I keep getting mail on Benghazi so here goes. First, Lindsey Graham on the Mike Gallagher show:
“Our Democratic friends, for the most part, have been in the tank over Benghazi,” the senator said. “Some guy said this about me yesterday on the left: The only reason I cared about this was because I have six tea party opponents. Well, if that’s true, I’m the biggest scumbag in America.”
[…] After Gallagher praised the senator’s doggedness on pursuing the administration over Benghazi, Graham interjected: “The scumbags are the people in the White House who lied about this.”
That’s from reader J, who also sent me this set of links over the poutrage about a run-of-the-mill talking points memo from White House adviser Ben Rhodes:
Carney, Karl in Heated Exchange Over Rice’s Benghazi Talking Points
Jay Carney Jabs at Fox News During Tense Exchange with Ed Henry
John McCain Calls Ben Rhodes a ‘Political Hack’ on Fox
GOP Rep. Explodes in Benghazi Hearing: Video Blaming ‘Only Comes from the White House’
Scarborough Unloads on Co-Host’s ‘Apologizing for the White House’ over Benghazi
That Carney/Henry one is kind of funny because it’s pretty clear that Carney knows that Fox is the boy who cried wolf on this one, so Carney’s just fucking with them now by asking Henry if he even remembers the reason for the Benghazi protests (spoiler alert: he doesn’t).
Finally, reader B asks if any right wing conspiracy theorists are saying that the Cliven Bundy showdown was engineered by Obama to distract the focus from Benghazi. I haven’t seen it, but some of you are better nutpickers than me.
Mustang Bobby
Sean Hannity didn’t make the direct connection, but according to Salon, instead of carrying deadbeat Bundy’s apology, he went on a tear about Benghazi.
Baud
All Over but the
ShoutingWaste of Taxpayer Moneyc u n d gulag
President Obama would need 15 Benghazi’s to tie the number of dead US Embassy and Consulate personnel under George W. Bush.
Bush – 60.
Obama – 4.
Maybe Rep. Issa could look to see what happened back then?
Oh, but this ain’t really about Benghazi is it?
NO!
It’s all about tarnishing that Kenyan SocialiFasciCommuniHeatheAtheithiMuslim Usurper!
And hoping they find some, ANY, grounds to impeach him.
Oh, and also tarnishing Hillary Clinton – whom they fear, in 2016.
debbie
@Baud:
I’m surprised some enterprising group hasn’t sat down and actually calculated the total costs. I wonder how the deficit hawks would react to Issa’s binges.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
Well this explains GI Jo’s in the desert
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/04/29/bundy-ranch-advisory-for-april-29-2014/
This is just more Wingnut Welfare. The Oathkeeper guy made his numbers and that’s why he packed up, the rest of them are pissed they aren’t getting more of the take.
Betty Cracker
@debbie: That’s a great idea. Of course, the so-called deficit hawks only get raptorish about spending on social programs, so it would probably have little practical effect. But it would be illuminating for taxpayers.
Patrick
When is the House GOP going to investigate why the House GOP decided to cut embassy security, and what the impact this had on the fours deaths at Benghazi?
MomSense
Ok, so I do have a serious question about Benghazi related stuff. What ever happened to that videographer? Do we know anything else about that real estate broker? Was he a real estate broker? I can’t remember.
Thunderbird
I swear to FSM every time I hear the B-word now, I twitch. And it’s only going to get worse…
the Conster
Can someone explain to me like I’m five years old what the nutjobs think exactly happened in Benghazi?
Belafon
@the Conster: They think that Obama did something bad, maybe involving a cigar, and if they dig long enough they’ll find it.
It’s not what did or did not go on in Benghazi, it the idea that hopefully they’ll find something that people will finally go “that is bad.”
NobodySpecial
@the Conster: Obama wanted to murder the State Department guy they sent there because he uncovered the fact that Vince Foster is still living and servicing Hillary, therefore he sent him into an ambush.
Jerzy Russian
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: Clearly that Oaf Keeper guy is a Federal Agent since he gave the Bundy Family a paper check that one of the will have to take to the bank to cash which will expose them to being arrested since they have to leave the compound to go to the bank (assuming they use banks in the first place).
C.V. Danes
Benghazi may be all the Republicans have at this point, but if it hands them the Senate it will be enough. While we’ve been snickering at them for losing the battles, they’ve been busy winning the war.
Just sayin’
jonas
@the Conster: Obama, being a secret Muslim Kenyan usurper who hates America, clandestinely allowed Al Qaeda to set up shop in Libya where — possibly with the support of the Black Panthers and Hillary Clinton’s lesbian ninja strike force — they coordinated a complex, well-thought out plan on orders from Dead Bin Laden to assassinate the US ambassador and other staff at a diplomatic post in Benghazi. When this plan was executed, the White House began an elaborate cover up by insisting that the post had been breached by a small group of local radicals who attacked the compound during a large protest in the area on 9/11 over an anti-Islamic YouTube video. Proof of this cover-up has been presented in the form of a series of White House, CIA, and State Department emails in the days following the attacks which say “we think this was the work of radicals who breached the compound during that video protest.” Case closed.
