Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Just in case any of you have missed Jimmy Fallon and Bruce doing their rendition of "Stuck in Gov. Chris Christie's Fort Lee Traffic Jam."
All kidding aside... it tells you everything you need to know about the current state of Amerika that no one has been arrested over the phony traffic study and resultant traffic chaos.
Me? I'd gladly put bullets into the heads of those responsible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-nsa-reform-20140115,0,5995749.story#axzz2qVK5jBGQ
Judges on the federal government's secret surveillance court have strongly rejected any proposed changes to their review process, putting unexpected pressure on the White House on Tuesday as President Obama prepares a speech aimed at bolstering public confidence in how the government collects intelligence.
In a blunt letter to the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees, U.S. District Judge John D. Bates made it clear that the 11 judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are united in opposition to key recommendations by a presidential task force last month aimed at increasing transparency and judicial oversight, including at least one that Obama has tentatively endorsed.
* FOLKS... "SECRET SURVEILLANCE COURT." DO WE KNOW WHAT THEIR "REVIEW PROCESS" IS NOW? DO WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT CHANGES ARE BEING PROPOSED? ONE WORD: KAFKAESQUE!
* FOLKS... WE HAVE NO WAY OF JUDGING FOR OURSELVES WHETHER THESE 11 JUDGES ARE OR ARE NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM!
[T]he judges opposed adding an independent advocate for privacy and civil liberties to the court's classified hearings, saying the proposal was "unnecessary — and could prove counterproductive."
* MAYBE... MAYBE NOT. (HOW'BOUT PUTTING RETIRED U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES ON AN ADVOCACY PANEL...?)
Obama and some intelligence officials have publicly signaled support for creating an adversarial legal process in the court...
* AND FOR ALL WE KNOW IT'S OBAMA AND HIS INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS WHO HAVE BEEN PUSHING BEHIND THE SCENES OPPOSING HIS OWN "PUBLIC" SUPPORT FOR CREATING AN ADVERSARIAL LEGAL PROCESS IN THE COURT...? HMM...???
* FOLKS... ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT I'M AN AMERICAN AND I SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/nsa-unleashed-obama-tells-public-trust-me-20140115
Nearly six months ago, President Obama sought to temper outrage over the nation's mushrooming surveillance programs by pledging new steps to balance privacy and safety. "It's not enough for me, as president, to have confidence in these programs," he said, "the American people need to have confidence in them as well."
* RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THESE PROGRAMS...
(*SMIRK*)
In other words, no government, not even one led by a liberal constitutional lawyer, can shield bad policies with empty promises. It's not enough to say, "Trust us," while curbing sacred liberties - and yet... that still appears to be Obama's position.
* OF COURSE IT IS!
Previews of the president's address on counter-terrorism Friday suggest he will not embrace the most far-reaching proposals of his own advisers and will punt some of the toughest issues to a dysfunctional Congress.
* AND...
The National Security Agency gets a pass.
My colleague James Oliphant wrote Tuesday, "President Obama has a rare opportunity this week to reshape the nation's counter-terrorism strategy. He won't take it." Meanwhile, Peter Baker and Charlie Savage of The New York Times reported today: "Mr. Obama plans to increase limits on access to bulk telephone data, call for privacy safeguards for foreigners and propose the creation of a public advocate to represent privacy concerns at a secret intelligence court. But he will not endorse leaving bulk data in the custody of telecommunications firms, nor will he require court permission for all so-called national security letters seeking business records."
* FOLKS... WHAT WE SHOULD BE DEBATING IS WHETHER THESE SO-CALLED "NATIONAL SECURITY LETTERS" HAVE ANY CONSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT! (THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT TELLS YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HOW EASILY LED BY THE NOSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE...)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The emerging approach, described by current and former government officials who insisted on anonymity in advance of Mr. Obama's widely anticipated speech, suggested a president trying to straddle a difficult line in hopes of placating foreign leaders and advocates of civil liberties without a backlash from national security agencies.
* NOTE: NOTHING ABOUT "PRINCIPLES." NOTHING ABOUT "DOING WHAT'S BEST FOR AMERICA." (AND CERTAINLY NOTHING ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION...)
Embracing "the spirit of reform" is a euphemism for not reforming. If anything, NSA could emerge stronger: Obama is codifying the sweeping and still-largely secret activities of the U.S. intelligence system while mollifying the public's privacy concerns.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
I do not doubt the president's sincerity about balancing national security and civil liberties.
* I DO! (BASED UPON THE PRESIDENT'S OWN ACTIONS OVER FIVE YEARS!)
I recognize that those of us outside of the national security system are comfortably ignorant about most threats against the nation.
* BUT WE CAN READ THE CONSTITUTION...
Our enemies are adapting to technology, dangerously so, and must be countered.
* GREAT JOB IN BOSTON LAST YEAR. OUTSTANDING JOB IN BENGHAZI.
But as the president himself conceded, this issue is bigger than one man's word. It's about the power ceded to future presidents, and it hinges on the public's faith in government. Since the early 1960s, when nearly 80% of Americans said they trusted government "most of the time," the public's faith in its political leadership has declined steadily, according to the Pew Research Center, to less than 20%.
* FOLKS... WE'RE NO LONGER "AMERICA." PEOPLE "GET" THAT. (UNFORTUNATELY A MAJORITY OF THE SHEEPLE SEEM WILLING TO ACCEPT IT AS WELL...)
The Bush and Obama administrations did not help matters by shrouding NSA's work in far more secrecy than needed, even lying about it. In public testimony before Congress, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper denied that NSA's collected of data on millions of Americans, a deceit exposed by rogue NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
* AND WHERE IS JAMES CLAPPER TODAY? IN JAIL? NO. DISGRACED AND OUT OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE? NO.
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
* CLAPPER TODAY REMAINS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL MEN IN THE WORLD!
Obama's obsession with national security leaks (which bump up against the public's right to know) led to scary overreach, the seizure of telephone records from The Associated Press and the criminalization of a Fox News reporter's investigation on North Korea.
Since the Snowden bombshell, the White House has focused on putting a positive spin on the NSA story rather than producing concrete information about the programs.
"Trust us," they say. "We're the government."
Well, we're skeptical.
* "SKEPTICAL" MY ASS! THE TRUTH IS... IN MANY WAYS OUR GOVERNMENT IS AMERICA'S GREATEST ENEMY.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/nsa-effort-pries-open-computers-not-connected-to-internet.html?hp&_r=0
* OK... NOW LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT... YOU AND I CAN READ THIS ARTICLE AND APPLAUD THE NYT FOR THEIR REPORTING...
...AND YET SNOWDEN IS A TRAITOR...???
* UH-HUH...
* SERIOUSLY... READ THE STORY...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/15/world/asia/us-prisoner-video/index.html
* THIS... IS... OBAMA...
* THIS IS HILLARY... KERRY... ALL THE SCUMBAGS WHO HAVE SERVED IN THIS ADMINISTRATION...
The U.S. military has obtained new video apparently made by those holding the lone American prisoner of war, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
A U.S. military official told CNN the clip shows the Wood Valley, Idaho, native in diminished health from the effects of close to five years in captivity.
* WHO HAS BEEN PRESIDENT FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS?
He was seized in Afghanistan in June 2009...
* WHO WAS PRESIDENT IN JUNE OF 2009? WHO WAS SECRETARY OF STATE IN 2009?
...and is believed held by the Taliban-aligned Haqqani network in Pakistan, the official said.
The so-called proof-of-life video, the first of him in nearly three years, has a reference to December 14, 2013.
CNN has not seen the video.
U.S. efforts to free Bergdahl, including negotiating for his release, have so far failed.
* WHAT EFFORTS...?!?!
"Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has been gone far too long, and we continue to call for and work toward his safe and immediate release," a Pentagon spokesman said.
