It remains a mystery in my eyes, how liberals and Democrats fail to recognize that by constantly playing the race card in every possible scenario, it ends up being patronizing to the minority group that they are actually trying to defend.
Case in point – voter ID. Liberals would have you believe that getting a free photo identification from the local DMV, and making it necessary to vote in elections, would suppress the minority vote. Now, the only way you can possibly believe that statement is true, is if in your own little head, you actually believe that those minority groups are too incompetent to attain the proper identification necessary to vote. It’s the only way that statement rings true.
And now we have this…
Via Gateway Pundit:
First off, Rice’s actions amount to one of two things. She either knowingly lied about what had happened in Benghazi, or she was used as a puppet by the administration to feed the public their talking points. If she lied, then she is unfit to serve in her current post, let alone as a replacement for Hillary Clinton. If she was used to promote the administration’s lies, then they have also denigrated this African-American woman by using her as a tool rather than letting her do her job.
Second, to come to the conclusion that Rice is being attacked because she is a black woman, is to view her with a condescending level of tunnel vision. The very people that are criticizing her are doing so because they view her as Susan Rice, United States Ambassador to the United Nations. The people that are defending her do not look at her in the same manner. Instead they patronizingly view her as a poor defenseless black woman incapable of standing up to her critics or defending her position.
When Susan Rice attained the tremendous heights that she has throughout her career, do you think she’d rather have been viewed as a successful overall individual, or do you think she’d prefer to be viewed as the career product of being a poor black woman?
There couldn’t be anything less racial about the entire Benghazi cover up. And yet Democrats feel they still have to play that card. The left consistently turns race into a political ploy. If you’re a minority, don’t you feel a little bit embarrassed every time they do it?
Bill Clinton: Who Wants a President Who ‘Knowingly, Repeatedly Tells You Something He Knows Isn’t True?’
“You are laughing, but who wants a president who will knowingly, repeatedly tell you something he knows is not true? When I was a kid, if I got my hand caught in the cookie jar, where it wasn’t supposed to be, I turned red in my face, and I took my hand out of the cookie jar.”
Gingrich: Networks May Have E-mails Showing White House Explicitly Telling Counterterrorism Teams to Stand Down in Benghazi
Last night with Greta Van Susteren, Newt Gingrich made the shocking claim that news networks have access to e-mails which explicitly show the White House itself ordering counterterrorism groups to stand down and do nothing while four Americans were being killed by terrorists.
Will they be released by the media? And will any network other than Fox start covering the story more intensely? This is after all, the biggest coverup in modern Presidential history.
Via the Daily Caller:
On Tuesday night’s “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” on the Fox News Channel, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that major news networks might have secret emails proving that the White House canceled plans to assist the besieged U.S. Embassy in Benghazi. Gingrich said that the bombshell emails could be revealed within the next two days.
“There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two networks have emails from the National Security Adviser’s office telling a counterterrorism group to stand down,”
Gingrich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobilize marines and C-130s and the fighter aircraft, and they were told explicitly by the White House stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reliable U.S. senator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enormous questions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser’s role, the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoulders, that he said don’t go. And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the president said he had instructions they are supposed to do everything they could to secure American personnel.”
Here’s the video…
White House Releases Photo of Obama in Situation Room Monitoring Hurricane Sandy, Still Waiting on Picture of Him Monitoring Dead Americans in Benghazi
The White House has released this very convenient photo-op of the President actually acting like a … President. (h/t Weasel Zippers)
President Barack Obama receives an update on the ongoing response to Hurricane Sandy, in the Situation Room of the White House, Oct. 29 2012.
Of course, we’re still anxiously awaiting any pictures of the President monitoring the situation in Benghazi on September 11th, as he and his staff were able to watch the 7-hour struggle in real-time.
Charles Karuthammer earlier today noted the contrasting events.
Via the Daily Caller:
As Hurricane Sandy was approaching the Jersey Shore, President Barack Obama has suspended his campaign activities to be at the ready for the pending crisis. But on Monday’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Special Report,” Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer wasn’t convinced it wasn’t just for political imaging purposes.
Krauthammer compared Obama’s willingness to be out front on Sandy to his lack of willingness to be out front on Benghazi, which he said suggested political opportunism.
“He says he’s not concerned about the impact on the elections,” Krauthammer said. “I’m sure he’s very sincere on that. It is a little odd that he shows up in the briefing room, where he hasn’t shown up in the briefing room for about, what — a month and a half on Libya, or for everything else for that matter? Then you get the photo-ops of him in the situation room deploying, I guess, the utility crews who will restore power all over America. Whereas you would think he might want to use the situation room and had convened high-level people during the nine hours our people were under attack in Benghazi.”
Watch Krauthammer below…
The American people must force the media to cover this story. This is a Presidential scandal of epic proportions.
