Skip to comments.Carney clashes with Jon Karl: That Benghazi e-mail from Ben Rhodes wasn’t about Benghazi
Posted on 04/30/2014 10:27:37 PM PDT by chessplayer
Not the first time the White House has tried to spin itself out of a political jam on Benghazi by very finely parsing a particular choice of words. The day after the attack, Obama said vaguely in the Rose Garden that no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation; after that, however, he studiously refused to describe Benghazi as a terrorist attack. Then, later, having taken some heat for that, he insisted that hed been calling it terrorism all along, pointing back to his Rose Garden statement as proof. WaPos fact-checker slapped him with four Pinocchios for that.
Now heres Carney insisting that the Ben Rhodes email that lit up conservative media yesterday, which listed as one of the White Houses goals before Susan Rices Sunday show appearances to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy, didnt necessarily mean Benghazi
Jon Karl:You Aint Obi_Wan, jackoff and your dark lord mind tricks won't work on us!
Obviously, the email labeled “PREP Susan Rice” was about getting her up to speed on how the IRS was actually involved in surveillance to prevent Mexican drug gangs who were making inflammatory videotapes of Tea Party members running drugs to the Libyans.
“Obama said vaguely in the Rose Garden that no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation; after that,”
This is a trick attorneys do when preparing briefs. They argue their side for 99 percent of the time, then bury a nut in a single paragraph os if they get into trouble they can claim “Your honor, we have argued all along that ________. See page _______. We said this from the very start.”
And The One is laughing his ass off over this latest “smoking gun.” It’s time for the right to stop wasting energy on this. There is no way, no how, anything will come from this,,,ever. If The One himself went on national tv tomorrow and admitted to everything, the left would still find ways to excuse his actions. The right should direct it’s energies elsewhere.
Your honor, we have argued all along that ________. See page _______. We said this from the very start.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Kind of like radio/tv personalities saying I said that - ?? months ago - roll the tape...
Of course 2 weeks earlier they ‘predicted’ something to the opposite, as another ‘opinion’ couple days after that.
Then, when one of the statements is proven correct,
‘ROLL THE TAPE’.
I still think that what is being hidden is something to do with the CIA. The murdered Ambassador had been in Libya doing who knows what for months before the final overthrow of Gaddafi and his appointment as Ambassador. He was very aware of the intensity of the risks. He went to Benghazi of his own volition. I have seen photos of the US compound there, it looked very vulnerable. He undoubtedly knew the overall risk situation, but did not get adequate intelligence on the apparently planned attack in time to react. While on the subject, how did the CIA manage to loose the maps to the Bora Bora caves which could have led to an early capture of bin Laden. That probably could have prevented the suggestion that a war in Iraq was needed from being agreed with by most Americans. Of course, then Halliburton, Black Water and others would not have made so much money.
I didn't know Carney was doing stand up comedy for The Onion.
Am looking only at one POI at this time. The visit made that night of the attack by the turkish ambassador. But to get at the truth, water-board would have to be allowed. That will not happen though.
Benghazigate enters new phase
The liar in chief nearly 2 weeks later on the international stage still blaming the video...
Obama blames the video in his UN speech
I would agree. I have other comments, but no time.
” Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making a victim doubt his or her own memory, perception and sanity. Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim. “ - Taken from wikipedia
The Media, the WH press offcie are all Gaslighting Operations...
And they are all abusing Americans.
Will look with anticipation to your post.
Top Intel Chief Testifies: We Should Have Sent Help For Americans in Benghazi
Katie Pavlich | May 01, 2014
Testifying in front of a House Oversight Committee hearing Thursday on Capitol Hill, retired Air Force Brigadier General Robert Lovell said the military should have and could have done more to help Americans who were killed in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Lovell is the former deputy director for intelligence at Africa Command. His testimony today is the first testimony from a member of the military who was at Africa Command during the time of the Benghazi attack on the U.S consulate. [Bolding is mine]
Many with firsthand knowledge have recounted the heroism displayed by the brave Americans in Benghazi that night. They fought the way they trained. That is in the record. Outside of Libya there were discussions that churned on about what we should do. These elements also fought the way they were trained. Specifically, the predisposition to interagency influence had the military structurein the spirit of expeditionary government supportwaiting for a request for assistance from the State Department. There are accounts of time, space and capability discussions of the question, could we have gotten there in time to make a difference. Well, the discussion is not in the could or could not in relation to time, space and capabilitythe point is we should have tried. As another saying goes: Always move to the sound of the guns, Lovell said. It is with a sense of duty as a retired General officer that I respectfully submit these thoughts and perspectives.
Lovell also confirmed again that the 9/11 Benghazi attack was not a result of a demonstration but instead was a well planned out assault and said the situation of holding back help made the military feel desperate.
The military should have made a response of some sort, he said.
Further, Lovell said people on the ground that night knew it was an attack from al Qaeda almost immediately.
I’ve got a few minutes:
It’s nothing revolutionary, my other comments. I have no new information, just like everyone else not having been there (CIA and State Dept. employees).
