Page 21 of 47 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 470

Thread: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

  1. #201
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Personally, I have not followed this Benghazi thing that closely.

    So I'm wondering if the overall picture I have is accurate:

    1. Terrorists/someone attacked the US embassy in Benghazi. US embassy staff were killed, most notably the ambassador.
    2. Questions about how much warning we had, and our response to the attack, remain unanswered/partially answered.
    3. Accusations (specifically against Pres. Obama and Hillery Clinton, but also the state department in general) that we were warned, were aware of the ongoing attack, and did not send reinforcements when it was possible, have been made.
    4. Claims/suggestions were made that an inflammatory video posted online caused the attack. This video was later shown to be unrelated.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #202
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Then there was the New Yorker who put out their piece on the CIA Emails.....while pointing out how this all undermines Team O's credibility.


    May 10, 2013
    Spinning Benghazi.....


    It’s a cliché, of course, but it really is true: in Washington, every scandal has a crime and a coverup. The ongoing debate about the attack on the United States facility in Benghazi where four Americans were killed, and the Obama Administration’s response to it, is no exception. For a long time, it seemed like the idea of a coverup was just a Republican obsession. But now there is something to it.

    On Friday, ABC News’s Jonathan Karl revealed the details of the editing process for the C.I.A.’s talking points about the attack, including the edits themselves and some of the reasons a State Department spokeswoman gave for requesting those edits. It’s striking to see the twelve different iterations that the talking points went through before they were released to Congress and to United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, who used them in Sunday show appearances that became a central focus of Republicans’ criticism of the Administration’s public response to the attacks. Over the course of about twenty-four hours, the remarks evolved from something specific and fairly detailed into a bland, vague mush.

    From the very beginning of the editing process, the talking points contained the erroneous assertion that the attack was “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved.” That’s an important fact, because the right has always criticized the Administration based on the suggestion that the C.I.A. and the State Department, contrary to what they said, knew that the attack was not spontaneous and not an outgrowth of a demonstration. But everything else about the changes that were made is problematic.

    The initial draft revealed by Karl mentions “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi” before the one in which four Americans were killed. That’s not in the final version. Nor is this: “[W]e do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” That was replaced by the more tepid “There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.” (Even if we accept the argument that State wanted to be sure that extremists were involved, and that they could be linked to Al Qaeda, before saying so with any level of certainty—which is reasonable and supported by evidence from Karl’s reporting—that doesn’t fully explain these changes away.)

    Democrats will argue that the editing process wasn’t motivated by a desire to protect Obama’s record on fighting Al Qaeda in the run-up to the 2012 election. They have a point; based on what we’ve seen from Karl’s report, the process that went into creating and then changing the talking points seems to have been driven in large measure by two parts of the government—C.I.A. and State—trying to make sure the blame for the attacks and the failure to protect American personnel in Benghazi fell on the other guy.

    But the mere existence of the edits—whatever the motivation for them—seriously undermines the White House’s credibility on this issue. This past November (after Election Day), White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

    Remarkably, Carney is sticking with that line even now. In his regular press briefing on Friday afternoon (a briefing that was delayed several times, presumably in part so the White House could get its spin in order, but also so that it could hold a secretive pre-briefing briefing with select members of the White House press corps), he said:

    The only edit made by the White House or the State Department to those talking points generated by the C.I.A. was a change from referring to the facility that was attacked in Benghazi from “consulate,” because it was not a consulate, to “diplomatic post”… it was a matter of non-substantive factual correction. But there was a process leading up to that that involved inputs from a lot of agencies, as is always the case in a situation like this and is always appropriate.....snip~

    Spinning Benghazi: The C.I.A.'s Talking-Point Edits : The New Yorker

  3. #203
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,953
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Personally, I have not followed this Benghazi thing that closely.

