Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive!
– Sir Walter Scott
Just how stupid is the White House press?
Just how sycophantic is the White House press?
We are about to discover the answers to those questions soon.
It’s very clear now that the White House orchestrated the big lie about Benghazi- that the attacks were the result of a video. It’s the bullsh*t coming out of the mouth of Jay Carney that leaves you incredulous.
Yesterday the White House defended the Benghazi emails:
The Obama administration Wednesday said recently released emails on the 2012 Benghazi attacks reflected what officials “understood to be the facts at the time.”
“In the email [deputy national security adviser Ben] Rhodes makes clear that our primary goals included making sure our people in the field were protected and bringing those responsible for the attacks to justice,” Bernadette Meehan, National Security Council spokeswoman, said in a statement. “The content reflects what the administration was saying at the time and what we understood to be the facts at the time.”
No it’s not, but we’ll revisit that again soon.
And on the very same day Jay Carney said those emails that they had insisted were about Benghazi weren’t ever about Benghazi at all:
“The email and the talking points were not about Benghazi,” Carney said. “They were about the general situation in the Muslim world.”
Again- on the same day, Bernadette Meehan, National Security Council spokeswoman:
“In the email [deputy national security adviser Ben] Rhodes makes clear that our primary goals included making sure our people in the field were protected and bringing those responsible for the attacks to justice,”
To his credit, Jonathan Karl took Carney on about this:
video via Mediaite
You’ll want to watch the entire video. It’s both infuriating and amusing.
Carney lies, repeatedly. He says it was the “best information we had at the time” but that is an absolute, outright lie.
And we’ll visit that very soon.
When MSNBC says “gee, you know, there is something to this Benghazi thing, you know the White House has a problem.
After months of denying any politicization of the Benghazi talking points, Wagner felt compelled to agree. “And isn’t there something to be said about just wearing the scarlet letter?” she said smilingly. “As Glenn points out, this was a few weeks before a presidential election.”
“Yes, there was a practical reality that this was happening six weeks before an election,” she noted, “and also any administration wants to convey control.”
Indeed. And within in that statement are the grounds for impeachment. The press knows it has been lied to and it’s on record. Let’s see if they pursue this properly.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
john
there has been many pick from OBAMA
in the school yard, not in the school
With the repeal Obamacare mantra (the GOP’s one and only objective, their sole purpose of governance)obviously biting them hard in the ass, it only stands to reason that in their desperation, there’s nothing like relying on the fake scandal “Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi” for plan B.
Naturally, Fox “if it doesn’t say Benghazi, it ain’t news” News is there to cheer-lead the scam.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Congratulations, RJW; you just make Lemming of the Year.
Ronald J Ward
DUDE,
get use to it, we are not done,
BENGHAZI, THAT IS WHERE 4 AMERICANS , WHERE LEFT TO DIE BY THEIR COUNTRY,
you come here to spit, they are silent, because people like you said , it’s fake,
@Ronald J. Ward:
The Collective really doesn’t allow you to think for yourself, does it?
@john:
You, Sir, are far too ignorant to be allowed to vote if you actually believe the garbage propaganda you just spewed. The kneejerk leftist defense of the current administration’s blatant deceit in covering up the lies surrounding the Obama/Clinton/Rice et al handling of Benghazi resulted in 4 American deaths. By your logic, Nixon should not have resigned.
Bush did not lie about Iraq and Afghanistan. Need we point out, yet again, that even Clinton believed Saddam had WMD, and furthermore those of us who went there actually did find such evidence…you leftists refuse to accept dual use technology designed by the soviets for the express purpose of hiding nerve agent by storing it as “organophosphate pesticides” exists and was discovered in Iraq. Or do you really believe that miles and miles of ammo storage bunkers, surrounded by guard towers and razor wire fences is an appropriate method for storing pesticides?
Since when is it acceptable for the politicians we elect to serve to lie to us?
@Ronald J. Ward:
RJW, you did notice that the GOP senate candidate from Oregon – a pediatric neurosurgeon – is neck and neck with the Incumbent dem senator in the latest polling.
In deep blue hippie granola head OREGON.
She is running on repealing obamacare.
Benghazi is not a distraction from obamacare. It is an additional example of democrat dishonesty and malfeasance, and both will figure prominently in this campaign season. We will see who wins as a result.
You got nothing but your Benghazi binkies, wingnuts.
