CNN is reporting that a well-placed source has indicated that CIA Chief David Petraeus will ‘amend’ his previous testimony, telling Congress that he knew the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans was terrorism, and that he knew this “almost immediately”.
Just a few minutes ago on CNN, Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr reported that a high-placed source informed her that former CIA Chief David Petraeus will use his upcoming testimony to amend his previous testimony. According to this source, Petraeus will tell the closed door congressional hearing that he knew “almost immediately” that the September 11 anniversary attack on our Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack committed by the al-Qaeda-linked militia Ansar Al Sharia.
Frances Townsend, a former Homeland Security advisor to George W. Bush, who is now a CNN analyst, tweeted this out:
Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.
The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.
U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.
By ultimately, they mean several weeks later. This is definitive proof that Obama’s White House was not getting bad reports and bad intelligence from the State Department or the intelligence community, and simply relaying mis-information that a video had sparked the attack.
They knew. They knew, and they lied.
Which is precisely why GOP lawmakers have a hard time considering Susan Rice competent when she subsequently went on a whirlwind media tour five days later claiming that the attacks were a spontaneous response to an anti-Mohammad video.
Petraeus, in addition to his ‘amended’ testimony, also informed CNN’s source that “he believed the CIA talking points given to Susan Rice came from within the White House or Administration.”
Politico is also reporting on these statements from Sen. Saxby Chambliss:
Sen. Saxby Chambliss on Friday stopped short of charging that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s explanation of the attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi was a lie but said it was crafted to provide White House political talking points.
“Susan Rice was sent to give a White House message,” said Chambliss, vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “It was not an intelligence community message, and there’s a very clear distinction in that.”
“I do think that there were some politics involved in the message that the White House wanted to send,” he added.
Upon hearing President Obama’s touchy defense of Rice a couple of days ago, Charles Karuthammer had this to say:
You called at it a show of passion, I would say it was his usual show of indignation, which is his default response whenever he feels defensive or backed into a corner. ‘How dare you attack my U.N. ambassador?’ And then he gives the strangest defense by saying she didn’t have anything to do with the Benghazi [attack]. Then why the hell are you sending her out there? Why didn’t you send out the Secretary of State, or the CIA Director, or [Secretary of Defense] Panetta or somebody, who did know?
The question is rhetorical. We know that the White House, the State Department, and the CIA Director were informed that this was a terror attack almost immediately. The White House then gave Rice her talking points for the American public five days later which denied terrorism was a factor by shifting blame to a video.
Rice had one job and one job only – to lie to you, to lie to me, and to lie to the families of those that were killed that night. All because an election was right around the corner.
This is disgraceful.
A liberal Democrat from Virginia recently told a shocked audience that military veterans are not fit for duty when it comes to serving in Congress. Gerry Connolly made the comment at a neighborhood civic association meeting. (Video below)
His reasoning? Their deployments (vets) prevent them from putting “sweat equity” into the districts they represent.
Connolly then went on to favorably compare his service to country by sitting on committees, while downplaying his opponent who is a veteran, stating that he wished his opponent would honor his service as a representative.
By comparison, Connolly’s opponent, Chris Perkins, is a green beret.
Via the Las Vegas TSG Business News:
Virginia Congressman Gerry Connolly (D-11) shocked constituents by suggesting that military Veterans are unqualified to serve in Congress because their deployments prevent them from putting “sweat equity” into the districts they hope to serve in Congress.
Congressman Connolly is running against Colonel Chris Perkins, a retired officer who served most of his more than 24 years in uniform as an Army Green Beret deployed overseas. Connolly has repeatedly suggested that Perkins’ lack of local involvement because of his military career makes him unqualified to hold federal office.
In an October 22nd Washington Post interview, Connolly “dismisses Perkins as unqualified” for Congress, despite Colonel Perkins’ many leadership assignments that included command of a Special Forces Battalion of over six-hundred men, and numerous combat deployments.
While speaking to a local Chamber of Commerce a few weeks earlier, Connolly asked the audience, “Where has my opponent been” while Connolly served in local government for 16 years.
Days later at a neighborhood civic association, Congressman Connolly subsequently pressed his line of attack dismissing Colonel Perkins’ extensive military experience saying, “I expect a [Congressional] candidate to have demonstrated some sweat-equity” on local issues, ignoring the 24 years Colonel Perkins served as an Army Green Beret.