* FUCK THE PENTAGON SPOKESMAN! LET'S HEAR FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF... OR BETTER YET THE "COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF" HIMSELF.
"We cannot discuss all the details of our efforts, but there should be no doubt that on a daily basis - using our military, intelligence and diplomatic tools - we work to see Sgt. Bergdahl returned home safely," the spokesman said.
* THEN YOU'RE FUCKING INCOMPETENT!
Bergdahl was 23 when he was captured after finishing a guard shift at a combat outpost in southeastern Paktika province. The U.S. government acknowledged in May 2012 that it was engaged in talks with the Taliban to free Bergdahl.
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... EVERY AMERICAN KILLED AND WOUNDED IN AFGHANISTAN OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS... THEY'VE DIED IN VAIN OR BEEN WOUNDED FOR NO GRAND PURPOSE. IT'S ALL BEEN A WASTE. (WHEN HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF THE "WINNER" OF A WAR HAVING TO NEGOTIATE FOR A RETURN OF THEIR PRISONERS...?)
The discussions moved in fits and starts because of U.S. concerns that any Taliban prisoners swapped for Bergdahl might be repatriated and allowed to rejoin the fight.
* REMEMBER WHEN AMERICA DIDN'T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS?
Later that year, however, the White House announced it was willing to send five Taliban prisoners to Qatar in exchange for Bergdahl.
* HOW'BOUT WE SWAP OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS FOR BERGDAHL?
http://news.yahoo.com/afghan-president-accuses-us-killing-8-civilians-airstrike-163231353.html
President Hamid Karzai on Wednesday accused the United States of killing seven children and a woman in an airstrike in central Afghanistan...
* NOT "THE TALIBAN ACCUSED..." NOT "AL QIADA ACCUSED..." NOT "THE RUSSIANS ACCUSED..." NOT "THE CHINESE ACCUSED..."
(*SIGH*)
* FOLKS... THIS IS HAPPENING IN OUR NAME. UNDERSTAND THAT. AND FOR WHAT? THE WAR IS LOST.
"The Afghan government has been asking for a complete end to operations in Afghan villages for years, but American forces acting against all mutual agreements... have once again bombarded a residential area and killed civilians."
* FOLKS... YOU'RE READING THIS, RIGHT? THIS IS INSANE! WE ARE THE BAD GUYS...!!! WE ARE AN IMPERIALISTIC POWER - ONLY INSTEAD OF PROFITING FROM IMPERIALISM WE SUFFER FOR IT! THIS IS INSANITY...!!!
Siahgird district, about 40 kilometres (25 miles) north of Kabul, is on the main road from the capital to Bamiyan. The route was considered safe, but the region has become increasingly violent with major clashes between Afghan security forces and the Taliban erupting since October.
* THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE LOSING! AND WE KNOW WE'RE LOSING! AND YET OBAMA STILL KEEPS SQUANDERING AMERICAN BLOOD AND TREASURE!
Relations between the United States and Afghanistan also worsened when Kabul last week said it would release scores of alleged Taliban fighters from jail as there was no evidence against them.
* AGAIN... FOLKS... OBAMA CAN'T EVEN HANDLE RUNNING A PUPPET REGIME.
* AGAIN... FOLKS... THIS IS NOT US... THIS IS NOT "MY" AMERICA. IS IT YOURS?
U.S. President Barack Obama on Monday insisted he had faith in his Afghan war strategy after former defense secretary Robert Gates claimed the president had soured on his 2009 decision to send in 30,000 extra troops.
* NO FICTIONAL MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE COULD HAVE EVERY DONE AS MUCH HARM TO AMERICA AS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS...
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hooria-mashhour-the-united-states-bloody-messes-in-yemen/2014/01/14/c21dfcec-7653-11e3-b1c5-739e63e9c9a7_story.html
A young bride traveled to her wedding with her relatives in Bayda province, Yemen.
December 12 was supposed to be a day of celebration for the al-Ameri family. But in a few dark seconds their celebrations were eviscerated. A U.S. drone fired at the wedding procession, destroying five vehicles and most of their occupants.