Please Don’t Read This Benghazi Article
May 2, 2014
Despite the fact that nothing new has been learned in months, the Benghazi story is back. Again. And less substantive than ever.
http://thinkprogress.org/world…
@Pete: I’ll agree that we’ll see who wins but that “as a result” will be as interpretable as your fake scandals.
I guess they faked their own deaths….right?
@Ronald J. Ward:
How will the results of the 2014 election be “uninterpretable”? Either the dems will hold the senate and make gains in the house, in which case the interpretation is that a majority of voters support a leftist tilt, including keeping obamacare and higher taxes, and that IRS gate, Benghazi and Fast & Furious were “phony scandals” – or the republicans will make gains in the house and senate (perhaps even taking control) in which case the interpretation will be that voters reject obamacare, want the economy fixed, and find merit to the claims of Obama administration scandals. The only conceivable result that would be uninterpretable would be for neither party to gain significant seats away from the other.
@Pete:
You have to understand RJW is the epitome of the term “useful idiot”. He’s no different than a brat kid of wealthy parents who attends a tony university and who believes Marxism is the answer to all the world’s ills. Even today, you will see useful idiots on college campuses sporting their Che’ t-shirts inspite of the fact that Che’ Guevara has been exposed as nothing more than a sadistic terrorist.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You’re a piece of garbage.
@DrJohn: #16,
Dr.J,
I actually think that Jarrett manipulated this whole thing — trying to smuggle the Quadafi arms to Syria, and Stevens was just a hapless gofer in that process who was evidently expendable to Jarrett and this Administration. They were a bunch of goofs playing at military games and didn’t take necessary precautions. Now they have to lie. My sense is also that Jarrett didn’t want Obama involved, and that she barely involved Clinton. I doubt she really kept Clinton properly informed on purpose (I don’t think she’s got any use for her) which wouldn’t have been too hard to do. BUT NOW, Jarrett is going to make sure that Clinton eats Benghazi. Jarrett has other plans for a candidate in 2016 and it ain’t Clinton.
IMHO, the rest of the goofs involved at State, CIA and Military, are too scared shitless to say a word. They’re all afraid of Jarrett.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Ron
What about this is fake? You really believe it’s not a scandal when the President of the United States lies through his teeth about the death of a US ambassador in order to save his re-election? If you don’t think this is a scandal then surely you feel Nixon was wronged.
@James Raider:
Interesting take. I don’t mind if they eat their own. The odd thing is HRC was awol with this. They sent Susan Rice out to do the Sunday shows. HRC should have been front and center, this was her people under her jurisdiction. She’s just another example of the “peter principle” in action.
@DrJohn:
For starters DJ, you’ve pretty much taken top honors on fake arguments. You consistently use bias polling, cherry picked quotes, evasiveness of reality, and manipulated data in order to justify your obvious hatred towards Obama and to anyone that doesn’t march lockstep to your unhinged mindset. I find it rich for you now to challenge me on what’s fake or what’s to be believed. And what good could it possibly do with your consistent strategy of singing “la la la” to relevant arguments while bringing in your calvary of kibitzing sockpuppets to spin and turn constructive arguments into your usual rubber/glue conclusions. When the arguments of you and/or your cohorts are challenged, you simply change dialog to diatribe or you just invent a new argument out of thin air, claim victory to your new fabricated argument, and then dismiss your opponent with contempt. You are indeed the face of dishonesty and fake arguments.
Your above argument ignores the fact that it was indeed the GOP presidential nominee who first ignorantly exploited Benghazi for political gain, prematurely shooting from the hip by dishonestly distorting facts.
It ignores that such casualties, while unfortunate, are not uncommon as we saw 14 similar Embassy attracts under GWB and over 40 in the past 40 years. It ignores the reality that the only real difference in this particular case is that Hillary Clinton happened to be Sec of State AND a very strong 2016 presidential candidate.
Your argument also ignores almost 2 years of investigations by the State Department Accountability Review Board, the Senate Armed Services Committee, the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the House Armed Services Committee, the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Everything that came out in the emails was already known, already investigated, and already been dismissed.
You ignore the very timing and politics at hand, the Obamacare approval is up and the likelihood of repeal is down-something the GOP has pretty much bet the farm on. It comes at a time of positive jobs numbers while the GOP holds firm to their unpopular anti-worker policies. So in their state of panic and disarray, it stands to reason that they once again bang the Benghazi drum, even prompting GOP leaders to create some new investigation committee and subpoena John Kerry.
Also ignored is that Fox News actually pulled away from a Presidential press release because nothing was being said about Benghazi.
