Skip to comments.Video: Obama ducks questions on why help wasn’t sent to Benghazi
Posted on 10/26/2012 10:21:56 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Were going to gather all the facts, he says, echoing Hillarys plea to let the investigation play out until, oh, say, mid-November at the earliest. Simple question: Why does he need all the facts about Benghazi to find out (a) whether anyone at the consulate called for help during the attack and (b) if so, who in the chain of command denied that request? He could find that out with 10 minutes of phoning around and then spend another 10 firing the people involved assuming, of course, that it wasnt The One himself who delivered the thumbs down on the calls for help. Problem is, theres only one thing he really cares about, and that thing wouldnt be well served by an admission 10 days out from election day that his administration screwed up badly enough in Benghazi to warrant canning people. So hes playing the all the facts game. Estimated arrival of all the facts: 11 days from now.
Clark pressed again.
Were they denied requests for help during the attack? he asked.
Well, we are finding out exactly what happened, the president again said. I can tell you, as Ive said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, were going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesnt happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. And I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number one priority making sure that people were safe. These were our folks and were going to find out exactly what happened, but what were also going to do it make sure that we are identifying those who carried out these terrible attacks.
Two things worth noting there. One: In claiming that he needs to find out exactly what happened, hes professing ignorance about the distress calls. Remember that if/when it comes out later that he had earlier notice than we thought. Two: The first directive makes it sound like hes blaming someone else for not informing him sooner so that he could send the help needed. Is that a reference to the CIA? If so, David Petraeus is prepared for it: Per Bill Kristol, he just threw Obama under the bus.
CIA spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood said, We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.
If CIA didnt give the order to stand down, who did? Panetta? In that case, why is the Secretary of Defense being called on to make a snap decision on a sudden military intervention in the middle of an international crisis? To put it differently, if Os excuse is that no one gave him a heads up while this was going on for hours why didnt he get that heads up? The ambassador is under siege by jihadists in Libya and his security detail is requesting assistance sounds exactly like the sort of thing youd get in the fabled 3 a.m. phone call. How come someone other than O took the call, if thats what in fact happened? Was he busy with something more important, like a fundraiser in Vegas?
His alleged ignorance isnt limited to the distress calls, either:
President Obama today said that he had not been aware of the requests for additional security made by security officials in Libya before the deadly attacks on U.S. diplomatic posts in Benghazi.
I was not personally aware of any request, the president told radio host Michael Smerconish. We have an infrastructure set up to manage requests like that but were going to find out what happened. Ultimately though any time there is a death of an American overseas I want to find out what happened because my most important job as President is to keep the American people safe.
It sure is odd how thoroughly uninformed he seems to have been about what was happening in Libya, which is supposed to be a key part of his reelection foreign-policy credentials. In fact, after you watch the video of his interview with the Denver station, listen to the call Rush Limbaugh got today from someone claiming (convincingly) to be a special ops planner. He insists that Obama would have, or should have, been informed within minutes once the Situation Room got a message that Stevens was in peril. If thats true, then it defies reason to think O wouldnt have also been informed immediately once Americans at the consulate were requesting military help. The caller thinks maybe Obama gave the thumbs down because he was afraid of another Desert One-type failure happening and branding his administration Carter redux right before the election. Could be, but I think the success of the Bin Laden raid has immunized him on that to some extent. Another possibility is that O didnt want to send American troops in with guns blazing for fear of a backlash in Libya specifically or across the region generally. That would have also complicated his reelection narrative: Supposedly, helping to topple Qaddafi has earned us goodwill among devotees of the Arab Spring; having a gunship hovering over Benghazi blasting away followed by protests among our new Libyan friends would have cut the knees out from under that storyline. The thing about the distress calls is that even the best-case scenario that Obama wasnt in fact told until it was too late to help is proof of catastrophic dysfunction. If thats how Os going to play it, pleading ignorance to cover his own ass, okay, but then lets some some people get fired. Tomorrow.
he ducked it, then he ducked it again, and finally he goosed it.
Obama will not be able to hide from the revulsion.
A final Nite all!!
By not canceling his trip to Vegas President Obamaghazi
was attempting to put distance between himself and the
knowledge of the attack and the decisions and non decisions
associated with the attack. How in the world he thought
he was going to be able to back-fill the story with lies is
beyond belief. It is a testament to his faith in the MSM to
carry his water no matter what.
Stalling tactics right out of Clinton’s playbook.
Playing it a bit TOO cool. He simply iced his own arse.
What a final image for me to see, before I hit the sack. A bunch of really hard core Socialist mixed with some down right verifiable Communist to boot. Time for this old guy to hit the rack. Do have a great upcoming day.
He has his work to do.
Just think about the average. What use have they for you?
Forget about your sill whim. It didn't fit the plan.
I remember when Leon Panetta was Clintons Chief of Staff. It was during that time that TWA 800 was shot down on the night of July 17,1996 by a Stinger missile off of Long Island. It was Leon Panetta who took an active role in the coverup, appearing nightly on TV to spin the latest yarn about how the incident was being thoroughly investigated. If the truth were known, Clintons reelection chances would have been destroyed.
There is NO question, this should sink Obama's ass for reelection! Isn't it ironic as all get out this comes down to the "3am Call!" Ha!
No doubt about it.
Posted on Fri 26 Oct 2012 16:33:48 PDT by ColdOne
So did the Denver TV station do an editing job?
Well it's the same on the front end.
If I were in the foreign service in any capacity or the military, I would be making alternate plans for survival ... knowing now that my government is going to hang me out to dry should an emergency arise.
I would not be surprised if our personell overseas are not having these discussions among themselves.