Not even the bride’s car, ornately decorated in flowers for the occasion, was spared from the carnage.
Senior Yemeni officials later admitted that the strike was a “mistake.”
Some mistake: Though the bride survived, the strike is said to have killed at least 14 civilians and injured 22 others, over a third of them seriously. This marks the largest death toll by a drone strike in Yemen since the drone war’s inception. It is also the largest death toll by U.S. strike since December 2009, when a U.S. cruise missile killed 41 civilians in al-Majala, including 14 women and 21 children.
* NO... IT'S NOT "COLLATERAL DAMAGE." IT'S INCOMPETENCE. IT'S HUBRIS. IT'S BEING MAD WITH POWER.
* JUST FOR A MOMENT IMAGINE YOU'RE NOT AN AMERICAN...
(*SIGH*)
In the wake of the killing, a wave of outrage has swept the country. The Yemeni government rushed to meet community elders, seeking to negotiate a quiet settlement for the killing of the bride’s loved ones. But the bereaved villagers rejected the overtures and instead demanded that Yemen’s president, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, stop U.S. drones before they would sit at any negotiating table.
On its side, rather than forthrightly address its role in these grim events, the U.S. government...
* BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
...has issued no admission of responsibility, nor any apology. It has left the Yemeni government to clean up another bloody mess.
* WHAT... A... PIECE... OF... SHIT...
Only recently we had cause to hope for better. In November, Yemeni civil engineer Faisal bin Ali Jaber traveled over 7,000 miles to the U.S. in search of answers. He met congressmen, senators, and even some White House officials to tell them how U.S. missiles incinerated his nephew and brother-in-law at his son’s wedding last year. In that strike the U.S. killed two potential allies – one an imam who regularly preached against al-Qaeda, the other, one of the town’s few policemen.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
Jaber received heartfelt condolences from many lawmakers. Yet no official was prepared to explain why his relatives were killed, or why the U.S. administration would not acknowledge its mistake.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
This is not the first time a U.S. drone has killed civilians in Bayda. On Sept. 2, 2012, a U.S. plane hit a village shuttle near Radda. The vehicle was full of villagers carrying their day’s shopping. As usual, the initial press coverage labeled the dead as “al-Qaeda militants,” but when the relatives threatened to deliver the bodies to the president’s gates, the Yemeni government was forced to concede that all 12 of those people killed were civilians.
Among the victims, a pregnant woman and three children were laid to rest.
* WE DID THIS. THIS WAS DONE IN OUR NAME.
The use of drones in Yemen might appear a simple, quick-fix option for President Obama, but as Nabeel Khoury, former U.S. deputy chief of mission to Yemen, recently wrote, “Drone strikes take out a few bad guys to be sure, but they also kill a large number of innocent civilians."
"Given Yemen’s tribal structure, the U.S. generates roughly forty to sixty new enemies for every AQAP [al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula] operative killed by drones.”
* YEP... OBAMA THE WARRIOR... THE HIGH TECH PUSH BUTTON COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF... MAKES YOU PROUD, DOESN'T IT?
(*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)
Let me be clear: I, like the vast majority of my countrymen, reject terrorism.
* THE AUTHOR OF THIS PIECE, HOORIA MASHHOUR, IS YEMEN'S MINISTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS...
All of us were repulsed by recent footage of a gruesome attack on a Yemeni defense ministry hospital. We agree that our fight against extremist groups cannot be won without a variety of efforts, including robust law enforcement. But more often than not, U.S. drone strikes leave families bereaved and villages terrified. Drones tear at the fabric of Yemeni society. Wronged and angry men are just the sort extreme groups like AQAP find easiest to recruit.
* MAKES... FUCKING... SENSE...!!!
Our president may reassure the United States of his support for drone strikes but the reality is that no leader can legitimately approve the extrajudicial killing of his own citizens.
* THINK ABOUT THAT, FOLKS... JUST THINK ABOUT THAT...
