But no coverage at Cavuto or The Five. IOW's Fox has given there best shot showing the hearing but believe the Dem talking point that there is no smoking gun. So now the Five go to a News Alert regarding the Arias verdict.
Geez. I give up.
No one except Chaffetz and Gowdy seems to give a s**t.
Will this incompetence and corruption in a cover up now be considered acceptable? It is incontrovertible that Obama lied again and again to save his election. Is that irrelevant? Can this be the new normal?
The coverage of this hearing by the MSM, Fox News included, disgusts me. There is no integrity left in the press. What good does freedom of the press do when there is no press or if the press only covers the blunders of one side of the political spectrum?
MARKO:I share your pain over this. I can hardly believe what has happened. To date -No terrorists have been found, Rice delayed FBI involvement with her lies, and we still don't know who gave the stand down order.
On PJ Media someone commented on this contrast of images: A Navy Seal with a wounded comrade strapped to his back in the middle of the night ,trying to save him and Obama snoring away inhis bed getting ready to campaign ind raise mov
ney in Vegas.
Impeachment is too good for him. Get the tar and feathers out.
TK; They are one and the same. And you answered my question on the previous post. They never check his eligibility or his real background. he hid those where no one can touch them. Thank God he is now term limited.
That is my great fear. Every horrible thing about Obama is designed to, among other things, bring the bar so permanently low that in time the country will not remember how things used to be and to what standards Presidents and their administrations used to be held.
It is all happening remarkably quickly, thanks mostly to Bill Ayers and the commies teaching kids in the public schools.
The duty owed to the Dead and the Brave of Benghazi is to get the truth out. This isn't about changing media behavior, that won't happen anyway. 4 truthes came out of the hearing today. There will be more truthes revealed, why?
Because the House will refuse anything the Obummer and the Senate Repubs want until they get the Benghazi answers-- no internet sales tax, no immigration votes, no nothin' until the Obamaniacs give up the facts. Today worked out better than I thought it would.
Gutfeld is right. Watch the vid of Hillary at the Senate hearing with the sound off. She looks like a circus act. Not presidential at all. I don't think that performance will keep her in the running. In fact, the Dems themselves will slaughter her over this in 2015 (run-up to primary year).
I know DoT and others think she is teflon by this but there is more to come and don't be surprised it comes from the center of certain Dems. Birch Bayh, Joe Biden and others have been known to deal with events like this.
NJJan:
You are right. I share Porch's fear but I know Hannity and O'Reilly will cover it tonight as will Bret Baier.
NK: Yes some good information was provided today,but I hope those really responsible, the killers Hillary and Obama will be brought to justice and their crimes of negligence and cover-up exposed.
Boy, now I can't write, I am so pi**ed. What I meant to say was there is no longer any reasonable doubt that September 11, 2012 did not happen a long time ago.
Stevens and his detail were murdered by Jihadis, not Obummer/Hillary. Nobody does the memory of those 4 men's sacrifice -- outright heroism in the case of 3 of them-- any service by falsely blaming their deaths on Obummer/Hillary.
Unfortunately these shows do not reach the broader public who are cocooned from the story. Hard to break through. Schieffer on Sunday helped, but exposure needs to be consistent and persistent to penetrate.
MT @mitchellreports: Gripping testimony today from Amb. Stevens 2nd in command in Tripoli the night of #Benghazi attack @nbcnightlynews
Details Expand Collapse
I am going to ask the same question here that I asked on my blog posting:
Where were these so-called “whistleblowers” when the United States of America was invading the Country of Iraq based upon blatantly false information about so-called “Weapons of Mass Destruction”? I mean, if there was any sort of false information being pimped to the media, and there was, trust me — these people would have known about it.
Where were these so-called ”Whistleblowers” when the United States of America was attacked on 9/11? I mean, if there was any sort of false information being pimped to the media, and there was, trust me
— these people would have known about it.
You want to know where these people where? I will tell you where they were; they were standing around with their noses straight up the goddamned ass of President George W. Bush and the neocon administration in the White House, that’s where!
Henry-- it will be easy for the House Repubs to do-- they will cite national security (Boston Bombers) and memory of the Benghazi heroes, plus Obummer/Kerry will give up scapegoats to the Repubs, Kennedy, Mills, Rice-- they are either careerists or HildaBeasts peeps, no Obummer bloods there. Hillary-- they'l say she can take care of herself.
Cindy Effin' Sheehan-- mental case. I take pride in predicting what the MSM would do with her as soon as 2008 was over-- if anything the MSM has dumped on her more than I thought they would. BTW-- EVERYBODY on the Right knew what the MSM would do with her after 2008... the Media are so obvious.
Well, the lies about the video make a difference...& the total incompetence of State not having security on a 9-11 anniversary in Libya.
Nobody fired. No terrorists caught.
Just issue reports, demand more money, & move on...it's all that DC seems to be able to do.
"It becomes the new normal if that is the way it is reported, if it is reported at all."
The reporting will focus primarily on whethe the GOP scored any knockout blows, and the consensus will be that thep put up a spirited fight but failed to score a KO. This story is at its peak right now.
I am unaware of any Legal Team trying to get the Anti-Islam Video Producer Nakoula, (jailed after being falsely termed responsible for BenghaziGate), out of Jail. Anyone know more about that.
If seems to me that if anybody should have decent Legal Representation, ala John Adams, trying to give him whatever Justice he deserves, it ought to be that guy.
If nothing else, no matter how much of a dog he might be in other matters, he deserves an honest, public apology from all these despicable Administration officials.
Krauthammer and Steve Hayes are doing a good job on Benghazi.
"Where were these so-called 'whistleblowers' when the United States of America was invading the Country of Iraq based upon blatantly false information about so-called 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'?"
Same place as Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Colin Powell, Clinton appointee George Tenet and a host of Dem. senators who voted to invade.
DoT,
If Steve Hayes on Special Report is correct and there are more hearings with Col Gibson, then it may still get legs. Mara Liasson (I know) also feels there will be more with a focus also on lack of security build up prior to attack. I'd like to think they are right.
The 'consensus' of the intelligence community was that the Sadaam STOCKPILES of WMD were a slam dunk; Sadaam's Rev Guards though there were stockpiles with other Guard units. Sadaam shrewdly convinced his enemies --the Mullahs mostly-- that he had them, because the threat would deter invasion. He bet wrong.
"WASHINGTON— Partisan politics loomed over a House hearing Wednesday on the deadly September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, as Republicans and Democrats clashed over the meaning of testimony from three witnesses who had little new to add to the story."
IMO-- LtCol Gibson is a very important witness-- the pre-9/11/12 Benghazi security stuff?-- ONLY important b/c it show more Hillary lies -- repubs have to be careful not to be second guesing the level of security. the key is Steven was begging for proper Benghzi security and Hillary denied it and then after 9/11/12 lied about budget cuts.
and it isn't like he a. used them previously and b. defectors pointed out stocks in 1995.
daddy-
He has been jailed for a probation violation on his federal bank fraud conviction. Believe he pled out before anyone could darken his already dark door.
Catching up on the threads. Whoo-my schools roi come in at a healthy 135 and 138.
F-i-l watching PBS...as I walk through they are showing clips of Susan Rice on the Sunday shows. None of the clips are of her blaming the YouTube video.
The tenor of the segment is calm & sorta boring.
You can tell Lou Dobbs is really smoked about Benghazi, and he just criticized CBS for withholding some negative info on benghazi for 3 weeks long ago to the advantage of Obama. Lou is taking a moment to personally thank 5 FOX reporters today for their reporting on Benghazi:
Jennifer Griffin
Catherine Herridge
James Rosen
Adam Housley
Bret Baier
My guess is he's got as little use for Shep as the rest of us. Man would I love to see those 2 swap their shows.
Connolly, was mentioned earlier, one of his earlier exercises, as councilman in Fairfzx, was voting to expand the Islamic Service Academy (sic) the Wahhabi style private school, that yielded a Saudi who tried to kill W, Abu Ali, something:
and no one commented on this item from Drudge..."Horror as bear on bike eats monkey at end of sick circus cycle race... " thought it was about the Benghazi hearings but sadly no.
daddy-
The story around Nakoula is certainly strange (previous arrests, pretty wealthy with no visible means of support, a poster child for immigration reform). Lucky the Egyptian state media got and aired the clips that maybe a dozen people here in the US saw.
I don't get Fox Business (which really pisses me off). And I can't bear to check and see if any MFM is reporting on Benghazi.
Only a miracle will give Benghazi legs, and I'm not seeing one.
Oh and assholes like the troll apparently think that 2 wrongs make a right - even tho one of those wasn't wrong. I've never met a liberal yet who didn't pull that shit. It is just so cowardly.
It's revealing that libs are going back to their whining claim that Bush lied. The smarter ones know that he didn't, but by going down this road they're tacitly admitting that Obama lied.
"Well what about your guy? Huh? He lied, too, didn't he?"
Uh, no, he didn't. Yours did. He told an untruth that he knew to be false. As did Hillary and his whole administration.
I don't think the fitting and proper result, namely, Obama being forced to resign in disgrace, and Hillary Clinton's public career being ended for once and for all, will prevail. However, the Benghazi dereliction of duty by the Commander in Chief will be noticed not only by the HIVs (high info voters), but also by the MIVs (middle info voters). It will further reduce Obama's political clout.
