Skip to comments.How Much of a Set-Up Was Crowley's Libya Question? (Jack Cashill)
Posted on 10/19/2012 6:39:23 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
On Tuesday night's debate, the evening's most notorious exchange did not begin with moderator Candy Crowley's wildly inappropriate intervention on the "act of terror" question. It almost assuredly began minutes earlier.
The audience question that prompted the exchange came from Long Islander Kerry Ladka, who, reasonably enough, asked in regards to the Libyan consulate, "Who denied enhanced security and why?"
The question went to President Barack Obama, and he launched into a well-rehearsed set piece about how he was handling the issue. Mitt Romney responded much as one would expect him to respond, criticizing the White House response to the attack, especially Obama's Las Vegas trip a day afterwards, and Obama's Mideast policy in general.
It was at this point that the debate, certainly from appearances, took a turn for the prearranged. It was now 70 minutes on. Crowley conceded a shortage of time and an excess of audience questions. Nevertheless, instead of moving on to that next question, Crowley asked a question of her own. Even before she began to ask, however, Obama was strolling confidently towards Crowley as though he knew what was going to happen next.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“Get the transcript”
yep! I heard Obama say that too!
1st. Why would Candy have of that obscure speech sitting in front of her?
2nd. How did Obama KNOW Candy had it?
It’s obvious that Obama was told ahead of time what all the questions would be to “level the playing field” since he can’t have a teleprompter during the debate feeding him the answers.
If the GOP continues to cave in accepting only liberal moderators, they shouldn't complain about interruptions and being given less time as it's almost a given!
There’s something else that struck me: somebody must have known in advance that Romney was going to mention the Rose Garden speech, or they wouldn’t have had this whole set-up so well prepared. They knew exactly what words Romney was going to use. And somebody from inside the Romney debate prep had to give them that information, either intentionally or accidentally (discussing it in a public place or with a person planted to find out about it).
I think Romney should examine his debate prep staff very carefully, including people like sound and makeup. I also think that wherever he preps should be carefully checked for listening devices and should be in a very secure location. This may sound excessive, but the Dems are desperate now.
Great analysis. Great comments after the article.
Romney impresses me more with every passing day. He gets ambushed by 0bama and the media and handles it with aplomb in real-time. His demeanor showed that he was not expecting the “illegal hit” from the 12th man on the field, the supposed ref. No one would have anticipated such an egregious flouting of the rules. Yet, he keeps his composure and handles it very well. It’s nice to see that our next President can think on his feet.
Kudos, Mr. Romney!
we’ve had obviously biased liberal ‘moderators’... how about a conservative?
can you imagine if Rush was the moderator?
Even the Kos kids think it was a setup. Their evidence is thaat the WH website’s transcript of Obama’s speech doesn’t have the ‘act of terror’ quote. So more fuel for the fire.
Why has no one picked up on the fact that Obama said, in the Rose Garden these acts of terror. The important part is the phrase these acts...plural. If people would just use the fact that the President used the word acts not act they could easily prove that he was not referring to the attack in Benghazi.
Wow! If Zippy has lost Kos, he must be circling the drain.
“Romney impresses me more with every passing day. He gets ambushed by 0bama and the media and handles it with aplomb in real-time. His demeanor showed that he was not expecting the illegal hit from the 12th man on the field, the supposed ref. No one would have anticipated such an egregious flouting of the rules. Yet, he keeps his composure and handles it very well. Its nice to see that our next President can think on his feet.
Kudos, Mr. Romney!”
I’m with you!
This backfired big time. Hard to imagine how Obama and CNN thought this was going to help his cause, but what it accomplished was we got to see our big, tough, full-of-himself know-it-all President get rescued by a girl in front of millions of Americans on live TV. He seemed quite proud of himself too, which made this even more repulsive. It also exposed a particularly disgusting member of the press for what everyone knows the press as a whole has become. I think once again Obama’s strategy failed and the polls are showing it.
>If the GOP continues to cave in accepting only liberal moderators, they shouldn’t complain about interruptions and being given less time as it’s almost a given!<
Wouldn’t we all give our eyeteeth to see a Romney-Obama debate moderated by Judge Napolitano, or John Bolton?
One can dream.
It is HUGH and SERIES!................
There was a time in journalism when Candy Crowley’s bias would see her humiliated and drummed out of the profession.
Today, sadly, she is a hero of the progressive left.
Thank you, Jack! The papers, whether they included a transcript of everything the debaters had said since campaigning began or (more likely) not, served solely as a prop. If those (fewer than 20) pages included anything more than the names of questioners and their respective questions (in whose selection she collaborated), the matter of moderator integrity becomes even dicier, almost as dicey as the bone she nervously and babblingly threw Romney after validating Obama’s claim.
Aside from all the other circulating violations of journalistic ethics, there’s the matter of waving a prop (if it didn’t contain the actual transcript) as if it were a valid vindication of Obama’s claim. Of course, if it DID contain a transcript of the president’s Rose Garden remarks, why did she, as a question-selector, happen to have it handy? The question on consulate security had nothing to do with the Rose Garden speech. If she’d had that degree of back-up info on every scheduled question, she’d have been waving a ream of paper.
Then, after the “get the transcript” order, he made her repeat it “louder”. He’s like an 8 year old saying, see I’ve got proof.
Only it wasn’t proof of anything except the fact that Crowley and Obama colluded on a Presidential debate.
Cashill says, “We need these answers quick. Forget the polygraph. Let’s go right to waterboarding.”
And, then the drawing of the beans from a jar with all black beans, then the wall.
CNN has apparently already admitted seeking to “level the playing field” in another way, by giving a time edge to the President since he didn’t get in as many words the last time - “he speaks slower.” At least the American people are finally waking up to the fact that there are is at least one job in which affirmative action should not put a less qualified candidate on top.
That being said, I honestly think Candy was more of a useful idiot than a direct conspirator. Prior to the debate the Whitehouse had made comments to the effect of the Rose Garden speech calling the incident an act of terror, probably reinforced to Candy by her cohorts in a manner to create plausible denial - she became aware of a potential line and she investigated, thus coming to the debate with a transcript of the speech (just wonder - have any other moderators ever brought such a document? I think not).
“Its obvious that Obama was told ahead of time what all the questions would be to level the playing field since he cant have a teleprompter during the debate feeding him the answers.”
Actually I think Candy herself was the designated teleprompter.
“can you imagine if Rush was the moderator?”
I’d settle on Monica Crowley