* THEN CONSIDER THIS: OBAMA CLAIMS THIS POWER FOR HIMSELF - AS DID BUSH BEFORE HIM.
* NOW ASK YOURSELF... WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION IS EITHER "THE PRESIDENT" OR "THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF" GIVEN SUCH POWER? (THE ANSWER? NOWHERE! INDEED, THE CONSTITUTION IS FULL OF CONSTRAINTS UPON FAR LESSER PRESIDENTIAL AND GOVERNMENTAL POWERS!!!)
Moreover, he does so in the face of Yemeni consensus. This August, Yemen’s National Dialogue Conference — which President Obama has praised — decided by a 90% majority that the use of drones in Yemen should be criminalized.
* AND YET...
(*SHRUG*)
* HEY... WHEN THE RULE OF LAW HAS COLLAPSED IN AMERIKA IS IT ANY WONDER THAT IT'S NOT FUNCTIONNG ALL THAT WELL IN OUR PROVINCE OF YEMEN?
* YEAH... YA CAUGHT THAT, HUH? YEAH... PROVINCE OF YEMEN. (WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU CALL IT? CERTAINLY YEMEN HAS NO POWER TO STOP US FROM OPERATING AS WE PLEASE... AND WE DO... ACT AS WE PLEASE. IF THIS ISN'T IMPERIALISM... THEN WHAT IS IT?)
Yemeni legislators are aware that the drone war is deeply unpopular. Since the Dec. 12 strike, our parliament has unanimously voted to ban drone flights in Yemeni airspace, declaring them a “grave breach” of the country’s sovereignty. For a country so often divided, this unanimity from Yemen’s most representative bodies testifies to the strength of opinion against drones. But their calls have thus far met only with more bombings from the skies.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
How can the people of Yemen build trust in their fledgling democracy when our collective will is ignored by democracy’s greatest exponent?
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/15/politics/senate-benghazi-report/
The deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was "likely preventable" based on known security shortfalls and prior warnings that the security situation there was deteriorating, the majority of the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded in a report released on Wednesday.
* FOLKS... "...THE MAJORITY OF THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE..." HARRY REID'S SENATE. THE DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED SENATE.
Separately, the findings also noted what the FBI had told the panel that 15 people cooperating with its investigation had been killed in Benghazi, undercutting the investigation.
* AND LET ME GUESS... NO ONE IS BEING HELDRESPONSIBLE FOR FAILING TO PROTECT THOSE COOPERATING WITNESSES. IT'S JUST... "OOPS." JUST... "ONE OF THOSE THINGS."
It was not clear if the killings were related to the probe.
(*GUFFAW*)
Moreover, it said that people linked with various al Qaeda-related groups in North Africa and elsewhere participated in the September 11, 2012, attack...
* WE KNEW THAT! FROM DAY ONE!
...but investigators haven't been able to determine whether any one group was in command.
* THE SAME "INVESTIGATORS" WHO ALLOWED 15 COOPERATING WITNESSES TO BE MURDERED...??? (FOLKS... RECALL WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT THE "INVESTIGATION." THE DELAYS. THE INCOMPETENCE.)
The report placed some blame for the outcome on the State Department...
* YES... "THE STATE DEPARTMENT." NOT A PERSON. NOT PERSONS. JUST... "THE STATE DEPARTMENT." (AND ONLY "SOME" BLAME.)
...saying it should have "increased its security posture more significantly" in Libya's second-largest city because of general warnings that U.S. personnel were at risk.
* FOLKS... COM'ON... WE ALREADY KNEW ALL THIS! WE ALREADY KNEW THAT HILLARY CLINTON PERSONALLY LEFT THESE PEOPLE HUNG OUT TO DRY... AND THAT WHEN THE ATTACK CAME SHE, OBAMA, PANETTA, AND THE OTHER DIRTBAGS LET OUR PEOPLE GET OVERRUN AND MURDERED.
The intelligence community "provided ample strategic warning" that Americans and U.S. facilities were in danger, though it didn't offer a single warning that would have predicted the Benghazi attack that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, the report said.