Benghazi is no more than a conspiracy from the right, a fake scandal, the right exploiting the deaths of Americans in order to help them politically, regardless of the dishonesty of that.
And you Dr John, along with your band of cloned merry men, are no more than a political hack and an argumentative fraud.
Ronald J Ward
AND WHAT ARE YOU?
JUST A MISERABLE THROL, TRYING TO MAKE OTHER FEEL BAD,
WHEN THEY SHOW TO BE BIGGER THAN YOU WILL EVER BE,
YOU ARE THE COPYCAT OF THE OTHER YOU LIKE TO SELL AND
PROTECT, WHO LACK SO MANY ATTRIBUTS AND ARE UNWORTHY TO EVEN BE PART OF THIS NATION ELITES,
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Well Bees, I will confess that it’s indeed hard to argue with that.
Perhaps if you could put that in a coherent form, I could possibly give an educated rebuttal. Until then, I’ll concede. Victory is yours.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Yet, the SDARB never interviewed Hillary Clinton, although she was head of State at the time? Kinda like having Eric Holder investigating Eric Holder.
So while you have determined that Benghazi is a “nothing burger” although four Americans were brutally slaughtered by radical Islamists, I bet you were screaming “Impeach” over Valerie Plame.
You put up a good fight for The Won, RJW, only trouble is the facts are proving to not be on your side. What a pathetic little man you are that you can so easily dismiss the willful neglect on the part of this current Administration in trying to save those Americans in Benghazi. You should command nothing but disgust from any rational thinking person.
Ronald J Ward
and you”re not suppose to use the CAP,
I alone own it
@retire05: The facts are not on my side because??? Because I’m a “pathetic little man” or, or, or some of such illogical justification of abject stupidity?
You not only serve as a reminder of why I dismissed you as a distracting troll but you validate my above argument that you are one as well.
And if it was im my power to impeach anyone, it would be Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. But that’s a different agrument.
@Ronald J. Ward:
The facts are not on your side simply because as more and more information comes out on the Administration’s handling of Benghazi, it is clearly wandering into Watergate-type lies territory. You know it; Bob Beckel knows it and that’s why he lost it big time on TV yesterday. So why don’t you tell us where the “video” meme originated? Or where the President was during the Benghazi attack? Or how about the fact that the attack began at 3:40 p.m. D.C. time but the President was not notified until an already scheduled meeting with Leon Panetta at 5-5:30 p.m. D. C. time, almost 2 hours later? Maybe you would like to explain why, after speaking with Gregory Hicks and learning that the Benghazi attack was a pre-planned military action, Hillary Clinton blamed it on a YouTube video just 8 minutes later (NY Times time frame)? Or why, when Obama knew that he had Americans at high risk, he spent an hour on the phone trying to patch things up with Benjamin Netanyahu due to the flack Obama was catching from the American Jewish community over his disgraceful conduct toward the PM of Israel? When Obama was on the phone with Netanyahu for an hour, who was giving the orders regarding Benghazi as the battle raged on and Americans were dying?
Oh, and there is much, much more that a pathetic little man like you will ignore in order to defend the Marxist in Chief.
As to using the term “troll” against anyone who dares to show you up for the fool you are, I suggest you learn what the true meaning of an internet troll is. It is you.
Get back to us when you have the answers, and not just spin, on the questions above.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Yo
And the moon is really made of green cheese. How do I know? Because I say so, and that holds the same amount of credibility as you calling someone a troll.
@retire05: I am confused. How is he useful? He can not even provide a case for the lefties? He is an oxygen thief who continues to generate CO2.
This one
ON YOUR 19
I always think of your next choice of words when i use the caps,
expecting your comment full of spit,
Hillary always had running for president on her radar.
As a result she could NOT go out an KNOWINGLY lie 5 times on 5 Sunday news shows in one day.
So, a person who had a level of deniablity had to be the front person.
That turned out t be Susan Rice.
Her deniability was not plausible.
And, now that the Rhodes’ email is out, the stink goes right up to the White House, bypassing Hillary.
Hillary can make some lame claim that she forgot about the terrorist part of the evening, just conflating it with riots in Egypt and elsewhere.
IF the media plays this narrative correctly she might even get away with it.
But Mona Charon has a piece up that points out how unlike a demonstration Benghazi’s evening was:
We need to remember this.
The media, in the tank for Hillary, will try to bury this fact of history with revisionism.
