Ron Paul Agrees With Obama: The Debate Over Benghazi Is A ‘Sideshow’

Mediaite ^

[mnehring]

Could President Obama have read this op-ed by Ron Paul before his joint press conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron this morning? The president’s assessment of the Benghazi scandal was remarkably similar to that of the former congressman. Both men called the controversy a “sideshow.”

While Obama primarily went after Republicans for trying to politicize his administration’s response to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya last September, Paul chose a more equal opportunity approach in his article, published this morning on the website of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

“Congressional hearings, White House damage control, endless op-eds, accusations, and defensive denials. Controversy over the events in Benghazi last September took center stage in Washington and elsewhere last week. However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.”

Paul accused Republicans of smelling “political opportunity over evidence that the Administration heavily edited initial intelligence community talking points about the attack to remove or soften anything that might reflect badly on the president or the State Department.”

[mnehring]

preemptive Paultard boilerplate response before they come on the thread.

[plain talk]

Ah yes. Libertarians. What would we do without them?

[servo1969]

You forgot your /s tag.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[New Jersey Realist]

A lot of FReepers like this asshole! ‘nuff said.

[mnehring]

http://www.livescience.com/13738-trouble-detecting-sarcasm-dementia-sign.html

;)

[bimboeruption]

I agree...Paul IS right on this...and I’ll take it a step further...99% of CONGRESS is a SIDESHOW...only interested in face-time and spouting out bumper sticker quotes in order to stay in power. They don’t care an iota about getting to the truth.

I don’t think some people read the article before posting their thoughts.

[Yosemitest]

May 12, 2013
Could assets have reached Benghazi in time to save lives?
Insiders assess US reaction to terror attack

Huckabee: Joining me now is retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, who is one of the original members of the Army's Delta Force, where he command elite warriors in combat operations.
He also commanded the Army's Green Beret.
He's participated in clandestine operations all over the world,
and NOBODY … knows more about special operations.

General Boykin organized a letter signed by more than 700 Special Operations veterans, asking the House to form a Special Select Committee on Benghazi.

Also with us today, former State Department Senior Advisor, during the Bush Administration,
and author of the forthcoming book "Smart Power: Between Diplomacy And War", Christian Whiton.

(applause)

Huckabee: General, I want to get right to … a burning question.
The Administration and military officials, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said
there were no assets that could have been moved, in place, for a rescue operation, to at least have intervened.
Is that … Is that a realistic, honest and an implausible answer?

Lt. Gen. Boykin: Governor, I don't believe so.
You know, when we created the Delta Force and Seal Team 6 back in the late 70s early 80s, to be able to respond to just this kind of thing.
And then in the early 90s we put in extremists forces in every theater, and their primary target was Embassies.
Then we have the 6th Fleet out in the Mediterranean, and we have a variety of other assets all across the Southern literals.
To say "We couldn't respond", I find incredible. Shame on us, but I don't believe that.

Huckabee: Well the … some, of the answers we that it might put some of these folks in danger.
I thought that's what they trained to do is to go into danger.

Lt. Gen. Boykin: Governor, when we stood these forces up, they were designed to rescue people, we knew that would never have all the intelligence we need.
We knew we would go at a higher risk, but it was an issue of "American Values" .
It was the value of "never leaving a fallen comrade to fall into the hands of the enemy."
When you are under attack, we're going to "be there."
That was the whole point of it, and so, to say that "we didn't know enough to put them in there", I don't buy that.
I think that that is incredible and I think that somebody needs to be taken to task over that.

Huckabee: Realistically, how long would it have likely taken to have put somebody on the ground,
or even put overhead, uh … just flying an F-16 at low altitude to scare the daylights out of somebody?
How long would that likely have taken in Benghazi?

Lt. Gen. Boykin: Yeah Governor, I thank that, first of all, we could have gotten an aircraft there in probably 3 to 4 hours.
Ah … and that certainly would have helped with the second attack.
Now to get boots on the ground, I think that we could have gotten them there in 5 to 6 hours.
If we had really scrambled, thrown caution to the wind, and made an all out effort to get boots on the ground to SAVE THESE PEOPLE,
if we couldn't save them, to bring their bodies home.