VA Congressman’s Son Caught Facilitating Voter Fraud and Forgery; UPDATE: Congressman Moran’s Son Resigns
|Congressman Jim Moran|
It was just yesterday that Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia sent a letter to Eric Holder’s Department of Justice asking him to look into allegations of voter fraud. Turns out the Congressman may want to start investigating his own son.
Patrick Moran, who also serves as Jim Moran’s campaign Field Director, has been caught in yet another revealing investigation by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas. The younger Moran is caught in the following video clip offering advice to a reporter on how to vote 100 times in Virginia, and also offers explicit instruction on how to fabricate utility bills in order comply with Virginia’s new voter ID law.
It is the first time a sitting Congressman has been implicated in one of these stings.
From Project Veritas:
Project Veritas has released a new investigation that exposes Representative Jim Moran’s Field Director, Patrick Moran, conspiring to commit election fraud.
When approached by an undercover investigator for advice on how to steal the votes of more than 100 people, Moran advised falsifying documents to satisfy Virginia’s new voter ID law. He said, “Bank statement obviously would be tough, but they can fake a utility bill with ease.”
Moran went on to clarify that, “You’d have to forge it.”
Announcing the release, James O’Keefe said, “This is the most damning evidence to date of the scope of voter fraud in this country. Patrick Moran is not only the son of an 11-term Congressman, but is also the Field Director on his father’s re-election campaign.
“If anyone should be opposed to voter fraud it’s him. Yet he actively encouraged our investigator to forge documents and pose as a pollster to disenfranchise registered voters in Virginia, Washington, D.C. and Maryland.”
After raising legal and practical concerns, Patrick Moran, son of Virginia Democrat James Moran, encouraged the reporter to create phony utility bills that would allow others to cast multiple votes in the November 6 election.
Supporters of stronger voter ID laws seized on the video as evidence of widespread corruption among liberal get-out-the-vote organizations.
“What he’s doing is soliciting fraudulent voter registrations and fraudulent ballots, and that’s a federal crime,” said Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. “Even attempting to do that is federal crime — you don’t have to go through with it. Attempting it is a crime.”
Blogger Stacey on the Right concurs that their is some illegal activity here:
“I’m pretty sure that some laws are admitted to being broken here.”
She adds that, “the allegation that there simply isn’t voter fraud and hence no need whatsoever for laws pertaining to voter ID is so disproven”.
O’Keefe adds, “Unfortunately, what Patrick Moran doesn’t respect is the integrity of our elections. He would rather win by fraud than risk seeing the political positions of his father, Barack Obama and Tim Kaine rejected by the legitimate voters of Virginia.”
Indeed, the video is quite damning for the Moran campaign, and for Virginia Democrats in general.
Other Posts on This Topic:
Patrick Moran has resigned amid the controversy.
Patrick Moran, son of Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), resigned from his father’s campaign on Wednesday after conservative activist James O’Keefe released a video that appears to show him offering advice to an undercover videographer who claimed to want to commit voter fraud.
“Effective immediately, I have resigned from the Moran for Congress campaign,” Patrick Moran said in a statement to TPM sent from his campaign email address.
GOP Calling Gillibrand’s Bluff, Demand Proof That Her Independent Organization Has Benefited Republican Women
Yesterday, the New York GOP released the following statement in response to Senator Gillibrand’s (D-NY) appearance on MSNBC, where she claimed her “independent” organization helps women of both parties get elected:
Yesterday, on MSNBC, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand proudly touted her organization “Off the Sidelines.org” as one that works with both Democrat and Republican women alike, when in fact all proceeds of her seemingly independent organization go directly to her campaign war chest.
Last year, the Buffalo News reported on Senator Gillibrand’s “independent organization” as nothing more than a distraction. The website encouraged people to donate to her re-election campaign by leading them to believe they were supporting women’s rights. It was a duplicitous cash grab and a total misrepresentation of the group’s efforts and under pressure Senator Gillibrand admitted as much.
One year later, Senator Gillibrand is back at it, telling Alex Wagner of MSNBC that Off the Sidelines is helping both Republican and Democrat women get elected.
We call on Senator Gillibrand to identify those Republican women whom benefit, or have benefitted, from Off the Sidelines.org, or simply admit that contributions to the organization go directly to her reelection campaign, rather than to getting both Republican and Democrat women involved in the issues, as she claimed on Alex Wagner’s show yesterday.
Instead of touting bogus bipartisanship, Senator Gillibrand should focus on getting co-sponsors for any one of her stalled jobs bills or sponsor legislation to repeal Obamacare, which has raided $741 Billion from Medicare, putting our seniors at risk.
