Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shameless Regime Blames Bad Intel
Rush ^ | October 10, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 10/10/2012 8:04:58 PM PDT by Kaslin


RUSH: Patty in Syracuse. I'm glad you called. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's good to talk with you.

RUSH: Thank you.

CALLER: I was calling because I'm listening to the stuff about the intelligence on this terrorist attack and everything, and it reminds me of when the Democrats and liberals came down so hard on Bush about 9/11, and the failure of intelligence and what a big debacle it was, and now that the tables are turned --

RUSH: You know what? This is an excellent point. And how about the intel failure of weapons of mass destruction?

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: That was worldwide intel. That was the CIA, that was MI5, it was MI6, it was Interpol, it was everybody. Everybody said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. It was intel. And they ripped Bush a new one for listening to the bad intel, for having bad intel, for not having good intelligence. And now this bunch is using bad intel as an excuse. In fact, I just got audio sound bites from some of the stuff that's happened since the program began. They are trying to bail Susan Rice out at this State Department hearing by saying, "Well, it was just bad intel," even though they've got their own intel unit at the State Department, they report to the White House. This cover-up is inept, but it's underway.

Let's go to the sound bite. Here is Jay Carney this afternoon at the press briefing in the White House, and this is during an answer about the newly released information that there was no protest before the attack on the consulate. It was not something spontaneous. It was not a video that started it. Here's what Carney said.

CARNEY: The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. As time went on, additional information became available. Clearly we know more today than we did on the Sunday after the attack. The point we have made all along, initial assessments in the immediate aftermath of the attack in Benghazi were made, and it was a government-wide assessment that was the foundation of what Ambassador Rice said, what I said, and what others said. It is what we knew based on the limited facts we had available to us at that time. They were conclusions of the intelligence community for the entire government.

RUSH: This is shameless. I told you earlier we had a story, shared the details with you from the US News & World Report, or maybe it was the Washington Examiner. At any rate, this is exactly what they're trying to do now. Bail Susan Rice out, it was bad intel. Jay Carney, what he's telling you here is, "I thought it was the video. For eight days I thought it was the video and the president thought it was the video because we got bad intel. It was a government-wide assessment that was -- all we could do was deal with the intel." She's exactly right, bad intel is an understandable, acceptable excuse. Nothing to see here, folks, don't blame us. We just had bad, bad intel. But the State Department threw this overboard.

There's more coming up.


RUSH: The AP, obviously the Administration Press, with a story on the State Department. You know, because you listen to all this, you know the State Department has said that we had no intel involving a video. There was no intel that said that this was a spontaneous uprising in Benghazi. The State Department says that, State Department testifying right now before Congress.

AP, headline: "State Department Reveals New Details of Benghazi Attack." Oh, really? You couldn't get a more pabulum headline. "State Department Reveals New Details of Benghazi Attack. ... The account answers some questions and leaves others unanswered. Chief among them is why for several days the Obama administration said the assault stemmed from a protest against an American-made Internet video ridiculing Islam, and whether the consulate had adequate security." The account answers some questions and leaves others unanswered? Chief among them -- which is which?

The cover-up is underway. The cover-up continues with the Drive-Bys doing everything they can to cover up. Jay Carney, White House press briefing, first one in two weeks, "We just had bad intel. I'm sorry. We did the best we could. We just had bad intel. The information that Susan Rice had at the time, the information I had, it was the best we had." They're laying this off on the CIA now. They're laying this off on General Petraeus. Petraeus runs the CIA. And so now they have met, they've had their crisis meeting this afternoon, and they've decided to dump this on intel. And they know that the press will accept it.

Of course, weapons of mass destruction, that's what the intel said that Saddam had, you know how that wasn't accepted. The bad intel was evidence that Bush ought to go. Bad intel, Bush lied. Bad intel, Bush is incompetent. Bad intel, Bush sucks. All of this stuff. And from that they tried to delegitimize the entire Iraq war. And now the same people come up and cite bad intel as their excuse for blaming a video for two weeks when the video had nothing to do with it, by the State Department's own admission.

Let's continue here with the audio sound bites. Patrick Kennedy is a State Department employee, undersecretary of state for management. So many bureaucratic levels. He's testifying on Capitol Hill and they're trying to save Susan Rice. That's the UN ambassador.

