Jay Carney: “There Are No Unanswered Questions” about Rice’s Appearances on Sunday Shows (Video)

In today’s press briefing, White House press secretary Jay Carney had the audacity to tell reporters that “there are no unanswered questions” about Susan Rice’s appearances on the five Sunday talk shows on Sept 16. “Those questions have been answered,” he said. Deploying a signature Obama Regime tactic, Carney also suggested that reporters asking about Rice’s Sunday show appearances were more interested in “playing politics” than learning about “what happened in Benghazi,” because the motivations of the Regime’s critics, (or even those simply seeking answers) can never be anything but bad and must be firmly denounced by all right thinking people.

Video via Weasel Zippers:

Most of the questions may have been “answered” by the regime, but they’re bogus, unsatisfactory answers that are insulting to the intelligence the average yahoo who has spent more than two minutes studying the issue. But Carney is trying to shame the media into moving on rather than acting like those nasty, racist, sexist Republicans who insist on “politicizing” the issue.

It’ll probably work, too.

Fortunately, Republican lawmakers have not been cowed even though the Obamacrat media complex has thrown an entire deck of race cards at them.

Sen. Kelly Ayotte rattled off some of the questions Jay Carney says have been answered when she spoke to Megyn Kelly on America Live, Tuesday afternoon.

Why didn’t Susan Rice come forward sooner to admit she was wrong?

Why was the real cause of the attack (al Qaeda tied terrorism) omitted from the talking points?

Why did Rice say that al Qaeda was decimated?

Who changed the CIA talking points to omit the reference to Al Qaeda?

Why was the intelligence community so wrong in their talking points?

Why did she leave a misleading impression on the American people?

Watch the video, here.

Lindsey Graham on Benghazi: “We will get to it like we got to the bottom of Iran-Contra” (Video)

“This is about four dead Americans, this is about a national security failure,” Graham said. “We will get to it like we got to the bottom of Iran-Contra.”

The comment came at the very end of Senator Graham’s remarks on ABC’s This Week with Steppie Stephanopoulos, Sunday:

Iran Contra, eh? Interesting.

Why do I think this is significant?

Let’s review what the Iran Contra scandal was about:

The scandal began as an operation to free seven American hostages being held by a group with Iranian ties connected to the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution. It was planned that Israel would ship weapons to Iran, and then the U.S. would resupply Israel and receive the Israeli payment. The Iranian recipients promised to do everything in their power to achieve the release of the U.S. hostages. The plan deteriorated into an arms-for-hostages scheme, in which members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of the American hostages.[2][3] Large modifications to the plan were devised by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council in late 1985, in which a portion of the proceeds from the weapon sales was diverted to fund anti-Sandinista and anti-communist rebels, or Contras, in Nicaragua.[4][5]

Iran Contra was basically a gun running operation designed to free our hostages and support the Contras in Nicaragua.

Out of the several conspiracy theories that have been bandied about as to why the Regime so vigorously engaged in a web of lies, obfuscations, and cover-ups regarding Benghazi, the Libyan gun-running operation theory seems to be the most credible and convincing.

I see Graham’s mention of Iran Contra as a sign that Republican lawmakers may be looking into this:

  In March 2011, U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens became the official U.S. liaison to the Libyan opposition, who were believed to have links to al Qaeda.  Not long after Stevens’ appointment, the U.S. announced a program that sought to buy man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) that had gone missing in Libya.  Glen Doherty, one of the former Navy SEALs who was killed in the Benghazi terrorist attack, was working in Libya for the state department to find and destroy the MANPADS, capable of shooting down commercial airliners.  Meanwhile at the consulate, with Benghazi still flooded with weapons from the war, Ambassador Stevens and U.S. embassy staff were becoming increasingly concerned for their safety.  Security threats were on the rise in the months leading up to the attack on the consulate in Benghazi.  As noted earlier, Ambassador Stevens’ last meeting was with the Turkish consul general and at least one source has suggested the meeting was to negotiate a weapons transfer;  specifically, SA-7 MANPAD missiles from Libyan fighters.   Interestingly, a week prior to the attack, a Libyan ship docked in Turkey with a large amount of weapons, including SA-7 MANPADS, bound for Syria.

