soliciting classified information from a State Department official.

    http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2013/05/kim-rosen-warrant/

    • HELENK2

      karl rove (not my favorite person) just made a good point. holder says he recused himself from the AP mess. Did he recuse himself from the FOX intrusion?

    • S7teen70six

      So now the FBI is a part of the scandal. Absolutely insane. Quite honestly I don’t see how O’Milhous gets out of this one. And I have a sneaking suspicion that this is all going to get much worse for him fairly soon.

  • HELENK2

    http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/20/obama-and-the-irs-the-smoking

    OH OH backtrack met with IRS union chief the day before the attacks on the tea party started

    • Deapster

      See above – Obama’s only “presidential” talent has been asking the unions how high to jump. How many unions is Obama beholden to?

      SEIU; AFT are two that immediately come to mind. The massive Government workers one – federal, state and municipal.

    • Deapster

      That is really explosive.

      But of course we already know coincidence is not causation. Nope, nothing to see here folks, Just move along.

  • HELENK2
  • KlugerRD

    “President Barack Obama says he has lost confidence in the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs and has told Congress he is removing him from the position. Obama’s move follows an investigation by IG Gerald Walpin finding misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group led by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star.”

    “Walpin was criticized by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled the investigation of Johnson and St. HOPE Academy”

    “(Senator) Grassley said Walpin had identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds that were wasted or misspent and “it appears he has been doing a good job.”

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31325894/ns/us_news-giving/t/obama-fires-americorps-inspector-general/#.UZpoLKI-arY

    This from the person who Pfeiffer said would be inappropriate for the President to get involved in an IG investigation in referencing the IRS.

    The intimidation and thuggery started back in 2009.

    • binky354

      Oh, I’d bet it started way before that!

    • Deapster

      Don’t forget Mayor Kevin Johnson is married to former Wash DC School Superintendent Michelle Rhee, who was featured in the film Race to NoWhere which was bitterly critical of the massive AFT (American Federation of Teacher) – Obama buddy Randi Winegarten’s teacher union crowd.)

  • HELENK2

    this has nothing to do with politics. since so many military are coming back and need artificial limbs , when I saw this I thought that it was something many should know about

    http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/05/video-an-example-of-how-3d-printing-is-changing-the-world/

    how 3-D printing is changing the world

  • HELENK2
    • foxyladi14

      Always remember the catastrophe of September 11, 1683 when the Jihad
      against Vienna and Europe was ruined by Polish cavalry, making the date a
      must for scheduling revenge strikes 9/11

      • S7teen70six

        Very interesting. Thank you. I’ve never heard of this battle before.

    • Deapster

      pjmedia should be relieved to know we have been targeting the 9/11/12 10pm call from the moment you posted the timeline of events, helen2K.

      That was the pivotal moment and glad others are also picking up on this important detail. What did they know and when did they know it?

      In fact it was a key moment screaming at anyone who read that chart of time line events. 8pm – Hicks calls Clinton to report it was an organized attack and 10pm Clinton after her call with Obama comes out with that video-made-them-do-it explanation …..out of whole cloth.

    • binky354

      Two weeks after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack and more than a week after U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice blamed the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans on an anti-Muslim video, President Obama picked up the very same ball and ran with it before the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25.

      Emphasizing that “we must speak honestly about the deeper causes of the crisis,” Mr. Obama specifically noted “a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”

      On this Obama minced no words: “There’s no video that justifies an attack on an embassy.”

      Except the video didn’t justify anything. What occurred was a premeditated terrorist attack. And the U.S. knew so immediately afterward, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., confirmed on Sunday. Why, the administration simply was being “cautious,” she said.
      http://conservatives4palin.com/2013/05/pittsburgh-tribune-review-the-benghazi-scandal-obamas-buck.html

      • Babasays

        The Cairo attack was pre-planned and documented by CNN reporter Nic Robertson. He interviewed the brother of al-Zawahiri and got a tour of the demonstration site on the morning of September 11. Take a look. It was about getting the Blind Sheik and other prisoners released.

        http:www.cnn.com/2012/09/10/world/meast/zawahiri-peace-plan

  • binky354

    From PJ Media, Victor Davis Hanson:

    … “And so a reckoning is on the near horizon. Let us pray it does not take us all down with his administration.” Four months later, it almost has.

    … ProPublica boast on their website: “Now, for the first time, ProPublica has obtained the group’s application for recognition of tax-exempt status, filed in September 2010. The IRS has not yet recognized Crossroads GPS as exempt, causing some tax experts to speculate that the agency is giving the application extra scrutiny”]?) …

    Does anyone care that five departments of government are either breaking the law or lying or both (State [Benghazi], Defense [the harassment issues], Justice [monitoring of phone lines], Treasury [corruption at the IRS], Health and Human Services [shaking down companies to pay for PR for Obamacare])? …

    Government has become a sort of malignant metasisizing tumor, growing on its own, parasitical on healthy cells, always searching for new sources of nourishment, its purpose nothing other than growing bigger and faster and more powerful—until the exhausted host collapses. We have a sunshine king and our government has become a sort of virtual Versailles palace.

    I suppose that when a presidential candidate urges his supporters to get in someone’s face, and to take a gun to a knife fight, from now on you better believe him. And, finally, the strangest thing about nearing the threshold of 1984? It comes with a whimper, not a bang, with a charismatic smile and mellifluous nonsense—with politically correct, egalitarian-minded bureaucrats with glasses and iPhones instead of fist-shaking jack-booted thugs.

    http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/it-can-happen-here/

  • akaPatience

    I’ve begun having computer problems when I visit some conservative websites, problems including virus warnings. I hate to say it because I’ve never been one to subscribe to conspiracy theories but I wonder if these sites are being targeted, just as the IRS targeted conservative groups? Has anyone else noticed a sudden spike in computer issues?

    • S7teen70six

      I wouldn’t put anything past these people because it’s been proven to have occurred in the past. Would you mind letting the rest of us know which sites you are referring to?

      • akaPatience

        E.g., American Spectator, National Review, and Breitbart posed problems so far today. Breitbart’s been a problem the last few days — I haven’t attempted to visit the other sites recently but Breitbart’s bookmarked so I check it out frequently. Maybe I’m just being paranoid…

        • S7teen70six

          I couldn’t get to American Spectator either but after trying a few times I was able to their blog and then the front page. I am currently there as well as National Review.

          National Review has an interesting article explaining the scope of harassment toward the Tea Party groups by far more than the IRS. Tyranny run wild.

          What specific error messages are you receiving?

    • jrterrier

      I haven’t just noticed it. It’s been going on for some time. For some time, I have often gotten warnings when I open National Review, Breitbart and NoQuarter.

      • KenoshaMarge

        Me too. It happened everytime I came to NQ for awhile and then went away. But still have trouble with Breitbart every time I go there. Some may decide to stay away for that reason. Not me, I’m a stubborn old bat!

        • foxyladi14

          Me too Marge.

    • Deapster

      I had weird problems too on similar sites when I tried to respond to the resident trolls a week or so ago and also reported them here – refused to load DISQUS or would not let me respond even if could access the DISQUS link.

      Something is also still skunking around on my computer through a phony yahoo.com link that I can’t get rid of. Cancelled my yahoo account as a result. Cyber-sabotage?

    • akaPatience

      I’ve gotten virus and Trojan Horse warnings with pop ups to click on the provided links to “fix” the problems. Fearing those pop-ups/links were bogus, I just log off and run my virus protection program which so far hasn’t turned up any threats — making me even more suspicious that the warnings were bogus, and instead were attempts to infect my computer with viruses.

  • Philip

    your comments are mostly opinion, which given your bias are of little value at all.

    • KlugerRD

      Of little value only to kool-aid drinking Obots.

      His comments are informed analysis based on his career and experience.

      Your comments are based on wikiidiot and whatever reckless and painful twisting of the facts comes out of Media Matters.

    • S7teen70six

      Talking into the mirror?

  • Deapster
    • binky354

      I have difficulty reading anything from the likes of Trudy Rubin.

      • Deapster

        It is such a formulaic article – hits all the same notes as all other Obama apologists.

        These are worth reading to speculate who is the Grand Master sending out these marching orders to write this stuff up in exactly the same way: deny, dismiss and denigrate.

        Game plan seems to be repeat The Big Lie often enough and hope you retain control of the story ….. and the journalists who slavishly repeat it.

        Carry on Issa, stay focused. Did our President lie to the American people (again)?

        • S7teen70six

          Obama met with the (anti-Tea Party) IRS National Treasury Employees Union chief, Colleen Kelley, the day before agency began targeting Tea Party affiliated groups. WH logs confirm this.

          • Deapster

            Explosive.

  • Deapster

    Crowley needs to explain why, in my recollection of that debate moment, she had some paper ready to wave at Romney to support Obama had called it an “act of terror”.

    And why did Obama lunge at her until she made the statement Romney was wrong, giving the appearance his claimed defense on this issue was rehearsed and pre-arranged — also hinting Obama knew ahead of time Romney would bring it up?

    What exactly was Romney supposed to do when it was all stacked against him like that and the clock was ticking on prime time TV. In real like one makes a strategic retreat to reassure one’s position, but it could look nothing like a fumble the way it had been set up.

    My guess is Obama had access to Romney’s debate prep and was ready to undermine this critical point.

    • S7teen70six

      I think it was fairly obvious that Romney would state the question he did. He really had no choice under the circumstances than to go right after Obama’s credibility. So I don’t think anything was particularly sinister about Obama expecting the question. The response to Romney’s response was, however, very organized and sinister.

      • Deapster

        Didn’t Obama say something to Crowley like her defense had already been pre-agreed?

        I don’t have the stomach to re-watch that moment but I probably should to compare it with my own recollections, which feel quite vivid.

        A good test for my own objectivity to see if I am remembering for my own prejudices or for its actual accuracy.

        • S7teen70six

          From NewsBusters:

          The controversy began after Obama referred to his earlier off-hand remark out of context, stating that “the day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime.”

          Romney saw an opening and tried to move in for the attack, not realizing that Obama was willing to deliberately misquote himself. Unfortunately for him, the Republican walked right into Obama’s false reality by inadvertently referring to Benghazi incident as “an act of terror,” the very same language the legalistic Obama had just referred to.

          “Get the transcript,” Obama commanded.

          Instead of sitting on the sidelines and letting a dispute ensue or simply moving on to the next topic as a fair moderator would have done, Crowley deliberately interposed herself into the debate and actively tried to contradict Romney.

          “He did, in fact, sir,” Crowley interjected before trying to dismiss Romney to move on. But she couldn’t leave that act of bias alone. Instead, she continued her interruption, saying “call it an act of terror.”

          This intervention gave Obama his only gleeful moment of the night as he called out to the very helpful Crowley, asking her repeat her attack on the Republican “Can you say that a little louder, Candy?” he cooed.

          The left-leaning audience in the room chortled in approval. Crowley obliged.

          “He did call it ‘an act of terror,”‘ Crowley repeated.

          In a CNN discussion after the debate was over, Crowley admitted her interruption of Romney was nothing more than a reflexive action and that Romney’s critique of Obama was correct “in the main.” She did not apologize for her offensive behavior either.

          • Deapster

            That was the moment. Thank you. When Obama immediately demanded Crowley “Get the transcript” ….. what was that all about?????

            Why did the two of them know that she already had the transcript of that exact moment in question.

            That was the oddest moment and demands an explanation. Creepy.

  • 0getfitnow1
    • S7teen70six

      Yeah, well I’m not about to cut Crowley an iota of slack for what she intentionally did.

      • 0getfitnow1

        They are all the same, with rare exception. It’s hard to tell anymore if it’s intentional deception or habitual. With That One, I believe it’s both.

    • binky354

      I don’t think I’ll ever forget Obama proclaiming to the world via the UN that the violence was caused by a video.

    • KenoshaMarge

      Liar-In-Chief.

  • HELENK2
  • HARP2

    Barry….Have you filled yours out yet….PUTZ.

    • binky354

      We can dream. I hope we’re all winners.

  • HARP2

    Hey Hillary……this is the difference.

    Barry……can you see the bump in the road ?

  • buzzlatte3

    It’s a triangulation of issues surrounding the Obama admin. With each problem getting more serious regarding Benghazi, IRS, AP. This is the tip of the iceberg. He can march out all the minions he wants to and it still doesn’t change the outcome.

    • binky354

      Even with all the scandals, his approval rating stays about the same.

      • buzzlatte3

        So far… let’s see what the rest of the iceberg will do to those.

        • KenoshaMarge

          Drip – drip – drip…

          • foxyladi14

            lol

      • Deapster

        If 47% are still getting their free goodies, what is there to not like?

      • S7teen70six

        There are 47% of the people who will vote for the President no matter what. All right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.