* WE... KNOW... THIS...!!!
* WE ALSO KNOW THAT THEN-SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON WAS AWARE OF THE DANGER AND DID NOTHING!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
The Obama administration initially believed the armed assault was triggered by outrage over a U.S.-produced anti-Muslim film.
* BULLSHIT! LIES! MY GOD... HOW CAN CNN CONTINUE TO SO BLATANTLY LIE...?!?!
Investigators haven't found evidence of pre-planning...
* PERHAPS BECAUSE THEY'RE INCOMPETENT...?!?! PERHAPS BECAUSE THEY WERE ORDERED NOT TO FIND "EVIDENCE?" SERIOUSLY, FOLKS... LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE...
...and suggest at least part of the attack was "opportunistic."
* "...AT LEAST PART..." GENERIC CYA LANGUAGE AND WE ALL KNOW IT! (BUT IN ANY CASE, WHOSE INCOMPETENCE CREATED SAID "OPPORTUNITY?" YEP... WE'RE BACK TO CLINTON...)
A State Department spokeswoman, Marie Harf, said ... on the issue of whether the attacks were preventable, "we have repeatedly said there was no specific threat" pointing to an attack.
* SEE WHAT I MEAN, FOLKS? EVEN AFTER THE DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE CAN'T HELP BUT ADMIT THE TRUTH THESE BASTARDS REPORTING DIRECTLY TO OBAMA AND HIS KEY HENCHMEN CONTINUE TO TRY AND EVADE EXECUTIVE BRANCH RESPONSIBILITY!
"Obviously, we've talked at length about the fact that we knew there were extremists and terrorists operating in Libya and in Benghazi. But, again, we had no specific information indicating a threat an attack was coming," she said.
* WHICH IS A SIDE-STEP OF THE FACT THAT HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON'S STATE DEPARTMENT TIME AND AGAIN IGNORED THE LATE AMBASSADOR'S PLEAS FOR SUPPORT!
The Intelligence Committee report follows the release on Monday of previously classified information by the House Armed Services Committee. According to the documents, senior military officials told the panel there were no discussions related to any specific threat in Libya despite general warnings about the possibility of terror attacks around the anniversary of 9/11. As a result, additional military assets were not deployed to the area.
* OBAMA HAS THOROUGHLY POLITICIZED THE MILITARY...
(*PURSED LIPS*)
* THREE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/01/15/hillary-clinton-largely-absent-from-benghazi-report/
A new Senate intelligence committee report is out, detailing the attacks that killed four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012, and the actions before and after the attack.
Below, we focus on four key points that will be important to the political debate about Benghazi going forward.
1. Hillary Clinton's name comes up only once
* AND AS YOU'LL READ, HER NAME WASN'T BROUGHT UP BECAUSE SHE WAS A FOCUS OF THE INVESTIGATION - BECAUSE SHE WASN'T! (YES... THE THEN-SECRETARY OF STATE WAS NOT A FOCUS OF THIS SO-CALLED "INVESTIGATION." WHAT'S THAT TELL YOU...???)
The lone mention comes in the section where the Republicans on the committee weigh in.
(*SNORT*)
* "WEIGH IN." AS IN "AFTER THE INVESTIGATION WHICH CHOOSE NOT TO INVESTIGATE CLINTON WAS OVER!"
They say Clinton ultimately bears responsibility for the failures...
* YOU KNOW... HAVING BEEN SECRETARY OF STATE AND ALL...
...and that her failure to act "clearly made a difference" in the lives of the four Americans killed.
* DUH!
"Ultimately, however, the final responsibility for security at diplomatic facilities lies with the former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton," the Republicans write. "Because the Temporary Mission Facility in Benghazi did not meet the security standards set by the State Department, it would have required a waiver to be occupied. Although certain waivers of the standards could have been approved at a lower level, other departures, such as the co-location requirement, could only be approved by the Secretary of State. At the end of the day, she was responsible for ensuring the safety of all Americans serving in our diplomatic facilities. Her failure to do so clearly made a difference in the lives of the four murdered Americans and their families."