While the official reason given for Ambassador Stevens being in Benghazi on such an important anniversary is that he was to be present at the opening of a new English-language school, it seems he was there to do his job as a liaison for the Libyan rebels.  Considering the fact that the U.S. has armed Libya before, the secret order President Obama authored at the start of the new Libyan war may have included giving weapons to the Libyans once again.  However, as the weapons quickly ended up in the hands of al Qaeda, the United States would have been urgently seeking to recover them; not only due to the security concerns but the fact that terrorists were armed as a result.  When Syria went to war after Libya, the U.S. was in an opportune position to give the Libyan weapons to the new resistance in Syria.  Once again,however, al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were lying in wait to receive the spoils of the newest conflict in the region.  Considering Iran-Contra and Fast and Furious, a new scandal wherein the United States once again armed terrorists would certainly be one the current administration would seek to cover-up.

According to an intelligence source the place where the attack happened “is one of the largest, one of the most active CIA operation centers in North Africa”:

What was really happening, before Gaddafi’s body was even cold, is that we had people locating caches of weapons, separating the working from those that weren’t, and making a big show of destroying the weapons, but only the weapons that were useless. The working weapons were being given to Islamic terrorists. They were being funneled through Libya, crisscrossing Libya on a Muslim Brotherhood managed strategic supply route. In fact, Michael Reagan called it the modern day equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in a recent article he wrote, and he is correct.

The entire arms and weapons running operation was headquartered in Benghazi, The weapons were actually being shipped out of Libya from the port city of Dernah, located about a hundred miles east of Benghazi. That was the ‘choke point’ of the weapons being shipped out. Remember the Lusitania? Think in those terms, ships carrying weapons hid among ‘humanitarian aid.’ By the time of the attacks, an estimated 30-40 million pounds of arms were already transported out of Libya.

What if the terrorists had killed those four Americans in Libya with weapons  provided by the United States?

Video: Lindsey Graham More Disturbed After Meeting With Ambassador Rice Than Before

UN Ambassador Susan Rice met with three Republican Senators on the Hill, today, in what has been described as “her final pitch for their support” if she is nominated to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton as the next U.S. secretary of state, which is looking highly likely at this point..

Liberals were hoping that  Republicans would abandon their opposition to Susan Rice after meeting with her. But that does not appear to be the case.

Instead of smoothing things over, she seems to have fanned the flames.

In an astounding press conference, that just finished moments ago, Senators Graham, Ayotte and McCain expressed more skepticism and displeasure with Rice and the whole Benghazi saga than they had before.

I was genuinely surprised by their response. I had fully expected the Regime to have supplied Rice with a plausible story to placate these easily placated Senators.

Folks….there’s no plausible story and Republican lawmakers are not letting this go.

I’ll have a video up as soon as it appears on YouTube.

UPDATE:

More from the press conference via Fox News Insider:

McCain said, “It is clear that the information that she gave the American people was incorrect when she said that it was a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video. It was not, and there was compelling evidence at the time that that was certainly not the case.”

Graham concurred, saying, “Bottom line, I am more disturbed now than I was before that the 16 September explanation about how four Americans died in Benghazi, Libya by Ambassador Rice, I think does not do justice to the reality at the time, and in hindsight clearly was completely wrong.”

They’ll have a video up soon.

UPDATE II:

Here’s Lindsey Graham’s appearance on Greta Van Susteren, last night, which I was just getting ready to put up when that news broke on Fox.

He told Greta that the more he knows about Benghazi, the more upset he is that the Consulate was even open on 9/11.

SEE ALSO:

Twitchy: Sens. Graham, Ayotte after Rice meeting: ‘Concerns even greater than we had before,’ Graham ‘disturbed’

Campaign Spot: Susan Rice’s Greatest Hits, Going Well Beyond Benghazi

Hot Air: GOP senators: We’re “more disturbed” after meeting with Amb. Rice than we were before

Ace of Spades HQ: Rice, Carney: Okay, There Was No Protest Before the Attack; So Let’s MoveOn.org

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,647,210 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 529 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: