Friday, May 10, 2013

Damage Control???...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Lib
erty -vs- Tyranny


President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton take part in the Transfer of Remains Ceremony marking the return to the United States of the remains of the four Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya.

It ain't a cover up but...
Mother Jones - The latest revelations about the Benghazi talking points—as opposed to what actually happened at the US diplomatic facility at Benghazi, where four Americans died—do not back up Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham's hyperbolic and absurd claim that the Benghazi controversy is Obama's Watergate. But neither are they nothing.

As ABC News reported on Friday morning, the most discussed talking points in US diplomatic history were revised multiple times before being passed to UN Ambassador Susan Rice prior to her appearances last September on Sunday talk shows. The revisions—which deleted several lines noting that the CIA months before the attack had produced intelligence reports on the threat of Al Qaeda-linked extremists in Benghazi—appear to have been driven by State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, who, it should be noted, is a career Foggy Bottomer who has served Republican and Democratic administrations, not a political appointee. Her motive seems obvious: fend off a CIA CYA move that could make the State Department look lousy. (The other major deletion concerned three sentences about a possible link between the attack and Ansar al-Sharia, an Al Qaeda-affiliated group; last November, David Petraeus, the former CIA chief, testified that this information was removed from the talking points in order to avoid tipping off the group.)

But here's the problem for the White House: It was part of the interagency process in which State sought to downplay information that might have raised questions about its preattack performance. That's a minor sin (of omission). Yet there's more: On November 28, White House spokesman Jay Carney said, "Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC's best assessments of what they thought had happened. The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility because 'consulate' was inaccurate."

Assuming the talking points revisions released by ABC News are accurate—and the White House has not challenged them—Carney's statement was not correct. {Read More}

Damage Control? You be the ultimate judge.

Via: Memeorandum

40 comments:

  1. I'm not sure exactly why but this blog is loading very slow for me. Is anyone else having this issue or is it a problem on my end? I'll check back later and see if the problem still exists.



    Here is my site Cheap Jerseys

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anon,

    The reason why this blog is so slow to load is because ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ... [still loading] ...

    Anon, I'll get with you tomorrow with an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the Obama people had simply been more circumspect and told the American people that they didn't yet have all the facts, they probably could have skated on it. But instead they pushed this imbecilic narrative about a spontaneous eruption (yeah, a spontaneous eruption with AK-47s and mortar) from some stupid-arsed youtube video and then continued with it for weeks. Yes, the Republicans are playing some politics here but so, too, is the Obama administration (their brazen attempt to convince us that Al Qaeda was somehow on the run).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed you are correct. It's really all about the game. The political game that is.

      Yeah, both "sides" play the game. It is only human I suppose. After all it is ultimately about gaining and then retaining power.

      Neither political party is really interested in real values and principle. Nope. It's ALL about winning, and to hell with all the rest.

      After 40 years of exposure to the s**t I've become the cynic. Yeah, both play politics. The biggest difference today is the rEpublicans are the party of less credibility, and it is getting more so every week it seems.

      Nobody in the game of politics tells the truth. Refer back to earlier paragraphs.

      On a most important note... Happy Mother's Day

      Delete
    2. to Mothers everywhere. The real backbone of the family and thus society.

      Delete
    3. You've taken lessons well, you never tell the truth. Republicans are losing the game. Now back to your lies that Obama is Hitler.

      Delete
    4. Seems it is springtime, and while other young men's thoughts turn to baseball, he somehow manages to go on a Hitler comment binge. Here's to you, Anon, the most uninteresting man in the world. Thank godwin you are gone.

      Delete
  4. The "damage control" is being done by the Republicans, in that they think they can "control" it higher by simply holding hearing after hearing until they get the result they want. There is no "cover up", this is just the Repubs playing politics in an disgusting attempt gain an advantage in the midterms (and slime Hillary in case she decides to run in 2016).

    ReplyDelete
  5. RN,
    I wish your family a happy and healthy Mothers' Day and, on this day of all days, I hope the troll leaves you alone.

    (Are we fully loaded now?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A belated thank you.

      Loaded for bear? I would have to say yes to that as I certainly unloaded on aNon. And yes, O do feel better. :-)

      Delete
  6. RN's mother was part of the Hitler baby camps, and RN is one of those Hitler babies, no surprise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You aNon are a diseased, sick, pathetic piece of human SHIT.

      If there was any doubt in anyone's mind about your sanity you have successfully removed ANY doubt there may have been.

      You are the living example of EVIL reincarnated in human flesh. A sick, lying, useless stinking pile of vile vomit and shit.

      You have posted for the final time. And, just so you understand, I allowed the last two of your vomits so you could further expose yourself for the sick demented piece of shit you are.

      PS: I, like (O)CT(0)PUS will keep your identity safe. Some, unlike you, have integrity.

      The pier is waiting aNon. Take a nice long walk on the pier.

      Delete
    2. I remember the Muppet Babies, but not the Hitler Babies. Sounds rather unfunny, but I suppose someone like Mel Brooks might make it work. Possibly. But really, I question Anon's taste in cartoons.

      Delete
    3. aNon is a real piece of work. The sick dude has made literally over 150 comments (all deleted) exactly like the one I decided to post today. I really feel sorry for the sick puppy so I figured why not give him an opportunity to have an orgasm all over himself.

      He's gone not to return.

      Delete
  7. Not one single person on the ground said that this was the result of a protest. NOT ONE SINGLE ONE. This was all about the administration protecting Mr. Obama's narrative (right before the election, no less) that al Qaeda was on the run and all that crap that they were laying on the American public for over two solid weeks was an absolute disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Point well made ans valid. But it is time to move beyond the politics of the "cover up' meme. At worst it wad political maneuvering.

      Delete
  8. Will Hart: This was all about the administration protecting Mr. Obama's narrative...

    I don't believe it was the right decision, but that hardly makes it an "absolute disgrace". Those are the words I'd use to describe how Romney jumped on the attacks in an attempt to use them to his political advantage. And I'd use those same words to describe how the Republicans are attempting to use this to their political advantage. I hope it backfires on them. There was no cover-up and the harder they push this false narrative the more disgusted the American people may become with them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remember, in politics all actions (statements and decisions) are driven by politics. Or put another way they are driven by the pursuit to gain and retain power.

      Delete
  9. This silly scandal has nothing to do with what happened in Benghazi. It displays a callous disregard for lives lost from anti-Obama propagandists. And it the depth of sleazy hypocrisy for anyone who supported the last administration to be harping on this.

    If there was some misinformation intentionally trotted out to the public, of no consequence whatsoever (there is none, cons), then there should be reasonable consequences. But this issue is not worth a snotty rag compared to the horror the last administration perpetrated while the cons sat silent.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JMJ, your platitudes, progressive scripted talking points are indeed becoming a broken record. Give us some substance.

      Delete
    2. RN said: "JMJ, your platitudes, progressive scripted talking points are indeed becoming a broken record. Give us some substance. "

      Yes, it seems rather scripted. I would bet dollars to donuts if say we get a President Marco Rubio in a few years, and he has an embassy screw up, Jersey will be at the front of the line whining about conservative incompetence and how Congress MUST hold the President accountable, while insisting that anything that happened under Obama should never be brought up in comparison.

      Delete
  10. Show me something comparable from Bush, Jersey. Like making up the movie protest story and running it for weeks. And the State Dept refusing help during the incident. You won't, since you can't. Sorry Jersey, you can't blame Bush for these failings of the current administration, and you are a pants on fire liar for attempting to do so.

    And I seem to recall you blaming filmmaking artists' noble expression of their rights of expression for the incident months later.

    ReplyDelete
  11. We were lied to, Jersey, and I don't particularly like being lied to whether it's Dick Cheney or Obama. This was a bald-faced lie of a story line that they didn't pawn on us once or twice but dozens of times and for over 2 solid weeks. And it was absurd, a spontaneous eruption. Yeah, people just carry around AK-47s and grenade launchers in their pockets 'cause you never know when you just might need one. And the fact that a terrorist cell was taking credit for it WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING. Yeah, Congressman Issa is a partisan jackass but those whistle-blowers aren't (that opening statement from Nordstrom was especially moving) and neither are the families of the victims who've been waiting months for answers.......Come on, Jersey. Don't be such a partisan hack here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But but.. Will? Can't you see? According to Jersey, events from 2000 to 2008 are the reason this must be ignored and swept under the rug.