KENNEDY: We have always made clear we were giving the best information we have at the time and that information has involved (sic). For example, if any administration official, including any career official, were on television on Sunday, September 16th, they would have said what Ambassador Rice said. The information she had at that point from the intelligence community is the same that I had at that point. Clearly, we know more about today than what we did on September after the - Sunday, September, after the attack.

Chilling. State Dept. Admits ONLY ONE Security Member Was Guarding Amb. Stevens

RUSH: This is unbelievable. Let me recap very quickly what we know. Yesterday the State Department has a conference call. They include every media outlet except Fox. In the conference call they admit that they did not ever have any evidence that there was a video involved here and that it was not spontaneous. They come clean because they've gotta go testify before Congress today. That testimony is under oath. Nobody wants to lie under oath, and so they come clean.

Now, while they're testifying, they're trying to save the bacon of everybody that went out there and blamed the video. "Well, on September 16th, that's all anybody knew. That's the best intel we had. It wouldn'ta mattered if we sent Elmer Fudd out there, he woulda said the same thing Susan Rice did." The thing is, Susan Rice went out there, it was something very specific. Spontaneous riots that were encouraged by what happened earlier in the day at the Cairo embassy, and the spontaneous riots were due to the video made by that rotten filmmaker making fun of the prophet in California, and that just led to an eruption in Benghazi and then before anybody knew anything, our ambassador was dead. That was the detailed story she went out with, the State Department saying today, "That was the best intel we had at the time."

So it's clear what's happening. The State Department doesn't want to go up there and lie. They are falling on the sword that they just didn't have any good Intel. They've got their own intelligence, a Bureau of International Research or some such thing, the BIR, just like the defense has the Defense Intelligence Agency. And they all report to this guy, Clapper, at the White House, James Clapper. Clapper, by the way, is the guy who said the Muslim Brotherhood, they're no big threat here. The Muslim Brotherhood, they're just like barbers, you know, at the corner barbershop. They're harmless guys.

This is outrageous to me. This is a bigger cover-up with far more ramifications and consequences than Watergate. This is huge. We got four dead Americans here, and they're dumping it on intel. "Well, it doesn't matter who we sent out on September 16th, doesn't matter, Susan Rice, Elmer Fudd, had the same story." Here's Darrell Issa, who is the chairman of the Government Reform Committee, hearing the diplomatic security situation in Libya. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Charlene Lamb, had to testify, and during the Q&A, Issa said this to Charlene Lamb.

ISSA: The September 11th cable from the now-deceased ambassador expresses current concerns on that day. Repeatedly in the cables that were denied to us, what we see is people telling you that Al-Qaeda type organizations are coming together. The problem I have is that the State Department is basically saying Mr. Nordstrom didn't do his job. He didn't make a formal request with justification. The ambassador didn't do his job. He didn't make a good enough case. And that's what you're standing behind here today, a compound owned by us and serving like a consulate was in fact breached approximately 60 days before the murder of the ambassador in that facility. Isn't that true?

RUSH: And this is what Charlene Lamb said. This is her answer, and Issa's follow-up.

LAMB: Sir, we had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time of 9/11 for what had been agreed upon.

ISSA: To start off by saying you had the correct number and our ambassador and three other individuals are dead and people are in the hospital recovering because it only took moments to breach that facility somehow doesn't seem to ring true to the American people.

House Oversight Chair Issa: Obama Administration "Absolutely" Misled US on Benghazi Attack House Oversight Chair Issa: Obama Administration "Absolutely" Misled US on Benghazi Attack

TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections

1 posted on 10/10/2012 8:05:03 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The real coverup is that these attacks were all about retaliation for taking out OBL, and taking out others with drones.

The point the terrorist are making is that if they can take out ambassadors, they can take out any other targets they wish.

Are we safer now than we were four years ago?

2 posted on 10/10/2012 8:13:22 PM PDT by jonose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What amazes me is during Bush there were continuos reports from “high up” state Dept officials, anonymous CIA officials, senior staff from a myriad of agencies. Where did these people go? Are they all on board or is the media just not reporting it?

3 posted on 10/10/2012 8:19:49 PM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin (Ignorance is bliss- I'm stoked)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonose

“retaliation for taking out OBL”

The bellowing at the Democratic National Convention about Obama got Osama is what inspired the attacks.