Is anyone familiar with the protocol for a military rescue mission in these cases? Does the CinC need to give a stand down order, or is the absence of an order from the CinC to execute the rescue mission sufficient to cause a rescue mission to be aborted. Either way, Obama deserves to resign in disgrace.
It appears from the article LUNed at my 7:52 PM post that personnel already in Libya could have executed a rescue mission without CinC authorization. Which raises the question whether Obama not only failed to authorize personnel to cross the Libysn border, but also ordered personnel already in Libya to stand down.
"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denied that an order was ever given denying the Americans in Benghazi military assistance, saying she personally organized the State Department response to the Benghazi assault.
“I directed our response from the State Department,” Clinton said in her opening statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, saying there were “no delays in decision making, no denials of support from Washington or our military.” from the Washington Examiner in January
Jane, these are issues for which there must be a definite protocol. Does CinC need to authorize cross border rescues? Who can stop a non-cross border rescue? Do any of the JOMers with military experience know the protocols in a Benghazi-type situation? If you do but are a lurker, here is an opportunity to delurk with a badda-boom!
One thing is pretty clear to me: I wouldn't bet against her winning the presidency, but if she does a huge slice of America will know on Inauguration Day that she's a cynical, hugely incompetent lying bitch. That's the way she'll begin her term. Have fun, America.
Mara Liasson (I know) also feels there will be more with a focus also on lack of security build up prior to attack. I'd like to think they are right.
I'm guessing/hoping that's wishful thinking by Mara, since that's the least of it. It can be called a mistake, or dismissed as 20-20 hindsight (though it would be ridiculous to do so). But it's not as outrageous as the stand down order and the lies to cover everything up.
No matter what liasson thinks, it seems to me that it's beyond doubt that the video carpola was a lie from the get go and that both Clinton and Obama were involved in creating and spreading it. That being the case, the question has to be why?
If to distract from their poor handling for domestic political reasons, that doesn't look good for them. Worse, it raises the suspicion that they were trying to hide something more substantial--like weapons running to Syrian rebels.
This is my view, as well, Stevens stood in the way, of the supply to the Salafi elements in Syria, btw, from my 7;55 LUN, the Kingdom is taking over the account from Qatar,
I disagree with only one point in the PJT analysis. I do not think the GOP majority made a mistake in holding this hearing in one day. They got all of the evidence on the record and duly recorded for posterity. This was a substantive hearing, but it also throws a shot across the bow of the administration and its minions that the facts are against them, and they had better come clean.
It also inoculates these three witnesses from any future bs from the head choppers.
Charles Woods, father of the fallen Tyrone, was on Hannity praising the cooperative, bipartisan efforts of today's hearing and saying that he shook the hand of Cummings and thank him for the lively statements.
TC, I have no idea what the rules are now. In May of 68 I was prepared for and about to launch a short raid across the Cambodian border above Chao Duc to rescue a captured Green Beret sergeant the CIA had said was being held at a stockade right on the other side. At the last minute the CIA guy said he couldn't get clearance so we couldn't go, and we didn't.
I'm not certain why, but I do recall believing at the time that without his say-so I couldn't go. In later years I began to think I should have just gone anyway--four PBR's and a SEAL platoon, every man chomping at the bit--but that probably would have been unwise in the extreme. Never saw the CIA guy again; never heard further about the sergeant.
Communications were very primitive at the time, and it is possible that had we gone, in the absence of a catastrophe it would have gone unnoticed. Very different world.
'Officially' they weren't operating in Indochina till 1970, of course, that had little to do with whar was actually happening with Mike Force, is that correct?
Very generous of you, TC. The strong support of allies when dealing with these 21st century threads cannot be underestimated. Though circumspection is appropriate on the matter of red lines, all options remain on the teal.
And, your comment threads have quite a bit of Benghazi coverage, too!
Posted by: centralcal | May 08, 2013 at 05:21 PM
But no coverage at Cavuto or The Five. IOW's Fox has given there best shot showing the hearing but believe the Dem talking point that there is no smoking gun. So now the Five go to a News Alert regarding the Arias verdict.
Geez. I give up.
No one except Chaffetz and Gowdy seems to give a s**t.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | May 08, 2013 at 05:35 PM
Meh. Benghazi has been covered completely.
Up.
Covered UP completely, that is.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 08, 2013 at 05:35 PM
Will this incompetence and corruption in a cover up now be considered acceptable? It is incontrovertible that Obama lied again and again to save his election. Is that irrelevant? Can this be the new normal?
Posted by: MarkO on iPhone at 35,000 feet | May 08, 2013 at 05:37 PM
The coverage of this hearing by the MSM, Fox News included, disgusts me. There is no integrity left in the press. What good does freedom of the press do when there is no press or if the press only covers the blunders of one side of the political spectrum?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | May 08, 2013 at 05:39 PM
It becomes the new normal if that is the way it is reported, if it is reported at all.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 05:40 PM
MARKO:I share your pain over this. I can hardly believe what has happened. To date -No terrorists have been found, Rice delayed FBI involvement with her lies, and we still don't know who gave the stand down order.
On PJ Media someone commented on this contrast of images: A Navy Seal with a wounded comrade strapped to his back in the middle of the night ,trying to save him and Obama snoring away inhis bed getting ready to campaign ind raise mov
ney in Vegas.
Impeachment is too good for him. Get the tar and feathers out.
Posted by: maryrose | May 08, 2013 at 05:43 PM
How does today's Benghazi media differ from yesterday's Obama's background media?
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 08, 2013 at 05:44 PM
should be money. How could the voters have let this happen?
Electing him as preesy and her as a drunk, inept SOS.Appalling!
Posted by: maryrose | May 08, 2013 at 05:45 PM
TK; They are one and the same. And you answered my question on the previous post. They never check his eligibility or his real background. he hid those where no one can touch them. Thank God he is now term limited.
Posted by: maryrose | May 08, 2013 at 05:48 PM
Damning headline over at Memorandum:
Are there even that many rank and file Dems who wouldn't agree with that?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | May 08, 2013 at 05:50 PM
Pres.
O.J. SimpsonKool promises to find the perpetrators of the crimes and bring them to justice.Jay Carney is making Joseph proud.
Posted by: Frau Eulenspiegel | May 08, 2013 at 05:51 PM
JIB @ 5:35 and Jim R @ 5:39 -- your comments far better express my thoughts on the disgusting state of media. It is frustrating.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 05:52 PM
Remember Benghazi!
Posted by: Frau Eulenspiegel | May 08, 2013 at 05:52 PM
Can this be the new normal?
That is my great fear. Every horrible thing about Obama is designed to, among other things, bring the bar so permanently low that in time the country will not remember how things used to be and to what standards Presidents and their administrations used to be held.
It is all happening remarkably quickly, thanks mostly to Bill Ayers and the commies teaching kids in the public schools.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 08, 2013 at 05:54 PM
The duty owed to the Dead and the Brave of Benghazi is to get the truth out. This isn't about changing media behavior, that won't happen anyway. 4 truthes came out of the hearing today. There will be more truthes revealed, why?
Because the House will refuse anything the Obummer and the Senate Repubs want until they get the Benghazi answers-- no internet sales tax, no immigration votes, no nothin' until the Obamaniacs give up the facts. Today worked out better than I thought it would.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 05:55 PM
Gutfeld is right. Watch the vid of Hillary at the Senate hearing with the sound off. She looks like a circus act. Not presidential at all. I don't think that performance will keep her in the running. In fact, the Dems themselves will slaughter her over this in 2015 (run-up to primary year).
I know DoT and others think she is teflon by this but there is more to come and don't be surprised it comes from the center of certain Dems. Birch Bayh, Joe Biden and others have been known to deal with events like this.
Oh, did I mention a certain Cuomo in New York?
Posted by: Jim Eagle | May 08, 2013 at 05:57 PM
Mark,
Do you now live at 35,000 feet. You have been there for a long time it seems.
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 05:58 PM
Maybe Brett Baier will be a newsman and lead with Bengazi, doubt if anyone else will.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 05:59 PM
He does, Jan.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | May 08, 2013 at 06:00 PM
NJJan:
You are right. I share Porch's fear but I know Hannity and O'Reilly will cover it tonight as will Bret Baier.
NK: Yes some good information was provided today,but I hope those really responsible, the killers Hillary and Obama will be brought to justice and their crimes of negligence and cover-up exposed.
Posted by: maryrose | May 08, 2013 at 06:02 PM
One thing emerges from today's hearing. There is no longer any reasonable doubt that September 11, 2012 happened a long time ago.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | May 08, 2013 at 06:03 PM
Boy, now I can't write, I am so pi**ed. What I meant to say was there is no longer any reasonable doubt that September 11, 2012 did not happen a long time ago.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | May 08, 2013 at 06:05 PM
I'm watching too, Jim. So, that makes one so far.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 06:06 PM
Stevens and his detail were murdered by Jihadis, not Obummer/Hillary. Nobody does the memory of those 4 men's sacrifice -- outright heroism in the case of 3 of them-- any service by falsely blaming their deaths on Obummer/Hillary.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 06:10 PM
Maryrose,
Unfortunately these shows do not reach the broader public who are cocooned from the story. Hard to break through. Schieffer on Sunday helped, but exposure needs to be consistent and persistent to penetrate.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 06:14 PM
Because the House will refuse anything the Obummer and the Senate Repubs want until they get the Benghazi answers
that would be a welcome change.
Posted by: henry | May 08, 2013 at 06:17 PM
Oh!
Andrea Mitchell tweets:
MT @mitchellreports: Gripping testimony today from Amb. Stevens 2nd in command in Tripoli the night of #Benghazi attack @nbcnightlynews
Details Expand Collapse
Did Schieffer embarrass them all?
Posted by: Jim Eagle | May 08, 2013 at 06:21 PM
Have missed a lot of News the past few days, but a few questions during catch-up.
1) Has any member of the media called the horrible Serial Kidnapper/Rapist suspect in Cleveland, Ariel Castro, a "White Hispanic"?
2) Why not?
3) Who's going to get better free Legal Representation, him or the Boston Bombing suspect?
Posted by: daddy | May 08, 2013 at 06:23 PM
I am going to ask the same question here that I asked on my blog posting:
Where were these so-called “whistleblowers” when the United States of America was invading the Country of Iraq based upon blatantly false information about so-called “Weapons of Mass Destruction”? I mean, if there was any sort of false information being pimped to the media, and there was, trust me — these people would have known about it.
Where were these so-called ”Whistleblowers” when the United States of America was attacked on 9/11? I mean, if there was any sort of false information being pimped to the media, and there was, trust me
— these people would have known about it.
You want to know where these people where? I will tell you where they were; they were standing around with their noses straight up the goddamned ass of President George W. Bush and the neocon administration in the White House, that’s where!
My Posting:
http://thoughtsandrantings.com/2013/05/08/on-these-benghazi-hearings-and-scandal/
You're welcome.
Posted by: TheTAmericanist | May 08, 2013 at 06:26 PM
Henry-- it will be easy for the House Repubs to do-- they will cite national security (Boston Bombers) and memory of the Benghazi heroes, plus Obummer/Kerry will give up scapegoats to the Repubs, Kennedy, Mills, Rice-- they are either careerists or HildaBeasts peeps, no Obummer bloods there. Hillary-- they'l say she can take care of herself.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 06:27 PM
I think we would be a lot safer and more appreciated if we replaced Kerry and the State Dept. apparathik with Dennis Rodman and his entourage.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | May 08, 2013 at 06:27 PM
Cindy Sheehan, is that you?
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 08, 2013 at 06:34 PM
Cindy Effin' Sheehan-- mental case. I take pride in predicting what the MSM would do with her as soon as 2008 was over-- if anything the MSM has dumped on her more than I thought they would. BTW-- EVERYBODY on the Right knew what the MSM would do with her after 2008... the Media are so obvious.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 06:37 PM
BTW-- the Dems did the same with Crazy Cindy-- the Dems are just as obvious as the Media.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 06:38 PM
It must be snowing in hell if Andrea Mitchell is tweeting what JIB highlighted
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 06:39 PM
Well, the lies about the video make a difference...& the total incompetence of State not having security on a 9-11 anniversary in Libya.
Nobody fired. No terrorists caught.
Just issue reports, demand more money, & move on...it's all that DC seems to be able to do.
Posted by: Janet | May 08, 2013 at 06:47 PM
"It becomes the new normal if that is the way it is reported, if it is reported at all."
The reporting will focus primarily on whethe the GOP scored any knockout blows, and the consensus will be that thep put up a spirited fight but failed to score a KO. This story is at its peak right now.
And yeah, it's the new normal.
Posted by: DoT on iPad | May 08, 2013 at 06:49 PM
I am unaware of any Legal Team trying to get the Anti-Islam Video Producer Nakoula, (jailed after being falsely termed responsible for BenghaziGate), out of Jail. Anyone know more about that.
I read that the Boston Bomber's Lawyer is essentially playing the role of John Adam's (in agreeing to represent a group of British soldiers accused of murdering five American civilians in Boston back in 1770.
If seems to me that if anybody should have decent Legal Representation, ala John Adams, trying to give him whatever Justice he deserves, it ought to be that guy.
If nothing else, no matter how much of a dog he might be in other matters, he deserves an honest, public apology from all these despicable Administration officials.
Krauthammer and Steve Hayes are doing a good job on Benghazi.
Posted by: daddy | May 08, 2013 at 06:50 PM
I really can't stand watching these liars and manipulators and this corrupt press any more really. I can't.