      Delete
    2. Good point dmarks. GWB was a poor President overall IMNHO and did more damage to conservatism than perhaps any prior conservative President. Having said this jmj seems to be stuck in time. But I suppose it is understandable. ;-)

      Delete
    3. I thought that those whistle-blowers (Nordstrom and Hicks, especially) came across as extremely credible....And, Jersey, if you think that I'm approaching this from a partisan perspective, you can relax. I also thought that Scott McClellan came across as credible, too (you know, back when he turned on Bush).

      Delete
  12. Will Hart commentary from 8/29/2012: On David Brooks... Liberals think that he's a conservative. Conservatives think that he's a liberal. Yeah, you better believe that I can identify with him.

    David Brooks on "Meet the Press" 5/12/2013: My reading of the evidence is a very terrible event happened at a CIA facility, they went into intense blame-shifting mode, trying to shift responsibility onto the State department, onto anywhere else, and the state department pushed back. ... Out of that bureaucratic struggle, all the talking points were reduced to mush and then politics was inserted into it".

    Sounds to me like Brooks is saying President Obama did not lie, but that the blame for the talking points being wrong can be attributed to a "bureaucratic struggle" between the CIA and State. I wonder, does Mr. Hart disagree with the fellow he identifies with so much?

    ReplyDelete
  13. What lie of Dick Cheney's are you referring to Will? What about bush's lies about WMD? Those DON'T bother you?

    ReplyDelete
  14. To give us some perspective of the desperation on the right to make Benghazi into something it is not, Dick Cheney, the former vice president of the U.S.A. actually said on FAUX NOOZ that Benghazi was the "worst disaster in his lifetime."

    Yes. He actually said those words on cable news. Benghazi, according to this man who was first in line to be president claims that the Benghazi attack was worse than 9/11, an attack that killed 3,000 Americans, destroyed the World Trade Building, destroyed part of the Pentagon, and crashed four American aircraft, killing all on board. An attack on an American consulate, which by the way, happened during the Bush administration many times and killed 53 people, was worse than 9/11? But wait, he said in his lifetime, right? Worse than the assassination of the president of the United States, JFK?

    Well it is in Big Dick Cheney's world where the only thing that matters is slamming Mr. Obama and his administration. Big Dick Cheney was wrong on how soon the war in Iraq would be over, wrong on telling the American people that we would be welcomed with flowers and candy in Iraq, wrong on Saddam having WMDs.

    No one who has any sense listens to Big Dick Cheney, he's been wrong so many times on so many important issues, and he made an ass of himself when he made that statement.

    He's turned into that crazy uncle families have to tolerate at Thanksgiving, because he has nowhere else to go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who gives a rat's arse what Dick Cheney says? The guy is a schmuck and the Bush administration was largely a failure. But just in case that you haven't noticed it, neither of these two fellows has been anywhere near the White House for going on four and a half years now. I mean, I know that your answer for everything these days is moral equivalency and "Obama isn't as bad as Bush" and all but isn't it about time that you started focusing on just what it is that your fellow is doing and maybe starting to hold HIM accountable (is party affiliation THAT paramount?)?.......................................................................................Like, I don't know, the fact that this administration RIGHT BEFORE AN ELECTION created out of entire cloth a scenario that literally nobody over the age of three would have ever in their right mind bought. Laying it all out for you here; a) not a single person on the ground said that there was a protest or that this was anything other than a planned terrorist attack (what, Eli Lake of Newsweek and Bob Bare of CNN knew about this but Obama didn't?), b) nobody, even in the Middle East, just happens to carry around with them mortars and AK-47s (spontaneous shmontaneous), and c) a terrorist cell was actually taking credit for this attack WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING. HOW in the hell/pray tell are you just willing to let the President skate on this, Shaw, and WHY?...................................................................................And it isn't just Benghazi, either. This President has also continued with the prior administration's policies of rendition, warrantless wiretapping, unlimited detention and, yes, he's even outdone Mr. Bush in other regards; expanding the war in Afghanistan (more Americans have died in this war under Obama now than Bush) , sextupling the drone attacks in Pakistan and spreading these attacks to 3-4 other countries, and, yes, my personal favorite, the kill list (the dude has a frigging kill list - if President Bush had had one, you and yours would have been going apoplectic and you know it). I think that you're just going to have to face it here, Shaw, Obama is a warrior and in a very bad way.

      Delete
    2. And all of the whistle-blowers were under oath when they said that they had informed Hillary that it was a terrorist attack and that there wasn't any sort of protesting period. Spontaneous eruption - LOL.