        Mitt Romney

    • KenoshaMarge

      The days when the MSM could cause a news blackout by their refusal to cover a story are gone. Too much social media around as well as on-line news.
      All the MSM does with their bias in the long run is destroy what remaining credibility that remains to them. Which ain’t much!.

  • HELENK2

    http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/garfinkle/2013/05/08/benghazigate-republicans-missing-the-point/

    interesting point of view
    Benghazigate Republicans missing the point

    • DianaLC

      The Republicans in the Senate may be missing the point, but I’m hoping the Republicans in the House will painstakingly move step by step to the CIA Annex questions.

      As far as I am concerned, if the shoe fits and Hillary’s chances for 2016 are ruined, that’s o.k. because she’s, in my mind, just another of the followers of Obama.

  • Van_Dessel

    On a different note, apparently the Prez needs to sign off on bonuses of $25k or more. So he personally approved of Ms. Ingram Hall’s performance? Or did Pfeiffer or Rice just walk around with Obama’s rubber stamp?

  • Popsmoke

    So the Republicans want go bitch and moan about DoJ and the AP? How about the republicans bitch and moan about ghe A N N E X? What a bunch of horses asses….

    • DianaLC

      I remember how long the Watergate hearings went on. I remember the agony of the Lewinskygate fiasco, since for weeks our high school teachers were bein subjected to news about stained blue dresses and what constitutes having sex as their current events reports.

      From the video above questioning the reason(s) for sending Stevens into that obviously deadly place, we’re getting closer and closer to the Annex.

      • Deapster

        Just to sort all this out for me because I still get confused with all the name changes:

        There were three sites in Libya: (1) The embassy, (2) the Benghazi site and the (3) Annex.

        Is the Annex (3) in Tripoli that had the secret CIA mission, or was that the Benghazi (2) site? Or both. Was Benghazi really going to become a full consulate or an expansion of the CIA project?

        Do I have to be shot if anyone tells me?

        • S7teen70six

          The Annex that was attacked was in Benghazi. The answer to your second to last question is anyone’s guess.

  • Justine00

    Really, I understand the need for confidentality in some governmental matters. Lies and coverup to the American public isn’t the same thing.
    .

  • HELENK2

    http://www.newsmax.com/ThomasSowell/US-Obama-Iran-war/2013/05/17/id/505030

    If I had read this six years ago I would have said NO WAY, NEVER HAPPEN. now with the backtrack bunch in charge I am not so sure

    • KenoshaMarge

      I’m more cynical than you Helen. I remember my parents talking about how horrible the Japanese American citizens had been treated after Pearl Harbor. They were appalled that American citizens had been put into concentration camps.

      We don’t like to remember that such things once happened in this country but they did. And they happened under a Democrat president!

  • DianaLC

    It does seem to be creeping forward to the point of having to admit the arms running.

    I’ve been so busy–my younger son and his girlfriend of ten years are getting married next Friday with a reception at my house–that I haven’t been able to keep up as much as I’d like.

    I did catch Krauthammer a few days ago saying that while the IRS scandal will catch more people’s attention, the Benghazi situation, in his mind, was the most important as it has the most to do with the security of our nation.

    The Denver Post this morning–got a copy in the restaurant where we went for breakfast–is FINALLY in a tizzy over the mistakes of their dear leader (without at all admitting their mistake in pushing him onto us along with the other MSM). But their major concern was over the AP situation.

    So I am feeling some hope that the cloth is beginning to unravel on many sides.

    I want more than anything that Benghazi finally reaches a boiling point and that the public finally has to wake up and see why choosing someone with some experience and concern for our protection is so important when they choose a President.

  • no_longer_a_democrat

    Hillary really is a power hungry POS.

    Wonder if the Hillary blogs like Hillaryis44 are still worshiping this power hungry loser?

    I fell for her candidacy once in 2008, all those hundreds of hours I spent campaigning for her sorry a$$! Never again!

    • KenoshaMarge

      Many, far too many, of the Hillary supporters from 2008 are on board for her 2016 run. It’s as if they have all been wearing blinders for 6 1/2 years. No difference between a Clintonista and an Obot IMO.

      • S7teen70six

        I think they’ve not only lost their sight completely but have suffered from a terminal case of stupidity.