Earlier today we reported on the news that the SEALs in Benghazi begged for help. Begged for help and were told to “stand down” multiple times.
The PJ Tatler reports that help was not that far away. The group could have been aided by the presence of an AC-130 that was actually stationed in Benghazi.
If you don’t get torches-and-pitchforks irate about this, you are not an American:
The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.
There were two AC-130Us deployed to Libya in March as part of Operation Unified Protector.
The AC-130U is a very effective third-generation fire-support aircraft, capable of continuous and extremely accurate fire onto multiple targets. It has been used numerous times in Iraq and Afghanistan to save pinned-down allied forces, and has even been credited with the surrender of the Taliban city of Kunduz.
Torches and pitchfork irate is an understatement.
Doug Ross writes:
Benghazi-gate is spinning out of control and the Obama administration is dying right before our eyes, thanks especially to leaks that are coming fast and furious (no pun intended; oh, and here’s a helpful hint for future Democrat Presidents in the mold of Carter and Obama: throw the intel community under the bus at your own peril).
In recounting this sordid abdication of leadership (or worse), Glenn Beck stated this afternoon that, “Today, officially, is the day that I no longer recognize my country.”
And Karin McQuillan asks, “Did Obama watch while they fought for their lives?”
And just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse for President Obama, there’s this.
Via the Weekly Standard:
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
The emphasis was added here, but let’s re-read that portion again.
Who in the Government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need?
It would have been a presidential decision.
Now, watch the President do what he’s done so successfully over the last month and a half – avoid answering questions about Benghazi.
He watched them die. He watched them die and then flew to Vegas for a fundraiser.
Where is the American media? Running scared.
We watched Navy SEALs ignore orders to stand down, running directly into the fight.
Then the President abandoned them. And now the media is abandoning them again.
America, we can not abandon these brave men a third time.
The story of four Americans killed in Benghazi grows more horrifying each and every day. This should be considered perhaps the biggest scandal in Presidential history.
Does it feel like it’s brig reported as such?
Via Fox News:
Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.
Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a small team who were at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When they heard the shots fired, they radioed to inform their higher-ups to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. An hour later, they called again to headquarters and were again told to “stand down.”
Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.
At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.
Three separate requests for help.
Three separate denials.
They were told to stand down. They were left to die.
Watch the report below…
So much for reporting on the intelligence available at the time. My question – Do you not as Americans get angrier with each and every lie that comes out of the White House regarding the murder of four fellow patriots?
Does it bother you at all?
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 erroneously relaying information that a video had sparked the attack.
They knew. They knew, and they lied.
More details from Gateway Pundit:
This email was sent to State Department officials, White House officials, Secret Service officials at 6:07 PM EST on 9-11.
This was at least the third email sent to the White House the evening of 9-11 on the Benghazi attack.
Barack Obama was meeting with his security team in the Oval Office that evening.
The email clearly blamed Al-Qaeda linked group Ansar al-Sharia for the attack on the US consulate.
This was before the lifeless body of Ambassador Stevens was dragged from the consulate ruins.
A copy of the e-mail:
The United States had an unmanned Predator drone over its consulate in Benghazi during the attack that slaughtered four Americans — which should have led to a quicker military response, it was revealed yesterday.
“They stood, and they watched, and our people died,” former CIA commander Gary Berntsen told CBS News.
The network reported that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft observed the final hours of the hours-long siege on Sept. 11 — obtaining information that should have spurred swift action.
But as Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three colleagues were killed by terrorists armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, Defense Department officials were too slow to send in the troops, Berntsen said.
“They made zero adjustments in this. You find a way to make this happen,” he fumed.
“There isn’t a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments.”
The Pentagon said it moved a team of special operators from Central Europe to Sigonella, Italy — about an hour flight from Libya — but gave no other details.
Fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships — which could have been used to help disperse the bloodthirsty mob — were also stationed at three nearby bases, sources told the network.
The White House knew about it and did nothing. They watched it happening in real-time and did nothing. President Obama knew about it and went to sleep. Literally.
Republicans are responding.
Republicans are blasting the Obama administration for failing to act on real-time information that the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was under attack. Emails obtained by the news agency Reuters show that officials at the State Department were told within two hours of the attack starting that the al-Qaida-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility. Reacting to the report, former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said he was not surprised by the disclosure, telling Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren Tuesday night that “what the emails show beyond any doubt is that the State Department was fully possessed of the information in real time.” Bolton said the “paper trail” now makes it harder for the Obama administration to “sweep away” the security failure at the U.S. compound in Benghazi, in which Ambassador Chris Stephens and three other Americans were killed. On Capitol Hill, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, called for additional hearings on Libya based on the emails…
… Bolton also blamed the failure to launch an immediate military response to the attack, based on the email traffic that reportedly reached the White House situation room and the State Department, on election year politics and the administration’s reluctance to admit that al-Qaida “was resurgent in Libya.” “It undercut the [Obama campaign] storyline that the war on terror is over, al-Qaida’s on the run, the Arab spring has been a success,” Bolton said. “And that led to the denials of the request [before the attack] for security enhancement. That led to the tragedy in Benghazi. And I think that then led to this ridiculous story that it was caused by some YouTube video.” Bolton described it as “a willful blindness” to reality.