Here’s the video of Senator Gillibrand on the Alex Wagner show…
But OffTheSidelines appears to be nothing more than a gateway site and fundraising tool for the Gillibrand campaign. A disclaimer at the bottom of the page says the site is “paid for by Gillibrand for Senate.” The homepage has a prominent link to “Contribute to Gillibrand for Senate,” and another link to simply “contribute” leads to a Gillibrand for Senate contribution form.
Late last night, the Romney campaign announced that the Republican presidential candidate will be revealing his choice for running mate at 8:45 EST in Norfolk, Virginia.
Speculation has been running rampant, but most news outlets have been leaning toward the choice as Paul Ryan, the Congressman from Wisconsin.
Fox News is now reporting that a Republican source has confirmed that Ryan is the choice. The Los Angeles Times adds details on that report:
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has picked Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan to be his running mate, according to a Republican with knowledge of the development. They will appear together Saturday in Norfolk, Va., at the start of a four-state bus tour to introduce the newly minted GOP ticket to the nation.
The official spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because this person was not authorized to disclose the decision.
And now, NBC adds further confirmation with more sources:
Three different sources close to the Romney campaign indicate to NBC News that Mitt Romney will announce House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate at tomorrow’s campaign event in Norfolk, VA.
Fittingly, this morning’s announcement will be made in front of the USS Wisconsin.
Time to break out the “Hey Girl, It’s Paul Ryan” tumblr site again…
Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) recently announced his retirement after serving 10 terms in the House of Representatives. He served New York’s 22nd congressional district since 1993.
Allison Lee-Hinchey, the lobbyist wife of Congressman Maurice Hinchey, was sentenced to 60 days in jail Friday and three years probation for driving drunk with a suspended license last winter when she rear-ended another car on Lark Street.
Lee-Hinchey, 50, of Hurley, Ulster County, must report to the Albany County jail by 5 p.m. Friday and submit to an ignition interlock device — which checks whether a driver is intoxicated before it allows an car’s engine to start — on any car she drives for the duration of her probation…
… “I regret my actions,” Lee-Hinchey told the judge shortly before he meted out the punishment for her second alcohol-related conviction in less than a year. She went on to say that she would try to be “a better citizen.”
We sincerely hope Ms. Hinchey can get the help she needs in order to overcome this problem, and that the family can move on in a positive manner. We also wish Mr. Hinchey continued health in his retirement.
Multiple sources have indicated that disgraced former Congressman, Anthony Weiner, is looking to get back into the public spotlight, even mulling a run for New York City mayor.
The sources, reported by the New York Post, indicate Weiner would like to run for Mayor in 2013, before the public match on his $4.5 million war chest expires.
The Post reported the story as only they can – laced with jokes and innuendo.
Anthony Weiner’s not shrinking from elected office.
The disgraced former congressman — who’s sitting on a $4.5 million campaign war chest — is mulling a bid for citywide office next year and “seriously considering” a mayoral run, multiple sources told The Post.
The cocky pol is also open to the post of public advocate as a backup plan, said sources, who described the Queens Democrat as “desperate” to get back into politics.
Weiner, 47, has even spoken to former staffers about going back to work for him, according to another source.
Experts are indicating that he may stand a better chance of earning a public advocate position, where he could presumably lay low and cleanse his public image of a sexting scandal known as Weinergate, which resulted in his resignation from Congress in June of 2011.
As one of the sources put it, “The general feeling is that you can’t text pictures of your penis to a girl, then lie about it, then get kicked out of the House and then run for mayor right after.”
In New York, why not?
This was originally posted by the fabulously talented Maggie Thurber over at Thurber’s Thoughts. Please go visit her site…
If you rely only upon the main stream media, you’ll probably miss the latest move by President Barack Obama’s administration that effectively guts the work participation requirement for the TANF welfare program.
TANF, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, was part of the Clinton-era welfare reform in 1996 that required individuals to work or ‘prepare’ for work (training, education) in order to receive benefits. It is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services.
As the Morning Bell points out, that requirement was successful, but now the law is being gutted – and you’re paying for it (emphasis added).
This reform was very successful. TANF became the only welfare program (out of more than 70) that promoted greater self-reliance. It moved 2.8 million families off the welfare rolls and into jobs so that they were providing for themselves. Child poverty fell, and single-parent employment rose. Recipients were required to perform at least 20–30 hours per week of work or job preparation activities in exchange for the cash benefit.
Now, Obama’s HHS is claiming that it can waive those work requirements that are at the heart of the law, and without Congress’s consent.
