Skip to comments.State Dept spox says she’s paid to be ‘dumb’ when talking about Benghazi attack
Posted on 10/13/2012 7:58:59 AM PDT by Lorianne
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland ended a series of questions about the Obama Administrations changing narrative about the terrorist attack in Benghazi by saying that shes paid to be dumber than other government officials.
Look, Im generally dumber than most of the rest of the government, Nuland told reporters yesterday. I mean, thats what Im paid to be.
The comment drew a laugh, but Nuland was serious about not taking any more questions on the topic. Were not going to parse this any further, she said sternly. Were just not. (You can watch video of Nulands briefing above. To see these remarks, made towards the end of that dialogue, start at the 21:45 mark.)
That was her ultimate response to questions about whether the Obama Administration knew immediately that the attack was more than a spontaneous attack. The comment about being paid to be dumb came after she stood by Ambassador Susan Rices claim that it was spontaneous.
Look, Im not going to parse this 17 ways from this podium, Nuland said. What I am going to say is, obviously when one goes out and tries to represent what the totality of what we know, the intelligence community plays a large role in that. And they had given an assessment to the entire government, which was the basis on which Ambassador Rice spoke on Sunday, they themselves have talked very explicitly about how their assessment has evolved over time.
These comments came after a reporter reminded her that a State Department official had contradicted the idea that the State Department thought a protest had sparked the attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Dumb can mean can’t or won’t speak. Dumb doesn’t necessarily mean stupid.
What in the blazes is a spox?
It sounds like a disease.
I wonder how well “dumb” pays in DC these days. I’d guess somewhere close to, if not, six figures.
She’s paid with your tax dollar to lie to you.
a pox on the spox
Translation : “I’m up here to spout what I’m told, in a hopefully convincing manner, and not to explore the logical inconsistencies of what I’m saying”. As such, she’s not much different from an MSNBC anchor.
I’ll swap FS/GS grades with her. I’m sure she’s an FS-01/GS-15 or better. I could do her job but no way could she do mine.
She’s paid to stonewall against the citizenry by the government and she’s honest enough to admit it.
I think it’s pronounced “Spokes” like the joke’s on you folks.
Victoria Nuland is the Maggie Williams of State!
Who is dumb, dumber, and dumbest in Øbozo’s regime is an open question (and the opportunity for great sport!).
This whole fubar and the pathetic attempt to cover it up is a fine example of ZERO leadership. They all knew what they were doing in Libya was risky. They did it anyway. They knew what went down on 9/11/12, and they came up with a kindergartener’s cover story. But what seems to have been happening is that the US was running a spy operation under the cover of the US State Department. When the cover was obviously blown, Hillary said, “This is not my baby!” The White House said, “We don’t have a clue!” And Intel came up with a cockamamie lie that blew up in everyone’s face. So why was the State Department running cover for the CIA? I thought there was some stink in the past about such and that we try not to mix spy operations with diplomatic operations. Haha is it customary for State employees to keep their location secret? I suppose it is possible for Sean Smith to have been working for State and just not telling his mother that he was being sent to an unprotected hellhole that was housing spies searching for missing weapons. But it sounds more like he was working for another agency. I am speculating big time.
A bigger question for me is who leaked or who exposed the operation to Al Qaeda. They were obviously aware of what was really going on. The Brits seem to have realized that it was a bad place to be. So why did we stay???