Congress seems to have dropped the ball on this. I lost track of where the committee was on subpoenas for the State employees that were hushed. Most of what I have are questions and speculation that few are asking:
Such as: Does Benghazi have any hallmarks of past clandestine operations, ala ‘Iran/Contra’? Well, yes it does, imho. This ship is but one indicator
As well, with Turkey’s role in Syrian false flag attacks now exposed, an honest person must ask: How convenient is it that the attack began ‘after’ the Turkish ambassador left? Was the meeting for some nefarious purpose? Perhaps to elicit a stronger US response against Assad? If every option is a possibility, what would Turkey have to gain from Libyan forces attacking the Benghazi compound? Why was the Turkish Ambassador made to travel to that pit of an area, Benghazi, widely reported to be overrun with rebels of varying factions? What was so ‘urgent’ or, for that matter, ‘secret’ that Tripoli wouldn’t do?
I don’t believe the attackers were to attack the Benghazi compound itself...OR the CIA: They were to attack Stevens. Whether this was a kidnapping gone wrong or not, I think he was the target all along and the site of the attack was shifted when it was revealed he was to travel to Benghazi from Tripoli, an unannounced/unscheduled trip. This, in part, explains why the Benghazi attack was ‘late’, compared to the Cairo attack.
We’ve been led to believe Benghazi was a front for funneling weapons to the Syrian rebels.
But that theory only ‘supports’ the Turkish position. Again, what was the meeting in the middle of the desert, rather than the embassy in Tripoli, really about? Only the Turkish ambassador, Ambassador Stevens and the CIA know for sure. It’s a fact that Turkey is embroiled in its own scandals and their own press has been critical of the provocations of Assad. I, for one, don’t yet understand why Turkey thinks a rebel-held Syria is better security than an Assad-controlled Syria, but I don’t have the time right now to expend on this.
I will write this: I have to wonder...if Turkey didn’t stage the attack on Benghazi (for whatever reasons), perhaps the Ambassador was there to warn Stevens, having been stonewalled by State Dept. Perhaps he was there to demand an increase in American assistance to the anti-Assad forces. Perhaps Ambassador Akin was ‘just lucky’ that their meeting ended on such a timely note. We do know that the compound was under surveillance...maybe the Libyans were ‘just mad’ that the Americans/CIA were shipping their weapons out of the country and maybe they weren’t getting ‘their fair share’. Maybe this is just a ‘turf war’ over gun-running and the CIA ended up butting heads with the Muslim Brotherhood over ‘their turf’ (North Africa) and the CIA ‘blinked’ (no help from a eunuch POtuS). Maybe Ambassador Akin didn’t get his ‘payola’ for permitting the shipments to layover in Turkish ports. Perhaps AQ is much more aligned within Turkey than is being made public, possibly explaining many mysteries the past couple of years. Who knows at this point.
I also have to wonder if this isn’t much, much bigger than most realize...as the facts, and the subterfuge, seem to fit that premise....
To twist the knot differently, could this (just possibly) be a complex plot that was intended to besmirch Hillary Clinton to permanently taint her and open up the 2016 POTUS race to a ‘different’ benefactor, much as the Puppet was put into play (recall the convenient scandal that gave rise to Sen. Puppet)? Having blown up in the Puppet’s face when Stevens et al were killed in the attack? Forcing everyone onto the same CYA page?
Hey...much like MH370, when the facts are few, the possibilities are endless .
Or perhaps it was all just coincidence, rotten security planning by State/CIA, and absolutely lousy timing on the part of the attackers, in terms of possibly exposing Bama’s ‘Syria-arms’ which had the unfortunate irony of being diametrically opposed to US policy for a decade (arming AQ) with less than 60 days to a major election... And was all the theater, cover-ups & malfeasance in the wake of the Benghazi Terror Murders just simply bumbling incompetence on the part of State, CIA and the WH collectively?
I’m inclined to believe the simplest answer is NOT the latter...the whole affair REEKS of an ‘Op’.
Preaching to the choir on the latter, I realize. Just a closure to a rambling series of opinions after a 14 hour day...
Eh...tired, and forgot to insert this. Still need to read it all, but interesting.
This is one of the best analysis have seen logi_cal869. Pertinent questions all. Pertinent analysis all. Well done and Thank You.
Am out of time this a.m. but am bookmarking your two posts. Know will make for excellent reading. Once more my Thanks.
I wouldn’t characterize it as anything resembling ‘analysis’ (more resembling a bar debate), but thanks.
It was a long day and, imho, they’re all very good and unanswered questions.
The ‘spin machine’ was just on the radio here (some ‘Doctor’ of some group back east for some think tank). The left is so desperate to keep this from getting attached to the Oval Office I think they’ll go to any length at this point.
One possibility: One reason I think that “THE email” of contention didn’t get ‘deleted’ was some loyalists to Hillary still in State or, perhaps, some very pissed off CIA people.
Another possibility: One thing I didn’t address in the rambling queries: Did anyone else get ‘just a bit’ of deja vu from that email? You know, related to a certain ‘memo’ about a decade ago?
I think it’s important to note that while everyone agrees that the WH had ‘something’ to do with Benghazi and the ‘coverup’ (the ‘video’ BS), this ‘tardy’ email raises my suspicions.
I don’t think enough questions are being asked as to why it wasn’t produced earlier and focusing too much on what it does (nevermind ‘doesn’t’) state...