      Delete
  15. In the spirit of exaggeration, I can do Cheney one better by saying that the worst tragedy in the world is that someone is too ignorant to spell the word "news". In contrast, I find precious few right-wingers who want to do the same sort of thing and come across as ignorant by mispelling any part of MSNBC for some supposed similar un-achieved effect. But I will say that when some conservatives spell Obama as "Obummer" it does come across about as kindergarten-playground as spelling news as Nooz.

    As for what Cheney was wrong on, Shaw: The first two are predictions, and few politicians get those right ever. The last one was correct, as WMD have been found (just the latest of many reports). Obama is pretty bad on predictions too, like the shovel-ready jobs, lowering the deficit, and other predictions. It is fair to say that he has been wrong so many times on important issues too.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And Shaw, you said "An attack on an American consulate, which by the way, happened during the Bush administration many times". I defy you to tell me that this is the same thing. That during ANY of these Bush-area attacks, the Administration did what ObamaCo did...went out and lied about the cause for weeks, refused help during the event itself, and even went so far as to attack the First Amendment implying that filmmakers should be censored.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Clearly Will isn't going to answer my question about David Brooks. BTW, it is former Dick Cheney aid Victoria Nuland who was responsible for the removal of references to Al-Qaeda and the CIA's warnings about the dangers to US diplomats in Libya. But I guess if Will ignores my comment David Brooks and him are still simpatico and Victoria Nuland doesn't exist. He can continue to tell himself Benghazi is an Obama conspiracy to protect the administration's narrative.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find it intetesting you chose to delete your own comment.

      Delete
  19. Will: "I know that your answer for everything these days is moral equivalency and "Obama isn't as bad as Bush" and all but isn't it about time that you started focusing on just what it is that your fellow is doing and maybe starting to hold HIM accountable"

    Calling out Cheney on his asinine statement is not "moral Equivalency," Will. It is calling out a career politician on his idiocy. He claimed Benghazi is worse than what happened on 9/11? This speaks to the feeding frenzy and scandal-mongering on the right and its dishonesty. We now know that the media lied about the WH emails on Benghazi. That should tell us something about the circus this has become.

    You and others are nitpicking on whether Mr. Obama called it an "act of terror," a "terrorist attack," or just plain "terror?" and whether or not Susan Rice said this or that on a Sunday news show? How is that important? Why are you and the others concerned about the quibbling that went on between the State Department and the CIA. And why don't you and the others ask why Rep. Issa wants a PRIVATE hearing with Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, co-chairmen of the Accountability Review Board. Why did he ask for public hearings for the other players in this issue, but a PRIVATE hearing with these two.

    You and the others are barking up the wrong trees, fascinated with what words were used in describing the attack instead of asking questions about how it happened and how to stop it from happening again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I realize your response was directed to Will and ask your as well as Will's indulgence.

      Cheney was a respected Representative before becoming the Vice President in the administration of GWB. Vice President do what they are expected to do. Support the President, unfortunately this means when they are right OR wrong. Perhaps a augment for voting on each independently.Or maybe a co-presidency? Domestic affairs and International affairs?

      The greater issue, at least for this fiscal conservative and social libertarian is this... Is it not time to focus on the present administration, its positives as well as its flaw and work positively to IMPROVE what ALWAYS been an IMPERFECT system.

      This would require honest discourse. Personally I'm not sure the average American is up to it.

      Thanks Will and Shaw for indulging me. I know you both are looking for honesty in politics. Which, by definition IMNHO is almost oxymoronic

      Delete
    2. The administration went with a laughably bogus scenario for over 2 weeks and they did it right before an election. I consider that not a minor transgression and if a Republican had done so neither would you, I'm positive, Shaw. That, and now Jay Carney is lying through his teeth about the changes in the talking-points only being "stylistic". I, unlike some of Mr. Obama's critics, actually voted for the guy in 2008 (I still think that it was probably the right vote given Mr. McCain's sometimes lack of temperament) but this is NOT what I signed up for.............And words? That's how lies are told, Shaw (and did you notice how Mr. Obama parsed his "words" today at that press conference, refusing to directly answer the question pertaining to whether or not anybody at the White House knew about the IRS situation? - cannot wait to hear your spin on that one), with words..............As for Cheney saying something stupid, you really and truly want to stop the presses on that one? I would advise you to try another shiny object.

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.