Willful blindness to reality. Does that statement apply more so to the administration, or those voters who will ignore this massive scandal come election day?
Remember when President Obama was criticizing Mitt Romney about his responsibilities at Bain Capital, even invoking Harry Truman’s ‘the buck stops here’ campaign?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Well, here’s what I know, we were just talking about responsibility and as president of the United States, it’s pretty clear to me that I’m responsible for folks who are working in the federal government and you know, Harry Truman said the buck stops with you.
Now, my understanding is that Mr. Romney attested to the SEC, multiple times, that he was the chairman, CEO and president of Bain Capital and I think most Americans figure if you are the chairman, CEO and president of a company that you are responsible for what that company does.
Ultimately Mr. Romney, I think, is going to have to answer those questions, because if he aspires to being president one of the things you learn is, you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of your operations, but again that’s probably a question that he’s going to have to answer and I think that’s a legitimate part of the campaign.
The buck stops with the President? He is ultimately responsible for the conduct of his operations?
Apparently that mantra doesn’t hold true when it comes to your administration’s conduct in dealing with the terrorist attacks in Benghazi.
Today we found out the buck doesn’t actually stop with the President, but rather it stops with Hillary Clinton.
Falling on the sword for the administration during a tough re-election bid, Clinton today told a CNN reporter “I take responsibility” for security ahead of the attacks.
“This was a purely political move to give Obama breathing room tomorrow night. That’s it.”
If the State Department had solely been responsible for the lack of security leading up to the attacks, the White House would not have consistently covered up this attack with the fabricated ‘spontaneous protest’ story.
With the economy being blamed on Bush consistently over the last four years, and now these terror attacks being blamed on Hillary, one has to wonder can anything that happens under this regime be considered Obama’s fault?
While Senate Investigates Benghazi Attacks, President Obama Talks About the Nikki Minaj/Mariah Carey Feud
Well, at least he has his priorities straight.
Late last week, and just over three weeks away from Election Day, the bipartisan US Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee announced it would launch an official investigation into the terrorist murders of 4 Americans, including a US Ambassador, in Benghazi.
Via Roll Call:
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee announced late Friday that it will investigate the events surrounding the death of four Americans in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador.
Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and ranking member Susan Collins (R-Maine) made the announcement in a joint statement.
“We intend to examine the circumstances before, during, and after the attack, including threat awareness, U.S. security needs for diplomatic personnel in Benghazi and Libya, and communications among the intelligence community, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the White House,” Lieberman and Collins said.
An early story line suggested the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sept. 11 of this year that took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was caused by a riot over an anti-Muslim video, but that has fallen apart. And various administration officials have given different accounts about what happened.
Since the Sept. 11, however, it has become clear that there were requests to bolster security in the country that went unmet before the consulate was attacked. Most officials now acknowledge it was a planned terrorist attack on the consulate.
Considering his administration is being accused of a cover up, you’d think this would be a significant priority on the President’s agenda.
But here’s where Obama’s priorities lie instead…
Earlier today, President Obama called into Y100s Michael YO! Show, where he weighed in on a very serious topic plaguing the pop world – the American Idol fight between judges Mariah Carey and Nicki Minaj. What better person to give their opinion on the American Idol spat, other than the top American himself.
The president told Y100 that he believes that the two can work out their differences. When asked how Obama thinks he would do on the reality show, he confessed that he thinks hell stick to his day job.
So the President didn’t have time to attend his security briefings prior to the attack on 9/11, but now that four Americans are dead he has decided to free up some time … to call into a local radio show?
Here is the interview…
Democrats for some reason seem to think that the singular act of killing Osama bin Laden equates to a successful foreign policy.
Problem is, the President’s other foreign policy tactics – disarming our Marines, creating a policy of ‘courageous restraint’, negotiating with the Taliban by releasing their commanders in exchange for a “promise” of peace talks, and failing to provide adequate security to our consulate buildings – demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of world events.
There is real concern over the President’s weak foreign policy.
On CNN’s The Situation Room yesterday Democratic Rep. Donna Edwards joined Stephanie Cutter and Team Obama in dismissing real concerns over Libya.
Watch as she first admonishes that we must “take the politics out of this,” then drops this bomb:
“…what voters care about, they may not care about Benghazi, but they care about Bin Laden.”