Posted by: Clarice | May 08, 2013 at 06:52 PM
"Where were these so-called 'whistleblowers' when the United States of America was invading the Country of Iraq based upon blatantly false information about so-called 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'?"
Same place as Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Colin Powell, Clinton appointee George Tenet and a host of Dem. senators who voted to invade.
Posted by: DoT on iPad | May 08, 2013 at 06:53 PM
Steve Hayes is really on top of the hearings from what I just heard.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads iPhone | May 08, 2013 at 06:55 PM
DoT,
If Steve Hayes on Special Report is correct and there are more hearings with Col Gibson, then it may still get legs. Mara Liasson (I know) also feels there will be more with a focus also on lack of security build up prior to attack. I'd like to think they are right.
Posted by: NJJan | May 08, 2013 at 06:58 PM
The 'consensus' of the intelligence community was that the Sadaam STOCKPILES of WMD were a slam dunk; Sadaam's Rev Guards though there were stockpiles with other Guard units. Sadaam shrewdly convinced his enemies --the Mullahs mostly-- that he had them, because the threat would deter invasion. He bet wrong.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 06:58 PM
Ring the bell, and the LA Times will salivate:
"WASHINGTON— Partisan politics loomed over a House hearing Wednesday on the deadly September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, as Republicans and Democrats clashed over the meaning of testimony from three witnesses who had little new to add to the story."
Posted by: DoT on iPad | May 08, 2013 at 07:02 PM
IMO-- LtCol Gibson is a very important witness-- the pre-9/11/12 Benghazi security stuff?-- ONLY important b/c it show more Hillary lies -- repubs have to be careful not to be second guesing the level of security. the key is Steven was begging for proper Benghzi security and Hillary denied it and then after 9/11/12 lied about budget cuts.
Posted by: NK | May 08, 2013 at 07:03 PM
Nk-
and it isn't like he a. used them previously and b. defectors pointed out stocks in 1995.
daddy-
He has been jailed for a probation violation on his federal bank fraud conviction. Believe he pled out before anyone could darken his already dark door.
Catching up on the threads. Whoo-my schools roi come in at a healthy 135 and 138.
Posted by: Richatgmu | May 08, 2013 at 07:07 PM
Did Schieffer embarrass them all?
Journalist II will get out the right talking points. See DoT's LA times clip above.
Posted by: Richatgmu | May 08, 2013 at 07:12 PM
Thanks Rich.
JOMer's, turn off Shep and go to FOX Business now for the Lou Dobbs show. He is on Benghazi and is interviewing Rep Trey Gowdy live. Good segment.
Posted by: daddy | May 08, 2013 at 07:14 PM
F-i-l watching PBS...as I walk through they are showing clips of Susan Rice on the Sunday shows. None of the clips are of her blaming the YouTube video.
The tenor of the segment is calm & sorta boring.
Posted by: Janet | May 08, 2013 at 07:21 PM
You can tell Lou Dobbs is really smoked about Benghazi, and he just criticized CBS for withholding some negative info on benghazi for 3 weeks long ago to the advantage of Obama. Lou is taking a moment to personally thank 5 FOX reporters today for their reporting on Benghazi:
Jennifer Griffin
Catherine Herridge
James Rosen
Adam Housley
Bret Baier
My guess is he's got as little use for Shep as the rest of us. Man would I love to see those 2 swap their shows.
Posted by: daddy | May 08, 2013 at 07:22 PM
Connolly, was mentioned earlier, one of his earlier exercises, as councilman in Fairfzx, was voting to expand the Islamic Service Academy (sic) the Wahhabi style private school, that yielded a Saudi who tried to kill W, Abu Ali, something:
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/05/08/benghazi-hearings-live-blog/
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 07:26 PM
and no one commented on this item from Drudge..."Horror as bear on bike eats monkey at end of sick circus cycle race... " thought it was about the Benghazi hearings but sadly no.
daddy-
The story around Nakoula is certainly strange (previous arrests, pretty wealthy with no visible means of support, a poster child for immigration reform). Lucky the Egyptian state media got and aired the clips that maybe a dozen people here in the US saw.
Posted by: Richatgmu | May 08, 2013 at 07:26 PM
Fox News Special Report. Amazing segment about Day 1 of the Benghazi Hearings...
http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2013/05/damming-segment-fox-news-special-report.html
Posted by: Steve | May 08, 2013 at 07:29 PM
Here it is. It was Langford finding out something new.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSLDqo47my8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Iraq funding was expiring so Stevens was rushed to his death.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 08, 2013 at 07:31 PM
I don't get Fox Business (which really pisses me off). And I can't bear to check and see if any MFM is reporting on Benghazi.
Only a miracle will give Benghazi legs, and I'm not seeing one.