Nanny G
i know now , what one of the attacker told one guard,
HE SAID , GET LOST,
and it did work well, WE SAW THE GUY RUNNING AWAY as fast as he could,
INSTANTLY,
@Ronald J. Ward:
I asked a polite question and I got a barrage of tangential ad hominem bullshit. I will again remind you that you are a guest but I will have no further interactions with you.
@Nanny G:
The “Cairo” excuse doesn’t hold water, either. It seems that Nic Robertson, of CNN, interviewed the protestors in Cairo that day, including the brother of the Blind Sheik. Not one word was spoken about a “video” being the catalyst for the protest. Instead, the protest was a demand for the release of the Blind Sheik.
The whole “video” meme was created in some White House think tank by people who use the term “dude” and look like the people in the movie Avatar.
@DrJohn: You did in fact ask a polite question (albeit redundant and debunked on several occasions) which you did in fact receive a detailed response.
The Benghazi attacks from the right have come up short by the long list of hearing committees which I listed. These new emails offer nothing new and again, have already been addressed. The charges from the right are inconsistent with the long history of embassy and consulate attacks the U.S. has endured (which in previous arguments I’ve even detailed). The howl from the GOP is an obvious distraction from the important wishes of today’s voters-which conflicts with the wishes (demands from corporate donors) of today’s GOP. The Benghazi mantra wouldn’t even exist if Hillary wasn’t a big name in the 2016 elections.
The fact that you prefer to run from that is indeed understandable. I honestly don’t fault you for that. But when you ask silly questions like “What about this is fake?”, well, you did ask, politely or otherwise.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Spin that lie all you want, RJW, but the truth of the matter is that the emails obtained by Judicial Watch under a FOIA were NOT released previously to the Congressional committee although they were requested.
If it is all out in the open, why don’t you answer the questions I posed to you in #73?
Here’s another question for you; the first State email re: Benghazi went out at 4:05 p.m. Why did Obama not meet with anyone (Panetta and Casey) until he pre-scheduled time of 5:30 p.m.? And why did Pete Rouse, Council to the President, meet with Chuck Schumer and two of Schumer’s lackeys at 5:30 p.m.?
@Ronald J. Ward: “These new emails offer nothing new ” True. Anyone that can draw a conclusion from evidence knew all along that the administration lied about the video. It was a weak and adolescent an excuse as anyone could have possibly concocted.
The noteworthy aspect of all those other embassy attacks is that none of the investigations were stonewalled. In fact, even during the 9/11 hearings and investigations, the only subterfuge was Clinton sending Sandy Berger to fill his underwear with documents out of the National Archives. It seems the left is all about fearing the revelations of facts.
it’s because they know they are doing something wrong,
@Bill Burris: From your very admission, the recent emails in question offer nothing new.
And yes, conclusions have indeed been made. But what conclusion hold merit? Those from right wing Obama hating sites like this? Bigoted right wing commentors of the likes of those here?
How about those I mentioned like the State Department Accountability Review Board, the Senate Armed Services Committee, the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the House Armed Services Committee, the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, and the House Committee on Foreign Affair? Now, those in bold are from the House of Representatives which is presided over by a Republican majority.
One of reasonable intellect can quickly deduce that if this very same evidence which you admit to be old hat didn’t fly in those committees, nothing has changed.
The only thing that has in fact changed is the urgent need for the GOP to take the electorate’s eyes off of the improving job numbers, the increasing approval of Obamacare, and the continued corporate kowtowing of the GOP who have come up short in any form of job creating legislation, failed to offer any health care alternatives, and have turned their backs on the unemployed and those struggling to earn a decent pay check for their services.
And that urgency demands a repeated flogging of that Benghazi dead horse, which you admit has already been hashed out.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Right; the fact that a smaller percentage of Americans are even in the work force, at levels not seen since 1978 and the days of Carter, is an improvement in the minds of brain dead liberals such as yourself.
Ummm, according to RCP it is disapproval 51%/approval 40%, about what it was at the end of 2009.
You are truly delusional, RJW. Now, we’re still waiting for you to answer my questions in post #73, but being the little coward you are, I fear we have a long wait.
@Ronald J. Ward:
No dead horse, RJW, just four dead Americans that you liberals could not care less about. Just collateral damage in the effort to protect the re-election of the Marxist in Chief.
@Ronald J. Ward:
RJW, the problem with continuing to say all these previous investigations on Benghazi “didn’t find anything” leaves out the fact that the Obama administration has been stonewalling all the investigations. The email from Rhodes clearly shows it was not due to the video, and that it was not a spontaneous protest and the administration KNEW it immediately. Due to the pending election they chose to lie about it to the American people to avoid such damning information from affecting the election negatively for Obama. This was an egregious lie, and an extremely dishonest attempt for the last 18 months at a cover up.
Let us try a little thought exercise….if the brother of the head of Fox News had been a political advisor/handler for Bush, and had written an email putting out talking points for Condoleeza Rice to go out onto 5 network talk shows to make the knowingly false claim that a terrorist attack against a US consulate which resulted in the deaths of 4 Americans – including the US Ambassador – was actually a “spontaneous protest” incited by a video not seen in the involved part of the world, and furthermore that no US military force was ordered to attempt a rescue for over 7 hours, and that the Ambassador’s repeated requests for increased security had been repeatedly denied by the State Dept for months prior to the attack, would you have such apathy regarding this clear dereliction of duty and the subsequent cover up?
@Ronald J. Ward: So, since you concur with my (and other’s) original assertion that Obama had concocted a silly lie to cover his campaign proclamations that he was whipping al Qaeda, you must have been aware all along that Obama and his henchmen were lying all along, dishonoring the deaths of the Americans they sacrificed.
Indeed, it was pretty obvious what happened very early on; before Susan Rice performed her lie-a-thon for Obama. What was needed was PROOF; something all the left defended Obama IN SPITE OF. Little by little, metered by the stonewalling of the administration, evidence and linkage leaked out. The last shoe to drop are these latest emails.
They are but definitive proof of what we already knew. Obama was lying. Hillary was lying. Dog bites man. No big news.
And, you knew it all along as well.
How can an investigation draw proven conclusions without the evidence? When the administration denies the access to the evidence or will not interview pertinent witnesses, how can an investigation conclude? The length of this scandal is no fault but of the Obama administration.
And RJW, please notice that I am not attacking you in ad hominem fashion, as I do not believe that someone who was once an active duty marine is arguing in a deliberately dishonest manner. My ire is completely directed at an administration that allowed two of our brothers in arms, our ambassador, and another US state department civilian to be murdered by a bunch of terrorist thugs, and then LIED about the situation for purely political reasons.
That does not mean that I am not frustrated by your continued disavowal of the Obama administration’s malfeasance on the matter…..
@Pete:
I have two words for you: John Murtha
If that is not enough, try these two words: John Kerry
@retire05:
I would agree with you regarding both Kerry and Murtha – based on the things both of those dishonest and disreputable men said and DID in their political careers. But I would argue that those of us average citizens who are not in positions of political power should not be so quick to engage in internecine disparagement amongst ourselves for disagreeing with each other in the absence of proof that one’s opponent is of the low, despicable character exhibited by Kerry, Murtha, both Clintons and Obama, or the deliberately ignorant trolls like This One. Say what you will about RJW’s opinions – as I know I have in my disagreements with him on almost everything – but when we choose to use internet anonimity as an excuse to immediately denigrate each other in an unnecessary fashion, it seems to me we are misdirecting our fire against fellow citizens rather than at the much more appropriate political leaders who are bringing our nation down for their personal gain. I apologize if this comes across as scolding, because Lord knows I have fired off my own heated posts in moments of angry thoughtlessness. But if we divide ourselves in such a manner without good cause, it makes us so much easier for our real enemies to manipulate and conquer us.
That should not be construed in any way to imply I want to be a doormat for those who attack conservative beliefs, nor that we should sacrifice our conservative principles just to get along – like far too many RINOs have done over the last few decades. But if we allow ourselves to devolve the debate into “I know you are, but what am I?” exchanges, and resort to sticking our tongues out at each other like Pee Wee Herman, why should we be surprised at average people hardening their leftist philosophical beliefs as they reject out of hand the valid points we are making in support of our principles? Maybe I am too naive, but I still think, unless one is dealing with a rabid, hyperpartisan leftist/commie, that we will catch more flies with honey than vinegar. In RJW’s case, though I vehemently disagree with him on pretty much everything, and he certainly espouses leftist positions, I have had exchanges with him in the past that lead me to believe he is not a disreputable individual like other leftists who post here.
Pardon the rambling…..it has been a long tough day in the NICU today.
@Pete: You make excellent points as usual and obviously put a lot of thought and time into your responses as do a lot of regulars on this site. Unfortunately you are wasting your time. Arguing with the “Collective” as Kraken refers to them is a waste of time, which is why I don’t read or respond to their bullshit anymore. You will NEVER come close to reasoning with the left. From one Iraq Vet to another, don’t waste your time. You are dealing with a cult.
@another vet:
I hear and agree with gist of your post when dealing with the leftist zealots. I guess I just want to give RJW tbe benefit of the doubt based on some other of his posts. I don’t want to lightly brand someone as despicable or just plain evil due to disagreeing with them, unless they do something truly maleficent like Obama, Lehrner, Reid, Clinton and their ilk.
Pete
I must say, you have a suitcase full of smart wisdom,
it could get you to the top seat eazy,
one great danger is you cannot under estimate the mean insights of your oponent,
they can use your gifts against you if they think you are in their way, even only once,
they are ruthless, envious, greedy, thiefs,
this is a good advice, is in it,
BYE,
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Awww, Bee. Thanks for the kind words.
@Pete: I hear where you are coming from and I used to think the same. Then when the Benghazi debacle happened the leftists on this site argued that we needed to support Obama and bomb Syria because they were using chemical weapons against women and children. The Holocaust was even evoked. All of a sudden after Putin stepped in and provided Obama an out, they hailed it as great foreign policy masterpiece. No more mention was made of getting even for the killing of the poor innocent women and children meaning they didn’t mean shit. What mattered was Obama’s political hide. Using the deaths of women and children to advance a political agenda. Can’t get much lower than that. People like that are incapable of any type of honest dialogue or debate. As for the WMD in Iraq goes, if there is some way we can make contact outside of FA (which I know there is), I’d be more than happy to send you stuff that you’d be interested in reading which supports our assertion that there was.
@Pete:
@Pete:
@Pete:
I’m finding two compelling flaws with your arguments that leads us back to the reality that it really has nothing to do with policy or even how an administration handles a situation but rather that deep seeded prejudiced (no, not necessarily race) that’s so prevalent here.
For starters, you’re automatically indicting Obama for “murdering” and then “LIED” for political reasons while exonerating previous administrations who oversaw multiple attacks. And even if your “LIED” claim had merit (which is indeed arguable) , you disregard that Obama’s opponent Mitt Romney, in a very tight race, first manipulated the attacks with distortion and lies which put Obama on offense (not a justification or an admission but even conceding your argument, in the real political world, are you really implying that campaign are honest? Would you seriously be hammering Romney today for his “LIES for political reasons” to win that race? I don’t think you would.). So I think your “ire” is more of a product of your choosing that you’ve simply calibrated in on your desired target.
To further strengthen that hypothesis, what’s all this John Murtha bashing about? Murtha was a pro-life, pro-gun, decorated veteran who had respect of both parties as a great patriot up until the time—up until the time that he opposed the Iraq invasions. Once he voiced his opinions on Iraq, that brought on the right wing attacks, the investigations, the bashings from the right wing pro-Iraq machine.
So you’re telling me your “ire” is in Obama’s actions but it sounds more like because of who he is or what party he belongs to. It’s interesting that you invoke Clinton, Reid, Murtha, etc as “despicable or just plain evil” while trying to validate your Benghazi argument. Is it because errors were more profound or because people of “despicable character” or of that “ilk” were in charge?
Is guilt or lack of contingent on how you personally like or dislike the accused? As I’ve mentioned, there has been numerous hearing and investigations on Benghazi, numerous similar attacks that didn’t draw your “ire”, and plenty of motives for today’s right wing attack machines to keep it alive. The new “smoking gun” provides nothing new. It’s no more than a propaganda tool for a party grasping for a life line and something to help energize the crazies and the ignorant.
@another vet:
Points taken, vet. I would be very interested in reading what you have. If the moderator of the blog wants to give you my email, I am happy to be contacted. It still annoys me when people who weren’t there, and who did not walk through those “pesticide” containing ammo bunkers to see how much was there will still shriek in complete denial that “there were no WMD”. I know there were many many reports of WMD being buried that were never investigated, but those I never saw. The ammo bunkers, however, I saw with my own eyes.
@Pete: The place “Randy” and I stayed in on our first tour had chemical mortar rounds “hidden” in the basement of the building which was a medical clinic meaning it wasn’t supposed to have any type of munitions stored there. Our G-2 had 18 Iraqi scientists surrender to him in Baghdad and told him where WMD was buried under a school parking lot. He reported it and the Iraqi Survey Group did nothing. My XO on my second tour died last summer from brain cancer caused by “stuff” Saddam had buried near the Iranian border where he was stationed on his first tour. I’m sure his wife would be interested in knowing how he could have died from something that didn’t exist. But like you said, those of us who were there know nothing.