Jerzy Russian
@the Conster: If you are only 5 then the nut jobs will have to still talk up to you, since they have all the sense of 3 to 4-year-olds.
Punchy
I’m no math major, but “collecting” $40K and “presenting” only $12.5K seems like they’ve rooked $27.5K for themselves. Grifting’s Finest.
By the way, which FDIC-insured bank is going to cash that check?
Patrick
@C.V. Danes:
How will that be any different than what’s been happening since 2010? Obama will simply veto everything. And just like since 2010, nothing will happen. 2016 we will get senate back anyway.
beth
@Punchy: Why would they give him a check anyway? Don’t they think the government’s put a lien on Bundy’s accounts to pay for the judgments against him? And if they haven’t, why the fuck not?
maya
@the Conster: They believe the gun that killed Vince Foster, with Hillery’s fingerprints on it, wrapped in Obama’s real Kenyan birth certificate is buried somewhere on the US Libyan embassy grounds.
peach flavored shampoo
@Jerzy Russian: They’ll send a woman and child to the bank. But I’d be stunned if any bank wanted any part of this mess.
patrick II
Alan West has claimed that the media has used Donald Sterling as a distraction from Benghazi. Different person than Bundy, but same general idea.
The total cynicism of complaining that the Sterling story isn’t important and merely a distraction brings Clarence Thomas levels of self loathing and self repudiation to Alan West’s game.
Felinious Wench
Every time I hear the word “Benghazi,” I think of John Cleese’s dead parrot.
Just Some Fuckhead
@maya: With the Michelle Obama Whitey tape.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Punchy:
Probably pledges, same way the Obama administration cooked the ACA enrollment numbers.
dmsilev
@patrick II: West is an amateur. Watch a true professional show how to blame Obama:
Belafon
@C.V. Danes: Not sure what war they have won. Right now it looks like this fall won’t be fun – I love the “we hate the Republicans but they should be in charge of Congress” vibe from most of the electorate – but what are they going to do, undo the ACA, reinstate DADT?
Felinious Wench
Just replace “Parrot” with “Benghazi.”
<a href="http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218″>
Thunderbird
@dmsilev: I thought the “Sterling was a Democrat” line had been debunked?
Just Some Fuckhead
I asked a rightwinger friend to explain the Benghazi scandal to me and he couldn’t do it. After badgering him a bit, it came down to not having enough security to stop the attack and lying about the reason for the attack. I pointed out to him that even if those things were true, they didn’t constitute a scandal because there was no underlying criminality.
He hasn’t spoken about the Benghazi scandal since that conversation.
Face
@Thunderbird: Hahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa! As if “debunked” and Limbaugh have ever co-existed. You crack me up.
catclub
@beth: “Why would they give him a check anyway?”
Gold coins, pure grain alcohol, and rainwater. Also, bitcoin!
the Conster
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Yeah, that’s really just it – Benghazi is just a totem word that wingnuts invoke, like flashing a gang sign. The details are meaningless and incoherent, because there’s no there there. Also, their hero Petraeus was exposed as an incompetent fraud and philanderer which is another reason to hate Obama because reasons.
Jerzy Russian
@Punchy:
Well, if you had differential calculus, if would make perfect sense.
GregB
These asschappers don’t even remember that they were the ones up in arms about ‘the movie’ and their first protests of outrage were that the people in the Egyptian embassy didn’t support the concept of freedom of speech because the embassy tweeted that the US government had nothing to do with the controversial film.
Yep, the wingnuts were the ones pushing the fact that the movie was at the center of the protests.
Brian R.
@Just Some Fuckhead:
You might ask him what he thinks about the House Republicans slashing the budget for embassy security the year before.
cleek
yesterday, my motherfuckin soon-to-be-former dentist started moaning about Benghazi while he was poking around in my mouth.
dick
Elmo
@the Conster:
“Benghazi is worship word! You dare not speak it!”
/yang
Brian R.
@cleek:
Ridiculous. Be sure to let him know that’s why you’re leaving.
Tommy
@Brian R.: Exactly. I’ve said this here a lot. I am a military brat. Outside of myself, well pretty much everybody in my family has served. You would be hard pressed to find somebody more pro-military then myself. But because I am pro-military doesn’t mean I am pro war. My father taught at the Army War College. First book on the reading list. Sun Tzu’s The Art of War.
In it he says if you have to fight, you have already lost.
What happened in Benghazi was terrible. There were people on site that are still here. The New Yorker talked to them. They all say they knew no help was coming. Nothing could be done about it. They don’t seem to be mad at Hillary or Obama. Sometimes shitty stuff happens and there is nothing you can do about it.
Bobby Thomson
@GregB:
This can’t be repeated enough.
Baud
@cleek:
When you fire him, do it while drinking a large Coke and eating some cotton candy, so he knows how much money his wingnuttery is costing him.
dmsilev
@Thunderbird: So what? Like that’s ever stopped Limbaugh before.
eric
@Tommy: That is because the Obama’s IRS thugs have gotten to them and are threatening to send them to a FEMA camp off of the NAFTA Superhighway.
SatanicPanic
@Patrick:
The impeachment trial will be a huge reminder for people why Republicans shouldn’t control the Senate
Just Some Fuckhead
@Brian R.: I did. He’s a glibertarian so any conversation that casts an unfavorable light on Republicans results in some form of “hold them all accountable”. (“Put them all in jail”, “vote them all out”, etc.)
Tommy
@Bobby Thomson: Exactly. What is stunning to me is we have this thing called the Internet. I am sure I am not the only person here that watched this happen almost in real time. I saw the protests over the film live on MSNBC. Figured this wasn’t going to end well.
But all those on the right, who seem to think they know so much about the military, can’t seem to grasp you can’t just deploy in seconds. Heck my cousin is in Qutar for a third time. If they told him to suit up, deploy, it would still take many hours. Right or wrong. Liberal or conservative President, we just kind of don’t assume our Embassies are going to be overrun.
shelly
Note to all in the Right Wing:
For good or ill, the American people don’t care about Benghazi.
But just keep shouting in that vacuum if it makes you feel better.
D58826
@c u n d gulag: And Saint Ronald the Great ran up a pretty hefty body count between the Marine barracks (about 250) and the embessay being bombed twice in 1983.
One GOOPer was upset because Obama supposedly was given a CIA briefing about a terrorist threat to the Benghazi compound. Two points:
1. the list of American targets overseas that terrorists would like to attack probably looks like the Manhattan phone book.
2. W received two briefings on EQ’s plans in Aug. 2001 and did nothing. 3000 American died as a result. Maybe The GOP should widen its investigation a bit (yea insert joke here).
I suspect that if the GOP takes the Senate in Nov. the first order of business in 2015 will be articles of impeachment. The crime – ‘we just don’t like you or your little dogs’
Tommy
@eric: Stevens actual bodyguard is still ALIVE. He was with him to the very last seconds of his life. I mean the New Yorker talked to him. He documents everything that happened. Things happened in a matter of almost minutes. Not days or hours and hours. They knew no help was coming. In fact, two other people actually pulled back and watched everything unfold on the security cameras. They didn’t engage. Some folks like Graham watch too many Rambo movies. Sometimes there is nothing you can do. Shit happens as they say.
eric
@Tommy: Not only does shit happen, but war is foggy. Foggy shit was tailor made for Issa, in fact, it might have been his favorite band name in college.
rea
@Tommy: A lot of it is, they think we should have bombed somebody or something in retaliation. Never mind that this happened in a country where the government and most of the people are more or less on our side.
hoodie
@the Conster: Benghazi doesn’t particularly stand out among the myriad fuckups that happen in war and other conflict situations. As far as wingnuts are concerned, its meaninglessness is a feature, not a bug. Wingers prefer meaningless symbols because facts don’t interfere. Because no outside of the cult really gives a shit about Benghazi, they can also endlessly whine about how the MSM is avoiding the biggest scandal of the century. It’s a closed outrage loop.
Villago Delenda Est
@D58826:
Well, they can’t state the real reason…”Presidentin’ while Blah” because look at all the trouble Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy got themselves into with that general tenor of complaint.
Villago Delenda Est
@Tommy:
Well, this is pretty much all the wingtards. All their actual combat experience comes from Hollywood. Huckleberry Closetcase is no exception.
Tommy
@D58826: After college I moved to DC. This lady I worked with kind of took me in cause she knew I didn’t know anybody. I was invited over to her house for things like Thanksgiving and New Years. Old enough to be my mother and with no children of her own, well I might have served as one. Her husband worked at the State Department. He was one of the hostages taken in Iran. It was one of those things that you know about, but you don’t talk about.
I recall asking her about it after a few too many glasses of wine in your backyard, cause well I am curious.
She told me that once he was back in the US, well the first day he walked into the State Department. People were like dude, you got some time off, what are you doing here? He said I want to come to work.
Anytime I think of Benghazi I think of him. Nobody knows his name. A faceless government worker that is a better man then myself and somebody that serves at the pleasure of the President. People seem to want to make Benghazi about Obama or Hillary. Ever hear these “patriots” talk about the people that go to work each day, often in terrible places, promoting the United States?
I sure don’t.
FlipYrWhig
The dumbest thing about the whole Benghazi story is that the big complaint — that the Obama administration said it had something to do with the Innocence of Muslims video — is hampered by the fact that the protest DID have something to do with the video. There was a protest, and then provocateurs came to the protest with bigger weapons, and the protest turned into an attack. This is pretty well established, right? So what’s the story about communications and cover-ups and such?
I know the “scandal” is supposed to be that they fucked up and then made up a story to explain the fuckup. But, you know, if the story is actually true, find a new angle or shut the fuck up.
Gordon, the Big Express Engine
@the Conster: I believe this would have gone away much sooner if the attack happened in a city that is much more difficult to pronounce and didn’t have a nice ring to it like Benghazi.
I am Facebook friends with an old high school friend who is full metal catholic wingnut now. He posts a lot on a variety of topics and has several frequent commenters that have inserted “Benghazi” as their middle name on Facebook.
Tommy
@Villago Delenda Est: It is a bizarre thing for me. As I said I am about the only person in my family that has not served. Far right folks then assume, when I mention this, that I am a conservative. I am like nope, not so much. I try to explain, and it never works, that my family members are the folks that actually fight wars. We’re not fans of war. When you have “skin in the game” things change.
Bubblegum Tate
@the Conster:
My favorite wingnut laid out his theory, which is a pretty rote recitation of the talking points. His closing paragraph doubles as the executive summary:
That bit about Obama not being “in the loop” is a reference to the notion that the “coverup” was all about politics and Obama maintained plausible deniability so as not to lose the election:
So there you have it.
Now, there are crazier wingnut theories out there–there’s one about the ambassador at Benghazi illegally selling weapons to terrorists (funny, I don’t think the ambassador is Ollie North) and the attack was blowback from that, for example. But the above is the baseline theory, I think.
C.V. Danes
@Belafon:
Who knows. Do you really want to find out? They might just be crazy enough to try an impeach Obama, as disastrous as that would be for them, and for the country in general. They would certainly use this as the opportunity to pack the courts with extreme conservatives, and so on.
TriassicSands
He doesn’t ask Henry if he remembers the reason for the Benghazi protests. Carney asks him if he remembers the cause of the Cairo protests that preceded the Benghazi protests. Why would anyone expect a Fox News hack to know or remember any factual background? And Carney doesn’t.
This is a superb job of making Henry look like the fool he is without resorting to direct insults. Carney’s disdain for Henry seems pretty clear though.
C.V. Danes
@Patrick:
Do you really want to go through another two years of that, this time without the buffer of a Democrat controlled Senate? Obama can only veto so much.
Villago Delenda Est
@FlipYrWhig: Yeah, I know. There’s a chaotic situation, they’re trying to determine what the hell is going on, so they send emails back and forth trying to come up with a single narrative to explain something that at the time had no narrative that was solid.
So the emails look contradictory in retrospect, when in fact at the time they were trying to figure out what the hell was going on.
But I guess since Rethuglicans don’t do anything without a script that was pre approved by the Koch brothers, they don’t understand how the real world works.
Bubblegum Tate
@GregB:
Their defense will be: “We only said that because Obama said that’s what happened. We never should’ve trusted him! He deceived us!”
jwest
I think that if you lose the “Morning Joe” crowd, things are not looking good.
It was pretty much settled on MSNBC this morning that everyone – EVERYONE – knows that Jay Carney is lying. After the hearing yesterday, it was established that while people were dying in Benghazi, no rescue effort was made. Even though nobody knew how long the attack would continue or how many would be captured or killed, nobody was sent to help.
This is not going to play well and the administration has effectively destroyed any credibility they had.
Or, Benghazi might just go away with no one ever mentioning it again.
Who knows.
dmsilev
@jwest: Who in the real world gives a shit about what Scarborough and his toadies think?
jwest
@dmsilev:
It wasn’t just Scarborough. It was the entire crowd.
No one on the set even attempted to stick up for Carney or the administration. No one.
D58826
@jwest: Funny how no one ever questioned the WMD lies of the Bush admin. But then maybe Obama doesn’t cause starburst for Rich Lowry or tingly foot syndrome for Tweetie.
Waspuppet
The only coverup regarding Benghazi is the GOP trying desperately to cover up the fact that they lost to That One. Again.
Villago Delenda Est
@jwest: You realize you’re a cretin, right?
FlipYrWhig
@jwest: The nation’s premier showcase for conventional wisdom settled on a view that matches something they already thought? That IS a surprising development.
Gin & Tonic
@C.V. Danes: They would certainly use this as the opportunity to pack the courts with extreme conservatives, and so on.
The Senate does not nominate judicial candidates, the President does. They could block his every appointment, but they cannot offer one of their own. That’s if I recall American civics correctly.
jwest
Well, the prime minister of Niger did say that the Iraqi delegation approached him to institute trade and the only thing they (in his opinion) they could have wanted was yellowcake. Also, the aluminum tubes were most likely meant for centrifuges although there isn’t any specific proof of that. Still, the tubes were forbidden by the UN resolutions.
So, at least with the Bush items, there was an arguable side to it.
Apparently with this Benghazi issue, the Obama administration flat out lied and covered up.
Pretty blatant.
LAC
@jwest: and who the fuck cares? What is that show comprised of? A sweater vest, a co -host trying to figure out which camera to look at, and the assorted douchenuts.
Is concern trolling paying well for you?
jwest
@LAC:
It’s like when LBJ lost Walter Cronkite.
Once it’s gone, it’s gone.
Alex
The weirdest part about “The scandal is the talking points!” conspiracy theory is that Romney’s initial response to Benghazi was to say…
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/09/12/timeline_the_romney_campaign_s_odd_response_to_the_embassy_protests.html
But hey, no apologies.
dmsilev
@jwest: You’re equating Joe Scarborough with Walter Cronkite? That’s the stupidest thing you’ve said so far, and that’s pretty impressive considering the rest of the comments you’ve made in this thread.
Villago Delenda Est
@jwest: Oh, puhleeze. Walter Cronkite was an honest broker. None of the scum of the current White House Press Corpse are fit to lick his shoes. They have no credibility of their own to offer to the situation.
Patrick
@C.V. Danes:
So? We have already had 3 years of this. Furthermore, the Senate Dems will filibuster a fair amount. Thus, Obama, like you yourself said, will only need to veto so much.
jwest
@Patrick:
I’m not in this discussion, but I thought I might remind you that Harry Reid effectively eliminated the option of filibustering by the minority.
He went nuclear and the fallout is going to last far beyond the midterms.
Patrick
@jwest:
Goodness! Scarborough’s ratings are now below even CNN’s. And he speaks for NOBODY outside the beltway. Seriously, do you anybody who give’s a rat’s a$$ about this issue who is not a Fox”News” watcher?
People care about the economy and jobs. Have you EVER heard Scarborough ask why the House GOP voted to cut embassy security? Or have you EVER heard him discuss the 13 Benghazi’s under Bush?
Patrick
@jwest:
He only did it for appointments. Thus, it will have no impact on idiotic legislation. Thus, it will not have a major impact beyond the midterms. As a matter of fact, it will actually be helpful when Hillary wins in 2016 and she will have many judges to appoint.
LAC
@jwest: yeah because “dead intern” Scarborough and Cronkite is a real comparison. I know what’s gone and you are going to have to provide it a better wheel if you want it to crawl back in your head and keep your brain functioning.
jwest
@Patrick:
Yes, you’re right. I’m certain that when the republicans take the senate they won’t take advantage of any rule changes. That just wouldn’t be fair.
raven
@Villago Delenda Est: I see what you did there!
Hal
I’m going to insert my obligatory I still don’t know what the fuck benghazi is supposed to be about. What is the administration lying about again? What’s supposed to be impeachable? Has Graham or McCain ever really explicitly stated exactly what they think happened?
CONGRATULATIONS!
DEAD INTERN IN THE OFFICE. WE NEED CLEANUP STAT.
Origuy
I follow the Reduced Shakespeare Company’s podcast; its producer, Austin Tichenor, was Ambassador Chris Stevens’ college roommate. He’s done a few podcasts about Stevens. He was the kind of guy who really loved his work, loved the people of the Middle East, and may have let that override security concerns.
c u n d gulag
@D58826:
Or, that he’s fathered two black girls!
LAC
@Hal: well, with McCain it is something along the lines of “THAT UPPITY SONOFABITCH TOOK THE PRESIDENCY FROM ME!” And , in contrast , Graham’s concerns are focused on “OH MAH STARS! SOUTH CAROLINA IS SLIPPING AWAY FROM MAH WHITE GLOVED HANDS! AH NEED TO BUTCH IT UP!”
In other words, it is very deep and real, this Benghazi thing. :-)
Villago Delenda Est
@Hal: They can’t explain what the hell the problem is because there’s no problem to explain. They just keep yelling “Benghazi!” over and over again, and the drooling wingtard masses bark in response.
They can’t create a timeline or a simple set of talking points because if they did, their entire “argument” (I use that word advisedly, hence the rabbit ears) would collapse if even the most cursory scrutiny is applied to it.
It’s the nothingburger of all nothingburgers. It makes Whitewater, which was a huge nothingburger, look like a full course meal.
Patrick
@jwest:
Again, how can the GOP take advantage of any rule changes? Harry Reid was extremely smart in the way he did it.
Chyron HR
@Patrick:
It’s a bit unfair to ask jwest questions that can’t be answered with “M-MUH MORNING JOE”, don’t you think?
Villago Delenda Est
@Chyron HR: Oh, the staggering unfairness of it all. I think I may swoon!
Patrick
@Chyron HR:
I know. He must be the only person I know who have admitted watching that FoxNews lite show.
D58826
@Patrick: A new Senate can change the rules. They can go back to the pre-nuclear rules or make any other changes they want. Will the in charge GOP simply eliminate the filibuster so that the dems can’t do unto them what they have been doing the past 6 years? Stay tuned! And it only takes 51 votes to do it when the rules are adopted in the new Senate.
Kristin
@D58826: This is a good point. The same people who spend all day making graphics to post on Twitter about how Obama is teh worstest evah because 4 people died in Benghazi thought Bush was a hero when 3,000 died in NYC.
SiubhanDuinne
Mike Luckovich gets it.
Patrick
@D58826:
Sure. I was just responding to his point criticizing Reid for the changes he made. Frist back during the Bush era had already threatened going nuclear. I have no doubt they would change the rules irregardless of what minor changes Reid had done if they take the senate. But they might think twice if it looks like Hillary will run.
Ruckus
@Villago Delenda Est:
Conservatives haven’t had a full course meal in decades. They don’t know the recipes, where the kitchen is, what a stove is if they found it, and would most likely chop off a finger or two in prep. All they have is stupid and loud. And that ain’t no meal.
D58826
@Kristin: And the 4500 in the futile hunt for WMD in Iraq. And that obviously doesn’t include the still growing list of Iraqi’s.
jwest
@Hal:
Benghazi has a number of elements, pre-attack, the attack itself and post attack. To simplify, what is being discussed now is the post attack lies and cover up.
After the attack by terrorist factions against the Benghazi facility, the Obama administration decided to claim that it was due to a reaction to an anti-Islamic video. They ignored the facts being reported by the people on the ground and the intelligence community and changed the talking points to blame the video.
Susan Rice, UN ambassador, was sent on to all the Sunday morning shows to spread the lie, long after any claim could be made that it was the confusion of the moment or that differing agencies were still promoting the video story.
The email which was released the other day proves that the White House deliberately started the lie about the video in order to give Obama the appearance of having foreign policy in control shortly before the election. It also shows that the administration went to great effort to cover up the truth, even to the point of having Obama and Hillary Clinton lying directly to the families of the people killed in Benghazi.
Even with this evidence, Jay Carney tried the past two days to say that the administration didn’t lie. This is why liberal journalists normally totally loyal to Obama have been calling Carney “Baghdad Bob”, in reference to the Iraqi information minister who kept telling ridiculous lies during the invasion of Iraq.
On top of this, hearings yesterday featured a General who testified that there was no rescue effort for the people in Benghazi. In the public relations battle, this could be the most damaging item.
charluckles
How many f-bombing millions of tax payer dollars and thousands of man hours have we spent investigating this now? There’s your scandal.
That and the fact that some right wing organization posts some emails and starts screaming about the smoking gun and our compliant horse race media comes running to transcribe without ever bothering to notice that there is no there, there.
Patrick
@jwest:
It’s funny that you completely left out the critical item where the House GOP voted to cut embassy security. Why did you leave that out?
And what are your thoughts on the 13 Benghazi’s under Bush? Why are the lives of the 4 dead under Obama worth so much more than the many more killed during the 13 Benghazi’s under Bush? Has FoxNews even talked about this?
Chyron HR
@jwest:
AKA Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough.
charluckles
@jwest:
After the attack by terrorist factions against the Benghazi facility, the Obama administration decided to claim that it was due to a reaction to an anti-Islamic video. They ignored the facts being reported by the people on the ground and the intelligence community and changed the talking points to blame the video.
Any actual evidence you have for this would genuinely be welcome.
jwest
@Patrick:
“It’s funny that you completely left out the critical item where the House GOP voted to cut embassy security. Why did you leave that out? ”
Just trying to simplify for Hal, focusing on what the big dust up was the past few days concerning the post-attack.
Concerning the budget cuts for embassies, Hillary’s top aide testified that they had no effect on Benghazi at all. On top of that, she confirmed that the State Department turned down additional security offered by the defense department outside of that budget.
jwest
@Chyron HR:
I’m sure there is video somewhere of this morning’s show. If it was just Scarborough, I wouldn’t have even brought it up.
C.V. Danes
@Gin & Tonic:
I think you are right ion this, my bad. But they would certainly block his every appointment, and many vacancies would go unfilled.
C.V. Danes
@Patrick:
You’re assuming that the Republicans won’t radically change the filibuster rules in their favor once they get control, as payback for when the Dems deservedly changed the rules.
LAC
@charluckles: ” newsmax, Fox News, the drunk angry guy in the bar, the lady who talks to herself on the street, my meth dealer, guy I play world war Z with, and hannity”.
There you go…jwest wins!!
ralphb
@jwest: Those are the Fox talking points. Too bad they’re full of lies and that’s been shown too many times to relitigate.
Chyron HR
@jwest:
Of course, you meant all the other loyal Obamists who warm the chairs on Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough’s talk show and demonstrate their loyalty to Obama on a daily basis, I’m sure.
chopper
@jwest:
lol, that chicken’s been fucked so much it’s just a handful of feathers and gristle at this point.
charluckles
@LAC:
I know I am probably asking for trouble. But I am genuinely bemused by several people in my life who I generally think of as having good critical thinking skills, all of whom are completely obsessed with Benghazi. I believe it’s a political tribe thing for them, because I just don’t see any there, there at all. I mean nothing.
LAC
@jwest:
Lovell Says “We Should Have Tried” To Rescue Victims, Clarifies He Did Not Mean The Response Was Insufficient. On May 1, Lovell, who served as deputy intelligence director at the U.S. Africa Command in Germany (AFRICOM) during the September 11, 2012 attack, testified that “we should have tried” to rescue the victims of the attack. Later, Lovell clarified his remark in an exchange with Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA):
CONNOLLY: I want to read to you the conclusion of the chairman of the [Armed Services] Committee, the Republican chairman Buck McKeon, who conducted formal briefings and oversaw that report. He said, quote, “I’m pretty well satisfied that given where the troops were, how quickly the thing all happened, and how quickly it dissipated we probably couldn’t have done much more than we did.” Do you take issue with the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee? In that conclusion?
LOVELL: His conclusion that he couldn’t have done much more than they did with the capability and the way they executed it?
CONNOLLY: Given the timeframe.
LOVELL: That’s a fact.
CONNOLLY: OK.
LOVELL: The way it is right now. The way he stated it.
CONNOLLY: All right, because I’m sure you can appreciate, general, there might be some who, for various and sundry reasons would like to distort your testimony and suggest that you’re testifying that we could have, should have done a lot more than we did because we had capabilities we simply didn’t utilize. That is not your testimony?
LOVELL: That is not my testimony.
CONNOLLY: I thank you very much. [Media Matters, 5/1/14]
Media Ignore Lovell’s Crucial Clarification, Seize On “We Should Have Tried” Comment
beth
@Baud:
Well I guess there’s still some taxpayer money they can waste. Boehner’s appointing a special select House committee to hold hearings into this matter. Do you suppose if they could get Obama to just appear before it say “yeah, we made it try to look good – I was running for President for Pete’s sake” they’d just finally stop wasting our money on this?
jwest
@LAC:
If the administration could somehow eliminate all other testimony and just have this one little clip, they would be ok.
I don’t think they can. The rest of the testimony was incredibly damaging to Obama and especially Hillary.
Kristin
And, let’s be real. None of the Benghazi screamers give a shit about the four people who died. They just think it’s their smoking gun that will get the blah out of the White House.
D58826
@jwest:
And where might we find these ‘facts’. Were they ultimately wrong about the video, probably but when the talking points were developed that was the opinion of the CIA in Washington. ‘People on the ground’ do not always have all of the information. They have just their slice, which is why they are debriefed and the timeline assembled as part of an after action report.
Was the White House trying to protect the president, esp during an election campaign by presenting the best case version, of course. Every White House (even before there WAS a White House) has been doing that. The folks across the pond at 10 Downing street do the same thing.
Patrick
@jwest:
Oh sure. If you are in the FoxNews bubble I suppose, where facts do not matter. You have given a complete one-sided view to the whole thing. And you have yet to answer why the 4 lives under Benghazi are worth more than the 50 lives lost during similar embassy attack during Bush.
And you would have a lot more credibility if the GOP hadn’t voted to cut embassy security. So apparently security wasn’t important until it became a political issue.
Patrick
@beth:
That is just silly.The House has already had a number of investigations into the same thing. They are just running scared of Hillary. Fortunately people couldn’t possibly care less about this non-issue.
jwest
All of you are probably right.
This Benghazi thing will fade away.
LAC
@charluckles: you and me both. The desperation is so pungent. Billions of dollars and wasted lives with the Iraq debacle and it’s like “Iraq, Chirac”. But this fantasy gotcha with these wingnuts is beyond crazy.
Chyron HR
@jwest:
You are probably right, jwest.
This Benghazi thing will propel Mitt Romney to the presidency.
D58826
@LAC: All of the arguing about the response seems to ignore the laws of physics (Capt Kirk and Scotti not withstanding). If I’m following the time line correctly the Ambassador and his aide died very early in the attack, at a point that information was just beginning to get back to DC. No amount of rapid response, unless it was actually in Benghazi, would have saved them. As for the two CIA guys they were killed by a lucky (for the terrorists) mortar round.. All of the military response in the world would not have changed that.
The Allies had 5000 ships off of Normandy and total air superiority and 4k men still died on D-day. Bad stuff happens in war or these types of attacks.
I remember a line from MASH – Col Blake tells Hawkeye that there are two rules to war: 1.young men die and 2. doctors can’t change rule 1. Well neither can Obama.
After the Civil War, whenever a politician wanted to stir up the crowd he would ‘wave the bloody shirt’. well that is exactly what the GOP is doing. They don’t give two hoots about the 4 men who died or their families
jwest
@Chyron HR:
I hadn’t thought about it, but if Mitt Romney does end up as president, this Benghazi issue will probably play a big part.
Ruckus
Is this poke an idiot with a stick day and I missed the memo?
Mike G
A direct quote from Lindsey Graham —
“I’m the biggest scumbag in America”
Nothing is important to the GOP unless it can be exploited for money or political advantage. A big part of failing to stop 9/11 was the Bush Assministration treating national defense as a patronage scheme and focusing on Star Wars because there was more profit in it for their cronies. Anti-terrorism bored them and had no political angle, so they couldn’t be bothered with it (plus it was one of the Clenis’s leading issues, so it had Democrat cooties).
Then after 9/11 they ginned up Iraqi involvement because their contractors could cash in big time on an invasion of that country.
Why these clowns are trusted to manage anything ever again is beyond me.
Chyron HR
@jwest:
Well, that and the secret “White Horse Prophecy” that foretold his coronation as Emperor of America.
eyelessgame
@SatanicPanic:
Because that worked out so well for us in 2000? The Republicans impeached a Democratic president, and two years later, with a budget surplus, firm and respected peace, and eight years of unprecedented prosperity, they won the White House with one of the least impressive candidates in history.
I want someone to tell me why it’s going to be different this time. “The voters are smarter now” seems a little thin to hang my hopes on.
Keith G
So the House is putting together a select committee to investigate. This will be a very good thing for the Administration. All the West Wing has to do is get its act together, be careful, and tell the truth and this will put a final nail in the story. The problem with what the Republicans have done here (from a wingnut point of view) is that they have created an exit strategy for the White House – one they’ll be successful with if the White House plays its cards right.
LAC
@D58826:I agree. It is slimy and an insult to the four who died and their families. Sadly, corpse dancing is what the GOP does best. They have been digging up and dancing with Reagan’s corpse for a while now.
I see now that speaker Bourbon is announcing some super special committee on BENGAZI !!!! Guess it beats responding to the latest jobs report.
D58826
@Keith G:
Thisf rom the leader of the House that snoozed thru 6 years of Bush mismanagement in Iraq and 9_11.
jwest
@Keith G:
“All the West Wing has to do is get its act together, be careful, and tell the truth …”
They’ve tried every other approach, so this might not be a crazy as it seems.
Keith G
@D58826: I know this is a rather fabulous gripe, but it really doesn’t matter what happened 8 years ago. Let’s concentrate on the here and now.
Again, if this White House has done the right thing and I believe it has, then they will come out of this okay and then the story will be over. And it will be over before Hilary announces her candidacy. That is why this is sort of a mistake on the part of the GOP.
Patrick
@jwest:
According to FoxNews…
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@jwest:
Since you guys are still whining about “Hanoi Jane” Fonda, probably not. Once you get a conspiracy between your teeth, you never let it go no matter how ridiculous it makes you look to everyone else.
Ruckus
@Keith G:
It’s been reasonably explained several times over. And I don’t just mean on this thread. And it hasn’t been let go of yet while all the time there is nothing there. That is precisely the reason they won’t let go, there is nothing there. It’s a perfect conspiracy theory because it can be spun and spun and all anyone with a lick of sense can say is, there is no there there. Because of course there isn’t. So all the denials get idiots back to the same place, yelling at their own shadows.
Gravenstone
@jwest: And unless and until the Republicans hold 67 Senate seats (or 66 and the Vice Presidency) there will not be ONE Obama veto overridden. Even if EVERY Democratic seat being contested in 2014 were lost, that threshold would not be reached. So fuck the filibuster.
D58826
I guess what I find most depressing about this whole thing is the idea, sometimes hinted at but more often stated out loud, that the President, any president, would stand by and do nothing to rescue endangered Americans if it was in his power to do so. This idea that Obama knowingly and willfully let these people die is what the ‘stand down order’ is all about. I did not like either Bush or Reagan but would not believe that they would do such a thing. They made mistakes that cost lives but that is part of being president. You don’t always get it right. Sometimes there is nothing that can be done as in the opening days of WWII in the Philippines. But it’s not just Obama that is guilty in the GOP’s eyes. There is Hillary, Biden, Panetta, surely the joint chiefs, the heads of the intelligence agencies, all must be involved in this willful act of murder.
Mart
CBS transcript 9/16/12:
BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?
SUSAN RICE: Well, we’ll have to find out that out. I mean I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.
Villago Delenda Est
@Mart: That’s an honest assessment of what was known at the time.
Some hotheads took advantage of the situation. If they were part of the global jihadist conspiracy that is out to make shithead Americans look more shitheaded has not been adequately determined, because these guys are so good they leave absolutely no trace of their activities, it’s as if they were never even involved in the first place, but damn it, we know they were because reasons and shit.
Besides, Obama is a Kenyan agent! We know this for FACT!
Epicurus
@C.V. Danes: Not really. The President will still have veto power, and it takes a 2/3rds vote in BOTH houses to override. We will still have enough to stop most of the damage, but the President and his entire Administration will be forced to waste lots of time responding to subpoenas. It won’t be pretty, but it’s not the end of the world. Now, if we fail to hold the WH in 2016, then I’m leaving the country.
vtr
If the president really wanted to divert attention from Benghazi, he could ordered the Marines to invade Granada to evacuate the medical students being threatened by Cubans.
Villago Delenda Est
@vtr: No one would ever fall for a ploy like that.
different-church-lady
@jwest:
You, sir, are an idiot.