* YEP...
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)
2. The report says the attack was, in fact, "preventable"
* AGAIN... NO MATTER HOW FLAWED... NO MATTER HOW PAINSTAKINGLY PROTECTIVE OF FELLOW DEMOCRAT CLINTON... APPARENTLY THE EVIDENCE WAS SO FRIGGIN' OVERWHELMING THAT EVEN SENATE DEMOCRATS HAD TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS!
It highlights numerous instances in which the Clinton-run State Department could have done more and/or was warned about potential danger. In particular, the report points out that Ambassador Christopher J. Stevens, who, later, was among the four Americans killed, in June 2012 asked for a special security team and in July asked for extra security personnel. Neither were provided.
* BINGO.
"The State Department should have increased its security posture more significantly in Benghazi based on the deteriorating security situation on the ground" and previous attacks in Benghazi, the report says.
* NO, NO... NOT JUST "SHOULD HAVE INCREASED"... HOW'BOUT "SHOULD NOT HAVE REFUSED...!!!" FOLKS... IT WASN'T THAT THEY WEREN'T PROACTIVE! IT'S THAT THEY ACTUALLY DENIED REQUESTS FOR STRENGTHENED SECURITY! DENIED!
3. The State Department might not, however, have been fully aware of imminent danger
(*SMIRK*)
* AND IF NOT - THEN WHOSE FAULT WOULD THAT BE?
The CIA in mid-August warned of Islamist training camps and militias in Benghazi, but while the message was intended to be shared with the State Department, it can't find evidence that it was. "...the Committee has not seen any evidence that those requests were passed on by the Embassy, including by the Ambassador, to State Department headquarters before the September 11 attacks in Benghazi," the report says.
* REMEMBER THE AMBASSADOR'S DIARY, FOLKS? REMEMBER THE REQUESTS FOR ADDED SECURITY THAT WERE DENIED? REMEMBER EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAD HAPPENED IN BENGHAZI, ATTACKS OF OTHER FOREIGN MISSIONS AND SUCH? FOLKS... IF HILLARY WASN'T "AWARE" IT WAS BECAUSE SHE DELIBERATELY CHOOSE TO KEEP "DENIABILITY" OPEN.
* FOLKS... OPEN SOURCE (NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, OTHER NEWS MEDIA) WERE AWARE OF THE SITUATION - BUT NOT THE AMERICAN SECRETARY OF STATE...?!?! COM'ON...!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)
4. The panel says there was no 'cover-up'
* WHAT ARE THE SENATE DEMOCRATS GONNA SAY...?
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
The report doesn't say too much about why the Obama administration's initial talking points were wrong...
* LIES! THEY WERE LIES! (NICE TRY TO PROVIDE COVER, HOWEVER; DUTIFULLY REPEATED BY THE MEDIA.)
...and why they took so long to change, even after intelligence suggested they were wrong.
(*SMIRK*)
But it does suggest the controversy is overblown.
* AGAIN... SENATE DEMOCRATS DOING ALL WITHIN THEIR POWER TO PROTECT CLINTON, OBAMA, AND THE DEMOCRAT "BRAND."
Even after it was clear to intelligence officials that the attack was pre-planned, administration officials continued to say it was a spontaneous attack emanating from protests against an anti-Muslim video.
* YEP...
The report notes intelligence officials reviewed video of the attack on Sept. 18, but that it took six more days for the administration to change its talking points.
(*SMIRK*)
Still, the panel saw no reason to suspect anything more than a failure to communicate.
(*SNORT*)
"The Majority concludes that the interagency coordination process on the talking points followed normal, but rushed coordination procedures and that there were no efforts by the White House or any other Executive Branch entities to 'cover-up' facts or make alterations for political purposes," the report says.
* THE DEMOCRAT MAJORITY... THE PARTISAN DEMOCRAT MAJORITY...
Post a Comment