Huckabee: Alright, Christian, from the Department of State prospective, talk about the protocol that happens within the Department when the Embassy is under attack.
Who makes the call to the military to say "Help us. Come get us. Do something."?

Christian Whiton: Well it's primarily a military decision.
There are only 2 civilians in the chain of command, the President and the Secretary of Defense.
But you have something called "Chief of Mission Authority", where the Ambassador in a country is the head of all U.S. Government employees there.
Of course that "Chief of Mission" was incapacitated and his deputy was denied permission to act.
So really a breakdown from the beginning, but we don't really know who gave those "Stand Down Orders", although all the arrows seem to be getting closer and closer to the Obama White House.


Huckabee: Christian, are you concerned that there is a concerted effort to make this seem like it was just an unfortunate incident,
and that nobody really is responsible, that it is just one of those days that everything went wrong?

Christian Whiton: Well sure, if you look at Jay Carney's performance yesterday as the White House's spokesman, and where he explained away how … you know, the talking points that explained away that this was terrorism, this was Ansar al Sharia, the al-Qaeda affiliate in Libya,
this was clearly an attack on America's Ambassador by terrorists and Islamists, how that got changed, how he just tried to explain this all way.
Yes, clearly there's a coverup here, and clearly, just a fiction being written.I think the press, hopefully, is catching on to it, though.

Huckabee: Talk about what probably happens within the State Department and the people who work there, when they see people above them running for cover,
and essentially saying "well if there was any blame, it was those folks down there at the lower levels."
Does that lessen the confidence of our people there at the State Department, and make them thank that "Hey, I'm on my own down here." ?

Christian Whiton: I think so, and here's the interesting thing, that if you look at people like Mr. Hicks that was testifying before Congress, these are not people who you would presume that are hostile to the Obama Administration.
The foreign service, the career guild of diplomats that exists at the State Department is naturally Democratic and left-leaning.
These people never thought they would be at a hearing that's making the Democratic Administration squirm.
So to take that step, they really feel upset.
They really feel that they're being thrown under the bus by politicos at the White House.

Huckabee: When we come back, I'm going to talk to you both, more about what … what we can expect to see unfold for the next few months, and perhaps even years.
This could be a while before all the layers of the onion come forth.
Ah, General, and Christian Whiton, stay with us. Well be back with more.

TAPE OF MR. HICKs DEPOSITION TO CONGRESS PLAYS:
Mr. Hicks, how did the personnel act to being told to "Stand down" ?

Mr. Hicks: They were furious.


Huckabee: Back with General and Mr. Chistian Whiton, former State Department Official,
General, they were told to "Stand down". They were told not to go in .
I want you to describe "WHO has the authority, to tell that … uh … contingent … to "Stand down" ?
And HOW high up is that order likely to have come from?

Lt. Gen. Boykin: Well, that's WHY we need more hearings, Governor.
First of all, to the order to actually engage troops in a rescue operation, has to come from the President,
unless it's a military facility, and then the Commander has certain authority.
But it has to come from the President, to put troops in harm's way.
Now in that case, ah because we don't know enough of the details, that could have come from the Commander of the Africa Command, that told them to "Stand Down".
But play that all the way out.
WHO told him "Not to allow them to" ?
This hearing, and I applaud Mr. Issa, but this hearing has left us with an awful lot of questions that have to be answered in subsequent hearings.
Because the question you asked IS A QUESTION that needs to be answered by a responsible people.


Huckabee: And Christian, if these request were coming OUT OF Benghazi, and also out of Tripoli, because that's where Mr. Hicks was saying, you know, "We want to go."
Ah, his response was that personnel there wanted to be turned loose to respond and do what they could.
And when they were told they could not, they were furious.
Does that sort of indicate what your experience was with people who are career born service people,
that … when it comes down to it, that they are Americans First, and their ideology goes out the window.


Christian Whiton: Well I think, certainly, and if you look at some of the comments, some of the military folks,
the CIA folks were highly impressed with the diplomats were willing to take risk to help rescue, or at least tend to their comrades.
So this really was shocking, and you know, where did it come from?
If you look back at the White House in particular,
Denis McDonough is now the White House Chief of Staff, was at that time, the Deputy of National Security Counsel,
pulled together a meeting along with Ben Rhodes [Benjamin J. Rhodes] and others,
which is probably where this, where, uh,
you know, I think we don't have the proof yet, but we need to get it,
but where some of these very bad and dangerous decisions were made, and where the coverup really had its genesis.

