Posted on 09/21/2012 10:04:58 AM PDT by Lakeshark
It is a measure of how skewed the reporting is and how intellectually inconsistent is most of the “analysis” from the mainstream media that while Mitt Romney’s comment on the embassy attacks held the attention of the press for days (when in fact he had correctly surmised that the administration was trying to make excuses for the embassy attack by expressing regret over an anti-Muslim video)), there has been comparatively little concern with a much more critical story: Did the Obama team intentionally lie to voters (or just shoot first and aim later) for a week about what it knew, and did the deaths of four Americans result, in part, from defective security and preparation at the Benghazi consulate?
**snip**
There is, as always, a media scandal here, a deliberate effort, conservatives believe, to construct narratives that favor the president. But that is small potatoes compared with the mounting evidence of a scandal in the Obama administration. If the administration was negligent in planning, convinced of its own spin (the war on terror is over!) and politicized national security to aid the president's reelection campaign, that is all a big deal. In any event, it should make for an interesting foreign policy presidential debate.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
DOJ Lawyers Who Represented Terrorism Suspects Detainees Are Identified
Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010
Fox News has identified the seven anonymous Justice Department lawyers who previously represented Guantánamo detainees or terrorism suspects.
Justice Department spokesman Matthew A. Miller confirmed the names to Fox News’ Mike Levine, but did not say whether any of the seven previously anonymous lawyers now work on issues related to Guantánamo detainees.
“Each of the nine people referenced in the letter filed legal briefs that are available by using something as simple as Google,” Miller told Fox News. “We will not participate in an attempt to drag people’s names through the mud for political purposes.”
Miller said “politics has overtaken facts and reality” in the battle over the lawyers’ identities. (Full statement below)
The current Justice Department employees who previously represented Guantánamo detainees or terrorism suspects are:
· Tony West, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.
· Jonathan Cedarbaum, of the Office of Legal Counsel.
· Eric Columbus, senior counsel in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General.
· Karl Thompson, of the Office of Legal Counsel.
· Joseph Guerra, Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General.
· Tali Farhadian, an official in the Office of the Attorney General.
· Beth Brinkmann, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Division.
Two other DOJ lawyers — Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal and National Security Division Attorney Jennifer Daskal – also formerly represented detainees, but their identities had already been known.
In response to the DOJ confirmation, Keep America Safe spokesman Aaron Harison said the organization still wants information on which of the lawyers works on detainee issues within the DOJ.
“The American people have a right to know whether lawyers who voluntarily flocked to Guantanamo to take up the cause of the terrorists are currently working on detainee issues in President Obama’s Justice Department,” Harison said. (Full statement below)
Details about the DOJ lawyers’ involvement in Guantánamo detainee cases are available in the article, which also points out that the Justice Department hired several lawyers who represented Guantánamo detainees during the George W. Bush administration
If you look at my post I said I was reposting a post I saw on another site, both Rush and Glenn Beck have stated they think he was CIA. I DID NOT STATE THAT.
Um, isn’t assassination a strict subset of murder?
Then let me correct my assertion:
I am assuming THEY have a reliable source for such an unequivocal statement.
The facts are pretty clear, an article by ABC stating one of the SEALS two weeks earlier was in country looking for weapons, admission they were not security, traveling in light vehicle. Pretty clear they were meeting someone.
I don’t disagree with you outright, but some clarifications:
1. SEALs on site were not SEALs. They were private contractors whom were once Navy SEALs. They were detailed by the State Dept. to find ground-to-air missiles. They had been fairly successful in this effort.
2. Those SEALs were not his security detail.
3. Sean Smith was a USAF Communications Spec., not a SEAL. He was Stevens’ comms guy.
4. You don’t make your CIA man the Ambassador. But Sean Smith could have been the active CIA man on scene. Which is why he was there. It’s possible, but not a definite.
5. All four of these men were not protected because Hillary Clinton is not a smart person. There was, apparently, no security detail for Stevens; neither in Bengahzi, nor Tripoli.
6. Steven’s State Dept. rise/career has been public. He’s in the diplomatic corps and his trip to Libya was pretty well publicized after Hillary swore him in her self.
7. Sean Smith posted that comment on his game because that is how he communicates with the CIA handler... and his buddies in the game. It’s a two-fer!
8. I believe that Stevens never made it to the safe house. From what I understand.
Summary: So why would an Ambassador, a weapons destruction team, and a comms guy (God knows, maybe the CIA man) be in the Bengahzi Consulate at 10PM on 9/11?
A very private and important meeting about a cache of missiles.
Which it turns out was an ambush.
Something to put on their resumes now as they prepare to leave.
Headline: Obama WH in a coup, but then some would just wonder why they are in a chicken house or a car.
Thank you the best explanation and facts I have seen. Here is the last article on his “State Dept work”
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/glen-doherty-navy-seal-killed-libya-intel-mission/t/story?id=17229037
I was wondering about this the other day. Is it possible that U.S. intelligence, or even the State Department itself, received information about some specific threat to the embassy in Tripoli, and then decided to secretly relocate Stevens to the mission in Benghazi as a precaution, where he’d be safer, if no one knew about the move. And doing so under the radar, by not taking a substantial security force for protection.
Then it turns out that the intel was a ruse by AlQueda, to cause the move to happen, knowing they could more easily get to Stevens in that place.
And the state department fell for it hook, line and sinker, leading to the attack and his assassination. Something like that would cause the administration to deny it was a planned attack, and for obvious reasons. They would look pretty stupid, and also responsible.
Yes, it is. But the WH is framing this as “murder” in the context of a “protest” when I believe it was a pre-planned assassination.
I don’t need to know everything about you life but how do you come by this information?
In other words Rats jumping ship.
He was scheduled to visit a hospital per this how many knew that?
Yeah. They have to take some of the stink off this before the debates.
Everyone knew he was coming including the tribes
great info in #12. thanks!
Just readin’ stuff
Ping for later reading
Ah, got it. Thanks for the clarification.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.