When it established TANF, Congress deliberately exempted or shielded nearly all of the TANF program from waiver authority. They explicitly did not want the law to be rewritten at the whim of HHS bureaucrats. In a December 2001, the non-partisan Congressional Research Service clarified that there was no authority to override work and other major requirements: “Effectively, there are no TANF waivers,” it reported.
But that did not stop the Obama Administration, which has been increasing welfare spending at an alarming rate already. President Obama has added millions to the welfare rolls, and his Administration has come under fire lately for its efforts to expand and add more Americans to the food stamp program.
This is a chronic problem: Over the past two decades, welfare spending has grown more rapidly than Social Security and Medicare, education, and defense. The TANF reform was one small step in the direction of reducing Americans’ dependence on government programs and getting them back on their feet. Cutting its work component is likely to unnecessarily swell the ranks of welfare recipients and with no way to pay for it.
Scope of Authority
Section 1115 authorizes waivers concerning section 402. Accordingly, other provisions of the TANF statute are not waivable. For example, the purposes of TANF are not waivable, because they are contained in section 401. The prohibitions on assistance are not waivable, because they are contained in section 408.
While the TANF work participation requirements are contained in section 407, section 402(a)(1)(A)(iii) requires that the state plan “[e]nsure that parents and caretakers receiving assistance under the program engage in work activities in accordance with section 407.” Thus, HHS has authority to waive compliance with this 402 requirement and authorize a state to test approaches and methods other than those set forth in section 407, including definitions of work activities and engagement, specified limitations, verification procedures, and the calculation of participation rates. As described below, however, HHS will only consider approving waivers relating to the work participation requirements that make changes intended to lead to more effective means of meeting the work goals of TANF.
Here’s the logic:
* the work requirement is contained in a non-waivable section of law (407)
* a different section (402), which requires that a state plan adhere to the non-waivable section, is waivable
* therefore, HHS is waiving section 402, which requires the state plan to follow section 407
* end result: section 407 is effectively waived.
But there’s a bit of a problem with that logic, as this Foundry.org article explains:
Section 402 describes state plans—reports that state governments must file to HHS describing the actions they will undertake to comply with the many requirements established in the other sections of the TANF law. The authority to waive section 402 provides the option to waive state reporting requirements only, not to overturn the core requirements of the TANF program contained in the other sections of the TANF law.
The new Obama dictate asserts that because the work requirements, established in section 407, are mentioned as an item that state governments must report about in section 402, all the work requirements can be waived. This removes the core of the TANF program; TANF becomes a blank slate that HHS bureaucrats and liberal state bureaucrats can rewrite at will. … In a December 2001 document, “Welfare Reform Waivers and TANF,” the non-partisan Congressional Research Service clarified that the limited authority to waive state reporting requirement in section 402 does not grant authority to override work and other major requirements in the other sections of the TANF law (sections that were deliberately not listed under the section 1115 waiver authority):
Technically, there is waiver authority for TANF state plan requirement; however, [the] major TANF requirements are not in state plans. Effectively, there are no TANF waivers.
And who do you think is going to cover the cost of the expected increase in welfare rolls when people learn they won’t be required to work in order to be eligible?
The Obama administration has just ended welfare reform – and you’re going to pay for it.
Allen West, once again showing that he fears nothing in his quest to deliver truthful commentary on the state of today’s liberal Democratic party, ripped into the left’s perpetual use of the race card and stated that ‘true racism’ lies with white liberals.
West was responding to an article in the Los Angeles Times that ripped into Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus for not condemning past comments from the Congressman from Florida. The Times piece showed their true colors by referring to West as a “gaffe-ster” and a “clown prince” of outrageousness.
Apparently, the author would have preferred that Priebus refer to West in the same terms.
West’s response, in an interview with Mike Huckabee, was laced with typical verbal beatings for the left (h/t Right Scoop):
I really feel that it is demeaning to me to think that I need some individual to justify me and my existence. Look, I went through 22 years being in the military, I rose to the rank of Lt. Colonel, I have a bachelor and 2 masters degrees.
And for these white liberals to believe they can have this condescending manner toward black conservatives that we need to have approval from our quote unquote, I guess “masters”, for us to be able to speak – see that’s where the true racism really lies governor is with the white liberals who don’t want to see someone such as myself that broke away from their dependency class and is out here and able to possibly contend against them with the policies that they are promoting that’s destroying the black community.
I know I’m their #1 target and it just emboldens me to speak out even stronger. And the heck with them if they think someone else needs to approve of me and what I stand for.