Oh and assholes like the troll apparently think that 2 wrongs make a right - even tho one of those wasn't wrong. I've never met a liberal yet who didn't pull that shit. It is just so cowardly.
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 07:32 PM
A sum up, of the matter,
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/05/08/seven-things-we-learned-from-the-benghazi-whistleblower-hearing/
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 07:34 PM
It's revealing that libs are going back to their whining claim that Bush lied. The smarter ones know that he didn't, but by going down this road they're tacitly admitting that Obama lied.
"Well what about your guy? Huh? He lied, too, didn't he?"
Uh, no, he didn't. Yours did. He told an untruth that he knew to be false. As did Hillary and his whole administration.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 08, 2013 at 07:40 PM
Former Ambassador claims that ONLY the president can issue a stand down order...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/05/whoa-rep-ann-wagner-only-president-gives-the-stand-down-order-video/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iABKTZvj-uc
Posted by: OldTimer | May 08, 2013 at 07:41 PM
I don't think the fitting and proper result, namely, Obama being forced to resign in disgrace, and Hillary Clinton's public career being ended for once and for all, will prevail. However, the Benghazi dereliction of duty by the Commander in Chief will be noticed not only by the HIVs (high info voters), but also by the MIVs (middle info voters). It will further reduce Obama's political clout.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 07:41 PM
Is anyone familiar with the protocol for a military rescue mission in these cases? Does the CinC need to give a stand down order, or is the absence of an order from the CinC to execute the rescue mission sufficient to cause a rescue mission to be aborted. Either way, Obama deserves to resign in disgrace.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 07:44 PM
They used to call this 'speaking truth to power'
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 07:49 PM
TC,
Everyone tweeting under the #Beghazi hastag today agrees that the only person who can give a stand down order if the President.
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 07:51 PM
See LUN for a piece arguing that Obama needed top issue a "stand-up" order for a cross border rescue mission to proceed.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 07:52 PM
IS the president
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 07:54 PM
Interesting perspective on the next snafu, yes the notion that the KSA is really about suppressing extremism is 'ironic' as they say,
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 07:55 PM
It appears from the article LUNed at my 7:52 PM post that personnel already in Libya could have executed a rescue mission without CinC authorization. Which raises the question whether Obama not only failed to authorize personnel to cross the Libysn border, but also ordered personnel already in Libya to stand down.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 07:59 PM
some at a Breitbart link, puts it rather plainly, in terms, we have come to understand;
they issued a 'Burn Notice' on Ambassador Stevens
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 08:00 PM
A little repetitive,
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/08/Live-Updates-Benghazi-Hearing
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 08:04 PM
TC,
See this.
Who knows?
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 08:05 PM
"only person who can give a stand down order if the President."
Yup. That's the word on Nightstalker Way.
Posted by: Skoot | May 08, 2013 at 08:23 PM
Maybe ValJar while the JEF slept?
Posted by: henry | May 08, 2013 at 08:23 PM
"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denied that an order was ever given denying the Americans in Benghazi military assistance, saying she personally organized the State Department response to the Benghazi assault.
“I directed our response from the State Department,” Clinton said in her opening statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, saying there were “no delays in decision making, no denials of support from Washington or our military.” from the Washington Examiner in January
Hitches had it right...No One Left To Lie To
Posted by: C.R. | May 08, 2013 at 08:24 PM
The Toesucker says this is the beginning of the end.
It might take 4 years, but this regime is going down.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 08, 2013 at 08:28 PM
Jane, these are issues for which there must be a definite protocol. Does CinC need to authorize cross border rescues? Who can stop a non-cross border rescue? Do any of the JOMers with military experience know the protocols in a Benghazi-type situation? If you do but are a lurker, here is an opportunity to delurk with a badda-boom!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 08:31 PM
Fox All-Stars hit a homerun today.
One thing is pretty clear to me: I wouldn't bet against her winning the presidency, but if she does a huge slice of America will know on Inauguration Day that she's a cynical, hugely incompetent lying bitch. That's the way she'll begin her term. Have fun, America.
Posted by: DoT on iPad | May 08, 2013 at 08:32 PM
Henry, whatever the protocol was, I suspect ValJar was the one in charge at the White House.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 08:37 PM
OT, the fact that the US and Russia, are sponsoring opposite factions, poses a problem;
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 08:38 PM
Without prejudicing any potential future claims, at present I yield the teal-toothed typepad tableau to TC, BoE, and others.
Posted by: Elliott | May 08, 2013 at 08:39 PM
Any time you want to displace me in the teal brigade, Elliott, I'll gladly cede my teal time to you!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 08, 2013 at 08:47 PM
a huge slice of America will know on Inauguration Day that she's a cynical, hugely incompetent lying bitch.
I agree. Unfortunately, an even bigger slice won't care.
Posted by: Eric in Boise | May 08, 2013 at 08:49 PM
Elliott!! Smooches!!!
Posted by: Clarice | May 08, 2013 at 08:53 PM
recall the source, that deferred, Ambassador Aujali, is the big time CAIR supporter that hosted the bogus Eid dinner for Hillary
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/08/top-u-s-diplomat-in-libya-knew-benghazi-was-terrorism.html
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 08:53 PM
Mara Liasson (I know) also feels there will be more with a focus also on lack of security build up prior to attack. I'd like to think they are right.
I'm guessing/hoping that's wishful thinking by Mara, since that's the least of it. It can be called a mistake, or dismissed as 20-20 hindsight (though it would be ridiculous to do so). But it's not as outrageous as the stand down order and the lies to cover everything up.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 08, 2013 at 08:56 PM
Here's Mara Liasson:

Posted by: jimmyk | May 08, 2013 at 08:58 PM
Clarice,
That PJ Tatler piece is the best I've read on today's hearings.
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 08:59 PM
No matter what liasson thinks, it seems to me that it's beyond doubt that the video carpola was a lie from the get go and that both Clinton and Obama were involved in creating and spreading it. That being the case, the question has to be why?
If to distract from their poor handling for domestic political reasons, that doesn't look good for them. Worse, it raises the suspicion that they were trying to hide something more substantial--like weapons running to Syrian rebels.
Posted by: Clarice | May 08, 2013 at 09:08 PM
Even the NYT is back stroking:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/us/politics/official-offers-account-from-libya-of-benghazi-attack.html?hp&_r=1&
Posted by: Clarice | May 08, 2013 at 09:10 PM
Not that it matters, but Ann Wagner holds the House seat last held by Akin!.
Based on her earlier record, I would have thought she would be less confrontational. I'm pleasantly surprised.
Posted by: Walter | May 08, 2013 at 09:11 PM
This is my view, as well, Stevens stood in the way, of the supply to the Salafi elements in Syria, btw, from my 7;55 LUN, the Kingdom is taking over the account from Qatar,
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 09:13 PM
What "Iraq budget"were they talking about? That is what I want to know.
Posted by: Threadkiller | May 08, 2013 at 09:14 PM
They tucked most of the Spin, into the second page. A banana for two of Carlos Slim's dancing chimps.
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 09:16 PM
I disagree with only one point in the PJT analysis. I do not think the GOP majority made a mistake in holding this hearing in one day. They got all of the evidence on the record and duly recorded for posterity. This was a substantive hearing, but it also throws a shot across the bow of the administration and its minions that the facts are against them, and they had better come clean.
It also inoculates these three witnesses from any future bs from the head choppers.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | May 08, 2013 at 09:22 PM
Charles Woods, father of the fallen Tyrone, was on Hannity praising the cooperative, bipartisan efforts of today's hearing and saying that he shook the hand of Cummings and thank him for the lively statements.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | May 08, 2013 at 09:24 PM
I hope you are right Jim.
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 09:24 PM
TC, I have no idea what the rules are now. In May of 68 I was prepared for and about to launch a short raid across the Cambodian border above Chao Duc to rescue a captured Green Beret sergeant the CIA had said was being held at a stockade right on the other side. At the last minute the CIA guy said he couldn't get clearance so we couldn't go, and we didn't.
I'm not certain why, but I do recall believing at the time that without his say-so I couldn't go. In later years I began to think I should have just gone anyway--four PBR's and a SEAL platoon, every man chomping at the bit--but that probably would have been unwise in the extreme. Never saw the CIA guy again; never heard further about the sergeant.
Communications were very primitive at the time, and it is possible that had we gone, in the absence of a catastrophe it would have gone unnoticed. Very different world.
Posted by: DoT on iPad | May 08, 2013 at 09:25 PM
'Officially' they weren't operating in Indochina till 1970, of course, that had little to do with whar was actually happening with Mike Force, is that correct?
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 09:29 PM
Sorry I meant Cambodia, Libya was I imagine a different story, since we had 'installed' that govt to a certain degree,
Posted by: narciso | May 08, 2013 at 09:31 PM
Very generous of you, TC. The strong support of allies when dealing with these 21st century threads cannot be underestimated. Though circumspection is appropriate on the matter of red lines, all options remain on the teal.
Greetings, Clarice! I hope you are well.
Happy belated birthday, Jimmyk!
Posted by: Elliott | May 08, 2013 at 09:31 PM
Elliott,
what the hell are you doing these days? Will you be anywhere near Norway in August?
Posted by: Jane - | May 08, 2013 at 09:35 PM