* A STAND-ALONE NEWSBITE BASED UPON PATRICK J. BUCHANAN'S LATEST COLUMN:
At his news conference Wednesday, President Barack Obama postured as
the young Galahad striding out onto the schoolyard to stop a pair of
bullies from beating up a girl.
Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham had charged U.N. Amb. Susan Rice with misleading the nation when,
five days after the Benghazi attack in which Amb. Chris Stevens and
three other Americans were killed, she appeared on five TV shows to say
it had all resulted from a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Muslim video.
Susan Rice, thundered Obama,
“made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave
her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to
her.
“If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody,
they should go after me. … But for them to go after the U.N.
ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a
presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to
besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”
The indignation here is more than a bit cloying.
* YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!
After all, Rice’s
rendition of the worst terror attack on the U.S. since 9/11 was utterly
false.
There never was a protest.
Rice misled the nation.
The question is: Did Rice deceive us, or was she herself misled or deceived?
*
AGAIN, FOLKS, I'M NOT QUITE AS CHARITABLE AS OL' PAT HERE. EVEN
ASSUMING "SOMEONE" GAVE RICE BAD INFO... RICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN... AT
THE VERY LEAST SUSPECTED... THAT SHE WAS BEING GIVEN BULLSHIT.
* WHY...?
*
BECAUSE THE BULLSHIT HAD BEEN SLOWLY BUT SURELY BEEN "OUTED" DURING THE
DAYS AFTER THE BENGHAZI ATTACK! I KNEW THIS! IT'S ALL IN THE ARCHIVES
HERE AT USUALLY RIGHT! IF I KNEW IT... THEN RICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IT...
SHE SHOULD HAVE HAD HER DOUBTS... SHE SHOULD HAVE DOUBLE-CHECKED WITH
BOSS HER OWN IMMEDIATE BOSS - SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON -
OR WITH THEN CIA DIRECTOR DAVID PATRAEUS DIRECTLY PRIOR TO SIMPLY
READING HER LINES BEFORE MILLIONS OF AMERICANS.
*
FOLKS... I NOTED THIS FROM THE BEGINNING... WHY SEND SUSAN RICE AND NOT
HILLARY CLINTON? WHY SUSAN RICE AND NOT PATRAEUS? WHY SUSAN RICE AND
NOT PANETTA? COM'ON...
Far from being a convincing defense, Obama’s remarks call into
question the competence or the truthfulness of the White House itself.
* AGAIN... PAT IS BEING OVERLY POLITE. THERE'S SIMPLY NO WAY IN HELL
THAT TOP ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS - AND I'M CERTAIN OBAMA HIMSELF -
DIDN'T KNEW THE TRUTH AND WEREN'T TRYING TO PROVIDE COVER FOR OBAMA'S AND
CLINTON'S FAILED FOREIGN POLICY.
Consider again what Obama said: "Susan Rice “had nothing to do with Benghazi.”
But if she “had nothing to do with Benghazi,” why was she sent out “at the request of the White House” to explain Benghazi?
* EXACTLY...
Who at the White House programmed Rice?
*
CERTAINLY NOT AN UNDERLING! AGAIN... SHE - SPECIFICALLY SHE - WAS SENT
TO SELL THE "IT WAS ALL ABOUT A VIDEO" STORY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY
"THE WHITE HOUSE" - MEANING OBAMA!
Did she push back at all when
fed this bullhockey about Benghazi?
* AH... PERHAPS I WAS TOO FAST TO ASSUME PAT HADN'T THOUGHT ALONG THE SAME LINES I HAVE! (GOOD FOR YOU, PAT!)
Or does she just parrot the party
line when told to do so?
(*RAISED EYEBROW*)
Why did the White House not send Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,
CIA Director David Petraeus, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta or National
Security Adviser Tom Donilon?
* THANK... YOU... PAT...!!!
Or did they decline to go?
*
AND HOW DOES ONE "DECLINE" A PRESIDENTIAL ORDER...? (UNLESS ONE COULD
HIMSELF OR HERSELF "OUT" THE PRESIDENT AND THUS BY THREATENING TO DO
THIS RENDER THE PRESIDENT POWERLESS TO FORCE CLINTON... PATRAEUS...
PANETTA... OR DONILON TO PLAY THE ROLE OF FALL GUY/GAL.)
The president says Rice “gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her.”
* PROVIDED TO BY WHOM...???
* PROVIDED TO HER BY A WHITE HOUSE/ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL HIGH ENOUGH UP THE FOOD CHAIN TO
TAKE IT UPON HIMSELF OR HERSELF TO REMOVE PERTINENT INFORMATION FROM THE
CIA INFO PACKAGE THAT TODAY PATRAEUS SAID WAS SENT TO RICE PRIOR TO HER
TV APPEARANCES...?!?!
And who might be the source of that “intelligence” about the protest in Benghazi, when there was no protest in Benghazi?
* WHEN... THERE... WAS... NO... PROTEST... IN... BENGHAZI...!
Rice was scripted to tell the nation it was not a “pre-planned”
attack, when that is exactly what it was.
(*NOD*)
The CIA knew it within hours,
because two of its former Navy SEALs died in the attack, and other CIA
people survived and got out the next morning.
* YEP!
Here we come to the heart of the matter. Though journalists, CIA personnel and State Department people
listening in real time all knew from intercepts and reports back from
our people on the ground that this was a terrorist attack involving
automatic weapons, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars, the fabricated
story - that it came out of a protest, a protest that never happened -
was pushed relentlessly by the administration.
*
AND IF IT HADN'T BEEN FOR FOREIGN PRESS AND INTERNATIONAL MEDIA
COVERAGE WHO KNOWS HOW MUCH SLOWER OUR OWN MAINSTREAM MEDIA WOULD HAVE
BEEN TO SLOWLY RELEASE THE TRUTH VIA DRIPS AND DROPS OVER THE DAYS AND
WEEKS TO COME?! AS IT IS THE MAINSTREAM AMERICAN MEDIA IS STILL DOING
ALL WITHIN THEIR POWER TO SKEW THE NEWS OBAMA'S WAY... OR AT LEAST
FURTHER MUDDY THE WATERS WHERE AND WHEN POSSIBLE!
Jay Carney pushed it two days after the attack.
Petraeus pushed it on
the Hill three days after the attack.
Rice went on five TV shows five
days after the attack to recite it chapter and verse.
Obama held off
calling it a terror attack for weeks in TV interviews and mentioned the
video half a dozen times at the U.N. on Sept. 25.
*
FOLKS... THIS IS ALL TRUE! THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED! SUCH BEHAVIOR DOESN'T
OCCUR BY HAPPENSTANCE... BY ACCIDENT... IN ERROR... IT HAPPENS BECAUSE
THAT'S THE GAME PLAN!
*
THEY LIED TO US! DAY AFTER DAY... FOR WEEKS! THEY DELIBERATELY MISLEAD
US! THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY AN ATTEMPTED COVER-UP WHICH FAILED BECAUSE THEY
GOT CAUGHT!
Another question arises from the press conference. When Obama said Rice “gave her best understanding of the intelligence
that had been provided to her,” was that also the best intelligence the
president of the United States had?
* BINGO, PAT!
If it is, if five days after the attack Obama was that clueless about
what actually happened in Benghazi, he ought to clean house at his
intelligence agencies.
* FOLKS... OBAMA WASN'T CLUELESS. CLINTON WASN'T CLUELESS. PANETTA WASN'T CLUELESS. PATRAEUS WASN'T CLUELESS.
DONILON WASN'T CLUELESS. AND FINALLY... AGAIN... IF RICE ACTUALLY WAS
CLUELESS... THEN SHE'S FAR TOO STUPID AND/OR LACKS THE INTELLECTUAL
CURIOSITY AND ANALYTICAL MINDSET NECESSARY FOR A PERSON IN HER POSITION.
From the outside, it appears
everybody was on board to describe the attack as “spontaneous” and
attribute it to the video. Yet none of this was true.
* YEP! THAT'S MY MEMORY ALL RIGHT!
And many inside knew, during or right
after the attack, the truth about what had happened and were leaking it
to the press.
(*NOD*)
That brings us to the question: Why?
* BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T AND WOULDN'T BE PART OF THE COVER-UP? BECAUSE THEY HAVE HONOR... INTEGRITY?
Why would the administration hierarchy collaborate in putting out a
phony story denying there had been a terrorist attack and attributing it
to a spontaneous riot that never happened?
Two answers come to mind:
One, the “spontaneous protest” cover story would enable Obama to keep
pushing his campaign line that he had gotten Osama bin Laden and that
al-Qaida was “on the run” and “on the path to defeat.” A successful
al-Qaida-type attack in Libya would have contradicted his best foreign
policy claim.
Second, if it was a spontaneous attack, an attack no one could have
foreseen, predicted or prevented, then that would absolve the
administration of responsibility for failing to see it coming, failing
to provide greater security, failing to have forces prepared to deal
with it when our guys were being shot and killed for seven hours.
* YEP... ALL STUFF I'VE NOTED ALL ALONG...
What was behind the cover-up is what Congress needs to find out.
* WHO WAS BEHIND THE COVER-UP... THAT'S WHAT CONGRESS NEEDS TO FIND OUT!
No comments:
Post a Comment