Huckabee: And we don't know where the President really was.
He had one phone call that night, but otherwise, no photos of him in the Situation Room, no indication,
no uh, even a White House Official coming and saying that the President is monitoring this from the Situation Room, or from the Oval Office, or even from the Residence.
We have no ideal what his engagement and involvement was.

Now General, a lot of accusations have come from Democrats saying that this is all about politics, just to embarrass the President.
You're a military guy, and you lead an effort … 700 Special Forces people to sign a letter.
Was that a political statement on your part and those of the 700 Special Forces individuals?

Lt. Gen. Boykin: No Governor. It wasn't.
Um, these people are people who have spent their military careers preparing for and launching operations to rescue Americans, or to recover their bodies.
Ah, it only took us a few days to get those 700 retired and operative Special Forces people, because their passion runs deep.
There is NO WAY that we could have watched 4 diplomats die, without launching a military attack, unless something broke down in the system,
and I think what we will find ultimately is, that the decision making system broke down.
But we feel passionately about it, and we don't care about the memo that was changed.
We don't care about what Susan Rice said.
What we care about is "WHY did we leave 4 Americans on their own?" because there's a message to every man, woman, in the future that we put on in harm's way, that if you get int a tight spot, we're not going to come and get you.
And remember this, William Tecumseh Sherman said to Ulysses S. Grant in a letter in 1864,
"I knew where ever I was that you thought of me, and if I got in a tight spot, you would come, if alive."
That's a national ethos.

Huckabee: I understand that there's a lot of anger within the military and within the Intelligence Community, feeling like they had in essence been blamed for everything for the rewriting of the memos.
Does this mean that at some point, these folks are going to break their silence, come forward, and start telling the story,
because they want to preserve their honor, and their dignity, and especially I think, these CIA guys, who I respect so much, because they … they put their lives on the line.
They risk everything, and they don't get the opportunity to go home and tell their families what they've done for America, today.
And they're being blamed for all of this.
Will some of them start breaking and telling their stories?

Lt. Gen. Boykin: I think the next set of hearings need to start bringing in several set of people, the military people as well, and some of the CIA people, and ask these questions as you asked.
You see, I have spent 2 years at the CIA. I'm tired of seeing the CIA get beat up.
They seem to be the whipping boy in this, because they live under such a cloud of secrecy that … you can't know what's going on there.
But these are good people. They're honorable people.
The CIA would never would have left those people behind.
I … I know them too well.
But there's got to be more hearings, and we're calling for a bi-partisan commission with subpoena power, to bring in these military and CIA people, and get to the bottom of this.

Huckabee: Well I hope it happens.
General, thank you very much for your prospective.
Christiasn, for your's, both of you having first hand knowledge of what happens behind the scene.

(Applause)

[MestaMachine]

Now you KNOW some deranged idiot is gonna run with this...

[RIghtwardHo]

With friends like this ...

Hopefully, in 2016, we’ll now be able to avoid the “how wonderful Ron Paul is” posts.

[Paine in the Neck]

I noticed they’ve boosted the satire warnings from earlier in the day.

[MestaMachine]

Is that like DOCTOR jerome corsi?

[BitWielder1]

The headline is misleading, Paul is right.
He does not suggest Benghazi is a sideshow, it's being handled as one.

"...However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.”

(emphasis mine)

[MestaMachine]

Won’t do any good. Daily Caller-Conservative. Therefore....

[Proud2BeRight]

Ron Paul can stick it.

[Gene Eric]

>> He’s an a##.

Yes. He has a limited prism of reality; a habitual contrarian on anything involving FA.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Ron Paul and 0bama or Dumb and Dumber?

[onyx]

You’re right!

[pallis]

If anyone knows a sideshow, it’s Ron Paul, but this sideshow gets right to the incompetence and corruption at the White House and in Obama’s cult. Hillery is a deserving scapegoat, in that she is paying for the sins of others, as well as her own.

[Conserev1]

I never thought of it as a political fight but to find the
negligence with in the White House that allowed the deaths of four Americans! No matter who, race, party, creed, male or female I want them prosecuted!