    So I'm wondering if the overall picture I have is accurate:

    1. Terrorists/someone attacked the US embassy in Benghazi. US embassy staff were killed, most notably the ambassador.
    2. Questions about how much warning we had, and our response to the attack, remain unanswered/partially answered.
    3. Accusations (specifically against Pres. Obama and Hillery Clinton, but also the state department in general) that we were warned, were aware of the ongoing attack, and did not send reinforcements when it was possible, have been made.
    4. Claims/suggestions were made that an inflammatory video posted online caused the attack. This video was later shown to be unrelated.
    Pretty much. But you have add the continued misdirection and blaming of other things besides a terrorist attack that the administration was spinning all the up until the election. In addition, all the stonewalling of the administration. It's years later and only now are some of the most relevant and pertinent documents finally coming to light.
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  4. #204
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    Pretty much. But you have add the continued misdirection and blaming of other things besides a terrorist attack that the administration was spinning all the up until the election. In addition, all the stonewalling of the administration. It's years later and only now are some of the most relevant and pertinent documents finally coming to light.
    Well plus the ongoing FBI Investigation inside Libya.....even though it has come to a dead stand still.

  5. #205
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Then I'd be good with that. If someone responsible for not securing the ambassador was fired - I'm content. Only this regime hasn't told us that is the case. The only thing they told us was a lie about the cause, and then an oh well I gues we were wrong. Yet not one person was canned for telling us it was a video induced riot? They won't even identify who wanted to roll with that for 15 to 17 days before it became so obvious to everyone they were lying. Why is that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    If Stevens was denied adequate security....then why did he go? It was the 9/11 anniversary, protests all over the ME, Benghazi was in a state of anarcy, Lybia's president says he warned of an attack three days in advance, almost all the foreign diplomats and NGOs had evacuated and relocated to Tripoli..... so who told Ambassador that it was safe to go to Benghazi? It had to be the CIA....who else?



    Heads did roll. They don't call him "former" CIA director for nothing.

  6. #206
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by CalGun View Post
    Then I'd be good with that. If someone responsible for not securing the ambassador was fired - I'm content. Only this regime hasn't told us that is the case. The only thing they told us was a lie about the cause, and then an oh well I gues we were wrong. Yet not one person was canned for telling us it was a video induced riot? They won't even identify who wanted to roll with that for 15 to 17 days before it became so obvious to everyone they were lying. Why is that?
    Hillary never even checked back on her own people after talking to Hicks.....now just think if she was a President and how she would leave Americans to die and not even have the decency to check back on them.

    Run Hillary Run.

  7. #207
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,953
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by CalGun View Post
    Then I'd be good with that. If someone responsible for not securing the ambassador was fired - I'm content. Only this regime hasn't told us that is the case. The only thing they told us was a lie about the cause, and then an oh well I gues we were wrong. Yet not one person was canned for telling us it was a video induced riot? They won't even identify who wanted to roll with that for 15 to 17 days before it became so obvious to everyone they were lying. Why is that?
    Yeah, but not even that happened. I believe that the people blamed by the administration got a few weeks paid vacation, and are back at their jobs, if I'm not mistaken.
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  8. #208
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,953
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Well plus the ongoing FBI Investigation inside Libya.....even though it has come to a dead stand still.
    MMC, that investigation never got off of the ground. In order for it to 'come to a dead stand still' it would have to have been moving at one point. I don't think that it ever did.
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  9. #209
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    MMC, that investigation never got off of the ground. In order for it to 'come to a dead stand still' it would have to have been moving at one point. I don't think that it ever did.
    Yeah it didn't really.....not with Judges, Polices, and even a Interior Minister being kidnapped, killed, or told to take a vacation.

  10. #210
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,267

    Re: Ex-White House Official On Benghazi: 'Dude, This Was Like Two Years Ago'

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Remember when Romney first jumped on Benghazi, making it an election issue?
    What did DEMs do on the original 9/11/2001?
    They were expected to act like Patriotic lemmings for the party of the Patriotic, the GOP, and they did.

    There will never be peace in foreign policy, as there will never be peace with any GOP faux issue.
    Even if the GOP impeaches another DEM President, it will not satisfy their hatred of the DEMs over Watergate.

    Your icon Goldwater is turning over in his grave on Benghazi.
    Imagine how Goldwater would have responded if DEMs tried to pull this **** on Beirut in the 80's, when he was still in the Senate .
    I wonder how LBJ would've reacted. Goldwater was done in with his declaration that he would bomb North Vietnam. LBJ made hay and was elected probably more on that advertisement than anything else. Later LBJ bombed North Vietnam. Wonder how LBJ would react? Got any insight? And by the way, nobody in the presidential office has been an outright scumbag except Obama, so it's not likely anybody has called other presidents a scumbag before now. Appropriate, don't you think?

Page 21 of 47 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •