source: @Catballou
Previous Post:
Benghazi Been-There-Done-That
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Frankly, had I been in the job at the time, I think my decisions would have been just as theirs were. We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible.
(he would not have) approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances.
. . . It's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces. The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that.
~
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates
We've got a whole bunch of people in the State Department who consistently say, 'You know what, I'm willing to step up, I'm willing to put myself in harm's way because I think that this mission is important in terms of serving the United States and advancing our interests around the globe.'
And so we dishonor them when we turn things like this into a political circus.
The whole thing defies logic, and the fact that this keeps getting churned out, frankly has a lot to do with political motivations.
. . . And suddenly, three days ago, this gets spun up as if there's something new to the story. There's no there there.
. . . Who executes some kind of cover up for three days?
~
President Obama
Dead and circuses: Clown-in-chief Obama calls Benghazi talking points a “sideshow"
~
Headline from Michelle Malkin
Hillary Clinton’s not a target. President Obama’s not a target. The target is how did we fail three different ways, fail to heed the warnings of an impending attack, fail to respond properly during the attack? At least-- we certainly could have done better and I think everyone knows that. And then failed to get the truth to the American people at a timely fashion.
~
Darrell Issa, R-CA, to David Gregory on Meet the Press, Sunday May 12
More from the Meet the Press Transcript:
GREGORY: And isn’t this Congress’s job to spend the money to beef up security?
REP. ISSA: David, I-- well, first of all, money is spent by the-- the secretary of state and her people. We appropriate the money. I have spent over 12 years both on the Intelligence Committee and on the Foreign Affairs Committee and now on the Oversight Committee. I visited countless embassies and consulates. I’ve seen both behind the scenes on the Intelligence Committee and the overt actions of what we do. And we do a great deal. And we do it well. But in areas of high risk, in areas like North Africa and for that matter, Sub-Saharan Africa, we’re not really prepared for the kind of-- of attacks we’re getting. We haven’t been since the-- the two bombings of our embassies and then the Cole. So can we do better? Yes. Must we do better? Yes.
(snip)
GREGORY: But do you need a select committee on-- on something like this? Something like (Unintelligible) or is your-- your investigation sufficient here?
REP. ISSA: You know, let’s not blow things out of proportion. This is a failure, it needs to be investigated. Our committee can investigate. Now, Ambassador Pickering, his people and he refused to come before our committee that…
AMB. THOMAS PICKERING (Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs/Chair, Accountability Review Board on Benghazi): That is not true.
GREGORY: All right. We’re-- we’re going to get to Ambassador Pickering.
REP. ISSA: We have-- we have it in-- we have it in writing, we have White House correspondence. It may not have been the Ambassador’s decision but it was the White House decision. That has been reversed. We’re inviting him on Monday along with Admiral Mullen to come, to go through, with his papers, a private deposition so we can get the facts in a nonpartisan way.
GREGORY: Right.
REP. ISSA: We’ll have Republicans and Democratic…
GREGORY: Well, all right. Ambassador Pickering, you-- you just jumped in here. You’re willing to appear?
AMB. PICKERING: Of course. I’ve said the day before the hearings, I was willing to appear to come to the very hearings that he disclu-- he excluded me from. The White House told me back that he said…
REP. ISSA: One second. Please-- please don’t tell me I excluded you.
AMB. PICKERING: Well, the-- the majority was-- we were told the majority said I was not welcomed at that hearing. I could come at some other time.
REP. ISSA: Well, as-- as the ambassador just said, the day before the hearing, if the White House said we’d like to have him, there’s a procedure. He could have been the Democratic witness. And we would have allowed him. The Democrats requested no witness. The fact is, we don’t want to have some sort of a stage show. We had fact witnesses. They testified. We have the Ambassador and-- and Admiral Mullen who conducted and oversaw the ARB. We’re inviting them on Monday. We’ll go through, not in front of the public but-- but in a nonpartisan way questions and answers and then obviously…
GREGORY: All right.
REP. ISSA: …a hearing to follow at an appropriate time. I’m delighted to have a long-serving career diplomat willing to come before us. I don’t think it was his decision to say no. But we were told no until just before the hearing
I’ve been watching it for the last four days getting bigger and bigger and even some of our liberal friends are sort of saying this is really bad. Between this (IRA scandal) and Benghazi, Benghazi — had this come out like this before the election, you could have had a different result.
~
Donald Trump
SCANDAL!!!
There will be hell toupee...
-Trump
~
John Q. Public on Politico
The IRS is the greatest scandal this nation has ever faced since Benghazi, which was the greatest scandal this nation had ever faced since Fast and Furious, which was the greatest scandal this nation had ever faced since.....choose your favorite right wing talking point.
~
Leftturn on Politico
Well since Trump has used up his entire vocabulary it must be legit. But seriously isn't this the exact same thing he said about finding evidence in Hawaii about Obama's birth certificate?
~
Billy on Politico
Why did Stevens take the 400-mile trip up to the tiny outpost in Benghazi, KNOWING it could not be defended, KNOWING there had been Al-Qaeda related activity there for months, KNOWING there was unrest in all Muslim countries, knowing he only had a couple mercenaries as a detail? Who decided that?
~
Wellstone on Politico
From the very beginning, Speaker Boehner has said that the American people deserve the truth about Benghazi, and that Congress has a responsibility to provide effective, vigorous and responsible oversight.
~
Ex-RNC Chairman Michael Steele
The truth shouldn't be hidden from the American people behind a White House firewall. Four Americans lost their lives in this terrorist attack. Congress will continue to investigate this issue, using all of the resources at our disposal.
~
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio
In March, Boehner, according to a senior administration official, was invited to a White House-arranged briefing where the emails and other Benghazi-related material could be privately reviewed. Bohener did not attend; he sent staff, who attended with other House Republicans.
~
Mother Jones
So Congress has had the talking points and how they were changed and by whom for a couple months now, showing the revisions, showing how they happened.
ABC published them today for the public as if they were a smoking gun, and all the Republicans in Congress who already had these things and have had them for months reported to be outraged by what was in them, shocked, , impeach, impeach!
They have had them for two and a half months now, and they never said anything about them before. Just today they decided it was a smoking gun, even though this has been long answered.
~
Rachel Maddow, via The Political Carnival
.