        • KenoshaMarge

          I think so too. But it seems for many people that once they fall in love with some politician they are unable to see any flaws or faults.
          Ugh, the very thought of falling in love with some damn politician makes me slightly nauseous. I can tolerate those I perceive to be the best of them and have naught but contempt for the rest. And at times my opinion shifts back and forth.
          Sometimes contemptible pols do the right thing and pols I thought had some integrity prove me wrong. It’s a constant guessing game.
          I supported Hillary Clinton as the better alternative to Obama. Now I don’t want to see her, or her obnoxious spouse anywhere near the White House except as an infrequent guest.
          How can people who prattle about “diversity” think that having another Clinton in the White House a good thing?

          • S7teen70six

            I’m not a fan of finger waggers. Especially finger waggers in pantsuits that cause 4 Americans to die.

  • TeakWoodKite

    SUSAN RICE: We do not– we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned”

    She knew it was a lie when she said it. And secondly, who’s “we”???

  • HELENK2

    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/05/19/obama-administration-behind-another-leak-hanging-israel-out-to-dry-putting-them-in-greater-danger/

    backtrack bigmouths leak .hanging Israel out to dry. How can any other country ever trust this country while this bunch is in charge? can’t they just step down due to health problems or time to spend with their families? It is going to take years to ever regain what this bunch has cost us/

  • Popsmoke

    Sorry gang to deflate this crap but the way the republicans are handling this investigation it will unfortunately go no where except sound bites. The more these guys blow smoke and go on fishing trips (BELOW) the more interest the american public will loose in incidents like Benghazi….

    http://m.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/terrorists-given-new-identities-allowed-to-board-commercial-flights-ig-report-finds/2013/05/16/89b709de-be52-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_story.html?tid

    • binky354

      So, what are your suggestions to the republicans that are investigating? How should they handle it?

    • S7teen70six

      I don’t think the American people in general give a damn about any of these scandals expect perhaps the IRS scandal. But I don’t buy your BS that this is because of Republican overreach. Quite frankly, with the level of political everything coming out of the Obama Administration and consequent obfuscation, not to mention the outright lying, Republicans have little choice but to go fishing.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      You are so off base on this I don’t even know where to start. Issa has been handling this just fine. Don’t be so obtuse.

      • Deapster

        Obama will be sorry he called the Issa hearings a side-show in his typical dismissive and arrogant manner. This will not go away because there is a there, there.

      • Popsmoke

        Last time you said this to me…. Obama won and by a bigger margin than I even imagined… But I am willing to put up another burger and beer or even a Chicago pizza and beer that says Issa and some of his republican chowderheads will screw this up to a point where it crashes and burns and never gets to the real issues for the attack.
        When Issa starts with the Annex and arms shipments then I will start paying attention. Until then Larry this is going no where…

        As far as the witness protection program is concerned. You known as well as I do that this article is smoke… Shit we have chaned the identies of crime bosses that make some of these terrorists who entered into the program (all two of them as reported) look like Dolly Parton. Besides this practice goes back to the Bush Administration….Nothing new here.

        Now the DoJ phone record grab from the AP? Well now we might have something. Except there is an exemption to the rule when it involves serious national security breaches and I note the APs lawyers worked with DoJ and they even held back the story for a few days. I do not call exposing a bombing of an airliner as a whistle blowing when the operation is on going to stop it.. So we do not have 5he entire story yet and hense I withold taking a critical shot at DoJ…so far…so far…

        • S7teen70six

          Remember when the very first question asked of Hicks by Issa was to explain what the Annex was? Both of Hicks’ eyes got very wide while an aide to Issa whispered something into his ear and very suddenly the subject was changed. So I doubt very seriously that the Annex is going to be exposed.

          • Popsmoke

            No Annex exposure? No story and Benghazi becomes a parlor game…..

            • S7teen70six

              Hey, I would like to see it all exposed too. I just don’t think that is going to happen. And just because it ain’t is no reason not to investigate and rake the Obama Administration perpetually over the coals. If not right through the shitpile.

              • buzzlatte3

                I don’t think it will ALL be exposed. But you can get certain issues off the table while finding our WHO gave the stand down…

      • Henry Glenn 2

        Issa is handling this as well as he handled the all male panel on birth control and reproductive rights. Voters could care less about Benghazi and there is no new information that has come out with Issa that makes this a real scandal. Nobody cares about talking points and changes that were made to talking points and that is all you got.

    • KlugerRD

      Not sure what it has to do with Benghazi but in terms of the substance, it if were not serious it would be comical.

      • Popsmoke

        On the AP story … One thing for sure. We do not have the full story yet. There is a big difference with people leaking details of ops dealing with national security and whistleblowing…

        At this point it looks like a fishing trip. My understanding is that due process was followed here. The problem I have is the broad sweep by DoJ.

        I will wait for all the details to come out before I become critical.

        • S7teen70six

          According to the AP the DOJ violated it’s own rules by not informing the AP of their inquiry and allowing the AP to attempt to narrow the search. Or to allow an unbiased judge to determine what was acceptable to all parties. The DOJ only notified the AP months after the fact. So due process was not followed.

          • Popsmoke

            Wrong… understand the exemptons to the USC involving serious leaks of national security. Until all the facts come out in this case. Let me repeat that, until all the facts come out. I will hold fire…

            • S7teen70six

              As you say, let’s wait until all the facts come out. If they ever do.

          • Popsmoke
            • S7teen70six

              Well that’s a nice article an all but I still totally disagree with you and the author. AP was cooperating with the Administration. The DOJ treated them like criminals.

              • Popsmoke

                Look you do not know that. Actually we do not know any details just select pieces. I can tell you first hand and from experience. If its true that this was an actual and serious breach of national security then it was justified. Boy O boy was it justified. BUT ….if this turns out to be a witch hunt… then we have a real serious 4th and 1st Amendment issue…

                • S7teen70six

                  And neither do you. The problem is that we don’t know who or what to trust. But given the circumstances I am siding with the President of the AP. Perhaps if Holder wasn’t such a cagey, non-responsive no-nothing idiot/asshole in the hearing and hadn’t given weapons to the Mexican cartels I might take his side.

                  But I agree with you, if national security was at stake I have no problems placing a temporary muzzle on the press until everyone is safe and accounted for.

                  • Popsmoke

                    I am not siding with anyone… I am waiting to see the full story. Look the Press is many cases has its own agenda. If this was a serious national security leak that had nothing to do with illegal operations then I have no problem with DoJ doing what it did. BUT this leaking of classified materials for political purposes can get people killed … It has to stop…

                • TeakWoodKite

                  “Why do you insist on putting Who on third base?”

                  As a pattern of past actions the AP has supported the Motel 1600 and it’s a fine mess because all of this was because there is some other very bad news right behind this “leak” that has not hit the transom. This is Obama nipping something else in the bud. So the bad blood between the AP and Motel 1600 gets going perhaps it will motivate other outlets… I am not holding my breath that many will rise above the intimidation. It’s interesting the Rosen was charged in the “leak”…

                  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/20/obama-doj-james-rosen-criminality

                  • Popsmoke

                    I don’t know is on third…

                    I have no smypathy for the so called press at this moment. About time they got bit…

                    Jim Rosen should have known better… Idiot…

            • S7teen70six

              I have done as you requested though I used a different route to educate myself.

              The Code of Federal Regulations states:

              Negotiations with the affected member of the news media shall be pursued in all cases in which a subpoena for the telephone toll records of any member of the news media is contemplated where the responsible assistant attorney general determines that such negotiations would not pose a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation in connection with which the records are sought.

              Since the records were kept by the telephone companies AP could do nothing to interfere with the investigation. So where is the justification for not negotiating?

              • Popsmoke

                First you are sighting a “rule” not a law. Secondly there is an exemption when it comes to very serious criminal activities that involve national security. It appears in this case DoJ might be right. More facts need to surface….

                Wait until the entire story comes out. Just because you don’t like this administration does not mean DoJ is wrong.

                • S7teen70six

                  This Administration has targeted citizens with political affiliations different than the President and only for that reason. I will not cut it a scintilla of slack. Holder is a contemptible asshole just like his boss. I don’t like any of them and I will oppose them regardless.

                  And just so ya know, I understand that a regulation is not a law. A regulation is how a law is administered. Among other things….

                  • Popsmoke

                    How a law “can be” not “is” administered… There is always an excemption…

                    Now if what I am being told happened then DoJ was justified. But I will wait for ALL the facts to come out before I critize…. Believe me I understand leaks of classed materials better than most and sometimes it can be overwhelming…. and also nuts no matter whos administration.

                    • S7teen70six

                      I certainly have no support for anyone that actually harms our national security by leaking classified info. My problem is that they can make anything “classified” that they like. For instance: Why were the Benghazi emails classified? No good reason other than to hide the information from the American people for whom these lunkheads are supposed to work.

                    • S7teen70six

                      If a regulation is only applicable when it is convenient to whomever happens to be in power then our laws have no actual meaning and there is no real government to trust.

  • HELENK2

    http://www.bizzyblog.com/2013/05/19/ap-headline-obama-agenda-marches-on-despite-controversies/

    they all were supposed to report to backtrack. But did they? was he on the golf course, on vacation or was there a party going on?

  • KlugerRD

    The indifference of this cabal of political thugs makes you sick.

    This was all over a campaign narrative and intentionally risked American lives.

    The IRS scandal will be huge but I think this will be Obama’s legacy.

  • HELENK2

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-cover-up-to-protect-hillary/

    this whole story about Chris Stevens going to Benghazi to see about upgrading makes no sense.

    Would you put a $50 million bathroom in a ghetto home?

    The Red Cross and the British had left the area due to attacks. What part didn’t Hilary understand?

    I still think it was about meeting the Turkish Ambassador to facilitate the shipments of arms to Syria

    • S7teen70six

      Yeah but liberals believe in fairies and high minded sounding ideas. They need no proof that anything they think will work. Their massive egos have decided for them. And if the “proof” doesn’t match their belief at what should take place they will argue that you are incapable of embracing it because you are a racist or that you hate America or some other such rot.

    • stodghie

      bingo! gun running to mexico and gun running to syria.

    • Babasays

      The attackers were gathering in the streets at about the time that the Turkish Envoy left his meeting with Chris Stevens. Why no fore-warning that something was wrong? Curious. Friend or foe?

  • KataKimbe

    The inconvenient truth will never be admitted by the left There is no there there with the lapdog media.

  • S7teen70six

    This does implicate Clinton directly. Good. She is responsible and deserves to be held accountable. That it pleasures me immensely is irrelevant.

    • sowsear1

      The stand down order supposedly had to come from BOwinkle….

      • S7teen70six

        Wouldn’t surprise me if his wife gave it.

        • buzzlatte3

          Val Jar probably texted it in…

  • HELENK2

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/two_words.html

    two words…..
    this article says a lot about the failure to send help and just what Americans will and will not forgive

  • HELENK2

    http://www.therightscoop.com/trey-gowdy-on-why-they-subpoenaed-pickering-and-what-he-wants-to-know/

    brought this up from downstairs.

    Trey Gowdy on why they subpoenaed pickering and what he wants to know

  • HELENK2

    do you think the truth will come out before or after 2016?

    how many are willing to throw themselves on the sword for backtrack and hilary?

    • S7teen70six

      I do not think all of the truth will ever come out. Not a single one of them will admit that they are responsible for what happened though Clinton and Obama have claimed to accept the responsibility. The Democrat party already fell on their sword way back in 2008.

    • KlugerRD

      If you go back to the timeline of events 40 years ago, the Senate Watergate Hearings began with no smoking guns regarding Nixon but within the 3 months of hearings nearly everything was revealed.

      If Republicans stay away from using the “I”word and simply let facts and evidence dictate the course, then each of these scandals will unravel for Obama and quickly.

      I found it humorous that Pfeiffer this morning was trying to suddenly claim that Obama was engaged although not with Panetta or Clinton but through some unnamed aids. His place was in the Situation Room and with his entire team – nowhere else.

      • S7teen70six

        I agree with you. If Republicans do this because it is the right thing to do they will

        do a great service for our country. And they may reap the benefits of doing so. If they overreach they might find the whole thing backfiring on them.

    • Philip

      The truth has already come out. The new truth is that the right wing tealaban that failed to get people to vote for Robme are now playing any policical angle. Did not work then, will not work now. Right wing nuts have dug a shallow grave for themselves politically by being such nuts

      • S7teen70six

        So nice to have someone new (sounding) from the Obama camp show up to demonstrate quite plainly why we are on the opposite side.

  • foxyladi14

    I can’t wait for their testimony. getting lots of Popcorn.

    • sowsear1

      When do we get sworn testimony from ValJar?

      • foxyladi14

        Never ever.

      • TeakWoodKite

        I would be happy if they got JarJar…