I wonder which target will be next?

4 posted on 10/10/2012 8:23:11 PM PDT by garjog (We do not want another four more years of the last four years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Does anyone watch Showtime’s “homeland”? Terrific series and it is so relevant right now regarding Benghazi, the infiltration of a terrorist into the US government and the games played with the State Dept. and CIA. It sure does mirror what is going on right now with this Libya mess, and Obama’s muslim roots, couldn’t be more timely.

5 posted on 10/10/2012 8:33:54 PM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

An attempt to use lies to tell the truth ?

6 posted on 10/10/2012 8:43:56 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 ( If you think I'm crazy, just wait until you talk to my invisible friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jonose

“Are we safer now than we were four years ago?”

I know the question is rhetorical; but, hell no, no ‘rat regime is going to maintain our national defense in a strong posture. ‘rat policy is to weaken us, it’s that’s simple.

7 posted on 10/10/2012 8:50:28 PM PDT by izzatzo (Just beat Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Bad intel? Well, how was Mitt Romney’s so accurate?

8 posted on 10/10/2012 9:04:29 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

Yeah - Mitt sure had a BAD WEEK after the Libya attack didn’t he?
What was it he said again?

here it is...

“It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks,”

I’m still trying to figure out how this was supposed to be such a terrible response when the statement looks more and more accurate in hindsight.

9 posted on 10/10/2012 9:10:00 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Scotswife

It could have been worse. It could have been election week. What an upset that would be (for those seriously condemning him for what he said) once it was known he was right.

Of course, many of us knew he was since the beginning

10 posted on 10/10/2012 9:19:00 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

I thought what he said was mild.

He actually showed restraint.

11 posted on 10/10/2012 9:26:44 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Scotswife
I thought what he said was mild.

I did too. I doubt any of the "offended" were serious. Just another MSM trick to try to make him look bad. They were unsuccessful in my book.

12 posted on 10/10/2012 9:31:58 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When does Obama introduce his version of Hitler’s screaming judge.

This administration is beyond corruption. Obama always picks the wrong alternative on every issue. He always lies. He follows his heroe’s teachings to the tee, Saul Alinsky.

Right now, the worst enemy of the U.S. is the group of radicals who have infiltrated and taken over the media.

13 posted on 10/10/2012 9:41:11 PM PDT by Enough is ENOUGH (Obama, Fear the TRUTH...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
This leads right to the top, just like Watergate.
The corrupt media has rushed to the aid of Oblamer and the entire failed regime by running cover stories, instituting a media blackout and attempting to even focus ire on Republicans who have the temerity to bring up the Benghazi fiasco and coverup - Romney called them on it and the press immediately tried to shout him down by shreiking "GAFFE!"

Don't let it be forgotten that Oblamer's mouthpiece, Susan Rice has a husband that is a producer at ABC News. How convenient.

The 'unbiased' moderator of the VP debates even had Obama at her wedding and has been friends with him for decades.
ABC tried to spike this story and even conspired with leftwing newssites and blogs to downplay this incestuous subterfuge.

14 posted on 10/11/2012 1:08:04 AM PDT by Bon mots (Abu Ghraib: 47 Times on the front page of the NY Times | Benghazi: 2 Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Film's fault
CIA's fault
Intel's fault

Everyone's fault but Oblamer/Clinton's

When will this nonsense stop?

Obama and Clinton are not only responsible for the entire mess due to incompetence, but guilty of lying to the American people, a conspiracy and coverup.

What's far worse, Obama used a disaster and crisis of his own making in an attempt to curtail free speech and criminalize any criticism of Islam.

Between Benghazi and 'Fast and Furious', Obama has created two crises and gotten dozens murdered in his two failed attempts at using a crisis to overturn the first and second amendments of the US Constitution. This regime has lied, whitewashed and stonewalled every attempt to uncover the truth.

These acts are criminal in nature and not merely the result of ordinary incompetence.

15 posted on 10/11/2012 1:20:46 AM PDT by Bon mots (Abu Ghraib: 47 Times on the front page of the NY Times | Benghazi: 2 Times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Obama lied, Chris Stevens died!!”

16 posted on 10/11/2012 10:36:27 AM PDT by AlanGreenSpam (Obama: The First 'American IDOL' President - sponsored by Chicago NeoCom Thugs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson